|
gnome7 posted:I have spent literally all day editing playbooks, between The Psion and The Shaman for Lemon and now also The Noble. I have entirely reworked how the Assistant move works, and I think it is entirely for the better. Specifically, The Assistant gets a third page dedicated to it - its own personal half-playbook. Just thought I'd ask if it's intentional that the Loyal Assistant has really low HP. As it currently stands, with bad luck they can just get one shot really easily. In the pbp I'm playing a Noble in, my Thief-based Assistant took 1d6 damage before the change and now he's half dead. Even if he was at full health, a single goblin with a lucky damage roll could just kill him. What I'm saying is, I don't want to go through one Assistant after the other but I feel like if I put my Assistant in a dangerous situation I'm going to be forced to. I do like the rest of the Assistant changes, though. Lurks With Wolves fucked around with this message at 20:49 on Mar 26, 2013 |
#
¿
Mar 26, 2013 20:44
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 01:48 |
|
|
gnome7 posted:It is intentional, yes. I've had a lot of questions about how Assistant HP should work, and after seeing it done both ways (just base HP, or base + the Noble's Constitution), I think I like the base HP method better. The Assistant is exactly that - an assistant. It is worth mentioning he can still take Last Breath moves like other players, although I realize that is small solace. In any case, I have a player running a Noble right now, and her Assistant is an Initiate, a very front-line class, so I'll get to check personally if that is too low. It might get changed later, but it was a deliberate decision to change to the current format. Oh, I get why you lowered their HP. Before the change my Assistant had more HP than the Noble. It's just that every move that involves you rolling will put you in a bad spot on a 6- and in what will probably become a bad spot if you let it on a 7-9. If you're doing something in a situation that it's important enough to roll for, you're putting yourself at risk. And six HP can disappear like that. Dungeons are dangerous places, and they're no place for someone who both can't take a hit and is at high risk of taking damage just because of how moves work.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2013 21:27
|
|
|
Lemon Curdistan posted: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. Speaking as a very nervous person, there's a certain thing about the actual mechanics that makes it seem like they shouldn't be changed. Like, that NecroRanger? He still rolls 2d6+Wis to follow a trail of clues left behind by passing creatures, even if he's siccing a hungry ghost on his quarry instead of looking meaningfully at tracks. But rangers being better at learning Druid and Cleric moves, that's a rule. The designer must have had a good reason for that, right? Maybe it breaks if I take a Fighter move at that level? I'll just leave it be, just to be safe. What I'm saying is, if you say somewhere that they're just suggestions and if your Shaman spent his whole life working as a noble's Speaker Of The Dead so you think Bard would fit better than Ranger it won't break, weird neurotic people like me would probably feel better making nonstandard interpretations of playbooks.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2013 21:54
|
|
|
Fenarisk posted:Alright, finally finished up The Assassin, let me know what you think in terms of flavor/balance it'd be greatly appreciated as it's a class I've made tailored for a player in my group. One, the racial moves don't seem to do much. At least they don't have the usual mechanical bits racial moves have. Two, I Think He Means It is just Parley using threats of violence or blackmail as leverage and a slightly different 7-9 effect. Three, there was a whole discussion in the last thread about a move like Master of Disguise that the Mastermind got and how it's unsatisfying for a move to tell you to stop playing for a long period of time. Also, the Crossbow can only be used in melee and doesn't have ammo, so I can only assume you whack people with it. And the Rapier has a much smaller advantage than usual over the dagger and shortsword other than slightly lower weight because Assassins can roll +Dex for Hack And Slash anyway. Lurks With Wolves fucked around with this message at 17:48 on Apr 7, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2013 17:43
|
|
|
RSIxidor posted:Can anyone help me with this bit? It's for a compendium class based around icy abilities. Is this too strong for an extra class move from the CC? Does it work okay otherwise? Personally, the duration's the only part I have a problem with. "Long enough to escape" just isn't the kind of measurement you can just double. At the very least, find a way to say the increased duration option without it doubling an arbitrary-but-short amount of time. Say it lasts half an hour, say it lasts long enough to prepare just about anything, say it lasts until it would naturally melt, just give it something easier to determine than "twice as long as needed".
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2013 19:03
|
|
|
Ich posted:I've recently come across a playbook called The Mage 2.0 There are some differences, from the DTRPG version, with the Black Magic, Battle Mage and Warmage moves. Can't know for sure without seeing it, but I'm fairly certain it's just one of the versions from when gnome7 was rewriting the Mage and didn't want to risk changing the main Mage file yet.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2013 17:26
|
|
|
QuantumNinja posted:I couldn't find it. Link? Right here. The list of playbooks in the OP is really handy for stuff like this.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2013 22:02
|
|
|
Gamerofthegame posted:What's the difference between the free rules and the print and PDF version? How many pretty pictures and sidebar quotes there are, basically. All the actual rules are up to date. Kaja Rainbow posted:I've now completed my tweaks to the Impostor class (think Dopplegangers--the main reason why I didn't name it that is there's already a Doppleganger compendium class). Not 100% sure about some things, but that's why I'm offering it up for review. Same link as the current one in the OP. Off hand, my main problem is that the class doesn't really have a "main" stat. Yeah, all the starting moves are Wis-based, which is all well and good. But of all the 2-5 moves that aren't upgrades to a starting move, one is based on Cha, one is based on Dex, one is based on Con, one improves an Int-based basic move, and one requires a Str or Dex-based move when you're not just sneak attacking a guy. The last time I saw this level of multiple attribute dependency was with the Warlock's 6-10 moves, and that was one of the first non-core playbooks released. Otherwise the moves are... pretty cool. I feel the advanced moves could be better worded, but other than the stat spread I can't really put my finger on how.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 16, 2013 23:05
|
|
|
Lemon Curdistan posted:Without commenting on the rest of the class (not had time to read it): this isn't a problem. You've got 10 2-5 moves; you can do four that don't rely on the primary stat for players who want to pick them up. Yeah, I probably overstated my case there. I mean, if there was a clear Cha-based group of moves for being a charming trickster and a Con-based group of moves for being an inhuman face-stealer, I probably wouldn't have had the problem. But then Brazen Imitation was Dex-based and it didn't feel like you had a good reason to have all your advanced moves using a different stat and it was just a real pet peeve of mine. Also, I probably shouldn't have mentioned the Spout Lore-based move in that bit. It gives you a bonus to Spout Lore, thus you can Spout Lore about stuff that you should know about without having to put much into Int. It does actually let you cut down on the number of stats you might need for your concept. It still doesn't really grab me, but it's a decent move. (Also Lemon's right, Misguided Trust/Et Tu Brute? are basically the perfect damage-increasing moves for a shapeshifter.)
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2013 19:12
|
|
|
Okasvi posted:Edit: Also, the class is literally meant to be Generic Adventurer: The Class. Honestly, I don't think you made a generic class, but it's still really cool so read the rest of what I say. If you want to see a generic class, see the Freebooter (which I would link right now if I had any clue where I downloaded it from). All the moves are basically guidelines for making decent moves. I probably won't ever play it because there's too many cool classes to play already, but it works for what it does. Your Fortune Hunter can do any concept, as long as it's The Person Who Has Just What We Need. Doesn't matter if they have it because they're lucky or made pacts with dozens of spirits or have a briefcase of toys from the boys back in the Agency or are just that good, they are competent and have tricks up their sleeve. What I'm saying is, don't say stuff like quote:For something flavorful, there are all the rest of classes available. (Also, I didn't mention this earlier because it wasn't what I came here to say, but anyone can get the narrative benefits of being a noble by just saying they're making a noble during character creation in Dungeon World. You can still give them an interesting mechanical widget to play with, if only because all the other playbooks would give them an interesting mechanical widget too.) Lurks With Wolves fucked around with this message at 21:32 on Jun 28, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2013 21:28
|
|
|
Overemotional Robot posted:Well, I decided to update the Merchant Prince a little. I hope the original creator doesn't mind. I didn't change too much, just some wording and added Drives. I'm stuck on the backgrounds, though. Any ideas? Personally, I'd change the Bribery drive to Power or something like that. Bribery isn't really a goal in and of itself, you know? As for Backgrounds, maybe how you got your fortunes? Inheritance, being a Self-Made Man and Sheer Luck, maybe? Then again, I don't know what they'd do, so hopefully someone that's better with mechanics than I am will come along soon.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2013 22:04
|
|
|
gnome7 posted:I made a kind of Muscle Wizard. And I know someone's done a STR-stat swap of the core Wizard, but I don't know where that is offhand. There's also the Channeler from Grim World. Well, it's magic requires more hardiness than muscle, but that's still pretty close. Not sure if there's a way for nonbackers to get the final version of the playbook at this point, but it's there.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2013 18:14
|
|
|
MagnesiumB posted:Is the version of the goon-made Slayer in the OP the most recent version? One of my players is using the class and I seem to recall an update being posted for it at some point. I'm fairly certain Boing posted a semi-updated version of the Slayer that took out stuff like Hedge Mage and Mutagenic Metastasis and added some other things that I don't remember. I don't have a link to it handy, though, so hopefully someone will post it soon.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2014 20:42
|
|
|
SystemLogoff posted:Welp. I tried my hand at making a playbook. First off, you're focusing way too much on emulating stuff from Legend of Zelda. As it is, it's really obvious that the playbook's just a collection of LoZ mechanics and not the brave adventurer solving puzzles with their wits and gadgets that this should be. Second, it just doesn't have a good base. Sure, the starting moves are things Link does, but those things alone don't help you feel like you're playing Link in something as fiction-focused as Dungeon World. It doesn't even touch noncombat stuff. Third, there's having flavorful gear, and then there's having gear that's mechanically fiddly for no good reason. Your gear list is firmly in the latter. There's a lot of choices, but they aren't that interesting. Also, if you're going to have a bunch of advanced moves key off of uses of adventuring gear, you should give them some adventuring gear as part of their starting gear. Fourth, and this is really just a repeat of the first point, the moves are just kind of dull in general. They do plenty of things mechanically, but fictionally they're dull as dishwater. A big part of this is that they don't get any advanced moves that aren't just modifying a basic move until level 6, and even then there's only two of them. They just don't get anything cool and unique to actually do. I know all this sounds very negative, and honestly that's because it is. There's the idea of a good playbook here, of an adventurer brave and true circumventing problems with a sword and plenty of tricks. It's just not here. I'll probably write a post about how I'd make this concept later, but for now I'm just going to think on it and hope people come along and give better playbook creation advice than I did.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2014 08:22
|
|
|
Bigup DJ posted:
Not touching most of this post because I'm not gnome7, but letting you just do things that you'd normally have to do a bunch of fiddly bullshit to do with your old moves seems like something advanced moves should be able to do. I mean, you could probably float in place with Personal Gravity, but any light's a strobe light if you turn it on and off fast enough. It doesn't mean you want to be flipping that switch for the whole rave.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2014 01:57
|
|
|
There's also the City Thief by Lemon Curdistan if you want Garret-style stealth or the Walker from Inverse World if you want to drop on people's heads like Batman.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2014 21:36
|
|
|
GimpInBlack posted:Inquisitor Chat I agree with all of this except for Mana Sap/Mana Destruction. I think they're just good but extremely overpowered moves, not something worth removing completely. The concept of the inquisitor whose blade cuts through magic itself is a good one, even if you could just say that that's how your Inquisitor dispels magic and not take Mana Sap in the first place. The problem is, Mana Sap makes any wizards you can get without sword range of a complete non-issue. The Inquisitor is all about witch-hunting, but it's strong enough that the GM will never send any traditional witches after you just so the people you're fighting don't become useless the moment you stab them. Mana Destruction just makes the problem extend past the fight. So yeah, maybe GimpInBlack is right and you should just go back to the drawing board. Just remember, destroying enchantments with your trusty cudgel is cool but completely invalidating a whole class of enemies isn't.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2014 06:02
|
|
|
Deltasquid posted:Okay, I have updated my inquisitor class once again. I added a resource management theme, rewrote some moves to be clearer and generally fixed the lay-out a bit. Looking it over, I think the Inquisitor's in a good place now. My one complaint is that the prices for things you can get with Inquest just feel a bit wonky for me. Three smoke bombs don't seem as useful as two potions. Getting someone to help you out doesn't feel like something that's a bigger deal than getting someone a full pardon. I still like what the move's doing, the prices just feel a bit weird.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2014 18:28
|
|
|
Deltasquid posted:Hmmm, any ideas for rebalancing the prices and/or adding more interesting assets? Thinking about it, here's how I'd handle asset prices:
I feel like I might be underpricing the Level 3 stuff a bit, but it's something. Any thoughts?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2014 04:21
|
|
|
Deltasquid posted:It's giving me some serious James Bond vibes. Yeah, I was focusing more on building on the Inquest rewards Deltasquid made and less on how they interact with how you get Inquest. You'd definitely need to make Inquest harder to get if you're using my suggestions. Maybe make it build up if you strike a major blow against your Target Group. (Also, the James Bond vibes are totally intentional.) As for the Beholder, it looks like it's both really good at being a beholder and really good at putting the dullest options at the top of the list of Advanced Moves. Looking at it again the rest of the moves are actually pretty cool, but you might not want to have the basic "get more types of eye ray" moves at the top of the list. Also, you can probably do something more interesting with the Gear if you can make space for it, but I'm not really going to blame you if you leave it as-is.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2014 03:50
|
|
|
The Survivor from Inverse World is the only playbook I can think of that's explicitly post-apocalyptic, since it's about one of the survivors of a great calamity that destroyed your home. Also because it has moves that are explicit Fist of the North Star and Bastion references. But yeah, Wahad's right. If the setting's post-apocalyptic, any playbooks you choose are going to be post-apocalyptic too. Just make sure the post-apocalypse you're playing in fits with what Dungeon World does mechanically and it should work fine.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2014 19:56
|
|
|
Daeren posted:(My pre-emptive response to anyone asking how a relatively modern day clown would fit into a DND party is "Because, that's how") Well, there is precedent. Anyway, some actual comments:
But still, even with those complaints, this class has potential and I hope you keep working on it. After all, the Jester is the only Dragon Warrior 3 class you can't really make in Dungeon World and that's a drat shame.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2014 02:32
|
|
|
Doodmons posted:I still feel like crutching on "fiction comes first" excuses some sloppy mechanics in many of the playbooks that lead to the rules saying that a retarded situation should be happening when sensibility and the fiction says otherwise. A good case can be made that since the rules are literally just there to call the shots when the fiction doesn't tell you what happens, they should be ignored very rarely and only with a really good excuse. As far as I know, at least some of the weirder bits of the Inverse World playbooks are because Inverse World isn't supposed to be about combat the way your standard Dungeon World game is. I mean, Alone Against The World is nuts, but it's less nuts when you're in a game where reducing a giant battle to a single montage is appropriate. I mean, that doesn't make stuff like the Golem being completely immovable or the Walker's optimum combat strategy becoming goomba stomping everyone once they get Spider's Leap less dumb, but it does give context for some of the oddities. (Also, if you've played a Walker up to level six and immediately started doing nothing but jumping on people's heads, you're lame and don't deserve to be playing a Walker.)
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2014 03:06
|
|
|
Deltasquid posted:I was going more for a Barkley's Shut Up and Jam: Gaiden style approach, along with real-life basketball terms, of course. Maybe mix in some Kuroko no Basket inspiration. There's always his wiki page, but basically he's both the default ranged attacker and the default source of status effects in FFX. You could probably get a few moves out of hitting someone hard enough that they also are __, if nothing else. You could also make some moves about being the captain of a team, although that's really more Tidus' thing than Wakka's.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2014 15:24
|
|
|
Babe Magnet posted:Hey yo, question. To paraphrase some advice gnome7 gave in one of these threads, a good playbook will have three pools of moves. Take the Lantern. It has moves about manipulating light, it has moves about turning your little will-o'-wisp buddy into things like shields and fists and all that other Green Lantern nonsense, and it has moves about being a wise person that people should listen to. This should give you plenty of room to make moves without either diluting the concept down to the point where it's unrecognizable or having to write a dozen moves that are all variations on the same theme just to fill up space. So, for your fighter/scavenger idea, maybe make some moves about forcibly taking stuff apart, some moves about taking what you have and making something useful with what you have, and some moves about being a ornery bastard that doesn't listen to reason. Or something like that, I'm honestly just throwing ideas at the wall right now. The point is, if you can think of three fields that a fighter/scavenger, you can probably think of enough moves to let it sit anywhere on the fighter/scavenger spectrum without making someone take a move that doesn't feel like it fits.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2014 01:59
|
|
|
Babe Magnet posted:Yeah, I'll take a look at Pirate World, thanks! The wandering ronin is probably a bit too far from the scavenger/engineer part of the concept for whatever starting moves you make, but I think you could cover the "Monster Hunter character" to "TF2 Engineer" range pretty well. I mean, your starting moves are going to need at least a /bit/ of each movepool, so so every character that uses the playbook is either going to be a bit fight-y or a bit scavenge-y no matter what.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2014 02:28
|
|
|
Error 404 posted:I'd sort of take a page from the Druid here. instead of any kind of rolled move, just make several statements about your races that are true, and each player gets one or all of those statements. Dark Heart of the Dreamer does this, actually. You get three monster moves that are appropriate for whatever you're descended from, and then you can spend hold to use them. In fact, since you basically thought up half the rules for it yourself and the moves are probably floating around the Dungeon World blogosphere anyway, here are the moves about heritage moves in Dark Heart of the Dreamer: quote:At the beginning of a session or when you invoke I'll be honest, I'm only mentioning this because Dark Heart Of The Dreamer is rad and everyone should read it at some point.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 17, 2014 00:18
|
|
|
Error 404 posted:I'll be damned. but iirc isn't dark heart about playing as monster races? and also, I'm not sure about requiring roll&hold for something that's supposed to be endemic to a race in whatever setting. No, Numbers Appearing is about playing monster races. Dark Heart of the Dreamer is about doing Planescape-style stuff and generally running a game that are less traditional fantasy "orcs are Evil, elves are Good" and more... realistically metropolitan, I guess. I mean, one of the GM principles it adds is that nothing is "just a monster". Anyway, using heritage moves cost hold for two reasons, as far as I can tell. One, they still want the fact that you're The Fighter to be more important than the fact that you're a troll and the class wouldn't really mean much if you could rend foes with your mighty claws 24/7 365 days of the year in the guaranteed way monster moves let you do things like that. Two, DHotD assumes you can be descended from just about anything, and you can't really let someone constantly disintegrate things with eye beams just because their grandpa was a beholder, you know what I mean? Actually, while I was writing all this I realized what the difference between your ideas was. Your idea focuses on stuff like "I have horns" while DHotD focuses on stuff like "I put my head down and charge through my enemies" and just lets whatever horns you do or do not have stay in the fiction and if you want to gore someone with them without specifically doing that charge Dad taught you, just do whatever your table thinks is right. They're approaches that are a lot more distinct than they looked at a glance.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 17, 2014 01:08
|
|
|
Handgun Phonics posted:The only one I've had the chance to see in action has been the Battlemaster, and it feels more like a D&D class ported over. My biggest beef is that a lot of the gambit-related mechanics don't have much tie to the fiction- why does someone getting hurt let you give someone else +1 to a roll? What does getting a 6- on changing tactics mean? Honestly, speaking as someone who has only read the Grim World playbooks and never seen them in play, the Battlemaster's main source of fun seems to be thinking of justifications for your gambits. If the Battlemaster doesn't want to spend time talking about how the kobold warleader gave Rurik a prime opportunity to roll past him and start picking the lock when he stabbed the Battlemaster in the gut and all that jazz the playbook is going to be really weak fictionally, just because it gives you mechanics to hang fiction from instead of mechanics that create fiction by themselves. Lurks With Wolves fucked around with this message at 00:03 on Sep 12, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2014 23:59
