Difference between revisions of "Talk:Game Systems/Mechanics"

Latest revision as of 15:10, 4 October 2008

User:Gdaze|Gdaze]] 23:49, 20 July 2008 (MST) So wait, even though weapons are usually bought at zero END, we should buy them with costs END? This means a Rapier would cost 3 End to use a turn (plus STR) while a short sword would cost 2 End (plus STR). Which is the same as a Stiletto (it only does 1D3 but has AP, so its active cost is high). Do we have to buy armor with costs END also then?

--Matts 00:05, 21 July 2008 (MST)Armor, the power, normally doesn't cost END, and if you buy it OIF I don't see why it would.

--Gdaze 00:11, 21 July 2008 (MST) Well right, and weapons usually don't either and I noticed he said "wearing armor makes you tired" so I thought maybe armor will too.

Oh, can my dude start with the full compliment of potions?

BEN: For simplicity's sake, i am just going to go back to the way the book suggests: weapons and armor cost 0 END. I'll have to think about the potion thing, although I will tentatively say yes: it will probably depend on what potions you want to be able to make.

GABE: Sweet. So far I have 3 potions, but may add another one. I have an oil that takes a minute to apply but ups the def of an armor by 3r/3r. I MAY change this to one that you apply to the body that has 5r/3r since nobody has armor. It lasts for the day.

Next up I have one of underwater comfort. It allows the user to breath underwater and withstand extreme cold, it lasts for a few hours. Very useful in such a water based world.

And finally I have a potion of dragon breath. It takes a full phase to use, drink and spew, and does 2D6 fire damage to one hex. I guess it has a range of 8 meters as well.

I may also add a potion of nightsight, which allows you to see in the dark as long as there is a little light, like the moon. Or a potion that ups STR by like 10.

BEN: any of those are reasonable, thanks for taking out the +40 str. one at this stage of the game. You can start with a full complement from those potions that you have described, just check with me again if you change them.

--Edmiao 19:03, 21 July 2008 (MST) are you sure you want to penalize the buy back for equipment? i would imagine that fighters would be trading in weapons and armor more often while i envision my illusionist buffing up his spells, so images from 1d6 to 2d6, etc, which is an increase of the same power. similarly, trading in leather armor for chain mail or a small sword for a long sword could be considered increasing the same power. I'd hate to penalize the armor dependent classes and not the magic dependent classes (i've always advocated equalized/fair xp distribution). As long as trade ins don't become abused of course.

--Gdaze 19:34, 21 July 2008 (MST) Yeah... it does make spell casters get kinda an advantage as all spell schools pretty much have the ability to have defensive magic. If there is a penality invovled it'd be better to pick up nice shit right away. I also thought we could just buy items and that everything was avaible long as we have the points, or rather that was one of the points of the system?

BEN: alright, if you think it will unfairly penalize it, you can just trade things in, that's fine.

--Edmiao 11:55, 3 August 2008 (MST) i don't see anything about dcv penalties for armor in the book. is that in the fantasy book?

--Edmiao 09:50, 19 August 2008 (MST) what is extraordinary feat?

--Edmiao 09:56, 19 August 2008 (MST) for skills, you say the limit is 13-, i recall in the skills book that it said you could buy penalty skill levels that would not take you over 13- but would offset any negative modifiers and by the skills book they allowed this with the normal skill maxima of 13-. can i buy these for Magic Power Skill at normal cost in the OAAAA or do you want to make magic top out? I ask because all magic comes with requires a skill roll that is usually decreased by active cost, so for example a magic roll of a 30 active cost spell at magic power skill 13- would be rolled at 10-.

BEN: dcv penalties are in the fantasy book...I haven't decided which of their optional rules I'm going to use, but basically, as DEF goes up, DCV/DEX go down. I think up to 1 point of armor will be free of penalty, 2-3 is -1 DCV/DEX, 4-5 -2, 6-7 -3, etc.
extraordinary feat is: if you have a skill of 18- or better, you can perform "impossible" tricks with that skill at a base penalty of -10 (their example is breakfall to land on your feet after jumping out of an airplane).
Oh, I also meant to add the bit about how if you fail at a skill roll, you can't repeat it until you get at least a +1 to your roll (ie, things turn "in your favor", as they describe it) from some source.
a normal maxima isn't a fixed max: you just pay more to go above it. If they say in the book penalty skill levels are ok, that's fine by me, although they also warn against letting players "get around" the normal max by just taking penalty skill levels instead of increasing their skill. I think a good guideline would be that you can't spend more on skill levels on a skill (or set of skills, in which case it would be for the lowest points spent) than you have spent on the skill itself.

