tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8038639802473593786.post3345967323719168553..comments2023-04-18T05:14:17.524-07:00Comments on Runeward Games: The MathAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10367813349077594896noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8038639802473593786.post-79700042863020249512011-07-13T10:49:52.145-07:002011-07-13T10:49:52.145-07:00There isn't a set number, but I expect charact...There isn't a set number, but I expect characters to have access to a number of sources (even at low levels) and gain access to more at higher levels. There is a natural deterrent from taking *too many* edge based power, though, in that you can only ever use one at a time. My gut is saying that it'll be in the 3-6 range for most of the game.<br /><br />To run through your list:<br />-- Class power are the big source of the personal edge that provides the big modifier<br />-- Group edges aren't really a term per se, it is just "an edge" but the modifier improves at a lower rate. For ease of communication at this stage, I'm using the term group edge but I sort of hope it does not catch on. I'll give two hypothetical examples (i.e. neither exist just yet).<br /><br />Bard Song. AP to activate, sustain move. Range close. Any ally can add +X (improving at group edge rate on the table) as an edge to attack.<br /><br />Master footwork. AP to activate, stance. "Your masterful footwork forces your opponent to leave himself vulnerable time and time again." Add +X (improving at NORMAL edge rate) as an edge to your attacks. In addition, all allies in the zone gain the following maneuver:<br /><br />Maneuver: "Wait for it..." Costs move action. Add +X (improving at group edge rate) as an edge to your attacks until the end of this round.<br /><br />So in the first instance the bard song is a clear choice for group optimization, but it costs the bard a fair amount. I also imagine that the bard will be the king of group edges. Most group edges are more similar to the second hypothetical where a beneficial rider follows on a selfish action--but the rider costs something extra (like a move action to activate a maneuver).<br /><br />In this way, group edges are commonly available but not always optimal. If you just entered a zone, you don't have a move action to spend on the maneuver. Sometimes other maneuvers are more attractive. Sometimes you want that incremental +1 that a personal edge grants.<br /><br />--Flank. Flank is strong at early levels but still not dominant. Recall the knight's example power of "Rally on me" that gives a maneuver to stand adjacent to the knight to get +2 defense. You could maneuver into flank (+2 atk) or maneuver next to the knight and use an AP for a personal edge (+1 atk, +2 defense). In addition, all of the discussion above about limited maneuvers pertains to flank. Finally, recall that some edges also provide bonuses to dmg and there are definitely times when you'd prefer dmg to atk. So lots of tactical tradeoffs.<br />--Feats/things. More "things" than feats. I am even bantering around the idea of limiting some magic items powers by making them edges instead of straight bonuses, but not sure just yet.<br /><br />So all of that draws into your main question--won't this be complex and isn't complexity slow?<br /><br />There is tactical complexity, but it is choosing amongst basic decisions that are quick to apply and are applied to the same basic numbers. The familiarity breeds speed. Compare this to 4e where you have 5-10 powers but each power is basically its own sub-system with multiple moving parts. Or, compare this to 3e where the complexity came from micro-managing a dozen little benefits that build into something huge. You need complexity to sustain people's interest, but just because it is complex doesn't have to mean it is slow.<br /><br />Second, and I think this is important, the difference between the perfectly min/maxed guy and the casual guy is fairly small. The optimizer will be better, but still similarly challenged to his casual counterpart. The impact of this is that slower players can make simpler decisions without suffering or lagging behind.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10367813349077594896noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8038639802473593786.post-1752029847332897522011-07-13T09:18:30.771-07:002011-07-13T09:18:30.771-07:00Maybe you have answered this somewhere but how man...Maybe you have answered this somewhere but how many sources of edges do you expect a given character to have? Right now I count at least four mentioned (with some questions as well).<br />-class power (from an Action Point)<br />- the group edge (unsure how these work, an example would help me see why this isn't the best way to go from a party optimization sense)<br />-combat maneuver (is it really better to flank than anything I can do with my action points until 3rd level?)<br />- feats/things that duplicate power attack or whatever you mention in this post.<br /><br />While the edges themselves are simple enough to apply it seems like you could amass a great deal of them on a character that require some thought for each attack which only ends up slowing things down. I understand, and approve, of removing the subtraction element and the idea of stacking half a dozen bonuses, but in so doing this system runs the risk of making each attack have several considerations. Even more so, the fact that the system assumes you use an edge but each edge has a cost beyond the standard action (move action in a condition or an action point)- won't that complicate the decision making process even more than the problems you are trying to fix by going to the edge system?Mikenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8038639802473593786.post-29537278927657917762011-07-12T21:48:21.077-07:002011-07-12T21:48:21.077-07:00The math is premised on the belief that an edge wi...The math is premised on the belief that an edge will basically be applied every single round to every single attack (there are routes to get multiple attacks like two-weapon). Often the edge will be a group edge (like bard song) and that has the benefit of being a single resource allocation like you comment.<br /><br />I think you undercut the benefit of upping the attack by +1 or +2 by activating the personal edge, though. Think what people will go through now for a +2 bonus and then imagine if such bonuses are harder to come by. I also wouldn't describe them as erratic since they are entirely within the control of the player. <br /><br />To get a better handle on this, the two articles about the Indifference Line (and Difference in Indifference) help drive the point home. As you increase in level and damage is increasing, the value of any given +1 to attack also becomes more valuable. The game begins close to the indifference line so the variance among edges is similarly low. "Do I want +1 atk or +1 dmg?" They are about equal at low levels and so you are able to trade them freely. At higher levels, that +2 atk is worth +3 (or +4) more damage and so the relationship has to change.<br /><br />A few more points that are useful just in general. First, recall that flank is an edge that basically gives +2 atk. Since this is available at first level, it is actually one of the best things in the game to start. But, it requires a move action and an ally, so it isn't always possible. Sometimes you just don't have those resources.<br /><br />Second, many group edges aren't free to apply and similarly require a maneuver to benefit from. The straight up edges tend to be free actions in addition to providing a higher bonus.<br /><br />Finally, getting the group edge to +4 at the end takes a little dedication on the part of the character. They default at +3 but can get up to +4. The impact if you forego this opportunity is just to continue the relationship from 7-12 into 7-15.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10367813349077594896noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8038639802473593786.post-25325452202167665752011-07-12T19:54:51.127-07:002011-07-12T19:54:51.127-07:00Regarding edges:
The difference in bonus between ...Regarding edges:<br /><br />The difference in bonus between an edge and a group edge is 0 at lvls 1-2; 1 at lvls 3-6,12-15; and 2 at lvls 7-12.<br />In other words, when you compare the difference between edges and group edges to the actual bonuses, the difference is non-existent to start, significant but not crippling for a while, and barely significant towards the end. These differences are blown out of the water by the ability to confer the group edge to multiple characters at once.<br /><br />Edges are tied to a limited resource, implying that there will be more rounds of combat than points to spend activating edges. So players will immediately try to find ways to maximise the number of "edged" character-rounds within the party. So for a group of 4 characters, activating a group edge gives 4 character-rounds of bonus per action point. If everyone takes group edges (and why wouldn't they with such a payoff?), the group can spend as many rounds as there are total action points among them with every character claiming edge bonuses. What incentive is there to bother with normal edges, when the bonuses are so small and erratic compared to group edges that benefit everyone?<br /><br />Have I misunderstood how/why edges will work?<br /><br />Regards, <br />JohnJohn Prattnoreply@blogger.com