|
|
|
Uberuce
|
 Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 8:08 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Location: Near the bar.
|
|
No love for Listen past that +2DC?
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Dev Disco
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 8:19 AM |
|
|
HRM Chicken I of Amia
Joined: 02 Jun 2005
Location: Amsterdam
|
Charles1810 wrote: 8. Roll modified/buffed pickpocket + 20 vs DC
What is the +20 accounting for? Besides this looks great and sounds fair and legit to me.
Usual DnD roll?
_________________
Say 'no' to JSBF!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dev Disco
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 8:19 AM |
|
|
HRM Chicken I of Amia
Joined: 02 Jun 2005
Location: Amsterdam
|
Uberuce wrote: No love for Listen past that +2DC?
Wasn't part of the old one either, I kinda remade the tests.
_________________
Say 'no' to JSBF!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ts_
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 8:23 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 28 Jul 2008
|
Dev Disco wrote: 8. Roll modified/buffed pickpocket + 20 vs DC
Should be "d20" or simply left out. Hence the confusion.
Regards, Ts
_________________
Ralghok & Hazamir "The Weasel"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dev Disco
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 8:43 AM |
|
|
HRM Chicken I of Amia
Joined: 02 Jun 2005
Location: Amsterdam
|
|
O, didn't even spot that typo. Yes, the usual ranks + d20() roll.
_________________
Say 'no' to JSBF!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gravemaskin
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 9:02 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 29 Jul 2007
Location: Norway: Home of the Trolls
|
Dev Disco wrote: [Snip]
This is how things look now...
The rolls, look kinda uneven to me.
let's say there are 5 bystanders and the pickpocket's seen, and the target has.. 100 spot.
that's 10+10+10+50= 90 vs d20+skillrank.
your average thief with say ... 13 dexmod and no skillfocuses can get pp up to 96, with capped out items. so pretty much an autowin, even against people with epicly high spot, populated areas and while being seen.
Just seems wrong to me that someone with like 120 spot, can easily get lifted by someone with 0 stealth but a 70-80 pickpocket, if no one's around. The first one, you pretty much have to go esf on and such to get, but the latter can be gotten with a normal dexmod, skillrank and items. Now if the players in question, didn't loose anything, but the pickpocket gained something (something's that has no real base in RP, I know), that'd be different.
Just always seemed unfair to me that someone can dump in a skill, and actually take cash form your char, without some form of RP consent.
_________________
Adair - Druid and part time treant cosplayer
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Incognitos
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 9:12 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 10 Dec 2007
|
|
But who can afford to jump PP up that far?(plans Uber-pp rebuild) I've decided I like that Thief drops gold on failure... that's even more risk for the fumble-fingered, more risk for PP in general.
_________________ Jess Incognito:- Ah, but the phoenix may fly only when its feathers are grown...
Olaf Grudgebringer: Stroppy Cleric or Morradin
Krunk (Underdark): Stay back! He's a bit mad.
the_incognitos@live.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gravemaskin
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 9:21 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 29 Jul 2007
Location: Norway: Home of the Trolls
|
The Incognitos wrote: But who can afford to jump PP up that far?(plans Uber-pp rebuild) I've decided I like that Thief drops gold on failure... that's even more risk for the fumble-fingered, more risk for PP in general.
33 skillrank, 13 dexmod. +50 from items. It's not that hard. i just did something similar to another skill on my shifter.
and 2% is 1 in 20 pickpockets, IF the 1 is a failure(skillrolls won't be an autofail), that's still 19 other people loosing 1%
_________________
Adair - Druid and part time treant cosplayer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Uberuce
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 9:23 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Location: Near the bar.
|
|
One of the problems with the current widget is that OOC note which says you do not know you've been picked. It obliges you to have your character act as if they are crap at keeping track of their goods, and there's no rule (nor can there be, I'd say) on when they are allowed to notice any item is missing.
I suggested a ten round delay inbetween the last roll and the gold/item drain since it means the official rule can be that your character notices the missing gold/item the second the battle log notes it.
My extensive research into real-life petty theft(ie stuff I've seen it on the telly) concludes that the standard practise is to dip, take, walk away as if already in a hurry, and only examine the find once you're out of sight. That minute's pause would be the walk-round-corner time.
Thus Blind Pete can be picked, then a minute later say ICly "Bastards! Someone's had my purse!" and his buddy Eagle-Eyed Pete can say "Oooh, I saw a wee slinky fella pass right by you a minute ago. Let's go kick his arse".
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dev Disco
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 9:40 AM |
|
|
HRM Chicken I of Amia
Joined: 02 Jun 2005
Location: Amsterdam
|
|
That's something I'd like to add too.
To Gravemaskin. Your example doesn't look that weird to me. If there are 5 bystanders, the pickpocket's seen, and the target has 100 spot the chances of you picking him should be close to zero, or you must be damn good.
Mind that over half the DC comes from the same calculation we have now. Spot/2 is taken right from the current widget.
Old calculation: 20 + party bonus + Character Level / 2 + Spot skill / 2
New calculation: 10 + bystanders + seen/heard + Spot skill / 2
Let's say your example target is level 30 (with 100 spot that will almost always be the case) and he has two partymembers close-by (out of 5 bystanders).
Old calculation: 20 + 4 + 15 + 50 = 89
New calculation: 10 + 10 + 10 + 50 = 80 (not sure how you got to 90)
_________________
Say 'no' to JSBF!
|
|
|
|
|
|
BrainSplitter
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 9:59 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Apr 2005
Location: Victoria, Australia
|
|
That DC needs some tweaking, actually, as Grave pointed out. I suggest some, if possible, amount of consideration for whether or not those 'nearby' people are Spotters/Detectors themselves.
The Thief's Roll
Assuming your midrange dexbuild rogue (+7 Unmodded Dex. Most have +8, elves +9) with Maximum Ranks, no Feats, and full Mythal Gear. His Roll will be;
(1:20) + 33 Ranks + 50 Items + 7 Unmodded Dex + 6 Dex Mod = (97:116)
Verdict: Lowest Possible Outcome = 97*. Highest Possible Outcome = 116*.
* Increase these numbers by 10 if Epic Skill Focus, 3 if Pre Epic Skill Focus, and 1 or 2 dependant on extra DEX
The Victim's DC
The DC to beat, assuming extrenuating circumstances (5 party members nearby, target has 100 spot, and can see the thief)
10 (base) + 10 (thief spotted) + 10 (5x +2 for nearby persons) + 50 (100 spot / 2) = 80
Verdict: DC = 80
Chance of Success = 100%
To make this worse; Let's say Joe Fighter who, by being human, had extra skill points on hand. He simply dumps skillpoints and boosts his gear with Mythal. He only has +1 Dex (because he needs 13 to be a weaponmaster), and doesn't even bother upping his Dex score.
(1:20) + 33 Ranks + 50 Items + 1 Dex Mod = (85:104)
He still wins automatically.
_________________
Mostly Retired
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yurell
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 10:14 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Location: ANU, behind the coffee mug (+10 GMT)
|
|
2/3 Spot modifier? That dumps an extra 16 points into the equation.
_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player
يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل
|
|
|
|
|
|
BrainSplitter
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 10:17 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Apr 2005
Location: Victoria, Australia
|
|
DC 96 vs Roll of (97:116)?
_________________
Mostly Retired
|
|
|
|
|
|
BrainSplitter
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 10:19 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Apr 2005
Location: Victoria, Australia
|
|
I still like the 50% of each nearby person's spot score instead of +2 >.>
_________________
Mostly Retired
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yurell
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 10:21 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Location: ANU, behind the coffee mug (+10 GMT)
|
|
Oh it's a DC! I thought it was a roll! My mistake.
Well, in that case I'd just suggest full skill and not be stupid enough to rob someone with high spot. It'd be like mugging a martial-arts expert.
_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player
يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dev Disco
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 10:39 AM |
|
|
HRM Chicken I of Amia
Joined: 02 Jun 2005
Location: Amsterdam
|
|
Hmmm... that kinda min/max calculations make the whole idea to be able to PP NPCs pointless. Most don't even have spot.
I guess it's either only using raw ranks, an total non-DnD calculation, or no balance. It's impossible to do anything sensible with a 1-100 skill range and a d20. Well, that's why DnD sucks anyway. Low skill ranks are insignificant compared to the d20, at higher levels the d20 is insignificant compared to the ranks. You got a bit of a sweet game mechanics spot between 10-30 skill ranks, outside that it's just poor design.
