GNS theory was inspired by the Threefold Model, which was discussed on the USENET group in summer 1997. 2 GNS: Gamist, Narrativist, Simulationist.Celerity would put more pressure on there, which would be good.Īctually, Celerity is just basically as OP as it always was, isn't it? My "massive dodge pool and toreador merit retest" plan meant I was laughing. I think we took one hit in the entire fight. Maybe we weren't supposed to show up with such force, but we just steamrollered them. ST doesn't have a lot of experience statting things, and it showed. Or maybe that's the moment for a Knockdown gun so at least they can't get move around - not that that's a problem when celerity is on my side. Maybe I should switch to bow for that and go for the stake, though it feels really metagamey, since it's betting on them being stock profiles. Ranged, not so good against single targets, though "not being targeted" is fine with me, and there are future buffs to take. Armour wouldn't have helped against the potence monkeys, but it might have reduced my damage to something sensible. They really needed celerity, and probably body armour. I don't know how many hits the mooks had - more than five, but not gigantic amounts - but they dropped quickly and without doing any significant damage in return. I had an automatic weapon and celerity 5, so my average damage per turn was eighteen which is pretty excessive. Three combat-statted PCs (including mine) and two less combat-statted elders (one of whom did nothing at all, and the other very little), vs eight mooks. yes? Their market includes people who aren't particularly sold on the idea of "balanced rules" but nonetheless end up dissatisfied when other people end up OP by exploiting imbalanced rules, and the rules are intended for PvP (which means you CAN'T lean that heavily on rule 0 - there may not be a GM *around*). They're not *terrible*, but the order of purchase for being awesome at something is optimally Traits, Disciplines, Skills)Īs for cloaking a solid basic rules chassis in "pretentious woo". (Again, this where the floodgates of XP you're playing under is possibly breaking something - compared to the cost/benefit ratio of Disciplines, skills shouldn't be that sexy. Personal belief: The linear traits are so people can get *most* of the way to a maxed-out test pool cheap, particularly if it's the focus of the character (started at 4), while the exponential costs on skills are to discourage people from having literally everything at their absolute max (thus leaving some room for relative specialization). Well, you were slightly vague on how useful breaking the normal caps on traits was, I wasn't sure. That is also a lack of clarity, and I note your position on that is a new one that nobody in previous conversations had considered. I have also had the conversation about how exactly status is read multiple times. It's bad, because it hasn't explained itself. This conversation has gone on too long for the rule to be good. We are having a conversation about it now. Maybe, but having a sentence saying "The knowledge of this status change is transmitted vampire to vampire by various means including subconscious body-language signalling, and does not magically transmit itself instantaneously across the globe" wouldn't hurt, now would it? Which was a joke, the first time I thought of it. And since the "inherently known" has no written mechanism and no information-speed limit, we can use vampires to transmit FTL. But which part of the mechanics says it goes like that, by RAW?īy RAW, your status changes when it changes. And if I were running, I might run it like that too (or more likely, use a completely different system). in your game, you can totally run it like that.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |