Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 42

Thread: Advancement Confusion

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Parkersburg, WV, USA
    Posts
    22

    Advancement Confusion

    Back in '97-8, we started a campaign in Middle-Earth using MERP (you know...that 'other' system...hehe). Our characters advanced to about what would be 5th-6th level and we haven't had a chance to get back to the campaign for some time (read: years).

    Now, we come back to it, thrilled with the movies and being more or less interested to see what these characters would be capable of in CODA. Using conversion tables found in the Moria booklet by ICE, the stats were easy to convert. We then built the characters up converting XP to CODA and assigning skill points as we went through each advancement (one advancement at a time, extrapolating from memory what the character had done/was doing at the time).

    Well, it went like this:

    One character, a Shield-Maiden of Rohan, ended up with 6 advancements, nothing big. She had, from character creation, some skill with a Spear (6 ranks, Weapon Mastery, high physical stats) and ended up at +10 or so, specialized. We were like, wow, she's as bad as Aragorn or Boromir with that Spear. Which was fine, that went with her story.

    Well, then she advanced. And, now, spending very stringently to advance her Armed Combat, she's ending up with a +17. Which seems insane. Plus, she spent some points and took Swift Strike 1, wants to go for Swift Strike 2, but we halted last night because we were all like, "We have GOT to be missing something..."

    Help! Let me know if there's something I'm missing, or if this system really is this unbalanced.
    "First, learn to use this," he said, indicating the boy's head. "Then, I'll teach you to use this," indicating the sword.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    3,208
    Is that +17 ranks in the skill, or her total modifier? The game caps skills at +12 ranks, though attribute modifiers and edge modifiers can increase your total bonus with a skill.

    The game does allow for high-powered characters. I have a zero-advancement PC in my current game that has Ranged Combat (longbow) +6. With her high Nimbleness and specialization, and the accurate edge, she's effectively +15 to hit with a bow and arrow.

    I once calculated Legolas as having something like a +25 or so in Ranged Combat.

    The game is geared toward high-powered heroic characters. If this is a concern, you might want to consider limiting character growth. It's really up to what kind of game the Narrator wants to run.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Parkersburg, WV, USA
    Posts
    22

    Aha...

    I think I begin to see, now...

    The stats for the core heroes (Aragorn, Legolas, et al); when they state +12 (i.e. FotR, TT Sourcebooks), that's only their ranks, correct? Ah, that makes it more interesting. So, Legolas was around +25 or so, huh? Okay, +17 isn't that out of hand, then.

    And, to answer your inquiry, yes, the +17 is with everything, not just ranks.

    So, the game caps at 12 ranks, huh? Interesting... Considering I just picked up the CODA rules in the past year or so, not surprising that I would miss a detail here or there. But, thanks for the info, Ineti, most appreciated,

    Addressing, rather, the penchant for high-powered characters, I must confess I frown. I prefer true grit to flash, any day. Has there been discussion (especially other posts) that have discussed the limitations on characters within the CODA rules? I much prefer heroes to toil true and deep for any reward, and they do, as well.
    "First, learn to use this," he said, indicating the boy's head. "Then, I'll teach you to use this," indicating the sword.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    3,208
    The stats for the core heroes (Aragorn, Legolas, et al); when they state +12 (i.e. FotR, TT Sourcebooks), that's only their ranks, correct?
    Correct. You have to add their attribute and edge bonuses. This is one issue I have with the FOTR and TTT sourcebooks--I think it would have been more useful to include a complete character sheet as opposed to a list of skill ranks and the like. Narrators are inherently lazy; don't make us do the math.

    But, thanks for the info, Ineti, most appreciated,
    Any time.

    Has there been discussion (especially other posts) that have discussed the limitations on characters within the CODA rules?
    There have been discussions here, on decipher's message boards, and on rpg.net's Open forum. Best bet would be to browse around and see what you can find.

    I recall reading about one Narrator who made starting characters lower-powered than the rules suggest. It was a good idea, and I'll probably do that in a future game. It was something like limiting starting characters to a max of 3 skill ranks rather than the standard 6 ranks.

  5. #5
    One thing I am begining to see also is that the "sicker" numbers simply allow Heros to hit more often with greater success.

    If they have a +15 total roll-mod...then they can concievably do multiple attacks and still have something "left over" for dodges and parries and even more attacks. Think of that sick scene of Legolas blasting the seven or so orcs in a single "round".

    Keep in mind that Parry is the best friend of any hero in CODA. A +10 total-mod charactr is just about garaunteed to hit a Defense reliant foe.

    Even Aragorn has a base Defense of like 12 or 14. Not to hard to hit. But if he parries, you are looking at him having a +15 (+2D6) minimum with all his Edges and Order Abilities.

    Odd...I just looked Aragorn up and they didn't give him any specializations for his Armed Comba: Blades skill.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Parkersburg, WV, USA
    Posts
    22

    Good initial idea...

    If we think about characters having a max of 12 ranks, then, seems a little extreme to be able to start out at 6 and hit the max within 2 advancements.

    I'm thinking along the lines that players need to start out extreme newbies and really have to sweat to advance, as if you're buying 1-for-1 advancements, you're going to hit 12 VERY quickly.

    Something like; okay, so we start out at 3 and we could impose a cap of 1 rank per advancement in any particular skill, forcing characters to spread out their points more and advance slower. That would still hit max by 9 advancements, but at least it isn't as severe as maxing out at 2 advancements.

    We could further impose a more stingy buying cost on skills, abilities, etc. Basically amend the whole buy chart for advancements...something to the tune more like 2-for-1, which would let them max out at 18 advancements, much more savory.

    Also, one house rule I impose across most of the games I play is taking Gygax's old 1E AD&D rules for disease, aging and so on, and impose these throughout a character's career.

    Furthermore, one system I'm going to impose eventually but haven't worked up the specifics yet is a system of "skill atrophy," perhaps even "attribute atrophy." When you don't use something, you lose alot of capability in it. So, let's say a character doesn't use his Track skill for over a month...he should then suffer a penalty, naturally speaking, correct?

    (I do realize this enhances the complexity of the system, but bear in my mind my group loves complexity as long as I have it worked out thoroughly prior to gaming...we've been gaming for many, many years)

    Thoughts?
    "First, learn to use this," he said, indicating the boy's head. "Then, I'll teach you to use this," indicating the sword.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    3,208
    Originally posted by Markraven
    Think of that sick scene of Legolas blasting the seven or so orcs in a single "round".
    You could come close to emulating that in the game without being overly 'sick.'

    A hero with Ranged Combat (Longbow) +12, with high Nimbleness, Quick Draw, and Swift Shot 2 could get 4 arrows off in one round using just the two regular actions and the extra two actions Swift Shot gives them.

    They wouldn't be able to dodge or parry (without penalty) or move, though.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Dark forest of Mirkwood....
    Posts
    17
    Concerning skill rank and advancements, we use a different method in your group.

    Basically your skill ranks cannot exceed your governing a tribute for the said skill.
    For example a warrior with Nim 9, cannot have more than 9 ranks on any combat skill (or on any Nim based skill for that matter).

    This makes it a bit harder to increase your skill to the maximum of 12. It doesn't solve all the problems but I think it helps a little.

    By the way the idea was taken from Shadowrun.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Posts
    176
    I agree with you that CODA characters have the potential to be rather overpowered--because the system is so flexible and customizable, it is a little easy to min-max. In some ways this "overpowered" potential is because the game is caught between two worlds--the mega-power, flash-and-dazzle movie world, and the much more mild book world. CODA LOTR tries to make it possible to recreate both worlds, with room for being "overpowered" as a result.

    Reining in overpowered abuses simply requires Narrator oversight and mature players willing to respect it. When I had a 1-advancement warrior rushing to Swift Strike, I simply said "no". When a 3-advancement warrior wanted to buy Swift Strike x2, I simply said "no". But ultimately the Narrator has completely under his control the most crucial factor: experience. Simply do not give out lots of advancements. CODA characters start out much more powerful, so they are strong and fun to play even as "beginners" for a very long stretch. And once a character hits 10 advancements, he pretty much has everything he really wants--anything beyond that is just gravy. So, in my chronicles, I view 1-10 advancements as the full life-cycle of a player-character. Once they get more than 10 advancements, I might as well have them go out an hunt a pack of fire drakes.

    I also want to say that I *really* like the idea of capping starting skill ranks at 3 rather than 6. That is such a simple, reasonable change! It doesn't complicate the system at all, it doesn't require a fancy rule-rewrite...it simply is a reasonable way to draw out skill improvement. Very nice!
    Scottomir's LOTR Game Resources:
    http://www.geocities.com/scott_metz/

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    3,208
    Originally posted by Scottomir
    I also want to say that I *really* like the idea of capping starting skill ranks at 3 rather than 6. That is such a simple, reasonable change! It doesn't complicate the system at all, it doesn't require a fancy rule-rewrite...it simply is a reasonable way to draw out skill improvement. Very nice!
    I like it too. I wish I could remember who came up with it. Credit where credit's due, and all that.

  11. #11
    I've always thought that whenever I run a game (I'm just a player), I'll limit maximum starting skill ranks at 3, and from then on, limit skill ranks by the number of advancements (perhaps with the caveat that players can pay double for advancements outside of that range).

    That way, a character must have four advancements before getting a skill at +4, five for +5, and when they reach 12 advancements, they're finally able to max out a skill.

    Naturally, I'll apply the same restriction to NPCs.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Parkersburg, WV, USA
    Posts
    22

    Experience

    I also tend to really get into crunching XP and I don't plan on following Decipher's rules at all. Decipher seems to give a lump sum at the conclusion of a particular goal; for my chronicles, I have NO HOPE of controlling these girls and guys enough to accomplish any particular goal in any sort of conceivable schedule.

    What I have always done in lieu of this is to use the following XP awards:

    1) You get XP points equal to the successful roll (modified) of any roll (test). The players love this, as they are more rewarded for their flashier skills, making them feel justified in their character concepts. This also keeps the warriors from hogging all the XP in a (traditional) fantasy RPG (although Decipher's lump system avoids this, it still isn't where I would like to be with XP awards).

    2) You gain 1 XP per mile travelled. I found this particular rule in the old MERP rules and hve completely fallen in love with it. It rewards travel and change of milieu, encourages the characters to "get out" and see the world. I also have been leaning towards only allowing them to spend this XP on skills like Lore (whatever realm travelled in) or Survival or such. Everyone seems to like the idea, so I figure that's what we'll end up doing.

    3) Other story-based awards, as appropriate. This is my catch-all and covers such things as the "last ditch shot from the back of the field to take out the big baddy" kind of thing, as well as covering great speeches, noble actions or deeds and so on. D&D was always pretty structured about doing this, but I think Scottomir said it best when he said that CODA had flexibility; I think that applies here. More work for me to balance awards and probably come up with them, but probably more rewarding, too.

    Scottomir's completely right, too, the CODA system seems to lean towards the flash of Hollywood with room to bring it back down to earth. I had posted a long time ago on the Decipher LotR forum that a certain scene in FotR wherein Aragorn charges the army of Uruk-hai...well, in my game, he'd be dead. But, the CODA system allows him to do this, because of the sheer untouchability of higher-level characters.

    I guess that's my concern, I'm guessing I'm just turned off by the flash of higher-level characters and it's up to me to adjust the rules to more suit our playgroup. Which is a bummer, but a little work never hurt anyone, right?

    But, I'd like to hear more thoughts on this...
    "First, learn to use this," he said, indicating the boy's head. "Then, I'll teach you to use this," indicating the sword.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Parkersburg, WV, USA
    Posts
    22

    Thumbs up Ineti, Eol & Jason Durrall

    I think between the two suggestions, we may have found a way here. To recap:

    1) Skills capped at 3, initially, or the value of their governing attribute, whichever is lower. Skill ranks cannot exceed governing attribute. (I really like this...there might also be bonuses for every advancement rank or two ranks...hmmm...)

    2) Increasing a rank is equal to the current rank, not 1-for-1. (I really like this, too!)

    Keep the ideas coming...
    "First, learn to use this," he said, indicating the boy's head. "Then, I'll teach you to use this," indicating the sword.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    11
    I like these thoughts. I'. hopefully starting a game soon and i might have to use these ideas to see where they go.

    and theBruce nice sig. took me a while to figure it out but then i should have guessed with a name like that

    Manty

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Parkersburg, WV, USA
    Posts
    22

    Signature

    Hehe, thanks~ FYI; the signature comes from the first act of "Braveheart," the Mel Gibson Scottish epic. And while I'm no terribly great fan of Mel Gibson or his work, I am a great fan of my own lineage (Robert the Bruce, in particular), and I find that particular statement (told by William Wallace's uncle to the young William Wallace after he lost his father) very nice, very indicative of the way I try to live my life. Thanks~
    "First, learn to use this," he said, indicating the boy's head. "Then, I'll teach you to use this," indicating the sword.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •