Yup.
I try to keep the mantra (now-a-days) no matter how, why, or what... my long term friends, mean well... I can only hope they take it the same.... it's about trust. :p.
Search Posts
I'll call you back, when I'm off work. We'll hammer this out, no biggie. I accept your apology, and I apologize for coming off so hard headed on my part as well. You are one of my best friends, an airborne compatriot, a fellow infantry man, and someone with whom I've served. This is a game. Nothing for comparison in my mind. If you still wish to play at the table with us, then we will continue to hammer this out, if not, then there is no continued need to go down this path, but we'd like you to continue to game with us, no matter the game. And especially I don't wish to hammer this out online, when we live... like... 10 minutes from each other... okay.. maybe 15 depending on traffic. -woof
*facepalm* Norgrim... really. We've been having this discussion for 2 years now. I did, at one point, say I would allow you to create spells. While I was on my finals, with 2 young children, and a hand full of other work I had to do, you handed me a folder full of... what... 17 or so spells to check over? Then we started another game and you asked about spell creation in that.. I told you I would when I was able to get to it... I'm now at a job with 10 hour days, 3 children... none over 4, an invalid father who has just moved back in, causing a massive amount of house work to be done, and I'm studying for my CCNA certificate, which is not a very light study load in and of itself.... All of these things have been mentioned to you as reasoning, many times before... There is also the fact that I'm running this from a module, that it takes me the month to get free time to be able to read it... and I'm running a module because I DON'T HAVE ANY FREE TIME! There is also the fact that you have no ability, that I've seen, to say, "Oh, he's the GM, I'll defer." You keep pushing and pushing, like this thread. We have had this conversation many times, I've said that I'll try to get to a point in my life that I can take your spell creation. You've even said that you thought the portfolio of spells was in bad taste due to my time constraints... so I know you know we've talked about this. Even suggesting that I've not given you any reasons is... well.. slightly insulting, to be honest. The conversation over text that caused this thread was in general, late at night, I've got to be awake at 4am, and we were finishing up the conversation at 10:30 or so the night before... as a reaction to your statement that the spell creation portion of the rules was an important part of D&D in general, I stated that it (to me) was more of a tacked on system that's not gotten major development focus because obviously "that squeaky wheel hasn't gotten any grease" rather than an integral portion of the game to date, including a comment that it hadn't even been included on the current edition, much less anything I've seen out the play testing on the 5th edition material. Though I was not so verbose about the latter. I've never said I'd not allow it... I just read over the conversation via text... I don't see it there. I've also stated multiple times that, though I'm uncomfortable with it, I realize that it's something you highly value, and due to that, I would attempt to go outside of my comfort zone, if you'd just wait to push it until I had some more time to deal with even running a proper game (rather than a hastily thrown together once a month). Also note, that I'm currently running a PBP using GURPS. When we started this game I told you not only that I couldn't handle your requirements for creating spells, because I'm just not ready for that at this point... you consented, after much pushing, and only after I mentioned that you had asked me to be more direct and forceful with you. At this point you really aren't making me want to try. Look man, I've got a family. I'm one of those sick bastards who actually enjoy spending time with them. I've got a future in the job that I'm working, and I'm actually trying to progress in it. I don't have time for gaming, but I love it so much I ask my friends to take what time I do have, and can make available to sit together at a table and play... When I got this together, I told you these things. I told you that we would deal with the spell creation later. Your character isn't even 3rd level, and you said you probably wouldn't even be working on spells until 6th... The conversation we had in text started with wish. which you called during Dinner, and understood that I had time for a call two days later... the next day you text me (one day shy of any time I had free) and started the discussion. Just because I personally think that the spell creation system is severely lacking (I mainly play point based systems, GURPS, Hero, Savage worlds, D6 system, FUDGE, etc), and I'd like to see more on it, I love the section that The Ultimate Magic has on it... I haven't had time to go over that in any sort of detail... I've never said you couldn't create spells, I'd just rather not deal with that portion of the system, especially right now. I don't remember if it was Norgrim's little death, but one of yours old spells that you handed me (and then went on about how much you agreed with it, and if I even sounded like desenting with your appraisal of your spells you'd just get a little louder and push a little more, and yes we talked about this because I remember you admitting that when you create something you tend to feel like you looked at all the angles, and feel justified in the numbers you bring me... but I need to be able to say, yes to this, no to that, and maybe to this other...) I can't work like that. I'm sorry. I will take conversation, but when you push... I become disinclined to continue to work with you on things, because we just get into an argument, and I think we both don't really want that. My understanding of the end of that conversation was that you no longer wish us to ask you to play D&D based games with us... I replied that I was disappointed, but fair being that we can't seem to get over this, and it seems to continue. Man, I don't know what I've done to piss in your post toasties... but wow dude.
