New Build-Your-Own-Race Expansion is live!

Either way people are going to be bothered. Tyger still wants there to be no racial expansion at all.

The difference between 7 and 8 is a negligible one and I'm okay with the basis being either 7 or 8. Living Legends effectively has 7 right now.

I feel the system is going to work fine no matter what though, especially once people have time to get used to it. Just a bit of tweaking now.

Baby Dragons, Earth Ponies, and Changelings. Three of of the five most played races.

Remember that Pony Tales came first dude, it's the system WE like more... Dislike all the LL flavor that's gotten all over Pony Tales. But I'm willing to deal with that. It just is bugging me that you seem to forget that or something.

And why'd you price things to avoid everyone picking the same thing? If anything I think people like a more diverse party then one with too much of the same thing...

To be fair, races that are played often are usually overpowered. Not always, but usually.

Xel Unknown wrote:And why'd you price things to avoid everyone picking the same thing? If anything I think people like a more diverse party then one with too much of the same thing...

Several reasons. A big one is that so everyone wouldn't pick the same thing. Many players have a huge urge to play with maximum efficiency, even when it's less fun. I know that I do, that's a central idea of the system - making sure people aren't incentivized due to power to all pick less interesting choices.

Gotta agree with Xel on both points there.

Pony Tales is the more flavorful system and more of us are playing it. It seems weird to lower our racial value to match LL's instead of raising LL's to match PT's.

Also, yeah, it does still strike me as weird to price things as if we assume everyone in the party is going to take all the same things when I can't imagine people wanting to do that even if they can, nor can I see a GM allowing it.

And why'd you price things to avoid everyone picking the same thing? If anything I think people like a more diverse party then one with too much of the same thing...

Several reasons. A big one is that so everyone wouldn't pick the same thing. Many players have a huge urge to play with maximum efficiency, even when it's less fun. I know that I do, that's a central idea of the system - making sure people aren't incentivized due to power to all pick less interesting choices.

I still vote for the 6+CM personally. Like I said before, everyone has a talent even if they don't get a tattoo for it. And I doubt the LL players will be upset at getting an extra point for their race tallies. That way both games balance out to 8 points rather than 7 and with both systems being the same racially, it makes it easier to keep track of and move one race to and from the other.

What do you mean Changelings are fine? At 7 points they have A Thousand Faces, Flight, and PK (assuming Stairc is gonna change that to 1 point for racial like he said earlier). That means they have 2 Skills. 2. That's sad. With 8 Points they get a third skill and are back to where they were before and not super super sad.

Edit: Stairc, that sorta sounded like you're punishing all of us for how you choose to play. Not all of us are like that.

Just because many players of all games do, doesn't mean that's how pony tales players seem to want to play. I personally recall how pony team bravo disliked hearing that my guy was another unicorn to the group...

Edit: With Pony Tales the power in this system is being different things with different talents and skillsets.

So I was reading through these talents, and I had two questions.

The first is a discrepancy. Two traits that have the same effect.
Challenge Fate (3) – Magic
Trigger – The DM makes a D20 roll and you dislike the result
Effect - You can tell the DM to treat the result of the d20 roll as a natural 1. No rerolls are possible.

Against The Gods (5) – 1/Day
Trigger – The DM makes a D20 roll and you dislike the result.
Effect - You can tell the DM to treat the result of the d20 roll as a natural 1. No rerolls are possible.

Obviously the difference is the magic point cost for the three pointer. But because characters can end up with more than one magic point a day, doesn't that make the 3 point trait MORE potent than the 5 point trait? Shouldn't it be flipped, balance wise, otherwise what's the point of the 5 pointer? Spellchild + Derp+ Challenge Fate equals 3 uses off the bat.

Second, say you have a really neat idea for a really unique race. But all the stuff you have in mind costs just a bit too much, point wise. Would there be an option to take flaws- ACTUAL flaws that have meaning- for negative points, allowing you to offset? For example, the race I want would use the 1000 Faces trait, flight, and one or two others. I haven't done the math yet, but I'm betting it comes out to more than 7 (5? whichever). BUT this race also has a unique crippling weakness, and (depending on how potent its written up) could be -2 to -4 points, allowing the specific trait build I want. Is htis possible?

I should point out, I don't intend to play with any of this stuff, but I like the idea of applying this character to this system, and this is a good way to have it allowed. In case of emergency.

Adding flaws will only lead to munchkining... This is without question and seen in ALL other types of game systems out there.

Flaws that everyone can take are a really bad idea. It's almost impossible to resist the lure to munchkin if they're around. You'll just end up with everyone ever taking flaws. It'll be awkward and cause a bit of drama every time a GM has to enforce someone not being allowed to take certain ones and it'll end up an unfair mess.

Ramsus wrote:Edit: Stairc, that sorta sounded like you're punishing all of us for how you choose to play. Not all of us are like that.

When building a system, it's good for balance reasons to make sure that players can't break the system by doing a simple rules-legal thing. Or have massive advantages that make it so powerful that there's no sense, power-wise, in taking anything else. We all agree on this, which is why we mention when some combat talents are strictly better than others or some destinies seem so powerful you can't justify taking others.

By making sure there isn't a massive advantage to a party that all takes the same thing, we encourage players to take different things. We make it a good idea to play how you want to play, so you don't have to feel like you're missing out because you want more flavor.

That's why races don't give combat advantages. That's why you can't trade utility talents for combat talents. That's why combat talents don't determine your destinies.

We want players to be equally rewarded for playing how they like and not feel like they're missing out on more powerful, less fun options. And we don't want to put the DM in the position of banning everything we didn't bother taking the time to balance.

Oh well, you know I support the division of combat and non-combat 100%. That's always something that unbalances everything about a system if you allow it.

Honestly, I'm ok with the point costs for stuff the way they are. It's a minor gripe and not a huge issue for me. I'm a lot more concerned we don't hugely nerf half the characters out there or end up with default racial setups where the race has only 2 trained skills and no cutie mark or a third trained skill. (Which is what we'll get for Changelings is we do 7.)

I'm actually fine with people asking for more Fury. I think things are fair as-is, but I also want to make sure as many people as possible feel good about the changes. Definitely going to do everything I can to make sure as many people as possible are happy. =)

Edit: Gotta run. Got a game-planning session at a sweet restaurant. Later!

Naw, he's just a good game designer. The goal of the game is to be fun, not to force your viewpoints on people. That's why the system is designed in such a gloriously open way. It's basically a blend of hardcore numbers based systems and those systems meant to just slightly gamify the storytelling experience. We get quick simple mechanics that encourage people telling the stories they want to tell. As such, the mechanics need to support what's fun more than what a single person thinks everyone else should be satisfied with.

Fury of the Tempest wrote:

Stairc -Dan Felder wrote:I'm actually fine with them asking for more Fury. I think things are fair as-is, but I also want to make sure as many people as possible feel good about the changes. =)

... Are you the bearer of the Element of Generosity by any chance?

In my opinion, Dan fits under most of the elements.
He's Kind enough to listen to everyone's opinions, and is Generous enough to try and fit them into the game.
He's Honest with his thoughts and is Loyal to his projects and systems.
He's full of Laughter and tries to make a game that's fun for everyone, and has enough Magic to be able to do it.

You forgot that he's Indomitable about.... um...... eating pancakes.

I was going for the Elements of Harmony, Ramsus

Eating pancakes isn't an element of harmony? What sort of backwards anti-pancake agenda society are you living in!?

Eating pancakes isn't an Element of Harmony, but I'm pretty sure it is a sub-element to either Laughter or Magic.