Aysle Backer Archetypes

Zackzenobi
Posts: 1013
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2017 11:52 am

Re: Aysle Backer Archetypes

Postby Zackzenobi » Wed Jan 15, 2020 1:20 pm

mathey wrote:I love the riffs on Columbo and Jamila Jamil/Tahani! Lot of great ideas in here.

I agree that the perks on the Backer Archetypes can get a bit wild, though. I'd be leery of accepting them as a GM if only because they seem so tied to the archetype concepts and making them "work".


I didnt realize she was a Tahani homage. That's funny!

Originally the Noble Scion's Exalted Blood Perk was called Fae Blood. But it was changed to make it more versatile. I was hoping to create something that others would use too.

User avatar
Kuildeous
Posts: 1505
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2016 1:41 pm

Re: Aysle Backer Archetypes

Postby Kuildeous » Wed Jan 15, 2020 1:59 pm

Daedra18 wrote:I don't think the raven can perform interaction attacks. The text states "It can't attack or be harmed." Maybe it only has your interaction attacks for the purpose of defenses - it can provide aid, but that is diminished if an enemy stymies/gets a players call on them.


Hmm, I took that to mean no physical attacks, but you’re right. The strict wording implies that the raven cannot make interaction attacks since those are—well, attacks.

I’m curious about the precedent for an invulnerable pet. Is there a cultural reason for an invincible raven? Is it based on Odin? I think this is the first invincible pet we’ve seen so far?
The Boneyard – Friends and foes within Tharkold's Blasted Land

Infiniverse Exchange Word template – Infiniverse Exchange template for MS Word users

User avatar
pkitty
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2018 12:09 pm

Re: Aysle Backer Archetypes

Postby pkitty » Wed Jan 15, 2020 2:20 pm

utsukushi wrote:I've felt for a while that the Perks they introduce tend to be a little unbalanced, and the Aysle set is feeling even more than usual.

I'm glad I wasn't the only one who thought that. One of the easiest things to do by accident when creating an RPG is "splatbook power creep." I think that happened subconsciously here, a few times, in the name of making the archetype backers happy.

Ancient Magic is kind of cool. Ancient Apportation, though, is so broken! That taking-Backlash-Shock is neat, but Apportation is Spirit based, so anyone taking this is going to have Shock to spare. (And with just one more Perk, he can drop a point in Faith and Multi-Action Soothe!)

My thought was that you take this with Elven Sorcerer and Resilient and now you know every Apportation spell that exists in in the game with absolutely zero extra drawbacks. (And then add Elven Magic to pick up some non-Apportation spells.)

The ability to use Apportation for movement and as maneuver is already an incredibly potent perk. Heck, even there I'd argue that it should just be to make maneuver interaction attacks or defense, not both! I'm confused why the need was felt to then also add the ability to cast every single Apportation spell that exists. This perk (as written) is easily three perks worth of potency.

Raven Seer is subtle but... I don't know if it's just unclear or not. It seems like the Raven gets its own action, like a pet, and uses your Interaction Attacks?

Actually, I'm unsure on that bit. "The raven speaks in a croaky voice, has Flight speed 10, and your own Interaction Attacks," seems to be missing a verb in the final clause, and "It can't attack" further confuses it. I'd want to see clarification on that bit. If the raven truly is an invincible spirit being that can make interaction attacks at no danger to itself, every single turn, then yeah this seems pretty overpowered.

The Centaur's Charger Perk feels weak, on the other hand. The Minotaur has better than that as a Racial bonus (+1 all the time, and the same +2 if they Run).

I disagree. +2 damage in a pretty reasonable circumstance is a very nice perk IMO, especially considering how fast the centaur is. It gives you some really useful options in a fight. And the minotaur only gets that with his horns; a centaur can wield a sword, hammer, etc.

Spell Slinger... OK, this felt familiar and for a moment I just thought it was cool, and then I remembered why I didn't already have the reason it felt familiar. Instinctive Magic is a really cool Perk that I was definitely looking forward to picking up someday! I had my Conjuration-focused mage who had let her Dexterity go a bit, so she was super looking forward to making Beta clearance so she could use that for Dodge. But now here's this, that does the same thing with lower prerequisites, available at Alpha, and it replaces both Dodge and Melee Weapon defense?

Yes. I have nothing to add here except to echo what you said. Double the utility with no drawback (other than "must hold a staff") for an Apportation mage. That's too good.

The Academic Warden I really like - her quote made me laugh out loud. But how many times has it been confirmed that Reality is Core Earth's thing? And now the entire Reality tree is just one-Perk-offset for anybody -- which might not be so bad if this Perk didn't actually stand in for Tenacious, a Reality Perk, only better.

Yeah, this one actually made me sad. One of the big things that was hyped when Torg Eternity came out is that there's finally a reason to play a Core Earth character, because they're the ones who get these awesome Reality perks. Now the one thing that was exclusive to Core Earth is universally available? :(

Of course, those are just the ones I'm complaining about. ;) Elven Monk is neat - cool, but also a bit of a trap, since dumping your Strength as it allows will leave you with a low Toughness which is definitely balancing for a melee concept.

Yeah, it's potent, but reasonable. Though I'm confused by this sentence: Disciplines are contradictory below Magic Axiom 12, and can be “lost” or “destroyed,” usually by equiping standard magical items, transforming, or succumbing to Darkness. So . . . if I equip a +1 sword, I lose my discipline? I feel like I'm missing a rule here.

Exalted Blood is... interesting. I'm honestly not sure how I feel about it beyond "intrigued," and that's an awfully good feeling to start with.

Part of me thinks it's unfair for it to have a drawback that only applies to certain races. It does fit the perk, though, so I can accept it.

Quantum Entanglement is... just... genius.

Complicated as all heck, but yeah, I do like the effect. The prerequisite ("Transformed Core Earth to Aysle") is so specific though! Wouldn't it make sense for Core Earth and Cyberpapacy mages to have this too?

The Minotaur Gumshoe is awesome; the character art alone was totally worth that. The Pixie Infiltrator rocks. Born To Defend is great - I know someone who should buy it at their next opportunity - and I love her smile. Connections isn't bad, and would go very nicely with Always Prepared. And I love her chart. I'm sure if everyone just does their part, nothing can go wrong. Now... um... what's my part, again?

Yeah, I really loved the new races. Any chance we can get a breakdown of how the Minotaur and Pixie look as actual races? I would love to add those to the game!
Our group's Torg Eternity wiki page
  • House rules, indexes of all perks/spells/etc, form-fillable character sheet, and more

Savioronedge
Posts: 546
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:55 pm

Re: Aysle Backer Archetypes

Postby Savioronedge » Wed Jan 15, 2020 3:02 pm

pkitty wrote:
Quantum Entanglement is... just... genius.


Complicated as all heck, but yeah, I do like the effect. The prerequisite ("Transformed Core Earth to Aysle") is so specific though! Wouldn't it make sense for Core Earth and Cyberpapacy mages to have this too?


This wouldn't be appropriate for Cyberpapacy mages because science doesn't work that way for them.

However, this does solidify my complaint shout Eternity's Aisle...the entire Realm seams to be saying, "Core Earthers go home!"

There were already a number of Perks that I thought belonged to a CE concept and we're Aysle only, and this is just the icing...iMO

User avatar
Greymarch2000
Posts: 583
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2017 7:48 pm

Re: Aysle Backer Archetypes

Postby Greymarch2000 » Wed Jan 15, 2020 9:21 pm

Well the advantage is they can make all the OP Core Earth perks after all the cosm books ;)

mystic101
Posts: 332
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2017 11:13 am

Re: Aysle Backer Archetypes

Postby mystic101 » Wed Jan 15, 2020 9:56 pm

Hi, everyone. I'm the one that backed the Elven Monk. Thanks for all of the kind words about it. I'm happy to answer any questions. The fluff of the new perk was going to mimic the original Disciplines much more closely than it does now, but due to time constraints, it had to be pared down to its current form. I think the developers did a great job of taking my initial suggestion and streamlining it into what we have now.

pkitty wrote:
Of course, those are just the ones I'm complaining about. ;) Elven Monk is neat - cool, but also a bit of a trap, since dumping your Strength as it allows will leave you with a low Toughness which is definitely balancing for a melee concept.


Yeah, it's potent, but reasonable. Though I'm confused by this sentence: Disciplines are contradictory below Magic Axiom 12, and can be “lost” or “destroyed,” usually by equiping standard magical items, transforming, or succumbing to Darkness. So . . . if I equip a +1 sword, I lose my discipline? I feel like I'm missing a rule here.


The bit about needing Magic Axiom 12 was because its a form of enchantment, and that keeps the Disciplines on par with what the requirements for what a normally enchanted item would need.

The part about being "lost" or "destroyed" was so that the perk wasn't extending "perk protection" to all of those +1 bonuses, above and beyond what they'd normally get as part of being carried gear. Normally, items that acquire an enchantment through Aysle's Law of Enchantment aren't intrinsic to the character, per se. They can still be lost, destroyed, stolen, etc, unless they're "perk protected" like a Nile hero's Unbreakable Shield, or a monster hunter's monster-slayer gun. Making the Disciplines an intrinsic part of the character would have been a hidden power boost, above and beyond the already pretty decent obvious benefits. By instead saying that they represent a non-permanent state of enlightenment, it lets the gm strip one or more of them away whenever the player, or some outside circumstance, would have instead stripped them of that cool +1 sword that they've been carrying around since Glorying in Aysle. :) (I've personally never seen a gm take away a player's neat toy like that; at least not without some buy-in first, like using a voluntary LL cosm card to disintegrate something; but I'm sure that this varies from table to table.)

I wouldn't necessarily say that dumping Str is a "trap", but I did intend for the perk to have bonuses that would also be counterbalanced by certain trade-offs. Being able to hit hard in a hand-to-hand fight while being "smart" instead of "tough" is a different type of advantage, and allows for a different kind of character to be built, than the rules normally allow. I liked the idea of giving new build options to players.

But since the ability can be on the strong side, I also wanted to rest it behind a few gate-keeper conditions, so that gms had plenty of control over when, how, and if it gets implemented. Some of the gates are rules-based (Aysle only, no using enchanted tools), and some are fluff-based (needs to start as a monk; or, needs to go through x number of weeks/months/years of training from a monastery willing to teach them. . . the timescale is left intentionally vague to suit different campaign needs and gm preferences; or, to learn spellcasting on top of all that, they need to search for x amount of time to find the rare sub-sects that can teach it, and get trained).

I didn't want to offer options to just players, though. I also wanted to give plenty of tools to storytellers, by offering a new subset of allies and/or antagonists for the players to encounter. The spellcasting sects can represent goals for a pc to work toward, as they evolve their character over time; or they can be thrown in as cool new enemies to fight. I wanted to add story hooks for gms to hang some adventures on.

Well anyway, I'm just glad to be a small part of the world-building, in this wonderful shared experience we all have.

mystic101
Posts: 332
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2017 11:13 am

Re: Aysle Backer Archetypes

Postby mystic101 » Wed Jan 15, 2020 10:11 pm

P.S. After a few days of consideration, I, too, think that Reality Scholar should be limited to just one Reality perk. It still lets the perk be plenty powerful, but without completely eating Core Earth's lunch.

It makes sense, as a scholarly focus. Did they concentrate on the mechanics of reality stabilization? Great, take Realm Runner. Did they study how fluid reality is? Take Adaptable. Were they working out the physics of reality storms? Go for Storm Caller.

I like that it gives an in-game rationale for Stormer antagonists to have one single, unexpected trick up their sleeves to surprise the pcs with. "Wait, did that Tharkoldu just Negate me? What the what the!!!" . . . But just one, instead of being able to have an entire arsenal of Reality perks up their sleeves. Who's going to want to be a CE Soccer Mom or Plumber now, not when their super-cool mage or cyborg warrior can do all those reality tricks, too? :)

I'm actually starting a new character in a game next week, and I think I'll put Reality Scholar on them . . . but only with one single Reality perk. Only one, now and forever after. It'll just be a personal house rule for me, even if it's not written that way.

utsukushi
Posts: 963
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Aysle Backer Archetypes

Postby utsukushi » Wed Jan 15, 2020 10:52 pm

mathey wrote:I agree that the perks on the Backer Archetypes can get a bit wild, though. I'd be leery of accepting them as a GM if only because they seem so tied to the archetype concepts and making them "work".

Oh, I'd caught Columbo, but I missed Tahani, too! Thanks for pointing that out.

But more importantly, as I understand it, the Backer Archetypes are supposed to be official, so their Perks should be generally allowable. And most of them are great. A few of them do seem super tied to the specific character concept (Mankind's Best Friend, I'm looking at you!), but most of them really just add a cool new idea to the game. And that's definitely what the people who bought in to do them are looking for, so I'd be reluctant to say they should be generally disallowed. Though sometimes I think, because they're being looked at in regards to their specific character, they don't always think about their implications in the game as a whole. I saw a proper ninja with the Stalker Perk out of the Living Land BAs, and it was pretty scary.

Daedra18 wrote:I don't think the raven can perform interaction attacks. The text states "It can't attack or be harmed." Maybe it only has your interaction attacks for the purpose of defenses - it can provide aid, but that is diminished if an enemy stymies/gets a players call on them.

I think the text is confusing, but it says it has "your Interaction Attacks." If it had them for defense, well, one, I think it would have said "It has your Interaction Defenses", and two, why would it even need those if it's immune to all harm and can't do anything? Vulnerable and Stymied both seem irrelevant in that case.

Kuildeous wrote:I’m curious about the precedent for an invulnerable pet. Is there a cultural reason for an invincible raven? Is it based on Odin? I think this is the first invincible pet we’ve seen so far?

I think (apart from my original theories that it was to avoid needing to include a statblock) the precedent would come from D&D. It's a familiar, and those tend to exist when convenient and vanish when you're not paying attention to them. But then, they work a lot more like the Familiars in the Cyberpapacy book, giving a very specific bonus and nothing else.

pkitty wrote:I think that happened subconsciously here, a few times, in the name of making the archetype backers happy.

I AM sure that's a big piece of it. I know if I ever manage to pull together the money for one of these, I'll darned well want it to have an impact. :lol:

My thought was that you take this with Elven Sorcerer and Resilient and now you know every Apportation spell that exists in in the game with absolutely zero extra drawbacks. (And then add Elven Magic to pick up some non-Apportation spells.)

I thought that, too, but honestly, with a 14 Spirit I'm doubtful I'd bother. Maybe one of them, but overall I just don't think the Shock is going to be a problem. I know it was set up to be a two-Perk combo, since the Ancient Magic one, while neat, has virtually no impact in the game. But honestly I can't even put a number on how many Perks this combo would need to be. It replaces so many things. It takes over Dodge and Melee/Unarmed Combat, and Dexterity, and Strength (Mage Hands!), and Maneuver. It's Spirit-based, so you'll have all the Shock you need, plus high Intimidate and Willpower, and Faith if you want it. Your Mind and Charisma don't need to be lowered at all, so your Taunt and Trick may not be so super strong, but they're not weaknesses. And then there are the, like, 20 iterations of Spellcaster that it swoops up. Three Perks and you've just short-circuited yourself halfway to Gamma.

I disagree. +2 damage in a pretty reasonable circumstance is a very nice perk IMO, especially considering how fast the centaur is. It gives you some really useful options in a fight. And the minotaur only gets that with his horns; a centaur can wield a sword, hammer, etc.

Allow me to direct you to some of my earlier posts on Speed Demon... *ahem* I'm sorry. I would absolutely agree that a circumstantial (but not too hard to justify) +2 on damage was a very nice Perk IF the Beast Riding Skill didn't say this: "A successful melee weapons attack while mounted on a running beast causes +2 damage." I still can't see any reason why that doesn't apply to being mounted on a running vehicle, or why it wouldn't apply to a running Centaur, without having to spend a Perk for it.

I will allow that my comparison to the Minotaur wasn't as fair, though. You're right; the Minotaur basically has a built in +1-or-2 weapon, while the Centaur has a stackable bonus that adds to a weapon, potentially giving them a +6.

Though I'm confused by this sentence: Disciplines are contradictory below Magic Axiom 12, and can be “lost” or “destroyed,” usually by equiping standard magical items, transforming, or succumbing to Darkness. So . . . if I equip a +1 sword, I lose my discipline? I feel like I'm missing a rule here.

Yeah, that's... unclear, though I do have the feeling that that's exactly what it means. Magic bonuses apply directly to them, without needing to attach to a thing, but the flip side is that they actually can't use magical things without losing that. (Or at least, losing what they've gained so far.) Like, they are an Arcane Item, and don't tolerate others. I do like that.

Also, I just saw the by-line. Aww!

Wouldn't it make sense for Core Earth and Cyberpapacy mages to have this too?

I thought that, too, especially as it's the closest thing we've seen to old Torg's ability to hack your spells on the fly. The "Transformed CE to Aysle" is weird, but you can just say that happened in backstory if you want to play one. Interestingly, it makes it much harder to explain an Elf with this, and I like that. (Arguably you could do that in backstory, too, and just say they flipped to Earth and then back, but I think a GM might challenge that.)

But I like it, actually. Possibly because I'm just so enamored of the whole thing that I want it to be perfect and am willing to rationalize on its behalf, yes, but still. Core Earth mages definitely shouldn't have it; they don't understand magic well enough. There's a good argument for CyberPapacy having the combination, but honestly, I agree with Savioronedge -- it doesn't actually fit their science, or their magic. But pure Aysle mages can't do it because they don't have the science. It makes it a neat wrinkle; an odd side-effect of the Realities mixing. Which is very pseudo-scientifically quantum. And I would note that as long as your character stays some kind of Spellcaster, there's actually nothing in that that says you lose it if you Transform again -- once you've gone from Core Earth to Aysle, you've met the qualifications.

Savioronedge wrote:However, this does solidify my complaint shout Eternity's Aisle...the entire Realm seams to be saying, "Core Earthers go home!"

There were already a number of Perks that I thought belonged to a CE concept and we're Aysle only, and this is just the icing...iMO

Yeah, I totally get that. Actually, to put a positive spin on the feeling, I'll note that something I really love in the CyberPapacy book is that along with offering tons of cool new content for CyberPapacy characters, it also offers some cool CyberPapacy-themed things for other characters.

It's the first one that's really done that, especially when it comes to Perks. Maybe an occasional Prowess Perk, but mostly everything's been Cosm-locked.

Mystic101 wrote:I wouldn't necessarily say that dumping Str is a "trap"

First, again, I really like the Elven Monk, so thank you! On that, I'm speaking a lot from my experience with Firecracker, who twisted the Ray rules into a pretzel and was a fantastic martial artist with 5 Strength. It was amazing... until she got hit. She definitely needed something like Force Field to make up for that, but it didn't fit her theme. So, OK, "trap" might be a strong word, but especially for a melee-fighting character, you have to be careful how far you let your Toughness drop. Her 7 Toughness is an automatic Wound for any weapon that starts at 12 or more, and that's most of them. And I noticed that Toughness isn't listed as a thing you can get adds to through Disciplines. I kind of feel like it ought to be, since armor is usually something that can be enchanted.

"Inducted into a monastic order" was an interesting piece that I did wonder about, so thank you for detailing that. It does work nicely, I think, to let GM's handwave it if they want to, or lock it down if they feel that need. Of course, GMs can technically do all that anyway, but it's nice to have it backed up by the text.

mystic101
Posts: 332
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2017 11:13 am

Re: Aysle Backer Archetypes

Postby mystic101 » Wed Jan 15, 2020 11:49 pm

utsukushi wrote:Also, I just saw the by-line. Aww!


Heh, yeah. She's seven, and said she wanted a character "like Kung Fu Panda". (Gulp) I thought about how to do that by backing an Aysle kickstarter, and this was the result. :)

utsukushi wrote:On that, I'm speaking a lot from my experience with Firecracker, who twisted the Ray rules into a pretzel and was a fantastic martial artist with 5 Strength. It was amazing... until she got hit. She definitely needed something like Force Field to make up for that, but it didn't fit her theme. So, OK, "trap" might be a strong word, but especially for a melee-fighting character, you have to be careful how far you let your Toughness drop. Her 7 Toughness is an automatic Wound for any weapon that starts at 12 or more, and that's most of them. And I noticed that Toughness isn't listed as a thing you can get adds to through Disciplines. I kind of feel like it ought to be, since armor is usually something that can be enchanted.


Good point about Toughness enhancement. It may be something some gms would let them do, since that's already in line with what magic items normally allow.

Yeah, being a "glass ninja" is definitely a concern, for sure. Much like a D&D monk, I'm guessing the character should be approached as a relatively squishy skirmisher. Someone who gets some early interactions off to set up foes for the tank or the blaster, while making sure that they're not out in the open taking a lot of ranged fire, and then dashing in to lay some hurt on otherwise distracted opponents up close. Taking unarmed up through Mastery will eventually get them up to an 17 defense in melee (18 or 19 with Disciplines) even without raising Dex first, which would help cut down a little on the Possibility drain from soaking. And throwing in Spellcasting could also help, with defensive things like Multiple Images and Instinctive Magic. I imagine it would need to be a careful, finesse character in battle, when not helping out with scholarly/perceptive things out of combat. I'd have cautioned users about it more in the Tactics section, but there just wasn't room!

Istrian
Posts: 184
Joined: Wed May 01, 2019 7:18 am
Location: Cyberpapacy (Paris)

Re: Aysle Backer Archetypes

Postby Istrian » Thu Jan 16, 2020 3:39 am

Spell Slinger does have one (admittedly small) disadvantage over Instinctive Magic: it requires a wand. So enemies have to focus on getting the slinger's wand away (for example with a GM's Call, or even a Setback) in order to negate the perk.

I think in my games I'll house-rule Spell Slinger to make it not work if the character is Vulnerable, so it works similarly to shields.


Return to “Rules Questions (TORG)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests