Markdoc

Re: Love for Non-Casters? That's true in all game systems, pretty much. You can, in theory, kill someone with a hatpin, but in general for gaming, you don't want hatpins doing large amounts of damage. This is a question of "volatility". High degrees of volatility are "realistic", but not good for most gaming since inevitably, it ends up killing player characters, through sheer bad luck. I suggested (but have never used) a solution here if it really bugs you.

Re: Love for Non-Casters? Even without the MPA, he has more options (see also my post above). cheers, Mark

Re: Love for Non-Casters? House rule time: In my game, you can never do less damage than you would do barehanded, unless you are exceeding the objects DEF+BOD. So if you are really strong, you can get more damage out of a halberd than normal (up to the object's DEF+BOD) - once, or maybe a few times - but then it's gone. Essentially I treat weapons like any other "object of opportunity" so it's kind of a quasi-house rule. With this approach, someone with 30 STR could get more damage out of spiked gauntlets if they didn't mind wrecking them. Like many things this approach fails at extremes - someone with a really high STR and a really tough object, for example, but in general, it works OK. It's not necessarily worse - as long as you actually target the throat, and the target has no rDEF. OTOH, if you want to target someone's throat, and they have armor, a greatclub's probably better for the job. As for CSLs (or DCs, which typically also represent skill), I don't see a great difference between ("I stab him in the arm with the dagger" and ("I stab him in the arm with the dagger: I'm really good at stabbing people with daggers". It's still a dagger - you can do more damage with better technique, but it makes sense that skill doesn't automatically convert it into a greatsword.

Re: Magic Resistance

Re: Love for Non-Casters?

Re: Love for Non-Casters? Yep, that's what I wrote. I don't allow free armour to add to existing protection, but that's clearly a house rule on my part (a very good one, I should point out! ) My players have never given me grief about that, since I point out it's part of the "real weapon" or "real armour" limitation.

Re: Love for Non-Casters?

Re: Speeding up combat "Restrict SPDs" is Dead Wrong "SPD1? But everybody else in the game is SPD5 or higher. How are you going to compete?" "Ah, I'm just buying a really big 1 use AoE killing attack with Trigger (when struck) and personal immmunity" That should speed up combat! cheers, Mark

Re: Love for Non-Casters?

Re: Love for Non-Casters? NO, not at all! I'm pointing out that an attack that can be routinely expected to exceed defences is going to function like an NND attack. It'll always (or almost always) do damage. This is truism, of course, but it makes the point that ina game where the max rDEF is (say) 8, the difference between a 6 DC and a 9 DC killing attack is far greater than it is is in a game where the max rDEF is 12 - even though the points difference involved is not huge. Both attacks will likely get STUN through 8 rPD on a regular basis, but the 6DC attack will occasionally get a small amount of BOD through , whereas the 9 DC attack will almost always get BOD through and will occasionally get quite a lethal amount of BOD through. So essentially what I am saying is that where DEF is commonly restricted, a GM needs to look carefully at increased attacks (especially killing attacks) because relatively small increases allow you to greatly increase lethality, because you end up putting BOD through on a regular basis (hence the "NND" comment. Perhaps I should have smilied it. cheers, Mark

Re: Magic Resistance Actually a simpler way to build it is an always-on Suppress (all special effect: magic (1 hex) - in 6E maybe you could use surface for this ... dunno, don't have 6E yet). This will reduce the effect of any spell and even a few dice can prove to be surprisingly useful, since it reduces the damage that gets through defences, even if it doesn't prevent damage, reduces entangles to the point where they are more easily broken, drops many powers below the point where they will function and kills smaller cumulative powers entirely. cheers, Mark

Re: Love for Non-Casters?

Re: Love for Non-Casters? Sure, in theory, you could (and occasionally PCs do). However, potions and powders capable of producing such strong and rapid efects are both rare and expensive, meaning that often they simply won't be available. Buying the powers yourself means that a) you can count on having access to them most of the time and having a VPP means you can tailor them to your needs. Sometimes you'll want sleep poison, sometimes you'll want acid, sometimes you'll want a blinding powder - and sometimes you just want a mild narcotic to make someone listen appreciatively as you spin them a yarn. It'd take a lot of gold and a lot of in-game time to ensure access to all of those. The current game actually has 4 sorts of different magic. There's what are called "Gifts" - single magical powers. They are bought outside a framework, but the cost is greatly reduced by two additions. The first is that every Gift comes with a Geas (Side effect). Break your Geas and you lose your Gift. Also, Gifts get the "Independant" limitation, meaning that if you lose it, it's gone for good. Players take Geases very seriously as a result. It also means that you can give Gifts - and Geases - to other people. The second (and most common) is Temple magic, which uses a VPP. Temple magic is tied to a specific cult (hence all the stuff about hours and elements). It's been worked out by the various cullts over the centuries and draws on the powers of specific gods, so that it's the safest kind of magic to use - but it's also the least powerful, for that reason. The third kind is what's called "heretical magic". This is magical power granted by a specific otherworldly patron (the nature of these patrons is deliberately ambiguous in the current game, since understanding what's going on is a recurring subtheme in the current game). This uses a Multipower and also has some heavy limitations whacked on - primarily that if you fluff a power skill roll, you'll end up owing a debt to your otherworldly patron (I merged the obligation system from the Valdorian age, with a magic system I was already using). That has the effect that using a lot of magic of this type can warp the caster over time (unless he pays off his debts), but also has the side effect that since (unlike a VPP) you can limit the reserve, that you get a lot of bang for your buck. That has the (entirely intentional) side effect that mages can have high active point spells, but the minus inflicted on their skill rolls by powerful spells means that the chance they'll fluff a spell and end up owing their patron a debt grows ever greater ... This is deliberately built "dark temptation magic" and it clearly works: one of the players recently succumbed and he has just converted his VPP into a MP. He's delighted to find that he can now master 60 active point spells, where before he could only master 30 active point spells. He's not yet fully aware of the consequences of spell skill roll failure, which will inevitably bind him ever tighter to the cult he has just joined .... cue evil GM laughter! The 4th kind is rare and only used by mages froma far off land (which is where I ran my last campaign in this game world). That's highly ritualistic. It uses a VPP but preparing spells takes hours and requires a bulky, fragile and difficult-to-replace spellbook, which functions as an Aid to the VPP (meaning that a good spellbook lets you learn and cast spells you could never manage on your own). All spells are triggered, and one use, so that they can be prepped in advance and then triggered with a mystic word or symbol. This makes Mages very, very powerful (since the limitations mean you pay a fraction of the real cost), but also very, very limited - once they've shot off their repertoire of spells, they are out of magic until they can spend a day or two recharging - which usually means going back to your Sanctum. No sane mage would take his bulky, fragile and all but irreplaceable spellbook adventuring. And if they have memorised the wrong spells ... If you want more, go here: if you click on "the World of Aarth" and then in the submenu "Political Atlas" you'll get a clickable map. The current game is set in the large archipelago bottom centre left of the map and you can get the detals there.

Re: Help with cost of living in 1630's France

Re: Fantasy Art Thread I'd agree with the others - either it's a gamma problem or a monitor problem: it looks fine to me, both at home and on the work computer - (however, those are all LCD monitors: I've no idea what it'd look like on a CRT, if that's what you have)

Re: Love for Non-Casters? Like this? 10 Multipower - Martial arts: 20 point reserve- requires sword (OAF, -1) 1 (u) Defensive Strike (17) +1 OCV, +3 DCV 1 (u) Disarm (19) + 5 STR for Disarm only (-1), +1 OCV, +1 DCV 1 (u) Fast Strike (20) +8 STR (only for strike, -1), +2 OCV 1 (u) Martial Block (10) +2 OCV, +2 DCV 1 (u) Martial Dodge (10) + 5 DCV It's easy enough to "martial multipowers". The one above is a really basic one, which gives improved combat ability and also lets the user augment damage froma "free" weapon (note the cost is from my current 5E game, where STR was changed to 2 pts per pt of STR, and maneuvers such as martial dodge are based on augmenting an actual dodge). Here's something a little more high powered: 45 Martial Arts Multipower (45 point reserve, An Ch'I and Fa Yengtao) 1 (u) Lotus Blossom Technique Block, +2 OCV, +2 DCV 1 (u) Superior Fist Technique Disarm,+1 DCV 1 (u) Flying Tiger Technique Dodge, +5 DCV 3 (u) Unfolding Lotus Blossom Technique 12PD force wall, Hardened (self and self's hex only -1/2) 3[ (u) ]Zheng Hsiang's Hand of the Dawn 4d6 Flash vs sight, unranged (-1/2) 4 (u) Delicate Whirlwind of Cheng Hwang 7d6 HA Area effect, adjacent, selective 4 (u) Rocksmashing Fist of Shih Ksien 10d6 HA Penetrating 4 (u) Fist of the Five Warriors 7d6 HA autofire, 1/2 END 4 (u) Fist of the Flashing Blade 2d6 HKA, Autofire 3 (u) Catapulting Blow of Loc Sun Pak 7d6 HA, Double Knockback 3 (u) Finger of Ice Technique 3d6 Drain vs STR, DEX, STUN, REC, END or Running/Superleap, one at a time (+1/4), Return rate 1 point per Turn (+1/4) 3 (u) Tiger in Bamboo Technique 2d6 RKA autofire (requires appropriate objects, -1/2) 3 (u) or 9d6 EB (requires appropriate objects to throw, -1/2) 2 (u) Seven Strikes of Serenity Entangle, Entangle takes no damage from attack (+1/2), Only works on humans (-1/4),unranged (-1/2), cannot be used on same target more than once per hour (-1/2) 2 (u) Tiger Jaws Grip 1" Darkness vs hearing (only to cancel voice of victim, -2) +15 STR (only for Grab, -1) +6d6 HA NND (targets throat without bonus or penalty, must follow grab, -1/2) 2 (u) Dancing Tiger Technique Missile deflection +5 (or dodging) (Arrows and thrown weapons) The latter of these include effects that can be obtained with the impairing rules, but the martial artists with these powers can obtain the desired effect easily and reproducibly, reflecting ... well, skill, I guess. It's not just fighting. "Thief" multipowers that include "superskills" such as invisibility, clinging or even chemistry are possible without pushing the total unreality button. Here's one such: 25 Poison pool VPP 22 point base, all powers must take KS: Poison roll (-1/2), Gestures (apply poison, -1/4), OAF, Potions and powders (-1), limited range of powers (-1/2) Suggested powers Hallucinatory toxin: Images to sight and tactile sense groups, cannot be defined by user (-1), only visible to victim (-1) Corrosive spray: 1pt RKA, continous, uncontrolled, explosive, 6 charges lasting one minute, can be halted by washing afflicted area Noxious cloud: 1d6 EB NND, area effect radius, 8 charges lasting 1 turn Smoke cloud: Darkness to normal sight, 2" radius Blinding powder: 1d6 Flash, area affect cone Paralysing toxin: 1 point major transformation attack, cumulative, continous, uncontrolled at 0 END; transforms target to paralysed form (can be reversed by Chinese healing)

Re: Fantasy Art Thread Some comments on another thead about gruesome fairy tales made me do this. Little Red Riding Hood decides not to wait for the woodsman....

Re: Love for Non-Casters? What double post?

Re: Love for Non-Casters?

Re: Help with cost of living in 1630's France Whoa. Big topic. A few very general points. The 1500's through early 1600's was a time of high inflation in France and so an increasing number of people (about 12% or 1 family in 6) lived in pretty dire poverty: there was much unrest as a result. Income was wildly divergent. An experience day labourer might make 10-12 sols a day: that was enough to keep him fed and housed, so there's your basic cost of living: about 3600 sols or 180 livres a year, if he had full time employment. (12 deniers =1 sol =1/20th of a livre) A noble of decent standing with a half dozen estates might make 3000 livre a year - a noble with a dozen or more great estates might make 40-50 thousand livre or more. A poor noble with a single estate might make no more than a few hundred livre a year and as one courtier said "Be barely distinguishable from the peasants and pigs he lived among" As a very rough rule of thumb, the livre was worth about the same as the English pound in this era, so you can also get some idea from English price lists of the time. As a veeeery rough rule of thumb (prices varied hugely from season to season, and place to place) common workers of the time used about 75% of their income on food and only about 8-10% on rent. The rest went on clothes and general items. So that gives you a rough estimate for daily cost - it'll cost you about 6-7 sols to get meals for a day (in contrast at wholesale a pound of meat cost about 1 sol for the most basic quality: so this is not a diet of gruel - the most expensive item was typically bread, which in cities at least was usually not made at home). Cloth (and thus clothing) was highly variable in cost - coloured wool was about 2 livres an ell, linen was about 2 deniers per ell. I've got no idea about specific prices for things like swords or horse furniture: a bit out of my period, sorry. cheers, Mark

Re: Love for Non-Casters?

Re: Lock-On System I'd use cover as well - in fact, I've already done so for primarily this kind of approach, with one refinement: I add "Trigger: target comes in range, +1/4)". That allows a "lock-on" to be established at long range and the wepaon can then fire as soon as it is able. Since you have already covered the target, the trigger allows the weapon to fire (probably successfully) as soon as the target is in firing range - even if that's automatically. It's a nice way of simulating "fire and forget" weapons systems" There's several potential augments. One is simply CSLs with Cover, which would make your weapon relatively inaccurate without first covering the target (ie: without a lock-on) - however, it would also mean your "lock-on" (ie: cover) roll would be high - so a locked-on target is likely to be hit. cheers, Mark

Re: Paying for Magic Items We've tried: "Pay points for everything you keep" just like in Champions. We actually stuck with this system through several campaigns, so fixed were we in Champions mindset, but it never worked well for us, and as soon as I dumped this approach, so did all the other FH GM's in our group. None of us liked it. In most FH games "Treasure" is a major motivator, even if "kill them and take their stuff" is not a focus in the game. "Equipment pools". We started this before DC was even written, but the concept is pretty much identical. However, this worked only marginally better than "pay as you go". The last straw was when the players were bickering over who got to carry the magic sword: none of them wanted to dump stuff out of their pool so they could have the sword - even though most of them wanted the sword too. In the end, the guy who took it, went out to fight the big bad in his skivvies - because he couldn't fit sword and armour both in his pool. That was so dumb, that I said "Forget the pool - just take the sword already". Duke Bushido has clearly seen some of the same issues, and has taken some of the same corrective issues we did. But in the end, I realized that if the pools were causing a problem that I was solving by saying "ignore the pool" then we'd be better off ignoring the pools. So we did. In FH, I now run and have for many years, with the concept that what you can carry is defined by encumbrance. Balance isn't an issue, with these simple rules. 1) Somebody, somewhere, paid XP to make a magic item (I, too, use independant to make permanent items, to offset the pain). That means the PCs can pick it up and cart it around, but there is no guarantee that they can keep it (rather, the reverse). That means in turn, if a player wants to make/have magic items they too must pay the XP cost (if it's a signature item) and if they choose to make it independent, odds are good that at some point it's goin' bye-byes. Mundane items can be acquired for money. Under realistic situations, PCs loading themselves up with stuff they "might want" has never been an issue - PCs spend too much time climbing tall things, running fast, swimming, in combat, etc for heavy encumbrance to have much appeal. 2) Mundane and magic do not stack. If you want to make a magic sword, you pay the full cost of the associated HKA. You can't add it to another HKA. Same goes for armour, whatever. This prevents people going gonzo with cheap, enhanced items. 3) If the PCs have a magic item it's either because they wanted it enough to pay points for it - or because I, as GM, gave it to them. Balance is not really an issue. And as free treasure is free, if you give away something as GM you later regret, it's easy enough to steal or destroy it again. Personally, I tend to be pretty light on magical treasures anyway: after 4 years realtime play, and well over 100 XP, the current group has one magical helmet that gives enhanced vision, one rod of animal control, and two one-use scrolls. Not everyone is as stingy as me, but collecting items has never been the focus of my games. cheers, Mark

Re: Sentinel Learning Program They can reconfigure themselves, but they also learn to adapt to their enemies tactics. So I'd simply give them: 1) A cosmic VPP (say 30 points). They can use it for whatever they like, but obviously, it will be more effective, if they know their foe's powers, so that they can produce whatever the best counter would be. It doesn't need to be huge, since they can use it to enhance their already considerable strength and defences. For example, a 6d6 EB might not be very impressive, but if it's a sonic against a foe with susceptibility to sonic attacks, or a laser vs a foe with defences that only stop physical objects, or an indirect attack against someone who relies on the Barrier power for defence .... you get the idea 2) 3 or 4 "all combat CSLs" only against previously encountered enemies and tactics (probably a -1/2, but maybe a -3/4). That would make them significantly more effective against foes that they have fought before - but you can still get around it if you surprise them with a tactic you haven't pulled previously. cheers, Mark

Re: Fantasy Art Thread