|
Jerec
Dec 16, 2009 16:53:23 GMT -5
Post by bountyhunter9 on Dec 16, 2009 16:53:23 GMT -5
But WHAT does it offer that's different? "It's an awesome power that only a few people can use" is just fluff unless it does something mechanically interesting and unique in the game. I'm not sure where you're going, read my last post where I pick out how it is different. The definition of Destruction I posted most recently is different from any other WotC Force power, but not in any major way. I don't think it's possible to create a direct-damage Force power without it being similar in some way to one of WotC's Force powers. We should try to create a few new abilities as are necessary, and other than the "fluff", I've yet to see the need for it Just because it isn't necessary to create a new ability doesn't mean we shouldn't do it. If he doesn't have Destruction, it just doesn't feel as much like Jerec as it could be if he had it. And, so far, Destruction says by popular opinion, one way or another. So I think we should try to make it work. Anyone have any suggestions?
|
|
|
Jerec
Dec 16, 2009 17:13:17 GMT -5
Post by Dendrite on Dec 16, 2009 17:13:17 GMT -5
Anyone have any suggestions? Well, to get a foothold, here's what we know of it: -Does varying amounts of damage depending on the power behind it (40 seems good) -Recquire much focus (a few force points/replaces turn) -Causes explosion (some kind of movement...the kind a B3 would be immune to)
|
|
|
Jerec
Dec 16, 2009 21:46:16 GMT -5
Post by gwek on Dec 16, 2009 21:46:16 GMT -5
Okay, based on Dendrite's notes and he Wookieepedia definition provided by BH, how about something like this:
Force X, replaces turn: range 6; X0 damage to target and to each character adjacent to that target, and push back target and each character adjacent to that target X squares if Huge or smaller. Huge or smaller characters are considered activated this round; save 16)
(For X, I'm thinking 4 or 5)
|
|
|
Jerec
Dec 17, 2009 0:54:43 GMT -5
Post by Roque Saber on Dec 17, 2009 0:54:43 GMT -5
That's really, really similar to Push 5. What is different about Destruction? For one, it seems to be much more...destructive. I'm thinking even more the X0 damage and possibly half that to those adjacent.
e.g. Force 4; replaces turn; sight or range 6: 60 damage to target and 30 to characters adjacent)
Just pure damage, no activation, no pushing, just...destruction.
|
|
|
Jerec
Dec 17, 2009 1:41:02 GMT -5
Post by gwek on Dec 17, 2009 1:41:02 GMT -5
That's really, really similar to Push 5. Well, yes, that's the point I'm trying to make. The description I posted (which is actually cut-and-pasted from Push 5) reflects what has been described. Make it range 6 and I think I can live with it, although everyone else seems to be pushing for either a push aspect (which just makes it Force Push 5) or activation (which makes it Force Lightning 5).
|
|
|
Jerec
Dec 17, 2009 2:01:13 GMT -5
Post by Roque Saber on Dec 17, 2009 2:01:13 GMT -5
Where does the idea for pushing and/or activation come in? Did force destruction stun the victims or send them flying? Even if it did, we have to keep it (as we've said) different from existing powers.
|
|
|
Jerec
Dec 17, 2009 2:32:57 GMT -5
Post by gwek on Dec 17, 2009 2:32:57 GMT -5
Yep, skim back through the thread and you'll see. I think the definition lifted from Wookieepedia talks about targets who survive being "thrown asunder" or something like that.
Personally, I have no stake in what the power does or does not do--but I feel strongly that if it basically replicates an existing power, we should just use the existing power.
|
|
|
Jerec
Dec 17, 2009 19:30:23 GMT -5
Post by bountyhunter9 on Dec 17, 2009 19:30:23 GMT -5
The basis around Destruction seems to be, well Destruction, like RS said. I think we should make is a pure damage Force power with a minimal (as in 1 or 2 squares) pushing effect. No activatings, even though that would fit. And either sight or range 12, making it range 6 does not make sense for Destruction (in the game, using the cheat that allows you to fly around, Jerec will use Destruction when he's very far away from you, still to devastating effect), and giving it a larger range is more unique than the usual range of 6. This is what I see now:
Force Destruction (Force 4, replaces turn: sight/range 12; 50 damage to target and each character adjacent to that target, and push back target and each character adjacent to that target 2 squares if Huge or smaller)
With this definition I'm thinking range 12, because of the increased damage.
|
|
|
Jerec
Dec 18, 2009 0:01:25 GMT -5
Post by Roque Saber on Dec 18, 2009 0:01:25 GMT -5
I really don't think characters adjacent should take equal damage. Even at 4 force, that's really potent. -20 damage or even 1/2 damage would work, IMO, much better.
Force Destruction (Force 4, replaces turn: sight; 60 damage to target and 30 damage to each character adjacent to that target, push back target and each character adjacent to that target 2 squares if Huge or smaller)
That still seems really strong. I'm still opting for just damage as seen in my above post.
|
|
|
Jerec
Dec 18, 2009 0:08:30 GMT -5
Post by Dendrite on Dec 18, 2009 0:08:30 GMT -5
I think 60 is a little much. Maybe make it 50 and the adjacent splash 20?
|
|
|
Jerec
Dec 18, 2009 2:20:22 GMT -5
Post by gwek on Dec 18, 2009 2:20:22 GMT -5
I say go for straight damage, no push. 50 or 60 to the target, 20 or 30 to adjacent targets. Does anyone get a save?
|
|
|
Jerec
Dec 18, 2009 16:52:49 GMT -5
Post by bountyhunter9 on Dec 18, 2009 16:52:49 GMT -5
I agree that 60 would probably be too much, but good point on adjacents taking less damage. So:
Force Destruction (Force 4, replaces turn: sight[?]; 50 damage to target and 20 damage to each character adjacent to that target)
Do we want push? I could go either way on it.
|
|
|
Jerec
Dec 19, 2009 1:01:40 GMT -5
Post by Roque Saber on Dec 19, 2009 1:01:40 GMT -5
I think 30 to adjacent would be acceptable, and no on the push. If Destruction is looking okay, let's get the rest of his stats back here and finish him off.
|
|
|
Jerec
Dec 19, 2009 2:18:58 GMT -5
Post by gwek on Dec 19, 2009 2:18:58 GMT -5
I think the adjacent damage should be half of the main damage or less, so:
60 to target, 20 or 30 to adjacent 50 to target, 20 to adjacent
I don't think WotC has anything that does more than half to the secondary targets, does it?
These numbers are a relatively minor point, though, and can be discussed as we discuss the overall stats.
So who's got some stats?
|
|
|
Jerec
Dec 19, 2009 10:02:39 GMT -5
Post by Dendrite on Dec 19, 2009 10:02:39 GMT -5
Well, here are the stats we were working on in the beginning
Jerec - 43pts
HP: 120 DEF: 20 ATT: 15 DA: 20
-Unique -Melee Attack -Double Attack -Lightsaber Duelist -Its A Trap
Force 2 Renewal 1 -Force Absorb -Sith Lightning -Force Destruction (However it ends up) -Sith Hatred
CE: Non-unique followers with a Force Rating start with +1 force
|
|