_________________
Say 'no' to JSBF!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Xaviera
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 10:54 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 07 Aug 2006
Location: Temple of Love
|
Dev Disco wrote: 9. On failure
- thief drops 2% of the his cash up to a level*500 cap or a previously stolen item
10. On success
- Animals etc only give XP
 to both of these. _________________  ~Sharess on AmiaWiki~Priestess, politician, prostitute "[They] were moving in on me like Sharessans on a new broad in the bath house" - Tracer BoltAmiaWiki mod (mostly inactive)
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Cobbit
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 10:57 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 09 Aug 2005
Location: Satellite Of Love
|
|
On failure is supposed to be kind of a deer-in-the-headlights, crap I'm caught, scramble dealie, where in their haste to avoid the law and an arse-stomping by the intended mark, the picker accidentally loses some of their gp.
I don't even know why you'd be shoving your hand up a badger's rectum though.
_________________
I have a large seashell collection which I keep scattered on the beaches all over the world. Maybe you've seen it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Xaviera
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 11:05 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 07 Aug 2006
Location: Temple of Love
|
The Cobbit wrote: On failure is supposed to be kind of a deer-in-the-headlights, crap I'm caught, scramble dealie, where in their haste to avoid the law and an arse-stomping by the intended mark, the picker accidentally loses some of their gp. I realize that. But it seems harsh/lame to lose even more than you would have won. I dont think there should be a penalty for failure apart from "Joe tried to pickpocket Alf and failed!" Then you can RP the consequences, be they face-stompage or ostracism if the little bugger runs off (3 days later: "Hey, everybody! There's the guy who tried to pickpocket me last week!"). For clarification, I dont play and never have played a PPer, so I dont stand to gain anything here. The Cobbit wrote: I don't even know why you'd be shoving your hand up a badger's rectum though.
Ah, so that's why a Druid might multiclass with Rogue... _________________ ~Sharess on AmiaWiki~Priestess, politician, prostitute "[They] were moving in on me like Sharessans on a new broad in the bath house" - Tracer BoltAmiaWiki mod (mostly inactive)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dev Disco
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 11:38 AM |
|
|
HRM Chicken I of Amia
Joined: 02 Jun 2005
Location: Amsterdam
|
|
The animals part is a mental fart. I should block PP on them altogether.
_________________
Say 'no' to JSBF!
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Incognitos
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 11:40 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 10 Dec 2007
|
|
On those min. - max. examples, if you get PPed by an Epic Pickpocket then expect to lose. If you're an Epic Spotter then you still have a chance to catch them IF the situation favors you. Standing in a crowd, etc...
If they get you in a dark ally with no one else about then expect to lose.
Like an assassin getting you with a Banshee Wail from out of the blue when they know you have a crap Will save.
EDIT: Uhhh... no more booze
_________________ Jess Incognito:- Ah, but the phoenix may fly only when its feathers are grown...
Olaf Grudgebringer: Stroppy Cleric or Morradin
Krunk (Underdark): Stay back! He's a bit mad.
the_incognitos@live.com
Last edited by The Incognitos on Fri, May 29 2009, 13:33 PM, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
|
|
|
|
TormakSaber
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 11:46 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 16 Dec 2004
Location: Somewhere
|
Quote: On those min. - max. examples, if you get PPed by an Epic Pickpocket then expect to lose
Um, that's not how it works. 
_________________
Davion Telemos - Monk of the Four Winds
Korthan Isharnos - Dragon Shaman of Thunder Spirit Zamasham
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dev Disco
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 11:56 AM |
|
|
HRM Chicken I of Amia
Joined: 02 Jun 2005
Location: Amsterdam
|
|
I allow you to pick any NPC that isn't an animal, and they don't mythal their gear etc.
_________________
Say 'no' to JSBF!
|
|
|
|
|
|
BrainSplitter
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 12:24 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Apr 2005
Location: Victoria, Australia
|
The Incognitos wrote: On those min. - max. examples, if you get PPed by an Epic Pickpocket then expect to lose. If you're an Epic Spotter then you still have a chance to catch them IF the situation favors you. Standing in a crowd, etc...
If they get you in a dark ally with no one else about then expect to lose.
Like an assassin getting you with a Banshee Wail from out of the blue when they know you have a crap Will save. Non-Epic Pickpocket vs Epic Shadowdancer surrounded by Buddies after Seeing the Pickpocket.
Pickpocket wins. Just look at my post for the breakdown of it, if you can't understand it.
_________________
Mostly Retired
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selmak
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 12:27 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 17 Dec 2004
|
|
Rolling d20 + skill ranks + modifiers is going to yield a fairly predictable result if skill ranks are high. Rolling Random(n + skill ranks + modifiers) gives a lot more room for excitement, IMO.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jan
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 13:00 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Nov 2005
|
WonWon wrote: post
The "right" to not suffer anything negative is completely retarded and should be abolished. I can't describe in words how much it violates what I consider a good roleplaying experience.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yurell
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 13:00 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Location: ANU, behind the coffee mug (+10 GMT)
|
Selmak wrote: Rolling d20 + skill ranks + modifiers is going to yield a fairly predictable result if skill ranks are high. Rolling Random(n + skill ranks + modifiers) gives a lot more room for excitement, IMO.
It would be more exciting, except that it does not even remotely resemble any other skill that way.
Or anything else in D&D for that matter.
_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player
يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل
|
|
|
|
|
|
BrainSplitter
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 13:02 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Apr 2005
Location: Victoria, Australia
|
Jan wrote: WonWon wrote: post The "right" to not suffer anything negative is completely retarded and should be abolished. I can't describe in words how much it violates what I consider a good roleplaying experience. I do agree, much like KJetta, that people need to stop being so damn protective about what happens to their characters.
However.
This is by long and far the wrong way to go about it.
_________________
Mostly Retired
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dev Disco
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 13:09 PM |
|
|
HRM Chicken I of Amia
Joined: 02 Jun 2005
Location: Amsterdam
|
Selmak wrote: Rolling d20 + skill ranks + modifiers is going to yield a fairly predictable result if skill ranks are high. Rolling Random(n + skill ranks + modifiers) gives a lot more room for excitement, IMO.
Yush
_________________
Say 'no' to JSBF!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selmak
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 13:46 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 17 Dec 2004
|
|
People would be less protective of their characters if other people wouldn't seek to inflict maximum butthurt with minimum repercussions. Or, if there are safeguards in place so that:
Either a pickpocket does suffer repercussions (in other words they stick around) if they're caught.
Or they can't inflict any butthurt (in other words, logging off quickly to avoid getting caught results in a reversal of the transaction).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jan
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 13:51 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Nov 2005
|
Selmak wrote: Or they can't inflict any butthurt (in other words, logging off quickly to avoid getting caught results in a reversal of the transaction).
Why do we have to base our systems on the actions of people who'll get banned anyway? Good players don't do that kinda shit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
TormakSaber
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 13:53 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 16 Dec 2004
Location: Somewhere
|
|
But not everyone is a 'good player' and so rulesets must be designed to be innately as unabusable as possible.
_________________
Davion Telemos - Monk of the Four Winds
Korthan Isharnos - Dragon Shaman of Thunder Spirit Zamasham
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yurell
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 13:59 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Location: ANU, behind the coffee mug (+10 GMT)
|
TormakSaber wrote: But not everyone is a 'good player' and so rulesets must be designed to be innately as unabusable as possible.
Unfortunately, I believe Tormak is correct in that assessment.
_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player
يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dev Disco
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 14:02 PM |
|
|
HRM Chicken I of Amia
Joined: 02 Jun 2005
Location: Amsterdam
|
|
Anyway, this point is rather moot. Picking items from inventory is severely flawed (You can steal somebody's halberd without him noticing? Come on!) and will only be improved by generating stuff that makes a bit more sense.
Maybe we can simply pick the worth of the item from the victim's cash, though. So, stealing WonWon's Fat Wallet (500 GP) would take 500 GP from WonWon. I have put a delay on the money taking, btw. Gives you time to leg it.
_________________
Say 'no' to JSBF!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jan
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 14:07 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Nov 2005
|
TormakSaber wrote: But not everyone is a 'good player' and so rulesets must be designed to be innately as unabusable as possible.
By your logic the rule should be "Don't log off to avoid consequences for pickpocketing"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dev Disco
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 14:10 PM |
|
|
HRM Chicken I of Amia
Joined: 02 Jun 2005
Location: Amsterdam
|
|
Folks, get a room. This discussion could be used to define 'circular' by now.
_________________
Say 'no' to JSBF!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gravemaskin
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 14:20 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 29 Jul 2007
Location: Norway: Home of the Trolls
|
|
Removing the skillpenalty also opens up Pickpocket for the same old uses, whom are banned on Amia. I know, but it'll still happen.. People can start using old pickpocket with success, some are going to.
My suggestion is throwing on a -100 pp to everyone who take a single rank, and add +100 on the calculation in the script.
_________________
Adair - Druid and part time treant cosplayer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selmak
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 14:26 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 17 Dec 2004
|
|
If everyone's entire inventory is marked as 'Can Not Pickpocket' though, the items are protected.
Doesn't protect your cash monet though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dev Disco
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 15:37 PM |
|
|
HRM Chicken I of Amia
Joined: 02 Jun 2005
Location: Amsterdam
|
|
True, but considering the damage of about 30 GP a hit I'd not bother too much.
_________________
Say 'no' to JSBF!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gravemaskin
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 15:57 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 29 Jul 2007
Location: Norway: Home of the Trolls
|
Dev Disco wrote: True, but considering the damage of about 30 GP a hit I'd not bother too much.
The original pp system can lift items too, unless I'm mistaken
_________________
Adair - Druid and part time treant cosplayer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ts_
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 17:39 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 28 Jul 2008
|
|
Gravemaskin, Selmak and Disco replied to your post:
The regular NWN pickpocket is / will be neutered to steal gold only with some trick.
Regards, Ts
_________________
Ralghok & Hazamir "The Weasel"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Charles1810
|
Posted: Fri, May 29 2009, 22:02 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 17 Sep 2007
Location: Hubbard, Ohio
|
Dev Disco wrote: O, didn't even spot that typo. Yes, the usual ranks + d20() roll.
Okay thank you was thinking just +20 for x reasoning. Thanks for clearing it up.
_________________
Lieutenant Belalad Feiwallyan
((Please take note if you PM me and you are ignored resend to me in 1-3days, it is likely due to not realizing I got mail))
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yurell
|
Posted: Sat, May 30 2009, 2:11 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Location: ANU, behind the coffee mug (+10 GMT)
|
Gravemaskin wrote: Dev Disco wrote: True, but considering the damage of about 30 GP a hit I'd not bother too much. The original pp system can lift items too, unless I'm mistaken I thought they wee marking all items as un-PPable.
_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player
يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wolfking6116
|
Posted: Sat, May 30 2009, 2:15 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 10 Jan 2008
Location: -5 GMT
|
Selmak wrote: everyone's entire inventory is marked as 'Can Not Pickpocket' though
Solution, Grave. Also, Disco stated he would do this earlier.
I hate to bring back the round-a-bout, but have it be that anyone who logs off within 5 minutes of a PP, the money goes back to the victim. Or perhaps something even harsher than that.
Also, I suggest making it so if you fail the DC by 10 is when you're caught. I think it's similar in the old widget, maybe it's ten. Above that, no reward. Failing by 20 or so causes a critical, which is when the gold should be taken from the PPer.
As a relative note, why does the PPer lose more gold on a failure than is even possible to take? Both 2% and 500xLvl are double of what is able to be taken. Yes, I understand that there should be "reprecussions", but seriously? _________________ Jack Tesilent - Jack's Bio
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dev Disco
|
Posted: Sat, May 30 2009, 6:55 AM |
|
|
HRM Chicken I of Amia
Joined: 02 Jun 2005
Location: Amsterdam
|
|
WonWon told me so!
_________________
Say 'no' to JSBF!
|
|
|
|
|
|
BrainSplitter
|
Posted: Sat, May 30 2009, 7:05 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Apr 2005
Location: Victoria, Australia
|
|
To elaborate;
A System that allows any player to breach a rule (that being, a mechanic that permits you to take something from another player, mechanically, without consent; despite our rules clearly stating that a player can opt to merely RP giving any item from their character) should be one wherein considerable risk is involved.
It's also much better than the alternative suggestion, that is "It causes nothing but headaches; remove the entire system and encourage Dicerolls or Equal Consent RP"
_________________
Mostly Retired
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dev Disco
|
Posted: Sat, May 30 2009, 7:09 AM |
|
|
HRM Chicken I of Amia
Joined: 02 Jun 2005
Location: Amsterdam
|
WonWon wrote: That DC needs some tweaking, actually, as Grave pointed out. I suggest some, if possible, amount of consideration for whether or not those 'nearby' people are Spotters/Detectors themselves.
The Thief's Roll
Assuming your midrange dexbuild rogue (+7 Unmodded Dex. Most have +8, elves +9) with Maximum Ranks, no Feats, and full Mythal Gear. His Roll will be;
(1:20) + 33 Ranks + 50 Items + 7 Unmodded Dex + 6 Dex Mod = (97:116)
Verdict: Lowest Possible Outcome = 97*. Highest Possible Outcome = 116*.
* Increase these numbers by 10 if Epic Skill Focus, 3 if Pre Epic Skill Focus, and 1 or 2 dependant on extra DEX
The Victim's DC
The DC to beat, assuming extrenuating circumstances (5 party members nearby, target has 100 spot, and can see the thief)
10 (base) + 10 (thief spotted) + 10 (5x +2 for nearby persons) + 50 (100 spot / 2) = 80
Verdict: DC = 80
Chance of Success = 100%
To make this worse; Let's say Joe Fighter who, by being human, had extra skill points on hand. He simply dumps skillpoints and boosts his gear with Mythal. He only has +1 Dex (because he needs 13 to be a weaponmaster), and doesn't even bother upping his Dex score.
(1:20) + 33 Ranks + 50 Items + 1 Dex Mod = (85:104)
He still wins automatically.
I think it's best to split the calculation. Maxed out PCs are not my forte, so you lot think of something clever.
NPCs will get some random Spot value (most were never given decent stats) and work along the routines mentioned above. Guess I'll use raw PP ranks to give a reasonable roll vs DC range.
_________________
Say 'no' to JSBF!
|
|
|
|
|
|
BrainSplitter
|
Posted: Sat, May 30 2009, 7:11 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Apr 2005
Location: Victoria, Australia
|
|
I agree, Disco. And, it's not even maxed out PCs.
IMHO, it's a system best kept for PC vs NPC. Leave PC vs PC for players to work out between themselves without a disagreement-spurring or inevitably-unbalanced (either for or against the victim) system that does, at its core, take something without consent.
_________________
Mostly Retired
|
|
|
|
|
|
BrainSplitter
|
Posted: Sat, May 30 2009, 7:28 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Apr 2005
Location: Victoria, Australia
|
|
Anyway. My personal opinion as a result of the above should we be keeping PC vs PC.
When you put an Epic Pickpocket against an Epic Spotter, the chance should be 50/50 if those are the raw factors. No prior spotting, nearbies, or anything.
Thus, go back to the oldest system of working out for counter skills. 1d20 + skill vs 10 + skill DC
1d20 + Pickpocket (+ Modifiers) vs 10 + Spot (+ Modifiers)
That's your standard for DnD. The d20 gives you the 'Random Edge' at higher end, which is the idea. If anyone is vastly better than the other, then they don't have a chance of failing, however when closely matched; chance comes to play.
It's why the d20 System actually works, to an extent.
Anyway, personally, I consider the fact that every Pickpocket is going to be a dexer. The majority of spotters aren't. Simple build mechanic.
Thus I'd tweak it to 1d20 + PP vs 15 + Spot. Favoured towards the Defender somewhat, yes, however still possible (25% chance). For an ability that offers a 'legal rule breach', this is pretty good.
Keep your standard modifiers in that you've already covered. This encourages your pickpocket to be careful about his targets. Is his target alone? Are they likely to be a spotter? Have they already seen him? All considerations the thief should be making; not the casual defender.
_________________
Mostly Retired
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yurell
|
Posted: Sat, May 30 2009, 8:18 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Location: ANU, behind the coffee mug (+10 GMT)
|
|
I like Won's DC. It makes more sense IMO.
_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player
يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل
|
|
|
|
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Login
