Alternate Core Documents

[Kkat]

All that above stuff still isn't done. Spending the week recuperating and... well, mostly being lazy and tinkering with other projects.

One minor note: Weapon and Armor Repair Kits are now more expensive and cannot be used to repair an item above Good condition. Both are listed as "semi-rare", meaning that GMs should maintain strict control over availability (for example: no settlement having more than one or two available for sale). Reinforcement Mod Kits are also more expensive and can now be purchased for reinforcing combat armor as well.



PS: After playtesting, we have learned that PCs should not be able to build repair kits of their own, so no rules for doing so will exist.

[Viewing_Glass]

So, an interesting point was brought up in the Stalliongrad game. A swarm of bloatsprites, or a 100 raiders with BB guns, are the most dangerous thing a Ranger in Power Armor can face.

How? Well, every time they crit, they can choose to degrade the armor a condition. Degrade a suit of armor enough, and it becomes useless scrap.

With that in mind, I would like the following added to the rules to prevent such abuse:

If the weapon's flat damage (the damage BEFORE dice are rolled) is NOT higher than the armor's DT, then they can not use a critical hit to degrade the armor's condition by one step.

Weapon's with the Armor Piercing (Light), Armor Piercing, and Armor Piercing (Heavy) Property reduce the amount of DT an armor has for the purposes of determining the amount of flat damage a weapon has to do to degrade armor.

Example: Shadow Step is fighting Steal Raiders, I mean, Steel Rangers in melee combat to keep them from hurting his friends. He wields a Machete imbued with a Spirit of Diamond at Advanced, and scores a lucky crit! The Steel Ranger's Power Armor is in used condition and has a base DT of 26. Before dice are rolled, Shadow Step's telekinetic strength of 7 would mean the machete only does 24 damage. However, the Spirit of Diamond lowers the DT of the Power Armor by 9, meaning the Base DT is only 17. Shadow Step can choose to degrade the Power Armor to heavily used condition, or deal normal critical damage.

In addition, I would like to suggest that Knight in Shining Armor and Flesh Wound increase the DT of armor for determining whether or not you can degrade the armor on a critical hit. This makes the perks slightly more valuable, and does make armor a little more difficult to destroy (Unless your using an Auto-Axe or something )

[Kkat]

Thanks, Viewing Glass! Added that!

[The Custodian]

Theres a couple questions i wanna ask revolving around Cyberponies with the Integrated Targeting Perk and how they react with SATS perks... .

Integrated Targeting:A cyberpony with this perk gains the benefits of E.F.S. and S.A.T.S. (as per a PipBuck or Magically Powered Armor). The cyberpony may take S.A.T.S. perks. If the cyberpony is a Stable Dweller or has PipBuck Training, the cost to activate E.F.S. is reduced to 15 AP and the cost to activate S.A.T.S. is reduced to 0 AP.

How does a stable dweller cyberpony with this perk react with Fancy Mathematics and Cooler under Fire?

Fancy Mathematics: You are able to optimize your PipBuck’s targeting spell logic. S.A.T.S. attacks cost now 5 AP less.(I dont know if this AP reduction is meant to reduce the weapon AP costs while using SATS, or to activate it... If its the later this perk is then useless to an integrated targeting cyberpony.)

Cooler Under Fire: You may activate S.A.T.S. multiple times in a turn. (This one is kinda obvious... Does that mean a cyberpony can have SATS on all the time with this perk? Constantly reactivating it for free? If so that means SATS Action Filly is sorta useless later on.)

Just wondering for a character i have a Stableborn Cyberpony with Integrated Targeting. ^^

[Kkat]

Update:

An extensive new section has been added on Steath!

There has been some minor tweaks of things like pegasus contrails and the Death From Above perk for consistency and streamlining.

Also, the fearsome new Dragon Breath monster perk is available for GMs to build truly terrifying opponents.

