The Campaign Builder's Guild

Very nice. How did you create that granular effect on the forests' edges?

yeah. very, very nice.

That in particular is done using the paintbrush tool, sourcing from a pattern instead of a color.  But it's a "Black and white trees" pattern that I had to download.  Normalized the colors, and then colored the whole thing.  

I'll admit that I'm not the one that came up with that technique.  I picked it up from a tutorial at the Cartographer's Guild.

If you plan to still fiddle with the map, one might thicken the black lines around the white labels of isles for readability and smooth the palette shift that occurs in the upper right lands. I like the style, and especially enjoy the symbol-set you choose or made for settlements.

What's next for Cad Goleor? And what are the odds of recordings of the correctly pronounced Setting Nouns?

Quote from: Tangent_JaercWhat's next for Cad Goleor? And what are the odds of recordings of the correctly pronounced Setting Nouns?

Like an audio file?  You mean you actually want to PRONOUNCE them!?  :jawdrop:

Currently working on fiction for it.  Maybe it could even get published someday when it is finished and doesn't suck.  It seems a better way to develop the setting than just deciding things at random and filling in.  Start building a world as entwined with its stories. 

Otherwise its just whatever it occurs to me to put in an entry about, or whatever someone is interested enough to ask about.  And, as always, trying to find a live group willing to play in it. 

I surely do. If you'd like I can probably whip up such a (theorized from my brain, and semi-familiarity with gaelic noises) audio file.

Ah, yes, the fabled fiction, that I so await reading. :P

Would you ever entertain the notion of a CG PbP?

Quote from: Tangent_Jaerc
I surely do. If you'd like I can probably whip up such a (theorized from my brain, and semi-familiarity with gaelic noises) audio file.

Ah, yes, the fabled fiction, that I so await reading. :P

Would you ever entertain the notion of a CG PbP?

I was actually thinking about doing just that.  I was running an IRC game for a while, but PbP would be easier on my internet usage.  It's just hard to keep them going.  But I may put up a thread to gauge interest.

http://www.thecbg.org/index.php/topic,191172.msg195157.html#msg195157

Here is the post on the Defense Roll

I am wondering if having 2 separate ways to defend yourself makes things too complicated.

Currently "Dodge" involves taking skill points, which means characters would have fewer points to put into other things, and would disadvantage low-skill-point characters.  On the other hand, "Block" currently works by "attacking" your opponent's attack, so it disadvantages non-warrior types. 

What if the "Defense Roll" were closer to the Pathfinder "Defense score" variant?  I am committed to an active defense roll, rather than a static defense score, but maybe a more simple

1d20+Dex bonus+Shield Bonus+Misc

would streamline things neatly?

To be thoroughly blunt, I see the attempt to separate out 'Blocking' and 'Dodging' into separate skills as fairly pointless. In any fight a character is doing everything they can to avoid being hit (also to hit the opponent), not just doing either (particularly if you assume that a single attack roll does not represent an individual blow and rather a whole round [of whatever duration] worth of effort)

I think blending the ideas and having a single defensive roll as you are now proposing is a far more mechanically and commonsensically intuitive solution. I still think it would be good to allow some degree of specialization in 'Defence' as a skill (through a feat with similar effects to Skill Focus, perhaps?) but I think consolidating the concepts into a single defensive capability is a definite improvement.

Quote from: Tangent_Jaerc
I surely do. If you'd like I can probably whip up such a (theorized from my brain, and semi-familiarity with gaelic noises) audio file.

Making an audio file as such is not a problem.  But it does not appear that such audio-files can be uploaded to the forums, so one would either need an external site to link to, or would need to zip the file.

Quote from: HippopotamusDundee
To be thoroughly blunt, I see the attempt to separate out 'Blocking' and 'Dodging' into separate skills as fairly pointless. In any fight a character is doing everything they can to avoid being hit (also to hit the opponent), not just doing either (particularly if you assume that a single attack roll does not represent an individual blow and rather a whole round [of whatever duration] worth of effort)

This is a good point.  Someone blocking an attack isn't likely to just stand with his feet rooted to the ground because he has to choose whether he will dodge or block.

Quote from: HippopotamusDundeeI think blending the ideas and having a single defensive roll as you are now proposing is a far more mechanically and commonsensically intuitive solution. I still think it would be good to allow some degree of specialization in 'Defence' as a skill (through a feat with similar effects to Skill Focus, perhaps?) but I think consolidating the concepts into a single defensive capability is a definite improvement.

So do you think "defense" would still be good to have as a skill specifically?  The ability to scale one's defensive abilities would definitely come in handy as attacking ability improves with higher levels.  Should this be a universal class skill?  Of course, in Pathfinder you can still have 20 ranks in cross-class skills by level 20, so it's not a huge deal to spend some points on it unless you have VERY few skill points. 

Or, since you mention "through a feat...similar to Skill Focus" do you think it should not ACTUALLY be a skill, but that PCs should just be allowed to take one or more feats that improve their defenses?

Quote from: Seraphine_Harmonium
Or, since you mention "through a feat...similar to Skill Focus" do you think it should not ACTUALLY be a skill, but that PCs should just be allowed to take one or more feats that improve their defenses?

You've hit the nail squarely on the head - I think a feat recognizing particular skills in defence (much as various skills in offence are reflected by Weapon Focus/Finesse/Specialization, etc) that provides a bonus commensurate with Skill Focus (+3, if I recall?) is the way to go.

Ultimately I think when it comes to the question of 'Defence' as an active roll to oppose attack, there are two real options that maintain game balance - either they are both skills or they both function like  Base Attack does in D&D/Pathfinder. And given the current model you're proposing I would advocate having them both function like Base Attack but with a similar array of feats allowing improvement and specialization.

Quote from: HippopotamusDundeeUltimately I think when it comes to the question of 'Defence' as an active roll to oppose attack, there are two real options that maintain game balance - either they are both skills or they both function like  Base Attack does in D&D/Pathfinder. And given the current model you're proposing I would advocate having them both function like Base Attack but with a similar array of feats allowing improvement and specialization.

I look at "Base Attack Bonus" and I see what is essentially a skill with a set progression, instead of one you choose.  So turning both of them into skills appeals to my "streamlining" and "simplifying" instinct.  On the other hand, the game is balanced with Base Attack Bonus in mind, and changing attacks to a standard skill might throw off game balance in unforeseen ways.  So having defense function like Base Attack might be more in line. 

Now I am thinking of how a "+6/+1" Defense bonus to parallel the "+6/+1" Base Attack bonus could make a degree of sense.  If two equal powered characters are fighting each other, then each attack relative to each defense is scaled to match, as one would expect.  However, if one is being attacked by multiple enemies, their defenses against the second and third attackers would be reduced, as the character becomes overwhelmed.

Quote from: Seraphine_Harmonium

Quote from: HippopotamusDundeeUltimately I think when it comes to the question of 'Defence' as an active roll to oppose attack, there are two real options that maintain game balance - either they are both skills or they both function like  Base Attack does in D&D/Pathfinder. And given the current model you're proposing I would advocate having them both function like Base Attack but with a similar array of feats allowing improvement and specialization.

I look at "Base Attack Bonus" and I see what is essentially a skill with a set progression, instead of one you choose.  So turning both of them into skills appeals to my "streamlining" and "simplifying" instinct.  On the other hand, the game is balanced with Base Attack Bonus in mind, and changing attacks to a standard skill might throw off game balance in unforeseen ways.  So having defense function like Base Attack might be more in line. 

This is quite ironic, because this is the basis on which I draw the line between 'Skills' and 'Saving Throws/BaB' - Skills remain fully customisable regardless of class (even within the somewhat constrictive bounds of 'Class Skills') where BaB/Saving Throws are decided upon from a fairly limited range of options at character creation and can never be tweaked again (except with multiclassing).

Certainly I think the way you're now heading sounds fantastic (I volunteer as playtester!), and your thoughts regarding the defence parallel to extra attacks are very both interesting and intuitive, and not something I've come across before.

Quote from: HippopotamusDundee

Quote from: Seraphine_Harmonium
I look at "Base Attack Bonus" and I see what is essentially a skill with a set progression, instead of one you choose.  So turning both of them into skills appeals to my "streamlining" and "simplifying" instinct.  On the other hand, the game is balanced with Base Attack Bonus in mind, and changing attacks to a standard skill might throw off game balance in unforeseen ways.  So having defense function like Base Attack might be more in line. 

This is quite ironic, because this is the basis on which I draw the line between 'Skills' and 'Saving Throws/BaB' - Skills remain fully customisable regardless of class (even within the somewhat constrictive bounds of 'Class Skills') where BaB/Saving Throws are decided upon from a fairly limited range of options at character creation and can never be tweaked again (except with multiclassing).

Certainly I think the way you're now heading sounds fantastic (I volunteer as playtester!), and your thoughts regarding the defence parallel to extra attacks are very both interesting and intuitive, and not something I've come across before.

Ah, well if you are drawing the line based on ability to customize, then yes, your designations make perfect sense.  Of course, in the most basic way, you can look at anything from attacking, to sneaking, to will saves to function in the same way.  You roll the die, and add to it your bonuses.  If your result is high enough, you succeed.

So, now I am thinking (and this is more a refining of my thoughts, than anything new):  Base Attack Bonus is at its core a measure of your overall level of "fighting" talent.   Anyone who learns how to attack will spend just as much time learning how to defend.  Fighting is about a lot more than your weapon.  It is about movement and distance, reading your enemy's signals, and anticipating their actions. Every aspect that goes into making a successful attack can be applied to making a successful defense.  So the defense roll would always be connected directly to your BAB. 

Now, I don't think that defending needs to count as using up an attack, but I think that for every attack your BAB grants you, you should get to defend yourself against an attack.  For any additional attacks made against you, you would not get to add your BAB to the roll, so you'd be left with, I'd say DEX and Shield Bonus.  And any miscellaneous mods. 

Of course, there could be a feat that allows you to defend against an extra attack, taking a -2 to all defense rolls, like Rapid Shot does with attacks.  The question is, how do you know when to use it?

What if you simplieifed your defense roll tp 1d20 + Dex + Shield + Misc bonuses + "training".
Characters with full BAB get +2 training, character with 3/4 BAB get +0, characters with poor BAB get -2.

I do not think requiring iterative attacks in order to use the defense roll is a sanity-preserving idea. It especially will caus wired oddness if applied to creatures with natural attacks.