|
So, I went with y'all's advice and ran 13th Age with pregen characters on Sunday, and it was great. I had one character of each class available with a race choice already filled in, but also provided the players with advice on a couple of other races they could pick if they didn't like the original race. The players ended up picking the Dragonic Sorcerer, the Gnome Wizard (who was quickly turned into a Tiefling), the Halfling Rogue, and the Elf Ranger (whose player wanted to play a half-human half-halfling, so I told her that for all mechanical intents and purposes her character is a halfling but within the narrative her character is a slightly larger-than-average halfling). I let the two spellcasters pick their spells, but provided some advice, such as telling the Sorcerer's player that her character should probably pick at least one chain spell (lightning fork) and one breath weapon spell (breath of the white) to make the best use of her abilities and telling the Wizard's player that she should consider picking utility spell as one of her spells. Finally, we did backgrounds, icon relationships and one unique things and ended up with the following bunch of characters: Delilargh, a Dragonic Sorcerer. Her one unique thing was that she had been created as a part of a magical experiment involving the mixing of dragon and human DNA in a magical test tube, and that also told us that she was the only one of her Dragonic kind in the world. The player described Delilargh as extremely feminine, including having nail polish on her sharp dragon claws, as well as having a bunch of gems and baubles attached to her tail (which she used as her melee weapon: I let the players have the benefit of the best weapon type for their class and simply describe it instead of worrying about the exact mechanics of weapons). She started with a positive relationship with the Great Gold Wyrm on account of him having noticed her as a potential force for good, as well as a conflicted relationship with the Three, who saw her as a potential asset but also as a threat. Lilith, a Tiefling Wizard. Her one unique thing was that unlike other tieflings she had been born with just one horn, namely an ebony unicorn horn. She had been abandoned by her demonic parents and raised in a barn by a human couple who reluctantly took her as their own. Lilith was a mischievous child, always causing trouble in her little village, until one day she decided to run away to a school for Wizards in order to become the best Wizard there was. She ended up having two conflicted relationships with the Diabolist (whose agents saw her as a potential asset, but also as totally creepy owing to the only one horn thing), and one unfriendly relationship with the Priestess (because the religious right of the Dragon Empire don't take kindly to tieflings). "Proudfoots", a Halfling Rogue. His player actually came up with his backgrounds before his one unique thing: he had lived a normal, comfortable life in a halfling village before his village had been burnt down by orcs and he had been taken as a prisoner by the orcs, probably to work in their salt mines or something. (We actually joked that since orcs probably don't do much in the way of real industry, he would've worked in an orcish destruction mine, i.e. a mine where the orcs dig out pure destruction from the ground. I might have to get back to that idea sometime later in the game.) His one unique thing emerged from having been an orcish prisoner: he was the only halfling who had ever contracted the orcish curse and survived, thus technically making him the only half-orc halfling in the world. His name was simply his family name, which he had taken as his epithet after the wholesale destruction of his family by the orcs. He picked two unfriendly relationships with the Orc Lord, and one positive with the Prince of Shadows (on account of having become a thief after his escape from the orcish labor camps). And finally, Hal, a Half-Halfling Ranger. The player picked Ranger because she wanted to be a kickass little guy riding a cool wild boar. What she ended up with was a former circus employee who had stolen the circus' main attraction, a magical boar named Princess Popo, become a fugitive from the law, and eventually settled down with a new name and identity in a seedy hive of scum and villainy as a Bounty Hunter (a free background Hal got from his Tracker talent). Hal's one unique thing? He was actually telepathically connected to Princess Popo, who had orchestrated her escape from the circus by using Hal to her advantage. Hal's player implied that Princess Popo was actually the one in control and that Hal was simply a puppet used by her to further her agenda, which somehow involved either usurping or driving off the High Druid. This started Hal off with two conflicted relationship dice with the High Druid, and one (either conflicted or friendly, I don't remember) with the Prince of Shadows. The game itself was rather short, but all the more fun. I started the players off with a simple fight against some goblins in a forest, which allowed Delilargh to demonstrate the power of her sorcerous might: she zapped a single goblin mook with lightning fork, causing enough damage to kill the entire mook squad (allowing me to take a moment to explain the mook mechanics to the player). Hal's player's dice weren't so hot, so as he rode Princess Popo around the battlefield to take on two of the goblins and rolled a 1 on his attack, I narrated it as Princess Popo suddenly grinding to a halt in order to gore the goblins and Hal flying off face first into a puddle of mud. I really loved the fact that because I wasn't so tied to a grid I could add a lot of narrative color to what would've been simple "You miss, nothing happens" rolls in traditional D&D. I mean, mechanically the 1 that Hal rolled was simply a "You miss, nothing happens," but because we were playing fast and loose with positioning I could embellish the result of the roll a bit with a bit of extra flavor. The players ended up running around the woods with a goblin they had taken prisoner in tow, in the process finding out that one of the goblin tribes in the forest had been press-ganged to work for the orcs, while another had taken to serving demons (this was me making use of a bunch of relationship rolls that we did at the beginning of the game, which had both the Orc Lord and the Diabolist having successes). The players did their best to turn the two tribes into open conflict, and here Proudfoots demonstrated the greatness that is Smooth Talk, gaining two temporary relationship dice with the Diabolist on account of sucking up to the lowly imp who had assumed leadership of the other goblin tribe. The demon-worshiping tribe agreed to help the characters with their assault on the other goblins' keep, where I simply pitted the two goblin tribes against each other in the background, letting the players deal with a bunch of orcs I threw at them. I first looked at the Orc Berserker and thought it was going to be really brutal, but suddenly the Sorcerer's and Wizard's dice turned really hot and the Berserker