View source
From Fax Encyclopedicus
for
Talk:D20r:Cartomancer
Jump to:
navigation
,
search
[13:57] FaxCelestis: I'd like to do the Cartomancer using a skill (Cartomancy) to determine the effects of their "spells". [13:57] FaxCelestis: Which are more of a manipulation of fate via the power of the Tarot than anything. [13:57] FaxCelestis: The main base of a skill-based magic system in this case would be that the Cartomancy skill is unaugmentable by anything short of an ability modifier or actual ranks in the skill. [13:59] MikeULEM: Hmmmm... [13:59] MikeULEM: What's your current plan for it? [14:00] FaxCelestis: I'd like to make it skill-based, using a sort of "hand" system. [14:00] FaxCelestis: IE: you can only "play" the cards you have in your "hand". [14:01] MikeULEM: Hmmm, reminds me of Ogre Battle. [14:02] FaxCelestis: Each card would have a number of different effects (with elevating DCs), and a rebounded effect on the Cartomancer if they fail the check. [14:02] MikeULEM: You mean a reversed effect. [14:02] FaxCelestis: Right. [14:02] FaxCelestis: Say I want to burn my opponent. So I play the "Phoenix" card, reversed, and make a Cartomancy check. If I pass, they are burnt. If I don't, I get burnt. [14:03] MikeULEM: Biggest problem I see is the lack of auto failures/successes in skill checks. [14:04] FaxCelestis: Well, at higher levels, your ranks alone would be enough to pass you for weaker plays. [14:04] FaxCelestis: For instance, say the Phoenix card, reversed, has a check DC of 10 for 1d6 fire damage. [14:04] FaxCelestis: At level 7, you autopass that. [14:05] FaxCelestis: It could also have a DC 20 for 3d6 fire damage. At 17, you autopass that. [14:05] FaxCelestis: Sooner, with a good Cha score. [14:06] FaxCelestis: Those are arbitrary designations, not actual mechanics, but that's the general effect I'm looking for. [14:06] FaxCelestis: And instead of getting "spell slots", one gets "hand size". Say, two cards (out of the 55 card deck) at level one, progressing in size up to, say, ten cards at 20. [14:07] FaxCelestis: You don't use these cards when you cast from them (though they may have a recovery time before use again, I'm uncertain on that), so they stay in your hand. [14:07] FaxCelestis: Does that make sense? [14:09] MikeULEM: Well hmmm... [14:10] MikeULEM: Yeah, so you have 55 cards total to choose from, but can only have 10 to choose from at a time? [14:11] FaxCelestis: Right. [14:11] FaxCelestis: well, 10, but you'd get the face up and reversed versions of each. [14:13] MikeULEM: Wait, so those two are separate cards? [14:13] FaxCelestis: No, the same card, but you have different effects for "face up" and "reversed". [14:14] FaxCelestis: So the Phoenix cardm face up, would also have a check DC of 10 for 1d6 points of healing and a DC of 20 for 3d6 points of healing. [14:14] FaxCelestis: Again, arbitrary designations. [14:19] MikeULEM: Still, a tarot deck had 55 cards? No duplicates? [14:20] MikeULEM: And is this a base class or a pristige class? [14:22] FaxCelestis: Base class [14:22] FaxCelestis: Yeah, unique deck for this actually. [14:22] MikeULEM: Why not just leave it at 22 cards? [14:22] FaxCelestis: http://corporation.walagata.com/fax/wiki/index.php/Levantine_Set [14:23] FaxCelestis: Because I like variety [14:24] MikeULEM: Eh, might be a bit too much variety. [14:24] MikeULEM: Unless you start assigning existing spells to the deck. [14:24] FaxCelestis: I probably will. [14:25] MikeULEM: Well hmmm, if I were gonna do it... [14:25] MikeULEM: I'd treat the cards like reusable scrolls. [14:26] FaxCelestis: That might be rather effective, actually. [14:26] MikeULEM: Yeah. [14:26] FaxCelestis: each usable a number of times per day, progressing with the class? [14:26] MikeULEM: I'd say usable once per day. [14:27] MikeULEM: And each card takes certain spells. [14:27] MikeULEM: For example, evocation spell above 3rd level. [14:27] MikeULEM: Casting a regular spell is a certain DC check. [14:27] MikeULEM: Casting a spell with a metamagic (determined by the card it's cast into) is a higher DC check. [14:27] MikeULEM: And if they fail, it's a scroll mishap. [14:30] MikeULEM: Interesting mechanic, minimal extra rules. [14:31] MikeULEM: Although I might make it a prestige class, +arcane or divine spell levels. [14:31] FaxCelestis: I'm pretty set on base class, here. [14:31] MikeULEM: So what's its advantage, then? [14:31] FaxCelestis: With a good roll, it can do certain things earlier than a wizard. [14:32] FaxCelestis: The trade off is that it can't qualify for casting. [14:32] FaxCelestis: Rather, item creation. [14:32] FaxCelestis: The Stasis card, for instance, might have a DC 30 for time stop. [14:33] FaxCelestis: Well, DC 35. [14:33] FaxCelestis: Meaning he could do it as early as level 13 (albeit at a high rate of failure). [14:34] MikeULEM: Ah, I see. So it's like a wizard with regenerating scrolls. [14:34] FaxCelestis: Right, and without the ability to craft. [14:34] MikeULEM: Why not assign it to Use Magic Device, then? [14:34] MikeULEM: I don't think that has any skill buffs. [14:34] FaxCelestis: Because UMD has a variety of other skills attached to it already. [14:34] MikeULEM: Well, okay, then a new skill, just for that class, with synergy bonuses with Use Magic Device? [14:34] FaxCelestis: I'd make an addendum to the UMD in that it can emulate Cartomancy at an increased DC (say, +10). [14:35] FaxCelestis: And yes, synergy bonuses. [14:35] FaxCelestis: Further, the Cartomancy skill can also be used for divinatory purposes outside of combat. [14:35] FaxCelestis: Which I will also create rules for. [14:35] MikeULEM: Trying to remember, I think there was an article about Tarot Card reading. [14:35] MikeULEM: I remember because we were discussing it after I looted that tarot deck off the gypsy in Ravenloft. [14:36] FaxCelestis: I wouldn't doubt it, but I haven't seen it. [14:36] MikeULEM: Okay. [14:36] MikeULEM: So a wizard that uses cards as scrolls. The wizard can regenerate so many cards after a day. [14:37] FaxCelestis: Do you think 3/4 BAB, 4+Int skills is too much? Cartomancy's Cha-based, and he won't have access to as many spells as a wizard. [14:38] FaxCelestis: it's essentially 3+Int, since he needs the Cartomancy skill maxed. [14:38] MikeULEM: Yeah. I'd lower the BAB, though. [14:38] FaxCelestis: okay. [14:38] MikeULEM: I'm seeing him having more spells/day than a wizard, potentially sorcerer+. [14:39] MikeULEM: But let's see, Hook 1 is that he, basically, casts all his spells off cards. [14:39] MikeULEM: I'd say Hook 2 is that he can enchant cards and give them to someone else to use. [14:40] MikeULEM: The higher his DC check, the lower their's has to be to use it successfully. [14:40] FaxCelestis: //nod [14:40] MikeULEM: So with a high-enough Cartomancer, you could give the fighter a fireball to throw. [14:40] FaxCelestis: And he has to physically give them the card. [14:40] FaxCelestis: Meaning he loses it from his hand until he gets it back. [14:40] MikeULEM: Yeah. [14:40] MikeULEM: Or it can be stolen, or placed as a treasure. [14:41] FaxCelestis: Right. [14:41] MikeULEM: And the deck size could be his total deck size. [14:41] FaxCelestis: It also gives a whole new genre of treasure: unique cards could be treasure or the purpose of quests. [14:41] MikeULEM: As in place in any more and the deck reaches critical arcana. *BOOM* [14:41] FaxCelestis: the 55 cards are merely the core of the Levantine Set. [14:42] MikeULEM: But yeah, the idea of an entire party packing 2-3 cards w/ spells on them is scary. [14:42] FaxCelestis: Well, remember, the Cartomancer maxes out at a seven card hand. [14:42] FaxCelestis: Assuming a four person party, that's two cards for each party member, and one card to cast from. [14:42] MikeULEM: Yeah, true. [14:42] MikeULEM: So how's it work? [14:43] MikeULEM: He has the whole deck, but he has to put a bit of essence into a card to prime it? [14:43] MikeULEM: And he only has enough essence to prime X cards at a time? [14:43] FaxCelestis: Right. He does that at the beginning of each day, like how a wizard prepares spells. [14:43] FaxCelestis: Those cards go into his "hand", from which he can "play" them from. [14:44] MikeULEM: Yes, I think that would work nicely. [14:44] FaxCelestis: I saw something the other day, a misspelling, actually, and it gave me an idea: the Diplomancer. [14:44] MikeULEM: And certain cards are just too powerful for him to prime at first. [14:44] MikeULEM: Sounds like a beguiler. [14:45] FaxCelestis: Well, he can prime them. He just doesn't have much of a chance of wielding them without backlash. [14:45] MikeULEM: Eh, true. [14:45] FaxCelestis: For instance, the Void card will probably not have a DC less than 30. [14:46] MikeULEM: Probably. [14:46] MikeULEM: Still, I'd be careful. My Level 12 rogue already has a +7 Dex and a base +15 ranks for a total of +22. [14:46] MikeULEM: A similar cardomancer would be making that at 8+ at 12th. [14:46] FaxCelestis: Do you think I should make the Cartomancy skill not tied to any attribute? [14:47] FaxCelestis: Make it ranks-only? [14:47] MikeULEM: Eh... I'd say no. Limits the ways they can buff it. [14:47] MikeULEM: For one thing, that makes most attribute buffs useless to them. [14:47] FaxCelestis: Well, it's already unaug-able by items. [14:48] FaxCelestis: so Cartomancy is Cha-based, I think. I can see justification for Wis-based, too, but I think Cha works best. [14:48] MikeULEM: Yeah. [14:48] MikeULEM: Although I'd expect up to a +10 from the attribute up to 20th level, at least. [14:49] FaxCelestis: Yeah. [14:49] FaxCelestis: So high-level stuff probably will have DCs in the 40s or 50s. [14:49] MikeULEM: Yeah. [14:49] MikeULEM: Anyway, I think you have enough to go on now. [14:50] FaxCelestis: L20 Cartomancer with a +10 Cha bonus will have a 33 score. [14:50] FaxCelestis: That means against a DC of 50, he's got a 15% chance of success. [14:50] MikeULEM: Just don't make the mishaps too nasty. [14:50] FaxCelestis: against DC 45, he's got 60%. [14:50] MikeULEM: I think anything above the usual scroll mishaps will turn out poorly, especially since they're already losing a turn when they mishap. [14:51] FaxCelestis: The mishap may probably just be "The DC for using this card again increases by 3." [14:52] MikeULEM: Eh, now that's not really enough, either. [14:52] FaxCelestis: 5? [14:52] MikeULEM: I'd suggest just a weakened version of the scroll mishaps. [14:52] FaxCelestis: And the card isn't usable for a duration? [14:52] MikeULEM: Yeah, I'd just go with "isn't usable for a duration". [14:52] MikeULEM: Too hard keeping track of DC increases. [14:52] FaxCelestis: Depending on the effect, it'd be a different duration. Right. [14:52] MikeULEM: Yep, sounds good. [14:53] FaxCelestis: Sweet. Thanks for being a sounding board. [14:53] MikeULEM: Although, perhaps, casting spells from a card doesn't require concentration checks? [14:53] FaxCelestis: Only if threatened. [14:53] MikeULEM: That's what I meant. Even while threatened. [14:53] FaxCelestis: Oh, yeah, maybe, since he's got to make a check anyway. [14:53] MikeULEM: I'd say one check + one DC per spell is enough. It'd also make the cardomancer a viable melee caster. [14:53] FaxCelestis: Perhaps an increase to the Cartomancy DC while threatened. Say, +3. [14:54] FaxCelestis: With a Combat Cartomancy feat that removes that.
Return to
Talk:D20r:Cartomancer
.
Views
Article
Discussion
View source
History
Personal tools
Log in
Navigation
Main Page
Community portal
Forum
Current events
Recent changes
Random page
Help
Donations
Google AdSense
Search
Toolbox
What links here
Related changes
Special pages