Re: (TFT) Shields and Feats.

[David Bofinger <bofinger.david@gmail.com>]

> You can make IQ 8 characters if you want.  In no way are IQ 8 characters
> removed from the list of starting characters.

​They are removed from the list of wise starting characters, becaus
e they
are simply not as good as IQ 9 equivalents. They're removed from the list
of starting characters you will observe in nature assuming competent
character design.

> ​
I do think that IQ 9 fighters should be better than IQ 8 characters
> so sooner or later people will want to raise the IQ of their fighters.

If you want them upgraded sooner or later then you can make them more
attractive by the time you get to 36 points. But you've made them more
attractive at 32 points, so the old standard design becomes obsolete and
disappears. I think that's unfortunate, you don't seem to mind.

> ​
I actually wrote up a starting character with ST 8, DX 8, IQ 16 to prove a
> point to someone.

I'm curious what the point was.

But a skill monkey like that is a perfectly valid character in a large
party. The rest of the party will have to carry you in combat but you might
make it worth their while if you have most of Master Physicker, Scholar,
Strategist, Woodsman, Detect Lies, Detect Traps, Alertness, New Followers
... especially when the rolls are being made at IQ 16 and rising - the
character will probably never raise his ST or DX. "The pit is very
difficult to detect. Roll six dice ... that would be four to you." "20 XP
please"

> my wizard died before earning his second attribute.

Ah. Interesting. The core capabilities of the character would seem to be
Trance, Summon Dragon and

> ​
Why would anyone want to make a 50 attribute fighter with an 8 IQ?

Actually now I look through the rules he'd probably go to IQ 9 for Warrior
& Veteran and Two Weapons. Something like ST 25 DX 16 IQ 9 (chain mail that
doesn't affect DX or MA, pikeaxe in each hand) is probably better. The UC V
version is ST 18 DX 18 IQ 14, doesn't deal out nearly as much damage but
has some impressive survivability.

> ​
Are you bothered that your 50 attribute killing machine can not take the IQ
9 Missile Weapons talent?

Not sure I understand the question.

I don't think Missile Weapons is obligatory - lots of characters are
basically specialising in melee. That's changed radically by the fast draw
talent but I'm assuming we don't have that.

> ​
I don't think that adding some new shield talents is that
> revolutionary.  TFT has had the idea that a 'cool combat concept' which i
s
> outside of the basic game, is added into the system with a talent, goes
back
> to the basic ITL.

Call it a revolution following constitutional form, if you like. The
mechanism might be familiar but the impact is huge.

> ​
I think my superscript rules are far more revolutionary

Probably are, and I'm a big fan of them. Thing about the superscripts, you
could point to obvious and clear problems that everyone agreed were
undesirable: wizards needing to become hugely strong to cast the big
spells, all-rounders needing to be geniuses to know many talents.
Superscripts were an elegant solution to problems that needed to be solved.

But the advanced combat talents don't give me that feeling. They aren't a
solution to an obvious and pressing problem. At least not one I can see.
And there's nothing specially elegant or entertaining about giving someone
+2 damage or whatever.

Also, I don't like the name "superscript" but I don't have anything better
to offer.

--
David

Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"