New Edition of Rules

[CatharzGodfoot]

Isn't Odysseus an Int/Str archer? Or are we just assuming that unless you're a Heracles you aren't Str-based?

[angelfromanotherpin]

1201304270[/unixtime]]Isn't Odysseus an Int/Str archer? Or are we just assuming that unless you're a Heracles you aren't Str-based?

Odysseus is cunning first and social second. While he performs feats associated with strength, such as being a proficient wrestler, and having a bow that only he can string, that's probably the result of INT-based abilities. One theory put forward regarding his bow is that since his son Telemachus almost managed to draw it while still a boy, is that there was some clever trick to it, not that Odysseus was especially strong of limb.

Personally, I don't think Odysseus was much of an archer. I mean, he left his bow at home when he went to war. When he got home, he used it to kill unarmed men. I don't recall him performing any other notable feats of archery.


Frank, I really liked how the Tome armors worked, so people in particular roles were encouraged to wear appropriate stuff.

[SphereOfFeetMan]

I'll put my vote in for archers being able to wear whatever armor they want dependant upon their secondary schtick.

[Username17]

So here's a quandary: the Monk Issue.

• If person A is equally effective as person B, and person A requires equipment and person B does not; then person B is better.
  
  
• If the game is intended to be played with both person A and person B having eqipment, and person B has abilities to function without that equipment instead of abilities that make him function better with that equipment; then person B is a hobo.

Obviously you want two characters to run in, with one dressed in silk robes and another dressed in heavy plate. But what model to use?

One possibility is to do up certain "combat roles" which benefit from certain kinds of equipment. Perhaps the heavy armor guy is better at wading through mooks and the light armor guy is better at kiting brutes? Possibly. If the different concepts are good at different stuff it's possibly OK if one character or the other is more dependent upon acquiring and trading fish early in their carreer.

-Username17

[Draco_Argentum]

Or level appropriate silk robes are as expensive as level appropriate steel britches.

[Username17]

1201342775[/unixtime]]Or level appropriate silk robes are as expensive as level appropriate steel britches.

That's a very real possibility. But would you feel cheated if Robin Hood's humble woodsman's garb also had the same cost?

-Username17

[Draco_Argentum]

That would be an issue up until it was a magic woodsman's garb. Suck it up until level 5 doesn't sound like a good idea for a system though.

[Username17]

1201343148[/unixtime]]That would be an issue up until it was a magic woodsman's garb. Suck it up until level 5 doesn't sound like a good idea for a system though.

If characters had a background that gave them access to different stuff, this might work. Comig from the nobility might mean that you personally could be a heavy armor fighter or a gadgeteer from level 1, while being trained by necromancers in the wilderness might mean that you could do other stuff.

And then at higher levels, those particular background abilities would fade into the background as they became obscured by the results of your missions.

Frank

[CatharzGodfoot]

Robin makes his own humble woodsman's garb (or instructs someone how to do it), and due to his knowledge it aids his stealth. Most other people don't have the skills to utilize that, but Robin does.

[K]

1201337751[/unixtime]]So here's a quandary: the Monk Issue.

• If person A is equally effective as person B, and person A requires equipment and person B does not; then person B is better.
  
  
• If the game is intended to be played with both person A and person B having eqipment, and person B has abilities to function without that equipment instead of abilities that make him function better with that equipment; then person B is a hobo.

An idea I've been toying with is that every character gets like four slots. In these slots, he puts in anything from this list:

1. His permanent magic items.

2. Extra class abilities. These are secondary but useful abilities. Maybe a monk gets a Dodge ability that offsets his lack of armor and a Fists of Steel ability that makes your fists like adamantine.

3. His monster and racial abilities. A Gargoyle puts his Wings in one slot, his Stone Chameleon ability in another.

4. Acquired Adventure-specific powers. Maybe you bathed in a nymph pool and can now Fascinate people, or the King of Elemental Earth made you his Herald and you can summon Earth elementals to aid you battle. Whatever.

Basically these slots have to slide up in power so that a guy who advances from 4th to 8th isn't stuck with the same ability from a Cloak of Mists he got at 4th level while a Monk is using his level-appropriate Fists of Steel (which now lets him punch right through walls and ruin armor).

By doing it this way, you can have a Monk who kicks butt with his profound skill and a classic DnD fighter who waves around a magic sword and Wing of Flying and a Shield that reflects magic and armor that bursts into fire.

[Koumei]

I approve - this could indeed work.

[CatharzGodfoot]

So, K, can the warrior switch out his armor for a shield any old time? Can the gargoyle switch out his skin for fists of steel?

I mean, some things totally make sense. The gargoyle can trade his camouflage for armor because the armor covers it. Similarly he could trade his wings for armor (they're still there unless he cut them off, but he can't fly).

I also don't get why these abilities are 'secondary'. Do you mean 'passive'? I can see having separate 'active' and 'passive' slots, with the passive being of fixed number. If, however, the dragon is putting its breath in slot 3, there's no reason to separate the different types of slots.

[Username17]

I imagine it would allow one to switch between adventure segments:


-Username17

[SphereOfFeetMan]

Final Fantasy Tactics

Best game ever.

[K]

1201419861[/unixtime]]So, K, can the warrior switch out his armor for a shield any old time? Can the gargoyle switch out his skin for fists of steel?

I mean, some things totally make sense. The gargoyle can trade his camouflage for armor because the armor covers it. Similarly he could trade his wings for armor (they're still there unless he cut them off, but he can't fly).

I also don't get why these abilities are 'secondary'. Do you mean 'passive'? I can see having separate 'active' and 'passive' slots, with the passive being of fixed number. If, however, the dragon is putting its breath in slot 3, there's no reason to separate the different types of slots.

Ok, it'd work like this:

Monsters don't get to switch things out. Sorry, you get to be a super cool monster. Its the price of doing business. As far as I'm concerned, Gargoyle Chamo works like the TV show Gargoyles where you get covered in a stone covering that shatters off your body when you decide to move.

Other people can switch out class abilities and magic items around as they wish during downtime (a few days for an item, weeks for class features, instant for gained adventure stuff). If you find a sword you like better than the one you have, you can spend a few days attuning yourself to it, but learning a new sword technique and abandoning an old technique takes time.

When I mean "secondary", I mean "not a core part of your character." Languages, skills, and important class features are all a part of your class. I mean, you can have a Monk who uses Mystical Belt armor and a Dragonbone Staff weapon to fight enemies, and he's the same as the Punchy and Naked Monk for all the iconic Monk stuff.

It has to be an automatic thing like "if you aren't wearing armor, you have one less slot and the Monk's Grace armor ability.

[RandomCasualty]

The slot system seems like it has potential. That'd allow you to play batman, who uses a ton of gadgets but no real supernatural powers, or you could play a straight up mage with all supernaturals and no items, or a mix of the two.

I'm thinking you probably need more than four slots though.

[virgil]

I think you should be alright to switch out abilities that fill the same slot nearly instantly.

If you're set to be awesome with swords in a slot, what sword you use is up to you; so finding & using a better sword that you just pulled from the coffin would consist of dropping the one in your hand picking the new one up.

For the equipment-less slots, this could be seen as a 'stance' for the monk. He switches out his Steel Fist for a Shivering Palm with a stance pose and a moment of concentration.

This could be problematic for the armor though, as that's generally not seen as something you switch around with ease.

Despite all this, using those slots doesn't really negate the Monk Issue. It relegates it to Frank's example A, where you can be just as good with equipment as you are without, making the equipment-less option a better one.

I think the simplest option would be to choose a role for the equipment-less, and don't let it intersect much with the equipped roles. This would intrinsically tie the system with the setting, as there are all sorts of characters that do the same thing but with varying levels of gear to do the job.

[Draco_Argentum]

1201349843[/unixtime]]If characters had a background that gave them access to different stuff, this might work. Comig from the nobility might mean that you personally could be a heavy armor fighter or a gadgeteer from level 1, while being trained by necromancers in the wilderness might mean that you could do other stuff.

One thing I was thinking. Does it even matter if one guy is wearing 'expensive' armour and another guy isn't? Could we just say that heavy armour people just get to start in heavy armour?

Class based starting gold is an arbitrary mechanic. Why not dump it and give everyone a level appropriate set of basic gear. Weapons armour etc. There are thousands of reasons why someone could afford this stuff at level one.

Then everyone can have the same starting gold for use on stuff like rope, lanterns and rations.

[Username17]

One thing I was thinking. Does it even matter if one guy is wearing 'expensive' armour and another guy isn't? Could we just say that heavy armour people just get to start in heavy armour?

The answer: it depends. If characters are supposed to care a lot about the turnip economy at low level, then it is a 4th wall violation if the heavy armor guys get to start with heavy plates of steel while the team is trying to pile sticks together to trade for a lesser number of advanced sticks. As I see it, there are a number of ways to handle wealth, with the following extremes:

• Cartoon - the soldier character has shiny plate armor and his distinctive spear. The penitent monk has rags and a stick. And next adventure this will still be true. The characters don't really pay money for their signature equipment, nor do they ever sell them. This is the system used in Slayers; and it is very abstract.
  
  
• Dinars and Fish - characters find individual copper pieces, and have to feed themselves with cabbages and cheese. Sometimes people extrapolate this into rations and koku like Might and Magic, sometimes people actually keep track of individual cheese like NetHack. In this set up a suit of armor has real (and large) value, and characters would either have to scrimp and save to get a set, or have a special ability that allowed them to start with a bunch of wealth (perhaps a princely or military background).

So anyway if you go more towards the cartoon direction, forcing people to acquire armor in-game is insulting because things in general don't really work that way. If you go more towards the dinars and fish direction, you're going to have to have some sort of real excuse for any character who wears heavy armor at low level.

---

I kind of like the idea of people being able to nominate themselves to personally not have to deal with one of the pieces of low level bullshit. Something along the lines of:

• Inheritance: you don't have to worry about scrounging for dinars at low level and just have your own high quality equipment.
  
• Monster Training: you don't have to worry about metagame monster knowledge, because your character actually does know what all the monsters are and do.
  
• Trade Tongue: you don't have to worry about all the languages and crap because your character personally speaks all of them.

-Username17

[angelfromanotherpin]

The way I see it, everyone should have access to their gear all the time, cartoon-style, but at low levels, it's low-level gear. So, just like how you don't get to wear hollowed-out god bones for armor until level 10 or so, 'heavy armor' in the turnip economy levels is turnip economy heavy armor. I'm not sure what that means exactly, maybe it's a barrel and a pot for a helmet, maybe it's pig iron left over from the smithy, or whatever.

I kind of like the idea that Heavy Armor Proficiency is on some level bundled with Wealthy.

[Username17]

For the heavy armored people to come bundled with wealth, we'd have to take an honst assessment of what we wanted our heavy armor people to be good at doing, and then give the other adventurers things to be good at to compensate.

---

For example: a knight is classically designed for fighting against peasants. Heavy armor and a warhorse allows a single person to take out a large number of crap troops with poor training and equipment. That would seem to make his position be one of Mook Control. And thus other characters (the naked barbarian or the street rat) would be expected to have bones thrown to them in other aspects of the game.

As I see it, you can literally divide characters up by how they dress:

• Naked Characters - well, maybe just "shirtless" or even "practically shirtless." These characters include He Man, Conan, the Scorpion King, but also magic characters like Dalsim, and Pirotess.
  
  
• Characters with Pockets - whether they are ninja pockets or blacksmith pockets or woodsman pockets, these are all pretty much the same. These characters wear something functional, and it includes: Robin Hood, Perrin, Stormshadow.
  
  
• Characters with Fancy Pants - some characters wear clothes which "get ruined." These characters are like Jafar, Giacomo, or the Princess.
  
  
• Characters with Medium Armor - Aragorn, the Witch King, or Beowulf all wear clearly identifiable armor which is nonetheless cut down from the full deal.
  
  
• Heavy Armor Characters - They have thick, heavy, armor. Example characters include Sir Griswold, Achilles, and Jozan.

I think it's important to note that characters who wear heavy or no armor appear with a bow and a spear, with a spell book, simple charms, or a heavy disdain for magic.

-Username17

[CatharzGodfoot]

There are plenty of reasons for people with high-quality adventuring gear to care about turnips. You have kids like Toshiro Mifune in 7 Samurai, who basically went grave robbing to get his stuff. You have bandits and ronin who either wear piecemail or their old armor, but they're not part of the higher social structure. You have old blacksmiths who were once knights (nobody pawns a Hanzo sword).

They can't sell the gear because they aren't part of the higher class. Grave robbers would just be executed, and the same for bandits. Ex-knights and inheritors of them place too much personal value on the gear or would just have it taken away.

[NoDot]

Um... were there any mages with heavy armor? (Serious question!)

[angelfromanotherpin]

1201465838[/unixtime]]Um... were there any mages with heavy armor? (Serious question!)

Do you mean anywhere, ever? It also depends what you mean by a mage, since the Green Knight's a pretty magician-like individual, despite not being a classic scholar-type.

I think Elric of Melnibone wears heavy armor in his naval battles, but that might just be in the art. Alphonse Elric is heavy armor.

edit: Doctor Doom, of course.

[JonSetanta]

1201465838[/unixtime]]Um... were there any mages with heavy armor? (Serious question!)

Urza.