TOPIC: Attribute Design

Wade Schwendemann wrote: Just to be clear, there are a couple other horns
Drinking horn of the bliss
50 GP drinking horn
Minotaur Horn of Alert

I am fine with limiting the total number of slotless, though I think the limit needs to be fairly high.

I actually think adding additional tomes and beads will open up more token design space at all levels, much like we have with figurines.

I would agree that any other benefit needs to be baked into the party card, even if it means a revision of the party card (which would presumably have to happen after class redesign anyhow)

Time is a constraint in coaching as well. So while adding to the party card takes the load off the DM, it puts it on the coaches instead.

Harlax wrote:

Wade Schwendemann wrote: Just to be clear, there are a couple other horns
Drinking horn of the bliss
50 GP drinking horn
Minotaur Horn of Alert

I am fine with limiting the total number of slotless, though I think the limit needs to be fairly high.

I actually think adding additional tomes and beads will open up more token design space at all levels, much like we have with figurines.

I would agree that any other benefit needs to be baked into the party card, even if it means a revision of the party card (which would presumably have to happen after class redesign anyhow)

Time is a constraint in coaching as well. So while adding to the party card takes the load off the DM, it puts it on the coaches instead.

Is there an argument to be made to extend the coaching time by 12 minutes, and instead of naming the rooms based on time, perhaps letter designations?

Or would people all just show up late anyhow.

Wade Schwendemann wrote:

Harlax wrote:

Wade Schwendemann wrote: Just to be clear, there are a couple other horns
Drinking horn of the bliss
50 GP drinking horn
Minotaur Horn of Alert

I am fine with limiting the total number of slotless, though I think the limit needs to be fairly high.

I actually think adding additional tomes and beads will open up more token design space at all levels, much like we have with figurines.

I would agree that any other benefit needs to be baked into the party card, even if it means a revision of the party card (which would presumably have to happen after class redesign anyhow)

Time is a constraint in coaching as well. So while adding to the party card takes the load off the DM, it puts it on the coaches instead.

Is there an argument to be made to extend the coaching time by 12 minutes, and instead of naming the rooms based on time, perhaps letter designations?

Or would people all just show up late anyhow.

Maybe and yes respectively.

More seriously, it would probably require more coaches. The 24 minute set up allows two coaches to leapfrog and cover coaching. Extending the time would break that system. As with so many things the availability of volunteers is a constraint

Harlax wrote:

Endgame wrote:

Harlax wrote: Limiting Ioun Stones is problematic as we will soon have three treasure enhancing stones.

So a limit that would prevent the use of all three...

Torches and pitchforks.

Besides CHA is already used for another slot

Not following the ioun Stone comment. Additionally, if you want to slot something other than a platinum nugget, no one is going to stop you.

Someone proposed an ioun stone limit of two or three.

Not sure who proposed a limit on Ioun Stones...but there already is one. Ioun Stone max is 9.

Just to clear this up:

Edwin accidentally typed ioun stone when he meant to type figurine. He posted about that on the first page that it was a typo, but people still keep going back to it haha

jpotter wrote: Just to clear this up:

Edwin accidentally typed ioun stone when he meant to type figurine. He posted about that on the first page that it was a typo, but people still keep going back to it haha

Second page actually. If I’d quoted his initial post in my responses less confusion would have resulted

So in regard to limiting the number of slotless items a character/player can carry, this should come down to simple math. In D&D encumbrance terms it is a weight vs effectiveness issue. As said in other posts the number should be reasonably high but it would be a simple matter of adding a statistic to the item description page for current slotless items. By example; "this item adds 1 to your encumbrance total" under the actual description. Player max is 25 Encumbrance total (this is an arbitrary number chosen for example, actual number could be thematically and mathematically determined). Something small like individual Cavadar teeth add 0 encumbrance, but final transmuted item actually counts as 1-3 Encumbrance (depending on what said item is) toward that total. This would start to add some limits on what and how many a player can bring in to the dungeon or grind. Add a slot to the playmat, say to the right of the eyes designated slotless stack here. Also could be a simple box added to party card if needed for a total and would allow for penalties for those that choose to become over encumbered, say minus 1 for Dexterity saves for each point over said total with higher penalty plateaus (minus to party initiative) for those that like planning for all occasions, risks be damned to themselves or others. Perhaps an icon could be added to future token development for slotless to be represented on it's dial/face so it's view-able at a glance for ease of adding (if needed). Also, could be used to enhance/detract character types. Dwarven Fighter could get an encumbrance bonus say +5 to total (accustomed to heavy loads), Elven Wizard and Regular Wizard perhaps a penalty of -5 to total, unaccustomed to heavy loads. This would add flavor and a design challenge over all to dedicated players while not being a major issue to beginners. I think this could be pretty simple application in the long run and contribute to the over all player/attribute creep that is gradually occurring.

My 2 cents

Spud

Spud wrote: So in regard to limiting the number of slotless items a character/player can carry, this should come down to simple math. In D&D encumbrance terms it is a weight vs effectiveness issue. As said in other posts the number should be reasonably high but it would be a simple matter of adding a statistic to the item description page for current slotless items. By example; "this item adds 1 to your encumbrance total" under the actual description. Player max is 25 Encumbrance total (this is an arbitrary number chosen for example, actual number could be thematically and mathematically determined). Something small like individual Cavadar teeth add 0 encumbrance, but final transmuted item actually counts as 1-3 Encumbrance (depending on what said item is) toward that total. This would start to add some limits on what and how many a player can bring in to the dungeon or grind. Add a slot to the playmat, say to the right of the eyes designated slotless stack here. Also could be a simple box added to party card if needed for a total and would allow for penalties for those that choose to become over encumbered, say minus 1 for Dexterity saves for each point over said total with higher penalty plateaus (minus to party initiative) for those that like planning for all occasions, risks be damned to themselves or others. Perhaps an icon could be added to future token development for slotless to be represented on it's dial/face so it's view-able at a glance for ease of adding (if needed). Also, could be used to enhance/detract character types. Dwarven Fighter could get an encumbrance bonus say +5 to total (accustomed to heavy loads), Elven Wizard and Regular Wizard perhaps a penalty of -5 to total, unaccustomed to heavy loads. This would add flavor and a design challenge over all to dedicated players while not being a major issue to beginners. I think this could be pretty simple application in the long run and contribute to the over all player/attribute creep that is gradually occurring.

My 2 cents

Spud

One more thing for coaches to calculate. I don't think the benefits of an encumbrance system out weigh the costs.

Spud wrote: So in regard to limiting the number of slotless items a character/player can carry, this should come down to simple math. In D&D encumbrance terms it is a weight vs effectiveness issue. As said in other posts the number should be reasonably high but it would be a simple matter of adding a statistic to the item description page for current slotless items. By example; "this item adds 1 to your encumbrance total" under the actual description. Player max is 25 Encumbrance total (this is an arbitrary number chosen for example, actual number could be thematically and mathematically determined). Something small like individual Cavadar teeth add 0 encumbrance, but final transmuted item actually counts as 1-3 Encumbrance (depending on what said item is) toward that total. This would start to add some limits on what and how many a player can bring in to the dungeon or grind. Add a slot to the playmat, say to the right of the eyes designated slotless stack here. Also could be a simple box added to party card if needed for a total and would allow for penalties for those that choose to become over encumbered, say minus 1 for Dexterity saves for each point over said total with higher penalty plateaus (minus to party initiative) for those that like planning for all occasions, risks be damned to themselves or others. Perhaps an icon could be added to future token development for slotless to be represented on it's dial/face so it's view-able at a glance for ease of adding (if needed). Also, could be used to enhance/detract character types. Dwarven Fighter could get an encumbrance bonus say +5 to total (accustomed to heavy loads), Elven Wizard and Regular Wizard perhaps a penalty of -5 to total, unaccustomed to heavy loads. This would add flavor and a design challenge over all to dedicated players while not being a major issue to beginners. I think this could be pretty simple application in the long run and contribute to the over all player/attribute creep that is gradually occurring.

My 2 cents

Spud

OMG No please. Some other thing for coaches to calculate, explain, moderate, and enforce. This might work IFF everyone we’re on the app and did all of their factoring before entering coaching.
People come in all the time with bunches of tokens and very little time. To have to explain then wait For them to decide and factor what they wanted to carry and what they didn’t would be nightmarish and not in the fun run way

One of my first thoughts was also the relationship between encumbrance and strength - stronger characters can carry more - but i get the penalty to coaches. Is it viable to enforce only at higher levels, when presumably players have their characters on the apps?

Also, (and I assume this is a rehash) why was using the WIS, INT, CHA bonuses as the basis for Cleric, Wizard, Bard bonuses for healing and spells discarded? Or for that matter spell counts (e.g. lower you walk in with fewer, higher you walk in with an extra lvl 1 or something).

Lequinian wrote: One of my first thoughts was also the relationship between encumbrance and strength - stronger characters can carry more - but i get the penalty to coaches. Is it viable to enforce only at higher levels, when presumably players have their characters on the apps?

No even at higher degrees of difficulty, I still see players who don’t use any character generated option.

Also, (and I assume this is a rehash) why was using the WIS, INT, CHA bonuses as the basis for Cleric, Wizard, Bard bonuses for healing and spells discarded? Or for that matter spell counts (e.g. lower you walk in with fewer, higher you walk in with an extra lvl 1 or something).

This one is so convoluted you have really opened a massive can of wryms. Fighter types don’t wanna have casters become more powerful, others don’t wanna have any sort of power creep, etc. (notice I haven’t included my personal beliefs here)

Over all I'm not a huge fan of stats unlocking slots, IMO ideally you want something you can scale like damage, +1 to X stat = +1 to y effect sort of thing.


I think the idea I've linked most from previous threads was + to skill check effect. Such that it might be worth it for an int stacking wizard to actually do a skill check.

Something like that scales better, opens more design space, and is accessible to non UR characters .