| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Dargoth |
Posted - 04 Mar 2007 : 06:41:03
Need some help with figuring out Personal costs for weapons of legacy (From D&D source book of the same name)
Now lets say a weapon of legacy uses Table 4-1 and 4-2 on page 185 of WoL for the cost (These are the "Fighter class" tables)
quote:
4-1
At 6th level loose 4 Hit points
At 8th level –1 Save Penalty
At 9th level –1 Attack penalty –2 Hit points
At 12th level –2 Hit points
At 13th level –2 Attack Penalty
At 15th level –2 hit points
At 16th level –2 Save penalty
At 18th level –3 Save penalty –2 Hit points
At 19th level –2 Hit points
At 20th level –2 hit points
Total losses at 20th level
Attack Penalty -3
Save Penalty (to all saving throws) -6
HP loss -16
quote:
4-2
At 6th level –1 Attack Penalty
At 7th level –1 to Single save –2 Hit points
At 8th level –2 Hit points
At 9th level –2 to Single save
At 10th level –2 Hit points
At 12th level –2 Attack Penalty
At 14th level –2 Hit points
At 15th level –3 to Single save
At 16h level –2 hit points
At 18th level –3 Attack penalty
At 20th level –4 to Single save
Total loss at 20th level
Attack penalty -6
Save penalty (To single saving throw) -10
Hit point loss -10
Is the math for penaltys correct? |
| 7 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Dargoth |
Posted - 07 Mar 2007 : 13:19:11
quote:
Originally posted by Bluenose
quote:
Originally posted by Dargoth
But the HP penalty IS cumulative isnt it?
Yes, it is. At least I think so.
quote:
That is really confusing cause it doesnt even say anything about it in the WoL
It is really strangely expressed.  However, the way I read it is that if a column is described as a penalty then that is not cumulative, and a column described as a loss then that is cumulative. I believe as well that if you can't pay the loss you still get the benefits for that level and have to pay it as soon as you can.
Ill go with that then
The near finished product can be found here
http://forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=9024 |
| Bluenose |
Posted - 07 Mar 2007 : 09:21:18
quote:
Originally posted by Dargoth
But the HP penalty IS cumulative isnt it?
Yes, it is. At least I think so.
quote:
That is really confusing cause it doesnt even say anything about it in the WoL
It is really strangely expressed. However, the way I read it is that if a column is described as a penalty then that is not cumulative, and a column described as a loss then that is cumulative. I believe as well that if you can't pay the loss you still get the benefits for that level and have to pay it as soon as you can. |
| Dargoth |
Posted - 07 Mar 2007 : 08:45:05
But the HP penalty IS cumulative isnt it?
That is really confusing cause it doesnt even say anything about it in the WoL
|
| Bluenose |
Posted - 07 Mar 2007 : 08:37:15
quote:
Originally posted by Dargoth
quote:
Originally posted by Hoondatha
I liked the concept a lot, but I don't like how they worked out the game mechanics. For example, why would a warrior take something that decreases BAB?
Your math looks accurate, and only underscores the problems that WoL have. I've toyed with the idea of either reducing the costs, getting rid of them completely, or making them a bit more limited (like a BAB penalty when you use any weapon but the WoL), but I haven't used one in a game yet, so I can't report on how they work.
One way to even it out might be to make the penalties for Saves and attack stated not cumulative ie Table 4-1 total penalty would be -2 to Attack -3 Save penalty and -16 hps by the time the character reaches 20th level. 4-2 would be -3 Attack -4 to single save -10 hit points
Checking it the penalties for saves/attacks/skill checks aren't cumulative. If a column in the table says something is a penalty then that isn't cumulative with previous entries but replaces them. If the column says something is a loss (skill points/hit points/spells) then those are cumulative. So your proposal is how the rules are supposed to work.
It's a very clumsy way of expressing things. I can't believe that a table would have both cumulative and non-cumulative penalties expressed in the same way, especially since it's not obvious that some are different. |
| Dargoth |
Posted - 06 Mar 2007 : 02:05:38
quote:
Originally posted by Hoondatha
I liked the concept a lot, but I don't like how they worked out the game mechanics. For example, why would a warrior take something that decreases BAB?
Your math looks accurate, and only underscores the problems that WoL have. I've toyed with the idea of either reducing the costs, getting rid of them completely, or making them a bit more limited (like a BAB penalty when you use any weapon but the WoL), but I haven't used one in a game yet, so I can't report on how they work.
One way to even it out might be to make the penalties for Saves and attack stated not cumulative ie Table 4-1 total penalty would be -2 to Attack -3 Save penalty and -16 hps by the time the character reaches 20th level. 4-2 would be -3 Attack -4 to single save -10 hit points |
| Hoondatha |
Posted - 06 Mar 2007 : 01:06:58
I liked the concept a lot, but I don't like how they worked out the game mechanics. For example, why would a warrior take something that decreases BAB?
Your math looks accurate, and only underscores the problems that WoL have. I've toyed with the idea of either reducing the costs, getting rid of them completely, or making them a bit more limited (like a BAB penalty when you use any weapon but the WoL), but I haven't used one in a game yet, so I can't report on how they work. |
| Dargoth |
Posted - 04 Mar 2007 : 23:14:30
I take it Weapons of Legacy wasnt popular with Candlekeep scribes?  |