[Dance_Explosion]

I do enjoy the fact my ninja zebra has become the baseline for how sneak is measured.
Also its worth noting that EFS just became very valuable since it avoids the penalties for darkness when your looking for some one sneaking, granted it does light your face up a bit if i recall correctly?

[Kkat]

Quick adjustment:

Fixed the Riposte perk so that it only grants one counter-attack per successfully parried opponent per turn.

(This correction was made after I realized that one of the bad guys could potentially turn a PC's six attacks against him with a sword into six counter-attacks against the PC with an Auto-Axe... for a total expenditure of 15 AP. There are no words for how broken that would have been.)

[Mister_Clacky]

I've been digging into the new Sneak rules for my stealth character in G13. There are a couple things I am curious about.

As with any check where a skill is opposed by a SPECIAL, the character using the skill rounds up for determining degrees of success.

This at first confused me, making me think the sneaking character rounded their roll up. This incorrect reading is opposite the "Skill trumps Natural Ability" standard for the system. I set myself straight by looking up opposed rolls for validation, but somepony could argue the other way if they are only checking the stealth bookmark. For consistency, I think there should be some of the "...making the Skill test divides their degree of success by ten, rounding up..." verbiage used here.

+2 for variance seems high to me. Especially when I consider low levels and my question below.

I'm curious what constitutes a group. Is a group simply more than one? If two ghouls are milling around, is the check made at 7 (4 base+ 2 variance +1 additional member)? If so, that makes sneaking at low level seem very difficult.

On the flipside, is there a consideration for setting guidelines for how to split a group, or leave it strictly GM discretion? The split seems incredibly important for how difficult the check is to make. Maybe consider giving some variety of options for GMs to choose from? Like:
Overflow Method - An enemy group's member bonus should not exceed +5. For groups larger than six, split the enemies into groups of six with the remainder forming the final group.
Even Split Method - An enemy group's member bonus should not exceed +5. For groups larger than six, split the enemies into even groups so that no subgroup's member bonus does exceeds +5.

Example

Spoiler: show

The Core Rules example appears to use the Overflow Method (OM). We'll compare the Even Split Method (ESM).
Using 8 ghouls: OM= +5|+1 (6 ghouls | 2 ghouls) ESM= +3|+3
10 ghouls: OM= +5|+3 ESM= +4|+4
15 ghouls: OM= +5|+5|+2 ESM= +4|+4|+4

In my experience, generally GMs like options, Players like rules. Thinking like a player, I'd like to see some guidelines in place. GMs will still do what they want, but having methods in the book might keep a GM from deciding "I want them to succeed, I'll split them this way" or "I need them to fail, I'm not going to split this group up at all". Anywho, my two cents.

[Dance_Explosion]

Two things i found that need a little bit of addressing:

1. Set a hard rule that no action can cost less then 10 AP, no action exists that does cost less then 10 AP, and every AP reduction spell or perk has a limit of no less then 10 AP so it may save a little time to just note in actions on the core doc "no action may cost less then 10 AP"



2. Thief needs a little update with the new stealth rules. Technically attempting to steal from some ones saddle bags with the perk is done with the opposing perception check at a +3 or +5 that can break the 10 cap, those penalties are for making the sneak check while touching and at close range. i think thief needs to be changed a little so that it notes that you don't grant the perception bonus if you have the perk so its possible to do it without the perk, but the perk just makes it much easier.

Just those two that i needed to share for now!

[Kkat]

Two things i found that need a little bit of addressing:

1. Set a hard rule that no action can cost less then 10 AP, no action exists that does cost less then 10 AP, and every AP reduction spell or perk has a limit of no less then 10 AP so it may save a little time to just note in actions on the core doc "no action may cost less then 10 AP"

There is already a note to that effect: With the exception of the Speed Burst perk, no effect or combination of effects can reduce any action’s AP cost below AP 10.

Please note, however, that you can spend less than 10 AP on dodge actions because they have a variable AP cost with points spent for effectiveness.