|
He doesn't sweat because if he does, he will unleash a terrible water elemental that will bring about a flood that would make Noah's look like a trickle. Said water elemental may or may not have influence on the character's actions, regardless.
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2012 05:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 07:44 |
|
|
He doesn't sweat because he is a human brain transplanted into a dog's body, and can only regulate his body temperature by panting.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2012 06:01
|
|
|
He doesn't sweat because he's the only guy who knows none of this is real.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2012 06:08
|
|
|
They're so sophisticated and classy they literally taught themselves to stop doing something as uncouth and disgusting as sweat. That kinda poo poo is for the uncultured plebes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2012 06:12
|
|
|
She doesn't sweat because they're all still inside the dream machine.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2012 06:31
|
|
|
Mystic Mongol posted:She doesn't sweat because they're all still inside the dream machine. You did a better job evoking the Total Recall vibe than I did.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2012 06:34
|
|
|
So I have a question concrning the monk Ki strike. In the description it says that you start up with 1 Ki strike each day, but in the table it shows that you have 2 at first lvl. So which one takes priority, the table or the description? It was originally 1 in the 1st escalation edition and changed to 2 so I'm guessing the table?
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2012 13:25
|
|
|
Alright, just got the okay to post this. He was considering pitching it to Pelgrane, but figured there was no harm in sharing with the goons. Stunts are a thing you do during combat to make things more interesting and deal with terrain or corner-case instances. You define a Stunt as a quick action (like Loquacious Multisyllabic Casting) and attach it to the environment (an object, a space, etc). The Stunt can then be executed like a Flexible Attack on a roll of (16-Escalation) or higher. A stunt will generally produce one of the following effects (though additional effects will still be considered): Maximize damage on an attack Add one Background to a single attack roll or one defense against the next attack Create a (save ends) condition – can be mechanical (Dazed, Weakened) or strictly narrative Basically, declare a stunt as a swift action before you spend a standard. On your standard action, if your attack hits and the d20 is equal to or higher than 16 minus the escalation dice, the stunt is successful. If the standard action has no attack roll, just roll a d20 with the same rules as previous. If attack fails, the stunt doesn't happen.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2012 17:47
|
|
|
Burning Justice posted:So I have a question concrning the monk Ki strike. In the description it says that you start up with 1 Ki strike each day, but in the table it shows that you have 2 at first lvl. So which one takes priority, the table or the description? It was originally 1 in the 1st escalation edition and changed to 2 so I'm guessing the table? I agree that since the table was changed that the table is correct. Hopefully it will be clear in the next revision (as well as the rest of the Monk class being good again).
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2012 19:05
|
|
|
I'm Fish's DM - thanks for the interest in my Stunt mechanic. I hope you folks try it out and enjoy it. I figured someone would ask why I set it up off the Escalation die as opposed to say, sighnoceros' idea with the skill check. Some of it is a matter of taste, I suppose. Skill check option is totally viable. The important thematic concept for me when thinking about it was how 13th Age handles resource management.. or rather, doesn't handle resource management. You don't pay for your awesome (such as with healing surges or carefully rationed powers); you trigger it. Almost every class has "encounter powers" (to use the 4E vernacular) that are encoded into the class' attack probabilites. They're mostly even/odd or 16+ as per the playtest document. It seemed more natural to use the game's inherent language of triggers to regulate the use of Stunts. Making the trigger number (16 - Escalation) is a little weird but I wanted to make Stunts easier as the combat progressed. Maybe there's a better way to do it but this seems to work well enough. Oh! One last important thing fish left out - Stunts do not disappear until they're triggered. A defined Stunt sticks around until someone gets to use it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 02:31
