Fantasycraft

[Silvercat Moonpaw]

The biggest advantage, by far, is that the adventures are not necessarily tied to level - that they can be scaled on the fly. I can say that the NPC/Monster system is pretty darned awesome. I like being able to pit a second level party against a giant and not have to worry that it will all end in tears. And because of the way NPCs work they scale relative to the PCs - so an NPC that can clean their clocks at first level can still do so at level ten.

For the homebrew in particular it means that I can scale an adventure when the PCs get to it - kind of important since it is a fairly open setting in regards to where they go. This allows me to place some adventures by area, rather than having them travel from job to job, adventure to adventure.

I've also recently wondered whether you couldn't use this to simulate slower growth in power, with the world scaling such that the PCs aren't mythical in comparison.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

I have not yet tried Fantasy Craft at the upper limits, so I can't speak from experience.

I did run a game of Spycraft that made it to level eighteen or so, but the group was a trifle atypical in their approach. Two years of gaming - four combats, only one of which was really dangerous. The PCs managed to duck, dodge, sneak by, or otherwise avoid nearly every combat that I had in the campaign.... My favorite involved ballroom dancing, two partner swaps, and a minor illusion spell.... I actually got annoyed at how deft they became at avoiding conflict. Something that had never happened to me before.

I have not taken a good look at True Sorcery yet, so I cannot really compare it to EoM:ME.

I did twiddle with the skill points though - the first Tradition feat a magic user takes gives him four skill points plus his Int modifier to spend only on the magic skills granted by that Tradition. He also gains a number of Magic skill points equal to the character's number of Tradition feats at each level. All other points come out of class skill points as usual.

Depending on the setting I also have casting deal subdual damage to the caster. (Still twiddling with that number - in my previously mentioned Steampunk game I first had the damage too high, and then too low. I am now going with subdual damage of D6 plus the level of the spell. The first spell is not very likely to knock you out, later spells without resting are much more likely to do so. All subdual damage resets at the end of the scene.

I am also still waffling on how to handle the subdual damage from Ritual spells - which has not been all that important in play, they managed to pretty much avoid ritual casting.

The Auld Grump

 

[pawsplay]

I'm sort of fascinated by the idea of Fantasy Craft, but there are a number of specific things I've noticed that are starting to give me fits. For instance, dwarves can't jump or swim. At all. If there's a DC associated with a jump or swim, they fail. Aside from the balance issues (necessity for Swim checks equals dead dwarf - this is supposed to improve play experience?), it seems like an awfully... specific... interpretation of the dwarf archetype. I'm not trying to get hung up on one thing, but it makes me nervous about what other surprises I can expect to find. On the Crafty boards the designer was talking about this issue and seemed to feel the banned actions were needed to "balance" the race because of its powerful advantages, but I wonder if perhaps the race could have simply had less powers, or if "you dwarf you die" is somehow a better result than assigning a -4 penalty or whatever to such checks, making high DCs essentially out of reach (no pun intended) of the typical dwarf.

I'm also sort of intimidated by the large amount of specialized vocabulary.

It also appears that a animating skeletons is a very intensive process that uses up lots of permanent resources... that might stand in the way of some classic villain activities.

I like to support innovative designs and I hear a lot about FC that I like the sound of, but it also sounds like there are some design choices I might consider idiosyncratic.

 

[coyote6]

Yeah, if I ever run Fantasy Craft, "banned actions" will mostly turn into "penalties to these actions". I'd probably replace or augment the banned actions for the dwarf, too.

(I've seen the "dwarves can't swim" thing before -- IIRC, in the Guardians of the Flame books, dwarves were denser than humans, and thus couldn't float. But "dwarves can't jump at all" just seems silly-hilarious; can dwarves hop? Skip? At what point does a long step become a short jump, and the dwarf fails and falls down?)

 

[pawsplay]

I'm also kind of stuck on the whole "longsword wielded two-handed is pretty much better than a greatsword in every way, including damage, unless you have a number of specialized abilities" thing. I don't want to pretend I'm speaking from great knowledge here, I don't own the book, but it's been talked over quite a bit on the Crafty forums. And the dev response is basically, "And, so?" I can appreciate that kind of panache, but it seems inconsistent with the design gains of a low(er) magic level assumed game with very extensive detail at most levels of the system. Particularly since armor = DR.

 

[Psion]

IME where people have tried to tack on mere penalties to skills in 3e, it has never been too meaningful. It's just "stuff you won't do and let the rest of the party take care of." It stank too much of GURPS style point farming.

That said, the banned skill check mechanic does seem a little cut-and-dried to me. The crafty take is that they can still jump/swim/whatever as long as no skill check is required. But to me, that's just a low DC and taking 10; there's always a DC.

My "behind the scenes" replacement for the banned skill check mechanic is:
1) None of your ranks apply to the check, and
2) -4 to the check.

That way, it
1) maps more neatly to the "spectrum of DCs" and not just relying on DM generosity, and
2) handles cases like jump spells, etc., in a way the cut-and-dried solution can't
... while still serving as an occasional snag when the check comes up in play.

 

[pawsplay]

That seems more reasonable and useful to me. It amounts to almost the same thing, but doesn't result in as many absurd special cases. Alex, however, suggest that such a light-hearted approach would result in humans being completely overwpowered. Hm.

 

[Silvercat Moonpaw]

Alex, however, suggest that such a light-hearted approach would result in humans being completely overwpowered.

It would, in the sense that dwarves then would have one less flaw that would make people consider twice whether their concept needs a dwarf over a human. Same reasoning as Iconic Classes and Iconic Specialties.

I'm not sure a simple -4 penalty is going to be able to replace that: as you go up in level it's going to mean less and less. Possibly if you always start at Level 1 it might scare you enough, but what if you start at higher level? I think Banned Skill Checks were just the simplest method the designers could come up with to keep the flaw relevant at all levels.

@pawsplay, in regards to longswords vs. greatswords: Shouldn't the use of a lighter weapon be easier -- and thus more likely to cause damage -- than a heavier one unless the wielder of the heavy one has more skill?

 

[Psion]

I'm not sure a simple -4 penalty is going to be able to replace that: as you go up in level it's going to mean less and less.

If this is a reference to my post, you missed half of the fix. The no ranks apply to the check (and implicitly, the check is always considered unskilled) will certainly have an impact as the group levels.

 

[Votan]

@pawsplay, in regards to longswords vs. greatswords: Shouldn't the use of a lighter weapon be easier -- and thus more likely to cause damage -- than a heavier one unless the wielder of the heavy one has more skill?

I'd kind of assume the reverse. You give untrained miltia heavier or larger weapons not smaller ones; i.e. spears and not daggers. Unless the argument is that the greatsword is simply too awkward to wield without special training, I'd think that learning to use the lighter weapon to maximize velocity (thus increasing energy) without overbalancing and overcoming the reach limitations would be a mark of skill.

Maybe the damage isn't the right place for this difference to show up but being uniformly superior seems odd. It's certainly easier to hit harder with a longer lever arm (2 handed sword) than a shorter one; which would make the armor penetration difference germane.