|
also: i think rejiggering the tags is smart, i think it could really benefit from some variety (and i like the ideas of the dazzling and comforting tags,, the latter in part because i have a character that has taken several advances that involve making/using food but paradoxically no longer cares much about food tag items lol, sorta) also i think making bonds an important, spendable currency that matters to everyone through their presence or absence is smart and a must, thematically. I played a squire/hero for like 30 sessions and i was constantly making bonds, thinking about bonds, and spending bonds for many purposes across several moves and playbooks. then i played a harbinger and even though I'm severely limited in how may bonds i got, it doesn't ever feel like a hinderance. i can only have 1 bond with someone, but i also don't ever have a reason or way to spend them (outside of a single pay a price choice). Friends who have played other playbooks with normal bond #s have said they basically get to 3 with the party and then mostly don't think much about it.
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 21:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 4, 2024 02:27 |
|
|
Thank you for the feedback! I have updated the document before I popped in here to read that, and some of your concerns might be assuaged there. Some may not, idk. Fellowship 3e Alpha Outline The Mountain - A Fellowship 3e sample playbook Farg posted:I think overhauling/removing the basic/powerful distinction is a good move. We're deep into a second longterm 2e game and there has always been some confusion over what makes something basic vs powerful. is it narrative power, mechanical, complexity? there are basic playbooks that can help essentially start out with super powers and powerful playbooks that can be a lot more grounded, as it were It was both narrative power and complexity. The Pair was too complicated to figure out how to let it get a Destiny, so I made it Powerful. The Harbinger has some Destiny-level powers from the jump, so I made it powerful. It was a solutiuon to the problem of "this doesnt quite fit with how the rest of the playbooks work but I want to do it anyway" Lurks With Wolves posted:A lot. First off, thank you for the feedback, I do appreciate it! Before I get into specifics, I do want to mention that I am not writing this with the intention to replace 2e. I am perfectly happy if you stay playing 2e instead because I messed up real bad. I am doing some ambitious things I don't think I would have trusted myself to write well a couple years ago. I am writing 3e for two main reasons. One, I have had bad writers block for months, ideas are flowing, I am going with the flow to try and kickstart my brain out of the mushpile it had been living in. Two, Fellowship is a really good game and I adore it, and I want to see if I can make its potential shine even brighter if I rethink and rebuild from the ground up. It is unlikely every proposal in this doc is going to stick, I am in the ideas phase. Lurks With Wolves posted:On an organizational level... well, this is a choice. I don't know how much of a benefit changing the split from "moves/gear" to "things you permanently have/things with charges you use up" would have, but it is definitely a change you could make if you really wanted to make one. The big reason for the changed split is because the Limited moves are more powerful than the Unlimited moves (at the cost of running out), but the Unlimited ones add depth and width to your character. Rather than making the player choose between power and variety, I figured the best way to make this work is to limit both. You get a maximum of 6 Limited Moves and 6 Custom Moves. That's the reason for the split, and the Mountain sample playbook should make this apparent. Because at the end of the day, it turns out it really doesn't matter if your limited burst of power comes from taking the Strong As An Ox gear option on your orc, or from taking the Dragon Magic core move on your Dragon. In both cases, you mark the move, you blast open a wall, and the game moves forward. The distinction of being Gear was not useful, so I'm removing it. Also I didn't do it in the Mountain but I can put tags on Core or Custom moves now, too, they aren't confined to the Limited Moves. quote:1) As they currently stand, custom moves are in that liminal space where it isn't entirely clear whether they're unique qualities of your people, something that can be taught or something weird in-between. Custom Moves are teachables or shareables now. That ambiguity will be staying in 2e, it's defined in 3e. If it's something exclusive to your playbook or your people, it'll go in the Core or the Upgrades now, or in the Limited Moves if it is potentially but not easily share-able, like Dragon Magic. quote:2) This can lead to diluting what makes each playbook unique in any given group. Yes, that's true, if I do a poor job splitting them up. I do not plan to do a poor job, but we shall see how it goes. The important stuff that makes your playbook unique will be more strongly focused into the other categories. quote:I agree that Fellowship could use better tools to help GMs design encounters and have a good threat level across the campaign, but those need to be teaching tools and not artificially game-y mechanics. Thank you, I will keep that in mind when I get to writing it. This is honestly the area most likely to be jettisoned from the whole thing. It is an idea, and someone else's idea even, but I can see it being useful. I want it to be a tool to help the GM, a nice teaching tool and aid as you run the game. If it is not that in practice, I have no hesitation about cutting it. Farg posted:also i think making bonds an important, spendable currency that matters to everyone through their presence or absence is smart and a must, thematically. I played a squire/hero for like 30 sessions and i was constantly making bonds, thinking about bonds, and spending bonds for many purposes across several moves and playbooks. then i played a harbinger and even though I'm severely limited in how may bonds i got, it doesn't ever feel like a hinderance. i can only have 1 bond with someone, but i also don't ever have a reason or way to spend them (outside of a single pay a price choice). Friends who have played other playbooks with normal bond #s have said they basically get to 3 with the party and then mostly don't think much about it. yes, 100%. It's an issue where like. The Squire and the Spy care about Bonds a lot, but then nobody else cares about them at all! So I want every playbook to have a move like the Squire and Spy do. Even if the Bond moves are only half as impactful, that's so much more impact than Bonds currently have! This is also why Teamwork is gonna make one of you erase a Bond if you want that Hope boost.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 21:38
|
|
|
Awesome, bonds having just a baseline use of spending to get Teamwork is great. Ending sessions by thinking through moments in the game where a bond might have been formed or something personal happened was a fun tool for interrogating what mattered to me/my character, having that be a consistent part of the game can only help' !
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 21:44
|
|
|
I'm torn on the new leveling up system. On the one hand I really like making agendas how you gain "experience", but the end-of-season ritual of talking through the session's events and collectively giving out levels was really fun. Especially for newer groups, I think it went a long way towards getting people on board since it was basically a mechanically-enforced chat where you decided how cool everyone was. E: also I like the threat currency idea in general. I guess it's "gamey" but Fellowship is a game, so... that's good Countblanc fucked around with this message at 22:08 on Dec 14, 2021 |
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 21:54
|
|
|
Also its a small point but if agendas are going to be central to character advancement, i think a lot of playbooks would benefit from a larger choice or "make your own" agendas as to avoid pigeonholing certain playbooks too much to certain motivations. IMO
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 22:11
|
|
|
Not a fan of threat currency, mostly because the heroes are SO powerful, and have so many recovery options, that the Framework already has to fling the kitchen sink at them just to make them work up a sweat. Turning "balance" into bookkeeping is just a new layer of complexity for not a lot of reward. Also, with the gonzo stuff that emerges from your typical Fellowship campaign, threat currency almost feels like the game's taking itself too seriously. Like the Framework has to plan. Who plans a Fellowship game? Like ugh.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2021 23:22
|
|
|
For the Nerve bond gained through Finishing Them, I feel it should have a use like all the others. Maybe you can use it to frighten others by what you did to the person you have the Bond on?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2021 01:47
|
|
|
gnome7 posted:First off, thank you for the feedback, I do appreciate it! Before I get into specifics, I do want to mention that I am not writing this with the intention to replace 2e. I am perfectly happy if you stay playing 2e instead because I messed up real bad. I am doing some ambitious things I don't think I would have trusted myself to write well a couple years ago. I just want to say thanks for going into detail on these responses. It is genuinely nice to see, even if I'm viciously poking and prodding at the rough proofs-of-concept you put out. Fellowship's just been a part of my life for years, seeing it be a good game is important to me. (But as a side note, if the intent is that this wouldn't be an automatic replacement for Fellowship 2e, it may be worth coming up with some kind of Fellowship: The Next Generation style subtitle. Otherwise I'm just worried this is going to run into a Halloween 3 problem where people come in expecting a basic continuation of what came before because previously it was a basic continuation of what came before, but instead they get something wildly different.) quote:Yes, that's true, if I do a poor job splitting them up. I do not plan to do a poor job, but we shall see how it goes. The important stuff that makes your playbook unique will be more strongly focused into the other categories. Also, to roast you a bit before I sink my teeth into the new update... You do realize "I plan on doing a good job" doesn't actually make me feel any better, right? Of course you think you're going to do a good job with it, it was entirely your idea. If you didn't think you could do a good job with it, I really don't know what we're doing here. But you know what can assuage my worries one way or another? The rough draft Mountain playbook you made. So let's focus on that instead. Agendas I do like that Agendas have a mechanical thing attached to them now. Before they were a nice way to show what you're trying to do but vaguely vestigial. But I do have some complaints about the implementation here. For one, it feels a bit... inconsistent. What if you pick the Elf-equivalents' "protect your people's secrets" agenda and you just never get a good chance to have it come up naturally during the Assault on the Orc Keep arc? Do you just level up less for however many sessions? What if you're like me and you're needlessly picky about whether you personally fulfilled an Agenda like that? Am I just going to level up slower until someone realizes I'm two levels behind and goes "Lurks, you're doing fine, just check more boxes you dumbass"? What if your concept is kind of weird and you don't quite fit into one of the existing Agendas? For that matter, there aren't any official rules for retraining choices in Fellowship. What if you start as Ancient Respect but in play realize you're more of an Insatiable Greed? Also, the time you level up changed from End of Session to whenever you Fill Your Belly. This is a problem, because the end of session is a natural time for everyone to sit down and think about what just happened and what's going to happen in the future. You have plenty of time to think about how you want to level up. Now, Filling Your Belly is a pause IC, but OOC you're taking two minutes to chat about what you're eating and then you're going to fight a dragon, and we need to beat that dragon in under half an hour because we all have work in the morning. You do not have the time to think through leveling up. You just fixed the "bonds are a bit too fiddly to write mid-session" problem! Don't just add the problem back with something with even more moving parts! Also, to emphasize what Countblanc said, the End of Session level-up move is one of Fellowship's charm points. Do I have complaints about that system? Yes. Does removing it entirely solve those problems? Technically yes. Would I be disappointed if it was removed entirely? Definitely yes, but I could be convinced with a lot of talk about why it's being removed. I'd probably disagree, but I'd get the point. (Also, my complaints about the End of Session level-up move: 1) If you end up doing a few sessions that aren't directly about striking against the Overlord, you get less recovery/levels in a way that's probably more punishing than intended. 2) You always want to level up, but you frequently end up in a spot where you need to recover instead and you need to parcel out the bits of healing you get and that can frequently get more tense than was probably intended.) Advancement The Upgrades section honestly have me a lot more hope that this approach for Custom Moves could work. Not enough hope that I think it's a good idea yet, I'm still skeptical don't get me wrong, but enough that I feel like it could work. I just really like having stuff like "you can Clear The Path through solid stone" in the regular advancement system. I just wanted to be positive while I had the chance, because I have an honestly shocking amount of vitriol for- Limited Moves I didn't realize how much more sterile Limited Moves was than Gear until I read this playbook. Still, that isn't really fair. This is a quick-and-dirty proof of concept conversion of the Dwarf into it's prototype 3e form. The Mountain's Limited Moves are all gear, because the only things the Dwarf has that are limited are gear. But the fact remains that, as the Mountain currently stands, Limited Moves feels like a gear list where one piece of gear is a page away for no good reason and I wasn't sure if the Mountain actually started with a melee weapon for way too long. I know a lot of the intent for this change in framing was to make gear more interesting, but in this form you've just made moves less interesting. I know I'm stating the obvious here, but if you're going to have this kind of thing be called a move, it needs to imply more than "I have a toolkit". This also brings me to a wider problem in this early draft. Customization Let's talk about the ways you can mechanically customize your character at the start of the game. You have your stats. (These mostly describe what your character is like, but might imply some things about your people.) You have the option your picked in My People Are X, which isn't in this draft but will be at some point. (This describes your people, but in very vague terms.) And you have your Limited Move choices. (Because this is still effectively just a gear list at this point in development, it kind of only describes what your character has.) The point there isn't much to imply much mechanical differentiation of your character from any other character with the same playbook at the start, and there's even less that imply much about your people beyond "we have easy access to explosives, which mechanically translates to me having easy access to explosives". Part of why I love custom moves is that they imply what the... customs of your people are, and that can both influence and be influenced by your lore for your people. "I like Elfsight and space elves, maybe my elves are transhumanists", or "my elves are baroque space transhumanists, maybe one of my starting customs should be Elfsight". There's less mechanical hooks like that in this model of character building, so there's just fewer chances to make mechanical choices that imply things about your character or people. Also, while I'm less innately wary of this new model of custom move, this talk of customization to fit your character/people concept did make me think of one thing. Take my friend Wolsh the Dwarf, from the game where I played a baroque space elf for a year and a half. His people were basically stone elementals with an innate connection to the earth, and they weren't particularly drunk, greedy or technically-minded. In 1e/2e, it's easy to represent that. Just don't take the custom moves about being that. However, with this model of custom moves, it doesn't matter that Wolsh's people aren't drunk, greedy or technically minded. He's here so he's adding those moves to our custom pool anyway, and it doesn't matter that the fiction behind custom moves is that there's cultural intermingling and we're learning them from Wolsh's cultural heritage. Trust me, I know it's easy to reflavor that kind of thing to fit if they fit your character concept in the first place. I took Let Me See That to represent elven technical knowledge in that game. But it does just feel... weird. EDIT: I missed a slight bit of customization, but the general point stands. Lurks With Wolves fucked around with this message at 03:57 on Dec 15, 2021 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2021 03:34
|
|
|
ok
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2021 08:49
|
|
|
I like the new Mountain playbook Gnome 
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2021 12:27
|
|
|
