Avian Mosquito's page

I normally don't create entire threads to discuss individual spell types, but in this case it's a spell I want to include but I think might be hard to balance due to the inherent power of this spell type.

There's a type of spell in my system called an elemental barrier. There's three versions, which are heat, cold and electric. When you cast one, you deal 1/2 caster level up to the caster level cap determined by spell level to every enemy that makes contact with you for the one minute duration, including those you attack hand to hand (hint). It also makes it so attacks of the other two elements are automatically diffused, removing their penetration and cutting their damage in half (before DR, no less) and automatically removes the critical effect of all three if they manage to critically hit. (Though it does not prevent attribute damage, and if better criticals is in use by your enemy it also does not impact the critical hit table.)

Now clearly, this is powerful. You become heavily resistant to two elements, and slightly resistant to a third that you also deal on contact. What's more, these three elements are the primary elements used by arcane casters. (Force is also used, but does much less damage.) So my issue is finding a way to balance these spells, without making them less powerful. The things I've come up with are making them not stack with eachother, or the physical barrier spells (which just deflects physical attacks, greatly weakening them), and prevent casting any spell of either of the blocked elements until the barrier wears off. In addition, its duration is quite short at only a single minute, and "contact" does not include attacks with weapons, so attacking an enemy with your weapon will not deal extra damage and if an enemy hits you with their weapon then only their weapon will be damaged by your barrier. In addition, they take 10 action points to cast, an entire turn for somebody with 10 agility. Only summoning spells take longer (20 or 40 action points) to cast. And, of course, spells provoke attacks of opportunity for every two action points used, enough that enemies can get up to 5 on you if they have that high of an allotment (which, thankfully, they usually only have 2-3, as 5 would take an agility of 20).

So this means leaving yourself wide open for several seconds. If you're in a melee, you might as well put on your tunic and head to the Theatre of Pompey, because it's the Ides of March for you. When you do use it, you'd better end the fight fast because it'll wear off in a minute, and you'll need to get out of range of your enemies to avoid being reduced to a pile of gore trying to recast it. And, of course, if your enemy has a good resistance to the element you chose, there's not much point to casting this spell. My question is if you think this is enough of a disadvantage, not enough or too much.

Okay, so in my system, just about every arcane spell has a focus component and many have material components. I've decided to make the casting components intentionally vague, so it's up to the players to figure out what they can use for a component.

I chose the vague components to allow them to use a wider variety of objects and make it so they can use something that fits the setting better, and can improvise casting components on the fly. This organic puzzle solving is a concept that I personally enjoy seeing, and I want my players to do it as much as possible. But more than that, it also encourages creativity and rewards intelligence and forethought, as the better they think out their components the better they'll work for them.

This isn't the case for all spell components, or even all focus and material components. Some are very specific, usually to create a cost for using the spell that can't be wriggled around, but the offensive spells all have vague components.

So, here's my question: How little detail do you think I can get away with using, and do I have to provide examples in the rulebook? I want to use as little detail as possible so they'll come up with more creative solutions, and I don't want to give examples if I don't have to because that runs the risk of them just using the examples and not thinking about it, but I also don't want them to be completely lost on what it is that qualifies as a component.

So, I've been thinking about adding the option to use items and tools as improvised versions of weapons. Some of the weapons in my system are already improvised, such as the hatchet, machete, work hammer (a small carpentry hammer) and sledgehammer (a light one, with a 2kg head), but all of those are perfectly functional weapons with no issue being used in combat. That's not what this thread is about.

What this thread is about is BAD improvised weapons, ones that perform as inferior versions of other weapons. And since I can't write down every single possible item that could be used as an improvised weapon and write down their stats, I thought maybe I could write just a few rules and let the GM decide what implement will function as each, after listing a few examples. Here's what I've got.

Improvised weapons are items that aren't designed to be used as weapons and aren't listed on the weapon list, but can be used as weapons on the weapon list. These are usually inferior to the weapon they are being used as. There are a number of potential problems they might have, of which the GM is left to determine which would apply.

