Pretty much what the title says. I'll start.
All Diehard really does is allow you to kill yourself faster by letting you burn multiple Resolve points and then having the enemy smack you one more time and you have to spend more Resolve. It should have been named Die-Easy.
Also, YOU LITERALLY NEED ENGINEERING TRAINING AND A FEAT TO PUT AN OBJECT ON TOP OF ANOTHER OBJECT. And it falls over by itself in a few seconds anyway! I'm not sure whether that's hilarious or enraging, but it's definitely at least weird.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Pretty much what the title says. I'll start.
All Diehard really does is allow you to kill yourself faster by letting you burn multiple Resolve points and then having the enemy smack you one more time and you have to spend more Resolve. It should have been named Die-Easy.
Also, YOU LITERALLY NEED ENGINEERING TRAINING AND A FEAT TO PUT AN OBJECT ON TOP OF ANOTHER OBJECT. And it falls over by itself in a few seconds anyway! I'm not sure whether that's hilarious or enraging, but it's definitely at least weird.
On the off chance that you're not trolling:
Barricade is cool and arguably close to over powered for a feat. It certainly is one heck of a lot more than just about any GM would allow without that feat
Diehard gives you the option of staying in a fight. Options are good. Whether it is worth a feat is a good question but the feat is far, far from useless. Sometimes you REALLY want that attack. Sometimes you REALLY want to be able to run away.
|
Pretty much what the title says. I'll start.
All Diehard really does is allow you to kill yourself faster by letting you burn multiple Resolve points and then having the enemy smack you one more time and you have to spend more Resolve. It should have been named Die-Easy.
Also, YOU LITERALLY NEED ENGINEERING TRAINING AND A FEAT TO PUT AN OBJECT ON TOP OF ANOTHER OBJECT. And it falls over by itself in a few seconds anyway! I'm not sure whether that's hilarious or enraging, but it's definitely at least weird.
I kind of have to object to these. Diehard will appeal to people for the same reason as halfork ferocity, some people want to tun the risk of danger to get back into the fight faster, or heal themselves up and join back in after. Actually that could be pretty good on a Mystic.
And the Barricade feat lets you use a move action to turn paper folders and styrofoam cups, or pine needles and twigs into a barrier that stops bullets and Plasma cannons, it's freaking amazing. Nothing says you can't flip a table and dive behind it, but how many GMs are really going to let you use a mere move action to turn junk they didn't even mention as being there into something that deflects heavy machine gun fire! It also only falls over if you or it is hit, and it's as likely to last the rest of combat even then as not unless you have a long fight going.
So your argument for Barricade is that it lets you warp reality?
My point was that you need to have engineering training and spend a feat to do this, and that it's so badly done that it falls over by itself in 6 to 24 seconds even if nothing touches it. I don't doubt it could be useful. I'm saying it's ridiculous that you need a feat to do it, and do it poorly.
Darkling's point was that it lets you create a blast shield out of nothing. A sane GM wouldn't let you use the feat if nothing appropriate is there (although a sane GM would probably not require you to take this feat in the first place). If the intent WAS to let you transmute a paperclip and a granola bar into a shielded bunker with nothing but the power of your imagination, however, then this game is even worse than I thought.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I mean, you could spend a few hours to build a barricade.
Or you could take the feat and construct one in 6 seconds.
You know, it's your call.
It doesn't take a few hours to sit a heavy box on top of a desk or kick over a table.
It doesn't take a few hours to sit a heavy box on top of a desk or kick over a table.
Sitting a heavy box on top of a desk sounds like a full round action. Kicking over a table would be a standard.
It doesn't take a few hours to sit a heavy box on top of a desk or kick over a table.Sitting a heavy box on top of a desk sounds like a full round action. Kicking over a table would be a standard.
Perhaps, yes, but still not worth a feat. Also, tell that to Shaudius. He thinks it should take more than a full round.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Additionally, once it or a creature adjacent to it is hit by an attack, the barricade collapses at the beginning of your turn in 1d4 rounds (unless the barricade is destroyed completely by the attack
so if it doesn't get hit nor you do it does not fall down. and a half made barricade shouldn't really stand much if it is hit. think of it like them old stacking blocks as a kid, they didn't take much to knock down. and if you want think of it more like hiding behind a small piece of tin, you can shoot through it but not guaranteed to hit what's behind it.
also I had to change feats cause my gm wouldn't have it in his games cause it was unrealistic.
To me, this is the beauty of games like this.
If you don't like the idea of the feat, you don't use it (and be upfront about it as Kagerage's DM was - don't let a player take it but never let it work).
