Back to Crafty Games Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 04, 2015, 06:25:38 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.

+  Crafty Games Forum
|-+  Recent Posts
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10

 11 
 on: Today at 02:06:24 AM 
Started by Antilles - Last post by Antilles
Mr. A: Yeah, more or less. The distribution's correct, but they can still move a bit around so their exact positions may differ when combat starts.

Ares: Ehhh, I'm thinking Excel is the wrong tool for the job, here. I'm finding that file/setup very... cumbersome, I guess.

 12 
 on: Today at 02:02:21 AM 
Started by RusVal - Last post by Antilles
Unknown at the moment, all this was revealed at the PAX panel last weekend, AAFAIK there is no video released of that panel yet.

 13 
 on: Today at 01:52:00 AM 
Started by RusVal - Last post by OverNinja
Whelp, I done gone and made a thread to try to create a "Crafty Company" for XCOM 2, and then what do I learn?  You can save and share your soldiers over the cloud with your friends.  So, redundant thread is redundant.  But what the heck, I'll try to keep it going regardless.

Which cloud? Steam?

 14 
 on: Today at 01:45:26 AM 
Started by Crafty_Pat - Last post by TKDB
That's a rather draconian reading the interaction of straight line and swoop.
I mean, I get that the intent is obviously for Charging Basics to enable these monsters to swoop, just saying it seems like making it actually work requires a rather ad-hoc exception to the usual rules for that feat and the Run action it's based on. I'm not getting why the basic common-sense definition of a straight line should bend in this instance.

Consider the following situation of character A, mounted on a hippogriffon, charging character B with a lance (assuming A does not have Spear Basics or anything else to increase his reach beyond the total of Reach 2 a typical character with a lance would have).


Character A needs to get to one of the x-marked squares to reach B. If he's charging on the ground, interpreting that diagram as a top-down view and ignoring the yellow line, the green paths to points 1 and 2 are obviously straight lines, perfectly valid. If A is in the air, and the yellow line is the ground, point 2 is of course inaccessible, but the point 1 is still fine. But the path to point 3 is definitely not a straight line, and it certainly seems off to me if the hippogriff-rider is on the ground; while it certainly is appropriate conceptually for the path a flyer might take, I don't think it's a good idea to let the same character use the same feat more flexibly if his mount's in the air rather than on the ground. If this is a flying charger scenario, where the yellow line is the ground, that leaves only the path to point 1 (or something generally similar, perhaps at a slightly different angle or stopping earlier along the path) as valid, but it's not much of a "swoop" in the sense I have in mind. I'd call it more of a (shallow) dive; as a hit-and-run attack, it doesn't really allow the flyer to maintain much altitude or distance.

So, I guess what I'm getting at here is to try to clarify: Is it the "swoop" that you think I'm being draconian on, or the "straight line"? I have no particular quibble if flying chargers being unable to regain altitude after the attack is intentional; it's a bit different from my intuitive expectation for things like the griffon and wyvern, but that's no big issue, and it's consistent with the general system principle of making sure attackers can be attacked back. But if you mean to say that the Run action's restriction to a "straight line" ought to bend a bit for flying chargers...well, I'm just inclined to say a straight line is a straight line, and I don't see why the straightness of a straight line should vary for the same character depending on whether his mount is airborne or on the ground. I'm particularly leery of giving extra ad hoc exemptions to flyers beyond what the rules afford, given that flight is a pretty potent and useful ability to begin with. Plus there's the fact that there's a feat specifically for addressing the straight-line restriction, so it raises the question of just how much curve is allowed before you need Mobility Basics to pull it off.

Another option besides what you are suggesting would be to give characters like that both Charging Basics and Surge of Speed; they make use of their Charge, and then use one of their free non-attack half-actions to retreat.
True. I just figured charge attack was the most straightforward adjustment, plus it has the nice bonus of not altering existing XP totals.

 15 
 on: September 03, 2015, 09:26:47 PM 
Started by Morgenstern - Last post by RusVal
Beyond Earth: Rising Tide - Hybrid Affinities

 16 
 on: September 03, 2015, 06:48:46 PM 
Started by RusVal - Last post by RusVal
Whelp, I done gone and made a thread to try to create a "Crafty Company" for XCOM 2, and then what do I learn?  You can save and share your soldiers over the cloud with your friends.  So, redundant thread is redundant.  But what the heck, I'll try to keep it going regardless.

 17 
 on: September 03, 2015, 01:48:12 PM 
Started by Crafty_Pat - Last post by Mutt
Another option besides what you are suggesting would be to give characters like that both Charging Basics and Surge of Speed; they make use of their Charge, and then use one of their free non-attack half-actions to retreat.

 18 
 on: September 03, 2015, 12:41:57 PM 
Started by Crafty_Pat - Last post by Krensky
That's a rather draconian reading the interaction of straight line and swoop.

 19 
 on: September 03, 2015, 12:27:03 PM 
Started by Namewithheld - Last post by Namewithheld
I whipped this up for one of my FC games.

I'm kinda proud of it, so here it is!

Mana-Tank

Cover (Full), Overrun (5d6), 2 Light Cannons (-2 to hit, Load 11, 5d6 damage, 18-20 Crit, 100 ft x 6 range) NOTE: With the gunner's aides and feats, the cannons fire, then need a round to reload, then fire

Speed: 25 (Run: 45)
Travel: 4 MPH
Size (defense): L (8 )
Occ: 6 (1 Captain and 1 Pilot, 2 Gunner, 2 Loaders)
Consistancy: Hard (+2) 5
Complexity: 40

Crew:
   Captain (26 XP)
      Medium Folk, 30 ft Walker, 10 in all stats
      Ini: III, Attack I, Defense: I, Resistance: I, Comp: III, Health: III
         Sig Skills: Tactics III, Resolve III
      Battle Planning I (Fire at Will!, No Prisoners!)
      Coordinated Attack, Coordinated Move, Coordinated Strike

   Pilot (19 XP)
      Medium Folk 30 ft Walker, 10 in all stats
      Ini: III, Attack I, Defense: I, Resistance: I, Comp: III, Health: III
         Sig Skills: Ride V
      Horseman Mastery

   Gunner (22 XP)
      Medium Folk 30 ft Walker, 10 in all Stats
      Ini: III, Attack III, Defense I, Resistance: I, Comp: III, Health: III
         Sig Skills: Notice II
      Siege Basics, Siege Mastery, Quick Draw

   Gunner (22 XP)
      Medium Folk 30 ft Walker, 10 in all Stats
      Ini: III, Attack III, Defense I, Resistance: I, Comp: III, Health: III
         Sig Skills: Notice II
      Siege Basics, Siege Mastery, Quick Draw

   Loader (15 XP)
      Medium Folk 30 ft Walker, 10 in all Stats
      Ini: III, Attack: I, Defense: I, Resistance: I, Comp: III, Health: I
         Sig Skills: Resolve III
      Iron Will

   Loader (15 XP)
      Medium Folk 30 ft Walker, 10 in all Stats
      Ini: III, Attack: I, Defense: I, Resistance: I, Comp: III, Health: I
         Sig Skills: Resolve III
      Iron Will

 20 
 on: September 03, 2015, 11:39:27 AM 
Started by Crafty_Pat - Last post by TKDB
Should flying monsters with Charging Basics, such as griffons and wyverns, have the charge attack NPC quality instead? The intent seems for them to make swooping attacks, but Charging Basics (being based on the Run action, which must be in a straight line) doesn't really allow for actual swooping unless you also give them Mobility Basics. Charge attack would do the trick, though (free move, attack, then move away), at least assuming the monster can deal with the adjacency issue. And handily enough the switch wouldn't alter the overall XP total as it's the same cost as the feat.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10


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