[Legend] Play Testing [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

Doc Roc

2011-02-13, 02:12 AM

The following is for archival purposes

Please take a look at the beta (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=190340)

I hand you a book. You run a game.
We talk about what went wrong and what went right.

Why should you trust me? I'm Doc Roc.
Starting 3/10/11. How does this sound?

We're starting early!

Presenting
The Raid (https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B8lf_LtvhqMlN2M1NzRmZWUtZWZkMS00YzVlLTk4MGE tZTgwOTRhZGE3ZmYz&authkey=CPm6qqMC&hl=e)
A oneshot adventure that your group should be able to complete in an hour or so. Combined with the tiny bit of errata below, this can be played straight out of the box, with little or no prior gaming experience.

Addendum\Errata

Errata: Ranged attacks
Ranged attack and damage rolls default to dex, not str.
Errata: Balsa-wood Bows
Lizardfolk bows do 2d6+4, rather than the noted damage and are no longer made from balsa-wood.
Errata: Jerry sucked.
Incantation is now:
As a standard action, you can either heal an ally or harm an opponent. You heal or harm for 2d4 hit points, plus your Wisdom modifier. This amount increases by 1d4 for each character level beyond 1st, for a maximum of 21d4 + your Wisdom modifier at level 20. Harming an opponent with your incantation requires a successful ranged attack roll. This ability is a spell-like ability and can be modified with any feats that affect spell-like abilities. For purposes of this ability, "ally" is defined as "anyone you choose to heal" and "opponent" is defined as "anyone you choose to harm."
Incantation is not a ray or an orb and you do not add your Dexterity bonus to damage rolls, because it is not a weapon attack.
As a result, Jerry's damage is increased appropriately. He is now a heal&&inflictbot instead of just a healbot.

6.5 Combat Maneuvers

Bull Rush
A bull rush is a rapid assault designed to force an enemy out of your way or into an exposed position. As a standard action, you can advance into an opponent’s space (provoking an attack of opportunity), then attempt to push the opponent 5 feet in any direction. The opponent can make either a Fortitude or Reflex save to resist (DC 10 + ½ your level + your Strength modifier). A successful save means that your opponent remains in place and you return to the space in which you started. A failed save means that you successfully push your opponent.

If you have not used your move action, you may continue to push your opponent up to half of your normal move distance, in addition to the initial 5 feet.

Charge
A charge is a straight-line movement ending in a melee attack. As a standard action, you may move up to your speed in a straight line and make a single melee attack (you gain no additional attacks from high BAB or effects that grant additional attacks). Any obstruction in a straight-line path prevents you from charging (although you could maneuver to a straight-line path, if one exists, with your move action).

Your charge attack, and any other attacks for 1 round (such as attacks of opportunity), gains a +2 bonus to hit. However, charging inflicts a -2 penalty to Armor class for 1 round.

Defensive Fighting
As a free action, before using a standard action to attack on your turn, you may declare that you are fighting defensively. Apply a penalty equal to or less than your Base Attack Bonus on all melee attack rolls that you make for 1 round, and apply that number as a dodge bonus to Armor Class for 1 round.

You may not fight defensively and power attack in the same round. You must make at least 1 melee attack roll on your turn to gain the benefit of fighting defensively.

Deadly Aim
As a free action, before using a standard action to attack on your turn, you may declare that you are activating Deadly Aim. Apply a penalty equal to or less than your Base Attack Bonus on all ranged attack rolls that you make for 1 round, and apply that number as a bonus to all ranged damage rolls that you make for 1 round.

You may not use deadly aim and take cover in the same round.

Disarm
As a standard action, make a single melee attack. The attack does normal damage. In addition, on a successful roll, your opponent must make a Reflex save (DC 10 + ½ your level + your Strength modifier) or drop any items that it is currently holding (such as weapons, wands, or grenades). If you still have a move action, you could use it to pick up a single item, as usual.

Power Attack
As a free action, before using a standard action to attack on your turn, you may declare that you are Power Attacking. Apply a penalty equal to or less than your Base Attack Bonus on all melee attack rolls that you make for 1 round, and apply twice that number as a bonus to all melee damage rolls that you make for 1 round.

You may not power attack and fight defensively in the same round.

Take Cover
As a free action, before using a standard action to attack on your turn, you may declare that you are taking cover. Apply a penalty equal to or less than half your Base Attack Bonus (minimum 1) on all ranged attack rolls that you make for 1 round, and apply that number as a dodge bonus to Armor Class for 1 round.

You may not activate Deadly Aim and take cover in the same round. You must make at least 1 ranged attack roll on your turn to gain the benefit of taking cover.

Trip
As a standard action, make a single melee attack. The attack does normal damage. In addition, on a successful attack roll, your opponent must make a Reflex save (DC 10 + ½ your level + your Strength modifier) or become [prone].

Prone
The [prone] condition referenced in the spoiler is the same as the SRD.

Attack Action
While not strictly relevant to The Raid, an attack action is a full attack as a standard action.

Feign Death
You learn to “play dead”, but with such precision and skill that you can fool even the keenest eye.
Prerequisites: None
Benefit: As an immediate action, you may attempt to feint. Instead of simply denying a target their Dex Bonus on your next attack, you also attempt to convince all observers that you are dead. You enter a state where it is very difficult to establish your life-signs, but you remain conscious. This effect has a duration of two minutes per character level, and you also fool divination effects of 4th level or lower. When this state is ended, you cannot attempt it again for 5 minutes
Special: Only characters of 1st or 3rd level may take this ability.

(The spoilered content is (c) 2011 Penny Dreadful Gaming. Don't be a jerk.)

Less Deadly Combat

While a lot of people strongly prefer somewhat swingy combat at first level, we understand that this is not a universal preference. As a result, the final beta will include some alternative rules for 1st level HP. If you'd like to use these for the One-Shot, here are the HP totals:

GMs Only

Mirana: 26 hp
Lizardfolk: 23 hp
Anathrix: 49 hp
Akasha: 22 hp
Idra: 23 hp
Mako: 18 hp
Jerry: 16 hp

Formula: (2xClass HP) + Con

Design Philosophy (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10434358&postcount=153)

Where To Play
C_M's PbP (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=188556)
T_S's PbP (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=188325)
Soon:
The Never-ending Dungeon
Your Living Room

Claudius Maximus

2011-02-13, 01:07 PM

Sounds awesome. I'm glad to hear you haven't abandoned this project!

I don't have a group willing to run this in person, but I would definitely consider a pbp game.

Dingle

2011-02-13, 02:31 PM

want to give us a link? or should the system be a surprise?
also, date format is slightly confusing.

Cieyrin

2011-02-13, 03:47 PM

want to give us a link? or should the system be a surprise?
also, date format is slightly confusing.

March 10th, 2011, so about 3 weeks-month from now. As for the system, Legend's Alpha release is in Doc's sig. It's basically a 3.5 rewrite attempting towards balance while still being fun to play and optimize. I think what's there so far last I read it was good fun, so the Penny Dreadfuls were at least moderately successful in that endeavor. :smallwink:

I'd be up for a PbP playtest and I could possibly run a playtest at my local gameshop. Let me know, 'eh? :smallbiggrin:

Spartacus

2011-02-13, 03:57 PM

Why can't the US use the same date system as the rest of the world?

Also, awesome.

Xefas

2011-02-13, 03:59 PM

Why can't the US use the same date system as the rest of the world?

It would conflict with our imperial measurements.

Glimbur

2011-02-13, 04:01 PM

I should be able to run a session on March 12th. Audience will be a gaming club who plays a variety of games: some play 3.5, some play Nobilis, many play a modified oWoD Vampire LARP, and other games also.

I have a moderate (~6 months) amount of experience running 3.5 and about 1.5 years of playing 3.5. I have run and played games of Wuthering Heights and Street Fighter. I have played one game of Savage Worlds (Necessary Evil), about a year of the previous edition of GURPS, and a one-shot of Lady Blackbird.

Doc Roc

2011-02-13, 04:44 PM

arguskos

2011-02-13, 04:45 PM

Glim, the day you need to justify yourself to me is the day I put down my dice.

Legend, as mentioned, is something of a long running pet project. It began as an experiment aimed at finding out if high power could still be high fun, and exploded into a community project. Then I graduated from college, got a job, and went AWOL. And now, I am back. And Legend is back too.
Really? Congrats are probably in order and whatnot.

Also, it's good to see you back, Doc. Not much has changed. I miss reading the ToS though.

EDIT: As to this, I'd absolutely love to help out with this, but my group doesn't have the time IRL to run anything else, sorry man.

Claudius Maximus

2011-02-13, 04:55 PM

Well if I cromble together a pbp game, you're welcome in it.

Are you okay with pbps Jake? Or are you more interested in the actual tabletop experience of the system?

Spartacus

2011-02-13, 05:03 PM

Or heck, you can play something that is similar to tabletop online.

Xiander

2011-02-13, 05:22 PM

This is certainly interesting.

At the very least i will monitor this thread with interest.

Doc Roc

2011-02-13, 08:31 PM

Tasty data is tasty data.
@X: There's a alpha-ish thing in my sig. We've come a very long way since then.

Kylarra

2011-02-13, 08:35 PM

Man if I had a playgroup that wasn't already bogged down with different games, I'd be all over this. I will be watching the thread though.

Rasman

2011-02-13, 08:42 PM

wow...your monk seems...kinda awesome...are you taking critiques now or are you waiting for the playtest?

Doc Roc

2011-02-13, 08:46 PM

unosarta

2011-02-13, 08:50 PM

I would absolutely love to playtest this, but I might be leaving for Japan by mid-June, for six weeks. Would this interfere with any playtesting schedules?

Nohwl

2011-02-13, 08:57 PM

i might be able to run a one shot or something, but not a real long campaign.

Noedig

2011-02-13, 09:19 PM

Looks quite fun from the way the classes are described, though the tracks are confusing. Do you get all of them, or pick one?

Rasman

2011-02-13, 09:34 PM

Our monk has been passed down from generations of kung fu movies!

I mean.... Critiques are lovely, but I recommend seeing how it plays for you before you think too seriously about it. My time away has made me realize that taste and subjective experience are just as important as the math behind a given class. That said, I think the old Test of Spite threads have some monk battles still accessible in them, but we found that in the traditional tier system, it often performed to the lower end of tier two, so it's a pretty high-powered rendition. Any thoughts help.

well, there's only really one Monk ability that bothers me, it's their Phoenix Rebirth. I understand a need for limitation and such, but only being able to do that 1 round after death isn't always an option nor does it always make sense. I mean, if it really is inspired by the old Kung-Fu movies then the hero, after he's been beaten, doesn't get up right away. It typically takes a minute, or one BBEG Monologue, to happen. Granted, it's a capstone ability, but all in all, there are too many ways to cheese your way around a Monk getting to use it, i.e. sticking him on a pike, throwing him into a flowing river of lava, etc, etc. Frankly, if this is supposed to be the "Hero gets back up to save the day" type of ability, it needs to have SOME answer to "Well I do this so you can't do this" in it.

I do really like the choices you get at 4th and 7th levels though, they add a bit more to the customization you seem to be trying to give to all the classes, rather than having to fit a cookie cutter mold.

Glimbur

2011-02-13, 09:34 PM

Will this be a one-shot module with pregenerated characters? That would standardize your results, but would not show you what other people would build with the rule set. It has the overwhelming advantage of being easier to run, which should increase your data volume significantly.

Doc Roc

2011-02-13, 09:56 PM

I can breathe life into a one-shot, and also permit people to just frolic. Once you have the book, you do whatever, and report back. I'll try to make life as fun as I can for you guys. My job, neh?

re: PRebirth:
You can always lengthen the permitted delay. It might be worth adding the "at least one round" clause in, but we felt that it was best to think about it as a combat ability. Besides, at that level, you are no longer the grasshopper. You are the one who sings a song of death with his fists. You are death given flesh. More importantly, all abilities need counters. Being tossed in lava isn't actually guaranteed to hurt you at all, but it shows that the villain at least did some research!
:)

Looks quite fun from the way the classes are described, though the tracks are confusing. Do you get all of them, or pick one?

Hoo-boy. That's a complex question which I hope to answer better within the system itself come beta-time. Paladin gets one and picks two, monk has some choices, rogue likewise gets one and picks two, and then some classes like Barbarian get a preset load-out with a higher synergy between abilities as a reward. It bears mention that there are feats which allow you to swap tracks, but I don't think those made it into the alpha in a meaningful way.

Gralamin

2011-02-13, 10:38 PM

As usual, I'll be around for critique and playtesting. I think I have an upcoming one shot in that time anyway :smallbiggrin:.

Jarian

2011-02-13, 10:50 PM

Well if I cromble together a pbp game, you're welcome in it.

*grabs you by the shoulders and shakes you while staring intently*

YOU MUST LET ME PLAY IN THIS. YOU MUST.

Okay, dialing back the crazy now. But seriously, do want.

Noedig

2011-02-13, 10:52 PM

I'd totally play this btw. Somehow managed not to mention that in my first post.

Spartacus

2011-02-13, 11:06 PM

Just noting that this project in its current form heavily deserves its title as "Alpha". Basically, the classes are really well fleshed out, but even they are liable to changes and reworks, the races for example have lines like "Bonus feat: X, Y or Z" and many sections read "Blah, blah do this later" or "Flavour Text goes here".

Bear with us, this is just to see if there is interest. An actual playable form will not be available for a little bit of time still.

EDIT: Related (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=10370679#post10370679)

Temet Nosce

2011-02-14, 12:06 AM

I don't have time presently (another campaign is just starting), but I might be willing to do this at some point in the next few months.

Amphetryon

2011-02-14, 11:54 AM

I would be more willing to help if my current group's mentality were a little less "You have Spring Attack? OMG that's teh b0rkenest!!!!111eleventy-one"

Something tells me Legend's presumptive power curve would confuse and possibly frighten them.

Also, welcome back to GitP and all that.

grimbold

2011-02-14, 12:52 PM

wait is the book digital or will we have to purchase it?

mrcarter11

2011-02-14, 01:07 PM

I'm all in for PbP playtesting..

Doc Roc

2011-02-14, 01:08 PM

wait is the book digital or will we have to purchase it?

Digital, and free for playtesters. While minecraft has been very successful at charging for beta access, I'm a bit uncomfortable with it as a programmer and a writer.

mrcarter11

2011-02-14, 01:09 PM

That is great news.. I was hoping it'd be free to try. But honestly, is there any chance of us getting a PbP game of this going..

Doc Roc

2011-02-14, 01:11 PM

Looks pretty high. I won't be running it. I'm a terrible irresponsible slob when it comes to PBP games.

mrcarter11

2011-02-14, 01:18 PM

I'm generally in anywhere from 7-11 PbP games, as PC's or DM's.. Question, so is wealth gonna be eliminated?

Doc Roc

2011-02-14, 01:23 PM

Wealth, M, but not as we know it.

mrcarter11

2011-02-14, 01:42 PM

So magic items representing wealth then? Because that sounds like a good system.

Claudius Maximus

2011-02-14, 01:46 PM

Yeah the wealth and guild systems are looking pretty slick, from what I know of them.

Anyway it turns out that some other bunch of jerks just published the exact book I'm writing, so I'll either have a lot of free time or very little come March, depending on what I'm doing about that.

But I will assure you that if I do start a pbp, then by God, I will be the last one standing. You wouldn't have to worry about flakery from me.

mrcarter11

2011-02-14, 02:00 PM

Well I'm quite excited to see it all.. And I know it's off topic, but what book was it?

ex cathedra

2011-02-14, 02:04 PM

Looks pretty high. I won't be running it. I'm a terrible irresponsible slob when it comes to PBP games.

You? Irresponsible when it comes to PBP games? What could give anyone that impression. :smallwink:

And again, Jake, nice to see you back.

Anyway it turns out that some other bunch of jerks just published the exact book I'm writing, so I'll either have a lot of free time or very little come March, depending on what I'm doing about that.
Wait, what? I was unaware of this. You should enlighten me the next time we chat.

But I will assure you that if I do start a pbp, then by God, I will be the last one standing. You wouldn't have to worry about flakery from me.

Also, I'd naturally be interested in playtesting the system, if there's room for me.

Doc Roc

2011-02-14, 02:29 PM

I will make room for you with an axe, some rappelling gear, and an utter disregard for human life. Or more likely, asking nicely.

Cieyrin

2011-02-14, 04:07 PM

But I will assure you that if I do start a pbp, then by God, I will be the last one standing. You wouldn't have to worry about flakery from me.

I'd be battling you for that last position, long as my laptop holds together, as it keeps threatening to commit suicide these days...

I will make room for you with an axe, some rappelling gear, and an utter disregard for human life. Or more likely, asking nicely.

Or we have two PbPs, if the response is so overwhelming. I could be persuaded to DM a different group, if such a need should show itself, much as I'd rather play. :smalltongue:

Doc Roc

2011-02-14, 04:09 PM

I'm really sort of overwhelmed by the positive response. I'm hard at work on Econ right now, and it's getting quite close to finished. Looks like we're on target at last!

Xiander

2011-02-14, 04:27 PM

I'm really sort of overwhelmed by the positive response. I'm hard at work on Econ right now, and it's getting quite close to finished. Looks like we're on target at last!

No reason to be overwhelmed, the classes in the alpha looks gorgeous.

Incidently i might overcome my shyness an join the fray for at spot in a PBP if one was to occur.

Radar

2011-02-14, 04:53 PM

I will make room for you with an axe, some rappelling gear, and an utter disregard for human life. Or more likely, asking nicely.
*Gasp!* You wouldn't dare! :smalleek:

I wish I could snack on a shiny new system. Sadly I'm too boged down to set up a game theese days. :smallfrown:

Amphetryon

2011-02-14, 04:55 PM

*Glances furtively at Legend's full BAB offerings... chomping hungrily at the bit*

Eldan

2011-02-14, 05:15 PM

Well, the opinions you people voiced in the "no wealth" thread seemed sensible, so I'm curious about what you have actually been doing. I'll see if I can convince a few of the other GitP-Skypers to try it for a session or two.

Spartacus

2011-02-14, 05:30 PM

*Glances furtively at Legend's full BAB offerings... chomping hungrily at the bit*

They are the primary reason I really, really want to play this system. Wait until you see the items we've made, many of them help even more of the traditional problems with being a beatstick.

Eldan

2011-02-14, 05:36 PM

How much would it help to read the Alpha in Doc Roc's sig? You said there were quite a few changes since the one linked there, are the basics still the same?

Edit: I've looked over the Alpha now, and it seems to me to have the same problem as Fax's d20r and pretty much all the other attempts to redo 3.5 so far have had: there's no class I'd really like to play.

In pretty much every system out there, I love playing the illusionists. The enchanters. The shapers. Why? Because I like abilities that don't tell you "here's what this ability does, this is what you can do." I like abilities that have many possible uses, that can be used creatively. I want my prestidigitations and silent images, instead of meteor swarms and lightning bolts and hitting things with swords.
And I realize, of course, that those are a nightmare to balance, and perhaps never will be, in D&D. But I can dream, can I?

And yet, I still love 3.5, and I'll probably always love it more than any other system. Haven't seen any systems that appealed nearly as much to me.

Doc Roc

2011-02-14, 05:52 PM

Well, they're a bit messy, and they've changed a good deal. In. The alpha, a lot of care was taken to make them relatively compatible with 3.5/3.75. I don't think it will hurt, and it is loosely indicative of the shape of the classes in Legend.

Noedig

2011-02-14, 07:10 PM

I say we knife fight for the open spots in the PbP.

ex cathedra

2011-02-14, 07:57 PM

Edit: I've looked over the Alpha now, and it seems to me to have the same problem as Fax's d20r and pretty much all the other attempts to redo 3.5 so far have had: there's no class I'd really like to play.

In pretty much every system out there, I love playing the illusionists. The enchanters. The shapers. Why? Because I like abilities that don't tell you "here's what this ability does, this is what you can do." I like abilities that have many possible uses, that can be used creatively. I want my prestidigitations and silent images, instead of meteor swarms and lightning bolts and hitting things with swords.

Like it says on the tin, these are the non-casting classes. That doesn't imply that the handful of classes listed on the alpha are the extent of the options that will ever be available, just that this is, in fact, in alpha. Working out the kinks of the current system is preferable to adding more untested material, don't you think?

Doc Roc

2011-02-14, 08:07 PM

Casters are: shaman, skald, sage, tactician. They should make it into the beta!

Nohwl

2011-02-14, 09:19 PM

ok, looks like i'll be able to run a one shot.

Land Outcast

2011-02-14, 09:33 PM

I might be able to run a one shot... besides, I'm really interested in whatever you've done with items.

Eldan

2011-02-15, 03:21 AM

Casters are: shaman, skald, sage, tactician. They should make it into the beta!

Ah, well. In that case, I'll probably be back for the beta, when the game gets interesting.

Doc Roc

2011-02-15, 04:34 AM

So, see you in about three weeks.

mrcarter11

2011-02-15, 12:52 PM

Alright.. Can someone help explain the class tracks to me.. I mean, do you gain the features of every track? And then if you do the multiclass feat lose a single track and gain some other track from another class? Does that mean the only reason for the tracks is for multiclass?

Tyndmyr

2011-02-15, 01:15 PM

Man if I had a playgroup that wasn't already bogged down with different games, I'd be all over this. I will be watching the thread though.

Likewise. I wouldn't mind going over material for it or running a sim using it, though, even though I'm not certain I'll be able to actually schedule a playtest.

true_shinken

2011-02-15, 01:26 PM

I'm willing to run a playtest here in Brazil.
Is it print-friendly?
EDIT: Also, wasn't there a Warscarred class?

Doc Roc

2011-02-15, 01:34 PM

War-Marked. It was targeted at being a T1 melee class, and unfortunately for us, it was reasonably successful, the end result being a melee class near the top of T2. As a result, it's outside the balance range of Legend by a small but meaningful margin. Worse, many many people felt it was "too magical."

Naturally, as the creative lead for it, I thought this was bullpucky, because it was perfect. Some bias is inevitable. ;)

Alright.. Can someone help explain the class tracks to me.. I mean, do you gain the features of every track? And then if you do the multiclass feat lose a single track and gain some other track from another class? Does that mean the only reason for the tracks is for multiclass?

Hum, well, so, why don't we build a paladin? At least the bare bones of one!

So, I'm going to go with dwarf for my race. Like in Arcanum, our Dwarves are the technocrats of the base setting. So I'm feeling pretty good so far. I'll ignore stats for the moment. I want to play a paladin who's got a fairly normal set of abilities, but one of my friends is playing a caster. So I'm going to definitely go with the Bastion line of abilities, so that I can be a buff-totem. So that's one of my class tracks, the Protection track. Another is probably going to be Smiting, because I am a dwarf, and I want to take my beautiful super-sledge to something extra hard. Then I get the standard class track that all paladins get. At the moment, I don't feel like trading it away, so I may opt to join a guild later for a late multi-class, if I get enamored of something else.

By contrast, a Barbarian's build out is pretty simple. You just get the three tracks for Barbarians. You can, again, multi-class though. I'm actually in the same party here as our previous dwarf, so I'm going to go ahead and pick up a multiclassing feat to swap out my Resilience line of abilities for the Vitality line from paladins, so I lose the Path of the Ancestors track, take a feat, and gain the Renewal\Virtue track. And bam, we have a Dynamic Duo, one impossible in traditional D&D.

Now, the caster is pretty easy to you just [REDACTED]

mrcarter11

2011-02-15, 01:45 PM

Is the option to multiclass only available at level 1? Do you have to multiclass into with something currently in your party? I'm assuming the answer is no to both, but just doublechecking..

So let us say I pick the barbarian or the monk.. I get all three tracks? Unless I multiclass?

Doc Roc

2011-02-15, 01:50 PM

There is a late multi-classing mechanism, which we'll be unveiling for the beta. Don't worry, I hated the lock-in too. :)

There is only one class that doesn't get three tracks natively, and that's due to the fact that its abilities are too tightly coupled. It may get a rewrite to fit the general milieu, but most people haven't seen it anyway, so it's outside the arc of the discussion.

I expanded my previous example post a little, by the way.

mrcarter11

2011-02-15, 01:55 PM

Alright I'm pretty sure I got it all. I had thought I remembered someone saying you only picked two tracks to gain abilities from..

true_shinken

2011-02-15, 02:05 PM

Spartacus

2011-02-15, 03:28 PM

Alright I'm pretty sure I got it all. I had thought I remembered someone saying you only picked two tracks to gain abilities from..

Paladin, specifically, has multiple tracks of which you choose two, in addition to the track all Paladins get. Seeing as how Paladin was among the first two or three classes created (depending on if you count Warmarked as Legend, or just as a separate Penny Dreadfuls release), you may have heard of or noticed its advancement and it stuck.

Doc Roc

2011-02-15, 04:43 PM

It's still around, T_S, it just hasn't seen a ton of refinement lately. I can repost it in the H-brew section if you like?

Paladin, specifically, has multiple tracks of which you choose two, in addition to the track all Paladins get. Seeing as how Paladin was among the first two or three classes created (depending on if you count Warmarked as Legend, or just as a separate Penny Dreadfuls release), you may have heard of or noticed its advancement and it stuck.

A good general rule is that if things line up so that a class doesn't give you at least one ability at every level, we try really hard to fix that.

Interesting note: We're actually a bit ahead of schedule right now! :)

D-naras

2011-02-18, 04:37 AM

I can run a playtest at any point in the future. I have 3-4 players ready and waiting and they love trying new systems.

Doc Roc

2011-02-18, 04:35 PM

If I get the one-shot out to you guys by monday, how early can you start?

9mm

2011-02-18, 05:17 PM

Looks like we're on target at last!

How many times have I told you never to say that?

Doc Roc

2011-02-18, 05:22 PM

How many times have I told you never to say that?

To be fair, this time I said it after the game was playable.

term1nally s1ck

2011-02-18, 06:00 PM

Hmmm. I feel like being nice.

The NED is open for people who want to use Legend to playtest. I'ma say L2 and standard WBL for starting stats. I'll even DM them myself. :smallwink:

EDIT: Oh, and if there's any room with another DM for an online game I would really quite like to give it a play, too.

EDIT2: So, Tier 3 is the balance point, right?

I'll need to alter a few of the later floors, they'll be too tough I think.

Doc Roc

2011-02-18, 06:13 PM

Amphetryon

2011-02-19, 10:10 AM

true_shinken

2011-02-19, 10:42 AM

It's still around, T_S, it just hasn't seen a ton of refinement lately. I can repost it in the H-brew section if you like?
Oh, I'd love that.

imperialspectre

2011-02-19, 10:48 AM

OK, so, the Paladin retool that I'm most interested in testing (Heroica) desperately needs a partner to be really able to use his abilities, at first blush. Is there a brave soul out there who'd like to form that partnership?

I can put together a decent Heroica partner. I tend to think that Rangers and Barbarians make the best ones.

Glimbur

2011-02-19, 11:44 AM

If I get the one-shot out to you guys by monday, how early can you start?

Game nights are on Saturdays. I should be able to get a crowd with a week's notice so I could probably run the game on the 25th. I'm assuming 4-6 PC's? 6 is honestly too many but that is where I would draw the line.

AshDesert

2011-02-19, 11:54 AM

If I get the one-shot out to you guys by monday, how early can you start?

This looks really interesting and I'd be more than happy to help you guys test it. I'd be able to run a one-shot next Saturday with my normal group to help collect some data.

Land Outcast

2011-02-19, 12:09 PM

Yep, about next saturday would be it... It might be more helpful to you if we know which aspects of the system are the ones in most need of testing, too.

imperialspectre

2011-02-19, 12:53 PM

Doc Roc

2011-02-19, 04:07 PM

Since I'm writing the one-shot for you guys, I can tell you that the only things that can really be tested in that framework are the rules for combat and social encounters. We'll introduce some magic items, but I'm not entirely sure how one would test the economy system in the framework of a one-off adventure.

We're fairly confident in the class balance we've achieved so far, but that may be because it's our baby. Please document any flaws you find in it, so we can fix them now instead of being embarrassed later. :smallsmile:

Well, we could prove that our set of finite gear options is structurally equivalent to our finite set of character options on a single case-by-case basis, but that'd require roughly 800 manual comparisons by my count, possibly lots more... sec. Pardon me, likely to be closer to 9600. A lot of items are structurally similar to abilities, so we could probably cut it to 3000 or so...

I think it'd be better if we sat down and worked with you guys, our nascent community, to try and define solid benchmarks for what you expect from each level and each layer of items. Obviously, this will need to wait until after we start ze testzings.

true_shinken

2011-02-19, 04:09 PM

I think it'd be better if we sat down and worked with you guys, our nascent community, to try and define solid benchmarks for what you expect from each level and each layer of items. Obviously, this will need to wait until after we start ze testzings.
You guys should test this at Paizocon. Set up a table or something.

Doc Roc

2011-02-19, 04:42 PM

You guys should test this at Paizocon. Set up a table or something.

.... Paizo knows me.
Also war-marked is up.

Cieyrin

2011-02-19, 04:42 PM

You guys should test this at Paizocon. Set up a table or something.

Are they even accepting applications anymore? Ticket sales started not all that long ago and all, plus tables cost money. Better, for now, to test in a small community before testing the waters in a bigger lake, as it were.

EDIT:
.... Paizo knows me.

Did you ever get that spoon to Jason Bulmahn? :smalltongue:

true_shinken

2011-02-19, 05:22 PM

.... Paizo knows me.
Being the better man is good for business.

Doc Roc

2011-02-19, 05:28 PM

Being the better man is good for business.

Being challenged to a duel at ten paces is not, however.

true_shinken

2011-02-20, 08:59 AM

Being challenged to a duel at ten paces is not, however.
Of course it is, you just need to win. :smallamused:

Eldan

2011-02-20, 09:22 AM

It would be a great way to generate PR if you were actually challenged to a duel at a con.

D-naras

2011-02-20, 11:54 AM

If the one shot comes out tomorrow, I can propably run it Tuesday night here, with at least 2 players, maybe 3.

Amphetryon

2011-02-20, 01:59 PM

Inquiry: Outside of the beta release document, what feats are considered fair game for character creation? There's no verbiage I can find to make feats from elsewhere anything other than a DM call; in addition, some feats have skill requirements that the Legend skill system appears to have difficulty supporting.

imperialspectre

2011-02-21, 08:42 PM

Our intent is zero backwards compatibility, once Legend is released.

For playing around in a 3.5 game that just happens to use our classes, feel free to use feats in 3.5 material. It's not an accurate playtest, however.

There are at least 3 new feats being released as part of the one-shot coming out today. By the time that we go beta next month, we will have enough feats for people to work with - probably several dozen overall for the core material.

imperialspectre

2011-02-22, 02:23 AM

I apologize for the late post, but we finally managed to finish the rules supplement that goes with the oneshot scheduled for release today. Since both Doc Roc and I are on GMT-8, I'm calling this "Monday" still.

The Raid, a oneshot adventure that your group should be able to complete in an hour or so, can now be found here (https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B8lf_LtvhqMlN2M1NzRmZWUtZWZkMS00YzVlLTk4MGE tZTgwOTRhZGE3ZmYz&authkey=CPm6qqMC&hl=en). There isn't a great deal of narrative material in the combat encounters, but I'm very willing to add that if there's demand in that direction.

We hope to release a second oneshot next month, probably shortly after Legend goes beta.

Doc Roc

2011-02-22, 03:16 AM

Gentlefolk, start your pre-mades. I'll be accessible for questions, help, and similar through-out tomorrow. Just post in thread or hit me from one of my listed contact options.

term1nally s1ck

2011-02-22, 05:42 AM

If anyone still needs a DM to play under, I'll be running this as a PbP for anyone who wants to play. Just PM me, and I'll put you in the next group of 4 that apply.

Doc Roc

2011-02-22, 12:06 PM

To clarify, we will be releasing another Oneshot on the 11th, along with slightly bare bones beta rules.

Claudius Maximus

2011-02-22, 01:05 PM

I think I'll be willing to DM this too, once I finish reading over the rules and getting everything prepared. I'll probably have a thread up tonight, or at the end of the week at the very latest. I will accept applications via PM, just like term1nally s1ck.

This is assuming term1nally s1ck isn't just willing to run an arbitrary number of these. If so I guess I'd be open to run something slightly different, if you guys want to test some other aspect of the system or something.

term1nally s1ck

2011-02-22, 01:08 PM

*is willing to run an arbitrary number of these*

I don't mind if you want to run it, though...

Doc Roc

2011-02-22, 02:48 PM

*is willing to run an arbitrary number of these*

I don't mind if you want to run it, though...

W00t! I owe you many cookies.

term1nally s1ck

2011-02-22, 03:10 PM

Heh. Not gonna be around as much from the 12th for well over a week, so I'll not be able to run any of the next one til a bit later in. Figured I should make the extra effort for this one.

EDIT: Oh, and 3/4 for the first run. Anyone wants in early better move fast :smalltongue:

randomhero00

2011-02-22, 03:20 PM

I will if you change the name. It sounds too arrogant. And it should be something more unique.

Doc Roc

2011-02-22, 03:22 PM

I will if you change the name. It sounds too arrogant. And it should be something more unique.

Legend is just the working title, Rnd. It's named for the Legendary super-type which formed the core of the initial project and was originally SUPR, then briefly RTFM, before a stint as Project Legend. We've batted around all sorts of final names, and though I remain enamored of Diesel And Duchesses, I am informed that this is probably not wise, and presents a limited view of the game.

Also, does it really sound more arrogant than d20 Rebirth or d20 Evolved or True20? At least we didn't call it Legend: The Mythos.

woodenbandman

2011-02-22, 03:34 PM

I wouldn't mind running a campaign that I was planning in this system. You've got a reputation for being a badass min-maxer so I can probably be sure that the system is balanced, and having it on 1 book is a definite plus. Simple enough for the casuals and such. However I can't guarantee that it'll start on or near march 10th.

Doc Roc

2011-02-22, 03:38 PM

I need no such guarantees. :) A beta is a beta is a long running ordeal is a beta.

randomhero00

2011-02-22, 03:56 PM

Legend is just the working title, Rnd. It's named for the Legendary super-type which formed the core of the initial project and was originally SUPR, then briefly RTFM, before a stint as Project Legend. We've batted around all sorts of final names, and though I remain enamored of Diesel And Duchesses, I am informed that this is probably not wise, and presents a limited view of the game.

Also, does it really sound more arrogant than d20 Rebirth or d20 Evolved or True20? At least we didn't call it Legend: The Mythos.

Oh, ya, they're very arrogant sounding too, they just didn't apply to bring up in the post at the time.

I'd like to volunteer as a beta or alpha play tester.

PS hahahaha, please please tell me Duchess is from the cartoon "Archer"? (that's his codename, despite being a james bonde type).

I say give it a classic name (old sounding) like Kings and Magic. Or Sorcery and Arrows. Or Blades and Mages. Or Magic and Militia. Or Sword and Dagger. Or Mages and Dungeons.

Not saying any of those are winners, but you get what I'm getting at as far as format. It gives it a DnD proper sounding name without getting arrogant.

Doc Roc

2011-02-22, 03:59 PM

I did adore Archer, but I was just using it to imply a steampunk milieu.

Actually, Imperial Spectre narrowly prevented me from naming it A Game That Is Fun. So, you know, why don't we just table this for a little while, so that saner minds can prevail?

randomhero00

2011-02-22, 04:04 PM

But where did duchess come from?

Actually, Imperial Spectre narrowly prevented me from naming it A Game That Is Fun. So, you know, why don't we just table this for a little while, so that saner minds can prevail?

Don't worry. I have super sanity and a OCD. I will not let this rest until we or you are satisfied. Besides, I think I'll apply for your image consultant.

Mages and Blades: the Lost Scrolls
Implying the best game was out there all along, it just needed new individuals to find it.

Intrigue and Fortune: the Battlelands

Doc Roc

2011-02-22, 04:36 PM

But where did duchess come from?

Steampunk draws much of its heritage from early generations of bodice-rippers, terrible romance novels that often involved weird science and women of nobility. Duchess sounds better than baronette, here, so I went with it.

randomhero00

2011-02-22, 04:50 PM

Steampunk draws much of its heritage from early generations of bodice-rippers, terrible romance novels that often involved weird science and women of nobility. Duchess sounds better than baronette, here, so I went with it.

Awww just lost major cool points.

How about call it "The Loser Game!"? As a kind of ironic thing

Doc Roc

2011-02-22, 04:54 PM

My experience suggests that irony is best kept to fora and fluff.

term1nally s1ck

2011-02-22, 04:58 PM

I like Legend as a name, to be honest. Probably better to change the name later on in development if it turns out that something else fits the feel of the game better. As it is, and from what I've seen, Legend fits fine.

EDIT: And dammit, I was so hopeful when I saw 'Legend Alpha (non-casting classes)' change to 'Legend' in your sig. Teasing isn't nice :smallannoyed::smallannoyed:

Doc Roc

2011-02-22, 05:12 PM

I am so sorry! It's just that people keep reading the old alpha, and getting some erroneous ideas about some of our plans.

randomhero00

2011-02-22, 05:12 PM

I still claim image consultant and Jr creative executor....

Did I hear right we get it early march?

i'll be able to come up with much better names once I know a bit more about it. (really, everyone at the table always asks me for names.)

I tried to get a circus job as a stuntman that could come up with endless names on the spot. They didn't like it :smallmad:

imperialspectre

2011-02-22, 05:13 PM

Doc Roc

2011-02-22, 05:14 PM

Glimbur

2011-02-22, 05:42 PM

I basically have to write spell descriptions for about 100 different spells. Once we do that, we can release Tactician and Shaman, and possibly even the Skald, and we'll finally have a whole alpha release. Beta will come next month, as promised.

Please tell me spells come in circles or tiers or mantras or anything besides "levels". It's just too confusing to have 5th level characters casting 3rd level spells when it's not necessary.

Also, I could probably help with spell stuff.

true_shinken

2011-02-22, 06:04 PM

Please tell me spells come in circles or tiers or mantras or anything besides "levels". It's just too confusing to have 5th level characters casting 3rd level spells when it's not necessary.

Totally agreed.

randomhero00

2011-02-22, 06:18 PM

Gaining spell strength should be done through magic pill like crystals.

One hint, you don't swallow it.... Then we'll see who the die hard wizards are :D

term1nally s1ck

2011-02-22, 08:07 PM

Panic!

Power attack is as 3.5 Power attack, as it is not listed as changed apart from where it is on the characters?

imperialspectre

2011-02-22, 08:18 PM

I knew that was going to be a problem.

Power Attack is a combat maneuver available to everyone. I will post the list here and update the document.

(The spoilered content is (c) 2011 Penny Dreadful Gaming. Don't be a jerk.)

6.5 Combat Maneuvers
Bull Rush
A bull rush is a rapid assault designed to force an enemy out of your way or into an exposed position. As a standard action, you can advance into an opponent’s space (provoking an attack of opportunity), then attempt to push the opponent 5 feet in any direction. The opponent can make either a Fortitude or Reflex save to resist (DC 10 + ½ your level + your Strength modifier). A successful save means that your opponent remains in place and you return to the space in which you started. A failed save means that you successfully push your opponent.

If you have not used your move action, you may continue to push your opponent up to half of your normal move distance, in addition to the initial 5 feet.

Charge
A charge is a straight-line movement ending in a melee attack. As a standard action, you may move up to your speed in a straight line and make a single melee attack (you gain no additional attacks from high BAB or effects that grant additional attacks). Any obstruction in a straight-line path prevents you from charging (although you could maneuver to a straight-line path, if one exists, with your move action).

Your charge attack, and any other attacks for 1 round (such as attacks of opportunity), gains a +2 bonus to hit. However, charging inflicts a -2 penalty to Armor class for 1 round.

Deadly Aim
As a free action, before using a standard action to attack on your turn, you may declare that you are activating Deadly Aim. Apply a penalty equal to or less than your Base Attack Bonus on all ranged attack rolls that you make for 1 round, and apply that number as a bonus to all ranged damage rolls that you make for 1 round.

You may not use Deadly Aim and take cover in the same round.

Defensive Fighting
As a free action, before using a standard action to attack on your turn, you may declare that you are fighting defensively. Apply a penalty equal to or less than your Base Attack Bonus on all melee attack rolls that you make for 1 round, and apply that number as a dodge bonus to Armor Class for 1 round.

You may not fight defensively and power attack in the same round. You must make at least 1 melee attack roll on your turn to gain the benefit of fighting defensively.

Disarm
As a standard action, make a single melee attack. The attack does normal damage. In addition, on a successful roll, your opponent must make a Reflex save (DC 10 + ½ your level + your Strength modifier) or drop any items that it is currently holding (such as weapons, wands, or grenades). If you still have a move action, you could use it to pick up a single item, as usual.

Power Attack
As a free action, before using a standard action to attack on your turn, you may declare that you are Power Attacking. Apply a penalty equal to or less than your Base Attack Bonus on all melee attack rolls that you make for 1 round, and apply twice that number as a bonus to all melee damage rolls that you make for 1 round.

You may not power attack and fight defensively in the same round.

Take Cover
As a free action, before using a standard action to attack on your turn, you may declare that you are taking cover. Apply a penalty equal to or less than half your Base Attack Bonus (minimum 1) on all ranged attack rolls that you make for 1 round, and apply that number as a dodge bonus to Armor Class for 1 round.

You may not activate Deadly Aim and take cover in the same round. You must make at least 1 ranged attack roll on your turn to gain the benefit of taking cover.

Trip
As a standard action, make a single melee attack. The attack does normal damage. In addition, on a successful attack roll, your opponent must make a Reflex save (DC 10 + ½ your level + your Strength modifier) or become [prone].

The [prone] condition referenced in the spoiler is the same as the SRD.

Eldan

2011-02-22, 08:19 PM

Deadly aim refers to Fighting Defensively in it's second paragraph, you should correct that.

Doc Roc

2011-02-22, 08:21 PM

Deadly aim refers to Fighting Defensively in it's second paragraph, you should correct that.

Yeah, fortunately, that's just re-ordering. Added to FP.

imperialspectre

2011-02-22, 08:32 PM

Deadly aim refers to Fighting Defensively in it's second paragraph, you should correct that.

Thanks, fixed.

Doc Roc

2011-02-22, 08:33 PM

Thanks, fixed.

Fixed in the FP as well, no worries.

term1nally s1ck

2011-02-22, 08:37 PM

Whew...more stuff to give the players.

I can see already, though, early combat is going it be a lot more interesting than 3.5...

imperialspectre

2011-02-22, 10:40 PM

3.5 is rocket tag at 1st level too. They just lie to you about it.

Edit: I also want to note, just so everyone knows, that criticals happen only on a 20, always confirm, and always do double the damage you roll. So an attack that does 1d8+4 with a result of 7 does 14 if it crits.

Doc Roc

2011-02-23, 12:02 AM

We can fix it up some, but that might be worth making an optional rule. Some people like a game of boom-tag...

true_shinken

2011-02-23, 05:35 AM

I also want to note, just so everyone knows, that criticals happen only on a 20, always confirm, and always do double the damage you roll. So an attack that does 1d8+4 with a result of 7 does 14 if it crits.
Hm, so weapons are only distinguished by effort required, damage dice and damage type? :smallfrown:

potatocubed

2011-02-23, 07:16 AM

I've read The Raid. Here are some nitpicks:

1. What's the range on Jerry's positive incantation? The same as the negative one (25 ft)?

2. Brutal Throw lets you use your Str instead of Dex on "ranged attack and damage rolls" with thrown weapons, but you already use Str to determine damage on thrown weapons (according to the stat writeup). Also, Mako has it as a feat but his Str and Dex are both 16.

3. Flyby Attack should probably specify 'movement while flying'.

4. Is there any limit to the harmful conditions that a Medicine check can remove?

5. Ride: What does it mean to "access a mount of the next higher tier"? Do I just auto-fail to get on without the right tier? (And does that apply to tier 0 mounts, which currently require 1 rank to mount?)

6. Stealth: Is everybody supposed to have hide in plain sight? I also suggest that the combat use of Bluff is expanded to allow it (as a standard action) to remove or reduce the -5 modifier for hiding after attacking someone.

7. The lizardfolk have Feign Death as an ability, but I can't see any explanation for what it does.

EDIT: 8. In the OP, Deadly Aim refers to itself as power attack in the last line of its description. Also it refers to fighting defensively, which I assume is meant to be Take Cover?

I'll see if I can arrange an actual test later to see how the game plays out.

term1nally s1ck

2011-02-23, 10:07 AM

Oh, I didn't mean rocket tag, that's expected for low levels on this sort of game. One stab can kill a L1 character makes it seem more realistic.

I meant that there's more things that seem to be worth doing at L1 other than 'charge' and 'attack'.

Doc Roc

2011-02-23, 10:29 AM

Hm, so weapons are only distinguished by effort required, damage dice and damage type? :smallfrown:

Actually, they also have special properties and a few different classes. Don't worry, we've just reduced the number of terrible choices. Potato, I'll let Chris answer those questions, if you don't mind.

Besides, unless you pushed them really hard, crits were statistically meaningless. I may add a feat or item chain for Crits-Matter builds.

Squally!

2011-02-23, 10:52 AM

First time seeing this, looks interesting from what ive read (combat actions and the one shot) Id be willing to run this one week with my group, a buncha power-game breakers xD)

Keep it up!

imperialspectre

2011-02-23, 11:46 AM

So much feedback! :smallbiggrin: I was going to finish shaman and tactician spell lists, but that can definitely wait.

Hm, so weapons are only distinguished by effort required, damage dice and damage type? :smallfrown:

This question invites a little bit of background. D&D editions as early as AD&D based combat on heavy abstractions, the most important being Critical Existence Failure on 0 hp and a single "attack roll" representing potentially several chances to hit an enemy (note that prior to 3.x, a "combat round" lasted for an entire minute). We think that this is a key method of promoting smooth, balanced combat (a key design goal in Legend). Spoilered material is a lengthy explanation.

We believe that the highly granular weapon system that D&D has traditionally included (as a legacy from the history nerds/wargamers that started the whole thing) is inconsistent with this general principle of abstraction and harms gameplay in several ways. First off, I should point out that the huge table of weapons currently in the SRD doesn't serve any purpose from a simulation point of view - aside from silly mistakes like halberds not giving reach, the only way to make the difference between swords and maces matter in vanilla humanoid-vs-humanoid combat is to implement armor as DR, hit locations, and other changes that conflict deeply with the basic principle of smooth, abstracted combat.

But from a mechanical perspective, you would have to agree that there are very specific "good" weapons in 3.x from a general-purpose perspective (greatsword for THF, shortsword for TWF, comp. longbow for ranged), and there are a list of other "good" weapons if you want to optimize one tactic (spiked chain for tripping/AoO builds, kukri for crit builds, crossbow for people who just need something to do after they cast one spell and can't afford/don't need a second spell for that encounter). We believe that this trades off with RP because people who don't pick the "optimal" weapon for their character concept are being mechanically hurt for no good reason.

Finally, one mechanic in 3.x is simply FUBAR. TWF either offers attack penalties that put characters off the RNG for their attacks, or in situations where characters specifically optimize for TWF, they gain extra attacks at a high chance of hitting that each do a whole build's worth of bonus damage. There is no way, from a number-crunching perspective, to actually balance this - and since attack rolls are supposed to be an abstraction, the idea that you would get extra abstract attack rolls for holding a main gauche instead of a shield is really hard to justify.

The solution, in our opinion, is to standardize weapon stats so that broadly-similar weapons do broadly-similar damage. This lets players pick whatever weapon they feel best fits their character from an RP perspective, and be successful with it.

If you just want the info, here it is.

There are 3 kinds of weapons - Hold-Out weapons, Special weapons, and Main weapons.

Hold-Out weapons are concealable on one's person (not automatically detected if you carry them under clothes, concealable from active search with a Larceny check). They do 1d6 + stat + mods. Examples include daggers, hand crossbows, saps, and small handguns if they exist in a given setting.

Special weapons offer a character some kind of extra capability while using them. This capability offers improved access to a combat maneuver, reach, etc. They do 1d8 + stat + mods. Examples include longswords and handaxes (can be used with a shield, granting +2 AC and anything else you get from the specific item), flails (give bonus to trip maneuver), spears (give Reach property), and shortbows (can be used while mounted without the Cataphract feat).

Main weapons offer a character the ability to focus on smacking people around. They always occupy both hands. They do 2d6 + stat + mods. Examples include greatswords, longbows, and paired weapons with the same Range (such as a pair of matched shortswords, or a rapier and main gauche).

Finally, we do offer a sort of TWF, in which one can have a weapon in each hand, each with different Range, and use them separately. To do this, you simply split up your attack rolls between the two - so you can attack one opponent with your pistol and hit another in the face. At first level, you can do this if you take the Flurry feat or have it as a class feature; otherwise you can't do it until you have 2 normal attacks per round.

I've read The Raid. Here are some nitpicks:

Cool. :smallsmile:

1. What's the range on Jerry's positive incantation? The same as the negative one (25 ft)?

Yes. This is stated in the ability description in the appendix, but not in the statblock. Apologies; I did that to save space.

2. Brutal Throw lets you use your Str instead of Dex on "ranged attack and damage rolls" with thrown weapons, but you already use Str to determine damage on thrown weapons (according to the stat writeup). Also, Mako has it as a feat but his Str and Dex are both 16.

We do not use Str to determine damage on thrown weapons by default. By default, all ranged weapons get Dex to attack and damage. If I made a mistake (which is entirely possible, as these are the first official Legend statblocks), please tell me where it is so I can fix it. :)

Mako's feat is a mistake; I decided on a different approach for getting him combat damage and neglected to re-select the feat. I will change it when I update and re-post The Raid (probably when beta is done). For now, let's just assume that the person who built Mako isn't very good at optimization. :smalleek:

3. Flyby Attack should probably specify 'movement while flying'.

Probably. Good catch.

4. Is there any limit to the harmful conditions that a Medicine check can remove?

I should probably specify that it can't remove the "dead" and "unconscious" conditions - the former has a high fixed DC, and the latter involves healing the person in question. At present, the limiting factor is the high DC of removing a condition - if you can make that DC, we're fine with you removing the condition in question.

5. Ride: What does it mean to "access a mount of the next higher tier"? Do I just auto-fail to get on without the right tier? (And does that apply to tier 0 mounts, which currently require 1 rank to mount?)

We haven't fully written up mounts yet, but the intent is that the ride skill does two things. First off, if you don't have the Ride prerequisite, you can never use a mount in combat. Second, we assume that item vendors, divine patrons, and similar folks can tell if you know how to ride, and don't tend to let you have items that count as a mount (there's one already, and we intend to release several others with beta).

Basically, since Ride checks are required to make proper use of a mount (mount-specific abilities are in the item description, not the skill description), we feel that it's better for everyone to make sure that players don't do something that will only screw their character over. So we enforce a mechanical "you must be this tall" sign.

6. Stealth: Is everybody supposed to have hide in plain sight? I also suggest that the combat use of Bluff is expanded to allow it (as a standard action) to remove or reduce the -5 modifier for hiding after attacking someone.

The whole point of being able to hide quickly is that if someone is watching you, you can find cover and get away somehow. In that sense, we think that everyone should always have had HiPS, and that Hide in 3.5 was largely broken as-written.

I'm not sure about the Bluff idea; it might be helpful, but wasting a whole round to make sure that you can hide could really hurt more than it helps in combat. I'll bring it up for discussion. Thanks for the suggestion. :smallsmile:

7. The lizardfolk have Feign Death as an ability, but I can't see any explanation for what it does.

It's a feat that lets you play dead. I'm pretty sure Jake was making a WoW reference or something when he added it. Feat description is spoilered below.

Feign Death
You learn to “play dead”, but with such precision and skill that you can fool even the keenest eye.
Prerequisites: None
Benefit: As an immediate action, you may attempt to feint. Instead of simply denying a target their Dex Bonus on your next attack, you also attempt to convince all observers that you are dead. You enter a state where it is very difficult to establish your life-signs, but you remain conscious. This effect has a duration of two minutes per character level, and you also fool divination effects of 4th level or lower. When this state is ended, you cannot attempt it again for 5 minutes
Special: Only characters of 1st or 3rd level may take this ability.

EDIT: 8. In the OP, Deadly Aim refers to itself as power attack in the last line of its description. Also it refers to fighting defensively, which I assume is meant to be Take Cover?

Yeah, several people have pointed this one out. It's fixed now in the main document; I'll fix it in the oneshot document when it's up for a repost.

I'll see if I can arrange an actual test later to see how the game plays out.

Thank you very much. :smallsmile:

Edit:

First time seeing this, looks interesting from what ive read (combat actions and the one shot) Id be willing to run this one week with my group, a buncha power-game breakers xD)

Keep it up!

Please break this game. Show us how you did it, and we'll make sure it's a bug, not a feature. We appreciate constructive criticism, and the best kind is actual tests that show failure modes.

Eldan

2011-02-23, 11:52 AM

From that perspective on combat abstraction, which isn't a bad idea, I think, wouldn't it just be better to make very, very broad categories of weapons like:

Light weapon: 1d4 damage
One-handed weapon: 1d6 damage
Two-handed weapon: 1d10 damage

And then add things on, like:
Disarming: +2 on disarm checks
Heavy: increase damage die one step
Tripping: can trip
Reach: +5ft. reach

Martial: choose one ability
Exotic: choose two abilities

Choose your kind of damage (bludgeoning, slashing, piercing), give the weapon an appropriate name, done?

Rouge Iz Tarp!

2011-02-23, 12:24 PM

It's a feat that lets you play dead. I'm pretty sure Jake was making a WoW reference or something when he added it. Feat description is spoilered below.

Feign Death
You learn to “play dead”, but with such precision and skill that you can fool even the keenest eye.
Prerequisites: None
Benefit: As an immediate action, you may attempt to feint. Instead of simply denying a target their Dex Bonus on your next attack, you also attempt to convince all observers that you are dead. You enter a state where it is very difficult to establish your life-signs, but you remain conscious. This effect has a duration of two minutes per character level, and you also fool divination effects of 4th level or lower. When this state is ended, you cannot attempt it again for 5 minutes
Special: Only characters of 1st or 3rd level may take this ability.

In the interest of directing scorn where scorn is due, that bizarre feat wasn't his fault it was mine. Although he has worked on it, I wrote it. I'm actually just chuckling it made it as far as to get sneaked into this material.

Doc Roc

2011-02-23, 12:27 PM

In the interest of directing scorn where scorn is due, that bizarre feat wasn't his fault it was mine. Although he has worked on it, I wrote it. I'm actually just chuckling it made it as far as to get sneaked into this material.

Why? It's ridiculously useful! Particularly for mooks!

Squally!

2011-02-23, 12:46 PM

Why? It's ridiculously useful! Particularly for mooks!

rogues playing dead then sneak attacking ankles? :P

term1nally s1ck

2011-02-23, 12:48 PM

Group of soliders #1 pretending to die, waiting for reinforcements, then pinning the attacking group between 2 sets of weapons.

PCs pretending to die so that the mooks bring their bodies to the BBEG as proof that they killed him for the reward.

PCs pretending to die so that the other half of their group can bring them to the BBEG for the reward, take the reward, THEN kill the BBEG.

I would take that feat.

EDIT: Also, the opposite should be considered. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKhEw7nD9C4&feature=related)

imperialspectre

2011-02-23, 12:58 PM

From that perspective on combat abstraction, which isn't a bad idea, I think, wouldn't it just be better to make very, very broad categories of weapons like:

I think that you may be missing the point. The point of abstraction with weapon stats is that we make the game mechanics focus attention on the PCs' abilities and use items to give them cool stuff to do. It's not about dumpster-diving and twinking the perfect glaive-glaive-glaive-guisarme-glaive (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0136.html) that gives you just the right properties.

Incidentally, there has not yet been a decision on whether to keep bludgeoning/slashing/piercing. They didn't make it into the statblocks at all, and DR is probably going to show up only as part of certain items and feats.

Josie Whales

2011-02-23, 01:14 PM

Greenish

2011-02-23, 01:15 PM

Incidentally, there has not yet been a decision on whether to keep bludgeoning/slashing/piercing. They didn't make it into the statblocks at all, and DR is probably going to show up only as part of certain items and feats.I don't think several types of melee damage are necessary. Carrying a bunch of weapons to have the right thing to pierce the DR is sort of annoying.

This "attack action" mentioned, is it the equivalent of 3.5's full attack, or are the melee still stuck with full attack or move and attack? (The latter would be shame, what with the options for the move action.)

Josie Whales

2011-02-23, 01:16 PM

Incidentally, there has not yet been a decision on whether to keep bludgeoning/slashing/piercing. They didn't make it into the statblocks at all, and DR is probably going to show up only as part of certain items and feats.

I think you could do away with this without much issue. The only instances it ever makes sense is for example a metal golem not being hurt by arrows. I'm sure you could just say "this golem being made of Iron is immune arrows"

imperialspectre

2011-02-23, 01:34 PM

I was bored at work and stumbled upon this thread somehow.

WOW you are exactly right about how weapons should be categorized. I know there will be people who don't like it but the most important thing about weapon selection is giving the players the ability to make their characters into however they define "awesome" without unnecessary mechanical penalty. You have done this.

I downloaded the one shot and have read the rules. I have game scheduled this weekend without a predetermined scenario and will give it a shot.

I have to ask though, any thought to getting rid of the 1-18 ability score scale and simply having the modifier be the measure (ie str of 2 means +2 mod)? Perhaps you wanted to keep the option of rolling for abilities?

I'm glad you like what you're seeing!

We kept 1-18 for a few reasons. The most important one is that yes, we keep rolling for abilities as an alternate chargen option, along with a point buy system. The default mechanism is an ability array, because it's by far the most balanced, but people who want to do one of the others won't break the game. The other main reason is that the 1-18+ ability scale "feels" like D&D in a way that a simple numerical modifier might not, and takes very little effort to explain and get used to.

We obviously didn't get into alternative chargen mechanisms for a oneshot with pregenerated characters. :smallwink:

I don't think several types of melee damage are necessary. Carrying a bunch of weapons to have the right thing to pierce the DR is sort of annoying.

I tend to agree.

This "attack action" mentioned, is it the equivalent of 3.5's full attack, or are the melee still stuck with full attack or move and attack? (The latter would be shame, what with the options for the move action.)

An attack action is a full attack. We really didn't like the lack of mobility in 3.x, especially because you could move and make all your attacks as an AD&D fighter. Seemed like a ridiculous nerf for melee to us.

I think you could do away with this without much issue. The only instances it ever makes sense is for example a metal golem not being hurt by arrows. I'm sure you could just say "this golem being made of Iron is immune arrows"

We could, but I doubt that we actually would. At levels where the PCs are likely to encounter massive armored robots with crappy magical AI (which is what golems are), they're probably using magically or technologically-enhanced ranged weapons that could punch through fairly substantial amounts of armor. Golems would have high HP and possibly some kind of damage resistance, but it would apply equally to all weapons because they're just tough.

Greenish

2011-02-23, 01:44 PM

An attack action is a full attack.Excellent. :smallcool:

Doc Roc

2011-02-23, 01:47 PM

Excellent. :smallcool:

The PD monk served as a testbed for this, and we found it made combat far more interesting. So we made it universal. Added a note in addendum.

potatocubed

2011-02-23, 01:54 PM

We do not use Str to determine damage on thrown weapons by default. By default, all ranged weapons get Dex to attack and damage. If I made a mistake (which is entirely possible, as these are the first official Legend statblocks), please tell me where it is so I can fix it. :)

Bottom of page 12 in Raid, under the bullet-pointed list for uses of Strength, "damage rolls when using a melee weapon or a thrown weapon".

The whole point of being able to hide quickly is that if someone is watching you, you can find cover and get away somehow. In that sense, we think that everyone should always have had HiPS, and that Hide in 3.5 was largely broken as-written.

See, I'm not sold on this. As it stands, RAW, I can be standing right in front of someone in an open field and suddenly *poof* I'm hidden. I can even claim a +2 bonus for being immobile! It kind of breaks verisimilitude for me that hiding in an empty, well-lit room while being directly observed is as easy as hiding in a blacked out waxworks museum with an hour of secret preparation.

The Bluff idea was just because I can foresee people going "Look over there!" and hiding while their target is distracted. It would be nice if the rules allowed for that possibility, although I think your design principle may preclude it.

Squally!

2011-02-23, 02:18 PM

Is there anymore info up besides the pre-gen scenario? i think im going to run it tonight after our short 3.5 game we have scheduled.

imperialspectre

2011-02-23, 02:31 PM

Bottom of page 12 in Raid, under the bullet-pointed list for uses of Strength, "damage rolls when using a melee weapon or a thrown weapon".

Wow, I did not realize that. Melee is supposed to default STR, all range is supposed to default DEX. Fixed in the main document. Jake can errata it.

I'll take a more careful look at the Stealth issue and get back to you.

Is there anymore info up besides the pre-gen scenario? i think im going to run it tonight after our short 3.5 game we have scheduled.

If you have gmail, pm Doc Roc or me and we can share you the gdocs we're using for feedback on Legend core rules. I imagine we'll release a PDF when we go beta, like we did for the non-casting class release.

Land Outcast

2011-02-23, 02:43 PM

We haven't fully written up mounts yet, but the intent is that the ride skill does two things. First off, if you don't have the Ride prerequisite, you can never use a mount in combat. Second, we assume that item vendors, divine patrons, and similar folks can tell if you know how to ride, and don't tend to let you have items that count as a mount (there's one already, and we intend to release several others with beta).

Basically, since Ride checks are required to make proper use of a mount (mount-specific abilities are in the item description, not the skill description), we feel that it's better for everyone to make sure that players don't do something that will only screw their character over. So we enforce a mechanical "you must be this tall" sign. Besides divine patrons, this doesn't make much sense, I mean, perhaps there should be a note saying that you can use them, you may not have the ability to use them effectively in battle though.

The whole point of being able to hide quickly is that if someone is watching you, you can find cover and get away somehow. In that sense, we think that everyone should always have had HiPS, and that Hide in 3.5 was largely broken as-written. Well, perhaps it could be explicited that you must have some cover from the enemy/ies you're hiding from.

--------------
Love the weapon system :smallcool:

Josie Whales

2011-02-23, 02:43 PM

It would also be helpful if you can provide as many of the design goals/philosophy as possible. No game will be perfect so when reviewing its helps to know what the goals/intentions are going and then judging accordingly

Squally!

2011-02-23, 02:46 PM

If you have gmail, pm Doc Roc or me and we can share you the gdocs we're using for feedback on Legend core rules. I imagine we'll release a PDF when we go beta, like we did for the non-casting class release.

Where do you want the feedback posted at? also, the shared docs have str for thrown weapons as well xD

Doc Roc

2011-02-23, 02:47 PM

Errata issued. I'll look into setting up an IRC channel to replace the meebo room we've been using.

Doc Roc

2011-02-23, 03:10 PM

Besides divine patrons, this doesn't make much sense, I mean, perhaps there should be a note saying that you can use them, you may not have the ability to use them effectively in battle though.

You don't need to portray it exactly that way in game, but you could argue that this is our way of adding a note. Intentionally letting people build bad characters is bad.

Where do you want the feedback posted at? also, the shared docs have str for thrown weapons as well xD
Right click, and if you have edit rights, there's an "add comment" option. We like to use this to just place comments as close to the source as possible.

Squally!

2011-02-23, 03:23 PM

Errata issued. I'll look into setting up an IRC channel to replace the meebo room we've been using.

IRC would be awesome, also, noted about the notes! xD

imperialspectre

2011-02-23, 05:07 PM

Design philosophy stuff

There are a few specific design goals. We also have a couple fairly strong opinions about how tabletop RPGs should work. So, let's cover those two sections roughly in order of importance.

No Bad Choices

Jake alluded to this a few posts ago. Obviously, I'm not talking about player characters doing things that are objectively stupid. If you charge headlong into a room with 15 pit traps in it, you're probably not going to have a very long or happy life.

But when it comes to players creating and building characters, we don't believe in bad options. If you can come up with a character concept that's reasonably within the game's conceptual space, we want to provide the mechanical options for you to build it. This also means that if you're new and think that the idea of a wizard with an artifact sword is super awesome, we want to make sure you won't be Blessed With Suck when you build your character.

Implementation

We've tried to implement this in a few different ways. First, we created track-based character progression. Track-based character progression means that each character gets several discrete sets of progressions, with a set number of abilities each. A given character class, over 20 levels, gets 3 tracks with 7 unique abilities in each track (with a couple exceptions). A character gets at least 1 new ability at every level, without counting items or feats.

Track-based character progression is a Big Deal because it allows for a very simple "multiclassing" system. If you want a swordsman who casts spells, you can start with a Paladin or Barbarian (among other options) and trade out one of your default tracks for the Spellcasting track from the Shaman or Tactician class (I recommend Shaman, personally).

Second, we make a point of ensuring that character concepts that would ordinarily be weak have some kind of "fix" in place to make the concept viable. For example, while writing the demo oneshot, we found that elves don't make for good barbarians as written. Elves don't really tank that well, and the default barbarian class is all about eating damage and hitting even harder. So we came up with a feat that provides for a Dex-based barbarian ACF, called "Elven War Dance." It was too big of a project to finish for the oneshot, but it'll be in the beta.

Third, if there's just no way to make something work, we make a point to make it mechanically impossible to access. Mounts require Ride checks to use their special abilities, so we don't let you have mounts unless you train the Ride skill. Feats that require skill checks to use have a prerequisite of that skill, and feats that are based on a track ability require you to have that track. If we can't make an option not bad, we make it not an option.

A = A`

We all know that 10 = 10. It's not up for debate. If you major in theoretical math, shut up anyway. So what on earth are game designers thinking when they make a CR 10 wizard give the same experience and rewards as a CR 10 fighter, but present a massively greater threat to the party? CR stands for Challenge Rating, as in a numerical rating for the challenge the critter in question poses to the party.

So we decided that a creature of level A needs to be roughly equivalent in capability to any other creature of level A. A equals A prime. I'm not telling you that we've achieved this across the board, and there's certainly a distinction between differences in capability and differences in specialty, but this is a key design goal for Legend. If we screw it up somewhere, tell us so we can try to fix it.

Speed of Play

I'm a huge fan of 8-hour gaming sessions. I haven't been able to do one for a long time, but I'm still a huge fan. I'm not a huge fan of level 1 combat taking half an hour or 45 minutes for an encounter to resolve. I like combat. Nobody's ever accused me of being an RP fiend or something. But it's a lot more fun when it progresses smoothly and interestingly instead of taking forever just to make one trip around the table.

In much the same way, I imagine that most of you have sat through at least one torturously long dungeon-crawling session where either the skillmonkey took 20 on every square or else you rolled time and again and occasionally made Reflex saves and took some damage. That's simply not necessary. Our skill system is based on making one or two skill checks to solve a specific problem, and on one member of the party being able to piggyback everyone else on a skill check for environmental encounters (if you climb up the cliff, everyone else can get by with a rope). We also allow players to use one skill check per round in combat, both to prevent daisy-chaining skill checks to get absurd bonuses on something and to make it so you never make more than two or three d20 rolls on your turn.

We also have modified the combat system in some other important ways. We're including an option for saving throws in which players roll an "attack" against the saving throw modifiers of all creatures in an AoE effect, so that we have one roll compared to multiple numbers instead of requiring the GM to make 4 or 10 or 15 rolls for a bunch of mooks. We also eliminated all opposed rolls for combat maneuvers and similar checks, often substituting saving throws.

So those are the big design philosophy issues. We also have one other major consideration that, while it's not strictly a design goal, is a key consideration when we write material.

GM-Player Cooperation

The title "Game Master" does not convey lordship over all that one surveys. It's an honorific for the person who does the hardest job at any given gaming table. It also signifies the fact that if you're going to run a game, you'd damn well better have mastery over the game mechanics.

The bottom line is, tabletop RPGs are a cooperative activity. Gamers should cooperate and discuss problems in a framework of mutual respect and understanding. Yes, players should respect the work that a GM has put into designing encounters and a landscape for the players to play in. But it's also true that GMs should design worlds that their friends will enjoy playing in. This seems pretty obvious, but we've seen too many games where the GM was on a power trip or the players didn't respect the GM's work, and we want to make it clear that we didn't write a ruleset for people who insist upon jackassery. It's not worth it.

Greenish

2011-02-23, 06:42 PM

to make it so you never make more than two or three d20 rolls on your turn.Never? Those poor full BAB classes, getting to level 16… :smallamused:

Amphetryon

2011-02-23, 06:47 PM

No Bad Choices

Jake alluded to this a few posts ago. Obviously, I'm not talking about player characters doing things that are objectively stupid. If you charge headlong into a room with 15 pit traps in it, you're probably not going to have a very long or happy life.

But when it comes to players creating and building characters, we don't believe in bad options. If you can come up with a character concept that's reasonably within the game's conceptual space, we want to provide the mechanical options for you to build it. This also means that if you're new and think that the idea of a wizard with an artifact sword is super awesome, we want to make sure you won't be Blessed With Suck when you build your character.
Jake and I were just talking about how this works in practice, actually.

Doc Roc

2011-02-23, 07:08 PM

Never? Those poor full BAB classes, getting to level 16… :smallamused:

That's an interesting one. I suppose you could say we have some tricks and some alternative rules there too.

potatocubed

2011-02-23, 07:17 PM

Third, if there's just no way to make something work, we make a point to make it mechanically impossible to access. Mounts require Ride checks to use their special abilities, so we don't let you have mounts unless you train the Ride skill. Feats that require skill checks to use have a prerequisite of that skill, and feats that are based on a track ability require you to have that track. If we can't make an option not bad, we make it not an option.

While I see what you're doing, I think its implementation in terms of the Ride skill is... well, absurd. The short version of my case is this: you cannot make it "mechanically impossible to access" a horse without breaking verisimilitude.

Horses are mundane. They're everywhere. You're saying "No one will sell you a horse, you cannot steal a horse, and even if you could you are physically incapable of riding one." and the only explanation you have is 'it's the rules'. Furthermore, it's not just horses. You also cannot buy, steal or climb onto an ox, a donkey, a Shetland pony, a riding dog, or anything else mount-shaped. It also raises the question of 'How do characters learn to ride, if they can't get onto a mount without the Ride skill?'

Suggestion: Make Tier 0 mounts accessible to Ride 0 characters, but don't give them any mount powers other than 'getting places faster'. If they don't require any Ride checks to use, then they aren't a waste of time, right? You can have a 'Tier 0-and-a-bit' for things like heavy warhorses, which require Ride 1 to ride and give you special benefits.

Anyway, I also ran a playtest game this evening prior to Planescape. I'm going to spoiler my findings, because I don't want my views to colour anyone else's before they've had a chance to run/play it themselves.

I originally wrote a huge long rambling thing about the game scene-by-scene, but this is the condensed version. Most of the issues we encountered were to do with the character and adventure design, but some game elements popped up too.

Game Elements
Skill DCs are really low. With his +5 Medicine skill, Jerry is already within shooting distance of raising someone who's been dead for an hour, and in conjunction with the aid another action this gets pretty silly, pretty fast. Mako can do it too, although he needs a little more assistance. I think you might need to lower the quantity and values of bonuses you can get. (This was the primary 'bug' we found. Skill stacking is too easy in basic d20 for you to lower DCs like that, so you'll have to unstack things a bit.)

A full round of actions for a successful surprise attack is brutal, especially in conjunction with multiple attacks in a single action. In the first run-through of scene three, the dragon burrowed out of a wall and made two attacks at Jerry and Akasha. Full power attack/reckless strike, +6 to hit, 1d8+6 damage, killed them both instantly.

The lizardfolk bows do 1d8+4 damage, but Idra's bow does 2d6+3 despite being smaller. Intentional, or mistake?

Is there supposed to be a save vs. the negative energy incantation, or does it just do damage? We assumed it just did damage because 1d4-2 hp is nothing.

In the Smells Like Victory text, the bomb is described as a firebomb but does acid damage. Intentional, or mistake?

The combat was really swingy. The amount of damage being thrown around meant that going first was basically the key to victory. The PCs were unlucky if they didn't one-shot the lizardfolk, the dragon could reliably one-shot any of the PCs except Akasha, and the one time we tried it and the PCs got the drop on the dragon a full round of attacks from all of them killed it instantly.

That said, taking on a properly-sized dragon at level 1 was way cooler than taking on some flimsy wyrmling.

The electric blast the dragon has sucks. It does 3-12 damage, with results clustering around 7.5. Conversely, a normal claw does 4-11 damage with no clustering. A reckless strike claw does 7-14 damage, and the dragon can throw two of them. The odds of saving vs. the blast and not getting hit by the claw are roughly the same, so all the blast really brings to the table is half damage on a miss. The dragon's ability to burrow, and thus gain reliable surprise attacks, is far more potent.

Adventure Elements
Mole tunnels? Dead moles? Moles are, like, 20 cm long. Medium-sized dragons are about two metres plus tail. I assumed giant moles, but it was quite odd.

Mirana has no skills.

The two people who are injured beyond all hope in scene one seem a bit arbitrary. I mean, one of your pregens has unlimited out of combat healing, so why not let him use it? Saving a couple of commoners seems like a harmless enough thing to do.

The ambush at the crossroads wiped out the party about three times before they finally got lucky. Low-level ambushes are always deadly, and the pregens are not equipped for it. (See below.) Also, I think the detect DC should be 16 because the lizardfolk get the +2 bonus for not moving about.

The fight with the dragon actually went pretty well - the most satisfying result was when two of the party died, the dragon was badly wounded, and all the survivors retreated, the party members sprinting off with an armful 8of gold each. We could imagine lots of ways the game could progress from there.

We spent an hour playing it, during which we went through the ambush a whole bunch of times and the dragon fight three times. We only played the intro scene once.

Character Elements
Your pregen characters' Perception scores are nowhere near good enough to reliably detect the ambush in scene two. In fact, the only character with a decent Perception is the healer. Mako especially would be a good candidate for extra Perception because his Stealth ability is halfway decent so if the group wanted to use him as a scout, they could.

As Jerry's player pointed out, the halfling may as well be an NPC. He's utterly useless in combat, and totally essential outside it (for healing). His only weapon is a bag of rocks, which do half the damage of anyone else's ranged weapons, or a negative incantation which would suck for damage even without his feat penalty. You could at least give him a knife or something.

Doc Roc

2011-02-23, 07:32 PM

imperialspectre

2011-02-23, 08:01 PM

Potato: Thanks much for the feedback. There are a couple more things to errata.

1) Lizardfolk bows do 2d6+4. I had teh dumb.

2) Shaman incantations are going to be buffed shortly. There is no save for the negative version, as it's specified as a ranged attack.

3) Since I said the moles were "massive" in the flavortext, I've decided that the verisimilitude of "giant" moles is just too much, and I'm renaming the giant moles "Maulwurfen." Hope we don't have any native German speakers here, because they totally won't get it.

Eldan

2011-02-23, 08:03 PM

Among those who post a lot, I know at least four other native German speakers on the boards. And the plural of Maulwurf is "Maulwürfe".

imperialspectre

2011-02-23, 08:13 PM

Thanks. We'll go with that then.

Claudius Maximus

2011-02-23, 10:26 PM

PbP recruitment thread. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=188556)

I thought it would be relevant to link it here. Basically I'm going to try to go with the module, pretty much by-the-book.

imperialspectre

2011-02-23, 10:59 PM

New errata for shaman's incantation. It now reads as follows:

Incantation (Sp): As a standard action, you can either heal an ally or harm an opponent. You heal or harm for 2d4 hit points, plus your Wisdom modifier. This amount increases by 1d4 for each character level beyond 1st, for a maximum of 21d4 + your Wisdom modifier at level 20. Harming an opponent with your incantation requires a successful ranged attack roll. This ability is a spell-like ability and can be modified with any feats that affect spell-like abilities. For purposes of this ability, "ally" is defined as "anyone you choose to heal" and "opponent" is defined as "anyone you choose to harm."
Incantation is not a ray or an orb and you do not add your Dexterity bonus to damage rolls, because it is not a weapon attack.

So, for example, Jerry the Previously-Useless Shaman now has an "autoattack" for 2d4+1, and heals for 3d4+5.

term1nally s1ck

2011-02-23, 11:01 PM

...you mean 1d4 for each level past 1st?

And he'll heal for 3d4+5, but hey.

imperialspectre

2011-02-23, 11:05 PM

That's what I get for not double-checking. Fixed.

Doc Roc

2011-02-24, 12:31 AM

Added information based on some of the rules in the Beta for less swingy combat at first and second level.

Rouge Iz Tarp!

2011-02-24, 12:40 AM

Small aside: Have you ever ridden a horse with no prior training? Or tried, god help you, to saddle one?

I have. It's agonizing at best, and implausible at worst. I narrowly dodged a kick to the head. I do like Tier Zero mounts, for balance and credibility reasons, as well as for ease of play, but the skill required to ride a horse is pretty considerable, particularly if you want to get some place faster than walking or marching. Contrary to popular belief, this has never been a ubiquitous skill outside of fantasy.

Chris and I are chatting about the feedback now. We really appreciate it, but we had no idea if you enjoyed it or were just playing it out of duty.

I want to redirect the flow of the "horse" subthread, if I may.
I think this at it's heart an issue of reality vs. combat vs. adventure. Like the good Doc says, if you went out there and tried to grab a horse to run off somewhere, if all you know is "gettyup?" you'd be better off walking. But I think we can also agree that in many Fantasy settings, you can even put a dwarf (no offense) on a mule and it will be better than asking him to trudge to Mummysummer on his own.
The two issues we should really tackle in game are:

Should you travel realistically or adventurally with 0 Ride skill
How dead is someone on a horse they just got ripped off 3-fold buying when the highway robbers drive them into a ditch?

I feel the issue of Ride skill and Mounts is definitely unresolved, but I think at this point we should note the complaint and discuss this elsewhere.

Claudius Maximus

2011-02-24, 01:30 AM

If you want I could run my copy of the one-shot with the increased HP rule. We could compare the results with potatocubed's.

Doc Roc

2011-02-24, 01:43 AM

If you want I could run my copy of the one-shot with the increased HP rule. We could compare the results with potatocubed's.

That would be stupidly marvelous. Added yet more resources to the first-post.

potatocubed

2011-02-24, 02:43 AM

Chris and I are chatting about the feedback now. We really appreciate it, but we had no idea if you enjoyed it or were just playing it out of duty.

Oh, we had fun - I'm sorry if I come across as harsh or overly negative; I'm one of nature's critics. Also, it was past midnight and I was tired.

I should probably note that Mako's player really liked his firebombs. They were much appreciated, even if there was nothing much to set fire to.

Right now the game itself seems to work just fine (the occasional odd rules quirk notwithstanding, but who doesn't have those?). But. Your adventure doesn't showcase the game well, and all the unique elements which distinguish it from other d20 mods don't appear. Your 'no bad build' philosophy takes place mostly in character gen, which of course the one-shot doesn't have. Likewise, the unique magic system doesn't show up (much). All the combat manoeuvres are interesting, but the adventure doesn't really give you a chance to use them.

So! For your next one-shot, I suggest first picking out the parts of the game you want to highlight, then designing an adventure that shows them off to best effect.

And now I'm late. asdfghjkl

Squally!

2011-02-24, 12:01 PM

Didnt get to play last night, our 3.5 game ran later than expected, when the level 7 party decided to attack the BBEG who had just slain a dragon :P

Should have a game going either saturday or monday!

Gralamin

2011-02-24, 05:42 PM

imperialspectre, I have two questions about Idra I'd just like a confirm on.

1: Idra has "The Bigger They Are" as a feat. It appears to do nothing at level 1. Was this intentional?

2: Idra can attack from 440 feet away with her bow, and has a +4 stealth modifier (Assuming skills is Skill ranks + mod). If she attacks, she takes -5. But if she doesn't move she gets +2 (Net +1). Then she is at "Long" Range, which is X (3?) amount of range category away from melee. So while sniping and hiding she would have a d20+1+X stealth modifier?

imperialspectre

2011-02-24, 05:47 PM

1) You're correct, for now. I'm not sure that's going to stay that way.

The intent is to represent something players often do, taking a feat because they're going to want it before the next time a feat arrives. I think we may change it to 1 + 1 for each additional odd level, like sneak attack.

2) d20+4 is correct.

Doc Roc

2011-02-25, 02:58 AM

Started work on the second one-shot. How do we feel about Airship Murder Mystery? Or would we rather have Raid The Temple?

Squally!

2011-02-25, 03:29 AM

always a fan of airships! especially if there happens to be a character on there that is superstitious (sp?) of airships!
xD

Greenish

2011-02-25, 08:24 AM

Started work on the second one-shot. How do we feel about Airship Murder Mystery? Or would we rather have Raid The Temple?Airships!

I scorn heavier-than-air aviation. Scorn!

Amphetryon

2011-02-25, 08:45 AM

Just remember the sig. Speak with Dead (and similar) obviates murder mysteries. "It was Hrothgar. He killed me. Go get Hrothgar." :smallwink:

Eldan

2011-02-25, 08:48 AM

More Murder Mysteries.

I love them, and I always need more to steal clues from.

Greenish

2011-02-25, 08:48 AM

Just remember the sig. Speak with Dead (and similar) obviates murder mysteries. "It was Hrothgar. He killed me. Go get Hrothgar." :smallwink:It's not that hard to get rid of the bodies on an airship. :smalltongue:

Also, the corpse has to have a mouth to speak with…

imperialspectre

2011-02-25, 11:58 AM

Speak With Dead does not currently exist. Also, it actually isn't all that reliable for solving murders, as the corpse has to have known who did it before it was a corpse.

Eldan

2011-02-25, 12:37 PM

It's not that hard to get rid of the bodies on an airship. :smalltongue:

Also, the corpse has to have a mouth to speak with…

Would it be enough to cut out the corpse's tongue?

And outlawing necromancy takes care of that spell nicely. At least, it wouldn't stand up in a court of law anymore.

Cieyrin

2011-02-25, 02:33 PM

Would it be enough to cut out the corpse's tongue?

And outlawing necromancy takes care of that spell nicely. At least, it wouldn't stand up in a court of law anymore.

It's usually a cleric spell and a nonevil one at that. If you don't trust your local Pelorite (Burning Hatred aside) to find what poor dead Bob's wishes were, who do you trust?

Doc Roc

2011-02-25, 02:39 PM

Let's just say that, right now, the script does not call for much of a corpse.

Squally!

2011-02-25, 03:10 PM

Ahh, must be a tradition case of "Toss them into the propeller."

Doc Roc

2011-02-25, 03:11 PM

Ahh, must be a tradition case of "Toss them into the propeller."

You'll wish it was, I suspect (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vORsKyopHyM).

Radar

2011-02-25, 04:27 PM

You'll wish it was, I suspect (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vORsKyopHyM).
Still a Victorian Vigilante would be viable character. I think I need to push hours around and prod someone to DM this. The urge to play Sherlock Holmes||Axel Lindenbrock||Arsen Lupin is rising.

imperialspectre

2011-02-25, 04:39 PM

The murder mystery will also showcase the true capabilities of Legend's social encounter system. We've designed a system that we believe balances and supports RP and mechanics in a way that no other d20-based system does.

Doc Roc

2011-02-25, 05:43 PM

Still a Victorian Vigilante would be viable character. I think I need to push hours around and prod someone to DM this. The urge to play Sherlock Holmes||Axel Lindenbrock||Arsen Lupin is rising.

Sherlock Holmes |= Demon Slayer; // May not be type safe to implicitly convert between genres.

9mm

2011-02-25, 06:36 PM

You'll wish it was, I suspect (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vORsKyopHyM).

Oh, are we visiting Gabriel?

Radar

2011-02-26, 10:59 AM

Sherlock Holmes |= Demon Slayer; // May not be type safe to implicitly convert between genres.
Stop undercutting me with logic! (http://freefall.purrsia.com/ff1300/fv01257.htm) :smalltongue:
Besides, if Cthulhu can be punched out, bartitsu (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BGCMfprPJoA) or Queensberry rules boxing (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjKXFBkNE10&feature=related) should work on some mere demon.

Doc Roc

2011-02-26, 02:13 PM

That's a bitwise-or-then-store, not a bang-equals. Holmes and demonslaying are like tea and crumpets. A rare but joyous interaction in this modern era.

Claudius Maximus

2011-02-27, 04:21 PM

One thing that occurred to me is that there does not seem to be any reason at all not to trip or disarm with every attack at low levels. Is this intentional? I'd figure there should be something lost there.

Also, is there any 5-step mechanic in Legend? The Tactical Movement chapter is kind of blank.

imperialspectre

2011-02-27, 04:26 PM

Combat maneuvers do trade off for characters that flurry. However, you're right that for a lot of melee characters it is optimal to attack + activate combat maneuver.

I personally think that this offers an incentive to have a melee character in the party, with the inherent tactical advantages that ranged combat offers (particularly at low level). So it was somewhat intentional on my part when I wrote the combat maneuvers.

I remain open to input, since this is actually the first time it's come up.

I actually don't know if we have 5-foot adjustments. I guess we probably do, but I'll have to think about it.

Edit: After review on the post, Doc Roc concurs with me on the combat maneuver issue and states that we have 5-foot adjustments and that they offer key tactical options.

Glimbur

2011-02-27, 10:08 PM

I ran the one-shot as originally posted but with the buffs to the shaman (healing for 3d4+5 and damaging for 2d4+1)

Experienced D&D players took every character except the ranger. The market place was instantly taken off of the rails by the shaman deciding to just heal Two-Toes. I decided that would take the place of the medicine check so they got the belt.

They also just healed Mirana, who told them what she was supposed to. The stole her hat... whatever.

They intimidated and healed Gormashk and talked him in to giving up banditry. Probably should have called for a Diplomacy roll but I run another game where Diplomacy just doesn't exist and they seemed to have a good argument so I went with it. He gave them the map.

They failed to find the tracks but used the map.

Combat encounter was not a surprise; Jerry made the perception check. Lizards started out shooting different targets because it's kinder that way. One arrow of the first volley hit but it did max damage and took the barb to 0. She raged and we decided she got 2 temp hp from that so she attacked. Jerry kept pace with the lizard damage but that was all he did that fight. It seems like every party needs a healer because combat is super deadly. That might just be level one talking though.

Dragon encounter was a slaughter. They lit it on fire with a firebomb and I thought he should put it out. That was the only turn he got. Even the shaman threw in a death laser on him. It was a natural consequence of four on one fights... also low AC and not that many hp. Boss fights need more work.

Player comments:
Jerry: "Skills are great, he likes the rolled in higher values.
Heal bots gonna heal.
Not enough info in rules and support documents." He never cast sanctuary.

Mako: "Fun. Simple. Good Skills-didn't use."

Akasha: "Combat was fun, Rage fun. Intimidate is cool with terrifying muscles. Lesser Resilience actually quite awesome. Heavy/Medic!"

I seem to have not gotten comments from the ranger, sorry. Idra did not know what The Bigger They Are did and only ever used her bow. Which is ok I guess but more combat options would be interesting.

The characters did not have all of their abilities and feats explained which is partly my fault for not making the PC's read the entire support document. Jerry's PC did read it so his comment about it being insufficient is at least informed.

Land Outcast

2011-02-28, 10:09 AM

First run through, with only two characters:

First of all: of course it was deadly, not only was it a level 1 adventure, it was played with half the supposed number of characters.

Yet, they beefed up their numbers recruiting the lizardfolk at the town. That way they managed to know about the rendezvous and the tunnels, and set an ambush to the other raiders. In said ambush they lost Gormashk and Jerry fell, almost dying, but luckily stabilized and was revived moments later by Idra.

They grabbed some lizardfolk spears just in case and proceeded to the tunnels. They didn't want to meet the dragon in his tunnels, but in retrospective it might have fared better for them, mobility outside was almost Jerry's death -it was Idra's-... I guess one couldn't charge inside the tunnels.

Feedback:
Skills: It sure was nice to succeed at bluff and diplomacy checks, but I see the low DCs can make it possible to auto-succeed in the Check vs. 10+CR+Wis/Int at later levels, at least for characters who invested in a given skill.
Diplomacy, Bluff, Medicine, Stealth/Perception, and an acrobatic check by Idra was all the skill checks used. It went fine. They didn't try skill uses in combat further than an acrobatic check to jump over the dragon and two bluff checks to paly dead.
While it wasn't used, I like the long-term care for Medicine.
I'm not sure how's the skill system -caps, item bonuses, etc-, but with those DCs things gan get ridiculously easy in my experience (by level 10 in regular D&D 3.5, my players usually get aprox. +20 total bonus to skill checks in skills they've invested in).

Spellcasting:
Well, we used the nerfed version and the characters survived more than one would have thought. The low hp made it compulsory to heal every round, but with hp and incantation as offered in the errata the shaman probably could avoid being a pure healbot. Of course, the damage version wasn't used.
Jerry's player whined about the uselessness of Sanctuary, but it was mostly lucky rolls by the creatures.
Question: is there anything to take the place of concentration checks? does casting incur in an attack of opportunity? is a spell/incantation lost if the caster is hit?

Combat:
Weapons: there's no difference in weapon damage by size, is there? I assume that weapons are still different sized for different creatures. This doubt comes from the same damage being dealt by the medium lizardfolks' longbows and Idra's.
I allowed the small characters to use the lizardfolks' spears at no penalty given that is was just a size category, but that was just house ruling.
Charging: as written makes defending hellishly difficult, given the freedom to first take a move action to get the enemy in a straight line with you, and the freedom to charge as little as 5 feet.
That way it effectively makes anyone able to -most of the time- take a move action, another move action (in a straight line) and attack.
Perhaps this is how it was intended, to make withdrawing useless, the only way to disengage becomes running away at full speed.

Detailed report, if you're really interested look at it, but could be tedious I guess:

Characters used: Jerry and Idra

Upon arriving to town Jerry proceeded to use his incantation with every wounded creature.

Two-toes:
They decided to only pay real attention to him rather than to Mirana ("small folk have to look after each other"). Jerry succeeded in identifying Two-toes shock and soothing him back to tranquility.
They then got the Grounding Belt and Idra wore it.

Gormashk:
Knowing now that they are after 4 raiders, they decided they needed some cannon fodder and proceeded to talk with Gormashk -first disarming him without dealing damage-.
A series of sensible arguments later they didn't try an Intimidate but rather Diplomacy (albeit I gave them a -4, reduced to -2 with their healing). They succeeded on making him join them against his previous companions to take revenge (they just patched his wound first, just in case he tried anything funny).
Of course they now didn't have any problem to find their way, know about the tunnel and the rendezvous point.
They decide to got to the crossroads to eliminate the off-chance of an encounter in the dragon's home terrain.

At the Crossroads:
They maked a pretense of having been taken prisioners by Gromashk -who just had his bow and three arrows actually-, "tied up" walking just behind him.
Anyways, Jerry spotted the enemy.
The lizardfolk came, confused, out of their hiding, and upon the accorded signal (Gromshak waved his hand), death rained upon the lizardfolks.
Surprise round:
Gromshak fell #1 with his bow.
Jerry threw a rock and maimed #2.
Idra used Deadly Aim and left #2 in the brink of death.
*Considering Gromshak had comitted treason I decided they wouldn't flee but rather try to kill him.

First round:
#2 & #3 charged at Gromshak "the traitor" downing him first to 2 hp and then to -10 hp.
Jerry used his incantation against
#2 and fell him.
Idra dropped his bow, drew his weapons and moved beside #3, dealing severe damage.

Second round:
#3, almost finished, made a gambit: five-footed and Power Attacked at Idra , knocking him unconscious.
Jerry moved back and cast Sanctuary.

Third round:
#3 charged at Jerry, succeeded the saving throw and dropped him to 0hp.
Jerry 5-footed and used his incantation in a final prayer, to heal Idra back to consciousness. Fell unconscious.
Idra quietly stood up and stealthily (rolled "20") moved behind #3 who, of course, failed perception.

Fourth round:
#3 attempts to coup de grace Jerry, provoking an AoO from Idra, who deals more than enough damage to behead him.
-------------end of combat------------

Idra tries to revive Jerry, failing. Jerry stabilizes deep into negatives.
Idra makes great efforts to hide everything, removing corpses from the crossroads. Shortly thereafter he manages to revive Jerry, who heals both of them completely and makes a try to revive Gromshak with aid from Idra, failing.

They take what seems useful and carry on after lifting gromshak on a tree to avoid his body being eaten by scavengers. They depart towards the tunnel...

The tunnels:
Jerry approaches from above and casts sanctuary on himself, then Idra starts towards the opening of the tunnel planning to set his new spear against a charge, but the dragon beat their stealth checks and appears:

Surprise round:
Anathrix charges at Idra dealing some damage.

First Round:
Anathrix flurries and drops Idra.
Jerry heals Idra halfway through.
Idra withdraws while drawing his bow.

Second Round:
Anathrix tries to bring down Jerry, just above him, succeeds the Will save, but fumbles with his first flurry attack.
Jerry also Withdraws beside Idra.
Idra tries his Deadly Aim against Anathrix, dealing a nice amount of damage

Third Round:
Anathrix tries his electric burst to finish Idra, but not only he rolls poorly, Idra makes his save, and the Grounding Belt absorbs what's left of damage. Player brags about his prowess. :smallbiggrin:
Jerry heals Idra of what damage remains and retreats.
Idra tries again his deadly aim, hitting true but rolling poorly, moves covering Jerry.

Fourth Round:
Anathrix has been angered and charges power attacking, and ravages Idra's neck, whose life now hangs by a thread.
Jerry casts sanctuary on Idra and steps 5 feet back trying to attract Anathrix's attention, draws his new spear.
Idra withdraws again drawing his swords, behind Jerry but with the dragon still on sight.

Fifth Round:
Anathrix lashes out at his nearest target, charging at Jerry, succeeds the will save and drops him to "0".
Jerry takes 5 ft. and heals himself.
Idra charges at Anathrix, Power Attacking, trying to jump over him (and succeeding, granted him +2 attack), got some nice damage there. Sanctuary ends in him.

Sixth Round:
Anathrix 5-foots and flurries at Idra, hitting just once and dropping him unconscious.
Jerry heals Idra.
Idra plays dead, barely making it.

Seventh Round:
Anathrix charges at Jerry, but -FINALLY- fails his will save.
Jerry takes 5 ft and heals Idra again.
Idra stands up and gets his shortswords

Eighth Round:
Anathrix charges at Idra -Jerry chooses to take his AoO and deals very little damage- managing a critical hit and outright killing him.
Jerry charges* power attacking, hitting barely but leaving Anathrix almost dead.
*Suboptimal choice, yes... but the power attacking charges of Anathrix instilled fear in them, and he wanted to avoid them.

Ninth Round: Showdown time!
Anathrix flurries at Jerry, hitting once and missing once.
Jerry moves back, gets a rock from his bag and prays to the gods...
Anathrix has his skull caved-in by a halfling rock.

Jerry tries to revive Idra but fails. (Used old damage/healing scheme for Jerry and low hp, all the rest as in the errata)

Doc Roc

2011-02-28, 12:19 PM

I guess the take-away win-all question for both of you is:
Would your players do it again?

Gralamin

2011-02-28, 05:49 PM

Cieyrin

2011-02-28, 06:07 PM

No apparent Critical hit rules.

That's currently in development, though imperialspectre mentioned earlier in the thread that crits are nat 20s, auto-confirm, double damage. There's some feats to open that up some that should make beta.

Doc Roc

2011-02-28, 06:07 PM

First impressions with Idra, from Claudius Maximus' pbp:
Good mix of actions (Can close into melee, can snipe, each has tactical reasons).
With the more hp variant, and the rules right now, it seems to accomplish your goal... though Jerry's healing is quite dependable. Some quick math (Lizardfolk encounter) saids to expect, against everyone but Idra, about 21.3 damage per round to a character if they focus fire. Sanctuary is thus a good idea, as is heal ASAP. Seems to be working.
No apparent Critical hit rules.

Trillion* dollar question: Do you like what you've played about as much as you like 4e?

That's currently in development, though imperialspectre mentioned earlier in the thread that crits are nat 20s, auto-confirm, double damage. There's some feats to open that up some that should make beta.

Will make beta. In fact, they should be in the next alpha rev! :)

*Technically approximately 1.2 Million, non-redeemable

Land Outcast

2011-02-28, 06:41 PM

I guess the take-away win-all question for both of you is:
Would your players do it again?

Certainly... and while it was hard to go through it with just two characters they would go again with two characters with the healing as per errata.
(It'd be nice to have other shaman too, for the other character can be switched, but the shaman is mandatory).

We enjoyed quite a bit the Deadly Aim/Power Attack options, there wasn't much opportunity to try out the other manouvers given that combat was fast and deadly at the crossroads, and extremely mobile at the tunnels.

Gralamin

2011-02-28, 06:53 PM

Trillion* dollar question: Do you like what you've played about as much as you like 4e?

Well, it's about as fun as a 4e premade, with the exception of not being able to pull out a big trick when you need it (Daily). I will have to try and see more before I can really say anything conclusive.

Doc Roc

2011-02-28, 07:01 PM

Well, it's about as fun as a 4e premade, with the exception of not being able to pull out a big trick when you need it (Daily). I will have to try and see more before I can really say anything conclusive.

There are things a lot like dailies in the higher levels, but mostly we have 1/encounter powers that are quite tank. We've been trying to produce more&better, which has left us a bit of a gap at the Really Huge Effect level.

imperialspectre

2011-03-01, 10:45 AM

A new review cycle is beginning for Legend's alpha, and we invite anyone who's interested to view the current document and provide feedback. If you want edit rights so that you can add feedback, PM me or Doc Roc. Some of you already have edit rights because of previous feedback.

The alpha document can be found here (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1niRIdrsvXqtJK6AcjSk-MztC4nXnlyGIDuCc3De7pjA/edit?hl=en&authkey=CPeTvL0G).

If you are going to leave feedback, please do so by 0800 GMT on Saturday. We set this deadline so that I have time to incorporate feedback and new content into the Big Bad Word Document in time for the next review cycle.

The next review cycle, beginning on 7 March, will be a short review to make sure that everything is lined up for beta, beginning on 11 March.

potatocubed

2011-03-01, 11:04 AM

Is there any sort of feedback you're specifically seeking or specifically not interested in?

(And yes, I'd like to be able to leave comments - I'm potatocubed on Google like I'm potatocubed everywhere, if you need my name to grant access.)

imperialspectre

2011-03-01, 11:15 AM

If you want to suggest additions to spell lists, we're happy to listen; critiques of existing spell lists are not likely to be useful as the spell descriptions are in progress and don't necessarily correspond closely to their 3.5 counterparts.

Other than that, feedback is generally welcome on all fronts.

Land Outcast

2011-03-01, 11:29 AM

I've just got that paticular issue I adressed in my feedback post: charging makes any kind of withdrawing an almost impossible feat, was this intended?

Greenish

2011-03-01, 11:40 AM

With the more hp variant, and the rules right now, it seems to accomplish your goal... though Jerry's healing is quite dependable. Some quick math (Lizardfolk encounter) saids to expect, against everyone but Idra, about 21.3 damage per round to a character if they focus fire. Sanctuary is thus a good idea, as is heal ASAP. Seems to be working.Sanctuary's DC 13 save has yet to save my bacon (I play Jerry in the PBP), but luckily the lizardfolk haven't hit my 14 AC either.

Still feel a bit vulnerable with that AC and 16 (after the hp revamp) hp. Should probably give a shot at Stealth.

Glimbur

2011-03-01, 11:45 AM

I guess the take-away win-all question for both of you is:
Would your players do it again?

Yes, they would. Most of them were interested in rumors of the airship murder mystery and there are additional players who want in. I probably should have mentioned that it was not a 1-2 hour module, it took about 40 minutes with some horsing around at the market place.

Personally, I am concerned that the ranger and to a lesser extent the barbarian did not have enough combat options. Mako had bombs and Jerry had healing, but the Ranger just had ranged/melee and Favored Enemy while the barb was about the same but with Rage. And you always Rage, so...

Doc Roc

2011-03-02, 03:14 PM

Personally, I am concerned that the ranger and to a lesser extent the barbarian did not have enough combat options. Mako had bombs and Jerry had healing, but the Ranger just had ranged/melee and Favored Enemy while the barb was about the same but with Rage. And you always Rage, so...

I am also concerned. Barb gets some interesting stuff in its other tracks, and there are some really charming rage feats coming in the next review cycle, but ranger is getting a partial rewrite.

Looks like the second one-shot will be going up soon, complete with char-gen rules, EL-generic monsters, and my beloved airships.

Cieyrin

2011-03-02, 03:37 PM

Looks like the second one-shot will be going up soon, complete with char-gen rules, EL-generic monsters, and my beloved airships.

Airships! :smallbiggrin:

That is all.

Eldan

2011-03-02, 03:56 PM

Truly... the world needs more airships.

Especially since I saw both Into the Eye of the Storm and The Mysterious Explorations of Jasper Morello for the first time last week.

Doc Roc

2011-03-02, 06:27 PM

In fact, I linked to poor Morello as part of the inspiration for this particular endeavor. It's definitely part of the inspiration of this adventure, particularly some of the imagery.

Radar

2011-03-03, 05:27 AM

Looks like the second one-shot will be going up soon, complete with char-gen rules, EL-generic monsters, and my beloved airships.
I can has Castle (http://www.girlgeniusonline.com/comic.php?date=20030630) Wulfenbach (http://www.girlgeniusonline.com/comic.php?date=20030702)? :smallbiggrin:

Doc Roc

2011-03-03, 11:04 AM

The HRMS Lithos is pretty titanic, measuring in at almost 5/8ths of a mile long, hanging aloft on an enormous rigid gas bladder, sixteen arcantric lifters, and three enormous engines. And a few very dark secrets.

Tyndmyr

2011-03-03, 11:10 AM

Sherlock Holmes |= Demon Slayer; // May not be type safe to implicitly convert between genres.

I should have expected as much.

Demon_Slayer myChar = (Demon_Slayer)sherlockHolmes;

Greenish

2011-03-03, 11:16 AM

The HRMS Lithos is pretty titanic, measuring in at almost 5/8ths of a mile long, hanging aloft on an enormous rigid blimpA "blimp", by very definition, is not rigid. It also refers to whole of the airship, not just the airbag.

Cieyrin

2011-03-03, 12:45 PM

I can has Castle (http://www.girlgeniusonline.com/comic.php?date=20030630) Wulfenbach (http://www.girlgeniusonline.com/comic.php?date=20030702)? :smallbiggrin:

Y'know, usually they have a full page spread linked when they do those shots. I wonder why the Professors Foglio don't in this case...

Greenish

2011-03-03, 01:30 PM

Y'know, usually they have a full page spread linked when they do those shots. I wonder why the Professors Foglio don't in this case...There's a picture around with the whole 'ship, but I've yet to find a larger version than: http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20080317072349/girlgenius/images/3/36/CastleWulfenbach.png

Doc Roc

2011-03-04, 05:14 PM

We're now up to 70 feats, from 20. Might be worth looking through that section, gentlefolk.

term1nally s1ck

2011-03-04, 05:47 PM

I have recently taken over the running of the ToDE. L15 gestalt dungeoncrawl.

I think I will figure out an appropriate level (possibly with some adjustments) for it to work as a non-gestalt game, and throw it open for testing the higher levels of this too. That might have to wait until I get the hang of the difficulty level of this one, though.

Gralamin

2011-03-04, 11:42 PM

On the Raid
The Heightened HP rule seems to be doing it's job to me. The damage is there, desperation is evident, but deaths have yet to happen.

On playtesting the Alpha release rules
I'll be running a playtest of these with my real life group on either the 13th or 20th. My plan is to transcribe the rules needed to play from the given document, thus forcing me to look at it all, and give commentary.

imperialspectre

2011-03-05, 01:06 AM

Full spell descriptions will be present in the release scheduled for Monday morning. This will effectively "unlock" the tactician and shaman classes for full 1-20 play.

Doc Roc

2011-03-06, 03:06 PM

Weapon linked feats are mostly done! Optional support for guns is included, and we plan a couple of small expansions shortly after launch, with material that couldn't be finished and tested in time.

Cieyrin

2011-03-07, 11:41 AM

Opinions on The Raid

I agree with Gral about the Less Swingy Combat option: as much as some people like imminent mortality to be in their face at low levels, it's nice to be able to be heroic at low levels.

In playing Mako, I felt he perhaps had the least contribution to the party, considering the action cost needed to use his track abilities. That could just be a symptom of being 1st level and it gets better as you level, like most things usually are.

Final result, though, is I did indeed have fun and look forward to being able to play Legend again some time soon. :smallsmile:

Doc Roc

2011-03-07, 01:03 PM

Yeah, I'm not sure his firebomb needs an action cost to mix.

imperialspectre

2011-03-07, 01:26 PM

I modified the action cost on firebomb to be either a move or swift action to create. This makes it a little friendlier to 1st-level rogues.

Greenish

2011-03-07, 04:33 PM

Weapon linked feats are mostly done! Optional support for guns is includedThere's any number of homebrew (and official) rules for guns, but they all tend to suffer from the same things.

I should think the basic weapon division outlined earlier in this thread works fine, have you changed that?

As for the Raid, I played "Jerry" in the Claudius Maximus's PBP playtest. The combat was a bit repetitive (as it is wont to be on the lowest levels), with all of my actions summarized as

Cast Sanctuary if there's time (on the offchance that the DC 13 saves might save me)
Heal if someone is hurt
Then I could use the autoattack, but in the playtest campaign someone would usually be hurt before I'd reached the range to use it, and it'd remove the Sanctuary.

imperialspectre

2011-03-07, 04:50 PM

The optional support is just feats that let you reload as a free action due to phlebotinum. Pistols are still Holdout weapons (aside from big ones, which are Special), and rifles are Main weapons.

Greenish, would you be interested in trying out a healing character who can autoattack (or use combat maneuvers, etc.) every round and still provide key healing support? If so, I can introduce you to a Paladin track that provides Legend's other main source of in-combat healing.

Doc Roc

2011-03-07, 04:58 PM

As for the Raid, I played "Jerry" in the Claudius Maximus's PBP playtest. The combat was a bit repetitive (as it is wont to be on the lowest levels), with all of my actions summarized as

Cast Sanctuary if there's time (on the offchance that the DC 13 saves might save me)
Heal if someone is hurt
Then I could use the autoattack, but in the playtest campaign someone would usually be hurt before I'd reached the range to use it, and it'd remove the Sanctuary.

Shaman opens up considerably at levels 2 and 3.....
We hope. Should have another adventure up as planned before the week is done, with full beta rules open, and the Airship Murder Mystery dropping by the 12th.

Greenish, would you be interested in trying out a healing character who can autoattack (or use combat maneuvers, etc.) every round and still provide key healing support? If so, I can introduce you to a Paladin track that provides Legend's other main source of in-combat healing.

Main class-driven source. We've got some other points of access for in-combat healing as feats and items, and sage also carries a first level HoT spell.

Claudius Maximus

2011-03-07, 10:45 PM

Thoughts on the pbp playtest:
Combat seemed smooth and enjoyable overall, at least on my end. I liked the Power Attack/Deadly Aim/Take Cover options. They added a bit of tactical decision making to every attack roll.

I feel like the module itself could have been a bit clearer on some things, like whether Jerry's healbeam could help the injured NPCs, or what options were available for trying to negotiate with Gormashk. These aren't major system things though.

I feel like the Less Deadly Combat rule was probably a big improvement. In Legend, everyone has Power Attack and a greatsword, and that makes for very nasty hits. If we were using the original HP values, I think the PCs would have been dropping constantly. While risky, lethal combat can be fun, what isn't fun is losing half your turns to being on the wrong end of the unconsciousness rollercoaster that results from high enemy damage and constant healing.

Like I said earlier, I see no reason not to use many of the combat maneuvers and special skill uses at every opportunity. Trips and Disarms are cool and should be able to be pulled off without requiring huge investments/specializations, and I think the current system is a step up in that regard, but I still think there should be *some* reason to occasionally use a regular attack over these maneuvers at low levels. Also, as Land Outcast said, the current charge mechanic makes Withdraw basically useless unless you have higher speed than your opponent.

Mako was somewhat useless, but I think this was mostly a matter of having difficulty getting within range of his target to use his ability. I think the damage and effect are fine for an at-will ability though.

I think Idra's The Bigger They Are feat should have had some effect. Perhaps a minimum of +1?

The dragon's breath weapon was a joke. 1d4/level, reflex half, to one person, 1/encounter? I'm pretty sure that's strictly inferior to Jerry's damaging Incantation, which is a secondary use of the ability in question, to boot. I feel that something as epic as dragon's breath should be a bit nastier. Even just making it a line effect would have made it viable, and would have added a better ranged option to the dragon's repertoire. Other options like increased damage would probably have worked too.

The dragon's AC was also pretty lame. He had the lowest AC of everything in the module that was actually expected to be in combat. Considering the devastating effects of gangups in games like this, a slightly higher AC would have probably been better. Since I'm aware he's the result of a broader chargen engine and needs to be balanced against other options, I see the possible difficulty of just slapping NA on him. However, I think the huge nasty monster = no AC problem will just get worse as levels increase.

Suggestions (note my complete lack of homebrew experience):
Perhaps you could consider adding NA boosts to the more monstery tracks, or including some option to make up for their low DEX with NA, like some feat that gives natural armor based on constitution or something. Larger sizes = NA bonuses as a general rule might also do this. Or you could give out NA to bizarrely shaped creatures equal to what you expect an equivalently leveled humanoid character's armor bonus would be, assuming the creatures in question won't be benefiting from both.

All this assuming that you haven't just run the numbers and come out satisfied about huge monster ACs as they are.
There were a few things I had to rule on as the game progressed, so you might want to check how I came down on them and see if that's what you meant. Some of the questions:

Does difficult terrain foil charges?
If so, can a charger attempt to leap over these obstacles?
Are weapons sized? Do smaller characters and/or weapons do different amounts of damage?
Does a character knocked unconscious become prone?
Is it possible to use stealth to emerge from total cover and get a surprise attack? It's unclear if this is possible based on the current descriptions of the action costs involved.
Can one move and then charge when using Reckless Strike?
Is ammo a Thing?