
GJC wrote:Two guys with basically the same name in a discussion about a character getting cloned.
There's gotta be a good joke in here somewhere.



GJC wrote:Two guys with basically the same name in a discussion about a character getting cloned.
There's gotta be a good joke in here somewhere.


Nope. You could create an immobile Lesser construct w/ Well-armed, give it a bag of rocks (which appears to be missing a Juice cost), and crank out 3 dozen 'archer' type units for your gate and towers for almost half the cost, with no real down-sides. Additionally, abilities like Agility, Explody, etc. would be relatively useless, and traps (which is what an explody immobile lesser construct would be) are really more the domain of dirtamancy than dollamancy.0beron wrote:A thought occurs. What if Statuesque meant the construct couldn't leave the SQUARE it was created in, and only cost 1/4 the Juice? And you had a Guardian special that does what Statuesque does now?


GJC wrote:Two guys with basically the same name in a discussion about a character getting cloned.
There's gotta be a good joke in here somewhere.


I'm okay with that. Wanda was shown to be very good at non-croakamancy spells, and grabbing a low-level Heal spell means that the caster is giving up access to a high-level spell, so that low-level spell should be valuable. And healamancers now are significantly more than just restore-HP units, so a croakamancer being able to heal isn't horribly unbalancing (especially since they still can't heal uncroaked).WaterMonkey314 wrote:I realized a potential unwanted consequence for redoing Healomancy to be per Caster level: what happens if, say, a level 8 Croakamancer also takes Revitalize at level 9? Would he/she now have the max healing ability of a level 9 healomancer?
I'd like to play test Shockamancy a bit more. Ickypron is doing significant damage against multiple opponents AND stunning them. William is more effective than you against a single, low-defense target, non-dodging target, but no other build has your stopping power. I might bump up Hobobarbie and 4Chan to 2d6, and maybe increase the area of effect, but all in all, you've got one of the deadliest characters out there. If I were to adjust anything, the juice costs of the spells would be the most likely thing to change; they might be a bit high at present. But all of those are minor tweaks more than anything, and don't require a complete rules rewrite to accomplish.ETheBoyce wrote:Given recent buffs to healing and hits will Shockamancy be getting some changes in the future?

MarbitChow wrote:I'm okay with that. Wanda was shown to be very good at non-croakamancy spells, and grabbing a low-level Heal spell means that the caster is giving up access to a high-level spell, so that low-level spell should be valuable. And healamancers now are significantly more than just restore-HP units, so a croakamancer being able to heal isn't horribly unbalancing (especially since they still can't heal uncroaked).WaterMonkey314 wrote:I realized a potential unwanted consequence for redoing Healomancy to be per Caster level: what happens if, say, a level 8 Croakamancer also takes Revitalize at level 9? Would he/she now have the max healing ability of a level 9 healomancer?

Marbit just explained why that is a bad idea. It's balanced the way it is.Nnelg wrote:Perhaps, instead of level, you use the amount of AP spent on Healomancy spells or caster-related abilities (like juicy). This would mean that a high-level non-healomancer who decides to take the base spell will still cast it better than a 1st level healomancer, but not nearly as good as one of the same level.
Like I alluded to above, there are schools which are effectively impossible to implement given the whole "fate" idea. Predictamancy for example is off the charts, and Luckamancy is close behind. The idea of Karma comes pretty close. It is basically a tally of how much you side has "mucked" with Fate. Do you have a suggestion that simulates Luckamancy better than Marbit in a game which can't have actual "fate"?Nnelg wrote:Personally, I'm sad about the direction the Luckamancy is going....Besides, in-comic the luck doesn't always come from the caster's side...
GJC wrote:Two guys with basically the same name in a discussion about a character getting cloned.
There's gotta be a good joke in here somewhere.


If you restrict it too much, its not worth taking at all. At higher levels, the ability to heal 4-8 points isn't worth nearly as much as anything else that caster could probably do. Low-juice spells that don't do much aren't as valuable as, say, drinking a potion to regain Juice and use the big guns next round would be. Casters don't appear to mix their spell selections much, and level 8 or 9 is going to be pretty much max level, thanks to exponentially-increasing XP costs. Being able to heal 8 Hits vs. grabbing Juicy for more Juice, or Mighty Blow for more combat, etc. doesn't seem comparable.Nnelg wrote:Perhaps, instead of level, you use the amount of AP spent on Healomancy spells or caster-related abilities (like juicy). This would mean that a high-level non-healomancer who decides to take the base spell will still cast it better than a 1st level healomancer, but not nearly as good as one of the same level.
I'm trying to find a build where the casters have tactical choices to make, and many of the effects that were in the original version - things like counter-spells and fumbles - aren't as necessary due to bodyguards, cloaks, and mounts (in addition to not appearing in the comic at all). The current system doesn't use random damage or critical hits, which would be two additional areas that Luckamancy could influence, but I don't really want to overhaul the entire rule system just for a single caster class.Nnelg wrote:Personally, I'm sad about the direction the Luckamancy is going. I thought it was more fun to mess around directly with the dice, so you're still gamboling about its effect. The new-version spells seem rather lackluster and underpowered by comparison. Besides, in-comic the luck doesn't always come from the caster's side...

0beron wrote:Like I alluded to above, there are schools which are effectively impossible to implement given the whole "fate" idea. Predictamancy for example is off the charts, and Luckamancy is close behind. The idea of Karma comes pretty close. It is basically a tally of how much you side has "mucked" with Fate. Do you have a suggestion that simulates Luckamancy better than Marbit in a game which can't have actual "fate"?Nnelg wrote:Personally, I'm sad about the direction the Luckamancy is going....Besides, in-comic the luck doesn't always come from the caster's side...
MarbitChow wrote:I'm trying to find a build where the casters have tactical choices to make, and many of the effects that were in the original version - things like counter-spells and fumbles - aren't as necessary due to bodyguards, cloaks, and mounts (in addition to not appearing in the comic at all). The current system doesn't use random damage or critical hits, which would be two additional areas that Luckamancy could influence, but I don't really want to overhaul the entire rule system just for a single caster class.Nnelg wrote:Personally, I'm sad about the direction the Luckamancy is going. I thought it was more fun to mess around directly with the dice, so you're still gamboling about its effect. The new-version spells seem rather lackluster and underpowered by comparison. Besides, in-comic the luck doesn't always come from the caster's side...
I want the Luckamancer to be able to sway fights and do cool luck-related stuff. Greater Boost is like a one-shot +5 (or better!) Combat buff, and Greater Curse is a focused 1-shot Defense buff that applies to every unit in the hex. Both can be incredibly powerful, and simply giving a maxed die or two to the enemy units makes it too easy to not have to worry about the down-side. I'm open to suggestions about cool luck-based spell effects (and being able to 'force' random encounters and friendly units seem like decent options). Having fun is the ultimate goal; game balance plus feedback from the actual luckamancer ultimately has the most sway over how I'll decide to implement this.

I'll often discover that I made an error, which requires me to correct a sequence of events; for example, rolling an attack for a unit that has been killed in a previous phase. If that unit's roll is no longer valid, then I'll need to scan forward to find the next result that might be changed, which could be the difference between a unit that was killed and still alive. Finding an error might require me to cascade changes forward, confusing the resolution even further. I prefer systems where individual results can't impact other rolls and results, so that I can double check each result independently. Unit position and health are the only factors I currently need to track sequentially; I'd prefer to avoid adding additional sequence-specific factors that I've got to track.Nnelg wrote:For instance, if you turned a die roll into an automatic 6, why don't you just reroll the next 6 irregardless of who rolled it?
This acts as a side-wise buff/debuff, equal to about a +2 Combat / +2 Defense bonus to all units on the player's side. Since players can delay their actions, a caster could in theory simply delay to keep the spell running. This is also highly prone to me forgetting that the spell is in effect, and remembering which 1s become 6s and which 6s become 1s.Nnelg wrote:... Rushin' Roulette (1 AP) - Until the caster's next action, all rolls by units in the same hex and of the same side as the caster of a 1 count as 6's, and all rolls by units of non-allied sides in the same hex of a 6 count as 1's. (20 Juice)
Any action that requires player feedback before it's resolved will not be implemented. The game runs slowly enough as it is. Introducing something like this guarantees a bottleneck.Nnelg wrote:...Bonus: Caster who specializes in Luckamancy rolls twice and chooses the result, any time he rolls dice. ...The target's next five attacks are pre-rolled, and assigned in the order of the caster's choice. (4 Juice)
I'm very glad you offered this as a suggestion. More of the spell categories should be able to protect themselves. Luckamancy should have a Luck Ward. Shockamancy should have a Shock Ward. Perhaps other schools as well. I want to think about this a bit more.Nnelg wrote:Luck Ward (1 AP) - The target is immune to the negative backlash of Roll the Bones and Dem Bones. Lasts 3 turns. (10 Juice)

MarbitChow wrote:Any action that requires player feedback before it's resolved will not be implemented. The game runs slowly enough as it is. Introducing something like this guarantees a bottleneck.Nnelg wrote:...Bonus: Caster who specializes in Luckamancy rolls twice and chooses the result, any time he rolls dice. ...The target's next five attacks are pre-rolled, and assigned in the order of the caster's choice. (4 Juice)
-----
What about something like a "dice theft" mechanic: cast a spell on a unit, and as long as that spell is in effect, every combat action they take gets a -1d6, and stores a bonus +1d6 that the caster can use later, with max dice based on their level?


MarbitChow wrote:[Requires Lesser Boost/Curse] Luck Ward (0.5 AP) - Any hostile actions that directly target the caster cannot be modified by Karma.


Users browsing this forum: Lord of Monies and 2 guests