|
|
|
sentrygun posted:Personally I really like the idea of orienting the Thief as a back-alley mugger, but the only thing I really remember out of the Thief's advances is a whole lot of +1's to a bunch of stuff. I prefer thinking of the Thief as Indiana Jones with more poisoned knives, myself. It fits better with the whole pulpy dungeon crawling aesthetic.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2015 05:55
|
|
|
Cheap Shot posted:I think this came up in discussion earlier in the thread, but it actually says you get any moves your move is dependent on as well. I personally think that's kinda meh though. My rule is you should spend a move on the starting move first and then the move you want next level. Like a prerequisite pretty much. That rule's specifically for stuff like Cast a Spell and Prepare Spells and Spellbook where there's multiple moves that don't actually do anything if you don't have all of them. It's not supposed to let you take a move that requires another move and get the required move as a bonus. Lurks With Wolves fucked around with this message at 18:45 on Mar 18, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2015 18:42
|
|
|
Big Mad Drongo posted:Has anyone had any success bringing something like 13th Age's Backgrounds into Dungeon World? Not the Backgrounds people use to replace Alignments, the skillsets unique to your character directly from 13th Age. I wouldn't give a generic +1 ongoing if I were you. A +1 is a really big deal when you're just rolling 2d6, and attaching that big of a modifier to backgrounds means that people will just take ones that are as broadly applicable to their class's focus as possible. Making a custom move or two for each character would be a much better way to give a bit of mechanical backing to their backgrounds. Maybe replace the racial move/racial move equivalent with a background move, maybe give everyone a bonus move, either way works as long as it's the same for everyone. It's also worth remembering that, even if they don't have a mechanic associated with them, backgrounds can change what a character is fictionally justified in doing. Can the Ranger pick that lock? He's a Master Locksmith, so yes of course he can pick that lock. If he's rolling, it's for "can he pick this lock before the guard gets back", not "can he pick this lock". Can the Fighter pick that lock? Well, she's an Eccentric Tinkerer, so probably but it's also probably worth rolling to see whether there's some interesting fallout from however she's unlocking it. Can the Cleric pick that lock? They're a Barbaric Westerner, so it's kind of out of their wheelhouse. You should still ask them how they know how to pick locks, because either they'll decide that they don't and try something else or they'll have a really interesting story about how they learned to pick locks and both of those are more interesting than telling them no, you can't pick that lock, but you get my point.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2015 20:35
|
|
|
Teonis posted:Upvote, Oh, I just made them up. 13th Age backgrounds are player-made skillsets that can be used for whatever you and your group agrees they can be used for, so I just picked some random stuff that sounded cool. 13th Age does have a lot of good examples if you want some, assuming you like games that are like D&D 3.5 but with more modern design.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 19, 2015 01:28
|
|
|
Error 404 posted:Been awhile since I read it, but afaik aodp playbooks are like 99% compatible with dw. The AoDP classes are pretty much fully compatible with the core classes. In fact, 3/4 of the classes are basically just heavily reskinned core classes. (The Earthling is the Paladin, the Technician is a Wizard with a different flavor to it's Vancian casting, and the Robot is at least half Fighter by weight. The Mutant draws from the same vague inspiration as the Druid, but it's not a straight lift like a lot of the other classes are.)
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2015 02:35
|
|
|
Error 404 posted:Afaik, Mikan wrote it. Actually it was written by Mors Rattus. Mikan and gnome7's company is just who published it for him.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2015 21:19
|
|
|
Drop Database posted:This is actually already how the class is supposed to work! It's not stated explicitly, but it's implicit in the mechanics. Here's all the ways to gain Mastery: If I may, the biggest flaw in the Inferior/Worthy dynamic is that the "easy Mastery use on Worthy foes" side of it just isn't there. Knowing Is Half The Battle is literally the only thing you can spend Mastery on that's more efficient against Worthy opponents. Every other move they get that interacts with Worthy just gives them more ways to get more Mastery, which instead just gives them a weird dynamic where you only mark someone as Worthy when you need ways to earn Mastery from them that won't leave you open to an attack. So, here's a suggestion for fixing that. I understand that you don't want to limit Glimpse of Power to only be used against Worthy opponents, since that locks Masters out from spending Mastery to knock a door down with a single strike or leap across rooftops or any number of cool things an old master should be able to do if they felt the need to. How about you make it cost one-for-one against a Worthy foe, two-for-one otherwise? That gives you an incentive to only go all-out against a Worthy foe but still lets you use your true power a bit frivolously if you want to.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2015 02:55
|
|
|
Drop Database posted:You're dead right about this. I need to lock down the better mastery moves to Worthy enemies. Currently, apart from Knowing is Half the Battle, only Perfect Stance gives you any reward at all. Let me put it this way. I'm a level one Master. I don't have any advanced moves yet besides the one I get from my background, and none of those interact with Inferior/Worthy. Do I have literally any reason to consider a foe Worthy? Because right now there's nothing, so the entire mechanical hook of the class is pointless until I take a move that actually interacts with Worthy. That could be three levels, easily. The Master needs something to make Worthy something worth thinking about at all. Also, the ability to spend the Mastery you just earned on a counterattack doesn't make the dodging option any less of an obvious pick. In fact, now that I'm thinking about it, it's probably worth rewriting the move to take that option out, just because it's that obvious of a choice. Maybe to something like quote:When you give an Inferior enemy a chance to attack you, gain 1 Mastery and Roll+DEX. On a 7 up, pick one from the list below. On a 10 up, you also dodge the attack completely. Lurks With Wolves fucked around with this message at 07:07 on Jun 11, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2015 06:54
|
|
|
Drop Database posted:Actually, as it currently stands, you don't even have a way to declare an enemy Worthy - Not left-handed is an advanced move. As I wrote it, you only fight Inferior enemies at level one, and get the second half of the mechanic as you level up/reveal your power. I mean, in terms of functionality, you can defend yourself effectively, and spend the Mastery you gain on exhibiting glimpses of your true power, without encountering a Worthy foe - it's not as though the class is broken until you level up and fix it. Three things. One, that isn't clear in the text. I always just assumed that all you needed to do to declare someone Worthy was, well, consider them worthy. Two, I Am Not Left-Handed triggers when you recognize someone as worthy under specific circumstances, which implies that you can do it whenever. Three, if you can't declare someone Worthy until you get a move like I Am Not Left-Handed, that means you can take a bunch of moves that only work against Worthy opponents without ever actually having a way to make someone Worthy. quote:That said, you're kind of making me second-guess that decision... I think you're making the Master out to be more complicated than it is. When you get down to it, Inferior/Worthy is just "if someone's not worth my time I can do X, if they are I can do Y". Still, wanting to incentivize Masters to decide more foes are Worthy as they go up in level is a good goal. I just think the baseline's too low. quote:I am actually totally okay with "enemy misses you" being an obvious pick most of the time. Why not? Many moves, including Volley and Defend are like that... Sure it's a non-choice in a typical situation, but it forces a more meaningful choice in a desperate one. I jumped in front of a charging chainsaw golem, to save a vulnerable teammate from getting cut apart...7-9 - I can pick one. Do I choose my own safety (I deliberately worded the option to only miss the Master, not anything else), or do I take one for the team, and divert it aside ensuring the safety of someone else. Come at me is closer to an alternative for Defend, than a replacement for Hack and Slash... I wasn't really viewing it as a Hack and Slash replacement in the first place, I mean, it's still a move about letting people you don't care about try to take a swing against you and then showing them how far out of their league you are. Anyway, I don't really have anything more to say on this subject beyond "I disagree with you", so let's just shelve it. quote:What I do agree with you on, though, is that "don't draw attention" is currently an unexciting choice. Initially, I had the idea of the Master jealously guarding his secrets, and not exhibiting his skills openly. Maybe just give them a minor fluff move to show what happens when they do reveal themselves? Say, something like this? quote:Interesting Times Lurks With Wolves fucked around with this message at 18:22 on Jun 11, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2015 18:16
|
|
|
gnome7 posted:Hello friends! For the first time in a very long time, I've released a new dungeon world playbook that I actually wrote: The Spellsword. As usual, there is a free preview available in the product description, please check it out! Yeah, uh, that free preview link isn't actually a link to anything. EDIT: Never mind, it's been fixed now.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2015 17:32
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 01:48 |
|
|
Oh hey, that guy. The guy that got really mad about how Inverse World totally ripped off his original setting that no one heard of and decided to make playbooks with all the same names as gnome7's to confuse the market. From what I remember, his playbooks are about what you'd expect from playbooks made entirely out of spite.
Lurks With Wolves fucked around with this message at 07:45 on Oct 5, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2016 07:42
|
|