Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Current one, unchanged.

+4 AS and +5 DMG when moving 4 spaces or more.

+2 AS and +3 DMG on Player Phase, with additional +2 AS and +2 DMG when moving 4 spaces or more.

+1 AS and +1.5 DMG for each space moved up to 4 spaces.

Current one but AS bonus is converted to DR from the end of the Player Phase until the next one.

I don't know but I want to see the results.

[Xanmyral]

Random Interesting Math; Discounting Performances and Staffs (and including Unique Weapons except those that are the above) there are:

Total - 279
Number Effective Against Wyvern Knights - 93
Percentage - 33.33%

I just found it amusing how the number came out as a perfect one third.

[Solymr]

Put the link to the playtesting thread in OP. Go check it out.

Also for Cecil: do you think it's time to make a GM handbook? And why roll one number for both hit and crit?

[Haspen]

And why roll one number for both hit and crit?

Wut.

[darkpaladin109]

Put the link to the playtesting thread in OP. Go check it out.

Also for Cecil: do you think it's time to make a GM handbook? And why roll one number for both hit and crit?

Cause it's better than if roll two like in the GBA FE's.

[Khaiel]

And why roll one number for both hit and crit?

I believe that although in the book says to roll once only, most GMs are rolling them separetely.

[Solymr]

Read the 1.3 handbook, the special rules. Apparently "higher crit than hit" was necessary to explain and mentions one roll.

Also effective damage is still double but I think we talked about that already :v

[Haspen]

....Does Cecil want me to call him a heathen now?

[CecilHoshino]

All's been quiet on the Cecil front, now that I've gone back to UVic for the Business Program, that reading load is crazy. Expect that to be a running theme for me in the future, and I apologize in advance for it. But let's tackle some of the issues right now...

Judgement - Before, it targeted specific class trees, which would cover about three classes at a time (ie: Avalon would only be effective against Mercenaries, Heroes, and Commanders). But there was always Thani and Ray, which targeted Armoured and Horseback, respectively. Which, as we covered earlier in discussions of the Soldier's Anti-Cavalry special, there were a LOT of Horseback units (hence why Anti-Cavalry/Spear Wall was reworked and slightly nerfed). So, I decided to try a different direction, see if Judgement could work on a bit of a broader scope. Which leads to the problem of...

Critical Eye - When it was proposed Berserkers get Critical Eye back, it led me to consider why exactly. Previously, the only classes that had them were Sniper, Sentinel, Mountain Warrior, Holy Guard (now Inquisitors), and Assassins. So I thought, "What do all these classes have in common?" To which the answer was "They all only have access to one Weapon type." And while it was at S Rank, the +5 Crit bonus seemed like a fair compensation for their lack of versatility. So, in the interest of fairness, Berserkers were given Critical Eye, as were Summoner and Mage Knight....

Buuuuut then that all fell apart when I realized, even back in 1.23, Samurai ALSO had Critical Eye, and they had Swords AND Bows. So, in the future, that IS going to be a change, the units with Critical Eye are going to be parred down. Right now, I'm thinking the list will be Sniper, Sentinel, Inquisitor, Assassin (considering Berserkers already have a Crit boost built into their kit, and Mountain Warriors are more about flat damage than crits).

Critical Hits on one dice roll - This was an early consideration of mine way back in v1.0. The thing about this was I was concerned about the "roll to hit, roll to crit" system, because let's consider Leona the Mercenary, who goes into battle with a 90% hit rate, and a 5% crit rate. On her hit roll, she manages to roll a 3, and that's great! But then she has to roll for her crit, and manages 96. Which seemed a bit unfair, given how she lucked out with the hit roll. So I reduced it to 1 dice roll, except in the case of higher Crit Rate than Hit.

Two Rolls like in the Games/"True Hit" - This is a system seen in Fire Emblems 6 through 13. In 1 through 5, one Random Number was generated, and if it was lower than the Hit Rate, the attack landed. Because of this, characters with a 90% hit rate flat out missed 1 time out of 10, while characters with a 30% hit rate still hit 3 times out of 10, neither of which is an insignificant number. However, in the True Hit system, 2 Random Numbers are generated, then averaged, and if the average number is lower than the Hit Rate, it lands. So a 90% hit rate is actually 98%, while a 30% hit rate is actually 18%, which significantly changes the course of the battle, highly favouring units with a higher Speed and either Swords or Bows, while greatly hurting those with lower speeds, and the entire Axe and Dark Magic weapon tree. It also is an indirect nerf to Skill specialists, because, at a certain point, Hit Rate is basically 100% anyway, so pumping any more into it is only for the +15 bonus to crit from a max 30 Skill which caps might even prevent from happening.

So, yeah, that system is never going to be included in the Tabletop game.

GM's Handbook - Consolidating the Enemy Handbook/Monster Manuel into this is definitely making it the next item on the docket. I need to do more research into how a GM's Handbook is made, and, with school, it'll still definitely be a long while before its release.

Alchemist and Time Mage - If these playtests go well, I'd actually be interested in included them in one of the expansion books (either the Playable Races or Tier Three classes, which would incorporate the whole tree from First to Promoted to Tier Three)

[Blade Master Model 42]

Did you notice my post with concerns about the Disarm Character Skill? It's a little problematic as is. Let me dig it up for you...

It just occurred to me that the new Disarm skill needs to either trigger only on Skill% chance, or be a cost skill, because right now, it's just a better Cancel.

To explain- Freddy the Myrmidon has Cancel. He is fighting somebody with better speed than him, and he attacks the guy. His hit connects, and Cancel procs, reducing the enemy to only one counterattack. Pretty nice.

Eddy the Knight took Disarm instead, and he attacks somebody with better speed- Disarm procs, and both of the enemy's counters are nulled because he is no longer holding a weapon. On top of that, his buddy Letty the thief can now take the enemy's weapon (provided his speed or luck is better and he has free inventory space), leaving that enemy unable to fight for the rest of the map- Unless they somehow get to one of the few allies carrying a spare weapon and they actually pass it to him. Really, the only disadvantage Disarm has compared to Cancel is that it can't proc against bosses.

tldr, plz nerf Disarm.

Found it :v

[CecilHoshino]

Ah, yep, I noticed that one, too (I just forgot about it while making the previous post).

Yeah, that was a whoopsie on my part. Disarm should be considered (Skill + Half Luck)% luck Big Shield, just forgot to put in the "Half." If Half Luck still seems too much, we could make it a Cost Skill, or reduce it to a flat (Skill)% for Free.

That also brings to mind something about Cancel. Just for clarity's sake, which do you guys prefer,
1. Free: Cancel has a (Speed + Luck)% chance to negate the enemy's first counter attack (potentially reducing the counter attacks to 0)
2. Free: Cancel has a (Speed + Luck)% chance to negate the enemy's entire counter attack (including follow up attacks if their AS is higher)
3. Cost: Cancel has a (Speed + Luck)% chance to negate the enemy's entire counter attack (including follow up attacks if their AS is higher)

When Cancel was written, it was made with 2 in mind (and that the opponent being "Cancelled" would only be getting one counter attack otherwise, anyway). But if you've all been working with 1 in mind, and 2 seems too much of an upgrade, we could shift to 3, or clarify it was 1 always and forever.

Also, I just remembered:

Dance, Magic Dance - That was a mistake on my part. See, I'm well aware of the Center + Call Magic exploit. That was actually built into the system, as a way to encourage diversifying growth rates so that the off-offensive stat (Strength or Magic) has a reason to be higher than 0%. When I first created the game, one of my original playtesters actually played a Bard -> Lore Master with Center and a not insignificant Strength growth for that explicit purpose. (I also had a Myrmidon with Imbue; she realized she had become Princess Wolverine and we loved it). However, for some reason, this slipped my mind when I considered giving Dancers an encouragement to shift from a Physical class (Dancer/Blade Dancer) to a Magical class (Lore Master). Instead of letting them gain even MORE from Center (by having Strength be a Preferred Stat, even if it doesn't always come up), I added in "Dance, Magic Dance," which, as you noted, blows the whole thing wide open.

So, yeah, that'll be the first thing to go. For now, assume that's not actually a thing, and that the Lore Master's Preferred Stats are still "Luck, Magic."

[Sirus]

I always thought that Cancel had a chance of triggering on each enemy counter attack.

Say you attack a myrmidon which can double you. Cancel can let you negate one, both, or neither of the myrmidon's counterattacks depending on the dice rolls.

[Blade Master Model 42]

No, Cancel activates on a hit that connects.

I'm fine with it as it is since Cancel is based on Speed so if you take it you're making speed a strong stat. So generally your enemies will tend toward only one counter, brave weapons notwithstanding.

[Solymr]

Welp time for my answer to Cecil.

Judgement: the fact that these weapons targeted class tress except the ones that cover Armoured and Horseback would be remedied by simply changing these two into "Knight tree" and "Cavalier tree". That would make the coverage of each of these about the same (except monsters/dragons).
Another thing about these is that the lower rank weapons get a really crappy bonus, since their might is really low, while the higher ups get a lot more damage. This feels kinda unfair when an archer barely gets a little more damaged by its judgement while a mercenary would get obliterated. Did you think of a flat bonus across all the tree?

Critical Eye: Assassins also have two weapons, but their special requires critical to be effective. Inquisitor is a different thing, they use light magic which every weapon gets a some crit. Other than that, your new list makes sense, if maybe the samurai's new special is a little bit too much.

True hit/True crit: we've always used one dice for the hit roll, since that's the way it's mathematically correct. But the crit chance is another thing. If it means "chance that a hit is a critical hit" then a second roll is required for them. Rolling one dice for both inflates the crit chance, as you probably thought when you made the "higher crit than hit" rule. This presents a problem. As your hit approaches your crit, your actual chance of critting on a hit increases, until your hit goes lower than your crit, where it becomes the true chance. If you have high evade, this could be worse for you, as a hit can become a devastating crit more easily. Thus why we tend to use one roll for each.

GM's handbook: there's one thing where new (and not so new) GMs need the most help: proper enemy statting. Is there any work done on that?

Alchemist and Time Mage: alchemist is being tested while time mage got erased out of existence because I couldn't fit it in without excessive complaints.

Samurai's Special: Musou's new under half HP effect seems OP to me. Mostly because there is a weapon made especifically for Myrmidons that fits the requirement for having that bonus crit added. Why not make it MAG/2 for all weapons?

Free Stats: I also noticed an important part about the newer versions of the handbook that I believe to be the source of most of the rejection. A lot of classes get free stats in their specials for nothing. I know you like LoL, so I think you know they don't like "balls of stats with no counterplay". We don't like it either. Things like Thief's passive evasion bonus feel too cheap and omnipresent, and some specials feel like better versions of character skills (Pass is rendered moot by En Passant and Jump).

Cancel: so, there are three possibilities... Why don't we test them?

[CecilHoshino]

Judgement: I suppose that could work, sticking with the Class Tree motif. And "effective" was just an easy go to; I want to explore the "anti-class" niche, since I think it also makes a good parallel to Druidic's "anti-weapon," but, in both cases, Effective leads to the problem where the lower ranked weapons offer merely a slap on the wrist while the higher ranked ones obliterate, whereas a flat +5 damage doesn't seem right, either.

Weapon Might in General: When I was readying 1.3 for launch, the biggest hurdle was rebalancing the weapon stats. Which, as you can probably guess, isn't exactly my strongest suit. At least, not without an environment or at least someone else to stress test these numbers before launch. So I apologize if it leads to...stupid stuff.

Critical Hits: I concede that point, and perhaps it'd be best to go with two dice, but I still feel bad about the hypothetical situation where you roll under your crit for your hit, and then miss the crit on its designated roll. Perhaps a system where you get +10 to your Crit if you rolled it during your hit, or something? Just so that, when rolling, the player's not wishing "I need to roll well but not perfect."

Critical Eye: And in all the discussion, I totally missed the Wyvern Hunter. So, if we were to revisit the list, if we took the Inquisitor's Critical Eye and gave it to the Wyvern Hunter, would that work?

Assassin's Weapon Ranks: This one I might seem to go back and forth on, but I really wanted to go for the idea of taking their specialization to the utmost, explicitly at the expense of their previous broadness. I did intend for the Spy to abandon either the Sword or the Bow in exchange for having an S Rank in the other. Would we be okay with this?

Free Stats: I'm aware of this design philosophy. And I completely agree with it, but, I admit, I got lost along the way and made some egregious mistakes. Like the Thief's "Overdeveloped Sense of Self Preservation." I'm too in love with that passive name to drop it initially, but the whole "bonus to Evasion while retreating" was ambiguous (I could see so many arguments around what constitutes "retreating"), but I want to give the Thief something aside from Steal (much like how Spy has Ambush and Vision, and Scavenger has Scavenge Gold and Power of the Underdog).
For the specific example of En Passant and Jump, I'd argue (semantics) that En Passant isn't strictly a better version than Pass; Pass allows you to move through units, whereas En Passant still requires you to move around units. You still have to run in ] this shape rather than going in a straight line, but it's an option if the Myrmidon needs to get somewhere quickly and not stop to deal with enemies directly. Jump, on the other hand, was admittedly another cute reference, this time to Might & Magic, where the entire class comes from (in that series from games 1 through 7, the Archer was actually the hybrid class of the pure physical Knight and the pure magical Sorcerer). To give them something other than Imbue Arrow, I included Jump as a reference to a spell from the games, as well as a tool to help reposition. But the new version is, admittedly, a bit much. In this case in particular, would a nerf to Jump be called for, or is Imbue Arrow more than enough?

If other cases of "Free stats, no counterplay" crop up, please, don't hesitate too; like I acknowledge, this is my first real game design rodeo, so newbie traps abound, I'm sure.
(In the instance of the Invincible Wyvern Knight, they are going to get a few nerfs: they're losing Armoured, which was included as a reference to previously being Soldier Trainee promotions before moving to Rider Trainee, and the Wyvern Rider's "Dragon Scales" will no longer provide bonus Resistance as well as bonus Defense, emphasizing the magic counter-play)

GM's Handbook: No done-and-done work as of yet. Again, time permitting, that's first on the docket.

[Xanmyral]

Hm... Perhaps for the thief's "Overdeveloped Sense of Self-Preservation," to instead of being free stats but an ability dealing with retreating, we take the Crusader's old ability, the one that gave Crusader's a sort of odd Canto to pillars after an attack. This would play well with their naturally higher MOV as a foot-slogger and plays into the retreat idea.

- One version could be that if a thief picks a lock (door or chest, either with a pick or a key), they can act as if they have canto and move the rest of their move.

This one is admittedly not really retreating based, but at the same time it would be a helpful boon to their primary job and allow them to get it done quicker and back into the fight instead of spending a whole map moving from place to place. It also has some weird play in that it could be used to escape quicker due to the whole 'can open a door and rush through it in the same action.'

- Another version: If a thief attacks an enemy, they can move the rest of their move (assuming they have some) to the nearest defensive terrain (assuming there's one in range).

I'm "iffy" of this one because its a toss up as to if its stronger than when the Crusader had the ability (they could move into pillars for one move and it was restricted to only pillars, thieves have the full cost but they have a naturally higher move and can move into any defensive terrain), but plays into the whole retreat thing.

- Third Version: Like the second, but it only activates if they got hit by a counter attack. If they dodged the counter attack, they can't use the rest of their move to back off into defensive terrain, but if they did it could.

This version is more restrictive than the second, but at the same time it would lead to more contingencies and conditional actions.


For Judgement balancing, how about this:

It deals extra damage to the class it would be effective against. The extra damage would be the total level of the character using it (Capping it somewhere suggested, 20 maybe?) minus the WT negation of the rank of the weapon (S is -8, B is -5 I think, etc). Higher the rank weapon you're using would have a higher base but a lower bonus. The lower rank weapon you use would have a lower base but a higher bonus.