Jump to content

bharrington73

Members
  • Content Count

    62
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About bharrington73

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

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

Profile Information

  • Location
    Orlando, Florida, United States

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Given this change, in an ambush scenario (Cool vs Vigilance) could characters that net one or more failures fail to act at all in the initial round of combat (No initiative slot is given)? Then, at the start of the second round, make a standard Cool vs Cool Initiative roll to determine the order for the remainder of the encounter. This could provide an 'extra' action to ambushers if they can increase the difficulty of the Initiative roll sufficiently.
  2. How was this generated? It looks even better than the GM-Binder stuff.
  3. I guess I'm trying to figure out what the advantages would be of increasing your silhouette. I could just have it add +2 Brawn (which would also include the corresponding +2 soak increase). But, a strong character (Brawn 4) would already be approaching the ridiculous Brawn 6 level. Too many dice. Bigger things tend to be able to take more damage. This could be done via increasing the soak (Enduring), or increasing the wound threshold or reducing the effect of crits (Durable). Some, examples from the Terrinoth book with a silhouette of 3. Forest Guardian (Nemesis): Brawn 5, Soak 6, Wound Threshold 25. 10 base damage Brawl rolling to hit. Also has Sweep attack. Spined Thresher (Nemesis): Brawn 5, Soak 7, Wound Threshold 25. 9 base damage Brawl rolling to hit. Giant (Nemesis): Brawn 6, Soak 8, Wound Threshold 33. 6 base damage Brawl rolling to hit with a Crit of 3 and Vicious 4. Giant Snake (Rival): Brawn 4, Soak 4, Wound Threshold 14. 10 base damage Brawl rolling to hit with Crit 3, Ensnare 4 and Stun 4. Adding extra damage instead of successes might work, but what about when the character wants to lift something or break something down? (i.e. a non-attack) Your average starting mage (Int 4, Magic 2) can get +2 soak from a Barrier Spell on an Easy() check 72% of the time so I don't see how the +2 soak is too much. Your average starting mage (Int 4, Magic 2) can get + to ALL checks from an Augment spell on an Average () check 80% of the time. I think getting + to just one Characteristic might be only an Easy () task. You can add +[Knowledge] to the wound threshold as well on a Difficult () augment check 70% of the time. The only part I think might be overpowered at Difficult () is for the addition of the Sweep attack.
  4. Does this spell seems remotely balanced? Giant Growth Augment Hard () Select one target at Engaged range. The target gains +2 Silhouette, +2 Soak, +2 successes on any Brawn based check and all of their Brawl and Melee attacks gain Sweep (may spend from a Brawl or Melee check to hit one additional engaged opponent that would be no more difficult to attack than the original target, dealing base damage +1 damage per ) Simply adding +2 to Brawn would achieve many of the same effects, but I'm trying to keep the dice pool at a reasonable level.
  5. Lately I've been contemplating how a player could push the limits of their magical capabilities (more successes and advantages) at an increased risk. I see the existing magic rules as a solid set for explaining how to cast (relatively) safely. You can add effects and even double the base damage by increasing the difficulty which in turn not only increases the risk to the character (in terms of disadvantages) but also makes it less likely to succeed at all. Is a talent that adds two boost dice at a cost of upgrading the difficulty unbalanced? It kind of captures what I am going for... more power at a greater risk of Despair. What else can a character risk in order to push the limits? How would we capture that mechanically?
  6. Precise Aim seems woefully under powered. The Aim maneuver by itself adds one Boost Die. Precise Aim (1) removes one Setback from Defense die for 1 Strain as a maneuver. Ummm, what? We know a Boost die is slightly better than a Setback die (given the extra Advantage pip). Also, being limited to removing dice from Melee or Ranged Defense is far more restricting. At rank 2 you are spending a maneuver and 2 strain to remove two Setback dice from Defense vs Aiming twice for 2 Strain (for the extra maneuver) and you can use it to target the squishy mage. At rank 3 maybe it becomes worth it, but only if you are consistently fighting guys in plate + shield in guarded stance. Making it a Tier 3 talent just make the cost-benefit analysis that much worse. My suggestion is to rename it and make it an enhancement to the Aim maneuver. Find WeaknessTier: 3Activation: PassiveRanked: YesOnce per round, when performing the Aim maneuver, suffer a number of strain no greater than ranks in Find Weakness , then reduce target's melee and ranged defense by that number.
