I spent 3e trying to get my fighter/mage back.

General questions, debates, and rants about RPGs

Moderator: Moderators

RandomCasualty2
Prince
Posts: 3295
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 4:22 pm

Post by RandomCasualty2 »

Bigode wrote:WTF? If warriors don't take part in "magical combats", then "you need a mage to beat a mage"; if they can counter mages, they do take part in "magical combats" ...
Why?

In Shadowrun you don't need a hacker to kill a hacker, even though non hackers don't interact with the matrix at all. You don't need a mage to kill a mage, even though mundanes can't access astral space. Shadowrun shows us that it's okay for some characters to be able to operate on a separate level, but that it doesn't necessarily mean that everyone should be able to operate on that level for the game to be balanced.

All it means is that magical combat shouldn't be innately better than nonmagical combat, and there are mundane counters. If the hacker is commanding the drone to come at you, you can damn well blow up the fucking drone. That's all I'm saying.

The big problem with D&D is that it pretty much have spells like wall of force which say "if you don't have magic, you can't win." so it's like having an indestructible drone and that's bad.
Last edited by RandomCasualty2 on Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Lago PARANOIA
Invincible Overlord
Posts: 10555
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

Post by Lago PARANOIA »

RC, what do you think about said non-magical characters having phlebtonium? I know you don't think that every character should have access to the setting's functional magic, which is fine, but what's your opinion on characters just outright breaking the laws of physics?
Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.

In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.
NoDot
Master
Posts: 234
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by NoDot »

There's another problem: Dragon Slave is simply too much a part of the current fantasy to give up.
User avatar
Bigode
Duke
Posts: 2246
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Bigode »

sigma999 wrote:Sure. I made some maneuvers recently to address this lack of build but they'll probably sink back to the last page. That's fine, I have reviews elsewhere.
I meant to point the errors on your maneuvers too, but I actually meant "RoW barbarian/fighter".
RandomCasualty2 wrote:In Shadowrun you don't need a hacker to kill a hacker, even though non hackers don't interact with the matrix at all. You don't need a mage to kill a mage, even though mundanes can't access astral space. Shadowrun shows us that it's okay for some characters to be able to operate on a separate level, but that it doesn't necessarily mean that everyone should be able to operate on that level for the game to be balanced.
If you have to defeat a hacker who-knows-where (possibly very far ...) before they blow something up via Matrix, you need a hacker, right? (Might be lack of Shadowrun knowledge showing, though.) Oh, and BTW, how come the game doesn't require everyone to have access to one such level (I wondered about non-magician non-Matrix users - I think one could exist in 4E)?
Hans Freyer, s.b.u.h. wrote:A manly, a bold tone prevails in history. He who has the grip has the booty.
Huston Smith wrote:Life gives us no view of the whole. We see only snatches here and there, (...)
brotherfrancis75 wrote:Perhaps you imagine that Ayn Rand is our friend? And the Mont Pelerin Society? No, those are but the more subtle versions of the Bolshevik Communist Revolution you imagine you reject. (...) FOX NEWS IS ALSO COMMUNIST!
LDSChristian wrote:True. I do wonder which is worse: killing so many people like Hitler did or denying Christ 3 times like Peter did.
SunTzuWarmaster
Knight-Baron
Posts: 948
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by SunTzuWarmaster »

Character concepts:
Gageteer
<Element> Caster (thank you Frank and K! My fiance is a Conduit with Pyre and Elemental Aura, and that is all she needs)
Shapeshifter (this needs to have unlimited shapeshifting and not suck)
Psychic Warrior (predicts enemy moves with precognition, has ectoplasmic armor, and has a shapeshifting Mind Weapon, Jedi?)
Psychic Caster (Raven ala Teen Titans)
Koumei
Serious Badass
Posts: 13882
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: South Ausfailia

Post by Koumei »

Bigode wrote:Did you actually manage to make a grappler swordsage worth talking about - if so, how? Also, if you care.
I tried it, using the various "I throw you around!" manoeuvres, but it didn't really work, no.
]WTF? If warriors don't take part in "magical combats", then "you need a mage to beat a mage"; if they can counter mages, they do take part in "magical combats" ...
RC probably wants warriors to be able to counter spells by swinging a sword at it: Summoned monster? Kill them (that works!) Wall of force? Cut it in half (that should work, with as much difficulty as anyone else would have). Invisible mage? Swing the sword to cut all invisibility away. So that he can just say "I swing my sword" every round and have that negate whatever the wizard did.
RandomCasualty2
Prince
Posts: 3295
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 4:22 pm

Post by RandomCasualty2 »

Lago PARANOIA wrote:RC, what do you think about said non-magical characters having phlebtonium? I know you don't think that every character should have access to the setting's functional magic, which is fine, but what's your opinion on characters just outright breaking the laws of physics?
I don't mind that sort of thing at high level, but generally, I prefer that things be kept superhuman but not impossible. Jackie chan style stunts, expert acrobatics and cool Legolas level stuff is cool.

I want phlebtonium characters and fighter/mages to be an option, but I don't want that to be mandatory. That is, characters shouldn't have to fly to be competitive, I mean shit, even superheroes don't do that. I mean, shit, you've got guys like Wolverine that just don't have flight or ranged attacks, and that has to work as a concept. You should never be at a point where the game just tells you, "Look you need this specific power to compete, and if you don't have it, you lose."

Most of the shit is flavor anyway. Whether your character kills your foe with a superhuman blur of speed and a massive barrage of blows, orif it's just one great Conan style decapitation is all flavor. Similarly, your hit points may actually represent your character getting physically hurt bad, like with a hole in his chest and surviving, or it may represent that his skin is so tough he comes out with just bruises, alternately, it just may be natural agility that takes him out of harm's way. I think a game needs to include all sorts of options like that.
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Username17 »

If you are [doing something] that causes [magical stuff] then you are "using magic" - QED. If your swordsman can do something about telekinetic force walls or doom spheres - and he'd better be able to - then he can "use magic."

Now, you can split hairs on that all you want. You can have magic split up into categories where only certain kinds of people can use Purple Magic or High Magic or whatever the fuck, but griffons fly because of magic, and people interact with a magical setting according to magical rules. Magical rules which they are by very definition "using."

The entire idea that it is even possible to have a "non magic using" character that is worth anything at all in a world that operates by magic is insulting and it is wrong.

-Username17
Last edited by Username17 on Sat Sep 27, 2008 5:58 am, edited 1 time in total.
Manxome
Knight-Baron
Posts: 977
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Manxome »

Well, you can go really extreme and have a character in a magical world but not interacting with it. Kind of like incorporeal creatures are totally unaffected if you shoot an arrow through them, you could have characters that simply walk right through "magical" effects as if they weren't even there.

Though, like incorporeality, that's a pretty far-out ability and probably not suitable for PCs without major limits or special DM permission. Not suitable for all settings, either. And it's worth noting that most imaginings of incorporeal creatures don't strictly follow their own rules (the "phased" hero on a sci-fi show that walks through walls but can stand on the floor is a classic).
RandomCasualty2
Prince
Posts: 3295
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 4:22 pm

Post by RandomCasualty2 »

FrankTrollman wrote:If you are [doing something] that causes [magical stuff] then you are "using magic" - QED. If your swordsman can do something about telekinetic force walls or doom spheres - and he'd better be able to - then he can "use magic."
Well not really, no. No more than you're interacting with the matrix by smashing a drone that a hacker is controlling or blowing up a metal door with explosives instead of hacking the keypad code.

The problem with D&D is when magic stuff is totally immune to nonmagic effects, like the old indestructible wall of force.
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Username17 »

Shadowrun operates under the concept that things on the other plane can detect you but not touch you. This means that it is valuable to be able to destroy things that are camping the astral, because they can call for help. And you need an astrally active dude to fight astrally active things.

That's fine. But if you are positing a game world where ghosts can attack you and there aren't virtually limitless on-call armies to come down upon you if the alarms go off prematurely, then that isn't a functional subsystem that you can emulate. If the goblin tower is supposed to be self contained and you're supposed to fight all the guards anyway, then the Shadowrun style of non-interactivity does not work.

