Jump to content

KilledWithStyle

Members
  • Content Count

    22
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About KilledWithStyle

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    KilledWS
  • MSN
    -
  • Website URL
    -
  • ICQ
    -
  • Yahoo
    -
  • Skype
    -

Profile Information

  • Location
    , Texas, United States
  1. Hey, if you are a GM like me (or perhaps a player searching for a better option) you have realized that races are awesome but EXP mods are stupid. I have argued with this problem for a while and for the longest time I had just been giving out EXP in gobs of where I wanted to campaign to end. You see -5 EXP penalites begin to look WORSE than +1 level mods. Hell even -1 EXP penalties begin to look worse than a +1 level mod. It depends entirely on how much EXP is given per session, but eventually an EXP penalty character is going to be worse than a level mod character. (Sorry Pure Sylvain, you have it the worst) So I decided to take a good look at the system. I argued that a -10 EXP penalty should be EXACTLY the same as a +1 level mod. The book creator never said what an EXP penalty to extra DP should be, but he DID say that a +1 level mod is 100 extra DP spent on powers. And I have just guessed that a -1 EXP penalty is the same as 10 extra DP. (or roughly around that) If it was 20 DP for every extra EXP penalty, a Duk'Zarist Nephilim would have a +1 level mod. Which it does not. If it was less than 10 DP, there would not be enough DP to make this worthwhile. There is my reasonsing behind EXP penalties and how much "extra" DP a race has. So beacuse a level mod increases the EXP needed by 25 to get to the next level compared to the last, and my goal was to have 10 EXP penalty be exactly the same as a level mod, I came up with my factor of 2.5. Now if other Brilliant individuals want to assign their own ratio of EXP penalty to a +1 level mod, go ahead. If you know your excel, you can read through and figure out where I used that. So with a +1 level mod, it takes 125 instead of 100 to get to level 2+1, and it takes 150 instead of 125 to get to level 3+1. This compounds over the levels. I just took that compounding effect and applied it to the EXP penalty. Without further ado, I present to you the revamp: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BxYiOqE1Mt0VOUFsSEF4LUNVUEk/edit (click file -> download in google docs, as you cant edit it online) The file is simple to read. You have 3 editable positions: YOUR level mod: YOUR EXP mod: Average EXP per session: Using these 3 values, my doccument will calculate for you the new rules for how much overall EXP you need as well as how many sessions it will take you. It will also calculate for you the number of sessions for the OLD system and how much EXP you really need before the EXP penalties kicked in. If you play around with the values, you will quickly realize that the new system works much more logically compared to the EXP penalties. So with a 0 level mod, -5 exp per session, and 20 average EXP per session, it would take you 50 Sessions to reach level 6 using the OLD system. Compare this to a +1 level mod, which would only take that person 44 sessions (43.75 actually) to reach level 6. REMINDER: a +1 level mod is SUPPOSED to be worse than a -5 exp penalty. But with the new system, the above example would only take 41 sessions (40.6 actually) to reach level 6. So it is worse than no EXP penalty, but better than +1 level mod. I have expanded this to work with any level mod and any EXP mod. The "compare this to" section is just a set of static level mods to compare to. Also If after all this arguement your GM still does not do this. Get 3 CP worth of EXP bonus per session. It WILL be worth it. I did use ONE house rule. If you go to level 15 on the EXP table, notice how it says each level beyond that is only +450. But all levels before that were increasing by 25 each. So the difference between level 1 and 2 was 100, but between level 2 and 3 was 125, and between level 3 and 4 was 150 (and so on.) I simply Extend this pattern beyond level 16. Thus it takes 475 EXP to reach level 17, 500 EXP to reach level 18, 525 EXP to reach level 19 and 600 EXP to reach level 20. (and so on.) I doubt your campaign will reach level 15+, but if it does there might be a difference between the two.
  2. Ejud said: I have the book and am currently in the process of translation when I went back to the announcment and saw that it said stuff about altering reality with your character's will or something like that, does anyone know which chapter that is, or if it was cut like the Artifact creation rules were? *sigh* Despite the "discussion" that is being had here. They are talking about the magic spells and psychic matrices (namely the matrices.) I believe there was additional psychic spells?
  3. And yet, I have seen players win in the poorest position BECAUSE of the 6 extra trade goods. Those trade goods can mean the difference between: an extra space dock, a extra technology, or a new fleet to take over more spaces. The truth was that player used those 6 goods to a major advantage to achieve this secret objective early and get to mecatol rex which he kept for the rest of the game quite effectively. Sure 6 goods does not seem like much, but early game bonuses add up quickly. You guys also forget that because there are indeed players that are closer to each other, there will be naturally more good planets that are closer to them. This results in the ability to play a good early game. Poor players will have disadvantages in those locations, but I always make sure an experienced player is put in those locations to help achieve game balance.
  4. Oh, right! I forgot about Custodians. That is an always on for our group. (adding now)
  5. Hey, long time supporter of this game just wanting to know what optional rules does your group ALWAYS play with, sometimes plays with and never plays with. I decided to make a list of these with our group, and since the new expansion is adding so many new elements I also am implementing a system to allow players to choose which ones they want. I also took the liberty of deciding on which ones will be chosen upon in the next expansion. I want to know if this seems about right for most groups or if they play with different sets of optional rules. If so, I would enjoy to read what you guys play with. List of optional rules ALWAYS played with: 1) Sabotage Runs 2) Race Specific Technologies 3) Shock Troops 4) Space Mines 5) Facilities 6) Tactical Retreats 7) Flag Ships 8) Mechanized Units 9) Wormhole nexus 10) Artifacts 11) Custodians of Mecatol Rex List of optional rules sometimes played: 1) Age of Empire (with Imperial 2) 2) Which Set of Strategy cards 3) Which set of Victory Cards 4) Preliminary Objectives 5) Mercenaries 6) Political Intrigue 7) Heroes 8) Fall of the Empire (only if 5 or 7 players) List of optional rules NEVER or RARELY played: 1) 14 Victory Points 2) Extended map 3) Distant Suns 4) Final Frontier 5) Simulated Early turns
  6. Thank you very much for this little bit of information. I saw the feats of strength one on the demo pages and immediately used it for myself, but thanks for the others. Also I heard that combat and magic changed a bit. Maybe not give us a full translation or conversion, but could you give information about what has changed between those two.
  7. JCHendee said: miles601 said: If you feel the game is dragging out, go for the win. Yeah, that's the ticket... it's only a knockout if you fail. Plus loosing your gold, Plus loosing your highest cost item, Plus while you are wounded or fatigued you roll fewer movement dice. Many little things go a long way to fearing the reaper.
  8. Well first of all if the people at FFG are releasing based off of book release, we wont see this for a while (even assuming that the release schedule is sped up) However I would really like to see how they increased combat (and to a lesser extent the secondary abilities) if only because that is the part my group said was the worst/most difficult part to learn about the game... I am probabaly just a bad teacher. I am guessing character creation wont remain changed too much, I really do like the idea of giving the players tons of points to coustomize themselves. Question: Is this an addition (like pay 20 bucks and get the changes) or is this a whole new core that I will have to pay 50 bucks on? (or do you know) *sigh* Most likely its going to be an other 50 bucks that FFG drains me of.
  9. miles601 said: Out of curiosity, what size group do you typically play with? I play with 2-4 and can't really recall running out of experience tokens. When we first started playing we were much more conservative and let each other level and gear up a bit more (sort of a mutual unspoken agreement that we'd give everyone a fair shot before taking on reds) As we got to play more the "race" to take on reds certainly sped up. I tend to shoot for 4-6 experience tokens before I take on reds (depending on how lucky I am with gear). I like to add 2 tokens to my characters "primary" attack stat and like to add a token to my "off" stats and a wound or 2. Geez, you must be lucky. We play with 5 or 6 players, but I usually find we level up about 3 or 4 times in each stat before one of us thinks of attacking reds. I guess I could try what you are doing... Its just we phear the reaper. When you die it sets you, as a player, further back than I would like. Also in reference to the gear, it really depends on which quests come out for players early on. We either find players are starved for gold (because they have to constantly heal up using what rare amounts of gold are on the table) or players have too much and are not able to find good gear through the market stack. Either way it forces players to level a few more times rather than getting good gear. One exception to that was last game we had a familiar out that allowed one player to do a market step if he was within 2 spaces of a city. Somehow he was in his own corner (where no one was) and he was constantly moving good items into the city stack. This created a strange situation where he had no money (because he had to constantly heal), and all the best items that he could not buy.
  10. Meh I would buy it, but probably buy it to play with other game systems (using the realms as the base.) That is unless the actual system intrigued me.
  11. To answer miles601's question. We, as a group, tend to find that leveling each area equally results in builds that allows us to win with little problems. And as a result not one token really disappears, its just we often find magic and mind gone while no one even bothers with stamina or health. This becomes especially true if someone picks up a character where a boost in one attribute results in boosts of others or easier battles due to a combat ability (looking at the new Dungeon Quest heroes in particular) Its kinda nice to see some discussion about this topic and to see that others are not unified about this topic (means it really is not clear about what is true; also meaning I was right to question it). However I wonder if there is an official answer somewhere/somehow. But for now I am sticking with not parts limited, simply because in the rule book it only really says one specific object is limited and that is the adventure jewels, including rules about who decides what when one is not able to place all jewels. OH! And jewels was never a problem with me also. I have the big box expansions of Midnight and IOD, so I never really had a problem with those to begin with.
  12. In Runebound it seems that when you run out of parts for most things you will just find some sort of replacement counter to use for that space, adventure jewels being the only exception. Now I have played many games and if things are playing right there is really only one thing that our play group runs out of and that is level tokens. To go around this I would often just say put an exhaust token on the counter that needs that additional level. Now this would not be an issue normally, but I noticed that the melee counters double each of the other counters in number. This probably means that melee is "expected" to be picked twice as much, or the level counters are parts limited and we have been playing it wrong. So I guess my question is, are the level counters parts limited?
  13. What he is saying is each of the mages are casting shields on each other so that way in case they fail, the other can dodge. It sounds good, but you have to keep in mind that there is a -40 to the roll for defending an other player (I made sure to look this one up this time) See page 93 under COVERING ORDERS. When a shield does fail, it gives the covered player a chance to dodge using the original attack roll that the attacker used.
  14. Cultadium said: Thanks ILOVECHEESE and yeah being retroactive didn't seem normal to me either but I had to check and make sure. So I guess the shield rules make spellcasters pretty darn squishy any advice from the spellcasters out there? How much dodge is needed or is it better just to risk biting the dust (and thanks for answering kill your reply made me realize how confusing things would get if you failed to block with a shield and it still blocked part of the damage) Yes well I misread that paragraph because I have never used psychic or magical shields. I read (somehow and accidently) that the shield would always be hit. So I was lying out the possibilites. Huge mistake. But as a further note for the part asking about your dodge level: The magical demo characters in the GM Toolkit actually do not put any points into block or dodge. The exception to that is that Warlock, Warrior Summoner, and Warrior Mentalist have developed their block abilities (as they should.) Keep in mind that the shield that you may or may not use will be enhanced by your ability of the Projection. Projection is the attack and defense ability of that class. So a Wizzard with Magical Projection of 100 (with no offset) has the equivilant of 100 attack in magic and 100 defense using magic assuming he is using a spell for that purpose.
  15. Sorry I misread that. I had just assumed that the extra damage would be applied to the shield. Oh well. Yeah I realized this soon after I read and was coming back to fix it, but you posted. I was reading believing that even damage dealt on the table would still affect the player's shield in question.
×
×
  • Create New...