>wake up
>see previous thread reached bump limit and got bumped off the boards minutes before I woke up
>about half the posts are touhofag, the other half is some autist unable to grasp the basic concept of player having the responsibility to make characters that aren't just a collection of disjointed mechanics
>so basically /tg/ as usual
Well then! Last thread was a disaster, so I'm trying again, putting a bit more effort into OP.
Strike! is a setting agnostic RPG that was built to deliver 4e-like tactical combat along with light-weight, narrative focused non-combat mechanics. The CRB has built in support for some genres/settings (s&s fantasy, Avatar, Star Wars) and guides/systems for running games with different focus, like political intrigue, war between nations, post-apoc, etc. Because of its modular nature and huge number of optional sub-systems, it's very easy to customize a game to your liking.
However, all that is basically the gravy; the meat and bones of the game is the combat side of things. Strike! characters at creation choose a Class (Necromancer, Duelist, Archer, Martial Artist, Warlord,Magician, Bombardier, Shapechanger, Summoner, Buddies and Simple) and a Role (Blaster, Controller, Defender, Leader, Striker). Class defines how you approach combat, giving you your basic powers to use (Duelist focuses on harassing one guy, Archers spray an area with ranged attacks, etc.), while Roles give your boosts to your class powers and a "role action" you can use every turn; the Blaster role for example makes all your attacks hit an AoE and can create difficult terrain as a role action, while Striker gives all your powers extra damage and more mobility/precision as a role action.
>>44191842
This basically means that there are the equivalent of 50 class combinations to begin with, and many classes/roles have further specializations, each having multiple powers to pick from as they level up, and also class paths that also put a spin on how the class plays (such as shapechanger picking 3 shapes from his list, leading to radically different combinations within the class). It's really quite diverse, but also kept very simple.
Combat itself is heavily tactical, making use of positioning with opportunities, special terrains and a cover system, with optional rules to increase the complexity (and lethality) further if required.
As for the future of the game, the Rogue class is coming (probably has some positioning/flanking and mobility/stealth based effects) along with a vehicle supplement. Last thread there was a bit of a discussion about homebrewing additional paths for some classes as well.
Guess I'll just post player aids to bump.
I backed this.
Never ran a game before, and this looks like a nice place to start. Got link to previous thread, by any chance?
>>44194790
>>44150002
Should be it.
I ran one game, and if I can persuade my stable group I'll be running it for a campaign.
>>44194899
Thanks.
Man, I'm starting to think even shitposting is better than a general that never gets off the ground.
One more, then I'll have to actually start talking about homebrew to myself.
Does anyone play this and how can I make a character if they do?
>>44199699
Well, judging from the last thread, at least 4 peoplethat is as many as 4 ones!on /tg/ at least played it once.
I can walk you through character creation if you'd like. It only takes a few minutes. Having the PDF helps. It was posted last thread.
>>44199887
I can't seem to get it in the short time between your post and mine, so would you mind explaining the basics?
>>44200024
Alright, character creation is divided into 2 sections. 1 for out of combat, 1 for in-combat. Each takes 3 steps.
For out of combat, you need to determine your character's skills, tricks and complications.
First step here is determining your background. The GM may supply you with a list, or you may make your own following the guide in pic related.
>>44200184
Second step is picking your character's Origin (again, either from a GM supplied list, or by making your own with GM approval), and writing it down. Depending on setting, Origin can be a Race (elf, dwarf, human) nationality, upbringing, anything really.
pic related has some example origins. The next page has elves, dwarves and such.
You pick 2 skills and a complication from the origin.
Critical anon here, I was the main one complaining about the game in the last thread. I just wanted to say something and then I'll be out of your hair for good.
I don't like Strike!. I think it's shit. The game has a lot of bad design choices, in my opinion, and the layout is incredibly terrible. It's overcomplicated where it needs to be simple, and it's oversimplified where it needs more depth. Did I mention that it's a technicolour nightmare that makes my eyes water? Well, anyway, I'm not going to complain about Strike! any more because it's not a productive use of my time, and nobody's getting anything out of reading those comments either.