I also don’t want people taking my playbook moves in a PbTA game unless I give them. I picked the book because I want them, or sometimes because I -don’t- want other people to have them. (It’s why you should always pick the most psycho pregen if you’re doing a convention game, so other people have to be reasonable people who move the plot forward.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2021 23:44
|
|
|
More fellowship 3e previews: https://twitter.com/Veliministriari/status/1474857825557958664
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2021 22:42
|
|
|
Golden Bee posted:I also don’t want people taking my playbook moves in a PbTA game unless I give them. I picked the book because I want them, or sometimes because I -don’t- want other people to have them. (It’s why you should always pick the most psycho pregen if you’re doing a convention game, so other people have to be reasonable people who move the plot forward.) I like picking up moves from other playbooks, it can be really fun flavoring a character that way with dipping into other things. Fellowship has a pretty hard cap on how many moves you can take outside your own anyway. It's not like they're muscling in on someone else's niche or anything. In a regular game at least. Picking up "the most psycho pregen" in a con game isn't what I'd prioritize, but I don't think it'd help much if the kind of randos who sink a game would grab a different sheet.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2021 08:18
|
|
|
I've been updating the Fellowship character sheet on Roll20 to 2e, and I've noticed there are multiple ways 2e playbooks describe how to gain a Move from another player. The most common are:
In any event, the Move being shared is always at the whim of the donor. By the look of things, Gnome is thinking about turning that around to allow players to pick and choose.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2021 23:37
|
|
|
Mirage posted:In any event, the Move being shared is always at the whim of the donor. By the look of things, Gnome is thinking about turning that around to allow players to pick and choose. Maybe it's that I've mostly run with people who weren't assholes, but I've never actually seen the bolded be a point of contention. At most, I've had someone ask, and be asked to explain why, and when the explanation was tendered, say, "Oh, hey, that actually sounds really cool, hell yes you can have that Move."
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2021 00:13
|
|
|
FrozenGoldfishGod posted:Maybe it's that I've mostly run with people who weren't assholes, but I've never actually seen the bolded be a point of contention. At most, I've had someone ask, and be asked to explain why, and when the explanation was tendered, say, "Oh, hey, that actually sounds really cool, hell yes you can have that Move." Same, though I could also understand a player who would prefer to be e.g. That One Guy Who Stings Like a Bee. (Also, unconnected Fun Fact: a Tinker or Dwarf who learns Doomed Soul from a Harbinger, then takes Hot Shot as their Destiny, would have eight stats.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2021 05:45
|
|
|
Was considering how many spells a starting character could have- seems like a Dragon/Elf (chosen champion) would be the best bet- that gives you Dragon Magic and Elder Arts, plus the Elf custom move giving you another spell. Then you could take War Paint from the Beast for a sort of spell-adjacent bonus.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2021 15:53
|
|
|
Sharing moves to me is more a matter of the narrative and thus I've had games where I didn't want to share anything, and wanted people to back up off my custom moves And then I've had games like when the halfling took two of my Giant customs (1e game obviously) and then took the Little Giant destiny, and I loved it because from the beginning of the game to the end my Giant and the Halfling were inseparablely bonded and it felt super good to have. Heck, my Giant took a couple of Halfling moves even.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2021 19:20
|
|
|
For Fellowship 2e, does anyone have suggestions on alternate uses for Advantage if the players aren't especially interested in defeating their foe at the moment? My crew ran into a miniboss - not a full General, but still important. However the Tinker's immediate 10+ on Keep Them Busy means unless the rest of the Fellowship decides to go have tea, he's going to be rendered a non-issue before anything really interesting can happen.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 02:44
|
|
|
Shardix posted:For Fellowship 2e, does anyone have suggestions on alternate uses for Advantage if the players aren't especially interested in defeating their foe at the moment? My crew ran into a miniboss - not a full General, but still important. However the Tinker's immediate 10+ on Keep Them Busy means unless the rest of the Fellowship decides to go have tea, he's going to be rendered a non-issue before anything really interesting can happen. In the FAQ of the Fellowship 2e book (page 260), Gnome admits that one good Finish Them roll can even take Generals out before they can do anything. This is because in the stories Fellowship is based on, even Big Scary Evil Guys fold in a single encounter (insert picture of the Witch King of Angmar here). So the strategy is either (a) surround them with minions and traps that the heroes have to fight through first, (b) give them Tough as Nails, or (c) make them smart enough that they don't confront the heroes directly. Put them on a high ledge, give them secret exits, have them collapse the floor when the heroes get too close, etc. Now if you mean someone Keeps Them Busy and then nobody else tries to defeat them, I'd say the Advantage should evaporate at a dramatically appropriate time, or at least when the spotlight returns to the Keeping Busy character. Remember too that you don't have to kill a baddie to Finish Them, if that's a problem for the players. Knock them out or make them retreat, then bring them back later.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2022 07:26
