|
That list of treasure is exactly what it needed, PO. gnome, you can replace the link to the Draigs/Spiderhorse in the OP with this: http://codex.dungeon-world.com/profile/58001/monsters
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2013 08:53
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 15:34 |
|
|
gnome7 posted:When you attack with telekinetic force, roll +WIS. On a 10+, deal your damage. On a 7-9, deal your damage, but choose 1: This is a really good rewrite and should go into the playbook. Speaking of the playbook, did it get updated since December? The version I have still has the wrong trigger/requirements for Mindjack. Specifically, it should either be a Requires (rather than Replaces) Imp of the Perverse (so that the more restrictive trigger only applies when forcing a target against its better judgement/moral code), or the move trigger should read: quote:When you mentally force a target to obey a simple order, roll +WIS. On a 10+, they obey your command to the best of their ability, even against their better judgment or moral code. As it stands, if it's a Replaces it means you can actually use it on less targets (only when forcing creatures to do something against their better judgement/moral code rather than any time you mentally command someone to do something). PS: when are you playbook-ing the Shaman 2.0, gnome? 
Lemon-Lime fucked around with this message at 11:01 on Mar 25, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2013 10:51
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:Here's an semi-related question for the DW experts; a lot of the fanmade playbooks seem to have some variant advanced multiclass move beyond the Multiclass Dabbler move present in the core playbooks. What's the purpose behind that decision? Is it largely a flavor thing or is there somethink hinky with Multiclass Dabbler that I'm not aware of yet? There's a few parts to this: 1) when you take a MC move and grab a starting move that requires other moves to function (e.g. Cast A Spell), you're meant to get the other moves as well. This is sort of tucked away in the main rulebook rather than made explicit, so for clarity's sake a lot of playbooks get "when you take X via an MC move, you also get Y and Z" somewhere in them. Your Warlord doesn't need this as none of the moves rely on each other. 2) you are specifically supposed to be able to take MC moves with MC moves, which isn't always tone-appropriate. This means your Commando move can actually be used to MC into Cleric via God Amidst the Wastes, for example. It also means that being able to MC to Fighter (or any class with MC Dabbler) means being able to MC to any class at all. This isn't mentioned in the rules and was clarified by Sage and Adam 3) some classes just plain can't MC, or can't MC outside of a couple of specific classes. A lot of times it's just a very arbitrary restriction and doesn't actually serve flavour particularly well. As a result, if you wanted to restrict MC to specific classes you'd need to write a different move that specifies that you can't take MC moves with it. This leads me to have the following multiclass moves for the Shaman: quote:Friend of the Land As you can tell, this is pretty awkward. Originally, this was "choose one from Druid/Ranger or one non-MC from [list of other classes]," but I realised that was pointless since the intent was to limit the player to MCing into classes I thought were thematically appropriate, which is pretty dumb. Shaman v1's MC move was Druid/Ranger only, but those two can only MC into each other. Ultimately, I think MCing is one of the worst bits of Dungeon World since it's both confusing and unfairly restrictive. It would be much better for everyone if instead of being a per-playbook move thing, MCing were either part of Level Up or just a rule. Specifically, something like this: quote:Level Up Each playbook can then include a list of favoured classes. This has the advantage of both letting you indicate which MCs you think are most thematically appropriate and letting people MC to what they think makes for the coolest character.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2013 15:12
|
|
|
MadScientistWorking posted:Well the issue is that its actually supposed to be follow the "genre conventions" of D&D because you kind of more or less just reinvented the level up mechanics from Apocalypse World. While I acknowledge that "having lovely and confusing rules that fail to accomplish what they set out to do" is indeed a D&D genre convention, I feel it's a D&D genre convention that DW can do without. In other words, all my Level Up move does is move the MC text out of class-specific special moves and clarify how MCing works. This has the additional benefit of meaning two more "slots" for cool and flavourful advanced moves in base classes. Although, yes, as pointed out, my version needs to be edited to only allow two MCs or something. Also: players aren't picking from a fixed list of advancements most of which aren't moves in my version, how is this like advances in AW? Lemon-Lime fucked around with this message at 23:29 on Mar 25, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2013 23:24
|
|
|
MadScientistWorking posted:Then why did you include them into the Shaman on purpose. Its also the reason why I hate the Artificer multiclass moves too. They are just needless restrictions on genre conventions in a game where you would want to actually multiclass into multiple classes. Because the alternate version of Level Up I proposed isn't RAW. The Shaman has to work with the rules that most people are using, and that happens to be the actual RAW core book. If I could somehow get Sage and Adam to include my variant in the official rules I'd jump at the chance to add two cool moves instead of the MC moves I have, but that hasn't happened. Instead, the MC moves are part of the class, but are set up like that alternate Level Up (choose a move at your level from class X or Y, or any other class at your level -1). UrbanLabyrinth posted:Your version (as written) also doesn't let them take moves from their own playbook. Their own class is obviously part of their class' favoured playlists. 
Lemon-Lime fucked around with this message at 09:01 on Mar 26, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2013 08:50
|
|
|
gnome7 posted:Everyone remember this? Me too. Have another preview! So when is it actually out?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2013 12:03
|
|
|
MadScientistWorking posted:No you kind of missed my point. The concept of a favored class/thematically appropriate is an incredibly annoying D&Dism that does not belong in this game. No, it's not. The concept of some class being inherently closer to other classes is not a D&Dism, especially not when used to drive a fictional identity. Why does the Shaman have the Ranger and Druid as "favoured classes?" Because they're all "primal" archetypes that are close to nature; it makes sense in terms of the fiction for any given Shaman to have a predilection for having an animal companion or being able to turn into a bear, and it also makes sense mechanically because of the overlap between these classes (e.g. the Druid's talking-to-things moves). What is unfairly restrictive is just plain going "no, you can't be a Shaman who takes Cast a Spell." MadScientistWorking posted:The Shaman is a particularly egregious example because Mage and Wizard would make just as much sense as the Druid or Ranger namely because of how varied the arctheypte actually is. Which is exactly why the Shaman's multiclass move allows you to multiclass to any class you want, but gives you a bonus (in the form of not taking the move as if you were a level lower) to MC to specific classes. MadScientistWorking posted:You are complaining about how unfairly restricting the game actually is but in the process of designing your class you kind of ramrodded in an extremely narrow view of the archtype with that stupid multiclass move. Have you actually read the v2 Shaman's multiclass moves? Lemon-Lime fucked around with this message at 16:04 on Mar 26, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2013 16:00
|
|
|
Okasvi posted:Why do you see shaman as just a "primal" archetype? Okay, that part probably has to do with D&D a bit.  More seriously: because the Shaman concept I had in mind when I wrote the class is lifted from fantasy sources where the shaman is: 1) predominantly from tribal cultures that spurn urban environments; 2) part medicine man (of the natural, plant medicine type); 3) has a strong connection to animals (able to shapeshift/summon animals). You're completely right that you can have civilised shamans and warrior shamans and sneaky shamans and shamans who also worship a deity and every other kind of shaman you want, hence the MC moves being rewritten. MadScientistWorking posted:Just out of curiousity have you ever played Legend of the Five Rings? No, but I'm not entirely sure what L5R has to do with anything?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2013 21:07
|
|
|
sentrygun posted:A while ago I came up with the idea of a Ranger who uses hexes and curses instead of a bow and arrows and controls undead as their companion. This NecroRanger would totally favor Wizard and Mage and stuff, but a typical Ranger that people think of wouldn't. Then assuming you went with this favoured class idea, you would change the favoured class list in the same way you would have to modify or write custom moves to represent the hexes and the undead companion.  sentrygun posted:The ability for some of the core classes to borrow from only certain other classes all make sense just based on what the moves the other class(es) have do, where this idea of a 'primal' Shaman kind of misses that and just focuses on how the author sees the class' fluff. Everything starts and ends with the fiction, so "how the author sees the class' fiction" is pretty much a justification for every class having the moveset and the restrictions they have. I am fairly certain the Thief wasn't given zero multiclass moves because Sage and Adam were afraid a Thief with a Signature Weapon or the ability to Cast Spells would break the game's balance in half. sentrygun posted:I'd be just as likely to make a Shaman whose spirits are actually just the electricity in machines, being able to command the 'spirits' of machinery and basically be a technomancer. It works perfectly with the class's mechanics, but that's not 'primal' in the slightest. The Shaman's "spirits" are explicitly ghosts, so that interpretation isn't part of the class as-intended, much like how the NecroRanger isn't part of the Ranger's intended concept. It's a cool concept, but requires you to change the fiction behind the Shaman, and thus modify some moves, exactly like it would for any other concept in the game not wholly covered by a class. sentrygun posted:As far as I see it, I think advanced moves that let you borrow from specific (core) classes should exist if the moves those characters have compliment the moves of the class at hand. Both in terms of fiction and mechanically, yes. Arguably, fiction alone (i.e. cases where the fiction of class B is a good match for class A, but none of the moves immediately synergise with class A's in ways that are mechanically interesting) is enough of a justification. Dungeon World is not the kind of game where mechanical synergy alone should justify your multiclass restrictions. edit: Okasvi posted:Full disclosure. I might be talking out of my rear end since most of this comes from manga and other Asian pop culture + Wikipedia and I don't have the appropriate background in cultural research, so take all of the following with a grain of salt. But I was under the impression that Asia has a long tradition of organised shamanistic religion, and a bunch of old empires, which resulted into a bunch of civilized spiritualists. Like the japanese onmyoji or the chinese wu, for example. No, gently caress, I haven't got any actual knowledge in this either - 95% of my inspiration for the class was cribbed from the Malazan Book of the Fallen (the author is a real anthropologist so I'm in the clear, right? ) and the other 5% from common conceptions of shamans. I am in no way an expert on actual real-life shamans, but much like how the other DW classes aren't remotely like their historical inspiration, the Shaman is meant to be "here is how shamans are portrayed in Western fantasy fiction" rather than "here is how real shamans are."Golden Bee posted:It's Lemon's class. If you want to give it Multiclass dabbler, that's fine, but this thread has been 30% "you didn't put a move in there, how dare you?" / "I didn't think it'd fit." Yeah - as much as I like talking about this, I don't think it's particularly fair of me to be eating up the thread like this. Sorry. Lemon-Lime fucked around with this message at 21:44 on Mar 26, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2013 21:36
|
|
|
sentrygun posted:Hell, looking at the book version of my Shaman purchase the whole introduction thing just kind of talks about death. You're the dude between the dead and the living, and that's your cool thing. Yes, that's still the case. We're talking about the reason why the Shaman's MC move favours two classes - it's not a link that the entire class has. Like I said, the nature angle comes from shamans being typically a fixture of tribal societies, from the medicine woman archetype and from the overlap with the Druid's nature spirits angle. All of this only affects the two MC moves.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2013 00:56
|
|
|
The Druid stuff has come up multiple times before, so here's a condensed version of how it works RAW:wrl posted:First of all asking the GM to come up with moves can be tough, especially with PbP where you may be looking to perform that move in the same post. Monster moves are incredibly easy to come up with; they're a single-sentence action description like "drag them off to your lair," not a full-blown player move. wrl posted:Secondly there are some questions here, Should these moves require rolling ever? Can they/should they be as powerful as standard class moves? What if the GM doesn't give me the move I intended? No, they do not ever require rolling. You spend hold and they happen, just like a monster just makes their monster moves happen. They are monster moves, not player moves, so they behave exactly like every other monster move in terms of power. If you change into a giant snake that has the "swallow them whole" move, you swallow an enemy whole when you spend your hold to use that move. Yes, that makes the Druid powerful. You're turning into monsters, so if you "intended" to have a move you're presumably turning into something from the back of the book, at which point your DM should just give you the monster stat card rather than coming out with a whole new set of monster moves just for you. Keep in mind that "flying" or "breathe underwater" is not a monster move; it's a thing you can do naturally as part of your form. If you turned into a giant snake with the intent of swallowing something whole and the DM doesn't give you a "swallow them whole" move, behave like an adult, talk to your DM and tell them what you were trying to accomplish by turning into whatever you turned into. e; a couple of posts I wrote on this same subject in the old thread: Lemon Curdistan posted:Regarding the Druid: dodging with hold is absolutely something he should be allowed to do... if it's one of the moves his animal form gets. He doesn't get to spend hold to just do anything, he spends hold to trigger a move, and if he's not turning into something with an entry in the DW book you're the one who writes those moves. Lemon Curdistan posted:on the topic of Druids turning into animals: You would still roll H&S or DD in animal form except for when one of your monster moves would let you bypass the roll. Lemon-Lime fucked around with this message at 16:22 on Mar 27, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2013 16:13
|
|
|
wrl posted:I guess what I'm saying is that most animals aren't listed as monsters in the book, so it may be worth putting together a list of moves that an animal could have access to. Mundane animals generally aren't listed - but then, why turn into a mundane animal when you can turn into something much more interesting? That said, a bunch of codex-made monster cards for standard animals (wolf, eagle, bear, etc.) would probably be a useful thing to do. I'll have a think.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2013 16:24
|
|
|
aldantefax posted:Honestly, kind of disappointed that Inverse World doesn't have anything to do with Slayers. Animeeee No, fax! Don't tempt the Mikanimé! You'll doom us all!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2013 08:57
|
|
|
gnome, I'll write that Druid post tomorrow, since someone just pointed out that tomorrow is a bank holiday and I had no idea. Crono S. Magnum posted:Is there any word as to when they will be making a print version available? Already available in the US via Amazon but not currently shipping worldwide (this is a glitch they're trying to fix). After that, they don't have a specific distribution channel for outside the US so it will be up to your local FLGSes to sort themselves out.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2013 18:36
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:Still plugging away at the Warlord, scrapping Wolf Pack Tactics as it stands for something else. Is this suitable for an advanced move in the 6-10 range or is it too under/overpowered, too complex, etc? Actually, I like the concept. The d4 damage on a miss seems a bit piddly and therefore out of place (then again, it could kill some weaker creatures outright). The problem I have with this on a conceptual level is roughly the same as my problem with Bend Bar, Lift Gates from the Fighter: an ambush is something everyone can do. Making a move where a partial success means not failing implies that all other ambushes not done via this move will misjudge enemy numbers, leave people exposed, etc. (basically, be generally disastrous). The way you fix this is by changing your options to be a list of good things, so that the Warlord is obviously the expert at ambushing people but anyone else can still have the ambush narratively succeed. quote:Wolf Pack Tactics Or something like that, anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2013 13:05
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:I like choosing from a list of positives better than a list of prevented negatives better now that I've sort of got my head around that. There was some talk in the old thread about the differences between the two, and essentially it comes down to how you want to present the move in terms of tone. A list of negatives you prevent is less upbeat than a list of positives you choose from. Negative lists are better suited to moves about stopping/mitigating things than they are to moves about acting on the world. It's just a question of picking which one is appropriate for your move. (There's a third type, which is "choose X bad things to happen," but it's a bit more complicated.) Lemon-Lime fucked around with this message at 14:43 on Mar 29, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2013 14:39
|
|
|
Let me know if this is too long or too complicated. The Druid Shapeshifter FAQ This short FAQ covers the intricacies of the Druid's Shapeshifter move, as it's a topic that comes up often. Dungeon World, page 105 posted:Shapeshifter Do I need to roll do to things while Shapeshifted? There are three types of actions you can accomplish when you're Shapeshifted (versus two normally):
Unfortunately, the terminology used here is confusing, so let me make an attempt to make things a bit less ambiguous. When Shapeshifter talks about spending hold to trigger a move, it's not actually talking about Defy Danger or Hack & Slash. Instead, it's talking about your creature form's monster moves (we'll call these MMs from now on). If you take a look at the monster list in the rulebook, you'll see a format like this one:  The MMs Shapeshifter refers to are those two lines at the end of the monster's profile. If you turned into a Black Pudding, you'd have access to those two MMs. You could spend 1 hold to trigger any one of them and it would just happen, no rolling needed. So can't I just have a monster move that lets me dodge or attack without rolling? Generally, no, unless it makes sense in the fiction. Shapeshifting won't let you automatically Hack & Slash or Defy Danger without a roll. What it might do is give you a MM that lets you automatically attack in certain situations. Does it make sense for something like a panther to be able to effortlessly dodge a trained warrior's sword? Not really, so that would require a Defy Danger roll - if you were turning into a blink dog or something small and hard to hit, though, sure. Similarly, being a python might let you swallow enemies as a move (and thus without rolling), so you could attack that way instead of Hack & Slashing. Does this mean the GM can never introduce complications or force me to roll for anything when I make a monster move, since they always happen without a roll? Not at all! The "without rolling" in this case is for doing exactly what the animal move says. It doesn't suddenly cancel out every other roll that might happen in the process; you might still need to Defy Danger if the fiction dictates that you would need to do so in the course of performing the action described by your monster move, but if you spend hold on "slam them into a hard surface" then an enemy is getting slammed into a hard surface no matter what. The GM isn't allowed to make a consequence of the failed Defy Danger roll "the enemy isn't slammed into a hard surface," but they can still do any other move in response (reveal an unwelcome truth, show signs of an approaching danger, use up their resources, etc.). What makes a good monster move? A monster move is not just anything that a creature can do, it's something that is special or unique to that type of creature. Every animal can attack you; attacking is not a monster move, it's just a thing the Druid can do in that animal form by rolling just as they would normally. If you want to make animal moves for the Druid, remember this: what thing can this animal do that few or no others can? Flying isn't a monster move, but "outpace any land-based creature" on a cheetah would be a MM. Attacking isn't a MM, but "poison them with your stinger" is a MM that a scorpion would get. Seeing things isn't a MM, but "see dangers way before they can see you" would be a MM for an eagle. Also, remember that Shapeshifting gives you all the inherent abilities of your new form Since the book doesn't actually contain monster entries for mundane animals, here are a few I could think of: Bear
Lemon-Lime fucked around with this message at 12:17 on Jul 14, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2013 03:47
|
|
|
gnome7 posted:Thank you, Lemon! Added to the OP under Player Tips. e; you linked rather than quoting, so all good. 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2013 03:54
|
|
|
Boing posted:This is a cool idea. I don't see why anyone would pick the first option, though. Or the second. "Actually, this thing you just tried fails without consequence" is not in any way a good option.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2013 16:02
|
|
|
That seems like it would make more sense as a resource you spend in your down-time to go questing on your own, rather than something PCs can just spend like that to gain benefits seemingly out of thin air.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2013 16:08
|
|
|
Okay, this should work: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B30fzv28XdrYb0taaGZuVzNhcFk/edit The Shaman 2.0 character sheet is now available for general downloading. You can thank Gnome7 for putting up with my constant nitpicking and creating the sheet. Please download for best viewing, as gdoc fucks with fonts. Please let me know if you spot any typos or any instances of words being spelt
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2013 17:24
|
|
|
gnome7 posted:I'd just like to say: For all those players who wanted to be a Blue Mage from Final Fantasy, The Mutant from this book is easily to best way to handle it. The class literally steals monster moves and uses them with Defy Danger, although they can gain hold from one of their other moves to just automatically use a Monster Move. It is fabulous and I like it way better than the Druid implementations I'd seen people using. So I take it that's a buy recommendation for the book, then?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2013 20:13
|
|
|
