Philsys Revisions!

RP-related discussion otherwise not covered in the Character Closet.
Archmage144
 

Re: Well:

Unread postby Archmage144 » Wed Sep 28, 2005 9:14 pm

Blame Kelne. If you have a better idea, rewrite the list yourself to be better balanced.

Also, I fixed my typo. That was copied and pasted directly from my file when we were going to merge the stats. <p>
<div style="text-align:center">Image</div>

</p>

User avatar
Kelne
EXTERMINATE!!!!
 
Posts: 3604
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 2:02 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Well:

Unread postby Kelne » Fri Sep 30, 2005 5:00 am

I didn't do a great deal of meddling with the flails or polearms, aside from adding a couple of extra weapons. Still, I have a little time, so I'll take another crack at it. Looking at the trident, I expect it should actually do less damage than the spear, but be a better defensive weapon. Since it occurs to me that I have no idea what a tristaff is, it can take that weapon's place, but with an AT/PA mod of -1/+2.

As for the flails, I suspect they'd work well as high damage weapons with a commensurately high AT/PA penalty. As per suggestions, the cutlass and sabre will no longer be light weapons, and the cutlass will have its damage upgraded a bit. <p>Centuries of threats of "I'll turn you all to stone!" and "I'll knock you all down!" have caused Domans to develop an instinct to form small groups. For safety, I assure you. – Keir</p>

Archmage144
 

Re: Well:

Unread postby Archmage144 » Fri Sep 30, 2005 10:48 am

A note about flails is that they are very hard to use, but they are equally difficult to block. I'm not sure how to reflect that, though. <p>
<div style="text-align:center">Image</div>

</p>

User avatar
Besyanteo
Would-be GitP Bard
 
Posts: 4612
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2002 8:56 pm
Location: Virginia

Re: Well:

Unread postby Besyanteo » Fri Sep 30, 2005 8:16 pm

High Damage for hitting, low AT? Actually, I can't see blocking with on either. Very high damage, very big AT/PA penalties? Something like a warhammer, that's lighter (lowwer str req) and is very hard to hit or block with?

I'm not sure how else it would be represented. <p>
<div style="text-align:center">Image</div></p>

Archmage144
 

Re: Well:

Unread postby Archmage144 » Fri Sep 30, 2005 8:36 pm

Strictly speaking, it'd give you an AT penalty to use it, but other people would take a PA penalty to block it, which would bizarrely cancel out. <p>
<div style="text-align:center">Image</div>

</p>

User avatar
Besyanteo
Would-be GitP Bard
 
Posts: 4612
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2002 8:56 pm
Location: Virginia

Re: Well:

Unread postby Besyanteo » Fri Sep 30, 2005 8:55 pm

...

AT +0 then? <p>
<div style="text-align:center">Image</div></p>

User avatar
Jak Snide
 
Posts: 5457
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 7:14 am
Location: London

Re: Well:

Unread postby Jak Snide » Fri Sep 30, 2005 9:17 pm

No AT penalty sounds fine to me, but with a fairly high PA penalty. Flails seem to be the appropriate choice of the warrior with reckless disregard for his own survival and an unhealthy lust for mangling things.


User avatar
Kelne
EXTERMINATE!!!!
 
Posts: 3604
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 2:02 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Well:

Unread postby Kelne » Sat Oct 01, 2005 5:24 am

Sounds good to me. I'll go with that. <p>Centuries of threats of "I'll turn you all to stone!" and "I'll knock you all down!" have caused Domans to develop an instinct to form small groups. For safety, I assure you. – Keir</p>

User avatar
Kelne
EXTERMINATE!!!!
 
Posts: 3604
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 2:02 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Well:

Unread postby Kelne » Sun Oct 09, 2005 11:35 pm

There we are. Took me a bit longer to get around to than I expected, but that ought to do it. <p>Centuries of threats of "I'll turn you all to stone!" and "I'll knock you all down!" have caused Domans to develop an instinct to form small groups. For safety, I assure you. – Keir</p>

Archmage144
 

Re: Well:

Unread postby Archmage144 » Fri Oct 14, 2005 12:13 pm

I've been giving a little bit of thought to the way skill points work.

As it stands, a character gets 20 skill points at 1st level, base. Assuming for some reason that they invest absolutely no points in INT or WIS, they can max out (at 4) 5 normal skills. Gaining 3 skill points per level, they will only be able to keep one of those skills at the soft cap (since they cannot increase a skill more than twice per level, they will have to put two points into the same designated skill every level). This isn't terrible--it means that characters have to focus to become really good at something, which really helps to validate why hard caps (the max skill rank + 6) are so high--it takes a while to get there anyway.

But suppose a character puts a combined total of 5 into INT and WIS, putting 3 of those points into WIS. He now has 30 skill points, allowing him to have 7 capped normal skills with 2 points left over to spend as he chooses (which will cap a knowledge or support skill, so the average character will have at least 8 skills). He will get 5 skill points each level, assuming no increases in WIS. He can only soft cap two skills out of those seven.

