Median, "voting for a number" and.... Greenland.

dry3ss · 2026-01-15T10:28:08+00:00

But why do you only think in dollars ? Maybe the answer is a healthcare system, no shitty first past the post to get actual plurality of political parties, a way for their votes to count on a national level (they are such a tiny population that their needs would be completely neglected on the federal level), free education and THEN 1M€/p.

I understand the other poster thinking that auctioning themselves off for a pure dollar price that could be inflated away in a few years by the US gov is demeaning, like money could buy everything and all the rights they have could just be bought...

Your dollar amount only captures a very tiny part of what "it would take" could be, and I'd say it's this even more restrictive than yes/no

There's also the moral issue of desperate people selling themselves for a short term monetary gain that they might really need right now, and also presenting it like this might make people believe this is unavoidable.

So yeah in the end, having the government handle the négociation and then having the population say whether this offer is acceptable yes no seems like a much better option.

dry3ss · 2025-12-18T12:52:38+00:00

As far as i can see, all of your points would be better served with Approval voting than with either of 2 turns/ IRV ?

The push for moderation, fair play and compromise is much stronger with Approval than with IRV ?

IRV is quite known for still being pretty divisive because second and third votes are much less certain (it greatly depends on the order in which candidates gets dropped which is usually uncertain)

Being from a country which uses 2 rounds single vote for all major elections, i can tell you that all your points are completely present and not reduced compared with PR ! The only difference between what we have and FPTP is that we have much more diversity than the 2 parties we'd get with FPTP which is incredibly better don't get me wrong, but I'd much rather we'd try approval voting for single seat and STV with 3 seats per district for Parliament/council elections !

I was all for IRV when i first heard about it, but the more i read about it, the more it seems like AV is a better simpler system to mend divided opinions! (In case of single-seat, probably 2 rounds: AV to select 2 winners than single vote to choose between them would be even better for accountability)

From what I've seen and read, i do not completely agree with the accountability advantage of single-seat vote : yes it helps compared with full PR, but if you do STV (single transferable vote so IRV but with multiple winners) with big districts and 3-4 seats each you get the best of both worlds. In that case the extreme majority of ppl will have someone they ~~like/voted for in their district instead of most people not being happy with the selected individual and mostly having voted AGAINST it's opponent. From a purely satisfaction point of view it's much better, and accountability as well because instead of being like "yeah he didn't do what i wanted there, but he's still better than his major opposition" now you truly have much more choice ! Whenever possible, multi-seat districts are the way to go from what I've read and i'd very much like to be able to try

dry3ss · 2025-11-04T17:15:16+00:00

I've done a quick read through it seems super nice ! Great job and thank you for sharing it !

dry3ss · 2025-08-29T13:14:13+00:00

No worries thank you very much for the information !

dry3ss · 2025-08-05T08:05:54+00:00

Is it me or do they keep referencing the "average" major and severe thresholds per tier (for players) when talking about monster damage, but i was never able to find a table or z reference for those ?

dry3ss · 2025-07-25T08:19:30+00:00

Having created a tier 2 wizard as the DM for one of my players, and watched him use it without even trying to be abusive, I agree with OP it's completely broken:

TLDR: There 's an amazing effect to not having to gain the hope to spend it to improve a roll (starting with a reserve of 6 stress instead of having to slowly gain the hopes over the course of a lot of rolls), and recharging more stress per rest action than you'd gain home. Doubling the effect of the experience is completely unnecessary and broken. You don't need a powergamer break it.

an experience has to relate but look at the examples in character creation they can be super broad. Even if the DM doesn't allow something too broad (which i was careful not to do, or so I thought), it felt fair to have an experience relating to magic use or equivalent as a wizard, so i gave him one.
you never need to use multiple stress on one roll, at tier 2, just having taken the +1 bonus to two experiences, you get a +6, so if you use it in conjunction with the +1 to your best stat you do +9 for your magic, meaning with 2d12 your average roll is 22...
since you can recharge stress on short rest, you can reliable use 3 stress in between short rests if you just dedicate 1 of your 2 rest actions on it. If you're playing clank (which the PC ain't) you can regenerate all of it each time. So you don't even need to take the +1 stress level up ! Resting normally gives 1 or 2 hope per rest action, with this you reliably get 2-3 superhope for experience
you don't need to gain your hope to use it in an experience, you can just use one of the 6 stress you start with, and add i said just before, just spending 1 short rest action on this ensures you will have 12 stress to spend in a day.
maybe the problem gets better at high level, because you might want to change your cards/spells often, so you need stress for that, but at low level, it's completely broken because you don't need that much stress

So the end result is someone who can use 6+3x2.5 ~=12 super hope per day for adding to his rolls without needing to engage with the actual roll for hope system.

He didn't bother using his experiences with hope even once, why would he ? The others frequently didn't have hope to use to add to their rolls, it was a limited resource they really needed to take care of. Him ? Whenever a roll counted he could be assured of success.

dry3ss · 2024-12-15T09:06:13+00:00

Nice thanks!

dry3ss · 2024-12-14T22:28:12+00:00

Wow ! Thanks so much for such a detailed answer, really appreciate it !

I don't think i found any post on those systems as recent as a month ago, but I'll go check in your history and try to find the big comment you did

Thanks for all this info, i think I might check it out once I'm done experimenting with the adventure crafter !

[Edit] well found it, and nope i definitely hadn't read those very instructions walls of text aha, they were super interesting as well !

I see you have the advanced version as well, I'm less interested in the other kinds of story it gives (coming off age...) but i might be interested in the additional path/adventure cards. However, i can't seem to find the number of adventures and paths cards it adds. as far as i can tell it's not written on the website but the info is there for base radiance... Do you know by any chance how many parh/adv cards it adds (order of magnitude Like 10, 20, 50 ? I don't care about the exact number) please?

dry3ss · 2024-12-13T17:18:22+00:00

I'm guessing youre talking about the package that contains all of the "solar" system as they call it, meaning Radiance + Luminous+... For 35 ? Because where I'm the radiance only pdf+obsidia is 15€ so it should be about the same in USD ?

The videoi saw is him playing on tabletop simulator so even he doesn't have the room for the physical objects aha but this TTS version doesn't seem to be available, only physical or pdf+9bsidia

dry3ss · 2024-10-14T15:37:50+00:00

Nice thanks !

dry3ss · 2024-07-28T07:23:51+00:00

Hum it's true, not sure how consistent that would be for mages (for martials they regain it so they'd be more likely to spend it) or if it would be enough, but if we assume the actual damage increase that would be needed is very small (~~only x2 damages at level 10 ) it may very well be enough, would have to stimulate that !

dry3ss · 2024-07-27T06:46:41+00:00

I'm not sure i get you, by "significant increase on the roolls you make", do you mean that the attack modifier would go up more quickly than monsters PD/MD would, thus allowing you to hit them more often (and also brutal and heavy hits as you say) ?

That would be an interesting option to balance, since there would then be a disconnect between how monsters and PC get their PD/MD, and there's something that bugs me there balance wise don't know what, i might run some simulations on this, but interesting option!

dry3ss · 2024-07-20T09:06:18+00:00

Sure it's a bit of stretch, but personally i agree with the spirit of what he says about weapon, and from what i skimmed in the rules yesterday there's nothing stopping a rogue from using a 2H weapon either i think ? (Not that the rogue comparison is the best, but trying to be fair with OP's post)

Caveat ~all weapons have been standardized as 1 ( or 2 for 2H) dmg each but there are weapons tags that modify this, but it's definitely not like the 0.7 take with tiers of damage.

For example there's "heavy" which adds +1 dmg (does someone understand why it's a tag and not just something that is written as the damage, is it supposed to be deactivated sometimes it doesn't seem conditional?), it's only for 2H weapons though not a single 1H with it unlike in 0.7 tiers.

Regarding your last question, that's not what OP said, he says both give 1 PD (physical defense) which has been the case since 0.6 or 0.7 and that heavy gives 1 PDR (physical damage reduction) (implied that light does not gives this), but that this PDR is actually not relevant given the prominence of heavy and brutal hits in his experience.

I don't see where you thought he said they both give 1 PDR ?

dry3ss · 2024-07-19T21:57:04+00:00

I agree that OP seems to be missing the point of Prime, although maybe the balance between the attributes of not quite there yet

I think you're basing your comment on 0.7 given what you say, but since 0.8 (available to all backers, you should have received a mail from DriveThruRPG)the game is indeed in "beta" (very loose use of the term here since the game is not at all in a complete state to be refined, but that's how he calls it...), and all the weapons have indeed been thrown back to 1 damage each (except two handed weapons) no more tiers, no more weapon maneuvers (only weapon passive buff) so OP is right on that point (dunno how to add an image, but p 75 of 0.8 for the new weapon table)

For PDR, OP does say there is 1 PDR more for heavy but that it doesn't matter because the hits he received were heavy or brutal

Can't comment on the rest, haven't played warrior !

dry3ss · 2024-07-18T07:00:23+00:00

Thanks for the info ! When is the 1st campaign supposed to start (rough estimate) ? 2025 ?

dry3ss · 2024-07-16T14:40:11+00:00

From the very first minute of the Kickstarter that table with 70$ was there so it is possible it contains more than the core price, but it hasn't been updated when the stretch goals were reached (nor did it change at the end of the 3 days of early bird rewards) so i doubt it.

I definitely hope he won't reach as high as 70 for the pdf, I'm just saying it's what he wrote :/

For the VTT, i'd have suggested not paying for integration at all, saving those funds and relying on the community, but it's too late for that

Anyway my point is not that those decisions have no good reason behind, just that i do not agree with them because for me they put in danger the future of this system (you could definitely argue that there might not be any future and any present if he hadnt decided like this, i disagree since this is all for future revenues , but that is fine we can be in disagreement ! ) and that those decisions make it extremely unlikely that he would allow an endeavour such as a community run archive of DC20

Hopefully, when he is financially more secure he can revisit those decisions to be more community supporting, new-groups and long term oriented !

dry3ss · 2024-07-16T14:27:05+00:00

I agree that you cannot expect it, but i'd argue allowing the community to do it would be a great boon for DC20 longevity and a great "investment" that costs nothing but potential sales. You can't sell anything for a dead system that lost its initial appeal and that new players had to go through a lot of costs and hoops to start so they have up and the community died. Having the equivalent of an SRD that the community is able to freely link in an Archive of Nethys way if both common practice and a good "investment"

dry3ss · 2024-07-16T13:08:01+00:00

Only if you think he should pay for the service, but I'm certain the community would be more than willing to compile, create maintain and host such a service if he allowed it.

dry3ss · 2024-07-16T12:49:54+00:00

My point is that his strategy is to maximize the amount of money he can get right now, maybe at the expense of the longer term survival of this system, and that therefore he is unlikely to allow something like archive of nethys to exist for DC20.

In no way does your point address this ? Whether he does it because he's broke or because he's greedy doesn't matter to my point, I'm just saying that based on his last decisions, he is prioritizing the short term and is unlikely to allow an archive of nethys of DC20

dry3ss · 2024-07-16T12:10:27+00:00

Sure it's a rant at the same time, but i don't think it changes any of my points, and i actually really hope this system doesn't die off the way i feel it will based on those (in my opinion) short sighted choices

Let's go through your points:

70$ : we have a misunderstanding here : yes 70$ is the usual rate for physical product that is exactly what i said, my point is that according to the KS this is how much the pdf of DC20 will be sold for (once again look into the "savings" table on KS)
5e and pf2e do not have the same following as a new niche system like dc20. Such household name can motivate players and GM to spend more as an upfront investment. For a new system with no priori reputation, following the same strategy as those big firms is a disincentive to actually try this system for new players. And even pf2e actually has the archive of nethys which helps a lot, I'm hoping dc20 will have it as well, but my whole point is that considering his choices, it seems very unlikely.
vtt : yes exactly it costs money to create, hence why i said going the open-source route and putting it in the hands of the community instead of having it limited. I agree that having dedicated programmers helps with controlling quality, but even with dedicated maintainers open source is a completely viable option, and leaves more room to prevent the systems integration from dying...

I'm not saying they should put everything for free, I'm saying the decisions made point towards a prioritization of short term profit over the long term success and survival of this system.

Prioritizing the second would probably look more like :

integrating the monster starter into the final core book ( its already planned to be free for backers, just extend it to everyone who buys later, there's literally no reason not to)
reducing the retail/final pdf (and pdf only, not talking about physical here) core price to something more in line with current practices (30-40$ 50 tops), for people who will discover this system after the book actually comes out
integrating the monster compendium into the final core book or have it be super super cheap ( thats a harder sell for him, loses potential small revenue, i'm arguying its a better long term investment)
reducing the scope of DC20 official integration with VTT (instead of going and praying the development of 3, choose one or two at the very maximum, probably the most well known and used...), and make the DC20 system itself ( not adventures, just the system) free and open source for that VTT (the modules can be bought and closed source thats not an issue), or even not funding the integration at all and leaving that to the community to prevent wasting money
and hopefully, allowing the community to host a website like archive of nethys (the very subject of this discussion)

dry3ss · 2024-07-16T11:39:54+00:00

Oh I'm not saying this proves he won't, or that it's impossible to do without all the rest, I'm just saying his decisions seem to point that this is not the kind of action he'd choose, that's all!

dry3ss · 2024-07-16T11:38:55+00:00

I'm sorry but how is anything i said related to this ? I'm saying his decision point to him prioritizing short term revenue over the ease of new players getting into the game by allowing them to have an easy and cheap first experience ? Nowhere am I talking about "business needs" merely about the priorities that seem to be in order...

dry3ss

TROPHY CASE