TRPG General Chat

Pixie

00:00

@doppelgreener Thanks! I would die without cheatsheets myself. :P

doppelgreener

i can barely manage in a game as complex as D&D. i should probably try to make myself one of those.

(a while back the rules barely made sense to me and still my choices at any point are kind of overwhelming sometimes)

by the way, i linked those chat posts to dale M - the next answer - in case he wanted to riff off of anything i said in there while he's busy talking about how rules are hard. in case you want to do similar you can go right ahead.

old players very often forget how bloody difficult it is to actually wrap one's head around the rules.

don't know if it's necessary or not, so this isn't me making a suggestion or pushing it on you or anything, just offering that in case you feel it would be helpful.

Pixie

00:17

@doppelgreener Most definitely. That's one of the things I had in mind when answering the previously linked questioned. Sure, 9 sessions... but that's still not that much, honestly, especially when there's time in between playing and you're trying to memorize rules as complex as any variation of D&D's.

And sometimes it's just because a player is not suited to the rules. I'm pretty decent with Pathfinder, for example, but I cannot remember Exalted rules to save my life. I feel really bad about it, but I've been honest with the GM that the rules are hard for me, and he doesn't mind. My boyfriend, on the other hand, really cannot grasp Pathfinder rules easily due to the way they're written, but he's having a far better time with 5e.

doppelgreener

@Pixie at a point my group was tossing up D&D 3.5e vs 4e, one of my players said he much preferred 4e for the way the books were laid out

that can make a big difference too

Pixie

@doppelgreener Yeah. This is actually one of the problems I have with Exalted. Everything is everywhere. The GM was pretty up front about this. He was like, "They're a mess." xD

doppelgreener

@Pixie ouch

and i had enough trouble when Atomic Robo defined a couple of key concepts each over the course of 3 different pages (found in entirely different points in the book)

Pixie

@doppelgreener For example, if you create a Lunar, you use the Lunar book. But the Lunar book will tell you something like, "Works as Solar ability of the same name. Refer to page [whatever] of Solar book." instead of reprinting the ability so you don't have to keep going back and forth between books. Things are also spread out, sometimes hidden in chapters you wouldn't expect, sort of like you mention with Atomic Robo.

doppelgreener

@Pixie oh no

i am imagining a web of such things, with each of the Exalted types all referring to each of the other Exalted types...

"wait a minute, how does this one book refer to the other books if it came first!" "it's the revised edition."

Pixie

00:30

@doppelgreener Hahaha. I haven't seen it myself, but anything's possible. :P The game is just biased toward playing Solars.

I can't help it if Lunars are way cooler. :P Actually, our party of four has only one Solar.

doppelgreener

Haha!

OH NO. That meditation image I linked yesterday is tiny!

Here's the full(er) version:

@AlexMitan ^.

@BESW Unstar that tiny image from the sidebar please! It is 2 small to ride the star coaster.

Pixie

We have two Lunars and an escaped Abyssal. It's pretty fun. xD Abyssals are Solars who are captured by death lords (I think that's what they're called but don't quote me) and forcefully turned all dark and abyssal-y. As you can tell, I am very well versed in this game's lore. :P

doppelgreener

00:45

Ooooo.

That sounds pretty cool. <_<

I like that kind of story element. (The only other thing I know that's like that is the void Naaru captured by the Blood Elves in Warcraft.)

Pixie

00:59

Ohh, I have a few more of the details now. It's not quite Solars being captured.

When an Exalted dies, their "spark" of Essence is preserved and bestowed to a new mortal. Through various events, a bunch of Essences from dead Solars got stolen and stored in something called the Jade Prison. The Deathlords found it and managed to get some of the Essences, which they corrupted and began giving them to people of their choice (not necessarily the person's choice :P) when they were close to death and enslaving the ensuing Exalts.

Grubermensch

@BESW I totally did not know that rule was a thing. Oops.

doppelgreener

@grubermensch that might be linked to the wrong chat message?

did you mean BESW's next one..?

Grubermensch

No, I was referring to the Fate rule from the question.

doppelgreener

oh!