One night when i was younger, we were playing way into the evening and two of us were rather awake, our 3rd (we'll call him Steve), was not as awake, so after the GM created the world, and us in it, we started to play (midnight or so). It was a home-brew cyberpunk setting, and we were all undercover cops, in a world where police weapons were bio-monitored.. meaning if you weren't coded into the piece, then it wouldn't work. So Steve decided that he liked the way the police pistols looked (our GM was a fairly amazing artist) and we drew up this amazing back-story, which included how he got it (this then pushed us to about 2am to start time.) Steve getting even more tired and less focused was still not "asleep" so we go through how we get "inserted into the cover positions" and after a time get an "interview" with the boss. It's now quite late... or more to the point early. Steve's turn comes up and as we were frisked upon entry, he sees the police firearm. So he asks, "Hey, how'd you get a Pig's pistol...." And without missing a beat, Steve looks truly puzzled for a moment, and says with so much incrajulaty "psha... I'm a Cop, what do you think?!" We all just stared at him, mouths a gape... He was fairly pissed that we ran with it, but I think in my older years I probably would have done one of those, "are you sure you want to say that?" Still that's a point where the character and the player were not in alignment... Steve even said later that he didn't realize (for whatever reason) that he was in front of the boss man. We ended up being beaten severely, and thrown in a "prison" type place... I don't even know if the campaign went any farther, I don't think it did... But yah... that's my story, and we still look at each other and say, "I am a Cop!" and burst into laughter... and that was in the early 90's that that happened. -Woof
I am starting, soon, the price of immortality trilogy, and I was thinking that the Shadow of the Fellknight Queen would be a perfect follow up. I'd just change "Bells" into "kessan" and some small other details...
But I don't know if you had started with the crypt of the everflame, so I don't know how much that would "fully fit" however you are still going to end in Kessen if you are to take the necklaces back there. My 2 copper.
Thank you for the kind words-- much appreciated. NP. :)
Absolutely agreed. As far as permanent character death == drama (or even dramatic Tension); this is part of the false dichotomy that I was talking about. Dramatic tension is created when there is a real "sense" of failure. Failure =/= Death. Now, do I think that this involves play-style preference, absolutely. In a game that showcases character build and optimization there is a tendency to see ones characters death as a "well... I didn't do a good enough build, I'll just have to try again." and this is good, no less of a valid play style than any other (and of course there are many levels between "pure story driven" (I use this phrase to say DM's who totally "coddle" their players as has been deemed by this thread) rp and the aforementioned style... (I'm not even saying that you can't have both styles in the same game) again because of that alone we can see the emergence of the false dichotomy that I'm referring to. You see, failure can come in many forms, thus creating dramatic tension. and the fact that we have so much history (we (humanity) are really good at story-telling, and have been doing it for many thousands of years, so we instinctively react to these dramatic queues, to an almost psychological predictability. Stick a character in a prison where his comrades have to bail him out, and see if he likes the threat of that happening again. Ask a comic book (American superhero) fan, why they still read their favorite series, despite the fact that it's now even an internal joke, that no one ever dies for real or permanently. But still there are some excellent stories that come out of that genre. Good Will Hunting. I love that movie... it's a drama.. It's intensely dialogue driven... I can't think of any death being threatened during the entire film. I do believe it's even called a "drama" (RPG's don't hold captive the definition of "drama"). I guess you could say I think that character death "should" (boy, I'm not even sure about putting that word on there, as I don't want to preach to anyone about how they should be playing the game) be "possible" just not quite "probable." But I also have a firm wall between what the characters know, and what I know. And I think stupidity should be rewarded with severe limitations (death). If you do something stupid you die. I don't care of you've calculated to the N-th that your 18th level fighter can survive a 100' drop, I'm sorry... your dude can do a fort save, to see if he's at -9 (or whatever is hovering on the brink of death) HP... and move from there. Now, if the BBEG throws the "magic ring" in to a pool of lava 100' below, and one of the PC's decides that he's going to jump down to try to catch it and throw it back up to the party, I will allow him to do that, and even require some rolls, of which I'm probably not going to assign them to horribly difficult DC's (though I am still going to make it a challenge). I will explain to the PC that this means he WILL die (save a reincarnation of some sort). And if he still wants to do it, then I'll even make some sort of "Hero's death" bonus that he'll get to his rolls, and bam, it's done. But now I'm just rambling. I think that "keep what you roll"/"roll it in the open and deal with whatever comes" is a valid way to rp, and it can be hella fun... it's just not what I personally prefer, or enjoy when I'm running a game. As the elements that I try to incorporate are closer to an attempt to mimic fiction and dramatic storytelling. Put simply, I think Heroes should be heroic... and as my definition, that means that they have to be able to do things no one else can, survive things that no one else should, and come back to tell the tale. But I also understand that this is my view, and not a universal constant among the gaming community. I also realize that at least in my 25+ year history where I've gamed in conventions, in my youth, in many different groups, in many different states, in many different countries, and I've never had a character die. Whether that's because I'm a "good at RPing," lucky, just have happened to find groups that aren't "killer groups," or whatever is definitely debatable.
Two quick things. I think Finn K said it "better" (in a better tone, and still managed to convey what I agree with, as in I will kill someone if they are being stupid, a player set off a thermal detonator in his hand in a game of mine... I didn't even calculate damage, he was barely highly irradiated water vapor with no Int after that) than I did.
Let me amend; So, I do think that there is a false dichotomy being created by many of the "just kill the characters" and "let's all be friends" lines of thought. My bad. I realized the 5th time that I watched Aliens and was still sitting on the edge of the seat despite knowing exactly what happens and to whom, Character death wasn't important. The story that leads to those situations were what make dramatic tension. And yes, the characters, if not the players need to believe. As a side note, I don't think an adventure killing off 80 some PC's is being very realistic at all... If I joined an adventuring crew, who said I was number 81 (or even 7 for that matter) to join their group of 5 in the last month... I think I'd bow out and look for a different group of folks to hang out with. (and that's coming from an infantryman, FYI). -Woof.
See, I guess I'm just a "Coddler" as it seems by most of these posts. Not that I don't like a thrilling fight, or a tough situation to go through, I just think there is a false idea of the possibility of death == excitement. I started looking at it with my group back in the 80's (but we really didn't play a lot of D&D, and really never in a game with any sort of "cleric" type classes/ healing) But I noticed with the "fear of death" they just wouldn't do "Heroic" things... They wouldn't follow the McGuffins, nor would they try interesting action. OH, the princess was taken by a bunch of orcs... that's nice, we're low enough level and that's enough of a threat that we don't need that kind of heat. What, the princess is across that moat, with the one falling apart bridge? well, sucks for her. That wasn't very good for the game.... it got pretty bland, TBH. Then I started thinking about it... If I pick up the "silver Shard trilogy" I'm probably going to figure out that Drizzt survives the Dark elf trilogy too, and did that make that series any less thrilling at the time? No. If I get into a series after the first (Die Hard) and get into it by watching the second one, and then watching the first one second, does that make the first one any less intense? Not at all. Lastly, as a mature gamer (been gaming for over 25 years), I can differentiate what I know, and what my character knows... Add to that the fact that family, work, and other adult obligations make it so my gaming time is pretty few and far between, if I have a character that I've literally spent hours working on, leveling, interacting, building in character relationships, working up contacts and people known, by 5th level I've got over 50 hours of my life wrapped up in that character... 50 hours that I could have been doing many different and more productive things with... you bet I'm going to be a touch salty if he dies... it may "just be a game" but my time isn't just fooling around time anymore, and it's got value of it's own. Now, am I saying that that time is also spent with friends and in a social setting? Yes, I realize that. and I'm not saying the character is the only part of the game, but in a world where most of the electronic gaming character death isn't even a concern (what with auto rez, one-up's and that's because they realize that the games where you couldn't "save" your progress (IE your "time spent" on that game) then those just aren't concerns in any modern "electronic games" that are currently far more popular than table top rpg's as a whole. So, I do think that there is a false dichotomy being created by many of the "just kill the characters" line of thought. But I'm also coming from the angle of creating a story based around Heroes... not a bunch of "normals" trying to slug through a world that resists every movement of them... if I wanted that I wouldn't even RP, I'd just go into work for Overtime (Get some money out of the deal). But that's my 2 copper.
I love my FLGS, I met my wife there. The store owners came to my wedding.
However I've been pretty tight with the bills, we now have 3 children, and money is... tight. We moved 3 towns away from our FLGS, and I miss them, but gas money etc. I've found that with an Amazon Prime subscription (75/year for me)nets me a book two days later, with no shipping cost (and if I lot myself 25 (or near) a week) I can pick up a book every payday, get them for about 3 for the cost of 2, and no shipping cost, that if I order when I head into work on Friday, the book will arrive Saturday with the mail. So I have my time-table down for gaming days (Sunday) and know that the book will be there hours before I need it. It's a mixed blessing. I feel like I'm cheating, but I've been able to get books at my needed price-point, but I've not been getting them from my FLGS... I've told myself, that if I win the lotto, I'll set them up in a major way... -Woof.
Awesome work.
Thanks for the help, I'll be sure to use all of these, and maybe work up something else for myself.
So, I'm into our campaign fairly well, and my boys are about to go into the Bastards layer, but I'm curious what you are using as Shadows for hunting the streets. I like the Shadowgarms, but they get old, and really don't challenge the PC's as much as I'd like, however the Shadow Mastiffs are rather too challenging (as are Shadow daemons and shadow dragons)... So my question, where can one go (again outside Shadows and Greater Shadow) to find a nice variety of Shadow creatures? Alternately, where can one maybe find a 3.x Shadow template to modify some "normalish" creatures.
I like the idea of a somehow "reduced" dragon. I think I'll have Kajen Tilernos be in cahoots with Tyraxalan and watching the PC's. They ended up treating the opera singer so well, they got an invite and so interacted with much of the upper crust that was there that night. If they go beyond the AP then they will see the "power" behind Kajen and "his" freedom fighters.
First off; Thank you James Jacobs, I love it when a gaming company cares enough to interact with it's players. I've been a fan of Hero games for years, and I've been an active person on their boards since '03... and one of the reasons for this is the interaction between DOJ and us, the fanbase (Steve is very interactive with us I'm reminded of the same vibe here). One of the reasons I'm starting to get into Paizo is that same level of respect and dedication. Thank you all, and keep it going. :) Well, looking at that response I think I'll mix the two. The portion talking about the age/ general non-interaction by the Westcrani people and the sewers.... hmm. Well, hows this: Tyraxalan is as he is described in the dragons book, however, he is not assumed the shape of a human. He has had time to establish a group of followers, a set of resources. He has allied himself with the family of Kajen Tilernos (a head of the Tilernos family, and a Paladin of Iomedae), Tyraxalan has made a lair for himself under the family home in the sewers (or at least branching off from the sewers) and he uses one of the grates as an entrance/ exit. He doesn't enjoy keeping himself in the shape of a human, however he understands how unhealthy to exit the lair without a disguise, and so has hidden himself as a number of creatures etc. In fact more than a few noble Chilaxian (Asmodian loyalist) families have had issue for some time now with flock being lost to "beasts of the forest." Both Kajen and Tyraxalan have been running a rebellion, but a quiet, underground. It isn't full of active members, but it's responsible for most of the "freedoms" and "good acts" that have survived legally. It's a rough draft, but I think it'll do for now. That way most of their power is political, and not directly physical... That will help them in being able to help more during the late game, and I can ally the PC's with Kajen openly, without reveling Tyraxalan until after the AP is done. How does that sound?
