This RPG is set in the land of Equestria after it has been conquered and split between the Changelings and a foriegn fascist nation. It is based in large part on the Equestria at War mod for Hearts of Iron 4, and uses D&D 3.5 mechanics
4 of the group have taken a job to clear a site of a future real estate development of undead. They seem to have stumbled upon a centuries old evil long forgotten by Equestria. Meanwhile, Ash has discovered foals from the order of Saint Prancis orphanage practicing dark magic and sacrifices in the woods, while Iron is having not-so-pleasant dreams
/vx/ - Videogames and Paranormal
2053 replies and 74 files omitted.
>>77818
>>77819
I'm just pissy that the whole quest isn't being done in a single take. There's supposed to be something like "4 encounters a day," and this has been 1 minor one and 2 serious ones. I guess there isn't really anything time sensitive about this one though, unlike the communists on the docks
>>77819
I'm just pissy that the whole quest isn't being done in a single take. There's supposed to be something like "4 encounters a day," and this has been 1 minor one and 2 serious ones. I guess there isn't really anything time sensitive about this one though, unlike the communists on the docks
>>77820
In all likelihood, though, the Dark Star player wasn't even meaning to metagame. He was given a prompt he didn't know what to do with because he didn't know anything about Ghoul Fever, so he just rolled with it.
In all likelihood, though, the Dark Star player wasn't even meaning to metagame. He was given a prompt he didn't know what to do with because he didn't know anything about Ghoul Fever, so he just rolled with it.
File (): C7560D0B438BA0CEF9E48A0723DFE395-63715.jpg (62.2 KB, 400x366, 940484.jpg)
Alright, so it looks like there is a general withdrawal from the caverns
The Dark Star character absolutely has things to do for the remainder of the night. Onyx, Spark, and Silver... not so much, at least at the moment. I guess it is okay to force an end to day 3 because I want to get Ash, Iron, and the Stallion gang all on the same timeline. However, at the moment I don't really have any planned out quests besides the Silver Springs Quarry and the missing foals (several of them). So don't be surprised if you get a loading-screen when you try to look for all that much else
The Dark Star character absolutely has things to do for the remainder of the night. Onyx, Spark, and Silver... not so much, at least at the moment. I guess it is okay to force an end to day 3 because I want to get Ash, Iron, and the Stallion gang all on the same timeline. However, at the moment I don't really have any planned out quests besides the Silver Springs Quarry and the missing foals (several of them). So don't be surprised if you get a loading-screen when you try to look for all that much else
>>77825
I guess I'll ask now if the Iron rape scene was real or a figment of paranoia from the lack of security.
I guess I'll ask now if the Iron rape scene was real or a figment of paranoia from the lack of security.
>>77825
This time if they try again with the quarry, they can bring Ash along for much-needed healing and magic use.
This time if they try again with the quarry, they can bring Ash along for much-needed healing and magic use.
Hey GM, are guns in this world considered as an exotic weapon category?
>>77834
So if I were to make a ranged rouge build, what specialization should I pick if I want to use rifles and don't want a -4 on attack rolls for example?
So if I were to make a ranged rouge build, what specialization should I pick if I want to use rifles and don't want a -4 on attack rolls for example?
>>77836
I would guess Ranger would have proficiency with most firearms from the start, especially rifles, while Rouges would start with proficiency with sidearms.
I would guess Ranger would have proficiency with most firearms from the start, especially rifles, while Rouges would start with proficiency with sidearms.
>>77840
They're probably among all three classifications, depending on the type of firearm, I would guess. Break-action rifles and shotguns, and semi-auto pistols and revolvers are likely simple weapons. Bolt-action and semi-auto rifles and shotguns, and SMGs are likely martial weapons. LMGs, MMGs, HMGs, full-auto rifles, and full-auto pistols are likely exotic weapons.
They're probably among all three classifications, depending on the type of firearm, I would guess. Break-action rifles and shotguns, and semi-auto pistols and revolvers are likely simple weapons. Bolt-action and semi-auto rifles and shotguns, and SMGs are likely martial weapons. LMGs, MMGs, HMGs, full-auto rifles, and full-auto pistols are likely exotic weapons.
>>77841
I would also guess that Rouges start with proficiency with SMGs despite them being a martial weapon, and that firearms with select fire between full-auto and semi-auto change their classification based on which fire mode you use them in. Sort of like how a bastard sword used in one hand is an exotic weapon, but a bastard sword used in two hands is a martial weapon.
I would also guess that Rouges start with proficiency with SMGs despite them being a martial weapon, and that firearms with select fire between full-auto and semi-auto change their classification based on which fire mode you use them in. Sort of like how a bastard sword used in one hand is an exotic weapon, but a bastard sword used in two hands is a martial weapon.
