• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7
 
zcthu3
Posts: 121
Joined: Wed 29 May 2019, 10:34

Re: Dragonbane Beta v3 Rulebook Feedback - Chapter 7 Bestiary

Tue 07 Feb 2023, 11:24

I have just spent about an hour going through the monster NPCs, common animals, and NPCs trying to systematically back calculate all their attributes, mainly to see how difficult it would be.

This wasn’t too hard for NPC monsters like orcs, or the NPCs as there are damage bonuses (for STR/AGL), HP for CON and, where given, WP for WIL. Where there were listed skills not covered by the above, I used the lowest ‘trained’ skill and halved it to get an untrained value if it would be above 5, and from that an attribute - this was useful for trying to calculate INT for NPCs like the scholar and Archmage (in both cases it would give them a 13 in INT) where a 9 just seemed too low. In all other cases I defaulted to 9 for the attribute based on the default skill of 5.

In practice, the most difficult part of the exercise was actually trying to back-calculate scores for common animals as there are no damage bonuses with which to calculate STR or AGL. In the end I just used HP as an equivalent for STR and CON on the basis it is a rough estimate of overall robustness (which gives a bear a STR of 20, so only failing a STR roll on a 20, a Moose one of 18, a Horse one of 16, and a cat one of 4). I also used half lowest trained skill level if it would result in a default skill level above a 5 for other attributes (which gives cats a 16 AGL which seems about right - 9 seemed too low).

I am comfortable now that it can be done, but I am even more convinced it would be better to just have attribute scores as there is a lot of assumptions when trying to sort out what someone needs to roll to resist effects / opposed attribute rolls, particularly for the common animals (like a horse subject to an Entangle spell).
 
User avatar
Short Fey
Posts: 398
Joined: Sat 03 Dec 2022, 14:45

Re: Dragonbane Beta v3 Rulebook Feedback - Chapter 7 Bestiary

Tue 07 Feb 2023, 11:36

I have just spent about an hour going through the monster NPCs, common animals, and NPCs trying to systematically back calculate all their attributes, mainly to see how difficult it would be.

This wasn’t too hard for NPC monsters like orcs, or the NPCs as there are damage bonuses (for STR/AGL), HP for CON and, where given, WP for WIL. Where there were listed skills not covered by the above, I used the lowest ‘trained’ skill and halved it to get an untrained value if it would be above 5, and from that an attribute - this was useful for trying to calculate INT for NPCs like the scholar and Archmage (in both cases it would give them a 13 in INT) where a 9 just seemed too low. In all other cases I defaulted to 9 for the attribute based on the default skill of 5.

In practice, the most difficult part of the exercise was actually trying to back-calculate scores for common animals as there are no damage bonuses with which to calculate STR or AGL. In the end I just used HP as an equivalent for STR and CON on the basis it is a rough estimate of overall robustness (which gives a bear a STR of 20, so only failing a STR roll on a 20, a Moose one of 18, a Horse one of 16, and a cat one of 4). I also used half lowest trained skill level if it would result in a default skill level above a 5 for other attributes (which gives cats a 16 AGL which seems about right - 9 seemed too low).

I am comfortable now that it can be done, but I am even more convinced it would be better to just have attribute scores as there is a lot of assumptions when trying to sort out what someone needs to roll to resist effects / opposed attribute rolls, particularly for the common animals (like a horse subject to an Entangle spell).
All skills cap at 18, you can not have higher than that.

Atm i'm just going "if nothing is listed that can be used to calculate attributes, default to a value of 9", considering the base skill chance for npcs on untrained skills is a 5.

It gives the players a slightly better chance to succeed (55%) but it gives especially mages reasons to spend more wp on spells that requires the target to make a roll.
Beware the fey!
 
zcthu3
Posts: 121
Joined: Wed 29 May 2019, 10:34

Re: Dragonbane Beta v3 Rulebook Feedback - Chapter 7 Bestiary

Tue 07 Feb 2023, 20:00

I have just spent about an hour going through the monster NPCs, common animals, and NPCs trying to systematically back calculate all their attributes, mainly to see how difficult it would be.

This wasn’t too hard for NPC monsters like orcs, or the NPCs as there are damage bonuses (for STR/AGL), HP for CON and, where given, WP for WIL. Where there were listed skills not covered by the above, I used the lowest ‘trained’ skill and halved it to get an untrained value if it would be above 5, and from that an attribute - this was useful for trying to calculate INT for NPCs like the scholar and Archmage (in both cases it would give them a 13 in INT) where a 9 just seemed too low. In all other cases I defaulted to 9 for the attribute based on the default skill of 5.

In practice, the most difficult part of the exercise was actually trying to back-calculate scores for common animals as there are no damage bonuses with which to calculate STR or AGL. In the end I just used HP as an equivalent for STR and CON on the basis it is a rough estimate of overall robustness (which gives a bear a STR of 20, so only failing a STR roll on a 20, a Moose one of 18, a Horse one of 16, and a cat one of 4). I also used half lowest trained skill level if it would result in a default skill level above a 5 for other attributes (which gives cats a 16 AGL which seems about right - 9 seemed too low).

I am comfortable now that it can be done, but I am even more convinced it would be better to just have attribute scores as there is a lot of assumptions when trying to sort out what someone needs to roll to resist effects / opposed attribute rolls, particularly for the common animals (like a horse subject to an Entangle spell).
All skills cap at 18, you can not have higher than that.

Atm i'm just going "if nothing is listed that can be used to calculate attributes, default to a value of 9", considering the base skill chance for npcs on untrained skills is a 5.

It gives the players a slightly better chance to succeed (55%) but it gives especially mages reasons to spend more wp on spells that requires the target to make a roll.
Being pedantic I didn’t have a skill greater than 18 - the bear’s HP indicate its CON attribute is 20 and I treated its STR the same - and while that is above the PC level it is probably reflective of a bear’s relative toughness and STR. In keeping with the you ‘can’t have higher than an 18’ however, it would fail a resistance roll on a 19-20.

The problem with just defaulting to a 9 where there is no obvious way of calculating an attribute (as is the case with most of the common animals) is that it can create nonsense situations. For example, something clearly stronger than an average strength PC/NPC (eg a bear) has the same chance of succeeding on a roll to break free of an Entangling spell than a creature which is clearly weaker in terms of what STR represents. Just assuming a 9 means the bear has the same chance as a goblin, which just seems weird and could easily be resolved by providing the attributes.
 
User avatar
Short Fey
Posts: 398
Joined: Sat 03 Dec 2022, 14:45

Re: Dragonbane Beta v3 Rulebook Feedback - Chapter 7 Bestiary

Tue 07 Feb 2023, 20:16

I have just spent about an hour going through the monster NPCs, common animals, and NPCs trying to systematically back calculate all their attributes, mainly to see how difficult it would be.

This wasn’t too hard for NPC monsters like orcs, or the NPCs as there are damage bonuses (for STR/AGL), HP for CON and, where given, WP for WIL. Where there were listed skills not covered by the above, I used the lowest ‘trained’ skill and halved it to get an untrained value if it would be above 5, and from that an attribute - this was useful for trying to calculate INT for NPCs like the scholar and Archmage (in both cases it would give them a 13 in INT) where a 9 just seemed too low. In all other cases I defaulted to 9 for the attribute based on the default skill of 5.

In practice, the most difficult part of the exercise was actually trying to back-calculate scores for common animals as there are no damage bonuses with which to calculate STR or AGL. In the end I just used HP as an equivalent for STR and CON on the basis it is a rough estimate of overall robustness (which gives a bear a STR of 20, so only failing a STR roll on a 20, a Moose one of 18, a Horse one of 16, and a cat one of 4). I also used half lowest trained skill level if it would result in a default skill level above a 5 for other attributes (which gives cats a 16 AGL which seems about right - 9 seemed too low).

I am comfortable now that it can be done, but I am even more convinced it would be better to just have attribute scores as there is a lot of assumptions when trying to sort out what someone needs to roll to resist effects / opposed attribute rolls, particularly for the common animals (like a horse subject to an Entangle spell).
All skills cap at 18, you can not have higher than that.

Atm i'm just going "if nothing is listed that can be used to calculate attributes, default to a value of 9", considering the base skill chance for npcs on untrained skills is a 5.

It gives the players a slightly better chance to succeed (55%) but it gives especially mages reasons to spend more wp on spells that requires the target to make a roll.
Being pedantic I didn’t have a skill greater than 18 - the bear’s HP indicate its CON attribute is 20 and I treated its STR the same - and while that is above the PC level it is probably reflective of a bear’s relative toughness and STR. In keeping with the you ‘can’t have higher than an 18’ however, it would fail a resistance roll on a 19-20.

The problem with just defaulting to a 9 where there is no obvious way of calculating an attribute (as is the case with most of the common animals) is that it can create nonsense situations. For example, something clearly stronger than an average strength PC/NPC (eg a bear) has the same chance of succeeding on a roll to break free of an Entangling spell than a creature which is clearly weaker in terms of what STR represents. Just assuming a 9 means the bear has the same chance as a goblin, which just seems weird and could easily be resolved by providing the attributes.
Meant attribute, sorry! But it is still a point they can't be higher than 18, so it would in this case be better to just set it to 18 instead to say "It's a twenty, but they fail if they roll 19/20"

But while a fair point, i think that could in that case be easily fixed by just giving the bear, or other stronger animals, a damage bonus die. You give the idea that the animal is stronger than other animals, and the system still works.
Beware the fey!
 
User avatar
Mcgibs
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun 29 Jan 2023, 01:22

Re: Dragonbane Beta v3 Rulebook Feedback - Chapter 7 Bestiary

Tue 07 Feb 2023, 21:36

I would also hand out Boons/Banes to things that are exceptionally high or low stated, and keep the cap of 18 on attributes just so it still works within the D20 system.
 
User avatar
Short Fey
Posts: 398
Joined: Sat 03 Dec 2022, 14:45

Re: Dragonbane Beta v3 Rulebook Feedback - Chapter 7 Bestiary

Tue 07 Feb 2023, 21:42

Sense we are on the subject, i think letting common animals have STR damage bonus dice makes sense, so here is a suggestion on what they can have.

D4: Wild Boar, Donkey
D6: Horse, Moose, Bear.

Edit: I chose specifically these ones because i think an animal having a Damage Bonus Die should be a bit restrictive to represent the animals in general strength. Wolves and dogs could also have them but i think they have other benefits hence why i excluded them.
Beware the fey!
 
Arioch1973
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue 30 Aug 2022, 16:45

Re: Dragonbane Beta v3 Rulebook Feedback - Chapter 7 Bestiary

Wed 08 Feb 2023, 01:25

All skills cap at 18, you can not have higher than that.

Atm i'm just going "if nothing is listed that can be used to calculate attributes, default to a value of 9", considering the base skill chance for npcs on untrained skills is a 5.

It gives the players a slightly better chance to succeed (55%) but it gives especially mages reasons to spend more wp on spells that requires the target to make a roll.

Skills cap at 18. But skills and attributes are two very different things in the system. It would not at all be strange for a bear to have a STR of 20, or 30, or even 42. Its skills will still max out at 18.
 
User avatar
Short Fey
Posts: 398
Joined: Sat 03 Dec 2022, 14:45

Re: Dragonbane Beta v3 Rulebook Feedback - Chapter 7 Bestiary

Wed 08 Feb 2023, 01:33

All skills cap at 18, you can not have higher than that.

Atm i'm just going "if nothing is listed that can be used to calculate attributes, default to a value of 9", considering the base skill chance for npcs on untrained skills is a 5.

It gives the players a slightly better chance to succeed (55%) but it gives especially mages reasons to spend more wp on spells that requires the target to make a roll.

Skills cap at 18. But skills and attributes are two very different things in the system. It would not at all be strange for a bear to have a STR of 20, or 30, or even 42. Its skills will still max out at 18.
Page 24

"Note that you can never have more than 18 in an attribute, regardless of your age"
Beware the fey!
 
Ravencloak
Posts: 27
Joined: Sat 31 Dec 2022, 21:31

Re: Dragonbane Beta v3 Rulebook Feedback - Chapter 7 Bestiary

Wed 08 Feb 2023, 04:17

All skills cap at 18, you can not have higher than that.

Atm i'm just going "if nothing is listed that can be used to calculate attributes, default to a value of 9", considering the base skill chance for npcs on untrained skills is a 5.

It gives the players a slightly better chance to succeed (55%) but it gives especially mages reasons to spend more wp on spells that requires the target to make a roll.

Skills cap at 18. But skills and attributes are two very different things in the system. It would not at all be strange for a bear to have a STR of 20, or 30, or even 42. Its skills will still max out at 18.
Page 24

"Note that you can never have more than 18 in an attribute, regardless of your age"
That rule applies to player characters. I would never apply that rule to monsters. It would be ridiculous (if we were actually providing stats for monsters) to cap a giant's or dragon's strength at 18 the same as a player character.
 
zcthu3
Posts: 121
Joined: Wed 29 May 2019, 10:34

Re: Dragonbane Beta v3 Rulebook Feedback - Chapter 7 Bestiary

Wed 08 Feb 2023, 06:04



All skills cap at 18, you can not have higher than that.

Atm i'm just going "if nothing is listed that can be used to calculate attributes, default to a value of 9", considering the base skill chance for npcs on untrained skills is a 5.

It gives the players a slightly better chance to succeed (55%) but it gives especially mages reasons to spend more wp on spells that requires the target to make a roll.
Being pedantic I didn’t have a skill greater than 18 - the bear’s HP indicate its CON attribute is 20 and I treated its STR the same - and while that is above the PC level it is probably reflective of a bear’s relative toughness and STR. In keeping with the you ‘can’t have higher than an 18’ however, it would fail a resistance roll on a 19-20.

The problem with just defaulting to a 9 where there is no obvious way of calculating an attribute (as is the case with most of the common animals) is that it can create nonsense situations. For example, something clearly stronger than an average strength PC/NPC (eg a bear) has the same chance of succeeding on a roll to break free of an Entangling spell than a creature which is clearly weaker in terms of what STR represents. Just assuming a 9 means the bear has the same chance as a goblin, which just seems weird and could easily be resolved by providing the attributes.
Meant attribute, sorry! But it is still a point they can't be higher than 18, so it would in this case be better to just set it to 18 instead to say "It's a twenty, but they fail if they roll 19/20"

But while a fair point, i think that could in that case be easily fixed by just giving the bear, or other stronger animals, a damage bonus die. You give the idea that the animal is stronger than other animals, and the system still works.
Page 24 states that PCs can’t have an attribute greater than 18 but there’s nothing to say animals (or NPCs for that matter) can’t. It actually makes sense that some creatures (bears, dragons etc) might well have attributes greater than 18 and other systems that have an ancestry in BRP, including ones like Pendragon which also uses a d20 instead of a d100, quite clearly have creatures with attributes greater than 20. That’s part of the problem with not listing attributes for NPCs and creatures - while some creatures, like bears, would clearly be stronger than most PC races, we have no way of determining how much stronger as the system doesn’t give us that information, and doesn’t provide guidance on how to resolve situations where that might be relevant. TBF, Dragonbane partially solves that problem by having true monsters which would have high attributes (like dragons) immune to some effects (some spells, poisons), but it doesn’t address opposed rolls (what happens when the burly STR 18 knight is challenged by a Minotaur to a contest of STR? Minotaurs are clearly strong, but how strong?) or resistance rolls for the common animals, assuming they act more like NPCs then true monsters - they roll attacks like NPCs and presumably could be affected by magic spells like Entangle?

TBH, my solution would be to allow animals/monsters to have an attribute greater than 18 and give them a bonus die on any opposed or resistance roll, plus an extra bonus die for every extra 10 points above 18, noting that they still fail on a 19-20. That of course means having an understanding of how much more powerful they are which pretty much requires attributes.

Edit: the conversation clearly went on without me, but I agree with Ravencloak.
Last edited by zcthu3 on Wed 08 Feb 2023, 06:07, edited 2 times in total.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests