Just confirming that I'll be there tomorrow night!
Great! See you then.
I won't! :(
Erik, did you ever figure out what happens to the bank between Baccarat hands if nobody wins the whole thing? I tried looking up the rules on the relevant Wikipedia article, but I couldn't tell which version we were playing, last night (Chemin de Fer or Baccarat Banque).
I was also trying to see if I could introduce a version of Baccarat to our occasional Dealer-Calls-It table (also known as the Loser's Table at our Texas Hold 'em tournaments), but I worry that the whole issue with the bank being at one player's discretion will either turn people off or make the round drag on, when the Dealer-Calls-It games that we play are supposed to be fun and quick.
Anyway, I enjoyed the introduction of the game to our session, the other night. I was a little disappointed that Jazeed's low intelligence and lack of the proper skills prevented me from playing the card game, but it was still a fun thing to add.
Anyway, I enjoyed the introduction of the game to our session, the other night.
Thanks! I'll look up the rules differences in Hoyle's before the next casino scene comes up, I promise.
I picked Baccarat/Chemin-de-Fer for two reasons:(1) I figured Derek (the player) wasn't as familiar with it, so that we'd have the fun of Fiachra trying to puzzle it out; and
(2) It's in so many James Bond movies.
Anyway, I like adding games to the game... things like that, or the chess game in the Unicorn's Castle, are like a homage to the fact that D&D was sort of founded as a continuation of those sorts of pastimes.
Anyway, I like adding games to the game... things like that, or the chess game in the Unicorn's Castle, are like a homage to the fact that D&D was sort of founded as a continuation of those sorts of pastimes.
I agree, but I liked the Baccarat experience better than the chess experience because the game wasn't just summed up with a single skill check. I understand that a standard-length chess game between only two people wouldn't have been much fun for the other people at the table (or maybe even the two people playing), but I can also see why character stats should affect the outcome of a game that the character is playing.
Hmm. Now I'm thinking of things like a timed chess game where a character's high intelligence gives you a little bit more time per turn to make each move. Or maybe a game like blackjack where a character's high intelligence allows you to look at a certain number of cards in the discard pile.
I understand that a standard-length chess game between only two people wouldn't have been much fun for the other people at the table (or maybe even the two people playing...
I ran that adventure once for a single player who was controlling a number of characters. We played out an entire game of chess using the characters' voices and interjecting commentary, and were both laughing too hard to play by the time we finished. When he finally threw the game, he had one of the PCs become outraged, accuse the unicorn of cheating, and attack.
Kirth, I just found your two campaign journal threads here and here. I remember you saying that you were going to start them, but I completely missed when you did so.
Anyway, I wanted to encourage you to keep up with them! They're fun to read! Once we're all caught up, are you still interested in player (or character) entries?
Once we're all caught up, are you still interested in player (or character) entries?
YES!!! And no need to wait 'til we're caught up, if you want to add stuff from past adventures.
FYI, we should be able to join you on the 12th and 19th of next month.
July 12th should be good -- look forward to seeing you.
Barring unforeseen circumstances, there will be no game on the 19th or 26th, however.
Andostre -- if you see this, Derek just called and said he'll be unable to make it tonight due to some sort of family SNAFU. So the regular game won't happen, although you're still welcome to come over for a beer if you like. When I get home I'll look up your number and try giving you a call as well.
Andostre -- if you see this, Derek just called and said he'll be unable to make it tonight due to some sort of family SNAFU. So the regular game won't happen, although you're still welcome to come over for a beer if you like. When I get home I'll look up your number and try giving you a call as well.
Sorry to butt in, but do any of you have any idea who the general and sub contractors are for Samsung's Fab 2 project in Austin. My search Fu seems to be weak. Your welcome to use my contact email in the Co Spring thread. (or tell me to bugger off of your thread;)
Bitter Thorn, you might try sending Adam Daigle an email asking him as I believe he lives in Austin. His email should be under his profile page.
Bitter Thorn, you might try sending Adam Daigle an email asking him as I believe he lives in Austin. His email should be under his profile page.
Thanks!
Thanks!
+1
|
Latest draft of my Ninja class is up. Renamed it to move it away from the Eastern flavor of the class. Comments are welcome. Link. Proofreading and spell list is the main points left to hit. I'll add the Death Attack talents later. Been at this for at least an hour now, and it is my bedtime.
Kirth, have you fixed up the notations for the ki powers list yet? If not, I'll probably sit down tomorrow night or this weekend to do it myself, but if you already have it done that'll save me some time.
Remind me again -- what ki powers list am I fixing notations for?
P.S. I like your ninja. Couple of comments:
1. I'd start the advanced talents at 12th, not 10th, so they get 5/5 instead of 4/6.
2. I'd roll the spell-like class features into the spells. Instead of ghost step, just add swift invisibility to the spell list, for example.
|
|
Monk ki powers, so I can tell my newb player what her choices are.
1.Right, that's legacy from when I was planning on allowing rogue/monk levels to stack for determining when advanced talents are selectable. I'll make an edit on that. Edit: Fixed it. I'm not sure what I was thinking anymore on that one. Must have been a math fail.
2.The current ghost step is a compromise between the 3.5 points system and the new spell system. Thinking about it, I may make it unlimited so long as the character still has spells available. I want the ninja to be able to go invisible at will at some point, but I haven't decided when is too soon. Also, I plan on having the actual spells invisibility and greater invisibility on the list, so they can opt to use resources to have unbroken invisibility a few times per day.
Monk ki powers, so I can tell my newb player what her choices are.
I don't think I've added/edited any in quite a while, but tonight I'll send you what I've got.
Also, next time you come down for a game, I'll go ahead and burn a CD with the latest versions of everything. That way you'll have the whole ruleset in one place.
Added a caveat to the at will abilities that you must have spell slots of a certain level remaining to use each ability. Should make it an interesting resource management choice, to either blow your spells or keep some in reserve and just use the at will powers.
That's been my big push as well. Have yet to see whether it feeds the "10-minute-adventure-day" syndrome, but, honestly, I dislike adventures that have more than like 4 encounters a day anyway (as I'm sure is abundantly clear by now) -- there are only so many times I can roll for initiative in one night before I get all glassy-eyed.
|
|
I mostly just like the idea of the ninja flickering across the battlefield. Also, at higher levels things have see invisible and true seeing, negating a good number of those at wills.
Got pointed out in the thread in the Conversion forum that this class can qualify for Arcane Trickster at 4th level. The save bonus would continue to rack up as written currently, but I think the loss of advanced talents and at will abilities is a strong deterrent to that. Plus I don't intend to put a huge number of offensive spells on the list, and there are only 3 known per level max. I think AT would be an interesting idea for it, but not broken. If anyone sees something I don't, let me know.
Easiest way to remove that possibility is to not put mage hand on the spell list.
Houstonderek, you still out there somewhere?
I'm alive. Just dealing with an insane amount of b#&&*%&@ and set backs right now.
Do me a favor? As we get into the weekend, let us know if you're coming next week.
I like the Incremental Attack Loss rule here.
Better than this one?
TACTICAL MOVEMENT
Characters with iterative attacks can trade attacks for extra movement. Each iterative attack given up can be used instead to gain 10 ft. of movement, +/- 5 ft. per 10 ft. difference in base land speed from 30 ft. (e.g., a halfling with a 20-ft. movement merely takes additional 5-ft. steps for traded attacks, whereas a barbarian with a 40-ft. speed can move 15 ft. per attack traded in).
Iterative attacks can be taken and/or traded at will, as long as they are completed in order. For example, a character with Speed 30 ft. and BAB +16 could attack once at +16, move ten feet (losing his +11 attack), attack again at +6, then move ten more feet (losing his +1 attack).
An attack of opportunity can be traded for a 5-ft. step.
When using this option, two-weapon combatants keep or trade their attacks in pairs. For the example listed above, if the character in question had Two-Weapon Fighting and Improved Two-Weapon Fighting, he could choose to attack once with each weapon at +14, move ten feet, attack again with each weapon at +4, and then move ten more feet.
And also don't forget
PREEMPTIVE ACTIONS
A combatant can choose to hold movement and/or attacks, to his normal limit, for use as immediate actions later in the round. For example, a ranger with attacks +6/+1 could attack once at +6, then choose to wait and take a 5-ft. step and an attack at +1 at any time before his next turn, even if his doing so interrupts someone else’s turn.
These rules supersede the normal Pathfinder rules for Readied Actions and Delay.
Yes, mostly because it's shorter. :P
Same length; mine just also provides an example, and also explains what happens for TWF and attacks of opportunity.
Actually, yours gives extra movement. That one says 'for every ten feet you move, you can take one less set of attacks'.
"Move ten feet and take one less set of attacks" = "trade one set of attacks for 10 ft. of movement."
A+B = B+A.So the net effect for common usage is exactly the same, unless I'm missing something here?
The difference is that I also provide options for AoO and TWF.
|
|
No, that one says 'for every ten feet you move, you get one less attack'. Instead of moving 20ft and losing all but your best attack when you have four attacks, you move 20ft and lose your last two attacks. It gives less than your rule does but is more streamlined.
Edit: Rereading your rules, I think I see what you mean. Which is my point, I preferred the other rule because I got it on the first read. :)
No, that one says 'for every ten feet you move, you get one less attack'. Instead of moving 20ft and losing all but your best attack when you have four attacks, you move 20ft and lose your last two attacks. It gives less than your rule does but is more streamlined.
Ah, I begin to see. His is actually more advantageous in a standard game, because where my fighter at +16/+11/+6/+1 moves 20 ft. and attacks at +6/+1 (or attacks at +16/+11 and then moves 20 ft., or whatever), his moves 20 ft. and attacks at +16/+11, always in that order.
However, my houserules also provide feats and talents to mitigate iterative attack penalties (which would cause them to break even again), and of course the hold action houserule in my game makes the ability to swap moves and attacks a lot more valuable. And the ability to move, attack, then move again, and then attack again is always a huge plus.
If you didn't "get" my rule on the first reading, that's a technical writing failure on my part. I'll revise it ASAP.
P.S. Sorry for the resend; please disregard.
Derek, think you'll make it tomorrow night? Just trying to plan ahead.
Groovy.
We do miss gaming with you guys.
Looking forward to next time.
@ Houstonderek -- just started reading one of Harrison's "Stainless Steel Rat" novels; I'd never checked them out before. The dude is Cadogan. I mean, like, I can hear your voice in my head when he talks. Was that intentional on your part?
|
@ Houstonderek -- just started reading one of Harrison's "Stainless Steel Rat" novels; I'd never checked them out before. The dude is Cadogan. I mean, like, I can hear your voice in my head when he talks. Was that intentional on your part?
Nope, never read him. Hmmm.
If Morgan's in town Monday, is it cool if she plays with us again?
If Morgan's in town Monday, is it cool if she plays with us again?
Okay with me -- let's use the same characters, then. I've got Monday off, so we can start any time.
Andostre -- what about you? Able to make it?