I honestly and sincerely hope that the designer improves the game, but hey, if you guys like it then more power to you. I feel like my negativity might have dampened your feelings towards the game, and that's really not what I intended. You enjoy playing this game and I don't want to take that from you, even if my intentions are good.
So, yeah. Have fun, and if you have problems with the game in any way, send it to the creator. Maybe he'll fix it, maybe he won't, but I know that if this was my game, I'd want as much feedback as possible, ESPECIALLY the criticisms. Without those we just don't improve as creators.
>>44200184
I'm going to use a character I'm using in another system here.
>Wealth +1
>Connections Skill: Military Rank
>Primary Skill: Medieval Combat
>Secondary Skill: Strategy
>Social Skill: Rapport/Persuasion
>Background Skill: History/Current Events
>Trick: (Character) can always discern one major detail about an enemy through analysis.
>>44200302
>Origin: Nomadic Tribe
>Skills: Horseback riding, Endurance
>Complication: Barbaric.
>>44200302
Finally, you pick an extra skill, trick and complication as extra. You may also get a Kit and pick an advance. Many settings can have kits built in (for example, Star Wars would have a force user kit) that give you special abilities.
And you are done with out of combat.
>>44200466
I see Advances but no Kits.
>>44191856
I am on the development team (granted, the author does 90% of the work and then shows it to the "development team" for feedback and ideas), so I have received an opportunity to look at the rogue class and offer my own ideas.
The rogue class is currently a basic attack-based class themed after the rogue (thief) from D&D 4e Essentials. Its at-will powers are move actions, and its encounter powers offer the choice between standard actions and move actions.
There are currently two builds for the rogue: the Poisoner, who constantly builds up ongoing damage against a single enemy (or multiple enemies as a blaster), and the Backstabber, who wants to gain Advantage on an attacks as often as possible because it deals a whopping 4 extra damage on a 6, improving to 7 at level 5 and 10 at level 9.
All rogues also have the "Edge" class feature, which gives them an "Edge" token whenever they miss or roll a 6 on an attack. An Edge token can be cashed in for all kinds of rerolls.
I will give my standard disclaimer for these threads, however: speaking as someone whose name is listed under "development" under the credits, and as someone who has GMed Strike! for several months, I can say with certainty that the noncombat mechanics of this game are *dreadful*.
The noncombat mechanics are deeply unintuitive, the probabilities are extremely punishing to players (due to how a success is supposed to be worth "1" while a twist is supposed to be worth "-1"), extreme results are disturbingly common due to the nature of the d6, there are very few options for granularity with difficulty, skill growth is bizarre, and so on and so forth.
This is a game to be played for its rich and finely-crafted grid-based tactical combat, *not* for its noncombat mechanics. That said, I am quite familiar with the noncombat mechanics and will be happy to clarify them.
I have the vehicle supplement but cannot share it. Ask someone other than a developer. It does contain several remixed roles.
Are these Strike! shilling threads gonna become a daily occurrence?
>>44200539
The kits are on the next few pages.
If I got the feel of your character right, I'd recommend pic related.
Also, so far it's looking good. Medieval combat and strategy are probably a bit too broad, but still acceptable.
>>44200613
Only if they catch on. I'm willing to give it 3 tries.
I mean, the last one was full of shitposting, but that's still discussion to some extent.
>I can say with certainty that the noncombat mechanics of this game are *dreadful*.
In my opinion they are merely "eh". They fill their role well, and some parts, like team challenges, I actually really like.
>>44200619
This is all before you pick a combat class?
Jesus Christ.
I mean, I know the idea is to give people options, but I see a lot of ribbons here that don't need to be given mechanics.
>>44200666
I do not think the noncombat mechanics fulfill their purpose well.
As I have stated in the previous thread, all six of the players I have GMed for in various Strike! games have unanimously agreed that the probabilities for noncombat rolls are heavily biased against the player (the book outright says that if a success is worth "1," a twist should be worth "-1," so players are afraid to make rolls because of the harsh consequences for rolling low), and that noncombat rolls cause extreme results much too often (there is a 16.666% chance of critical success and a 16.666% chance of critical failure by default).