was staggered during the very first turn. What's worst, when he finally dropped to 0 hp, I rolled the ability which gave him 2d6 temporary hp, giving him 5 hp. Which was not enough to save him from the ongoing damage he was suffering thanks to Lilith's acid arrow spell. The orc fight thus accidentally turned into a cakewalk. We had to call it a night after the orc fight, but I left the players on a cliffhanger: after they surveyed the battlefield, they found that the imp was nowhere to be seen, eventually finding him in a cave below the keep, in front of something that looked undeniably like a demon gate or something, getting ready to open a rift into the Abyss. That's when we called it a night. All in all, it was a great game. The two completely new players (the players of Delilargh and Hal) both picked up the game really quickly, and apparently much fun was had by all. I've been recently playing games like Dungeon World and Monsterhearts a lot, so 13th Age was definitely a lot more crunchy than I'm used to, but compared to 3.5 and 4e (both of which I burned out on due to their excessive crunch) the level of crunch is much lighter and the game is extremely easy to run. Also, even though I only threw orcs and goblins at the players, I love the monster design in this game: each of the creatures clearly implied a certain style, and it was easy for me to think of monster tactics on the fly. I'm definitely going to run this game again.
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2013 09:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 18:05 |
|
|
Oh God. If these are not a reference to Ornstein and Smough (AKA "The CEO and Vice-CEO of 'We Will poo poo You Up Inc.'") from Dark Souls than I will eat my lunch.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2013 14:29
|
|
|
Doublehex posted:Oh God. If these are not a reference to Ornstein and Smough (AKA "The CEO and Vice-CEO of 'We Will poo poo You Up Inc.'") from Dark Souls than I will eat my lunch. Looks like you're skipping lunch then!
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2013 22:23
|
|
|
I knew it! ...but I already had my delicious lunch.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2013 22:33
|
|
|
So I'm looking at the Ranger; without an animal companion, its combat choices seem kind of underwhelming. Like I have to pick both cleric and sorcerer talents to compensate, to get something beyond basic attacks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2013 01:30
|
|
|
Jackard posted:So I'm looking at the Ranger; without an animal companion, its combat choices seem kind of underwhelming. It's meant to be the second simplest class, just over Barbarian. Some talents will help, as you've noticed, but it's possible to build an incredibly bland Ranger if you want to. Even the more complicated ones are going to do a lot of basic attacks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2013 02:25
|
|
|
Will expansions flesh out existing classes at all or only introduce new ones? Seems like the martial classes lost out on interesting progression this time around. The Ranger especially feels like half a class, with its melee/ranged split and passive talents. Jackard fucked around with this message at 06:24 on Oct 23, 2013 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2013 03:03
|
|
|
I'm really hoping there will at least be some talents introduced to, say, poach a druid spell or ability as a Barbarian.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2013 03:09
|
|
|
I would assume druid-poaching is in, at the very least.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2013 03:22
|
|
|
Jackard posted:Will expansions flesh out existing classes at all or only introduce new ones? Rob and Simon have both said publicly that they'd like to flesh out some existing classes in future expansions, but nothing's been announced yet. (And I personally suspect won't be, until 13 True Ways is either out the door or close to it.)
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2013 04:03
|
|
|
CaptCommy posted:It's meant to be the second simplest class, just over Barbarian. Some talents will help, as you've noticed, but it's possible to build an incredibly bland Ranger if you want to. Even the more complicated ones are going to do a lot of basic attacks. A starting Barbarian has Rage and five out of six talents that function as active abilities. Another simple class, the Paladin, has Smite and five active abilities out of seven talents. The Ranger has three active abilities (Archery, Cleric, Sorcery) to choose from and the remaining talents are passive buffs to autoattack. Jackard fucked around with this message at 06:49 on Oct 23, 2013 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2013 06:39
|
|
|
Jackard posted:For reference, my last character was a Barbarian, and with his talents I never thought "Wow, this guy just has nothing appealing." Oh I'm not trying to argue that the class is interesting, I just wanted to confirm you weren't missing anything. If you don't want an animal companion, I don't think I'd recommend anyone play Ranger right now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2013 06:45
|
|
|
Which is a shame, because animal companions were totally optional in 4E. I don't remember them playing a large role in 3E either.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2013 06:47
|
|
|
They didn't play a large role in 3E because nothing the ranger did or could do did much in 3E.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2013 07:07
|
|
|
Playing a melee ranger in PF once, the party druid's companion was basically my character but better.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2013 07:10
|
|
|
Jackard posted:I don't remember them playing a large role in 3E either. They were pretty huge for druids. A ranger's animal companion in 3e was half as strong as a druid's, because he wasn't a caster.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2013 07:27
|
|
|
Thought I'd share these, the tokens I'm using for dudes on the Barge:     
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2013 08:55
|
|
|
P.d0t posted:Playing a melee ranger in PF once, the party druid's companion was basically my character but better. For reference, it was even more of a disparity than that in 3.5.  The 13th age no-companion archer ranger strikes me as excessively boring, if only because there's like two positioning concerns tops (disengage from melee, preferably be at far range) and besides those you're basically never not leaning on "I shoot, maybe twice, and maybe I reroll". I really wish there were some options/talents/something to make it more interesting to play than poaching one daily from another class.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2013 23:03
|
|
|
Oh hey, the Archmage Engine/13th Age SRD is out now! Pretty cool, and makes me want to make something with it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2013 18:43
|
|
|
PublicOpinion posted:Thought I'd share these, the tokens I'm using for dudes on the Barge: Where did you get these and how do I get thousands more like them??