gnome7 posted:Yeah, definitely. It's got some neat stuff in it. The playbooks are free if you don't want to put money into it, though. They're right here if you don't want to search for the link on that page. I'd be a jerk if I didn't buy it considering how much money I've made from the Shaman. Load values can be tweaked super easily, and you have only yourself (and maybe my incessant badgering re: the Shaman sheet) to blame for Inverse World not being out yet.  e; you're right about the Mutant vs. the rest - it's almost entirely original material, rather than the 30/70 original/reused split that the other playbooks are. I may well rewrite some of this stuff. e2; unrelated: Kai Tave you forgot the best Warlord move, find space to put this in your playbook tia: Tiger posted:Eulalia: when you let out your battlecry at the start of a fight, everyone who joins in takes +1 forward. Lemon-Lime fucked around with this message at 22:18 on Mar 30, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2013 20:27
|
|
|
Ich posted:Brainstorming an idea about a gnome racial move for The Mage: That's too long to be a racial move, as it's a full move. It's a drat good full move, though. I'm working on giving all the classes moves for all the races (plus orcs), and this is what I had for the halfling Wizard (which steals the gnome illusionist archetype): quote:Halfling Which becomes this for the Mage: quote:Halfling The shorter move is more in line with the length expected for a racial move, but all it does on Black Magic is add a disadvantage, which is weird. At least on Cast a Spell it's offering you a consequence that doesn't harm you, which is interesting, but that feels slightly out of scope with the human/elf racials.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2013 12:23
|
|
|
Ich posted:Yeah, I knew mine were crap. I like yours, short and sweet. It's actually better suited to the gnome. Yeah, the only reason it's a halfling move is that I find gnomes are boring and overlap with halfling too much, and I couldn't think of a better halfling move. If anyone is interested, here's the finished set of alternate racial moves: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_vi-GwUYRauwesyLsm81Hl5pGo7xX0YMHBJVeb_6EmA/edit?usp=sharing This contains moves for each of the missing races for each of the core classes, as well as for the four Funhaver classes (Warlock/Initiate/Shaman/Namer). Oh, and it contains an Orc racial move for all of those classes. This might eventually be part of a thing published through Mikan, so I'm not sure how long the doc can stay up, and I've shared it with a more restrictive license for now.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2013 14:23
|
|
|
Golden Bee posted:Those moves are really cool! That's, uh, exactly what it does, exactly for those reasons? It gives you +1 armour until you lose HP. If you're hit and don't lose HP, you don't lose the bonus. (As it stands, you can also regain the bonus as long as you're still outnumber/outmatched by praying for a few instants. This is by design.)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2013 17:04
|
|
|
Okasvi posted:While this might have been the case in the old version too and I just didn't notice it back then, I just noticed that "A plague on both your houses" seems a bit weak when compared to the name of the move. I mean the move is fine otherwise, but with a name like that I'd expect it to, you know, be able to bring misfortune to the target's whole household and extended family, instead of just them alone. You know what? That's actually a good point. I wasn't particularly happy with the 10+ on Plague. If Mikan hasn't pushed out the update yet I'll see about making Plague a change in scope rather than what it is right now. e; done: quote:When you beseech the spirits to lay a curse upon someone whom you can see, take a debility of your choice and roll+Wis. On a hit, they and any blood relative of theirs that you name will be the victims of ill fortune until the next full Moon. On a 10+, your target will also suffer terrible tragedy sometime soon. On a miss, they find out what you were trying to do. Lemon-Lime fucked around with this message at 21:02 on Apr 1, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2013 17:24
|
|
|
TalonDemonKing posted:Does this game have any skills? If my fighter was a merchant before he picked up his sword, is there any way to reflect that at all? madadric posted:making a custom move is the easiest way. You don't even need to make a custom move. You go "I was a merchant" and the DM goes "cool" and then later on when you're trying to do things you narrate how being a merchant helps you solve a problem. Fiction Comes First. Basically, what slydingdoor said. PublicOpinion posted:I've considered writing a list of "day jobs" that would provide a Racial Move level of benefit, and then everyone would choose 1 to start with. fax mentioned working on something like that in the old thread, but I believe he didn't get around to finishing it. It's a cool idea, though, and one I was considering investigating for Funhaver's eventual DW player options supplement.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2013 09:07
|
|
|
Okay, several conversations with PixelScum and others have lead me to realise that I'm not overly fond of the D&D 3-18 stats in DW, and I've been giving getting rid of them some thought. The long and short of it is that getting rid of stats and keeping just the mods breaks: 1) The rate at which your stat mods increase. 2) HP. If you want to read poorly-written word vomit you can go here where I spell out my thought process, but essentially:
The HP fix is janky as all hell but gives the following list of HP values: Seemingly completely arbitrary but based on my guesstimates: Bard 18 HP; Cleric 21 HP; Druid 19 HP; Fighter 26 HP; Paladin 23 HP; Ranger 21 HP; Thief 18 HP; Wizard 16 HP; Shaman 21 HP. Rounded to the nearest multiple of five (I like this less because it makes HP differences between classes even smaller): Bard 20 HP; Cleric 20 HP; Druid 20 HP; Fighter 25 HP; Paladin 25 HP (poor Fighter, there goes your very slight toughness advantage); Thief 20 HP; Wizard 15 HP; Shaman 20 HP. Alternatively, rounded to the nearest multiple of three would probably work as a compromise between those two options. Ultimately, I think the whole exercise basically shows that trying to get rid of the stats in this way is pretty pointless. PixelScum is working on a tag-based approach which will probably work much better. On an unrelated note, gnome, if you're still updating the Improved Fighter, why doesn't Signature Weapon have "Bow and Arrows/Rope Dart" as a look option and "Near" as a range option and why can't I be an awesome bow-using Fighter? Lemon-Lime fucked around with this message at 15:49 on Apr 3, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2013 15:40
|
|
|
Boing posted:Why not make the HP bonus a multiplier of the CON mod? If your HP is 20 (or whatever) + (CON*4) that should give you a nice distribution. Also I can't check but don't the classes have different baseline HPs regardless of constitution anyway? There's different base HP amounts, 4/6/8/10. Using a multiplied Con mod would be janky as hell (derived stats are not elegant at all) and also doesn't map directly because DW uses pre-3.x stat modifiers instead of the modern mod=(10-stat)/2 convention (this is mentioned in my giant horrible posts on G+). Boing posted:The stat point fix lets you get a +3 mod to one of your stats at level 2, which you can't do normally and might be a little overpowering, depending on how the game looks. It does, but I don't think it'd be a huge problem and I'm assuming people will want to shore up their weaker mods or get a second +2 first. Boing posted:Any GM would be totally fine with houseruling this Not a reason not to have it in the playbook! vulgey posted:Is there a playbook version of the v2 Shaman? I'm assuming the one in the OP is v1. The OP links to the book-format class, not the playbook. Playbook is here: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B30fzv28XdrYb0taaGZuVzNhcFk/edit?usp=sharing Download it, gdocs hates fonts.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2013 17:32
|
|
|
TG, glad to see you working on more psionic classes. I'll actually read through the class probably this weekend, but a couple of surface-level observations: It doesn't really feel right to give this dude 10/10 HP/damage. That's supposed to be the Fighter's shtick, in exchange for which the Fighter doesn't get to do anything very interesting. This dude feels more like he should be 8/8. Similarly, it seems like the +d4 damage/+d8 damage moves don't belong here and should be replaced with the ability to do stuff that's more out-there, as befits the PsyWar's psionic nature (especially as your version doesn't even require the PsyWar to behave in a specific way). Also, good god does it ever need a different name than "Psychic Warrior;" that's always been absolutely terrible. It also sort of feels like it ought to differentiate itself more from the Battlemind in concept. Boing posted:Sounds much more like a Monk than a Psion to me. You could probably get a lot of leverage out of the D&D monk abilities if you need inspiration? It's not a Psion, it's the Psychic Warrior. TombsGrave's Psion is here.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2013 13:34
|
|
|
I would imagine it's both, to be honest. D&D will have driven adoption by making it easy to pitch to people, and the KS will have made enough of an initial splash to get the momentum it needed to keep on growing.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2013 14:02
|
|
|
Grim Portents #1 is out: https://www.dropbox.com/s/b5j40i3bi565c2v/Grim%20Portents%201%20-%20Larger.pdf The theme for issue #2 is "the Wine-Dark Sea" and subs close in 17 days: http://livinglibre1.wordpress.com/2013/04/06/download-grim-portents-issue-1-here-submissions-open-for-issue-2-theme-the-wine-dark-sea/ e; TombsGrave posted:While 10/d10 is definitely the fighter's claim to fame, the paladin also has 10/d10 for HP/damage and can do a variety of non-combat stuff in addition to being a powerhouse. Yeah, this is because DW suffers from the Curse of D&D in this regard and the Fighter is a crap class. Every other class gets interesting things, even the Thief if you count poisons; Scent of Blood wins the prize for worst move in the book, and the Fighter is just generally super boring beyond Signature Weapon. Why do you think we ended up with the Improved Fighter? TombsGrave posted:From what I can tell that's deliberate, making melee damage the most dangerous period while Volley and its damage is slightly weaker to give melee types a chance to close in and making ranged combatants have to think about what they're doing, not just plink away invincibly. PWs thus far have great range, and that's been a concern so far. The throwing move they no longer have essentially gave them every range from hand to near so long as they had something to toss at people, which immediately leapt out at me as too good after I wrote it. Worth contemplating: Volley and H&S rely on different stats, and the PsyWar is going to want a mental stat as well. I think making the "I can attack at Hand, Close and Near ranges" the PsyWar's thing is neat, and would work fine with d8 damage. Just don't give them a way to ignore physical stat requirements (i.e. attacking with Int/Wis). TombsGrave posted:Might even extend that to Soul Shatter/Soul Sever, though a part of me nags about not including a damage-boosting move on a dedicated brawler, which includes every core class expected to hit things. And so on. And so on. It's not including a damage-boosting move that's the problem, it's including a condition-free damage boost that's taken straight from the Fighter (and the Fighter's is supposed to have a fictional condition - if you stop being merciless, you're not meant to get the bonus). Make it bonus damage that applies only in certain, thematic situations and you're gold. TombsGrave posted:Also, a namechange from Psychic Warrior is... well, probably going to happen, but I'm sticking with PW until I think of something better. I really like the idea of calling this one the Soulknife, plus Kai's other suggestions. It fits. TombsGrave posted:For reference, other psychic classes I'm planning are the Fury (pyro/cryo/etc.kinesis), the Poltergeist (telekinesis, and based a bit on the Wilder), and the Telepath (also in need of a better name, and just what it sounds like). The current pitch I have is that the Psion and Psychic Warrior are general-issue psychics that could easily fit into a DW game, while the others would either be one-of-a-kind freaks or the replacement for conventional magic classes in a psychic-heavy game. But I'm just blathering now. At least those will be easier to design since you can make them reflavours rather than full classes. Lemon-Lime fucked around with this message at 15:33 on Apr 5, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2013 15:00
|
|
|