The 2d6 noncombat book is hardly satisfactory either, because, puzzlingly enough, it seems to think that success with a cost (worth "0.333" according to the back of the book) is equal in value to a twist (worth "-1"), which grievously undermines the 2d6 variant's math.
Team conflicts have very tight mechanics behind them, but selling them to players has been very difficult because the mechanics behind them are really quite disconnected from what is actually going on in the scene; it takes a great deal of abstraction to fit everything into the model of advance, defense, roll-offs, and so on.
Team conflicts would perhaps work better as a dedicated minigame for something like hacking or ritual-working; in the latter case, advance could be "yang" and defense could be "yin," and the various actions could be flourishes the characters perform to enact the ritual.
>>44200753
I strongly, strongly believe that tricks (and fallbacks) should have been discarded and that a greater emphasis should have been placed on kit advances, which would have been a much more interesting avenue for signature abilities and ways to spend action points.
>>44200753
It's optional for a reason.
Anyway, once that's done, creating the combat side is a breeze.
You pick a class (Necromancer, Duelist, Archer, Martial Artist, Warlord,Magician, Bombardier, Shapechanger, Summoner, Buddies and Simple)
and a role (Blaster, Controller, Defender, Leader, Striker), if there's any 1st level decisions (mostly power choices), make them, then a feat, and you are done.
Classes are meant to be refluffable, so your military strategist guy could be just about any class with a Leader role.
>>44200815
Warlord Leader.
What does that mean I'll be doing- buffs, manipulating the battlefield, debuffs, extra attacks?
>>44200815
"Simple" is not supposed to be a class option. "Simple" is strictly, strictly meant only for games wherein *all* characters are "simple" characters.
At some point during the development of the game, all classes were much weaker than they were before, and "simple" characters were roughly on par with characters with actual classes. However, the actual classes were gradually increased in power until they greatly outshone "simple" characters.
Mr. McGarva did not think it was worth his time to shore up the "simple" characters in light of this, because they were never meant to be played alongside characters with true classes anyway.
No, the encounter-building guidelines do not take this into account.
The book claims that "the balance should be roughly appropriate," but that is a lie. I have in my Skype logs a statement from Mr. McGarva that yes, "simple" characters are, in fact, weaker than regular characters, and that he never bothered changing this or their description.
>>44200849
Dangit, I just finished the class list! will post the warlord and the leader page in the next post.
>>44200939
Okay, that's good info, thanks.
Do you think them getting double the bonus damage for effect would make up for that? Effects always seemed like they are worth about 2 HP at least anyway.
>>44200849
And here you go.
>>44201047
I'd recommend taking Incisive as your class feature, since that one gives you bonuses for knowing stuff about the enemy. Leader also has Encounter role actions mostly, so you can use your Asses (which is a Role action) more freely than other roles can.
I recommend Enumerate weakness and Knock him off balance as your at-wills. Could pick any of the encounters.
>>44201047
I like it.
There are more powers, right? This isn't it?
I can pick them later, but this does indeed seem like the class/style of choice for this character.
In terms of skills, I would probably switch Strategy to Strategy (Personal Engagement) and Medieval Combat to (Hand-To-Hand Medieval Martial Weapons)
>>44201190
This is your character progression from 1-10, so there's not much space to fill in more. You can get more powers/options through feats, equipment, etc, but from class and role, that's it.
>>44201230
Man, it seems like kits get more material than either classes or roles.
It seems interesting enough, and thanks for explaining it, but unless there are other people willing to play, I'm not sure how much good continuing is going to do other than providing archival reference for other people who want to learn about the game.
>>44201047
>Do you think them getting double the bonus damage for effect would make up for that?
No. Give "Simple" characters a bonus feat at levels 1 and 5. Feats are quite powerful in Strike!, so this is a major upgrade.
>Effects always seemed like they are worth about 2 HP at least anyway.
The general design *intent* was for attack powers to have effects worth about...