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2013 18:51
|
|
|
These new Heritage Feats are pretty sweet. http://www.pelgranepress.com/?p=13341 They're all pretty great, albeit sometimes very situationally specific, feats to flesh out your character's backstory. Except Luck of the 13. No idea what benefits are supposed to come from being able to at will nerf any roll you make.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2013 19:14
|
|
|
-Fish- posted:Except Luck of the 13. No idea what benefits are supposed to come from being able to at will nerf any roll you make. Someone's never lost control of their character.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2013 19:46
|
|
|
Speaking of a bunch of community made stuff, I just finished my first ever class! Let me introduce you guys to The Thief. He's not probably not that good yet, because this is the first time I designed anything of this scale. But I am proud of a bunch of stuff associated with him, like the idea of a regenerating resource, and Venoms, and the whole using technology in a very high fantasy setting. Check him out and tell me why he sucks so I can make him not suck.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2013 20:03
|
|
|
Doublehex posted:Check him out and tell me why he sucks so I can make him not suck. The Thief posted:Charisma and Intelligence are good for roleplay purposes. If you feel charisma and intelligence are important to the class, include them somehow. (e: You're actually pretty OK with including intelligence... as a primary attack stat on a bunch of moves, which is the classic "W shaped character") Mystic Mongol fucked around with this message at 20:23 on Oct 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2013 20:11
|
|
|
-Fish- posted:Except Luck of the 13. No idea what benefits are supposed to come from being able to at will nerf any roll you make. I could see it in very specific circumstances, like if you really, really want to proc an even/odd for a battle cry/maneuver/spell or something and are willing to sacrifice a definite hit for it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2013 20:14
|
|
|
That's a bit I forgot to edit. I turned Intelligence into the Gadget attribute - as in, you use that for all of the Gadget Ruses instead of Dexterity. The exception to that rule is Wired Claw, which uses half of Dex and half of Int. Early on it was all just Dex though, thus the inaccurate info.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2013 20:15
|
|
|
I didn't like how the SRD was in multiple word docs/PDFs so I complied it into a single PDF. It's fully bookmarked. So, if anyone's preferences match mine you might like it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2013 20:28
|
|
|
Covok posted:I didn't like how the SRD was in multiple word docs/PDFs so I complied it into a single PDF. It's fully bookmarked. So, if anyone's preferences match mine you might like it. Good man! That is exactly what prevented me from downloading the SRD.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2013 20:29
|
|
|
-Fish- posted:These new Heritage Feats are pretty sweet. Yeah, I don't really see the use of that one as well. I guess it lets you roll failures whenever you like? A bunch of the others are pretty cringeworthy too. Bestial Wrath gives you one extra attack per day even after investing two feats into it. On the other hand, Critter gives you a mini-meatshield that attacks all the time for just one adventurer feat. Doublehex posted:Speaking of a bunch of community made stuff, I just finished my first ever class! Let me introduce you guys to The Thief. He's not probably not that good yet, because this is the first time I designed anything of this scale. But I am proud of a bunch of stuff associated with him, like the idea of a regenerating resource, and Venoms, and the whole using technology in a very high fantasy setting. Okay. First off, Thief gets a LOT of class features before even getting to his talents. Compare it to the Ranger, who has zero default class features, and the Rogue, who only has Sneaky and Trap Sense. Sneaky Bastard is terrible, since it forces you to spend talents just to have a background related to being a thief. Double Melee Attack is one of the most powerful talents in the game and one of the only thing that makes the Ranger mechanically viable, even if he's totally boring. Sure you want the thief to have access to that? The class seems...extremely powerful. More so than anything else in the game. Steal seems ridiculous, giving the ability to stun every fight and the only guideline being that you pick something "most target appropriate". Its base stats are identical to the Rogue's, except that it has a two point advantage in mental defense. Guile is a bit complicated. Since it goes away just by being attacked, not on a hit like momentum, it's really hard to hold on to. On the other hand, you always start off with full so you're encouraged to nova as quickly as you can. I want to give you a slap for thinking Swift as a Shadow is on par with Double Melee Attack or Always a Second Try or A Poison and a Theft. Ruses are too powerful. Caltrops makes any combat against enemies without ranged options trivial. That should be a red flag. Scorpion Venom is just...what the gently caress dude. Multi turn stun? Really? Surprise Shot is just...what. I'd like to point out Pommel to the Head as being really crappy in terms of design if not so much its utility. Specifically, its champion feat. quote:Champion Feat: If an enemy is near to you target you can attempt to hit both at the same time. Add the difference between the two AC’s to the target with the highest AC and that is the new AC that you have to beat. Example: Garret the Thief is sneaking up on two guards in a mansion. Guard 1 has an AC of 12, while Guard 2 has an AC of 16. The difference between the two is 4, so Garret must now beat an AC of 20. So if Guard 1 is asleep on the job and has an AC of 5, the new AC to beat is...27? Does that make sense to you? Choking Gas with the two feats lets you start every single battle by stunning 1d6 enemies for 1d4 turns, with no save. loving hell. Just...loving hell. So, to recap, the Thief has a hax selection of talents, a ton of broken class features already, and Ruses can be used more often than spells AND are more powerful. On the flipside, the Rogue is going to be better at actually being a Thief just by virtue of being able to put their background points into a thief background, which the Thief is forbidden from doing. With Double Melee Attack and Sneak Attack, damage is top tier, near barbarian rage levels. That's before applying all the Ruses. And the design itself on a lot of abilities are just poorly implemented. Stuff like "Use an Unknown, Magical Object" is going to really, really slow the game down. All in all, if the average class in 13th Age is an A, the more boring or overly complicated classes like Ranger and Monk are a B, then I would give this class a failing grade.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2013 20:53
|
|
|
Right, first impressions, focusing on the gadgets. So you either have two full sets of possible attacks, which is essentially two classes sharing core mechanics, or you have a single class with a subset of ruses they're just not very good at. Sticky Bomb is +int vs. AC, which is--well, it's a hard roll to make for a dex primary. Which is a pity, because there's not enough gadgets to do a full gadgeteer. Which means the dreams of running around as a technician dangling bombs all over people and then blowing them up shall go unanswered. Sticky bombs hit a comical number of targets, but do a trivial amount of damage for their status as a daily attack. You don't indicate what action it is to use the sticky bomb power--is it a standard action to detonate them on the turn they're used, or a standard to apply them and then to detonate them? If I throw them now and detonate them later, is throwing them now a free action? Is there any particular reason why throwing sticky bombs hits considerably more targets than any other power in the game? Caltrops is effectively a hard stun on any melee-focused opponent, and revovles around making things NOT happen, which is maybe a mistake for a at-will. They don't expire in any way. Also at higher levels it becomes a permanent immobilize on hitting something's PD, so you throw nails at someone's feet and anchor them to the ground forever. Blinding Powder doesn't last forever, which is better, but it's still an at-will attack that slows combat and brings the party no closer to resolution. Do you want a player chain-throwing dust into people's eyes? Maybe upgrade it to an encounter, make the dust a reactive magnesium blend, and toss a match in there for blind + fire on that poor sucker. A LOT of these powers hit multiple targets. Is there any particular reason these handfuls of powder are more wide-reaching and inescapable than a sorcerer breathing fire? Players are also going to be fighting a lot of monsters--oozes, floating skulls, spectral abominations, statues. Have you given any thought to how these tricks work on something without flesh? Or eyes? Or feet? Or breath? Honestly the gadgets are the only thing I see significantly different from the Rogue--there's just a lot of overlap here. The snatch and return power is neat, but I don't see why it needs a whole new class to contain it, instead of it being an interesting new class feature avaible to rogues. The gadgets are fun, though. So in a perfect world where you cater to my whims, you'd stop trying to remake the rogue and instead focus on a dastardly inventor who strides into combat with length of copper wire, pouch full of nails, and a deboning knife.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2013 20:54
|
|
|
Doublehex posted:Good man! That is exactly what prevented me from downloading the SRD. I'm talking with another guy about making an SRD site like Pathfinder's based on these for ease of use/navigation. Probably will host it off of 13thage.org as a subdomain - stay tuned.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2013 21:26
|
|
|
Okay, so allow me to make a list of the CC that you guys are providing, and try to respond to them in turn. quote:Sneaky Bastard is terrible, since it forces you to spend talents just to have a background related to being a thief. You misread that wrong. You get two background points right off the bat. If you want more, you invest into the Adventurer and Epic Feat. quote:Okay. First off, Thief gets a LOT of class features before even getting to his talents. Compare it to the Ranger, who has zero default class features, and the Rogue, who only has Sneaky and Trap Sense. I was thinking that too...but the first two features, Guile and Ruse are just related to his energy pool, so I didn't really think those should count against him. And then with Sneaky Bastard, that is for giving him some Background Points, so again I don't think that should be struck against him. That leaves him with Steal, Poison and Sneak Attack, which seems reasonable enough. quote:Double Melee Attack is one of the most powerful talents in the game and one of the only thing that makes the Ranger mechanically viable, even if he's totally boring. Sure you want the thief to have access to that? How is it the most powerful? You have to reduce your dice tier AND you only get the bonus of it when it is naturally lands on an odd number. To me, it seemed completely balanced and I didn't think anything of it. I haven't played as or with a Ranger so I could totally be loving wrong about that. But at first glance it didn't seem powerful at all. quote:I want to give you a slap for thinking Swift as a Shadow is on par with Double Melee Attack or Always a Second Try or A Poison and a Theft. You are right on the money. Looking it over, it may be decent at Adventurer Tier, but it is completely worthless once a Thief hits Champion or Epic tier. quote:Caltrops makes any combat against enemies without ranged options trivial. Caltrops DO alot of things at once. They slow enemies down, they do damage... I should focus on one or the other, but a Ruse with both is going to be OP. quote:Scorpion Venom is just...what the gently caress dude. Multi turn stun? Really? I don't think it's the being stun for multiple turns, but the fact that it can be longer than the fight if the Thief has a large enough Dex. I'll nerf that. quote:Surprise Shot is just...what. What is the issue here? It is limited per target, so the Thief can't keep a target stunlocked for the entire fight. It deals no damage. It is simply CC. quote:So if Guard 1 is asleep on the job and has an AC of 5, the new AC to beat is...27? Does that make sense to you? Of course not, but then again this skill is not meant for RP but for combat! For RP purposes the GM should just tell the player what the DC he needs to beat as usual. quote:Choking Gas with the two feats lets you start every single battle by stunning 1d6 enemies for 1d4 turns, with no save. loving hell. Just...loving hell. It is also a high tier ability, and to get those additional stuns per round you need to invest an Epic Feat into it. It seems like a worthwhile investment. Additionally, the amount of enemies stunned is dependent on their proximity to the Thief and on a random number. quote:Which is a pity, because there's not enough gadgets to do a full gadgeteer. I was just thinking that on the way to school today - especially the lack of a 9th Level Gadget Ruse. quote:Sticky bombs hit a comical number of targets, but do a trivial amount of damage for their status as a daily attack. You don't indicate what action it is to use the sticky bomb power--is it a standard action to detonate them on the turn they're used, or a standard to apply them and then to detonate them? If I throw them now and detonate them later, is throwing them now a free action? Is there any particular reason why throwing sticky bombs hits considerably more targets than any other power in the game? Here is what I meant to say, but apparantley was not clear enough in the descrip: Thief throws a sticky bomb at target. He succeeds at the roll. This is considered a Quick Action. IF he decides to detonate on the same turn that he throws it at the target then THAT is considered a Standard Action and his turn is consumed. IF he decies NOT to denoate the Sticky Bombs on this turn than he is free to do any other Standard Action. When he does decide to detonate them - granted that the target has not torn them off first - then the detonation is considered as a Quick Action. But there is the risk of wasting the daily power. Now you say it is underpowered. Here's a thought: reduce the range from d6 to d4 and have the amount of damage doubled. quote:A LOT of these powers hit multiple targets. Is there any particular reason these handfuls of powder are more wide-reaching and inescapable than a sorcerer breathing fire? I suppose not. I was thinking in the regards of: "Hey, lots of particles flying around! Plenty of targets!" But in gameplay terms that doesn't apply. The fact that lots of them are At-Will may slow the combat down. quote:The gadgets are fun, though. So in a perfect world where you cater to my whims, you'd stop trying to remake the rogue and instead focus on a dastardly inventor who strides into combat with length of copper wire, pouch full of nails, and a deboning knife. I wasn't trying to go for the Rogue, but rather a more realistic one that doesn't play by the rules, isn't charming, and is something of a bastard. He cheats to win, thus the emphasis on poisons and gadgets. I'll try to add more gadgets, remove the redundant skills, and try to follow your comments guys. Appreciate the time you took!
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2013 21:26
|
|
|
Doublehex posted:
Pretty sure the criticism here is that it's harder to take out a tough guy (AC 18) and a squishy wizard (AC 12) than it is to take out two tough guys. In the first case you're looking at a DC of 24, whereas in the second case it takes no extra effort whatsoever. Surely you can see this math makes no sense? TBH I'd just put a static +DC on top of the highest AC.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2013 21:46
|
|
|
Doublehex posted:It is also a high tier ability, and to get those additional stuns per round you need to invest an Epic Feat into it. It seems like a worthwhile investment. Additionally, the amount of enemies stunned is dependent on their proximity to the Thief and on a random number. Is there a power in the 13th age book that approaches the terrifying might of 1d6d4 turns of stun? That is a lot of stun. Doublehex posted:Caltrops DO alot of things at once. They slow enemies down, they do damage... I should focus on one or the other, but a Ruse with both is going to be OP. They should probably just do damage then... restricting movement is going to always be extremely powerful or extremely weak in a system without a battle map. Doublehex posted:I wasn't trying to go for the Rogue, but rather a more realistic one that doesn't play by the rules, isn't charming, and is something of a bastard. He cheats to win, thus the emphasis on poisons and gadgets. See, the problem is you can already play the rogue as a ruthless unlikable sociopath who fights dirty. Doublehex posted:I'll try to add more gadgets, Yaaaaaaaay!
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2013 22:07
|
|
|
quote:Is there a power in the 13th age book that approaches the terrifying might of 1d6d4 turns of stun? That is a lot of stun. I...I...can't argue with that. Valid point is valid. quote:Pretty sure the criticism here is that it's harder to take out a tough guy (AC 18) and a squishy wizard (AC 12) than it is to take out two tough guys. In the first case you're looking at a DC of 24, whereas in the second case it takes no extra effort whatsoever. Surely you can see this math makes no sense? TBH I'd just put a static +DC on top of the highest AC. Going in, my idea was to have the DC reflect the difficulty to knocking out two guys in one swift motion. So I was thinking; "Well, it should account for the sturdiness of both." Originally I was gonna have the average of both ACs be added to the highest, but that is too Mathy so I aimed for the difference. But I can see the issue with that being too complicated as well. Doublehex fucked around with this message at 22:12 on Oct 24, 2013 |
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2013 22:10
|
|
|
Doublehex posted:You misread that wrong. You get two background points right off the bat. If you want more, you invest into the Adventurer and Epic Feat. Right. You get 2 points in a thief-type background. At that point, you can either get a second thief type background that does pretty much the same thing but with a higher bonus, or you can just get non-thief backgrounds. The more canny player will spend those 2 points on something that is only very tangentally related to being a skill monkey thief, but most players would be stuck with a +2 bonus to "steal money and hide and poo poo" checks. quote:I was thinking that too...but the first two features, Guile and Ruse are just related to his energy pool, so I didn't really think those should count against him. And then with Sneaky Bastard, that is for giving him some Background Points, so again I don't think that should be struck against him. That leaves him with Steal, Poison and Sneak Attack, which seems reasonable enough. quote:How is it the most powerful? You have to reduce your dice tier AND you only get the bonus of it when it is naturally lands on an odd number. To me, it seemed completely balanced and I didn't think anything of it. I haven't played as or with a Ranger so I could totally be loving wrong about that. But at first glance it didn't seem powerful at all. At level 1, an attack with a d8 weapon is going to do about 4.75 damage/attack. With the double melee attack, even though it only triggers half the time, your damage/attack jumps up to 6.375, a 34% increase. And an extra attack is always going to scale with level. Of course, this is the Thief, so let's say you have sneak attack. At level 10, a standard d8 attack does 35 damage per round. A ranger's double attack is 45, a rogue's sneak attack is 50.75. A thief using both is about 53. And if you can combine it with Ruses like Viper Blades, it's even more powerful. And then you have to consider that so many ruses can be used as a quick action... [/quote] You are right on the money. Looking it over, it may be decent at Adventurer Tier, but it is completely worthless once a Thief hits Champion or Epic tier. [/quote] No. No, it is not. A +1 bonus to sneaking while you're in the shadows is crap. Unless by "+1 dex bonus" you mean it functions as "+1 to your prime stat modifier when it's dark", in which case you've worded this in the worst way possible. quote:I don't think it's the being stun for multiple turns, but the fact that it can be longer than the fight if the Thief has a large enough Dex. I'll nerf that. Being able to stunlock the dragon god for any number of turns is going to be ridiculous. You should at least give it something like a hp threshold. quote:What is the issue here? It is limited per target, so the Thief can't keep a target stunlocked for the entire fight. It deals no damage. It is simply CC. quote:Of course not, but then again this skill is not meant for RP but for combat! For RP purposes the GM should just tell the player what the DC he needs to beat as usual. quote:It is also a high tier ability, and to get those additional stuns per round you need to invest an Epic Feat into it. It seems like a worthwhile investment. Additionally, the amount of enemies stunned is dependent on their proximity to the Thief and on a random number. Wow. I thought for sure that you had wrote the ruse out poorly and hadn't realized that there wasn't a save involved. But if that's your idea of working as intended, then yeah. Wow. Just...loving wow. quote:I'll try to add more gadgets, remove the redundant skills, and try to follow your comments guys. Appreciate the time you took!
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2013 22:12
|
|
|
Stallion Cabana posted:Do one ... one for Combat. Took a while because I had come down with a bad case of  . Look at this wall of words and tremble as you realize it was once THREE TIMES AS LOOOOONG (oooo spoooky halloween post). I wound up finishing the cleanup after seeing Doublehex there making an entirely new class just because he didn't like the 'feel' of the Rogue. Man, that poo poo is not pre-ordained! You can change it!Let's talk combat! Nowhere is the term 'engaged' rigidly defined, which means that engaging and disengaging can mean a lot of things. There are no grappling rules, which should result in tons of grappling at all times, both by monsters and players. And what is and isn't a weapon, and how it can and can't be used in combat, is defined not by the rules but by agreement between player and DM. Two characters can use the same rules and fight completely differently. First, consider Kele the Bird, who is a level three fighter because no one knows if monk is going to be terrible or not. His favored weapon is a martial two handed weapon, both of his bare hands in the Rigid Claw of the Righteous Omnipresent Eagle, a two handed jujitsu technique in which he punctures holes in wood with his fingertips. Because he is a spaz, he often rolls around in the dirt with his opponent. In practical terms, although he has no literal weapon, the DM is allowing him to do two-handed weapon damage with his bare hands as long as he keeps both hands free. So if he's not using a shield or holding a potion or a torch or a plot important crystal, Kele the Bird is dealing 3d10+4 damage with his base attack. If something is occupying one hand, suddenly he has to use his much less impressive martial technique, Furious Claw of the Smug Grackle. Kele doesn't want to use this technique, both because it does one handed non-martial damage (3d6+4) and because it reminds him of his hated rivals, the grackles. Every time he uses it, he has to close his eyes, turn his head, and say, "Once again, I am forced to use 'that' technique. Well, shucks!" He does this mainly to annoy his fellow player, who takes samurai fantasy very seriously. Kele's ideological opposite is Miyamoto Musashi, a level 3 fighter made by a player who just read the Go Rin No Sho for the first time. His two handed weapon is his Katana, but for most of combat it is kept sheathed, while he walks around with his arms crossed. Instead of running back and forth across the fight with his weapon over his head like an excitable five year old, Musashi only draws his sword a split second before he strikes with it, and then immediately returns it to the sheathe. Because he needs one hand on the scabbard and one hand on the hilt of his weapon, using his weapon is a two handed affair, and thus it does two handed weapon damage--3d10+4. If circumstance forces him to hold a flickering lantern in one hand to illuminate the shadowy dojo he's defending from ninja, he can't use his Katana effectively. Then he uses his wakizashi, a smaller sword he doesn't do fancy unsheathing nonsense with. A one handed, less involved weapon, the wakizashi only does 3d6+4, a puny damage total suitable only for wizards. Both characters spend most combats with both hands completely empty; because they need to keep their hands free they have no relative advantage over a fighter who runs around the battlefield with a two-handed great axe. True, a GM can disarm the axe using goon more easily than Kele or Musashi, but if he's just trying to make things complicated for them he could put a glue trap down or hit them with bolos or tangle them in vines or give them the clap or have them carried away by dingos. There is no limit to GM cruelty, so there's no need to force players to fight in a specific way just to leave one avenue of inventiveness open. Other possible two handed weapons: The Meteor Hammer. A magical rapier with a blade made of a spell cast with your off hand. A zinc rod and a copper rod that only blast your foe with electricity if you jab with both of them. A razorwire garrote you wrap around a body part and slice with. Two one handed weapons, if you feel the existing two weapon rules are stupid and don't want to use them, but still want to be a rad duelist with a rapier and a main gauche. (Alternative: The main gauche counts as a shield) A statue of your high elf character made of brass, supposedly the only weapon beautiful enough to be worthy of you. A pop-up book which animated paper monsters burst out of. The wooden post you spent two years chained to as a slave. A dead horse. So, Kele the Bird and Miyamoto Musashi head out from a town beset by the Orc Lord's forces. The roads are packed with raiders and supply trains, so our heroes have to sneak through the forest or be beset by more orcs than any two heroes could face. Their objective: assassinate the shamans leading the army. Musashi rolls dex + "Last Living Student of the Crimson Lotus School of Swordplay" to use the silence of falling snow technique and move silently through the forest, while Kele the Bird rolls dex + "Bird" to sneak up on something he intends to kill and maybe eat. The two of them find their quarry, walking along a path near some underbrush. With these shamans dead the soldiers will lose their spiritual connection to their icon, and may flee completely! The heroes decide who's attacking who ("I'll take the one on the left." "You ALWAYS get the one on the left!") and spring their ambush. Kele gets initiative, and attacks first. He engages the shaman on the left (sorry, Mushashi, shoulda rolled better) which means he springs out of the bushes with a shrill cry, seizes the orc by the shoulders, and tumbles to the ground in a heap with him. Seizing the orc's head, he bashes it against the hard forest floor over and over again! This isn't exactly his Rigid Claws of the Righteous Omnipresent Eagle technique, but he's using both hands only to hurt his opponent, so who cares. He rolls to hit, and on a success against he opponent's AC he deals quite significant damage! Unfortunately, he doesn't hit, which means he just rolls about on the ground with the orc, trying to choke it to death. Three damage! The orc, understandably, is quite surprised by this turn of events. Next up is Musashi, who decides that he's not going to engage in such a rough and boorish manner. Instead he simply stands up from the bushes and locks eyes with the other orc. Who cares that he's fifteen feet away? He's focused on the orc, that orc is within his killing range, and he just used a move action to engage it. If that orc's attention wavers from Musashi, say by casting a spell or trying to move carelessly, Musashi will get an attack of opportunity, just as if he was standing two feet away and beating on him directly. Cold sweat pours down the orc's neck as he realizes he's already in the tiger's jaws or some such pointlessly rad nonsense. Then Musashi misses his attack--had he hit, he would have said his attack was so perfect the orc didn't even see it coming, and would have done his 3d10+3 damage without leaving his bush. But it was a miss, so the orc just gets a shallow cut along one arm and a branch twelve feet behind him is suddenly cut from the tree it grows from. That orc just got hella lucky, and is pinned in place by the hateful gaze of a true samurai! It's the shamans turns. The shaman grappling with Kele wants to get away so he can cast a spell without suffering an attack, so he tries to disengage by planting a boot on the In purely mechanical terms there's no difference between the two--both had a fighter move to engage them, then attack vs. their AC, and took the miss damage, but could have taken way more damage. But one player wanted their fighter to be engaged in a desperate struggle rolling in the dirt, and the other wanted a quiet display of true mastery. And, in what may be some of the best combat mechanics being sold today, neither player is rewarded or punished for their purely stylistic combat choices. One player is a bird, the other player is an anime, but neither one has an advantage over the other--and they still play wildly differently from each other at the table! How great is that? Spoilers, it is amazing. Best of all, neither of them simply moved adjacent to an enemy, hit them with a basic attack, and then stood there furiously like a dragon age antagonist. Word of warning: The only downside to 'engaging a foe with your baleful gaze' is where you put your miniatures down on the table. If you leave your mini a short distance away from the target, how are you going to make it apparent that you're engaging them? Be consistent. The fight against the shamans ends quickly. Each of our heroes suffers some damage, which like everything else is viewed through the prism of character expectations. Musashi gets a serious burn along one arm, which he uses a recovery to cure by wrapping it in a bandage. Kele gets his shoulder dislocated, so he uses a recovery to pop his arm back into place. Both are back to full hitpoints, but they still have injuries; this is represented by the expenditure of recoveries. As they catch their breath from the fight, suddenly a tremendous roar splits the quiet woodland scene. An ogre appears and charges at the two warriors with a terrible cry! The ogre acts first and engage them both. Because he's the active character and gets to define what engagement is, he strides forwards and picks them both up. In any other system, this would be a check to grapple, and then we'd roll for contested grapple checks and check to pin and check for footing and in a dozen other ways this would take half an hour while everyone bickers over how grappling works. But in 13th age, the ogre grabs the heroes, and the heroes are engaged, just like Kele engaging a shaman by bearing him to the ground earlier. No one needs to modify the check based on what body part the ogre is using and if the ogre is willing to accept immobilization, because we all have things to do tomorrow. The Ogre uses a standard action to make a melee attack. Normally for ogres this is a club strike, but the ogre's hands are full so instead he just raises Kele up and smashes him into the ground. Again: details are lame, action is awesome. Roll to hit, on a hit deal full damage, on a miss do miss damage (which for an ogre is half of a hit). Play passes to our heroes. Kele is woozy from being smashed into the ground, so he doesn't feel he can break free. Instead he just makes a standard attack to drive all ten fingers into the ogre's massive hand, using his Rigid Claw of the Righteous Omnipresent Eagle. He stays in the ogre's hand because as a melee character he's perfectly fine being engaged with a big scary ogre. Finally, Musashi gets to act, and Musashi doesn't think he can use his katana technique while he's held by an ogre. So he takes advantage of the ogre's distraction to flip out of the monster's hand and land firmly atop its shoulders. A flicker of steel later, and he's landed a terrible blow on the Ogre's head. Again, there's no roll to escape the ogre's grasp because he's not leaving engagement, but because he has narrative control over how he fights, he can do the incredibly rad, somewhat implausible master swordsman nonsense that he wants to do, and not have to suffer through one or more 'stunt rolls' where he might arbitrarily fail for no real improvement over a basic attack. Can you imagine trying to declare, "I stand atop the ogre's shoulders and strike at him" in traditional D&D? You'd be making climb checks and balance checks and lord knows what else. Even if you passed your checks on an 7+ on the die, that becomes a flat 50% chance to fail--the same as if he had put his eyes out before attacking, all for the crime of trying to be cool. Conversely, in Exalted you get a bonus for standing on top of a NPC, which means it's punishing players who want to play a gritty, somewhat realistic warrior who plants his feet in the dirt and doesn't take risks with the lives of his friends. By leaving the details of a character's fight to the players, 13th age celebrates the incredible diversity of roleplaying. Kele the Bird, Miyamoto Musashi, Tordek the Dwarf, and Valeros the Somewhat Drunk can all roll into combat however they feel is best, and anyone playing them can say, "I was never punished for my choice of fighting style." That's fantastic!
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2013 23:00
|
|
|
Really interesting post. That kind of thinking is definitely a departure from the tone of the book, what with its very specific rules for grabbing and such, but the rules totally support that style of play. I think an issue that a lot of people have is that when you're playing, sure, you can flavor the attack and engagement in whatever way you please, but you're still going to just be rolling a d20 and hoping to hit. Kele and Musashi only really have to think about how to describe what they are doing. What they are doing--moving to engage and then making basic attacks--has already been decided, because the characters can't really do anything else. That disconnect between having a ton of freedom in terms of narration but being locked in to something very unfun in gameplay can be jarring for a lot of people, and I would think that that's the source of the "doesn't feel right" sensation.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2013 23:18
|
|
|
Oh, there's tactical considerations to make, I just didn't care because there were too many words already.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2013 23:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 18:05 |
|
|
For some classes. A rogue can pick which power he uses, a barbarian has to carefully judge whether or not to use his daily rage. Casters pick their spells. A ranger uses their double attack. A fighter makes a basic attack, then uses whatever maneuver he qualified for. Neither really could be said to be tactical classes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2013 23:37
|
|