Grubermensch

I've totally been soaking big hits with multiple stress boxes.

doppelgreener

01:03

yes we were doing that originally as well

@BESW which brings to mind: I recall that when you have a stack-o-mooks (like the boar stampede), you check off multiple stress boxes for each hit, and eventually the stack disperses. was that based on something from the books? would it work better with the stack-o-mooks taking consequences?

@Pixie nice thinking on their part, haha

that spark concept sounds good.

so exalted are actually uplifted mortals, not a race unto themselves?

Pixie

@doppelgreener Yep, uplifted mortals.

Shalvenay

@waxeagle brrring

wax eagle

01:24

@Shalvenay sorry tried to ping you in g+, but no game tonight :(

Shalvenay

gotcha

np

Grubermensch

01:55

OH. MY. GOD. None of the chat highlights are by @BESW or about @BESW.

We are in the end times.

doppelgreener

He's on vacation in another country visiting people!

He'll be back.

Grubermensch

Well that's much less exciting.

BESW

I'm currently in a game of Do.

I just fell into a sneezing whale while trying to give it a hankie.

2

user61230

Looks into sidebar; sees "I just fell into a sneezing whale while trying to give it a hankie"; pops in; stars; pops out.

SevenSidedDie

02:10

@BESW We had fun with the whale. I think we ended up serenading it while shattering snot-barriers.

BESW

I've run it three or four times now.

We have Pilgrims Mighty Tree, Antsy Candle, and Wet Blanket.

Grubermensch

@Emrakul NOOOOOOO

BESW

@SevenSidedDie This time around, the planet and its house are made of cookies.

And the whale was allergic to salt water (Wet Blanket got in trouble by crying).

We repaired the gingerbread house with whale snot.

doppelgreener

02:29

Gross

Effective but that property value just went way down

BESW

02:55

The phrase "further enraging Melanie" was used at least once.

@doppelgreener I'm constantly revising my understanding of mook-stacking.

Magician

I think you do check off multiple stress boxes, if mooks even have those, because you effectively attack multiple targets.

BESW

("Are your mooks taking up too much space? Do conventional mook storage solutions not work for your home? Try Mook Stacking absolutely free for thirty days!")

Shalvenay

@BESW :P

Magician

I just imagine Batman's flow combat from Arkham games when someone takes out a bunch of mooks with a single melee attack.

You get some, and you get some, and now I'll propel ten meters through the air BECAUSE I"M BATMAN and you get some.

BESW

My current approach is that mooks stack however makes it easiest for the GM to run them in the conflict, depending on the GM and the conflict.

That's the point, after all.

For me, this generally means either implementing Teamwork rules (all but one mook passes his turn so the last mook in the round gets a +1 for each of the others, but they all have separate stress boxes) or making the mook a single NPC that's just flavoured as a group.

Magician

03:06

A swarm of mooks.

BESW

Numbers only correspond to power very roughly in Fate anyway.

Magician

Hah, I remember in 3.5, when they offered crowd rules for mobs of commoners. Cityscape? Heroes of Horror? No matter. The party, level 5 and proud of it, was tracking a murderer in a city, and said murderer used magic aberrant pheromones to whip a crowd into a frenzy. "Pft," the party said, they're commoners. The party nearly died.

They have declared these rules to be Bullshit, and vowed to kill any 47th member of any group, as at 48 they become a mob.

"I fireball them, problem solved!" "Weell, they do take double damage from AoE". "Wut?"

BESW

@Magician Wait, what?

Magician

Only very vaguely related.

It was... gah, I can't even remember. It was a nasty critter that I had to retool a bit to be a perfect assassin.

Magician

03:24

So, last night we finally met Ilsensine, the Mind Virus. A lord of madness and the chief illithid deity (kiiind of). Turns out he's quite unhappy, and wants to commit suicide. By killing every sentient being in the world. More out of fear than anything, my bard soon called him a "melodramatic wanker." Then the fighting started and my bard called the Mind Virus a brainfart. The Mind Virus took 31 psychic damage. Don't piss off the bard.

Grubermensch

@BESW That movie was NUTS

Shalvenay

LOL at the bard

doppelgreener

03:42

@Magician because no living things -> no illithids to worship the mind virus -> no mind virus?

Magician

Almost. No living things -> no minds to get the idea and be infected by it.

misterducky

What system?

Magician

13th Age.

A continuation of a series of D&D games, this one. 3.5 -> 4e -> 13A.

misterducky

Ah, gotcha.

I've been brainstorming a pathfinder campaign idea.

doppelgreener

13th age is a third party d20 game made by the lead designers of 3.5e and 4e.

misterducky

03:47

Cool.

Emrys Ternal

06:30

Is anyone here that's into D&D 3.5e?

(and awake)

Magician

Nope and nope, but ask regardless.

Emrys Ternal

I have a proposed relatively-simple fix for Truenamers and want to run it by anyone aware of that class's problems.

Magician

Do tell. I recall reading about its problems recently.

Emrys Ternal

Presuming that like Pathfinder your skill ranks are capped by HD instead of HD+3, at any time, you can add half of your combined ranks in any two of the following skills to all Truespeak checks: Knowledge (Arcana), Knowledge (Religion), or Knowledge (The Planes).

For example, a Lvl 20 Truenamer with 20 ranks in Truespeak, KnowArc, KnowRel, and KnowPlanes can get a +20 to all Truespeak checks.

Magician

14

Q: What is wrong with the Truenamer?

I have seen a lot of people say that the Truenamer does not work (such as this answer placing Truenamer at the bottom tier) or that it's terrible. As far as I can read and see, though, it seems to be very strong as a caster type. At low levels it doesn't much more or less then a low level wizard...

(for context)

Pureferret

06:38

Morning

Magician

@Pureferret Mine now. Greetings. Yes.

Pureferret

@Magician wu?

Magician

@Pureferret I've been stealing mornings from people careless enough to offer them. Is... a silly in-joke, I guess.

Pureferret

@Magician fiend!

Emrys Ternal

In effect, by putting ranks in any two of those skills, they can add them and then cut the total in half to make up for the fact that the Truespeak DC increases at +2 per level while your ability to make checks only increases by +1 normally.

Magician

06:42

@EmrysTernal There's still the DCs increasing with usage, though.

Emrys Ternal

That only applies to the same ability on the same target.

If you use a different utterance or a different target, the DC stays the same.

Magician

"Each time you succeed, the DC of that particular utterance increases by 2". Is that incorrect? Seems to say the target doesn't matter.

Emrys Ternal

Ah. It seems I was mistaken.

Magician

As far as fixes go, it's simple and will help, but won't fix the deeper issues. It's also a bit of a skill point tax, but eh. You might as well declare the DC goes up by 1 with level, not 2.

Emrys Ternal

That said, it wouldn't be amiss to make the law of resistance only apply when used against the same target

Magician

06:46

Even trickier to keep track of!

Emrys Ternal

True. Hm.

Yeah it'd be simpler to just make it go up by +1.

Magician

I guess the +2/level is there to account for magic items or feats you might take to improve the skill. But it's just annoying to keep up with that.

So if you decrease the scaling, and perhaps the resistance scaling too, it'll be easier to make a functional non-optimized truenamer.

Emrys Ternal

The Law of Sequence could have a simple fix where each later use ends the prior one.

Instead of requiring you to wait

Magician

I'm not even sure why you need it with Law of Resistance on hand.

Adeptus

There is a homebrew replacement for the Truenamer that is fairly well regarded. Search for "the way words work". It was made by one of the RPG forums (Giants In The Playground?)

Emrys Ternal

06:51

The purpose of the Law of Sequence is so you can't at-will give the effects to everyone at all times.

Magician

@EmrysTernal But doesn't Law of Resistance already do that by incrementing DCs each time you use the same ability?

Emrys Ternal

The purpose of the Law of Resistance is similar, but fills a different purpose: to make it harder to apply it to the SAME target multiple times.

Magician

Which is your houserule/interpretation :). As written, spamming an ability increases DC each time, making it impossible to just use it at-will.

Emrys Ternal

That's not the point.

Magician

Law of Sequence forbids multiple concurrent uses of an ability, Law of Resistance discourages it. Their functionality overlaps significantly.

Emrys Ternal

06:55

The point is that because it can be used at-will and truename effects bypass many of the faults of spellcasters, it has to be limited in a specific way.

doppelgreener

relevant to this 'fixing the truenamer' business is that some of the giants in the playground folks apparently attempted the very same

2

Q: What tier is The Way Words Work's version of the Truenamer in?

The D&D 3.5e's original Truenamer is considered so badly broken it's nearly unusable, and in the Tier system, it gets pegged at tier 6 or 7, i.e. it is the lowest of the low. However, the folks on the Giant in the Playground forums have rewritten the class in an attempt to mold the Truenamer int...

dnd-3.5e optimization class

Emrys Ternal

As for my houserule/interpretation, you might be right, but unlike most players I have special training that enables me to get a better educated guess at the original author's design intent.

Anyway

When I look at the Law of Resistance, I can say that the point was to be flavorful but prevent a Truenamer from being able to spam endlessly with no penalty.

As for the Law of Sequence, I can say that the point was to prevent the same effect from affecting more than one target at once.

Those are entirely different balancing factors.

I disagree with having to wait via the Law of Sequence, as that puts the flavor of the Law of Sequence above what's reasonable and within precedent.

You can retain the goal of the Law of Sequence without unnecessarily burdening the player.

By simply making a new version of the same utterance end the one that came prior.

Magician

With zero memory of actual abilities of the Truenamer, I still don't think there needs to be a hard limitation on the number of concurrently running instances of the same ability. But that's beside the point. If you like the Law of Sequence, keep it, by all means.

Emrys Ternal

Likewise, as precedent, spellcasters can end a dismissable ongoing effect at-will as a standard action. Oddly, truenamers don't seem to get a similar ability.

Emrys Ternal

07:25

In short:

The Law of Resistance only increases the Truespeak DC by +1 for each subsequent successful utterance. Resting for 1 hour removes these DC increases. The Law of Sequence does not stop you from using the same utterance before a currently-running instance of it ends, but successfully speaking the utterance again ends the running instance of that utterance. In addition, you can dismiss any ongoing utterance of yours with a duration outright as a standard action that does not provoke an attack of opportunity. Dismissing an utterance does not require a Truespeak check, but you must mee…

Magician

@EmrysTernal Seems reasonable. Is it safe to assume your group is not going to cheese the Truenaming skill, like described in the answer to the TWWW question?

Emrys Ternal

Well no, and even if they did, it woudn't matter anywhere near as much (at least not in my game).

I use the Bell Curve Rolls variant with optional Variable Modifiers. Additionally, the number of encounters per day is double to quadruple what is normal for a typical game. However, that's just me.

And really, the big problem with cheese is that they almost always rely on prestige classes, and almost no GM that I've seen runs PrCs as they were actually intended.

That is, with gravitas, thoughtful placement in the world, and requiring narrative forethought for entering them on the part of the player.

The same goes for multiclassing really, although that's less suspect.

If all GMs were to put that kind of basic minimum effort into thinking about the role of PrCs in their game world and in the story of the PC that wants into it, most forms of cheese would die.

Most PrCs are freakin' GUILDS. Guilds almost never walk up to someone and say "We've heard of you and are impressed with your efforts, would you like the key to our clubhouse?"

Instead, most GM's apparently react to "Oh we just leveled up? I'm taking a level of Paragnostic Assembly" with "okay".

It's that kind of GM laziness that makes me bang my head against a brick wall.

Basically, it infuriates me that there are a million statements on Theoretical Optimization of players for various things, but almost nothing about how a GM can work with a PC to make their entry into a PrC take place over time.

Sandwich

09:47

I definitely see the flaw in that Emrys. For example, in the forgotten realms campaign setting Red Wizards are a huge evil order of mages who pool their magic power to advance their plots, taking a level in red wizard would kind of be impossible without knowledge of how to utilize that spell pool or entry via some kind of Red Wizard contact or instruction.

Purple Monkey

I don't understand why this edit was approved. There is no below 0 HP and they're not unconscious and stable when they do drop to 0 HP. Unless that's part of the starter kit?

trogdor

those are definitely the 4E rules for dieing, I don't know what 5E's rules are, but that answer contains the 4E ones

save for that it doesn't mention the fact that if you drop below - 1/4th your max hp you auto die

I don't know if that means they added 4E death rules into that 5E starter kit or not but I wouldn't be too exceptionally surprised

Sandwich

10:16

Hmm, You're right. How do you revert an edit?

Actually now that I look at it there is one exception to the rule

Purple Monkey

@Sandwich Go into the edit history scroll down to the revision you want it to revert to and click rollback

Sandwich

If the person attacking you chooses to knock you out rather than kill you when dealing damage higher than your remaining hit points you're still alive, but at 0 hit points

trogdor

also. looks like it says that if they receive half their life in damage they die, which I don't think was in 4E, unless I remember that part wrong

but the rest of it is still surprisingly similar

Sandwich

There we go, I think I did that right.

Oops, got the wrong revision, there we go.

Sorry about that guys, I'm new to this and I'm kind of learning

I hit more than 2k karma just answering stuff, this is my first step into the administrative side of stack exchange

wax eagle

11:07

@trogdor negative bloodied killed you outright

Sandwich

Hows your morning thusfar Wax

trogdor

@waxeagle the way the answer was worded seemed like it was an auto kill if you took all that damage at once

I may very easily have just misread that

wax eagle

@trogdor in 5e? yeah if you take a hit that takes you to negative max hp in one go you're dead

trogdor

ok, so I must just have mis-remembered the amount of damage it takes to kill you in 4E

it has been a couple years now XD

Sandwich

I think I prefer the pathfinder iteration of the death and dying rules

Being able to take damage up to your constitution in negative hit points makes sense

trogdor

11:14

I was fine with the 4E ones

Sandwich

Since your Constitution is a numerical identifier for how hardy you are

It doesn't make sense that something with 44 con would have the same death threshold than something with 10 con

It also gives larger creatures with higher cons more leeway in stabilizing

trogdor

to be honest, it wasn't too hard to kill PC's in 4E, I did it a few times without trying to

to be fair though, if your PC's in 4E were really trying hard and using the right builds, they could tear through level appropriate encounters like a dragons flames through a single piece of paper.

Sandwich

I don't like the way powers were structured in 4E

Too exploitable

trogdor

especially if they co-ordinated builds

I think it had to do with a lot more than powers honestly

said powers worked really well with the right feats and magic items

Purple Monkey

D&D 4e a.k.a "D&D: superpowers" as my group liked to call it

trogdor

11:20

and even certain paragon paths were possibly exploitable.

I really did love 4E for a while, but it certainly had it's own special flaws that made it a chore to DM for

BESW had to stop after running us through one campaign of it, and I actually never finished my campaign of it at all

by the time my campaign stopped, our group had at least one PC who was strictly built to neuter opponents so they couldn't hit anything, and I was crippled with the idea that I had already killed a staggering number of PC's

I say at least one because he was technically working with a defender as well, so hitting anyone but the guy with the most hp and defense was practically impossible, and even hitting him was pretty hard

Sandwich

It was reaaaally exploitable

I just stuck to 3.5 when 4 came out for the most part

Wibbs

isn't 3.5 equally exploitable?

trogdor

it kinda is

Sandwich

Yeah but you have to know A LOT about 3.5 to exploit it

trogdor

it just sticks more to exploiting spells

Sandwich

11:28

Craft Contingent Spell for the most part

trogdor

you kinda had to dig a bit to exploit 4E too, to be fair

Sandwich

Craft Contingent spell for Mages, Divine Metamagic for Clerics

You could pull off some pretty decent gish builds as well that weren't that bad either

trogdor

and I personally was at least happy that 4E didn't keep the idea that the only viable choice in terms of class was spell caster or suck master.

