Re: Ask a Simple Question - Get a Simple Answer

**Stairc -Dan Felder** Tue Jan 19, 2016 5:00 pm

AleneShazam wrote:WANDERLUST QUESTION
Given that Armor in Wanderlust functions similarly to temporary HP in Pony Tales, albeit refreshing every round, does it function like temporary HP in which different sources of armor override with the highest armor value being used? For example if I were to have the Avenger feature (you have armor 10), and then taking the Thick Skin trait (you have armor 5), would I have 10 armor from the avenger feature only, or would I have 15 armor total?

Armor stacks. You'd have 15 total.

AleneShazam Wed Jan 20, 2016 8:13 pm

WANDERLUST QUESTION 2.0
With abilities like this:

Elemental Tempest:

does the clause in the end mean that you can target the same target, even without the nova feature?

**Stairc -Dan Felder** Wed Jan 20, 2016 8:20 pm

AleneShazam Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:25 am

WANDERLUST 3.0
(Sorry for the string of questions)
So, since Armor stacks, and ongoing damage stacks according to the conditions document, am I to assume that weakness also stacks?

**Stairc -Dan Felder** Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:26 am

Yep. And no problem. Happy to clarify things.

Espresso Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:06 am

Wanderlust related

(2) Quickdraw
At the start of your turn, you gain 2 energy that can only be used on Minor actions. You may take an additional Minor Action on each of your turns

Is this 2 energy cumulative? (So, is this like the Energetic feature for minor actions?)

**Stairc -Dan Felder** Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:20 am

Yes. It's cumulative.

Faege Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:26 pm

So since it's established that Guardian's Oath and Shield of Valor synergize, how does this clause: "At the beginning of each turn, you may choose an ally. That creature becomes the subject of your “Guardian’s Oath” until you apply your Guardian’s Oath to another creature." interact with the Oath granting abilities of the Shield?

Say at the beginning of the turn I choose Ally A to be under by oath. Then I use this targeting Ally B and C:
[+3] Guardian’s Vow - Standard Utility
Up to two target allies are subject to your “Guardian’s Oath” until the end of your next turn. You also gain 1d4 temporary HP.

Would Ally A still be under oath?

Also, do the 'challenge' series of traits stack? Say I had both Iron Warden and Throw the Gauntlet, and I attacked an enemy, which would I apply? Or is it up to me?

Iron Warden/Throw the Gauntlet:

Same with these two 'mark' abilities, do different challenges grant different effects?

Spoiler:

**Stairc -Dan Felder** Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:14 pm

Faege wrote:So since it's established that Guardian's Oath and Shield of Valor synergize, how does this clause: "At the beginning of each turn, you may choose an ally. That creature becomes the subject of your “Guardian’s Oath” until you apply your Guardian’s Oath to another creature." interact with the Oath granting abilities of the Shield?

Say at the beginning of the turn I choose Ally A to be under by oath. Then I use this targeting Ally B and C:
[+3] Guardian’s Vow - Standard Utility
Up to two target allies are subject to your “Guardian’s Oath” until the end of your next turn. You also gain 1d4 temporary HP.

Would Ally A still be under oath?

Nope. And this aspect isn't ideal. It should be changed so that the Guardian's Oath feature allows you to apply your oath as a free action 1/round during your turn so the abilities don't interfere with one another. I'd approve this house rule. Might change this ability officially later (at work and crunching).

Also, do the 'challenge' series of traits stack? Say I had both Iron Warden and Throw the Gauntlet, and I attacked an enemy, which would I apply? Or is it up to me?

Iron Warden/Throw the Gauntlet:

Same with these two 'mark' abilities, do different challenges grant different effects?

Spoiler:

Unless I misunderstand your question, the intention behind having multiple challenge-punishing traits like this was that defenders...

A) Could choose from different options if they just wanted one.
B) Could stack them together if they wanted to increase the nastiness of their challenge build.

So if you have multiple abilities that all say "you get to do this stuff against your challenged creature" - you can benefit from ALL of them against that challenged creature.

AleneShazam Wed Jan 27, 2016 1:05 pm

In pony tales, can you convert standard actions into minor actions? (As in take two minor actions instead of 1 standard and 1 minor)

**Stairc -Dan Felder** Wed Jan 27, 2016 1:07 pm

AleneShazam Fri Jan 29, 2016 10:30 am

In regards to guardian's shield and blink, would missing blink then taking damage trigger guardian's shield, even if it's the same attack? This is confusing because I'm not sure if the rule "you can only use one free action, interrupt or reaction per trigger" defines trigger as the power or as the effect of the power (first getting targeted by the power then taking damage from the power)

[–2] Blink - Interrupt Utility
Trigger - An enemy targets you with an attack.
Effect - Flip a coin. If heads, you are not affected by the attack. If tails, gain 5 temporary HP.

[–2] Guardian’s Shield - Interrupt Utility
Trigger - You would take damage from an attack
Effect - You take half that damage instead.

