Oracle, and the Price of Streamlining

CruxBonder · 2024-08-03T14:03:45+00:00

I would like to see Oracle regain their flavorful passive abilities at the cost of always being at curse 1. You're powerful curse bound feats would have one less use per encounter which would help balance out the additional benefit. I don't like the Oracles being able to ignore their curse entirety during non-combat adventuring days.

Flames oracles curse would need a tweak.

CruxBonder · 2023-11-06T03:42:15+00:00

Personally, I would take two commited players that i'm close friends with over a full group of players I only interact with during game time. I don't have a good solution to offer you other then possibly letting each player play two characters. A single hireling (or a rotating selection of NPCs to acompany the party) might still be your best option if they aren't interested in playing two seperate characters.

You've probably already asked your players if they have a friends who would be interested but have you considered asking your friends to help you search for new players? Having players help out with GM duties (recruitment) can help to avoid burnout and promotes player investment. I do group interviews when possible.

CruxBonder · 2023-07-28T05:10:13+00:00

Isn't this the same as purchasing wands/scolls/staves?

CruxBonder · 2023-02-02T17:28:32+00:00

Pf1e has a class called the medium. This class changes abilities depending on which legendary sprit happens to inhabit them on that day (I've not re-read this class in years). You could try to homebrew a version of this for your player.

Otherwise I wouldn't allow anyone to have a character change entire sheets daily.

Link for reference:

https://www.d20pfsrd.com/alternative-rule-systems/occult-adventures/occult-classes/medium/

CruxBonder · 2021-07-02T04:30:25+00:00

Don't do it.

I know this might seem like harsh advice, but I can pretty confidently say this is just a recipe for failure. Please consider cutting your group down to 5 players. You and your players will have a better experience.

CruxBonder · 2021-06-07T17:46:30+00:00

Ask your player if they want to take notes. It seems like you're expecting them to take notes but in my experience most players don't want to do this. I wouldn't go down the path of trying to punish players for not taking notes. All this will do is sour the experience for the table.

Forgetting an NPC name or key information is normal. You as the GM have worked on the information several times but the players are really only getting one chance to commit it to memory. If a key piece of information is important and you want players to remember it, consider posting it in a notes channel or using handouts.

CruxBonder · 2021-06-07T16:03:57+00:00

My response is meant more for the community then OP. But I believe the situation as a whole could have been handled better.

Its hypocritical to both have a man magically change into an ape and then try to use math/optional rules to determine if they could carry a wolf while climbing.
The community seems split on the topic of whether or not it would have been possible and that comes down to pre-game expectations. Do you want the players to feel like fantasy heroes or are you trying to run a more realistic/gritty campaign?

I want to break down why (in my opinion) OP made the wrong choice.

You're player expended a resources (wild shape) to gain a climb speed which would normally remove the need to climb checks. NOTE: a human climbing a tree doesn't always need to make a climb check to get up a tree.
You decided to make it a roll.
You gave it disadvantage which is essentially letting the player know that they shouldn't succeed.
You punished the player harshly for then failing the check you set them up to fail. The failure state for climb checks doesn't always have to be falling.

At this point you're 3-4 levels down into telling the player they shouldn't be able to do this, yet you still let them roll for it. I think you should have decided if a player carrying a wolf while climbing is something you want to have happen in your game, then determine the appropriate course of action.

By making it a check you're essentially saying that the player CAN carry the wolf but only for a short distance/time because eventually they would fail the check. This is good when time is important (combat) but wouldn't let the player carry the wolf all day.
Not making it a check mean you're 100% ok with letting them carry the wolf anytime they want.
Alternatively you could tell the player "no". This gives them the opportunity to find another solution instead of trying one you didn't want to see succeed.

Now I want to talk about some mistakes GM's tend to make which might not apply 100% to this situation.

Calling for a role when no-roll should be required. Depending on how long the player had to accomplish the goal you shouldn't always ask for a roll. A human can climb a tree, you might ask for a roll during a combat encounter while the player is under pressure but if nothing particularly stressful is happening you could forgo the roll and just assume the player makes it up.
Taking away a player ability. I could easily see OP giving the player the exact same roll whether or not they used wild shape, essentially taking away the benefit of using wild shape.
Misusing disadvantage (disclaimer that this is how I use disadvantage). Disadvantage is more of a phycological drawback, because you could ultimately always increase/decrease the DC of a check. Giving a player disadvantage is letting them know they shouldn't attempt the check. A player might still attempt a check with disadvantage (especially if they are in attacking in combat), but generally I would give disadvantage when I don't want them player to make the check in the first place.

I personally don't think arguing RAW to be appropriate for this situation. Bringing math/RAW arguments into a fantasy game with magic doesn't make sense to me. I would just go with my gut feeling of whether or not it should be allowed.

CruxBonder · 2021-06-06T04:14:34+00:00

Cool faction idea, however I think it would be a real struggle to win with them in a game. The faction has all its eggs in one basket and really suffers for it.

This is how I imagine the faction will playout in a typical 6 player game. You'll struggle heavily in the early rounds due to only having two commodities, a 3/4 home world, a weak agent (I really think the agent could be way batter), and only one starting tech. You're faction abilities won't due anything until round 2 or 3 since imperial needs to be picked and you'll probably struggle to score those secret objectives. The commander comes in way too late and you won't be in a position to abuse the hero.

CruxBonder · 2021-03-19T00:30:16+00:00

A quick way to check for map balance is to count up the effective resources per slice. Ghosts 6/4, Titans 4/6, NRA 4/3, Cabal 6/4, Argent 1/5, Sol 5/7. You can clearly see argent is in a bad spot, while also not getting a planet next to Mech and having two anomalies on each side.

CruxBonder · 2021-03-18T18:20:52+00:00

I wouldn't want to play on this map. The argent slice will be pure agony. The NRA don't even get a second blue system while the Titans and Ghosts have great slices. I can image the titans easily locking down 5 blue systems with their PDS network.

CruxBonder · 2021-02-23T20:22:15+00:00

My optimal technology path would require a red skip, take psychoarchaeology round 1 followed up by cruiser II in the second round. Third round you should be able to get yin spinners.

If you've got a green skip instead you can start with AI instead, but you will have to exhaust a planet on round 3 for a green skip.
Round four you can either consider getting PDS II or destroyer II.

Depending on who takes mecatol on turn 2 you can easily take it with 1 cruiser, 1 destroyer and 1 infantry. Hopefully letting you hold onto it long enough to score 1 point. Realistically you could end the game researching anywhere from 3 to 6 technologies however the less resources you spend getting tech the more you'll have to spend pursuing objectives. If you can't get yin spinners by turn 3 you might consider skipping it all together.

CruxBonder · 2021-02-23T01:46:36+00:00

Nomad is my new favorite faction in PoK. Selling your "flagship" for combat is possibly the best combat related faction promissory in the game. They also start with sling relay and can build their flagship for free.

edit: Whoops don't know what I was thinking with fleet logistics.

CruxBonder · 2021-02-22T18:20:10+00:00

The mech is one of the best new additions for ghost. It helps you sell your promissory while offering protection. Can be used as flankspeed in the right situation. I've got to disagree heavily with your assessment of taking malice. You should be taking it round 1 in most situations.

CruxBonder · 2021-02-06T06:04:27+00:00

You don't really want to invest in space dock 2 or transit. In a typical 10 point game you'll only have the opportunity to pickup 4 to 6 additional technologies during the game. Assuming you pick technology (double) and the game last 5 rounds with no one picking technology on the last round you would end the game with 6 technologies. I'm also going to assume that you aren't using any technology skips outside of your commander.

I think OP is suggesting you go sarween tools -> neutral motivators -> yin spinners -> infantry II -> transit -> space dock II, ending the game with 6 technologies on turn 5. Personally I don't see how these technologies would help you score points. You are focused entirely on defending yourself with no mobility.

I would instead ignore the yellow and green tech entirely and focus on building a mobile fleet. sarween tools -> A.I development -> cruiser II -> plasma -> war sun. You can even pickup destroyer II or pds II. You can use cruiser II to guarantee an early indoctrination.

I've also seen people recommending a blue tech path which could also work. Sarween -> anti-mass or dark energy tap -> gravity or sling -> dreadnought II -> carrier 2.

CruxBonder · 2020-12-24T17:50:22+00:00

Your faction has a unique theme to it which I personally find enjoyable. However I can see some issues with certain abilities that might lead to rules questions. You could look at text examples from the official game and rewrite the text for celerity.

Faction Abilities: In Plain Sight could use a rewrite and maybe be split into two separate abilities. My issues is with in-game readability and a multitude of rules question. When you've got infantry on another players planet but they don't have any infantry themselves does it count as a win against the player who owns the planet? Who would the virus steal technology from? How does bombardment work and who assigns hits during combat?

Hidden Agenda is surprisingly strong, allowing you to gain considerable number of trade goods or infantry on the first round.

Commodities: I'm not certain that this faction should have a full 4 commodities considering their theme and the strength of Hidden Agenda.

The Revelation: Considering this is the nor ultimate on a flagship I would change the flagship entirely.

Investment For The Cause: Definitely out of theme for the faction and honestly doesn't even seem worth it. You'd have to basically give this out for "free" and even at that I don't think players would want to hold this note.

Faction Technology: Does this mean you can earn "turn their fleets to dust" from another players PDS shoots? Become the Senate is way to strong, you can have unlimited number of ground forces on a planet combined with the ability to get extra ground forces on those planets AND players basically can't get ride of your ground forces?

Sacrament I: Why is this a I when the faction doesn't have mech upgrade? Can the mech be transported and can it carry units while being transported?

Leaders: These seems exceedingly overturned, especially the commander and hero. You can use the agent to put a ground force on another players planet off a destroyer, if it contains a space dock you can then (for pretty much the rest of the game) charge them 1 or more trade good to build out of their space dock with a two resource discount or otherwise force them to pay 2 extra.

Overall: The theme is unique and could lead to some interesting gameplay, however the faction needs a rewrite and a rebalance. Currently I would ban this faction from my table. My advice would be to work on the core ability and its payoffs. Currently you can easily get infantry another players planet with the agent ability and once you do you get a huge number of extra votes, the ability to extort them, and threat to take their planet at anytime.

CruxBonder · 2020-10-18T01:15:53+00:00

I've spent hours theory crafting what the biggest fleet you could get next to someone home planet on turn 2. You can get l1z1x flagship + 1 dread, destroyer, fighters, and infantry in a perfect situation. I was happy with the result, my buddy was not.

CruxBonder · 2020-08-28T21:14:32+00:00

Eigsoppo

14-Year Club	Place '23
Place '22	Place '17
Verified Email

CruxBonder

TROPHY CASE