dbm_

Members
  • Content count

    32
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About dbm_

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday

Contact Methods

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

Profile Information

  • Location
    Preston, Lancashire, United Kingdom
  1. DnD 4e had a good mechanism whereby you had to fail multiple saves (usually 3) before the fatal effect kicked in. It allowed for countermeasures. In HERO attacks like this generate points of damage and if they do enough to kill you you're dead, but if they don't the power has no effect (IIRC - not a big player of HERO). How does force choke work in SW?
  2. It does, but you can still use the fantasy ones, too, as I understand it from reviews.
  3. Well, in GURPS for example the ability to fly is a power with a cost that can be modified by such things as maximum speed or altitude and whether or not you need wings. The ability to travel at speed on the ground is also a power with a cost that gets a multiplier based on speed etc. Vampires and werewolves (for example) can change shape to access different abilities. So generic powers of flight could apply to a robot transformed into a plane, a jet pack or a spell of flight. Same core rule, just a different price due to implementation. A car or horse or the ability to run like the Flash would also use the same basic power. If Genesys uses an effect based system to build a wide range of powers then very few completely new rules systems should be needed to implement different genres.
  4. @Bellyon My point was that I think it's very unlikely we will get 'fantasy powers', 'sci-fi powers' etc. It's for more likely IMO that we will get a big chunk of general powers followed by genre-specific guidance on how to implement them appropriately. I also think we should anticipate guidance on how to create adversaries plus a small number of examples rather than extensive bestiaries for each genre. A combat droid / iron golem / clank solider could all use very similar stats.
  5. I doubt the game will be structured like that. If you look at a comparable game like Cypher System then a third of the book is focussed on character rules, which includes all the powers and special abilities. Each genre has eight pages dedicated to it, explaining how to use the core rules in a genre-applicable way. That's about one tenth of the overall page count. I would expect a similar approach for Genesys; a core, flexible system for powers or abilities then separate guidance and example mixes to get you started on the genres. The setting books (when they arrive) will predominantly focus on 'recipes' for putting the core mechanics together to support the world, in addition to the 'fluff' of course. Maybe the genre books will include further rules or new powers/ abilities but that is actually a poor way to make a long-lived game. GURPS 3e used that approach and it eventually caused big problems as subsystems and powers / abilities from different world books clashed. 4e took an approach of having as much of the mechanics as possible defined at the beginning and just using the genre books to provide 'recipes' using those rules, for the most part. Since Genesys is built off a fairly deep lineage (WFRP 3e and three lines of SW books) they can hopefully jump to a fairly complete set of powers on their first try.
  6. I suppose it depends whether you are thinking film version or comics version. The film version of the characters are capable but not 'super'. In the comic books some of the Guardians are really powerful. The book professes to address sci-fi, but not supers I think?
  7. A question to anyone who played or ran: with regards the non-combat encounters where there specific sub-systems that applied to different types of activity (like the Dual of Wits in Burning Wheel, for example) or was it more free-from where the GM just chooses a skill based on player actions? I guess one of the things I'm particularly interested in is whether there are more 'mechanically rich' subsystems for non-combat activities.
  8. The concentration mechanic in D&D 5e was really good at keeping magic from being too overpowered in many ways. It would add to lots of magic systems in my opinion. In 5e you can only concentrate on one spell at a time, limiting the number of buffs or long-term battle shaping spells you can have to one-per-caster. And if you take damage you can lose concentration, making self-buffing in combat very brittle; this encourages more teamwork which is definitely a plus for D&D which is based around niche protection and forcing collaboration between character types.
  9. Thanks guys! Re the question: "Was it all combat or did you get to experience the more narrative encounters?" I think the key question here is if you had any non-combat encounters that involved significant mechanics? So maybe exploration, interacting with puzzles liked locked doors, attempting persuasion or other influence. That kind of thing?
  10. One of the acid-tests will be if magic has a use outside of combat contexts. Both Savage Worlds and Fantasy AGE really suffer in this regard.
  11. That could be a general rule, or a campaign specific rule (e.g gritty campaign - once per day limit; four-colour campaign, no limit). Certainly in WFRP 3e the limit on healing was covered in the rule book rather than being addressed in the commentary for specific abilities. I'm not familiar enough with SW to know exactly how it is addressed there.
  12. Any indication of whether the magic skills are different in scope? For example, in D&D arcane magic can't heal.
  13. Any insight into whether all a caster can do (magically) is use the spells on their sheets or if there is the opportunity to improvise different effects on the spot?
  14. It seemed to like my Mac better Sounds good, if the information was sparse. Sounds like there will be guidance on how to create all sorts of things from equipment to talents, which is very promising for customisation.
  15. I don't Facebook I'll see if I can get that link to work - currently it doesn't like my iPad.