**Stairc -Dan Felder** Fri Jan 29, 2016 10:32 am

The triggers are different. One is a "when attacked" trigger. The other is "when damaged" trigger. You can choose whether to blink first. If the blink fails, you can use shield.

AleneShazam Sun Jan 31, 2016 2:40 pm

Telepathy (3) – At Will
You can communicate silently with other willing characters that you can either see or that you know very well within 1000 feet.

Would communicate entail a two-way communication? Or is it only the sender?

**Stairc -Dan Felder** Sun Jan 31, 2016 2:45 pm

Two-way.

AleneShazam Sun Jan 31, 2016 3:00 pm

Would that have to be language based? As in, if a person who is incapable of understanding language were to communicate using exclusively telepathy, would that work?
(or would that be subject to GM interpretation?)

**Stairc -Dan Felder** Sun Jan 31, 2016 3:08 pm

AleneShazam wrote:Would that have to be language based? As in, if a person who is incapable of understanding language were to communicate using exclusively telepathy, would that work?
(or would that be subject to GM interpretation?)

You can basically send what you're thinking to the other person. That takes the form of words often, but you can also send ideas or emotions that you're genuinely feeling (remember, they have to be willing and can turn it off at will).

AleneShazam Mon Feb 01, 2016 2:13 pm

Can one take multiple elemental affinities or resistances? For example have both Fire and Lightning Affinity for flaming lightning?

Elemental Affinity (1)
When you take this ability, choose one of the following effects.

Fire – Affinity
You can safely create small puffs of flame at will. These puffs of flame are identical to a torch in many respects and are capable of burning objects and lighting fires outside of combat just as a torch might. Puffs of flame are ordinary fire, they extinguish quickly without tinder.

Lightning – Affinity
You can safely spit small bolts of electricity at will. These bolts can be used for minor things such as starting a small fire if used on flammable material, powering an electrical machine, and similar actions that can be achieved with low voltage electricity.

**Stairc -Dan Felder** Mon Feb 01, 2016 2:22 pm

Eeyup.

Dusk Raven Wed Feb 03, 2016 7:12 pm

More of a design question than a clarification question, but Ember seems to be unique amongst Abilities in that it also grants a combat effect:

You can use this ability in combat as a [0] Standard Attack to deal 2 damage to target creature and cause it to suffer 1 ongoing damage (save ends).

While I understand that this obviously needs to be kept weak so you don't have players taking the Ability to gain combat Talents and nothing else, but I feel like the concept could extend to other Abilities with obvious combat applications...

A1C Bronymous Wed Feb 03, 2016 10:20 pm

But they'd all really have to be just the same thing with other flavor to keep balance, and if that's the case you may as well just custom flavor it as something else yourself, rather than add copies to the rulebook. Right?

ZamuelNow Fri Feb 12, 2016 2:15 am

Paper Shadow wrote:Applejack of All Trades (0) [Concept by LoganAura]
Training no longer grants you a +3 bonus to trained skills. You gain a +1 bonus to all skill checks instead.

With the new AoAT, can you pick up training for multiple +1s? I'm assuming not due to the no stacking rule but verifying to make sure. If not, it may need to be slightly reworded. Separately, it's now 0 points but not at the top of the list since abilities are in point order.

**Paper Shadow** Fri Feb 12, 2016 9:09 am

ZamuelNow wrote:
Paper Shadow wrote:Applejack of All Trades (0) [Concept by LoganAura]
Training no longer grants you a +3 bonus to trained skills. You gain a +1 bonus to all skill checks instead.

With the new AoAT, can you pick up training for multiple +1s? I'm assuming not due to the no stacking rule but verifying to make sure. If not, it may need to be slightly reworded. Separately, it's now 0 points but not at the top of the list since abilities are in point order.

I don't understand what you mean. Pick up training for multiple +1s? Could you please expand?

ZamuelNow Fri Feb 12, 2016 11:54 am

Yes. Training can be purchased multiple times so my question is whether buying say...three trainings would be +3 to all stats or would it just be +1 once and buying multiples is a waste of points.

**Paper Shadow** Fri Feb 12, 2016 2:46 pm

ZamuelNow wrote:Yes. Training can be purchased multiple times so my question is whether buying say...three trainings would be +3 to all stats or would it just be +1 once and buying multiples is a waste of points.

Okay, I understand where you are coming from, thank you...

Buying training would be, for the most part, a waste of points. The main reason AJoAT makes training lose the +3 bonus it provides instead of outright removing training is to make things like No This Is Whining, the Dynamic Duo Destiny, and any homebrew thing the DM gives you that affects training not be pointless or have awkward interactions with your character. As for the rewording part, I can now see what you mean. You can see that some people might see the ability saying that training provides a +1 bonus to all skill checks instead, as opposed to the two sentences being separate entities. I'll speak to Dan about it...

As for your other thing, I will move it up the ability list when I next update the ability document...

Sponsored content