RolePlay onLine RPoL Logo

, welcome to All Men Are Brothers - The Prequel

22:07, 17th June 2024 (GMT+0)

Your opinions on possible rules.

Posted by GMFor group 0
Irfan
player, 24 posts
Scholar, Spheres of Might
Thu 7 Feb 2019
at 23:51
  • msg #22

Re: Your opinions on possible rules

2 (Background)skills * .5 (Consolidated) skills  = 2 background skills per Level or 1?
Effects that grant extra skill point per level(E.G. Human Racial + Consolidated Skills = .5 per level or 1 skill?


Consolidated skills = Background skill(s) should (usually)go into a thematic background and possibly unique profession or craft skill now?

I have Profession scribe since it's my actual background even though all the skills it would use or encompass were rolled into Influence. Trying to decide on a second one, if i get a second one.

-------------------------------------------

(each time a creature's vigor and wounds drop by 1/4, they receive a -1 penalty on all attack rolls, saving throws, skill checks, ability checks, AC and caster level).

Vigor or Wounds, or Vigor and Wounds.  (do dead people get -8 (-4 when vigor hits 0, and -4 when wounds reach 0?) Do they stack but have a cap?(say -4), do we just use the worst of the two?
This message was last edited by the player at 23:59, Thu 07 Feb 2019.
GM
GM, 99 posts
Fri 8 Feb 2019
at 03:13
  • msg #23

Re: Your opinions on possible rules

Background skills are not subject to the 0.5 of consolidated because background skills aren't part of the consolidated skills. Background skills are:

Appraise
Artistry
Craft
Knowledge (engineering)
Lore
Profession

Everything else (human racial trait, favotire class bonus, Int mod, class skill points ect...) are reduced by half.

It's vigor AND wounds and yes, they do stack. Feats that lower or convert these penalties into bonuses though also apply to each seperately and stack, so it balances out in the end.

What does it matter if dead people do or don't get a -8 penalty? They're dead. It's not like they can do anything that would require dice rolling.
Irfan
player, 25 posts
Scholar, Spheres of Might
Fri 8 Feb 2019
at 03:35
  • msg #24

Re: Your opinions on possible rules

Curious about how badly you can disable someone if you dedicated to it, and it factors into wound vs vigor damage choices. Someone at 0 vigor isn't out of the fight, but they are quite winded. Most things are supposed to bleed out at half wounds unless they have a reason and will to live as i understand it.

I gotta try to poke holes in the rules before they get too big to stop! Forgot about the two new skills, Artistry was a fun one you got a few side quest in with and spiced up loot.

My character was planning on taking multiple profession, but lore will fit better in practice and theme.


I Cross-Referenced Scholar's skills with the consolidated list, and it seemed they should get all the consolidated skills besides Athleticism and Acrobatics. Since they from a different system the closest i can check with is rogue. They only have access to 6 of the 12 consoldiated skill, and no one else has more then 6, let alone 10.
This message was last edited by the player at 04:08, Fri 08 Feb 2019.
GM
GM, 100 posts
Fri 8 Feb 2019
at 21:58
  • msg #25

Re: Your opinions on possible rules

The fastest way to disable someone is with dark, evil, life sapping magic (necromancy) and that stuff is frowned upon if not outright persecuted in most societies (especially if they're superstitious).

BTW, other non-core skills like knowledge martial also fall within the scope of background skills.

Psionics is just "magic of a different tradition". Anything that applies to one applies to the other and vice versa. Knowledge psionics is covered under knowledge arcana (although psionics related lore may reveal more in-depth stuff).

To determine which skills are class skills for your class in the consolidated skills rules, just look at which skills that comprise a consolidated skill are class skills for you. If all of them are then that consolidated skill is a class skill for you.
Irfan
player, 30 posts
Scholar, Spheres of Might
Sat 9 Feb 2019
at 06:21
  • msg #26

Re: Your opinions on possible rules

Appraise (Int), Bluff (Cha), Craft (Int), Diplomacy (Cha), Disable Device (Dex), Disguise (Cha), Escape Artist (Dex), Handle Animal (Cha), Heal (Wis), Intimidate (Cha), Knowledge (all) (Int), Linguistics (Int), Perception (Wis), Perform (Cha), Profession (Wis), Sense Motive (Wis), Sleight of Hand (Dex), Spellcraft (Int), Stealth (Dex), Survival (Wis), and Use Magic Device (Cha).

Knowledge all so remove all knowledge skills for simplicity
Acrobatics Acrobatics (except jumping), Escape Artist, Fly, Ride
Athletics Acrobatics (jumping), Climb, Swim
Finesse Disable Device, Sleight of Hand - Check
Influence Bluff, Diplomacy, Intimidate - Check
Nature Handle Animal - Check
Perception Perception, Sense Motive - Check
Performance Disguise, Perform - Check
Religion - Check
Society Linguistics - Check
Spellcraft Spellcraft, Use Magic Device - Check
Stealth Stealth - Check
Survival Heal, Survival - Check

Add Lore + Artistry + Appraise + Craft + Profession + Knowledge Engineering -Check

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Magic Psionic transparency is in full effect got it. Means we might seem some occult classes
This message was last edited by the player at 06:23, Sat 09 Feb 2019.
Irfan
player, 32 posts
Scholar, Spheres of Might
Sun 10 Feb 2019
at 06:21
  • msg #27

Re: Your opinions on possible rules



Closest thing to a common language would probably be found in the Ironian Theocracy?

It would probably be closer to a religious/diplomatic/royal language/high tongue or a trade language used there, and by nature be the most common language. Internally they may have some form of mandarin going on?

What holds the Ironian Theocracy together since it seems to be stable and was growing, One individuals might? a network of arranged marriages? a group of powerful individuals said enough warrring? Divine intervention?

Should we do languages by region or nation, with racial languages being more regional then racial? Elemental and Alignment type languages are independant coming from outside the prime plane, so they are probably around not living languages. I left my languages marked red on my character sheet for now.

Where are the druids? I assume they may or may not be opposed to the exalted on principle, but what role do they take? Shepards for Humanity found in small towns and rural area where clerics are few and far between? Are they a group of Outcasts holding on to the old ways, living in the spaces between civilization? Are they the  roman church, second only to the kingpriest's, and a large neutral force everyone would rather heed then start a fight with?

Are there deities, or just Exalted, are there both but deities are weakened due to large quantities of faith/devotion being channeled at Exalted and king priests.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Are Halflings present? Not keen on Kendar showing up, and Halfing's growing association with being racial thieves and cutthroats in pathfinder rubs me the wrong way. I always associated halflings with wanderlust, trade, and gypsies more then greed, malevolance and mafia.

I always had a image of gnomes living in dens or warrens like burrowing animals then having enchanted ceilings that mimic the sky above, mostly keeping to themselves unless they feel their shallow towns are threatened. They may be there but are rarely seen or felt having no unified nation or culture beyond family clans?

First Gnomish bank, Gnomes are the trustworthy but xenophobic medieval jews of europe, Their gnomish family networks and clever business management allow them to issues bank notes, loans, and investments good anywhere in the 3 kingdoms?


Side note, any major changes to the moon(s) or Sun(s) we should consider, I think Earth-like is good enough unless plot demands otherwise.
Irfan
player, 33 posts
Scholar, Spheres of Might
Mon 11 Feb 2019
at 06:17
  • msg #28

Re: Your opinions on possible rules

*Attacking with only light weapons: +2 bonus
*Thrown/Ranged weapon attack only: +2 bonus,
*Trigger weapons (guns, crossbows): +2 bonus

^SomeRanged weapons are listed twice, or are those intended to be faster ranged weapons, or explicitely called out as still qualifying for the range bonus.

By small dis you mean light weapons, or undersized and small creature weapons, do tiny weapons get a larger bonus?
This message was last edited by the player at 18:16, Tue 12 Feb 2019.
GM
GM, 104 posts
Mon 11 Feb 2019
at 07:39
  • msg #29

Re: Your opinions on possible rules

Ranged weapons aren't mentioned twice. Guns and crossbows just happen to also be ranged weapons as well. And yes, the bonuses do stack because with a gun or a crossbow you just need to point and pull the trigger. That's faster than using a bow (trust me I should know, I've used both).

Furthermore, its faster to shoot a handgun or a handcrossbow instead of a rifle or a heavy ass crossbow. 1 hand vs 2 hands I'm just saying.

And sorry, my bad I should have said "Light" weapons instead of small since that's the propper PF term.

A small creatures using a light weapon intended for a medium sized creature treat's the weapon as 1-handed for itself. For example, a shortsword for a human would be a longsword for a halfling. A longsword for a hunan would be a greatsword for a halfling.

And no, you don't get any further bonuses for using even smaller weapons (regardless whether tiny or fine or whatever).
Irfan
player, 37 posts
Scholar, Spheres of Might
Tue 12 Feb 2019
at 22:18
  • msg #30

Re: Your opinions on possible rules

I have Medical training and using the 10 hit vigor healing 1 wound system could work for it.

But what about

Heal skill: Treat Deadly Wounds*
Requirement: You must expend two uses from a healer’s kit to perform this task. You take a –2 penalty on your check for each use from a healer’s kit that you lack.

When treating deadly wounds, you can restore hit points to a damaged creature. Treating deadly wounds restores 1 wound point If you exceed the DC by 5 or more, add your Wisdom modifier (if positive) to this amount. A creature can only benefit from its deadly wounds being treated within 24 hours of being injured and never more than once per day.

DC 20 = 1 Vigor point per character level
DC 25 = 1 Vigor point per character level + your Wisdom

10 vigor to 1 wound doesn't seem right here, feels like it should heal atleast 1 wound, more if you roll better up to your attribute modifier
DC 20 to get 1-4 wounds healed once per day almost makes the 1 hour worth taking.

Action/Time: 1 hour.

Retry? Varies. Generally speaking, you can’t try a Heal check again without witnessing proof of the original check’s failure.
This message was last edited by the player at 00:44, Sun 17 Feb 2019.
GM
GM, 112 posts
Fri 8 Mar 2019
at 05:22
  • msg #31

Your opinions on possible rules

I originally wanted to make the whole "training for power" thing to be even more prevelant, encompassing classes as well (before I figured "nah, too complicated"). When you leveled up you'd gain 1 level in commoner or noble (tier 4 class, lowest tier class). Then you could retrain that class into 1 of 3 level 3 tier classes: Warrior, Expert and Adept. These 3 are like templates for better classes. You could retrain the warrior into a Fighter or Barbarian or other such full bab low/no magic classes, the expert into a rogue or monk or other such quirky classes, and the adept into better spellcasting classes such as wizard, cleric, sorcerer, oracle, witch ect... I didn't decide specifically which classes would go to tier 2 and 1, but obviously those were reserved for objectively supperioys classes such as the Path of War ones. The whole point was that the more powerful classes you wanted to be the more effort you had to put in because you had to retrain/upgrade classes 1 tier at a time, not to mention potentially have to unlock other requirements. Anyway just wanted to share that for the heck of it.

But back to the original purpose of this post, how do you guys feel about allowing the Amateur Swashbuckler feat (specifically the Parry and Ripposte deed)  to be used with 2-handed, TWF and normal 1-handed weapons rather than just 1-handed pircing finesse/light weapons? (With penalties and restrictions of course)

The way I see it, now that we've removed the iterative penalty to attacks, introduced a way to weaken/kill someone way before their hp is down (meaning bypassing vigor and damaging Wounds directly), not to mention the dozens upon dozens of 3rd party feats that increase the attack bonus, also PoW maneuvers, I felt like we needed a 2nd layer of protection in addition to AC to balance things out a bit. Parry seemed like the most reasonable choice because it was limited in both number of times it could be used per round (since it requires an Aoo action) and limited number of uses overall (since it requires panache and/or combat stamina, both of which are in short supply), thus giving the game an additional layer of strategic complexity where you'd have to prioritize defence over zone control (Aoo for attack or defence) and which attacks to stop (a judgement call on who looks like the most dangerous enemy, and based on what you've learned about him, when would be the best time to parry).
Irfan
player, 55 posts
Scholar, Spheres of Might
Fri 8 Mar 2019
at 17:14
  • msg #32

Your opinions on possible rules


Getting mildly close to the format used by Final Fantasy Tactics Advanced for the Gameboy system.

You could draw ques from 5th Edition's Reaction abilities in-addition to just the swashbuckler feat, in itself there isn't anything inherently wrong with the idea as it adds options to melee like stamina pool does.

I'd also like to get most of the advanced path of war things away from nameless npcs or elite groups, so this is a nice lower powered option that is part of a active defense they spend a feat on, it's not as omnipresent as crane style either.

For this to function properly you need more then the 1 panache amateur swashbuckler gives you(you use the 1/day you have automatically to initiate the parry, and the riposte requires having at-least 1 left,  3 panchache gives you 3 parries and 2 ripostes)

Basing this off the amateur swashbuckler feat without extra panache will only help you avoid 1 attack, with learning to riposite and parry more often requiring the branch feat extra panache.

Into the mechanics of this it helps High BaB fighters edge out lower BaB fighters or try to negate the attack of a stronger foe. Mechanically the follow up riposte seems unneeded and mess up the turn mechanics.

Thematically parrying and riposte is more for nimble/dexterous fighters then heavy armor, and probably should be capped per day/encounter by your max dex bonus  to ac as determined by your armor. Across cinematic genre's parrying is not limited by weapon types with even whips and greatswords being allowed to parry. The follow up strike usually requires a finesse or speed weapon to land an attack in the opening.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amateur Duelist: You gain a pool of Cha(Dex?) panache/duelist points each day, you may spend one point to attempt to parry an attack and gain a +2 on the roll. You must decide to use this ability during your turn, and may specify triggers for it like a readied action. A sucessful Parry does not consume the point used.

Expert Duelist: You may now use a point from your Panche/Duelist pool to riposte after a sucessful parry if you are in light armor, This attack is at a -2 for each weight category your weapon is outside of light. Landing the riposte returns 2 panache points.

Just thoughts on steamlining the process, may want to be able to spend more points to increase you hit bonus, or increase the size of the pool with a extra feat as-well. This is also high fantasy, other options include turning the opponent's weapon back on themselves, deflecting ray spells, and countering touch attacks. Nothing says F-U like melee being able to bounce a Enervation ray back at the caster, a Disintegrate ray, or the destruction's spheres blast attack. Having the subject required to be aware and planed for the attack (use parry if he shoots magic at me as a readied condition) means if the opponent is using illusion magic you don't get to parry if you didn't see that chair as a threat. The

Amateur Duelist       BaB +3
 -> Practiced Duelist BaB +3
 -> Unexpected Duel   BaB +3 If you have uncanny dodge, you may attempt a unplanned parry at -2
    -> Expert Duelist BaB +6
    -> Shiny Metal Duelist +6 Redirect magic attacks if you beat the attack roll
       -> Deadly Duelist +9/12
       -> Flashy Duelist +9/12


Just some thoughts on the subject, Amateur duelist and extra panache on their own aren't that good and without looking may not be subject to current seed/branch feat rules.
GM
GM, 113 posts
Sat 9 Mar 2019
at 05:44
  • msg #33

Your opinions on possible rules

It's possible. I played fft a lot back in the day so it may have ribbed off on me (although I don't remember squat about it now). Anyway.

You only spend panache when you parry, not when you ripposte (that's just an immediate action if parry was successful, nothing more). Furthermore, if you look at Combat stamina, you are allowed to use 5 stamina points instead of 1 panache point to use the feat (and there is an Extra Stamina feat too).

Amateur Swashbuckler is subject to seed/branching because in order to gain the Extra Panache you only need a panache pool (which Amateur provides), and since Extra Panache is one of those feats you can take multiple times (if you recall what I said about those kinds of feats), you can train for it multiple times as well without spending additional feat slots.

A ripposte attack doesn't disrupt combat anymore than an Aoo attack would.

Everyone gets at least 1 Aoo per turn (even the cluncky heavily armored knight with a greatsword) so it's not like only dexy characters can benefit from this (plus there's a 3rd party feat that lets you add Wis mod to Aoo instead of Dex). One of those restrictions/penalties I mentioned earlier was that when using a 2-handed weapon you can only parry but not ripposte. If using a non-finnesse 1-handed or light weapon, you get a -2 penalty to ripposte and you have to use the Touchè combat option. TWF is actualy suppose to be better at this than a 1-handed fencing sword because in reality that's how it was meant to be used (you simultaneously parry with the dagger or sword while attacking with the other), but in the context of the game system when you use Parry and Ripposte with TWF you gain a +2 bonus to ether the attack or the block (basically meant to reduce the panalty from TWF) but you have to use both even if the parry fails (so you have to spend an immediate action of you can) and you get a -2 penalty to AC and further Parries you might make against attacks from any other enemy until the start of your next turn (it's basically like the samurai/chevalier challenge class ability. You've focused on 1 enemy to the detrement of all others.

You say high bab classes can use this to reign over mid bab classes, however if they do this (choosing to stop the weaker attacks) they are leaving themselves open to attacks from stronger enemies (high bab as well), and they are also not using Aoo for zone controlling.

Finally, you are always looking at this from the perspective of you vs npcs. Don't you think npcs deserve a chance against your PoW maneuvers and attacks?

Some other things you made me consider and I want to bring up:
-If we're taking cues from 5e then we can make it so that swift actions and immediate actions aren't mutually exclusive. The swift can be the same as 5e's bonus action and immediate action xan fill in the role of the reaction action.
-I'm ganna rule this right now: A character cannot use Parrying or Counter maneuvers if they have their Dex denied (whether because they're flat-footed or attacked by an invisible enemy or a rogue they didn't perceive is breaking stealth or an enemy successfully feinted or whatever else). This should give feinting more importance because it's vastly underused in PF, for justifiable reasons. What's the point of dumping so many feats into an ability that may or may not successfully lower the enemy's AC by a few points, and that's assuming the enemy even has positive Dex mod.
-Borrowing from Elephant in the Room, Power Attack, Combat Expertese, Finnesse, Piranha attack, Reckless, Deadly Aim, Touchè and such (in case I missed any at the moment) are combat options rather than feats you have to waste feat slots on.
-Just like Signature Deed, there can be a Signature Combat Maneuver or Efficient Combat Maneuvers feat that would reduce the stamina cost of a maneuver(s) by half (rounded up to the higher whole number in case of odd numbers). This can make Parry cost only 3 stamina instead of 5, making it more viable for builds that don't want to rely solely on Amateur Swashbuckler. I also always intended to tie in PoW maneuves with combat stamina or something similar somehow (haven't worked out the kinks yet) in order to nerf or limit them a little since they're objectively OP.
-There are already feats and fighter class options that deal with messing up rays and ranged attacks. (Melee Touch attacks are already subject to Parry if I'm not mistaken?)

The point is, I want to reduce the introduction to new feats and stuff to a bare absolutely necessary minimum, working within the already established system whenever possible. There are already 3rd party feats called Parry and such that can already do many of the stuff you suggested or would require a little adjustment. I'm also skidish about allowing characters to stop spells using feats too easily since that takes away uniqueness from classes that can already do this via class abilities (such as the vanguard, monk or direlock off the top of my head).
This message was last edited by the GM at 07:45, Sat 09 Mar 2019.
Irfan
player, 57 posts
Scholar, Spheres of Might
Sun 10 Mar 2019
at 08:40
  • msg #34

Your opinions on possible rules

Combat reflexes exists for every class aswell, so limiting it only by AoO would be bad.

