Collective Issues with the Earthdawn 4e Game System/Engine

Discussion on the Earthdawn game line, errata, and feedback not related to playing or GMing.
Jaracove
Posts: 112
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 7:58 am

Re: Collective Issues with the Earthdawn 4e Game System/Engine

Post by Jaracove » Sun Oct 01, 2017 6:32 pm

Well that made for some slightly depressing reading

User avatar
The Undying
Posts: 696
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2016 11:25 pm

Re: Collective Issues with the Earthdawn 4e Game System/Engine

Post by The Undying » Sun Oct 01, 2017 10:38 pm

It's cool, I know how to cheer you up!!

Image

You're welcome!! :D

Purplefixer
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 3:12 pm

Re: Collective Issues with the Earthdawn 4e Game System/Engine

Post by Purplefixer » Fri Oct 06, 2017 5:23 am

After a brief break, we're back at the table, and the only question we've had so far has come up with the Bedazzling Display of Denim... I mean Logic... spell.

We're pretty set on this spell not being a bonus to your raw Charisma all around the entire world, and it pretty clearly works on Conversation,, Diplomacy, Haggle, Engaging Banter, and probably Inspire Others as well.

Our current ruling is that it doesn't affect Winning Smile, First Impression, Lasting Impression, or anything relying on Emotions, such as Flirting or Seduction.

As a rule of thumb, a single spell enhancing a single talent or skill seems correct (iron hand, see the unseen, cloak), but it feels like Bejazzling Display knocks this sideways. Any thoughts from the FASA crew as to just where this spells effects begin and end?

Slimcreeper
Posts: 813
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 11:44 pm

Re: Collective Issues with the Earthdawn 4e Game System/Engine

Post by Slimcreeper » Fri Oct 06, 2017 6:17 am

I'm not from the FASA crew, but I let it take effect whenever the wizard is trying to convince people that she is really smart or really right about something, not really likable. I almost wrote "not really lickable", and I think you guys needed to know that.

User avatar
The Undying
Posts: 696
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2016 11:25 pm

Re: Collective Issues with the Earthdawn 4e Game System/Engine

Post by The Undying » Fri Oct 06, 2017 7:51 am

The five dollar word in there, plus the somatic component, suggests this is meant for addressing a crowd. However, without a REQUIREMENT for a crowd, no reason the audience MUST be a crowd.

Spells in ED can be a bit finicky - you have to incorporate the whole to find the real boundaries and effects. Slim's point makes a lot of sense - that first sentence of the spell description suggests there's a limit to bolstering a logical stance, not making friends or seducing someone (unless, maybe, your angle for seduction is demonstrating the logic of how the target would be a fool to pass up this golden sexy time opportunity as can be seen in my five point presentation). It's also worthwhile to note that somatic components in an ED spell are REQUIREMENTS to cast the spell, not suggestions. If the Wizard can't, or isn't willing to, stand up to his/her full height, then can't cast the spell. So, no crouching in the corner.

Anyways, it'll be interesting to see if/how Mataxes weighs in here. +4 to Charisma-based tests at Circle 1 without a very good limit to those tests does seem a bit unbalanced.

Telarus
Posts: 255
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 1:16 am

Re: Collective Issues with the Earthdawn 4e Game System/Engine

Post by Telarus » Sat Oct 07, 2017 12:49 am

I've always run this spell as "Sherlock Homes explains the case" style overwhelming display. Holmes isn't charismatic all the time, but when he really starts putting the pieces together out loud for his audience he leaves them in stunned silence. He can then use this advantage in the social test of his choice, depending on situation.

User avatar
The Undying
Posts: 696
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2016 11:25 pm

Re: Collective Issues with the Earthdawn 4e Game System/Engine

Post by The Undying » Sat Oct 07, 2017 3:08 am

I just realized this may be a hold-over piece of language from prior editions that didn't get updated well. "Charisma tests" was what became "Interaction tests," IIRC. So, it wouldn't be intended to improve Talents that use Charisma as their base attribute, it's just be focused on the Interaction skills, and a subset at that.

I'm just vaguely remembering an old Thread Item that had Hypnotize that used this language and was updated thusly...

Purplefixer
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 3:12 pm

Re: Collective Issues with the Earthdawn 4e Game System/Engine

Post by Purplefixer » Wed Nov 01, 2017 4:10 pm

A few new issues:

Spot Armor Flaw:
Does this talent only work on creatures WEARING armor? Does it work on any creature with an armor rating? Since it seems to be the Archer 'chink in the armor' and the Weaponsmith 'I know how to make armor not function' it feels like it is meant to be worn armor only, but it's a bit nebulous.

Thread Items:
There's a value for thread items that adds +1 rank to a talent, and one that adds +1 step to a category of tests. Listed are unarmed damage, ranged attacks, and charisma tests. When it refers to charisma tests, is this the raw attribute only, or does it include any talent that runs on charisma? There's often a clear difference in value between +1 rank (durations, range, targets, uses, etc) and +1 step, but it could be pretty widely spaced power wise if you can add +1 step to all dexterity related tests.

User avatar
etherial
Posts: 731
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2016 11:04 pm
Location: Berlin, Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Collective Issues with the Earthdawn 4e Game System/Engine

Post by etherial » Wed Nov 01, 2017 4:58 pm

Purplefixer wrote:
Wed Nov 01, 2017 4:10 pm
Spot Armor Flaw:
Does this talent only work on creatures WEARING armor? Does it work on any creature with an armor rating? Since it seems to be the Archer 'chink in the armor' and the Weaponsmith 'I know how to make armor not function' it feels like it is meant to be worn armor only, but it's a bit nebulous.
I totally support it working against a creature's natural armor, a la Bard in The Hobbit shooting Smaug through the chink in his hide. It seems a little odd that it might work against completely nekkid creatures with no natural armor, but I have shrugged and said "You spot a flaw in its armor - it's not wearing any!" in my last Campaign and it worked just fine.

User avatar
The Undying
Posts: 696
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2016 11:25 pm

Re: Collective Issues with the Earthdawn 4e Game System/Engine

Post by The Undying » Thu Nov 02, 2017 12:08 am

Purplefixer wrote:
Wed Nov 01, 2017 4:10 pm
Spot Armor Flaw:
Does this talent only work on creatures WEARING armor? Does it work on any creature with an armor rating? Since it seems to be the Archer 'chink in the armor' and the Weaponsmith 'I know how to make armor not function' it feels like it is meant to be worn armor only, but it's a bit nebulous.
Allowing it against natural armor gets prickly, IMHO. It won't come up too often, but this begs the question "How does it work against Obsidimen"? These Namegivers usually wear armor over their natural armor. Does that mean Spot Armor Flaw could be used against them TWICE? I'd say yes, if it works against natural armor, as the effective target is different - one their natural armor, one their worn armor. Obviously, both can have separate flaws. I agree, preventing it from use against natural armor seems unfortunate (this is really how Smog does down, after all), but saying "yes, except against Obsidimen" seems like fiddliness.
Purplefixer wrote:
Wed Nov 01, 2017 4:10 pm
There's a value for thread items that adds +1 rank to a talent, and one that adds +1 step to a category of tests. Listed are unarmed damage, ranged attacks, and charisma tests. When it refers to charisma tests, is this the raw attribute only, or does it include any talent that runs on charisma? There's often a clear difference in value between +1 rank (durations, range, targets, uses, etc) and +1 step, but it could be pretty widely spaced power wise if you can add +1 step to all dexterity related tests.
I think this is just copy-pasta from previous Editions. "Charisma test" was the old way to reference Interaction Tests. A number of things got changed from "bonus to Charisma test" to "bonus to Interaction test." So, my guess is that is the intent. Would be worth some errata though. A very similar question was brought up elsewhere WRT a Wizard spell that gave bonuses "to Charisma tests" - I don't think we got any official clarification there, though.

Side note: someone has mentioned this before, but it'd be really helpful if you broke these posts into different threads. A running thread of "here's my problems with ED4" isn't super helpful for folks that come later and share similar questions. If you break these into different threads, they'll be far easier to find, especially as the forum search function continues to degrade (more and more useful terms are being excluded from search as "too common.").

Post Reply