Recent Posts
From categories:
page 1123...next »

Yea this is what I tried to say just much better said and less confusingly.

So this +1 and much more.

Yea…. Tbh if it was up to me I would very much changed how the quad stat system for attributes in gurps/DFRPG into something ala pathfinder with 6 stats, but you know at that point one could as well just rebuild the entire system since the entire skill system would have to be revamped.

Lets just say I am not a great fan of Willpower and Perception scaling IQ and leave it at that shall we, Pretty sure I could write an 6000 words assignment on that subject given the time and willpower to do it ;P

Third advantage: The only defense is diving for cover. Now you're prone, and it'll take 2 rounds to recover. And you still take a third of the damage.

The only defense is "Taking Cover" which is either a retreat or a dodge and drop. So you can just do a dodge roll and take a step away from the explosion without going prone.

There is a big difference between what is right mathematically/technically and what feels right.

In Xcom Enemy Unknown you have % based hit chances. While playtesting the developer noticed that the testers were unhappy with how certain hit chances worked out. If you have a 95% chance to hit people would be very unhappy if they missed even though it had a 1/20 chance to happen. So the developers changed the code so that a 95% chance (as seen by the player) is a 100% chance to hit in reality.
Similar situation was encountered in one of the Civilization games. People would be ok with loosing a fight with 4 to 3 odds. But when the odds where 16 to 12 they assumed they would win more often even though the ratio was still 4 to 3.

What I am getting at is yes the cost and result of an explosive spell is right from a mechanical standpoint. It still can feel very unsatisfying for the player especially considering that you have to hit the maximum amount of targets to break even with the cost (action economy not withstanding). Stunning and wounding the enemies is very good and has a huge impact on the fight. Having the feeling that an explosive spell does too little oomph for its cost can still be an issue even though mathematically and balance wise it is fine.

Like many things in GURPS the explosive missile spells needs tactic and planning to get the most out of, like getting the enemy grouped up in a choke point. As an example for that I can point to last session where we fought 10 constructs with scythes for hands. The ninja wanted to retreat because he was scared of getting killed but we convinced him to stay and not move since that would let us hold a 3 hex front line which prevented the enemy from swarming around us and attacking from all sides. I don't know how the fight would have turned out if the enemy could have swarmed us but with the front line established it was very easy.

That is indeed the one magical trap I can recall, yes :)

And the truth of my statement is actually a quirk of the system - spotting traps is Per-based, which for every class except wizard is equal to or greater than your IQ… and clerics much like wizards benefit greatly from increased IQ. The best trap finder in the campaign is Martos Silverbeard, dwarven cleric of Rehuna.

Wait really? Sure the magical fluid draining basin dont count as a magical trap?

Well if so then I am honestly surprised to learn that is true, I guess mixing memories in the campaign preping sessions here, I am however tired so odds of that is likely i am.

Either way good on you guys in that case. +1

Gonna adress one thing in specific here, because it is useful to know for anyone reading this thread: no player has so far run into ANY trap that required a specific class to notice.

The fact that your knight (more or less the worst class in the entire game for spotting traps and other hazards, along with the swashbuckler) fails to spot a trap nine times out of ten doesn't actually mean you need a thief to spot a trap. And regarding the one(?) magical trap players have run into, identifying that thing is a thaumatology roll, which is a skill anyone can learn if they want to invest a point or two.

Oh sure, when its a tightly packed formation of squishy fleshlings with internal organs and what else to be effected I am sure it can be used to great effect. Just of what I have seen, down below in the dungeon, I have yet to see an tight formation of enemies that could be stunned like that example.

But otherwise yea that seems about right as far as advantages of explosion spells goes but again I do stand on my point as far as AoE damage spells goes, they generally leaves me unimpressed by the result. As I said earlier, Sure the one guy in the middle of it is bloody dead but I would be lying if I didn't say the sole reason I see the appeal of those spells is because they are the best of otherwise mediocre options.

Anyway at this point I think we are just arguing in circles and standing at each point of arguement and getting nowhere, And since I am leaving the campaign, I see no real reason to continue this one ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

So live in respect and disagreement or how the norwegian saying goes.1

I wish you and your GM staff best of luck with running rest of the campaign and the offer of getting my character as an PC to hand out to others still stands, Otherwise have nice day/evening.

Oh I am, Just dont change the fact as an offensive spell against things you find down in the dungeon, Its leaves much to be desired.

Having it doing full damage for 7 hexes would becompletly insane for this system considering you can at most have like… 37ish hp?

But it dont change that it get reduced rather heavily per hex outwards as it is, too much soo in my opinion, Having it be halfed per hex instead would leave it dangerous but not insanely so, making chucking a spell in combat an option instead of a general wasteful use of energy points.

Honestly, you should probably be happy that a well placed spell can't completely obliterate everything in 7 hexes. Remember, enemy spellcasters will generally have access to the same spells we have.

The math is off there: 21 in the center, 7 to the 6 hexes around it, and then 3.5 to the 12 around that. And then 2.3 to the 18 around that. It's reduced by 3x the number of hexes, not divided by three each time. It's also apparently rolled separately per target, which goes a long way to protect against a single bad roll.

First advantage of explosions: Large Area Damage. Unless your target is wearing a face plate, that halves the effect of armor.

Second advantage: +4 to hit. And no parry, no block.

Third advantage: The only defense is diving for cover. Now you're prone, and it'll take 2 rounds to recover. And you still take a third of the damage.

