(06-27-2015, 12:22 AM)Ehksidian Wrote:

(06-27-2015, 12:19 AM)Gonzogonz Wrote: We'll just replace the orcs with massive meat-head cavemen jakkai
That'd not work too well as not being able to throw spells as a jakkai would be pretty crippling for a jakkai Mage. Which should be a valid option. Wait, when you normally get a partial success on a spell, the GM selects from a little list what side effect/what goes wrong. Maybe with jakkai this list is different? What the exact differences would be could be up for discussion.
Or we could just give an jakkai Mage the ability to negate a spell directed at it or something, Katja-style.

jakkai are legit known for being absolutely shit mages. second worst, if not the worst, magic-using race in medius. only capable of learning one strong spell.
...
That actually could be a thing. Jakkai mages are unable to use multiple spells without a lot of prep, but they can use said spell a limitless # of times/more than only once.

(06-27-2015, 12:31 AM)Gonzogonz Wrote:

(06-27-2015, 12:22 AM)Ehksidian Wrote: jakkai are legit known for being absolutely shit mages. second worst, if not the worst, magic-using race in medius. only capable of learning one strong spell.
...
That actually could be a thing. Jakkai mages are unable to use multiple spells without a lot of prep, but they can use said spell a limitless # of times/more than only once.

Only being able to use one spell is very crippling for a Mage. And mages don't forget their spell after using it. That happens when they get a partial success and the GM decides that said spell is forgotten until it is re-peeped.

We'll probably have to break SD-canon-lore on Jakkai when making this, because saying a jakkai can't be a spell caster is a little boring... I know it fits the canon, but this would not only influence the Mage class. If all jakkai were bad at magic they couldn't be bards, Druids, clerics or paladins either as they all build on magic.
You could easily have a jakkai spell aster be more "unstable" In the way it feels by changing what the choices are on partial successes. Any roll (expect for damage rolls) are made with two d6, a partial success is a 7-9. That'd be very often, even with a +2 to int, that you'd have a partial success.

(06-27-2015, 12:34 AM)Ehksidian Wrote:

(06-27-2015, 12:31 AM)Gonzogonz Wrote: Only being able to use one spell is very crippling for a Mage. And mages don't forget their spell after using it. That happens when they get a partial success and the GM decides that said spell is forgotten until it is re-peeped.

We'll probably have to break SD-canon-lore on Jakkai when making this, because saying a jakkai can't be a spell caster is a little boring... I know it fits the canon, but this would not only influence the Mage class. If all jakkai were bad at magic they couldn't be bards, Druids, clerics or paladins either as they all build on magic.
You could easily have a jakkai spell aster be more "unstable" In the way it feels by changing what the choices are on partial successes. Any roll (expect for damage rolls) are made with two d6, a partial success is a 7-9. That'd be very often, even with a +2 to int, that you'd have a partial success.

"unstable" works, yeah. makes more sense i guess
muh canon tho

(06-26-2015, 11:30 PM)Gonzogonz Wrote:

(06-26-2015, 11:22 PM)Jim_Clonk Wrote: If you don't want flintlocks, how about matchlocks?

the guns in the setting will be a bit... odd. in a sense. i'll explain it in depth later, it's getting quite late for me here, but essentially it takes a lot of work and resources to make a gun in the setting so only a few expert craftsmen make them, and them make most of them by hand/simple machines, not any sort of automation or anything. no guns are made on a commercial or industrial level, all arms are pretty much private and thus super rare and expensive. and often also rather odd or gimmick-y in some way.
there'll probably still be a few classic weapons like revolvers and double barrel rifles. but there might also be guns like a revolver with a shotgun barrel, or a rifle made partly out of a sword or spear or some crap, we'll see what ideas i come up with, but no matter what expect guns to be super duper rare with most people never even heard of them, even in the military. they'd probably be regarded as something from a fairytale or something with "a stick made of wood and metal, making noises like thunder, emitting smoke and fire" guns are not 100% settled yet, but they'll be a part of the setting.

(06-27-2015, 12:40 AM)Gonzogonz Wrote: Well, nighty night people... It's 2:40 am here, so I should really try to get some sleep...

(06-27-2015, 12:39 AM)Jim_Clonk Wrote:

(06-26-2015, 11:30 PM)Gonzogonz Wrote: the guns in the setting will be a bit... odd. in a sense. i'll explain it in depth later, it's getting quite late for me here, but essentially it takes a lot of work and resources to make a gun in the setting so only a few expert craftsmen make them, and them make most of them by hand/simple machines, not any sort of automation or anything. no guns are made on a commercial or industrial level, all arms are pretty much private and thus super rare and expensive. and often also rather odd or gimmick-y in some way.
there'll probably still be a few classic weapons like revolvers and double barrel rifles. but there might also be guns like a revolver with a shotgun barrel, or a rifle made partly out of a sword or spear or some crap, we'll see what ideas i come up with, but no matter what expect guns to be super duper rare with most people never even heard of them, even in the military. they'd probably be regarded as something from a fairytale or something with "a stick made of wood and metal, making noises like thunder, emitting smoke and fire" guns are not 100% settled yet, but they'll be a part of the setting.

Sounds like a horrible idea to me, to be honest.

(06-27-2015, 12:40 AM)Gonzogonz Wrote: Well, nighty night people... It's 2:40 am here, so I should really try to get some sleep...

(06-27-2015, 01:15 AM)Reks Wrote:

(06-27-2015, 01:26 AM)Battle Bee Wrote:

(06-27-2015, 01:15 AM)Reks Wrote:

Looks great!

Like I said previously, you should add some stone to make it look more natural.
As well as some sloped blocks.

(06-27-2015, 01:32 AM)Reks Wrote:

(06-27-2015, 01:26 AM)Battle Bee Wrote: Looks great!

Like I said previously, you should add some stone to make it look more natural.
As well as some sloped blocks.

I did, just not where the screenshot was.

Sloped blocks on the ceiling interrupts the vines from growing, which I want to grow

And rocks are, yes, more natural, but at this point I personally think it looks fine.

Besides the bottom of it all, which really needs fixing, but since nobody hops on my server (I run a server to build stuff on. Purely personal and my internet is shite anyway) I'll be the only one seeing this beyond what I show~





Really, I'll keep the improvement stuffs you recommend in mind, I'm mostly thinking towards newer projects, not so much tiny touchups on an almost finished one.

(06-27-2015, 01:15 AM)Reks Wrote:

(06-27-2015, 02:05 AM)Ehksidian Wrote: i made a square, wooden box once in terraria.
it has a door and a table and that was it. i am good builder.

(06-27-2015, 02:08 AM)Umbra Wrote:

(06-27-2015, 02:05 AM)Ehksidian Wrote: i made a square, wooden box once in terraria.
it has a door and a table and that was it. i am good builder.

I'm not exactly good, either.