PhilFleischmann

The real problem is that the Autofire advantage is not a good simulation of machine gun fire. Machine guns are intended to make it more likely to hit a target by putting more bullets in the air (or to hit multiple targets rapidly), not to hit a single target more than once. Usually, IRL, hitting a target with one bullet is enough. A better simulation of RL autofire weapons is (IMO) AOE Accurate, or even just bonuses to OCV. If all you want is to be more likely to hit your target once, Autofire is not the way to go. However, I seem to remember an option somewhere of using Autofire to increase hit probability. Something like each additional shot can be used to gain +1 OCV, instead of a potential extra hit. So with that 3-shot Autofire, you could use one or two shots to increase OCV, declared when making the attack, before the roll, so with an 11- to hit, for example, you could three shots to get: a) One hit on 11-, two hits on 9-, three hits on 7-; b) One hit on 12-, two hits on 10-, and no chance of three hits; or c) One hit on 13-, and no chance of more than one hit. Am I remembering that correctly? Or did I make that up? IDHMBIFOM.

I wouldn't call being mounted a weapon familiarity. After all, your horse is not a weapon. It's just a requirement of the maneuvers in the martial art. And Gnome is correct that it doesn't require any additional rules representation. I suppose it does bear some similarity to a weapon element, but it shouldn't cost points - after all, it's a restriction. If you get knocked off your horse (or your horse is incapacitated), your maneuvers can no longer be used. There might even be modifiers for the horse itself: if your usual horse is incapacitated, and you have to use some other "horse of opportunity" which isn't necessarily trained, and isn't used to you and your commands and maneuvers, you may suffer a penalty (or have to make a Riding roll). And one other thought, which may be irrelevant: Having defined this martial art as requiring being mounted, you could theoretically add an additional "weapon element" to use the power unmounted, if you happen to have some extra running/strength/KB resistance/etc., so that you can maneuver sufficiently like a horse, and do something like those same maneuvers on foot. Maybe a pair of magic "Boots of Horseyness".

If the defeated robot's weapon is defined as a universal focus, then you can pick it up and use it without having to buy any additional power. For a boostable blast (or any other power), you can buy it in pieces, with the appropriate limitations and advantages: 12d6 Blast - 60 points (plain) +2d6 Blast, 10 Active, Extra Time - Extra Phase (-3/4) - 6 Real points +2d6 Blast, AOE (for the entire 16d6), 90 Active, Extra Time - Extra 2 Phases (-1) - 45 Real points So you can do a 12d6 normal Blast every phase, or a 14d6 Blast every other phase, or a 16d6 AOE Blast every three phases. Season to taste.

Don't look up. At least the pillars of the kings were fully dressed. OTOH, do we know if the colossus is anatomically correct?

And a high total on the dice is better than a low total on the dice. This is a pretty pointless argument, and it's not getting any more pointful.

And presumably, the bridges in Aarn are high enough to allow ships to pass under them, or else maybe they're drawbridges.

Presumably, a raft or small rowboat could travel along any river. The question is, which rivers (and which parts of rivers) are deep and wide enough for large ships to navigate - for major trade, holding large amounts of cargo, not just one or two farmers/rangers/craftsmen bringing their wares into town on a raft that would otherwise fit on a single cart over land. Or for war, a large number of soldiers would not likely be transported in ones and twos and threes in small paddled crafts. The the Ordring River from the Ettinstone to Lake Beralka, and the Loskell, from the Ettinstone to Aarn, are navigable by large ships. And the thick line on the map of the Whitburn River implies that large ships can sail up it at least as far as Tashorn, and beyond that. The text says that the Dragonsmoke River is navigable (by ship) all the way up to Londregos.

At the very least, there should be a martial art for centaurs. And maybe leomachi.

You're absolutely right!

I've created a few martial arts styles, not with any actual "school" or tradition, but simply based on the unusual physiology of the characters. For example, one was for a character with multiple arms (and wings and a prehensile tail).

The MP itself doesn't have a STR min, but the weapon of opportunity that you're using probably does. The STR min of the weapon still applies. Now you might find a magic "Sword of Might" that has no STR min, in which case no STR min would apply when using these sword tricks.

My first instinct would be the Hargeshite Empire of Vashkhor as the most likely road-building empire - not for conquering armies, but for proselytizing priests (and *then* conquering armies if the priests fail). Pretty much any empire with goals of conquest, and a good level of confidence in success might build a lot of roads. But there aren't that many really big empires in Ambrethel. One other possibility is Kal himself. Who else is a bigger conqueror? However, why would he bother spending his resources building roads when the various nations of Ambrethel will do it for him? He might have to build a few roads south from his realm, just to get to the roads of his targets. And of course it also depends on the availability of transportation magic. If a nation has the ability to teleport a whole army a hundred miles, then they really don't have much need of roads. Likewise with flying, or flying mounts, or any number of other non-road methods. For my games, I prefer to keep such transportation magic (and mounts) very strictly limited, so roads would indeed be needed.

Not even close. Numbers behave themselves. A +1 to a target number that you want to roll that or less, is no different that +1 added to the roll that you want to roll a target number or higher. "I need an 11 or less." "But because of circumstance X, you get +1." "So I need a 12 or less." "I need to roll 10 or higher." "But because of circumstance X, you get +1." "So I add 1 to my roll." The latter is no less intuitive, and for many people, it's more intuitive. With roll-high, you set a single difficulty level, and each character's own modifiers, skill level, and other circumstances are applied to the roll. With roll-low, each character has his own target number, and then more modifiers may be piled on top of that. The GM decides that every member of the party needs to make a Climbing roll. With the roll-low system, Mountaineer Mike has a 14- roll, Climby McClimberson has a 15- roll, but he's injured so he takes a -3, Joe Genero has an 11- roll. Feeble Felix has an 8- roll, but gets a +2 because Mike and Joe are helping him. And everyone takes an additional -1 because of the strong winds blowing. With a roll-high system, the GM sets the target number at 11, due to the strong wind blowing, so everyone needs an 11 or higher. Mountaineer Mike has Climbing +3. Climby McClimberson has Climbing +4, but takes -3 due to injury. Joe Genero makes an unmodified roll. Feeble Felix is at -3, but +2 for being assisted = -1.

I wouldn't say it's arguable, I'd say it's decidable - by the GM. Especially since neither Kal, nor the Thunese gods are statted out. You don't have to be convinced. I don't have to be convinced. Even the PCs don't have to be convinced. Only the Thunese themselves have to be convinced. We know someone eventually has the power to stand up to KT, and all it might take is for the Thunese to weaken or distract him enough. That's one of the things that's so great about TTA - it's not on rails. The eventual defeat of Kal-Turak can work out however the GM and players want it to.

Detect: Target's Name, if you saw them in Heaven. 2d6 Aid to Standing, if you saw them in Heaven.

One of the parts of the Turakian Age that has always intrigued me is Thun. Two ideas: 1. (And this may be obvious) That the ultimate defeat of Kal-Turak is brought about by the PCs manipulating events so that Kal-Turak must face off against the wizards of Thun (or even the gods of Thun!). Maybe the PCs have subtly brought this about, or maybe the good guys must overtly ally with Thun against the greater threat of Kal-Turak. (Sort of like how the US and UK allied with Stalin to stop Hitler.) 2. A campaign-starting adventure: The PCs are from the various parts of Ambrethel, but they have all been kidnapped by Thunese wizards to be sacrificed in some specific ritual with very precise requirements. The PCs find themselves in a dungeon on Thun. Their first adventure: Escape from Thun! As starting heroes, they won't be powerful enough to do that much damage to the Thunese, other than preventing the sacrifice ritual. But that's OK - all they have to do is get to (relative) safety. Once the PCs have survived this ordeal together, they band together as a long-term adventuring party. It's lot less of a cliche than all meeting by chance in a tavern. Now they have to figure out how to escape the pirates and get off of Aresea. etc.

I have no problem with a Multipower of sword tricks, but I wouldn't build it directly from Talents. You have to take into consideration the Active Cost of the abilities, not just the final Real Cost of an ability built as a Talent. Does anything distinguish this Sword Tricks MP from a Sword Tricks Martial Art? You might be able to do everything you want with Martial Arts, for fewer points.

Maybe I'm missing your point here. What exactly are you arguing? That a character who is blind (or has some other disadvantage) can do various things to compensate? Yes, of course he can. No one is claiming otherwise. Are you arguing that anything a player character does to enable himself must always work perfectly? That the GM can never throw any challenge at the character that he hasn't already figured out how to compensate for? That if a blind character has a seeing-eye teammate, the GM must never incapacitate that teammate?

