[DF] Bardic power modifier - Singing or Playing? / Usefulness of Druids

[Lupo]

Originally Posted by aesir23

Not quite. An attack just needs 2 points of damage to overcome the leather armor for Tough Skin to be relevant.

Please read carefully the original post. In the example, Natural armor (tough skin) was DR 2 and worn armor was DR 4.
So you need more than 4 hits to bypass the worn armor.
But if you deal more than 6, you bypass the whole armor (worn+ natural), thereby making Tough Skin irrelevant.
It might look like DR 2 (Tough Skin) is severely limited, but actually it is only slightly so.

Originally Posted by Harald387

Second: It's neither cheating nor adversarial for the GM to create situations in which limited DR isn't as good as non-limited DR.

Ok, I give up. It's pointless to argue if people don't read previous posts.
I DO run situations where Tough Skin is less useful. I am FULLY AWARE of Tough Skin "flaws". Please believe my good faith when I say so.
What I am saying is simply, that such flaws do not come into play often enough to justify a -40% limitation; it should be -10% or -20%. IMHO.

I wrote about cheating and adversarial GMing in response to Stone Dog's ideas that DR (Elemental) should include metal, or that DR (Tough Skin) does not protect against Fireballs. That would be cheating, IMNSHO, regardless of your belief that Dungeon Fantasy is an "explicitly adversarial style", because Metal isn't an Element, and Fire isn't a "scratch-based" attack.

Originally Posted by Harald387

The player has paid less for his DR; it should be less good.

That's reverse logic.
Do you mean that a GM should change his gameworld, and make poisons unbelievably common, just because by RAW DR (Tough Skin) costs less than DR (Limited, Elemental)?
By that reasoning, ANY discount would be "fair" for Tough Skin (or for any limitation/enhancement) because it all depends on how common conditions that bypass Tough Skin are common on the game world.

The "correct" reasoning should be: let's try to evaluate how common are those conditions, and let's price Tough Skin accordingly. NOT the other way around!

Originally Posted by Harald387

Kromm's example of a 1d stinger with a 3d followup is an excellent one. Tough Skin also won't protect you against:

-The HT penalties on Water as-Sharak's 'Ocean's Frozen Spray' ability or that of an Earth as-Sharak's 'Desert's Sand' ability;
-An Erupting Slime's Slimeball attack;
-A Frost Snake's 2d toxic follow-up, which will affect you fully even if its 1d bite is stopped to exactly 0 points by your armor;
-A Toxifier's Toxic Attack.

That was very informative, thank you, but I am not debating the fact that poisons bypass Tough Skin. I read the rules.
Not every criticism of GURPS Rules-As-Written come from ignorance or stupidity, you know... some people might actually have read the rules carefully, and might have rational reasons to believe that some rules would be better if slightly modified.

Originally Posted by Harald387

Tough Skin is not a free limitation.

Nobody ever said it should be:

Originally Posted by Lupo

I am not saying that Tough Skin isn't a limitation, I am saying it should be worth -10%.

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by Peter Knutsen

Also, instruments can be magical

This was my Secret Reason, in fact, but I guess I'll admit it: In some future supplement on artifacts and treasures, I hope to see a list of such instruments (see DF 2, p. 29 for a hint). Once they're in play, no bard who could get one would want to go back to Singing! The fact is, any enchanted aid to bardic magic is likely to be an instrument.

Originally Posted by Peter Knutsen

The big question here is, are there any benefits of higher-than-14 Instrument skill, for a Bard?

Aside from a roll vs. Musical Instrument or Singing being needed to use Musical Influence (so you might want at least a 16 to avoid critical failure on a 17):

• DF 1, p. 20: Bard-Song abilities operate at a level equal to the bard's skill with Musical Instrument or Singing, as applicable, plus his Bardic Talent.
• DF 2, p. 4: Musical Instrument and Singing can earn a little extra cash for a poor bard.
• DF 2, p. 11: Musical Instrument and Singing can be used with the Trickery rule (p. 10).

I guess all of those applications would be classed as "subtle" by most players, who are more into smashing stuff in dungeon crawls. But a canny bard could use all of his Bard-Song abilities at a very high level, earn money, and distract some fairly scary foes early on in the campaign, when high skill at many abilities is harder to get, money is scarce, and nobody is buff enough to kill every foe.

[Lupo]

Originally Posted by Kromm

DF 1, p. 20: Bard-Song abilities operate at a level equal to the bard's skill with Musical Instrument or Singing, as applicable, plus his Bardic Talent.

I though this was only for resisting Dispel Magic (as said in the box in DF1, p.20).
Do you mean that Bards roll against Musical Instrument, not IQ, when using Mind Control or Empathy? That would be a major point break, allowing Bards to improve their abilities for 4 points/level (and would make Bardic Talent, and especially Bard-Song Talent, less desirable since they cost 8 and 5 pts, respectively)

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by Lupo

That's reverse logic.
Do you mean that a GM should change his gameworld, and make poisons unbelievably common, just because by RAW DR (Tough Skin) costs less than DR (Limited, Elemental)?
By that reasoning, ANY discount would be "fair" for Tough Skin (or for any limitation/enhancement) because it all depends on how common conditions that bypass Tough Skin are common on the game world.

The "correct" reasoning should be: let's try to evaluate how common are those conditions, and let's price Tough Skin accordingly. NOT the other way around!

You may be missing what people are trying to say. They are appealing to genre. That is:

In the dungeon fantasy genre, most monsters have one of only two sorts of attacks: Attacks with sufficient basic damage to blast through armor and weaker attacks that, if they scratch you, hurt as much as or more than the first kind because they're acidic, burning, icy, poisonous, shocking, etc. Read the old Monster Manual to see what I mean . . . dozens upon dozens of creatures have venomous bites, turn you to stone or drain life on a touch, or otherwise have contact effects that make life unpleasant if they hit (which means "bypass DR," in GURPS terms).

Then there are slimes and the like, which are made of acid and poison. When slime eats through DR and then dissolves you, it's generally better to spend points on money or Signature Gear for thicker armor than it is to spend them on DR (Tough Skin), because DR 8 dwarven plate will take twice as long to dissolve as DR 4 scale . . . and another DR 4 (Tough Skin) underneath is worthless after that.

Not all foes are "monsters," of course. There are humans and humanoids, who fight like PCs. Of course, since the PCs can and will shamelessly exploit poison, the Pressure Points skill, Flaming Weapon and Icy Weapon spells, and so on (and possibly Imbuement Skills, if the GM permits), equally matched enemies should do the same.

Moreover, there ought to be lots of traps that use things like contact poison, or tiny poisoned needles or darts. There should also be challenges where the PCs have no choice but to remove armor – to swim, squeeze through tight openings, operate on a delicate mechanism, whatever. In that case, all the PCs will be vulnerable . . . but points in DR (Tough Skin) are sitting there being worthless.

Honestly, I believe that in a true-to-genre dungeon crawl, most encounters should challenge Tough Skin. Thinking back over my last few battles, I can't remember the last time the PCs didn't need sufficient armor DR to avoid penetrating damage that would deliver poison, fire, or other bad effects.

[Kromm]

Originally Posted by Lupo

I though this was only for resisting Dispel Magic (as said in the box in DF1, p.20).

And Counterspell, Ward, etc. The point being that if a bard with good Musical Instrument uses Mind Control or Terror to blast his enemy's mind, there's really no cure . . . it keeps going until the bard stops singing.

[Not another shrubbery]

Originally Posted by Kromm

And Counterspell, Ward, etc. The point being that if a bard with good Musical Instrument uses Mind Control or Terror to blast his enemy's mind, there's really no cure . . . it keeps going until the bard stops singing.

Or strumming, as the case may be. Lotsa potential for slapstick "Stop the music!" cries, a la Durante :)

Don't shoot me, I'm only the piano player.
heh

[PK]

Originally Posted by Lupo

Dungeon Fantasy 5: Allies is awesome! The beasts are very cool but (from a munchkin perspective) I think Divine Servitors are preferable.

Not a problem. Druids can have those as well. Just slap the Natural lens on there and you've got a Nature Spirit (box, DF5, p. 7).

And while it's only fair to note that Clerics can have beast allies as well (box, DF5, p. 13), they suffer from the huge limitation that they cannot use said beasties as mere cannon fodder. A dead Holy Hound means you've got to take weeks (or more, if you were a jerk) out of your schedule, holding up the rest of the party (or having them go on adventures without you) while you go off and pray for a new one. At the very least, you're not getting it back while still in the dungeon. A druid, OTOH, can just give it a day then summon himself another one. No muss, no fuss.

(And yes, the druid has the drawback that he has to make a reaction or influence roll each time, sure, but even assuming a starting druid with Animal Handling-13 and PI 3, that's a 16, practically ensuring success.)

[Stone Dog]

Originally Posted by Lupo

You are assuming I don't exploit it... why? I can assure you I do exploit it. If by "exploiting" you mean that "each and every attack should be poisonous", then I think this is unfair.

