[Weapon Proficiencies]

In another thread, Morgenstern presents an interesting new idea (at least new to me)... a new use for Weapon Proficiencies.

Weapon Proficiencies
Proficiency: Wrecker. Your sneak attack damage affects constructs. Forte in this proficiency grants a +1 bonus to attack checks targeting constructs.

Has anyone else used proficiencies this way?  Basically this is like a mini-feat allowing you to alter an attack to do something it normally couldn't. Granted it is very specific as only certain character options give Sneak Attack. However, it has my wanting to explore this option, especially since it gives a very flavorful optional use for Proficiencies than forcing characters to take proficiency in weapon categories they may have no interest in taking, just because they have the slots to fill.

Are there other types of similar uses you think would make good proficiencies? 

[Special:]

Another, possibly simpler way to tackle the "Wrath Feat" issue would be to simply add the following line to 'Adamant Oath'.

Special: You gain access to the Wrath feat category, and may choose such a feat any time you would be allowed to choose a bonus feat.

This allows Wrath feats to remain their own category (for much easier grouping than scattering them throughout the list of other feats with a tagline marking them as Wrath feats) and makes it obvious to anyone who takes 'Adamant Oath' that they have another avenue of feats available to them, which is kind of the secondary point of the feat IMHO.  This way anyone with an Alignment, but especially the divine oriented classes like Crusader can also dabble in this arena. Especially since I'm not a fan of single class exclusive feat categories.

JMHO.

Thanks Krensky. By chance can you point out here it says that you can still succeed on a 1. I can't seem to find that and my group assumes its like 'other' d20 where a 1 is always a failure.

Thanks for the comments.  Pretty much what I already assumed. I'll simply make a set of notes calling out the existing features and how they really work against the assumed issues of other d20 systems.

[SKILL THRESHOLD]

Hi all. Been a while since I posted but I had something new to run by you all.

My group has 2 primary issues with the standard skill system.
1)   The chance that any check has a chance to critical fail, no matter how well trained in a skill you are.
2)   Rolling for every skill check that has a DC attached to it, no matter how trivial (for instance having +12 to climb and having to make a DC 10 climb check).

Thus I came up with the following and just wanted to run it by people for a sanity check and make sure I wasn’t missing something obvious.

Does anyone see any real issues with this?  I know it could basically be handled just by the GM, but I have issues with players that if they don't see it in writing they don't believe its being done that way. Any feedback appreciated.



SKILL THRESHOLD
This system is designed to create a skill threshold system for use with the Fantasy Craft skill system. Rather than rolling for every skill including for “tying your shoes moments”, your skill proficiency dictates a level of auto-success with trained skills. This reduces the number of dice rolls required for skill use as well as eliminates the Critical Fail on mundane tasks issue that is imbedded in the d20 Skill System.

Untrained Skills: Can Default Roll on skills that are not “Trained Only” but the maximum result cannot exceed 15 and the skill’s error range increases by 2.
(This remains as normal, just listing it for completeness.)

Skill Threshold = 10 + total Skill bonus (Ranks + Attribute Bonus + Bonuses [e.g. insight, gear, etc.])

No Skill Check is required when a Skill Check calls for a DC at or under your Skill Threshold with that skill. The skill check is automatically considered a success. However, a roll may be attempted if the player deems it necessary to try for a critical success. Skill Checks are still required when a Skill Check has a target DC higher than the skill’s Skill Threshold.

Active Opposed Skill Checks are resolved normally, while Passive Opposed Skill checks use the passive character’s Skill Threshold. For instance a Bluff vs. Sense Motive check is an Active Opposed Skill Check and would resolve normally. However, a Sneak vs. Notice check (unless the character is Actively looking for the sneaker) is a passive Notice check and would use the character’s Notice Skill Threshold.

Note that when using Skill Thresholds, there is no chance for critical failures. This is by design as the GM really shouldn’t be burning Action Dice to trigger critical failures on what should otherwise be a mundane task for the trained character.

Example:
Ragnar (Wis 12) has 3 ranks in the Survival skill and  wants to forage for food in the forest.  Ragnar’s Survival Threshold = 14 (10 +1 Wis +3 ranks).  Let’s say there are no threats or stress involved so the GM sets the task at the standard DC 10. Since DC 10 is below Ragnar’s Survival Threshold of 14, Ragnar need not roll a skill check and the GM informs Ragnar of his success at this mundane task.

Now if, unbeknownst to Ragnar, there are goblins who live and have recently foraged this area and thus pickings are slimmer than usual, the GM may set the DC for the task to DC 15. Ragnar must now actually roll a Survival check at his regular +4 bonus. Ragnar must thus roll an 11 or better (a 50% chance of success) on a task that is slightly more challenging than mundane.

NM... nothing to see here.

Thanks for the compilation list. Very useful.

What about change of direction?

What do you mean? Something like Maneuverability Classes?  If so, as far as I can tell, there is no such thing in FC unless I missed something. I believe that was done on purpose, as Alex pointed out, to be more cinematic.

On a different note, I would see natural flyers being just as able to make course corrections as a human changing direction while walking. Its intuitive. If you really wanted to be more simulationist about it, you could either:
* Involve a DEX check to make 90-degree course changes at speeds above base.
* Use a Flying skill like Pathfinder does.

Just a few quick thoughts off the top of my head on it. Personally, I use the DEX check for extreme cases. Otherwise I don't really worry about it.

Aye. I too am definitely awaiting this resource with baited breath. It really is the single most important book required after core to make the magical aspect of Fantasy Craft truly come alive. I'll keep my fingers crossed that this will be a Birthday/X-mas present for myself this year. 

Another question, this time for my own drake character. Besides the spell Fly I, I don't see anywhere that describes heavy armor/load interfering with winged flying . Does it not, or am I just missing it?

My interpretation would be...

Heavy Load's "and you move at only 1/2 Speed (rounded up)" and Armor's "a penalty applied to the wearer’s Speed (to a minimum of 5 ft.)." applies to ALL modes of movement, including Flight, with the exception of the spell which acts a little differently because it isn't normal movement, its a spell. Its very short term so it can be slightly better than normal movement modes. However I would still apply the armor speed reduction as the spell says nothing about making an exception for armor as it does for Load.  JMHO.

I definitely think we need more to go on.  There are too many variables here. We really need to know more what exactly are the key things the player wants the character build to be able to do.  For instance if "Vanish/Invisibility" is a MUST, then we have to figure out how to work that it. If the player is ok with something akin to Vanish, then we can go into other areas.  MUST the  character be able to heal, or would a healing PL suffice? etc.

[For any Weapon Group you spend 0 Proficiency Points in]

The way I read the rules is as follows:

1) You spend Proficiencies to acquire skill with an ENTIRE Group of Weapons from either: Blunt, Edged, Hurled, Bows, Black Powder or Siege Weapons. You can spend points to attain 2 levels of skill: Trained and Forte.

2) For any Weapon Group you spend 0 Proficiency Points in, means you are considered Untrained, thus take a -4 non-proficiency penalty to Attacks.

3) For any Weapon Group you spend 1 Proficiency Point in, means you are considered Trained, thus cancelling the non-proficiency penalty to Attacks with the chosen weapon group only.

4) For any Weapon Group you spend 2 Proficiency Points in, means you are considered to have Forte (aka Mastery or Well Trained), thus gaining a +1 bonus to Attacks with the chosen weapon group.

5) Certain exotic weapons in a Weapon Group require you to have Forte in the Weapon Group before you may use them. This does not change the fact that you gain your +1 to Attack with these weapons. It simply means that until you have become "well trained" (aka gained Forte), some weapons are still just too complicated to use effectively.


For instance, this is how I look at it. Simply being Trained (Proficient) in basic blunt weapons is not enough skill to allow you to correctly utilize exotic blunt weapons. Once you have achieved mastery (Forte) with basic blunt weapons, you have enough skill o broaden the types of weapons you understand the use of (gain access to exotic weapons).

If anything, Foghorn has the easiest solution: just require them to have that feat.

That just doesn't work for my game or my logic on how the spells should work. For me the house rule is the better option, and I do hope the Crafty guys go over them. I personally don't see why a mage can't heal themselves (or cast any of the other spells listed on themselves) and I don't believe that requiring a Feat Tax is the appropriate answer either. However, if the Crafty guys say the spells are as intended I hope to at least see some logic as to why.   JMHO. YMMV.

Also applies to Cause Wounds I-IV for Undead casters (the Reaper being chief among them).

Interesting point. I hadn't eve been thinking about it from the point of view of an undead as I was thinking from the perspective of normal living creature types. Also, I haven't seen the Reaper so didn't realize it caused the caster to become Undead.

However, this brings up yet another point... Unborn (and other Construct) casters and the Tinker I-II spells.

No need, I've got it down as a note here. Don't have time to look over those spells at the moment but I guarantee that if this is an issue we'll get it solved in the final drafts.

Thanks!

No. Thank you for actually looking into it. 

[Priority House-Rule:]

See PG 113 for the description of Touch.   The last line says, unless the Distance also has Personal, the caster may not place the effect on themselves.

Interesting. That is something I never caught before. So basically a mage can never cure their own Wounds until they can cast Cure Wounds I, Mass at 11th level? They can only Touch of Light themselves?

I honestly think this is something that needs an errata. In the meantime, note to self...

Priority House-Rule: Replace the Distance entry in the following spell descriptions with "Personal or Touch" rather than just "Touch": Cure Wounds I-IV, Heal, Heroism I-III, Jump, Lift Curse I-III, Neutralize Poison, Protection from Alignment, Protection from Spells, Regenerate, and Restoration I-II.