Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Kisanji Arael" data-source="post: 4533967" data-attributes="member: 20056">Pardon me while I wax philosophicalOkay, so to start out, I’m probably just going to spout some theory at you. I don’t have a lot of time tonight (and I’m going to be busy tomorrow because, well you know, it’s Nov. 4), so I’ll see what I can get out. Okay, now knowing that you’re working off of the basic Naruto premise is helpful, because it lets me know where your center of focus is located. First off, concerning Naruto, remember that all the puppets used by Kankuro were not actually made by him, but by a master. Plus, remember that every series published by Jump is incredibly overpowered. Therefore, you should ask yourself to what degree you will and won’t be following that continuum.Now, let us consider puppetry for a moment. Even at its most basic, there are three areas that must be effectively considered – the puppeteer, the strings and the puppet. Put another way, it is the continuum between the controller, the controlling and the controlled. Lets start with the controlled, because it’s the easiest to deal with. In any case, there are a limited number of things which can ever be controlled; I’ll be discussing the control over enemy, ally, the neutral (corpses), the tool (dolls) and the self. It is not necessarily so that the self can be controlled; this depends on the systems you, as game designer, set in place. The only advantage of controlling yourself is to push beyond your own natural limitations. However, for all the other categories, the advantage is tactical: someone else is hurt, and the controller is left unharmed. For this reason, I oppose the suggestion of a joint hit point pool; check out the artificer preview instead.  You have thus far addressed corpses and dolls, and in limiting yourself such, you are confined to only a small portion of your options. Controlling your enemies is far more satisfying. . .And then, looking at his hands, Devon realized to his horror that they were bound by tiny black threads, which ended at the other man’s fingertips.A puppeteer should not be a mere bruiser, even if 4E seems to imply that to be the way one should approach it. He is, as you said, a controller/striker. But this is not just so: rather, the puppeteer is a controller, and should have abilities reflecting that, while the puppet is the striker. But I’ve already said that not only dolls (tools) but also allies as well should be considered. A puppeteer, then, should be able to turn anyone into a striker, like a competent bard. He should be capable of enabling others. I dislike that all of the at-will abilities you have thus far are only tools for the dolls. Consider all the other possibilities of what a puppeteer can do. Why is why I to strings: strings are what bind the controlled to the controller; they are the necessary link. And I, for the record, am highly against the Naruto notion of chakra strings: real string or nothing. Needles too, if you can put them in. Of course, make them easy to reattach, or really tough to cut, but still. At the surface, the two easiest things to do with something you’ve bound with string are to move it or make it stop. Consider abilities that let you keep an enemy from moving farther away once he’s been bound. That’s a controller’s ability. Consider taking control of one of your allies to give him a bonus to attack or damage. Consider strangulation (on that note: consider watching the episode of Hellsing where the butler goes badass with a couple hundred feet of piano wire). The puppet should always be a competent distraction leading the enemy away from the puppeteer; systems in place should be designed such that ignoring the puppet is what changes him from a distraction to deadly; give the puppeteer immediate interrupts that can substitute for atttacks of opportunity. At the same time, there should be some reason why the puppeteer is himself valuable. Or, put another way, would the party care if they just had the puppet: if so, then you’ve done something wrong.One last note: have you seen Stardust? Okay, if not, what the hell are you doing here? Go out right now and rent yourself an awesome movie. But if you have, there’s something which very closely resembled puppetry in the last scene. In it, you had someone being controlled and showing very excellent swordplay. This shows that not only does the puppet have to have a skill, but the puppeteer does as well. It wouldn’t just be about putting a sword inside your puppet, like how it’s sometimes shown in Naruto. Against a skilled swordsman, a puppeteer would need to know how to get inside defenses – he would have to be competent at dueling as well. I really wish we still had the perform skill, because it would work really well for this.Oh, and as far as abilities for the puppeteer himself go: defensive and evasive short range, hindering mid-range. I know I would never take anything except Eladrin for this class, and not just for the stat bonuses: I would Fey step the hell away whenever I got near anything. But I should never have to; because I should be able to trip them before they reach me, then pull my puppet to me and engage him in combat that way. Okay, that's all the time I have for today. I'd love to help you out more; tell me what you want. But I don't just want to be power-balancing a bunch of powers for a doll, so keep that in mind, too.</blockquote>

Verification