Printable View
It is my understanding from Ineti that yes, the new chart is going to be used in LOTR. In fact, it was his telling me that he planned to do that in the LOTR errata that tipped my decision to do it for ST, since I was pretty ambivalent about the change.Quote:
Originally Posted by tonyg
She was the only one who learned additional languages during development. None of the archetypes have any of their species skills; that's left up to the player who takes that archetype to decide, for personalization of the character.Quote:
Originally Posted by C. Huth
While I question its bearing on professionalism, I have been looking at the notion of separating the two. I didn't this time around because of time constraints and a general sense of being kind of tired at the end of the project. It will be happening, I'm just not 100% sure when.Quote:
Originally Posted by C. Huth
Quote:
Originally Posted by PGoodman13
Really, it's my favorite change so far! I always felt that the 4-7 = +0 scale meant that species with low attributes got off scott free. For example, a Zakdorn PC who puts a 7 in Presence winds up with a 4. With the old chart that was no panltiy so the -3 was practically a freebie. Now, at least it is worth a -1.
BTW, Do creatures use the same attribute chart as characters now? I hope so. I like the idea of a 2 Agility being the same for everyone/thing.
I'm not 100% sure how that discussion turned out. Hell, I'm not 100% sure it was even brought up since that was going to have more to do with the NG, and I kind of had blinders on at the time....Quote:
Originally Posted by tonyg
I'll post the question to the group once again and see what their consensus is. My gut tells me that yes, they're going to use the same chart, but I still need to double-check.
I've posted a slightly more polished PDF of the errata, with some typo fixes and some formatting & organizational fixes, in the first post of the main PG Errata 2.0 thread. I haven't gone in and cleaned up the actual posts to reflect these changes, however; that can be a real bear with as much stuff as appears in the PDF. If there's a great hue and cry, though, I'll go through and clean that up as well, though I'd just as soon leave that until I have cause to put out PGE 2.1.
Have you had a chance to look over the revised PDF, Christopher? If so, is that more like what you had in mind?Quote:
Originally Posted by C. Huth
Glad it works for you. :) Like I said, I could take or leave it, and it's going to make life a little interesting for me when I go to errata Creatures, but I think I'll get over it. Knowing that some of the players out there like what's been done makes me feel like the project was worthwhile.Quote:
Originally Posted by tonyg
So far, the response from the development team is in favor of this change. Don't have a quorum yet, though, but I'm thinking things are going to come out in our favor on this one.Quote:
BTW, Do creatures use the same attribute chart as characters now? I hope so. I like the idea of a 2 Agility being the same for everyone/thing.
Hey PG,
I'm a bit dense so let me know if I got this right.
If a player is doing a normal punch/unarmed attack (assuming Str 7, for no str bonus) and gets a extraordinary success, damage inflicted would be 3 (max D3 for the extraordinary success) +0 (no STR mo) +4 (special Unarmed Combat perk for an extraordinry success) for a total of 7 points?
What if a character gets an extraordinary result while doing an attack Nerve pinch that do not normally cause damage? Does it inflict 4 pts of damage and stunn the target for the max time (12 rds)?
Happens to me all the time.Quote:
Originally Posted by tonyg
Actually, the errata puts unarmed damage at 1D6 + STR mod. Otherwise I think you've got it spot on.Quote:
If a player is doing a normal punch/unarmed attack (assuming Str 7, for no str bonus) and gets a extraordinary success, damage inflicted would be 3 (max D3 for the extraordinary success) +0 (no STR mo) +4 (special Unarmed Combat perk for an extraordinry success) for a total of 7 points?
I'll get back to you on this one.Quote:
What if a character gets an extraordinary result while doing an attack Nerve pinch that do not normally cause damage? Does it inflict 4 pts of damage and stunn the target for the max time (12 rds)?
Oops, I missed the D6 unarmed damage in the errata.
That opens a can of worms though, since it might require some chances to the key traits in the SOM (yeah, I know you aren't up to the SOM for errata yet, but worth ponting out especially for those with exisiting campaigns).
Akikijutsu;
Aiki Otoshi; did 1d6+1 damage in a throw. Should this be increased to 2d6? or maybe 1d6+4?
Brawling:
The Roundhouse punch does double damage. Does that double the +2 and the +4 for superior and exceptional success rolls?
The Flying Smath did 1d6 damage. Should this be increased? Say 26 or 1d6+3
Ponn-ifla:
Narilk Upgrade increases damage to 1d6. Same question as before.
Starfleet Self-Defense:
The Point Strike only does 4 pts+STR. Good vs. a D3 punch, not so good vs a D6 punch.
Y'know, Tony, the more I look at this the more I think something's slightly wonky with unarmed combat damage. I guess I haven't done much with unarmed combat or I might have noticed it earlier. As soon as I figure out what it is that's bugging me about it, I'll go in and talk with the team about it and figure out a solution.Quote:
Originally Posted by tonyg
I've gotten a response from the team, and the answer is, "Yes, creatures use the same attribute modifier chart as characters." This will end up in the Narrator's Guide errata at some point, but for now...run with it. I'll worry about what it's going to do to the errata for Creatures later. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by tonyg
Welcome to my world. :) Well, the Narrator's Guide is obviously the one that's up for errata workover next, but I do need to start thinking about what we're going to do about Starfleet Operations Manual before too long.Quote:
Originally Posted by tonyg
My gut says that, for those items that did 1D6 instead of the old 1D3, give them a +3 (just assume the max on the 1D3). On the ones that doubled the damage, I think just double the die roll and not the bonus points for complete or exceptional success. Note that this could be subject to change at a moment's notice once I've had a chance to consult and consider all this.
Also subject to change: For a nerve pinch, which is considered an unarmed attack but does no damage per se, I'm thinking just increase the amount of stun time for the victim. I'd say add 2 rounds for a complete success, and max "damage" plus 4 rounds for an extraordinary success. Again, there will be some consultation on this one.
Yeah, sorry. I don't do this to be a fly in the oinment. I have run a lot of games and added a lot of stuff to them, and so the first thing I think of when I see any sort of change is, "What will this mess up?". It just part of my GMing style to "seek out new rules and new complications" and deal with them before the players get there. I eliminates a lot of problems, and mades me look like a make a lot fewer scewups than I actually do.Quote:
Originally Posted by PGoodman13
IMO it is best to have a rule that works consistiently for all situations and systems. It is easier, leavers fewer loophols, and makes it eaiser for gamers to work stuff out for themselves (so they don't run to you:D .Quote:
Originally Posted by PGoodman13
If I get a vote, I'd suggest going with the +3, and rewriting the roundhouse with the +3 too (1d6+3 is better than 1d3x2 66% of the time anyway, and a LOT better 50% of the time!)
Since the VNP doesn't do any damage, I like your idea of the +2 +4 to the stun effects.