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.
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.