Jump to content

Doctor Xerox

Members
  • Content Count

    111
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Doctor Xerox

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    -
  • MSN
    -
  • Website URL
    http://-
  • ICQ
    -
  • Yahoo
    -
  • Skype
    -

Profile Information

  • Location
    Minnesota, United States
  1. I like these a lot. My one thought is that the potent potions might be a little too strong. You could make them all unranked and leave them at their current tier or increase the tier of the base and enhanced by 1 to keep them ranked. Stacking setback and upgrades seems very strong.
  2. I've also had a GM rule, at times, that you could disengage and engage a different enemy in a single maneuver. This usually only happened when A) the two enemies were very close together or B) the enemy you wanted to disengage from was obviously not paying as much attention to you do to attacking a different entity engaged with it or something similar. It usually required both. Pure houserule, but I think its something for GMs to consider, especially in a game with lots of melee fighting.
  3. The wording is a little wonky, so I can understand the confusion, but the cheat sheet is correct here. Pg 104 in the chart, "Perform an immediate free maneuver that does not exceed the limit of two maneuvers per turn." Works the same way in Star Wars.
  4. My opinion is that if your biggest reason for choosing your hobby is to make money, you're looking for disappointment. Financial success can come from a hobby, but its a very rare and unpredictable thing. You should create and play because you find it fun to create and play. If money is your goal you should work on making your own product.
  5. I think that looks very good. It gets rid of another cheesy tactic you can do in star wars: grabbing one enemy and throwing it into another to damage both with no difficulty increase. As for the manipulative attack effect, I'd personally houserule it can't move people anywhere vertically. Especially if using this power you've just made.
  6. I probably would never allow this talent to work on a monster of silhouette 3 or higher, and would think hard before I allowed it on a silhouette 2. Of course, once you get to silhouette 3 or more, you could often say the monster could reach into short range with its melee attacks. And remember that the Ensnare quality usually lasts for multiple turns and requires an action to remove early, so this talent doesn't make the advantage pointless. This system was highly lethal in star wars (In terms of wound threshold, that is. The crits are generally as lethal as the gm chooses.), and I don't imagine it has changed much from reading the talents. Giving up most, if not all, of your damage for the turn is a steep price for this action. If a player is somehow abusing it, its trivial to start giving most of your melee threats a back-up ranged weapon.
  7. Immobilize is not that strong. Especially not in a game with lots of ranged weapons like in your example. If you're at range to shoot someone, they're at range to shoot you. And you say the poorer shots in the group will abuse this, but you still need to hit for it to work, so you don't want to be that poor of a shot. So you're trading damage for a situationally-useful condition. Good encounter design makes this weaker as well. The PCs should usually be outnumbered, which makes sacrificing damage to inconvenience one enemy a poor decision. Encounters should include minion groups, against which you should pretty much always choose damage over this. The targets you'd want to use this on are rivals and nemeses, which will often (or always at higher xp levels) have adversary ranks, so the poor shots will have trouble hitting them. I don't see many situations where this talent is good, frankly. It's more useful in a fantasy setting where ranged is less common than melee. I'm having trouble imagining a time to use it besides when a dangerous beast or a rampaging orc with a battleaxe can be kept out of the battle temporarily.
  8. The simple way would be to just use the attack spell. The rules call out that any spell that's intent is to damage the enemy is an attack. Any custom spell that does this should be balanced against the damage potential of the attack spell, though could be made slightly easier as it can't be used indoors. Also remember we also don't have the morality system that star wars has in genesys, and any good star wars GM would be handing out conflict like candy for this very grim method of execution. Plus, move in star wars was notoriously the cheese-damage ability and this tactic made it even more cheesy. Its pure munchkin rules manipulation rather than roleplay, so I'd be inclined to veto any attempts to recreate the power from star wars and tell them their attack damage from the normal attack action is how much damage they can do by throwing someone upward.
  9. A few quality-of-life suggestions on the materials: Adamant: Division is rarely found in this system, so rather than 50% encumbrance, I'd suggest -1 or 2 encumbrance to a minimum of 1. If you want to leave it at 50%, make a note of which way you should round a half. I also wonder if this can be used with any armor or it needs to be metal Bloodsteel: Is this supposed to work with any type of weapon? If so, getting straight to Crit rating 1 on a bludgeoning weapon is absurd. I suggest either specifying it can only be used to create bladed weapons or changing the Crit part to Crit rating of -2 to a minimum of 1. Starmetal: Similar question to bloodsteel, is this intended on all types of weapons or no? And does anything happen to a weapon's pierce quality when it gets this or does it get to keep pierce? (Not that ignoring 10 soak is all that different than ignoring 11+ on personal weapons, but a weapon having both sounds a little messy.)
  10. Not sure exactly which point they're arguing about. If its Magic shouldn't have the extra cost of activation: The charts all say "the attack gains the _______ quality" making no mention of running it any differently from a normal weapon quality anywhere in the text. The rules for weapon qualities are on 86-89. Tell them to feel free to peruse . If its "Burn/Blast/Ensnare/etc don't say it costs advantage to activate: 4th paragraph on page 86
  11. Well, if you had a setting with Cybernetics and Magic you could combine them to get 7 in a characteristic. Maybe up to 8 with overcharge.
  12. There's a tier 5 talent in star wars that does exactly that: Coordination Dodge: Spend a [Story] Point when targetted by a combat check to add failure equal to ranks in Coordination to the results.
  13. You might tone down the warhammer and greathammer, slightly. Note that pierce 3 or less is almost always the same as that much damage, unless cortosis (or whatever you want to call the armor quality that ignores pierce) is common in your game. Maybe drop their pierce ratings by 1 and give them disorient 2 for the head-ringer/appendage-numbing potential?
  14. I think you mis-remembered it then. I double-checked and the Gencon sheets say you may spend 2 strain instead of 2 advantage to activate the second strike.
  15. Yeah, I was struggling to get the numbers to even match up with each other when I tried more complicated. I eventually noticed something odd, and to test it, told it to tell me the odds of getting 1 or more successes AND 0 successes on the same roll. It claimed there was an 8% chance of that happening
×
×
  • Create New...