• 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
 
User avatar
Short Fey
Posts: 398
Joined: Sat 03 Dec 2022, 14:45

Re: Dragonbane BETA v2 Rulebook Feedback - Chapter 7 Bestiary

Wed 11 Jan 2023, 18:12

I would like to advocate for not giving monsters Attributes. For me one of the main strengths of this system is that the players have fully fleshed PC with Stats, skills and attributes that allow the players interesting character progression choices whilst NPC and Monsters are kept as stripped down as possible to minimize the burden on the GM.
I'm in this camp as well. Give monsters/adversaries the bare minimum in terms of stats that we need to run them, so it's easier on the GM.
I lean towards this camp as well.
Beware the fey!
 
Arioch1973
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue 30 Aug 2022, 16:45

Re: Dragonbane BETA v2 Rulebook Feedback - Chapter 7 Bestiary

Thu 12 Jan 2023, 00:43

Well, I am not against stat light minions, I guess I just have a different opinion on what bare minimum is.
Looking at spells where it says that the target should roll vs their STR is kind of hilarious when minion npcs and monsters dont have a STR to defend themselves with. It is clear that the logic of having at least basic attributes (STR, CON, AGL, INT, WIL, CHA) for them was there, but then those were not included. So either we need those stats for the minons and monsters, or we need a rewrite of the magic rules.
 
Chekmx
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue 31 Aug 2021, 17:13

Re: Dragonbane BETA v2 Rulebook Feedback - Chapter 7 Bestiary

Thu 12 Jan 2023, 10:42

Well, I am not against stat light minions, I guess I just have a different opinion on what bare minimum is.
Looking at spells where it says that the target should roll vs their STR is kind of hilarious when minion npcs and monsters dont have a STR to defend themselves with. It is clear that the logic of having at least basic attributes (STR, CON, AGL, INT, WIL, CHA) for them was there, but then those were not included. So either we need those stats for the minons and monsters, or we need a rewrite of the magic rules.
There is definitely an issue with the rules as written. I'd prefer to see something like a one or two generic skill value with some notes to encourage the GM to alter this up or down where it make sense to them perhaps with some examples/ suggested skill levels
 
Arioch1973
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue 30 Aug 2022, 16:45

Re: Dragonbane BETA v2 Rulebook Feedback - Chapter 7 Bestiary

Thu 12 Jan 2023, 12:36

Well, I am not against stat light minions, I guess I just have a different opinion on what bare minimum is.
Looking at spells where it says that the target should roll vs their STR is kind of hilarious when minion npcs and monsters dont have a STR to defend themselves with. It is clear that the logic of having at least basic attributes (STR, CON, AGL, INT, WIL, CHA) for them was there, but then those were not included. So either we need those stats for the minons and monsters, or we need a rewrite of the magic rules.
There is definitely an issue with the rules as written. I'd prefer to see something like a one or two generic skill value with some notes to encourage the GM to alter this up or down where it make sense to them perhaps with some examples/ suggested skill levels
The way the system is structured, skills are based of the value of attributes. So thats why I am stubborn about having at least the six basic attributes there. From that you can calculate things if needed. Its not exactly stat heavy if you list STR, CON, AGL, INT, WIL, CHA, HP, Movement, Armor, and then weapon with skill level and damage. Or just make it easy, give minions and monsters attributes like Body to represent STR, CON, AGL, and Mind to represent INT, WIL, CHA. Those two attributes would then be used when making resistance rolls etc.
 
Chekmx
Posts: 26
Joined: Tue 31 Aug 2021, 17:13

Re: Dragonbane BETA v2 Rulebook Feedback - Chapter 7 Bestiary

Thu 12 Jan 2023, 21:10

or use HP and WP and give every Minion some WP. If the value is over 20 due to Robust/Focus then they can't fail or only fail on 19-20 and its just a case of who rolls lower? (Corrected Punctuation)
Last edited by Chekmx on Fri 13 Jan 2023, 00:32, edited 1 time in total.
 
Arioch1973
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue 30 Aug 2022, 16:45

Re: Dragonbane BETA v2 Rulebook Feedback - Chapter 7 Bestiary

Thu 12 Jan 2023, 22:28

or use HP and WP and give every Minion some WP if the value is over 20 due to Robust/Focus then they can't fail or only fail on 19-20 and its just a case of who rolls lower?
Why would they only have WP if the value is over 20? as the rules are written now, it seems only the higher end of the spectrum minions have WP.

When I look through the rules, the most well written part seems to be the magic system. It has a feel of being almost done. Other aspects like the bestiary seems very much like it is a work in progress. And overall the rules feel as if it is several rule systems trying to fit together to become one. It seems incoherent, but then I guess it is Beta for a reason.
 
Faråtzonen
Posts: 388
Joined: Tue 08 Mar 2016, 18:36

Re: Dragonbane BETA v2 Rulebook Feedback - Chapter 7 Bestiary

Fri 13 Jan 2023, 17:46

Monster and NPC attributes.
I think that both monsters and npcs should be given at least attributes (STR,CON,AGL,INT, WIL, CHA). Simply because there might be situations where a player character has to make an opposed roll against them. For example, imagine a dwarf fighter challenging a minotaur to armwrestling (insane, but can happen). The player character rolls against his Strength. And the minotaur rolls against ????. Ah, no values. I guess he loses.

I definitely agree. Also the system of penalty/bonus die isn't enough to handle situation like the situation mentioned either. This is because a character that already has a penalty die (and cannot get a bonus die to cancel the penalty die out) will have equal possibility to get loose from a dragoons bite as from a dogs bite. Then it doesn't matter that the game master gives the character a penalty die to get loose from the dragons bite but not from getting loose from the dogs bite. Penalty dice doesn't stack (1 penalty die + 1 penalty die = 1 penalty die, not 2 penalty dice) therefore a character that already has one penalty die has the same probability to get away from a dragons bite as from a dogs bite. But it the dog and the dragon both had values in STR the game master could call for opposed roll between the character and the dragon (or dog). Then it would be much harder to get loose of a dragons bite than a dogs bite. My example is not taken out of the blue. A similar situation may occur in one of the scenarios that comes with the box.
I understand your argument, but the example doesn't work. The dragon uses one of its six auto-attacks, none of which are a grappling bite. The White Worm's Constrict attack offers rules for fighting against a constricting attack, which is a STR with a bane.

Meanwhile the dog has a Bite Skill of 12, thus provides a number for an opposed roll. But more likely, I'd just do a Strength check without a bane.

So what I am beginning to hear more is "As a GM, I want guidance on how to handle corner cases with opposed rolls and my first thought is more attributes or more granular bonuses."

My point is not whatever a dragon or a dog will be able to commit a bite attack. It was just an example to show that there may occur strange situations if the result only depend of the skill of the character. Instead of comparing a dragons and a dogs bite one could compare a giant and a character and a goblin and a character trying to push a rock at each other. If the strength of the character is the only value that matters then the character will have the same probability to win against the goblin as the character will have to win against the giant. My point is that the size/skill of the NPC/monster doesn't matter and that I think it is awkward.

By the way. The monster attacks have pros and cons. The monster attacks help the GM to do different types of attacks during combat but at the same time the monster attacks restrict what the monster are able to do as seen in my example. In practice a giant and a goblin cannot push a rock against a character. They don't have the skill to do it because the doesn't have "push rock" as a monster attack and they don't have any attributes or general skills that can be used to do it. The character will have the same possibility to win against a giant as against a goblin or the GM will have to decide that the character cannot do it. There will probably be a lot of situations where a monster or NPC cannot oppose the characters because the monster or NPC doesn't have either attributes or monster attacks that allow them to.
 
Von Ether
Posts: 103
Joined: Wed 31 Aug 2022, 16:09

Re: Dragonbane BETA v2 Rulebook Feedback - Chapter 7 Bestiary

Fri 13 Jan 2023, 18:20

My point is not whatever a dragon or a dog will be able to commit a bite attack. Instead of comparing a dragons and a dogs bite one could compare a giant and a character and a goblin and a character trying to push a rock at each other. If the strength of the character is the only value that matters then the character will have the same probability to win against the goblin as the character will have to win against a giant. My point is that the size/skill of the NPC/monster doesn't matter.
If you want the STR of the monster/animal to matter that is the purpose of an opposed roll, but as discussed some are requesting more guidance/stats to support opposed rolls for that very reason. A dog would have a STR or BODY of 10 and a Dragon would have a STR/Body of 16.

The implied use of bane/boon, though, is suggesting a wider "range" of use than some GMs are used to for a straight up roll. It seems that in a bite/constrict of Large monsters inflict a bane on a straight STR roll. A mundane dog would be just a straight STR roll and a cat would be a STR with a boon. That is three category of uses and perhaps some GMs want a more granular set of choices.

As an example, what about straight STR check against the bite of a tiger or a bear? A GM might think they need a penalty or bonus that is more granular between the grapple bite of a dragon (monster level challenge) and grapple bite of a (minion level NPC challenge) dog. Perhaps flat bonus like a +1 or +2? (A boon/bane is a fuzzy +5 bonus).

Or some "animals" could become mimi-monsters much like the Vampire Bat swarm to demonstrate the range of bane and boon.

I am not against more granular bonuses but I think this example helps illustrate the point better.
 
Faråtzonen
Posts: 388
Joined: Tue 08 Mar 2016, 18:36

Re: Dragonbane BETA v2 Rulebook Feedback - Chapter 7 Bestiary

Fri 13 Jan 2023, 18:58

My point is not whatever a dragon or a dog will be able to commit a bite attack. Instead of comparing a dragons and a dogs bite one could compare a giant and a character and a goblin and a character trying to push a rock at each other. If the strength of the character is the only value that matters then the character will have the same probability to win against the goblin as the character will have to win against a giant. My point is that the size/skill of the NPC/monster doesn't matter.
If you want the STR of the monster/animal to matter that is the purpose of an opposed roll, but as discussed some are requesting more guidance/stats to support opposed rolls for that very reason. A dog would have a STR or BODY of 10 and a Dragon would have a STR/Body of 16.

The implied use of bane/boon, though, is suggesting a wider "range" of use than some GMs are used to for a straight up roll. It seems that in a bite/constrict of Large monsters inflict a bane on a straight STR roll. A mundane dog would be just a straight STR roll and a cat would be a STR with a boon. That is three category of uses and perhaps some GMs want a more granular set of choices.

As an example, what about straight STR check against the bite of a tiger or a bear? A GM might think they need a penalty or bonus that is more granular between the grapple bite of a dragon (monster level challenge) and grapple bite of a (minion level NPC challenge) dog. Perhaps flat bonus like a +1 or +2? (A boon/bane is a fuzzy +5 bonus).

Or some "animals" could become mimi-monsters much like the Vampire Bat swarm to demonstrate the range of bane and boon.

I am not against more granular bonuses but I think this example helps illustrate the point better.

Yes, but the bane/boon will not have any effect if the character already has a bane or boon because banes doesn't accumulate. Neither does boons. A bane can cancel a boon out and vice versa but if the character doesn't have the possibility to cancel out a bane or a boon and already has a bane (or boon) then there is no difference between trying to win against a giant or a goblin. It is also strange that a character that already has a bane (or boon) will have the same possibility to success as a character that gets a bane (or boon) but didn't have one before when trying to do the same thing. The character that already has a bane (or boon) will suddenly become as good (or bad) as a character that hasn't got a bane (or boon) before. This will be the result if the GM only will use bane and boon as difficult level and if the banes (and boons) does not accumulate (1 bane + 1 bane = 1 bane).

I do understand that bane and boon is a simple system but maybe it's a little too simple. Maybe the NPCs and the monsters need attributes.

A boon/bane is a fuzzy +5 bonus.

Yes, it's fuzzy. The boon/bane will have different effect on a skill level at for example 5, 10 and 15. A character that has a skill level 10 will benefit more of a boon than a character that has skill level 5 and a character that has skill level of 10 will suffer more of a bane than at character that has skill level 5. The fact that a character that does already have a bane won't be affected by another bane and the difference a bane and boon does have at different skill levels may not make sense in the game world. Here are the probability graph of bonus/penalty die in D&D 5e. https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/ ... disadv.png
 
Arioch1973
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue 30 Aug 2022, 16:45

Re: Dragonbane BETA v2 Rulebook Feedback - Chapter 7 Bestiary

Fri 13 Jan 2023, 20:29

Faråtzonen: *applauds* You described it better than I could. And thanks for linking the probability curves.
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests