Back to Crafty Games Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 19, 2015, 06:02:42 AM
Home Help Search Login Register
News: Welcome to the Crafty Games Forums!

Note to New Members: To combat spam, we have instituted new rules: you must post 5 replies to existing threads before you can create new threads.

  Show Posts
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 99
16  Products / Fantasy Craft / Re: [LABORATORY] The final Spellbound spells on: January 17, 2015, 11:43:13 PM
I'm actually fine with corpse hands just bursting up out of the ground.
17  Community / License to Improvise / Re: Improved language for 'Paired Skills' benefits on: January 16, 2015, 02:21:49 PM
The only wonky situation I see there is if someone gains paired skills after level 1 and already has ranks allocated.
18  Community / License to Improvise / Re: Chow Down on This. on: January 16, 2015, 04:49:06 AM
Not only is that a good point, but I like the idea of an Assassin/Alchemist/Chef
19  Products / Fantasy Craft / Re: [LABORATORY] The final Spellbound spells on: January 16, 2015, 04:48:01 AM
Hm. Well, I've got a name for that spell: "Dead Man's Hand."

Here's what I'm thinking - you basically turn a corpse's body part into a tiny little half-familiar, ala Evil Dead 2 ("Farewell to Arms"). Familiars actually can deliver touch attacks at higher levels, so this might be a situation where you can use your devilish little animated part-corpse to perform one skill check or Touch attack which then ends the spell. Complete with a simple stat line for the critter that defines it from Animate Dead, making it fun.

Thoughts?

So, a minor summon that can deliver one touch attack or perform one check? I like it.
20  Products / Fantasy Craft / Re: [LABORATORY] The final Spellbound spells on: January 15, 2015, 09:03:41 PM
Ghoul Touch?

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/ghoulTouch.htm

21  Products / Fantasy Craft / Re: [LABORATORY] The final Spellbound spells on: January 15, 2015, 02:14:22 PM
Okay, I think the biggest problem with the spectral hand developing touch attacks concept is that it actually seems more like Shadow than Necromancy to me.  It needs to be more undead-er. You could call it Hand of Glory and make it a glowing, burning hand that lets you deliver spells at a longer range, and that might be a little better. But maybe replacing it with a specter that attacks people, developing some damage and a condition, would be better.
22  Products / Fantasy Craft / Re: [LABORATORY] The final Spellbound spells on: January 14, 2015, 09:03:32 PM
I would change only one thing: change the description so that the fingers appear to be lit by ghastly candle flames. Just to symbolically evoke the Hand of Glory.
23  Community / License to Improvise / Re: Improved language for 'Paired Skills' benefits on: January 13, 2015, 02:44:27 AM


Paired Skills: Each time you gain permanent ranks in [Skill A] or [Skill B], the other skill increases to the same rank or its maximum rank, whichever is lower. (2)

This doesn't seem to address the scenario where the maximum skill changes. There are also possible hypothetical scenarios where you might gain Paired Skills later in your career, which makes maximum rank not a great software decision.  Finally, this seems like there are situations where you might earn dedicated skill ranks that result in no gain. For instance, some classes grant dedicated skill ranks.

If the goal is to remove time and sequence, and avoid a cyclical skill increase, I might turn this:

Quote
Paired Skills: Each time you gain 1 or more ranks in the
Spellcasting skill, you gain equal ranks in the Intimidate
skill. This may not increase your Intimidate skill beyond its
maximum rank.

into this:

Paired Skills: Each time you gain 1 or more ranks in the Spellcasting skill, you gain extra ranks in the Intimidate
skill. Extra ranks cannot generate more extra ranks, and any ranks in excess of your maximum ranks confer no benefits.

But I actually prefer more relaxed phrasing.

Thus:

Paired Skills: Each time you gain 1 or more ranks in the Spellcasting skill,the gain is also applied to Intimidate. If you have more ranks in Intimidate than your maximum, the additional ranks confer no benefit.


24  Community / License to Improvise / Re: The Myth (Master Class) on: January 13, 2015, 01:12:50 AM
I like the concept and the Blade by My Side bit.  The first thing that occurs to me is that Trademark Gear should be a bonus feat.

The next thing that occurs to me is that several of the tries at abilities seems to be mimicking the Edgemaster. I think it's useful to think about what other things the chosen bladewielder does. The things that stick out in my mind are Renown and Chance feats.  Maybe something, something, Gear feats count as Chance feats. Edge?

And the third thing is that the idea of upgrading the item with new Charms or Essences is not a bad one but seems a little limited. What if the class turned the item into an artifact? You could gain the ability to add some abilities and level it up.

Why is Fortitude Medium and Defense is low? I'd swap those.
25  Community / License to Improvise / Re: "Remember when Elf was a class?" The Incarnate [Base, Specialties] on: January 12, 2015, 08:50:04 PM
Once upon a time, I opined that a Specialty is what you are, and your class is how you solve problems. The essence of this class, I understand it, is "I solve problems by using species-specific or mixed blood abilities." There really isn't anything about cross-training or other pick-a-mix elements that really seems to fit that theme to me. Instead, the class is treated as a toolkit to a custom wildcard. That almost isn't even a class.  It's like a method for making Fantasy Craft into a menu-driven custom character process.

Like, imagine your character is Thorin Oakenshield. He's a very dwarfish dwarf. It seems to me like you would want this class to reflect his exceptional heritage. But I think you would get a lot more mileage from a new specialty and the Soldier class. His noble lineage is his Origin.

Or if your character is some sort of mongrel. Most of what you want should be there at 1st level. Being a mongrel is an origin, not something you grow into.
26  Community / License to Improvise / Re: "Remember when Elf was a class?" The Incarnate [Base, Specialties] on: January 12, 2015, 05:20:37 PM
What makes you think that? I am honestly curious as to your line of reasoning; the overall intention of the class in its current form is as a throwback to the old AD&D-style of play where "Elf" and "Dwarf" were classes all on their own; going in the way that the class is right now, it's a general-purpose "make your own hero" class that doesn't constrain itself with being a full-on warrior, or a dedicated craftsman, and it can even sling a spell or two if need be.

Mainly because if you scrub off the serial numbers, this is a variant Sage class. I can't think of what this class is supposed to do for you, unless you just hate the Sage's group boosts. The meat of it is grabbing the species-specific stuff. With a Master class, or even an Expert class, you could just turn all that stuff into low-hanging fruit. Everything in this class that is not gaining species feats or benefits seems like a waste of time, unless you are intentionally trying to replace the Sage as the jack-of-all-trades class.

My take on the "back when elves were elves, dwarves were dwarves, and halflings were nervous," would be Specialties, since those the most impact at low levels. Come up with three species-specific Specialties for each, and I think you have something.
27  Community / License to Improvise / Re: New Specialties: Rounding Out The Combat Feats on: January 12, 2015, 05:14:47 PM
The point is, there's no reason why the specialty shouldn't get a Catfall-esque ability; if you're the type to go for the arteries and tendons than the reduction of falling damage will be excellent for when the giant punts you into the air and causes you to fly a good couple of yards up and over. If you're the sort that starts climbing all over a dragon while it's in mid-flight, then it's beneficial for if/when you get bucked-off.

Is it more useful to a Giant Slayer than an infiltrator? An acrobat? I'm not saying it couldn't be useful, but Specialty design, ideally, isn't "throw in everything useful." I don't being purposefully punted by a giant something that happens very often, and when you are clinging to a dragon, my thought is that you really wouldn't want to fall off. Like, at all. It seems like a very specialized area not very closely related to slaying things that are big. Right off the cuff, a Dodge bonus seems more relevant and desirable.
28  Community / License to Improvise / Re: "Remember when Elf was a class?" The Incarnate [Base, Specialties] on: January 12, 2015, 05:34:17 AM
I'm thinking about this, and I'm wondering if this wouldn't work better as a Master class, my assumption being that you would start as probably a Sage and take a specialty that grants a species feat.
29  Community / License to Improvise / Re: New Specialties: Rounding Out The Combat Feats on: January 12, 2015, 05:29:53 AM
By that sort of standard, anything beyond fingers and toes would pretty much count, making the cases where vitals are out of reach limited to extremely rare niche cases where you're fighting something vastly larger than you, or something with weird anatomy that for whatever reason has more dispersed arterial vasculature in the distal regions of the limbs.

Right. So you can't sneak attack something's finger, and an octopus tentacle is right out. But as a hideous bleeding wound from the artery can be imagined, that should be fair game.

Quote
Considering that Crafty tends to be fairly economical in their verbiage, and leave rare corner cases essentially unmentioned on the assumption that GMs will rule as they see fit, I'm inclined to believe the case of vitals being out of reach is supposed to be something that one might reasonably expect to come up not too drastically rarely.

Or it could be a paraphrase from the 3.0 SRD:

Quote
A rogue can only sneak attack a living creature with a discernible anatomy. Any creature that is immune to critical hits is also not vulnerable to sneak attacks. The rogue must be able to see the target well enough to pick out a vital spot and must be able to reach a vital spot. The rogue cannot sneak attack while striking a creature with concealment or striking the limbs of a creature whose vitals are beyond reach.

the assumption being, I think, as is often made by the Crafty team, that GMs can decide for themselves how they want to handle "vitals." Note that even in 3.0, as I quoted, the limbs are fair game if the vitals are within reach.

Speaking of Achilles, are you familiar with his cause of death?
30  Community / License to Improvise / Re: New Specialties: Rounding Out The Combat Feats on: January 11, 2015, 09:26:41 PM

Ankle, no. Hacking at the Achilles tendon is a good way to hobble a guy, but it's not exactly what I'd consider "attacking the vitals". It also seems kind of out of place with the intent of the sneak attack rules; why bother specifying that the creature's vitals must be in reach if even the far extremities can be considered "vitals"?

Well, I consider my Achilles tendon pretty vital. But I was actually thinking more specifically of the artery.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 99


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.13 | SMF © 2006-2011, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!