|
11 months ago ::
Jul 22, 2012 - 10:37AM
#41
|
Date Joined:
Sep 20, 2004
|
want to be able to do neat things
What does neat things mean (in your opinion)?
A combination of cinematic and mechanical variety. I would also like the option to choose hard coded versions of those things. So, for example, a set of stances that each give a different flat mechanical benefits; per encounter or per day abilities that allow me to both make an attack and impose some sort of debilitating condition. I already posted this earlier in the thread, but if I were to create a sample list of options it would look something like this: a maneuver that lets a fighter move their speed (without provoking any attacks of opportunity) and make one attack against any enemy adjacent to them during any point during the move. Or the ability to bank an arrow off of some surface in order to ignore partial cover. Or a defensive stance in which a fighter can make an attack against any adjacent enemy if it chooses to attack an adjacent ally instead of the fighter. Or the ability use a feint with their main hand to make an attack with advantage using an off-hand weapon. Or the ability to make an attack which bloodies an enemies forehead, causing temporary blindness. Or an attack that disarms a foe, allows the fighter to grab the weapon which they have just caused a foe to drop, and then quickly make an attack with that weapon, as a single maneuver.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 22, 2012 - 10:41AM
#42
|
Date Joined:
Mar 26, 2007
|
I don't remember if it was the case in 2e anymore.
I have experienced 3rd Ed being the edition that started the madness.
Even with 2nd Ed, I got disillusioned in the latter days, 3rd Ed came along; was right on board same with 4th Ed; then started to realise this wasn't right.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 22, 2012 - 10:46AM
#43
|
Date Joined:
Mar 26, 2007
|
A combination of cinematic and mechanical variety.
Can we not already have that with Ability Checks?
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 22, 2012 - 11:00AM
#44
|
Date Joined:
Sep 20, 2004
|
No, "we" cannot, because we includes me, and it includes fans of 4e. The whole point is that there is an entire subset of people who don't want to be relegated to improvisation while spellcasters get hardcoded plot coupons. I mean, we could make spellcasting something that relies 100% on improvisation as well. But we don’t. For the same reason that we don’t do that with spellcasters, there are those players that want their hardcoded plot coupons so that their fighters can have their moment to shine too, even when their DM (who they might otherwise love) doesn't share their belief that a fighter should be able to reasonably pull of cinematic maneuver X. I am not saying that all fighters need to have this baked into their build. I am fine with it being an option which some fighters can choose. I also want the overall presentation of the game to support improvisation. But the option should be available for those players that want it. Speaking of which, I would be fine with a long spell-like list (in terms of format, not capabilitites) of example manoeuvres, each of which has a skill DC associated with it. Players could pull off the manoeuvres by spending both their move action (to perform said skill check) and their attack action (to perform said attack roll). Fighters could also pick a theme which would give them a certain number of automatic skill check successes when performing a maneuver per encounter/per day. When using an automatic skill check success the fighter could pull off the maneuver as a single attack action. As the fighter gains levels he would get more automatic successes, and those successes would be for higher skill check DCs. For those who like to improvise, they could improvise what they are doing with said maneuver… the DM would help them decide what sort of feat they could automatically pull off with their skill check success. If they don’t like what the DM is willing to allow they can just pick something off the example list.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 22, 2012 - 11:13AM
#45
|
Date Joined:
Mar 26, 2007
|
No, "we" cannot, because we includes me, and it includes fans of 4e. The whole point is that there is an entire subset of people who don't want to be relegated to improvisation while spellcasters get hardcoded plot coupons. I mean, we could make spellcasting something that relies 100% on improvisation as well. But we don’t. For the same reason that we don’t do that with spellcasters, there are those players that want their hardcoded plot coupons so that their fighters can have their moment to shine too, even when their DM (who they might otherwise love) doesn't share their belief that a fighter should be able to reasonably pull of cinematic maneuver X.
I am not saying that all fighters need to have this baked into their build. I am fine with it being an option which some fighters can choose. I also want the overall presentation of the game to support improvisation. But the option should be available for those players that want it.
Speaking of which, I would be fine with a long spell-like list (in terms of format, not capabilitites) of example manoeuvres, each of which has a skill DC associated with it. Players could pull off the manoeuvres by spending both their move action (to perform said skill check) and their attack action (to perform said attack roll). Fighters could also pick a theme which would give them a certain number of automatic skill check successes when performing a maneuver per encounter/per day. When using an automatic skill check success the fighter could pull off the maneuver as a single attack action. As the fighter gains levels he would get more automatic successes, and those successes would be for higher skill check DCs. For those who like to improvise, they could improvise what they are doing with said maneuver… the DM would help them decide what sort of feat they could automatically pull off with their skill check success. If they don’t like what the DM is willing to allow they can just pick something off the example list.
Hey, I am with ya, I do not want casters to rule all, but I do not want all caster classes to work the same.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 22, 2012 - 11:15AM
#46
|
Date Joined:
Nov 27, 2006
|
Spellcaster Power!
First, ritual magic needs to be doable by anyone with the materials and the knowledge.
And here, for all these years, I thought that was the whole point of hauling the casters with us on adventures....
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 22, 2012 - 11:18AM
#47
|
|
|
What the hell is a 'plot coupon'? If I'm not getting half off or BOGO, I'm disappointed.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 22, 2012 - 11:34AM
#48
|
Date Joined:
Nov 27, 2006
|
What the hell is a 'plot coupon'? If I'm not getting half off or BOGO, I'm disappointed.
It's what people call spells when they get all pissy.
For some reason they're mad that the designers of the game sat around & dreamed up some specific spell effects.
That this makes the caster classes seem more complex, powerfull, & option loaded than the fighting types.
I look at like this;
As far as the casting effects go? So someone else has already done the work of improving it. Not a big deal. I could do more if I wanted.
(researching new spells has always been implied. And I don't believe the game designers have any more domain over MakeShitUp than I do....)
For the fighting types? The players still have to do all their own improv.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 22, 2012 - 11:37AM
#49
|
|
|
What the hell is a 'plot coupon'? If I'm not getting half off or BOGO, I'm disappointed.
It's what people call spells when they get all pissy.
For some reason they're mad that the designers of the game sat around & dreamed up some specific spell effects.
That this makes the caster classes seem more complex, powerfull, & option loaded than the fighting types.
I look at like this;
As far as the casting effects go? So someone else has already done the work of improving it. Not a big deal. I could do more if I wanted.
(researching new spells has always been implied. And I don't believe the game designers have any more domain over MakeShitUp than I do....)
For the fighting types? The players still have to do all their own improv.
As a coupon-clipper, I gotta tell ya...that's a pretty poor coupon. 
I always did love spell research. Mmmm....
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 22, 2012 - 11:44AM
#50
|
Date Joined:
Mar 26, 2007
|
It's what people call spells when they get all pissy.
Do you mean penisy?
|
|
|
