Alternate Core Documents

[Thanqol]

Radscorpions you are immune to, as well as Feral Ghouls with the flight perks. However, Hellhounds don't solely rely on their claws that ignore DT. They carry Magical Energy Weapons, and are nasty shots with them. And the wing is only a -20 to hit...something easily countered with the Precise Shot action and a Perception of 7. I'm not saying that the 1 perk, on its lonesome, makes up for flight or having basic spells (especially when you are limiting it to Tough Hide, which gives +2 DT and +1 Stun Resist. There are such better perks below level 4). I am saying that, if each character chooses to completely ignore their racial perks in favor of general perks, then the extra perk the EP gains actually gives them an edge of the other races. Since perks are an extremely limited resource, then that extra perk comes in handy. Of course, this is my opinion from playing an EP. Your mileage may vary.

I feel very strongly that, as a result of some intense theorycrafting with spreadsheets, most EP builds can be done just as well with alternate races, and frequently better. I feel that if I want to play an Earth Pony but have to face niggling doubts that all the builds gain vast amounts of strategic versatility by being of a different race.

Actually, my objections, as I have listed them before (along with several others):

[*] Limiting Player Options
[*] Limiting GM Options

I don't think this is the case; I think it's balancing a currently freeform system. As a player or GM I have no idea how to balance most potential inventions against the list of weapons and armour. Can I create a robot? What do I need to create a robot? If I create a robot will it break the game? Can I create power armour? What do I need to create power armour? Why does everyone in this thread think that nopony in the waste should be able to create power armour? We get into a vague realm of muddy Opinions where if I have a case I gotta argue my case and convince the GM I should be able to do a thing.

I find that exhausting. I'd prefer to be able to have my own cards in hand.

[*] Potentially unbalancing creations (this last one can easily be worked on).

Yeah, not an issue, can be hacked till fixed.

[*] Goes against the lore of the world (Earth Ponies, by themselves, did not create Power Armor or Pipbucks. It was a cooperative effort between the Ministry of Wartime Technologies and the Ministry of Arcane Sciences (Power Armor) and took them over a year to do it, and Stabletech created the Pipbucks with the assistance of the Ministry of Arcane Sciences, which took them an unknown amount of time. But, it took at least a year or more.[/list]

The last point is the largest one. It shows that the best of the Earth Pony Inventions were not created solely by Earth Ponies. It was created as a group effort between Earth Ponies and their friends.

Fine. But this is contesting one specific aspect of my system (Grandmaster Inventions) rather than the core of the system. I'm happy to have the Grandmaster perks argued out of existence.

Actually, an Earth Pony Medical Specialist is the best In-combat healer in the game. Healer of Mother Earth provides that Earth Pony with an extra 4d10 of healing with ANY healing item they use. And, the healing from that Potion is instantaneous, unlike a unicorn. The only problem an Earth Pony has is Magical Energy Damage, but that is taken care of with a Super Restoration Potion, a cyberfetish OR (and this only works for damage that does not cripple a limb from magical energy damage) the Earth Pony Medic can cut away the warped and damaged area and then heal it up afterwords. Its a bit of risky surgery, but a specialized Earth Pony Medic can do it easily. In terms of guns and violence, I will redirect you to Jus’ buck it an’ it’ll be fine!, Rooted, and Ah’ fixed it!. Should we expand this list all the way up to level 10, we can include Adrenaline Rush, Blazing Saddle, Strong Buck, Bombermare/buck and Steady Grip.

I'll have to run the numbers on these again but the Base perks are by and large so solid that it's possible to be just as good at shooting things without any of those.

Grenades are a problem for everyone, not just for EP. Sure, a Pegasus has a bit of an easier time using them than any other pony, but remember that the area you can throw a grenade is 10+STR in yards. An EP with a 5 STR who is skilled with Explosives (Like my Earth Pony, for instance), can easily toss a grenade at any target within 15 yards, or 45 feet. If she takes a dose of Buck, that range increases to 51 feet. She can now, reliably, throw that grenade at anyone within Short Range. And then don't forget the AOE distance! Combine it with Bombermare, and she gets to roll twice.

Of course, she could just use the APGR she has. It has medium range.

The process of moving into short range can often be very AP intensive, especially in situations with difficult terrain. A pegasus explosives expert only really wants for the extra +1d10 from Years of Applebucking and the Bombermare perk, both of which are easily replaceable with other useful perks at those levels.

I could see a few schematics for Barter. Perhaps a new form of cash register, an ATM. Maybe a slot machine! Speech is definitely the weaker of the two, but still very possible. How about a schematic for a new speaker system? Or maybe a new microphone?

