Alternate Core Documents

[SilverlightPony]

Getting back on track by looking at some old ideas left unresolved:

I suggest the following, rather generic trait.

Specialization: Chose one or a few closely related applications of a skill. Increase that skill by +5 (or more in some cases if GM allows it) Any other applications of that skill is done against its base value. This trait can be removed anytime the character improves the skill, removing both the bonus and restriction.

I think a simple +5 is rather innoffensive and encourage good rp more than anything else. I suspect that players simply trying to break the game wont give this a second look.

I do like the idea of a specialization-style trait. However, as Viewing Glass suggests later, +5 seems low for a trait. There was mention of giving a penalty for other uses of the skill. Perhaps +10 for a specific use, -5 for other uses? Something else? And to make the trait more significant, should the bonus from this trait count for meeting difficulties? And should the bonus allow the character to have an effective skill rating above 100% for purposes of determining degrees of success? Also, should this be restricted to knowledge uses (as the original version of this trait suggested) or be allowed for other application?. For example, somepony whose Science is specialized in Hacking?

Alternately, should we make it a perk as Ghostpony suggests?

Hrm... I like the idea of having it be a trait that gives +10 to a specific usage of a skill (Such as bartering with spirits for barter, or inventing with an Earth Pony's special talent) and to allow it to break a skill cap. The trait should also be subject to GM Approval.

For Hellgate Canyon group, my character is supposed to be talented with raw magic, but rather lost when it comes to arcanotech. The GM gave me a custom trait that gives me +15 to Science when casting or otherwise dealing with spells, but -15 when dealing with arcanotech (no change for other applications of the Science skill).

[Kkat]

In the course of looking at this, I've expanded the write-up on the Speech and Barter skills.

Hrm... I like the idea of having it be a trait that gives +10 to a specific usage of a skill (Such as bartering with spirits for barter, or inventing with an Earth Pony's special talent) and to allow it to break a skill cap. The trait should also be subject to GM Approval.

For Hellgate Canyon group, my character is supposed to be talented with raw magic, but rather lost when it comes to arcanotech. The GM gave me a custom trait that gives me +15 to Science when casting or otherwise dealing with spells, but -15 when dealing with arcanotech (no change for other applications of the Science skill).

Sounds like people are already using variants of this idea.

How does this sound:

Specialized: You are particularly adept at a focused area of expertise within a skill. Choose an area of knowledge, an application of the skill, or a sub-category of what that skill allows you to use (subject to GM's approval). You gain +10 skill points to that skill when it applies to your specialization, but -5 skill points to that skill for any other use of that skill. These skill points affect whether you meet the requirements for skill rolls. Likewise, your skill level cap is 10 higher for you area of specialization, and five lower for all other applications of the skill. Examples include: Survival (cooking), Barter (spirits), Firearms (shotguns), Speech (reading others), Science (Manipulation spells) and Medicine (cybernetics).

[Ragebrew]

Well this just got buried in the background

[Seraph-Colak]

A lot of places likely didn't see the need for spell wards as the highest form of magic they'd likely seen the zebras utilize was cloaking and the zebras being the enemy and all was who you would be considering when making your defenses.

Also I think it would be a great idea to tie an alarm of some sort into the wards. No use putting them up if someone can break through without waking you up.

I like the idea of an "alarm" ward of some sort. The trick with that is that wards would be put into surfaces and effect things attempting to pass through the surface rather than over it. So how would we an alarm ward work without breaking that rule?

Also, I'm thinking that the time for setting up wards (with the exception of the possible alarm ward) would be in the range of an hour per level of the ward. How does this sound? I do agree with the assertion by Viewing Glass and TyrannisUmbra that making the spell last weeks is undesirable from a fun standpoint, although very appropriate from a conceptual standpoint. So I am inclined to make only the expert versions last weeks, and make permanent wards only possible through a Great and Powerful version of the spells. Making the Great and Powerful version also require either a gemstone of high Rarity or a surface made of non-degrading material (such as a Stable walls or a clipboard) would also explain why every building in the wasteland isn't fully warded.

An alarm shouldn't be too hard to integrate into a magic ward, besides if something breaks through the ward it would only make sense to have a way to be alerted of this. Without the alarm that would mean something smashed its way through your ward and you're all asleep so you're all doomed to whatever fate this creature decides for you.

[Viewing_Glass]

Also fair. Hrm... though the alarm would be something that would be more technologically appropriate. Perhaps in combination with an Arcane Mark?

[TyrannisUmbra]

Something else that got lost way back:

Sneaking is missing a core part of its mechanics from the rules. Nowhere is it defined what constitutes normal sneaking speed, nor what penalties there are for sneak-running without the perk. Additionally, sneak-flying is a problem because it's even more unclear how "fast" you're allowed to move without penalty.

[Viewing_Glass]

Something else that got lost way back:

Sneaking is missing a core part of its mechanics from the rules. Nowhere is it defined what constitutes normal sneaking speed, nor what penalties there are for sneak-running without the perk. Additionally, sneak-flying is a problem because it's even more unclear how "fast" you're allowed to move without penalty.

Hrm... I had assumed it was 'No faster than half your regular movement speed'. As for the penalties... yeah. That's a fair point (Maybe a -20? That feels about right).

[Palm]

Oh, sneak flying is interesting.

In that situation the speed penalties would be reversed. If you hover or move slowly you need to flap your wings. But if you move at full speed at slow decent, you can glide and be silent like the night.

[Viewing_Glass]

Ooooh. That is nifty... but probably shouldn't be true for:

A.) Simplicity
B.) To keep flying from being the superior option for everything.

[TyrannisUmbra]

Something else that got lost way back:

Sneaking is missing a core part of its mechanics from the rules. Nowhere is it defined what constitutes normal sneaking speed, nor what penalties there are for sneak-running without the perk. Additionally, sneak-flying is a problem because it's even more unclear how "fast" you're allowed to move without penalty.

Hrm... I had assumed it was 'No faster than half your regular movement speed'. As for the penalties... yeah. That's a fair point (Maybe a -20? That feels about right).

Half regular movement speed is slooooow. Even using a decently quick character, it tends to take me multiple turns to get within range if I only use "walking" movement speed, using only movement actions, already. If we're talking half that, that's something along the lines of 5+ turns. o.O