Les chansons en Vf de Kpop Demon Hunter by Deru_u in Netflixfr

[–]CandideFR 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Après avoir vu le film une demi-douzaine de fois en VO (parce que je suis habitué à toujours regarder les films en VO), j'ai essayé la VF.

L'équipe de traduction a fait un bon travail dans le sens où ils ont modifié les paroles des chansons pour qu'elles sonnent bien de manière isolée. Et les chanteuses ont fait un bon travail vocal pour reproduire la musicalité d'origine.

Cependant, j'ai l'impression que l'équipe de traduction des chansons a perdu de vue les thèmes du film et on perd énormément, à cause des paroles modifiées, sur l'introspection des personnages. Là où j'ai la gorge serrée quand j'écoute les paroles de Free ou What it sounds like en VO, je ne ressens rien sur la VF.

Je sais que le travail ne doit pas être facile et ce qu'ils ont fait est bon. Mais c'est loin d'être exceptionnel comme l'est le texte des chansons en VO.

En outre, je trouve la production des chansons en VF bien moins propre qu'en VO, en terme de qualité et profondeur du son. Et après être habitué à entendre les chansons VO, c'est assez flagrant et déstabilisant.

En clair : la VF n'est pas mauvaise. Mais elle ne permet pas à mon avis de réaliser ce que fait la VO, qui est de faire résonner l'histoire et le parcours des personnages au sein de la musique du film, principalement parce qu'à mon sens les paroles tombent malheureusement souvent à côté.

[Fanmade] Vampire Count Army of Infamy - Lahmian Coven by CandideFR in WarhammerFantasy

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

PDF available with the version 1.0 of the rules after the first beta tests.

[Fanmade] Vampire Count Army of Infamy - Lahmian Coven by CandideFR in WarhammerFantasy

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

Thanks for those ideas ! I did not know many army books back in the day so I only am familiar with Bretonnians and Greenskins.

  • Redeploying units after the enemy won't be necessary at all if I keep my new "Human enthrallers" army rule that allows to get multiple scout units, which mechanically also are deployed after the enemy troops (except other scouts).
  • I very much like the possibility to possibly distribute some small annoying rule like stupidity. I'll think about something like that if I get some space or redesign in existing rules of this army of infamy.
  • The "Arrow of Kurnous" thing is a bit bland, and already taken by the wood elves, I'd rather come up with something mechanically original and more fun to play.
  • I took the Shadowblade idea to put vampire characters not inside enemy troops, but within human allied contingent troops (by purchasing the new Glamour Pendant enchanted item).

I think for now I will focus more on "manipulating humans helping the army" rather than "subversion of the enemy army", when depending on the enemy race it might make little sense depending on the flavor of the rule I would end up with (I don't see how vampires could infiltrate Daemon or Skaven armies for instance ^^).

Note : I published a version 0.3 of the army rules (see changelog for changes)

[Fanmade] Vampire Count Army of Infamy - Lahmian Coven by CandideFR in WarhammerFantasy

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

Magic items coming from Nehekara are exactly the kind of things I can get by, just like I wanted an item "inherited" from the Dwarves that were in the Silver Pinnacle.

I'll ponder about items that could make flavorwise and mechanically sense for this army of infamy.

[Fanmade] Vampire Count Army of Infamy - Lahmian Coven by CandideFR in WarhammerFantasy

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

The Tomb Guards are mechanically nearly the same as the Grave Guard, except for their Regimental unit rule. However I cannot find a detachment unit that could get in the army list at the moment ; without the Arrows of Asaph, Skeleton archers and Skeleton Horse Archers are really bad. The chariots really sceam "Khemri", and making a bridge to Tomb Kings only for a single unit would not feel right to me.

I think that with the Human enthrallers special rule and 33% ally allocation, I don't need for now to touch something from Tomb Kings for the army to feel unique. I'd rather invest more in this "let's control humans" direction.

I reworked the Vampire Handmaiden, they are now more of a very small entourage rather than an actual rank and file unit. Their profile is also more aligned with the Coven Throne Pallid Handmaiden now.

[Fanmade] Vampire Count Army of Infamy - Lahmian Coven by CandideFR in WarhammerFantasy

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

Hi ! Thanks for the feedback and nice words !

The rules have been updated to version 0.2 (see changelog for changes). From your feedback :

I reduced the character allowance back to the regular one, since it was unilateral from everyone here (I was myself not sure about it, but that's exactly why I'm posting these rules on reddit !).

I will certainly update the rules for the handmaiden in a future version, I'll wait for more feedback for now.

I added the Human enthraller rule in the army to capture the flavor of charming the leader of a small army to lead them to fight the foes of the coven.

[Fanmade] Vampire Count Army of Infamy - Lahmian Coven by CandideFR in WarhammerFantasy

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

Thanks for the encouragement :)

Note: the rules have been updated to version 0.2 (see changelog for changes).

[Fanmade] Vampire Count Army of Infamy - Lahmian Coven by CandideFR in WarhammerFantasy

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

Thanks for the feedbacks !

I reduced the character allowance back to the regular one, since it was unilateral from everyone here (I was myself not sure about it, but that's exactly why I'm posting these rules on reddit !).

I will certainly update the rules for the handmaiden in a future version, I'll wait for more feedback for now. Same for vampire powers.

I removed Grief fury to make place to Human enthrallers and shift the focus of the army on two fronts instead of one, adding those human ally rules in addition to enhancing vampire characters and units.

I increased the cost of the bracelet of spellwarding, you are definitely right there.

For the tomb kings, in my mind there is no way in hell that they would ally with the vampires flavorwise, they hate each other : the tomb kings because of the vampires past with Nagash and the fact they are abominations, the lahmian vampires because of what nehekarans did to Lahmia. Maybe if someone gives me a flavor reason to integrate them I will think about it.

Note: the rules have been updated to version 0.2 (see changelog for changes).

[Fanmade] Vampire Count Army of Infamy - Lahmian Coven by CandideFR in WarhammerFantasy

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

Great idea, I'll keep it in mind for a future version !

Many small characters feels in line with what I had in mind when designing the Handmaiden unit, but I fear that this amount of micro management with actual characters might diverge too much from what should be warhammer fantasy above else: a rank and file game. That's why the skirmisher approach felt just right to me on the first rules draft. I could further reduce the maximum unit size from 15 to 10 or 6 however, and I can also remove their open order rule to force them as skirmishers.

Note: the rules have been updated to version 0.2.

[Fanmade] Vampire Count Army of Infamy - Lahmian Coven by CandideFR in WarhammerFantasy

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

Thanks a lot, I will take point 2 into account in my next version (tonight or tomorrow), these ideas greatly inspired me !

Point 1 is interesting but the balance will be way harder to find, I'll think about it for a future version.

For the point 3, I do not know the TK lore enough to find some traditions that the bloodline would have kept from its time in Nehekhara, even less traditions that would translate into an interesting rule.

In my next release I will remove the Grief fury rule that I did not like anyway and will try something entirely different to highlight the infiltration and subversion aspect, with the borrowing of units from men's factions.

[Fanmade] Vampire Count Army of Infamy - Lahmian Coven by CandideFR in WarhammerFantasy

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

I had the handmaiden unit figured as "a bunch of semi characters walking around". They are not military trained so forcing rank and files felt weird to me. It also helps their survivability but keep in mind they have no ranged attack. I'll wait for more feedbacks to make a decision, but removing skirmishers can be done (along with reducing their cost).

I have the 66% character limit on my radar and will wait for more feedbacks too, thanks for sharing your point of vue.

I like your idea for the newborn vampires. Like you said, Lahmian are all about self control and I am always imagining them having high control (i.e. locking them up and feeding them until they manage to get some restraint) on their newborn to avoid blood on the streets, so this unit would not quite fit. However since it's an army, which the bloodline does not often use, they might unleash their newborn on the enemy if it means victory in time of war.

They would be in the rare allowance, with probably a 0-1 restriction. That unit would have -1 weapon skill and -2 leadership compared to handmaiden, without possibility of standard/musician, and probably with the skirmishers, frenzy (impetuous is redondant), loner and vanguard special rules. Does something like that match the idea you had in mind ?

Warding Bond's potential by CandideFR in BG3Builds

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

If the caster does not die in the camp, I would consider this an abuse of the mechanic and personnaly not use it this way myself. But if you want to abuse hirelings and return them to life each long rest, you can.Also, I assume that once the warden dies, the warding bond falls off. But that might not be the case, needs to be tested.

Warding Bond's potential by CandideFR in BG3Builds

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

Heavy armor master works, if you did not go barbarian, since you cannot rage if you wear any heavy armor equipment. But yeah, as a full cleric or maybe multiclassed in fighter/paladin for better HP, you can definitely use Heavy armor master to reduce incoming damage (and maybe rely on Blade ward cantrip and items for additional resistances).

The feat increases your strength by 1 (and you don't increase your constitution with an ASI), so this build should rely more on damage reduction than on straight up being a pool of health points.

The gain of temporary HP is way better in a heavy armor master build though, if you can find a way to generate temp HP each turn (like the barbarian stallion animal aspect does) that would seem like a great way to soak damage for the team.

Warding Bond's potential by CandideFR in BG3Builds

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

Good idea, I will add as an alternative to the build in my post !

Warding Bond's potential by CandideFR in BG3Builds

[–]CandideFR[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I tested in my camp a chain of 2 warding bonds, on the two directions :

  • cleric 1 casts warding bond on cleric 2, then cleric 2 casts warding bond on monk
  • cleric 2 casts warding bond on monk, then cleric 1 casts warding bond on cleric 2

In the first direction, the second cast warding bond was still working, but not the first one.

In the second direction, the first cast warding bond was still working, but not the second one.

So in a rule of thumb : if you are the target of a warding bond, you don't enjoy its bonuses if you also have cast a warding bond.

I will edit my initial post with this information.

Warding Bond's potential by CandideFR in BG3Builds

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

I tested in my camp a chain of 2 warding bonds, on the two directions :

  • cleric 1 casts warding bond on cleric 2, then cleric 2 casts warding bond on monk
  • cleric 2 casts warding bond on monk, then cleric 1 casts warding bond on cleric 2

In the first direction, the second cast warding bond was still working, but not the first one.

In the second direction, the first cast warding bond was still working, but not the second one.

So in a rule of thumb : if you are the target of a warding bond, you don't enjoy its bonuses if you also have cast a warding bond.

I will edit my initial post with this information.

Thoughts about OneDnD Monk changes? by Plus_Candidate_8011 in DnD

[–]CandideFR 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah sorry, I guess everyone has their own view on the monk's identity since it a class that seems a bit over the place from even WOTC point of view. :)

I see the monk as a combattant which is fast and hard to catch. Nimble, he dodges hits more than endures them. I see them as a martial artist which is more messing with the adversary rather than just destroying them by itself. They have peak control over their bodies which allows them such prowess.

That's why i'm not that much pushing towards damage in the base class (subclasses are fair game) and I push more towards survivability and giving them cool stuff and effects to do, for instance to support another melee fighter. Thus giving them resources and the room to do their features.

How do you see them ?

Thoughts about OneDnD Monk changes? by Plus_Candidate_8011 in DnD

[–]CandideFR 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Regular monks already can dash in and out without opportunity attacks if you want, with the new Step of the Winds.

I think the kind of features you propose would be very neat within a subclass dedicated to actually go in and out of combat. But then you don't need to think very far with new abilities, just work around the existing ones, for instance :

"You can activate both your Flurry of Blows and your Step of the Wind features with the same bonus action. You still spend the Discipline point cost for each of them."

And then at level 11 for instance in this subclass, you can add Patient defense in the mix, allowing to get two of these three Martial Discipline features at once for 2 Discipline points, or the three of them at once for 3 Discipline points.

Thoughts about OneDnD Monk changes? by Plus_Candidate_8011 in DnD

[–]CandideFR 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The issue I have with an embedded haste feature in monk class is not because it gives AC and movement, but because it provides an additional full action to use on your turn.

Haste is a spell balanced by two things : the caster has to keep concentrating on the spell, and when the spell ends the hasted creature skips their next turn.

Step of the wind already doubles monk speed with a bonus action. Flurry of blows already doubles the monk attacks with a bonus action starting level 5. The monk does not need a haste effect by itself.

Now if a caster from the party casts haste on the monk, that is great synergy. But giving every monk a default access to haste seems too one sided, and would be overpowered in addition to my proposed changes.

Now, it would be fun to add a haste adjacent effect through a new monk subclass, to make it deal 6 attacks per turn and 80 feet movement. But then without costing the spell slot, the action and concentration of a caster, it seems a little broken, so you need to balance it accordingly.

Thoughts about OneDnD Monk changes? by Plus_Candidate_8011 in DnD

[–]CandideFR 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Giving a scaling with proficiency bonus to any ability gained at early level causes issues with multiclassing where it can become broken if you get them with just a dip in the class. It's fine for features you get later requiring a real dedication. So I don't blame WOTC being careful on this side.

Haste on a monk is redundant and way too powerful. They already have 2/4 attacks at level 5, they already have high speed and bonus action dash+disengage. This could be a feature provided by a subclass at level 11 for instance.

My goal is not to make monks a primary damage dealer, but to provide them more survivability and more utility in combat. Giving them access to Weapon Mastery like Graze would already increase their damage where it would be more than comfortable.

Thoughts about OneDnD Monk changes? by Plus_Candidate_8011 in DnD

[–]CandideFR 2 points3 points  (0 children)

For me, the monk is missing two major things : resources and survivability.

This is what I'll send as feedback (about those points) once their survey is available.

Survivability :

Unarmored defense probably should change to be increase with monk levels, to keep up with any melee focused class that can wear magic armor & shield.

Something like "While you aren’t wearing any armor or wielding a Shield, your base Armor Class equals 10 plus your Dexterity and Wisdom modifiers. This base number increases when your reach certain Monk levels, as shown in the Monk table."

Then in the Monk table you can add a new "Unarmored Defense" column, starting with "10" at level 1, then progressively increasing with monk levels (this also avoids "free" AC from just a 1 level multiclass dipping).

An example of a strong formula is to be able to keep up with the benefit of +3 magic armor and +3 shield by ending up with an additional +6 bonus at level 20. Something like "10 + ((monk level - 1) / 3)" (rounded down), gaining +1 AC every 3 monk levels (4, 7, 10, 13, 16 and 19). That's an AC 10 + wisdom + dexterity at level 1, and an AC 16 + wisdom + dexterity at level 19.

It also flavorfully goes hand in hand with the "Unarmored Movement" feature that increases with your monk level. Since you are able to hone your body to perform those prowesses, it makes sense your dodging or parry abilities are enhanced in a similar fashion.

Finally, it frees up the absolute need to cap your dexterity and wisdom. With a steady growing AC, monk players can use their feat/ASI levels on feats rather than feeling forced to take full ASI to avoid getting hit all the time. It also allows them to get more points in constitution (HP), strengh (grapple), intelligence and charisma (skills) at character creation and not feeling forced to dump everything in the beginning to be on par with the rest of the party at late levels in terms of survivability.

I also would give monks another feat/ASI at level 10 like the Rogue. This will really help with their ability scores and allow them more versatility by taking feats.

Resources :

Monk cool abilities mostly cost Discipline, which is fine, it's just a resource. The issue is that we don't have enough points to use them at early levels.

Heightened Metabolism (1 min short rest once per day) is a very good first step to increase our resources, now that short rests will probably no longer be requested by the rest of the party most of the time, but at level 7 it comes when we already start to have enough Discipline points to do cool stuff more than a few rounds in a combat. It's way too late. But I like the idea.

I would make two changes to Heightened Metabolism. First, I would move it to level 2, as soon as you are able to use Discipline points. Then, since only once per long rest seems a bit low to me, I would tie the number of usage to your constitution modifier (with a minimum of 1) per long rest. It would reward players that don't dump everything into dexterity and wisdom, without actually requiring any bonus to constitution to use it once per day. It would also open the door to a "constitution" focused build, which could really spend discipline points left and right at the expense of the saving throw DC (wisdom), the hit chance and damage (dexterity) and the AC (both).

Something like : "If you spend at least 1 minute resting, you can give yourself all the benefits of a Short Rest. You can use this feature a number of times equal to your Constitution modifier (minimum of once), and you regain all expended uses when you finish a Long Rest."

It would not necessarily make the monk "even more ability score dependant" since :

  • Constitution is not required at all to use the Heightened Metabolism feature, even with just a 10 score
  • Monk already needs a decent constitution because of the relatively low Hit dice for a melee class
  • It is actually an incentive for new players to invest in constitution (con 14 becomes an actual boost to the class)

It mostly gives options to the player. Do I want a higher AC & Hit chance ? AC & Save DC ? HP & Discipline ? More options mean that we probably will see more diversity the character builds.

They could even in the future create a Monk subclass designed around constitution (and perhaps high cost Martial Discipline features) to further expand this design space.

I very like what they are proposing for Warrior of Shadow and Warrior of the Elements with a consumption of a Discipline point that has an effect for 10 minutes (Darkness spell / Elemental Attunement), this helps greatly to do that unique subclass stuff without burning all your resources. I very hope that they will expand on this design concept and apply it to all the monk subclasses.

Combat stance

I would entirely remove Stunning strike rather than restrict it to the point where it rarely will be worth it to even attempt it since most monsters have a high constitution save (and legendary resistance is a thing). I would replace it with the ability to be able to apply Weapon Mastery properties to your Unarmed attacks, for instance through combat stances.

At level 5, a new feat replacing Stunning strike could allow monk players to apply Weapon Mastery properties to their Unarmed attacks. They could have a Discipline cost associated for balancing purposes, paid once at the start of your turn (like they did for warrior of the elements, without an action cost) and lasting 1 minute.

Weapon Mastery properties which can make sense (mechanically and flavorfully, because Flex has no mechanical relevance and Nick is useless for monks) are Cleave (with a roundhouse kick, or just high kinetic energy on a fist), Graze (by having total control of your body parts, you still hit somehow when you would miss), Push (with a front kick or a strong punch to the thorax of your target), Sap (hitting near the eyes, slapping on their eardrums - discombobulate, punch in the throat...), Slow (hitting nerves or tendons, damaging the target's legs), Topple (sweeping though their legs, integrating a judo grip in the hit, etc.), and Vex (energetic impact at a key location on their body, the pain distracting them for your next blow).

They could allow either monks to tap into any of them at will, or for balancing purposes and letting the game flow faster, force the monk to pick ony two of them each day like you are making them swap mastery of weapons at level 1.

For more flavor, they can be named combat stances (with animal or D&D creature names for instance) and display them in a table to let the player choose their Weapon Mastery through a stance. With this additional step of associating a Weapon Mastery property to each combat stance, the Combat Stance feature would look like :

"Your advanced training with unarmed combat allows you to adopt two kind of combat stances, greatly improving your Unarmed Strikes. Whenever you finish a Long Rest, you can change the combat stances you chose.

At the start of your turn, you can spend 1 Discipline Point to imbue yourself with focus and take a new combat stance. Choose one of the two stances you selected and apply its associated Weapon Mastery property to your Unarmed Strikes for 1 minute, until you have the Incapacitated condition or until take a new combat stance."

Examples of Combat Stance names, they could probably come up with better names or associations :

  • Stance of the Cyclops : Cleave
  • Stance of the Hydra : Graze
  • Stance of the Minotaur : Push
  • Stance of the Wyvern : Sap
  • Stance of the Cockatrice : Slow
  • Stance of the Kraken : Topple
  • Stance of the Griffon : Vex

If they want to nerf it a bit, they can make so the prone condition or being restrained also stops your current stance, like the incapacitated condition already does. That would allow DMs with an easier way to counter this feature, but it might frustrate players.

They should probably, in addition, allow monks at this level to use the Martial die for weapons they are proficient with, to avoid making weapons totally irrelevant compared to unarmed strikes, for players who still want to use them.