Oh, be still my beating heart

[EDIT] Ok, hold on a sec. Maybe I read your last post wrong, the one where you responded to TyrannisUmbra, but the tone I'm getting from it is "I think you are wrong, and I am not willing to compromise". Um...I hate to be the guy to say this, but if you aren't willing to compromise on what you suggest for the game, maybe you shouldn't be suggesting new changes to the system? I mean, your stealth suggestions are excellent (and were very much needed) and I love your work on the Northern Empire. But, at the same time...this system is a cooperative effort. Heck, the Pegasus Magic stuff was a combined effort of Kkat, Ilushia, and I, but it would have never gotten done were we not willing to compromise.

Now, if you want to make this something that is just occurring in your game, go ahead. But, unless you are willing to compromise and talk things out, consider our points as valid concerns with the system...you really shouldn't be suggesting the changes.

I am chillaxed! I am as chill and serene as a cucumber. And as I am an Honesty Pony, I am not getting personal about any amount of this.

But the reason why I seem unwavering here is cause you guys are refusing to acknowledge that there is a problem at all. You're just saying 'no changes, everything is fine and working as intended', to which I object. You guys are refusing to meet me half way on this.

I'm happy to scrap the system I'm working on if you guys have any other ideas, but you gotta show me the other ideas and stop keep running the status quo line because I ain't happy with the status quo line. And if the status quo line is determined to be the final line then I'ma just take my houserules and go my separate way with no hard feelings.

[Dimestream]

But the reason why I seem unwavering here is cause you guys are refusing to acknowledge that there is a problem at all. You're just saying 'no changes, everything is fine and working as intended', to which I object. You guys are refusing to meet me half way on this.

I'm happy to scrap the system I'm working on if you guys have any other ideas, but you gotta show me the other ideas and stop keep running the status quo line because I ain't happy with the status quo line. And if the status quo line is determined to be the final line then I'ma just take my houserules and go my separate way with no hard feelings.

Well, that's the beauty of house rules, and also the beauty of pre-testing some ideas before throwing them out for community approval. We'd been working on the Zebra Shamanism stuff for MONTHS before that ever hit the forum. I think the problem is that those of us, myself especially, who have been actively doing the Earth Pony inventing/specializing things in ongoing campaigns haven't seen the need for a change. If you're the only one seeing a problem, then that is EXACTLY what house rules are for. As you mentioned before, the idea of wanting to play an Earth Pony for 'interestingness of mechanics' is a factor for you, as it was for me. I wanted to try them out. And as we've clarified them thus far, they work fine, in my less-than-totally-humble opinion. For you... not so much.

If you want a little more structure and direction for inventing in your game, by all means try that stuff out. It can't hurt to try them. That's what playtesting is for, after all.

Peace out for now. I have to get an MRI of my spine in the morning. At this time, I value sleep more than I do the prolonging of this discussion.

[Thanqol]

Yes, and the EP perks stack with the base perks, giving you the heavy specialization. Not to mention: +10 to a skill is a lot, especially considering this +10 to unbalanced saddles is to counter the permanent penalty you get when using an unbalanced saddle. +2 to a SPECIAL check is like having a perk that gives +20 to a skill (And being harder to be knocked down is very useful, /especially/ when you're fighting an enemy with an equivalent of the Super Slam perk). Jamming your gun can be devastating, and I've seen it happen to someone in a game 3 times in a single round. Needless to say, they were /angry/. Jamming will happen, and you're glad you have that perk when it does happen.

Extra Special: Luck, while not as good as a 75% reduction in critical failure with guns, can be around a 25% reduction in crit failure, a +25% enhancement in critical hits, and applies to everything. Extra Special: Strength is only half the bonus except it applies to everything, not just falling down resistance. This is what I mean when I say the base perks are easily comparable to the EP perks.

I pretty much just completely outlined the entire system. It's not complex. I'd much rather use my time either working on various other projects I haven't touched in a while, working on my new pet idea of Improved Alchemy, or making sure I have everything ready for the first session of the new group I'm playing in tomorrow. You're the one who thinks EPs need drastic changes, so take my suggestion/outline and run with it.

Sure. Does this have widespread internal acceptance? Are people in favour of an earth pony meditation/inner strength system?

You're well within your right to post suggestions about how to fix any perceived problems with the system, but we're also well within our own rights to bring our issues with your suggestion to your attention.

EDIT: I just want to clarify: I'm not saying your ideas are bad. They're a decent step toward something we can all be happy with. I just think it needs to be done in a way that makes it so none of the other races feel like they're "losing" something to EPs

Sure, and I'd love to have that discussion. My current decision was a unilateral, spur of the moment, THIS IS AN IDEA thing that I created and implemented without any thinking through. I'm happy to make broad, sweeping adjustments to it, including rewriting the core concept and mechanic, because it's just a thing I did in thirty minutes. Take a look at the thread - basically everyone who posts a thing convinces me of something and is met with immediate change.

"All is good right now, no changes needed", though, that's a straight-up no sell with me.

[Thanqol]

Well, that's the beauty of house rules, and also the beauty of pre-testing some ideas before throwing them out for community approval. We'd been working on the Zebra Shamanism stuff for MONTHS before that ever hit the forum. I think the problem is that those of us, myself especially, who have been actively doing the Earth Pony inventing/specializing things in ongoing campaigns haven't seen the need for a change. If you're the only one seeing a problem, then that is EXACTLY what house rules are for. As you mentioned before, the idea of wanting to play an Earth Pony for 'interestingness of mechanics' is a factor for you, as it was for me. I wanted to try them out. And as we've clarified them thus far, they work fine, in my less-than-totally-humble opinion. For you... not so much.

If you want a little more structure and direction for inventing in your game, by all means try that stuff out. It can't hurt to try them. That's what playtesting is for, after all.

I like systems.

If you get a bunch of good friends together they'll have fun no matter what they're doing. They could be playing D&D 3.0 and have an absolute blast, rocking it through understanding and a great relationship with the GM and having stories they'll tell for years and years and there's nothing wrong with that.

But I like systems. I think systems have aesthetic value regardless of how awesome your GM is, and great deal of time and care should be spent to ensure that the system works smoothly and efficiently without requiring that awesome collaborative relationship. I think that a well designed system should tantalize and inspire, and make the players and GMs look at it and say "I want to be a part of that". The better, the cooler the system is the more people are inclined to buy into it, and the more bought in they are the more they throw themselves into that awesome, passionate roleplaying which is the end goal of everything. This is why I'm in favour of making things inspiring. Everything I create, I'm thinking, "When someone looks at this, will they want to be a part of it?"

Currently I don't want to be a part of the earth pony aspect of the system. I regard that as a problem! I want to fix this problem, because I want people to be inspired to have fun with their friends. That is why I do, that is who I am.

Peace out for now. I have to get an MRI of my spine in the morning. At this time, I value sleep more than I do the prolonging of this discussion.

Good luck, sir.

[Night Light]

Dimestream, Viewing Glass, and Tyrannis definitely all have some great points and posts here, I'll try to avoid discussing points they already have unless I feel it necessary. Also nice to actually have a couple earth ponies weigh in on this.

This is a simulationist system. It's hard and mathematical and uses spreadsheets and people are worried about internal balance. This is a very crunch heavy system with a very antagonistic, player v. GM series of assumptions and core mechanics.

Woah there, no, no it does not have a player vs. GM set of assumptions. Yes, this is a simulation-ish system, with exceptions made for show, game, and story mechanics where appropriate (such as how radiation works). Yes, it uses math and spreadsheets and is concerned about internal balance, just like most other tabletop games and pretty much all multiplayer games (moreso with the internal balance part there). But in absolutely no way is a player vs. GM assumption made nor hardwired into the mechanics. The GM is going to throw threats, problems, and obstacles in general at you, yes, but because they're necessary to have an enjoyable game, not because they're trying to kill you. If they were trying to kill you, a super friendly Hellhound would show up at the beginning of your first session and turn everypony into a fine red mist.

What level is it balanced to come up with a personal laser cannon? GM Fiat? Maybe never? No, now we have a practical answer.

...

I, as a GM, have no idea what inventions I should allow and reject because I don't know what'll break the game. I want a frame of reference to lean on.

That's actually rather simple and there already is a readily accessible reference guide. Simply take the item your character wants to build and compare its abilities and costs (AP, resources, etc) to existing items, helping you determine what the materials (and, thus, the costs, whether via caps or via scavenging) should be to make an item. Making an item that doesn't cleanly fit with existing items? Look to the perks and spells lists then, see what level a character could accomplish something similar via perk or via spell, or judge its relative utility based on a comparison to other existing items. Accidentally let a game-breaking item through? No problem! Discuss the problem with your players, get their opinions, and work the rebalance it. Nothing need be set it stone.

To your questions of "Is it alright to invent power armor or robots", my answer would be "Absolutely!", though other GMs might say "No way!" - again, GM freedom. I'm going to off the cuff this one, but this would be my take as a GM (other opinions are 100% valid):

It would require considerable time (given two entire Ministries dedicated a year to making such creations) from a dedicated team of knowledgeable specialists reverse engineering such pre-war technology, scavenging or reinventing the factories and processes needed to create such the components and, ultimately, the whole, and it would likely be very resource and material intensive. Early stages of such designs might be functional, but less effective or reliable than well-preserved/repaired examples from pre-war, though ultimate completion of such a project would be functionally identical. Costs would obviously be based on successes and failures, some schematics might have a creation penalty due to unusual complexity, and ultimate material costs of production would be based on (though I'd say probably a bit lower than, given you're creating it) existing costs for power armor or, for robots, a comparison of their abilities relative to other offensive/defensive/utility items/spells/perks.

So, the objections are:
- No new perks because Perk Bloat
- No new mechanics because (???)
- This mechanic is bad because you can run out of points

A) There are certainly some perks that could easily use improvement or could simply due with being removed, and there is always the potential for new perks, I doubt there's much disagreement there. Viewing Glass is pointing out that you're wanting to add perks to something that is already perfectly functional, balanced, and fun without the investment of perks.
B) No new mechanic because it's unnecessary, not because new mechanics are bad - otherwise we never would have pushed through Shamanism and Pegasus Magic.
C) Running out of points is a bad aspect of the mechanic because it's illogical for a pony to suddenly lose all capability to innovate and act creatively once they've done so for their allotted period of time per day. Unicorn and Pegasus being able to run out makes sense, there's only so much magic you can perform before you're exhausted.

The ability to create a schematic based off my Barter or Speech skill is of profoundly dubious use.

Notably, it's your special talent, not just a tagged skill. But, still, I'll go ahead and provide some examples for both.

Off the cuff here:
* Invent a new outfit to improve your appearance, granting you bonuses to Barter, Speech, Charisma, Reputation, or a mix of those.
* Invent a new merchants stall to show off your goods in the best light, opening up all sorts of possible benefits. Heck, invent a mobile merchants stall and take it on the road with you.
* Invent a new caravan design to speed trips or help protect goods.
* Invent a projector mechanism that allows you to create and project slideshows to aid with your pitches to potential customers or potential allies.
* Invent a new instrument.

I could go on. All of these examples are very easily done with the existing invention rules and there are plenty of existing items, spells, and perks to base such inventions off of. I definitely agree with Viewing Glass, however, that a simple additional doc with examples and suggestions on how to run inventions, how GMs and players should approach it, and what resources to utilize, could certainly be worthwhile. If you're not familiar with a cooperative and creative tabletop game environment, the invention concept and outlines could possibly be confusing.

But the reason why I seem unwavering here is cause you guys are refusing to acknowledge that there is a problem at all. You're just saying 'no changes, everything is fine and working as intended', to which I object. You guys are refusing to meet me half way on this.

I think the largest problem here is that even half-way on what you've suggested is still very limiting/conflicting to the setting, and I feel like the general consensus is that invention mechanics are generally fine (though, as noted above, some additional clarification and suggestions for those confused could well be of value). I'm also getting the feeling that you're somewhat alone on the feeling that there's a problem so severe with earth ponies that they need a radical new system put in place. I would, however, absolutely back up suggestions to improve existing Earth Pony specialisation perks or add new ones in to fill missing gaps. I suppose that would be my half-way suggestion on this one.

[Thanqol]

Woah there, no, no it does not have a player vs. GM set of assumptions. Yes, this is a simulation-ish system, with exceptions made for show, game, and story mechanics where appropriate (such as how radiation works). Yes, it uses math and spreadsheets and is concerned about internal balance, just like most other tabletop games and pretty much all multiplayer games (moreso with the internal balance part there). But in absolutely no way is a player vs. GM assumption made nor hardwired into the mechanics. The GM is going to throw threats, problems, and obstacles in general at you, yes, but because they're necessary to have an enjoyable game, not because they're trying to kill you. If they were trying to kill you, a super friendly Hellhound would show up at the beginning of your first session and turn everypony into a fine red mist.

I've been moving in a world of highly narrativist systems recently and my definitions have changed a lot. Essentially the difference is if the players ask the GM what happens next, or if the GM asks the players what happens next.

This is a system where the GM creates appropriately balanced encounters and throws them at the players, and the two sides use their numbers to try and kill each other. That's player verses GM, even if the GM always tries to lose. Compare that to, say, Apocalypse World.

That's actually rather simple and there already is a readily accessible reference guide. Simply take the item your character wants to build and compare its abilities and costs (AP, resources, etc) to existing items, helping you determine what the materials (and, thus, the costs, whether via caps or via scavenging) should be to make an item. Making an item that doesn't cleanly fit with existing items? Look to the perks and spells lists then, see what level a character could accomplish something similar via perk or via spell, or judge its relative utility based on a comparison to other existing items. Accidentally let a game-breaking item through? No problem! Discuss the problem with your players, get their opinions, and work the rebalance it. Nothing need be set it stone.

What level is it appropriate to give an Earth Pony flight? Or a tunneling machine? Or a steam bike? Questions like these aren't answered anywhere, and it's these kind of strategic options that matter to me a lot more than +10 to hit here or +2 damage there.

To your questions of "Is it alright to invent power armor or robots", my answer would be "Absolutely!", though other GMs might say "No way!" - again, GM freedom. I'm going to off the cuff this one, but this would be my take as a GM (other opinions are 100% valid):

I hate that, though! It means if my GM says 'no' I've either got to pitch an elaborate argument to him or just not ever have that power. That's not freedom, that's pushing that back on me and saying it's my problem. And as the prospect of that brass-tacks negotiation discussion exhausts me when I'm meant to be having fun I just don't do it.

A) There are certainly some perks that could easily use improvement or could simply due with being removed, and there is always the potential for new perks, I doubt there's much disagreement there. Viewing Glass is pointing out that you're wanting to add perks to something that is already perfectly functional, balanced, and fun without the investment of perks.

I contest that it's balanced or fun because an EP's only special ability is the ability to "Create schematics", and the current system gives basically no scope for them to use that to do anything unique.

C) Running out of points is a bad aspect of the mechanic because it's illogical for a pony to suddenly lose all capability to innovate and act creatively once they've done so for their allotted period of time per day. Unicorn and Pegasus being able to run out makes sense, there's only so much magic you can perform before you're exhausted.

Have you ever dug a 200ft trench in an hour and then sat down to build a gyrocopter? Or built five jetpacks in a row? I think it's entirely believable that you're exhausted by that point and need a rest.

Off the cuff here:
* Invent a new outfit to improve your appearance, granting you bonuses to Barter, Speech, Charisma, Reputation, or a mix of those.
* Invent a new merchants stall to show off your goods in the best light, opening up all sorts of possible benefits. Heck, invent a mobile merchants stall and take it on the road with you.
* Invent a new caravan design to speed trips or help protect goods.
* Invent a projector mechanism that allows you to create and project slideshows to aid with your pitches to potential customers or potential allies.
* Invent a new instrument.

From what I understand all this can be done with Mechanics by a unicorn. And given that there are no rules on infrastructure or strategic/long distance movement, a lot of it is 'GM-handwaving-abilities-into-GM-handwaving-effects'.

If you're not familiar with a cooperative and creative tabletop game environment, the invention concept and outlines could possibly be confusing.

I am familiar with systems where everything is done in a cooperative and creative environment, including combat. Ever heard of Mage? My Mage character has the power of "Forces". I can use that ability to turn bullets, bend light, transmute sound into fire, listen in on radio transitions, create EMP detonations, create radiation, force fields, etc. Everything is done in an environment of maximum creativity and co-operation and that's the type of game Mage is all the way down.

This system isn't like that. The vast majority of stuff is extremely tightly managed and controlled, with a very clear bent of 'you need GM permission'. Having this one area of the system which operates on the same freeform rules as Mage when everything else is so tightly controlled is strange and unnatural. I mean, if I take my creativity off the leash I can rapidly create huge setting-disrupting inventions, like rapid communication or personal transport, but that in itself will conflict with the genre conventions of the FOE universe.

I think the largest problem here is that even half-way on what you've suggested is still very limiting/conflicting to the setting, and I feel like the general consensus is that invention mechanics are generally fine (though, as noted above, some additional clarification and suggestions for those confused could well be of value). I'm also getting the feeling that you're somewhat alone on the feeling that there's a problem so severe with earth ponies that they need a radical new system put in place. I would, however, absolutely back up suggestions to improve existing Earth Pony specialisation perks or add new ones in to fill missing gaps. I suppose that would be my half-way suggestion on this one.

Mm, I can work with that. What I want, though, is options. Earth Ponies need strategic options.

Being able to move huge quantities of earth, as I suggested with Siege Works - that's an incredible option. If something like that was implemented I'd be prepared to call that a win and go from there. It would let Earth Ponies have an answer to a question nopony else could even ask - being able to tunnel into enemy locations, being able to establish caves, dig wells, dig irrigation trenches, establish fortifications and castles, and a vast range of other things.

We don't need 'em to be better at hitting things or critical failing less often. The base perk list is already comprehensive in that regard. They don't need an answer to Contrail Strike, they need an answer to Stormcloud Architecture, Teleport and Fog Bank.

EDIT: Big MacIntosh drags a house around town like it's nothing. The CMC dig a 20ft pit in minutes to trap him in. That's the stuff I'm talking about here.

[Night Light]

I've been moving in a world of highly narrativist systems recently and my definitions have changed a lot. Essentially the difference is if the players ask the GM what happens next, or if the GM asks the players what happens next.

This is a system where the GM creates appropriately balanced encounters and throws them at the players, and the two sides use their numbers to try and kill each other. That's player verses GM, even if the GM always tries to lose. Compare that to, say, Apocalypse World.

Alright, that's a very different definition of player vs. GM than from what I've ever seen. Even then, both of those should be happening in any good game, as the world reacts to the players and the players react in kind, creating a flow of action back and forth between the players and the GM. A game being entirely one way or another is either on the most insane railroads I've ever heard of or really, really strange. Notably combat can be a lot more innovative than "numbers", but if you say "numbers and strategic options" then that's fairly close. I personally know as a GM I rarely focus on how my players win, or trying to lose, but rather how my NPCs are trying to win, but that's definitely a GM-by-GM situation and not exactly the topic at hand here.

What level is it appropriate to give an Earth Pony flight? Or a tunneling machine? Or a steam bike? Questions like these aren't answered anywhere, and it's these kind of strategic options that matter to me a lot more than +10 to hit here or +2 damage there.

Assuming you're willing to think creatively - which is the entire point of the invention system and, again I'll point out, half the point of tabletop roleplaying games from my experience - none of those are terribly difficult to figure out . A tunneling machine would pull from the monster perk Burrow and/or the Sculpt spell. Given we're looking at a spell with a Basic option, the item could be appropriate even in early game, the specifics would just depend on player desires. Just want a slow way to tunnel through basic dirt and not worried about getting too deep or through tough materials, much like basic Sculpt? Not too hard, easy invention with some drilling mechanisms that could be attached to a pony-sized control platform. Want to basically be mimicking the Burrow perk? That should definitely be more difficult, requiring some more advanced and probably custom designed drilling components (requiring their own invention) and probably some high quality steel. Wanting a fast transit through even dense stone? Now you're talking about a utility that surpasses even Unicorn magic, so we're talking about significant research, pre-war tech, and skills nearing 100 sort of affair. Anything in-between is easily discerned between the monster perk and spell. I gave plenty of examples in my last post about how a GM can use basically anything that's already been done and their own sense of game-balance to guide their decisions, with plenty of options available if their first attempt doesn't quite work.

I hate that, though! It means if my GM says 'no' I've either got to pitch an elaborate argument to him or just not ever have that power. That's not freedom, that's pushing that back on me and saying it's my problem. And as the prospect of that brass-tacks negotiation discussion exhausts me when I'm meant to be having fun I just don't do it.

Well, bummer, you're barking up the wrong tree then. If it exhausts you, if you're not willing to put in effort to create new and unique items, then don't pursue invention, it's certainly a more creativity and discussion focused area of the game. Not every aspect of a game is going to be awesome for everyone. GMs have the final say, no matter what system or setting you're using (at least from everything I've ever played), and sometimes you have to have conversations with them to work out what is and isn't appropriate for their game and the setting. We do it all the time with Kkat and we've had some absolutely fantastic items and spells get created for her game. Another example, in the Pathfinder game I'm currently running with Dimestream, Viewing Glass, and another local friend of ours, everything, every item, every spell, every class ability, gets passed through group consensus before it gets included in my game, and it's been absolutely wonderful for everyone involved.

I contest that it's balanced or fun because an EP's only special ability is the ability to "Create schematics", and the current system gives basically no scope for them to use that to do anything unique.

...

From what I understand all this can be done with Mechanics by a unicorn. And given that there are no rules on infrastructure or strategic/long distance movement, a lot of it is 'GM-handwaving-abilities-into-GM-handwaving-effects'.

Science, not Mechanics. The super social Earth Pony can use their Special Talent Speech/Barter skill to create those schematics, whereas the super social Unicorn/anything else has to use Science, requiring them to invest anywhere from 50 to 100 skill points into a completely additional skill to do the same thing an Earth Pony is already. That seems pretty unique to me. You also seem to have this "If it isn't in the rules but the GM is doing it then it's pretty much terrible" attitude towards approaching this, which is, and I cannot stress the enough, literally the opposite of the intention of tabletop roleplaying games. GMs (and players) should always be creating new things for their games, ideally in a fashion which nests in neatly with the rest of the setting at one point or another along the balance scale.

Have you ever dug a 200ft trench in an hour and then sat down to build a gyrocopter? Or built five jetpacks in a row? I think it's entirely believable that you're exhausted by that point and need a rest.

Yes, that could physically exhaust you, but that doesn't strangely make your brain stop working, as Dimestream has already discussed quite thoroughly .

I am familiar with systems where everything is done in a cooperative and creative environment, including combat. Ever heard of Mage? My Mage character has the power of "Forces". I can use that ability to turn bullets, bend light, transmute sound into fire, listen in on radio transitions, create EMP detonations, create radiation, force fields, etc. Everything is done in an environment of maximum creativity and co-operation and that's the type of game Mage is all the way down.

This system isn't like that. The vast majority of stuff is extremely tightly managed and controlled, with a very clear bent of 'you need GM permission'. Having this one area of the system which operates on the same freeform rules as Mage when everything else is so tightly controlled is strange and unnatural. I mean, if I take my creativity off the leash I can rapidly create huge setting-disrupting inventions, like rapid communication or personal transport, but that in itself will conflict with the genre conventions of the FOE universe.

Yes, anyone can imagine anything that can wildly disrupt a setting, it's rarely hard. The magic is, so can the NPCs. If something like that doesn't exist yet, despite being so incredibly awesome that it would destroy the whole logic of the setting, it obviously indicates to the GM that this should be incredibly difficult to create, requiring pre-war industry scale production, lost arts, and ultimately effort that possibly pushes it to the point of not being worth it.

I am passingly familiar with Mage, yes, entirely thanks to Kkat. And, while you're right that the entirety of the setting doesn't flow like Mage does, inventions have clearly been designed to function in a similar fashion - much like item and spell creation in D&D 3.5 is, and in Pathfinder, and in a slew of other settings. Even in Mage, if the GM says "That ability doesn't make sense for it to be possible/fit in with that school" or "It's so flashy that the world would obviously whiplash the crap out of you for it" then, boom, it doesn't exist/isn't worth making, but such an activity requires a discussion between player and GM and effort on the part of the player.

Being able to move huge quantities of earth, as I suggested with Siege Works - that's an incredible option. If something like that was implemented I'd be prepared to call that a win and go from there. It would let Earth Ponies have an answer to a question nopony else could even ask - being able to tunnel into enemy locations, being able to establish caves, dig wells, dig irrigation trenches, establish fortifications and castles, and a vast range of other things.

You do realize that Raise That Barn absolutely lets Earth Ponies be the superior race for those tasks, right? Say you have a permanent tunnel, a group of Earth Ponies can accomplish this task up to four times faster than any other race. This remains true for moving huge quantities of earth, building trenches, castles, and everything else they can get their collective hooves on. Like I said, I'd happily see new/improved Earth Pony specialization perks, goodness knows you've come up with some solid stuff in the past, Thanqol, but don't ignore what's already there.

[Thanqol]

Assuming you're willing to think creatively - which is the entire point of the invention system and, again I'll point out, half the point of tabletop roleplaying games from my experience - none of those are terribly difficult to figure out . A tunneling machine would pull from the monster perk Burrow and/or the Sculpt spell. Given we're looking at a spell with a Basic option, the item could be appropriate even in early game, the specifics would just depend on player desires. Just want a slow way to tunnel through basic dirt and not worried about getting too deep or through tough materials, much like basic Sculpt? Not too hard, easy invention with some drilling mechanisms that could be attached to a pony-sized control platform. Want to basically be mimicking the Burrow perk? That should definitely be more difficult, requiring some more advanced and probably custom designed drilling components (requiring their own invention) and probably some high quality steel. Wanting a fast transit through even dense stone? Now you're talking about a utility that surpasses even Unicorn magic, so we're talking about significant research, pre-war tech, and skills nearing 100 sort of affair. Anything in-between is easily discerned between the monster perk and spell. I gave plenty of examples in my last post about how a GM can use basically anything that's already been done and their own sense of game-balance to guide their decisions, with plenty of options available if their first attempt doesn't quite work.

Well, bummer, you're barking up the wrong tree then. If it exhausts you, if you're not willing to put in effort to create new and unique items, then don't pursue invention, it's certainly a more creativity and discussion focused area of the game.

Not wanting to enter the realm of theoretical balance negotiations every time I want to create a thing isn't an indication of sloth, it's an indication that there should be a more robust set of examples, systems and practices to lean on.

Tabletops are time sensitive; you're only there for a few hours, and if every time you need to build a disposable invention to solve a specific need you need to stop and cross-compare half a dozen different spreadsheets and negotiate with your GM for leeway to create something in the middle of an otherwise action-packed session then it quickly falls by the wayside. When I'm at the table, I'm there to roleplay my character, not to systemcraft for thirty minutes and work out the appropriate costs and drawbacks of the device and run internal balancing. Often by the time the session has ended the invention's potential scope has ceased being relevant.

Furthermore, all this stuff is wildly dependent on the GM thinking it would be a cool idea and being prepared to give you a junkyard where you find all the spare parts you need/a storyline that enables you to sit on your plot and invent things for two weeks. This means that it's all GM drip feeding rather than the player being able to make an assertive change to the setting.

Science, not Mechanics. The super social Earth Pony can use their Special Talent Speech/Barter skill to create those schematics, whereas the super social Unicorn/anything else has to use Science, requiring them to invest anywhere from 50 to 100 skill points into a completely additional skill to do the same thing an Earth Pony is already.

Science, being the key skill of unicorn magic, is maxed by virtually every unicorn vaguely focused on spellcasting.

You also seem to have this "If it isn't in the rules but the GM is doing it then it's pretty much terrible" attitude towards approaching this, which is, and I cannot stress the enough, literally the opposite of the intention of tabletop roleplaying games. GMs (and players) should always be creating new things for their games, ideally in a fashion which nests in neatly with the rest of the setting at one point or another along the balance scale.

No, GM doing things that isn't in the rules is totally fine.

A player's core competency should not be a thing that isn't in the rules and is therefore at a GM's discretion.

A player's core competency is the medium through which they inflict changes, including unexpected changes, upon the world. Imagine if you had to ask the GM's permission every time you wanted to cast a spell.

Yes, that could physically exhaust you, but that doesn't strangely make your brain stop working, as Dimestream has already discussed quite thoroughly .

Have you ever done hard labour? Hard labour actually does stop your brain working. Because you're tired.

Yes, anyone can imagine anything that can wildly disrupt a setting, it's rarely hard. The magic is, so can the NPCs. If something like that doesn't exist yet, despite being so incredibly awesome that it would destroy the whole logic of the setting, it obviously indicates to the GM that this should be incredibly difficult to create, requiring pre-war industry scale production, lost arts, and ultimately effort that possibly pushes it to the point of not being worth it.

Ah, the nothing new under the sun argument.

