Post by Quinn Starling on Mar 7, 2016 15:30:07 GMT
Vester Lombard So, some feats are other action options (some of which require rolls & specific DCs and some don't) and some feats are just more of roll-modifiers, etc.
For some reason, this bothers me...Should we consider organizing those into a separate group? Would it be too complicated for everyone to have 1 modifier feat AND 1 action option feat? Or do you like it better with us just deciding which kind of feat we want?
As for the action-feats, I'm just curious what would happen if we reconsidered the DCs for rolling on some of those...The only ones I'm seeing with DC success/fail conditions are Protego & Decoy....Should those just be general actions instead of feats? Maybe along with Dodge, they can be 3 rolled actions for anyone to use? Beaters can beat anyone, why shouldn't any position be allowed to use a decoy snitch?
I still feel strongly that Rest should not be a rolled/success/fail action. To me, it's already painful enough having to rest knowing you can't use a third action that round. I couldn't even imagine failing a rest roll. Lol I'd be pissed.
Post by Vester Lombard on Mar 7, 2016 16:37:04 GMT
I agree, it is a bit weird if there's only a few feat actions. I would also like to either eliminate all of them or add more.
And yeah, having to spend an action to Rest is already punishing. I just thought that by adding the Dodge option that people would be taking less damage, so I added the Rest roll to counteract that. But maybe I'll change it back to how it was.
Post by Quinn Starling on Mar 16, 2016 17:53:42 GMT
Considering some of the hilarious/unfortunate DC/roll combinations I've seen, wouldn't this make a great feat (general feat):
Something like "Switcheroo" or "I meant to do that": Once per period, swap any two of your own same-action rolls with differing DC targets (post below them declaring the switch)
So, say you try to deflect and roll a 20, and then block and roll a 10. This would let you swap those results. Is this too dangerous?
Maybe after this game, I'll go back and count how many times this could have been used...It wouldn't necessarily make BOTH rolls successful, but maybe one of them...it'd also make some people consider playing one position rather than spreading across multiple skills.
Walltur: Mmk, I can see that now
Mar 17, 2016 15:19:37 GMT
Vester Lombard: Beating a seeker in the 4th is pretty huge. Each IP is essentially erasing the effect of one of their successful searches.
Mar 17, 2016 16:28:34 GMT
Quinn Starling: Yeah, I would have hit Ginger more if I thought she'd rest up or if you'd heal her. But I figured that you guys would maybe leave her at 2 since that was her max, especially since we decided to stay inujurred, too Lol
Mar 17, 2016 16:36:34 GMT
Quinn Starling: We planned back between periods 2-3 to consider staying injured if we got to -3 again, to waste any coming beatings. If you aim for low DCs, have enough skill to make up for the IP, AND get lucky, it's sometimes worth it to keep the damage & keep rolling
Mar 17, 2016 17:34:53 GMT
Vester Lombard: I think in the 2nd period you definitely have to rest. 3rd period, maybe, pending your team strategy. 4th period, probably not.
Mar 17, 2016 21:14:43 GMT
Sprye Tatel: In the interest of not adding a new post each day to the Space Debate threads, would we be interested in sharing ideas via Google Docs? tinyurl.com/zlk8sb3
Mar 21, 2016 5:01:20 GMT
Quinn Starling: I'm in favor of death penalty for illegal pretty floral bonnets. I think that needs to be an argument that happens Lol
Mar 21, 2016 13:54:41 GMT
Walltur: Pro, but under the argument that all viewers of the bonnet be executed, rather than the wearer. Deadly illegal bonnets
Mar 22, 2016 4:16:02 GMT
Quinn Starling: Depends on how pretty. We'd need a numerical rating scale, to start. Any bonnet rated 6 or over (by 2/3 vote of galactic council) is determined "pretty" and a single flower may be defined as "floral." Any fixture worn upon the head may serve as "bonnet."
Mar 22, 2016 15:54:13 GMT
Quinn Starling: (that's on a scale of 1-10) And I'd be against death penalty for illegal ones (unregistered, obtained illegally, etc.) Jail sentencing and community work are appropriate, but not death penalty. Too extreme.
Mar 22, 2016 15:56:18 GMT
Vester Lombard: While I am against the death penalty for pretty floral bonnets, I do think that all people who have encountered the bonnet should have their brains slightly melted. I think this would both save lives and prevent any risk of spreading that fashion
Mar 22, 2016 16:25:34 GMT
Sprye Tatel: Again with the slightly-melting brains proposal? Seems very convenient for the Muppet-race; who can re-grow/stuff brain cells! Whose pocket are you in? Who is pulling your strings!?
Mar 22, 2016 17:16:41 GMT
Sprye Tatel: I say that the punishment should fit the crime: The penalty for Pretty Floral Bonnet's (PFB's) should be death by PFB!
Mar 22, 2016 17:19:46 GMT
Quinn Starling: I have found my people. This is where I belong <3
Mar 22, 2016 23:08:03 GMT
Walltur: Any games coming down the pipe? Online practice game of Cornucopia?
Apr 6, 2016 15:19:22 GMT
Vester Lombard: If you guys want we could try doing some online Galactic Debate. It would lose a bit of the spontaneous improv element when played on the forum, but maybe it could at least help figure out which cards are fun or boring.
Apr 11, 2016 16:36:36 GMT
Quinn Starling: We could schedule a "live" session and either skype or have the speaker type up their response within a certain time frame. So, speaker says they're free at 9pm. At 8:55 they're given their topic, then they have from 9:00-9:05 to type up their platform...?
Apr 11, 2016 17:53:36 GMT