Unwieldy:
This item is heavy or badly balanced compared to the weapon it is taking the place of. These weapons do not get any bonus to attack, critical threat or guard saves from the user's ability scores, and cannot make jab, swipe or bash attacks or any form of attack of opportunity. They cause twice as much fatigue and have twice as high of a strain DC when used. Two examples of items that might be unwieldy are sledgehammers with heads significantly larger than the 2kg head used on the sledgehammer on the weapon list, (IE: One with a 4-5kg head), and a meat cleaver that otherwise would perform like a kukri or machete (depending on size).
;Translated, these weapons are inaccurate and imprecise no matter how strong or agile you are, are difficult to guard with, can't make light attacks and such can't attack fast enough to take advantage of an opening, and due to their weight are tiring and strenuous to use. It's also noteworthy that even dedicated weapons can be unwieldy if they are built for somebody a size larger than you, though you can use it as if it was a weapon type two categories larger (IE: a small creature could use a medium fighting knife as an improvised messer, or a medium shortsword as an improvised longsword), but if it's more than one size you'll need to move it up even more. (IE: A tiny creature using a medium shortsword would need to use it as an improvised zweihander, rather than a longsword.)

Unwieldable:
This item is beyond unwieldy. This weapon is either extremely heavy, or is both heavy and badly balanced. You can still use it, technically, but so poorly you're better off unarmed. These weapons suffer all the penalties of being unwieldy, and then some of their own. They take twice as long to attack as normal, provoke an attack of opportunity when used, cannot be used to guard and have both their fatigue and strain DC doubled again, now up to four times standard. The best example is a very large sledgehammer such as one with a 10kg head.
;Translated, using this item as a weapon is tantamount to suicide. They take really long to attack, and not only will you probably not hit and almost certainly not crit, you'll get hit for even trying (possibly with a bash, which inflicts a penalty and if it causes damage acts as an interrupt), and you can't defend yourself with it. You would, literally, be better off unarmed as at least your punches and kicks can connect. I would take a flail over anything with this designation, and flails don't even exist in this game because nobody in their right mind would use them. And this isn't even just improvised weapons, a dedicated weapon built for somebody two sizes larger than you, that you don't use as an if it was a weapon in a much larger weapon category, becomes unwieldable. (IE: A tiny creature trying to use a medium greatsword would find it unwieldable, since there isn't a higher category to step it up to, much less two to make it merely unwieldy, much less four to make it effective.)

Weak:
Some items that can be used as improvised versions of weapons are much weaker than the actual weapon they are being used as. As a result, they deal half damage and get half penetration on their attacks. Examples of this would be a chef's knife, which would otherwise perform as a fighting knife, or a baseball bat, which would otherwise perform as a heavy club.
;For examples of how bad this is, a fighting knife is normally a pretty effective weapon, dealing 7 piercing damage with 7 penetration in a thrust with 10 strength (8 damage with 9 penetration if you have 50 skill), but a chef's knife would only deal 3 damage with 3 penetration (4 damage with 4 penetration if you have 50 skill). A heavy club would normally deal 2d8+10 bludgeon damage (average 19) with 12 penetration in a two-handed swing with 10 strength, but a baseball bat only deals 1d8+5 (average 9.5) with 6 penetration.

Flimsy:
Some tools that can be used as improvised weapons are particularly fragile compared to an actual weapon. These items get half damage reduction and health. These weapons are also weak, as their flimsiness seriously interferes with their ability to deal damage. A good example of this would be a golf club, which would otherwise perform as a heavy mace. Any natural object you use as an improvised weapon is probably in this category, such as a stick you might try to use as a truncheon.
;This is so straight-forward I don't think I even need examples. A golf club, for instance, will probably be bent too far to be at all usable after a couple hard collisions with a human body and likely not inflict lethal damage in the process. And a stick is even worse, likely breaking in a single hit, inflicting fairly light damage, and needing to be immediately replaced. That's not saying you shouldn't use them if you get desperate, they're probably better than your bare hands on at least the first hit, but any actual weapon would be better, and it's unlikely you won't have a better option available if there's any option at all.

Okay, so my RPG allows for both skirts and trousers for both sexes. As of the moment, the two have identical stats, and they might stay like that if I can't find anything, but I would like to make them meaningfully different without making one better than the other.

Here's three examples of each. But first, a quick explanation of terms.

Coverage: What parts of the body this counts as protecting. In this case, all of these apply only to the legs.
DR /--: General damage reduction, applies to all damage types.
DR (): Extra damage reduction against the damage types this apparel is strong against, stacks with general damage reduction. In this case, all of these are strong against cold, bludgeon and concussive damage.
Armour rating: This has a chance to deflect incoming attacks. All attacks that land between the target's defence and the sum of their defence and their armour rating are deflected. Deflected attacks have their penetration halved, and most damage types either lose half their damage, are unable to score critical hits or both. Apparel does not add armour rating against the damage types listed after the slash.
Armour check: A penalty to agility relative to the part in question.
Armour cap: The highest agility can be counted as, after armour check, on the part in question.
Health: How many hit points the apparel has. At 50%, apparel loses its armour rating. At 0%, it no longer provides any protection.
Somatic spell failure: The percentage chance added by this apparel to fail spells with somatic components. Stacks between all equipped items. All caster classes have an effect that reduces this.
Carry weight: The amount this apparel allows you to carry without equipping. You absolutely require clothing items to carry anything without equipping it. In this case, with just these your carry weight increments are 30% those of your equip load increments.
Weight: How much this adds to your equip load when equipped, and to your carry weight when carried unequipped.
Value: How much this item costs before mark-up. The mark up, however, tends to be enormous. Especially in places with fixed prices. The units are worth roughly $0.10 each.
Special: Something specific to this apparel. In this case, it's just a note reminding you that pants and skirts don't protect your feet.

And now, for three examples of each.

Fabric trousers:
Coverage: Legs
DR 0/--
DR 0(cold, bludgeon, concussive)
Armour rating: 10/Slashing, piercing, puncturing
Armour check: 0
Armour cap: 30
Health: 30
Somatic spell failure: 25%
Carry weight: +30%
Weight: 300g
Value: 6
Special: Does not protect the legs from damage originating from the ground.
A pair of light, soft trousers made of thin textile such as linen, cotton or wool.

Fabric skirt:
Coverage: Legs
DR 0/--
DR 0(cold, bludgeon, concussive)
Armour rating: 10/Slashing, piercing, puncturing
Armour check: 0
Armour cap: 30
Health: 30
Somatic spell failure: 25%
Weight: 300g
Value: 6
Special: Does not protect the legs from damage originating from the ground.
A light, soft skirt made of textile such as linen, cotton or wool.

Leather trousers:
Coverage: Legs
DR 2/--
DR 2(cold, bludgeon, concussive)
Armour rating: 10/Slashing, piercing, puncturing
Armour check: -2
Armour cap: 25
Health: 30
Somatic spell failure: 50%
Carry weight: +30%
Weight: 600g
Value: 12
Special: Does not protect the legs from damage originating from the ground.
A pair of leather trousers.

Leather skirt:
Coverage: Legs
DR 2/--
DR 2(cold, bludgeon, concussive)
Armour rating: 10/Slashing, piercing, puncturing
Armour check: -2
Armour cap: 25
Health: 30
Somatic spell failure: 50%
Weight: 600g
Value: 12
Special: Does not protect the legs from damage originating from the ground.
A skirt made out of leather.

Quilted trousers:
Coverage: Legs
DR 4/--
DR 4(cold, bludgeon, concussive)
Armour rating: 10/Slashing, piercing, puncturing
Armour check: -4
Armour cap: 20
Health: 30
Somatic spell failure: 75%
Carry weight: +30%
Weight: 1200g
Value: 18
Special: Does not protect the legs from damage originating from the ground.
The equivalent of a gambeson for the pants.

Quilted skirt:
Coverage: Legs
DR 4/--
DR 4(cold, bludgeon, concussive)
Armour rating: 10/Slashing, piercing, puncturing
Armour check: -4
Armour cap: 20
Health: 30
Somatic spell failure: 75%
Weight: 1200g
Value: 18
Special: Does not protect the legs from damage originating from the ground.
The quilted lower-body wear for men and women that don’t like trousers.

So, I've been thinking about the ability of a character to use a particular weapon effectively in my game. Now, this game doesn't have "proficiencies", it uses a skill system, but that still lets everybody use a weapon regardless of their stats. We all know that if you give some people some weapons they will be unable to handle them, and some others may be able to handle them, but only with both hands. So, to handle this, here's what I came up with. I just want general feedback on this.

Strength requirement:
All sidearms have a strength requirement of 2 for a single hand, 1 for both hands.
All light one handed weapons have a strength requirement of 6 for a single hand, 3 for both hands.
All heavy one handed weapons have a strength requirement of 8 for a single hand, 4 for both hands.
All hand and a half weapons have a strength requirement of 10 for a single hand, 5 for both hands.
All light two handed weapons have a strength requirement of 21 for a single hand, 7 for both hands.
All heavy two handed weapons have a strength requirement of 32 for a single hand, 8 for both hands.
All great weapons have a strength requirement of 50 for a single hand, 10 for both hands.
Failing to meet a requirement gives up all benefit from the strength score to your weapon. This means a loss in attack, damage or penetration, critical threat and guard saves, removing accuracy, lethality and defensive power from your weapon. If you do not have at least half the requirement, you cannot use the weapon this way at all.

Agility requirement:
All simple weapons (clubs, maces and spears) have no agility requirement, intermediate weapons (axes, hammers, some blades) require 5 and complex weapons (swords, swords and swords) 10. If you fail to meet this requirement, you don't get any benefit from your agility for this weapon. That means losing the agility bonus to attack, critical threat and attack rate, making your weapon slower, less accurate and less lethal. There is no secondary point that prevents you from using the weapon at all, however, and no benefit from using both hands.

One hand and two hand definition:
This is a second thing. How do I make a one or two handed weapon function as one or two handed, without just claiming you can never even try to wield them the other way? And here's my answer: Two handed weapons are two handed in that their strength requirements shoot through the roof when you try to use them one handed, making it much less likely (for great weapons, almost impossible) to use them that way. One handed weapons lose agility when used with both hands, due to the lack of a grip, and sidearms also don't get as much strength. One handed heavy weapons lose half of their benefit from your agility when used two handed, one handed light weapons lose all of it, and sidearms also only get 1.5x strength instead of 2x.

So, that's it. Opinions?

I have a fairly universal RPG coming up, and I'd like to ask what melee weapons and polearms people think I should include. Here's what I've got so far.

Sidearms:
Truncheon
Hatchet
Knife
Work hammer
Dagger
Combat knife
Tanto
Pugio
Throwing knife
Tecpatl

Light one-handers:
Light mace
War hatchet
Machete
Light hammer
Short sword
Cutlass
Smallsword
Wakizashi
Gladius
Xiphos
Javelin
Pilum
Tomahawk

One-handers:
Cudgel
War axe
Messer
Warhammer
Arming sword
Sabre
Rapier
Kodachi
Spatha
Kopis
Khopesh
Throwing spear (Note: This is specifically a larger throwing spear, like an assegai.)
Macuahuitl
Shotel

Hand and a half:
Mace
Short spear
Field axe
Kriegmesser
Battle hammer
Longsword
Scimitar
Katana
Quarterstaff (Note: Worst weapon in the entire game.)
Tepoztopilli

Light two-handers:
Heavy club
Battle axe
Maul
Claymore
Nodachi
Halberd
Naginata
Su Yari

Two-handers:
Heavy mace
Long spear
Heavy axe
Sledgehammer
Zweihander
Odachi
Glaive
Omi Yari

Great weapons:
Great club
Kanabo
Pike
Great axe
Great hammer
Greatsword
Zanbatou
Nagae Yari

Alright, I've been trying to get to some of the skills used in my unique system, Change. I managed to work out weapon and armour skills, the shield skills and a few others. Then I tried to handle the grappling system, and I realised that I am attempting to handle the system that in every other system is "that one rule". I'm going to ask for some help here before I write up another overly complicated nightmare of a grappling system, or a shallow piece of crap that doesn't do anything it needs to.

Grappling needs to:
Allow you to move, turn and manipulate your opponent, and prevent them from moving and turning.
Greatly weaken swinging attacks.
Allow you to increase your defence somewhere in there, as a good grappler uses it to prevent their opponent from hitting them, while reducing your ability to guard.
Disable/weaken the grappled part to some extent.
Be capable of inflicting damage, and that's locational.
Improve some special attacks meant to be used while grappling. (Headbutting, biting, swallowing for some species.)
Enable some attacks that can ONLY be used while grappling. (Slams and throws, mostly.)
Be resistible with the very same grapple skill.
Still be simple enough to use without frustrating yourself or making your GM and all the other players hate you.

I've got my own RPG system now, took a long time. It can be found here. Go ahead, take a look, the rulebook's nice and short at 22 pages. And to those familiar with my previous threads, yes, this is the same system. It's changed a lot, no pun intended, and it's DONE! But there's a problem. It's just the core rules that are done, and I have almost no content. That's not the content book, of course, but even the content book is pretty sparse. (Only 87 pages... A content book should be a couple hundred.)

So, I was going to try a brainstorming thread for anybody willing to participate, with particular emphasis on creatures. I'm trying to get a campaign ready for this site, so add anything you'd like to see in a campaign. And anything you'd really rather I only used on players that aren't you.

A few quick notes:
Some amount of physical plausibility would be required. This is a fantasy, sure, but the laws of physics still apply.
100% immunity to any form of physical damage is impossible.
Be careful about making something immune to fatigue, that can be game breaking.
Sanity damage is totally a mechanic here.

