Back to Crafty Games Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 21, 2014, 05:03:23 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 ... 61
1  Community / License to Improvise / Re: [Farthest Star] So, guns... on: December 09, 2014, 01:54:03 PM

  On the accuracy thing, I was thinking that certain feats would offer bonus to hit with certain weapon types - in the hands of a typical shooter, the better heat distribution and reduced barrel warping of a bull barreled sniper rifle is meaningless... but to the master, it's a significant boon. The tagging (bull barrel) would be on the weapon, but the benefit (would be on the feat when using weapons with the tag.
  Good shooting form would also be encouraged through stand alone tricks bought with proficiencies. World of difference between a trained agent with the wherewithal to use a perfect teacup grip even while ducking and rolling vs a punk waving a gun around every which way. A good grip stance is might let you handle a larger weapon comfortably, while forte continues to provide the straight +1 to hit.


Way back when, I was spitballing character mechanics for a turn-based squad tactics game. (The whole "Let's do Jagged Alliance 2, but BETTER" cliff upon which many many dreams have been shattered.) One thing I was planning was something similar to the _Craft feat chains for each class of weaponry, but instead of having each chain strictly improve only handling weapons of that type, I instead focused on more universal benefits that made sense for the weapon class itself but also applied to other classes of weapons, where they were perhaps not as useful but still had an effect.

F'rex, for sidearms, I was considering these abilities: 1) Weapon Retention (making you much harder to disarm at close range), 2) Quick Reload (reducing time costs for all reloads), 3) Trick Shooting (Lessening several to-hit penalties that would be likely to crop up with sidearm use, such as for running and gunning as well as for guns akimbo). Each ability in that category would also grant a flat to-hit bonus for using sidearms. Other weapon categories would grant different single benefits (usually universal with an eye towards effectiveness in that category, with more powerful abilities explicitly locked to that weapon category only) while granting a cumulative benefit to weapons in that category. (Recoil reduction for automatic weapons, effective range increase for sniper rifles, that kinda stuff.)

Now, it's not strictly analogous to feat chains because those could have been picked in any order, but the idea was that a character would only have a limited number of those, maybe up to a half dozen or so, so this was a way to reward specialisation (via the cumulative benefit) while also encouraging the player to shop around the other trees for abilities that gelled with what they wanted that character to be good at - and picking up a minor specialisation benny for a wholly different weapon category along with that, to encourage characters who would be useful in multiple roles.

So...that project died, but I thought I'd air out those ideas here anyway. Maybe there's something in that approach you might find useful if you're trying to create gun types and feats that are good on their own while unlocking deeper synergy together.

(Side note, there's no such thing as a perfect teacup. Teacupping is a rookie mistake and inferior to a proper two-handed grip.)
2  Community / Play-by-Post / Re: STORMSURGE: Around the Campfire [OOC and open feedback] on: December 09, 2014, 12:52:03 AM
So, any news to share here?
3  Community / License to Improvise / Re: STORMSURGE - Warstrider Gaming for Mastercraft on: October 31, 2014, 03:12:03 AM
Coolness. I've been thinking about the gadgetry in my designs for a while, too, the prevalence of sensors and EW. I can't speak for everyone else, but I feel like they usually end up in the design after I've figured out armor (ALL THE ARMOR) and what I want as a weapons load. To a degree, I think there's a tendency to want to be prepared against striders with similar electronics (Mechonics? Stridonics?) loads, kind of a peer-to-peer combat thing, Battlefield Superiority striders - the analog of modern-day F22s and PAK-FAs. On the other hand, the design option I have consistently underused is Speed and Handling upgrades - mostly because Eurowalker designs are built to not rely on either, but also because it feels like the base weight classes are good enough without those upgrades. The Handling in particular: I can see the case for a strider with a Handling of, say, 4, for a "hero" machine, maybe 5 if you're really pushing it? But I don't see the point of a Handling beyond 3 for a mass production line strider - we're talking about keeping up with pilots who have a Dex of 16, which is pretty damn high for a faceless mook. Building an effective strider with a Handling of 3 is a piece of cake.

I'm starting to think that this is a situation rather like said fighter aircraft, where we're entering a phase that we can easily design aircraft to exceed maneuver g-loads a pilot can cope with. Likewise, we can easily design striders that are so maneuverable that there's maybe a half dozen people in the whole world with the reflexes and quick tactical thinking (not to mention resistance to motion sickness) that they can fully take advantage of these hot rod machines. I mean, on a fluff level, that makes sense to me. But on a crunch level, it leaves me thinking "Okay, so these are options I do not need, what else do I spend points on? Sensors, I guess." See, I might not always have the power reserves to operate them, but if its sensors or nothing, why not sensors? There's no penalty for not maxing out my design point budget just as there's no bonus for leaving points unassigned, other than vague fluff about cost. That said, I can totally see a future contest where a hidden criteria is '5 or more unspent design points', representing either a particularly thrifty design or one that has weight and power budget for future upgrades by their operators.

What I'm saying is, if high Handling had some benefit even for your average faceless mook, I'd look a bit harder at those upgrade options, and maybe not fall back on "MOAR GADGETS" when I still have points to assign. It doesn't have to be super-big. Like, spur of the moment, how about adding Handling as a bonus to the pilot's Initiative roll? When similar machines go up against each other, it effectively balances out. Light Striders are more spritely off the starting line than Assault monsters. The only issue I can see right now is that this gives Striders a boost against everything else on the battlefield, but then again, isn't Striders being more mobile and able to react quicker than conventional vehicles kind of their fluff raison d'etre?
4  Community / Play-by-Post / Re: STORMSURGE: Around the Campfire [OOC and open feedback] on: October 27, 2014, 11:26:18 AM
Sounds very cool to me.
5  Community / Play-by-Post / Re: STORMSURGE: Around the Campfire [OOC and open feedback] on: October 22, 2014, 09:58:41 AM
Any news on this front?
6  Community / License to Improvise / Re: New Expert Class: (Looking for a Name) on: September 30, 2014, 01:07:25 AM
I think that the class should focus on one feat chain. If you're gonna have Mobility Basics as a prereq, grant Mastery and Supremacy in the B slot, along with some other bonus. Or, well, making Charging Basics the prereq and grant its Mastery and Supremacy, respectively. Considering that I see the Charging feat chain pretty well covered by Morg's Golden Lion, my inclination is to go with Mobility here, but that's your call which fits the class's style better. Charging has the advantage that it's Basic Combat, so it powers up Combat Focus even if a player for some reason doesn't get the Core Ability.

EDIT: Or if you have neither as prereq, then yeah, Basics and Mastery at 2 and 7.

On the jumping thing, have you considered the Martial Artist's (there I go again) Wuxia?
7  Community / License to Improvise / Re: New Expert Class: (Looking for a Name) on: September 29, 2014, 02:03:42 PM
There's also that this class has a Spell Point progression that it literally cannot use unless you multiclass out of the class into a "proper" caster at some point.

Spell points: low is 0 spell points. Every class that has no spell points is considered to have low spell points

Shows what I know about casters, doesn't it. Tongue
8  Community / License to Improvise / Re: New Expert Class: (Looking for a Name) on: September 29, 2014, 01:17:13 PM
There's also that this class has a Spell Point progression that it literally cannot use unless you multiclass out of the class into a "proper" caster at some point. The "caster level zero" prereq actually reminds of the Intruder expert class from way back in Shadowforce Archer, and while I can see why you have that thematically, in my opinion classes that have fluff prereqs like this are a sign that your concept is too narrow for how FantasyCraft expert classes are expected to work. I think that accounts for TKDB's feeling that you're mushing up two general ability sets that don't interact much - it feels to me like you're trying to duplicate the diverse abilities of one specific character you had in mind for this.

That said, I like the idea of trading Combat Focus for edge, and letting different feat trees count for uses. (That should probably be widened to the standard "Count as Basic Combat Feats for the purposes of class abilities and feats" language, though, along with rethinking which feat trees you want to include.) Have you looked at Morg's take on the Jedi Watchman? That class also cues off Combat Focus in an even more involved way, you might find something worth pilfering there.

As for an Edge generator, you really need one outside of the Core Ability. Have you considered something akin to Strut, a Martial Artist ability? Basically, it gives you a small action die if you spend a half action posing after a successful attack. I think something along those lines that lets you trade a half action for a point of Edge (building up your power?) would do nicely.

I'm not strictly against coupling the class to Covert feats, not least because I made a covert feat chain for combat parcour and such which gets into the problems of building Edge through momentum, but I'm wary of building this into the class as frankly, outside of Mobility, the official Covert feats just don't synergize well with what you're trying to do. If you're gonna dig into Covert, you should think about what's in that tree other than the Mobility chain, and figure out whether that other stuff can fit into what you want to do with the class or if there's a better feat tree a class user would have more motivation to buy into.
9  Community / License to Improvise / Re: The Sentinel, again on: September 29, 2014, 01:28:16 AM
Indeed. This ability is an expression of the Sentinel's commitment to preparation and safety beyond what might be obvious - it doesn't even have to be his own prepared safety gear, but if somebody slips off the rock, he's the guy with the mental acuity to grab that severed line and hold on to it for dear life. The real meat of it is then when stuff goes wrong, the Sentinel says "No worries, mate!" and steps in to, if not outright save you, then at least stop you from getting dragged further into oblivion, and then he finds a way to drag you back to safety. The balance is in precisely how limiting this is for the Sentinel - after all, if you're running from a volcanic eruption and one of your team slips into a crack in the earth, the Sentinel now has to tether him, stop moving and start dragging him back to the surface.

I've noticed that one of our changes to my original phrasing - the bidirectional "cannot move beyond 30 feet apart" phrase - is actually not a strict nerf. Yes, it prevents a Sentinel from tethering, climbing the whole damn mountain and then dragging you up the whole way with no rolls made, but it also means that a if the Sentinel slips and falls, he can anchor himself to a teammate that's still on solid ground and stop his own fall that way. The teammate can't reel him in, so the Sentinel will have to find another way up (usually by swinging towards the rock, grabbing on and climbing up, all involving Athletics rolls in my estimation), but this way it's bidirectional safety as long as the Sentinel sticks with the team. I actually like that - the Sentinel's the expert, but not infallible, and it wouldn't make sense for his obsessive prep to safeguard everyone else while he's got no safety for himself. After all, the first rule of rescue is to keep yourself safe and not become another victim that needs rescuing.
10  Community / License to Improvise / Re: The Sentinel, again on: September 28, 2014, 02:53:41 PM
Well, other than adding another clause to an already wordy ability, there's also the logical disconnect I have that this allows you to - albeit slowly - drag someone out of the danger zone as long as you do anything but actually try to move. My mental image for this phrasing is a Sentinel doing two half-action attacks and a 5 foot step drag while enjoying all the bracing and safety benefits of the ability, and that seems weird. I've come around to the general idea here that a Sentinel using Safety Line will be exposed and effectively pinned in place while using it, precisely so it adds a little dramatic heft and strategy to its use. I vote we just completely excise the "drag with you" idea, which is in any event better handled by reeling the rescuee in completely and then carrying him on your back or dragging him on a sled.

I mean, if you've got a dramatic visual in mind for it, I'm willing to be convinced (as I have been on many points!), but I'm not seeing the cool scene here.
11  Community / License to Improvise / Re: New Base Class: The Geomancer on: September 28, 2014, 01:28:43 AM
Heh, do I see a little Man-Thing in the gamebreaker ability?
12  Community / License to Improvise / Re: The Sentinel, again on: September 28, 2014, 01:22:58 AM
That said, I'm not super-satisfied with the Five-Foot Step phrasing. What's the intended use case for that?
13  Community / License to Improvise / Re: The Sentinel, again on: September 28, 2014, 01:13:07 AM
Ooh, yes. Looking good. I think the Close Quarters interaction is really cool, and for the previously envisioned "rescue someone unconscious" use, it now requires the Sentinel to actually get closer and take a risk - climbing down into the glacial fault, jumping into the ocean to brave the waves and get closer to the shipwrecked survivor, sprinting after a dragon to rope the prey from its claws before it can fly out of the cave - all instantly cinematic dramatic moments building off this. Love it. Let me add the phrasing and the PDF to the first post, then.
14  Community / License to Improvise / Re: The Sentinel, again on: September 27, 2014, 03:09:28 PM
Hmm. What's a fair distance, you think? Thirty feet? The more general "close quarters"?
15  Community / License to Improvise / Re: The Sentinel, again on: September 27, 2014, 12:05:50 AM
Alright, Safety Line updated with Big Jim's phrasing. Anything else?
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 61


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