|
I had a few more questions about Channeler. #1: In regards to the Smoke-Out encounter power from the Calling the Inferno path, it seems to be a situational power that borders upon being a liability to the party in most cases. Smoke-Out Encounter; Range 10; 3 Damage Effect: The target’s square and all adjacent squares are obscured until the end of the target’s next turn. This smoke follows the target as it moves. When a target is concealed, all Ranged and Melee attacks against it have Disadvantage. While this would give the enemy's out-going attack disadvantage, it also imposes Disadvantage to all of your allies attacks towards it and creatures near it. It also does comparable damage to the Immolation at-will (which synergizes with the Calling the Inferno's passive, something that Smoke-Out lacks) at levels 1-4 and less damage from level 5 onward. I appreciate some powers that may take a little finesse to get the most out of, but it's hard to imagine an ideal situation for this power. Especially compared to other powers available to the class. The ability may have some more use if it operated as a zone rather than a targetable power (though even that is situational). As an alternative, I just came up with an idea. Backdraft Encounter; Range 10; 3 Damage Effect: Choose an open flame in range, the target is pulled 3 [4-5?] squares towards that flame. I figured this would give a control effect that the other Callings lack (a pull) while also synergizing with the passive and putting the enemy into a position where they would want to move. It could also pull an enemy towards another enemy that's on fire via the Immolation at-will (nice mechanic on that at-will, by the way). Alternatively, perhaps the power would pull multiple enemies towards the open flame, but that's trickier keep consistent with other encounter powers. Lastly, another idea is that the target would gain the immolation / open flame status while other enemies within 3 of that enemy would be pulled towards that target. That way, the initial target would be put into a position to want to put the flame out while the allies around it would want to get away before running the risk of being caught in the passive or the Explosion at-will. All-in-all, I think it'd help enable the Channeler set up some positions / situations for their allies to be able to work with. #2: Calling the Storm Passive. Passive: On an attack roll of 6, instead of doubling your damage (including Striker Damage), you may make your attack again against a different target within range. At the end of each of your turns, designate an empty square within 5 of you. That square has an electric charge building up in it. When you first make an attack in that square while Calling the Storm, you get to make the attack on a different target within range when you roll 5s as well as 6s. The electric charge is spent after your attack (the square is no longer one of your designated squares), whether you scored an extra attack from it or not. I'm not entirely sure how this works. The way I interpret it is: 1. Channeler "charges" an empty square. 2. Somehow coaxes an enemy into that square. 3. Make an attack in that square. 4. On a 5 or 6, repeat the attack on another enemy in range. 5. Charge in that square dissipates. The payoff is decent, but that seems to be a lot of conditions to meet for an effect that is still left up to chance, especially when compared to the other passives. In addition to being quite complex, it also seems like a passive that is unlikely to trigger in all but the most ideal of situations. Overall, the passive seems much more dependent on chance while having the least impact on the battlefield (it's the one passive effect enemies could pass through its square with no consequence). Now if maybe the ionized air clung to them or something when they passed through the square.  Or alternatively, the ionized air spreads each turn, growing in area, giving an enemy a reason to not want to be near it for too long, lest they get charged. Though that would still be comparatively weak, it would give the enemies something to think about reason in being near that square. #3: The ordering of swapping a Call and triggering its passive. I agree with both being free actions individually usable once per turn; though only being able to swap a Call at the beginning of a turn and triggering the passive at the end feels stifling. What if that ordering restriction were removed? It'd free the Channeler up, and allows some more variety in their decision-making: enabling them to have a more immediate effect with their calls and passives rather than having to wait a turn to take advantage of their passive ability. As an example, let's say the Channeler is separated from the group by a ravine and Big Bad is chasing them down. Current: Channeler changes to Call of the Gale at the beginning of their turn. Having no other option, the Channeler uses the Gust at-will in an attempt to push Big Bad away. At the end of their turn, the Channeler triggers the passive to summon a dust devil to enable their Downdraft at-will on the next turn. New: Channeler uses their passive to summon a dust devil. The presence of the dust devil enables the use of the Downdraft at-will as an option, which they use to fly over the ravine to rejoin the rest of the party. The Channeler then swaps to Call of the Landslide to turn the earlier dust devils on their side into Low Cover for the party to duck behind. Thought that this would enable the player to feel less constrained by the order of their actions and feel a bit more responsive overall. Anyway, enough  from me!  I hope that you find the observations helpful. 
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2016 09:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 02:18 |
|
|
Please don't nerf Sprinter, it's ridiculous cool.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2016 09:13
|
|
|
Ghostpilot posted:#2: Calling the Storm Passive. I asked for clarification on this earlier; it works when you are standing in the square and make an attack from there. Still not amazing though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 2, 2016 15:28
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:Toughness: +3 to max HP. Resist 1 damage against everything except for attacks and Opportunities. (e.g. you Resist Ongoing Damage, environmental damage, and damaging zones.) Player has asked me if this revised version would let them resist the damage from Bombardier misfires.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 01:18
|
|
|
gourdcaptain posted:Player has asked me if this revised version would let them resist the damage from Bombardier misfires. I suppose so. I could go either way on that, but if I'm just interpreting the rules as they are currently written, it makes sense. Although actually, it might be smarter to future-proof toughness by making it just Resist 1 against the specific things mentioned: ongoing, environmental, and zones. That way I don't have to worry about it completely obviating a particular monster's trait or whatever. Playtesting Tonight So Count is not around and I was thinking about doing something a bit different. I just watched the movie Redline and it reminded me of the many many many hours I spent playing F-Zero GX on my old gamecube (why did Nintendo never make another one???). I started trying to make a little game based on it. I initially conceived of it as an add-on for Strike!, but then the mechanics ended up being nothing like Strike, so I'm now thinking of it as its own thing - maybe a card game if I can figure out how to make the track work as cards. Anyway, I quickly wrote up the rules that were in my head. That was 2 days ago. Then yesterday I re-wrote them because the initial rules were a crazy dice-fest. Here they are - they might suck, since I've only played with myself so far, but it seems like a decent start. The next step is to play and see if the gameplay is actually any fun, and that's what I'd like to test tonight - tests for balance can come after that, assuming it is indeed fun. I can take up to 6 volunteers, and we'll play at 9PM Eastern. I expect we can get a race done in under an hour no problem, and if it's fast then we'll try a second one. All I ask is that you've read the document before you show up.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2016 20:39
|
|
|
Alright, I guess that was a bit short notice. Well, I'm happy to try it out later in the week. If anyone is interested, just let me know which days work for you. Also, it's just 4 or 5 pages so it'll only take a couple of minutes to read.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 01:54
|
|
|
Sounds like you've got a bunch of errata and rules changes coming down the line. Are they going to be coming soon? I want to get a hardcopy of the book but if the playtesting is going well I can wait a few weeks for the pdf to get updated. Should I wait, or are these changes going to be a while in coming?
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 05:38
|
|
|
bbcisdabomb posted:Sounds like you've got a bunch of errata and rules changes coming down the line. Are they going to be coming soon? I want to get a hardcopy of the book but if the playtesting is going well I can wait a few weeks for the pdf to get updated. Should I wait, or are these changes going to be a while in coming? Also interested in this info
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2016 09:25
|
|
|
Is it intentional that unlike Leader role character, the Bard cannot heal themselves? All the Bard heal powers specify "target ally" or such so you can't use them on yourself, while the Leader heal just says "target". It makes sense given the way melodies work, but it's a bit odd on Chord of Healing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2016 18:05
|
|
|
^^^ It is intentional, but I might change it for Chord of Healing.bbcisdabomb posted:Sounds like you've got a bunch of errata and rules changes coming down the line. Are they going to be coming soon? I want to get a hardcopy of the book but if the playtesting is going well I can wait a few weeks for the pdf to get updated. Should I wait, or are these changes going to be a while in coming? I'm been hemming and hawing about when to actually make the changes. On the one hand, making them right now is good - folks like you don't have to wait any longer for them. On the other hand, if I wait and something else comes up, I'll be able to do it all at once instead of having to do it twice. But how likely is it that something important will come up? I don't know. I'm leaning towards getting it done now. But that means I need to work out Sprinter's fate. Anyone who has played with the Sprinter Feat or played in a game with someone else using it, please vote (about the saving movement for later in the round part of the feat): A) It's fine. Leave it. B) It keeps interrupting things - limit it to 1/round. C) Players are moving too far off-turn - make it trade in unused points at 2-for-1. If you think B and C should both apply, just say that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2016 21:01
|
|
|
I'm probably in category A, B at most, but my players haven't been especially active in using the reaction bit. Also, can a Bard use Chord of Positioning on themselves? My Bard I'm playing right now has the perfect fluff for it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2016 21:08
|
|
|
I've never had a problem with it so A
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2016 22:01
|
|
|
Yea, A. Whole point of the feat is to go fast off-turn; if it's causing problems in a game somehow then just remove it from that game/campaign.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2016 22:25
|
|
|
B for me. The whole point of the feat is to go fast, not to go in fits and starts and slow the combat down.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2016 23:25
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:Anyone who has played with the Sprinter Feat or played in a game with someone else using it, please vote (about the saving movement for later in the round part of the feat): I pick A) It's fine. Leave it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2016 23:43
|
|
|
I just had an... interesting Star Wars session I ran in Strike. Where one poor smuggler PC got immobilized (save ends) near a micro-black hole for an entire fight being slowly sucked in and taking more and more increasing damage and unable to get anyone in range to do anything for five rounds. Then he got injured in the Team Conflict to escape the space station when they rolled a Double-Tie on the Team Conflict and rolled Death on the resolution of that (first time I've ever had that table come up). Then in a dogfight (first time I've used those rolls) he loses by 3 or more on the engagement roll for his ship, the party attempts a Risk action in the first round, rolls another 2 (WITH ADVANTAGE), rolls a 1 on the table for being shot at, and the session ends with them crash landing and totaling his ship. So many rules cases I have never used before, coming together for the purpose of him having a bad day.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 03:41
|
|
|
gourdcaptain posted:I just had an... interesting Star Wars session I ran in Strike. Where one poor smuggler PC got immobilized (save ends) near a micro-black hole for an entire fight being slowly sucked in and taking more and more increasing damage and unable to get anyone in range to do anything for five rounds. Then he got injured in the Team Conflict to escape the space station when they rolled a Double-Tie on the Team Conflict and rolled Death on the resolution of that (first time I've ever had that table come up). Then in a dogfight (first time I've used those rolls) he loses by 3 or more on the engagement roll for his ship, the party attempts a Risk action in the first round, rolls another 2 (WITH ADVANTAGE), rolls a 1 on the table for being shot at, and the session ends with them crash landing and totaling his ship. Hah, that's funny. I hope he was a good sport about it. Who died when you rolled Death on the table?
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 19:44
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:Hah, that's funny. I hope he was a good sport about it. Who died when you rolled Death on the table? The player who was leaving the group after that session indirectly, at their suggestion (and LOTS of their enemies) when a different group of pirates showed up (I basically had one player do a relationship roll to see who it was, this was the good result compared to the Hutt everyone was fleeing from), got trapped in the cheap interdictor field the pirates were using the black hole for, and just started shooting up the station. And the player who had everything go wrong for them was a fairly good sport about it, although he was cursing Roll20's dice tower during the fight a bit.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 19:52
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:^^^ It is intentional, but I might change it for Chord of Healing. Oh cool, post in here when you do the update, please. I'll hold off for now. quote:But that means I need to work out Sprinter's fate. If A wins out, you could always put options B and C in an errata or FAQ document as optional rules for people who think it's overpowered as is.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 22:07
|
|
|
bbcisdabomb posted:If A wins out, you could always put options B and C in an errata or FAQ document as optional rules for people who think it's overpowered as is. I haven't played with it yet in any form, but I'd probably vote B just on those grounds alone.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2016 23:46
|
|
|
With regards to the Sprinter feat, I'd be inclined to say B. The out of turn movement thing didn't come up that often but when it did it certainly bogged down the game.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2016 10:13
|
|
|
Serf posted a setting pack for Star Wars. Anyone mind reposting that? Just curious how it went again and can't find the O.G. thread it appeared in.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 04:05
|
|
|
Covok posted:Serf posted a setting pack for Star Wars. Anyone mind reposting that? Just curious how it went again and can't find the O.G. thread it appeared in. It's mostly just Origins/Backgrounds, but I got u fam Star Wars Strike Backgrounds and Origins
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 04:10
|
|
|
Serf posted:It's mostly just Origins/Backgrounds, but I got u fam Thanks for the hookup. And, yeah, I remember, but I was just curious.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 04:39
|
|
|
How do the Buddies and Summoner interact with Bard melodies? For instance, does Melody of Endurance heal the main character and the buddy, or only one?
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 09:49
|
|
|
gourdcaptain posted:How do the Buddies and Summoner interact with Bard melodies? For instance, does Melody of Endurance heal the main character and the buddy, or only one? Good question. Will consider. As written, it includes them - but I need to make sure that's not ridiculous.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 18:58
|
|
|
Okay, so here is what I've got for the FAQ/Errata document so far: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RF9BOUhwRlLCm_ZovdS_iaFc84oIs_oJFWu0spibEbM/edit?usp=sharing If any of you can think of any other common questions or necessary clarifications that aren't in the document, let me know. Or, I suppose, if you spot a problem with anything in the document, let me know. Once I've got this sorted out, I'll update the PDFs and physical books, and upload this document as a PDF to anyone who bought the game.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 20:00
|
|
|
I realize this is probably impossible to answer, but do you anticipate updating the physical books again? If so, is there any ETA for a "final" version?
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 20:21
|
|
|
Not a huge deal, but the difference in capitalization between some of the classes' and roles' powers was making me twitch when I was creating power cards. E.g. Archer's "Pin Down" vs Blaster's "Like moving through maple syrup". If there was a reason why this was the case I didn't see it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 20:35
|
|
|
ImpactVector posted:Not a huge deal, but the difference in capitalization between some of the classes' and roles' powers was making me twitch when I was creating power cards. They Should All Be Capitalized. It's just the powers in the Roles that have this problem, right? I've already caught those for the new version. Tuxedo Catfish posted:I realize this is probably impossible to answer, but do you anticipate updating the physical books again? If so, is there any ETA for a "final" version? I hope to make this the only revision needed for the physical version. I wouldn't revise the physical version for just one or two little tweaks, but there is enough stuff that could do with a change in that Errata doc that it's definitely worth it at this point. Like, I can't guarantee it, but I don't see any reason to think that I'll find anywhere near this many things to change after this round. That's why I really want to find as much stuff to fix as I can RIGHT NOW - I don't want to have to revise it again!
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 21:05
|
|
|
What ever came of potentially giving base classes three at-wills instead of two? Was that scrapped?
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 21:18
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:I hope to make this the only revision needed for the physical version. I wouldn't revise the physical version for just one or two little tweaks, but there is enough stuff that could do with a change in that Errata doc that it's definitely worth it at this point. Like, I can't guarantee it, but I don't see any reason to think that I'll find anywhere near this many things to change after this round. That's why I really want to find as much stuff to fix as I can RIGHT NOW - I don't want to have to revise it again! You say this now, but I look forward to repurchasing everything as Strike! Version 3.5 in six months 
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 21:36
|
|
|
Hey, if you're thinking about updating the physical books, I'm going to go ahead and talk about my pet issue of 'Single-form Shapeshifter is a bad choice'. --If you don't use Rally or sacrifice a higher level encounter power, you trade two forms worth of potential versatility for zero benefit. --With the exception of Reach, the single-form buffs are really situational and/or underwhelming. Virtually every form passive is better than than the single-for buffs, and giving up access to two of those for maybe some Reach isn't a good trade-off. --Single-form Shapeshifter has to spend two Encounter powers just to have more tactical options than a Basic class. They have fewer options than any class except maybe an Archer that doesn't pick Trick Arrow. Honestly outside of a Defender super gimmick (Huge and Long-Reach feats, +size/+reach single-form buffs for a hilarious 72 threatened squares as early as level 3), I can't imagine why you would even mechanically want to go for a Single-form Shifter. Maybe someone else knows some secret I don't, but I've taken to warning my players away from it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 21:52
|
|
|
You are trading potential versatility and potential options for actual bonuses. A single-form Form of the Bull shifter is strictly better than a multi-form shifter in Form of the Bull. It's not a whole ton better because then it would make it hard for anyone to pick multi-form without feeling like they're giving up the best stuff. Yes, the buffs are weaker than any form's passive, but the whole point is that you can get both the buff AND a passive, while a multi-form shifter can never have two passives at once even if they have two available. The main impetus for having Single-Form shifter in the game is that it makes a lot of sense for certain character concepts - if you think that the mechanics for one of the forms perfectly match your concept and don't actually want those other forms that come with the class, this gives you the option to trade in those unwanted forms for a minor buff.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 05:15
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:You are trading potential versatility and potential options for actual bonuses. A single-form Form of the Bull shifter is strictly better than a multi-form shifter in Form of the Bull. It's not a whole ton better because then it would make it hard for anyone to pick multi-form without feeling like they're giving up the best stuff. You only get those 'actual' bonuses once you've payed an additional encounter power. Sacrificing your versatility by itself gives no benefit. Single-form Shifters are paying two separate opportunity costs (start-of-battle versatility AND an encounter power) for a not-particularly-impressive bonus. My proposed simple fix is ---Single-Form Shifters can choose one of their special buffs when they first transform, as well as any time they spend an additional encounter power on 'transforming' again. ---Make the +1 size buff grant allies full cover, like the Buddy version of that buff. That's really it. You trade your versatility for a different, lesser (but stacking) kind of versatility, instead of for the privilege of spending additional resources to get what you already paid for. I don't really think it's the best possible solution, but it's easy and bandaids the issue well enough that I wouldn't warn my players away from the option.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 06:14
|
|
|
In 'Things I cannot believe I didn't notice until now', isn't the LV 2 Controller power Flash flat out worse than Save or Suck? They're both "enemy within 10 makes a save, is distracted until EoNT on a failure' but Flash induces Blind, which while good, in no way measures up to Save or Suck's Stun. I feel like there should be a "Save Ends" or something in Flash, or am I missing something?
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2016 00:11
|
|
|
Blinded lets allies (melee) attack with Advantage. Stunned doesn't. They are similarly powerful, but Blinded is more aggressive and Stunned is more defensive.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2016 06:30
|
|
|
Jimbozig posted:Blinded lets allies (melee) attack with Advantage. Stunned doesn't. They are similarly powerful, but Blinded is more aggressive and Stunned is more defensive. I guess? I just view hard action denial as better out of the two since it buys you more time to hit things. Personal taste.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2016 07:13
|
|
|
Added the Errata above to the character generator.
|
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2016 18:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 02:18 |
|
|
The Magician power "Radiant Motes of the Overworld" says the target is blinded until the end of its next turn. This seems really clunky -- it could be really powerful if the creature came right before you in the initiative order, or it could be completely useless and do nothing if the creature comes right after you. Is this intentional, or should it be "until the end of your next turn? e: It also does nothing in a 1-player, 1-GM game, although I realize the rules may simply not be set up to support such a game. Also, does Strike! have a "hold action" equivalent? I don't see anything about it on page 88 with the basic initiative rules, but I might have missed something. e2: it looks like this is part of a larger effort to have status upkeep checks occur exclusively on the target's turn, which I guess makes sense, but I can't help but feel tracking on the caster/source's turn would cause fewer weird initiative hiccups, especially if the game doesn't have hold actions Tuxedo Catfish fucked around with this message at 20:05 on Sep 18, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 18, 2016 19:53
|
|