|
Everblight posted:Is a dragon not entitled to the sweat of her scales? The Blue has basically become this weird mix of Princess Bubblegum and William Birkin, but as a giant dragon that has a shameful Bard habit and attends meetings for city residents who want to live by 'food that talks is not food.' I think their dark elf knight of the Blue is in love with his boss specifically because she treats him like a person and doesn't mention his abs.
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 21:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 18:06 |
|
|
I always kinda had a problem in DnD with the fact that you have a whole shitload of cool races like ant men and hyena dudes, kobolds, hobgoblins and stuff, and they are by default just evil monsters and all of civilisation is just "dudes, 3 kinds of short dudes and like 9 flavours of elf", so I tended to run my games with more Drakenhall-esque demographics anyway so I'm wondering how to make Drakenhall really stand out. Since Drakenhall was the first city my dudes all went too, I don't think the strangeness really registered, my players just kind of see stuff like a Gnoll police chief and a squad of Kobold ninjas having a political argument in a bar as just kind of standard. I don't want to make the rest of the game boring by just having elves and humans and such running everything else.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 21:21
|
|
|
One of the big things we did was making Drakenhall a legitimate Imperial city instead of Waiting To Betray You So Hard. The Blue wants to rule the Dragon Empire, sure, but no more than any other Imperial Dux schemes to make sure they'll be the next Dragon Emperor. It's also meant to contrast very much with the attitudes about monsters outside of the city, while actively working to promote 'monsters' as Imperial officials and officers elsewhere in the Empire. Sure, the locals have 'maneaters' anonymous' meetings and clinics on how to deal with your garlic/rare herb/sawdust allergy, but they've also got political action committees trying to promote the idea that 'monsters' should be citizens of the Empire outside of their one dedicated city, too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 21:37
|
|
|
Covok posted:To be fair, TWF is one of the Ranger's main shitcks. Also, the Ranger doesn't get maneuvers -- which aren't great, but do give the Fighter some extra stuff to do -- so it's more reliant on its big shitcks to stand out and be effective. When classes overlap in abilities, it's a problem if one can do it better than the other without tradeoff. That's just my opinion. quote:On a more detail oriented critique, 1) Fair point. My problem was I assumed I knew how DWA worked. 2) Yup, see above. Someone on G+ suggested making them light weapons with +2 damage instead. 3) I had actually forgotten all about bracers when I wrote this. Guess I can nuke that paragraph. 4) I like the idea of them being able to punch someone hard enough to send them reeling backwards. That's why I allowed that one maneuver.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 21:48
|
|
|
Okay, version 2.0.quote:Brawler I'm not in love with that epic feat.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 22:17
|
|
|
It seems like just a superior version of Second Shot that applies to melee and lets you use other flexible attacks at the same time. Like, the whole talent.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 22:28
|
|
|
Evil Mastermind posted:Okay, version 2.0. It's starting to shape up nicely! Hope it sees use. Personally, I think you should have at least as many classes that can effectively punch enemies as you do ones that can spellcast at them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 23:36
|
|
|
It's tough, because I want a fighter who can hold his own dual-wielding, but isn't going to outshine the ranger in that department.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 00:30
|
|
|
A two-weapon fighter holds their own, and a two weapon fighter/ranger does even better, as someone who's made both. Having a very good miss maneuver starting at level 1 that plays very nicely with other maneuvers and talents helps a great deal with this.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 00:44
|
|
|
Not to be rude but doesn't the Stalwart cover the grappling angle already?
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 00:55
|
|
|
Stalwart more has a few builds available, from grab control to doing crazy weapon poo poo to Caber tosses like cruise missiles. There may be more space for a Melee type more focused on grabs and various holds l, locks, and debuffs.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 01:42
|
|
|
M.c.P posted:Stalwart more has a few builds available, from grab control to doing crazy weapon poo poo to Caber tosses like cruise missiles. I'd be interested in seeing a character with an array of different holds and strikes that have different effects on the humanoids (or giants or dragons or oozes whynot) you are fighting.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 07:59
|
|
|
01011001 posted:A two-weapon fighter holds their own, and a two weapon fighter/ranger does even better, as someone who's made both. Having a very good miss maneuver starting at level 1 that plays very nicely with other maneuvers and talents helps a great deal with this. A half-Orc Two-weapon fighter/ranger is barely playing the same game as everyone else because they can just drop so many rerolls, it's nuts.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 08:02
|
|
|
Some OUTs from my players and the major NPCs in their guild. Wood Elf Fighter Ranger: "Is one-quarter dryad" led to one of his backgrounds being "Raised by Fey Creatures". Dwarf Cleric: "Has an evil identical twin". Human Bard (flavored as a monk): "Has a bit of regenerative ogre-mage blood in his veins." --I told the GM this can be a boon or a burden. Male Hagspawn (NPC): "Only son of a hag that wasn't drowned at birth". Gnome Loremaster (NPC): "Can judge the purity of metals by smell". Dwarf Guildmaster (NPC): "His body has countless scars and burn marks, but his beard is always undamaged".
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 17:21
|
|
|
I'm looking into joining a 13a group. This would be my second 13A game, and basically my first session creating my own character. I want to play a fighter. I was wondering how it would multiclass with a druid, if you went Adept in shifting. So, in exchange for two talents and a level's progression in maneuvers, the fighter would be able to (in champion levels) do things like add 7 to AC/5 to PD, or triple crit damage (and considering things like Carve an Opening), or suddenly make it really hard to disengage from him, or throw down a whole bunch of temp hp, or whatever. If I went two-handed weapon, I'd still have 1d8xlevel damage, 1d10 recoveries (using strength druid), and 7+con mod as total HP. Isn't this, like, kinda better than being a fighter? Then I started looking around at other fighter/melee multiclasses. Wouldn't those also be kinda pretty much better than a straight fighter? Would a fighter/ranger or fighter/rogue also be just really really good?
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 21:07
|
|
|
BetterWeirdthanDead posted:Dwarf Guildmaster (NPC): "His body has countless scars and burn marks, but his beard is always undamaged". Beards matter, man. The way our Former Demon Cultists Cleric realized she'd hit rock bottom and got out of the demon biz was when she realized she no longer had a beard.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 21:17
|
|
|
Also, how would a two-weapon fighter work? Doesn't it only allow a reroll on a roll of 2?
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 22:35
|
|
|
Gharbad the Weak posted:I'm looking into joining a 13a group. This would be my second 13A game, and basically my first session creating my own character. I want to play a fighter. I was wondering how it would multiclass with a druid, if you went Adept in shifting. Multiclassing in 13th age is weird. There's a no mixing rule. So as a Shifter Adept, you attack as a Druid (benefits of being a bear) or as a Fighter (flexible attack options) but not as both. Fighter/Ranger is ok, but only if you decide you are attacking only as a fighter and then take solid Ranger talents that have nothing to do with attacking, like Animal Companion or Tracker. Lethal Hunter is an edge case, but since it's a kind of debuff as a free action, not an enhancement to attacks, it works with Fighter/Ranger. If you really want to be a shifted person with multiple attacks the only way is to be Shifter Adept / Initiate Warrior Druid which is one of the better Druid builds. A fighter with 2 weapons re-rolls 2s and there's like one or two flexible attacks that requires it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 22:41
|
|
|
Well, for the Bear Fighter, a lot of the benefits of shape-shifting are passive. So you could use flexible attacks, and suddenly have a bunch of shape-shifting bonuses. For the Ranger Fighter, couldn't both of the attacks potentially trigger flexible attacks? Or is it "You double attack OR you do a single attack that may be flexible"? Edit: Likewise, would a rogue's sneak attack trigger from a double attack? Gharbad the Weak fucked around with this message at 22:47 on Mar 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 22:45
|
|
|
You may want to re-read the multiclassing chapter, specifically the paragraph or two under "No power crossovers". This is the sentence to look out for especially:quote:As a rule, you can’t make (or milk!) an attack or spell using more than one class’s benefits. e: The other trick to fighter/ranger (and barbarian/ranger, and rogue/ranger) is taking Two-Weapon Mastery and the ranger multiclass feat. Fighter and barbarian/ranger also do well by taking the Archery version, but not as well. 01011001 fucked around with this message at 23:04 on Mar 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 23:01
|
|
|
It's the later. You attack as a Ranger and get all the benefits of being a Ranger, or you attack as a Fighter and get all the benefits of being a Fighter. Double Attack never works with other class Flexible Attacks. If you want flexible attacks then you can't use Beast Form Attack with any of the benefits. The Aspects are Recharge Quick Actions though, just like a clerics spells, so those you can use and apply to fighter attacks I suppose. You're dropping two talents and a damage die for it, and you have to wear light armor and no shield and a 1d8 (bumped down to 1d6) weapon or take attack penalties. Plus you have to peg strength to wisdom.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 23:02
|
|
|
Mr. Prokosch and 01011001 posted:Thanks! I was thinking my interpretation was way too powerful! That makes me feel a lot better about 13A.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 23:20
|
|
|
Multiclass Fighter/Ranger with Deadeye Archer/Archery/Tracker is super duper good though, as long as you keep them away from mind takers. One of the fighter's biggest problems IMO is that they don't have enough ranged maneuvers, so losing a few maneuver choices doesn't hurt them and gaining the archery rerolls and crit bonus stacking makes them really nice. Since you're using fighter attacks you can still wear heavy armor, and as you level you can either become the Crit Fishing King or get an animal friend, and you can add power-attacks or comeback strike for even more rerolls. Biggest problem with the build IMO is that it's super feat hungry so basically requires you to be a human, but it's still super good.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 23:27
|
|
|
I have to assume any given fighter is always taking comeback strike barring extremely defense-oriented setups, and that goes double for two-weapon or archery. It nearly always goes the distance.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 00:12
|
|
|
Gharbad the Weak posted:Also, how would a two-weapon fighter work? Doesn't it only allow a reroll on a roll of 2? Yes, unless they multi'd into ranger and grabbed Dual Weapon Strike, which they couldn't use maneuvers with.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 01:45
|
|
|
How do martial classes stack up to spellcasting classes in 13A? Are there clearly weak classes and strong classes?
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 03:17
|
|
|
Gharbad the Weak posted:How do martial classes stack up to spellcasting classes in 13A? Are there clearly weak classes and strong classes? More like there are clearly classes with a lot of different and flavorful ways to do more or less equivalent things, and a few classes with very few real in combat choices beyond "hit it with a sword"; that said, they are just as good at "hitting it with a sword" as the wizard is at setting it on fire. Numerically, things are more or less balanced, aside from a few outlier heavy charop type things. Whether you think it is a problem that there is a class or two whose in-combat action roster is basically "Hit Bad Man", is entirely down to your own philosophy of play. Personally, I tend to like that there's one or two super simple options in there. Other people in this thread get real angry about the Barbarian and Ranger sometimes though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 03:34
|
|
|
Spellcasters have insane burst damage. Given the mandatory 4 fights per long rest I think it probably works out balanced in the long run, but I will confess that a lot of the memorable fight bits involved the sorcerer dealing triple damage to a thing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 03:37
|
|
|
I haven't played 13a, but it seems like the OUT and skill systems help mitigate the lack of narrative influence of martial types.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 03:41
|
|
|
chaos rhames posted:I haven't played 13a, but it seems like the OUT and skill systems help mitigate the lack of narrative influence of martial types. Also, spell casters don't really have too many out of combat spell options to provide the sort of narrative influence that they have in a certain other d20 based system. Wizards have the Utility Slot, but it's fairly narrowly defined, and anything else is a Ritual, which is basically just another flavor of "I'm gonna bullshit up a solution that fit's my character's Schtick and let's see if the GM approves it".
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 04:03
|
|
|
Since 13th age encourages re-skinning and open ended skills there isn't much of a difference out of combat between martial and caster classes. Wizards get ritual casting which is an easy in for doing creative things, but in the end that's just a background roll, and it's very easy to have the OUT "I'm made of rubber" and the background "rubber man" and be able to do all sorts of crazy stuff with the same roll the wizard would have. Even if you're a regular old sword-man fighter you can still be a tactical genius or have incredible luck or whatever. So long as your background / OUT / theme justifies the action everybody just rolls. In combat it's not as perfectly balanced as you might hope. I'd say it's a little worse than 4e but a lot better than 3.5/5. Classes are broken up into "simple" and "complex". Numbers wise they're more or less the same, but simple classes just roll their only attack every round and deal a ton of damage while complex ones are doing all sorts of neat stuff that's shifting the battle around without actually having the biggest numbers. At least that's the ideal, but Wizards and Sorcerers have enough burst that they swing the battle around faster and can sometimes turn the whole thing into a joke. Yeah, the Barbarian does more damage over the four rounds, but the Wizard instantly killed the biggest threat on the first round and turned the fight into a mop up so it doesn't matter that he does nothing for the other three rounds. Here's my subjective ranking of 13th age classes: Tier 1 (Super strong and fun to play) 1. Bard 2. Wizard 3. Commander 4. Sorcerer Tier 2 (Some issues, mechanically sound but only some players will actually like them) 5. Barbarian 6. Chaos Mage 7. Cleric 8. Necromancer 9. Druid (good builds) Tier 3 (Serious problems. Not garbage, but there's usually a better option. Either there's actively un-fun elements or the numbers just don't work.) 10. Fighter 11. Ranger 12. Monk 13. Paladin 14. Rogue 15. Occultist 16. Druid (bad builds) Multiclassing gums things up a bit. Ranger, Paladin, and to some extend Fighter and Rogue can be fun as multiclass options.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 04:13
|
|
|
If you do pick a "simple" class, you can add a little bit of complexity by being a dragonspawn (so you get a quick action encounter power), a tiefling (because their power involves making things up, and even if when it triggers is random it usually happens at least once in a fight with a decent number of enemies), or a high elf (teleporting is cool). Magic items with activated powers or conditional bonuses might also help with keeping it exciting as it adds another choice or an incentive to do things.
PublicOpinion fucked around with this message at 04:49 on Mar 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 04:40
|
|
|
Mr. Prokosch posted:Since 13th age encourages re-skinning and open ended skills there isn't much of a difference out of combat between martial and caster classes. Wizards get ritual casting which is an easy in for doing creative things, but in the end that's just a background roll, and it's very easy to have the OUT "I'm made of rubber" and the background "rubber man" and be able to do all sorts of crazy stuff with the same roll the wizard would have. Even if you're a regular old sword-man fighter you can still be a tactical genius or have incredible luck or whatever. So long as your background / OUT / theme justifies the action everybody just rolls. This example really fits, because when I did my One Piece short sample that I do with many games to try them out that's basically exactly how I handled devil fruit powers. "I am a Steam Man" is a background that is really useful as it turns out. As is "I'm a loving Shark." If I could clone those two dudes until I had a full group I thin my life would be a lot easier. quote:Tier 3 (Serious problems. Not garbage, but there's usually a better option. Either there's actively un-fun elements or the numbers just don't work.) Disregarding the 13TWs classes since I've not played any of them, what do you find the issue with the Rogue to be? Our Rogue player seems to have way more options and power than the other martials, granted we're still at level 2.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 05:01
|
|
|
I don't know Rogue all that well, so I'm not going to defend it's really bad position all that stridently. It seems to have the same thing as the Barbarian where the talents are the cool part and it stays more or less the same over time. As you level up everyone else gets cool new things and the maneuvers are just kind of underwhelming and there aren't many of them to choose from. I haven't playtested that idea though, I just eyeballed it by comparing it to the monk, which I know pretty well. The monk has a lot of issues but it actually stacks up very well to the Rogue on pretty much every front, which makes me think the Rogue kind of sucks. Even if the Rogue is sub-par, this isn't 3rd edition. You can have fun with any class and you won't feel useless. The Rogue definitely has more options than the fighter, barbarian, paladin, or ranger. It's a complex martial which means it has more tactical options but no amazing super ability to spam. I just think when you get down to it the class falls kind of flat.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 05:19
|
|
|
My groups' OUTs: (Human Paladin): I’m the bastard son of the Emperor, and his only living heir. (Wood Elf Rogue): I stole someone’s heart, but I don’t know whose it is. (Dark Elf Bard): I am totally going to be a dragon when I grow up! (Holy One Sorcerer): I am a star, fallen to earth under portentous circumstances. (Human Wizard): I am the only one who can open the Dark Armoury. I have done it once already. The best part is that most of these characters were thrown together within moments when we thought we were going to do a 1-shot 13th Age game. It turned out we liked the characters so much we made it a full-fledged game. I play the sorcerer, and I'm really pleased at how easily 13th Age handles divergent concepts like a fallen star. The sorcerer powers fit really nicely with a bit of refluffing, burning with pure arcane fire and magnetic forces.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 06:10
|
|
|
Honestly, the Wizard just seems broken. First round drop an Evoked feated Force Salvo. High Arcana to do it twice a day. Backing up a dump truck and dropping 240 points of damage on an encounter in one round starting at 2nd level just seems excessive. It looks like it scales too, doing well over 1000 damage at level 9.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 06:36
|
|
|
Mr. Prokosch posted:I don't know Rogue all that well, so I'm not going to defend it's really bad position all that stridently. It seems to have the same thing as the Barbarian where the talents are the cool part and it stays more or less the same over time. As you level up everyone else gets cool new things and the maneuvers are just kind of underwhelming and there aren't many of them to choose from. I haven't playtested that idea though, I just eyeballed it by comparing it to the monk, which I know pretty well. The monk has a lot of issues but it actually stacks up very well to the Rogue on pretty much every front, which makes me think the Rogue kind of sucks. I had thought the same at first, but it's far better in practice than it looks on paper. Same goes for most of those other 3rd tier classes you listed (less so the monk).
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 06:52
|
|
|
Cyclomatic posted:Honestly, the Wizard just seems broken. At least Force Salvo's miss effect is garbage? Getting a guaranteed 6 or 7 targets, with the feat giving you a better chance of hitting dudes when there's fewer than that, is really drat good. It's per-target damage is just about on par with Fireball, but with Fireball you'll probably be targeting half as many people. I've had my share of encounters ripped in half by empowered Lightning Fork, but at least that either takes a standard action or comes after escalation 4, plus the caster was a half-elf and thus gave up the cooler racial abilities in exchange for being able to turn an odd into an even 1/encounter.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 07:23
|
|
|
It's more evocation being a bit too powerful than the wizard in general. Maximizing damage is pretty nasty, especially for something you can do once a battle on round 1.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 08:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 18:06 |
|
|
Honestly I've found that wizards have the nova and not much else. Everyone brings up Force Salvo because that's about the only time I've seen a wizard really smash into a fight like a truck, and if they miss then they're hosed. Non-daily spells just aren't as competitive. On the other hand, melee not only scales well in damage, they scale every level while spellcasters scale every other level. Even levels seem to be when non-spellcasters rule the roost almost undeniably, and even on the odd levels the spellcasters need that nova blast keep up. It also helps that all classes get the same number of backgrounds (at one point they didn't; thankfully, wiser heads prevailed), spellcasters don't get to bullshit their way through non-combat spell supremacy, and everyone has an OUT.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 11:38
|
|