Jump to content

TedMaul

Members
  • Content Count

    25
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Well, there might be some concern about PCs that not only stack up on ranks of Defensive Training, but then pile a fully-tweaked Lorrdian Gemstone and curved hilt as well as donning armored clothing or armored robes. That starts getting into some very excessive numbers of setback dice onto an opponent's difficulty for melee checks, and one thing that the designers have been fairly adamant about is generally avoiding the huge piles of dice that is commonly seen in games like HERO/Champions and Shadowrun. Which is probably why the restriction is there in the first place, to avoid said problem. Then, take Defensive Training off of some trees. Maybe put a Deflective Training (weapon gets +1 Deflection rating). The number of setback die would still be fairly limited, this way. Also, I don't think Armor defense should stack with an item's Defensive rating, just like cover.
  2. Another option is to make Defensive Training give Defensive +1 to a weapon whether it has a Defensive rating or not, and simply move it to to a lower row on the trees, if necessary. I really don't like how this talent penalizes a player who chooses a defensive weapon, and also I can't understand the in-game explanation for such restriction.
  3. I really like this take on the Morality system. My main problem with Morality (RAW) is that, unlike Obligation and Duty, it is not a campaign driver mechanic, and it feels like a poor player resource, unlike both Obligation and Duty. The "Destiny" track as presented could fulfill the campaign driver mechanic very well, and I think the "player resource" thing attached to it (Extra destiny points) fits nicely also. I would make some changes tough: 1) A player's "Destiny" should have 2 descriptions attached: one related to the dark side, and one to the light side. 2) Each player has both a Conflict and a Serenity score that should be tracked separately. Whenever a player performs selfish and greedy actions, he increases his Conflict. Whenever he is altruistic and generous, he increases his Serenity. When his Serenity is equal to or higher than his Conflict, the player is a light-side Force User (using white pips on the Force Die). When his Conflict is higher, he becomes a darksider (using dark pips on the Force Die). 3) The player's current Destiny score is the greater of either his Serenity or Conflict. Each player starts with 25 Conflict and 25 Serenity. Alternatively, a player can choose to start with either with 10 Conflict or 10 Morality (or both), instead. If he chooses any of these options during character creation, he starts with bonus XP or extra credits, as showed below: 10 Conflict or 10 Serenity --> +5 XP or +1000 credits 10 Conflict and 10 Serenity --> +10 XP or +2500 credits 4) Whenever a lightsider uses dark pips to activate powers (flipping a destiny point and suffering strain) he also increases his Conflict by one for each dark pip spent (he is falling in temptation and using the dark side). Similarly, a darksider who uses white pips when activating powers (flipping a destiny point and suffering strain) increases his Serenity by 1 for each white pip spent (he is restraining himself and trying to keep to the light). However, a lightsider does not increase his Serenity by using white pips and a darksider does not increase his conflict by using dark pips. 5) At the end of each session, you can increase both your Conflict and Serenity, depending on the actions taken by the character (same guidelines as OP). 6) At the beginning of each session, when the GM makes the Destiny roll, comparing it to the party's Destiny chart. If a player's Destiny is rolled, his strain threshold increases by 1 if he is a lightsider, or decreases by 1 if he is a darksider. Double this bonus or penalty if the d100 roll comes in doubles (i.e. 66, 33 etc). Either way, the player's Destiny should come into play during the session, and this means that the character should have a tough moral choice related to his destiny along the way. Also, double any Conflict or Serenity the character gains during the session. 7) Using Destiny as a resource: the player's can change his Conflict or Serenity scores to gain benefits. He can either lower his Serenity by 5 when using a Light side destiny point to prevent it from being flipped to the dark side afterwards, or he can increase his Conflict by 5 to ignore a dark side destiny point's negative effects, when the GM uses it on himself (and only himself). The destiny point still gets flipped to the light side, afterwards. Both lightsiders and darksiders can choose either option. 8) Using Destiny as Threshold: If a player's Destiny gets higher than 100, it means he is close to fulfilling his destiny. When his happens, the GM and the player arrange the details of what happens. This should be a major dramatic event and give substantial story rewards for the player. The event should also be related to the type of destiny fulfilled (light or dark). Afterwards, the player should choose (or roll) a new destiny and replace the one fulfilled, also reducing both his Conflict and Serenity by half.
  4. Ok... maybe Makashi should have 4 ranks of Parry, then. This would make a full Makashi Duelist able to negate 8 damage with a single use of Parry... which is close in range to the RAW (5 ranks of Parry, for a 7 damage mitigation). But the point was the changed to Parry/Reflect, and I can't tell if you didn't like my suggestion or just ignored it, @Dono. Quoting for evaluation purposes.
  5. I agree that with the current setup, a Force User will get pretty high scores of "soak" with Reflect and Parry in the "1 + 2 per rank" idea. If you take Makashi Duelist, with 5 ranks of Parry (RAW being a total of 7 damage reduction), that would lead to a 11 damage reduction. My suggestion is to remove excess ranks to keep the total reduction the same. So for Makashi, with "1 + 2 per rank", you'd need only 3 ranks of Parry instead of 5, freeing 2 talents for flavor talents (or grit or toughened). I still think that +1 damage reduction for 1 talent is a pretty high cost, but since first rank will be pretty good, I guess it evens out. I think it's another fair compromise where you get to remove 1 instance of each to give the LS Form trees more flavor. I still favor the "1+2*rank" but "3+1*rank" would also get my vote. IMO keeping the numbers at "3 base +1 per rank" would still keep most LS trees a collection of repeated talents. To keep things interesting, no tree should have more than 3 copies of the same talent. So, using another suggestion based on discussions from other topics too, I'd suggest the following changes: Parry/Reflect: cost 2 strain to activate (instead of 3), and negates 2 damage per rank (instead of 2 base + 1 per rank). Improved Parry/Reflect: spend 2 Threat (instead of 3) or 1 Despair, and take 2 strain to activate (no strain cost, originally). Can also be activated on a miss, in which case you don't have to pay 2 strain to also activate Parry/Reflect. Every LS tree should be limited on how many Parry and Reflect it has, to a maximum of 3. This way, Makashi Duelist would have 3 ranks of Parry, negating up to 6 damage. DM's suggestion for the talents substitution on each LS on the other thread fits nicely. And also, this way, the activation of Improved Parry/Reflect will be more on the player's hand, since they roll 2 threat more frequently, but at a strain cost that will make them think twice before redirecting every attack.
  6. I was speaking broadly before, and I do realize that. What I meant to say was that a Force Talent should not simply be a copycat of what a Force Power can already accomplish (i.e. Overwhelm Emotions), because that pretty much makes the Talent (or a Force Power's upgrades) redundant. The Draw Closer, IMO, is a actually the opposite of the above, since it allows a specific application of Move, but a more powerful one indeed, since it also allows a combat check. That's exactly how I see Draw Closer working (on a telekinesis basis), and I think that it should be linked to the Move power. But allowing it also to spend FP on Move's all regular uses and upgrades would make it extremely overpowered. Tough, it makes sense to me to allow Draw Closer to work on several targets (i.e. activating Magnitude upgrades). It is looks very Jedi-ish to Force pull several battle droids (minions) and cutting them in half with only one action.
  7. Agreed. The talent should be renamed to "Weapon Throw" or something, tough. I really liked this idea. Maybe it could be one of the Discipline-related mods discussed on the other thread. Now, I have to disagree! The Agressor archetype is clearly the kind of guy who rushed into melee, so a Parry would fit in much better. Who really needs a Reflect on his tree, IMO, is the Shii-Cho Knight.
  8. And that is an example of talent I think should not be followed on F&D, since it is pretty much does the same thing as a Control Upgrade of Influence. If Force Talents are supposed to be more specific and less powerful than Force Powers, than they should complement whatever a Force Power and its upgrades allow someone to do, not replace it. The Draw Closer talent, on the other hand, allows someone to perform both a specific use of the Move power and an LS attack as only 1 action, which is great. Also, I would consider to adding the requirement of having the Move power in order to use the talent.
  9. Yes, upgrading is better than adding a setback die, but nevertheless it feels a little odd that the iconic defensive LS Form's spec doesn't have Defensive Training.
  10. Interesting discussion. But one of the things I don't agree with is that Unleash should be, in itself, a dark side power, since it becomes fo de lighting (which IS dark side!) only with several upgrades. Also, I don't see why the basic power should always grant 1 conflict, considering that the target could be a droid or even a object. The basic power could very well simply be an application of focused and strong telekinesis (a force "punch" for example)
  11. I do find that weird too. Since sores is basically the most combat defensive / enduring LS Form, it should have this talent. Also, Def. training would make activating improved parry more likely.
  12. I don't think harm should ignore soak, since it is essentially a life-energy drain, not exactly an attack (energy or otherwise). But I agree it is too powerful as it is. I like the idea of requiring FR 2 to buy it. And to make it not so easy to activate it, while also keeping it within the fluff of having a dark side and a light side version, Heal should be activated by using light side pips only, and Harm by spending dark pips.
  13. Makes sense to me. They specialize in wider, harder hitting attacks (Sarlacc Sweep being a huge example), so it only makes sense that you're more likely to hit something if you've got more people around you. A little bit, yes. But if you have only 2 people engaged to you, 1 attacking from behind and other in front of you. I don't see how anyone would be better at attacking an enemy in this situation then at attacking a single engaged enemy. That's why I think the boost die should go to defense. Shii-cho Knight should be good at defending themselves at a big melee.
  14. Actually, has anyone tought that maybe it is Shii-Cho Knight's Multiple Opponents that need fixing? It does seem too overpowered giving 1 free boost dice while engaged with more than 1 opponent. Although situational, it is not that uncommon, when you consider that most fights will have minions working close to each other, as a group. Also, I can't understand the logic of being better at striking someone when you have other targets engaged, threatening you. Maybe Multiple Opponent's bonus should go to defense, not attack.
  15. Agreed. That's why I think the offensive part (Improved Parry/Reflect) should be treated as a talent apart from the defensive part (Parry/Reflect). Each one should have its own out-of-turn-incidental. I made some suggestions on another topic: See the discussion on this topic: http://community.fantasyflightgames.com/index.php?/topic/122062-improved-parry-no-use-on-a-miss-does-it-work-with-circle-of-shelter/
×
×
  • Create New...