|
Countblanc posted:re: Kits (or some non-class system) as a source for at-wills, an issue there is that many of the new classes are designed with three at-wills in mind. This would mean giving those characters 4 with the "bonus" at-will. I sorta like the idea of secondary sources for powers like how you get Skill Powers in 4e, but I don't think it's necessarily the right fix for this particular problem. I mean, if it's really a big enough issue that needs to be addressed, could it just be an errata done to the classes in question that need more options. "Here's new powers for x class, you can now learn 3 at-wills instead of 2." Then there's no issue with weird combos or some classes ending up with too many choices.
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2016 23:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 10:03 |
|
|
I think the current balance is pretty solid, barring a few edge cases. I won't say no to more at-wills though, I love at-will powers. Personally, if you guys were going to do it, I would just go the simplest route and update the base rules for people to pick 3.Countblanc posted:1) PCs possibly seeming less unique, particularly for classes who have a limited pool of at-wills (coughNecromancercough). This could be alleviated by writing an additional at-will or two for these classes for the upcoming book, but it'd still mean that, especially at lower levels, a Duelist in one game will look more like a Duelist in any other game. I personally don't think this is a big issue since between Encounter powers, Feats, Roles, and the fact that you still have a few at-will choices anyway, but I'd like to hear what others think. Yeah, I don't think this is a big issue either. Countblanc posted:2) Analysis paralysis. Again, limited choices were a design goal to keep games running quickly and smoothly. Most at-will powers are quite simple so this may not be too bad but it's worth keeping in mind. I don't think one extra choice would be too bad. Countblanc posted:3) Strength of PCs. Obviously at-wills are balanced against each other and at a particular tier of power, but versatility is a strength too. Do you think players would be able to cover too many situations if they had more at-wills available? Would this make monster design annoying for GMs, having to worry that the next 4-6 powers spread among the party might cover too many weaknesses (not in an adversarial way, just "now the party has 2-3 sources of at-will Slow instead of just 1 so my monsters are less mobile"), or would it not really shake out that differently? This can be a concern. I wonder if it would be possible to designate power niches for certain classes. Like, "these 2-3 classes have movement impairing as a sub-gimmick, these 2-3 classes have ongoing damage, etc." In the end, the characters are still going to be taking the same actions per turn. I do wonder if Strike has the design space for a whole slew of new at-wills that fell unique to each class. Countblanc posted:4) Classes with weird at-will rules. Would Martial Artists now get 4 stances? What about Summoners, who are their own unique thing? Does every Shapechanger form get a third at-will? I don't think every class needs a 'pick one more at-will addendum.' Like, for me, Martial Artists already has 3 at-wills since they have 3 stances. Summoners can get another Ancestral Spirit. Shapechangers sorta have 4 at-wills with the two from their base form.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 00:18
|
|
|
Relatively neutral on the "another at-will" thing, but please don't put combat options in kits, that's just a way to completely cross my optimization streams and decide if I'm picking one based on in-combat or out of combat effectiveness.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 01:22
|
|
|
A deck of action cards, optionally with some removed in advance by the GM. The powers are about on par with an at-will, or even weaker, but have highly eccentric effects that can be situationally very powerful. Turn the top card of the deck face up at the start of each encounter. Any player may perform the action on that card during their turn. After the turn ends, discard it and turn up the next one. Shuffle the discards back in after every encounter. The idea is that these represent opportunities provided by the environment.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 04:16
|
|
|
So my impression is that some of you have played this game using the Shadowrun setting. I've been thinking through the same, since the actual Shadowrun rules are a trainwreck, and would love to hear any advice or just hear about how you did it. Using reskinning to cover character building is pretty obvious, just slotting in cyberware or magic as the diegetic explanation for extraordinary abilities, but I'm curious how you handle things like Shadowrun's lengthy item catalog or Essence of the Matrix. The former two could be ignored, I guess, and the latter just handled as skill checks, but I'm curious if people got into more complex solutions, or anything else you ran into adapting things.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 06:10
|
|
|
Sir Kodiak posted:So my impression is that some of you have played this game using the Shadowrun setting. I've been thinking through the same, since the actual Shadowrun rules are a trainwreck, and would love to hear any advice or just hear about how you did it. Using reskinning to cover character building is pretty obvious, just slotting in cyberware or magic as the diegetic explanation for extraordinary abilities, but I'm curious how you handle things like Shadowrun's lengthy item catalog or Essence of the Matrix. The former two could be ignored, I guess, and the latter just handled as skill checks, but I'm curious if people got into more complex solutions, or anything else you ran into adapting things. Yeah for the campaign I ran (winding down now), just fluffed the classes as needed for the various party members. Had two Street Samurai (one was an Archer Striker for the group's sniper, the melee/close fire one started as a Warlord Blaster who later respec'd to a Duelist Leader and then again when they picked up a second character in-universe to Buddies Blaster), and two Mystic Adepts who were a Shapechanger Multi-Role and a Martial Artist respectively. Ignored the first two (length item catalog, essence) for the most part except letting players request items for me to convert for appropriate prices, and handled the Matrix either as a simple skill check (for basic stuff), a Team Conflict for more advanced stuff (with non-hackers helping social engineer info for the hacker) or for ones that would be a central bit of a run as a tactical combat where you play the hackers... and their hacking programs that for some reason have the exact same tactical setup as the other players. Then just handle personal consequences as things going wrong in the hacking that affect that player (triggered security noticing them and a turret getting a shot off before being disabled) and such. gourdcaptain fucked around with this message at 07:13 on Jul 8, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 07:11
|
|
|
The only good way I can think of to attempt to replicate some kind of cyberpunk RPG gear porn thing in Strike! without it being a huge mess is making a lot of it stuff like "this gear gives you some kind of funky utility power or the equivalent of a trick that's only good for one use/X uses." Things like a list of 100 different guns with slightly different stats, 10 of which are good, wouldn't actually be any better than 4E's less prodigious but still pretty dumb big lists of weapons where everyone ignored 90% of them because most of them weren't really that useful or good, plus the math in Strike! is actually properly bounded and stuff so fiddly modifiers don't really have much of a place. I suppose you could try making some cyberpunk-specific kits but again, if you're willing to reskin things a lot of the bases are already covered. edit; also here's a thought, handle hacking using the chase rules.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 07:20
|
|
|
I could see cyberware being a way to make rolls to do things that would otherwise be impossible. A human shouldn't be able to punch down a wall (in a Shadowrun game) without either magic or cyberware, but get a cyberarm or a hydraulic jack, and that option's now open to you. Now make a skill check.Kai Tave posted:edit; also here's a thought, handle hacking using the chase rules. Yes! Spycraft 2.0 used its chase rules for so many things - chases, seduction, infiltrating an organisation, hacking... I never played the game, but the rules looked good.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 07:53
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:edit; also here's a thought, handle hacking using the chase rules. I didn't do this because when I did a Shadowrunny thing, we didn't have any deckers, but my idea was to use role actions for in-combat hacking, to model the decker desperately trying to turn off the turrets or whatever in a firefight (since they'd have to choose between using their role actions in meatspace or hacking). Could probably also work for astral plane hijinx in combat as well.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 14:27
|
|
|
Combining this discussion with the last one, using chase-like mechanics for disarming a trap is an interesting idea. I wonder how much reskinning would do and how much tweaking I'd need to do. I could probably adapt it to work in combat, too, since they usually last about the same number of rounds.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 18:30
|
|
|
Minor cyberware (cyber eyes let me see things better!) could just be backgrounds/skills. Major ones (Muscle replacement makes me stronger then anything else!) could just be a Trick.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 21:53
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:Minor cyberware (cyber eyes let me see things better!) could just be backgrounds/skills. Major ones (Muscle replacement makes me stronger then anything else!) could just be a Trick. There's that feat that gives you weird movement capabilities as well that could be a good template for how to handle augs.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 22:32
|
|
|
I'm pleased to announce that the character generator at http://hyphz.github.io/ now supports all the Roles and almost all the Classes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 17:51
|
|
|
