Back to Crafty Games Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 24, 2014, 03:06:19 PM
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 ... 230 231 [232] 233 234 ... 341
3466  Products / Fantasy Craft / Re: Fantasy Craft Q&A Thread! on: December 08, 2009, 02:19:58 PM
I haven't shared the story about my room-mate and his innocuous questions recently, and this seems like a good time.

He'll occasionally come up and ask me something really trivial, like "are there fluffy bunnies in your campaign setting?" Years ago I'd just answer "Yes, of course," and go back to what I was writing... only to have him (metaphorically) dump some appaling character build on my desk about 30 minutes later that used fluffy bunnies to power an unstopable scheme for world domination!!!

After a few times of that happening (and a number of revisions and corrections to rules under test and a couple of full-on errata being issued for SC 1st ed comming directly from these harmless sounding questions), I learned that when he asks me something, the correct answer is not the first thing that pops into my head... the correct answer is "Why?" Roll Eyes.

So, when Mr. A asked:

Can dwarves (or any medium sized species) make large-scale weapons?

What I heard was "Are there fluffy bunnies in Fantasy Craft?"

...Mostly because Alex and I already know where this one is going Wink. I encourage the interested reader to go back and look at the thread about the Martial Arts feat from shortly after release. I offered up a short sketch of what I thought was probably one of the most vicious combat builds possible for the system. I guess nobody asked me "Why?" Cheesy
3467  Products / Fantasy Craft / Re: Fantasy Craft Q&A Thread! on: December 08, 2009, 01:36:26 PM
Yes. Characters can use weapons up to their own size. The pech can (just barely) manage a normal longsword. A tiny character cannot manage a longsword (they are T, it's size S) and a pech cannot manage weapons that are medium sized (most human-scale 2-h swords and spears).

The giant can manage the longsword easily but gets no advantages for doing so. Other than the native advantages of his large footprint letting him use it against a potentially larger number of squares (pause and consider a giant with Greatsword Supremacy vs. a human with that feat - there is a lot more than just a damage advantage going on there). It does NOT become a dagger. This has major impact on the way melee feats interact with weapons becauser they check for weapon type in a number of cases. A pech's claymore, a humans' longsword, and a giant's dagger may all have around the same blade-length, but in the hands of a giant, they are all still different weapon types and interact favorably with different feat trees. They may be the same size, but they are still balanced/shaped/sharpened for a particular mode of use.

We talked out this arrangement at great length - believe me it handles a LOT of possible scale interations very smoothly, but it does not enjoy players freely or easily rescaling weapons. It will cope, but I encourage a fairly steep cost.
3468  Products / Fantasy Craft / Re: Is two weapon fighting unbalanced? on: December 08, 2009, 01:20:32 PM
Two-weapon is in basic combat because it is neither melee, nor ranged. It's effective with both types of weapons. Two-weapon is is the most versatile of the extra attack feat chains because it covers the largest variety of mix and match options. Until multi-round ranged weapons become available, its best pairing is with Quick Draw, so the character can do things like throw 2 axes and make two sword attacks every round for the duration of a fight. The other lovely pairing is Surge of Speed so you can actually reach your opponent (or stay in range) while unleashing your full compliment of attacks.

The first feat in the chain is also generally more directly useful because getting to stand next to an opponent and beat on them with both half actions can be an iffy thing. Being able to take a move then double attack shows a much more favorable return on investment (a.k.a. comparing 1 attack at full value vs 2 attacks at -2 instead of the 2 at full vs. 3 at -2 comparison). Used defensively, you could double attack then move away, forving other oponents to play your game rather than letting them dictate the flow of battle.

The math for the multi-attack feat chains favors adding them to a character after you've already built up a few other advantages - so they are multiplying your existing non-damage roll-based advantages and because as career level goes up, attack checks tend to slightly outstrip Defense, both in base values (BAB vs. Defense) and because players tend to invest in increasing the attribute used for the majority of their attacks, while NPC Dex tends to remain static. You could easily get both feats of a multi-attack chain at level 1 for a nice 'shtick" for your character, but they really won't fully develop until about career level 6+. Something as simple as the relentless attack trick will change you performace dramatically. "I missed? Ok, how about +2 to hit on the next try?" That's excellent insurance against flat-footing yourself.

But one of the subtle and most important aspects that makes them worthwhile is critical hits. Crit hit chance per round goes up rapidly when you use the multi attack feats because threat events are NOT reduced by the -2/-5. If you are only looking at times your dice came up 19-20, you probably are only looking at hits Smiley. 'More rolls' always equals 'better' when looking for crits. With a weapon with a threat range of 19-20, the number of threats you score over time making making 4 attacks per round is essentially double the number of threats you score making 2 attacks per round, and activating crits radically shifts the landscape in a fight. That's why I mention the multi-attack feats are actually quite good against special characters too, just not for doing raw damage.
3469  Products / Fantasy Craft / Re: Planescape Help on: December 08, 2009, 07:35:56 AM
I think Dragon Magazine had a couple articles with D&D 3.5 Prestige Classes for each faction. converting those to Master Classes is something I looked at along time ago. If someone can find the issue numbers I'll try to give you a jump start Smiley.
3470  Products / Fantasy Craft / Re: Fantasy Craft Q&A Thread! on: December 08, 2009, 07:21:02 AM
Lets take a simple Long sword (1d12 lethal 20 S/1h Hard 2 12M 6 lbs. Feudal 60s). Unless noted otherwise, this is a Medium sized weapon made by a Human and of "standard" quality. In the hands of a Giant for example, this would act like a short sword, correct?

No. It'll act exactly like the stats it has listed. Those are the stats for a medium scale longsword in the hands of ANY character that can manage to wield it - from a giant on down to a pech or goblin. Yes, a pech or goblin can handle it exactly as written - it's size is small.

Quote
* Drake seems to make it apparent that "+1 Scale" should cost +2 Comp & +50% Cost as it gain only "+1 Scale".

AND the ability to be use by a drake, which is a dramatic change for a race with the beast type Smiley. My feeling is the racial ones basically benefit from economy of scale - there is a reason people make those - and entire species worth of demand. Further, the Racial upgrades have a lot better footing for the GM to just say 'no' once players start sniffing around at large-scale longswords for normal-sized characters. Explainign why generic bigger weapons are banned for in-setting reasons is harder than just setting the price high enough to be prohibitive in the first place. I mention +400% because it amounts to a pure damage buff with no drawbacks at all for most weapons (and +700% is actually very justifiable for the reason I mentioned). It needs to be pricey or its going to appear everywhere.
3471  Products / Fantasy Craft / Re: Is two weapon fighting unbalanced? on: December 08, 2009, 07:08:42 AM
A -5 penalty tells me he'll hit 25% less (d20 + BAB - 5) than soldier B but will do 100% more damage (weapon damage x4) per round. Let's remove that 4th attack (from 25% less hit chance) and you'll have him do 50% more damage at all times.

Sorry, the math here is completely wrong. A -5 penalty means you will miss 25% more of all Attempts, not that you lose 25% of your suscessful attempts. At level 1 all else being equal (strength mod being the same as target's Dex mod, ect.) you will hit 50% of all attempts. With 2 attempts per round, you can normally expet to do an average of 1 hit worth of damage (.5 successrate x 2 attempts). The first feat lets you make 3 attempts with a .4 success rate (1.2 times weapon damage as an average. The third gives you 4 attempts at a .25 sucess rate - bringing you back to an average of 1 weapon worth of damage. That's right - against an evenly matched opponent it is potentially less than worthless (because of the added risk from failing all atempts).

The reality is not all enagagements are equal. If you have a better than 50% chance the feats work better. Asume you hit on a 6 or better - you are delivereing 1.5 average hits per round with normal attacks, 1.95 average hits per round by taking the -2, and 2 aveverage hits per round by taking the -5 for 4 attempts.

In otherwords, unless you have an extreme attack advantage the first feat is generally you best bet. The second feat is only for killing inept or incapacitated opponents as quickly as possible. Or for gambling on a lot of tries at rolling a threat so you can speed kill a special character if grinding down their vitality just isn't working. And the second feat comes with added risk in that if you do have a string of mere average (not even poor) rolls, you may just have killed yourself with going flat-footed. It's got its place but it's NOT the king of the battlefiled by a long shot.
3472  Products / Fantasy Craft / Re: Is two weapon fighting unbalanced? on: December 08, 2009, 06:48:41 AM
So the guy A invested 2 feats in more attacks. What is guy B getting for his 2 feats? The comparison is only valid at equal levels of investment.
3473  Products / Fantasy Craft / Re: Wands as weapons? on: December 08, 2009, 04:47:03 AM
Sorry, slight language error on my part - class them as "thrown weapons" (not just hurled weapons) and all the feats/tricks work, ricochet (from Hurled Supremacy) being quite fun. Angry Hornet and Blackened Sky also kick in. I expect the bounce trick from SC will be along sooner tha later, and daunting shot and relentless attack tricks are both solid choices.
3474  Products / Fantasy Craft / Re: Fantasy Craft Q&A Thread! on: December 08, 2009, 04:35:41 AM
So what's the cost of upgrading the scale of a weapon outside of racial manufacturing by large/small species?

I'd lean toward +2 complexty and +400% cost (or more). You are talking about 8 times the raw materials and quite a bit more time crafting it.
3475  Products / Fantasy Craft / Re: Is two weapon fighting unbalanced? on: December 08, 2009, 04:30:40 AM
At 0 feat investment sword and board is general much more potent than 2-weapon (thought 2-weapon does have some versatility benefits).

At 1 feat investment 2-weapon is getting a 3rd attack for -2 to everything while sword and board is either grabbing Sword Basics and kicking butt with the stance or shield basics and becoming a bastion for his allies to hover near along with bullrush bonus.

At 2 feat investment 2-weapon is getting his 4 attempts at -5 each, while sword and board has either learned to burry the blade or just gotten at least 2 points of AP and keen resistance and picked up a stun attack, which is one of the nastiest tricks in the entire chapter.

Basically at lower investment levels 2-weapon is just not a powerhouse. There are many strong first tier options for the combatant. Later when the BAB vs. Defense gradient is a little more favorable AND they can pick up some other feats to enhance the individual attacks rather than just multiplying the number of attempts, then 2-weapon gets mean(ish). 2-weapon also picks up when you have repeating 1-handed ranged weapons: sword-and-gun and 2-gun both make sound use of those feats once they become possible.
3476  Products / Fantasy Craft / Re: Wands as weapons? on: December 08, 2009, 04:17:17 AM
Oh, and a 2-handed version with 1 die-type better damage and longer range would be hawt. Wizard staff FTW.
3477  Products / Fantasy Craft / Re: Wands as weapons? on: December 08, 2009, 04:13:39 AM
Thank you for your insight, Morgenstern.   Smiley

No problem. I play enough World of Warcraft to find the idea appealing and very supportable in many slightly higher magic settings.

Quote
I would not want to use the range increments based on any stat modifier just because 1.) there does not exist this modifier in the physical ranged weapons and 2.) it's a bit too much of a bother in the middle of battle to remember that the cult's acolytes have wands with a range of 20 ft while their master has a range of 50 ft.  (Or maybe that's just my limited ability to remember details in combat.   Tongue)

SC2.0 adds range increments for strength, but FC does not, so I could see skipping it. Reduced memmorization is a significant plus.

Quote
I really appreciate the Wand feats that Turnip did and don't follow that the Hurled feats would work instead.  (Feinting & tripping with a wand?)  Perhaps you could explain further?

Again thinking ahead to when more SC2.0 feats have been ported over. Opperating a wand being some 1-handed arm-wavvy motions reminded me of throwing axes. I suspect the mechanics will work out well upon closer investigation. Turnips feats would also be available, just setting up a larger initial library by leveraging existing tools.
3478  Products / Fantasy Craft / Re: Wands as weapons? on: December 08, 2009, 04:06:42 AM
The Sorcerous quality doesn't make it obvious that you use spellcasting checks for attacks, unless that isn't your intent?

Normal BAB + dex (hurled attack) was my expectation for wand, with a theoretical BAB+ str for melee things with the quality. Using skill checks against Defense is not good parity - that's why doing so a limited number of times per combat is treated as a pretty hefty trick in the melee feats. Mirroring one of those melee tricks so that a skilled wand-wiggler can use spellcraft instead of BAB a couple times is probably a good call.
3479  Products / Fantasy Craft / Re: The Defendinator! on: December 07, 2009, 08:28:19 AM
It's not that its unbeatable, its that its a level of advantage that shouldn't have existed in the first place. Three part combo (as ussual): Guard is a passive benefit, guard is an unnamed bonus (honestly, those two alone should have set off alarm bells), and finally the Many-Armed feat, which multiplies that passive, unnamed benefit. That give it three places to be taken apart. Changing the passive aspect is a huge pain way beyond the scope of casual errata. Many-Armed is for the most part an innocent bystander. That leaves the unnamed aspect.

The only (minor) problem I see with making guards benefit a named bonus (likely 'gear') is there is a fine bit of nuance in making Greatsword Basics' effect intuive while 2 different items with Guard don't stack. That is a really small concern Smiley. Dual wielding folks can lump it until feats representing those styles come along. It also cuts way down on the Guard upgrade shenanigans.
3480  Products / Spycraft 2.0 / Re: Question on Street Knights on: December 07, 2009, 03:07:28 AM
He can either do full tilt damage to the target (and only the target) OR do collision to both him and the target. How does that sound? He should never be getting full tilt AND collison.
Pages: 1 ... 230 231 [232] 233 234 ... 341


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