Where the hell is my d20 muse?

[Wulf Ratbane]

Shouldn't Emulate a feat be cheaper? The magic items are always on, while the AP is one time only.

That's accounted for in the 1/50th multiplier: one charge.

What's the modifier for being a free action to activate?

That's already accounted for in the "use-activated" feature. Another way to think of "use-activated" is "always on." The bonuses in a magic sword: use-activated. You swing it, it works. The bonus for a cloak of resistance? Use-activated: You wear it, and when you need the bonus, it's there.

What else is cinema cliche that isn't in D20/GT?

On that note, allow me to re-recommend Ronin Arts' Fantastic Stunts PDF-- they covered quite a few cinematic cliches.


Wulf

 

[BryonD]

That's accounted for in the 1/50th multiplier: one charge.

It was my understanding that there would be no math in this debate.....

On that note, allow me to re-recommend Ronin Arts' Fantastic Stunts PDF-- they covered quite a few cinematic cliches.

Wulf

In my basket, just waiting for Green Ronin's Advanced GM Guide to buy at the same time.

But there STILL must be more stuff you can apply action points to.

1 AP: Villian will spend 1d6+ CHR MOD minutes talking instead of killing you right away.

 

[Andur]

1 AP: Villian will spend 1d6+ CHR MOD minutes talking instead of killing you right away.

So would 2 AP's get you: Villian who has captured you tells you of all his immediate glorious plans and then leaves the room while you have 5 minutes to an hour before you suffer the gruesome death he described at the same time. Of course the escape DC become 5.

 

[Ymdar]

Hmmm....interesting thread.

I've got an idea: Spend an action point and post in this thread

By the way there are so many feats today it will be hard to create new ones. For example my players can never choose from the feats in the core books even.

 

[DonAdam]

Just a thought:

There seems to be a disparity between the benefits that spellcasters and non-spellcasters get with action points, in that AC, attack bonus, and saves can all be increased, but save DC's cannot. On the other hand, being able to spend one action die that can affect multiple people (area spell) is probably going too far.

With GT being low magic, you might like it this way, but I just thought I'd point it out.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Just a thought:

There seems to be a disparity between the benefits that spellcasters and non-spellcasters get with action points, in that AC, attack bonus, and saves can all be increased, but save DC's cannot. On the other hand, being able to spend one action die that can affect multiple people (area spell) is probably going too far.

With GT being low magic, you might like it this way, but I just thought I'd point it out.

It is a good point.

One of the best uses for APs for spellcasters in the GT system is to make that caster level check. They are extremely important for that-- and I think it more than balances out. If a caster never had to use his APs for anything other than making his spells work, he'd be happy.

Wulf

 

[Rodrigo Istalindir]

In the caster I played in Old One's gameday session last October, that's all I used APs for. Almost every darn time I had to cast a spell, too. I would be tempted to allow an automatic success with an AP, depending on the spell level. It's hard enough being a spellcaster and dealing with the failures, but to blow an AP on a d6 only to roll a 1 would be adding insult to injury.

Not sure that using an AP to increase caster level would be fair, though. Adding a d6 to caster level could be brutal in GT where saves tend to be lower.

My preference has always been for AP/Fate Points/whatever to be less common than Wulf seems to anticipate. In other games where I've used the mechanic, they weren't used at all in most fights, and maybe a couple times in important encounters. In GT, they seem to come up almost every round.

One of the hardest things, I think, is to balance the flow of APs to the players so that they don't feel they can use one every time they miss a roll. This is why I'm intrigued with the idea of optional feat effects/bonuses that can be activated with an AP. Adding d6s all the time is too mundane.

 

[GlassJaw]

In other games where I've used the mechanic, they weren't used at all in most fights, and maybe a couple times in important encounters. In GT, they seem to come up almost every round.

Well it really depends on whether you are playing a GT one-shot or a full campaign and how fast the GM refreshes them.

In one-shots, the AP's are flying! There's no tomorrow so who cares if you use them up? In a campaign though, players have to be much more selective unless the GM refreshes them after every session. IIRC, the "default" is with each level gained and the 3 skulls option is never.

 

[Rodrigo Istalindir]

Well it really depends on whether you are playing a GT one-shot or a full campaign and how fast the GM refreshes them.

In one-shots, the AP's are flying! There's no tomorrow so who cares if you use them up? In a campaign though, players have to be much more selective unless the GM refreshes them after every session. IIRC, the "default" is with each level gained and the 3 skulls option is never.

True. But using APs for run-of-the-mill tasks like confirming crits, or to essentially replace magical healing, kind of assumes a steady supply. (These kinds of discussions are hard in GT because of all the seemingly innocuous twitches the GM can make to the rules.)

If APs are rarely replenished, then they should accomplish something more special than add a d6 to a skill check. But if you replace them too often, any special capabilites can make them too powerful. Using an AP to make an opponent flat-footed, for example, would be a worthwhile use in a rare-AP game, likely used only in desperation against the BBEG. In a free-AP game, that same ability would be used every session.

I guess the point I'm trying to make is that I think the power of an AP should be inversely proportional to their frequency.

Using Wulf's numbers above, an AP 'set' costs 1666gp. If you go by the stock wealth/level guidelines:

A character going from 2nd to 3rd should accumulate 1800gp in wealth, or enough to for a full AP 'set' plus some left over for booze and hookers.

A character going from 9th to 10th will pick up 13,000gp, or enough for almost 8 full sets.

From 19th to 20th? 180,000gp, or 108 sets...

So if you are looking at using APs to emulate magic items, you're gonna be hurting at low levels (when arguably you need the most help), and spending them like a dying millionaire at the high levels.

Part of the problem is that the wealth guidelines assume a mix of permanent items you use forever (eg an iouon stone), some you use for a couple levels (that +1 sword that you eventually drop for the Holy Avenger), some that are consumed and gone (potions, scrolls), and some that are of dubious value to you but you keep around on the off chance you'll need it (arrow of vampire slaying).

In an organic campaign, I'd think you'd see very little AP use except in dire emergencies up to 8th or 9th, as the characters are relatively cash poor and are still getting basic equipment. Past that, though, cash outstrips their ability to spend it, and you'll start seeing APs a lot. At a constant 13 encounters per level, you'll see every one using them every encounter before too long.

So, the power of an AP is more or less fixed (plusses to hits probably matter less at high levels, plusses to saves probably more, use of a feat constant, etc). The opportunity cost (to use the term loosely) starts off very high but drops to insignificance at high levels.

(Rambling instead of paying attention in a meeting. Hopefully there was something coherent in there.)

 

[DonAdam]

Maybe the AP die size should increase, like in Spycraft. This might also help as the disparity between bonuses grows; a d6 at low levels might mean that my wizard can smack a fighter, but it's not enough at high level.