Say I create a spiritual weapon in the form of a (horizontal) quarterstaff. Can I grab it and use the bonus action to move it (and myself) 20 feet. Say move me across a pit, or allowing me to take the rest of my normal movement, or even avoid introducing and attack of opportunity.
My character ha...
@trogdor You might be "lucky" enough to become Fey, which means you retain your identity and actually gain the power to warp reality: instead of being at the whim of whatever stories are happening around you, a Fey playing into their chosen character tropes compels the people and things around them to fit themselves into the Fey's story.
(But even Fey can't survive in the most chaotic worlds, just like dragons can't survive in the very most orderly worlds.)
I'm a newbie D&D5e Wizard player and was intrigued by the Ritual tag and its major benefits for Wizards.
I'd like to ask if a Ritual Spell in my Spellbook can be cast multiple times a day, without the need for a rest, assuming I have plentiful components to cast said spell?
Wow, I nce more looked into the Bête thing, unearthed the Nagah stance (which is plainly WEIRD) but I am still locked with not being able to write more XD
@AncientSwordRage yes, I have one answer that literally broke the cap of how much I can put in an answer, leading to me writing an extended answer in a google-doc...
@Trish so from my cursory research when I was but a teenager, I thought all the werewolf tribes were strongly tied to human ethnic groups (which felt weird and slightly wrong). Is that true, or am I really misinformed?
@AncientSwordRage yes and no, actually a good question to ask. All are patterned after some groups, but not necessarily ethic ones. Black furies are female activists, but the tribe has greek origins. Silver lords are designed to be the rulers, but are stereotypical russian. Get are dedicated warriors, but stereotypical nose/germanic. Bone Gnawers are not ethnically bound, but often homeless...
Silent striders are supposed to beof egyptian, north-african and arabian descent, but are less bound to be so. Red Talons are of no human descent at all.
@AncientSwordRage no, that's the wrong way around. you don't become a werewolf, you are born one. You could be of nordic heritage, but your mom or dad was a Silent Strider bloodline (who just dropped you off somewhere) and then you are taught by a Glasswalker, so you are Glasswalker.
It's somewhat complicated actually. I mean, technically, after the first transformation you have just 2 aspects, unless you are metis: Your breed (homid/lupus) and your auspiece (when did you change). The tribe is who accepts and taught you and bound you to their tribal totem
the typical way is that your parent or one of their tribe teaches you, but as the Black Spiral Dancers and the male, not metis Black Fury born show (which are given to other tribes to care for) show, you can be genetically hailing from one tribe, but you are introduced into another.
@AncientSwordRage in vampire you are what your sire is (unless you are a gargoyle)
@AncientSwordRage The degree to which it works will vary by game line. For a game that is heavily leaning towards a reboot, like VtM<-->VtR, I guess it'll be good enough. For a game whose design principle is 'let us trample and burn all the iconic stuff about the spiritual predecessor!', like CtL's attitude to CtD, this will be a false friend.
@AncientSwordRage The pentaphilia can make a setting look less naturalistic . . . even if it's convenient to have a same splat matrix recurring everywhere. Because of how regular and convenient it is.
@vicky_molokh-unsilenceMonica I have the same question of whats the appeal of the 20th edition games when CoD exists? I know there's story baggage, but having never engaged with that, it's never been a pull for me
@vicky_molokh-unsilenceMonica To answer plainly I prefer the mechanical system
@vicky_molokh-unsilenceMonica that sounds good to me, but it felt weird personally, that CoD already does a really good job (IMO) of mechanical streamlining
it felt like Python 3 vs Python 2 (no idea if that analogy hits). Yes Python 2 feels more like a scripting language, but the benefits of Python 3 outweigh that
@AncientSwordRage Some people do advocate using Storytelling System in place of Storyteller System where the mechanics fit into otherwise compatible 'slots'. Which is mostly the two Mage games.
But I don't think there would be any compatibility in, say, Changeling.
@vicky_molokh-unsilenceMonica I think so, if you separate the core from the 'extras'. Integrity works better than morality etc, imo. Conditions are great.
@AncientSwordRage Mage is one where the powers are the most freeform of the bunch, in both settings, despite vast lore differences. Freeform magic demands flexible, almost-setting-agnostic mechanics. And flexible, almost-setting-agnostic mechanics are easier to port.
Thus the mage mechanics are more mutually portable.
So long as you port the rest of the core, of course.
But Changeling? Yeah, good luck with porting that one, you're gonna need it, because from what relatively modest knowledge I have of the two Changelings, they are so distinct that trying to force-port the mechanics of Lost onto Dreaming would stop Dreaming from feeling like Dreaming at all.
Because of course most of White Wolf mechanics are written setting-rigidly.
@AncientSwordRage Well, consider this: Storytelling and Storyteller don't have a generic splat-agnostic fast-acting mechanic that gets slightly modified to produce the variants existing throughout splats with some cost adjustment resulting from the differences. Instead, vampires have Celerity and werewolves have Rage and werespiders have blood-point-powered-extra-actions and each of them is a basic building block.
Each of them is carved out of stone as a singular thing, tailored to a specific splat, built from the ground up without any internal transparency of the building process.