hyphz posted:I'm pleased to announce that the character generator at http://hyphz.github.io/ now supports all the Roles and almost all the Classes. Small change: Blaster should choose between their boosts like the Striker, as they don't get both.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 18:04
|
|
|
Generic Octopus posted:Small change: Blaster should choose between their boosts like the Striker, as they don't get both. Fixed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 20:44
|
|
|
hyphz posted:I'm pleased to announce that the character generator at http://hyphz.github.io/ now supports all the Roles and almost all the Classes. I assume not, but is there any easy way to format the Shapechanger's traits/powers under the respective Transformation powers? Like this:  Otherwise it looks fantastic, good poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 22:04
|
|
|
hyphz posted:I'm pleased to announce that the character generator at http://hyphz.github.io/ now supports all the Roles and almost all the Classes. I notice the option for a custom Background, which is good, but a Custom Origin option would be nice too. Otherwise it looks really nice.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 00:52
|
|
|
Will the character generator support feats as well? Or is that a bit tricky to do?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 01:38
|
|
|
Gonna DM a game of Strike! for some friends this weekend, and none of us have played before. What should I know going into this?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 04:45
|
|
|
Are you doing one of the premade adventures or something of your own? Either way, here's some general tips from a bad GM (me): 1) Make your party roll a lot, and don't let them stretch their skills. Strike wants you to be rolling often because the skill system doesn't punish failure, it just changes the situation, and it's also the primary way of learning new skills. This will usually result in people laughing more too which is good - You want the party's resident strong dude to roll Lift Boulders and Poetry (Unskilled). 2) Try to have an encounter built so you aren't just grabbing monsters from the book at the drop of a hat. Not necessarily anything complex, in fact I encourage you not to do that and to just grab some sample monsters, but doing it ahead of time means you can take your time and make something cohesive rather than "well there's a few wild boars so they fight 5 Charger-type enemies." 3) Summoner, Buddies, and Bombardier are all sorta weird "advanced" classes, and Blaster is similarly the most complex role (currently~), so I recommend trying so there isn't more than one of those at the table, and try to keep them out of the hands of players who you think might not do great with something more complicated on their first go. But ultimately let people play what they want, just... don't go out of your way to recommend a Summoner/Blaster to the analysis-paralysis prone player. 4) Chases are fun, fast, and easy, maybe work one in somewhere! Team Conflicts are a bit more complicated (though not majorly so) so maybe save them for the next game. 5) Be the party's biggest fanboy/fangirl.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 05:07
|
|
|
Countblanc posted:Are you doing one of the premade adventures or something of your own? I let them decide the setting and they picked sci-fi/cyberpunk so I'm making up my own thing for this game. I'm not having a problem reskinning things to fit, and I made up a bunch of sample origins for them to pick from that are setting specific. Should I let them choose Kits right away? I wanna ease into the rules so that they(and I) dont get overwhelmed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 05:19
|
|
|
Kits are an optional module so I'd say maybe leave them aside for now. After the first session your players will probably have a better idea what they want anyway. Like, this:quote:3 Trick Shot Probably doesn't mean a lot to someone who doesn't know how useful Action Points are, how often they'll have Disadvantage, how often they'll roll skills, etc. And like you said, everyone's new so might as well take it easy to start. In my last game I even had players pick Feats after the first session just because it was everyone's first tabletop RPG and they had no clue how useful "You may use any melee power while charging instead of a Basic Attack" was without seeing combat first.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 05:25
|
|
|
That reminds me of another GM tip - Make sure to remind players to use their Complications liberally and that they start each session with 1 Action Point and can dole out another freebie to someone at the table when they do something cool/funny. Also remember that anyone who misses in combat gets a Miss Token. It seems minor but it does a lot to make you feel like your turn wasn't wasted when you turn a 5 into a 6 later in the fight.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 05:27
|
|
|
Countblanc posted:Also remember that anyone who misses in combat gets a Miss Token. It seems minor but it does a lot to make you feel like your turn wasn't wasted when you turn a 5 into a 6 later in the fight. I'm not sure what I did to make so many people miss this rule, but it's important. Miss Tokens are great and mean that nobody ever has "that fight where I did nothing because I couldn't roll for poo poo."
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 05:42
|
|
|
hyphz posted:I'm pleased to announce that the character generator at http://hyphz.github.io/ now supports all the Roles and almost all the Classes. Nice! This is looking great so far. I just took it for a spin and most of it is working great! I'm sure you already have most of these in your to-do list, but anyway: Chosen Wealth, Tricks, Complications, and Fallbacks aren't being displayed. Learned Skills aren't being added to the Skill list. Need Custom Origins, as Maleketh said. The order it displays the powers RBA, Charge, and MBA changes around in a weird way depending on which Class and how many at-wills I have picked. The order in which it displays Martial Artist Stances is all hosed up. Simplified Classes MBAs and RBAs don't scale yet. Feats shouldn't be too hard to add in a basic way, but if you want, for instance, powers to output when you pick "Minor Leader," that's obviously more work. Eventually, adding custom components would be nice - for when the GM gives you an item and it gives you a Trick or a Power or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 06:02
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:I'm not sure what I did to make so many people miss this rule, but it's important. Miss Tokens are great and mean that nobody ever has "that fight where I did nothing because I couldn't roll for poo poo." I think most people just read the attack roll table (either in the manual or the combat reference) and skim over the plain text where the tokens are mentioned. You could probably print "Miss: Gain a Miss Token" and "Miss: Gain a Miss Token and a Strike" on that table next to the entries for 2 & 1 to force the realization that the tokens exist in the first place. Rurea posted:Gonna DM a game of Strike! for some friends this weekend, and none of us have played before. What should I know going into this? I like the Dangerous Delves rules at the back of the book (pg 191) just for structuring things. What I did was have a fairly scripted first dungeon that introduced the different mechanics and got them to level 2, and then opened up the world to exploration from there. The campaign started with a rogue, a druid, and a cleric participating in a dragon civil war/uprising and has since become Fantasy Stargate with the party adventuring through time and space to accomplish such varied deeds as destroying an insane robot wizard hivemind and finding their sphinx friend a date. Point is, just make a loose framework to kickstart things and then let the rest evolve from play at the table.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 06:32
|
|
|
I absolutely want to do Feats, but will have to see how hard they turn out to be. Multi-Role Shapeshifter could be a nightmare. That said, having the powers model return a blocked list instead of a flat list (so that powers for shaper forms, etc, can stay together) could be good for that and other reasons.. Fallback/tricks etc don't show up yet because I'm not sure how to design the sheet to show them. I'm not even sure if we should stay with printing out the skill origins rather than using colour coding as in the sample sheets in the book. In particular a requested feature was including the 10 dots for natural advancement which probably means everything on its own line, but that will look really sparse without those dots.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 12:44
|
|
|
Ok, added in support for sub-blocks in the power sets and the Magician and Shapechanger now use them.quote:The order it displays the powers RBA, Charge, and MBA changes around in a weird way depending on which Class and how many at-wills I have picked. That.. shouldn't change. Is there a particular combination that puts them out of order? quote:The order in which it displays Martial Artist Stances is all hosed up. I wasn't sure how to order these. Thing is, as soon as you pick a stance at level 1 it has to include all the variants on that stance to allow for focus -> rally -> focus. Would it be better to have all the basic stances, then all the greaters, and so on? Or the stances in sub-boxes? quote:Simplified Classes MBAs and RBAs don't scale yet. Did you set the Specialization? You have to set the Specialization to "none" if you want them both to scale. Until you do, it doesn't change them because information it needs to know is missing. This is a bit counter-intuitive though I agree, so I've fiddled it so that 'no selection' is treated as "None" in that case only. I hope this doesn't bugger up the general architecture though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 20:30
|
|
|
I'd put the stances in sub-boxes. Keep up the good work, this is an awesome tool.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 20:42
|
|
|
Not sure if I fed this back, but I recently finished a level 1-10 campaign of Strike and these were the major points I'd like to feed back on: 1. There aren't enough pre-generated monsters. I'm a lazy GM who can't be bothered making my own every session. (You're dealing with this and I'm going to buy the book) 2. We had three characters - a martial artist/defender, a wizard/leader and a blitzer archer/striker. By the higher levels, the damage the former two characters were doing was barely worth writing down. It was actually annoying as a GM to write down the 1 damage the martial artist was automatically doing with her stance, and the wizard's guaranteed 3 damage felt pathetic to everyone involved. Maybe a bit of a boost for the non-damage roles is in order? Even if it means weakening their primary role 3. You've got too many chunks of rules. We stopped using "awesome points" and just started giving everyone two action points a session. Kits felt like "too much" character - we introduced them around about level 6 and people barely used the abilities from them. Likewise fallback powers. Likewise team conflicts - they looked complicated and reminded me in a bad way of skill challenges from 4e. We pretty much just used the class/role powers and skills. The skill system is loving awesome, by the way. Sorry if I'm blunt, but I love your game generally and think you deserve honest feedback. Looking forward to the monster book!
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 20:52
|
|
|
Team Conflicts are 100% worth doing to cover large scenes without getting bogged down horribly. So far, our group has used them to escape a burning building, break into a mansion, and traverse a swamp on the way to ancient ruins--the sorts of things that are too big or complicated to put in a single skill roll, but that you also can't really do at the most granular level without it taking forever.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 22:06
|
|
|
The Lord of Hats posted:Team Conflicts are 100% worth doing to cover large scenes without getting bogged down horribly. So far, our group has used them to escape a burning building, break into a mansion, and traverse a swamp on the way to ancient ruins--the sorts of things that are too big or complicated to put in a single skill roll, but that you also can't really do at the most granular level without it taking forever. To me that sounds like a chain of skill rolls in a Dungeon World "conversation" fashion. "Bob rolls a 2 on his strength roll, so he has crashed through the burning door but a bunch of beams have collapsed behind him, blocking that exit. Kate, the flames are getting closer, what do you do?" Gort fucked around with this message at 22:34 on Jul 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 22:15
|
|
|
Gort posted:2. We had three characters - a martial artist/defender, a wizard/leader and a blitzer archer/striker. By the higher levels, the damage the former two characters were doing was barely worth writing down. It was actually annoying as a GM to write down the 1 damage the martial artist was automatically doing with her stance, and the wizard's guaranteed 3 damage felt pathetic to everyone involved. Maybe a bit of a boost for the non-damage roles is in order? Even if it means weakening their primary role I feel like it's more a problem that Striker is too powerful, especially once they get to +2 damage/hit. There's a reason Defender got nerfed from Resist 2 at level 4.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 22:33
|
|
|
I appreciate the advice on Shadowrun adaptation, everyone. It seemed like it would work pretty smoothly, so glad to hear people have had success. My thought on the gear catalog was to just make the original Shadowrun rulebooks available and, if people liked the idea of something, figure out how to adapt it in a way that wasn't just a mechanical number-change of the sort that the game doesn't benefit from.Gort posted:3. You've got too many chunks of rules. We stopped using "awesome points" and just started giving everyone two action points a session. Kits felt like "too much" character - we introduced them around about level 6 and people barely used the abilities from them. Likewise fallback powers. Likewise team conflicts - they looked complicated and reminded me in a bad way of skill challenges from 4e. We pretty much just used the class/role powers and skills. The skill system is loving awesome, by the way. This is interesting because these are exactly the rules portions that didn't really click with me when I was reading the book. It seemed like a lot of the stuff from kits could just be done with skills and tricks.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 22:46
|
|
|
I really like Kits, they make out of combat stuff feel much more character focused and unique. I stopped using the 'awesome points' too, because in all three games I've been in they just don't get used. I haven't really used Chase or Team Conflict enough to have a serious opinion on them, but then again, I don't feel like I'm missing anything by not using them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 01:49
|
|
|
hyphz posted:That.. shouldn't change. Is there a particular combination that puts them out of order? quote:I wasn't sure how to order these. Thing is, as soon as you pick a stance at level 1 it has to include all the variants on that stance to allow for focus -> rally -> focus. Would it be better to have all the basic stances, then all the greaters, and so on? Or the stances in sub-boxes? quote:Did you set the Specialization? You have to set the Specialization to "none" if you want them both to scale. Until you do, it doesn't change them because information it needs to know is missing. This is a bit counter-intuitive though I agree, so I've fiddled it so that 'no selection' is treated as "None" in that case only. I hope this doesn't bugger up the general architecture though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 04:57
|
|
|
Gort posted:Not sure if I fed this back, but I recently finished a level 1-10 campaign of Strike and these were the major points I'd like to feed back on: Thanks for this! I definitely appreciate it. Blunt is perfect. I like to be aware of any perceived flaws, even ones I don't think are "real" because even those are places where better writing and communication could fix the perception. And of course, often people point out things which are "real" mechanical flaws that I need to fix. The game won't get better if people don't tell me their issues! #1 is taken care of. #3 - I know Team Conflict continues to be divisive, and I wonder if there's a way to change it to bring aboard the people who don't like it while keeping the people who love it happy. Some people say it fixes everything they didn't like about 4e Skill Challenges - and that was my goal. But they've been divisive in this way from the start, and I even put in a little sidebar at the start of the section saying basically "If you don't like these, don't use them" because, hey, some people don't like them and shouldn't use them, right? Did you try them? The more