Fenarisk posted:One of my players wants a very Indiana jones styled character, just without the whip. Any cool move ideas? What are the things Indiana Jones does, aside from being a dick, being afraid of snakes and somehow surviving all the traps? I can't really think of anything that wouldn't just be a Thief.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2013 18:41
|
|
|
TombsGrave posted:While I've mainly been enjoying the hell out of Fiasco lately, I've also been prodding at that psionics-handbook-for-DW idea. Here's what I have so far of the Psychic Warrior. Okay, let's go. The Soulknife Stats: as mentioned, drop them to 8+Constitution HP/d8 damage. Alignment: Neutral seems harder to do than the other two, and is also more passive. Chaotic/Good are fine (except that your Good is the same as my Lawful Fighter ). That said, Good/Neutral/Chaotic is a boring vanilla alignment triumvirate, and also doesn't seem to fit the concept of "dude who makes weapons out of his mind" too well. Lawful/Neutral/Evil seems like it would work better (discipline/self-improvement/hunger for power).Perfection in Form: name doesn't really seem to fit? Also, on a more pedestrian level, too much intro text! The trigger is enough to convey what happens. Also also: "swiftly, stealthily or both" doesn't really need to be there. Like gnome said, "take an unexpected route" doesn't work too well, but I feel it would still need a fourth option to keep the 10+ = 50% of choices ratio. Also, take a look at Mors Rattus' Initiate since it has a similar move. Sharp Thoughts: seems weird to have "when you draw a weapon." Just change it so the fiction is one of creating a weapon out of mental energy. Mechanics-wise, I'd go with Hand/Close/Near so you can have psychic throwing knives. End condition needs to be something like "until you break concentration." Enlightened Strike: is really bad for the reasons gnome mentioned. I am not too fond of gnome's suggestion because triggering a rolling move on dealing damage means you're rolling to hit, rolling damage, then rolling your second move in one single bout, with no room for the "conversation" to switch to the other players. Also, none of gnome's options bar the redirect one feel particularly flavourful or fitting to the psychic warrior concept. The class could probably do with a fourth move, one that's social/investigative. Crowd Control: "you can easily attack multiple enemies when in combat" == "deal your damage multiple times instead of one." That is pretty drat powerful. Take that out, make it a more narrative move that makes it so being surrounded by enemies doesn't penalise you. Enlightened Shot: see Enlightened Strike. Multiclass Dabbler: not a fan of Dabbler/Initiate as they're hella bland. Instead, make it a MC move like the Shaman's or make it Worldly from gnome's playbooks. The former would make more sense since there's an obvious affinity between the Soulknife and the Psion, and maybe the Soulknife and Fighter. Soul Shatter: bad, as previously mentioned. gnome's suggestion of "when you deal damage to someone who is dismayed, demoralized, or otherwise not at their best, deal +1d4 damage" is neat. Defying Gravity: is ridiculously powerful and invalidates ground travel. It also doesn't fit the class, since I don't remember the PsyWar being Superman. I'd keep the name and make it something like a short-ranged teleport when you roll 12+ on Defy Danger+Dex. There should be a 6-10 teleportation move called Folding the Earth that builds on this. Battle Meditation: seems alright? I like the concept but +2 is just bland, though. Tandem Strike: cool concept, whether it works or not will be down to the revamped on Enlightened. Razor-Sharp Thoughts: just counting as magic weapons capable of wounding ghosts/werewolves/etc. is a good enough benefit for an advanced move. You should make a second advanced move for the tag stuff, and instead of giving all three it should give +1 range tag. Soul Sever: see Soul Shatter. Leave the Earth Behind: see Defying Gravity. The thing with the Sky Dancer's flying is that Inverse World isn't the same setting as Dungeon World; it's a setting in which flying is the default transport option. Adding flying to DW, especially unlimited flying, breaks DW. For additional move ideas, Okasvi's suggestions are good. edit: you know, I'd honestly ditch Enlightened Strike for the "12+ on DD+Dex = teleport a short distance" move as a starting move. Fourth move can still be social/perception. Lemon-Lime fucked around with this message at 00:18 on Apr 6, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2013 23:57
|
|
|
PublicOpinion posted:I think "Psychic Warrior" has a neat B-movie appeal. Calling it "Psychic Warrior" is roughly the same thing as making a gish and then choosing to call it "Magic Fighter" instead of "Spellsword" or something cool. If you absolutely want to stick to it, at least call it Psionic Warrior. The "Psion" is a purely D&D class name, as is the Soulknife, so it would make sense to have a trio of psionic classes called Psion/Soulknife/Ardent. e; if you want to reinforce the fighty teleporting angle "Jaunt" is a great name. You could have Psion/Jaunt/Fury or something. The Soulknife/Jaunt/Psionic Warrior v2 Transcendent Agility: still doesn't need "swiftly, stealthily or both." "When you perform gravity-defying acrobatics to get where you need to go, roll+Wis" is more than enough. It's still a better version of Ability of Lightness but I guess that's not a problem in itself since the class has a different concept. Sharp Thoughts: gnome's said everything there was to say. Not entirely sure I like the trigger he proposed, since "enter a warrior's trance" is nebulous in terms of how long it takes (instant? A few instants of mental preparation? Several moments of physical prep? etc.). I personally prefer defining a time unit in these kinds of triggers (i.e. "when you take a few instants to enter a warrior's trance"). Alternately, consider reusing the Battlemind's Stance trigger: "When you set your mind and body to combat." That is more flavourful and to me implies near-instantaneousness. Ether Step: why on a 10+? Extra effects are normally on a 12+. If you absolutely don't want to have a 12+ for some reason, consider phrasing it like this instead: quote:When you Defy Danger with +Dex and roll 10+, you do so by teleporting a very short distance. Still needs a fourth starting move of the social or investigative kind. Probably the latter, since you've got a dude sharpening his mind to be good in combat. Crowd Control: needs a wording pass but fine. Multiclass Dabbler: like I said in the previous post, ditch it and use a Friend of the Land style MC move. Slipstream Step: is this meant to be used as part of Ether Step? Either way, I'd suggest going with gnome's suggestion except the trigger should be "when you close your eyes and step back into the space behind reality, you can teleport up to Near distance" because it's way cooler. Warrior's Precognition: still suffers from being too mechanically-oriented (+1s are boring!). Also, the final option should be "take +1d4 armour forward" (but honestly, just make it +1 armour, rolling for temporary armour is weird). My Dreams Are Visions: not sure I like the name, but I like the move. Biofeedback Trance: neat. Soul-Forged Blade: yep, but consider phrasing it differently, like "your weaponised thoughts can harm even the toughest or most intangible creatures." War Titan: interesting, but needs an end condition. Doesn't really need the last sentence, the fiction takes care of that. Transcendent Strike: "choose two range tags from this list instead" since the list is bigger than the default one. Biofeedback Circle: sure. Maybe up it to d8? Battle Meditation: see my comments on Warrior's Precognition. Lemon-Lime fucked around with this message at 12:32 on Apr 6, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2013 11:42
|
|
|
I just wanted to remind people how fantastic the following blog post is: http://rocketpropelledgame.blogspot.com.au/2012/06/marx-monsters-burning-city.html e; [20:32:08] <+foxxbot> LemonCurdistan, 8 9 19 The City lurks within an immense dark cavern beneath the surface of the world. As far as everyone knows, it's all that's left - Topside was long ago Unmade, and the City is all that's left of reality. [20:33:07] <+foxxbot> LemonCurdistan, 9 6 4 The City is populated by myconids, [20:33:45] <+foxxbot> LemonCurdistan, 1 6 7 A powerful spirit of law slumbers in the ground the City is built on, which is doubtless why the generals who have appointed themselves supreme rulers in this time of crisis can stay in power unchallenged. The litorian generals work more or less hand-in-hand with the fomorian vampires to keep each other in power. [20:34:48] <+foxxbot> LemonCurdistan, 2 7 8 Thanks to those same fomorian vampires, the City has made great advances in the necromantic arts: the bodies of the dead can be returned to life to labour unceasingly, and (for the right price) one's mind can be transferred from one body to another (don't ask where the receiving body is from). The generals and nobles have stayed in power for longer than anyone can remember by frequently changing bodies. Anyone who turns to crime or sedition is conscripted into the City's armies and sent Topside. According to the Generals, they're fighting the Unmakers to keep them from ever reaching the City, but no one's ever come back... [20:36:23] <+foxxbot> LemonCurdistan, 2 3 In the poorer neighbourhoods, street toughs have ended up organising into impromptu anarchist co-operatives - everyone takes care of each other, since everyone is so drat poor. The City Watch doesn't normally bother with the poorer districts, but every now and then there's a fresh round of articles in the press accusing them of harbouring revolutionaries, and the Watch comes a-raiding. [20:37:15] <+foxxbot> LemonCurdistan, 7 1 The Watch is mostly made up of remote-controlled undead - they don't feel fear, pity or remorse, they can't be bribed, and they don't tire or falter. If they've come to take you away, you're done for - especially since one of the few ways to eke out a living is to rat out on your neighbours. The City doesn't sound like a very nice place. 
Lemon-Lime fucked around with this message at 21:13 on Apr 6, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2013 20:08
|
|
|
Zerilan posted:Has anyone come with any more poisons for the thief beyond the four in the book? Yeah, I had this as my Orc Thief racial: quote:In addition to any other poisons you may know, you always know the following poison: Seems like a Treatise on Variouſ Natural Substanceſ Both Beneficial and Nefariouſ is a thing that someone should write. Speaking of the Thief, this is all Drakkar's fault: quote:The City Thief I considered ditching all the poison moves, but I couldn't really think of what would replace them. e; edited this to tidy up wording. Removed grapple, since that should already be covered by the adventuring kit. Lemon-Lime fucked around with this message at 19:38 on Apr 7, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2013 00:13
|
|
|
Benly posted:Seems like a preparation-type move to keep you supplied with elemental arrows and flashbombs ("The Right Tool For The Job" or something) is a natural to go with them. Maybe one that lets you scrounge them together from materials on hand, since I recall that was part of the justification for having them available to find in-mission in the Thief games. The Thief has Connections, which would cover resupplying yourself. Garrett isn't really the type to make his own gear; he just buys it or finds it lying around. Still: The Right Tool For The Right Job You have a lab back home that lets you build some of your own gear. When you spend a few hours' downtime in your lab, you gain up to three additional uses of flash bombs, moss arrows or water arrows at no cost.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2013 01:05
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 15:34 |
|
|
TheLoneAmigo posted:Dude, I'm glad you found it so useful, and that City sounds uber-cool. I really want to run a hardcore Iron Council-esque DW game of fantasy revolutionaries and hosed-up anarchists one of these days. I nearly did with my Daojin City game, but it ended up being zany adventures closer to Avatar: the Legend of Korra than it did anything Mieville would put his name on. Oh man, it was you! My only complaint with that article is that it needs more tables, because I think you managed to capture the whole New Crobuzon/the City vibe pitch-perfectly. Thanks for writing it. I read the Daojin City Blues posts on BFA and they were great, too. Did you use any other resources to help you design Daojin City (like Vornheim or something)? I'm hijacking my current game to make it into a city game.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2013 11:51
|
|