06-30-2019, 02:01 PM | #11 |
Join Date: May 2015
|
Re: Starting with a Mana Staff?
If a GM likes the idea of wizards starting with staff mana and doesn't mind them having shorter spell/talent lists for it, more power to them, of course, and enjoy. I'm just pointing out what seem like some of the things to consider about it, to try to help people make informed decisions.
(I can see it being fun, especially for the wizards, who will have several new ways to do some quite powerful things even as starting wizards, if they think about how they can take advantage, though they'd have fewer spells.) |
06-30-2019, 04:14 PM | #12 | |
Join Date: May 2019
|
Re: Starting with a Mana Staff?
Quote:
I think it is quite a restriction having less starting spells though. It could certainly inspire a bit more creativity in play. |
|
06-30-2019, 07:04 PM | #13 |
Join Date: Jun 2019
|
Re: Starting with a Mana Staff?
Thanks for the detailed comments Skarg. I'm definitely thinking about this in terms of making characters for adventures or campaigns, where making a less flexible character is a more significant choice. I can see it might be more of an issue for balancing a straight up arena fighter.
The risk of unbalancing things was a bit of my reasoning behind not sweating the change in my "1 IQ buys 2 starting Mana" ratio. Also it keeps the character building simple. I'm looking at this as a option for players whose character concept steers away from a high-STR build, but still want to start as a reasonably effective spell-caster. |
07-01-2019, 02:49 AM | #14 |
Join Date: Nov 2017
|
Re: Starting with a Mana Staff?
|
07-01-2019, 03:05 AM | #15 |
Join Date: Nov 2017
|
Re: Starting with a Mana Staff?
If I used the Staff Mana rule, I would allow players to trade attribute points, not talent points, for the xp they need to buy mana. It's punitive, but I don't think starting talent points are = to 500 xp. Maybe if you played that starting talents were unlinked to IQ, but as is, I think the disconnect between starting IQ granting talents but later IQ not creates a weird disconnect.
|
07-01-2019, 04:53 AM | #16 |
Join Date: May 2019
|
Re: Starting with a Mana Staff?
Some others have mentioned that they would think twice about it - I guess because it is the sort of thing that would require finding and persuading a master to teach you, kinda like researching spells. And it would probably make a great motivation for your character and lead to adventures and stuff! Not the kind of thing a very beginning PC would have learnt yet.
I'm not sure if that also applies to higher level spells, and other skills which you might reasonably assume are not just 'freely available' to learn? |
07-01-2019, 09:13 AM | #17 | |
Join Date: May 2018
|
Re: Starting with a Mana Staff?
Quote:
|
|
07-01-2019, 09:34 AM | #18 | |
Join Date: Nov 2017
|
Re: Starting with a Mana Staff?
Quote:
Meanwhile bob the wizard over there with a 14 IQ starting is summoning whatever monstrosity happens to be on the spell list for...reasons? If a player wants to experience that journey, they can choose not to buy the talent, or have a 10 IQ to start with or whatever and signal to the GM that they want that experience. Saying no, this is off limits but Summon Gargoyle, Flight, and Lightning Bolt are okeydokey is just weird. |
|
07-01-2019, 09:40 AM | #19 | |
Join Date: May 2018
|
Re: Starting with a Mana Staff?
Quote:
|
|
07-01-2019, 11:35 AM | #20 |
Join Date: May 2015
|
Re: Starting with a Mana Staff?
I can see several reasons to not allow starting PCs to start with Expert/Master weapon talents, and perhaps other combat-aiding talents.
1) It feels thematically off to me. What is a beginning fighter who's not as good as other beginners in terms of ST & DX, has had no adventures, and before being a master would not be a good fighter at all, but is already a master? How did that happen, and why did it only happen to the not-so-capable beginning fighters? 2) I want Expert and Master combat talents to represent people who have exceptional levels of experience and training. That doesn't match typical starting characters, or 32-point characters, or fighters with ST + DX totaling 20 or less. If people want to start as exceptionally trained weapon experts/masters, then I'd want those PCs to have appropriate backgrounds and higher attributes, too. In short, I think the listed requirements are too low and should probably include years of exceptional experience and training, like Captain and Strategist do. 3) For a game where PCs start as 32-point beginners, I want Expert and Master combat talents to be challenging goals that can be earned through much successful play. Something to strive for and to reward survival of the combat experiences that are what develop a superior fighter. 4) Using the Legacy experience/talent-learning system RAW, it's a bypass of what otherwise would be the need to spend 500 XP of actual play experience per talent point. i.e. In addition to my reason 3, if a PC starts with these talents by taking enough IQ and getting it for no XP, they avoid spending XP on the talent and so can just jack up their combat attributes, which is a big XP advantage of doing it this way that seems backwards and like an exploit to me. Compare: Mr. Normal Starting Warrior ST 13 DX 11 IQ 8 Ax/Mace, Shield Mr. BeginnerExpert ST 9 DX DX 12 IQ 11 Ax/Mace, Shield, Ax Expert/Master By the time they both advance through play experience to, say: ST 13 DX 12 IQ 11 Ax/Mace, Shield, Ax Expert/Master, both will have had to add 4 attribute points (for 700 XP), but Mr. Normal would need to spend 1500 more XP than Mr BeginnerExpert (total 700 vs. 2200, i.e. Mr. Normal needs enough XP that he could instead get to about 38 attribute points to get here). |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|