>>77841
D20 Modern just places the them in 3 profficiencies mostly bas d on size: Personal, Longarm, and heavy. Other gunz are exitoc.
D20 Modern just places the them in 3 profficiencies mostly bas d on size: Personal, Longarm, and heavy. Other gunz are exitoc.
>>77843
Personally, I think that oversimplifies it a bit too much, and at the same time defeats the purpose of the Simple, Martial, and Exotic classification system.
Personally, I think that oversimplifies it a bit too much, and at the same time defeats the purpose of the Simple, Martial, and Exotic classification system.
Will the GM even respond to this quandry as well as informing of when a character gains XP?
>>77837
In D&D mechanics, a sneak attack may only be attempted with a ranged weapon at a distance that does not exceed 30 feet. This means that ranged rogues only really have much value at "point blank" distances. Because the short distance of the rogue sneak attack probably represents the slow travel of a crossbow bolt and how much time a target has to react, it might make sense to increase that distance for a firearm, and to reflect the reality of snipers.
I have Blue Skies, for example, rate as good with pistols and carbine rifles, partly reflective of a 9 Strength score
>>77845
No, and after they do things
In D&D mechanics, a sneak attack may only be attempted with a ranged weapon at a distance that does not exceed 30 feet. This means that ranged rogues only really have much value at "point blank" distances. Because the short distance of the rogue sneak attack probably represents the slow travel of a crossbow bolt and how much time a target has to react, it might make sense to increase that distance for a firearm, and to reflect the reality of snipers.
I have Blue Skies, for example, rate as good with pistols and carbine rifles, partly reflective of a 9 Strength score
>>77845
No, and after they do things
>>77844
Well, that system actually separates guns as a separate class of weapons. In d20, martial weapons become 'archaic' weapons.
The system is somewhat feat-intensive, but characters in d20 may get bonus feats based on starting occupation or background, kind of like how GM said.
Well, that system actually separates guns as a separate class of weapons. In d20, martial weapons become 'archaic' weapons.
The system is somewhat feat-intensive, but characters in d20 may get bonus feats based on starting occupation or background, kind of like how GM said.
>>77846
>increase that distance
How much can it be increased? Are we talking about 12000 feet here or just a small increase of 30 more feet?
Besides that, a rogue can just pick up a carbine and shoot it without any feats to use it averagely, right?
>increase that distance
How much can it be increased? Are we talking about 12000 feet here or just a small increase of 30 more feet?
Besides that, a rogue can just pick up a carbine and shoot it without any feats to use it averagely, right?
>>77847
Except the Simple, Martial, and Exotic system doesn't separate weapons out by size, it does so by ease-of-use. A break-action rifle will be significantly easier for most people to use than a semi-auto rifle, even if they are both longarm weapons. Just like how it's much easier to use a longspear than it is a lance, despite them both being two-handed melee weapons.
Except the Simple, Martial, and Exotic system doesn't separate weapons out by size, it does so by ease-of-use. A break-action rifle will be significantly easier for most people to use than a semi-auto rifle, even if they are both longarm weapons. Just like how it's much easier to use a longspear than it is a lance, despite them both being two-handed melee weapons.
>>77849
Well, it doesn't, but it's separated basically on training.
Most Personal and Longarm firearms operate more or less the same way, at least as far as aiming and shooting them goes. Mechanics may be different, but the basis really boils down to whether or not the character knows how to aim a handgun/rifle.
Well, it doesn't, but it's separated basically on training.
Most Personal and Longarm firearms operate more or less the same way, at least as far as aiming and shooting them goes. Mechanics may be different, but the basis really boils down to whether or not the character knows how to aim a handgun/rifle.
>>77850
If they were operated the same way, then there's no reason to even have a classification system.
If they were operated the same way, then there's no reason to even have a classification system.
It's times like this where I really wish I was actually any good with words. I KNOW why I think separating them based on their size just doesn't work, and why it would be much better to separate them based on the older system, but I can't put it into words. It's why I don't like getting into arguments, words just don't come naturally to me, so I always end up at the bottom.
>>77851
No two weapons are operated the same way.
Class-based weapon profficiencies are basically blanket feats: a fighter is considered to have martial weapon profficiency in every martial weapon, because he's trained in medieval weapons of war.
No two weapons are operated the same way.
Class-based weapon profficiencies are basically blanket feats: a fighter is considered to have martial weapon profficiency in every martial weapon, because he's trained in medieval weapons of war.
>>77852
Size isn't really how they're classified. I oversimplified it for the sake of explaining.
But overall, a character who's trained in a general type if firearm, could figure out how to operate others that are held the same way.
Size isn't really how they're classified. I oversimplified it for the sake of explaining.
But overall, a character who's trained in a general type if firearm, could figure out how to operate others that are held the same way.
>>77853
>Most Personal and Longarm firearms operate more or less the same way
>No two weapons are operated the same way.
So, which is it then? Are revolvers and rifles operated differently, or is there barely any difference between how they're used?
INB4: semantics, but that's not the point.
>>77854
And someone who is trained in a general type of melee weapon could figure out how to use others that are used in the same way.
>Most Personal and Longarm firearms operate more or less the same way
>No two weapons are operated the same way.
So, which is it then? Are revolvers and rifles operated differently, or is there barely any difference between how they're used?
INB4: semantics, but that's not the point.
>>77854
And someone who is trained in a general type of melee weapon could figure out how to use others that are used in the same way.
>>77855
No two weapons operate *exactly* the same way, but having profficiency in a class of similar weapons means knowing the basics to operate all of them.
>And someone who is trained in a general type of melee weapon could figure out how to use others that are used in the same way.
That's what I said.
No two weapons operate *exactly* the same way, but having profficiency in a class of similar weapons means knowing the basics to operate all of them.
>And someone who is trained in a general type of melee weapon could figure out how to use others that are used in the same way.
That's what I said.
Well, I'll have smol nap for today. Please no bully, Mr GM fellow.
>>77856
Then if you could figure out how to use any kind of weapon that is used similarly to another kind of weapon you already know how to use, then why would you still take a penalty to attack rolls for using a lance if you already know how to use a longspear, just because your class started with only simple weapon proficiency? Why would they have to be classified differently if they are both piercing, two-handed weapons that are used the same way?
Then if you could figure out how to use any kind of weapon that is used similarly to another kind of weapon you already know how to use, then why would you still take a penalty to attack rolls for using a lance if you already know how to use a longspear, just because your class started with only simple weapon proficiency? Why would they have to be classified differently if they are both piercing, two-handed weapons that are used the same way?
File (): 3696CDDAA0B07D193F4BDD7773D8C7B3-35726.jpg (34.9 KB, 580x624, _hmmmm naz.jpg)
File (): A8CFE47489236012A49AD68249AB9B99-377516.gif (368.7 KB, 500x281, 1503633773018.gif)
>Like 20 posts of meta-discussion about weapons none of you actually even want to use anyways
>>77855
>Are revolvers and rifles operated differently
yes,because one is a handgun while the other is a long arm.
>Are revolvers and rifles operated differently
yes,because one is a handgun while the other is a long arm.
>>77859
M8, idk. The categorization of weapons is based largely on training; but more importantly, it's meant to separate classes that are meant for combat from the other classes, to balance the game. Rogue only get a handful of martial weapons, because if they got any more they'd be encroaching on the Ranger's niche.
Simple Weapons are generally simple to use: they amount to stabbing creatures or just smacking them. All creatures with humanoid, giant, outsider or fey hit dice get them. All classes get them, with the exception of Monks, Wizards and Druids who trained up until complex age in a specific style of combat.
Martial weapons are weapons of war: they require a deal of training to use. Only the classes that specialize in combat get them: Rangers, Paladins, Fighters, Barbarians and psychic warriors.
Overall, deciding factor is what classes are meant to use kind of weapons, and what classes should need extra feats to gain them.
>>77861
Sorry...
M8, idk. The categorization of weapons is based largely on training; but more importantly, it's meant to separate classes that are meant for combat from the other classes, to balance the game. Rogue only get a handful of martial weapons, because if they got any more they'd be encroaching on the Ranger's niche.
Simple Weapons are generally simple to use: they amount to stabbing creatures or just smacking them. All creatures with humanoid, giant, outsider or fey hit dice get them. All classes get them, with the exception of Monks, Wizards and Druids who trained up until complex age in a specific style of combat.
Martial weapons are weapons of war: they require a deal of training to use. Only the classes that specialize in combat get them: Rangers, Paladins, Fighters, Barbarians and psychic warriors.
Overall, deciding factor is what classes are meant to use kind of weapons, and what classes should need extra feats to gain them.
>>77861
Sorry...
>>77865
Idk, m8. I just think the Personal, Longarm, and Heavy classifications make sense for gunz.
It's not really any of my concern though. Last I've recalled, I don't think I've ever even made a single attack roll against a creature using a weapon.
Idk, m8. I just think the Personal, Longarm, and Heavy classifications make sense for gunz.
It's not really any of my concern though. Last I've recalled, I don't think I've ever even made a single attack roll against a creature using a weapon.
>>77867
I did throw that one fireball as a touch attack though... Not sure why I did that...
I was considering if I wanted to take Vow of Nonviolence, but idk. I've just been holding my character to exalted restrictions for the sake of possibly qualifying for things when I actually decide what feats I have.
I did throw that one fireball as a touch attack though... Not sure why I did that...
I was considering if I wanted to take Vow of Nonviolence, but idk. I've just been holding my character to exalted restrictions for the sake of possibly qualifying for things when I actually decide what feats I have.
>>77869
Well, any """normal""" druid would be best off taking Augment Summoning at this level, but idkehat I want to pick.
Well, any """normal""" druid would be best off taking Augment Summoning at this level, but idkehat I want to pick.
>>77871
Sister Ash definitely has the personality to make a good Cleric, but I kind of like the foreign witch-like sage gig. She enjoys learning about ponies, observing them to get a broader understanding of divinity, rather than already having a pact with a particular deity.
That and I didn't really know how Clerics would work in Equestria, and being a Cleric would imply having already been a member if Equestrian clergy, which I did not know. Playing Sister Ash, as a foreign mystic who's learning about Equestrian religion makes it simpler for me to just go about rolling comprehension checks as the world is developed.
I can't say that playing a Cleric wouldn't be easier though. Clerics have far better spellcasting ability, more spells per day, better healing and a selection of spells that work better for utility and mesh more smoothly with a modern setting. Some of the Druid class features feel slightly obsolete in a modetn world, but it's not like I made Sister Ash with mechanical power in mind (otherwise, I'd take Augment Summoning without hesitation).
I made her as a Druid, and she doesn't really make sense as anything but a druid. She's generally neutral in every sense but her preference for moral virtue; her knowedge and magick are archaic and mystical; she's wholeheartedly devout, but doesn't have a specific covenant; she spurns material possessions, wealth, power, and the
luxuries of the modern world, believing simplicity and abstainance being part of the path to godliness. All-in-all, she's best as Druid, because that's hoelw I made her
Also, Clerics require holy symbols to cast their spells, and that would count as a possession and thus break the Ascetic's code which I really, really want to follow, since it was basically the basis for her character upon creation.
Sister Ash definitely has the personality to make a good Cleric, but I kind of like the foreign witch-like sage gig. She enjoys learning about ponies, observing them to get a broader understanding of divinity, rather than already having a pact with a particular deity.
That and I didn't really know how Clerics would work in Equestria, and being a Cleric would imply having already been a member if Equestrian clergy, which I did not know. Playing Sister Ash, as a foreign mystic who's learning about Equestrian religion makes it simpler for me to just go about rolling comprehension checks as the world is developed.
I can't say that playing a Cleric wouldn't be easier though. Clerics have far better spellcasting ability, more spells per day, better healing and a selection of spells that work better for utility and mesh more smoothly with a modern setting. Some of the Druid class features feel slightly obsolete in a modetn world, but it's not like I made Sister Ash with mechanical power in mind (otherwise, I'd take Augment Summoning without hesitation).
I made her as a Druid, and she doesn't really make sense as anything but a druid. She's generally neutral in every sense but her preference for moral virtue; her knowedge and magick are archaic and mystical; she's wholeheartedly devout, but doesn't have a specific covenant; she spurns material possessions, wealth, power, and the
luxuries of the modern world, believing simplicity and abstainance being part of the path to godliness. All-in-all, she's best as Druid, because that's hoelw I made her
Also, Clerics require holy symbols to cast their spells, and that would count as a possession and thus break the Ascetic's code which I really, really want to follow, since it was basically the basis for her character upon creation.
[Reply] [Last 50 Posts] [Last 100 Posts] [Last 200 Posts]
You are viewing older replies. Click [View All] or [Last n Posts] to vew latest posts.
Clicking update will load all posts posted after last post on this page.
Post pagination: [Prev] [1-50] [51-100] [101-150] [151-200] [201-250] [251-300] [301-350] [351-400] [401-450] [451-500] [501-550] [551-600] [601-650] [651-700] [701-750] [751-800] [801-850] [851-900] [901-950] [951-1000] [1001-1050] [1051-1100] [1101-1150] [1151-1200] [1201-1250] [1251-1300] [1301-1350] [1351-1400] [1401-1450] [1451-1500] [1501-1550] [1551-1600] [1601-1650] [1651-1700] [1701-1750] [1751-1800] [1801-1850] [1851-1900] [1901-1950] [1951-2000] [2001-2050] [2051-2100] [2101-2103] [Next] [Live (last 50 replies)]
2103 replies | 78 files | 35 UUIDs | Page 24