At-will attack: Tier 1.5 to 2
Level 1 or 3 encounter attack: Tier 3-4
Level 7 encounter attack: Tier 5-6
Magician encounter spell: Tier 4-5
Magician major spell: Tier 7-8
There are some outliers here, of course; I brought up that the archer's Leg Shot, for example, has a tier 6 effect, and that it should probably be a level 7 encounter power instead. Mr. McGarva had agreed, but since the game was already released, it was too late.
The reason why the progression of effects works this way is because any direct damage past 2 is increasingly more vicious, because it stands a greater and greater chance of taking out a combatant. Thus:
1 direct damage = tier 1 effect
2 direct damage = tier 2 effect
3 direct damage = tier 3-4 effect
4 direct damage = tier 5-6 effect
5 direct damage = tier 7-8 effect
This is why powers hardly ever hand out direct damage as part of an effect: a power that effectively says "damage: 2, effect: 2 extra damage" is much stronger than a power that says "damage: 2, effect: tier 2 effect."
This is why the Striker and Sniper generic monster templates are deceptively brutal against PCs, especially in goon form. They could have stood to be toned down.
>>44201308
Well, you can kinda just bullshit advances, while combat stuff is actually made with attention. Obviously there's a lot of space to grow to, but for a core rulebook it covers a LOT of ground. I will probably allow players to multiclass and pick powers from other classes through special equipment/training/feats to mix and match and shake things up a little if.
Also, if nothing else it prompted me to make those images. Thanks for participating.
>>44201363
Thank you for that table. It is quite useful.
>>44201440
>I will probably allow players to multiclass and pick powers from other classes through special equipment/training/feats to mix and match and shake things up a little if.
The rewrite of Strike! I am working on is much more freeform when it comes to power selection, allowing characters of any class to pick any attack powers, and characters of any role to pick any role powers.
Of course, I have had to implement many limitations and restrictions here, such as designating certain powers as exclusive to a single class.I will also be branding the rewrite as "Magical Anime SRPG: A Game of Fantastical Powers and Grid-Based Teamwork," because let us face it, that is the kind of game Strike! is most apt at emulating. It is not even especially XCOM like, despite the cover system.
>>44201619
>Rebranding a system someone else made
Are you normally like this, or does it take practice?
Also, I think you contradicted yourself in your statement.
>allowing characters of any class to pick any attack powers, and characters of any role to pick any role powers.
>designating certain powers as exclusive to a single class.
>>44201619
I'm probably just going to go ahead and say that any equipment worth talking about as special (i.e. magic items in a S&S setting) are just going to give feats, and then you can multiclass for a feat.I'm probably going to run either a Bloodborne or a Star Wars campaign in it, so not sure it's Magical Anime only. Also, would totally run an XCOM game with a bit more fantastic tech on the human side; not that there aren't machete wielding badasses in the new one already anyway.
>>44201787
Not him but
>Are you normally like this, or does it take practice?
Originality is overrated, especially if you actually tweak enough stuff.
>Also, I think you contradicted yourself in your statement.
It makes sense. Many powers simply wouldn't work with other classes (see warlord pure support powers), and certain combinations may be broken. Also, for example magician powers are balanced around not always being available, so for other classes they'd be worth more than their own powers.
>>44201874
There's a difference between imitating a system and straight up rearranging an existing rulebook for your personal use and then passing it off.
I understand why you would want powers to be modular, I really do, but you can't just say, "This is mine now" and be done with it.
It reminds me of how Pathfinder is Dungeons and dragons 3.5 OC donut steel.
>>44201787
>Are you normally like this, or does it take practice?
Fate was a rebranding of Fudge by a third party, Powered by the Apocalypse has spawned many a third-party rebrandings as well, retroclones of various D&D editions are a dime a dozen, and Strike! itself is a retroclone of D&D 4e.
>Also, I think you contradicted yourself in your statement.
Players will be given free rein with power choices except when a power has selection restrictions.
>>44201976
I am also rewriting the entire noncombat side of the game, as I have mentioned in previous posts.
The RPG industry is built on iterations and the sentiment of "I think I could do better."
>>44202111
>I am also rewriting the entire noncombat side of the game, as I have mentioned in previous posts.
>The RPG industry is built on iterations and the sentiment of "I think I could do better."
The key point here is that it is in fact an iteration- something is added that differentiates it in a meaningful way from its predecessor.
If you have the social rules changed, new things added, a complete overhaul, fine. I haven't seen it, nor do I honestly think it will ever be published in a meaningful way. I have my own personal pet projects that will never see the light of day, which is why I say this.
If I sound fucking mettled, it's because I've seen too much shit that passes itself off as the next big thing but does nothing new or novel or good.I'm looking at you, fucking SW d20.
>>44202111
Do you think you could do a version of it that either uses dice pools or dice bigger than d6s?
I had to come into my workplace 2 hours early but apparently I'm not needed for 2 hours anyway. So I got time to waste. Awesome.
I think I'll waste it by creating an Aura based bard/paladin type of guy.
>The Bard
>Taking center stage
Bards use auras to buff allies and hinder foes, that they can change at the drop of a hat to fit the situation. They can be the adhesive that binds the group together, giving out effects that the group is missing, but at the same time, bunching together makes the group an easy target for AoE attacks; good positioning is key.
Auras affect the originator, and all creatures adjacent to it. Auras last until the beginning of your next turn.
At 1st level, choose one of the following:
Inspiration: When you activate an aura, it originates from you.
Praise: When you activate an aura, it originates from an ally within 5 squares of you.
Mockery: When you activate an aura, it originates from the enemy you targeted with your ability.
Choose 2 At-Wills from the list:
Harmonious strike: melee 2dmg
Effect: activate an aura
Dance like a bee: -
Special: Shift 3 squares, then activate an aura. You can only target a creature with Mockery who is adjacent to you during this movement.
Booming Voice: range 5 dmg 2
Effect: Activate an aura.
Choose 2 Auras from this list:
Aura of hope: Allies starting their turn in, or entering the aura may roll a saving throw.
Aura of despair: Enemies in the aura roll saving throws with disdvantage
Aura of protection: Allies in the aura ignore marks.
Aura of punishment: Enemies in the aura are marked by whoever is closest to them from your group.
Aura of speed: Allies who start their turn in, or enter the aura gain +3 to their speed.
Aura of slow: Enemies who start their turn in, or enter the aura are slowed.
Burning aura: Enemies who start their turn in, or enter the aura take 1 damage.
Shielding aura: Allies who start their turn in, or enter the aura get 1 buffer.
>>44191842
>>44191856
So this is what Munchkin would be like if it was a full RPG? Just pick up a class/role combo and play? Sounds fun.
>>44204734
Weakness aura: Enemies in the aura gain vulnerable 1 to all damage.
Shielding aura: Allies in the aura gain resistance 1 to all damage.
Choose 1 encounter power from this list:
Versatile performance: M/R5 3dmg
Special: Activate an aura
Effect: Activate an aura
Thunderous performance: M/R5 3dmg
Special: Activate an aura
Effect: Slide everyone in the aura 1 square
Personal performance: M/R5 3dmg
Special: Activate an aura
Effect: The aura persists on the originator until the end of combat, or until he is taken out.
>>44204776
You pick classes/races in munchkin?
>>44202380
I understand.
>>44204277
The current plan is to use 1d12 as a base, with a 2d6 variant.
>>44204734
>>44204856
You have a very good basis for a class here. It is praiseworthy work.
The bard could stand to choose two from Inspiration, Praise, or Mockery. That should make for a more mix-and-match dynamic together with the at-will powers and the auras, and would line up with the Bombardier's starting array of two shapes, two at-will methods, and two at-will ammunition types.
Dance Like a Bee could use an improvement; losing out on Role Boost hurts a fair bit, and it could stand to automatically trigger a character's Role Boost in the vein of the Magician's the Excellent Prismatic Spray.
Aura of Hope and Aura of Despair should be revised and replaced with something else; manipulating saving throws like that is definitely a higher-tier effect than everything else you have for an aura.
Aura of Protection is too situational and applies only against specific types of enemies.
Aura of Punishment needs clearer wording on how it actually works.
Your encounter powers should avoid mixing automatic effects with regular effect lines. Try removing the "special" lines and instead having each effect line be "Effect: Activate an aura, and [rest of effect that makes the overall effect amount to tier 3-4]."
You also need clearer rules on how this class would interact with the Blaster role.
>>44205075
>>44205075
Hope could roll at the beginning of the turn and despair I think isn't bad because they can just not stand into the aura; it only works if they are there on the end of their turn still.
Protection: should probably stop all opportunities (or maybe the first opportunity provoked by the action?) from happening, Punishment probably should just provoke from the origin.
Could possibly set auras up like MA stances, with 3 levels, and put current hope/despair at a later level. Plus then I can just copy the MA encounter power as well so I don't need to come up with more effects, just auras. Which is good because I'm kindof at a loss as to what to put there.
I was thinking I'd mix up the risk-reward with guaranteed aura activation on encounters, but I guess it really does make more sense to activate auras on effect instead (and possibly have one effect that doesn't activate an aura instead doing something else like MA's double attacks).
Maybe just copy the bombardier and extend the aura by 1 for blaster? I felt that the guranteed aura+flank from Dance would be worthwhile, and I'm not sure how to apply some role boosts to it.
Hmm.. could possibly introduce "flow"; you gain 1 flow for each turn you have an aura active, and lose 1 when you don't have an aura active; you could "cash in" on your flow with your encounter powers. Auras themselves are a bit plain, so this could spice the class up a bit.
>>44205466
Flow does not seem like a worthwhile mechanic since that would mostly be out of the player's control.
Dance Like a Bee could perhaps apply your role boost as if you rolled a 5, although if something must apply to an enemy, you need to have been adjacent to the enemy at any point during the shift.
It is a good idea to try to pattern the auras on the martial artist's stance progression. You could even call this a "hybrid class" between the bombardier and the martial artist.
>>44205483
"here, let's hybrid a blaster/controller and a striker/defender to get a leader"
Heh, fun idea. Anyway, thanks for the feedback, I'll sleep on it.
>>44191842
If you want to have regular Strike! threads then it needs better starter images. Ones that are recognisable in the catalogue, ideally.
Unfortunately quality visuals has never been a hallmark of this project.
>>44204776
It has its problems but it's a better game than Munchkin. I mean give it some credit.
>>44208126
I was actually willing to donate several of the art pieces that I legally owned to Mr. McGarva, but they were turned down, presumably due to being "too anime."
>>44204734
I like this. I like it a lot better than the default warlord.
It's not clear how many auras you can have active, since versatile performance seems like it's meant to enable multiple auras. Is the default that activating an aura switches off existing auras?
>>44208531
That's understandable. It might work great for magical girl adventures but he probably doesn't want to give the impression that that's what it's for by design.
>>44208777
You could have two active, but auras end at the beginning of your next turn, so you'll usually have only one.
>>44208777
The Strike! warlord is patterned after the 4e warlord; this is presumably themed after the 3.5 marshal.
Presumably, you can have an unlimited amount of auras, but their duration and your action economy prevent you from having too many active at once.
>>44208801
ah right, missed the duration somehow
Hey Strikedev, if you want your project to get off the ground, I suggest getting a better shill than your autism elemental here.
>>44208836
Do you even know what "shill" means?
>>44208836
... Is Touhoufag the Strikedev (since he actually did dev the game for a bit) and I'm the autism elemental, or the other way around?
>>44208836
the guy who made it doesn't frequent this board, I'm pretty sure. He's a bit of an autism elemental in his own way though.
>>44208996
I wonder if autists attract to each other.
Hey touhoufag, if you around, do the vehicle rules work for spaceships? Is it worth hunting down a copy?
