Remove ads

Be a Dungeon - The Quest

How you want combat dice results shown during updates?

  • First option, purely narrative

    Votes: 1 6.7%

  • Second option, show simple results

    Votes: 3 20.0%

  • Third option, show us all the numbahs!

    Votes: 9 60.0%

  • Fourth option, you choose it, youre the QM...

    Votes: 2 13.3%
  • Total voters
    15
  • Poll closed .
Reader mode
Okay people, I don't mind the discussion, I rather enjoy it, and in my opinion this bit of mystery help to make it better, but I can't have you calling each other names. I'll ask you guys to keep this civilized, without name calling and without trying to poke each other. Poking arguments is fine, but please don't aim your words at other people.
 
FullNothingness said:
Look, no matter how you cut it if you want to gain mana from killing people you will be killing people... If that is going to make us enemies then we better have our defenses ready and effective. While I get that building a dungeon up more along the lines of a violent theme park is in genre when coming at it from the other side but from our perspective it doesn't make much sense. If someone comes in here to kill our minions, take our stuff and maybe even kill us we should kill or capture them efficiently. Not waste resources to make it fun and interesting for them. Every minion we lose does costs us mana and presumably traps do too. Setting up a classic dungeon experience tm​ is not exactly beneficial for us.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
EXACTLY! if we want to lure people in it is called adding treasure to the dungeon to lure people in, and we can use the stuff from adventurers for that as well as whatever else we can get. We just allow adventurer parties to find the treasure and see it before killing most of them off but letting a survivor or two escape to spread tales of the amazing loot to find in our dungeon though it is incredibly dangerous.
 
@FullNothingness, I got an idea already for a way to change the dice for the stats. Some Specials will change, but nothing big, so it can be done easily. Basically, both attack and defense will roll all dice, you compare only the equal numbers with higher results for each side, but any attack above defense will give an auto-hit. This will make creatures even more squishy and easier to kill, but it does balance the shown problem.

What do you people think? I don't like to simply change it without thought, so I'd like your opinions before I make the call.

Edit: I'll be closing votes now, since the voting seem to be finished, but I'd like to decide if we change or not the system before the next chapter, since it's very possible combat may be just around the corner, what with this mysterious visitor.
Adhoc vote count started by Metrux on Mar 9, 2018 at 11:57 AM, finished with 129 posts and 19 votes.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
san said:
ok this is just STUPID with capital letters.

1) how would you know if they mean to harm you BEFORE they are about to kill you? answer... you can't.

2) that is assuming we leave survivors, and why would people bear a grudge about us defending ourselves given that is the literal PURPOSE of a dungeon.

3) people are going to try and murder us no matter what all we can do is grow stronger faster to prevent this.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


Again , while its OK to disagree with me do remember to be polite, hmm?

As for point 1: your right we don't and that's definitely why we should make the area around the core a death zone. No one should really be going near us unless we give them peremission anyway so I can agree with turtling up. Generally tho most dungeons can watch or listen in on people who enter their domain, it's a common enough trope. Being able to hear the people's conversation may give us insight on their intentions or motivations. And thankfully we have fae as our starting race, allowing for possible communication as well as a possible less hostile reaction. What would you trust more if approached, the walking abomination skelaton dripping oooze, or the fist sized dressed in leaves tiny woman who is glowing.

2- people can be irrational, and the deaths of their friends may result in them believing it to be the "dungeons fault". Again we can't stop irrational things. But having say a group of individuals or adventuring guild or some allied organization on the outside putting up rules on who can enter and what they can do would be fairly bennifical as it helps set rules that if broken allow us to get on with the murder and broker less I'll will because "those idiots broke the rules"

3- I'm actually banking on this not being true. Again we don't know much about the outside world , so I could be wrong but consider this. Your a small kingdom bordered by other kingdoms that vary in hostility, you must worry about monsters, recourses , bandits and all sorts of other factors.

Suddenly you find this "dungeon" in your territory that endlessly produces recourses (lootz) helps train/gain experience your fighting forces or at least the adventures in your lands , which in turn makes your lands more secure. There are now less monsters to worry about, less bandits, the recourses you've gained allow you to expand and not only that, the dungeon is larger thus giving different and more recourses . Soldiers gain experience and your borders are more secure. Rare magical ingredients become slightly less rare. It is in your interest to see this dungeon is SECURE because it's become part of the lifeblood that is your kingdom.


Simply watch the anime

Is It Wrong to Try to Pick Up Girls in a Dungeon?

If you want to see how a dungeon and people can interact and bennifit each other.
 
Mr.rodent said:
Again , while its OK to disagree with me do remember to be polite, hmm?

As for point 1: your right we don't and that's definitely why we should make the area around the core a death zone. No one should really be going near us unless we give them peremission anyway so I can agree with turtling up. Generally tho most dungeons can watch or listen in on people who enter their domain, it's a common enough trope. Being able to hear the people's conversation may give us insight on their intentions or motivations. And thankfully we have fae as our starting race, allowing for possible communication as well as a possible less hostile reaction. What would you trust more if approached, the walking abomination skelaton dripping oooze, or the fist sized dressed in leaves tiny woman who is glowing.

2- people can be irrational, and the deaths of their friends may result in them believing it to be the "dungeons fault". Again we can't stop irrational things. But having say a group of individuals or adventuring guild or some allied organization on the outside putting up rules on who can enter and what they can do would be fairly bennifical as it helps set rules that if broken allow us to get on with the murder and broker less I'll will because "those idiots broke the rules"

3- I'm actually banking on this not being true. Again we don't know much about the outside world , so I could be wrong but consider this. Your a small kingdom bordered by other kingdoms that vary in hostility, you must worry about monsters, recourses , bandits and all sorts of other factors.

Suddenly you find this "dungeon" in your territory that endlessly produces recourses (lootz) helps train/gain experience your fighting forces or at least the adventures in your lands , which in turn makes your lands more secure. There are now less monsters to worry about, less bandits, the recourses you've gained allow you to expand and not only that, the dungeon is larger thus giving different and more recourses . Soldiers gain experience and your borders are more secure. Rare magical ingredients become slightly less rare. It is in your interest to see this dungeon is SECURE because it's become part of the lifeblood that is your kingdom.


Simply watch the anime

Is It Wrong to Try to Pick Up Girls in a Dungeon?

If you want to see how a dungeon and people can interact and bennifit each other.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
ok 1) that was polite it was just blunt, I don't mince words much when I feel something is a terrible idea. Note I did not call you anything I just said your idea was dumb.

2) still not good enough in my eyes, maybe we can do this MUCH later (though I am still against that, more reasons in a moment.) but right now our dungeon is WAY too small for such a thing, wait until we are at LEAST a few floors before suggesting this. Remember we are basically a hallway and a single room atm.

As for why I am against it no matter what and see it as stupid, adventurers tend to believe better loot is behind better defended areas so the more heavily we defend our core the more likely that adventurers will try to get through our defences for the supposed loot there. Our best bet is to spread out the defence with it getting much more trap heavy near our core while leading adventurers towards monsters in another direction, maybe add signs stating that a core room is beyond a certain point before the defences, and to stay away, with another sign stating loot this way in another direction.

3) Not really you forget adventurers tend to know what they are signing up for. It will only be the rare noob or weak willed idiot that will get pissed from us killing off his party members.

4) maybe you're right about people not wanting to kill us, maybe I am right and people do. We don't know this and our best and SAFEST option is to assume the worst and hope for the best.
 
san said:
ok 1) that was polite it was just blunt, I don't mince words much when I feel something is a terrible idea. Note I did not call you anything I just said your idea was dumb.

2) still not good enough in my eyes, maybe we can do this MUCH later (though I am still against that, more reasons in a moment.) but right now our dungeon is WAY too small for such a thing, wait until we are at LEAST a few floors before suggesting this. Remember we are basically a hallway and a single room atm.

As for why I am against it no matter what and see it as stupid, adventurers tend to believe better loot is behind better defended areas so the more heavily we defend our core the more likely that adventurers will try to get through our defences for the supposed loot there. Our best bet is to spread out the defence with it getting much more trap heavy near our core while leading adventurers towards monsters in another direction, maybe add signs stating that a core room is beyond a certain point before the defences, and to stay away, with another sign stating loot this way in another direction.

3) Not really you forget adventurers tend to know what they are signing up for. It will only be the rare noob or weak willed idiot that will get pissed from us killing off his party members.

4) maybe you're right about people not wanting to kill us, maybe I am right and people do. We don't know this and our best and SAFEST option is to assume the worst and hope for the best.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

All good points. And your right this is a definitely long term plan stuff, great ideas on how to keep us safe. Have we considered having a "treasure room" with the loot and such while our main core resides in another room under the floor or behind a wall in a dusty somewhat normal/empty "storage room " . It might not fool everybody but it's an somewhat funny way to throw off people . Especially greedy adventurers .

Also yeah while we should definitely protect ourselves I also don't want to go into this with the attitude that "everyone is the enemy and must die" at least until we can get some knowledge on the outside world and dungeons relationships with kingdoms/mortals.

Thankfully again there shouldn't be any nearby humans according to GM , and getting a soul bound creature should be a priority. Specifically one that can go into the outside world and gather recources/info
 
Metrux said:
@FullNothingness, I got an idea already for a way to change the dice for the stats. Some Specials will change, but nothing big, so it can be done easily. Basically, both attack and defense will roll all dice, you compare only the equal numbers with higher results for each side, but any attack above defense will give an auto-hit. This will make creatures even more squishy and easier to kill, but it does balance the shown problem.

What do you people think? I don't like to simply change it without thought, so I'd like your opinions before I make the call.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I'm not 100% sure how this suggested change works. How would the various rolls determine which roll is compared against which? It sounds like it will at least solve the 'less defense can be better problem' but I would need to understand it a bit better to gauge if it causes new problems.


@Mr.rodent While I get what you are saying I feel the need to point out that your plan has some downsides that I believe may very well make the plan nonviable:
-All signs thus far indicate that to create and replace stuff in our dungeon we need to spend mana. This mana is the same stuff that we would be trying to get from the adventurers who we would be enticing in... There is a clear conflict there, if the adventurers break/steal too much stuff without us being able to harvest enough mana from them to replace said stuff we'll lose mana from having them in our dungeon, not gain it.
-We can either kill the adventurers or not. Leaving aside any serious defenses around our core we would still need to kill adventurers to gain kill-mana from them. As you already indicated adventurers are unlikely to be happy to die. To maintain friendly relations we would need to keep a pretty tricky balancing act up.
-By spending mana on constructing a 'friendly' zone in our dungeon we would be taking away mana from our core defenses when compared to a fully fortified dungeon. We will be weaker against dedicated attack because of doing this. Or at least until it pays of with sufficient mana to pay for itself (if that works that is). Remember that if the locals like us that anyone who doesn't like the locals will also likely not like us, we will still have enemies even if we are beneficial.
-If we start being generous and help the locals build up strength and wealth then we need to keep in mind that they could likely amass more power than we have. Which in turn means that we are to some degree at their mercy. We would likely be the weaker party in the arrangement. And being in another party's power is IMO not desirable.
 
FullNothingness said:
I'm not 100% sure how this suggested change works. How would the various rolls determine which roll is compared against which? It sounds like it will at least solve the 'less defense can be better problem' but I would need to understand it a bit better to gauge if it causes new problems.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Okay, I'll put examples to exemplify, heh...

Let's say A is attacker and has 3 Attack, while B is defender and has 2 Defenses.

A rolls [5, 3, 7]
B rolls [4, 6]

So, A has an extra roll, and thus can trade his 3 for the 7, getting a 5x4, 7x6 and a 3x0, since any attack above defense would be considered an auto-hit, he just hit thrice.

Now, let's say A rolls [4, 6, 2] and B rolls [5, 7]

Even if you swap around, at most A can hit twice, but since it's higher with higher, it gets 6x7, 4x5 and 2x0, thus in the end A hit only once, the one auto-hit.

In this model having more defenses means more chances to defend against the attack, but it won't make each defense easier. Remember that any tie is favorable to the defender.
 