|
|
|
I really like the stunt system and how it ties action economy and escalation die together. I have an overwhelming desire to also tie it into the adventurer/champion/epic tiers, but the elegance of d20+escalation vs 16 is not something I want to gently caress around with. If this subsystem was in actual rules, I'd also want a quick rundown of example triggers and effects similar to 4e DMG's page 42. Perhaps these examples could be broken out by tier: "flip over a table/caravan/castle," etc. which would sate my need to tie tiers to DM advice. In a similar vein, a friend and I were spitballing 13th Age Zelda ideas a few days ago and an idea came up to make the Escalation Die represent an actual, in-world force that characters would be aware of. Similar to connecting a gameboy when playing Wind Waker, but also shooting for that one new element of each entry into the series (dark world reflection, world of birds in the sky, land of rail/sail/steam, etc). Along the lines of making broad setting elements into Icons, embracing abstract game mechanics into the narrative should help convey a world of magical realism.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 03:34
|
|
|
So, are you "priming" a certain bit of terrain or something? It seems like the stunt is more to determine whether there's an opportunity to do something than actually doing it, and taking advantage of the stunt is automatic. It's flatly based on the escalation die instead of "an appropriate skill" in order to facilitate that. Right? That seems really cool if so. It makes it so that your stunts just work when you go to use them, instead of your attack riding on a skill check (so no failing an acrobatics check and falling on your rear end), while still limiting them and adding some chance.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 03:38
|
|
|
fosborb posted:In a similar vein, a friend and I were spitballing 13th Age Zelda ideas a few days ago and an idea came up to make the Escalation Die represent an actual, in-world force that characters would be aware of. Similar to connecting a gameboy when playing Wind Waker, but also shooting for that one new element of each entry into the series (dark world reflection, world of birds in the sky, land of rail/sail/steam, etc). If Tingle isn't the equivalent of the Diabolist in your reskin I will be eternally disappointed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 04:17
|
|
|
@fosborb Some ideas that I've either described or have seen in use: "Dark Water" - a portal to the Elemental Plane of Water that maximizes the damage of any cold spells "Jailbait" - the target is tangled up in the bars of a prison cell (save ends); the target can not move or use ranged weapons (though could theoretically kick or cast a spell.. maybe) "Blizzard Breath" - against a yochlol in gaseous form, the target is "condensed" (save ends) effectively negating the gasesous form. This shows off how the DM can do really obnoxious mechanical things with a monster (invisibility, gaseous form, duplication) but the PCs are really only one good roll and an interesting bit of flavor away from negating it. Makes up for the lack of a dedicated Gust of Wind spell. "Blood Blade" - invoking Tempus (god of War) with a blood-stained weapon turns the blood to acid, maximizing damage (as if it were eating through armor, etc) "Table Flip" - + (relevant Background) to AC against next attack, using the table as a shield Though we haven't actually done it yet, I don't see why you couldn't do things like create difficult or dangerous terrain (the map itself Intercepts the character or deals impromptu level-appropriate damage on a failed save while moving "HERE") as well. It's just another iteration of a high roll validating narrative input (like an attack or skill roll). I'd love to see what other people do with the concept. @zachol Exactly. Defining the Stunt merely creates it or "primes" as you put it. One of my few niggling complaints with 13th Age was the lack of terrain features. Then again, I certainly didn't want to go back to a full grid setup. This way, the DM and all PCs get to set up terrain features (using an action they probably didn't have a use for anyway) and allowing the dice to (approximately) balance the use of said terrain features. By the end of a fight, there should be Stunts lying around all over the place, numbering maybe even more than the bodies.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 04:29