--Gdaze-- Oh snap, didn't see that about double the points for skills over 13, yikes, gotta re-do my guy... a bit... a really bit.

--Edmiao 10:52, 19 August 2008 (MST)yeah, that's why i ask, because penalty skill is getting around the rules, kind of like power based characteristics can get around the rules. so just make sure you double check that balance as time goes on. That skill book is good, yes? definitely worth the money, unlike the spells book.

--Gdaze-- Man, you must have some major buyer regret to still be talking about that!

Well I guess I'll have to drop my alchemy skill down to 13-, it was at 15- heh heh. Hey for my potions, it says that I can have an amount equal to my INT. And they take six hours to make, is that for each potion or for all the potions for that type (thus 18 armor potions for example)? Or is that the time for ONE potion? And if I fail a roll, where in the time frame should it happen? Right away? After 3 hours? At the very end? The magic book didn't cover these details but I think the fantasy main book does.

BEN: I'll look into it. I would say that, barring the book saying different (and I'll defer to the book if it does), that is the time for ONE potion. A potion is a magical thing, not a stew, and in my mind it shouldn't "scale". As for rolls: I would say potion rolls should be done in secret by me. If you succeed, you know you succeeded. If you fail by 1-3, you fail 1D6-1 hours into it, and know you failed. If you get a critical failure, you think you succeeded and the potion has side effects. If you critically succeed, you get a benefit: either you finish it quickly, it works "extra good", or something like that.
If the book says something else, I'll let you know, or we'll look it up friday before game if I don't have time.

--Gdaze-- Hmm, I don't think I should be penelized because my spells have delayed effect, that is after all an advantage. Wizards know right away if their spells fail. So I don't mind not knowing till right away, half way, or at the end. I didn't buy side effects for them however so it'd be kinda odd to give me a disadvantage that didn't make my powers cheaper. I don't mind other affects for critical failure or success like half time, or double time, but not knowing till I drink it is almost like having a form of uncontrolled on it.

BEN: ok, that's fine. We'll do it that way unless the book has specific thoughts on it.

--Gdaze-- If you wanted potion makers to be more unstable I could take side effects on them. It happens when you fail the skill roll.

--Edmiao 13:26, 19 August 2008 (MST) If we are to play with critical failures in general, my opinions are: If a magic spell can have a critical failure, it happens immediately. If a skill roll critically fails, it happens immediately. If an attack roll fails, it happens immediately. if a potion or another power with delayed effect has a critical failure, it happens when the power is triggered. you can't bypass the critical failure rule by buying delayed effect. The Disadvantage: Side Effect, if taken, would occur with every failure, not just critical failure, according to the book. I think critical success/failure is an optional rule that Ben has chosen to use to add cinematic appeal.

--Matts 13:34, 19 August 2008 (MST)Critical failure could just have a side effect immediately when making the potion, like he inhales burning sulfur or smells like pork butt for a week.

--Edmiao 13:56, 19 August 2008 (MST) true. depends on what makes more cinematic and dramatic sense for the game, would be what i would say. in other words, up to the GM

--Gdaze -- Delayed effect just means I can store the power. I'm not trying to by-pass it, but the hero system uses points, and I paid for advantage (+1/2 mind you) that due to some cinematic appeal would now hinder me? Plus, your not playing a character with my power set... If potions are going to be that un-stable I'll most likely just play a mage with similar powers. I just wanted potions because I thought potions were neat. But if you "feel" like I'm "by-passing" the critical failture, I'm down with changing.

Um, side effects do not always occur with every roll, I remember reading they are recommanded for powers with activation or skill rolls. I'll look up when I get home.

BEN: I've already said we will run potions as they are described in the rules: I will post what it says in the grimoire tonight. Since "critical failure" effects will affect any roll (not just potions), it's not a limitation: what the specific effect is depends on the roll. So if you fail a climbing roll with a critical failure, you could fall and take a bunch of damage, rather than just not progressing, while for potions it might make you sick, turn you into a toad, or whatever. If the idea of critical failures doesn't appeal to you guys, we'll get rid of them, though this of course means you won't get critical successes, either.

--Matts 15:19, 19 August 2008 (MST)Here's a point: Wizards know when they use the spell whether or not it critically failed; they don't get to cast, and then decide not to use the power if they critically fail. So I don't see how gabe's being penalized anyways, aside from the fact that his potions take forever to make, which is in the cost of the power isn't it?

--Gdaze Yeah I don't mind them taking forever and failing at the end. But if it comes down to having not knowing if my potions work or not, thats what would bother me the most. Wizards would get to make their power rolls while I'd just hope I got them and not know. You could say well that is the limitation of potions! Potions already have a ton of limitations on them to reflect their potion like nature. Whats why I said if we want potions to be more unstable I'm okay with side effects.

But as you said Matt Hero is a great system to see how characters stack up against each other. So secret rolls for my powers, in which I wouldn't know until I used the potion, is something added as a story effect but I see as a disadvantage. If that is the case all characters shouldn't roll for their spells. But since some people seem to think I'm dodging rules or what not secret rolls are fine, or whatever other rules people want. Its also kinda harsh since any roll of 15 or over is an auto-failure. I'd like to at least know if my power fails, like the potion goes flat, whatever. But really I'm quickly loosing interest in playing a potion maker if its this much of a pain in the ass.

As for the argument of the power being "triggered" delayed affect means you turn on the power and basically save it for later, thus it would be triggered at the end of six hours.

--Matts 16:27, 19 August 2008 (MST)Why not roll at time of use of the potion, as a sort of retroactive thing, instead of when you make the potion? That way it's exactly the same as other magic users.

--Gdaze 17:52, 19 August 2008 (MST) Well... in a way I'm already like other magic users. I use the power and then store it. Thats the advantage I'm paying for. The disadvantage is I can only have so many and each one takes six hours to make while another spell caster can kinda just toss 'em out there. I think I should waste at least half the time, maybe even the full six hours. But I think I should know the roll. My potions are already very limited. Lets say I want an armor potion, well I drink it, roll, fail, then what? I have to take another one, but maybe I don't have any more, that is my limitation is that I only have so many. A wizard, if he fails a roll can continuely re-cast before an adventure almost unlimited times, messes up five times in a row? No problem, he can just take a recovery. Plus six hours to make one potion. I think a wasted six hours is already a big enough disadvantage then not knowing if my power works. And like I said I actually trigger the ability once the extended time is done.

Also note I can't do ANYTHING else for that six hours. Not walk around town, nothing, I have to be brewing.

But really up to the GM.

--Gdaze 18:25, 19 August 2008 (MST) Actually rolling when I use the potion is cool I guess. Although it does go against the delayed affect advantage a bit.

--Edmiao 22:18, 19 August 2008 (MST) it doesn't go against the delayed affect, that lets you do the prep time in advance while other characters have things like incantations and gestures to limit them. in theory, whatever disads you have to take for potions should bump down the cost of the powers and make it so that they are much more powerful. they can be more easily transferred to non magic users, they can be used by all the party simultaneously in one turn, they are probably more powerful in active points than a non potion spell. i haven't looked at the math, but that's what i figure. personally, i think an alchemist who has to spend 6 hours for potion making would really be annoying in game play. same reasoning is why i made all my spells without the focus limitation; i just didn't want to spend all day looking for feathers and shiny rocks to cast spells. i had some of that with Shennong but he could batch huge amounts of his shit in andvance and make like 12 at a time. it was an all day affair but happened only rarely.

BEN: I've looked up potions. according to the rules for POTIONS, there is no comment on secret rolls. As I've said already, for anything other than a critical favor, I'd tell you anyways. In the Ultimate Skill, under the section entitled "hiding skill rolls" it says that you can hide rolls when a.) the outcome would be in doubt (such as potion brewing) and b.) where it would add fun to the game. Since it sounds like it would have a detriment on your fun to hide the rolls, I won't do it. This creates a bit of a dilemma though. In the potions rules, side effects is a storing limitation. But this is totally separate from any critical failure rules, which are optional rules from the Ultimate Skill. Spectacularly bad effects should be the result of critical failures, but the beauty of delayed effect is that it's a "sure thing": yes, a spellcaster can cast 3 times in a row, but if he needs that spell NOW, he may not get it, whereas a properly brewed potion is a sure thing. Thus, a spectacularly failed potion could just be tossed in the trash like a regular fail, thus negating criticals.
I see 3 solutions. One, which everyone seems to like, is to make your potion roll at the time the potion is drunk. I think this is an elegant solution that will create interesting and fun scenarios. The second is that we just get rid of criticals altogether both for success and failure. I'm indifferent to this one: as I've said before, criticals increase the chance of both spectacular victories as well as crushing defeats, and if that kind of variance is too unpredicatable and infuriating for y'all, we should probably skip it. The third is that, rather than affecting the drinker, a critical failure has bad effects at the time of BREWING. Your alchemical lab explodes, your potion turns to acid and burns you, all your ingredients turn into dust, whatever.
On top of these things, let me reiterate a couple of optional potion rules I want to implement. First, potions are distinctive, and people with the proper KS can identify what a potion is from the smell, taste (small tastes don't activate the effect), and color of a potion. Second, drinking two magical potions at the same time, or drinking one while another hasn't yet worn off, will cause both potions to affect the drinker, BUT ALSO will have strange, unprecedented, effects from the interaction of the potions. These effects are up to the GM, and will sometimes be good, sometimes be bad, or a mix of both. Third, the rules state that a person can carry INT/5 potions at a time, although there is the suggestion that you can increase this amount. I don't know what you've read on this.
An important note in the section on potions, and I don't think you will like this, Gabe, is that it says that "in adventuring groups where PCs frequently share potions, the GM should require the "usable by other" advantage for potions, rather than just relying on the universality of the focus". I would say there is a 99% chance that our group falls into this class, so we should discuss this: it will increase the cost of your potions considerably, I think.
Let me mention here how powerful I think potions are. They aren't better than spells, per se, because of the prep time needed, but they have distinct, notable advantages. 1.) delayed effect means, as I said above, that they are a "sure thing": every potion you keep is going to go off exactly how you want when you want (unless we use that rule above), and being able to rely on something is very powerful. 2.) If the time comes to pull out all the stops, potions effectively turn every character into a magic user for a turn: a wizard can keep casting spells, but if potions are doled out, every character can cast a spell, effectively, in a turn. That's useful. Even just usable by other is a powerful effect. So, even if we decide that "usable by other" should be a potion advantage, I still think they are very, very good.

--Edmiao 23:59, 19 August 2008 (MST) the beauty of the hero system is that you can make up whatever you want. I presume potions are Power, with advantage: trigger, and disad: concentration (0DCV), gestures (2 hands), incantations (complex), extra time. the good thing that balances trigger is that your other disads can be more severe, like concentration 0 DCV would suck in combat. So that said, is it necessary that the extra time limitation be 6 hours? the following are the extra time limitations and values: 1 minute (-1.5), 5 minutes (-2), 20 minutes (-2.5), 1 hour (-3), 6 hours (-3.5). why not use 20 minutes or 1 hour instead of 6? guess that is a question for Ben. 6 hours per one potion is really bothersome, i think. i mean you could quaf 6 potions in a combat and then its a 3-4 day extravaganza to remake them.

--Gdaze-- There is a reason they set it at six hours. Because potions are so useful, there should be a limitation so that I can't pump out a ton of them. I think it would be easier to just be a priest of one of the god's and buff people. Also if I take a bad spill or get hit hard, my potions are very likely to break (OAF Fragile). They have a ton of limitations on them as is. Also even though they aren't independent, they still could be driken by other people, even enemies.

I'm glad for your concern Ed, but I already knew my guy would spend a lot of time making potions.

Yeah I read about Int/5, all delayed powers have to have some limiting factor but you can bump this up for 1/2, I just went by what was in the spellbook.

I'm not really a fan of the rule that two potions at once will cause some other random affect, and I think if that is the case I should get a -1/4 disadvantage for it, or something... kinda like the spell dis-ad. Even more so since I'll be using a two potion combo a lot (armor and fire breath).

Also if we do have critical failure, I think we should take out the any roll over 15 auto fails. If we are suppose to be able to become epic, we should have high chances, but just minuses to the roll. I don't mind spending double for anything over 13 though.

BEN: ok on the advantage to increase the # of potions you can carry. As far as "brewing time" goes, I'm not too concerned: if you want to be able to make a batch of potions instead of just one, that's fine too. I thought the "two potion combo" effect was neat, but if you don't like it, it is your character and we can scrap it.
a 16+ on 3D6 is a 10/216 chance, which comes out to just about 4%. 17+ is 4/216, wich is just under 2%, and 18+ is 1/216, which is less than .5%. I'd prefer there to be some possibility of failure (you can still take skills above 15, it just won't matter unless you have minuses to the roll), so I'm going to keep the 16+ is an auto fail. That being said, if the other players also want to be able to increase their chance of success to 98-99.5% on rolls, I'm ok with that and we'll change it.
I'd also like a quick sound-off on criticals: it sounds like Gabe really doesn't like the idea, so we will remove them unless other players want to try them out: I'm indifferent either way.
Gabe, could you comment on the "usable by others" advantage issue I posted above?

--Gdaze-- Well I just thought that with the auto-failtures, very difficult things are going to be harder to do, so they would bring your roll down (or up, whatever!) anyway. Epic level people tend to be able to do normals things fairly easiley.

Hmmm I thought I put that up there! Yes I'm fine with useable by others. Also I'm fine with making one potion at a time. In fact I'm pretty sure the rules support that. I just asked orginally cuz I thought maybe the fantasy book might have something. Also with how much time a lot of characters spend shooting-the-shit around towns, six hours isn't too bad for one potion, which has FOUR charges I should add.

I actually don't mind critcal failures, but if so I think we should take out auto-fails.

Actually I just realized we are going to be on the move a lot (least I imagen we would, trying to save our friend), so maybe a character requiring workshops of sorts wouldn't fit in.

BEN: points well taken. I'm open to ditching either critical failures and/or auto fail (on anything other than an 18) if that's what the majority of players want. Moving around a lot will make it hard to set up a lab sometimes, but that doesn't make it impossible. If you think you want to change your concept, that's fine, just have him/her made up by friday before game so I can take a look at them.

--Gdaze -- Will do. Potions have been such a pain anyway. As far as fighter type characters go. What kind of limits are there on powers? For example rapid attack, stuff like that. Can we start with these? Is it cool to take a martial art with a weapon (IE sword school)? Got a kinda assassin like character in mind.

BEN: I really liked your potion dude, btw, and I thought the potions you had were really neat. That being said, if you want to switch, fine by me: I'm excited about this game and really all I'm interested is seeing people enjoy the setting and the game, so I want people to have characters they can do fun shit with. You can start with rapid attack (that lets you attack repeatedly, right?), and you can take a martial art with a weapon: as with everything else, just be reasonable, your characters are "starting characters" and they shouldn't be tricked out through the gills.

--Edmiao 10:26, 20 August 2008 (MST) I think both autofail and critical success/fail are both fine. I like autofail for balance purposes and critical success/failure for cinematic purposes. If either is going to cause some game implosion or excessive complaining, then I'm fine with tossing them. I think though, that they are misunderstood.

autofail: it is what you roll on the dice before modifiers (I think you were missing the before modifiers part, gabe). so if you roll a 16 you will fail, even if you have +10 to your roll with a 13- skill. like ben said, this is a 4% fail rate. the purpose of autofail is so you can never just bump up skills so they are sure things. like i bought sneak up to 20- and 6 penalty skill levels so I an so sneaky that I can never never fail, so why bother rolling. this discourages one shot pony ubermaxing of character powers/skills.

Likewise, critical success/failure is also your roll before modifiers. so there is like what a <1% chance of a critical success/failure and its not like if you try to brew a hard potion with a hard roll that your chance of critical failure increases. purely for cinematic and story effects, it's a rare event.

--Gdaze Yes I got before modifiers. I was trying to say that if we are to become these heros of legends, some things where normal people would fail you simple succed because you are that badass. We are moving from heroic characters to super-heroic in a way. You bother rolling because A. You might get an auto failture, and B. there could be huge minuses. For example, running across a stretched out rope, that'd be some big minuses, but unless you buy your skill up high your changes are gonna be pretty darn low.

Its pretty easy to avoid people buying skills too high, just cap them. But whatever, I'm fine for either.

I'm pretty sure I'm gonna drop the potion guy, other players seem to have problems with how I want to play him.

--Edmiao 10:49, 20 August 2008 (MST) what? I have no problem with your potions guy. i don't actually care if you can bypass the rules, i was just rulesmongering on your ass. i'm perfectly fine with you not having critical fails and my character having them, don't matter to me. you should play what character you want to play.

That is a good point on us evolving into superheroic characters, though, who can do ridiculous things. eh, whatever.

i should stop debating this as i don't really care one way or the other and i think i'm just working up a bessonettesque lather on our game group. my bad!

BEN: I haven't noticed anyone saying anything specifically targeted at the potion maker, although i may be missing something. Mostly this has been a discussion of auto fail and criticals. I think we've ditched most of the potion specific rules, anyways.
If your skill is high, I won't make you roll for shit you should just be able to do. the higher your skill, the less you ahve to roll, this is something laid out in the ultimate skill book. Like if you have a climb of 13- (expert), you wouldn't have to roll to climb an average tree. At 15-, you wouldn't have to roll to climb an average cliff, given enough time. At 18-, you could probably climb anything without rolling as long as it wasn't completely shear, raining, or you were under fire (or trying to hang upside down, or something), or trying to do it really fast.
I'm not sure I see a difference between auto fail and capping skills, except that auto fail is beneficial when minuses come into play...am I missing something here?
I've generally found that we, as a group, are hesitant to assign significant minuses on rolls. I do plan on doing it more, but I figured a "cap" on max success would help for this.

--Gdaze I don't mind rule mongering as long as it is right. You totally ignored my point that delayed effect means you trigger the power and then can use it later. Spells have the same option as Stored Spell. Still, I could be wrong. I'm totally cool on any of the rules for skills.

Also Ed I never made the argument I shouldn't have critical fails, whats up with ya man? I was saying my rolls shouldn't be secret and that I should roll at the end of six hours, or when I take the potion which I also thought was fine. I also said I shouldn't have side affects if I flat out fail a potion roll... as that would be the side affects dis-ad. But really I think its fair for me to roll at the end, or when I take it, although at the end of the six hours would be the rule correct time to roll. I think I misunderstood Ben about my failture results and I was making an argument against critcal fails that you read as me trying to just make me avoid it. But when another player wants to invest this much time into looking over another character, it just sucks the fun out of it.

--Brandon 11:11, 20 August 2008 (MST) For the record, I'm in favor of critical failures and successes, 'cause I like the cinematic drama. Also, I think potions are cool, and think Gabe should run with Fantus (but only if it would make him happy). On a different note, can someone do me a favor and throw my character into heromaker (or whatever that program is called) and print him out for me for Friday? He should be all set, except I need to add some points in disads (I'm open to suggestions, but was planning on flipping through the psychological disads before gaming on Friday).

--Edmiao 13:51, 20 August 2008 (MST) I appologize for my rules-mongering discussion. I don't care what the rules are, nor if they are applied with absolute equality. I just enjoy the intricacies of rules sometimes, if you hadn't noticed from my magic play. I will try to refrain in the future, last thing i want to do is spoil the fun by creating shit storms. We have your mom do make shit storms enough as it is, and oh man!

--Gdaze-- Haha, Ed you've always carried if rules are carried out equally amoung players! And ew...

--Gdaze-- Also, Ben, could you please post the defenite (for now) rules on potions?

BEN: ok, here are the rules that I would 'like' to see for potions, based on these discussions:
1.) 1 potion = 6 hours of work in an alchemical lab
2.) potion ingredients must be gathered or "bought": most are relatively common but some will be rare(r).
3.) the roll for whether or not a potion was successfully made is done at the time the potion is made. the creator discovers the failure 1D6 hours into the process. All ingredients are wasted. In the case of some very valuable ingredient, the alchemist may burn a reroll for that session to save that ingredient only.
4.) On a critical failure, on this roll, something goes dramatically wrong, such as an explosion, a fire, or some such thing.
5.) All potions, along with OAF fragile, universal focus, charges, delayed effect, etc, must take "usable by other" as an advantage. 6.) A character can carry int/5 potions unless the appropriate advantage is purchased.
7.) I've thought about this some more, and in the interest of preventing WoW style "everybody drink one of each of these 5 potions to buff!" style buffing sessions (which are decidedly, in my OPINION (not fact, opinion), against the spirit of high fantasy) I will reinstate the "multiple potions leads to unprecedented effects" rule.

I think that's all of them.

--Gdaze -- Hmmm, okay. I'm 80% sure I'm gonna drop the potion maker then. I want to be someone who can buff himself and others, and it would be fare more effective in-game to do this with a priest like character, maybe one of war or something. And its cool, I mean buffs from either a spell or potion are pretty much the same thing, but I understand if you think one takes away from the feel of the game your trying to run.

BEN: I don't think POTIONS ruin the feel of the game at all. I think potions are awesome. What I want to avoid are metagame effects...this is the same issue I have with looting: I'm not going to go on a long description of it, we can discuss it on Friday if you want to hear me try to lay out my position. I disagree that potions and "on the spot" buffs are the same thing, but again, we can discuss that friday if you want. If it makes or breaks the decision for you, I will pull rule #7, but the others I'm pretty set on.

--Gdaze -- Oh sorry, I thought the whole thing (rules 7) about it not being in the spirit of high fantasy and being WoW like meant it went against the mood trying to be established (mixing potions that is). Even though really I wouldn't be handing these things out like candy, although I COULD to be sure. Buffing is buffing, potions are meant to do so so its hard to avoid the whole buff-up way of thinking.

And no need to pull the rule, it is what it is, my fault for not seeing it sooner. Plus it feels odd to have the game make such big changes to the universe trying to be made just so I can play a potion guy who much just get killed off right away. I'm seeing potions as a very stable form of magic but this world seems to be opposite of such.

And that is fine by me really. Just not the kinda guy I wanna play. I wanted to be more of an alchemist anyway, and not so much a druid/witch, which as you stated is what potion making is close to. Again, this is too much trouble for me to even really bother with anymore, so I'm just gonna be either a spellcaster or assassin.

With regards to the summoning magic, any specifics that summoners have to follow?

BEN: summoning magic is from Eburon. You and I should chat in person if that is what you want to make, largely because Eburon is the precursor to a "bad" country, essentially. Also, if you are from one of the empires, there needs to be a good reason why you came to Amoris at a fairly young age, and why you are now settled there, etc. But all of those things should be pretty easy to work out. As for rules specifics, just like with potions or other spellcasting, i will by and large follow what the book says, although i will impose some restrictions, also based on what the book says are good ones to include (for instance, I probably won't allow you to summon 128 200 point demons, for instance, unless you guys start getting into large scale wars and such).

--Gdaze 20:09, 20 August 2008 (MST) Cool cool. And are we going to use those rules regarding lengths of weapons? That are in the equipment book and I think in the fantasy one?

ANNNNNND, are we playing with hit locations or not? I would like to, but if nobody else does thats fine.

BEN: sure and why not, respectively.

--Brandon 00:14, 21 August 2008 (MST) How do hit locations work in Hero? I'm generally for things that make things less predictable, and offer more tide turnings, but hit locations sometimes strike me as really dumb. In WHFRP, for example, I'm consistently distracted by the seemingly random nature of hit locations: "Ok, you swing your sword at the skaven and hit him in the 71, er, right leg, I mean left arm . . . ." I usually prefer that damage is just translated accordingly into an appropriate description by the GM (i.e., a low damage roll is explained as a glancing blow, etc.). The other advantage of this, in my eyes, is that I can join in a bit more in the storytelling by "aiming" with my attacks and whatnot, thus having more control over my character's actions. But, I'm not sure how it works in Hero, and am open to being persuaded.

--Gdaze-- It CAN be as random as WHFRP, but you can do things like aim high, or aim low, at an - OCV (unless using a small weapon, then you can aim either high or low at no -). There are some nasty shots like head or vitals. And some lamer ones like arms which do little damage.

--Gdaze-- Alright well I'm gonna do either potion guy (GASP!) or an assassin type. Or just use one as a back-up.

To Ben! Would it be okay if I personally can use more then one potion at once? Like due to my training? Or, perhaps CON/5, rounded up? If so I will NOT put a dis-ad on my potions due to the random effect from using two at once. This said one of my potions is now an oil that is applied to armor. But my guy has no attacks besides his potions, can't even use a dagger (well no WFs). The oil also takes one minute to apply, so it isnt' some quick potion someone can drink down.

Re-cap of request:

I can use more then one potion at once at no extra cost, or equal to my CON/5 before taking random affects.

Others will get random affects once two potions are injested. This is worth a -0 dis-ad.

I also have oils, I will have NO OILS, EVER, that increase stats besides armor. All oils take one minute to apply, and can only be used on ONE substance (IE, armor in this case, natural armor does not count).

How does this look? I thought this way I can use my potions but also avoid the whole WoW style buffing. (While allowing my guy to use one or two potions at once.)

BEN: those all sound like very reasonable mechanics for maintaining balance: thanks for suggesting them! As to my thoughts on them:
YES to the no dual effects on you: I think it would be cool if you RPed this out, like your character swishes one around in his mouth or gargles it or snorts it or something wierd because that's the "safe" way to take it...or something, whatever you think would be cool and character appropriate (all of those things I suggested were probably too silly).
YES to the "others get mixed effects."
You can have oils that increase other stats besides armor: these recipes will be harder to obtain so they are special, but this way it can be a "big deal" when you can hit someone else with multiple buffs, rather than just run of the mill WoW style dealy. I would ask, however, that a given person can only be under the effects of one oil type (ie, armor vs. other stuff) at a time, though if you want different oils that have a single effect to stack, I'm ok with that, I suppose.
So basically, I agree with all your ideas, except that I won't restrict you as much as you offer on the "oils" front.

--Gdaze-- Cool, glad you like them. And I agree on the oil idea. As there is another one that offers protection but has to be applied to skin only, that combined with the armor one would be insane. And I'll come up with some interesting ways of how I take them.

BEN: for particularly striking combos of potions, we will use your CON/5 rule, but for your basic ones, you can just take them together (basic will include most of your potions as you level, as well, I'm talking here about really powerful potions)

--Edmiao 23:34, 22 August 2008 (MST) i read up on penalty skill levels. i don't think they apply to a Magic Power skill. They are for OCV penalties mostly on ranged attacks or combat maneuvers. also from last session, i think flash may have ranged penalties applying if cast at range.

GABE: Question. I was looking at attunement, and so if we put that on one of our items it is still a focus right, not independent?

Also the five point limit, is that active points or real cost?

BEN: it does NOT become independent. HOWEVER: if you lose the item, you get the points back (therefore not independent), but you do not just get to replace your attuned item. You can respend the points on other equipment, or respend it to attune a new item (5 pts/session limit still applies), but you don't just get your full attuned item back when you could replace a "normal" item: an attuned item is "unique", just like the special drops off big bad guyes, you just don't get the "GM special" discount, because you can tune the item's power as you like. You can also "sell back" attuned items just like any other equipment, though the "only use the points for new equipment, not stats or skills or powers" limitation applies just like for other equipment you sell back. The five points/session is meant to be an active point limit: Also, if you started spending this session: you could spend 5 pts, not 25 pts, even though it is session 5: you can spend 5 pts per session, and this limit doesn't add up if you didn't spend some points the previous session.