I assume that you don't exploit it because you think it is cheap enough to only warrant -10% of a discount. I don't think you are cheating to do it that way or anything, I just think that you are giving Tough Skin a 10% because you think that is all it deserves.

We are trying to point out that there are other valid ways of looking at it that you are deriding as cheating. There are plenty of ways to bypass Tough Skin fairly and reasonably that aren't as heavy handed as giving everything a poison attack and making sure it rolls just enough damage to bypass. THAT is cheating indeed.

I wrote about cheating and adversarial GMing in response to Stone Dog's ideas that DR (Elemental) should include metal, or that DR (Tough Skin) does not protect against Fireballs. That would be cheating, IMNSHO, regardless of your belief that Dungeon Fantasy is an "explicitly adversarial style", because Metal isn't an Element, and Fire isn't a "scratch-based" attack.

When did I say Fireballs? I said FIRE. FIRE isn't a scratch attack. It is an attack that only needs to lightly touch you to do damage, just like electricity. You don't need to get whacked with fire for it to burn you. Fireballs are mainly sudden shock damage, which is why armor counts against it (says so under "hazards" in "campaigns").

I'm perfectly okay with Tough Skin working against fireballs and even getting hit with a torch. Where Tough Skin probably fails is extended (longer than a second) contact. However, Elemental works just fine against that.

Classically speaking, metal and minerals are kinds of Earth just like rocks and dirt are. Solids are Earth, liquids are Water, gasses are Air and sources of heat are Fire. Since this does count as everything, it shouldn't be a limitation at all, so Elemental has to exclude something.

Things that are organic seem like a good exclusion to me. Also I'd go ahead and say that certain exotic energies don't count as Fire. Divine and Infernal attacks, for instance.

Now if you wanted to make an argument that a forged sword counts as piercing the Druidic PM, then I think there is a better point there. I'd be happy to say that a forged steel blade is just as "unnatural" as a city or a cut stone tunnel and would slice Druidic DR by a third. If it is an alchemically treated metal like one of the exotic alloys, I'd say that it would even count as "ordinary pollution" and cut the DR in half.

That's reverse logic.

Wait... something that costs fewer points shouldn't be as good as something that costs more points is reverse logic?

The "correct" reasoning should be: let's try to evaluate how common are those conditions, and let's price Tough Skin accordingly. NOT the other way around!

No. that is YOUR reasoning. Other peoples reasoning, which is just as valid, is to actually make Tough Skin count for a -40% limitation. Tough Skin is almost half as costly as regular DR. It makes perfect sense for it to be almost half as effective.

You want to charge less for it, you go right ahead. That is perfectly fine and if you are only limiting Tough Skin against scratch attacks and electric shock it makes perfect sense. It is JUST as valid to make sure that the -40% actually means something and isn't "cheap."

This is not cheating, adversarial GMing or any other insulting way you want to talk down about it.

[Stone Dog]

Originally Posted by Kromm

You may be missing what people are trying to say. They are appealing to genre.

I don't think I am.

Honestly, I believe that in a true-to-genre dungeon crawl, most encounters should challenge Tough Skin.

I think that Tough Skin should be challenged fairly often because it has a fairly large discount attatched to it. In a Dungeon Fantasy setting this should be a bit more apparent, true. However in any situation where a -40% discount applies there should be plenty of chances for it to be bypassed fairly and honestly.

Then there are slimes and the like, which are made of acid and poison.

Now that brings up a point I am going to need to consider. I do think that Tough Skin would be worthless against the attack of a slime. Your skin maybe leatherY, but it isn't actual leather.

I have gone on record as saying that Elemental counts vs acid attacks because of its direct affinity to Water. I have also said that Elemental does not block organic attacks like sticks and fists and claws and such.

Given those two things... does the secretions of a slime get blocked by Elemental DR or not? Now a given campaign might decide that a slime is a wholly unnatural creature and so the PM would allow it to completely bypass Druidic DR, but that really isn't the issue here.

In D&D terms I would say that it does. It wouldn't protect against the physical impact and/or contriction of the slime or ooze, but the separate acid attack would be blocked by it.

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by Stone Dog

I have gone on record as saying that Elemental counts vs acid attacks because of its direct affinity to Water. I have also said that Elemental does not block organic attacks like sticks and fists and claws and such.

Given those two things... does the secretions of a slime get blocked by Elemental DR or not?

Given those two things, it sounds like slimes are water elementals.