|
Blasphemeral posted:Vanilla stunts are so terrible. +Numbers... yay? This is a problem I've been having while writing Inverse World Accelerated. +2 To A Thing stunts are loving boring, but part of my FAE conversion is redoing as many moves as stunts as I can, so I keep having to look for ways stunts can interact with the mechanics that aren't that. It works but it's a pain! 
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 02:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 12:04 |
|
|
So I've been musing more on a Kriegszeppelin Valkyrie/Crimson Skies style aerial adventures and how to handle air combat. I really like the stuff KZV mentions, but it doesn't really say anything of zones. I guess like any other combat, it really depends on the situation. If you're intercepting enemies on the way to attack the Valkyrie, the zones are maybe just "close, near, far, very far" or something, while if you're flying over a base the zones might be parts of the base (northern airfield, hangars, barracks, west outskirts). I'll admit I have little experience with Fate/FAE, so maybe I'm just uncertain about zones in general. How many do people tend to use? I'm also trying to think of ways to put advantages on an opponent in air combat that isn't just a variation of "On XYZ's tail". Stuff like luring the enemy into a friendly's path (Good ol' Thatch Weave) or attacking from altitude. I'm also mildly wondering what happens when a pilot comes back with a shot up plane, suffering moderate and severe consequences, and suddenly finds himself in a different sort of conflict on foot. I figure its just tough luck and he's in extra danger of being taken out easily. Afterall, sure its just an argument, but hey, you just got all shot up in that last mission, you don't have room to argue! Also, because I was bored, I made this (anyone who recognizes where the art is from gets a cookie): 
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 02:56
|
|
|
Transient People posted:Examples? Because usually the internal logic is reallllllllly obvious. Like how Smoke Bomb makes perfect sense once you actually realize how it works. EDIT: It also doesn't help that the stunt is so poorly worded that I can't even tell what the intended effect is of the wording "pause battle". Ettin posted:This is a problem I've been having while writing Inverse World Accelerated. +2 To A Thing stunts are loving boring, but part of my FAE conversion is redoing as many moves as stunts as I can, so I keep having to look for ways stunts can interact with the mechanics that aren't that. It works but it's a pain! MadScientistWorking fucked around with this message at 05:39 on Feb 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 05:20
|
|
|
Isn't it kind of obvious? You spend your action to clear your stress box, you then aren't attacked nor can attack anyone for the exchange. It's a rule patch to the very obvious problem of 'hey, cool, I can regain my lowest stress box in a fight! Wait, what do you mean when you say you're just gonna hit me again?!'. Like I don't see how this is even remotely debatable. It's vaguely decent if your setting is full of manly 1v1 solomid shonen duels, and absolute garbage otherwise cause you're effectively conceding the round and giving the enemy team +1 Action relative to yours. It wouldn't be that good even if it cleaned the highest stress box instead of the lowest, because it only works once per two turns and people caa just punch you for boosted damage in the snout by setting up Aspects and inflict Consequences while you try to keep up with their damage.
Transient People fucked around with this message at 05:44 on Feb 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 05:39
|
|
|
Also, Pouring Wine requires Drinking from the Jug, which clears your lowest stress box. Stopping people from punching you in the dick every other time you use it is all Pouring Wine does.
Ettin fucked around with this message at 06:17 on Feb 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 05:41
|
|
|
Transient People posted:Isn't it kind of obvious? MadScientistWorking fucked around with this message at 16:30 on Feb 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 16:14
|
|
|
MadScientistWorking posted:No it actually isn't because you got it completely wrong. The internal logic of that stunt tree is that you want to be attacked as often as possible because you'll be able to stack aspects faster than doing it normally. Its weirdly tactical for a game like Fate and it really isn't at all obvious that you can violate the action economy. quote:No it actually isn't because you got it completely wrong. The internal logic of that stunt is the exact opposite of what you assume it is. Its tricky to figure out because its only readily evident until you look at the stunt tree as a whole but its basically allowing you to violate the action economy by using the Defend action. quote:No it actually isn't because you got it completely wrong. The internal logic of that stunt is the exact opposite of what you assume it is. Admittedly, part of the problem is that you have to take the stunt tree on the whole to figure out what is going on because the other bunch of stunts give you as many Create an Advantage actions as you have defense rolls. It is really hard to respond to how dumb "that can't be what that stunt does, because three different stunts in this eight-stunt tree give you bonuses for defending! I guess it's tricky to figure out though  " is when you keep editing it to make it dumber.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 16:45
|
|
|
MadScientistWorking posted:No it actually isn't because you got it completely wrong. MadScientistWorking posted:The internal logic of that stunt tree is that you want to be attacked as often as possible because you'll be able to stack aspects faster than doing it normally. Its weirdly tactical for a game like Fate and it really isn't at all obvious that you can violate the action economy. MadScientistWorking posted:No it actually isn't because you got it completely wrong. The internal logic of that stunt is the exact opposite of what you assume it is. Its tricky to figure out because its only readily evident until you look at the stunt tree as a whole but its basically allowing you to violate the action economy by using the Defend action. MadScientistWorking posted:No it actually isn't because you got it completely wrong. The internal logic of that stunt is the exact opposite of what you assume it is. Admittedly, part of the problem is that you have to take the stunt tree on the whole to figure out what is going on because the other bunch of stunts give you as many Create an Advantage actions as you have defense rolls. Hey, can you do us all a favor and figure out your argument before you post, instead of editing arguments into your post after you make it over the course of ten minutes? Because that really just makes it hard to respond to you. Also, you're talking about the Drunken Monkey stunt tree as a whole. The Drinking From The Jug line of stunts, which you can take without taking anything else from the Drunken Monkey stunt tree, work the way Ettin describes. The tactical uses of the stunts change if you take stunts from the Drunkard's Stagger line of stunts, yes, but that doesn't change what the stunts actually do.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 16:49
|
|
|
Lurks With Wolves posted:Also, you're talking about the Drunken Monkey stunt tree as a whole. The Drinking From The Jug line of stunts, which you can take without taking anything else from the Drunken Monkey stunt tree, work the way Ettin describes. The tactical uses of the stunts change if you take stunts from the Drunkard's Stagger line of stunts, yes, but that doesn't change what the stunts actually do.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 16:59
|
|
|
MadScientistWorking posted:Right but honestly that stunt is entirely useless without the rest of the stunt tree. Quoting this before you edit it six loving times. While not strictly speaking actionable, please stop doing that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 17:19
|
|
|
MadScientistWorking posted:Right but honestly that stunt is entirely useless without the rest of the stunt tree. Man, that was a real quick change of opinions. quote:Well since we are talking about health based stunts Wine Pouring is kind of ridiculous for something that is supposed to be the same exact resource expenditure you get for Smoke Bomb and violates the advice given about how stunts should only provide two shifts of effect. Either it's poo poo without an entire tree of stunts or it's ridiculous, chief. Not both. I'm inclined to just say 'it's kind of really bad, should recover the highest stress box instead of the lowest, and shouldn't require you to take a worthless prerequisite stunt to access', but you may disagree. It certainly wasn't broken like you claimed and I'd take Smoke Bomb's 'you literally cannot do anything to me until you make a hard Notice check that I can boost, toodles' effect over this any day.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2014 21:22
|
|
|
I know they're outdated and such, but Legends of Anglerre, the Companion, and Starblazer Adventures $5 per PDF until the 31st. Looks like Cubicle 7's not going to renew the licenses (and admits there are better implementations) so they're doing a big sendoff sale.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2014 00:24
|
|
|
So, I'm working on a .hack//Fate thing. While I made a fair bit of rules for it, I'm not actually SUPER experienced with Fate. So I'd like the opinions of the Fate Wizards in here about it, either what you'd do differently, how to tweak it, whatever. Anything that lets me see some different Fate Core techniques and things like that. .hack//Fate Booklet So there's the main booklet I've been working on that layers are making characters with. While recruitment is still going on, I won't make major changes to it but I will definitely try to keep what you guys in mind., and probably put it in a different doc. There are also these Dungeon Exploration rules I'm working on. And these will probably change a lot faster based on feedback, considering they haven't been integrated into the booklet yet. Although I'd love to have them up before recruitment ends in 2 week for players to get stunt ideas or the like based off of them. There will also be typos and some weird issues throughout. If you guys see anything too egregious, if you decide to check these out, tell me anytime. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2014 01:13
|
|
|
Galaga Galaxian posted:I'm also trying to think of ways to put advantages on an opponent in air combat that isn't just a variation of "On XYZ's tail". Stuff like luring the enemy into a friendly's path (Good ol' Thatch Weave) or attacking from altitude. When I get stuck, I usually think cinematically. What does the audience see? When we see a shot of each pilot or their copilot, what problem are they dealing with? When you deal with that, you can create all kinds of aspects. "Deafening Noise" from buzzing an opponent, "Drunk Copilot", "I've got a better height ceiling" or "Scarf in his propellers" spice things up from the usual "Out of the Clouds" and "I'm in her head." quote:I'm also mildly wondering what happens when a pilot comes back with a shot up plane, suffering moderate and severe consequences, and suddenly finds himself in a different sort of conflict on foot. Well, in KZV, your plane is designed to take a lot of the damage. Once YOU start taking hits, it means the plane was almost falling out of the sky, or for some reason, you're moving your cockpit in the way of the fuel tanks. Remember the easy memonetic when it comes to action increasing: Minor means your ankle's bruised, moderate means sprained, severe means broken. (Extreme is lost.). Say you come back from a mission with a torn rotator cuff and a bloody noise. If your officer gets in your face, you won't have much time to argue, because your big motivation is to get to the sick bay. You can't get physical (he can tag the rotator cuff). You don't look so dashing (what with the red stains in your mustache). So it makes sense that if you're banged up, you'll have a harder time of it... Or have to pull out those fatepoints, and prove why you're a REAL pilot.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2014 02:45
|
|
|
devilmaydry posted:So, I'm working on a .hack//Fate thing. Reading through it, here's what catches my eye. First, exploits need some more guidelines. The ability to change a -4 into a +4 is ridiculously good, and the document doesn't give any guidelines into how often you can use it, whether it costs fate points, etc. When you have a mechanic, start from the bottom and go over everything, because otherwise you assume that the reader will assume what's locked up in your head. The way you balance the three types--physical, magic, balanced--might not work well with Fate. If I'm reading it right, then a physical or balanced fighter can't use any fate points or situation aspects to increase their defense when they're hit with a magic attack, and they can get a compel to lower their defense even further. That means rocket tag, and as long as a party is able to make both physical and magic attacks, the overpowered strategy would always be for everyone to CA to pump up the person with the right attack to flatten the enemy in one hit. About the roles. Tank functions identically if you just say "gain a +1 bonus to defense". DPS makes attacking even better than it already is, which is only compounded with the rules for Types. Here's a scenario. A physical DPS attacks a Balanced Tank and both get a total result of +3. A tie. The player spends a Free Invoke from a situation aspect to change that to a hit, and the Tank can't do anything because they're balanced. Now, the tank has been hit for 1 shift, and the attack gets a Boost in exchange for their free invoke. They're not done though, and they spend a fate point. Three shifts of damage now, and this tank only had 2 boxes, so a minor consequence. The total result is that they spent a free invoke and a fate point to inflict 1 stress, one consequence, AND they got a boost AND a free invoke on the consequence. For Buffer, a one shift increase on a tie is meaningless, since there is no difference between succeeding and succeeding with one shift. Same with Tactician. You might as well say "+1 to these rolls" if that's what you want to accomplish. Skipping the class section, the Inventory's ability to use AOEs is probably broken since in Fate it's super easy to pump up one attack with situation aspects, then apply that to everyone in a zone. My advice for AOE attacks is that when you do you have everyone roll and see who is hit. Then, you compare the highest defense of the one you hit with your own roll, and divide those shifts among all the targets. So if you Fire Scroll a zone and Roll a 6, and they roll 3, 1, 4, 7, then you hit the first three with a total of 2 shifts. Spend a fate point to raise that to 4 shifts, and then divide that into a 2, 1, and 1 shift hit on the three targets. But that might be a bit convoluted, I dunno. Threat Reduction is too narrow for a skill, probably works better as a stunt. Maybe if you tie it more closely to stealth. Armor is powerful, but I've got to say, adding a second parallel stress track next to the physical one is nice, really nice. Good idea. I can see what Class Tech is meant to do, but it's really a "work this out with our GM" kind of thing. Works for when you're the only one using it, but maybe add a few more guidelines? Aggro has the same issue as Threat Reduction. The reskinning of the player skills is nice for the most part.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2014 02:59
|
|
|
Posting stuff for criticism, eh? Well, how about all the stunts I put together for Inverse World Accelerated?  (If someone would actually like to, comments are enabled! Please tell me who you are though in case I want to DISCUSS THINGS.)
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2014 13:11
|
|
|
Quadratic_Wizard posted:The way you balance the three types--physical, magic, balanced--might not work well with Fate. If I'm reading it right, then a physical or balanced fighter can't use any fate points or situation aspects to increase their defense when they're hit with a magic attack, and they can get a compel to lower their defense even further. That means rocket tag, and as long as a party is able to make both physical and magic attacks, the overpowered strategy would always be for everyone to CA to pump up the person with the right attack to flatten the enemy in one hit. quote:About the roles. Tank functions identically if you just say "gain a +1 bonus to defense". quote:DPS makes attacking even better than it already is, which is only compounded with the rules for Types. Here's a scenario. A physical DPS attacks a Balanced Tank and both get a total result of +3. A tie. The player spends a Free Invoke from a situation aspect to change that to a hit, and the Tank can't do anything because they're balanced. Now, the tank has been hit for 1 shift, and the attack gets a Boost in exchange for their free invoke. They're not done though, and they spend a fate point. Three shifts of damage now, and this tank only had 2 boxes, so a minor consequence. The total result is that they spent a free invoke and a fate point to inflict 1 stress, one consequence, AND they got a boost AND a free invoke on the consequence. quote:For Buffer, a one shift increase on a tie is meaningless, since there is no difference between succeeding and succeeding with one shift. Same with Tactician. You might as well say "+1 to these rolls" if that's what you want to accomplish. A few other things I noticed while looking through: .hack//Fate posted:This is modeled in invokes and compels, a physical class is able to invoke to increase rolls to defend against a physical attack, and can be compelled to roll worse when defending against a magic attack. .hack//Fate posted:Class Stunt: The Wizard may choose to take 2 stress in order to deal 1 stress directly to the consequence track instead of dealing strain equal to the number of shifts if their attack is successful or matches the targets defense roll. If the target has no consequence tracks left to fill, it is taken out. .hack//Fate posted:Aggro is primarily used to draw in foes and keep their attention. This can apply a scene wide aspect, drawing in all the enemies that don’t overcome your roll, or go down to only targeting one enemy. I also noticed that certain classes seemed to get aggro generation/reduction as uses of their Class Tech. If Aggro/Threat Reduction do end up being too narrow, you could consider folding them into Class Tech and letting people decide whether aggro management/stealth are main features of their class. Even if your class doesn't have stealth, you could still probably justify using Lore to get past unaware monsters by knowing their aggro radii and patrol routes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2014 18:04
|
|
|
Zandar posted:Unless the wording's changed since, that's not true. A bonus to defence would decrease any stress taken from hits, which the Tank's ability doesn't affect. Ah, yeah, you're right. quote:That's not the best example, given that the second invoke makes the result exactly the same as in Core (assuming the defender doesn't invoke, of course, but that's nothing to do with DPS). I'd argue that Buffers get just as much relative value when using Create Advantage, since their success with style gives them a total +2 instead of +1. Tacticians and Tanks will probably get less use out of their abilities, although having Aggro would alleviate that for Tanks by drawing weak attackers to them. Well, the main thing is that when you make an attack, the defender has serious incentives to spend their resources--invokes, fate points--making sure that attack doesn't hit, because big hits are going to basically generate more value than they cost. The issue is that with the Types, defenders are unable to spend their resources defending, so it's very much a rocket tag with boost chains. quote:A tie is a separate result in Core. The Buffer's ability will give them a full aspect instead of a boost, and the Tactician's will let them succeed fully instead of partially/with a minor cost. Aspects do have a lot of uses outside of just being there for Invokes and Compels, but even so, most of the time a boost is going to be just as good as an aspect with a free invoke. In combat, Overcome rolls are already really uncommon since you're spending your turn to do something that doesn't help end the battle. Most of the time it's to get rid of a negative aspect, and it's still usually a bad call tactically. Essentially, the rules as a whole buff Attacking to a rather ridiculous degree, leave CA mostly unchanged because CA feeds the buffed attacks, but makes Overcome more of a false choice. It's better to Take Out the monster with one big hit than it is to roll Inventory to pull out an antidote and Overcome your Paralytic Poison aspect, because the monster isn't going to be able to Invoke the poison aspect against your attack anyhow.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2014 18:50
|
|
|
I definitely see that wording is probably an issue with the booklet. The way Types are supposed to work is that the class aspect could be invoked to defend against an attack that's the same Type as the class. The second part of that, a penalty to defense against magic type attacks, is definitely not worded right. Anyway, a physical type could still invoke things to better defend against a magic attack, they just couldn't invoke their Class Aspect. That was the main idea, anyway. Me buffing attack too much is probably accurate, and I definitely want to try making all actions viable. Does anyone have any ideas on how to achieve this? Making Class an important part of a character is definitely one of my goals, but I suppose I'm not sure how to model it in a balanced way.
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2014 20:40
|
|
|
Golden Bee posted:When I get stuck, I usually think cinematically. What does the audience see? When we see a shot of each pilot or their copilot, what problem are they dealing with? There's also Wikipedia's Aerial Combat Tactics page for inspiration for maneuvers you might pull. Golden Bee posted:Well, in KZV, your plane is designed to take a lot of the damage. Once YOU start taking hits, it means the plane was almost falling out of the sky, or for some reason, you're moving your cockpit in the way of the fuel tanks. I've been looking at KZV for a similar game idea. Maybe I'm dense, but I don't see anything about planes having a separate stress track. A couple of the heavily-armored ones have that "once per battle gain Armor:2 effect; is that what you're talking about or am I missing something? GimpInBlack fucked around with this message at 20:54 on Mar 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2014 20:52
|
|
|
Sorry, I was remembering the "Extras" rules (where a plane might get 2 stress and one consequence.)
|
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2014 21:24
|
|
|
Nope, the planes are just considered stunt-based equipment/extras in KZV. Basically like any stunt they give you bonuses when performing certain actions. Most of the planes are actually several stunts worth of bonuses rolled into one and cost 1-3 refresh (KZV pilots start with 5 refresh). Damage goes straight to the pilot's stress. The way I'd do it is I'd allow consequences to be applied to the character via his plane and the immediate situation. So if you take a minor consequence because a Triplane shot at you, you might get Fractured Wing Strut. This would likely go away at the end of the scene (presumably when you stop using the plane) and you start recovery (repairs) like any other minor consequence. A moderate one might be a Severe Oil Leak, which not only can be tagged by enemies for a boost, but compelled to do things like spray oil in the pilot's face, blocking his vision at a critical moment. After recovery starts it downgrades as thematic, if the aircraft might be used again soon maybe the aircraft now has a Poorly Tuned Engine. Or maybe it shifts in nature when it reduces into being Ashamed at the damage from the enemy besting you, which might make the pilot temperamental. Though a moderate one could also be a minor injury like a glancing hit. A severe consequence might be something truly serious, like a worrying wounding of the pilot The Bullet Grazed my Skull!, or perhaps still stick to aircraft related consequences with a Flaming Engine. Galaga Galaxian fucked around with this message at 22:51 on Mar 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 5, 2014 22:47
|
|
|
Golden Bee posted:Sorry, I was remembering the "Extras" rules (where a plane might get 2 stress and one consequence.) Ah, yeah, that makes sense. You also get a wingman that gives you an extra minor consequence, of course. Galaga Galaxian posted:The way I'd do it is I'd allow consequences to be applied to the character via his plane and the immediate situation. So if you take a minor consequence because a Triplane shot at you, you might get Fractured Wing Strut. This would likely go away at the end of the scene (presumably when you stop using the plane) and you start recovery (repairs) like any other minor consequence. A moderate one might be a Severe Oil Leak, which not only can be tagged by enemies for a boost, but compelled to do things like spray oil in the pilot's face, blocking his vision at a critical moment. After recovery starts it downgrades as thematic, if the aircraft might be used again soon maybe the aircraft now has a Poorly Tuned Engine. Or maybe it shifts in nature when it reduces into being Ashamed at the damage from the enemy besting you, which might make the pilot temperamental. Though a moderate one could also be a minor injury like a glancing hit. I think I'd be okay with just having plane-based consequences stay on your plane but still eat up one of your consequence slots, but I guess it depends on the ratio of flying adventure time versus non-flying adventure time.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2014 00:47
|
|
|
Oh certainly. My thinking with potentially transferring a consequence from plane-themed to the character directly during recovery is that it keeps the consequence focused on the character himself, since the plane is just a tool. You get badly shot up during the mission and then after the fight, when recovery starts, the plane itself can be patched up good as new, but the pilot himself is still stewing and kicking himself at the enemy making him look like a cadet out there. The previously plane themed consequence now can effect him out of the plane (which is just a collection of stunts, not a character), but it can also influence him in the next sortie as well, as he is determined to get revenge for that embarrassment (but such narrow thinking might just get him in worse trouble). [edited to rework a bit and hopefully make things clearer.] Basically, while flying damage to the plane is a consequence to the character, but once he's done using the plane and recovery begins those consequences may transition to stay focused on the character if the plane's condition is no longer immediately important plot-wise. Galaga Galaxian fucked around with this message at 01:34 on Mar 6, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2014 00:56
|
|
|
Galaga Galaxian posted:Oh certainly, my thinking with potentially transferring a consequence from the plane itself to the character as its partially recovered is that it keeps the consequence focused on the character himself, since the plane is just a tool. You get badly shot up during the mission and then after the fight when recovery start the plane itself can be patched up good as new, but the pilot himself is still stewing and kicking himself at the enemy making him look like a cadet out there. Oh man, I totally misread that the first time. Yeah, that's a super cool idea. ...Dammit, I'm gonna have to run Crimson Skies now.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2014 01:02
|
|
|
Ettin posted:Posting stuff for criticism, eh? Well, how about all the stunts I put together for Inverse World Accelerated? I need permission?
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2014 01:25
|
|
|
Bigup DJ posted:I need permission? It's up now! Ettin fucked around with this message at 02:27 on Mar 6, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2014 01:31
|
|
|
Ettin posted:
Currently view only?
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 16:38
|
|
|
Ettin, I can't add comments to the doc. My feelings are a little hurt. In other news, Evil Hat's first Patreon release is out in PWYW: Venture City Blues. quote:Looking for a little inspiration for your next Fate Core campaign? Check out Venture City Stories! This adventure toolkit written by Brian Engard will give you everything you need to send your characters on an adventure full of superpowers, villainous corporations, and ruthless gangs in a near-future setting where superpowers are for sale. It's a short supers setting where supers started showing up about 60 years back, but 5 years ago corporations managed to crack the metagene code and can give anyone powers if they can afford it and are willing to sign a contract with said company. Now, all protection services (including the police) are privatized, and if your neighborhood can afford to get corporate protection then you're good and have a force of metahumans protecting you from mundane criminals and super-threats. If you can't afford it, then you're pretty much on your own. Sometimes you'll get a corporate superhero patrolling those areas as a PR stunt, and other times you might get an unaffiliated metahuman helping out in exchange for a hiding place from the corporations. It's a bit of a mix of Robocop's OCP/Detroit angle and Marvel's Civil War, with a dash of Shadowrun. You can be part of a corporation-controlled community, chasing down unregistered supers and defending the company's interests, or you can be one of the renegade supers fighting against the corporate takeover of, well, everything. Powerbuilding is actually pretty simple and builds off the stunt system. You basically get one or two "power suites", which you build yourself. Instead of a list of powers, you pick some stunt-level effects that your powers grant you using the normal stunt guidelines. This determines the base cost in "stunt slots". Then you get two "special effects" for free, and can add more at the cost one one stunt slot each (there's a list of effects provided). You then have to add a Drawback aspect, which is like a Trouble aspect in that it's supposed to be primarily negative. You also pick a "Collateral Damage" effect, which is an always-on effect that gives you a bonus, but will also have a narrative drawback when the Collateral effect is used. I haven't made a character with it yet, but it seems to skew more towards the X-Men level of power rather than Avengers or X-Men. e: Actually, here's a sample power they do in the book. quote:Powerhouse: You’re inhumanly strong and tough. As long as you’re using brute strength, you get a +4 to Physique rolls and a +2 to Fight rolls. You also get Armor:4 against physical attacks like punches, stabs, gunshots, and getting thrown through buildings. Evil Mastermind fucked around with this message at 16:45 on Mar 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 16:40
|
|
|
Whoops, and I can't fix it on my phone. Send stuff to me on G+ if you want and I'll fix it in like 8-9h 
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 17:20
|
|
|
Ettin posted:Whoops, and I can't fix it on my phone. Send stuff to me on G+ if you want and I'll fix it in like 8-9h I've made a commentable copy - although it doesn't have all the old comments. Ettin, you get version control.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2014 23:33
|
|
|
neonchameleon posted:I've made a commentable copy - although it doesn't have all the old comments. Ettin, you get version control. My old version is fixed now at least. Also to answer some of your messages: Yes I am aware that "you get +2 to doing a certain thing" is a way stunts work, that is right there in the book! My problem with it is that "a +2 bonus" is a kind of boring incentive, and in the specific context of Inverse World Accelerated, if it were mostly +2-to-a-thing stunts I would not feel the book would as worth buying. Those stunts are super easy to write and usually milquetoast, you don't need to buy a book to tell you how to do it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2014 03:22
|
|
|
So I saw that Tianxia has been released, I can't find any reviews of it though. Any backers mind sharing their impressions?
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2014 04:03
|
|
|
I was bored at work and had both Fate and starships on my brain, so I ended up drafting a space combat implementation where about four player characters crew a single starship together: First draft here. Y'know, just like in Star Trek or Banner of the Stars. Some setting notes as a bonus. I have no idea what I'm doing, I've never even played Fate. Not gonna let that stop me from hacking it, though! 
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2014 23:30
|
|
|
Ettin posted:My old version is fixed now at least. The stunts I was pointing out there were not fundamentally different from the +2 stunts except in that they were clunkier and more awkwardly phrased. Notably any stunt that says "your failures become a success at a cost, ties become successes, and a success becomes a success with style" is for most practical purposes so close to a +2 it might as well be +2. It's just adding words and complexity while not adding anything that's significantly different from +2 stunts. Seriously, going through it: Miss by 3 or more: +2 will still be a miss. Your version goes to a tie Miss by 2: Both go to ties Miss by 1: +2 goes to a success by 1, yours goes to a tie. Tie: Both go to success. Success by 1: Both go to success with style Success by 2: Both go to success with style Success by 3 or more: Already successes with style So the only times your version is different are on a spectacular miss or on a miss by 1. You haven't removed +2 stunts. You've just obfuscated them by replacing them with something that takes twice as many words and an extra processing step but is mathematically almost indistinguishable. Which is why I suggested changing them back - to tighten up the wording because they are not otherwise very different. The other ones I was objecting to as a group were the 1 boost to anything 1/scene. Which are both overpowered and less interesting in play than a standard +2 stunt. The stunts that didn't fit in the above two categories were generally pretty good. (I questioned the balance on some of them, but that's a different story). But I also had the problem that you appear to have more stunts in that document than D&D 3.5 core has feats. Pages and pages of rules text is not what I want to see in an FAE based game. Were there thirty great stunts in there? I'd say so. Would I want to see thirty great stunts? Hell yes. Would I want to see thirty great stunts buried in a sea of 100 mediocre ones? Especially ones that were barely different from +2s other than that they had a clunkier and more verbose way of writing them? Not really.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2014 00:33
|
|
|
I'm sort of new to Fate, but how compatible is the phase trio/character concept stuff with other games?
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2014 00:56
|
|
|
Funktastic Dog posted:I'm sort of new to Fate, but how compatible is the phase trio/character concept stuff with other games? Very, though you lose some of the benefit without invoke/compel and fate points. But many games have similar rule functionality. As a pure character creation exercise it has some use, but you're probably better off stealing Dungeon World's bonds, which do the same kind of thing but quicker and simpler. If you tie something else in the game to aspects, then the full on treatment works well.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2014 01:52
|
|
|
Comrade Gorbash posted:Very, though you lose some of the benefit without invoke/compel and fate points. But many games have similar rule functionality. As a pure character creation exercise it has some use, but you're probably better off stealing Dungeon World's bonds, which do the same kind of thing but quicker and simpler. If you tie something else in the game to aspects, then the full on treatment works well. I'm using 40k, so I'm thinking about using them exchanging fate points for... fate points... But I'll look into the bonds, thanks!
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2014 02:43
|
|
|
Alright, been a while since I've been in here. I made a new custom skill list by looking at lists of common trappings in fate games and atuff, and came up with this for my .hack//FATE game. I also came up with new Dungeon Exploration rule utilizing the Fate Fractal idea instead of... whatever I was using before. There's also some character ideas in there as well. The can be found here I've enabled comments on both documents if anyone just want to look and comment that way.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2014 04:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 12:04 |
|
|
So work is boring and I'm listening to a mix of 80s action movie themes and sound clips. I'm now musing on what portions of Fate Core or FAE would be best for running an action movie style game (be it martial arts, guns blazing, or both) or even go whole-hog and run Feng Shui in Fate/FAE. My first instinct is FAE just to keep thing as fast and furious as possible, but I'm not sure.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2014 21:55
|
|