Mr.rodent said:
All good points. And your right this is a definitely long term plan stuff, great ideas on how to keep us safe. Have we considered having a "treasure room" with the loot and such while our main core resides in another room under the floor or behind a wall in a dusty somewhat normal/empty "storage room " . It might not fool everybody but it's an somewhat funny way to throw off people . Especially greedy adventurers .

Also yeah while we should definitely protect ourselves I also don't want to go into this with the attitude that "everyone is the enemy and must die" at least until we can get some knowledge on the outside world and dungeons relationships with kingdoms/mortals.

Thankfully again there shouldn't be any nearby humans according to GM , and getting a soul bound creature should be a priority. Specifically one that can go into the outside world and gather recources/info
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
FullNothingness said:
I'm not 100% sure how this suggested change works. How would the various rolls determine which roll is compared against which? It sounds like it will at least solve the 'less defense can be better problem' but I would need to understand it a bit better to gauge if it causes new problems.


@Mr.rodent While I get what you are saying I feel the need to point out that your plan has some downsides that I believe may very well make the plan nonviable:
-All signs thus far indicate that to create and replace stuff in our dungeon we need to spend mana. This mana is the same stuff that we would be trying to get from the adventurers who we would be enticing in... There is a clear conflict there, if the adventurers break/steal too much stuff without us being able to harvest enough mana from them to replace said stuff we'll lose mana from having them in our dungeon, not gain it.
-We can either kill the adventurers or not. Leaving aside any serious defenses around our core we would still need to kill adventurers to gain kill-mana from them. As you already indicated adventurers are unlikely to be happy to die. To maintain friendly relations we would need to keep a pretty tricky balancing act up.
-By spending mana on constructing a 'friendly' zone in our dungeon we would be taking away mana from our core defenses when compared to a fully fortified dungeon. We will be weaker against dedicated attack because of doing this. Or at least until it pays of with sufficient mana to pay for itself (if that works that is). Remember that if the locals like us that anyone who doesn't like the locals will also likely not like us, we will still have enemies even if we are beneficial.
-If we start being generous and help the locals build up strength and wealth then we need to keep in mind that they could likely amass more power than we have. Which in turn means that we are to some degree at their mercy. We would likely be the weaker party in the arrangement. And being in another party's power is IMO not desirable.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Ya having a friendly zone or free loot is a poor idea.

I am thinking once we have multiple floors we go the standard route for a dungeon, each floor gets progressively more difficult and has better/more loot in it. After all in the immortal words of Sun Tzu if you try to defend everywhere you lose everywhere.

I figure we give the average weaker adventurer the first floor with weak inexpensive monsters and traps, like our pixies and pit traps and the like, while making it even if they clear the floor they are not getting too much in coinage. Then the next floor is 250% more dangerous but has 200% more loot. this way the danger gets progressively greater than the loot offered so people are less likely to visit our deeper floors keeping us safer. Plus this should keep adventurers regularly flowing through our first floor without having to spend too much on defending it. Especially if we make it so the amount of loot on the first floor is worth just slightly more than the difficulty level.
 
san said:
Ya having a friendly zone or free loot is a poor idea.

I am thinking once we have multiple floors we go the standard route for a dungeon, each floor gets progressively more difficult and has better/more loot in it. After all in the immortal words of Sun Tzu if you try to defend everywhere you lose everywhere.

I figure we give the average weaker adventurer the first floor with weak inexpensive monsters and traps, like our pixies and pit traps and the like, while making it even if they clear the floor they are not getting too much in coinage. Then the next floor is 250% more dangerous but has 200% more loot. this way the danger gets progressively greater than the loot offered so people are less likely to visit our deeper floors keeping us safer. Plus this should keep adventurers regularly flowing through our first floor without having to spend too much on defending it. Especially if we make it so the amount of loot on the first floor is worth just slightly more than the difficulty level.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Kind of like how you always build the best defenses closer to the Heart in Dungeon Keeper: focus on the thing that allows you to exist, then build too many traps in false hallways and dead ends.
 
Metrux said:
Okay, I'll put examples to exemplify, heh...