I mentioned dex/light armor as it is thematically in there area based on tropes.

Limiting it to a pool gives reasources to use which is nice, having it be constantly availible would be bad as it dramatically increase dice rolls to land attack.

It's harder online to declare you are going to use X,Y or Z before a attack roll without knowing the results hence creating free version of the readied action. I'd use X if this happens, instead of waiting to roll the hit or damage till the player says no.

One instance i've ran into is a player using a immediate action to teleport out of melee after they know if an attack hit or how damaging it was. Having them specify conditions to trigger a reactionary ability makes sense here since stopping before every attack post to ask would be tedious.

For the feint bit, that makes sense, the question is where uncanny dodge fits, because feint explcitly allows sneak attack through uncanny dodge. Could some with uncanny dodge parry a hidden/invisible attack since they aren't denied dex. Uncanny dodge users usually have light armor restrictions.

Riposte won't work with only Amatuer due to the 1 point, without extra panche, so it will take training to hit back, which is nice. Not have to spend a second feat slot makes this more manageable as you listed.

I'd be ok with allowing riposte and parry to move under stamina pool as a combat option as it already is.

There is the option of reducing the generic 5 stamina cost To do something cool, to make the actions have costs like ki pool, 1 or 2 points extremly rarely 3.

There is room for power attack to cost 1 stamina to activate for a round, which doesn't strike me as a terrible idea. The two options  Parry and riposte would be 2 to parry with free riposte if sucessful, or 1 stamina to parry and one to riposte.

Extra stamina is a bad feat when most stamina abilities cost 5.

Since a riposte is a AoO, normally i wouldn't inflict twf penalties since twf does not normally let you hit twice on a AoE.

So -4 parryriposte if twohanded, +/-0 if one handed, +2 if dual wielding (two weapon, shield bashing, double weapon.) Could easily give a bonus on parries to twf, and probably over penalize 2h fighting.


I'm afraid my character will be hurt quite a bit early on if people start blocking touch attacks like acid flask or flash bangs with melee weapons. As a army instructor i'd consider it useful training.
This message was last edited by the player at 08:57, Sun 10 Mar 2019.
GM
GM, 115 posts
Sun 10 Mar 2019
at 15:11
  • msg #35

Your opinions on possible rules

I was merely saying there are other ways to increase your Aoos than just combat reflexes.

Well I thought it was common sense knowledge for pbp games but I'll make it official all the same:
Aoos, parries, counters and other sorts of immediate actions are all treated as readied actions (meaning you have to list the conditions under which they would trigger BEFORE you want to use them). No retroactive activations or "mother May-I" prompting after every instance.

There are certainly ways to keep your Dex in circumstances under which you'd normally have your dex denied (such as the Blind Fighting feat and Uncanny Dodge as you said) and in such cases you would be able to parry. I've yet to see an ability/feat or combination there of, that would make one completely immune to having his dex denied.

Riposte doesn't cost a panache, only Parrying does. Also you regain 1 panache point if you crit or kill/defeat so it's not like you're completely left at the mercy of combat stamuna and Extra Panache.

You do not need to spend stamina to activate a combat option (like power attack). The cost listed in the stamina rules about power attack was intended for selective activation. Normally, if you chose to use power attack you were stuck with the atk penalty and dmg buff till your next turn. Combat stamina allowed for you to turn it off or on prematurely (useful when using multiple attacks and iterative penalties start being an issue). Another thing about stamina related maneuvers is that each attack could possibly have more than 1 maneuver (example: you could use both, combat expertiese, vital strike and the standard stamina attack buff on 1 attack). Stamina is spent on the attack action itself so by spending only 1 stamina point you'd be getting the benefits of both combat expertese (reduces the atk penalty) and the standard atk buff (exxectively having increased your attack by 2 instead of 1). But no, I will not be decreasing the cost for Parry and riposted by 3 or 4. I'm open to the idea of rewarding those that put in the effort to improve their swordsmanship (by using a feat like Signature Deed or some such) but not an outright decrease. Combat stamina is meant as the trump card not the go-2 bread and butter option.

Oh, I forgot that twf didn't apply to all attack (like power attack) but just when actually using both to attack. My bad.

I'm still against riposting with 2 handed weapons (maybe with a stamina cost but otherwise no), as for parrying...lets just say you have to use Touchè (no benefit, just penalty) and you don't get the benefits for using a large weapon (parrying comes with a penalty based on weapon size difference). This way you'd have to plan using the parrying ahead of time, it would be kinda like assuming a defensive stance (unless like power attack, you use stamina to prematurely activate/de-activate it).
1-handed remains the same.
TWF...will get additional benefits as you ramp up other twf related feats (like two weapon defence for example, or shield bash), but otheriwse you get a +2 bonus on ether the attack or the riposte and are always treated as if you made an attack with both weapons even if only parrying (meaning you get the twf penalty if using 2 weapons, or if using a sword and shield you lose the shield AC).

Parry only works on MELEE attacks. Cut from the sky doesn't work on ranged touch attacks, and Shield/Ray Deflection feat (even though they apply to ranged rouch attacks) doesn't work on splash attacks. So I think your safe. Besides, I doubt you'd be stupid enough to go picking fights with npcs that look THAT competent when you're still low level.
GM
GM, 121 posts
Sat 23 Mar 2019
at 05:59
  • msg #36

Your opinions on possible rules

Guys, this isn't exactly a game system rules issue but it is an issue all the same. Combat takes a fucking long time when done over pbp. More so with multiple players. It's not just the long time it takes to resolve rounds but the prompting and uncertainty of dice rolls. Using the grayhawk initiative will help with this but I think we can do better, plus not everyone might be comfortable with that system. I have several suggestions, each with their own strengths and weaknessess:

1) When a comat situation emerges we schedule a meet on my roll20.net game (it's a site for roleplaying in real time).
Pros: An encounter is resolved in less than an hour than possibly weeks.

Cons:
-Setting a time and date that fits all might be hard.
-People might not feel comfortable doing voice chats (Solution: Use real-time text messahing only)
-On the spot pressure might not give the player a chance to consider the best possible option.
-No creative writing/images.

2) The gm does dice rolls for your character that would occure out of their turn (such as a save throw during the enemy's turn, or parrying or using a counter maneuver).
Pros:
-Solves the prompting problem.
-Avoids abusing abilities that occure only before knowing the result of a dice roll or action.

Cons:
-People generally like rolling their own dice. It's fun.
-Doesn't trust the gm not to fidge the dice (Solution: 1 of the players can host a game, the gm will join it and do all the dice rolling there for the characters in this game (propperly labling each roll of course). As a player in the alt game he won't have the ability to fidge the dice even if he wanted to)

3) Just like the previous point, enemy dice rolls that occure during your are subject to the same problems. If the gm gets to roll his saves and parries and counter maneuvers after seeing your attack and damage rolls, how do you know the enemy decided to focus blocking/defending against one of your allies (who rolled better) rather than you? It would also slow the game or at least make it less flexible if he has to roll saves after the fact. A solution to this would be the players get told the basic stats of their enemies (AC, HP, saves ect...) and their intentions, that way they'll immediately know if an attack is successful and can roll saves parries and abilities for them, OR we use active spellcasting variant rule (explination: This rule flips the save and spell DC dynamic on its head. Instead of Spell DC being a static 10 + bonuses and the save being a 1d20 + bonuses, with active spellcasting the spellcaster rolls a 1d20 + bonuses against a static enemy save throw of 10 + bonuses (it's like a take 10 but for save throws). If we really want to get crazy we can have both be a 1d20 plus bonuses.)

Pro:
-Combat would go faster.
-Grayhawk initiative won't be necessary.

Cons:
-Knowing what the enemy can do takes away the suspence and mystery.
-Pkayer meta knowledge would influence in-game behaviour of characters.
-Rolling for other characters than your own can be annoying.
-It would make combat more bland.
(Possible solution: Only the enemy uses active spellcasting. This way you don't have to roll dice for enemies or have the surprise spoiled, and the gm isn't rolling for your character. But it also takes away control from you (no dice rolling since your characters's defences are static, just like AC).

...you know as I write this it occured to me that instead of a rule mechanic this would make an interesting feat. A feat that lets you roll a 1d20 + whatever instead of a 10 + whatever on any normally static stuff (like AC, spell DC, ect...). It would certainly make games more chaotic and up to chance. Nevermind that was just me rambling.

So anyway, tell me what you guys think and if you have any ideas/suggestions feel free to voice them. Even if its a bad idea  it might inspire me to come up with a good one (weirder things have happened).
Irfan
player, 106 posts
Scholar, Spheres of Might
Sat 4 May 2019
at 07:36
  • msg #37

Your opinions on possible rules

GM
GM, 155 posts
Sat 4 May 2019
at 08:49
  • msg #38

Your opinions on possible rules

Sure, no problem.
GM
GM, 175 posts
Sat 11 May 2019
at 22:04
  • msg #39

Your opinions on possible rules

Hey guys I need your opinion on a houserule for the Sacred Geometry feat.
https://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats...ats/sacred-geometry/

Normally, when you're playing around a table with people you're under pressure and constrained by time so making the math for the feat as written is justifiable, however in a pbp game you have all the time in the world plus aids like calculators and such. So I figured I should make it a little harder. Here's what I came up with so far:

1) You are not allowed to multiply or divide with 1 and 0.
2) You have to get all 3 Prime Constants instead of just 1.
3) Both.

What do you think?
This message was last edited by the GM at 22:05, Sat 11 May 2019.
Irfan
player, 120 posts
Scholar, Spheres of Might
Sun 12 May 2019
at 06:54
  • msg #40

Your opinions on possible rules

In reply to GM (msg # 39):

I think it is a outlier feat that is very munchkiny.

I'd prefer to replace it with 3.5's sudden meta magic or class talent/arcana that lets you spend your class pool to use metamagic without increasing the spell level.

As far as in game i'd consider it a mythic level feat, something a kingpriest could reasonably have, but lesser creatures would have to jump through hoops to get.

Magus arcana: Sudden metamagic: you can spend X points from your spell pool instead of increasing a spell's level when applying metamagic.

silent or still = +1, so eats 2 arcane points each, or 4 for both.


I'm also a fan of attribute exhaustion, you character can try to bend the rules/descriptions, but they takes ability damage that can only be offset by miracle, time, or wish.
GM
GM, 176 posts
Sun 12 May 2019
at 10:04
  • msg #41

Your opinions on possible rules

Actually, Sacred Geometry is very integrated in the very lore of the world. It was invented by the tengu and the reason for their rise to prominence. It's so common in Pintherast that when someone thinks of a tengu wizard, their long spellcasting followed by unimaginable devastation is the 1st thing that comes to mind. It's like their signature thing. Now granted, it may have spilled over into the rest of the world since then (Ironia certainly tried copying and researching the technique, and there is of course the occasional Celestial Dragon that decided to leave Mariejois) so it's not unheard of for someone other than a Pintherast tengu to use it, but's still their defining feature.

That being said, Sacred Geometry adds an element of risk to spellcasting (if you succeed to win big, but if you fail you get nothing) so it requires good judgement on whether to use it, adding another layer to tactics in combat, however it's unlimited in use. Sudden meta magic (and there is a PF equivalent to it, as well as class features that let you spend ability uses/pool points in exchange for meta cost) is a 100% guarantee of success (of casting the spell I mean) but limited usage.

This characteristic of Sacred Geometry is what ties in with what it represents in-game. Tengu pride themselves on using magic "the smart way", on efficiency in the use of magic, on constructing spells in such a way that "no magic is wasted" thus maximizing their effectiveness through minimum effort. Think of it as Archimedes lifting giant boulders 10 men couldn't lift, with only one hand just by adding a pole to the equation. It ties in with other such abilities, like Arithmacy and Path of Numbers. It's like splitting the atom for them. To them magic is a science, not a mystical mystery.


The exhaustion aspect you are referring to is an optional drawback when constructing spellcasting traditions in Spheres of Power. And yes, the tengu do have more than 1 spellcasting tradition (in fact they know all of them, they're just not all popular because, of course, their traditions are superior to all other, of course, of course).
Liv Vladislav
player, 4 posts
Thu 27 Jun 2019
at 21:21
  • msg #42

Your opinions on possible rules

Adopted Template: You are of a none human race or a human adopted by another race.

Level Adjust +0
Age: You grow and mature as a human would.
Languages: As the Adopting race.
You many use either Race's  Abilities scores bonus, this is chosen at first level and can't be changed.
Human Blooded: Just has humans have everything imaginable floating around in some section of their gene pool from gods to Cthulu, you have a bit more then the usual human in your ancestery. If you aren't human, your type changes to include human. You count as human for the purposes of spell that affect humanoids and for magical effects such as the bane property in addition to your usual race and types.
This message was last edited by the player at 01:45, Fri 28 June 2019.
Liv Vladislav
player, 5 posts
Thu 27 Jun 2019
at 23:34
  • msg #43

Your opinions on possible rules

.

New term Respecting Allies.

You have allies you aren't trying to kill you, maybe even fighting alongside you, and then you have Respecting allies for class abilities.

Sharing teamwork, favored terrain, maybe not inspire courage, and other none magical aura like effects as needed.

Abilities normally intended for party members require other allies to respect you in a ally rich environment.


Generally Leadership feat npcs, npc companions like familiars and other class animals, party members, Helpful npcs, and anyone under your relatively immediate command or that values your input or advice is a respecting ally.

A boat captain my influence his entire, but a admiral will only influence the boat he is on. A military commander will only effect a reasonable number of nearby soldiers under his command.  Generally such abilities have a fixed area to help understand who xan be effected, this makes it's lessed fixed and more reasonable. Bards were intended to effect anyone in hearing range, but sharing tactics or bonues can be seen as learning from, training with, or sharing in an allies' strength and may not be as cut and dry.

Furthermore some allies would rather die (unusual) or consider your help as voodoo, insulting, superstisious or otherwise fake or unusable and choose trusting in what they know.
This message was last edited by the player at 23:39, Thu 27 June 2019.
Irfan
player, 197 posts
Scholar, Spheres of Might
Tue 16 Jul 2019
at 06:38
  • msg #44

Your opinions on possible rules

quote:
Ooc: Any recommendations you want to give Hana on which spells to prepare? BTW I'm changing the rules to instead of taking penalties when both vigor and wounds go down to only when wounds go down. However I'm thinking of ether doubling the penalties or making them happen at shorter increments.


As it is, it's a collasal FU i agree.

Vigor is loosely related to things like fatigued and exhausted conditions.


Wounds are pretty much spot on as is, but could include other aspects of we need to rebalance.

First I'd like to address the stacking penalty situation. It's basically kicking the player or npc after they are down and dying. They are both moral based, so the greater of the two should matter. I can see a bard displacing a vigor penalty, but a wound penalty takes real skill. Wound penalties deserve their own tracker in my opinion, but that would be complicated.


If we cap vigor at a total of -2, (at 75% and 25% respectively) That feels fair.

It's stronger then the Fatigued penalty by a mile, unless your running.

Wounds are bugging me, but in a math kind of way.

before  13 con = -13 to 0 is unconcious.
now it's 1 to 13 out of 26 is unconcious.
Personally it's harder to figure percentages when going below 0, but it had that psycological impact of dropping below 0 is a bad thing.

Wounds scaling to -4 seems fitting, -4 to everything is litterally the description of the depression/despair causing spell.

Vigor seems like it's a pool you shouldn't get punished too hard for using, It's your general physique/fitness energy,

Wounds litterally are "you would normally be dying in another campaign setting, but you've got slunk kid." These deserve to weigh you down mentally and physically.

-2 from vigor and -1 from wounds is a big deal, One strange idea would be to increase the penalties at hit dice intervals kind like a poor man's enervation, but that seems like a hassle.

Look at staggered, exhausted, and fatigued to help you decide what to do. The conditions should renain independant, but could have similar effects.

Also would like to see 5e's short rest being considered with the vigor system. Taking a hours break to breath restore (half?) vigor points feels reasonable
GM
GM, 271 posts
Tue 16 Jul 2019
at 09:14
  • msg #45

Your opinions on possible rules

Actually I was thinking of vigor doing 0 penalties regardless of how low it goes (because it's a mental frame of mind mostly, plus a bit of exhaustion and minor wounds).

Wounds is lethal damage, real life I'm bleeding/have broken bone and could die damage.

And yes, stacking is kicking a guy while he's down because that's what real life battle is like. The more injured/tired you are the less punishment you can give out and avoid. You're not Metal Bat from One Punch Man.

How about a compromise.

In the original rules, you don't add Con to vigor, 0 vigor = staggard, 1/2 wounds = disabled or unconcious and dying and wounds easily healed (like ability damage). In "dark fantasy" mode, each time vigor goes down by 1/4 you take the -1 on everything, -2 if using "gritty" mode. I made it so that vigor is larger (by allowing the Con mod to be added to it) and less punishing by not making one staggard when it hits 0 and delegating half the incurable penalties to wounds (the total is the same but it takes longer time to reach it), but making wounds harder to heal (like negative levels).

What I'm suggesting now is this, Vigor does -1 at 50% and -2 at 0%, wounds do -1 per 10% missing but they don't stack (meaning a total -9 when 2 wound points away from death). If vigor is 0, also become staggard the 1st time you take -1 from wounds. 1/2 wounds = disabled/unconscious/dying. Wounds are hard to heal. And I'll throw in the short rest from 5e, except instead of optional HD heal, you heal half vigor the 1st time you rest (and possibly some class fratures a bit), and every rest after that is half as exxective as the previous.
(affected by toughness, iron will, deathless initiate and such).

By making it -1 panalty every 10% (which should on average happen every 2 wounds unless your Con is +15), you give greater impact to and make critical hits more realistic. A big girthy guy (+15 Con) might be able to shrug off a dagger stab (x2 crit multiplier = 2 wouds) for a while but not from an axe (x3 crit = 3 wouns).
Irfan
player, 198 posts
Scholar, Spheres of Might
Tue 16 Jul 2019
at 16:14
  • msg #46

Your opinions on possible rules


quote:
By making it -1 panalty every 10% (which should on average happen every 2 wounds unless your Con is +15), you give greater impact to and make critical hits more realistic. A big girthy guy (+15 Con) might be able to shrug off a dagger stab (x2 crit multiplier = 2 wouds) for a while but not from an axe (x3 crit = 3 wouns).


I like the wound stacks at 10% part.
-5 is beyond the scope of most creatures to function under. Perhaps diehard can reduce the penalties from wounds by 4.

Toughness could add 2 vigor per level and 3 wounds.

Vigor not giving penalties is enough that short rest becomes less needed. I wanted it as a option to get rid of those penalties so the party is less likely to fail important dc 5 and 10 checks because of scrapes and being winded.
This message was last edited by the player at 16:25, Tue 16 July 2019.
Sign In