@vicky_molokh-unsilenceMonica that is definitely one issue, and one I would love to see resolved, but they seem committed to playing the splats separately
@vicky_molokh-unsilenceMonica I initially thought you meant, for instance vampire powers come from blood, werewolf from spirit worlds, mage from twisting reality
all of those can be ported/tweaked to suit a setting
but changling seems like it wouldn't work from what I know
@AncientSwordRage Source of power doesn't matter much. How it works is what's important. But there's no general implementation that gets customised for each variant in transparent ways, piece by piece. Instead, each time a new splat gets some sort of super-speed power, the new power gets carved from scratch out of a single block of stone.
@AncientSwordRage It's not impossible, it just requires building the common base first, including the framework for customisation-compatible powers. Then splats need to be built using those building blocks.
@vicky_molokh-unsilenceMonica I think you could find some constants (speed ability), rework those to be consistent, and then pull a common base out of that rework
@vicky_molokh-unsilenceMonica no, but it sounds fun as a thought experiment
For a worked example of the benefits and flaws of such an approach, consider how GURPS 4e (not 3e!) built its supers, its sorcery magic (but not other types), its monsters for Monster Hunters (vampires, shapeshifters &c.).
GURPS front-loads a lot of complexity. Which means it is indeed a monster, but also establishes frameworks for handling many things later with more coherence. Note more coherence, not perfect coherence. There's no such thing as a perfect system.
4e is by no means perfect, partially because the establishment of a solid framework didn't go far enough, partially because reverse-compatibility comes at a cost, partially just a case of things not working out as great as hoped for.
@AncientSwordRage Oh, it's not that kind of reverse-compatibility. But things like maintaining some naming conventions because they're familiar. Or keeping the largely similar pricing structure, even though there are issues with the curve produced by the ratio of competence breadth vs. competence pricing per level.
An awkward example is Rcl ('recoil'), which in 3e behaved as gun recoil, but in 4e behaves more like overall bullet spread during rapid fire, but is still called Rcl/recoil, which can be misleading.
Overall, 4e autofire rules are one of the things where redesign wasn't fundamental enough, resulting in autofire behaving very weirdly for anything other than human-sized opponents shooting at each other within typical engagement ranges with typical handheld small arms.
It's not bad if you run typical modern action games. It gets awkward when the same rules get used for handling spaceship-to-spaceship missile barrages and point defence against the latter.
@vicky_molokh-unsilenceMonica the opportunity to play is more based on my freetime/focus than availability, but if that changes I will hit them up
I'm currently working on my own system which is pulling from things like WoD/Cod, mouse guard, smidgeon of DnD and hearing how GURPS had handled being suitably generic is very helpful to the thought process
@AncientSwordRage I've been trying to make a system of my own, inspired largely by GURPS, FATE and EABA. It's not a self-evident process, but I think I found a promising pathway. Transparent (even if complex) scaling formulae, like the deciBel progression, provide opportunity to better control the results one's rules achieve, but this still requires plugging in the right numbers into the variable slots. But . . . at least that makes fixes easier.
My question was, how do you balance enabling different builds having equal agency over how their powers function Vs making different builds feel unique?
Ah, yes: Making Superman Truly Invulnerable describes how to avoid the "Superman always wins" problem by reinforcing the "paper world" feeling. Superman doesn't get physically hurt, but bad things happen around him.
@AncientSwordRage At some point the progress stalled, but my attitude was to focus less on uniqueness of builds within a given specialisation, and more on ensuring differentiation between specialisations.
Though do note that my leaning has more to do with understanding I as an amateur TTRPG designer lack the skill, crew of assistants, and the time required to produce something with the degree of detail GURPS or EABA have.
It's not that I don't appreciate a system that has multiple, mostly-balanced and distinct ways to build a specialist of a given profile. It's that this requires more work than something where a single specialisation is always built around the same mechanical core with a minor refluffing and/or minor mechanical adjustments (such as applicability to certain situations).
@AncientSwordRage I'm using it more as 'specialise in opening locks', 'specialise in mêlée combat', 'specialise in electronics warfare', or (on the weirder side) 'specialise in combat against a single opponent'.
Having five ways to build a mêlée fighter, all comparable in terms of competence achieved per units of chargen currency paid, is something that can be enjoyable, but I think it's reasonable to sacrifice that when there is a scarcity of TTRPG-design 'resources'.
A huge consideration about evaluating the price of competence is how often it is relevant throughout the campaign.
There are . . . different approaches to handling that consideration, all with trade-offs.
@vicky_molokh-unsilenceMonica I think I'm close to answering the point @BESW raised a short while back about identifying what I want my system to achieve, in that I want a strong coupling between character personality/behaviour/motivation to their mechanics
so rather than having strength, characters have 'Brute', which might be brute forcing a door or brute forcing the password an encrypting harddrive
@AncientSwordRage I've got notes toward a system where the PC's stats are the stories (media, family, history, etc) they use to understand their world and themselves.
But what you're describing sounds a lot more like Fate Accelerated's approaches.
Approaches are "TV logic," where a Forceful character is equally good at bashing in a door or pushing through social niceties, while a Clever character is equally good at programming and linguistics.
(The differentiation comes in the narrative permissions granted or revoked by aspects.)
The base roll modifier is unchanged for Forcefully breaking a door or Forcefully convincing a client, but your aspects give you permission to try things, or say that things can't be tried; or increase or decrease the difficulty of you achieving those things (change your target numbers); and aspects also give you and your opponents hooks to hang fate point currency on when things get rough.
(Just like you can have +5 Lockpicking but still not be able to pick a lock if you don't have your picks, or it's an electronic lock, etc. Narrative justifies access to mechanics.)
@vicky_molokh-unsilenceMonica Weird! I was thinking of giving each stat a knack, so that while yes you might be more motivated to brute force a physical door, so get a small bonus, you have a knack for computers so that is where you excel
@AncientSwordRage I personally think (after some playing of FAE and comparing) areas of competence are best for always-on stats, with things like motivation or style being better suited to more 'optional' and/or 'on-and-off' 'bolt-ons' like Aspects (invoked a limited number of times per session by spending Fate Points) or Stunts (often customised on a per-character basis).
I was thinking of cribbing the conflict system from Mouseguard, and where you roll your stats (e.g. that 3d12 had two success and totals 25) you can (depending on the conflict type you pick) convert or spend some of that total to limit break tokens to spend later
@vicky_molokh-unsilenceMonica I think I like the idea that your characters are almost fables/avatars of ideals, so having them work like aspects (?) seems apt
@AncientSwordRage Your sentence looks like how I've seen Exalted Fair Folk implemented by someone, and I suspect inspired by Three Rocketeers. But maybe I'm mistaken.
@AncientSwordRage It's one of the many Worlds of Adventure for Fate that Evil Hat made via their Patreon funding. Each World manual assumes you're familiar with Fate Core or Accelerated, and then proposes changes and additions to modify the system for a particular setting/campaign conceit. Three Rocketeers is basically "What if Three Musketeers but with jetpacks?"
Lots of mechanics for buckling swashes, which Fate of the TMNT borrows for differentiating turtle combat techniques.
Fate of the TMNT also has this cool "two-sided aspect" thing first described here which defines a truth about the setting that both the PCs and the NPCs can use to their advantage, and access to it wobbles back and forth over the course of the session to create an extra layer of pacing.
@BESW lots of the worlds seem to ask questions of that format, and it's great. "What if cats but magic?" "What if laser fantasy but archeologists?" (Or what if archeology but laser fantasy?)
@AncientSwordRage Well Exalted's native system is a variant of Storyteller. Meanwhile, the implementation I saw was seemingly inspired by Three Rocketeers. What I remember is that Aspects were assigned ratings (like Skills or Approaches); I don't remember whether Rocketeers had such ratings too or not.
At the end of season two the writers proved they were willing to lay down stakes that matter, and pay them off by dramatically altering the status quo. They spent a significant portion of season three doing an extended version of the "lowest point" farmhouse beat from the movie and the show really grew its beard during that time. And they just hit the ground running after that, leaning into the most ridiculous gonzo bits of Turtle lore and shaking things up dramatically at least once a season.
Shillelagh states (emphasis added):
For the Duration, you can use your Spellcasting Ability instead of Strength for the Attack and Damage Rolls of Melee Attacks using that weapon, and the weapon's damage die becomes a d8.
Does this mean you have to use the spellcasting ability, even if Strength...
Asking if it's a problem nobody is answering the OPs question seems odd in the middle of a Fate conversation, but not an overreaction. I'll go look at the question in question.
Better answers have come in, but I'm not sure how to handle the original two. They don't actually answer the question at all - in either a frame challenge or the question itself.
Sure, but then after the fact they still didn't update to answer. I guess it just feels like an answer to a question that isn't asked now. They could have added an actual answer as well, but they both just left it as that.
It as actually asked in comments to the question what school they were.
OP wants to change criteria after you've spent time building a productanswer ... I can understand not changing the answer. I do not like when reqs change.
@NautArch "Well, it is there, " doesn't come off as a particularly friendly opener. The "Well" is superfluous and makes it hard for me to read the comment in a bouncy friendly voice in my head.
I half expected a request to talk to the manager to follow.
Yeah. They'll get downvotes for not answering the question while the OP won't get downvoted for pulling a bait and switch by changing the requirements after the answers are in.
Flag the OP. I don't like it when people ask how fast a stock from the dealer car can go then come back and specify, not a sports car but a compact hatchback.
I'm happy to let the now non-answers accumulate downvotes.
I'm a newbie D&D5e Wizard player and was intrigued by the Ritual tag and its major benefits for Wizards.
I'd like to ask if a Ritual Spell in my Spellbook can be cast multiple times a day, without the need for a rest, assuming I have plentiful components to cast said spell?
Shillelagh states (emphasis added):
For the Duration, you can use your Spellcasting Ability instead of Strength for the Attack and Damage Rolls of Melee Attacks using that weapon, and the weapon's damage die becomes a d8.
Does this mean you have to use the spellcasting ability, even if Strength...
