The Gaming Den

ModelCitizen wrote:For example, in Star Wars Saga you don't add Dex directly to your AC; your AC is the higher of your Reflex defense or your bonus from armor. They fucked up the level scaling (because it's SW:S and that's what it does) but there is a point at the intersection of the curves where neither Boba Fett nor Luke Skywalker is doing it wrong. Maybe because Luke's Dex bonus is one point higher, maybe because Jedi get +2 to Reflex and Bounty Hunters don't. I don't know, the point isn't how SW:S actually handles it, the point is how it could work. If use Reflex as your minimum AC rather than adding Dex to AC, and you get the math right so it's easy for a player to build for one or the other to be higher, then you can have an unarmored rogue, barbarian, or swashbuckler and it's not a big deal. You don't have to tell them to "refluff" their chain shirt as a ninja suit / bear pelt / body oil / leather thong and skull pasties / whatever the fuck they actually want to wear.

Actually, it's your character level vs. armor, not Dex vs. armor, and you don't take the higher one unless you have the Armored Defense talent; otherwise you take the armor bonus if you're wearing armor even if it's lower than your level bonus. Improved Armored Defense makes it level + half armor. So high-level characters can walk around unarmored but protected as if they had power armor and be just fine, and characters who walk around in actual power armor get a big benefit from it.

In exchange for wearing heavy, restricting, and often dubiously-legal armor, armored characters can get Fort bonuses, built-in equipment, etc., so the choice is not "do you want high Reflex?" but rather "do you want good defense, some subtlety, and good speed, or do you want great defense, extra armor-based perks, no subtlety, and less speed?" which is what the tradeoff is supposed to be in D&D as well.

Fuchs wrote:How much realism do we want? I'd not worship realism too much, that way lies dieing from infections, save vs. scurvy, and so on. At the very least light or no armor should remain viable as cheesecake.

good question, the answer i would say is NONE, and ALL.

the chainmail bikini works because it is a fantasy world where the mechanics dont deal with hit locations HP are abstract (in ways) and dont represent actual wounds directly within the mechanics, etc. this allows for verisimilitude to state someone in a chainmail bikini is deflecting blows in such a way to to have any hits land on actual armored sections of their body rather than unarmored ones. not unlike piece mail armor, where you may be wearing a chain shirt and the legs are unarmored.

as for the ALL, you want armor that makes sense. 4 foot spikes like swords are not something you will wear very well and use without likely hurting yourself. the armor needs to be based on something real, or real-like and plausible.

this way that platemail is based on something real, you can excuse the game for being a game so that people have the kind of mobility to get on and off a horse, walk around in it, etc. those looking for more realism and simulation CAN have the info provided to guide the players as to what sorts of problems wearing platemail all the time present. sleeping in your armor making it not as resting, so you need to take it off to get a full rest such as AD&D, and so forth. those wanting the real, can them have it, while others can handwave it. the problem always will be when mixed groups have different playstyles within them, and that is something ONLY the group itself can work out. the game shouldnt force a preferred or default playstyle.

the thing is just have decent art, cause the type of armor shouldnt matter that much as long as it works the same way for all. excess bulges on male and/or female art is unneeded.

also things that don't lactate shouldnt have breasts like Na'vi from Avatar and dragonborn. as that goes with the verisimilitude.

Emerald wrote: Actually, it's your character level vs. armor, not Dex vs. armor, and you don't take the higher one unless you have the Armored Defense talent; otherwise you take the armor bonus if you're wearing armor even if it's lower than your level bonus. Improved Armored Defense makes it level + half armor. So high-level characters can walk around unarmored but protected as if they had power armor and be just fine, and characters who walk around in actual power armor get a big benefit from it.

In exchange for wearing heavy, restricting, and often dubiously-legal armor, armored characters can get Fort bonuses, built-in equipment, etc., so the choice is not "do you want high Reflex?" but rather "do you want good defense, some subtlety, and good speed, or do you want great defense, extra armor-based perks, no subtlety, and less speed?" which is what the tradeoff is supposed to be in D&D as well.

Bah, I don't actually play SW:S, I could have sworn that was how it worked. Ah well.

Anyway, in D&D the defense vs mobility tradeoff is between heavy armor and light armor. No armor isn't a real option unless it's forced on you by your class (or you're high level and have magic robes you can put in that slot instead). The goal would be to get going unarmored to be an option for rogues/barbarians/rangers/bards/finesse fighters.

No armor is definitely an option in DnD. It's just objectively worse.

Life after Death after Death after Death
http://community.wizards.com/dndnext/bl ... fter_death

Monte Cook wrote:According to the feedback you’ve given us, most of you want there to be at least some measure of actual threat of death in the game.

without that as the minimum do you even HAVE a game?

i just stopped reading there because it's a Monte article.

Well, just like everything else coming out of M&M, it's just more nothing-speak.

Monte Cook wrote:One, I’ll call “revivification.” This is magic that the mid- to high-level PC cleric likely has access to, and basically if the caster can get to a fallen friend very quickly and use the magic, the character comes back immediately and without muss, because the character was never really dead. It’s more resuscitation than resurrection.

Ah, so I guess he was only mostly dead.
I thought that was what the addition of the whole "-10" was about.

For several years now, my groups have been using options that definitely put some teeth in death. Sometimes we've used a "3 strikes and your out"; but that one bothers me a little. Lately we've made it a kind of Save roll -- everyone seems pretty satisfied by that.

wotmaniac wrote:Ah, so I guess he was only mostly dead.

but was he alive enough to make a "to blave" roll, and for those of 3.x to blave means to bluff.

the character was probably playing cards and he owes you money.....

Monte's game design is THE cause for ultimate suffering.

anybody want a peanut?

shadzar wrote:
anybody want a peanut?

No more quoting that movie, I mean it!

Doom wrote:

shadzar wrote:
anybody want a peanut?

No more quoting that movie, I mean it!

It would take a miracle.

5e healing... forget surges and single HP restored per night of rest, forget raise dead or rezz, just visit Miracle Max.

wotmaniac wrote:Well, just like everything else coming out of M&M, it's just more nothing-speak.

Monte Cook wrote:One, I’ll call “revivification.” This is magic that the mid- to high-level PC cleric likely has access to, and basically if the caster can get to a fallen friend very quickly and use the magic, the character comes back immediately and without muss, because the character was never really dead. It’s more resuscitation than resurrection.

Ah, so I guess he was only mostly dead.
I thought that was what the addition of the whole "-10" was about.

For several years now, my groups have been using options that definitely put some teeth in death. Sometimes we've used a "3 strikes and your out"; but that one bothers me a little. Lately we've made it a kind of Save roll -- everyone seems pretty satisfied by that.

It's just adding another step on the death track. Currently if you're at negatives you're "dying" (can be healed with HP-restoring spells) which goes directly to "dead" (can be healed only with Resurrection spells). Under the new system it would be wounded (healed with HP effects) into "dying" (healed with cheap resuscitation effects) into "dead" (healed with expensive resurrection effects)

It is, in fact, a perfectly reasonable system to have in a system where you're going to hand players rocket launchers.

wotmaniac wrote:Well, just like everything else coming out of M&M, it's just more nothing-speak.

I think it was less pointless than some of the other articles in the series.

I kind of agree with him that there should be more "at death's door" kind of rescues and fewer "revolving door heaven/hell" resurrections. For instance, I would probably prefer something like the "Dragon Age" (the video game, not the tabletop RPG) approach to death where you don't really die unless there's a TPK (you're just mortally wounded, possibly with debilitating injuries).

isnt that where the BIG problems come in? "debilitating injuries".

now you have to calculate this that the other and the rest for each effect those injuries have.

there already is death's door, the thing is how common is coming back to life, and how is death perceived in the game world itself?

Did you already place to copper coins on the dead man's eyes for the boatman? if so he might not be coming back even with a raise dead.

this really should be simple to figure out for the game.

dead = dead.

raise dead or resurrection exist and available as the game world allows it. the game shouldnt dictate how common or rare coming back to lfie is, that is for the players and those designing their own worlds and such to decide.

-10, negative bloodied, whatever.. there is a way in the game to prevent dying immediately when hitting 0 HP.

going back to a single HP per night would show that injuries are long lasting instead of this instant heal when someone yells at you crap or the bag of CLW.

bandaging/stabilizing give's plenty of room to prevent people from dying, just most people dont do it and worry about themselves more than quickly helping a fallen friend.

I disagree. If you heal at realistic speeds or even at 1hp / day, then if you are seriously hurt then the whole story is fucked up. If there is a strict time limit in the story and only one PC is hurt then the rest of the party is forced to leave the injured at the nearest village and carry on, making it for all purposes exactly the same as death.

Serious wounds should not be considered exactly the same as death, but if you make healing basically impossible then they are the same since in both cases that character is no longer taking part in the adventure.

You need to be able to heal quickly, at the very slowest taking a day or two to recover fully from almost dead. Otherwise the whole game breaks down with either disposable characters or being unable to have any real time limits for fear of failing everything due to normal wounds.

Parthenon wrote:I disagree. If you heal at realistic speeds or even at 1hp / day, then if you are seriously hurt then the whole story is fucked up. If there is a strict time limit in the story and only one PC is hurt then the rest of the party is forced to leave the injured at the nearest village and carry on, making it for all purposes exactly the same as death.

Serious wounds should not be considered exactly the same as death, but if you make healing basically impossible then they are the same since in both cases that character is no longer taking part in the adventure.

You need to be able to heal quickly, at the very slowest taking a day or two to recover fully from almost dead. Otherwise the whole game breaks down with either disposable characters or being unable to have any real time limits for fear of failing everything due to normal wounds.

maybe understand a TTRPG isnt a video game?

sure the fellowship of the ring had plot protection and waited for Frodo to heal, but they could have done other things towards the same goal....oh wait they DID, because Frodo was injured before the fellowship was formed, and then they split up afterwards.

this is a reason the "ticking clock" type adventures dont really work, and ONLY work in fiction due to plot protection. "timed missions" either become video games, or childish and won by deus ex machina.

movies and such have decent tension in timed events, but things also happen at the speed of plot int hem, which is NOT something a game can reproduce.

how many FPS have injuries carry over between rooms? each new room you join and group you join, you start the game fresh with HP and everything, you dont have penalties from the last game played. this doesnt work for a continuous world. the extended rest and healing surge nonsense shit from 4th is just cartoon silly. you might as well be playing Candyland because it has the same maturity level.

with 1hp/day healing, you can still heal in a single day or two, with a full compliment of cleric spells. but it still doesnt mean the "ticking clock" adventures are good things to use. aside from earlier mentioned reason.. they are just too railroady.

you insta-heal method is where the game breaks down for those looking for verisimilitude, or just a low-magic, or gritty game.... or one where humans are humans, not demi-gods masquerading as humans, or some other kind of mutant just calling itself a human.

shadzar wrote:how many FPS have injuries carry over between rooms?

Tons and tons and tons. It's become a lot less common in the last five years ish, but it used to be the standard not the exception. There are still some games that do it that way, like Hard Reset and Serious Sam, although they're deliberate throwbacks.

John Magnum wrote:

shadzar wrote:how many FPS have injuries carry over between rooms?

Tons and tons and tons. It's become a lot less common in the last five years ish, but it used to be the standard not the exception. There are still some games that do it that way, like Hard Reset and Serious Sam, although they're deliberate throwbacks.

by room i meant not exist a door and reach the next part of a single player game, but where you go from a central lobby to get groups to play a co-op first person shooter. such as:

CoD, Wolfenstien, and the list could fill the field size for this post...

when you enter a new room, you begin play with the freshest character.. the injuries from the last grouping dont carry over to this room.

Okay, well, I assumed you were talking about single-player campaigns because the single-player campaigns are where shooters have character permanence. The notion that each time you start a round of multiplayer you're at full health is even less analogous to D&D because there's not even implied character permanence whatsoever in between matches.

But I suppose at least your argument is just based on a ludicrously bizarre analogy, rather than outright complete factual error.

John Magnum wrote:a ludicrously bizarre analogy, rather than outright complete factual error.

It's Shadzar. So it's both. It's ALWAYS both. Without proper sentences or punctuation. Then it's followed by a contradiction suspended in nonsense and a light sprinkle of WTF.

STOP TALKING TO SHADZAR. We could seriously have a forum bot that made more sense than he does.

...hey... why don't we have our own forum bot that makes more sense than he does?

PhoneLobster wrote: ...hey... why don't we have our own forum bot that makes more sense than he does?

Isn't that where Ant and Giant Frog came from?

Besides, he does sometimes have flashes of insight. His narrative advice is usually actually pretty good.

Injuries should become relevant in an attrition based adventure. I don't think that a specific injury should be relevant over the breadth of a campaign, barring wierd things like magical body modification.

Fighting a powerful adversary while seriously impaired is not fun. Higher level heroes being worn down by a horde of skirmishing kobolds can be entertaining...Especially when the roles are reversed and the heroes are wearing down a more powerful foe like a Dragon or something.

I don't think that HP bloat should be encouraged, or even be a mainstay of appropriate combat challenges, but including certain break points where the target becomes debilitated might reduce grind induced boredom. Forcing a dragon to land or smacking around an Ankheg until it becomes too tired to burrow could add an interesting dynamic to some combats.

Blave rules.. what the hell did I just read.

HP in D&D Edition Whatever Number should have Bloodied. I'm convinced this is the sole saving export from 4e and it should be expanded upon.

When becoming Bloodied a character begins to lose 1 HP per round at the end of each round until a Heal check DC 15 or 20 (I can't think of which at the moment) is made, then it becomes 1 HP per minute, then 1 per hour.

So, someone that simply got lucky with their Heal might live a bit longer or at least fade into unconsciousness, while someone good with Heal or has Cure spells will recover faster. That's what I want out of realism in HP and combat.

fectin wrote:Besides, he does sometimes have flashes of insight.

About as many and in the same way as Time Cube.

Do you read Time Cube? Do you trash up endless threads trying to TALK to Time Cube? Do you encourage Time Cube to start more "Whut is a thingz?" threads on this forum?

No? Then STOP TALKING TO SHADZAR.

Seriously. You want to talk to a monkey on a type writer because it might have an insight? REALLY? Because Shazard isn't writing the complete works of Shakespear any time soon. And you know you could just go read the complete works of Shakespear. Or maybe I dunno. Any mildly coherent forum poster of your choice. Hell. Read Kaelik. At least he can start a sentence with a fucking capital letter.

Sorry, sorry. I'll take your advice. Mea culpa.

I agree that D&D can safely step further into the 'game' territory when it comes to defeat.

Just come out and say that HP does not represent your physical health, it represents a combination of your ability to sustain damage and will to fight and whatever else. When you lose a certain amount of health in a single blow (1/2 total HP, 1/4 total HP, whatever), then you are wounded, which gives you penalties to certain things. Resting for an hour or so will bring you back to at least 1/2 HP, possibly more based on CON score/Fort save, and resting for 8 hours will bring it back entirely. Wounds, however, remain until they can be treated, magically or mundanely, and those penalties persist until then. Going into the next fight at 1/2-ish HP with possibly a Wound penalty is clearly a disadvantage, and you should have some kind of Fate Points that you can expend to help you through, which otherwise would be cashed in for additional XP.