EDIT: Actually a fair point but also kind of a downer one.

I am passingly familiar with Mage, yes, entirely thanks to Kkat. And, while you're right that the entirety of the setting doesn't flow like Mage does, inventions have clearly been designed to function in a similar fashion - much like item and spell creation in D&D 3.5 is, and in Pathfinder, and in a slew of other settings. Even in Mage, if the GM says "That ability doesn't make sense for it to be possible/fit in with that school" or "It's so flashy that the world would obviously whiplash the crap out of you for it" then, boom, it doesn't exist/isn't worth making, but such an activity requires a discussion between player and GM and effort on the part of the player.

I'm not sure what the point you're making here is. The point I'm making is that when the FOE system is by and large so locked down and mechanical this one spot of growing nature doesn't fit and, if implemented inconsistently with the existing mechanics, causes crashes and errors.

You do realize that Raise That Barn absolutely lets Earth Ponies be the superior race for those tasks, right? Say you have a permanent tunnel, a group of Earth Ponies can accomplish this task up to four times faster than any other race. This remains true for moving huge quantities of earth, building trenches, castles, and everything else they can get their collective hooves on. Like I said, I'd happily see new/improved Earth Pony specialization perks, goodness knows you've come up with some solid stuff in the past, Thanqol, but don't ignore what's already there.

If this was Applejack's Infrastructure Adventures then yeah, Raise This Barn would be a lot more useful than I'm giving it credit for. But the basic assumption of the setting seems to be 4-6 friends wandering around the wasteland Fighting Crime. It's not particularly relevant what Gary the IT Systems Engineer can do with computers when the zombie apocalypse hits because he doesn't have that infrastructure behind him any more.

I would forward the premise that groups of 5-10 Earth Ponies who all have that perk and are willing to help the player character build something are uncommon enough to not satisfy the role I want filled.

The role I want filled is the ability to open the door to mobility, infrastructure, and battlefield control options to Earth Ponies. Like I said, they need something to help them compete with Storm Cloud Architecture and Teleportation, things that can be done by a single pony, without needing a ten pony backup squad or explicit GM permission.


EDIT: The Mage core book has a long, long list of Spells. It doesn't represent even 10% of what you can do but it gives you an idea of what effects are available at what levels of mastery, and what the costs of each new level of mastery are. It's a nice simple guideline structure of what can be cast when and what the costs are. The Pegasus Tricks thing uses the same system - what effects are available at what levels and what they cost, all there in nice round numbers. I want that, but for inventing things.

EDIT 2: I'm even happy to give up on the whole 'inventing things' angle so long as my core point - strategic options for Earth Ponies - is addressed somehow.

EDIT 3: I want to play Applejack's Infrastructure Adventures now.

[Night Light]

I'll definitely agree that, as I noted before, a document expanding on examples and player/GM suggestions for invention could definitely be useful and I'd be happy to participate in its creation, I'm sure Viewing Glass would as well given it's his suggestion. I'm sure other players from our group and others could have some great insight there.

EDIT 2: I'm even happy to give up on the whole 'inventing things' angle so long as my core point - strategic options for Earth Ponies - is addressed somehow.

More fun options are always a good thing. By and large from the responses we've seen, adding/refining some of the master specialist perks that Earth Ponies have seems like it would be a functional solution to this and would certainly fit with existing mechanics and themes for Earth Ponies, and I'd certainly be happy to look at anything you come up with in that line of thought.

EDIT 3: I want to play Applejack's Infrastructure Adventures now.

Rofl, I don't think someone would have to try hard to convince me to play that, sounds amusing.

[Thanqol]

I'll definitely agree that, as I noted before, a document expanding on examples and player/GM suggestions for invention could definitely be useful and I'd be happy to participate in its creation, I'm sure Viewing Glass would as well given it's his suggestion. I'm sure other players from our group and others could have some great insight there.

More fun options are always a good thing. By and large from the responses we've seen, adding/refining some of the master specialist perks that Earth Ponies have seems like it would be a functional solution to this and would certainly fit with existing mechanics and themes for Earth Ponies, and I'd certainly be happy to look at anything you come up with in that line of thought.

Consensus reached, then. An easier to use invention reference document and more scope for EP strategic options.

I've got a bunch of ideas for both of those, but the implementation is the rub. If we make the EP mastery things Perk-based then taking them is going to directly cut into combat survival abilities, meaning each one has to be a pretty significant gain. The invention list I see perhaps using some form of tiering system similar to the current weapon list, indicating what should be craftable when.

Here's a short list of things I want to see somewhere:

- Feats of ridiculous strength (house towing prana)
- Mass earth movements (minecraft method)
- Temporary aviation (jetpacks)
- Concept space for vehicles of various kinds

These all seem to be fairly clearly within EP concept space. Any one of those would give a strategic edge comparable to aerospace control.

Rofl, I don't think someone would have to try hard to convince me to play that, sounds amusing.

Don't tempt me.