Since I'm driving for a campaign, I'll also let you guys pick the setting for the campaign, since that's what we're going to have to focus on. Keep in mind, that's also the setting that'll need the most attention. Of course, some nice, universal creatures are also appreciated.

I want to start at the bottom of the technological ladder, easier that way, so here's the three options:

Duat: (Negligible conventional tech base)
The Egyptian world of death. The Egyptian gods rule over the vast necropolis and sprawling cities of Duat, constantly competing with eachother while dealing with insurrections by the death lords and their supporters. A bronze age fantasy setting loaded with supposed “allies” covertly trying to overthrow one another, and rebels trying to overthrow them all.

Anineyah: (Negligible magical tech base)
The Mesoamerican realm of death. The empires around Anineyah’s equator, ruled by various Mesoamerican gods, wage perpetual wars of conquest on one another, while trying to spread north and south out of the tropics. Their vast influence reaches far up into the temperate regions, but no farther. A magitek stone age setting where imperialists are constantly invading into tribal lands, the tribals and death lords never pushing them back quite as much as they push forward.

Mayta: (Negligible biological tech base)
The independent world of death. A chaotic realm with no central leadership and few major factions. A bizarre realm, with large stretches inhabited by colossal reptilian beasts, but many other stretches inhabited by hunter-gatherers and primitive agricultural settlements. (Though, surprisingly, there’s no shortage of food.) The only real faction of note are the death lords, and even they can’t keep a firm grip on a land with creatures of this sort. A biotech stone age fantasy setting with a hostile environment and dangerous beasts.

These are all realms of death. That means the first campaign will be pretty forgiving, but the low tech base means the creatures probably shouldn't be too strong either.

When you do multiple die rolls, are you supposed to roll each die individually? My groups have always just rolled a single die and multipled by the number of dice we're supposed to roll, but I've recently had somebody act as if that idea had never come up in any of their gaming groups and it was downright blasphemous.

EDIT:
Specifically, it was a sanity damage roll in our own system. The call was for 100d3. And it's pretty silly to roll a d3 100 times. And no, it's not usually that high.

I've been making a new tabletop RPG for a while now. The system is meant to do a lot of things and have a lot of settings, while using completely unique mechanics and incorporating aspects and ideas of other franchises.

This game comes with its own universe, and (so far) thirteen different worlds within it. (More to come, of course.) These vary in climate, technology and wildlife, but use the same system and have a number of universal aspects. These settings are rated based on their tech level from 0 to 5, and primary tech type of conventional, magic or biological. (Biotech is massively under-represented so far.)

The game so far has a solid set of core mechanics that, while not finished, are shaping up quite well. However, one of Change's intended main features is a massive number of minor fringe mechanics and its incorporation of bits and pieces of other franchises into its mechanics, content or both. Including inspirations from Reality, Dungeons and Dragons, The Elder Scrolls, Tolkein's Legendarium, Star Wars, Halo, Half-Life, Fallout, Command and Conquer, Star Craft, old-school shooter mechanics, Final Fantasy, Dragonball, Bleach, Neon Genesis Evangelion, The Cthulu Mythos, Norse Mythology, Greco-Roman mythology, Egyptian mythology, Mayan mythology, Japanese mythology, Abrahamic mythologies, conspiracy theories and more. Part of the appeal is supposed to be the sheer variety of available mechanics to experiment with, and eventually present in the game's creatures and factions.

My name is Justin, I'm coming here from Giant In The Playground forums. I'm building my own tabletop RPG and I'm hoping that here I can get more help (it is a herculean effort with such a small group) than I could over there. (I will admit that I have no idea if this site provides any chance of success, I stumbled across it at random.)

I'm coming here for a number of reasons. First off, I've been getting less and less comfortable with the lazy, zero-tolerance moderation of the Giant in the Playground staff. I haven't gotten in trouble there in a long time, but I'm sick of walking on eggshells. Second, my attempts to get help on GITP have been met entirely with failure. Nobody is interested in making a new system there, just playing the old ones. Third, the site has been down for (I think) a couple weeks, and while that's not a big deal it's kinda the last straw for me. I'm not leaving that forum entirely, but I need a new one and I hope this is it.

I'm here *only* for my new system and nothing else. I want to make it work, but making an entire system from scratch is rather difficult and my real life friends are putting in very sparse efforts on it if any at all, so if this system is to work, I will need a lot of help.