  7. This brings up something I have been struggling with. Where do you draw the line between adding an Effect that any player can trigger and a Talent needs to be purchased? What if the Effects you listed cost a Maneuver to initiate instead of / in addition to the Stress cost? I'm not sure that trying to balance Melee / Magic is necessary. I think that's entirely setting dependent.
  8. Something about the flat 2 Strain cost to all Magic spells doesn't sit right with me. I guess I prefer the costs to be more dependent on the magnitude of the effect you are attempting to generate. Also, the fixed cost (along with 2 Strain penalty for excess Threat) really limits the number of times a spell caster can take the spotlight in an Encounter. Just spit balling here, but what if the Strain cost was equal to the total Threat rolled (not just the Threat that wasn't cancelled by Advantage but ALL Threat rolled)? The more difficult a spell you are attempting the more Strain you risk suffering. Net Advantages could be used to reduce the Strain and net Threat could cause additional Strain at the normal 1-1 ratio. Standard AAPPDD roll would result in an average of 1.5 rolled Threat --> Strain. This is almost the current default cost of 2. The average 1.1 Advantages could offset most, but not all of that Strain, unless you decide to use it to trigger Qualities. Hmm, do I want to trigger Burn or take 2 less Stress? At worst on an Average [DD] roll you would suffer 8 Strain before offsets. 4 from Threat rolled and somehow not rolling any Advantages for a net Threat of 4 --> additional 4 Strain. Currently, rolling 4 net Threat results in 10 Strain. Kick up the Difficulty to AAPPDDDD and now you are rolling an average of 3 Threat (--> Strain) and now the net Advantages drops to -0.4 (or an additional 0.4 Strain from Threat). Overcoming Setback dice could cause more Stress? OK. Easy rolls should cause minimal Stress but roll badly on a Daunting Task and you just KO'd yourself. As you increase your Skill the Strain cost should go down unless you now decide to push for more difficulty spells. I think I prefer that "feel". Certain Items and Talents could now be used to offset Strain loss. Thoughts?
  9. dbmeboy said: Brad Harrington said: dbmeboy said: I just wanted to make sure that nobody is having any trouble scheduling their matches. Please let me know if you are. So far, I have these results: Still haven't been able to get a hold of JCMB to schedule the match. I'll try to contact him as well. If he doesn't respond to me by the time that the rest of the matches are finished, he will be considered to have dropped (you'll get +4 points). I got a hold of him last night and we will try to get the match done tonight. I will keep you posted.
  10. dbmeboy said: I just wanted to make sure that nobody is having any trouble scheduling their matches. Please let me know if you are. So far, I have these results: Still haven't been able to get a hold of JCMB to schedule the match.
  11. JMCB - Any night after 9:00 PM EST. Check your FFG messages for my email address so we can set something up.
  12. Hey, I play with a buddy every sunday at his place over in Avalon. I'd love to swing by Paladin some time you guys are there. What times are you normally there?
  13. Mobilize the Squardrons has: Reaction: After you refresh, remove 1 focus token from a target objective or enhancement you control. Heavy Blaster Emplacement has: Action: Focus this enhancement to have your opponent deal 1 damage to a unit he controls. In the rulebook on page 30, the timing chart indicates there is an Action window before the end of the Refresh Phase ends. Turn begins with Focus token on Heavy Blaster Emplacement, which gets removed during the second 'box' of the Refresh Phase. Can I use the Action on the Heavy Blaster Emplacement during the Action window specified in the Refresh Phase diagram and then after the Refresh Phase ends use the Reaction on Mobilize the Squadrons to remove the new Focus token, thus allowing me to effectively use the HBE twoce a turn?
  14. DefconX said: This also makes a lot of sense. If we expand it out a little more, we are basically looking at something like this: [Constant Abilities] --> [Conditional Triggered Ability #1] --> [Constant Abilities] --> [Conditional Triggered Ability #2] --> … --> [Constant Abilities] --> [Conditional Triggered Ability #N] --> [Constant Abilities] --> [Paid Triggered Abilities] With no allowance for any paid abilities to be used until the Nth conditional triggered ability is resolved. Sound about right? Err, well, kinda… it's more of a priority system than a clear flow like that. Constant Abilities are always in effect so before any Conditional or Paid Triggered Ability can be triggered you have to check to make sure there isn't any Constant Ability effects to resolve. Each scenario is unique since a Conditional or Paid Triggered Ability may result in a game state where a Constant Ability effect now "matters" or a Conditional Trigger may now have its conditional met. And we haven't taken into account Prevent or Avoid abilities
×
×
  • Create New...