Or it's simply the definition of what a soul is, or how the game setting works.

Parties get split all the time without anyone having an obsession with it. If you've disadvantaged yourself to save points or have greater power in some other area, any good GM is going to make that matter once in a while - without ever being "obsessed".

Remember also that each sense is unique, it does something that other senses don't do. If you've sold back your sight and bought passive sonar instead (Spacial Awareness based on hearing), then you can no longer see colors or color contrasts - meaning you can't read anything printed, you can't "cut the red wire, not the blue wire", you can't recognize someone by their clothing or skin color, etc.

Assuming the target wants to go to heaven, they can simply "stand still" and voluntarily take the hit. Just like you don't have to roll to hit with a Healing power on someone who wants to be healed. There could even be a limitation: Willing Targets only, so that those with "unfinished business" can remain behind as ghosts. The real question is, how do you build a flashlight in heaven?

Back before 6e, there was a discussion here in which I made the case that STR should cost 2 points, HA should be 5 points per die, and MA DCs should cost 6 points each. With the removal of figured characteristics, the STR cost issue is resolved. In 4e HA cost 3 points, because it needed to be cheaper than 5 points of STR. In 5e, this became 3.333 points (5 points with an arbitrary "HA limitation") for the same reason. And MA DCs needed to cost more than HA, because they do more and don't cost END. So they cost 4 points. What does HA cost now, in 6e? 5 points per d6? Great! Then MA DCs should cost 6 points.

One other thought that occurs to me: The gods of any given campaign world do not have to conform to the "God of ____" format, so neatly laid out by that other game system, lo these many decades ago, as the way gods must be. There's nothing that says a pantheon has to be this way. You could have some gods named Asdf, Bnm, Cvbn, Dfgh, and Ertyu. And they have their personalities and goals and aspects, but they don't have to be the god *of* something specific - they can just be gods. Asdf may be a big, strong guy with a sword, but that doesn't necessarily make him the god of war, or of strength, or of swords.

Roads often also get made along the sides of rivers. Perhaps not nicely paved roads, but worn paths and trails. Those traveling without a water craft, will often follow rivers as well. There are two roads shown on the map of Aarn on page 57, one going north and the other going southeast. But if you look at the larger map on page 60, you'll see that there are no apparent destinations for these roads. Presumably, they are there for the farmers in the countryside around Aarn to bring their goods to the city. Which means that these roads likely end at the first reasonably-sized farming village they meet - and then become mere dirt paths beyond that. In general, roads would be built between cities in the same nation (if at all). Let's take Vestria as the first example from the first map on page 50. If Vestria wished to invest in roads (they do cost money and labor to build), they would likely build them between cities that are not already connected by water. So perhaps between Daravel and Ashburn. Or between Daravel and Greyspan - or perhaps better, from Daravel south to the bend in the Greyspark River. From there, a traveler can go downriver to Odellia or upriver to Greyspan. Considering the political situation in Vestria, it is unlikely that there are roads connecting Colgrave, Toreth, and Skeld to the rest of the kingdom. Although there could be a road from Ashburn to Brecon - or for less building cost, from Brecon to the bend of the Silverrock River, just north of the Enchanted Forest of Danaflor. This makes for easy access among Brecon, Ashburn, and Teriadoc. We aren't given much info about the Enchanted Forest, so I'm assuming that such a road's proximity won't cause too great a hazard. If the forest is a problem, then the road would need to cut a wide berth around it. Cities are shown in TTA that, like Brecon, are not along any river or coast. On the same map, we see cities of Athring and Forgald in the Mhendarian Palatinate, and Ytheis in Umbr. Presumably, these cities have their own sources of fresh water - wells, springs, or even a lake or pond too small to include on the map. Because of these cities' isolation, they would be likely to have roads to another city within the same nation. And also for other isolated locations, like Blackfairn and Gwinden Abbeys. Not that these "roads" would need to be anything other than worn tracks through the grass. Roads are often built to allow a large kingdom to maintain control over its various regions - roads make it easier to send soldiers to put down the rebellion in a distant province. Roads are less likely to be built from one kingdom to another - unless they really, really trust each other, and have a mutually beneficial trading arrangement.