Fantasy Craft Play Experiences

[pawsplay]

It sounds like the goal was for each archetype to be unchallengeable in their own area of specialty, while others could contribute meaningfully but to a lesser extent in most areas. If so, that would be idea..

 

[Silvercat Moonpaw]

Well, that would be because I sort of disagree with Moonpaw. The default standard NPC mob is equal to the party size. So while the combatant classes are going to be the major players in combat, even a combat-secondary class is more than a match for a standard npc unless they deliberately eschewed any options that gave them combat ability.

Right, but combat isn't their class role. I was concentrating on that, I missed the non-class character aspect because it felt separate, not part of the equation.

It sounds like the goal was for each archetype to be unchallengeable in their own area of specialty, while others could contribute meaningfully but to a lesser extent in most areas.

Well a lot of the classes have overlapping areas: by the roles mentioned at the beginning of the class section only two (Explorer and Keeper) have only one role (not counting the Wildcard role in this equation). The combatant discrepancy comes because only Courtier, Explorer, and Keeper don't have at least a secondary role that could be about fighting.

But other classes -- by class features -- aren't oriented around being combatants or being primary combatants:
* The Assassin mostly has abilities for being "sneaky" in social situation.
* The Burglar is mostly avoidance.
* The Captain's features are mostly all buffs for others.
* The Sage is mostly about helping others achieve things whether by skill check assistance or a vitality-restoring speech or by luck.

So you end up with 5 classes that are (or at least could be in the case of Mage and Priest) primary combatants: Mage, Priest, Lancer, Scout, Soldier. The breakdown more becomes:
* Low combat potential: Courtier, Explorer, Keeper.
* Medium combat potential: Assassin, Burglar, Captain, Sage.
* High combat potential: Lancer, Scout, Soldier.
* Wildcards: Mage, Priest.
So there's really a spectrum of combat capability rather than a duality.

EDIT: Perhaps if you want to take a look at what Psion is talking about you can check out the free, pre-built Level 3 sample characters.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

It is hard to say - the amount of combat varies from campaign to campaign. I had a lloonngg running Spycraft 2.0 game set in the 1880s, in the entire time there was only four combats, and only one of them particularly urgent.

And this was not of my doing - the players seemed to delight in avoiding combat at every turn, even the Soldier. My favorite involved ballroom dancing, two partner swaps, and some pretty minor illusion magic. (I was using Elements of Magic: Mythic Earth for the spell system.)

Hell, it was probably the only time I have wished that my players were more combat prone.

The Auld Grump

 

[Silvercat Moonpaw]

Although one of the things Spycraft 2.0 had going for it was the Dramatic Conflict system. FantasyCraft doesn't have that.

 

[Krensky]

The combatant discrepancy comes because only Courtier, Explorer, and Keeper don't have at least a secondary role that could be about fighting.

The Courtier and Keeper can hold their own in a fight, although ideally they should avoid directly engaging in combat in favor of ranged attacks and support roles (healing, buffing, etc). Explorer, however, is a quite capable combatant, primarily due to the large amount of feats and it's (insane at high levels) toughness. Explorer is the class you use to build Indiana Jones, Daniel Jackson, or Laura Croft. It's not as tightly focused as a Soldier or Lancer, but still good. The Sage is similar, especially with it's access to other classes abilities.

Again, they are not as focused on combat as a Soldier or Lancer, but they're at least as good as a Scout in combat.

These classes are largely unchanged from SC2.0, so experience with them there carries over well. My current SC2 game has a Pointman (aka Sage, although there are some differences), Scout/Sniper, Soldier/Scientist/Medic, a Sleuth, and an Explorer. The Pointman and Sage more then pull their weight in combat not quite as good as the Scout/Sniper, but then again they have more flexibility (the Scout is very focused on being a marksman).

 

[Khaalis]

Although one of the things Spycraft 2.0 had going for it was the Dramatic Conflict system. FantasyCraft doesn't have that.

Yet. Crafty has said that they will be releasing Dramatic Conflicts for FC, they just haven't said when. I believe they have also said they will be released as individual conflicts like I believe they did later in the Spycraft releases.