View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Wed Jan 29, 2020 2:54 am



Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ] 
Star siege 
Author Message
Henchman

Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 12:29 am
Posts: 2
Post Star siege
Since AA is going to do the reboot of star siege what books other than the main gender book would you like to see.


Sun Jan 24, 2016 4:27 am
Profile
Mogrl

Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 20660
Location: Arizona and St Louis
Post Re: Star siege
What I like to always see for sci fi RPG's, a wide range of cool gear, ships, vehicles, weapons, armor, robots, cybernetics, etc... However, I'd like to see the "tool box" spirit of the original SS kept alive by giving us a good "build" system with which we can create/adapt our favorite things from other RPG's people like me own.

_________________
Since its 20,000 I suggest "Captain Nemo" as his title. Beyond the obvious connection, he is one who sails on his own terms and ignores those he doesn't agree with...confident in his journey and goals.
Sounds obvious to me! -Gm Michael

Grand Knight Commander of the Society.


Sun Jan 24, 2016 11:06 am
Profile
Greater Lore Drake
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 8:00 am
Posts: 3868
Location: Oklahoma
Post Re: Star siege
Brian44 wrote:
Since AA is going to do the reboot of star siege what books other than the main gender book would you like to see.



First, let me say welcome to the forum!

For what I'd like to see. Though I'm arguing a lot of points in the SS/SW thread, and it may seem like I dislike SS, I like the idea of a skill bundle build instead of a class based system.

So, I'd like to see that element in the AA adaption - or at least as an add on to it if they keep Sci Fi - AA a class system.

For add on books, I'd want what Tree already mentioned. a book of gear weapons ships etc etc etc. That would fill the biggest weakness SS out of the box had.

_________________
"And so I am become a knight of the Kingdom of Dreams and Shadows!" - Mark Twain

Forgive all spelling errors.

Knight Errant & Humble C&C Society Contributor
C&C Society


Sun Jan 24, 2016 10:48 pm
Profile
Clang lives!
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 7149
Location: Conneaut Lake, PA
Post Re: Star siege
Personally, I'd like to see SS as is with a better layout and support.

R-

_________________
Castles & Crusades: What 3rd Edition AD&D should have been.
TLG Forum Moderator
House Rules & Whatnots
My Game Threads
Monday Night Online Group Member since 2007


Mon Jan 25, 2016 2:54 am
Profile
Grey Elf Troll
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 789
Post Re: Star siege
Just letting you guys know I'm paying attention... :ugeek:

_________________
Jason Vey, The Grey Elf
Author, Amazing Adventures: Multigenre Role Playing with the SIEGE Engine
Amazing Adventures Current Errata
Amazing Adventures on Facebook | Amazing Adventures on Twitter


Mon Jan 25, 2016 5:06 pm
Profile
Mogrl

Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 20660
Location: Arizona and St Louis
Post Re: Star siege
The Grey Elf wrote:
Just letting you guys know I'm paying attention... :ugeek:


In that case, let me second Rigon's comment. The problems with SS were its layout/organization and lack of support materials. I, too, like the fact that it is not class based. So a well presented set of rules, with good support materials, is what I want for SS as well. Just look at any of the successful Sci Fi RPg's, TONS of support material, when they are long running successes, Such as Traveller, Eclipse Phase, the various Savage World Sci Fi settings, Mindjammer, and so on.

_________________
Since its 20,000 I suggest "Captain Nemo" as his title. Beyond the obvious connection, he is one who sails on his own terms and ignores those he doesn't agree with...confident in his journey and goals.
Sounds obvious to me! -Gm Michael

Grand Knight Commander of the Society.


Mon Jan 25, 2016 8:07 pm
Profile
Grey Elf Troll
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 789
Post Re: Star siege
Treebore wrote:
The Grey Elf wrote:
Just letting you guys know I'm paying attention... :ugeek:


In that case, let me second Rigon's comment. The problems with SS were its layout/organization and lack of support materials. I, too, like the fact that it is not class based. So a well presented set of rules, with good support materials, is what I want for SS as well. Just look at any of the successful Sci Fi RPg's, TONS of support material, when they are long running successes, Such as Traveller, Eclipse Phase, the various Savage World Sci Fi settings, Mindjammer, and so on.


Unfortunately, those sentiments are in the vast minority based on what we've heard. I want to present options for people like skill packages, equipment creation and and such, but one of the reasons SS didn't work had everything to do with the fact that it was only a SIEGE engine game in the loosest sense of the word. For most fans of the SIEGE engine it was just way too much of a departure with way too huge of a learning curve to pick up and play.

A reboot under the AA banner would be class based and 100% compatible with AA and C&C without a heavy learning curve for fans of the system and TLG's other products. The current effort is to unify all of the lines--this is why the second print of AA moved back to the 12/18 prime/non-prime split of C&C instead of the first printing's 15/+5 approach.

That being said, I dig the original StarSiege and would be looking to incorporate as many of those ideas as possible into the new approach.

_________________
Jason Vey, The Grey Elf
Author, Amazing Adventures: Multigenre Role Playing with the SIEGE Engine
Amazing Adventures Current Errata
Amazing Adventures on Facebook | Amazing Adventures on Twitter


Mon Jan 25, 2016 9:35 pm
Profile
Mogrl

Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 20660
Location: Arizona and St Louis
Post Re: Star siege
For me its so easy to convert anything D&D like to the SIEGE engine, I don't really feel a need for a version already converted for me. Plus, for sci fi, classed based stuff really doesn't work for me. Now a very "loose" class system does work for me. Check out Stars Without Numbers to see exactly what I mean. So if your looking to do "class based" that loosely, or even more loosely, I'll probably like it.

_________________
Since its 20,000 I suggest "Captain Nemo" as his title. Beyond the obvious connection, he is one who sails on his own terms and ignores those he doesn't agree with...confident in his journey and goals.
Sounds obvious to me! -Gm Michael

Grand Knight Commander of the Society.


Mon Jan 25, 2016 10:46 pm
Profile
Greater Lore Drake
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 8:00 am
Posts: 3868
Location: Oklahoma
Post Re: Star siege
The Grey Elf wrote:

Unfortunately, those sentiments are in the vast minority based on what we've heard. I want to present options for people like skill packages, equipment creation and and such, but one of the reasons SS didn't work had everything to do with the fact that it was only a SIEGE engine game in the loosest sense of the word. For most fans of the SIEGE engine it was just way too much of a departure with way too huge of a learning curve to pick up and play.

A reboot under the AA banner would be class based and 100% compatible with AA and C&C without a heavy learning curve for fans of the system and TLG's other products. The current effort is to unify all of the lines--this is why the second print of AA moved back to the 12/18 prime/non-prime split of C&C instead of the first printing's 15/+5 approach.

That being said, I dig the original StarSiege and would be looking to incorporate as many of those ideas as possible into the new approach.


I guess I'm in the minority (in oh sooooo many things) but I too prefer a futures game to be skill based vs class based.

However, as you have said, it under AA would be class based, I hope you can push the class emphasis back a notch or 2 and pull the skills packages up toward the front a bit. I have no issue with a C&C fighter being very similar to every other fighter. However, as history progress, and then goes forward into the realm of Sci Fi, I prefer there to be a greater diversity than a standard class based game allows.

I hate to sound like I'm advocating for a 3.5 type game, but I did like how Star Wars SAGA rules handled it (as a class based system) giving different paths for each main character class. (I did hate all the feats and minutia skills etc etc etc that comes with a 3.5 game)

with us doing a rework for Rigon's proposed SS Star Wars house rules, I do think that it would be fairly easy to 'modernize' the SS into something that more fits the C&C AA Siege rules without scraping the good stuff in the original SS. I really do like the idea of skill bundles governing the prime vs non prime instead of primes being specifically tied to atributes, things like that. So if you reset the attributes and associated bonuses to more fit the standard C&C 'siege' standard, and other little things like that, I think you will bring the learning curve down to nearly 0.

Also, to me the big learning curve wasn't the mechanic of the game, or even picking skill bundles and then specialties from the skills list, it was the lack of equipment (bare bones equipment lists at best) and the non-common sense way the rules presented making your own equipment ships etc. If you can fix that learning curve for that part of the game then you've gone a long way on improving the game!

Oh yeah, after skimming through Clavis' 'ghastly affair' rules I really like some of his Assets and Afflictions, so I'd suggest giving your AA traits a look and build on them (of course with a sci fi focus instead of Clavis' Baroque focus)

_________________
"And so I am become a knight of the Kingdom of Dreams and Shadows!" - Mark Twain

Forgive all spelling errors.

Knight Errant & Humble C&C Society Contributor
C&C Society


Tue Jan 26, 2016 12:55 am
Profile
Clang lives!
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 7149
Location: Conneaut Lake, PA
Post Re: Star siege
If it was similar to Victorious!, I think that might work. It has base classes and skill bundles, so , that might work.

R-

_________________
Castles & Crusades: What 3rd Edition AD&D should have been.
TLG Forum Moderator
House Rules & Whatnots
My Game Threads
Monday Night Online Group Member since 2007


Tue Jan 26, 2016 2:11 am
Profile
Lore Drake
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 8:00 am
Posts: 1547
Location: Topsham, Maine
Post Re: Star siege
The Grey Elf wrote:
A reboot under the AA banner would be class based and 100% compatible with AA and C&C without a heavy learning curve for fans of the system and TLG's other products. The current effort is to unify all of the lines--this is why the second print of AA moved back to the 12/18 prime/non-prime split of C&C instead of the first printing's 15/+5 approach.

That being said, I dig the original StarSiege and would be looking to incorporate as many of those ideas as possible into the new approach.


I like this. Though so far I seem to be in the minority on these forums. I think the popularity of White Star based on the Swords & wizardy RPG show this approach would have a good fan base, too.


Tue Jan 26, 2016 2:56 am
Profile
Henchman

Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 12:29 am
Posts: 2
Post Re: Star siege
I like star siege to be more like c&c and I'm more concern for source books for ss like equipment, aliens,and monsters. What kind of books would you like to see done for ss?


Tue Jan 26, 2016 3:17 am
Profile
Clang lives!
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 7149
Location: Conneaut Lake, PA
Post Re: Star siege
I was just looking through V! again this morning and it seems to me that a if a complete rewrite of SS has to be done, then it should be something along the lines of V!. A loose class structure with player options to pick abilities and/or powers/skills. I think JV should take a hard look at V! and maybe even contact Mike for a collaboration of sorts.

R-

_________________
Castles & Crusades: What 3rd Edition AD&D should have been.
TLG Forum Moderator
House Rules & Whatnots
My Game Threads
Monday Night Online Group Member since 2007


Tue Jan 26, 2016 3:30 pm
Profile
Grey Elf Troll
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 789
Post Re: Star siege
Something else just occurred to me: did we actually ever announce that we were rebooting Star Siege as an AA sourcebook? I remember once saying it's something I'd like to do, and that we've talked about, and that if it was done that's how we'd do it...but just to be 100% clear to everyone, this isn't something that's on the schedule being actively worked on at the moment.

_________________
Jason Vey, The Grey Elf
Author, Amazing Adventures: Multigenre Role Playing with the SIEGE Engine
Amazing Adventures Current Errata
Amazing Adventures on Facebook | Amazing Adventures on Twitter


Tue Jan 26, 2016 7:24 pm
Profile
Clang lives!
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 7149
Location: Conneaut Lake, PA
Post Re: Star siege
The Grey Elf wrote:
Something else just occurred to me: did we actually ever announce that we were rebooting Star Siege as an AA sourcebook? I remember once saying it's something I'd like to do, and that we've talked about, and that if it was done that's how we'd do it...but just to be 100% clear to everyone, this isn't something that's on the schedule at the moment.

I know Steve had mentioned something about it on one of the Kickstarters or chats or somewhere. I didn't know if he had Oked it or not. I would think with the release of SW VII, he would want to jump into the Sci-fi interest being stirred up.

R-

_________________
Castles & Crusades: What 3rd Edition AD&D should have been.
TLG Forum Moderator
House Rules & Whatnots
My Game Threads
Monday Night Online Group Member since 2007


Tue Jan 26, 2016 7:31 pm
Profile
Grey Elf Troll
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 789
Post Re: Star siege
Rigon wrote:
The Grey Elf wrote:
Something else just occurred to me: did we actually ever announce that we were rebooting Star Siege as an AA sourcebook? I remember once saying it's something I'd like to do, and that we've talked about, and that if it was done that's how we'd do it...but just to be 100% clear to everyone, this isn't something that's on the schedule at the moment.

I know Steve had mentioned something about it on one of the Kickstarters or chats or somewhere. I didn't know if he had Oked it or not. I would think with the release of SW VII, he would want to jump into the Sci-fi interest being stirred up.

R-


Oh, he and I have definitely been discussing this and it's something that is on both of our radars. It's just not in active development at the moment and as I'm sure you guys all understand, the last thing we want is accusations of vaporware!

_________________
Jason Vey, The Grey Elf
Author, Amazing Adventures: Multigenre Role Playing with the SIEGE Engine
Amazing Adventures Current Errata
Amazing Adventures on Facebook | Amazing Adventures on Twitter


Tue Jan 26, 2016 8:04 pm
Profile
Mist Elf

Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2015 5:52 am
Posts: 41
Post Re: Star siege
Hmmmmm....a new Star Siege along the lines of AA would have been VERY handy for my current campaign. I used to play Star Frontiers and drew some races, weapons, equipment and ideas from it to incorporate into a C & C campaign (Haunted Highlands) while also working in the AA classes and equipment. I have the AA companion book which has some Sci-Fi material in it which has been essential to fill in the blanks. But putting together a Sci-Fi "set" that would be usable as is for AA (or as part of AA) or C & C adventures would be IDEAL.

I have only seen the quick start Star Siege rules so I guess maybe my view is a bit skewed. I didn't want to buy Star Siege because I already have Star Frontiers.

I think more races would be needed. I think that additional classes would be needed even if they are just a copy/paste/rename of a class that already exists (with some appropriate adjustments) is needed e.g. like the Monk from C & C versus the Pugilist in AA; almost exactly the same but the name gives a flavor to it appropriate for pulp. I don't really like the classes that d20 future provides; or at least the names of them. I'd say there are too many weapons in the AA companion book. Why are there no (nice to have) small pictures of the weapons?

I also like the way Star Frontiers does their skills: One primary skill area (PSA) and within it you select a specialization and within that comes the skill set. Pretty easy and player malleable versus the way AA or C & C do the skills (deterministic and pick up the new ones once reach a certain level). It occurs to me now that the PSA of Star Frontiers is -somewhat- like the choices given to certain classes in D&D 5th edition like the Fighter class can go in a few different ways which give the Fighter a different flavor. I don't remember what they are; I sold my PH but one of them is Eldrich Knight.

Maybe an AA "Sci-Fi" companion could be made which just expands the AA rules?


Wed Jan 27, 2016 7:10 pm
Profile
Ulthal
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 25, 2015 12:29 am
Posts: 722
Post Re: Star siege
I don't like long lists and descriptions of loot. Besides rules lawyering, the thing I hated most about the old D&D games was flipping through endless copies of books trying to find items and their descriptions. I much prefer general guides or categories with a few idea tables to help trigger the imagination. That kind of system can be a great GM tool for the inclusion of unique and meaningful items for one's campaign or story.

I recently ran into this https://forums.sufficientvelocity.com/t ... ems.11893/ Scroll down to what Acatalepsy says. I agree completely. The loot should further the story.

I am really liking the flexibility of the class and skill system in Stars without Number. They use three classes and a couple pages of skills. It is surprisingly powerful and flexible. I saw one guy was able to create dozens of unique character professions using this combo. It probably wouldn't be too difficult to factor a siege system into something like that.

Edit: what I love to see in any of these game books:

1. Eliminate walls of text. Be as concise as possible. When I am reading a non-fiction book I am seeking information and I want to find it quickly.
2. Make the system as simple as possible so game play runs smoothly. If the important bits can can fit on one GM page that is best.
3. The check system as described in AA felt complicated and the description was unclear to me. I am probably not the only one who puzzled over understanding it.
4. I love it when sample adventures, pre-gen characters and sample character sheets are included.
5. Provide some free stuff to build a community. A free quick start can draw in new players. I felt good about asking my players to join a SWN game because I knew they wouldn't have to purchase anything. But guess what? Someone liked it so much they did make a purchase. Another way to tune the business model is to provide a service instead of a book. For example: sell GM services online. People would probably pay to join a 'professional' game. Make the leader some kind of celebrity or otherwise well known/credible person.
6. Spells/tech descriptions of one or two lines are ideal. Multiple paragraphs slow the action.
7. Be mindful of accidental sexism, racism etc
8. Always include a Table of Contents. A DETAILED index is always appreciated.


Wed Jan 27, 2016 7:58 pm
Profile
Grey Elf Troll
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 789
Post Re: Star siege
Penny-Whistle wrote:
3. The check system as described in AA felt complicated and the description was unclear to me. I am probably not the only one who puzzled over understanding it.


THIS caught my attention. How, exactly, did it feel complicated and unclear? I'm not being snarky. I genuinely want to know. This is the first comment to this effect I've had in the several years the game's been on the market, and if it is, in fact, unclear I'd like to make sure that's cleaned up in future printings.

_________________
Jason Vey, The Grey Elf
Author, Amazing Adventures: Multigenre Role Playing with the SIEGE Engine
Amazing Adventures Current Errata
Amazing Adventures on Facebook | Amazing Adventures on Twitter


Tue Feb 02, 2016 10:03 pm
Profile
Ulthal
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 25, 2015 12:29 am
Posts: 722
Post Re: Star siege
The Grey Elf wrote:
Penny-Whistle wrote:
3. The check system as described in AA felt complicated and the description was unclear to me. I am probably not the only one who puzzled over understanding it.


THIS caught my attention. How, exactly, did it feel complicated and unclear? I'm not being snarky. I genuinely want to know. This is the first comment to this effect I've had in the several years the game's been on the market, and if it is, in fact, unclear I'd like to make sure that's cleaned up in future printings.


You can be snarky if you want to.

I really enjoyed playing AA. I especially loved the range of characters that people could create. But I really struggled with the opposed spell check system.

The description didn't match the example. That was confusing. But mostly, having multiple steps meant everything slowed down as I had to stop and think and answer a whole lot of questions for just one action including: how much mep does the spell cost, how much does the person have to spend, what is the spell level, what is the CC, what is the spellcraft check, what is the CL and then finally what is the CB. All that to see if the spell worked!

I have no doubt you made it this way for a reason. I just prefer simpler systems because I never want dice rolling to slow things down. Also, having all the acronyms start with the same letter (CL CC CB) just makes everything kind of blur together.


Tue Feb 02, 2016 11:27 pm
Profile
Grey Elf Troll
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 789
Post Re: Star siege
Penny-Whistle wrote:
You can be snarky if you want to.

I really enjoyed playing AA. I especially loved the range of characters that people could create. But I really struggled with the opposed spell check system.

The description didn't match the example. That was confusing. But mostly, having multiple steps meant everything slowed down as I had to stop and think and answer a whole lot of questions for just one action including: how much mep does the spell cost, how much does the person have to spend, what is the spell level, what is the CC, what is the spellcraft check, what is the CL and then finally what is the CB. All that to see if the spell worked!

I have no doubt you made it this way for a reason. I just prefer simpler systems because I never want dice rolling to slow things down. Also, having all the acronyms start with the same letter (CL CC CB) just makes everything kind of blur together.


That's standard SIEGE engine, drawn from C&C (the CL/CC/CB thing) and not exclusive to AA. But you're (deliberately?) making it look more complex than it is. CB/CL/CC comprises the basic task resolution of the SIEGE Engine, and it's got a reputation for being one of the fastest and easiest fantasy games out there. It's very basic arithmetic and breaks down like this:

CB: Challenge Base. If your ability score is Prime, it's 12. If it's not Prime, it's 18.
CL: Challenge Level. The Difficulty of the Task. In contested checks, it's equal to the HD or level of your opponent (forget the opposed check rules, which are expressly optional)
CC: Challenge Class. Equivalent to DC in D&D. Add CB+CL to get CC.

Example: You're making a Dexterity check and you have Dex as a Prime. That means your CB is 12. The check is to sneak up on a 5th-level opponent. This means the CL is 5. The final difficulty, or CC, is 17 (12+5=17). Roll a d20, add Dex bonus and level, and if you hit 17 or better, you succeed.

Likewise, there's nothing complex about magic. It's a standard spell point system, no different than a thousand others out there. You spend MEP equal to the spell level +1. Spellcraft Check is a basic SIEGE check using your spellcasting ability. CL is equal to spell level. Spend points, roll a die, spell works or you take d4 points of spell burn per level.

You shouldn't need to figure out how much MEP a character has. It's written on their character sheet.

Re-reading your complaint, it seems that you're specifically talking about counterspells. Again, very basic.

Your CB is always going to be 12 because your spellcasting ability should be a Prime Attribute for you. The CL is equal to the level of the spell being cast. And honestly, you should know what level spell is being cast. Indeed, you have to because it affects the casting of the spell in the first place. Every character (and NPC) should have their spells written down on their sheet by level. "Figuring out" what level a spell is, is a matter of glancing at your character sheet. Takes less than a second. How much MEP you can spend in this case is your spellcasting ability bonus + class level. Half the amount of MEP you spend translates into additional CL applied to the spellcaster's check. If their original spellcraft roll to cast the spell doesn't exceed the modified check, the spell is countered.

I've just re-read the example and it perfectly matches the rules. I'm not sure where the disconnect is.

_________________
Jason Vey, The Grey Elf
Author, Amazing Adventures: Multigenre Role Playing with the SIEGE Engine
Amazing Adventures Current Errata
Amazing Adventures on Facebook | Amazing Adventures on Twitter


Wed Feb 03, 2016 12:34 am
Profile
Mogrl

Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 20660
Location: Arizona and St Louis
Post Re: Star siege
The Grey Elf wrote:
Penny-Whistle wrote:
You can be snarky if you want to.

I really enjoyed playing AA. I especially loved the range of characters that people could create. But I really struggled with the opposed spell check system.

The description didn't match the example. That was confusing. But mostly, having multiple steps meant everything slowed down as I had to stop and think and answer a whole lot of questions for just one action including: how much mep does the spell cost, how much does the person have to spend, what is the spell level, what is the CC, what is the spellcraft check, what is the CL and then finally what is the CB. All that to see if the spell worked!

I have no doubt you made it this way for a reason. I just prefer simpler systems because I never want dice rolling to slow things down. Also, having all the acronyms start with the same letter (CL CC CB) just makes everything kind of blur together.


That's standard SIEGE engine, drawn from C&C (the CL/CC/CB thing) and not exclusive to AA. But you're (deliberately?) making it look more complex than it is. CB/CL/CC comprises the basic task resolution of the SIEGE Engine, and it's got a reputation for being one of the fastest and easiest fantasy games out there. It's very basic arithmetic and breaks down like this:

CB: Challenge Base. If your ability score is Prime, it's 12. If it's not Prime, it's 18.
CL: Challenge Level. The Difficulty of the Task. In contested checks, it's equal to the HD or level of your opponent (forget the opposed check rules, which are expressly optional)
CC: Challenge Class. Equivalent to DC in D&D. Add CB+CL to get CC.

Example: You're making a Dexterity check and you have Dex as a Prime. That means your CB is 12. The check is to sneak up on a 5th-level opponent. This means the CL is 5. The final difficulty, or CC, is 17 (12+5=17). Roll a d20, add Dex bonus and level, and if you hit 17 or better, you succeed.

Likewise, there's nothing complex about magic. It's a standard spell point system, no different than a thousand others out there. You spend MEP equal to the spell level +1. Spellcraft Check is a basic SIEGE check using your spellcasting ability. CL is equal to spell level. Spend points, roll a die, spell works or you take d4 points of spell burn per level.

You shouldn't need to figure out how much MEP a character has. It's written on their character sheet.

Re-reading your complaint, it seems that you're specifically talking about counterspells. Again, very basic.

Your CB is always going to be 12 because your spellcasting ability should be a Prime Attribute for you. The CL is equal to the level of the spell being cast. And honestly, you should know what level spell is being cast. Indeed, you have to because it affects the casting of the spell in the first place. Every character (and NPC) should have their spells written down on their sheet by level. "Figuring out" what level a spell is, is a matter of glancing at your character sheet. Takes less than a second. How much MEP you can spend in this case is your spellcasting ability bonus + class level. Half the amount of MEP you spend translates into additional CL applied to the spellcaster's check. If their original spellcraft roll to cast the spell doesn't exceed the modified check, the spell is countered.

I've just re-read the example and it perfectly matches the rules. I'm not sure where the disconnect is.


I think it was just the stress of running a rules set for the very first time and trying to figure out what the rules mean while trying to keep the game moving at the desired pace.

_________________
Since its 20,000 I suggest "Captain Nemo" as his title. Beyond the obvious connection, he is one who sails on his own terms and ignores those he doesn't agree with...confident in his journey and goals.
Sounds obvious to me! -Gm Michael

Grand Knight Commander of the Society.


Wed Feb 03, 2016 1:21 am
Profile
Grey Elf Troll
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 789
Post Re: Star siege
Good call. Could very well be.

_________________
Jason Vey, The Grey Elf
Author, Amazing Adventures: Multigenre Role Playing with the SIEGE Engine
Amazing Adventures Current Errata
Amazing Adventures on Facebook | Amazing Adventures on Twitter


Wed Feb 03, 2016 1:42 am
Profile
Greater Lore Drake
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 7:00 am
Posts: 2727
Location: The Court of the Crimson King
Post Re: Star siege
She's talking about in the first printing how the CC of the saving throw of spell is the result of the spellcraft check (haven't checked 2nd). Which I also find clunky, but any "leave your dice on the table" checks are always sort of a pain for me.

_________________
My C&C stuff: www.rpggrognard.com


Wed Feb 03, 2016 2:27 am
Profile
Ulthal
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 25, 2015 12:29 am
Posts: 722
Post Re: Star siege
The Grey Elf wrote:
Good call. Could very well be.


I didn't panic, get stressed out or even succumb to the vapours.

I said the description in the book wasn't clear and that the number of steps was more complicated than I like to see in a game. I offered my opinion only because you had asked your customers what they wanted to see. I sure didn't expect to receive such a condescending answer.

If I have misread your tone and you actually do care what your customers think then I recommend looking again at The Spellcraft Check on p. 88. Your example includes every last one of the steps I mentioned in my last comment. I mentioned the problem with the acronyms because that is a well known issue in brain research. Having them all share the same first letter makes it confusing for the reader. The first printing DID have an error. I wasn't 'complaining' but offering constructive criticism.

I used to like your game and even got a game going on this very forum because I wanted to support this project. Your disrespect has really made me question whether I will ever again play your game or invite others to do so.


Wed Feb 03, 2016 7:07 am
Profile
Grey Elf Troll
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 789
Post Re: Star siege
You've very much misread my tone. I mean no disrespect whatsoever, nor did I intend to come off as condescending. You outlined exactly how complicated it was, and I endeavored to break it down and explain it to you. I'm sorry if it came off otherwise. As most of those who have interacted with me here can attest, I very much value and appreciate fans of the game and enjoy engaging with them whenever possible, and I try very hard NOT to disrespect them.

As I said, I have read the rules to ensure that my example didn't contradict the explanation (as you accuse) and they don't include all those steps, so I'm genuinely confused as to what you're seeing.

You have to understand that the way you're making this sound, it could be a real turnoff to someone who has never seen the game but visits these forums...which then hurts the sales of the game. I have to respond to those kinds of accusations with corrections where necessary, especially when I've never received a complaint like this before. I'm not attempting to be disrespectful or insulting to you in any way. I'm just trying to help you understand the basics of it so it doesn't seem so complex.

[EDIT]Okay, I see now what you were talking about--I was looking at the Counterspell rules on page 90. There's no mistake in the example on page 88--I just re-read it. And I can see, I guess, how the description may be a bit confusing but again, the CB for the caster is always going to be 12, unless for some odd reason their spellcasting ability isn't a Prime. So the CL for your saving throw will be your Spellcraft check - 12. In the example...8.

The total casting process is pretty simple and again, is a basic point-based magic system similar to many others out there. It breaks down like this:

1. Spend the MEP for the spell (Cost: Spell level + 1)
2. Make Spellcraft Check (d20 + Spellcasting Attribute Bonus + Level). CL for the check = Spell Level.
3. If the check succeeds, the spell goes off. If the check fails, take d4 subdual damage per spell level.

IF a saving throw is permitted against the spell, the CL for the save is equal to your Spellcraft check - 12 (or Spellcraft check result - 18, if for some reason your casting attribute isn't a Prime).

_________________
Jason Vey, The Grey Elf
Author, Amazing Adventures: Multigenre Role Playing with the SIEGE Engine
Amazing Adventures Current Errata
Amazing Adventures on Facebook | Amazing Adventures on Twitter


Wed Feb 03, 2016 3:31 pm
Profile
Grey Elf Troll
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 7:00 am
Posts: 789
Post Re: Star siege
Upon further reflection on all this, I think I tend to agree that basing the save CL on your spellcraft check result might be a bit much. The idea was to allow spellcasters to throw really powerful magics that were really hard to save against, by virtue of a high casting roll. You could easily just make the CL for a casting roll equal to the caster's level, which is less dynamic but is simpler, avoids the "leave the dice on the table" problem and brings it in line with pretty much everything else in the SIEGE engine. I'll have to remember to make that an optional rule in future printings.

_________________
Jason Vey, The Grey Elf
Author, Amazing Adventures: Multigenre Role Playing with the SIEGE Engine
Amazing Adventures Current Errata
Amazing Adventures on Facebook | Amazing Adventures on Twitter


Wed Feb 03, 2016 4:07 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 27 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF.