Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="LordEther" data-source="post: 3021311" data-attributes="member: 29298">On the subject of languages, however, I would like to note that one would be hard pressed to find a system that could handle characters' ability to speak 6 million languages as anything other than an exception or special advantage. Whatever mechanic is referred to in these Living Force rules, it's not True20's method of handling languages that's problematic so much as it is d20's (and the undertandable, general trend in RPGs to give minimal focus to languages).  The simplicity, in my opinion, lies less in a daerth of material than in the presence of a unified, streamlined system (using one die type, for example, and lessened redundancy in not using both ability scores and ability bonuses or class abilities and feats). <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />  This is possible. But there are other facets of this, too... consider that when groups want to emulate a particular genre or setting, those "hard" controls become difficult to justify and potentially damaging to immersion. Outside of Vancian works, systems inspired by Vancian works (D&D's magic system), and literature inspired by such systems inspired by Vancian works (D&D novels), there's really not much evidence for "hard" controls on characters' abilities. That non-fatiguing powers are usable at will only makes sense... since they're not fatiguing. The idea that they should be limited in some way, regardless of their utility, is very evocative of everything I don't much care for in D&D (although even that game gives some "at will" abilities to certain races or, more often, as a package deal with some equipment).  Hmmm... I have to disagree. A lot of the differences of opinion on this game stem from different perceptions of its mechanics. I've found that Tough can be one of the most powerful feats available, considering the relative rarity of damage and Tough increases (Warriors have access to the most damage/Toughness bonuses with the least conditions... which suits their role fine). I don't feel this benefit is by any means a "slap in the face." Everyone else has to rely on just armor (although some Experts can get a Toughness bonus, though they lose it when caught flat-footed). It's significant. Even one level of Tough can increase a character's survivability significantly... now, if a group has introduced a scaling Toughness rule, as is found in Blue Rose (where all characters' Toughness increases every level), the value of Tough decreases drastically as characters advance in level... this ties in to something I'm going to say later.   Not quite true, in my opinion. Adepts receive powers, granted, but as to whether or not they are "better" than feats available to other roles is definitely arguable. Many of the powers have additional limitations (aside from fatigue, which is significant, considering the slowly increasing resistance difficulty)... they might require mental contact (establishing mental contact requires a separate power use and the target can make a saving throw to resist that, even before the desired additional power is attempted...), for example. And this is where Adepts fail. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> While there has been discussion as to the possibly dubious value of the Expert role's core ability (it's fairly decent, as it lasts for an entire scene, but... more skill ranks?), the Warrior's core ability is possibly the most useful of the bunch. The ability to remove those "minor" wounds in True20 in combat is very powerful. Those who remember the "meat shield" statement earlier should note that this is how it's managed. Warriors who've taken nicks and minor wounds can shake them off, repeatedly if necessary, to continue on. Granted, if a Warrior has taken more serious damage, that damage and its negative effects remain... On the subject of the Adept's core ability... it's fairly powerful... but overpowered? That's questionable. Consider that emulating powers using this ability costs Conviction. Conviction that might be better spent rerolling a save (like a damage save, since Adepts don't benefit from Warriors' core ability)... and these powers might be fatiguing, too. And while there are powers to heal damage, if I remember correctly, none aid in fatigue. Also, all roles can emulate feats of their type by spending Conviction (so Experts can spent Conv. to get an Expert feat for a round, Warriors can spend Conv. to get a Warrior feat for a round, and Adepts can spend Conv. to get an Adept feat for a round); the Adept feat list is significantly shorter than that of the other two roles, and the feats are much less useful or tied to supernatural power use. Also, Adepts' core ability doesn't remove penalties for fatigue; rather, it removes penalties to saving throws made to resist fatigue, and that's a significant difference (Normally, as Adepts use powers, it becomes successively more difficult to resist fatigue... essentially the save decreases by 1 per previous spell cast in a certain period of time, usually either an hour or a day, depending on the GM... the core ability sets the penalty back to 0. In this way, it's a limited version of the Warrior core ability. The Adept's current levels of fatigue remain.). Adepts really don't have it all that good. Now, one can argue that Experts get shafted... but with the ridiculous number of skills they get, making a couple of characters will quash that argument fairly quickly. I'd hire him! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> Really, though... hmmm... the Adept was at least at 6th level then, right (I'm counting nine necessary feats, all prereqs included)? Is that so terrible, considering that every one of those actions, save Sense Minds, is fatiguing (A 6th-level adept has a Will save of +5... how long before he gets fatigued?)? Consider that this character can perform no special skill without risking winding himself. Also, can the character actually hit with those elemental blasts (with an attack bonus that's half an equivalent level Warrior's Defense) or fight at all (remember, the Combat Sense bonus tops out at +5... that's a DC 35 power roll for a +5 bonus that then has to be divided between attack and Defense scores that are each roughly half a Warrrior's)? I think the idea of the Adept as overpowered tends to be less a result of holes in the rules (and oh, there are holes, make no mistake... look close at two-weapon fighting <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> ) than preconceptions tied to other d20 games. The removal of the "hard limit" on Adept powers alone will not, in my opinion, invalidate other characters. Pure Adepts cannot fight as well as pure Warriors, and pure Experts can perform very effective social-fu on par with many Adept powers (without worrying about fatigue, and in addition to having a vastly superior skill set and a much more impressive feat list, to boot).</blockquote>

Verification