Let's say A is attacker and has 3 Attack, while B is defender and has 2 Defenses.

A rolls [5, 3, 7]
B rolls [4, 6]

So, A has an extra roll, and thus can trade his 3 for the 7, getting a 5x4, 7x6 and a 3x0, since any attack above defense would be considered an auto-hit, he just hit thrice.

Now, let's say A rolls [4, 6, 2] and B rolls [5, 7]

Even if you swap around, at most A can hit twice, but since it's higher with higher, it gets 6x7, 4x5 and 2x0, thus in the end A hit only once, the one auto-hit.

In this model having more defenses means more chances to defend against the attack, but it won't make each defense easier. Remember that any tie is favorable to the defender.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

So basically the steps are:

1. Roll dice equal to attackers attack and the defenders defense.
2. Pick the highest (remaining) die from each pool.
3. If the attacker scored higher than the defender add one hit, then remove both dice from their respective pools.
4. Unless one of the two pools is now empty go back to step 2.
5A. If the attacker still has dice remaining these now convert into hits.
5B. If the defender still has dice remaining they are lost to no effect.
6. Any hits deal damage according to the special abilities of the involved creatures. By default that means 1 damage per hit is inflicted on the defender.

Correct?

If I got this right then IMO the system may end being a bit more lethal than I'd like (though this is a matter of personal preference I'll note that very lethal combat will tend to mean less turns for interesting special abilities to come into play), it would heavily favor more elite units over mooks as they would be able to do large amounts of very reliable damage through autohits and it would likely make investing in attack more worthwhile than investing in defense (though I haven't done the math to prove that yet). It does indeed solve the whole issue where less defense is sometimes better. I think you may not end up liking how much of combat ends up being no longer random though.

san said:
Ya having a friendly zone or free loot is a poor idea.

I am thinking once we have multiple floors we go the standard route for a dungeon, each floor gets progressively more difficult and has better/more loot in it. After all in the immortal words of Sun Tzu if you try to defend everywhere you lose everywhere.

I figure we give the average weaker adventurer the first floor with weak inexpensive monsters and traps, like our pixies and pit traps and the like, while making it even if they clear the floor they are not getting too much in coinage. Then the next floor is 250% more dangerous but has 200% more loot. this way the danger gets progressively greater than the loot offered so people are less likely to visit our deeper floors keeping us safer. Plus this should keep adventurers regularly flowing through our first floor without having to spend too much on defending it. Especially if we make it so the amount of loot on the first floor is worth just slightly more than the difficulty level.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
King Tharassian said:
Kind of like how you always build the best defenses closer to the Heart in Dungeon Keeper: focus on the thing that allows you to exist, then build too many traps in false hallways and dead ends.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Defending multiple layers kinda is defending everywhere... In reality most of the time concentration of force wins the day. It likely is mechanically in our best interest to group up most of our forces at one point. That way we get as many attacks as possible on the enemy each round while the enemy does not get to pick off isolated units cheaply. We'd probably want to post some scouts or noisy traps one or two rooms out which are there to ensure our main force isn't surprised and to reduce the chance of stealth abilities slipping through.

The rest of the dungeon would likely end up being a tarpit wasting the enemies time and if possible resources so as to maximize both sentient-presence-mana and our odds in the fight.

This kinda leads to somewhat boring setups though... So there may be rules that disallow grouping up this much.
 
Last edited:
FullNothingness said:
So basically the steps are:

1. Roll dice equal to attackers attack and the defenders defense.
2. Pick the highest (remaining) die from each pool.
3. If the attacker scored higher than the defender add one hit, then remove both dice from their respective pools.
4. Unless one of the two pools is now empty go back to step 2.
5A. If the attacker still has dice remaining these now convert into hits.
5B. If the defender still has dice remaining they are lost to no effect.
6. Any hits deal damage according to the special abilities of the involved creatures. By default that means 1 damage per hit is inflicted on the defender.

Correct?

If I got this right then IMO the system may end being a bit more lethal than I'd like (though this is a matter of personal preference I'll note that very lethal combat will tend to mean less turns for interesting special abilities to come into play), it would heavily favor more elite units over mooks as they would be able to do large amounts of very reliable damage through autohits and it would likely make investing in attack more worthwhile than investing in defense (though I haven't done the math to prove that yet). It does indeed solve the whole issue where less defense is sometimes better. I think you may not end up liking how much of combat ends up being no longer random though.




Defending multiple layers kinda is defending everywhere... In reality most of the time concentration of force wins the day. It likely is mechanically in our best interest to group up most of our forces at one point. That way we get as many attacks as possible on the enemy each round while the enemy does not get to pick off isolated units cheaply. We'd probably want to post some scouts or noisy traps one or two rooms out which are there to ensure our main force isn't surprised and to reduce the chance of stealth abilities slipping through.

The rest of the dungeon would likely end up being a tarpit wasting the enemies time and if possible resources so as to maximize both sentient-presence-mana and our odds in the fight.

This kinda leads to somewhat boring setups though... So there may be rules that disallow grouping up this much.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The problem is that I can't find a way to make defense better without making immortal units possible in high level, as in, you can survive against any unit of your power level, even if you can't kill them.

About the limits on such groupings, there are several limits you still don't know, but one of them is number of units of X power level per room, which is diferent for each floor, according to your mana density.
 
Metrux said:
The problem is that I can't find a way to make defense better without making immortal units possible in high level, as in, you can survive against any unit of your power level, even if you can't kill them.

About the limits on such groupings, there are several limits you still don't know, but one of them is number of units of X power level per room, which is diferent for each floor, according to your mana density.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
ok I have to say I LOVE the defense/attack system. It is basically risk and it WORKS! so good on you. I assume you have HP with that to so that the enemy has to get a certain number of wounds and all that good stuff.
FullNothingness said:
Defending multiple layers kinda is defending everywhere... In reality most of the time concentration of force wins the day. It likely is mechanically in our best interest to group up most of our forces at one point. That way we get as many attacks as possible on the enemy each round while the enemy does not get to pick off isolated units cheaply. We'd probably want to post some scouts or noisy traps one or two rooms out which are there to ensure our main force isn't surprised and to reduce the chance of stealth abilities slipping through.

The rest of the dungeon would likely end up being a tarpit wasting the enemies time and if possible resources so as to maximize both sentient-presence-mana and our odds in the fight.

This kinda leads to somewhat boring setups though... So there may be rules that disallow grouping up this much.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
ok as the OP already said, there are indeed limits on that stuff so I won't bother with that.

I was indeed thinking of making the first floor EXACTLY what you are saying there, a tarpit. I figure plenty of non-lethal but hard to disable or get out of traps that are easy to rebuild after they are finished, alongside a few rooms designed to auto-spawn our pixies and maybe other super weak monsters for much cheaper than we currently pay for them, like say maybe it costs us 5 mana upkeep per room, but it spawns 10 pixies at the end of each day. making it a way to mass produce the cheapest weakest monsters we have. In other words I am thinking of making floor 1 a relatively low cost, low danger floor but one that keeps adventurers occupied for decent periods of time :D

this would maximize the profit from having adventurers stay in our dungeon without making us unable to adjust the floors.
 
Last edited:
Remove ads
Is that a giant...?
  • Threadmarks
    • Monday, Dungeon Date 01/01/0001

    -------------------------------

    Immediately you send your pixie to the entrance, both you and her giggling while thinking of how to greet your first... Visit? Meal? Explorer? You don't know yet. While she flies to the front, you breath your energy into a new form. You would call it life, but your monsters don't really have a soul or make choices by themselves, so...

    The new pixie seems to have a diferent hair color, is an almost nothing taller and her face is somewhat rougher, when compared to the first one, though both still seem pretty similar. You are contemplating these differences when your senses tell of a third being in your dungeon... Inside of you... In the cave? The term doesn't matter, you decide, going to watch as the big thing scuttles through the ground, a solid carapace and several legs perfurating the ground. He is so big that your pixie could be swallowed in a single bite, but those pincers would probably chew her before that. It is so long that you could probably compare his legth to twenty of your crystals! Well, to you, this seems like a mighty beast indeed, segmented and with legs in pairs.

    Hearing the giggles and seeing the small fairy wave, this thing tries to snap it's pincers up, while kinda jumping some of it's pair of frontal legs in the air. She avoids and keeps giggling, out of its reach, and even though you first had an almost heart attack (having no heart makes no difference!) now it seems almost like they're playing... Of course, if she got down to the ground this would suddenly finish with her eaten.

    Somehow you see similarities between him and your pixies, and you think of the possibility that you could do some other fae, something between this thing and a pixie. You surely can do other Fae, you just dont know how yet, but this gives you some ideas.

    Even though she's giggling and waving, you can't help but notice the pixie can't speak. Your other pixie also can't, you tried ordering her to. This gives you a glimpse of loneliness, because you feel like you should have someone to talk to, but as a dungeon, thisseems illogical. You let the thought go and focus your mind, ignoring these feelings, so you can decide what to do now. You could certainly kill it, mana is important, but you aren't sure how you would do it. You could try to leave it be, but it doesn't seem like he would give up on the little fae so soon. You could ignore him and just do your thing, but what if he comes closer to your crystal? Though you could experiment and try creating this new Fae, you don't know what you'd be doing and this could waste your mana. Decisions, decisions, you are so young, and yet have so many things to decide...

    -------------------------------

    Second pixie created.

    Mana Reserves: 0004

    Votes
    [] Kill this thing!
    -[] (How? Write-in)
    [] Ignore it, do something else
    -[] (What? Write-in)
    [] Try to create a new Fae inspired on this.
    [] Do something else, I got a good idea! (Write-in)

    ____________________________________________________________________________________________

    So, small update all in all, but you guys haven't decided your common choice for dealing with animals/monsters, this will come later. The how and what are sub-votes because I'll count the main votes (kill & ignore) as a single block, no matter what plan is choosen, so that you don't need to bandwagon to make sure it is killed or not.

    I've been wondering both why the votes call it a pixel and who put the new tags on the quest...

    All in all, thanks for reading :3
     
  • Threadmarks
    • And with this centipede, we shall enter the realm of creepy-crawling-fae, and all who enter our domain with aracnophobia and similar shall die of heart attacks automatically, bringing much needed mana.

    [X] Do something else, I got a good idea!
    -[X] Make a hole for the centipede to hide, so he would sleep and bring other creatures there.
     
    Metrux said:
    The problem is that I can't find a way to make defense better without making immortal units possible in high level, as in, you can survive against any unit of your power level, even if you can't kill them.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    What about my suggestion but with a cap on the bonus or even having the bonus not apply directly linearly? So it would be something like:

    1. Roll dice equal to attackers attack for both the attacker and the defender.
    2. Determine the bonus applied in this combat.
    2A. If the attacker's attack and the defender's defense are equal neither get a bonus.
    2B. If they are not equal then the party with the higher score gain a bonus to all its rolled results. If the difference is one the bonus is +1, if the difference two or three the bonus is +2, if the difference is between four and six the bonus is +3, if the difference is between seven and ten the bonus is +4 and if the difference is more than ten the bonus is +5.
    3. Take the die rolled first from both pools.
    4. If the attacker scored higher than the defender add one hit, then remove both dice from their respective pools.
    5. Go back to step 3 until all rolls have been used.
    6. Any hits deal damage according to the special abilities of the involved creatures. By default that means 1 damage per hit is inflicted on the defender.

    It would be hard for a high defense creature to become 'immortal' in this system. As the cap is strictly limited at +5 it any roll still has a chance to cause a hit, though it is fairly unlikely. Likewise there would be no guaranteed damage though a good chunk of damage would be likely by a high attack creature. If you don't like the way I handled the bonus you could always simply say that the bonus is the difference between the two scores with a maximum of +5.

    Thoughts?
     
    [X] Kill this thing!
    -[X] Have the pixie's drop rocks onto it, surely it would die from the constant bombardment of little rocks!!! and if not it would be dissuaded from your core!

    [X] Try to create a new Fae inspired on this.
    -[x] While they are bombarding, watch over the situation and see if we cant make a Fae similar to this...especially one that can ambush! those sharp pincers would surely be helpful to keep the Outsiders still as the pixies bombard them to oblivion!
     
    FullNothingness said:
    What about my suggestion but with a cap on the bonus or even having the bonus not apply directly linearly? So it would be something like:

    1. Roll dice equal to attackers attack for both the attacker and the defender.
    2. Determine the bonus applied in this combat.
    2A. If the attacker's attack and the defender's defense are equal neither get a bonus.
    2B. If they are not equal then the party with the higher score gain a bonus to all its rolled results. If the difference is one the bonus is +1, if the difference two or three the bonus is +2, if the difference is between four and six the bonus is +3, if the difference is between seven and ten the bonus is +4 and if the difference is more than ten the bonus is +5.
    3. Take the die rolled first from both pools.
    4. If the attacker scored higher than the defender add one hit, then remove both dice from their respective pools.
    5. Go back to step 3 until all rolls have been used.
    6. Any hits deal damage according to the special abilities of the involved creatures. By default that means 1 damage per hit is inflicted on the defender.

    It would be hard for a high defense creature to become 'immortal' in this system. As the cap is strictly limited at +5 it any roll still has a chance to cause a hit, though it is fairly unlikely. Likewise there would be no guaranteed damage though a good chunk of damage would be likely by a high attack creature. If you don't like the way I handled the bonus you could always simply say that the bonus is the difference between the two scores with a maximum of +5.

    Thoughts?
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    That would've worked, but I already thought of something different, by keeping this last way I told: the bonus is based on Specials and equipment. So, instead of armor giving a plain 2 to Defenses, it would give a 1 +1, meaning that you add 1 to Defenses and receive a +1 to all defense rolls. the same would apply to Attack. Of course, this still leaves attack with slightly better expectatives, though you'll need higher Defenses to survive and it's better for attack to havean edge, since lot's of indiscriminate combat needs deaths. Preferably, it should be easier to die than to stay alive.
     
    RandomDwarf said:
    [X] Kill this thing!
    -[X] Have the pixie's drop rocks onto it, surely it would die from the constant bombardment of little rocks!!! and if not it would be dissuaded from your core!

    [X] Try to create a new Fae inspired on this.
    -[x] While they are bombarding, watch over the situation and see if we cant make a Fae similar to this...especially one that can ambush! those sharp pincers would surely be helpful to keep the Outsiders still as the pixies bombard them to oblivion!
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    You do notice your pixies can cast Pixie Fire, yah? x) Sure, if you prefer to kill with rocs, I won't stop you, this is just amusing.
     
    [X] Try to create a new Fae inspired on this.

    [X]Have the pixies sing to the thing. Music is the universal language!
    [X] Make a hole for the centipede to hide, so he would sleep and bring other creatures there.
     
    [X] Kill this thing!
    -[X] Have the pixie's drop rocks onto it, surely it would die from the constant bombardment of little rocks!!! and if not it would be dissuaded from your core!
    [X] Try to create a new Fae inspired on this.
    -[x] While they are bombarding, watch over the situation and see if we cant make a Fae similar to this...especially one that can ambush! those sharp pincers would surely be helpful to keep the Outsiders still as the pixies bombard them to oblivion!
     
    reason for death by rock? Work-out time! plus maybe the pixies get inspired to set the rocks on fire as they fall! magic be bullshit.
     
    [X] Kill this thing!
    -[X] Have the pixie's drop rocks onto it, surely it would die from the constant bombardment of little rocks!!! and if not it would be dissuaded from your core!
    [X] Try to create a new Fae inspired on this.
    -[x] While they are bombarding, watch over the situation and see if we cant make a Fae similar to this...especially one that can ambush! those sharp pincers would surely be helpful to keep the Outsiders still as the pixies bombard them to oblivion!

    I find this hilarious.
     
    The problem with killing this thing inefficiently is that its logical response would be to run away... And then we don't get any mana from it. If we want to kill it we should either pixie fire it too death or create a monster based on it and hope that pixie healing can help it win the fight.
     
    Reader mode
    You must login or register to reply here.
    Remove ads
    Back
    Top