What I'm trying to figure out is whether we really want to be so harsh about skill-ups. I don't know exactly how to deal with this--giving more skill points per level doesn't really seem necessary, but then, it isn't really vital for a skill to be capped to be useful in Philsys--or is it? I honestly don't know. But at the moment, keeping a skill capped is a choice you have to make at level TWO. From your first level up, you are deciding whether or not you want your character to keep a skill capped. Is this too harsh? <p>
<div style="text-align:center">Image</div>

</p>

User avatar
Jak Snide
 
Posts: 5457
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 7:14 am
Location: London

Re: Well:

Unread postby Jak Snide » Fri Oct 14, 2005 1:11 pm

Dunno if anyone else finds this but having a maxed skill isn't that important. Kilraianjja, despite only having a sword skill of 11 at level 8, has been able to demolish most opponents in melee (provided nobody disarms her, Kelne ;p). Jak's level 7 and his two primary magic skills are at rank 11 as well and, while I haven't used him in a big battle for a long time, I'm fairly sure he could hold his own.

Then again, Kilra might be more effective because I've given her other skills which factor into fights and have proved to be far more useful than an extra +4 to hit and damage. This is hardly a stunning example of a case study, but I feel that it shows that max ranks are simply overkill.


Archmage144
 

Re: Well:

Unread postby Archmage144 » Fri Oct 14, 2005 1:33 pm

Sounds good to me, then!

Especially considering that it makes a skill that is capped or near capped all that much more of a signature skill for the character. <p>
<div style="text-align:center">Image</div>

</p>Edited by: [url=http://p068.ezboard.com/brpgww60462.showUserPublicProfile?gid=archmage144>Archmage144</A]&nbsp; Image at: 10/14/05 13:34

User avatar
Besyanteo
Would-be GitP Bard
 
Posts: 4612
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2002 8:56 pm
Location: Virginia

Re: Well:

Unread postby Besyanteo » Fri Oct 14, 2005 2:24 pm

Expounding on Jak, I have tried to keep Jeridan's unarmed fighting skill capped as much as possible. The result is that, at level 5, he has potential to super crit several villians and high level PCs I've looked at. By focussing on his skill, even with a 'slow' rate of progression, the way PS works means that at level five he's got an AT/PA of 28/21, after skill.

So yeah. I don't think that the skill progression is harsh at all. o.o <p>
<div style="text-align:center">Image</div></p>Edited by: Besyanteo&nbsp; Image at: 10/14/05 14:25

User avatar
Jak Snide
 
Posts: 5457
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 7:14 am
Location: London

Re: Well:

Unread postby Jak Snide » Fri Oct 14, 2005 2:54 pm

TOTALLY DIFFERENT TOPIC. But I just looked at this again;

[Standard Weapon Skill=2]Defender's Stance (1 TP) - Adds weapon skill rank to all PA rolls made this round. Even if no parry roll is allowed, half of the users's weapon skill rank is added to his PA for the remainder of the round. This tech cannot be combined with any other offensive tech, and the user forfeits any bonus attacks (but may use them, instead, as bonus parries).

Anyone this this is really overpowered, given the TP required and pre-req?


User avatar
Besyanteo
Would-be GitP Bard
 
Posts: 4612
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2002 8:56 pm
Location: Virginia

Re: Well:

Unread postby Besyanteo » Fri Oct 14, 2005 3:12 pm

... I want to say that it is, but I can't seem to find a modification of it that I'm happy with.

I don't like suddenly switching bonus attacks over to bonus parries. Maybe remove that bit? *shrug* <p>
<div style="text-align:center">Image</div></p>

User avatar
Jak Snide
 
Posts: 5457
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 7:14 am
Location: London

Re: Well:

Unread postby Jak Snide » Fri Oct 14, 2005 3:35 pm

Looked at that, and made this for Kilra instead.

[Any Weapon Skill=4]Flawless Defense(5 TP) - During this round weapon skill rank is added to PA and any bonuses to parry and dodge rolls are doubled (such [s]Advanced Parrying and [s]Evade Missiles). May only be along with a full defense action.

Character's gonna be hard to hit unless they're flanked/outnumbered, but they can't do anything else.


User avatar
Nakibe
Lady Malix wills your demise!
 
Posts: 1214
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 8:51 am

Re: Well:

Unread postby Nakibe » Fri Oct 14, 2005 6:03 pm

Its definitely better now, if you ask me. I mean, you're STILL looking at effectively doubling your PA for a turn, which is incredibly nasty at higher levels of skill. (Whoops, you would've hit me before... NOW YOU CRIT-FAIL! >:D!) This bothers me a bit. But if that's ALL you're doing for the turn it isn't AS bad.


NamagomiMk0
 
Posts: 1223
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 1:47 am

Re: Well:

Unread postby NamagomiMk0 » Fri Oct 14, 2005 6:29 pm

And it still doesn't apply to spells, as a FYI. <p>ChibiUrusai: *chomps* I am underage. ^-^
Arch mage144: This means nothing to me. =P
T3chn0Namagomi: *motherly voice* Brian! What would Kate think if she heard you say that?!

---Dirtiness in a chat. Blame my mind for being in the gutter.

-Namagomi, who lives up to his name in this case.</p>

Archmage144
 

Re: Well:

Unread postby Archmage144 » Fri Oct 14, 2005 9:30 pm

I personally don't think it's overpowered, even at 1 TP, because you can't kill anyone with it, no matter how much you do it. Sure, you get better parrying against physical attacks, but you're not able to do anything seriously offensive, and if you aren't doing damage in a one on one fight, you can't win. You are forfeiting ALL of your attacks for that round in order to get an improved chance to fend off enemy blows.

At rank 4, that will amount to increasing your PA roll by 4 and your base PA by 2. Even at higher ranks, it's still not going to be as good as even a bonus PA roll is (average bonus 10.5). until you get to rank 20! The bonus overall is very small. It doesn't "double your PA" unless you're dumping every rank up in your weapon into your PA bonus to begin with, in which case I wonder how you're hitting anything. <p>
<div style="text-align:center">Image</div>

</p>Edited by: [url=http://p068.ezboard.com/brpgww60462.showUserPublicProfile?gid=archmage144>Archmage144</A]&nbsp; Image at: 10/14/05 21:38

User avatar
Kelne
EXTERMINATE!!!!
 
Posts: 3604
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 2:02 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Well:

Unread postby Kelne » Sat Oct 15, 2005 4:37 am

I was actually under the impression that people could choose between bonus attacks and bonus parries each round anyway under the new rules.

In any case, I don't really have much of an issue with defensive techs. Generally, the loss of any opportunity to attack balances out the defensive benefits. Once you start getting up to high ranks, they become seriously difficult for an opponent of similar skill to penetrate, and even if denied a PA roll, the odds can still be 50-50 or less. Which is fair enough, given the kind of damage they're passing up inflicting by that point.

On a random note, it would be handy to see the rules for unusual schools of magic and so forth compiled somewhere convenient. Blood magic and blue magic are the ones that spring to mind. <p>Centuries of threats of "I'll turn you all to stone!" and "I'll knock you all down!" have caused Domans to develop an instinct to form small groups. For safety, I assure you. – Keir</p>

Archmage144
 

Re: Well:

Unread postby Archmage144 » Mon Oct 31, 2005 7:36 pm

This thread is obviously sticky now, and has been for a while.

Any new thoughts from anyone? <p>
<div style="text-align:center">Image</div>

</p>

User avatar
Jak Snide
 
Posts: 5457
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 7:14 am
Location: London

Re: Well:

Unread postby Jak Snide » Mon Oct 31, 2005 8:56 pm

Not a new idea, but something that we've chatted about before via IM and that everyone needs to take a shot at.

Techs: What's the limit of what they can achieve? Are they limited to the purely mundane, or can you eventually perform supernatural acts without magic with a whole lot of training?


User avatar
Capntastic
Aa, cracked glass!
 
Posts: 4578
Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2002 2:09 pm

Re: Well:

Unread postby Capntastic » Mon Oct 31, 2005 10:02 pm

I would like to see standardized method to create a sheet for familiars.


User avatar
Besyanteo
Would-be GitP Bard
 
Posts: 4612
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2002 8:56 pm
Location: Virginia

Re: Well:

Unread postby Besyanteo » Mon Oct 31, 2005 11:19 pm

Same system, significantly less points for stats and such?

Not sure how we'd do EXP for them, short of giving them a dividend of the EXP of they character they're attatched to. <p>
<div style="text-align:center">Image</div></p>

User avatar
Capntastic
Aa, cracked glass!
 
Posts: 4578
Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2002 2:09 pm

Re: Well:

Unread postby Capntastic » Mon Oct 31, 2005 11:39 pm

The problem as I see it stems from the fact that a zombie could be a familiar, and may be about as powerful as a human, whereas a Birdito would be rather troubled to inflict even a scratch on something.

So, there could be different scales for making the sheets.
-(A trimmed down to basics PS sheet), for medium-powered familiars like zombies or demons.
-The same for small critters, only the stats being treated differently.
-Maybe one for Summons?

Who knows!


Archmage144
 

Re: Well:

Unread postby Archmage144 » Wed Nov 02, 2005 12:38 am

Familiars can be treated in one of two ways, depending on how much detail is important to the player.

A familiar can be treated as a player, with its own entire PS sheet. Usually, a familiar will get fewer skill points than a regular character and will have few, if any, techs that do not somehow involve its master (telepathic communication, an empathetic link, etc). It is up to player judgment, then, to design a reasonable familiar. If a GM thinks a familiar is overpowered (it will probably be immediately obvious), he does not have to allow the familiar in his RP. Most familiars that are small animals or whatever are probably going to have very low stats anyway, but I can't put a number on that at this point in time.

A familiar can also be treated as an NPC. This is good for familiars that require less detail--only relevant details are included. This usually means things like HP, move speed, AT/PA, and base MBlock/missile evasion. Other things can be specified as needed (TP, MATK, various unique qualities of the familiar). This assumes that the familiar does not need a complex stat or skill breakdown, either because the familiar's stats are irrelevant in most cases (it does not matter what the CHA stat of your pet dog is) or because they have no skills to speak of outside of what is instinctual. A cat familiar does not need a weapon proficiency, for example, or detailed stats--it can still be assigned a reasonable AT/PA based on what its stats might be, assuming a high agility and dexterity and possibly assigning some sort of arbitrary size-based bonus. Essentially, it's a matter of guesswork and judgment calls no matter what.

What this means is that creating a familiar is going to very complicated, if not impossible to do without GM assistance, especially for new players. If a truly standardized set of familiar rules are required, it could be done, as mentioned above, by treating them as mini-PCs. In this case, the only parameters that need to be determined are how many stat points and such forth a familiar gets, but it seems wrong to me to apply all of the same rules straight across the board. Giving a pet dog 55+(STA*5) HP seems way off to me, for example. <p>
<div style="text-align:center">Image</div>

</p>

Archmage144
 

Re: Well:

Unread postby Archmage144 » Fri Nov 11, 2005 9:39 am

Last night, I was trying to fall asleep when suddenly an idea occurred to me that would help to further clarify various Philsys spell ranks and their capabilities. At the moment, this set of ideas does not take precedence over the spellbook, but a lot of this is a combination of the spellbook, people's character sheets, and a general idea of how I think things should work. I'll copy and paste my rough notes for now and I'll elaborate on them later.

Philsys Magic

Ranks 1-5 produce minor effects.
Ranks 6-11 produce moderate effects.
Ranks 12-17 produce major effects.
Ranks 18-25 produce incredible effects.
Ranks 26-32 produce insanely incredible effects.

Minor means +2.
Moderate means +4.
Major means +6.
Incredible means +10.
Insanely incredible means +20.

Very minor elemental spells cost 4-8 MP, average 6.
Very minor elemental spell average damage (when learned): 13 (2.2 dmg/MP)
Very minor elemental spell average damage (at minor cap 5): 21 (3.5 dmg/MP)
Very minor elemental spell average damage (at moderate cap 11): 33 (5.5 dmg/MP)

Minor elemental spells cost 12-16 MP, average 14.
Minor elemental spell average damage (when learned): 37 (2.6 dmg/MP)
Minor elemental spell average damage (at minor cap 5): 42 (3 dmg/MP)
Minor elemental spell average damage (at moderate cap 11): 65 (4.6 dmg/MP)

Major elemental spells cost 30-34 MP, average 32.
Major elemental spell average damage (when learned): 102 (3.2 dmg/MP)
Major elemental spell average damage (at major cap 17): 132 (4.1 dmg/MP)

Good damage benchmarks. DoT spells should be more MP efficient or more damaging to compensate for slower action.

[Malediction=1]Poison (6 MP) - Level 3 poison (6d6 total damage, average 21, 3.5 dmg/MP).
[Malediction=4]Poison 2 (12 MP) - Level 5 poison (15d6 total damage, average 53, 4.4 dmg/MP).
[Malediction=6]Poison 3 (20 MP) - Level 7 poison (28d6 total damage, average 98, 4.9 dmg/MP).
[Malediction=12]Poison 4 (32 MP) - Level 10 poison (55d6 total damage, average 192).

[Element=1]Element 1 (4 MP) - Generic single target elemental attack. 8+rank*2+1d6 damage.
[Element=4]Element 2 (12 MP) - Generic single target elemental attack. 14+rank*4+2d6 damage.
[Element=12]Element 3 (32 MP) - Generic single target elemental attack. 20+rank*6+3d6 damage.
[Element=4]Area Element (29 MP) - Generic multi-target elemental attack. Affects a small area or a limited number of targets. 10+rank*2+3d6 damage.
[Element=8]Area Element 2 (54 MP) - Generic multi-target elemental attack. Affects a medium-sized area or a greater number of targets. 16+rank*4+2d6 damage.
[Element=16]Area Element 3 (76 MP) - Generic multi-target elemental attack. Affects a large area or a very large number of targets. 22+rank*6+2d6 damage.

[Enhancement=1-5]Improve (8+(rank-1) MP) - Increases a minor physical substat by rank. Includes AT, PA, attack damage, missile evasion, or AC. Learn one skill per rank. Cost is determined by rank. Duration negotiable (add 2 MP to cost for every round on average the spell will last than rank).
[Enhancement=6-8]Greater Improve (10+(rank-1) MP) - Increases a minor magical substat by rank. Includes MATK and MDEF. Learn one skill per rank. Cost is determined by rank. Duration negotiable (add 4 MP to cost for every round on average the spell will last than rank)
[Enhancement=7-12]Capacity Improve (12+(rank-2) MP) - Increases a primary stat by 1/3 of rank, rounded down. Includes COU, WIS, INT, CHA, AGI, DEX, STR, and STA. Learn one skill per rank. Cost is determined by rank. Duration negotiable (add 6 MP to cost for every round on average the spell will last than rank)

[Malediction=1-5]Cripple (8+(rank-1) MP) - Decrease a minor physical substat by rank or apply a minor general penalty of -2. Includes AT, PA, attack damage, missile evasion, or AC. Learn one skill per rank. Cost is determined by rank. Duration negotiable (add 2 MP to cost for every round on average the spell will last than rank). Effect can be increased up to 2x by quartering the duration.
[Malediction=6-8]Greater Cripple (10+(rank-1) MP) - Decreases a minor magical substat by rank or apply a harsh general penalty of -4. Includes MATK and MDEF. Learn one skill per rank. Cost is determined by rank. Duration negotiable (add 4 MP to cost for every round on average the spell will last than rank) Effect can be increased up to 2x by quartering the duration.
[Malediction=7-12]Capacity Cripple (12+(rank-2) MP) - Decreases a primary stat by 1/3 of rank, rounded down, or apply a serious general penalty of -6. Includes COU, WIS, INT, CHA, AGI, DEX, STR, and STA. Learn one skill per rank. Cost is determined by rank. Duration negotiable (add 6 MP to cost for every round on average the spell will last than rank). Effect can be increased up to 2x by quartering the duration.

[Healing=12]Revivification (50 MP) - Resurrects a person that has only been dead for up to rank minutes, assuming that their body is repairable.
[Healing=18]Resurrection (included for benchmarking)
[Healing=30]Absolute Resurrection (# MP) - Resurrects a person without need for their body or a destroyed undead creature as the creature they were in life. Resurrection window is extended to rank days.

[Creation=1-5]Call/Create Minor Object (6+(rank) MP) - Calls a relatively minor possession belonging to the caster to his location or creates a simple object.
[Creation=8]Create Significant Object (20 MP) - Creates some sort of magical object with a minor enhancement.
[Creation=12]Create Amazing Object (48 MP) - Creates some sort of very complex or impressive object or a magical object with a moderate enhancement.
[Creation=18]Create Incredible Object (72 MP) - Creates an incredibly complex object or a magical object with a major enhancement.
[Creation=26]Create Absurd Object (168 MP) - Creates an artifact object. Truly powerful artifact objects will require a ritual.

[Summon=4]Summon Minor Creature (35 MP) - Calls a creature that is roughly as powerful as a 1st level character, but that is less versatile and usually not a spellcaster. Average HP 50. Base AT/PA average of 12/12. Base missile evasion of 16. Base MBlock of 16. Base damage average of 14+1d6 for a light attack. Base AC of 8. Spellcasting minor creatures will have a base MATK of 14, ranks capped at 1.
[Summon=8]Summon Moderate Creature (50 MP) - Calls a creature that is roughly as powerful as a 3rd level character, but that is less versatile and usually not a spellcaster. Average HP 65. Base AT/PA average of 16/16. Base missile evasion of 18. Base MBlock of 18. Base average damage of 20+1d6 for a light attack. Base AC of 12. Spellcasting minor creatures will have a base MATK of 16, ranks capped at 4.
[Summon=14]Summon Major Creature (72 MP) - Calls a creature that is roughly as powerful as a 5th level character, but that is less versatile. Average HP 80. Base AT/PA average of 18/18. Base missile evasion of 20. Base MBlock of 20. Base damage average of 26+1d6 for a light attack. Base AC of 16. Spellcasting minor creatures will have a base MATK of 18, ranks capped at 8.
[Summon=20]Summon Incredible Creature - Calls a creature that is roughly as powerful as a 7th level character, but that is less versatile. Average HP 100. Base AT/PA average of 20/20. Base missile evasion of 22. Base MBlock of 22. Base damage average of 30+1d6 for a light attack. Base AC of 20. Spellcasting minor creatures will have a base MATK of 20, ranks capped at 12.

Creature summon spells are separate from Final Fantasy-esque Spirit Summon spells that create a creature that deals damage for one or several rounds before leaving. The damage of these spells should be compared to Elemental rank in terms of effectiveness and adjusted accordingly--they require ranks in more than one skill in most cases, and they also often deal their damage over time. This will usually mean increased effectiveness over equivalent Elemental spells (damage, duration, side-effects).

Creature summoning spells are not intended to use the average values for all of their statistics. Like player characters, some are intended to be higher and others are intended to be lower. A spellcaster summon should have higher casting stats than AT/PA, for example. The AT/PA and damage assume that the summon is not wielding a weapon. If the summon is wielding a weapon, the effective rank is capped as normal for the level, and damage should be calculated as normal for an armed character. Magic skill caps are intentionally reduced because of the power of such spells. If more than one creature is summoned at a time, the resulting creatures should be weaker than the single creature. Creating abbreviated stat blocks or NPC sheets for summoned creatures is an excellent way to condense the relevant information.

Effective Rank Caps at Levels:

Level Cap
1 4
2 6
3 8
4 10
5 12
6 14
7 16
8 18
9 20
10 22
11 24
12 26
13 28
14 30
15 32 (ranks above 32 not possible for magic)
16 34
17 36 (max effective rank for non-magic skills)
18 36
19 36
20 36

Average MP at Levels: Increasing INT and WIS does not grant retroactive MP bonuses, but increasing MAG does, if applicable. "Average" casting stats for a PC caster are assumed to be INT +4, WIS +4, and MAG 5 at 1st level, intentionally weighting them low. The average caster will, then, gain about 5 MP per level for most of his career. The most MP he can possibly gain at levelup is 12, which requires INT +10, MAG 6, and a roll of 4 (8+1d4 MP/level at this point). It is as such safe to assume an average MP gain of 5 per level and a base MP of 70. A very focused mage with high casting stats will have more (+10-20 MP).

Level MP
1 70
2 75
3 85
5 95
7 100
8 105
10 115
12 125
15 140
20 165

If the levels chosen seem arbitrary, it is because they are, but the general idea is to get an idea of average MP around each benchmark of 1, 6, 12, 18, and 26 to assist in spell MP costs. Resurrection is a good example of a ritual spell because its MP cost is such that many wizards will have to burn some HP casting it or need assistance.

The general trend is that destruction should be easier than creation. An elemental burst is still only a major effect even at third tier, because it is just a bigger fireball. Elemental damage caps are such that a PC can incapacitate an average person at rank 11 without a critical hit. At rank 12, killing an average person (or even a very tough person, STA +5 or so) is easy with a little effort. Lower cost damage spells are more slightly more MP-efficient, but they work more slowly, because a character normally only gets one turn each round, and opponents have multiple chances to resist compared to a single, bigger spell.

Even instant-death spells should in most cases be at most high-tiered major spell effects. To undo life is easy--to create it or repair it is more difficult. An instant-death spell that affects a very wide variety of creatures (such as celestials and demons, the most poweful of whom are presumably immune to many things that would kill a normal human) might breach the incredible threshold with appropriate justification.

PCs can gain access to "emergency" resurrection spells at the earliest at level 5, resurrection spells at level 8, and very powerful resurrection spells at level 14. Still not an excuse to kill off PCs at random in most cases, but it gives them a chance to survive a botched encounter if someone is a healer and the party is prepared.

PCs at current generally have up to major effects. Major effects are considered to be very powerful spellcasting in general, but not impossible to achieve by a dedicated wizard. Incredible effects demonstrate true mastery of an art (i.e., bringing someone back from the dead is far beyond the capacity of most casters unless they dedicate themselves to the healing art fully). Insanely incredible effects demonstrate power beyond that of most mortals. A rank 30 effect is effortless for a deity, but would require incredible expenditure of power by a mortal. Insanely incredible effects are generally considered to be only theoretical and are the kinds of things Gunnir Archmagi write long speculative essays about (the creation process of artifacts, returning an undead creature to its former life weeks after its animation, the summoning and binding of demons at least as skilled at magic as they are, raising an enormous pile of plush pink rabbits out of the Val'Ri to create a small artifical island of stuffed animals, etc.) Some insanely incredible effects might be achievable at lower ranks through ritual magic requiring days, weeks, months, or years and adequate arcane assistance from followers or other aides.
The big point is the minor, moderate, major, incredible, insanely incredible benchmarking system. By splitting magical effects up into these five categories, we effectively establish rough but better defined guidelines. Think White Wolf's system and its spheres for Mage--essentially, you're given a couple benchmarks and you're left to figure out what falls between them.

The most important benchmark, I decided, is the Resurrection spell. Bringing someone back from the dead is definitely classified as incredible, which is why the cutoff is rank 18. This is both a suitably hard to reach rank and an appropriate benchmark for most magical skills. Essentially, even the most powerful of basic area-effect elemental spells is only going to be a "major" effect--it takes a lot of energy and effort to blow up an entire room with damaging fire, but it doesn't really do anything that's more spectacular, reality-bending, or impossible than a smaller fireball.

I will clarify further later and would love to discuss this with interested parties. I apologize in advance for weird formatting, I use txt files for everything.

Edit: Included more stuff! <p>
<div style="text-align:center">Image</div>

</p>Edited by: [url=http://p068.ezboard.com/brpgww60462.showUserPublicProfile?gid=archmage144>Archmage144</A]&nbsp; Image at: 11/11/05 13:10

Idran1701
None some call is air am
 
Posts: 42195
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 9:37 am

Re: Well:

Unread postby Idran1701 » Fri Nov 11, 2005 10:53 pm

Hmm. I'm not sure about the Capacity Improve template. It increases a stat as well as giving you knowledge you don't already possess, even if temporarily? <p>

"Never let your morals get in the way of doing what is right" - Salvor Hardin
</p>

Archmage144
 

Re: Well:

Unread postby Archmage144 » Fri Nov 11, 2005 11:52 pm

This is all very rough and hypothetical--I might actually boost the minimum rank on those to at least 12.

What do you mean, "it gives you knowledge you don't possess?" <p>
<div style="text-align:center">Image</div>

</p>

Idran1701
None some call is air am
 
Posts: 42195
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 9:37 am

Re: Well:

Unread postby Idran1701 » Sat Nov 12, 2005 12:40 am

The extra skills you get from the spell on top of the stat boost. Or am I misreading it? <p>

"Never let your morals get in the way of doing what is right" - Salvor Hardin
</p>

Archmage144
 

Re: Well:

Unread postby Archmage144 » Sat Nov 12, 2005 4:06 pm

No, you learn one at each rank. You never gain skills from these abilities that you don't already have--you're misreading the description. The description is that a mage with Enhancing magic of some sort can learn one spell at each rank of his skill, each with a different effect.

You can't learn all of them at 7, for example--at 7, you might learn the AGI increasing spell, and at rank 8, you might learn the STR increasing spell, etc. <p>
<div style="text-align:center">Image</div>

</p>Edited by: [url=http://p068.ezboard.com/brpgww60462.showUserPublicProfile?gid=archmage144>Archmage144</A]&nbsp; Image at: 11/12/05 16:07

User avatar
Kelne
EXTERMINATE!!!!
 
Posts: 3604
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 2:02 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Well:

Unread postby Kelne » Sat Nov 12, 2005 8:02 pm

Hm. Not sure about the enhancement spells, myself. It looks like you're trying to turn what's essentially a series of generic examples into fully-fledged spells. The mechanics are good, but I think rather than the 'learn one per rank' approach, players could simply pick one stat that the spell they're creating can improve.

Things like Protect for AC, Defender for PA, and so forth. Balance would be maintained by the usual limit of three new techs/spells per level, rather than by skill ranks.

In all, I think it's a pretty good set of guidelines in terms of spell power, and one which will come in pretty handy for me in creating new spells.

I think the major thing that still requires addressing spell-wise is the haste spell. I'll give that a shot myself sometime soon.

A last point. I was under the impression that as it stood, boosts to Int or Wis would give a 5MP bonus, as did increasing Sta for HP. After all, the other derived stats (AT/PA, MgA, dodge, etc)increase when their base stats are boosted; why not HP and MP?

This doesn't strike me as a retroactive thing, rather a measure of a character's improving ability to channel magic as a result of their increased mental agility. A potential 10MP boost over and above the standard levelling bonus may seem like a large amount, but it still only works out to one extra moderate-level spell per day. And that's assuming that both stat-ups succeed, which becomes a tad unlikely when you start to reach high values. <p>Centuries of threats of "I'll turn you all to stone!" and "I'll knock you all down!" have caused Domans to develop an instinct to form small groups. For safety, I assure you. – Keir</p>

Archmage144
 

Re: Well:

Unread postby Archmage144 » Sat Nov 12, 2005 11:46 pm

Quote:
The mechanics are good, but I think rather than the 'learn one per rank' approach, players could simply pick one stat that the spell they're creating can improve.

That's actually exactly what I meant. My point is that you don't learn them all at rank 7, for example. You can't learn the AGI boosting spell, the COU boosting spell, and the STR boosting spell all at the same time once you hit rank 7--you learn them gradually. The basic idea was just to express that by suggesting that you would be allowed to learn how to learn one stat booster for every rank up you got.

There is no limit of three new techs/spells per level. What the hell are you talking about? You're not the first person I've heard reference this--it's not in the rules and never has been. I have corrected at least one person on it. There was an unofficial guideline at one point about how inventing an assload of new abilities each level was unacceptable, because I was responsible for updating everyone's sheets and rebalancing everything. I did not want to handle 30 new abilities everytime someone gained a level. One tech or spell per rank is a good idea in most cases.

We need to work on the haste spell. Damned right.

MP doesn't increase because adding INT or WIS already has so many other boosts to it--AT/PA, MBlock, Missile Evasion, and Initiative in the case of INT, and skill points per level in the case of WIS. Boosting WIS gives you an additional skill point for that level, which is very significant. Boosting STA should improve your current HP as well as your future HP, or boosting STA is never worth it, because you get a whole extra hit point at each level up. Whoohoo. <p>
<div style="text-align:center">Image</div>

</p>

Idran1701
None some call is air am
 
Posts: 42195
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 9:37 am

Re: Well:

Unread postby Idran1701 » Sat Nov 12, 2005 11:49 pm

...There isn't such a limit? Huh.

Well, yay, then. That makes things much easier on me. :O <p>

"Never let your morals get in the way of doing what is right" - Salvor Hardin
</p>

NamagomiMk0
 
Posts: 1223
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 1:47 am

Re: Well:

Unread postby NamagomiMk0 » Mon Nov 14, 2005 7:20 am

Hmm. I have a question about what order damage modifiers would be applied in, when I think about it. Namely skill/crit/armor/elemental modifiers, since those seem to be the main for. <p>"DO YOU THINK YOU CAN DEFEAT US? OUR TREASURE MAY BE HEAVY, BUT WE ARE LIGHT AS WIND. ONLY MAGICS MAY HURT US, BUT ONLY WE KNOW WHICH ONES." --Omoikane, Digital Devil Saga 2</p>

Archmage144
 

Re: Well:

Unread postby Archmage144 » Mon Nov 14, 2005 9:32 am

Skill modifiers (as in weapon skill mods to damage and so forth) are all applied first. This is the base damage of the attack.

Apply critical hits or elemental weakness/resistance multipliers before AC or other damage reduction. A critical hit is a particularly good blow, so it will have a better chance of penetrating armor. This allows attacks with a very low base damage to still hurt if they critical:

15 damage - 10 AC = 5 damage * 2 crit = 10 damage.

15 damage * 2 crit - 10 AC = 20 damage.

I think critical hits ignoring armor or whatever is too powerful, but it should have a better chance to get through in the first place. The idea of landing a 0 damage critical hit because your base damage didn't get through armor doesn't really appeal to me--a critical hit should do something. <p>
<div style="text-align:center">Image</div>

</p>

NamagomiMk0
 
Posts: 1223
Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 1:47 am

Re: Well:

Unread postby NamagomiMk0 » Mon Dec 26, 2005 11:28 am

A question regarding things! Particularly relating to ranged weapons and melee targeting.

First, it is true that now all melee attacks add rank to damage. However, what about ranged weapons? Is their damage primarily dependent on the weapon, and possibly ammo? Or does skill have the same effect on damage with bows, throwing weapons, crossbows, and guns(though bows and throwing weapons already get a STR mod)?

Secondly--it is well known that ranged weapons' defense is based off of dodging, not parrying. As a result, realistically, you only get one dodge roll. However, I am wondering on dodges and the like in general--and whether or not they're connected to parry rolls, and if so, how. Seeing as it has been established that projectile weapons get only one attack per round, I am curious as to how EXACTLY this would work.

Third--It has been established that it is likely possible to deal locational damage with a melee attack. This is logical. However, as per the incident in Doomsday Episode 1, I am wondering exactly HOW locational attacks with melee weapons would work and be generally balanced.

That is all for the moment. <p>"DO YOU THINK YOU CAN DEFEAT US? OUR TREASURE MAY BE HEAVY, BUT WE ARE LIGHT AS WIND. ONLY MAGICS MAY HURT US, BUT ONLY WE KNOW WHICH ONES." --Omoikane, Digital Devil Saga 2</p>

User avatar
Besyanteo
Would-be GitP Bard
 
Posts: 4612
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2002 8:56 pm
Location: Virginia

A sheet!

Unread postby Besyanteo » Mon Jan 09, 2006 4:17 am

So, I went and made a new sheet, using the modifications to PhilSys so far.

However, I have NO CLUE if I did it properly. So... lunk. If nothing else, this should give us some idea of what the altered rules look like in action? ... Oh: I have no idea if Advanced Parry and Shield Blocking (which seems to be properly defined on the skill list now) can stack or not.


User avatar
Nakibe
Lady Malix wills your demise!
 
Posts: 1214
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 8:51 am

Re: A sheet!

Unread postby Nakibe » Mon Jan 09, 2006 10:54 am

I just want to point out how inherently WRONG it seems that the shields in Kelne's weapons list give out more AC generally speaking than the armors do. I mean, Bes' Ring Mail gives him 9 AC... and the shield gives him TWENTY. Wut?

Personally, I think shields should JUST provide PA bonuses and no AC, since you essentially use them to deflect rather than take damage. But that's my general bias there. Either way, I still don't think that your average shield should double your AC like that. And note also one more thing : Why would anyone in their right (twinking) mind use Full Plate armor when you can get a Body Shield. Big and unweildly it may potentially be, sure, but BETTER IN EVERY WAY THAN PLATE MAIL.


User avatar
Capntastic
Aa, cracked glass!
 
Posts: 4578
Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2002 2:09 pm

Re: A sheet!

Unread postby Capntastic » Sun Jan 15, 2006 7:14 am

I think that shields should give a minor PA bonus, and have their own AC that doesn't stack with 'body' armour.


PreviousNext

Return to OOC RP Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron

Yalogank