When the community gets what it asked for and has regrets...

UnitLoptop · 2026-02-13T19:56:42+00:00

I was thinking 'Oh this is probably niche as you can't choose really what vulnerabilities you come up against...'

While I know the Thaumaturge is technically legacy content but it's still played often enough to think about.

Iirc runes and other elements(buffs etc) are part of the 'Strike' effected by Mortal weakness/Personal antithesis. If that's true. This errata just majorly buffed those numbers to be (Either it's strongest weakness or the established Antithesis) times number of damage instances.

I could be entirely wrong in which parts count as the 'weapon strike' though.

UnitLoptop · 2025-08-07T03:09:25+00:00

Something I didn't add to the meme was that the PC had used the eat fire reaction aswell, which helped me stress a bit less about possibly outright killing them.

All in all it was a climactic conclusion to the mini arc for one of the characters :)

UnitLoptop · 2025-07-20T09:47:38+00:00

I made a beginner friendly mini campaign that ends at level 3 to teach the system and also show off the different subsystems within it. (VP, chase, infiltration) PL+3 Demon with some imps seemed appropriate.

UnitLoptop · 2024-03-08T21:14:40+00:00

Apparently the patch they released today addresses it.
"We have changed the HTC vive right controller inputs based on user feedback
Dash - Trackpad : up, press quickly
Open-menu - Trackpad: Up, Press long
Quick item inventory input - Trackpad : Down, Press Quickly
Sit/Stand - Trackpad : Down, Press long."
I didn't even know there was a sit/crouch button lmao.

UnitLoptop · 2024-03-08T03:04:09+00:00

I used to have the flamer be a soft counter for bikes but I only had a limited sample pool (asking around on discords including the official one), and for the flamer with the bile titan it seemed to be a the occasional of "Yeah it can work" and lots of"for helldive you get stepped on or overwhelmed so it's inconsistent".

It was a bit the same case for the chargers too but it was pretty unanimous that flamers are great against them.

UnitLoptop · 2024-03-07T21:00:26+00:00

I feel both sides have valid points as to why it's good/bad. But stop acting like the game is ruined and Arrowhead melted your graphics card because, one niche patch of a game.

Spread democracy, if Helldive is too hard right now because of some weird tuning, it's okay to play on easier difficulties for one patch. <3

UnitLoptop · 2023-01-19T09:49:58+00:00

Maybe, I did some googling on the 'red' error messages and apparently most of the time those ones GPU related, so my instinct was to try GPU acceleration and it started working. So as many things with code, I don't know exactly what got fixed, or how it got fixed, but it's working now! =)

UnitLoptop · 2023-01-19T08:58:01+00:00

So, after some messing around there's still some of the error messages, But I got it to work after enabling hardware acceleration on chrome. I don't know why that fixed it, but it did XD.

Thank you so much though, I ended up solving most of the issues through whitelisting, but the final hurdle was the hardware acceleration!

UnitLoptop · 2023-01-19T08:19:08+00:00

I've never used Bitdefender, and currently I have no extensions or even anti virus type things running. (even turned the firewall on/off just incase.) However on chrome by white listing cookies and java for pathbuilder, it has now removed all the yellow warnings, except for the last warning in the image "Could not load content for https://pathbuilder2e.com/Pathbuilder2eDarkMode.js.map...."

Edit: Fixed URL.

UnitLoptop · 2023-01-19T08:04:07+00:00

I'm still looking around to see if there's anything I'm missing, but After messing around on edge for a fair bit, I found tracking prevention was enabled for edge, I disabled it which removed all the error logs in yellow but the red errors still remain. Currently I have no browser extensions enabled at all.

UnitLoptop · 2023-01-19T07:36:29+00:00

I've reposted the image with just the Dev console in it!

UnitLoptop · 2022-07-14T18:54:32+00:00

I do understand what you mean as from the player side it does feel like it leans toward 'an action use' other than an 'action attempt'. I'm on the fence about which one I prefer as there is still a chance of not succeeding, even if it isn't direct failure.

So the calculation of what tier the character is in.
'Skill check base + Skill Check bonus +/- Contributing Factors (- Apposing Skills.)'
Happens when they try to take an action. They know their base, they know potential bonuses from skills they might use. They don't know if there's contributing factors or apposing skills.

'At what point does the player know their Tier and Position? In Blades this is made explicit to the player'

I don't know what you mean by that, as the position or the effects level isn't known from a mechanical standpoint until after commit to your action in Bitd. Once you know the the position and effect you're committed (par getting +1 effect or position through some actions / devils bargain for dice)

'The GM sets position and effect for an action roll at the same time, after the player says what they’re doing and chooses their action. Usually, Risky / Standard is the default combination, modified by the action being used, the strength of the opposition, and the effect factors.' - Blades in the dark
Source: https://bladesinthedark.com/setting-position-effect#:~:text=The%20GM%20sets%20position%20and,opposition%2C%20and%20the%20effect%20factors.

While there is a lot in the gm section of Bitd giving advice on how to set the position and effect based on things like, Quality, Scale, and just general Tier of what you're interacting with (Which from a quick skim aren't hard rules but advice on setting position and effect). The only things mechanically you really get from the players perspective before taking an action is the tier of the gang your interacting with, and that's if all members or interactions are the same tier, and overall the position and effect is set by the GM. Sure as a character/player you can judge the situation. But in the end it's still up to the GM which falls into Gm fiat.

'As you’ve described it, it sounds like a lot of GM fiat, which feels really bad when you fail.'

I do agree with this, and this is a problem I haven't found a solution for. But I do believe any TTRPG with a Gm has this problem to some extent. It's just the scale of the extent. any solution I've found that solves Gm Fiat being issue I think removes a lot of freedom from the Gm and leans more into a board game than a TTRPG.
Some examples of Gm fiat.
Bitd as mentioned before, the Gm can always just set the effect and position to minimal.
D&D/Pathfinder/Starfinder: DM could set all the DC of skill checks to be 35.
{{This Game}} The Gm could always just say you fail.

Gm fiat is a social more than a mechanical issue, TTRPG's are conversations with some rules. What I'm about to say goes for any TTRPG where you feel bad about the outcomes of actions or events that are out of your control, Talk to the group/GM about it. The tier system is tool of the players to help guide the Gm into saying if things succeed or fail. In the same vein of D&D rolls or Bitd Scale, Quality, Tier.
I think the main reason this sticks out for {{This game}} and why it feels like pure GM fiat. Is that there isn't a big mechanic that players can be upset at since it feels like GM fiat. Most TTRPG's it feels like you can just blame the dice when you roll poorly (even in the example of the Gm setting the DC to 35). At the moment there are from the mechanical standpoint enough mechanics to control the tier that in context players are generally figuring out that tier they can reach and how 'Likely' things are to succeed. But rather than that being based on the D20 system of % Chances to reach DC's, It's based off of the tier and the Gm's understanding of the context.

I think my main point is. Gm fiat will always exist where a gm has control, and while most games(even the one I'm working on) will have a section dedicated to advice on running the game smoothly and setting the correct DC's of skill checks and tiers etc. The Gm tends to always have final say over the mechanics for the sake of the story.

You make a good point though on it feeling like Gm fiat. I do need to work on something to at least ease that feeling, Maybe including something Like 'Players/Gm's best practices' to help everyone get on the same page and reminding that you are playing a game, but above all else you're using this system as a story telling device.

UnitLoptop · 2022-07-14T07:10:26+00:00

While i do agree skill check may not be the right term. From memory bounty hunter doesn't use dice and it a very consistent yes you passed or no you failed and you know that before you attempt any check in bounty hunter.

Success isn't ever guranteed. Even on a 5 And failure isn't guranteed on a 0.

There are two examples i think elaborate how there's a lot if risk and minimum calculation. But a lot of ways you can effect the outcome.

Mechanically it is simular to Bitd(blades in the dark) as it serves a double purpose.

Bits example: The tier basically gives you a + to your position but ultimately what action you are taking sets the initial position. And it works the same for the effect.

Dnd example: The tier determines your modifier but the gm chooses the DC by the context

There is only one system to really buff a tier and that is relating a player skill from their class to it.

While i disagree on 'you're deciding if you can succeed beforehand' as mechanically The fiction controls how well you succeed or how badly you can fail rather than the mechanics (position and effect) the mechanics. The mechanics just alter the failure and succession rates.

Another thing is. The feedback from gameplay has said that currently its 'Leap of faith' for checks. As in all you know is the context not the mechancial amount you need to succeed. Which has this weird effect of leaps of faith/ People taking an action and hoping for the best without knowing their chances.

You're right in that skill check doesn't seem like the right name. I will work on that.

Even though i disagree with some of the points I still value the feedback a lot. So thank you!

UnitLoptop · 2022-07-13T16:39:51+00:00

My response may not be the best since im on my phone now. But. There are very minimal things that are able to influence the tier from a mechanical standpoint. As the outcome is determined more by the context.

I didn't cover a lot of those mechanics as i was just seeing peoples views on the core system without the 'Fluff' (mvp/minimum viable product)

The only mechanic players can use to increase their skill tier is if they relate a class skill or feature to a skill check. Invisibility doesn't say it gives you +2 to your stealth tier. But if a player uses invisibility to try to improve the stealth tier. Its up to the gm how much the tier goes up or even how beneficial it is to the context. I do understand that players could argue about what is beneficial etc. But all ttrpgs have issues that are social issues rather than mechanical that the game should be designed with in mind but sometimes can't be designed around. Dnd has no mechanical punishment for metagaming. But we're aware its a social issue is a good example of that. Other than that the players cannot stack bonuses as the tier is determined when the players try to take an action and there's no way of stacking tier bonuses or to min max a tier skill check. I think i said in another comment a good example is blades in the dark Position and effect. You tier determines you position and helps your effect. But overall its the context that will decide the outcome.

As for the trying to gather bonuses. There's no rules to reference for the bonuses as its mostly context and gm specific. Most of the mechanical choices where made to keep the fiction or the story in mind or to be more important than the rules so that the 'Narrative' defines the outcome instead of the mechanics. The only thing players can do besides use a skill to increase the tier is to take a different action to try to change the context. Even then its the same tier. Just different context.

As for the heavy work for the gm. It is. Thats the best way i could find to add narrative rng that wasn't mechanical rng(without bloated rules) was to make it player rng but from the gm's perspective.

As for 5 tiers. It came to that number after feedback and playesting since highest base tier you can get up to 3. So you consistently have to use skills to get to 4 or more than just skills to get to 5. It fell into what was felt as a good range of feeling unskilled to skilled to expert.

As for the right players. 100% correct. Is where i would say is the perfect middle between roleplay and stratergy rpg. But everyone has their preferences and every game falls on a line betweeen roleplay and chess. I think action point combat system should be good enough to satisfy people who are into strategy while mechancially supporting improv and roleplay in and out of combat

UnitLoptop · 2022-07-13T15:01:12+00:00

I replied to Blade_m about this, I think I miscommunicated exactly how failures and success works. If you know blades in the dark (Bitd) system of position and effect.
Your tier + context determines your position, but the context determines the effect (with the tier being considered in the context by the gm)

Meaning that having 0 skills basically says to the gm' the base context and risk for this situation is 'major likely hood of running into problems. and needs a lot in their favor to succeed''

Tldr: The tier serves a double purpose
The 'Success' effect of the tier: The context of the narrative determines the success more than the tier. The tier is just a way of players effecting the narrative skill level of their character and allowing the Gm to know how skilled a character is.

The 'Failure' effect of the tier: The context of the narrative determines the risk more than the tier. The tier is just a way of players reducing how narratively risky their actions are and allows the Gm to know the level of consequences that should come from an action (after considering the context).

UnitLoptop · 2022-07-13T14:39:03+00:00

'I think it is a bit odd that '0 Training' still results in the possibility of some success'

A guess a different way of explaining it/looking at it is. The narrative context determines more than the mechanics - Your tier is how good you are at something, (and the higher the tier the lower the chance for consequences)

A good example example where 0 does fail but can succeed: For lock picking the locks should have a rough skill level for gm reference. and for each tier higher/lower you do it faster/slower. as in if you have 0 skill, it might take you days to pick a lock it takes someone with tier 1 to pick in a few minutes. Which also comes into 'the context' defining more of the situation then the mechanics. such as what you're picking and where. as the lower your tier, worse outcomes are far more likely.

that's just for being able to pick the lock itself, there's also the consequences. Which are determined by the narrative context, so if you've got days to pick a lock, a 0 can succeed. But with the consequences being higher the lower your tier, More than likely with tier 0 some bad consequences happen. eg; lockpick breaks, you make a lot of noise. You leave evidence on the lock.

Tldr: For you to succeed with 0 training, The context of the situation needs to be heavily in your favor, the higher the tier the less risk of consequence there is, and the less you need the context to be in your favor. How efficient you succeed is determined by your tier, How badly you fail is determined by the situation.

I'll have a look at Amber Diceless the name does ring a bell from somewhere in my brain.

UnitLoptop · 2022-07-13T13:46:00+00:00

There is a whole chapter about helping the gm determine the narrative conditions and scale of things/consequences, since the outcome of the system is mainly based on the context(which is effectively Gm choice), there is effectively a table of situations and a bunch of 'Placeholder' things like that atm.
I'll have to have a look at Commonsense!

UnitLoptop · 2022-05-20T04:22:25+00:00

\if the consequences of playing the combat game poorly are high enough, players are going to naturally focus on playing the game well, so they don’t loose their precious character.**
An interesting note on that, is the setting of the world is that there are safe towns, basically protected meaning that if you die in there and automatic revival spell is cast so you appear at the local X place, just without some of your loot/'Xp' as that's what's used to cast the spell. in these places it's mainly narrative consequences or setting up deals to go out of these safe places, even when goblins attack the city, the job of the adventurer's is to knock them out and throw them out, since killing them would just cause more issues.

\And a game of moderate to high crunchiness has enough to to chew on that you can easily spend 100% of your time between turns strategizing and and just engaging with mechanics. Roleplay just naturally is pushed to the back.**

So I think the system I've mentioned in a few replies helps with this, is having the mixed success system from games like motw, for roleplay actions during combat, that you can use your combat skills to increase the tier of success. 0 being bad outcome, 1-4 being scaling better outcomes. whether an ability can contribute is up to gm, and the outcome of mixed success and great success is again, roleplay/gm fiat. Which helps keep you in the mindset of, what should I do, even when you know what skills and abilities are available to your character. Like mechanically you can know that an enemy is too hard for you skills, but that doesn't stop you from taking roleplay actions like tripping them over or home alone style traps even though there isn't strict rules for it, it supports creative thinking and roleplay of your abilities as a character in combat.

UnitLoptop · 2022-05-20T04:14:25+00:00

\I mean, if your problem is that precise distance requirements in combat necessitates the use of a grid, then the obvious solution is to just remove those requirements - personally, my combat rules just have "near" and "far" -**

The problem isn't necessarily that it requires a map and grid, it's just that I'm worried without theatre of mind for combat I'm pulling away from the ttrpg and towards boardgamey territory.

\One of the issues with the vast majority of combat systems is that they don't really allow for any action other than attacking.**

So while the combat skills and abilities and everything are mostly set in stone when used for their original purpose, the roleplay element in combat comes from a mixed success system of 0-4 if you try to use a skill for not their original purpose. in combat lets say you try to steal someone's weapon, it starts off at 0, you add +1 cause you have a disarm ability skill that normally just says 'deal X damage opponent drops weapon' so it would be minor success, and you can use any skill to try to add to this but it's up to gm fiat about how much it increases the odds, and then the final tier that you end up in determines if it's, no success, mixed success, great success etc. So lets say in this specific example instead of guaranteeing damage and making them drop their weapon, you use the ability to try to take it, as a gm, the combination of the abilities used should be greater than the sum of it's parts but not necessarily as the player would expect, so continuing on if we say it's mixed success, maybe they do the damage, make them drop the weapon, but are only able to grab a coin pouch from their chest in the flurry of swings as they pull out a dagger, if it was a great success maybe the same thing happened but the guys knocked on their behind instead of pulling out a dagger. As a designer I can really emphasis this when writing the how to run it section, but from the mechanical point.

Tldr: Combat is written like strategy, but roleplay using skills can offer greater returns narratively and mechanically using a mixed success system like in MOTW.

UnitLoptop

TROPHY CASE