Set 3 Open Playtest

[Krylancelo]

I'd say it is instant in that an animal happens to be passing by at the time the ability is used. The ranger seeing it tries to lure it then and there as part of the ranger's action, so in reality its not quite instant because it will always take atleast that action (likely a major action for the Communication(Animal Handling) test) for the ranger to still lure it. It's just instant in the animals time to arrive because it is already nearby.

15 seconds for luring an animal and have it help the ranger? Even it happens to be passing by, I'd say that this is quite a short time.

[Zapp]

I don't think the 2d6 minutes time period is "wait until a suitable animal can be found", i.e. something passive. I think the 2d6 minutes time period is the amount of time you spend calling the animal to you and befriending it, after which it's ready to fight for you.

The difference being that if you happen to roll 12, that might not only be because the animal was far away (or didn't hear your call). It might also be because it was especially wild and uncooperative.

(12 minutes to tame any beast is still very very good... )



Regarding the original question: If you're asking if it's reasonable to change the time from 2d6 minutes to 1d6+6 minutes, then by all means, go ahead if that makes for a better game in your campaign. But if you're asking if 2d6-6 should be considered to have "1" as its minimum value, sorry, I don't see why zero = instant isn't what the designer intended (assuming, of course, it wasn't a honest mistake)

[Krylancelo]

I don't think the 2d6 minutes time period is "wait until a suitable animal can be found", i.e. something passive. I think the 2d6 minutes time period is the amount of time you spend calling the animal to you and befriending it, after which it's ready to fight for you.

I agree with you on the passive aspect of that test. But befriending an animal in less than a minute? Well...no, I guess, I'd rather stick with the 1d6+6 minutes.

But if you're asking if 2d6-6 should be considered to have "1" as its minimum value, sorry, I don't see why zero = instant isn't what the designer intended (assuming, of course, it wasn't a honest mistake)

Well, take Runecrafting, for example. Similar gameplay mechanics, one difference: The time for the inscription of a rune cannot be reduced to zero.

I guess, I'll wait and see.

Thanks for your answers.

[Halistar]

Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems to me that the novice level of the Mounted Combat Style talent is completely worthless once you get the journeyman level.

With just the novice level, it makes some sense, but even then only in the specific situation when you start a round between a half and full move action away from your target, and wish to end your turn not adjacent to that target. Normally you could get the same effect that this talent seems to give by charging, and then moving away as your minor action, so all this gives you is the ability to do that when a bit farther away (though also losing +1 to attack from charging).

Once you get the journeyman level though, I can't think of how you could make use of the novice ability in such a way that a charge followed by a move couldn't accomplish the same thing but with a +1 to hit to boot. You can start from up to one full move away, charge, and then move up to a full move away.

Am I making sense, and am I right in my interpretation of the rules?

[Vaelorn]

Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems to me that the novice level of the Mounted Combat Style talent is completely worthless once you get the journeyman level.

With just the novice level, it makes some sense, but even then only in the specific situation when you start a round between a half and full move action away from your target, and wish to end your turn not adjacent to that target. Normally you could get the same effect that this talent seems to give by charging, and then moving away as your minor action, so all this gives you is the ability to do that when a bit farther away (though also losing +1 to attack from charging).

Once you get the journeyman level though, I can't think of how you could make use of the novice ability in such a way that a charge followed by a move couldn't accomplish the same thing but with a +1 to hit to boot. You can start from up to one full move away, charge, and then move up to a full move away.

Am I making sense, and am I right in my interpretation of the rules?

I see what you mean. I've often thought it would make more sense if there was a minimum charge distance rather than a maximum one. I'm guessing that the normal maximum distance for a charge is half Speed because coupled with a move action it allows you to travel at most Speed x 1.5 in a round.

Reading the novice description again: "When mounted and making a move action, you can move part of your allowed distance, make a melee or ranged attack, and then move the rest of your allowed distance." Does this mean that you get an additional attack? Because the move action is a minor, and you could still attack (or charge!) as a major. What it doesn't say is something like "During your round you may move after your attack, provided the total distance moved is not greater than your Speed", which might be what's intended. Still doesn't help with your point though!

[Halistar]

Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems to me that the novice level of the Mounted Combat Style talent is completely worthless once you get the journeyman level.

With just the novice level, it makes some sense, but even then only in the specific situation when you start a round between a half and full move action away from your target, and wish to end your turn not adjacent to that target. Normally you could get the same effect that this talent seems to give by charging, and then moving away as your minor action, so all this gives you is the ability to do that when a bit farther away (though also losing +1 to attack from charging).

Once you get the journeyman level though, I can't think of how you could make use of the novice ability in such a way that a charge followed by a move couldn't accomplish the same thing but with a +1 to hit to boot. You can start from up to one full move away, charge, and then move up to a full move away.

Am I making sense, and am I right in my interpretation of the rules?

I see what you mean. I've often thought it would make more sense if there was a minimum charge distance rather than a maximum one. I'm guessing that the normal maximum distance for a charge is half Speed because coupled with a move action it allows you to travel at most Speed x 1.5 in a round.

Reading the novice description again: "When mounted and making a move action, you can move part of your allowed distance, make a melee or ranged attack, and then move the rest of your allowed distance." Does this mean that you get an additional attack? Because the move action is a minor, and you could still attack (or charge!) as a major. What it doesn't say is something like "During your round you may move after your attack, provided the total distance moved is not greater than your Speed", which might be what's intended. Still doesn't help with your point though!

I hadn't considered your interpretation of getting a second attack. I am sure that wasn't the intent for two reasons. One, because the last line in the description says, "Normally, you’d have to finish moving before attacking." This implies that the attack in the middle of your move is instead of a normal attack which you could make. Second, it would be game breaking; a level three character could get two attacks per round in many combat situations.

I'm glad that you see my point though. I thought I might have been missing something.

Your interpretation did make me think of something. They might have meant you can move before and after the attack you make as part of a charge action. That would also correspond to the last line which I quoted before.

[aris]

a) With out this talent, if you wanted to attack mounted (starting away from your opponent) and then continue moving you would need to spend a charge action and then use a move action to move away from him.

b) with novice you can with same action move to your target, attack then continue moving. you still need to spent a move action to move and a major to attack but you can begin your turn further than before, since with charge you can move only half your speed. On the other hand the total distance you can travel is less since you only move up to your speed instead of moving your 3/2 speed (charge + move). So here I totally agree with you

c) with journey man you can charge (move full speed) spending a major action. Then after this, can you continue moving the rest of your speed or after your charge the remaining movement is lost and you must spend an extra minor action to continue moving? I think that what they intended was to allow you to continue moving after the charge action up to your speed. In that way journeyman talent uses the novice ability.

On the other hand even if what I am saying is wrong, it is acceptable I think for a higher talent to make useless the novice one. You can see it as an upgrade of the novice one. IMHO a talent can either add an extra ability or upgrade an ability you already have.

[Vaelorn]

On the other hand even if what I am saying is wrong, it is acceptable I think for a higher talent to make useless the novice one. You can see it as an upgrade of the novice one. IMHO a talent can either add an extra ability or upgrade an ability you already have.

I think I disagree with this point, as this mechanic not reflected in any other talent or specialization description that we've had so far. In fact, in many cases, it's almost the opposite. Take Thievery for example. This allows you to re-roll various thief-type tests: Lock-Picking at Novice, then Traps, then Searching. You could probably put these in any order and still have a perfectly reasonable talent. Some talent degrees do build on previous ones: Single Weapon (Novice) gives +1 Defense, Journeyman gives +2. I wouldn't say it makes Novice obsolete - but does enhance it.

Making one degree of a talent obsolete strikes me as wrong (a bit like the "feat tax" in some elements of 4th ed D&D). I really don't think GR meant it to be read that way!

[shonuff]

But that's a case of the journeyman making the novice ability obsolete. If a later talent gives an upgrade, you don't use the previous one. Champion does the same, IIRC.

[Vaelorn]

I've just looked up Champion, and it does't do that: novice is -1 to enemies in range, and journeyman is about Rally mode.

But I'll concede that Single Weapon Style probably wasn't the best example to make my point!

[shonuff]

It's Journeyman and Master for Champion. And just giving a cursory look over Sync's Forge program, Berserker Novice -> Journeyman ability is an improvement (so blame Sync if it's wrong! lol). Also, Assassin's Master ability is kind of an improvement of Novice (kind of... may be a stretch, though).

All-in-all, while more often than not, you're right that talents do not make previous levels obsolete, there is some evidence of it, as well.

[Vaelorn]

Champion (Master) gives +1 to Courage and +1 to damage, which is in addition to the +1 to Morale and Defense at Journeyman, so I wouldn't say it makes it obsolete. I take your point about Berserker though. It's interesting that this discussion is focussing on specializations to provide examples where higher level degrees may make lower level ones obsolete - I wonder if that's a defining feature of them when compared to 'regular' talents?

[Zapp]

Well...no, I guess, I'd rather stick with the 1d6+6 minutes.

As I said, if that house rule works in your campaign - go for it!

[shonuff]

Champion (Master) gives +1 to Courage and +1 to damage, which is in addition to the +1 to Morale and Defense at Journeyman, so I wouldn't say it makes it obsolete.

I would say it does because you would never use the Journeyman ability. The Master ability is both.

It's interesting that this discussion is focussing on specializations to provide examples where higher level degrees may make lower level ones obsolete - I wonder if that's a defining feature of them when compared to 'regular' talents ?

Yeah, it's interesting that most of the improvements happen in the specializations, but even most of them give new perks as opposed to improvements. Personally, I would love more talents in general. My game will be giving a talent point every level as opposed to every odd one; I think that the RAW talent growth tends to focus the talents more around the combat aspects.

[Loswaith]

A couple of take on Mounted Combat talent.
The Move action is the only one that is split, so I'd likely be inclined to say the intent is for it to be used with a major action for the attack. Given you cant charge with a ranged attack, which the Novice talent makes mention of is what leads me to the conclusion. So in effect you are using part of your move before and after a major action (which you cant otherwise do), in this case the attack.

While the Journeyman gives a bonus to Charge range, effectivly giving a full round charge of double speed rather than 1.5 speed, while some can happen before and some after the charge itself as well. While it doesnt completly superceded the novice ability (it upgrades the melee part some), as the novice ability still allows the ranged attack to be used with split movement.

[vonpenguin]

I really wouldn’t dismiss the novice level of Mounted combat. Cavalry is traditionally shock troops or skirmishers, neither one of which should get “stuck in” to a drawn out combat if they can help it. Mechanically a standard riding horse has 20 speed. Assume the PC spent some cash on barding and we can estimate an 18 speed. Average human enemy will likely have a 12 base speed. Minus 2 for light mail is ten. If the horseman charges a group then uses a minor to retreat at 18 then a group with an effective 10 speed can catch up to and surround the horseman in a single turn. They won’t be able to attack right away but it’s not happy fun times for Mr. Cavalry. Against a larger force I’d take the lack of a plus one to hit in order to get out of reach faster.

[Arimmus]

I would actually like to see something done with Military lore for combat.

Dunno what to call it but this is how i would go about it:

Novice: Choose a Single target in the encounter. Make a Cunning (Military lore) TN (GM Choice) to gain a +1 to either defense or attack for the remainder of the encounter. You can switch targets as a Minor action.
Journeymen: Choose a Type of enemy (Warrior, Rogue, Mage). Make a Cunning (Military Lore) TN (GM's Choice) To find all of that type of enemy in the encounter. You gain +1 defense and attack against that type. You can only do this once per encounter.
Master: Choose a race ( Darkspawn, Dwarf, Elf, Human, Kossith). Make a Cunning (Military lore) TN (Gm Choice) and gain +1 Stunt points against that type. You may only attempt this once per encounter.

[Loswaith]

Not a bad idea Arimmus, though it would be more linked to tactics for something like that than Military Lore.

[Arimmus]

I thought that was the purpose of Military lore, Learning Tactics, or am I mistaken?

[shonuff]

I would think it wouldn't work for single combat, but would be useful for mass combat.

[Loswaith]

I thought that was the purpose of Military lore, Learning Tactics, or am I mistaken?

Actually your correct, I seemed to have missed the factor that the RAW has no Tactics focus and Military Lore actually covers that.

[Arimmus]

I was gunna say, lol. oh wells, we all make mistakes. Get me coffee and we coo..

[5trangeCase]

Hi, new to the forums. I'm a Player who will be taking over for our GM for a couple of sessions, and thus I thought it important to read the Set 3 open playtest. But I found quite a few problems in the rules that I'm not exactly sure where to deliver to:

First: "Slippery", the Rogue class power, is identical to Single Weapon Style (Master).

Second: I expect that this will be instantly dismissed, but it seems like a good idea that Green Ronin offer alternatives to those powers and bonuses that refer to Exploration and Roleplaying stunts. I don't know whether we're alone in this, but our group finds those game features slightly abhorrent.

Third: This is a balance issue, but is it some kind of cruel irony that Green Ronin seems to have replicated the nature of Ranger in DA:O with it in this game? Basically, Rangers, if considered competitively, are awful. The animal they summon takes up to 12 minutes to summon. Most encounters will be long over by then. So, you summon it in advance. Except it disappears in half an hour, which means you have to predict when you will get into a fight, and any scenario where you can consistently predict when you will have a combat encounter probably isn't all that great.

Finally: Related, although this is another thing that will doubtlessly be ignored...It's sad how the word specialty gets abused so often in games like this :p If you specialise in something, it means you're good in one area, like Duelist and close combat. Except you can also take Marksman, meaning that you can't really be called specialised in anything. What would be a better idea, in my opinion, is if they added greater levels for the initial specialisation you chose.

But I don't want this post to be viewed as some ragevent. I really do like the DARPG system a lot of the time, it's nice, clean and easy to swallow and all the things it does it does well. And by association, I like Green Ronin. There are just flaws to everything.

[Elfie]

First: "Slippery", the Rogue class power, is identical to Single Weapon Style (Master).

Good catch. Maybe Slippery would be better worded as something where if you have both Slippery and Single Weapon Style (Master), you are actually harder to hit when outnumbered.

"You use different moves when you're fighting half a dozen people than when you only have to be worried... about ... one."

[shonuff]

First: "Slippery", the Rogue class power, is identical to Single Weapon Style (Master).

Yeah, I'm assuming that will change.

Third: This is a balance issue, but is it some kind of cruel irony that Green Ronin seems to have replicated the nature of Ranger in DA:O with it in this game? Basically, Rangers, if considered competitively, are awful. The animal they summon takes up to 12 minutes to summon. Most encounters will be long over by then. So, you summon it in advance. Except it disappears in half an hour, which means you have to predict when you will get into a fight, and any scenario where you can consistently predict when you will have a combat encounter probably isn't all that great.

Look at Bard from set 2 for horrible balance! Anyhoo, a pet could be an extremely powerful ally (emphasis on could). It seems fair to me that it wouldn't always be able to be summoned.

Finally: Related, although this is another thing that will doubtlessly be ignored...It's sad how the word specialty gets abused so often in games like this :p If you specialise in something, it means you're good in one area, like Duelist and close combat. Except you can also take Marksman, meaning that you can't really be called specialised in anything. What would be a better idea, in my opinion, is if they added greater levels for the initial specialisation you chose.

You could call it a misnomer, then. Or that a duelist/marksman has a certain level of speciality in close combat, but a duelist/assassin has even more.