emeraldbeacon
Adventurer
Thinking about the Conquest game within this campaign; I'm trying to balance the game for different character abilities, as there's one character in my online game (a Lore Bard who specializes in being drunk) who has a massive number of synergies for the game, that would otherwise have no reason AT ALL to be good at the game. These are changes I'm thinking of making to the setup...
What stays the same: The game still uses Intelligence (History) checks for the main contested roll. "Bigger Army" bonuses still add +2 for each factor of 2 that one force outclasses the weakest army by. Insight, Deception, and Persuasion all add synergy bonuses from turn 3 and beyond. Losses still add cumulative -2 penalties.
What I'm thinking of changing: I'm considering allowing the use of alternate Intelligence-based skills as an optional choices for the main contested roll, if the player can justify it. Perhaps each other skill can be used once during each game: Nature, for example, would involve using terrain & weather to your advantage, while Arcana might employ magical troops in an unexpected fashion. I'm also thinking of reducing the impact of skill-based proficiency/expertise bonuses from +2 to +1, so a particular drunken Bard can't instantly gain a +10 bonus on turn 3. Alternately, maybe only one of those skill bonuses can be applied, rather than all three being viable every turn.
What I'm not sure about: There are also +2 bonuses granted for certain in-game traits, such as a noble or military background, and the Commander archetype. Should those represent a single +2 that can be gained one of many different ways, or are they cumulative (i.e. a Lord or Duke, who's become a Commander Fighter, and has extensive battlefield experience should get +2, or +6?) I'm also not sure if proficiency in gaming tools (such as Dragonchess) should extend towards Conquest, or if a player that devotes a tool proficiency to Conquest should be rewarded as such...
Thoughts?
What stays the same: The game still uses Intelligence (History) checks for the main contested roll. "Bigger Army" bonuses still add +2 for each factor of 2 that one force outclasses the weakest army by. Insight, Deception, and Persuasion all add synergy bonuses from turn 3 and beyond. Losses still add cumulative -2 penalties.
What I'm thinking of changing: I'm considering allowing the use of alternate Intelligence-based skills as an optional choices for the main contested roll, if the player can justify it. Perhaps each other skill can be used once during each game: Nature, for example, would involve using terrain & weather to your advantage, while Arcana might employ magical troops in an unexpected fashion. I'm also thinking of reducing the impact of skill-based proficiency/expertise bonuses from +2 to +1, so a particular drunken Bard can't instantly gain a +10 bonus on turn 3. Alternately, maybe only one of those skill bonuses can be applied, rather than all three being viable every turn.
What I'm not sure about: There are also +2 bonuses granted for certain in-game traits, such as a noble or military background, and the Commander archetype. Should those represent a single +2 that can be gained one of many different ways, or are they cumulative (i.e. a Lord or Duke, who's become a Commander Fighter, and has extensive battlefield experience should get +2, or +6?) I'm also not sure if proficiency in gaming tools (such as Dragonchess) should extend towards Conquest, or if a player that devotes a tool proficiency to Conquest should be rewarded as such...
Thoughts?