-Username17
User avatar
virgil
King
Posts: 6339
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by virgil »

If you're in a setting where people throw fireballs, summon walls of energy or demons galore, then we're already getting into impossible territory. Arbitrarily saying an entire PC category can't partake in impossibility while another can is wrong.

RC, what is with your fetish on thinking flight is all-powerful? And I don't even understand the point in that Wolverine example.

While I 'might' be able to agree with the idea that a game shouldn't go "you need this specific power to play the game", that's a far cry from the idea of "you must be able to do supernatural things to play the game". That's straight into retarded-land, with the same people who play single-classed
Come see Sprockets & Serials
How do you confuse a barbarian?
Put a greatsword a maul and a greataxe in a room and ask them to take their pick
EXPLOSIVE RUNES!
Manxome
Knight-Baron
Posts: 977
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Manxome »

FrankTrollman wrote:Shadowrun operates under the concept that things on the other plane can detect you but not touch you. This means that it is valuable to be able to destroy things that are camping the astral, because they can call for help. And you need an astrally active dude to fight astrally active things.

That's fine. But if you are positing a game world where ghosts can attack you and there aren't virtually limitless on-call armies to come down upon you if the alarms go off prematurely, then that isn't a functional subsystem that you can emulate. If the goblin tower is supposed to be self contained and you're supposed to fight all the guards anyway, then the Shadowrun style of non-interactivity does not work.
I was thinking more along the lines of a model where you occupy several planes at once and can interact with creatures or objects only in the planes they share with you.

So if one creature occupies {physical} and another occupied {physical, magical}, they can interact with each other through physical means, but any magical actions taken by the second character cannot (directly) affect the first. If there's another creature that only occupies {magical}, then it can't interact with the {physical} creature at all, and it can interact with the {physical, magical} creature only through magic.

And the default assumption is that most creatures (and probably even most objects) occupy physical, magical, and maybe one or two others (e.g. psychic, spiritual) at minimum, but there's some weird things running around (like incorporeal creatures) that don't. And even if you don't occupy, say, the physical plane, if you're after a multi-natured artifact (or something), then a strictly physical opponent can still mess with you by manipulating your goal (or setting off a multi-natured rube goldberg device), even though you can't fight directly.

I'm not actually endorsing this as a good model for an RPG (though I suspect it's workable with sufficient care). Just pointing out there's a lot of weird interactive restrictions one could postulate.
RandomCasualty2
Prince
Posts: 3295
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 4:22 pm

Post by RandomCasualty2 »

virgileso wrote: RC, what is with your fetish on thinking flight is all-powerful? And I don't even understand the point in that Wolverine example.
Mainly because flight is the first real instance where you start to feel the magic/nonmagic schism. I mean, it's possible to balance a shocking grasp against a sword strike, or even to deal with stuff like displacement or mirror image. But flight and then greater invisibility are the points where the game starts to really change to the "you must be able to do X to win". Seriously, you can't hurt a flying character without at least a moderately powerful ranged attack or the ability to fly yourself, and that's pretty limiting to a lot of concepts.

Now there are lots of other effects that do this sort of thing. Greater invisibility, forcecage, wall of force, ghostform, etc.

Stuff that basically says "you must have a specific counter to beat this." is bad for the game. That's all I'm saying.

In other words, I don't want all characters turning into superman and flying around. Nor do I want all characters capable of sensing invisible creatures, because then these abilities are cheapened and boring. Flight is cool as a schtick, but like in comics, not all superheroes should fly.
Frank wrote: But if you are positing a game world where ghosts can attack you and there aren't virtually limitless on-call armies to come down upon you if the alarms go off prematurely, then that isn't a functional subsystem that you can emulate. If the goblin tower is supposed to be self contained and you're supposed to fight all the guards anyway, then the Shadowrun style of non-interactivity does not work.
Why not? I don't think I quite follow you on this.
Koumei
Serious Badass
Posts: 13882
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: South Ausfailia

Post by Koumei »

For the forcecage/wall of force thing, I agree completely - it shouldn't be arbitrarily Immune to Sword. Any kind of spell or effect that basically makes you a ghost should probably limit your interaction with the world so that you can affect things only as much as they can affect you (so your spells, even force effects, will always fail if you cannot be stabbed).

Although actual ghosts are another story.

As for flight? It's a common power that's typical for the genre (protip: Marvel Superheroes != D&D, so we don't care that Wolverine can't reach the dragon, phoenix or pegasus). Seriously, it's a very common trick, so if you're still crying about it I suggest you fuck off and play 4E.

As for invisibility, it's possible that limiting it to "You attack, you become visible afterwards" would be a good idea. I don't know.
baduin
Master
Posts: 207
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 3:12 pm

Post by baduin »

Wizard 20 can single-handedly take over the Earth in XXI century. Fighter 20 is a man in a tin can with a big knife. In XXI century he can fight with a motorcycle gang, unless they got a granate launcher - and some do.

Think about the power level of a wizard and a non-magical fighter. If you think about what game rules are supposed to represent, a non-magical figher is a medieval knight, perhaps better trained, but on the same level. A wizard is equivalent of something from XXX century. Guess what, medieval knights don't exactly inspire terror in modern armies. On the other hand, an egg-head from XXX century isn't very good at swinging swords - but he doesn't need to be.

You can play that game, and you will always get Twain's "A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court ", with the knights blown up left and right. It is good for a bit of laugh at the idiots who agreed to play the knights, but nothing more.

If you want non-magical fighter to be able to fight wizards, you must pull wizards down to the level of actual medieval spell-casters, as described in romances, sagas etc.

That means no more Walls of Force, Gates or Wishes. On the other hand, you get to run around with a sack over your head to cause a blizzard.


And here is a short quotation from "Yankee"

http://bulfinch.englishatheist.org/yank/p9.htm#c43

"The sun rose presently and sent its unobstructed splendors over the land, and we saw a prodigious host moving slowly toward us, with the steady drift and aligned front of a wave of the sea. Nearer and nearer it came, and more and more sublimely imposing became its aspect; yes, all England was there, apparently. Soon we could see the innumerable banners fluttering, and then the sun struck the sea of armor and set it all aflash. Yes, it was a fine sight; I hadn't ever seen anything to beat it.

At last we could make out details. All the front ranks, no telling how many acres deep, were horsemen—plumed knights in armor. Suddenly we heard the blare of trumpets; the slow walk burst into a gallop, and then—well, it was wonderful to see! Down swept that vast horse-shoe wave—it approached the sand-belt—my breath stood still; nearer, nearer—the strip of green turf beyond the yellow belt grew narrow—narrower still—became a mere ribbon in front of the horses—then disappeared under their hoofs. Great Scott! Why, the whole front of that host shot into the sky with a thunder-crash, and became a whirling tempest of rags and fragments; and along the ground lay a thick wall of smoke that hid what was left of the multitude from our sight.

...

Now ensued one of the dullest quarter-hours I had ever endured. We waited in a silent solitude enclosed by our circles of wire, and by a circle of heavy smoke outside of these. We couldn't see over the wall of smoke, and we couldn't see through it. But at last it began to shred away lazily, and by the end of another quarter-hour the land was clear and our curiosity was enabled to satisfy itself. No living creature was in sight! We now perceived that additions had been made to our defenses. The dynamite had dug a ditch more than a hundred feet wide, all around us, and cast up an embankment some twenty-five feet high on both borders of it. As to destruction of life, it was amazing. Moreover, it was beyond estimate. Of course, we could not count the dead, because they did not exist as individuals, but merely as homogeneous protoplasm, with alloys of iron and buttons."
"Omnes vulnerant, ultima necat."
User avatar
virgil
King
Posts: 6339
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by virgil »

So that's the point of your Wolverine example, a wholly wrong one that doesn't help your point at all when it comes to flight.

I agree that truly binary powers, which flight definitely isn't, are bad. Most of the time, it's only a failure in imagination in designing counters to them. Of course, this does require that you leave Bruce Lee in the ditch where he belongs once you reach a certain point.

Baduin makes a solid point. As long as you have one side doing awesome things, then the other side better be doing their own brand of awesome.

As for the original purpose of this thread, I've seen quite a few people attempt to make the gadgeteer archetype. In fact, that specific archetype isn't really supported in virtually any system I know of, let alone 3E.

While I can understand the reason why, I still like the idea of having an intricate list of things to arrange for the effect I want. Whether that's poring over the Stronghold Builder's Guidebook, or making up a list of spell ingredients/diagrams for the functioning of large scale spells.

There's one! Rituals! Those things are used constantly, and you'd think they go past plot-fiat in design by now. The attempts I've seen are about as balanced as the magic item creation tables.
Come see Sprockets & Serials
How do you confuse a barbarian?
Put a greatsword a maul and a greataxe in a room and ask them to take their pick
EXPLOSIVE RUNES!
Username17
Serious Badass
Posts: 29894
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Username17 »

In general, powers which if countered make you lose make for much better game components than powers which make you win unless they are countered. But flight could easily be like that.

And you'd better find some way to work flight in because you literally can't do any fantasy world or even the real world without flight in it. And it shouldn't be too hard, because even Superman falls down and hurts himself when someone hits him pretty hard in the air.

-Username17
User avatar
Maxus
Overlord
Posts: 7645
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Maxus »

virgileso wrote:
As for the original purpose of this thread, I've seen quite a few people attempt to make the gadgeteer archetype. In fact, that specific archetype isn't really supported in virtually any system I know of, let alone 3E.
Well, Dragonmech took a stab at a gadgeteer (called a coglayer) where in addition to every tech-related and Knowledge skill and 8 + Int skill points, you get to maintain a scaling number of gizmos which you can combine to produce more complicated or more powerful effects.

Offensively, it's lacking because you have to pour all your "Steam Powers" into one device for it to be offensively effective, but you can do, for example...

-Extra melee attack at your full bonus, by combining an 18 Str sword-holding mechanical arm with an animator (lets it move on its own) and a voice-activated device.

-Essentially, a taser. Take a Spark generator (does 1d4 nonlethal damage on a touch attack) and then load it up on amplifiers (increase energy effects). The first amp makes it do lethal damage, each successive one adds another d4 to the damage. Add a Pump and it could fire out the electrical energy as a ranged touch attack or a Line (at your option when you build it).

-A Force Generator, which by itself, just makes 10 square feet of a penetrable Force effect (AC 10, HP 10, Hardness 10 to get through it for a round before it close back up), which is enough to provide you with a circular Shield you don't have to carry. But each Amplifier doubles the area it can create, and as long as you're making a uniform shape/object, you can reconfigure it as a full-round action. Which is great for dungeon crawl, because you can make platforms or whatever you need to get around. Also, I suppose you could use one Force Generator and an amp or two to make yourself a flank-guard (have the force screen around behind you and to one side, or something).

It wasn't a bad try at a gadgeteer.
He jumps like a damned dragoon, and charges into battle fighting rather insane monsters with little more than his bare hands and rather nasty spell effects conjured up solely through knowledge and the local plantlife. He unerringly knows where his goal lies, he breathes underwater and is untroubled by space travel, seems to have no limits to his actual endurance and favors killing his enemies by driving both boots square into their skull. His agility is unmatched, and his strength legendary, able to fling about a turtle shell big enough to contain a man with enough force to barrel down a near endless path of unfortunates.

--The horror of Mario

Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
RandomCasualty2
Prince
Posts: 3295
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 4:22 pm

Post by RandomCasualty2 »

FrankTrollman wrote: And you'd better find some way to work flight in because you literally can't do any fantasy world or even the real world without flight in it. And it shouldn't be too hard, because even Superman falls down and hurts himself when someone hits him pretty hard in the air.
Yeah, well that's the sort of shit I'm talking about.

It's not so much that I'm against flight entirely, so much as I want mechanics that make flight not so awesome and actually beatable.

Similarly, I don't want wall of force to be removed entirely, I just want it to be breakable by sufficiently powerful strikes. It means that the general attitude that "It's a wall of magic, what good is a sword, lolz!" needs to go.

Magic either needs to work like everything else or it needs specific counters that a fighter could easily have. Like only a cold iron weapon can dispel a wall of force.
Last edited by RandomCasualty2 on Sat Sep 27, 2008 11:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Judging__Eagle
Prince
Posts: 4671
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Location: Lake Ontario is in my backyard; Canada

Post by Judging__Eagle »

RandomCasualty2 wrote:Like only a worked iron weapon, that is currently cold, can dispel a wall of force.
fixed.
The Gaming Den; where Mathematics are rigorously applied to Mythology.

While everyone's Philosophy is not in accord, that doesn't mean we're not on board.
Lago PARANOIA
Invincible Overlord
Posts: 10555
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

Post by Lago PARANOIA »

Anyone have a problem with sword-based characters having a manuever that lets them reflect projectiles Star Wars-style?

I'm surprised that the game has gone this long without it being viable. Sure, such a setup is possible in Epic, but takes waaaaay too many levels for a simple manuever.

I personally believe sword-based characters should be able to hold up their sword when the evil druid calls lightning down on them, hold the electrical charge, and then slam said sword into the druid to cause them to explode Mortal Kombat II style.
Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.

In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.
User avatar
Cynic
Prince
Posts: 2776
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Cynic »

Lago PARANOIA wrote:Anyone have a problem with sword-based characters having a manuever that lets them reflect projectiles Star Wars-style?

I'm surprised that the game has gone this long without it being viable. Sure, such a setup is possible in Epic, but takes waaaaay too many levels for a simple manuever.

I personally believe sword-based characters should be able to hold up their sword when the evil druid calls lightning down on them, hold the electrical charge, and then slam said sword into the druid to cause them to explode Mortal Kombat II style.
BUt, isn't that inherently magical in nature. I'm sorry, are we calling this by pure strength of heart or is this Flex Mentallo style where we have muscle mystery? If so it's still magic. I have no problem giving a sword-based/physical character magical powers but don't mince your words. Call it what it is.

If you have an inherently magical attack being held and then thrown back by pure brute strength that doesn't make sense. I'm sorry, you need a reasoning for this. See, FYIM (Feck You It's Magic) works because there is a system behind that magic that tells you why that can be so.

But FYIS (Feck you it's Strength/Sword/SHIT) doesn't work because the system isn't in place.
Ancient History wrote:We were working on Street Magic, and Frank asked me if a houngan had run over my dog.
User avatar
Maxus
Overlord
Posts: 7645
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Maxus »

Of course, the other answer is that by the time Druids can call lightning, sword-based characters are extreme enough to dodge a lightning bolt with a reasonable chance of success.

And that physical-based characters continue to get more physically extreme compared to non-physical characters, until they are strong enough and fast enough that they stand a 50/50 chance of evading spells with no harm, and get Herculean Strength and routinely break the record for the 100-meter dash every time they gain a new level.

Of course, that's just 'too anime'.
Last edited by Maxus on Sun Sep 28, 2008 7:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
He jumps like a damned dragoon, and charges into battle fighting rather insane monsters with little more than his bare hands and rather nasty spell effects conjured up solely through knowledge and the local plantlife. He unerringly knows where his goal lies, he breathes underwater and is untroubled by space travel, seems to have no limits to his actual endurance and favors killing his enemies by driving both boots square into their skull. His agility is unmatched, and his strength legendary, able to fling about a turtle shell big enough to contain a man with enough force to barrel down a near endless path of unfortunates.

--The horror of Mario

Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
User avatar
Cynic
Prince
Posts: 2776
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

Post by Cynic »

Maxus wrote:Of course, the other answer is that by the time Druids can call lightning, sword-based characters are extreme enough to dodge a lightning bolt with a reasonable chance of success.

And that physical-based characters continue to get more physically extreme compared to non-physical characters, until they are strong enough and fast enough that they stand a 50/50 chance of evading spells with no harm, and get Herculean Strength and routinely break the record for the 100-meter dash every time they gain a new level.

Of course, that's just 'too anime'.
Look, being faster, stronger, whatever, that works. Plausbility problems arise when the Greenthumb the druid coughs and hits Donan the barbarian's sword with lightning, Donan farts and holds the lightning in his sword with the mighty farting power and then next round hits away with an electric sword killing the druid.

If Donan wanted to have an electric sword in the first place, fine. If he wants to have an ability that lets him fart magically and allow him to be a conduit for other's lightnings or fireballs or sonic sneezes, sure. But, there has to be a WHY? That's my only concern.
Ancient History wrote:We were working on Street Magic, and Frank asked me if a houngan had run over my dog.
Post Reply