Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

additional Wizardry slots

Expand Messages
  • Brandon Blackmoor
    On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 18:13 -0400, Brandon Blackmoor ... No one else has an opinion? Kind regards, Brandon Blackmoor -- bblackmoor@blackgate.net 2011-03-24
    Message 1 of 15 , Mar 24, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 18:13 -0400, "Brandon Blackmoor"
      <bblackmoor@...> wrote:
      >
      > One idea I had was that each additional slot after the first
      > two would cost (number of that slot)/6. ...
      >
      > Another idea I had was to say that every additional Wizardry
      > sub-power cost 1/2, and that a character could have a max of
      > six sub-powers.


      No one else has an opinion?


      Kind regards,
      Brandon Blackmoor

      --
      bblackmoor@...
      2011-03-24
    • Tommy Brownell
      It s not a helpful one, but: Don t use point buy in ICONS. There are systems better suited for it if you wanna go that route. Taking that stance, it s a non
      Message 2 of 15 , Mar 24, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        It's not a helpful one, but: Don't use point buy in ICONS. There are systems better suited for it if you wanna go that route. Taking that stance, it's a non issue...that's my opinion on it, anyway.
         
        ----- Original Message -----
        Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2011 8:59 PM
        Subject: [icons-rpg] additional Wizardry slots

         

        On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 18:13 -0400, "Brandon Blackmoor"
        <bblackmoor@...> wrote:
        >
        > One idea I had was that each additional slot after the first
        > two would cost (number of that slot)/6. ...
        >
        > Another idea I had was to say that every additional Wizardry
        > sub-power cost 1/2, and that a character could have a max of
        > six sub-powers.

        No one else has an opinion?

        Kind regards,
        Brandon Blackmoor

        --
        bblackmoor@...
        2011-03-24



        No virus found in this incoming message.
        Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
        Version: 9.0.894 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3527 - Release Date: 03/24/11 14:34:00
      • Brandon Blackmoor
        On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 00:42 -0500, Tommy Brownell ... Nope, not helpful. But better than no response at all. Thanks for taking the time to
        Message 3 of 15 , Mar 24, 2011
        • 0 Attachment
          On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 00:42 -0500, "Tommy Brownell" <tommyb@...>
          wrote:
          >
          > It's not a helpful one, but:


          Nope, not helpful. But better than no response at all. Thanks for taking
          the time to respond.


          Kind regards,
          Brandon Blackmoor

          --
          bblackmoor@...
          2011-03-25
        • Tommy Brownell
          And please don t get me wrong, I m not being down on you for trying to work it out for yourself, I just wanted you to know that your attempts at discussing it
          Message 4 of 15 , Mar 24, 2011
          • 0 Attachment
            And please don't get me wrong, I'm not being down on you for trying to work it out for yourself, I just wanted you to know that your attempts at discussing it were being read, and not just ignored.
             
            For me, the main appeal of ICONS is "roll 'em up and go", and it's been mentioned several times since the game's release that if you stare too hard at the point buy system it'll break, because it was really only meant to appease people who just absolutely had to have an alternative to random rolls.
             
            That said, for a slightly more helpful comment: I absolutely HATE "half points"...half points in the D&D3 skill system is one of the reasons I grew tired of that game quickly. 
             
            ----- Original Message -----
            Sent: Friday, March 25, 2011 1:25 AM
            Subject: Re: [icons-rpg] additional Wizardry slots

             

            On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 00:42 -0500, "Tommy Brownell" <tommyb@...>
            wrote:
            >
            > It's not a helpful one, but:

            Nope, not helpful. But better than no response at all. Thanks for taking
            the time to respond.

            Kind regards,
            Brandon Blackmoor

            --
            bblackmoor@...
            2011-03-25



            No virus found in this incoming message.
            Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
            Version: 9.0.894 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3527 - Release Date: 03/24/11 14:34:00
          • Jakub
            ... I actually prefer Character modeling from MSH (FASERIP) system - simply tell the GM my guy is stronger than Captain America but not as strong as
            Message 5 of 15 , Mar 25, 2011
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com, "Tommy Brownell" <tommyb@...> wrote:
              >
              > And please don't get me wrong, I'm not being down on you for trying to work it out for yourself, I just wanted you to know that your attempts at discussing it were being read, and not just ignored.
              >
              > For me, the main appeal of ICONS is "roll 'em up and go", and it's been mentioned several times since the game's release that if you stare too hard at the point buy system it'll break, because it was really only meant to appease people who just absolutely had to have an alternative to random rolls.
              >

              I actually prefer "Character modeling" from MSH (FASERIP) system - simply tell the GM 'my guy is stronger than Captain America but not as strong as Superman'. One of the reasons I love Icons is that it is not another boring point-buy system. All pb systems are essentially the same, so why do I have to buy M&M when I already have Savage Worlds?

              If you want to pick new Wizardry Powers at half cost that'd be fine at my games - but they'd lower a player's starting determination as any new power outside Wizardry. I think that Determination is the real balancing factor in Icons, not the number or quality of powers.
            • Tommy Brownell
              Modeling is also certainly a valid approach, no doubt. I just have a REAL fondness for randomly rolling stuff and then making it all fit (as anyone who has
              Message 6 of 15 , Mar 25, 2011
              • 0 Attachment
                Modeling is also certainly a valid approach, no doubt. I just have a REAL fondness for randomly rolling stuff and then making it all fit (as anyone who has read very many reviews on my blog can probably attest to).
                 
                I do disagree that all point buys are the same...I'll gladly run, play and make characters in Savage Worlds or BASH, but Mutants & Masterminds, GURPS and Hero all make my eyes bleed, personally...but that's a whole other discussion.
                 
                ----- Original Message -----
                From: Jakub
                Sent: Friday, March 25, 2011 5:17 AM
                Subject: [icons-rpg] Re: additional Wizardry slots

                 



                --- In icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com, "Tommy Brownell" <tommyb@...> wrote:
                >
                > And please don't get me wrong, I'm not being down on you for trying to work it out for yourself, I just wanted you to know that your attempts at discussing it were being read, and not just ignored.
                >
                > For me, the main appeal of ICONS is "roll 'em up and go", and it's been mentioned several times since the game's release that if you stare too hard at the point buy system it'll break, because it was really only meant to appease people who just absolutely had to have an alternative to random rolls.
                >

                I actually prefer "Character modeling" from MSH (FASERIP) system - simply tell the GM 'my guy is stronger than Captain America but not as strong as Superman'. One of the reasons I love Icons is that it is not another boring point-buy system. All pb systems are essentially the same, so why do I have to buy M&M when I already have Savage Worlds?

                If you want to pick new Wizardry Powers at half cost that'd be fine at my games - but they'd lower a player's starting determination as any new power outside Wizardry. I think that Determination is the real balancing factor in Icons, not the number or quality of powers.



                No virus found in this incoming message.
                Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
                Version: 9.0.894 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3527 - Release Date: 03/24/11 14:34:00
              • Soylent Green
                Pretty much agree with what s been said so far. The random character generation system is certainly one of the strengths of the game. I love that Ah-ha!
                Message 7 of 15 , Mar 25, 2011
                • 0 Attachment

                  Pretty much agree with what's been said so far. The random character generation system is certainly one of the strengths of the game. I love that "Ah-ha!" moment when a player who has been trying to make sense over the randomly generated stats, suddenly figures out how it all could work together. Bear in mind that players can generally use the origins option, bonus powers selections, Specialties and Aspects to customise their characters. I've not tried it but I suspect modelling would work well too.

                   

                  I tend to think ICONS' of the point based system as "modelling with some guidelines". Any point build system is open to abuse, but ICONS' has fewer safeguards in this respect than most. A GM that expects that ICONS' point build total to act as first line of defence in enforcing game balance is probably in for a nasty surprise.


                   

                  To: icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com
                  From: erpegis@...
                  Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 10:17:29 +0000
                  Subject: [icons-rpg] Re: additional Wizardry slots

                   


                  --- In icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com, "Tommy Brownell" <tommyb@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > And please don't get me wrong, I'm not being down on you for trying to work it out for yourself, I just wanted you to know that your attempts at discussing it were being read, and not just ignored.
                  >
                  > For me, the main appeal of ICONS is "roll 'em up and go", and it's been mentioned several times since the game's release that if you stare too hard at the point buy system it'll break, because it was really only meant to appease people who just absolutely had to have an alternative to random rolls.
                  >

                  I actually prefer "Character modeling" from MSH (FASERIP) system - simply tell the GM 'my guy is stronger than Captain America but not as strong as Superman'. One of the reasons I love Icons is that it is not another boring point-buy system. All pb systems are essentially the same, so why do I have to buy M&M when I already have Savage Worlds?

                  If you want to pick new Wizardry Powers at half cost that'd be fine at my games - but they'd lower a player's starting determination as any new power outside Wizardry. I think that Determination is the real balancing factor in Icons, not the number or quality of powers.


                • Brandon Blackmoor
                  On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 14:07 +0000, Soylent Green ... I do not disagree with any of this, but none of this is actually germane to my
                  Message 8 of 15 , Mar 25, 2011
                  • 0 Attachment
                    On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 14:07 +0000, "Soylent Green" <gsoylent@...>
                    wrote:
                    >
                    > I tend to think ICONS' of the point based system as "modelling
                    > with some guidelines". Any point build system is open to abuse,
                    > but ICONS' has fewer safeguards in this respect than most. A GM
                    > that expects that ICONS' point build total to act as first line
                    > of defence in enforcing game balance is probably in for a nasty
                    > surprise.


                    I do not disagree with any of this, but none of this is actually germane
                    to my question.

                    This is surreal. It's like asking someone, "What route would you
                    recommend to walk from here to Wal-Mart", and getting a bunch of blank
                    stares and two or three people saying, "Why don't you just drive? You
                    should just drive."

                    Just take it as a given that I have my reasons for wanting to walk to
                    Wal-Mart, okay?


                    Kind regards,
                    Brandon Blackmoor

                    --
                    bblackmoor@...
                    2011-03-25
                  • Soylent Green
                    Sorry, conversations tend to drift. For what it s worth my I agree with Abespiens response from earlier this week and making extra Wizardry powers cheaper
                    Message 9 of 15 , Mar 25, 2011
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Sorry, conversations tend to drift.
                       
                      For what it's worth my I agree with Abespiens' response from earlier this week and making extra Wizardry powers cheaper isn't something I'd choose to do in my game.
                       

                      To: icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com
                      From: bblackmoor@...
                      Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 10:16:18 -0400
                      Subject: RE: [icons-rpg] Re: additional Wizardry slots

                       
                      On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 14:07 +0000, "Soylent Green" <gsoylent@...>
                      wrote:
                      >
                      > I tend to think ICONS' of the point based system as "modelling
                      > with some guidelines". Any point build system is open to abuse,
                      > but ICONS' has fewer safeguards in this respect than most. A GM
                      > that expects that ICONS' point build total to act as first line
                      > of defence in enforcing game balance is probably in for a nasty
                      > surprise.

                      I do not disagree with any of this, but none of this is actually germane
                      to my question.

                      This is surreal. It's like asking someone, "What route would you
                      recommend to walk from here to Wal-Mart", and getting a bunch of blank
                      stares and two or three people saying, "Why don't you just drive? You
                      should just drive."

                      Just take it as a given that I have my reasons for wanting to walk to
                      Wal-Mart, okay?

                      Kind regards,
                      Brandon Blackmoor

                      --
                      bblackmoor@...
                      2011-03-25

                    • jaerdaph
                      In my games, I would probably use the point-buy RAW for Wizardry rather than lower the cost on additional powers after the initial two, but I don t think you d
                      Message 10 of 15 , Mar 25, 2011
                      • 0 Attachment
                        In my games, I would probably use the point-buy RAW for Wizardry rather than lower the cost on additional powers after the initial two, but I don't think you'd seriously break anything if you decided to give an additional two powers for the price of one after the initial two from Wizardry purchase have been picked. I'd keep the picks bundled in groups of two - half points are annoying.

                        If you did allow that reduced cost for additional two powers picks at the price of one, I would suggest making some sort of Challenge that limits the powers or Wizardry in general mandatory. Perhaps the Challenge could state that power use requires spell components (verbal, somatic or material), or a special magical focus device like a wand or staff or a ring that the character must have in his or her possession for the powers to work.

                        jaerdaph

                        --- In icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com, "Brandon Blackmoor" <bblackmoor@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > What's the general consensus (or is there one) regarding the purchase of
                        > additional powers under Wizardry (when one is building characters with
                        > points, rather than randomly)? My intention was to make them cost
                        > normal, but then I realized that this means that the character might
                        > just as well buy those powers outside of the Wizardry. My next thought
                        > was to make them cost half, which is essentially what it costs for the
                        > first two powers a character has under Wizardry.
                        >
                        > What do you guys think?
                        >
                        >
                        > Kind regards,
                        > Brandon Blackmoor
                        >
                        > --
                        > bblackmoor@...
                        > 2011-03-22
                        >
                      • Chris Tavares
                        I ll throw in something, why not. I would leave the point buy costs as they are. As I see it, Wizardry isn t really a power per-se. That s why it gives the two
                        Message 11 of 15 , Mar 25, 2011
                        • 0 Attachment

                          I’ll throw in something, why not.

                           

                          I would leave the point buy costs as they are. As I see it, Wizardry isn’t really a power per-se. That’s why it gives the two bonus powers out of the box; otherwise Wizardry doesn’t really *do* anything, certainly not anything worth the x2 determination cost out of the box.

                           

                          What Wizardry actually does:

                           

                          1)      Lets you choose some or all of the rest of your power slots instead of random roll. Irrelevant in point buy.

                          2)      Gives you an excuse to stunt any power without having to appeal to a Quality.

                          3)      Limits you to one Wizardry power per page.

                           

                          I think the restriction vs. the advantage is pretty much a wash. It’s certainly not enough of a down side to result in half-cost powers. If you did this, I expect *every* character would buy Wizardry right out of the box.

                           

                          Wizardry is, during play, more like an aspect in my mind then a power in its own right.

                           

                          -Chris

                           

                           

                          From: icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com [mailto:icons-rpg@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Brandon Blackmoor
                          Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2011 7:00 PM
                          To: Icons Discussion List
                          Subject: [icons-rpg] additional Wizardry slots

                           

                           

                          On Tue, 22 Mar 2011 18:13 -0400, "Brandon Blackmoor"
                          <bblackmoor@...> wrote:

                          >
                          > One idea I had was that each additional slot after the first
                          > two would cost (number of that slot)/6. ...
                          >
                          > Another idea I had was to say that every additional Wizardry
                          > sub-power cost 1/2, and that a character could have a max of
                          > six sub-powers.

                          No one else has an opinion?

                          Kind regards,
                          Brandon Blackmoor

                          --
                          bblackmoor@...
                          2011-03-24

                        • Brandon Blackmoor
                          On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 10:40 -0700, Chris Tavares ... That s the best argument I have heard for keeping the cost of Wizardry sub-powers flat. I m convinced.
                          Message 12 of 15 , Mar 25, 2011
                          • 0 Attachment
                            On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 10:40 -0700, "Chris Tavares"
                            <cct@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > I think the restriction vs. the advantage is pretty much a
                            > wash. It's certainly not enough of a down side to result in
                            > half-cost powers. If you did this, I expect *every* character
                            > would buy Wizardry right out of the box.


                            That's the best argument I have heard for keeping the cost of Wizardry
                            sub-powers flat. I'm convinced.


                            Kind regards,
                            Brandon Blackmoor

                            --
                            bblackmoor@...
                            2011-03-25
                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.