|
|
|
Another Fellowship question, since my game is finally getting started soon: does anyone have a set piece or encounter they used as the first one/early on and thought was really good for establishing the game and teaching the rules? I'm leaning toward using the Titans as my Overlord's army, but I could be talked into the Organization.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 17:16
|
|
|
It can lose a bit using it early on, but the fancy gala setpiece worked really well for me for an early tool. Since there won't be an established backlog of npcs to summon the players can instead invent new ones to bring back later on. And when things go south you can easily transition from social skills to action/combat ones
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 17:57
|
|
|
The game I'm Overlording now started with The Chase on p. 123. It's a good way to establish how loosey-goosey the game plays for people new to PbtA, at least. Lotta folks I've seen in other discussions seem to like using the Kraken as a way to jump straight into the game, medias res style.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2022 18:51
|
|
|
I used Time To Go! to start the game I'm running at the moment, although I had to lay on the 'you cannot fight this entire army' quite thick to convince them to run instead of stand their ground. Speaking of which, the Harbinger just gained the Dark and Terrible move which lets her lay curses -- are there any guidelines for what those curses might look like?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2022 21:41
|
|
|
potatocubed posted:Speaking of which, the Harbinger just gained the Dark and Terrible move which lets her lay curses -- are there any guidelines for what those curses might look like? I don't have a guide or anything, but as a Harbinger player with Dark and Terrible I have some advice. Honestly, the main limitations on Dark and Terrible are "what do Harbingers do here, thematically" and "what does the group think your Harbinger's curses should be capable of". Now, this does sound very broad. But remember that the Harbinger is a Powerful class whose power is mostly wrapped up in having very fictionally powerful moves, and that Dark and Terrible costs a stat when the other powerful thing about Harbingers makes them extremely stat-hungry. My recommendation is to have the Harbinger just write down some example curses ahead of time, because they have some idea what they want their curses to look like and it gives you all something to work with. If they're bad at coming up with cool curses like I am, have them ask the rest of the group for ideas. The point is to establish what "a Harbinger's curses" looks like in this campaign. I guess the only other advice I have is to make sure the way the target lifts the curse is fictionally interesting, because that's what will prompt most of the interactions with that character moving forward, but that still feels a bit self-explanatory.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2022 23:48
|
|
|
disaster pastor posted:Another Fellowship question, since my game is finally getting started soon: does anyone have a set piece or encounter they used as the first one/early on and thought was really good for establishing the game and teaching the rules? I'm leaning toward using the Titans as my Overlord's army, but I could be talked into the Organization. Like Mirage mentioned, The Chase is a good opener that lets you establish something valuable and a number of people who want it straight out of the gate. That's what I started my game with, and it went pretty well!
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2022 21:38
|
|
|
Thanks, all. I did the Chase for the first session and went into the fancy gala for the second, and people seemed to enjoy it. Problem I'm having for once is that, well, I'm not enjoying it. I love playing freeform games, I would happily run so many PBtA games, but this time I might have gone too freeform? Like the situation in the Chase eventually devolved into combat, and I ended up stressing about the time it took me to find suitable threats to use in combat and then about adequately expressing their abilities. Essentially, I feel like I'm giving the party enough rope to hang me. Any advice on how to keep a hand still on the wheel, but gently? Also, one of my players is a Remnant, and I want to check and make sure these two moves interact the way they appear to: quote:Feed On Pain quote:Lash Out (Blood) So, since every Remnant has Feed On Pain, half of Lash Out's text is irrelevant and it's just free damage on a 7+, and even on a 6-, that "two damage" is really only one? Is that intended behavior?
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2022 01:07
|
|
|
I don't know. When I played a Remnant, I didn't ever try to claim that, but I see the argument for it, since they can't eat.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2022 01:35
|
|
|
I'd table-rule that Lash Out supersedes Feed On Pain; the damage you take with LO isn't healed by the damage you deal. It's not exactly RAW but it makes the sacrifice actually mean something. When gotcha-loops like this come up during a session, they usually just get an eyeroll when I'm running the game. disaster pastor posted:Problem I'm having for once is that, well, I'm not enjoying it. I love playing freeform games, I would happily run so many PBtA games, but this time I might have gone too freeform? Like the situation in the Chase eventually devolved into combat, and I ended up stressing about the time it took me to find suitable threats to use in combat and then about adequately expressing their abilities. Essentially, I feel like I'm giving the party enough rope to hang me. Any advice on how to keep a hand still on the wheel, but gently? I had the same experience with The Chase, made worse by one of my players being The Ogre and having zero problem beating down an entire army. Just let them kick rear end, take the L and move on. To bring the game back a little more under your control, I'd suggest using the Overlord's nefarious plots, and make them suitably earth-shaking so the players have to react to them. Threaten their homes, subvert their best friends, kill their companions, punch them in the snoot and steal their lunch money. The Overlord always has two secret plans going at once, and while the players are dealing with one, the other one continues unabated. Also, the Overlord always has the option to level themselves up any time the players choose to level up one of their own, which both makes the Overlord more dangerous and automatically advances the Overlord's plans one step each. It's all well and good to have some control over your immediate situation, but when the skies turn black and the rivers become as blood, your heroes should realize they've maybe been paying attention to the wrong things.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2022 04:32
|
|
|
When I played a Remnant I used Feed on Pain and Lash Out in conjunction regularly and it wasn't a problem. The key things to note are:
NGDBSS fucked around with this message at 19:44 on May 17, 2022 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2022 15:42
|
|
|
Also, remember Lash Out is a custom other playbooks can take, so even if Feed on Pain zeroes it out for the Remnant, if someone else takes it it's still quite a double-edged sword.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2022 19:04
|
|
|
Dealing damage is fine, but Remember Me? is amazingly fun to have around.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2022 23:59
|
|
|
Quick question about the Lantern's Little Light: If the Little Light is destroyed (via the 'destroy one of your gear' use of Pay the Price), does one of the specific forms get destroyed (like the melee weapon or the ranged weapon specifically) or is the whole thing disabled?
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2022 04:24
|
|
|
Also question: How are early conforntations with the Overlord expected to end, and what should be stressed before that happens? Are there any plans for ready-made lists of threats and set pieces and Fellowship boons that aren't presented as book pages but as play sheets? Torches Upon Stars fucked around with this message at 19:56 on Sep 9, 2022 |
|
#
?
Aug 30, 2022 20:05
|
|
|
If a player picks up The Rain's version of Doomed Soul, do they suffer the same drawback as The Harbinger? (When your Doom stat gets damaged by an enemy attack, you must damage another one of your stats.)
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2022 18:57
|
|
|
Shardix posted:If a player picks up The Rain's version of Doomed Soul, do they suffer the same drawback as The Harbinger? (When your Doom stat gets damaged by an enemy attack, you must damage another one of your stats.) It's not RAW, but we've been ruling that any "extra" stat does this except for The Dwarf's Iron specifically. Otherwise it kinda waters down The Dwarf's schtick of being so awesomely unbreakable that he can take more damage than anyone. Iron Heart posted:Also question: How are early conforntations with the Overlord expected to end, and what should be stressed before that happens? Usually an early appearance of The Overlord will quickly defeat the players. Maybe even be a little bit unfair about it. Stress that, as powerful as they are, they're currently underprepared and need a lot more friends and power to even put up a fight.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2022 17:51
|
|
|
Fellowship is now available in the Bundle of Holding, you can get all four books for $20. https://bundleofholding.com/presents/Fellow2023
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2023 05:58
|
|
|
Just got my Bundle, thanks!
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2023 13:36
|
|
|
The bundle claims that Gnome's old DW playbooks are easily compatible with Fellowship which... doesn't sound right to me?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2023 23:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 4, 2024 02:27 |
|
|
It definitely isn't right, I didn't write any of the ad copy on that page. But I also do not care enough to correct em
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2023 04:26
|
|