In my mind, it's got nothing to do with granola bars and paper clips, nor with putting boxes on tables that anyone can do (I'll mark things like that on the battlemat). It's a skill in constructing a weak, temporary barrier out of things one usually can't use for effective cover (and that are present but not marked on the map).
I guess you could use needler pistols with fusillade? If you want to tranq everyone in sight that is. There's no autofire longarm equivalent (yet).
|
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
My point was that you need to have engineering training and spend a feat to do this, and that it's so badly done that it falls over by itself in 6 to 24 seconds even if nothing touches it. I don't doubt it could be useful. I'm saying it's ridiculous that you need a feat to do it, and do it poorly.
To quote the Feat:
"As a move action, you can stack and reinforce objects that are too small or too fragile to provide cover into a single square of adjacent cover."
Anyone can get cover from a heavy box or a flipped table (those are 'objects large or tough enough to provide cover'). With the Feat, you can do it from things you normally couldn't get cover from without the Feat, and possibly at an action economy advantage. That's a good Feat.
Darkling's point was that it lets you create a blast shield out of nothing. A sane GM wouldn't let you use the feat if nothing appropriate is there (although a sane GM would probably not require you to take this feat in the first place).
What the low end for objects you can use for this is, is rather up to the GM. It's just definitionally lower than that for people who lack the Feat, probably by quite a bit. I personally probably wouldn't allow styrofoam cups, but would allow something like paint cans or general trash, for example.
If the intent WAS to let you transmute a paperclip and a granola bar into a shielded bunker with nothing but the power of your imagination, however, then this game is even worse than I thought.
If you hate the game so much, and you certainly seem to based on your post history, why are you continuing to post about it?
I've read (and even played) a number of games I disliked or thought were poorly designed, and I've never gone on Forums specifically for that game just to go on about all the problems it had. It seems a singularly un-fun thing to do, and kinda not great to the people on the Forum in question who like that game.
It's like showing up to a party and then doing nothing but complain despite everyone else seemingly having a good time. It doesn't sound like a fun idea, and even if you're objectively correct in your complaints, everyone else is having fun and you're being kind of a buzzkill to no good purpose.
|
|
Many things...
A agree. My group tends to run with a lighter note hence the somewhat ridiculous descriptions. But at its core the feat lets you use objects the GM didn't explicitly state as being there to make something useful. The GM isn't going to name every single thing in a room in every description, that's just too much detail to tell a group how many pens, pencils, and tablet styluses are in each room of an office building. The game presumes we use our imaginations to fill the gaps, this feat just lets players use the myriad items present but not mentioned to do something useful. And in a fraction of a turn no less.
I also agree with him regarding Bloodrealm. If you want to have even a slightly constructive conversation then great, criticism can even be constructive too. I disliked the automatic quality until some others here helped crunch the numbers, I still think it has some flaws but I think it's a net gain now. Your complaints don't seem constructive.
I've read (and even played) a number of games I disliked or thought were poorly designed, and I've never gone on Forums specifically for that game just to go on about all the problems it had. It seems a singularly un-fun thing to do, and kinda not great to the people on the Forum in question who like that...
Oh, sorry, you're right. If anyone else anywhere enjoys something, you should never criticize that thing. That way it never gets feedback other than yes-men and can't improve. I'll criticize even things I like if they need it.
Also, it's not like I specifically made an account on this site to complain about Starfinder.|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, sorry, you're right. If anyone else anywhere enjoys something, you should never criticize that thing. That way it never gets feedback other than yes-men and can't improve. I'll criticize even things I like if they need it.
As will I. Heck, I've already criticized several things in Starfinder (the ship combat rules are actively broken for example, something I brought up even before Owen KC Stevens noted he was aware of the problem and it would be corrected...as are NPC gunnery scores, something I hope to see corrected soon).
My point was not that you should never criticize anything, my point was that if you actively dislike the core assumptions of a system you're probably not gonna be especially constructive or unbiased with your criticism, nor will the process be fun for you or anyone else.
That's probably true of just about everyone, and it's certainly true of you from what I've seen thus far.
To round back to my analogy, there's a difference between going to a party, having fun, and while there noting that you hate the song currently playing, the decor in the living room clashes, and maybe a handful of other problems, and going there specifically to criticize the fact that alcohol is being consumed and loud music is occurring, and throwing in criticizing the decor and some other stuff while you're there. The former is useful, the latter is weird and aggressive and no fun for anyone.
Also, it's not like I specifically made an account on this site to complain about Starfinder.
And yet, of your last 50 posts more than half are about Starfinder. You're investing more time and energy into commenting on a game you don't like than one you presumably do. I'm suggesting that's a waste of energy for everyone and not a productive use of anyone's time, including yours.