You know, I still don't understand what the deal with the Thac0 hate... I am bad, and I mean BAD at math... I still count on my bloody fingers... seriously. I just don't want to deal with math. I can still do Thac0 in my head, for the most part. It's easy: Thac0 minus AC equals your Target number or higher roll (Thac0-AC= TN+ on a D20). First level "anyone" (thac0: 20) trying to hit an unarmored person w/no dex bonus: (AC 10) 20-10= 10 and up hits. a third level fighter (thac0: 18) trying to hit un-dex modified person in chainmail and a shield (AC: 4): 18-4= 14+ to hit roll. Follow math, and a negative plus a negative equals a positive (IE Thac0: 8 VS an AC: -2 calculated is: 8+2= 10 or higher to hit). I just don't get the issues people had with the concept.
Yah, I've taken most of my home material from the Chilax book and the stuff in the AP itself. Putting pieces together from various sources as I can find them (such as the question that started this thread). As a side note, is there anything major in The great beyond that's been noted as non applicable so far? There is an element of my players that are really asking to overthrow the rulers of Cheliax... and I think I'm going to take them into plainer travel to do that. My thought, however dangerous, suggest that they release Ravogog, and his desire to be revenged upon Asmodius will distract Asmodius enough so he's not focusing on anything other than the fight.... that would buy the PC's enough time to launch an assault on the capital.
Oh, okay... Hmm. Okay. I was under the impression that all the PF stuff was "as a whole" as it were. I suppose I need to look at the stuff that is printed for the "new gen" of Golarian adventuring. Thanks.
PG 33 of Dragons Revisited has a dragon named Tyraxalan, who apparently has a resistance group that's been fighting against the powers that be since Chilax fell, this group is based in Westcrown... Do you plan on incorporating this group into your games? I'm unsure if I should or not, by adding this much power (a CR 19 Copper and his troops) may significantly change the end game, however I've stated before that I'm also looking at the lvl 20 overthrow the Asmodian worshipers story arc, and that would be a good friend to have. What do the boards think? Part of my issues are that I tend to like the world that Paizo has created, so I'm unsure if I want to remove elements that I have read about in the books. Balancing that issue is really the problem of adding that powerful of a contact to the game. And again, it's good for the later game... I might have them fully show up after the events of the Adventure Path... I dunno, I'll see what comes up in the discussion.
I guess I call it Pathfinder. I called 3.5 well... 3.5, I called 3rd 3rd, I called second D&D and later 2nd, and I called 1st ed D&D pretty much until 3rd. Honestly I'm a RPG whore, I LOVE the Hero system and call it my favorite, though my time actually playing the game is less than I've spent playing others. At one time (this year) I had a Savage Worlds, Hero, 4e (D&D, because yes, I still play 4th ed Hero, or Champions to call that one what I call it(even though I don't play supers), lol), and a pathfinder game going... So I tend to refer to whatever game I'm playing/talking about at the moment as it is. Then again, I also tend to call myself (or whoever is running the game) as a GM, as I have played much D&D (what I now call the collected masses from TSR's rules, through WoTC rules, to Piazio's rules, and all 3PP. Huddled together they all make up what I call D&D), I still have played other systems muchly, so the GM is the name of the Dude (or chick) at the helm. My buddy who we just got into Pathfinder calls it 3.75, and still uses his 3.5 books, as he says, "so little different, I'm going to use these until they are useless." LOL, but hey, he's digging it. For the most part I refer to all of it in total as Gaming.
I know this is house ruly, but I tend to think of it like this: upon the "golden rule/ Rule #1: make sense, and whatnot." (now I know some folks would use this basis to let Augmented Summon work) I'm using this to say it won't. Simply because the Eloden can get pretty powerful on it's own, honestly letting this feat work is out-right... just simply too powerful, so at my table (maybe even barring a different ruling) Augmented Summon won't give it's bonuses to Eloden's in my game... :) My 2 copper.
yah, I went out and got the book on Chilax and read it... there is actually quite a lot of internal forces that could be brought to bear, if the negotiations went right. With the Item and maybe a country or two, I think the PC's would stand a chance... We start next weekend (with the bastards), and we're all pretty thrilled. I can't wait... I've said for a while these AP's are Piazio's strong point, I'm hoping my folks over here like it. I think I'll start steering the campaign towards this end... Side question: how many PC's are assumed to be in your party? I don't see any "official" suggestions on how to modify the encounters for different PC sizes (I've got 4, so I think I'm good, but it was sort of a curiosity thing).
I think that using perception VS illusion or a "craft" skill for illusion would be like asking a Mage to make a Stealth check to use Invisibility and perception against it. Point being- magic makes things easy... that's the trick, the draw if you will. I think if you follow this path, you would end up restricting mages more than they are empowered under the current system... IE slippery slope, IMHO.
Why is it that I kill any thread I conversate in? (not all, and it's not just this board).
For the purposes of the OP I'd have to go with the "lost powers" for 24 hours... it's due to "my perception of the fluff" that I reserve the right to be wrong on, because I'm pulling this out of my rear, lol. I just read the Wiki article and I'll quote and spoiler as such:
wiki quote:
I think this has something to do with the classical "iron" and the Fey... at least originally, I mean sure, now in d20/3.x/PF it's "cold iron" that hurts the fey, but in the old tales I'm pretty sure it's just Iron. Now to say that Iron disrupts what may be a "grant from the fey" IE druidism, then it's the "metal" that messes with them, and not divine mandate per say, it's like sticking a Radio in a concrete basement... your going to have a disruption in signal, and if the rules say that it takes 24 hours to "realign yourself" with the power source, then that's the deal... Not to be a jerk DM, but that's my two copper on it.
Okay, this time I'll post this is the right thread... Sorry all others. I have this AP, I'm planning on running it soonly, and frantically spending the last few days of summer reading these books as fast as I can (including the book on Chilax and the Campaign book (Golarian CS, not just the AP book that is). One of my players is rather old school D&D, and from what I've told him (and what he's gathered from reading the main book) he wishes to continue after the AP on to take out the leadership of Chilax... I don't know if I'm cool with that, but I'm pretty big on letting the PC's do wicked earth shattering and world changing things. So I'm not opposed to doing it, either. However, do the folks here who have ran it think that it can be modified that way... and how would you go about developing that tangent... Also if this were to be done, I'd obviously be changing Golarian considerably... I like continuing later adventures in the same world with the effects from the last major story arc. How would I go about this "new world" Or fast forward a bit, and have a new group have shown up and taken things back to the way they were... I guess I'm just looking for people to spitball with, because obviously I can't talk to my players about this. And I'd like to put some of the stuff into the AP as it's building, and not tacked on at the end. Do you guys think that you could take the Children of Westcrown from the AP's end and move on the leadership of Chilax? I'm sure that might be what they would be thinking, but man that's a lot to do.
HA!!!!!!!!! nice. I think I did too... damn. I must have had my head up my rear end. Sorry guys.
I thought about some of these, not all, as I don't know the outcome yet... but I guess it's just I'm kinda iffy on trying to take out the establishment, when it looks like Asmodius is kinda iffy on doing that... I figure they are pretty well concreted in place. lol.
This is off of the exact topic, but the title sounded right, and as I didn't want to start a new thread.... I figured I'd put my question in here. I have this AP, I'm planning on running it soonly, and franticly spending the last few days of summer reading these books as fast as I can (including the book on Chilax and the Campaign book (Golarian CS, not just the AP book that is). One of my players is rather old school D&D, and from what I've told him (and what he's gathered from reading the main book) he wishes to continue after the AP on to take out the leadership of Chilax... I don't know if I'm cool with that, but I'm pretty big on letting the PC's do wicked earth shattering and world changing things. So I'm not opposed to doing it, either. However, do the folks here who have ran it think that it can be modified that way... and how would you go about developing that tangent... Also if this were to be done, I'd obviously be changing Golarian considerably... I like continuing later adventures in the same world with the effects from the last major story arc. How would I go about this "new world" Or fast forward a bit, and have a new group have shown up and taken things back to the way they were... I guess I'm just looking for people to spitball with, because obviously I can't talk to my players about this. And I'd like to put some of the stuff into the AP as it's building, and not tacked on at the end.
