Print

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

[syvarris]

Oh, damn it, sorry.  I misread your response post!  >.<

Spoiler: Quote of the bit I misread (click to show/hide)

I read this to mean the fight bonus is for the attack, but if I don't succeed, in the attack, my defense bonus for the counterattack is gone. I.e. If I used that move one you, I would have 55 fight to your 60. if I rolled a 5 and you rolled a 3, then the totals would be 60 vs 63. you win, and your blow connects where mine does not. now we roll damage. I have 20 endure, so on a normal attack I would absorb 20 damage before losing hp or whatever. in this case I don't absorb that and take all the damage. Now, with my recover, that's not a big issue, but nerfing a technique that anyone can learn, due to a specific advantage one characer might have while using it seems a bit off. unless that were to make me effectively immortal, which it doesn't.

I misread the highlighted portion to mean you attack at your perfectly normal bonus, but if you manage to hit, you immediately get +20 to fight, thus dealing an extra twenty points of damage.  So, if I rolled 42 fight on the technique, my roll would count as 42 if my opponent rolled 45, but if they rolled 40 instead then my roll would count as a 62.  So, there's a risk/reward mechanic, in that you get a big damage bonus if you hit, but get hit with a lot more damage if you don't.

Yes, the highlighted portion directly contradicts my misunderstanding, I don't even have an excuse.  Though, this misreading is rather impressive; I actually understood exactly how the technique worked, up until you explained it to me, at which point I came up with my own interpretation, so everything past that post was me uselessly pointing out the flaws in said figment of my imagination.  I'm very sorry, that must have been extremely confusing. >.<

Okay, since I now understand where I disconnected, I can go back to quibbling about balance.  Your move is 100% riskless because you're shifting points from Endure (which directly mitigates damage) to Fight (which directly mitigates damage identically to Endure, and also can deal damage).  In the example you described, you use the ability to get 55 Fight, then roll a 5, while I roll a 3 to add to my innate Fight of 60.  This results in you having a final total of 60, with me having 63.  Since you now have 0 Endure due to the technique, you take three damage.

My point is that there was no increased risk.  If you started with 35 Fight, rolling 5 for 40 combined, versus my combined score of 63, you take 23 damage... which is then mitigated by your Endure, for three damage taken.  An identical result.

The only functional difference between this technique and "Gain +20 fight at the cost of 5 Stamina" is that such a technique would also mitigate twenty points of damage, being useful when you're weaker than your foe.  Otherwise, it's completely identical.  As such:

Basically
1. They drain large amounts of stamina where as most engines drain none
2. They have a very specific use and have to be activated. Ie they're not flat bonuses to everything that uses that roll. So you can't have "Fight +10" it has to be like "+20 move bonus for doing sick parkour"

Seems to be saying that it's an unfair technique, as it can indeed apply in every situation that you'd be rolling fight.  If it got through entirely on the fact that it isn't helpful when you're vastly weaker, I would call it overpowered, because that isn't really a significant penalty.

[Devastator]

As for some suggestions..

I was thinking that maybe crafting should be more streamlined.  Say, you can build X amount of stuff, based on your build.  Then your stamina determines how often it resets, and you can build another batch.  Out of the bore, (or in combat), everyone gets so much stamina, + however many more points for having points in stamina, which are deducted every time you roll, and with penalties when you run out.

I'd also streamline techniques, as well.  You'd make techniques with whatever stat the technique uses, say fight for fight techs, except that building equipment should be easier and better as it doesn't have direct combat applications.  Say techs always require XP, and the roll for them is more difficult than building equipment using build, etc.  With the same stamina rules applying for developing techs.

Those are just suggestions.  I think the only mechanic I'm dubious about is just finding experience inside the bore with Find rolls.  That seems kinda safe and dubious.  Maybe Find could grant a certain amount to start with, or only do stuff outside the bore or when dived or such, in addition to it's normal use.

[Gentlefish]

Oh, damn it, sorry.  I misread your response post!  >.<

Spoiler: Quote of the bit I misread (click to show/hide)

I read this to mean the fight bonus is for the attack, but if I don't succeed, in the attack, my defense bonus for the counterattack is gone. I.e. If I used that move one you, I would have 55 fight to your 60. if I rolled a 5 and you rolled a 3, then the totals would be 60 vs 63. you win, and your blow connects where mine does not. now we roll damage. I have 20 endure, so on a normal attack I would absorb 20 damage before losing hp or whatever. in this case I don't absorb that and take all the damage. Now, with my recover, that's not a big issue, but nerfing a technique that anyone can learn, due to a specific advantage one characer might have while using it seems a bit off. unless that were to make me effectively immortal, which it doesn't.

I misread the highlighted portion to mean you attack at your perfectly normal bonus, but if you manage to hit, you immediately get +20 to fight, thus dealing an extra twenty points of damage.  So, if I rolled 42 fight on the technique, my roll would count as 42 if my opponent rolled 45, but if they rolled 40 instead then my roll would count as a 62.  So, there's a risk/reward mechanic, in that you get a big damage bonus if you hit, but get hit with a lot more damage if you don't.

Yes, the highlighted portion directly contradicts my misunderstanding, I don't even have an excuse.  Though, this misreading is rather impressive; I actually understood exactly how the technique worked, up until you explained it to me, at which point I came up with my own interpretation, so everything past that post was me uselessly pointing out the flaws in said figment of my imagination.  I'm very sorry, that must have been extremely confusing. >.<

Okay, since I now understand where I disconnected, I can go back to quibbling about balance.  Your move is 100% riskless because you're shifting points from Endure (which directly mitigates damage) to Fight (which directly mitigates damage identically to Endure, and also can deal damage).  In the example you described, you use the ability to get 55 Fight, then roll a 5, while I roll a 3 to add to my innate Fight of 60.  This results in you having a final total of 60, with me having 63.  Since you now have 0 Endure due to the technique, you take three damage.

My point is that there was no increased risk.  If you started with 35 Fight, rolling 5 for 40 combined, versus my combined score of 63, you take 23 damage... which is then mitigated by your Endure, for three damage taken.  An identical result.

The only functional difference between this technique and "Gain +20 fight at the cost of 5 Stamina" is that such a technique would also mitigate twenty points of damage, being useful when you're weaker than your foe.  Otherwise, it's completely identical.  As such:

Basically
1. They drain large amounts of stamina where as most engines drain none
2. They have a very specific use and have to be activated. Ie they're not flat bonuses to everything that uses that roll. So you can't have "Fight +10" it has to be like "+20 move bonus for doing sick parkour"

Seems to be saying that it's an unfair technique, as it can indeed apply in every situation that you'd be rolling fight.  If it got through entirely on the fact that it isn't helpful when you're vastly weaker, I would call it overpowered, because that isn't really a significant penalty.

I think the risk is suck that he spends it and takes the endurance penalty the whole round, while the fight bonus is only if he hits. I think? Do I have this right?

[Ozarck]

@gentlefish, that's kinda what I had in mind.

Like this: the bonus applies to my attack, but if I fail the attack, the bonus is not included.
However, the rules are a bit more straightforward about attacks, it seems:
Both characters use fight for their action that round. Whichever gets the highest total score damages the other. in which case, sy's explanation makes sense.

To mitigate that, I'll either have to take a heavier penalty to endure, or make the penalty last a second round. PW did say I might need to go negative on endure.

there are a other considerations though. For instance, we are discussing this as if one-on-one fights are all we will encounter. this technique is good against a single target, so It's not a flat +20 fight. it's a +20 fight against this particular target. Dropping endure drops it against all enemies who might attack in that round (or the next, if we went that route)

So, options for a better write up:
+20 fight, -30 endure, -5 stamina. Fight bonus is against one opponent only. effects last one round.
or
+20fight, -20 endure, -5 stamina. Fight bonus is against one target only, for one round only. Endure malus lasts two rounds.
or
+20 fight, -20 endure, -(x) Move - 5 stamina. Fight bonus is against one target only, for one round only. User is unable to dodge, disengage, or whatever the following round.
or
+20 fight, -40 endure, -5 stamina. Bonus is against one target only, for one round. On a successful strike, target is stunned (or has his endure score reduced, or some other effect) (this is practically a different technique though).
or
+20 fight, -30 endure, -5 stamina. Bonus is against one target only, for one round. technique cannot be used again until the user has had time to rest.

