Search options (Page 1 of 2)

They're being taken by the spirit...

Actually, that's a cool image that isn't usually around in these games.  I *LIKE* it.

Very nice.

Owing to the fact that alignment and morality are separated in LotFP, you can do this.  It's a fundamentally different worldview, not a code of behavior, per se.

From the Rules & Magic book (p. 21):

The biggest difference is that the cleric will be fatalistic, owing any success to favor from above, while the mage will believe he can make his own luck.  How these characters act in any other manner is up to the PCs.

Don't be so quick to say that...  I don't know if they have actually purchased them, but I've got two people in my three-man group right now saying they are going to buy the box.  They love the books (I've got four copies of the Rules & Magic for people to look through...) and while it's a bit on the pricey side, they love that they know it won't get splat-booked the way other games do.

My quick glance only noticed a few typos and such.  Functionally, they are identical to dwarves and elves, though?  I didn't see much outside of different appearances separating them from the originals.  Was that the intent?

Got mine yesterday and it's even nicer than I expected.  The paper quality and the feel... wonderful.  Well done, sir.  Well done.

I'm debating scrapping the specialist and just giving each character Specialist-level skills.

And if you have the Grindhouse Edition try A Stranger Storm from the Referee Book, I want to say we did A Stranger Storm within four or so hours, and that was over Skype and DF Chat.  It might have stretched to six, but you can blame the communications media for that.  Since James ran it a few times, he can probably provide more insight into that.

We'll have to wait for an official ruling from Raggi, but my thought on this is situation dependent.

If the opponent is in a Man-Catcher, automatic hits for max damage makes sense.  If they are magically slept or frozen, I'd say the traditional "coup de grace" instant kill is appropriate.  Anywhere in between, I'd consider giving a saving throw to determine if they can react quick enough to either take max damage (a successful save) or die (an unsuccessful one).

That's just how I'd run it.  Your mileage may vary.

[The bonecrunching sound of Higgipedia hating discuit's face for bringing up Kender]

Even though I *despise* Kender, I have only one constructive thought for you:  If you add bonuses, you're going to need to up the XP required per level.  The way it exists as written is based upon the Halflings getting, by far, the best saves in the game.  They just aren't good at much else, a la Tolkien's Hobbits.  If you start giving them bonuses, they should probably have to earn them, XP-wise.

The "problem" of overspecializing isn't really a problem as much as it's a reflection of what they are experiencing.

Early on, you might diversify, since you aren't sure what you'll be doing.  If you keep encountering a varied amount of situations, requiring a different set of skills, each time, they will continue diversifying.  If they end up needing some skills more than others, they will naturally enhance the high-usage skills at the cost of less proficiency in low-density skills.

It's just personal nature.

The game as written is pretty unforgiving, so I'd go with the former.  If I were coming up with something for D&D 4e, I'd go with the latter, since it's much more "balanced" and forgiving of players.