I'm new here and so I figured I'd give you guys my 2 copper.
I recently ran across Savage Worlds game though, and they use a very "minion like system" and I think I'm personally going to adapt it. I will call it the damage threshold system.
Anyway, so basically you turn the DT (Damage Threshold) into a target number based on the damage roll. Let's say you have 4 3HD Goblins (I'll give them a DT of 5 (4 base, +2 for HD above 1, and -1 because their goblins, and I don't see them as being "all that and a bag of chips") PC 1 (Fighter) swings, hits (AC and all other numbers are the same) and does 8 damage; that's over the DT 5 so it dies. PC 2 (Cleric) swings and hits doing 4 damage; not over the DT 5, so you describe a soft blow. PC 3 (Rouge) swings and hits doing 5 damage; just enough to trip the DT, and it goes down screaming as it dies. PC 4 (mage) does an AOE against the other two; one saves one doesn't, the mage does 9 damage, enough to trip the DT of the one who didn't save, but the one who did, was safe by only taking 4 damage. That Goblin attacks the mage, doing 3 damage, meh, whatever (all the attacks, ac etc, are the same, the minions just take damage differently) now the mage swings his staff at the goblin, remarkably doing full damage of 6 tripping the DT and killing the goblin. If you want you can even take it a step further and use the complete savage worlds system by using the shaken condition for anyone who takes equal to up to four above their DT (in the example the fighter, rouge, and cleric would have just shaken their goblins, but the mage would have killed the one who didn't save (and there would have been a lot more goblins there to fry...) thus using the "if a minion becomes shaken once more by an attack then it counts as being killed." Changing it to look something like this from my example above: PC 1 (Fighter) swings, hits (AC and all other numbers are the same) and does 8 damage; that's over the DT 5 but under 9 (5+4) making it shaken. PC 2 (Cleric) swings and hits doing 4 damage; not over the DT 5, so you describe a soft blow. (no change, goblin is still alive) PC 3 (Rouge) swings and hits doing 5 damage; just enough to trip the DT, and it barely becomes shaken. PC 4 (mage) does an AOE against all of them, as none are dispatched, and two are shaken. Of the non-shaken one saves one doesn't. The mage does 9 damage, enough to trip the DT (and passing it up by 4, and killing it) of the one who didn't save, but the one who did, was safe by only taking 4 damage. Of the shaken ones, one saves and one doesn't. The 9 damage is also enough to go over the DT of the one who didn't save (and passing it by 4) thus killing it, and the one who saved still only get's 4 damage, not enough to make it shaken again, so it keeps it shaken status and lives. (However if the damage would have been one more, to 10 points there would be some differences with the shaken rules in effect: Of the non-shaken one saves one doesn't. The mage does 10 damage, enough to trip the DT (and passing it up by 5 (more than 4 over), and killing it) of the one who didn't save, but the one who did, became shaken by taking 5 damage. Of the shaken ones, one saves and one doesn't. The 10 damage is also enough to go over the DT of the one who didn't save (and passing it by 5, more than 4 over) thus killing it, and the one who saved takes 5 damage, enough to make it shaken again, so with it's second shaken status it dies.) This way there is no book keeping, it's just a question of did the attack do enough damage to trigger the effects, being death or shaken, or shaken that leads to death. One disadvantage to this system is that if your players have a run of bad rolls a minion who was supposed to last less time then a "normal" of his type may end up taking much more damage... this can be mitigated by DM caviot, but as I said I'm just kinda working this up in my head as I go along. I hope I made sense, and that I've added to the conversation rather than not.
Hi all, first post. if DR/- is the "uber DR" then what pray tell does DR/any do? I mean I see it saying that anything can overcome the DR... so the question is, how am I missing the point, technically speaking aren't all starting characters with DR/any, due to the fact that they don't have any DR? I'm looking at the fighter high level DR, when wondering this. I remember being confused on this point in 3.5 also. I'm sure I'm just being thick. Thank you all. Never mind, I misread it. I see it's DR/- |