Print

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

All the time.

2 (13.3%)

Sometimes.

9 (60%)

Only when there's a new release.

2 (13.3%)

Never. ((get out))

2 (13.3%)

Total Members Voted: 13

[Projeck37]

Or add an awesomeness multiplier for physical damage, and it's up to the plot's GM for the multiplier.

(I'm not completely serious)

[kj1225]

Why not just have 1 point of strength account for a 2 damage role? That makes Strength important (And maybe a little abusable) by having it's max damage equal to STR*2. Weapons would just add to the total role, so a +5 weapon used by a person with 20 strength would make the roll a 1d45 for an average of 22 damage.

So now this:

20 Strength, +5 weapon: Avg damage: 15.5 before Damage Reduction.
20 Magic, Large Spells: Avg damage: 22.5 before Damage Reduction.

Becomes:

20 Strength, +5 weapon: Avg damage: 22.5 before Damage Reduction.
20 Magic, Large Spells: Avg damage: 22.5 before Damage Reduction.

Bam! They equal out now~

Because then there's less of a difference in the two. And makes strength more abusable.

[Sanure]

As if magic wasn't abusable~

To make them different:

Take the two stats used to tank damage: Resistance and Defense. So far they are a 1dX roll to mitigate damage. So far that means we have a possible chance to tank the damage out right, or fail and take critical damage. Good as is, but something always bothered me. Defence is how tough a person is and how much damage they can stop before taking injuries. Resistance is how able a person is at resisting the effects of magic. See the difference? defence is pure toughness while Resistance is pure willpower.

Now to make Strength and Magic different: we change Defence to be pure damage mitigation via DEF/2. From what I've seen plot wise (Past and present), More enemies use magical attacks to deal the damage, while the physical attackers are just large damage sponges. This leaves room for abusablity, which isn't a bad thing as long as the GM makes sure to watch it carefully. Doing this allows STR based charactes to actually do damage making melee attackes deal good DPS.

Spoiler: Example: Hero versus Villian (click to show/hide)

 Hero is a melee class designed to do damage and has 20 Strength and a +5 weapon. Has 15 points in DEF and RES. Villain is a steriotypical evil magician wanting people dead and has a high MAG at 30, and his DEF and RES is at 10.

Starting HP
Hero: 150 HP
Villian: 150 HP

Ending HP
Hero: -9, Defeated
Villian: 88

Turn 1
Hero attacks Villain with his weapon dealing 0 damage.
Villain laughs and sends a medium fireball at Hero dealing 7 damage.

Turn 2
Hero slashs down at Villain again dealing 20 damage!
Villain casts a medium icebolt dealing 8 damage.

Turn 3
Hero attempts a combo (x2) attack dealing 14 damage and 28 damage
Villain casts a large arc lightning dealing 8 damage, 0 damage, and 0 damage!

Turn 4 (final turn)
Hero attempts a finishing attack dealing 22 damage and failing to kill the Villain.
Villain casts an enormous Firestorm spell dealing 82 damage and 54 damage!

So in the example the villain was doing paltry amounts of damage against the hero who was being a badass with the damage he was dealing per turn. At turn 4 the villain, being evil, cast his enormous spell, Firestorm, hitting him twice for major damage and defeating the Hero.

Melee is where the most DPS lie at, while Magic has the large kill damage. Both are different now with physical being pure damage output and pure damage mitigation while magic is calculated damage and more based on the mind (as magic should be since it is more based off of willpower and Intelligence).

Also, I can see a single subtype who would abuse this: Magical melee units. If they can use their magic to boost their STR stat, then they can abuse the changes. I don't know how to fix that other than making it so that any current magical increase to STR just adds bonus damage to the attack after damage calculation :/

Anyways, this is just me putting in my two cents, What gets changed isn't up to me~

[smurfingtonthethird]

So, everything on the table for this lovely 'fighting overpowered with overpowered' thing:

1. Separate Skill and Strength stats: Skill for gunners, Strength for melee
2. Double Strength damage output[quote author=Rolepgeek l

3. Modifiers:
For Def/Res, +1 DR against Phys/Mag for every 4 points in it beyond 6.
For Health, +1 HP regened every turn for every 6 points in it beyond 6.
For Strength, +1 HP per point, and +1 to hit with melee attacks per 6 points beyond 6.
For Speed, +1 to dodge attacks for every 6 points beyond 6.
For Skill, +1 to damage(still go off strength for base damage) with ranged attacks per 4 points beyond 6.
For Mana, +1 MP regened every turn for every 6 points in it beyond 6.
For Magic, +1 to TN rolls for every 4 points in it beyond 6.

4. Change defense roll to DEF/2 OR DEF/[enemy SKILL]

Support? Problems?

Don't post a complaint without providing a solution.

[kj1225]

I liked number three but with these changes.

On Regen: No, that would drag fights out.
On Magic: You want -1 and definently not, to easy to abuse.
On +1 to hit and dodge: Slow the rate down. Maybe every six points including the sixth one.

[Sanure]

I am totally buzzed right now since I'm at a party. Ciao peeps~

[Akroma]

Why not just have 1 point of strength account for a 2 damage role? That makes Strength important (And maybe a little abusable) by having it's max damage equal to STR*2. Weapons would just add to the total role, so a +5 weapon used by a person with 20 strength would make the roll a 1d45 for an average of 22 damage.

So now this:

20 Strength, +5 weapon: Avg damage: 15.5 before Damage Reduction.
20 Magic, Large Spells: Avg damage: 22.5 before Damage Reduction.

Becomes:

20 Strength, +5 weapon: Avg damage: 22.5 before Damage Reduction.
20 Magic, Large Spells: Avg damage: 22.5 before Damage Reduction.

Bam! They equal out now~

Not equal, as large spells require mana, which you can run out off, while running out of melee attacks is kinda difficult. This would make strength based fighters too damagey. And it would *still* not actually make them equal to skill based fighters, as having high skill ensures both high damage AND that you actually hit your target. Add on top of that that there is still the elusive chance to crit, which I think all GMs have been forgetting until now, I have yet to see one happening.


as for the buffs:


Def/Res: Does not actually need a buff. The stat is not underpowered. Doing this would drag on fights.
Health: Again, not underpowered, needs not a buff
Strength: +1HP and +1 to hit for every 6 points above 6 is actually very very low. Most of us would only gain 1-2 HP and 1-2 to hit. This hardly lets str catch up to mag.
Speed: This is still one of the quintessential stats of the system, not underpowered, does not need a buff, fights dont need to be prolonged
Skill: Should only be buffed if Skill is not used as suggested above for ranged fighters as both the aim and the damage stat.
Mana: Mana regen should be taken as a perk, if at all. The whole idea that you can actually run out of mana is what keeps magic somewhat in check
Magic: Again, the TNs for very high tier spells is what keeps magic in check. If you want to burst out loads of damage in a single action, there should always be a risk that you cant concentrate enough and need two actions. Buffing magic by removing the TN is a bad idea

[Sanure]

Think of it this way:

Without a weapon a melee fighter deals their base Str damage. The only people that actually use pure physical attacks is Seras, Kyle (when not using magic), Sen (even when using magic), Linda, and Kaiser. (those listed were active and didn't use magic to alter STR stat.). How often do you see them making kills (barring Linda who is a champ.) This means that unless those players just dump stats into STR, most enemies will just tank the damage due to pure roll luck. We need to increase the amount of damage melee fighters deal or else it's Magical combatant or just make an non-combatant. Magic is variable damage because you can dump as much mana as you want into the spell and have it deal tons of damage. This makes a negligible spell become the size of a enormous spell for no failure chance due to how the current spell mechanics work. Literally the Combat rule for Magic is thus:

Depending on how much mana you use, the mag score will be increased, more on that on magic.

There is no clause stating that spending more mana on a spell increases the size of the spell, but yet you can spend as much mana on a spell to increase the Mag score for that spell.

But here is a fun fact, From looking at all of the current magic users... most people don't use their Magic Stat to actually deal variable damage. At all. Sen, Kyle, Stella, and Garrett are literally the only people who actually need to roll their Magic rolls to deal damage to an enemy. Everyone else has either listed base damage, or use their magic for entirely different reasons...

The hell? Why wouldn't people use their Magic stat to roll for damage if they can dump more mana to get more bang for their buck? It's because Mana is far too important to waste on making a spell bigger when you might need the mana to buff a team mate or debuff an enemy. Seriously, we always fight any enemies in a group of 5+ people.

Anyways, the point I am getting at is that Magic and Melee both need buffs. Melee needs more damage dealing potential and Magic needs more mana recovery (and require a Magic roll for doing damage) to make dumping mana into a spell worth while. Literally when you run out of mana during a fight and you don't have someone to cover you or a way to fight back, you will die.

So yeah, I agree with buffing the stats to add buffs to the players for putting stats into that stat.

On the topic of Seras, I need some negative buffs to sort out the rest of her sheet. Something major would be nice but some minors would also be acceptable.

[Akroma]

actually all magic damage should be based off a mag vs res roll. Listing base damage is technicaly incorrect


as far as negative buffs go for Seras, that's the munchkin way to go. Taking tons of flaws so you can take tons of perks. Instead I suggest dropping most of the perks.

[Sanure]

Agreed, however it seems to be happening anyways.

And yet I find Munchkin a very fun game.
Saying that taking a ton of flaws for a ton of perks is the munchkin way is like saying that mixing Oranges and Apples into one container isn't a smart idea. It adds character to the character. If you don't get my reference then I watch too many Podcasts :/

EDIT: Still buzzed. Can't spell.

[Akroma]

the thing is, the flaws have to actually balance out the perks.

so yeah, if you want an auto +50% speed bonus, you should take an auto -50% in an equally valueable (so not in mag) stat, like Res for example. Similarly with the 20% strength bonus, there should be a -20% skill. If you want to always move first unless the enemy has +10 speed, then the enemy should always do full damage, unless you have 10 more def.

As far as immortality goes, this is simply impossible to balance.

I am glad to see you already removed the part where you only took 1/2 damage from mundane attacks, as the balancing factor would mean to take double from magic attacks.

I know these flaws sound heavy, but think about it that way. +50% speed and +20% (when grappling even 40%) strength is already much stronger than what Icarus ability can actually achieve, and unlike for Icarus, it is ALWAYS active and doesn't cost any mana. And that's not even the beginning of it. 10 HP passive heal every turn? That is better than Alice heal, and again is passive and costs no mana. It's a blatant "I am better than Icarus and Alice combined, and that's just my passives"

frankly, with all those super buffs, Seras needs to be nerfed way into the ground and below it to still be fair.

If you *really* want to even start about nerfing Seras without removing all the perks, you should think about stuff like "Takes 1d20 damage each turn when in contact with sunlight" alongside "Is put into a fear status when shown a cross" and "Stats reduced by 20% when around garlic". Being a vampire is not just take tons of buffs at no downsides

edit: considering that Seras only has 5 res, a percentage based debuff is not even fair. It should be a straight up buff to incoming magic damage.

[USEC_OFFICER]

Magic is variable damage because you can dump as much mana as you want into the spell and have it deal tons of damage. This makes a negligible spell become the size of a enormous spell for no failure chance due to how the current spell mechanics work. Literally the Combat rule for Magic is thus:

Depending on how much mana you use, the mag score will be increased, more on that on magic.

There is no clause stating that spending more mana on a spell increases the size of the spell, but yet you can spend as much mana on a spell to increase the Mag score for that spell.

Actually... This is one of those cases where the rules aren't clearly stated, most likely because we've changed them so many times. If you check the magic spoiler you'll notice that the different spell catagories have stuff like MAG + 20% in them. While I don't think that it's flat out defined how extra mana converts into extra damage, it's heavily implied (and sorta agreed by everyone) that to do more damage with spells you have to use a higher spell catagory, which costs extra mana and increases the chances of failure. If everybody doesn't know that then you should now. After Hilda did her magic snipercannon thing we did tone down magic damage quite a bit.

Anyways I'm going to be reading through all of the mechanics changes and then vomiting my opinions out on them. So look forward to that?

[Sanure]

@ USEC, agreed, it's implied and sorta agreed by everyone, but just being implied and sorta agreed on doesn't mean it isn't happening. However, due to the way that a lot of people have set up their magical attacks, it doesn't matter if they did dump mana into a spell, they might as well just cast it for base cost and save the mana due to having their magic do a base damage without rolling the MAG skill to do the damage. But, yes wehn the voting happens I will also be voting also (since I'm not contributing anything solid and only suggesting an idea ).

@Akroma, And yet those automatic SPD and STR boosts only apply at certain times. SPD when dodging and STR when grappling. Grappling deals nodamage, so even if she did get so the 20% more damage does not apply. The 20% more damage is not an actually increase to the STR stat, but an addition 20% damage added on after damage calculation. ALso, the 20% more damage is only on Melee, so there is also that.

I would normally agree that a 50% decrease ina skill would work, but due to being situational, the debuff would need to be situational as well. I would consider a "Put into fear by seeing a cross" negative perk, but due to her Clairvoyance ability: "Immune to fear." As for Takes damage in sunlight, it wouldn't be 20HP of damage due to how PrivateNomad set up the damage to be 5 dmg per turn during the fight with The Bewticher, a vampire.

As for the "blatant "I am better than Icarus and Alice combined, and that's just my passives"" statement: She can't modify her strength Stat like Icarus, and she only heals herself and can't heal others like Alice. Your point is moot.

As for her resistance and Defence, She has 5. That isn't a design flaw or minmaxing, that's how I made her works. She is squishy, made of glass, and hits hard. She has a base healing at the start of her turn (which is 10). Lets say she is fighting three people, They each have say 25 STR. Mook 1 attacks deals 15 damage. Mook 2 attacks and deals 18 damage, Mook 3 attacks and deals 20 damage. She has taken 53 damage (if she was unable to dodge, and it wasn't magcal damage) Her turn comes around healing her for 10 hp leaving her with 17 HP. Next turn if she doesn't succeed her dodge rolls, which isn't a guarantee, one attack can remover her from a plot. She does a little bit of increased damage, has a better chance at dodging, but at the end of the day, She is just another glass cannon.

Being a anything other than a human or a robot shouldn't be punished Akroma. Seriously you suggested the same exact stuff when Usec, Smurf, and me were applying a nerf to one of Sen's attacks. You call her unfair? Did you even look at her sheet? She is a True Vampire, sired by Dracula who was boss as hell. She is not allowed to even increase her HP or Mp unless she absorbs a soul, and that is up to the GM if at all. Hell, Everyone uses magic anyways so most of her Buffs don't even apply. 50% increase to dodge, use AoE: instant amplified magic damage. Does 20% more damage to melee? stay out of Melee range. Heals 10 HP per turn, Deal damage as normal and kill her in 3-4 turns.

Anyways, you did give me a few ideas for debuffs, so I thank you for that. :3

[Projeck37]

I'd be fine with shifting ranged damage from STR to SKL, seeing as I can make Linda more of a badass sniper.

Though, it'd remove her flexibility to actually be proficient in hand to hand combat seeing as she's a soldier... And it'd require some odd stat reallocation, I guess.

[Sanure]

Okay added to negatives to Seras:

Awkward at Day: Seras' self healing is reduced to 5 while in sunlight.
- what it says on the tin. She heals less and will take less turns to kill.

Sap heart: Seras will actively try to protect an ally with her shadow essence taking half of the damage to herself. (increased damage if magical, silver, or blessed.)
-only applies to allies (meaning her friends) and tanks half the damage that would be dealt to them. So if Alice was hit with 40 magic damage, Seras would tank half of it allowing Alice to take only 20, Seras then takes 15 extra damage due to magical damage for a total of 35. considering how many people are in the team and Seras is already friends with Linda, Kyle, and Alucard to an awkward degree, 1 turn dead. Talk about a debuff.

Like don't like?