[piecewise]

So here's the core rebalance ideas.

1. Shift to d100 system where every roll is a d100 roll and you try to roll under your stat number
2. The addition of a few extra abilities, namely defensive abilities to handle the new way combat would work. And combat would work by you rolling your attack skill, they roll their defense skill, and whoever succeeds on the roll would be the winner. If both succeed, then whoever succeeded by the most, ie if someone with skill 70 fought someone with skill 30 and both rolled 20, the skill 70 would winn because they succeeded by 50 rather than 10. But if the 70 rolls 65 and the 30 rolls 20, the 30 skill player would win. 
3. Weapons would have hard damage values (or rather roll values, like this weapon does d12 damage) rather than doing damage based off differences.
4. Stamina removed. Crafting still takes time but there's no limit to how long you can do it in a stretch. Diving becomes even more dangerous. Techniques, if they exist still, will have to drain something else or be made with serious disadvantages.
5. Player gen changed, mostly rebalancing starting classes and the number of points available at chargen.

[piecewise]

The Basic big thing about the rebalance is that it would  be a precentile system at heart. At 70 skill you could know you'll succeed 70% of the time. And it removes the thing in the current system where you simply cannot beat some people in a contest of the same skill.

[Radio Controlled]

Sounds promising. I especially like the change to diving, now we can get ourselves killed faster can saunter around this brave new world all we want. And making combat a little less deterministic without it being random.

Thanks for keeping up with all of our balance whining. Will you be updating the existing docs file with the new rules?

[piecewise]

Sounds promising. I especially like the change to diving, now we can get ourselves killed faster can saunter around this brave new world all we want. And making combat a little less deterministic without it being random.

Thanks for keeping up with all of our balance whining. Will you be updating the existing docs file with the new rules?

Most likely.

[piecewise]

There's an awful lot of rebalancing going on. A lot of changes. You're all gonna have to basically make new sheets.

[Ozarck]

Are we going to remain where the Bore is now, or is the entire universe resetting? And when can we expect the new ruleset to be available?

On an unrelated note, I rescued my first Kerbal from low Kerbin orbit last night! I was very pleased.

[Egan_BW]

There's an awful lot of rebalancing going on. A lot of changes. You're all gonna have to basically make new sheets.

Sigh.

[syvarris]

Sigh.

What?  It's not my fault, at least not entirely.  I always complain about balance, usually it doesn't result in complete rejiggering. 

[Ozarck]

PW's been leaning toward d100 since Oro. Seems easier for him to manage balance issues with a broader number range. Easier to tweak, for one thing.

[piecewise]

Alright, that should be done. Lots of core changes and some smaller changes. I'd recommend rereading the rules.  Classes are basically the same, but now everyone has +10 something (Or +5 to two somethings) and a weapon at least.  Diving is different now, in that you dive through one level at a time and there's no minimum level for it. You could do it at  level 1 if you were super fucking lucky.

Weapons are now rolls, defensive stats exist, stamina is no more, etc. There's just a lot of stuf different now.

[Ozarck]

600 points to distribute among 12 abilities, 80 max per? You could max out seven of them and have 40 points left to distrbute among the last 5,

Is that the intention there? looks like you start us out with 50 per ability.

Nameless: Thoughful corpse
Body: 80
Mind: 20
knowledge: 0

60 Blast
80 Fight
80 Dodge
70 Cover
80 Endure
80 Move
50 Hide
10 Find
10 Transcend
90 Recover (80 +10)
00 Build
00 Control

Weapon: Knife (3d6 dmg)