openlegend / core-rules Goto Github PK

https://github.com/openlegend/core-rules/blame/master/core/src/01-character-creation/01-chapter-one.md#L72

This is the first time I've used this, so hopefully I'm not doing anything wrong.

May just be personal preference, but I've noted that the Supernatural abilities are not in alphabetical order, so was just wondering what the reason is for the order, or if maybe they should be alphabetical. Just thinking about speed of finding them on the character sheet etc.

As is, the intimidated bane increases number of targets based on power level, but isn't that what multi-targeting is for?

What if higher power levels just increased the level of disadvantage. I'm thinking that disadvantage 1 isn't as strong of an effect at higher levels anyway so it won't really redirect attacks the way this bane is meant to.

The footnote for Shields from the Armor table in the section Armor says:

^ Grants advantage when using the defend or deflect actions.

This seems to not be consistent with the other mentions of Advantage where it is capitalized and has a value, though in this case I am guessing it's 1.
I'd suggest it be changed to something like the following:

^ Grants Advantage 1 when using the defend or deflect actions.

@brianfeister There have been a few discussions about changing the bane/boon process to the following instead of determining your power level first:

1. Name the bane/boon
2. Make action roll
3. Determine Power Level

I like this change, and I think you do too, but I just wanted to confirm before I make it official.

In the free adventure "A Star Once Fallen" under "Making a damaging attack" on page 10 it says "If an unconscious creature takes damage, it must make a Fortitude action roll greater than or equal to the damage or else it dies." but in the Core rules under "Finishing Blow" it says "When you suffer an attack while unconscious, incapacitated, or otherwise unable to defend yourself, you must make a Fortitude roll with a Challenge Rating equal to half the damage dealt. If you fail this roll, you are dead."

Is the final rule "CR = half damage" or "CR = full damage"? or is CR full damage for NPCs and half for PCs?

https://github.com/openlegend/core-rules/blob/master/boons/boons.yml#L521

Power Level 9 states that there is no range limit, but PL 7 doesn't actually give a limit. It just says 1 mile per minute of casting time.

For this feat, instead of giving a list of banes (which could potentially expand in the future), what if you just became immune to any bane that targets Resolve. I'm pretty sure that all of the listed ones do.

https://github.com/openlegend/core-rules/blame/master/core/src/06-combat/01-chapter-six.md#L258

It seems to be in the middle of the 'Invoke a Boon' description instead of after it.

It's not clear what the difference is between the two.

In the combat section, multi-attack refer as picking multiple targets, but the multi-attack feat refer as making multiple attacks.

And then there's the Multi-target attack feat that reduce the penalty for including multiple targets (like what the multi-attack in the combat section refer to).

So to make it clear, if I target multiple targets in a Melee Attack doest that mean we have to roll once and compare to the defense of every targets ? As if I made a cleave attack that just hit other creatures . And if I use the Multi-attack feat grand me separate attack rolls on every target ?

If that's it, could one the attacks of the multi-attack feat target multiple targets ?? Could one of the attack be a bane one ?

Tl;dr; Is the multi-attack feat simply a way to perform multiple actions in your round ? Or simply a duplicate of multi-target with worse inconvenient ?

Versatile – The weapon can be wielded either one-handed or two-handed. The wielder can freely switch between the two modes and has all of the benefits and restrictions of each while using the weapon in that mode.

It can be interpreted such that when wielding such a weapon you'd have benefits of Advantage 1 to all attacks, while having a hand free to use another weapons or shield, and would have the restrictions of not being able to use another shield or weapon. (I've seen people that would seriously try to take argue that in a real game.)

Please reword it to avoid that confusion. A possible suggested clarification below:

Versatile – The weapon can be wielded either one-handed or two-handed. The wielder can freely switch between the two modes and has all of the benefits and restrictions of the mode in use at that time.

Suggestions:
The first suggestion I have is related to the physical stats. I recommend separating Agility
into two stats, Agility and Precision. This is due to the fact that Agility, as it is now, is
simply a better stat than Might. It contributes to both offense and defense, while Might only
contributes to offense. By splitting this stat into Agility and Precision you can make Agility
the defensive stat and Precision can be the offensive stat. Additionally, the two stats still
have plenty of secondary skill contributions (E.G. Agility: dodge attacks, stealth, perform
acrobatics, escape a grapple. Precision: shoot a bow, pick a pocket/lock, perform sleight of
hand, juggle). Another option is to combine Might and Fortitude into one stat to match the competitiveness of Agility, but it makes more sense to me to split Agility.

My second suggestion is related to the first suggestion. I recommend having agility,
presence, and will contribute to hit points but to a lesser degree than fortitude. This is a
fairly simple change but prevents some scenarios where your caster has more hit points than
your front liner while allowing your defensive stats to still contribute to your hit point
total. My suggested HP contribution is as follows:

Hit Points = 3(Fortitude)+ 2(Presence) + (Agility+Will)+10

The reason being that Fortitude is a major direct contributor to your vitality
whereas Agility allows you to efficiently mitigate damage allowing you to fight longer while
avoiding damage. While Agility is not increasing your hit points directly it does allow you to
fight longer and should have some contribution to HP. The same holds true for Presence and Will
which are mental contributors, and therefore indirect contributors, to resisting damage by
overcoming damage and pushing your body past its limits. Presence, however, contributes to both mental and physical willpower (see my reasoning for this below my third suggestion) giving it two indirect hit point contributions and as such should contribute slightly more than will and agility which only have one indirect contribution.

My third suggestion is that you modify your defense calculations to the following:
Toughness = 10 + Fortitude + Presence
Evasion = 10 + Agility + Armor
Resolve = 10 + Presence + Will
By moving to this strategy you allow Evasion to be your defense stat for getting out of the way
of negative effects including weapon attacks and some spell attacks like a death ray, firebolt,
or fireball where you can intervene your armor/shield between you and the effect or get out of
the way of the attack completely. Your Toughness then becomes how well you resist effects that
target your constitution that are hard/impossible to dodge and need to get their hooks into
you. For example things like a chill wind that would freeze you, a necromantic essence drain
that would sap your vitality, or a poison fog that threatens to suffocate you and corrupt your
body. Finally, this leaves Resolve as a defense against mental attacks that have the same
nature as the examples for Toughness but with respect to the psyche. Meaning that they are hard
to avoid but need to get their hooks into your mind before becoming a threat. For example
attacks such as a banshee's wail, a bard's cutting words, a lethal phantasm, or malefic
visions.
In defense of presence contributing to both Toughness and Resolve. I see social skills as a
mixture of mental and physical contributors that manifest into a new third category. This
supports the idea that Presence is not only your physical willpower but your mental force of
personality. Using this approach to the stat you can see why it would contribute to both
physical and mental defenses to stave off harmful effects.

My fourth suggestion is that you clarify how area of effect attacks accrue disadvantage. The
current wording isn't entirely clear as it seems to suggest that one 5x5x5 cube would impose
disadvantage 3 because it has three 5' lengths. This doesn't seem to be RAI and you might
consider changing the wording to 1 per 5 cubic feet or per 5' cube depending on what the intent
is. For disadvantage 2 at 10x10x10 go with the former, for 5x5x10 the latter. I would suggest 5
cubic feet to make it simpler, and to give players a reason to use area of effect attacks
rather than multi-attacks for hitting multiple targets, which I feel is your intent.

Other than these suggestions I have mostly nit picky naming consistency, and other syntax/wording. I want to say that I really like what I have seen here and would be very interested in playing the game. I believe that the suggestions I have made above would improve what is an already amazing rule set. Thanks for all of your hard work towards breaking down genre limitations and commitment to the community. I will probably continue to contribute as I analyze the rest of your rules in the form of editing oversight if I feel that my input is desired.

https://github.com/openlegend/core-rules/blame/master/core/src/07-running-the-game/01-chapter-seven.md#L333

Have to say I love having this section in there now as it will help me plan adventures better. But I wanted some help clarifying a few details.

Here it states that the party's level determines the ability scores, but it doesn't give guidelines around how many NPCs/Monsters per party member. If you see what I mean? (e.g. should it be one monster of party level 1 per PC).

Similarly for the boss later:

https://github.com/openlegend/core-rules/blame/master/core/src/07-running-the-game/01-chapter-seven.md#L404

Though I think that assumes a party of four adventurers.

Don't know too much about github code, but this doesn't seem quite right to me.

"Might" is listed as the only attribute in the tags for Bane Focus. I'm assuming the tags should include either all of the attributes or none of them.

https://github.com/openlegend/core-rules/blob/master/banes/banes.yml#L194

Wording wasn't clear. Can the target still use their normal action? Or do they have to spend their entire turn moving away?

I'm kinda thinking it might make sense to require that you can only choose two banes that target the same defense. That way you avoid weird combos of Charm and Knockdown and the such.

As far as I can tell weapon attacks and damage are only based on the Attribute they use.
Two handed and swift weapons get advantage, but that's it.

This is especially noticable with bare hands being exactly the same as a one handed longsword.

Not sure what to do about that though.

A few things:

1. Do we ever define exactly how two weapon fighting works? It just grants an extra attack, correct?
2. This feat allows you to wield a two handed weapon when dual-wielding. Logically, shouldn't you also be able to wield a two handed weapon in one hand when only using one weapon?

What if we re-title it to Heavy Weapon Master and change the description: You can wield two handed melee weapons in one hand. If you do, you still gain the usual advantage to attack rolls for two handed melee weapons.

https://github.com/openlegend/core-rules/blame/master/core/src/06-combat/01-chapter-six.md#L361

The description here says "after an enemy has rolled a successful attack against yourself or an ally",

But the continuation here only mentions replacing an allies defense score, not that it can replace your own:
https://github.com/openlegend/core-rules/blame/master/core/src/06-combat/01-chapter-six.md#L362

Can you use it to defend yourself?

It doesn't even matter if this is incorrect, because I've heard it a million times thus far, get asked often. If it's there, we need to clarify and make it more prominent, maybe with character creation? I don't know. And if it's not there, let's add it.

Kinda thinking that characters should be able to get pretty epic if they invest in this feat. I mean, eventually a monk should be able to fall limitless height, right?

What if we make it 9 tiers. Each one adds another 10', but the 9th tier makes it unlimited?

https://github.com/openlegend/core-rules/blob/master/banes/banes.yml#L651

The current text indicates that in addition to being limited to a single action, a stunned target also cannot sustain boons.

Is this correct? I'm asking because I thought that in a previous discussion you mentioned that the stunned bane can force casters to make hard choices about whether to sustain a boon or take an action.

Was just doing a run through as part of something else and I notice this. Is it deliberate, are we thinking of taking out the psychic ability, or has it just been missed off?

https://github.com/openlegend/core-rules/blob/master/boons/boons.yml#L448

Let me know what you think. I tried to clarify the movement mode thing in the "special" heading. Also noticed some disparities between the power level tags and the list in the effects. Think that's all cleared up now.

I have not completed the document but there is an inconsistency dealing with range.
It is not stated what the numbers for range indicate. It could be assumed to be squares on the battlemap, centimeters on the battlemap, yards, feet, etc.

In the Combat section, the table for Supernatural Attack Range seems to be the only place where it is clearly defined, as each entry is a number followed by the word feet.

I would suggest that you perhaps use a commonly recognized mark for that. Most people use an apostrophe, such as in 20' away, though that's more of a keyboard cheat than the correct prime mark. I did find a page that clarifies the correct characters for ease of reference. I had not been previously aware it was properly called a prime mark. (http://practicaltypography.com/foot-and-inch-marks.html )

I believe using that format consistently throughout the documents will look better and reduce initial confusion, even among those in countries that employ the metric system.

Looking over https://github.com/openadventure/Open-Adventure's @kylemecklem means of using Github as a public table of contents reminded me of something I want to be capable of with this source core. Use a source in either YAML, JSON, XML, whatever, to generate something consumable by InDesign which could separate the image content from the rules text, allow for public contributions to the rules text and expose the rules source for consumption by other endpoints (including the Open Legend website).

💯 🌟 for a long time I've thought it would be nice for the source to be pulled from Google Docs, I've looked into that and it's possible, technically, but would require too much heavy lifting in parsing, since Google's API for docs only outputs since formatting should be managed in InDesign where the programmatically generated output can be massaged. But Google Docs being a great source, a better option might be to go the other way and set up a Google Script that periodically fetches the latest rules from the Github source and overwrites (or versions and bumps) the Google Doc content. This way it would still be a friendly place for non-technical people to ask questions and feel that the core team is listening to / engaging with them.

Maybe ODT would be a valid format, just musing aloud. Looks like the Google Drive node API allows you to export documents, which frustratingly does not have a complete list. The only two that seem relevant, however, is ODT and RTF.

'application/vnd.oasis.opendocument.text'` just now and got back a valid response.

function getDoc(auth) {
  var service = google.drive('v3');
  service.files.export({
    auth: auth,
    fileId: '1-yL5gpXpReo5pnCC0gk8orHZulaaHgca8jY8vKMUd28',
    mimeType: 'application/vnd.oasis.opendocument.text' // https://developers.google.com/drive/v3/web/manage-downloads
  }, function(err, response) {
    if (err) {
      console.log('The API returned an error: ' + err);
      return;
    }
    console.log('response!',JSON.stringify(response))
  });
}

full code here: https://gist.github.com/brianfeister/af0903ced789a22cdf3d

https://github.com/openlegend/core-rules/blob/master/feats/feats.yml#L315

Do companion's always have 3 attributes? If so, how do you calculate the value for the second two?

Here's my suggestion for simplification:

Your companion has three attributes. The primary attribute is determined by your tier. The other two attributes are equal to the primary attribute minus 2.

Tier 1 - Primary attribute equals your level minus 2 (minimum of 3).
Tier 2 - Primary attribute equals your level minus 1 (minimum of 4).
Tier 3 - Primary attribute equals your level (minimum of 5).

@brianfeister I realized that a lot of the confusion with alternate form is that it reads more like a boon than a feat, and we already have a boon that does this: shapeshift.

So, I propose that we make alternate form simply a path to acquire a narrow version of shapeshift. I'll wordsmith it more if you approve, but basically Alternate Form would do the following:

When you take this feat, specify a specific type of creature to be your alternate form, such as wolf, tree-man, dragon, or shark. As a major action, you may transform into your alternate form or back into your usual form. This transformation is the same as using the Shapeshift boon on yourself, except you do not have to make an action roll to invoke it and you do not need to sustain it.

The new feat would only have one tier. And we would remove the information about getting a pool of points to adjust your physical stats.

Did we have a discussion about removing combat opportunist because we are changing Lethal Strike to grant advantage?

Since this feat is so fluffy, do you think it should instead be re-written as a trait when we get to those?

So, this feat doesn't work with wealth levels. Here's my thought on how to update it:

Tier 1 - You can craft items equal to your Wealth Level.
Tier 2 - You can craft items equal to your Wealth Level + 1.
Tier 3 - You can craft items equal to your Wealth Level + 2.

We would leave things like how long it would take up to the GM based on the item being crafted.

Although it might seem OP to give a means of getting items 2 higher than your wealth level, the downside (other than the feat points invested) is that the equipment is only in the narrow sphere of your craft focus.

https://github.com/openlegend/core-rules/blob/master/boons/boons.yml#L335

Power Level 8 indicates two options to choose from, but the second one is cut short and I can't surmise what it is meant to be. Any insights?

I'm having a bit of trouble understanding this text:

While in your alternate form, you can divide your Alteration attribute score amongst your physical attributes. If your Alteration score is higher than a given physical score, you can raise the physical score to a maximum of your Alteration score. If the physical attribute is higher than your Alteration attribute, you can raise the physical attribute by 1 instead.

Does this mean that you can add your Alteration score to your current physical attributes? Or does it mean that you completely re-assign your physical attributes?

Seems like a pretty good feat. I think it should probably be worth 2 points. Also, I could see this one being kinda annoying for the GM (and other players too) if the player can do it more than once a day. I'd suggest keeping it at one tier. Whatta ya think?

Since opportunity attacks are a sometimes thing, I don't think the benefits of this feat match the cost.

I noticed a couple of things. First of all, the descriptions in Character Creation for the Social and Mental attributes are in the opposite order on the character sheet. I would like them flipped around to match up easier. Additionally, Master Tracker and Heavy Weapon Master are not alphabetized on the Feats listing.

https://github.com/openlegend/core-rules/blob/master/boons/boons.yml#L367

I think that this boon could use some cleaning up. Since the current power levels are not cumulative, there are situations in which PL 3 would be more beneficial than PL 5.

What if we make it like this:

PL 3 = +5 defense
PL 5 = +10 defense
PL 7 = immune to damage

Also, one of the listed damage types is Enchantment, but I don't think that makes sense. Not sure about Psychic either.

Good and evil are both listed as damage types as well, but I think we need to clarify what that means. I'm assuming it would be damage from an extraplanar creature hailing from an aligned plane but NOT just protection from attacks from a good or evil humanoid. Is that what you were going for?

The casting time is 1 minute, which effectively means it can not be used in combat situations. Thoughts on reducing it to 1 Normal action?

https://github.com/openlegend/core-rules/blob/master/banes/banes.yml#L560

Scrying provides two sets of rules depending on whether you are scrying a creature or a place. This makes sense. What I don't get is why you can scry a place on another plane of existence, but when it comes to a creature, they have to be on the same plane.

I'm thinking that Agility and Abjuration might also be applicable.

https://github.com/openlegend/core-rules/blob/master/banes/banes.yml#L283

It seems like phantasm favors the target too much. First, the attacker has to overcome their resolve. Then the target gets a free resist roll every round. And finally, the target gets an extra roll whenever it interacts with the illusion. Conceivably, a target would always be interacting with an illusion.

I propose we just make this like every other bane in that we keep it at the resist roll to end.

Was this intentional or an oversight? Kinda seems like they would be mirror images of one another.

https://github.com/openlegend/core-rules/blob/master/banes/banes.yml#L89

I was wondering...

"Altering a spell that does lightning damage and stuns it’s victims"

When you are using its as a possessive, don't use the apostrophe.

I'm assuming yes, but I figure either way we should clarify in the rules text because its an unusual situation.

The current rules specify "fire, cold, lightning, acid, poison, and force" as the energy types you can pick.

I'm thinking it might be better to leave this one to the user's imagination and just offer these as examples. Thoughts?

As it stands now, https://github.com/openlegend/core-rules/blob/f072700873a8911b4621780d2e7973408a739790/boons/boons.yml#L122 has the problem of enabling a mechanic that is used frequently (minor action) and can make it too easy for a character to invest in Creation 1 / Spirit 1 to get a "heal every turn" effect that has huge payoff and no risk. David Hynes has proposed that a roll below zero inverts the effect, not in the sense that it damages the target, but rather, a total roll of 7 deals 3 damage to the boon invoker and heals 3 HP to the target.

Would love other people's thoughts on this!

https://github.com/openlegend/core-rules/blob/master/banes/banes.yml#L503

Just wanted to point out that I added some formatting to Persistent Damage and want to make sure I don't crash the website or anything :-)

Right now, this feat costs 3 but only protects you from one bane, so it's overpriced, and also just a bit boring.

What do you think of this:

You are immune to the fatigued bane when it is caused by natural sources (such as a forced march, starvation, or swimming long distances). If you suffer the fatigued bane from a supernatural source, you ignore the first level inflicted in any given 24 hour period.