specifically I know about the issues people have, the better the chances that I'll have that epiphany and be able to make them better. I wish I could say that it works for everybody, but right now I have to settle for "it works for me and it works for some other people". Awesome points are something that often gets forgotten or unused. I like them, but that's another place where I wonder if there is some tweak I could make to bring on board the people who don't use them. #2 - Your feedback about damage is interesting. In my experience, Defenders at high levels end up doing almost as much damage as Strikers as they dish out nasty Opportunities. It doesn't come all in one giant lump like the Striker's, but it comes. Was that not happening for you? I often have monsters ignore the defender's mark when it makes sense - if they just do what the defender wants, they'll never Take Out anybody, so they might as well try hit someone else. As for the Martial Artist's tempest stance, that's great at any level for crowd control: taking out Stooges and Goons. A Magician should be able to dish out good damage on the regular, too: if you're star or chaos, you have 5-damage powers ready to go a couple of times per combat, and if you're a blood mage, you're doing tons of damage. Being a Leader obviously doesn't do much for your own damage output, but you should be able to get the team's damage output higher to help end fights faster by enabling the Striker and keeping the Defender healthy. Neither of those class/role combos should be particularly weak in the damage department. Maybe they look weak damage-wise in comparison to the blitzer-archer-striker, which is perhaps the best pure-damage build in the game. Did they have Melee Shooter and Savage Striker, too? I'd love to hear more details of a whole 1-10 campaign! Do you have any data you could give me, even estimated? I'd be interested to know: How many rounds did fights usually last? How long in terms of time? Face to face or online? What sort of concessions did they usually owe? How often did a player get Taken Out? Did you make the fights harder than the baseline? How often did they fight with Minor and Major Conditions? Did any of your answers to these questions change significantly as they went up in levels?
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 06:40
|
|
|
I was the Magician in that game! I'll let Gort answer the bulk of questions, but I'll mention that I probably didn't do myself any favours in the damage department by really leaning into the Leader role and picking a bunch of defensive powers. Generally I'd be throwing out 3 damage auto-hits while keeping everyone else up with heals, which did indeed help a lot, I guess it's just that picking up the archer so he can do 10-20 damage is great, but it's more abstract to see that as a thing that I did, y'know? My majors were the dome one, the one that grants advantage against one monster for a whole fight, and the one that takes out an enemy that fails a save- sorry I don't remember the spell names, since I renamed them all to fit my stupid theme, a fun notion which I cannot recommend nearly enough- so essentially I'd be going like 3 damage, 3 damage, YOU'RE DEAD, 3 damage, which seemed a little inconsistent. I don't think it was a massive problem or anything, it's just that when the archer puts out like.. 16 in a hit, it feels kinda shoddy to follow it up with 3 
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 12:10
|
|
|
I'll chip in as I was the striker archer. I'll specifically say I enjoyed low level more than high level, at least initially. You've got an interesting setup where escalating badguy damage gets set against escalating powers rather than escalating health. This is cool because it's not as zero sum as most systems but it starts to swing towards extremes. Badguys who dropped me in one or two good hits were a consistent frustration. It doesn't feel particularly heroic to be scrabbling in the dirt. As for damage no one else came close. By the end I had bonuses to my short ranged dice roll result, bonuses to my damage, and bonuses including permanent advantage on targets of my choice, which meant when I focused on a boss I was massively critting more often than not. On the other hand, even with that damage in play we would have been lost without it. We consistently scraped through fights by the skin of our teeth. A couple of further thoughts. That build seems to simulate a guy with a shotgun far better than any kind of archer, and running up to people with my bow felt a bit daft sometimes. Mechanically seemed the only choice though. People go down a lot. Strikes come into play when that happens but I was thinking about this in terms of movies and it's pretty unusual for a hero to drop in a film outside of a major moment. It's really not a major critique but I'd personally like to see people getting downed less but it being a much bigger deal when it happens. Not just a couple of minor concessions, but the heroes forced to retreat while the villain completes his terrible ritual. The despair point in the movie before the heroes rally for the big finish.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 13:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 10:03 |
|
|
Jimbozig posted:Yeah, the MBA moves around especially, separating from the other two at times, depending on what class I pick. What browser are you using? I can't reproduce this at all. MBA is always the first green power and stances are always in base->greater->supreme order. Please tell me there isn't a browser that thinks it's a good idea to randomly reorder lists.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2016 14:14
|
|