Sandwich

Pathfinder fixed a lot of Suck master classes

trogdor

good to hear

I really am not sure what some of the people making classes in 3.5 were thinking

there were some cool classes that at least worked, and then there were,... abominations that truly should not have existed, simply because they did jack all

Sandwich

11:32

Have you looked at this Q/A Trogdor?
http://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/1/differences-between-dd-3-5-and-pathfinder

Wibbs

@trogdor I found that the way powers worked, it pretty much framed all classes as spellcasters, just without actually calling them that

Sandwich

Pathfinder has so much better exp progression

Wibbs

Guess it depends on the fluff

trogdor

@Wibbs I can see how you would feel that way

Sandwich

Instead of having to calculate encounter levels and party levels and then divide amounts and whatnot theres numbers that each monster is worth and you just add them up and divide by N

Thats so much better than 3.5

Not to mention they did a few things and fixed Flurry of Fail with monk

trogdor

11:36

many things, in my experience, could be improvements to 3.5

Sandwich

Pathfinder is the best thing that happened to 3.5

trogdor

not to say it wasn't fun, but I was definitely sick of non spell caster classes automatically being underpowered without serious work, for example.

Sandwich

Just like these white lifesavers are the best thing thats happened in breathmint based technology

trogdor

lol

Sandwich

Someone at Lifesavers has ranks in Craft ( Breathmint )

Very Niche skill

Not a lot of people back then needed or cared about breathmints

Aaron

12:08

Morning

@Magician

Magician

Brave.

trogdor

lol

it isn't bravery, it must be MADNESS

Aaron

This isn't madness. THIS. IS. STACKEXCHANGE.

Magician

trogdor

lol

Aaron

12:14

lol

Sandwich

Lol

Aaron

Anyone want to test something for me real quick in a google spreadsheet?

Sandwich

Sure

What do you need?

Aaron

I have a process for putting together skeletons for a game. Right now it is just in google spreadsheet so I could get the process down. docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/…

Sandwich

I see the sheet, it looks fine. What are you trying to get it to do?

Aaron

12:25

@Sandwich It all works (as far as I can tell.) Just want to make sure the process isn't too confusing.

Sandwich

Hm, I'm not familiar with the system the sheet is using so I can't really comment more on the functionality Aaron

What I can tell is that each type of racial bone has different stats

And it just adds those stats from the alternate sheet

Aaron

Ok.

Sandwich

It seems like its functioning fine

I don't see any problems

Aaron

Cool. I wasn't to worried about functionality. I wanted to make sure the actual process of making the skeleton made sense. This is going to be a major feature of the video game.

Sandwich

ANONYMOUS PYTHON OOOOUT

Aaron

12:34

see ya

Sandwich

I just left the sheet

I'm not actually leaving

Aaron

Oh.

Joshua Aslan Smith

12:54

@waxeagle sorry about last night, I responded maybe because Holly had a super stressful day and I didnt know if Id be able to help her calm down in time for the game, but then ended up being able to play but only knowing that around 8pm. Hopefully we can all get together and continue next week.

Alex Mitan

If I asked the stack something like "What's a balanced/interesting way to make an Artificer-like character in Fate?", would it get closed as subjective or something?

Joshua Aslan Smith

Its something we might be able to do but you would need a LOT of detail and requirements

especially since artificer has many different versions across editions

Also your goal would need to be heavily defined

Alex Mitan

In.. in Fate... does anyone even take previous Fate editions into account?

Joshua Aslan Smith

balanced/interesting is a bad goal for SE users to work toward as both of those are very subjective

@AlexMitan Im saying there are different artificers in D&D

trogdor

@AlexMitan he means between different D&D editions

Alex Mitan

13:07

Yeah, but I'm talking about Fate RPG

Joshua Aslan Smith

but you are talking about replicating a class that has multiple versions into another game

Alex Mitan

He wants this sort of... mechanomage..thingy

Yeah, I should inquire further

Joshua Aslan Smith

so you would need to nail down specifically what about your specific idea of artificer does, what is core to the character

trogdor

what he is trying to say is that you need to make it clear exactly what you mean by artificer

Joshua Aslan Smith

@AlexMitan ah yeah your player, not you should probably post it

Alex Mitan

13:08

..hmm, yeah, true

Ok, but what about a warlock, a 5e Old One warlock being replicated as an idea in Fate

I have a whole page of backstory about what the character has, acts and wants

Joshua Aslan Smith

basically SE while a great way to get help and communication functions like a software design team and to get good output you need good input and that means lots of specifications and information to achieve results.

So firstly are you playing Fate Acclerated or just regulare Fate?

Alex Mitan

Accelerated

preparing for it

I'll have the session somewhere next month but I've been manically reading about Fate in every way and everywhere I can

two of the players have a very good idea of what they want to be, one of them wanting a Warlock of some sort

like an Old One 5e warlock

The main thing would be his familiar... his summon

if I treated it as an individual character he'd basically be a bit overpowered, with two turns per turn

Joshua Aslan Smith

I believe this summon could/would be an aspect

Im not a super fate expert though, the person you really wanna talk to is @besw who is probably asleep right now (he lives way out in guam)

BESW

BESW is currently in South Carolina.

Joshua Aslan Smith

@besw THIS IS MADNESS

sillyputty

13:17

Not sure how it works in Core Rules, but in Strands of Fate, you can model it as an Advantage. It would cost quite a bit of starting Advantage Points, but it would essentially give a character a whole new stress track, and a way to do things he normally wouldn't be able to do cause, hey, familiar. Or, as @JoshuaAslanSmith suggests, Aspect.

Joshua Aslan Smith

conference?

BESW

But not around as much as usual because visiting.

Family & friends.

sillyputty

Also, hullo everyone.

BESW

And talk to @Pixie about pet mechanics in Fate.

Joshua Aslan Smith

Id imagine that his/her familiar would be around all the time, hence having it represented in 1 or 2 aspects to trigger it would make sense

in general from other systems as well doing things with/as the pet uses your turn is a nice way to balance pets vs characters without pets

BESW

13:19

We've talked about that before.

As for the artificer bit... yeah, gonna have to know more about the story before we can talk mechanics.

What does "artificer" mean for the player? How does his artificing help solve problems?

Joshua Aslan Smith

Ive also seen legendary/magical weapons modeled as aspects to keep them balanced because they are part of that characters identity and approach

Alex Mitan

Oh damn I've got to go

Thank you very much everyone

I'll check everything when I come back

Thank you, see you around!

doppelgreener

14:26

@JoshuaAslanSmith or me, maybe trogdor too

besw and i have both spent similarly enormous amounts of time examining fate

he just tends to beat me to the questions 8)

Miniman

15:04

@JoshuaAslanSmith THIS IS ~~SPARTA~~ SOUTH CAROLINA!

Joshua Aslan Smith

hmm I guess ive returne dto lurk

BESW

16:09

Yeah, there are plenty of Fate experts hanging around here.

Sandwich

17:00

I'm not one of them X3

Just D&d here

And a bit of Maid

Maid is a really silly system

Pixie

20:46

@AlexMitan On pets in Fate: I can't give you something tried and true because I haven't gotten to play Fate much myself, but I've been thinking about similar topics lately.

@Sandwich Which is what makes it so fun. :P

(Scratch the summoner bit, I somehow managed to think of the wrong game.)

Pixie

21:19

Also, if we're discussing converting D&Dish classes to Fate, I haven't used this, but it exists and has good reviews.

BESW

21:35

@Pixie Good catch!

JohnP

22:17

Anyone know of a pathfinder effect/spell/ability to where you can possess someone's shadow?

Zachiel

22:37

Wonderful D&D session tonight. Characters wandered around a town in search for a cure to an impending threat, I got the opportunity to RP s many different NPCs. Enervating halflings! Dwarves with prejudices against elves! Priests with prejudices againts adventurers! Meddling merchants! Amulet peddlers! And the list goes on!

Transcript for