Star Wars Saga/D&D 5th Hybrid [OOC/Rolls]

[GreenKarl]

The first tunnel with troopers in it has the smoke and the second tunnel that was 60 meters away had the troopers and officer Wissen come out of and the tunnel 100 meters away had the two battle droids. PART of the plan was for you to go further forward BUT Cal spotted the sniper in the first tunnel and so the plan went a bit to heck

 

[GreenKarl]

No problem. Work has been super slow today, so I decided to try to put together a droid PC to see how those rules work out.

A few questions/comments:

1) Do they get Force Points? I know they cannot access force skills, feats, talents, classes, etc, but wasn't sure about Force Points.

2) I think HPs may end up artificially low due to not having a CON bonus. Perhaps their Degree should provide some kind of per level HP bonus based on how sturdy one would expect their construction to be? Degree 1 & 3 maybe not getting any extra HPs, Degree 2 getting some extra HPs, & Degree 4 & 5 getting a solid HP boost?

3) When droids get feats/skills/talents due to increasing levels, do they have to purchase them? Or is that only if they want to swap them out?

4) I'm not sure how I feel about swapping talents, that seems like it should be something specific to class. Or is there an unwritten limitation that they can only swap out talents that they would otherwise qualify for by class?

5) Basic Systems: Can a droid downgrade their stock basic systems to recover Mod points? For instance, if a droid comes stock with two legs (1 Mod) for locomotion, could it gain a mod point by downgrading to Tracked Locomotion (0 Mod)? I assumed so. Also, can two arms be swapped for two grabbing claws, two tool/weapon attachments, or a combination without expending additional mod points? For instance, I swapped out the two arms on my droid for one tool/weapon attachment and one grabbing claw, but didn't charge an extra mod point. My idea was a droid with a drill for one hand (Tool/Weapon attachment) and a grabbing claw for the other (or alternately, some kind of pile-driving fist, which I guess would be another weapon/tool attachment).

6) Since Unarmed Strikes aren't light weapons, I was thinking about swapping out the grabbing claw with a weapon/tool mount for a power glove, which is considered a light weapon. Would that grant normal unarmed damage plus the bonus Energy damage? Could it be used to make a grappling attack in accordance with the Brawl Feat? The ultimate goal would be to two-weapon fight with the fist and drill, grabbing the target and then applying the drill, but that would only work if both weapons are light. I guess I would need advice on how to pull this off. Maybe it is just something that would have to wait for 5th Level and Double Attack.

Sorry about all the questions about a theoretical build, but I figured I might as well test it out.

1) Droids with Heroic levels do get Force Points but can't take any of the feats that give them more or allow them to roll a d8 instead of a d4
2) I was thinking about letting them use their Strength modifier instead...
3) All droids get feats at 1st, 3rd, 5th, etc. Droids with Heroic levels get the Talents and bonus Feats of their classes.
4) For swapping I am assuming you are talking about the Memory and Memory Wipes and yes this is suppose to be restricted to the class of the Droid. So a Droid Scout with Evasion could swamp it out for Acute Senses, etc.
5) Yes I was thinking about allowing a droid character to downgrade a basic system for something else. I also meant to put in that a droid could also use a Class Talent as a 1 point System.
6) Yes the glove and other simple weapons are listed as Light Weapons so they could as such for think like Two Weapon fighting, double attack, etc. so long as one is listed as a light weapon.

 

[Sezarious]

Ok. So if that's the direction you want to head in GK, then what about the 'stunned' condition? Does it stay the same? I suppose, just the change to the reeling rules mean that it inadvertently changes, because you could potentially recover from both stunned and reeling in the one round with successful rolls, but that DOES require two successful roles and an action and bonus action/end of round recovery roll.

With regards to my thoughts about damage threshold, I think back to when we were fighting the pirates, I don't remember the numbers specifically, but we were blasting groups of them with auto-fire in the hope to send them reeling, then leaving them so that we could take down others.

