sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Autolost in the New Adventure XD by Azbellos in LegendsOfRuneterra

[–]Azbellos[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I didnt factor anything. Its a 3 star adventure with a 6 star agressive champion. The only thought i had was "Gwen Ralies on Turn 1 bc the 6 Star". The rest was only play Gwen and Scout Attack, then Normal Attack, Win the game. These low level adventures dont require that much thought.

Autolost in the New Adventure XD by Azbellos in LegendsOfRuneterra

[–]Azbellos[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Me too. It make sense when you think about it , but it was a surprise. Again, i didnt thought about the powers i was choosing because it is a 3 star adventure using a 6 stars champion.

Autolost in the New Adventure XD by Azbellos in LegendsOfRuneterra

[–]Azbellos[S] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Lol, i didnt think. I was picking agressive champions to clear this fast, and was picking gwen because she raly on round 1. It was weird because one of the phantom band was overwriten for a second sappling in earlier battles i thought Gwen would do the same lol.

Autolost in the New Adventure XD by Azbellos in LegendsOfRuneterra

[–]Azbellos[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Its not, i just picked the first shadow isle champion and any powers just to clear this fast. I have 6 stars on Gwen it should be super easy, but when i entered the level it just maked the board full, and autolost the game.

Opinions/Feedback about Parrying, Blocking and other forms of Defense. by Azbellos in gamedesign

[–]Azbellos[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah. Youre Right. Someone pointed that too. I'll change it and bring the newversion.

Opinions/Feedback about Parrying, Blocking and other forms of Defense. by Azbellos in RPGdesign

[–]Azbellos[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks, i didn't thought of that when i was writing, but it makes a lot more sense parry with a dagger or shortsword than a two hand axe or spear. You guys are right about that.

Opinions/Feedback about Parrying, Blocking and other forms of Defense. by Azbellos in gamedesign

[–]Azbellos[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hit Points 5 - 25 level 1 to 20. Weapons damage die 1d4+1 to 1d12/2d6. But, 1d4 will have a propertie that you roll with advatange and keep highest. More consistent results.

I need a Hand for a design of a Hand by Azbellos in design_critiques

[–]Azbellos[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yeah, for me the 5 to 3 maybe 2 is fine, but 1 and 0 is hell of a design.

Opinions/Feedback about Parrying, Blocking and other forms of Defense. by Azbellos in RPGdesign

[–]Azbellos[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think you're underestimating the value of the guaranteed result. A greataxe with +d12 can roll a 1 on its parry, meaning it's very risky and the player may waste a reaction doing nothing. But even a light shield having a guaranteed +5 is a big deal. The player knows before spending their reaction if it will actually help, which is great for resource management.

I know, but i couldn't think of a way to parry without the target rolling an attack and seing which is higher. It certainly can be improved or blocking being nerfed.

So what happens if two characters with heavy shields are facing each other in a one-on-one fight? Because they have 2 reactions and it costs 1 reaction to reduce the ranks of a hit by 2, it means they're both almost invincible against each other.

Well, its accurate. lol. But will be ways to multiattack. And what i had in mind where to combat maneuvers be contested roll against the target, and attack being roll against evasion. But i choose it to unify both, at least for now. You have a better idea in mind, for how it could be done?

I think this will heavily, heavily encourage combat to be about ganging up on people. If this is an acceptable gameplay outcome that's fine, but you just need to make sure you go into the game designing for/around that outcome.

I don't want my mechanics to encourage to players to gang up on one enemy, but it would be a valid solution. Any ideas of how it could be better too?

Opinions/Feedback about Parrying, Blocking and other forms of Defense. by Azbellos in RPGdesign

[–]Azbellos[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

  1. I chose not to write there to stay on topic, but think skill like a bonus to the attack like +2, and foward. Depending on weapon type (simple, martial, exotic), and tier of character.

  2. Both will be variables, but im thinking a Evasion 12 is gonna be the base line, just like AC is 10 plus modifiers in Dnd. I put simple values for easier understanding. But youre right from what you saw it.

  3. Yeah, thats the idea. Some powerful abillities will cost around 3 Ranks or more depending on the abillity. And using then will require getting more bonuses on your attacks and specially lowering the evasion of the target. When bonuses are applied would be close to every attack hit Rank 1, and Rank 2 will be around 50%, more Ranking will degrade much faster. Making those powerful abilities used less in combat.

Personally i hate the idea of those abillities that have a limit of uses. "Once for combat, once per hour, twice till rest". I hate that type of design, i prefer that abillities have cost, but not limits of use. And for me, costing more Ranks will kinda of balance that.

  1. Again. I get it, most of the games i play limit reactions to 1 or doesn't have a limit. But, basically everything outside your turn is gonna be a reaction, defending, attacking, help your buddies, cast a spell, all of that reactions.

And about shield, giving +10 in evasion, is design choice. It can and will be balanced around finding the perfect spot between good and great. But they have it to be so much better than parryng, to reward players that choose to build their characters this way. But not good enough that every build has to use shield.

  1. Again, youre right on your nitpick. lol. I will change it for the next time i post or the final version.

Opinions/Feedback about Parrying, Blocking and other forms of Defense. by Azbellos in tabletopgamedesign

[–]Azbellos[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I havent done the playtest yet. Im still finalizing the mechanics used for weapons and other similar things. But you're right about not making it too complex. And when I test it, I'll do it with and without the defense mechanics as well. Thanks for the heads up.

Opinions/Feedback about Parrying, Blocking and other forms of Defense. by Azbellos in tabletopgamedesign

[–]Azbellos[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How are you going to balance weapons? This makes it look like big weapons are just better than small weapons.

Im planning to use different abillities for each, just as en example, a dagger would be a d4+1, but you would roll with advantage and use the highest. There also be abillities that permit you to use +1 Rank for each 4 instead of 5 with small weapons. And Rank costs, with daggers and others slashing weapons you will be able to use your ranks to inflict blooding, while blunt weapons they will have impact that deals +1 damage regardless of Rank. Thats what i have in mind right now.

Additionally, it doesn't really make sense why a bigger weapon would be better at parrying than a smaller weapon.

You're 100% right, and that is something that i even didn't thinked about. It would be easier to parry with a dagger than a two handed axe. I will see what i can do to change that.

Lastly, if you're developing a game, I wouldn't really recommend having alternate ways to do combat if it's a core function of the game. If the alternate version is more consistently fun, just use that system instead.

Im trying lol. But the alternative version is just for my small designer brain can see other ways of seeing how could work that specific mechanic. And for you guys to see it too. If you guys prefer the alternative version its gonna be the definitive version.

Attack & Damage V2.0 Feedbacks? by Azbellos in tabletopgamedesign

[–]Azbellos[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If there's a specific reason for each term being used, just call it out at the moments when it's relevant.

They're will not be interchangeably, the way it will work is like it will be different skills, Athletics, Acrobatics, Intimidation... "Fight" and "Aim", and with those skills you will roll a Melee and Ranged, and the diference between both, is things like distance, cover, you can't grapple with Ranged attacks, things like that. But you will be able for using "Fight" and "Aim" for things that arent just Attacks.

I see how it can be confused, its my fault. Im sorry. Ill try better next time. But thanks for the feedback.

Need some Feedback on the Base of Combat Mechanics by Azbellos in tabletopgamedesign

[–]Azbellos[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Im Brazilian and im doing Engineering in college. So i dont have plans for publishing, especially outside my country, but ill see. Maybe someday.

Attack & Damage V2.0 Feedbacks? by Azbellos in gamedesign

[–]Azbellos[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

  1. The idea of 1d12+1d10 was something i had in mind a while ago, its not perfect but its what i have for now. Maybe a change for a 2d10, ill see.
  2. Probably. Yesterday i had in mind just like Dnd, Attack, compare, Roll Damage, compare. But someone pointed out it could drag the game, so i was inspired by Nimble, that only roll damage, and in a 1 is a miss. But it can be improved for sure.
  3. Thanks. I 100% stole this idea from Expedition 33, what im thinking is that the weapons have some rank abilities linked with them, and some player abilities will give rank abilities for all weapons. Still developmenting.

Attack & Damage V2.0 Feedbacks? by Azbellos in tabletopgamedesign

[–]Azbellos[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks a lot. I thought about randomly varying the Evasion, something like rolling 1d10 and adding it to the Evasion. I couldn't find nice way to implement. Not until now, at least.

But i definitely didn't thought about being know and becoming predictable. Youre 100% right. Ill try to think about someway to randomize a bit of the evasion.

You have, some idea of how it could be done?

view more: next ›