|
|
|
I'm putting together a simple 13th Age cheat sheet for my group with common combat actions (rallying, dying, disengaging, etc.) as well as character stat calculations (HP, Defenses, etc.) I can post it up when it's done if people are interested. I also put a quick description of my stunt rules on it. I'm totally stealing adding the Escalation Die to the roll because that's awesome. Here's the simplified rule I'm putting on the cheat sheet: Combat Stunts: May use a quick action to perform a stunt. FIRST describe how you are using the environment or special circumstances to perform the stunt (make it interesting). Then the GM may let you roll a skill check with an additional bonus equal to the Escalation Die to get an extra effect added to your next standard or move action this turn. This may be a +2 to the next attack against an enemy, some bonus damage, some movement related effect, free disengage(s), a minor condition, or something else thematic that the party and the GM can agree on. I like the simplicity of d20 + Escalation Die vs 16, but since my rules imply that it should be some special circumstances or environmental effect I want players to feel like if they want to do a stunt they have a pretty good chance of being successful most of the time. Conversely, it also allows me to set the DC based on the difficulty of the task. And lastly it's another opportunity for players to flex their Backgrounds if they have something relevant ("Here's a trick I learned fighting along the sheer cliffs of the Abyss... ") What do you guys think of those clarified/simplified rules? sighnoceros fucked around with this message at 05:55 on Jul 25, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 05:06
|
|
GOONS ARE MEAN
|
sighnoceros posted:I'm putting together a simple 13th Age cheat sheet for my group with common combat actions (rallying, dying, disengaging, etc.) as well as character stat calculations (HP, Defenses, etc.) I can post it up when it's done if people are interested. Yes, please share the cheat sheet! I like it, and the reasoning behind it, though I do miss the simplicity of a single roll. Hm. You mention adjusting the DC and using backgrounds, but those aren't reflected in the wording of the rule. How about this? Combat Stunts: May use a quick action to perform a stunt. FIRST describe how you are using one of your backgrounds to take advantage of the environment or special circumstances to perform the stunt (make it interesting). Then the GM may let you roll a skill check against a DC based on the difficulty of the stunt, with an additional bonus equal to the Escalation Die. Success gives you an extra effect added to your next standard or move action this turn. This effect may be a +2 to the next attack against an enemy, some bonus damage, some movement related effect, free disengage(s), a minor condition, or something else thematic that the party and the GM can agree on.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 05:51
|
|
|
I like your re-write, here's the cheat sheet: Word Doc: https://dl.dropbox.com/u/20990367/13th%20Age%20Player%20Game%20Aid.doc PDF: https://dl.dropbox.com/u/20990367/13th%20Age%20Player%20Game%20Aid.pdf You guys should let me know if there's anything else you think should go on it. I may put one together for the GM too with skill DCs, impromptu damage, DIY monster stats, and maybe even a sampling of monster powers to throw on DIY monsters. Edit: Changed to .doc, added .pdf sighnoceros fucked around with this message at 06:21 on Jul 25, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 05:56
|
|
|
Just wondering what the reasoning is that some attacks are Stat vs AC and some are Stat + Level vs AC, in particular the Rogue attacks and powers seem to be mixed and I'm curious as to why?
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 06:28
|
|
|
I would honestly be surprised if there were any attacks that didn't add +level. I suspect it's just a format issue... just like 4e doesn't bother to say to add half your level in the power blocks, only in 13th age they haven't decided on a unified power format yet. Prerelease, and all that. I'm tired of grappling awkwardly with my monk critique. http://pastebin.com/srkWzQM0 That is way too many words. Any suggestion for a core thesis, instead of this gruesome wall of text?
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 09:22
|
|
|
I'm reserving this spot for a later edit (probably over lunch). Counter-proposal to keep the elegant single die roll but bring in some of the flexibility of the skill check (seems most people want both): Have two Stunt targets at (16- Escalation) and (11 - Escalation) that the DM can assign when the Stunt is described. Further reasoning to be added. EDIT 1: My rationale for this new proposal assumes a few things. First, if players know a DC will be set for an action, they will attempt to leverage their best numerical values in the attempt. Second, the rolled value that is required for a well-prepared character (+5 Background, +4 modifier, +2 level vs. 25) to take on a Ridiculously Hard task in the lowest tier is 14 ± 1. This value increases by about 2-3 for each tier. The Hard tasks start at 9 ± 1 and follow the same progression. Thus as a skill check shortcut, a 16 is a fairly accurate 'naked' roll (within about 10% or so) at just about any point in the campaign lifepan to require for a well-trained character to do something crazy. An 11 is also then a good estimation to do something slightly less crazy. I can only speak for myself here, but I pretty much only think in terms of "crazy" and "less crazy" for Stunt difficulties. If the character is less skilled, the 16 then becomes something "less crazy" and the 11 "relatively normal." Sure, there's some loss of granularity. If we really like the simple one-roll Stunt interpretation, we need to accept some granularity loss. I try to make it up by adding the Background value itself back in for whatever action the Stunt is going to bolster, but that's just me. Point being, if you're interested in trying to get the best of both worlds from the skill check option and the original single-roll option, I believe this is a fair compromise. RyvenCedrylle fucked around with this message at 18:11 on Jul 25, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 14:41
|
|
|
Mystic Mongol posted:I'm tired of grappling awkwardly with my monk critique. I don't think it's gruesome. Seemed readable and made its points perfectly fine to me. Megaman's Jockstrap fucked around with this message at 16:21 on Jul 25, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 15:39
|
|
|
Mystic Mongol posted:I would honestly be surprised if there were any attacks that didn't add +level. I suspect it's just a format issue... just like 4e doesn't bother to say to add half your level in the power blocks, only in 13th age they haven't decided on a unified power format yet. Prerelease, and all that. I agree with jockstrap. I think you did a great job explaining the issues that you have. Since you have numerous issues numerous words are required. You have done a much better analysis and breakdown than I could have.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 16:00
|
|
|
Same here, it explains well the reasons why the E2 monk has been reduce horribly. Not sure if this is also important but something else I noticed. While some features like flurry, Iron Body and Still mind were outright changed or removed, a some ability simply were made weaker by taking parts of the previous version into feats. Ki Strike: A Weird exception, in E1 you could gain an extra one for a feat, but now you you have to use a whole track for it. That said, you start with 2(?) Ki strike this time. Monkey Paws Lotus: The damaged done by the opening was default but now requires a feat. Path of the Patient Mantis: This one's opening now requires a adventurer and a champion feat to act like it's previous version (d8 damage and it being cumulative) and even then it's only once per day. Also like to add that Swift water seems like a good track, but only once at champion lvls as the feat there makes it so you don't loose health.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 16:27
|
|
|
Mystic Mongol posted:I would honestly be surprised if there were any attacks that didn't add +level. I suspect it's just a format issue... just like 4e doesn't bother to say to add half your level in the power blocks, only in 13th age they haven't decided on a unified power format yet. Prerelease, and all that. This seems fine and makes the point well. Don't be so such a tough critic on yourself! sighnoceros posted:I like your re-write, here's the cheat sheet: Oh my goodness thank you so much. I have actually been pecking away at one of these for about a week but it has been on the low end of my priority list. You saved me some time and I thank you for it! (btw, don't be surprised if this shows up in our game on Friday!)
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 18:08
|
|
|
RyvenCedrylle posted:Thus as a skill check shortcut, a 16 is a fairly accurate 'naked' roll (within about 10% or so) at just about any point in the campaign lifepan to require for a well-trained character to do something crazy. An 11 is also then a good estimation to do something slightly less crazy. I can only speak for myself here, but I pretty much only think in terms of "crazy" and "less crazy" for Stunt difficulties. If the character is less skilled, the 16 then becomes something "less crazy" and the 11 "relatively normal." I completely agree with this and I came to similar conclusions regarding difficulty of the actual roll, and I was planning on using the base impromptu DCs rather than more granular DCs anyway. I think both methods are perfectly usable and it's up to the group/GM what they want to use. I personally think there's a benefit to being able to thematically tie your background to the roll, even if the end result is the same % chance of success. I also like being able to make two separate rolls, because there may be situations where the stunt can succeed where the attack itself fails to "hit", possibly helping to mitigate the effects of a botched attack roll. This could still happen in your system, but is less likely where both effects are tied to the same roll, and a particularly low roll still results in a miss for both. I haven't tested my system a whole lot (trouble getting my group together) so can't comment on how much the additional roll affects the pace of combat. I am probably also going to take your idea of setting up "stunt zones" that can be used by other characters in addition to the options I laid out before, I think that's awesome and definitely in the spirit of a stunt system. In general I am trying to learn to err on the side of letting characters be "more awesome" rather than "less awesome". My stunt system was inspired by my limited experience with Dungeon World. Dungeon World combat is strongly narrative, and it allows players to create situations that, though they may not provide a BONUS to an action for another player, may provide OPPORTUNITIES they wouldn't otherwise have. So maybe you unbalance the ogre which allows someone else to blast it off a ledge. They might not get a bonus to their attack, but if it makes sense in the narrative and everyone thinks it's awesome then you can generally go for it. Likewise, FATE makes use of the aspect-tagging system where I can give an enemy some aspect that my ally can capitalize on for free, that's the kind of thing I was trying to go for with my system. Overemotional Robot posted:Oh my goodness thank you so much. I have actually been pecking away at one of these for about a week but it has been on the low end of my priority list. You saved me some time and I thank you for it! No problem, let me know how it goes and if there's any other information you end up needing that could be put on the sheet! I could easily make it two pages for a duplex sheet if there's much more that makes sense to add. sighnoceros fucked around with this message at 21:16 on Jul 25, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 19:08
|
|
|
sighnoceros posted:I also like being able to make two separate rolls, because there may be situations where the stunt can succeed where the attack itself fails to "hit", possibly helping to mitigate the effects of a botched attack roll. This could still happen in your system, but is less likely where both effects are tied to the same roll, and a particularly low roll still results in a miss for both.. I've done something like this for monsters and would consider it if the PCs ever asked - I give some monsters "6-" abilities, such that if they miss, they salvage their attack as a parry or as energy to be tapped into for the next action, etc. My players just do so much damage on missed attacks that I haven't bothered bringing it up. I too have played a little Dungeon World and FATE but I feel more of my inspiration is coming from the newest iteration of Margaret Weis' Marvel RPG.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 21:25
|
|
|
RyvenCedrylle posted:I've done something like this for monsters and would consider it if the PCs ever asked - I give some monsters "6-" abilities, such that if they miss, they salvage their attack as a parry or as energy to be tapped into for the next action, etc. My players just do so much damage on missed attacks that I haven't bothered bringing it up. ONE player does a lot of damage on a miss. The rest of us do level damage on a miss.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 22:28
|
|
|
-Fish- posted:ONE player does a lot of damage on a miss. The rest of us do level damage on a miss. YOU do level damage on a miss. Reese took a feat or two; his miss damage is frequently nearly as good as his hit damage.
|
|
#
?
Jul 25, 2012 23:28
|
|
|
Mystic Mongol posted:monk critique Well put. I would have been more specific in a few places and upped the word count even higher, so bravo on your concise thoughts. I didn't get a chance to mess around with the monk in our playtest games, but that last line in parentheses at the end is absolutely something I agree with. Why are they giving the cleric the highest melee damage potential in the game? That doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me - barbarians being the only class who could natively use d12 weapons without a lot of rigamarole was cool, and I don't understand why that was changed. Digging the stunt system! This is absolutely being used in my new campaign.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2012 13:07
|
|
|
I've been following this thread a while, and this game looks pretty cool. The only issue is my current gaming group is a bunch of huge 1st edition/houserule fans, and most of us are either fencers or SCA armored fighters, or both, so we're at least somewhat familiar with which end of a sword to hold. We play on a very rigid grid, where it's ruled that some weapons take more space to swing (try whipping around a broom handle and not hitting someone standing 5 feet next to you, it's harder than it looks) and clerics have to make an attack roll to heal someone currently in combat as they're considered to be bobbing and weaving out of their opponent's way, things like that. Would 13th age be adaptable to a group like this, or would I have to get a less rigid group together in order to enjoy this game? $50 is a bit steep for pure reading material.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2012 17:42
|
|
|
13th Age isn't really built to work in that kind of simulation-heavy environment as far as I have seen. It doesn't even use a grid at all. Some of the RP systems you could probably steal but it's probably not worth it to buy the book just for that honestly.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2012 17:46
|
|
|
TwoQuestions posted:Would 13th age be adaptable to a group like this, or would I have to get a less rigid group together in order to enjoy this game? $50 is a bit steep for pure reading material. Movement and position are more abstracted in 13A, you may like it or you may not. The advantage is accommodating your increased weapon ranges wouldn't be very hard, but the tactical position stuff is a lot less important.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2012 17:53
|
|
|
I know this game is still in playtest, so it may seem silly to present this rules question, but I'm looking at the Wizard spell Energy Bolt. The spell has a line that states "Choose cold, fire, or lightning when you cast the spell," but the Hit line says "3d6 force damage," with no reference to the energy type you chose. In fact, this choice isn't referenced again in the spell until you get to the Adventurer Feat for it that lets you add more energy to the choices. So, is the intent that the chosen type is supposed to replace "force," or is the damage supposed to be both "force" and that energy type?
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2012 18:05
|
|
|
Introducing... my 13th Age GM Game Aid Doc: https://dl.dropbox.com/u/20990367/13th%20Age%20GM%20Game%20Aid.doc PDF: https://dl.dropbox.com/u/20990367/13th%20Age%20GM%20Game%20Aid.pdf I took some liberties with a few items based on missing, unclear, or redundant data in the book. For example, Large Monsters in the book have their own full table to show doubled HP and doubled damage. Even though the damage figures are slightly different (looks like Large monsters do SLIGHTLY less than 2x damage on average), I just made a note that you should double the Standard Monster damage and HP to save space. The extra column under impromptu monster damage is somewhere in the ballpark of an average roll taking the damage figures offered into account. Also I hope I helped at least one person with the Monster Equivalencies table, because that thing made no sense to me when I started. So including it in the sheet made me figure it out and try to explain it. PLEASE let me know if there are any errors or suggestions, or if you like the sheet and plan on using it in your games! Here's my 13th Age Player Game Aid again for reference... Doc: https://dl.dropbox.com/u/20990367/13th%20Age%20Player%20Game%20Aid.doc PDF: https://dl.dropbox.com/u/20990367/13th%20Age%20Player%20Game%20Aid.pdf Note: Some of the things in the cheat sheets are directly lifted from the book, so if that becomes an issue for some reason Wade just let me know and I'll take them down. sighnoceros fucked around with this message at 06:50 on Jul 27, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2012 06:45
|
|
|
Yesterday WotC twitter was asking people if they could design a D&D background, what would it be? It was kind of cute, in a way.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2012 13:56
|
|
|
sighnoceros posted:Introducing... my 13th Age GM Game Aid You are an awesome person. If I ever actually get in to or start running a 13th Age game, I will be abusing these documents.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2012 17:08
|
|
|
sighnoceros posted:Introducing... my 13th Age GM Game Aid Very nice! I don't suppose you could make landscape versions, could you? I've got one of those customizable GM screens and these would work really well with that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2012 17:17
|
|
|
It was more work than I was expecting just putting them together, messing with the columns to rearrange things into a landscape format is probably not going to happen unfortunately, but we'll see how busy I am this weekend. You're welcome to mess with it and post your results though!
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2012 18:57
|
|
|
sighnoceros posted:Note: Some of the things in the cheat sheets are directly lifted from the book, so if that becomes an issue for some reason Wade just let me know and I'll take them down. Thanks, I will! I look forward to reading it. Simon and I want to start sharing good community-created 13th Age aids on the Pelgrane site - cheat sheets, adventures, GM screen inserts and what have you. If you've made some or know of some, please let us know here: https://www.pelgranepress.com/forum/comments.php?DiscussionID=124&page=1
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2012 19:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 07:44 |
|
|
sighnoceros posted:Introducing... my 13th Age GM Game Aid Thanks! These are great.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2012 19:20
|
|
