Fantasycraft

[Psion]

I think Fantasy Craft puts more emphasis on the differentiation lying in the feat chains than the weapons themselves. This is more true of some weapons than others.

The main reason I might consider Greatsword over a 1-H or Fencing Sword would have more to do with how I want to build the character (frex, not wanting to put ranks in sense motive to get the best out of Sword Basics) rather than raw weapon damage.

 

[Silvercat Moonpaw]

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.

Sorry, thought those were separate proposals.

@Votan: Well Vitality points measure not only damage but fatigue of combat, and if you can swing your weapons faster (if it's light) you can wear down your enemy as he/she/it has to use up energy dodging or resisting more blows.

I just see the whole issue as a problem of the d20 systems and their schizophrenia between "1 attack = 1 swing" and the abstract nature of their damage resolution.

 

[pawsplay]

@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'm going to go with "No." Now, in AD&D, it's arguable, as historically, two-handed longsword use has been popular, everywhere from feudal Germany to the Shogunate. It is fast, accurate, and relatively powerful as a weapon. However, the greatsword is inarguably more powerful, and this advantage should be reflected in some way. The greatsword is, historically, a somewhat exotic weapon simply because it is big, making it both expensive and heavy (sometimes 4.5 lbs and up, compared to about 3 lbs. for most arming swords).

In the case of a novice, it is almost certainly a superior choice to give someone the biggest sword they can wield. Anything shorter than their shoulder height and a reasonable weight. If you were going to give a sword to a hulking brute with a 16 Strength, there is very little question that without training, the greatsword is the way to go. I think this is important, because not everyone who uses a weapon is going to be an expert, so the baseline for comparison should be a proficient, basic user of the weapon.

Every abstraction has to consider the outcomes. In Fantasy Craft, armor = DR. Greatswords are superior at cleaving light armor, superior at denting mail and plate, and superior for reaching vulnerable joints and hinges. Since armor = DR, there is little choice but to make the greatsword superior in damage.

 

[Silvercat Moonpaw]

Every abstraction has to consider the outcomes. In Fantasy Craft, armor = DR. Greatswords are superior at cleaving light armor, superior at denting mail and plate, and superior for reaching vulnerable joints and hinges. Since armor = DR, there is little choice but to make the greatsword superior in damage.

Or give it greater AP because that's how you break through armor, not damage.

I'm not really disagreeing with you. I just think the issue is the system is not realizing that it can't roll "fatigue of combat" and "light damage" into one category. If you track fatigue vs. damage then a weapon's damage doesn't matter on some types of attacks because it's about how easy it is to force you opponent to get tired dodging your blows.

EDIT: Although if the reach of a greatsword is such that you have to dodge more to avoid it that doesn't change what you said. This is what I meant by "I'm not really disagreeing with you."

 

[pawsplay]

At one point, I was starting to think, "I should really give this a try, if only to look at what they did with the core rules," but at this point, I'm a lot more cautious. I think I really want to spend some time paging through this at Ye Olde Gaming Store.

 

[Silvercat Moonpaw]

Here's the response I gave on another thread regarding what I think FantasyCraft is designed for:

'Combatant' has to be everyone's minimum 'secondary' role IMO. It's not clear to me that the designers of FantasyCraft thought so.

That's probably because FantasyCraft is coming out of Spycraft. Or you could call it MissionSpecialistcraft.

I never played Spycraft, never even read the book, but if it's trying to emulate spy movies I think it's built with the premise that not everyone contributes at the exact same spacetime coordinates. Your Hacker guy doesn't contribute in the current fight against the evil mastermind because that's not his time, or, ideally, he's trying to shut down the mastermind's system while the fighter guys are fighting.

Translated to Fantasycraft that means the "skill monkey" classes aren't supposed to be contributing to a fight that's not their time. The Courtier is for Social time, the Explorer is for Find Clue time, and the Keeper is for Fix-it-Build-it time.

For some people that system works, they're fine with it. For others they want everyone to be built to somehow contribute to all, or a sub-set of, situations even if it's not all equal. For those people FantasyCraft might not be the right system.

 

[drnuncheon]

I'm going to go with "No." Now, in AD&D, it's arguable, as historically, two-handed longsword use has been popular, everywhere from feudal Germany to the Shogunate. It is fast, accurate, and relatively powerful as a weapon. However, the greatsword is inarguably more powerful, and this advantage should be reflected in some way.