And yes, all of these are best employed against single targets, swarms, or tight formations of not overly tough creatures. Take a human pike formation in light chainmail: An Explosively Lightning spell dealing that 21 damage attack above means 37 pikemen need to make HT rolls or be stunned. One of them is just flat out dead, and another 6 suffered major wounds. But the spell that does less damage per die because it treats metal DR as 1 isn't going to be impressive when used against leather armored skeletons.

As for casting cost: a 3d explosive does 1d or more to up to 7 targets with the advantages described above. It also costs 6x what a non-explosive 1d costs. That seems about right to me.

Devastatingly strong for the target in ground zero yea, but… Eh… the fact damage get so extremely reduced out of the main target really just make explosion spells seems kinda… Eh for crowd damage compared to the time investment and energy investment, The example I had from the combat last week was a fully charged shot of explosive lightning. Sure it took out 1 skeleton properly and I wont argue, For 1 target in armor thats does a metric ton of damage compared to other to options but as an AoE damage spell? I am not impressed, The damage reduction/penalty on explosions spells are just to high to be much of use once the target got innate DR, Which so far been a lot of enemies. (That I have met anyway.)

The problem is it basically just softly tickled the rest of the skeletons in comparison. That's where I am coming from, Generally so far, the few times I seen a explosion spell fly around the enemies have never been grouped up enough to be much of worth (aka I was a lightning rod for Dire… Porcupines I think?) on the plot we installed the elevator down to level 2, And then we only took out 3 of many enemies, Mainly since I worked as an lightning rod to be ground zero for, the other case I seen explosion spells flying about was last weeks skeleton encounter where as I mentioned it being kinda… eh.

I mean sure Mister skeleton guard nr 15 got shocked to death but the disappointment is it did very little to his friends.

Even for a fully charged spell, generally explosions spells (and explosions in general) have left me rather unimpressed :/

As far as the smokebomb/flashbang etc point I can honestly not say I been in a part of the dungeon where throwing a smoke bomb or a flash grenade would do anything for the situation1 and as far as glue goes, I have yet to met an enemy that didn't already have their weapons/equipment out or didn't primarily use natural attacks, Thats before we even begin to talk about the action economy that really discourages you from changing up ones stuff in combat. I do however see how the glue bomb can make an archer very sad with his/her lot in life.

But to be completely honest it felt more like cases of in the encounters department of being: Man sure hope you did bring Alchemist fire or snagged Rune with you for your party cuz here is Diffuse enemies/hordes of enemies/a trap only this class can see etc. At least how I have observed the pattern to be the last weeks :/

Welp, its not like my opinion matter much more since I am 99% sure I wont return to the campaign, so if nothing else you can use my character as an high level handout knight to new players, Might want to redo the hand writing if you guys decide to do that shamefully bad handwriting :X

I can assure you, most if not all encounters are not made with the expectation that the players will use X game element - though you should not expect your favorite trick to work every time. Because ultimately, that is repetitive for both you as a player and the GMs.

And I assure you, a properly employed explosive fireball, flashbang, smoke grenade, alchemical glue, or other is absolutely available to the players - and many of these are cheaper than the alchemist's fire. In short, stay on your toes, and consider alternative options.

1d per 2 invested energy is standard for explosive spells - and MORE than explosive lightning. Explosions are pricy because they are, when properly emplyed, devastatingly strong.

Hmm I did not realize that my bad. But it makes sense since the rules for DR come after the ones for minimum damage

That's before Damage Reduction though, so it's not that relevant for anyone who has DR.

Minimum damage for crushing is 0 for all other damage types 1 (exploits p 52)

That being said I now realize how this affects our "unkillable" tanks with DR 12 who could now die from a thousand cuts.

Mistakes were made…

Yea its really pretty much the go to option in general that, Or was atleast. Only real options are the Liquid Ice that does 2d6 damage and armor dr is reduced to 1/5 that cost 250$ the bottle and is a magic item which mean you can only get 1 on a shopping roll of 10 under1 or have an wizard who knows explosions spells which everyone in the party, the Wizard under Rune's control, Found to be an huge let down considering how gimped the damage is due to the reduction by 3 per hex away from ground zero2.

As far as I know there is only one more Explosions spell and that's concussion but that one only does 1d6 damage per 2 energy invested into it and rather big AoE of 10 yards meaning it will likely deafen the party members and slightly tickle enemies damage wise, doing on top 18 damage in ground zero, 6 damage at second hex then 3 and so on.

So in light of learning that Alchemist fire is really only good against critter swarms on the ground and slimes3 as far as enemies goes and explosions spells are ironically only really good at single target enemies or anything that is diffuse with little to no DR.

Oh yeah, Torgeir did roll in the open and any roll of 3 or less would be negated since its 1d-1. Their DR negated the damage. Since it was in according to the rules, nobody protested. (beyond groaning).

But it does kind of raise the question of if the encounter was made with the idea that Alchemist Fire would be more dangerous. It is the number one AOE available to players and any mass combat is pretty much predicated on their use.

Actually, this is worse than I thought, and even means I have played this wrong a few times. Note how it says armor DR counts for 1/5th. Natural DR still protects at full value - which means monsters with 2 or more natural DR take even less than the DR value would expect. (It ought at this point to be open information that at the very least the armored skeletons have some form of natural DR besides heavy leather, and thus they should have been taking even less damage than I was giving them.)

page 1123...next »
Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License