It was a really fun fight, because conventionally with gaming, you generally try to take out one enemy at a time, but in that situation it was a gamble that paid off, sending a few pirates reeling, chasing others through to the ships, at one point, i ignored a pirate who was blocking my way, copping the attack of opportunity, just so i could attack the pilot. In that situation, reeling worked strongly in our favour as a party and allowed us greater action economy so we could prevent the pirates from stealing any ships.

I guess what i'm saying is i've always found the reeling mechanic to be a lot of fun, because it adds another dimension to combat and can impact on our methods of fighting.

Regarding my suggestion about armor, i would also point out, that lightsabers would still bypass the bonus i suggested, because that's what they do. A lot of force powers would be the same.

I don't know.... Just my thoughts on the matter.

Furthermore.... In regards to my IC post..... Greenkarl, if you are happy with the change, I would prefer, to probably change my previous post to have Jihahna double back. I was mainly thinking about trying to draw fire from the droid, but standing up will possibly help with that. I'll make the change assuming you are ok with it, but will change it back if you are not.

 

[Forged Fury]

I don't think the proposal changes the damage threshold calculations, so they should work like they did against the trandoshans. The proposal is to change the recovery mechanic and formula. It would ultimately retain the fact that something happens from reeling (disadvantage on everything for a turn or using your Action to more easily recover), but reduces the likelihood that someone is taken out for multiple rounds, particularly at higher Reeling DCs, by allowing the recovery roll to improve by something other than raw Constitution.

As far as changing the Stun condition generated by multiple Reeling conditions, as written, I think it only last one round as it is. There's no roll required I think it could still be in place, since the roll to remove Reeling would be a non-action, at least with the latest proposal.

Two questions about the Stunned condition, @GreenKarl:

You have it lasting one round, but I think most conditions applied like this in 5E are listed as being "until the end of your/their turn" with respect to who applied or is suffering from the condition. Basically, the question is when does the stun end? At the end of the stunee's turn or until the beginning of the stunner's next turn? Given group initiative in our game, it may not matter since they are effectively the same thing, assuming two groups.

Also, how do the Stun condition rules change given static defenses? In 5E, it means you auto-fail any STR or DEX saves since you're considered incapacitated. But we don't have those saves...

 

[GreenKarl]

As for Stunned condition... yes I should problem change it to the 5th ed. writing, until the end of your turn. There are some Talents that impose the condition which I think I would word until the end of the attackers next turn, etc. Have to think about it a bit more...

As for how the condition changes with static saves, instead for situations these usually instead require an attack roll. So a Dex save might include vs. an Area of Effect, and in that case, the attack has Advantage. A situation where you might have disadvantage on fortitude saves vs. poisons the attacking poison instead would have advantage on its attack to hit the Fort defense.

 

[Forged Fury]

RE: STR/DEX saves & the Stunned condition - Since attacks against stunned targets already have advantage, I'm not sure that changes anything. I'd suggest either ignoring that part of the Stunned condition from 5E, since this system combines AC and saves or make it like disadvantage on a passive check, just apply -5 to their Fortitude or Reflex Defense while Stunned. That combined with the Advantage means the stunned target is likely well and truly screwed.

 

[Sezarious]

Ok, so although reeling is less likely to last multiple rounds, it'll probably be a lot more in alignment with 5e principles. An enemy would still be unable to fight or they'll be at disadvantage for at least one round. For players, it will create an element of a gamble in it, 'do i use up my action now or do something else and hope the condition subsides'.

Then, the idea of giving the stunned condition a boost might be kind of cool.

I'd be inclined to go with Greenkarl's suggestion of giving advantage to attackers. I understand that the -5 is mathematically the equivalent of advantage/disadvantage, however, using Greenkarls proposed method, you'll have a nice interaction between opposing sides. If we stun an enemy and one of our characters are reeling, they could still attack the stunned enemy and the advantage will cancel out their disadvantage from reeling. Pretty cool if you ask me. It makes this gand have an ability to buff the party with her devastating attack. It just fits in my mind...

My main fear before, was losing the fun dynamics of the reeling and stunning conditions, but this would rebalance pretty nicely i think. I just wasn't quite sure about what people were thinking for the final solution.

I'm convinced now. . Awesome rules discussion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Sezarious]

Oh, separate matter. Greenkarl, in the original rogues gallery, i think you had Captain Kaldo. I was just wondering what he looked like or if you had a picture? I was also wondering about the Survey rep Zabrak Kooth Odok. Did you picture him as having any face tattoos or specific horns or cream skin colour?

Finally, minor detail, but i looked up the morning song, because i was curious about it 'lore'-wise. In looking myself mind you, I was surprised to find it difficult to bring up any old republic light freighter. The best i found was a 'Lethisk Class light freighter', but it requires a crew of 3. Though the remaining slots could be filled with ai or droids as Kaldo likes his ship as it requires only himself. I'm just re-reading through campaign info for fun and just was curious about those things....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Forged Fury]

The reason I was suggesting the -5 to Fortitude/Reflex Defenses was because the stunned condition already grants advantage on attack rolls against the stunned target as one of the benefits.

Here's what Stunned does, under 5E rules:

[LIST]
[*]A stunned creature is incapacitated (can take no actions or reactions), can’t move, and can speak only falteringly.
[*]The creature automatically fails [URL="https://roll20.net/compendium/dnd5e/Ability%20Scores#h-Strength"]Strength[/URL] and [URL="https://roll20.net/compendium/dnd5e/Ability%20Scores#h-Dexterity"]Dexterity[/URL] saving throws.
[*][URL="https://roll20.net/compendium/dnd5e/Combat#h-Attack"]Attack[/URL] rolls against the creature have advantage.
[/LIST]

Since we're operating under a system that consolidates armor class and save mechanics into one unified defensive score system, the second and third benefits are kind of redundant, more along the lines of the second benefit not meaning anything in our system since we don't have saving throws. The third benefit also makes Stunned a slightly more severe effect in our game since it now helps mental attacks as well, as the advantage of the third benefit would also be applied to "attacks" against the stunned target's Will Defense.

Suggestion for a change to Stunned: Delete the third benefit (Advantage on attacks). Modify the second benefit to grant advantage on attacks made against the stunned target's Fortitude or Reflex Defenses. That would basically keep it in line with the 5E version of stunned (since all standard weapon attacks are going to be against the target's Reflex defense).

Would that work?

 

[Sezarious]

Ah, I misunderstood. Yeah I think that would be the most efficient solution.

Though, in effectively combining the two lower rules, we do lose the 'automatically fails' aspect of strength and dex saves regarding environmental factors.

I mean, it's not a big loss, but if an enemy is say standing on a droid factory conveyor belt and is stunned under the 5e rules, they're guaranteed to fail the dex save to avoid getting chopped up. (I tried to envision a star wars relevant scene there).

But it could be as simple as stunning someone who is climbing a rope, balancing on a small beam atop a lava pit or trying not to slip on ice.

If you wanted to keep that aspect of stunned in there though, the final points could be something like:

*A stunned creature is incapacitated (can take no actions or reactions), can't move, and can speak only falteringly.

*The creature automatically fails any fortitude or reflex save brought on by their environment.

*Attack rolls against the creatures fortitude and reflex defence have advantage.

I just don't know if that second point is too open to interpretation...

On the other hand, if it was something not worth bothering about, maybe instead allowing point 3 to allow advantage on all attacks would be kind of cool. Stunning an enemy so you can more easily mess with their head?

Handy if it just happens naturally in combat.... But definitely would be a dark side tactic if done deliberately... Torture mechanic. Hmm... No scratch that last idea... Could be easily abused i think.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk