Don't think about it as gaming then. This was part of a world building challenge, and these creatures really add to the world. By having creature in the world a whole new avenue of sci-fi orientated story lines and perspective on story lines is accessible. Go to Comment
It reminds me slightly of the Cuthulhu mythology of the deep ones, but has a much more usable origin and some interesting concepts.
I do have to agree with Axle however, in that it feels a bit brief, and I would enjoy reading more about their culture and other unique aspects of their race. (Do they forge metals using geothermal vents?) As for the vignette, that too would be a welcome addition. Go to Comment
Actually, I am aware of the nature of the Decathros challenge but it is true that I did not start reading this sub with the Decathros association in mind. My comment was basically written from my impression that the length of this sub was what Val had intended it to be and the fact that I'm fine with it in this particular instance. But yes, I can understand why others would expect more of this sub starting their reading experience from the Decathros angle. And in general I do think that more content in a sub would be of benefit to it rather than being detriment. In this particular case, I was just judging more on the basis of author positioning, I guess. Go to Comment
Valadaar suggests that it would be fun to for make table top RPGs more video game like and about 1000 words later we have Valadaar's outline how to install a "turbo" button on your character sheet. The claim that a table top mechanic is "video game like" is often used pejoratively, but I reject such ideas as biased snobbery. If you enjoy your games to be dice driven versions of Dynasty Warriors than why shouldn't you make that happen?
I think it is easy to overlook how this would be a useful RP tool. Anything that makes a character see combat as more than hit and miss ratios expands the game world. This will force the characters to be more vested in the events around them.
Consider the following scenario:
GM: the Sith Lord Baron Hideous slices through the lifting droid KV-zero-N with his orange light saber.
Player 1: "Not Kevon! NOOOOOOOO!" I add plus 3 to rage tests.
GM: He was just a lifting droid.
Player 1: My character loved that droid.
Player 2: Yeah don't disrespect the dead, "Lets win this one for Kevon!!!!" Go to Comment
The crunchy bits seem to be the start of a new trend in the Citadel. (which I noticed began with the d20 conversion stats included in the Ysra Fulsven Vineblud sub by Axlerowes)
Personally i approve wholeheartedly of a bit of (or in this subs case) a lot of crunch in subs where appropriate, since it gives the reader a ready to use baseline from which they can easily convert things to their rule set of choice.
As far as the sub itself, laying out rage in such a clear and easy to use manner is welcome change from the rather bland versions of barbaric/bestial rage seen in most RPG's.
The table and lay out is generic enough to be easily adapted to most any setting, and one can use the table with some modification to represent the building rage of wild animals or supernatural predators as well, giving them an added threat in combat. Go to Comment
I do not think I would use this. But, I think that using this 'build up' to activate an item that players have acquired would be interesting. A sudden unexpected action that helps the party during combat could be played as an unexplained mystery or subplot. Add to it, the fact that the action might not be the same each time. Go to Comment
This is good starter advice. The content suggestions aren't bad, though as you say it's hard to set iron-clad rules for content. A first-time poster would do well to follow this advice.
I'm almost taking the "Self-named Characters" issue as a challenge, since Dozus was one of my first fantasy RP character, but on further review I remember he's a Drizzt clone and better left unspoken of. Go to Comment