Oh, it is - but the greatsword also required more training, and that's reflected too. If you actually rack up the greatsword-related feats you're going to be a scary area-denial machine.

The basic feat gives you defense bonus like a shield and lets you enter a stance where you can do max damage if your opponent hasn't moved. The next step lets you use hammer and sword tricks (if you have those feats) and lets you stop foes dead in their tracks if they try to move adjacent to you. The third feat gives you an AOE attack against everyone within 10 feet.

I actually really like the way FantasyCraft sets up the feat chains for the different weapon types - it gives reasons to choose a polearm over a sword, or a hammer over an axe (or vice versa).

J

 

[Khaalis]

Kinda getting in on this late but I had a few comments anyway.

On the FC Dwarves topic, keep in mind that their Banned Actions are for a specific type of dwarf. The reasoning being physical, environmental and mechanics.

First and foremost, as Psion already pointed out, keep in mind that in FC, you don’t make a skill check for a mundane function. You only make skill checks for advanced, complex actions. Example, a dwarf CAN jump to say “jump & skip” or to jump up and reach a higher shelf, or could swim a doggy paddle across a calm stream. A dwarf CAN’T however jump to clear a major clearance such as a running long jump or swim the English channel. As an example, think of the LotR scenes on the stairs in Moria or outside the walls of Helm’s Deep (“Toss Me, but don’t tell the Elf”).

Additionally, a “typical” LotR Mountain Dwarf (which the base FC dwarf is based on) I can see having these penalties physically. The physical build of a mountain dwarf is definitely not designed for jumping or swimming. They are very heavy and very stocky with somewhat disproportionately short legs and arms for their height. Remember, dwarves are NOT built the same as humand or elves. Secondly they live in tunnels and caverns. There is little to no real need for jumping or swimming so they would have no extended need to train in these skills. Now, if you want dwarves that are acclimated to water and used to swimming, be a Cliff-born Dwarf.

Another note on the topic is that Banned Actions are very rare for PCs and should only be used when they make the most logical sense for the species in question. If you don't want LotR style Dwarves and you think a dwarf is simply a short human, re-write them to reflect the changes.

I won't really get into the longsword/greatsword debate other than to say there is a reason that longswords (a very broad definition btw) were more popular throughout history around the world than greatswords. Only someone who is a true master of the greatsword is going to be more effective with their greatsword than someone that is even mediocre with using a longsword two handed. JMHO.

Overall, I like the FC system. It has a lot going for it. However, like already mentioned, if you want a game system specifically for detailed tactical combat where every member of the party is on even footing in a combat - stick with 4E.

 

[coyote6]

First and foremost, as Psion already pointed out, keep in mind that in FC, you don’t make a skill check for a mundane function. You only make skill checks for advanced, complex actions. Example, a dwarf CAN jump to say “jump & skip” or to jump up and reach a higher shelf, or could swim a doggy paddle across a calm stream. A dwarf CAN’T however jump to clear a major clearance such as a running long jump

At what point does a jump or swim cease being "mundane" and become "advanced" or "complex", though? That's a hugely vague way to do it -- "banned, can't do it at all, except when you can".

Say there's a three or four foot wide crack in the PCs' way -- can a FC dwarf make it across? What if an assassin dumps a couple of venomous water snakes in the dog-paddling dwarf's path -- does the dwarf suddenly start drowning?

 

[litpho]

At what point does a jump or swim cease being "mundane" and become "advanced" or "complex", though? That's a hugely vague way to do it -- "banned, can't do it at all, except when you can".

It seems to me that this has been left deliberately vague to aid DMs (who can always answer questions like "does it look like a distance I can jump") in setting barriers to fit the story. With the added bonus of not attracting ruleslawyers who will argue the letter, not the spirit.

Say there's a three or four foot wide crack in the PCs' way -- can a FC dwarf make it across? What if an assassin dumps a couple of venomous water snakes in the dog-paddling dwarf's path -- does the dwarf suddenly start drowning?

I would say no to the jump. As far as the sudden combat in the water goes, the Dwarf will go under and start holding his breath. Which he can do for a number of rounds equal to his constitution. After that, he gets to make fortitude saves. Luckily, constitution (and thus fortitude saves) is one area where Dwarves do get bonuses.

Having said that, I'm not terribly fond of the no jumping rule (no swimming I'm fine with), if only for the amount of terrible dwarftossing jokes I see in my future.