>>44209551
The vehicle rules are split up into four sections:
• Remixed tactical combat roles suitable for vehicles (but also for regular characters)
• Dogfight dueling rules
• Mad Max: Fury Road-style chase rules
• Rules for vehicles as items
All of them, save for perhaps the Mad Max: Fury Road-style chase rules, are perfectly suitable for spaceships.
I would suggest acquiring a copy for yourself.
>>44209641
>• Dogfight dueling rules
Could this be used for Star Trek ship combat, in your opinion?
>>44209786
I am unfamiliar with the source material, but I would conjecture that the answer is "No," because the dogfight dueling rules are themed around actual dogfights of mobility, chasing, and being chased.
>>44209839
here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oD9ARfF9x0o
>>44209912
This would not seem to be very appropriate for the dogfight dueling rules in the vehicles supplement.
>>44208815
...
I actually haven't even looked at the marshal, I was just thinking D2 paladin+4e chevalier+skald and stuff, but now that you mention it, it's an obvious fit.
Is this a shilling thread?
>>44213927
What ever makes you think that? We are just discussing what a great game Strike! is. Absolutely worth the 15$ on DriveThru RPG.
Here, see how some other people enjoyed it all over the interwebs, fellow 4chanite:
"Yeah, this is pretty sweet. It's like out-of-combat Burning Wheel/Mouse Guard got Franken-stapled to the best parts of in-combat D&D 4e."
"I played a game of it over Maptool once and it took us something like five minutes to pull a friend-of-a-friend into the game and help him make a character. Combat was always considerably faster due to the fact that we didn't have to [mess] around with minute bonuses or large numbers - it was extremely straightforward in every respect, while still maintaining the 4e tactical combat core."
"[Strike!] is the perfect game for a bunch of lazy [friends] to play while mildly drunk and not worrying too much about verisimilitude or themeing. Just a couple of adventurers having some [gosh darn] fun adventures. [...] It's just fun, you know? No apologies."
"I'm very, very impressed with what you did here. It's probably the most clever design I’ve seen since Apocalypse World."
"So far, this is one of the favorite RPGs I've ever played, and it’s not even finished!"
"Strike! is way better than I thought it was going to be."
One thing that bothers me with the combat system having to roll to hit against all enemies in an AoE. Aside from that, everyone seems to handle combat with a single roll. Rolling multiple die at once helps, but I wish there was something even faster.
I never posted this, did I?
One more bump before I go sleep. I'm pretty sure I'll start brewing Star Trek themed stuff tomorrow.
>>44216769
The purpose of rolling multiple attacks against enemies in an AoE is to prevent extremely swingy results. If you rolled a single time, then if you rolled poorly, you would have nothing but failure on your hands, while if you rolled a 6, you would land that critical on all of your targets.
This would also fail to take into account advantage or disadvantage against individual targets.
>>44191842
> some autist unable to grasp the basic concept of player having the responsibility to make characters that aren't just a collection of disjointed mechanics
Fuck you.
The game is a bunch of disjointed mechanics to start with.
I'll stick to games that don't require me to do half the work because the authors can only into math and don't care about anything else that makes a game good.
>>44204776
There's an actual munchkin RPG, and it's better than this shit.
>>44224089
While I fully disavow the noncombat mechanics of the game, which I think are very poor, I do not think they are as disjointed as you claim them to be.
What are you having difficulty understanding?
>>44222332
Yeah, I got that, I was thinking if there could be some version where you don't need to roll as much.
Like for example (and I'm saying this secure in the knowledge that this is a terrible idea), roll a d6 and hit d6/6th of the enemies, either rounded to nearest or fractions counting as partial hit. So with 4 enemies, even a 1 would hit 1.
>>44226047
The rounding would be terribly inconvenient much of the time, and it would not take into account the many possible results on a hit, nor would it advantage/disadvantage, miss triggers, strikes, glancing hits, critical hits, or role boosts.
>>44226453
The math I had in my head was :
-Roll attack
-Multiply by number of targets
-Divide by 6, assign hits from center of the blast moving out in a spiral (player decides which way it goes)
-Leftover is the roll for the last creature in the spiral
So, 4 enemies, you roll a 5, that's 4x5=20. Means you hit 3 of them, and got a 2 against the fourth (which may hit with duelist).
