Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

User Profile

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
  • Source
Clear All
new posts

  • Charlaquin
    replied to The D&D thread
    How do you feel about skill checks being binary pass/fail?...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Charlaquin
    replied to The D&D thread
    Archetypes in 5e are a very different thing than archetypes in PF1. And from the look of archetypes in PF2, they seem pretty similar to archetypes in PF1 to me. The only difference is that an archetype feature costs the opportunity to pick up a class feature, instead of costing a class feature. There's no functional difference, except that there are more non-archetype options this way....
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Charlaquin
    replied to The D&D thread
    But... That’s still what they do. They just call class features class feats now, and archetype features come at the opportunity cost of a class feat instead of replacing a class feature.

    I feel like this is similar to a lot of complaints I’ve seen on the Paizo forums that “XYZ used to be a standard feature of the class, now they’re just taking it away and selling it back to us as a feat!” But like... If you take that class feat, you get the feature, and you still get the same number of general feats as you did in PF1. They’re just giving you more options you can take instead...
    See more | Go to post
    Last edited by Charlaquin; Yesterday, 01:55 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Charlaquin
    replied to The D&D thread
    Archetypes are back in PF2, and they look awesome! As a lot of folks had predicted, instead of archetype features replacing class features, you take archetype feats in place of class feats. Each archetype has one “dedication feat” you have to take first, and once you’ve taken a dedication feat, you have to take a certain number of feats from that archetype before you can take the dedication feat for another archetype. It looks like any class can theoretically take any archetype, though prerequisites might make certain dedications easier for some classes to grab than others. Speaking of which,...
    See more | Go to post
    Last edited by Charlaquin; 06-22-2018, 05:42 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Charlaquin
    replied to The D&D thread
    I mean, obviously, from a practical definition of nature. From that perspective there is no such thing as unnatural, excepting things from the far realm, and even that is arguably just natural to a universe with different physical laws. But such a clinical scientific definition isn’t really useful in this context, and it certainly isn’t what a Druid means by “nature.” Remember, Druids are spiritual if not outright religious, so we have to understand “nature” in this context to mean “the way things should be.” Humans come from the natural world, and so by extension do the things...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Charlaquin
    replied to The D&D thread
    You don’t really need to add ranger to the mix for this to be a problem. An “all life is sacred” philosophy is just a poor fit for a game that at its core is about beating intelligent beings up and taking their stuff, using the alignment system to justify it. That’s why Druids are generally more “the natural world is sacred, and monsters are an affront against nature.” In that sense, ranger actually fits right in....
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Charlaquin
    replied to Premade scenarios?
    I've ported a handful of 1e SAS stories to 2e, it's mostly pretty straightforward to do. That said, I'd love to see more new scenarios written specifically for 2e.
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Charlaquin
    replied to The D&D thread
    It's been a while since I read 13th age, but what I remember being disappointed with was its powers. In 4e, I got several options of powers to choose from every level, and in combat I had a plethora of tactical decision points, both on my turn and throughout the round. In 13th age, from what I recall, there weren't a ton of character building options to mechanically differentiate, say, one rogue from another, though I could be misremembering. But what I distinctly remember was a ton of powers being triggered by random factors, primarily by rolling an odd or even number on the die, and that was...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Charlaquin
    replied to The D&D thread
    I think 13th age might be right in the middle ground between our preferences, because I really like it too. It doesn’t work for me as a spiritual successor to 4e, but as its own game it does work wonderfully....
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Charlaquin
    replied to The D&D thread
    I agree as well. Damage is the only place in D&D where degree of success matters. Every other roll in the game, you either pass and do the thing, or fail and don’t. But for some reason with attacks, once you pass, you have to roll a different die to see *how well* you did the thing. Tying weapon damage to the Platonic solids also restricts weapon design....
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Charlaquin
    replied to The D&D thread
    Not by the sound of what I’ve heard. It apparently includes maps for parts of every layer, but leaves some stuff unmapped intentionally to leave room for DMs who want to expand a layer....
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Charlaquin
    replied to Social Combat discussion.
    Ahh. Then sure, that could be a Forcing Doors roll. Probably Presence + Intimidation....
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Charlaquin
    replied to Social Combat discussion.
    Sounds like a different approach than “flatter their ego,” and in that case I’d probably call for Manipulation + Subterfuge....
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Charlaquin
    replied to Social Combat discussion.
    Yeah, if you were playing in my game and your goal was “make the NPC kneel” with the approach “flatter the NPC’s ego,” I wouldn’t call for a roll. There is no reasonable chance of the approach succeeding in achieving the goal, so the action would fail. No dice required.
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Charlaquin
    replied to Social Combat discussion.
    If it helps you to think about it that way, sure.


    ...What?...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Charlaquin
    replied to The D&D thread
    A friend of mine who I accidentally scared off D&D years ago has recently expressed an interest in giving it another try. And another mutual friend of ours has offered to DM. I am very excited for this game cause it’s going to include all of my best friends.
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • The way I think about it, the embrace divides the sire's Beast, in much the same way that the Stirges divide to manage Shadow Potency. Blood Sympathy, then, could better be thought of as Beast Sympathy. The more closely related one vampire's Beast is to another, the stronger the sympathy.

    So, in my view, both are correct. The various forms of blood sorcery (and lets face it, Oaths and Law are a form of blood sorcery) are expressions of blood sympathy, and blood sympathy is an expression of the predatory aura, so blood sorcery is an indirect expression of the predatory aura....
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Charlaquin
    replied to Crafting in 2nd edition?
    It's not in Hurt Locker. It's in the core rulebook, right there on page 100 with the rest of the crafting rules that I already cited.


    Technically correct, but not what I was talking about, as Satchel explained....
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Charlaquin
    replied to Games Discussion/What Are You Playing?
    I'm tentatively interested. For as much of a single-player gal as I am, I really like the idea of online multiplayer games. I've only found one such game I actually enjoy in practice, and that mainly because Bungie makes FPS mechanics so good they're worth putting up with the online aspects for. But I'm liking the sound of 76 so far, a lot of the ideas they're throwing out for how to make it palatable for their very single-player focused fan base have got my attention. But I'm still hesitant to get too excited, because I felt similarly about Elder Scrolls Online, and I don't want to be disappointed...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:


  • Charlaquin
    replied to The D&D thread
    All of the level 19 features they’ve shown off feel like that to me. Like “ok, cool, that seems fitting for that class. But on the off chance I actually stick with one character long enough to get it, the campaign will nearly be over, so what’s the point?” On the other hand, what are they going to do, not give anyone any abilities after 10th level?

    It’s just kind of the unfortunate truth of RPGs, both tabletop and video. The cool high level abilities are what you strive for, but by the time you get them, there’s not much game left to use them. And if there was, you’d feel cheated...
    See more | Go to post

    Leave a comment:

No activity results to display
Show More

Profile Sidebar

Collapse
Charlaquin
Charlaquin
Moderator
Last Activity: Today, 09:02 AM
Joined: 11-01-2013
Location:
Working...
X