You don't have to care about role boosts (since only blaster can do AoEs that aren't tied to effect, which happen after you roll afaik), and it somewhat makes sense that explosions don't care about advantage/disadvantage, and glancing hits can still happen, although crits can't (maybe if the leftover is exactly 0 you could crit 1 guy automatically, but then if you get exactly 6 guys in a blast they are kinda screwed, but then how often does THAT happen?).
But again, it was just the first thing that popped into my head.
I can not convince anyone I know to play this game
I have presented it as a perfect tokusatsu system to several friends who are deep into kamen rider or super sentai and who all were quite eager initially, but every one of them, every one, dropped out at the idea of using 1d6 as the base roll for everything.
I'm considering making my own mode for it that uses dice pools, probably FATE-style, just to be able to convince people to play
>>44227600
Us gamers man. We say we like simple but deep and elegantly complex mechanics, but really what we want is funny dice.
>>44227780
I'd hardly say 4d6 is any more "funny" than 1d6
>>44228045
Well, it's at least 4 times as funny.
I mean, that's just simple math.
>>44228053
...Well, you got me there
>>44227535
You raise a point about role boosts. However, advantage and disadvantage are *major* mechanical hinges of the combat system that should not be ignored so easily, glancing hits and critical hits should have cleaner probabilities associated with them, and your proposed system still leaves miss triggers and strikes unaccounted for.
>>44227600
The 1d6 actually *can* be a problem, but only really during noncombat scenes wherein 1s and 6s can produce devastating results. This makes for a very swingy game, and the 2d6 variants are not particularly well-written either.
It is not quite as bad in combat, of course.
>>44224101
I... I mean I'm not Strike!'s greatest fan but I really can't believe that's true.
Even so, got a pdf?
>>44224089
>If the game doesn't hold my hand, I can't make characters that make sense
>why does the game allow me to make a wizard with 5 INT? what shit game design!
>>44230211
I'm talking about fluff, moron.
The Strike! book reads like a tax form. The math might be the tightest in the world, but if the game is flat there's no reason for me to choose it.
>>44222332
One of the downsides of this is that you can end up getting multiple strikes that mean your character's crippled on the strike front for one attack, even if they faceroll for the rest of the game.
Also didn't know we had a general for this; it could definitely use a theorycraft/analysis thread.
>>44230335
Are you familiar with GURPS? Or Fate? Or HERO? Or...
Someone's struggling with the concept of a generic system, I think.
>>44230472
Strikes and miss triggers occur only for your first attack in an area attack, which must be resolved against whatever the GM considers to be the most powerful opponent in the area.
>>44230497
Ya know, I always felt that rule was kinda inelegant.
>>44230905
It is certainly more elegant than having area attacks follow a completely different set of mechanics for attack resolution.
>>44230489
I'm only struggling with the concept of why the fuck I should care about this game.
But probably I'm too functional a human being to be in the target demographic.
>>44233610
>But probably I'm too functional a human being to be in the target demographic.
You're on /tg/.
>>44200588
So the Rogue isn't about invisibility/sneak attack?
>>44235851
The backstabber rogue is, in fact, about sneak attacking, since flanking is one of the easier ways to gain advantage and thus land 6s.
>>44233610
>I don't understand something!
>This means everyone else is dumb!
>>44233610
It has cool fight rules. That's it, but it's not a small thing. It's an obscure indie game so it's assumed you're experienced enough with rpgs to bring whatever setting flavour you want.
>>44236058
"Flanking" isn't necessarily sneaky, though.
>>44243652
Not necessarily, but the "rogue" it is inspired by does emphasize flanking.
This rogue also builds in the effects of the Stealthy feat into some of its powers in case you wish to actually hide.
>>44245315
Now that is considerably more my jam.
>>44245315
Do you know if it's going to be released as standalone, or as part of an expansion of some sorts?
>>44251284
I would not know of how Mr. McGarva plans to release it, no.
Whats with all the anime pictures?
>>44253606
