FREE 5E CONTENT at www.Patreon.com/TheAlpineDM When you join my Patreon, you'll gain: - Instant access to Bestiary & Arcane Vault (150+ pages) - 3 Creatures and 3 Magic Items every month - Wardweaver Class: Versatile arcane tacticians who summon wards to manipulate the battlefield in their favor - Explore ancient Maps & Locations - VTT Creature Tokens
These are great! I even like some of the more complex ones. They remind me of old card games where the rules were often strange or complicated. It's one of the reasons why there's so many variations on rules in modern card games - travelers would forget certain rules or change the ones they didn't like when teaching new people the game. My favorite is probably Shipwreck, but I'll probably use Co-Bald next time I run a casino in one of my games! Thank you very much!
I'm seeing a possible issue with thieves can if more than one player is involved. The insight becomes a double bluff. If the player is telling the truth they want to reveal anyway for the boost for winning the challenge. So either it adds a weird penalty to winning the check, or they reveal anyway and now if they don't, everyone knows they were lying. Otherwise I love it. Maybe make npcs roll against dc to tell it's a lie/truth and players just like, play the game against eachother?
That's a great point! I realized a similar thing when editing of how the thief would want to fail the check if they're being truthful. It could certainly use a bit of tweaking, thanks for the suggestion! 😁
I would go with on a failed insight check the 'guard' doesn't know which was rolled, where as on a successful check the guard learns what was rolled. To be honest here the fact that the Guard is *forced* to do things based off the die roll makes it so that the correct play is to *always* halt because it doesn't matter if the rogue is using deception or diplomacy - the final result of the interaction is based off the check... This being said I think it may be better for the rolls to be made in secret and GM informs players they either thing rogue is lying or not, and a failure by 10 or more causes guard to gain incorrect information.
It could definitely use a bit of tweaking and more play testing (from people who aren't just me and my friends), thanks for the suggestions! The idea was that it's a gamble to 'halt' since it could end up making the thief slightly richer, but it can be tricky to translate through to game mechanics - I'm still learning!
FREE 5E CONTENT at www.Patreon.com/TheAlpineDM
When you join my Patreon, you'll gain:
- Instant access to Bestiary & Arcane Vault (150+ pages)
- 3 Creatures and 3 Magic Items every month
- Wardweaver Class: Versatile arcane tacticians who summon wards to manipulate the battlefield in their favor
- Explore ancient Maps & Locations
- VTT Creature Tokens
I used Co-Ball'd in my game last night and the players loved it! Thanks for the suggestion!
That's awesome, you're very welcome!! Hopefully they didn't lose too much gold 🙃
These are great! I even like some of the more complex ones. They remind me of old card games where the rules were often strange or complicated. It's one of the reasons why there's so many variations on rules in modern card games - travelers would forget certain rules or change the ones they didn't like when teaching new people the game.
My favorite is probably Shipwreck, but I'll probably use Co-Bald next time I run a casino in one of my games! Thank you very much!
Thank you for the kind words! Euchre was definitely used as inspiration, so strange complicated rules is 100% correct haha
I'm seeing a possible issue with thieves can if more than one player is involved. The insight becomes a double bluff. If the player is telling the truth they want to reveal anyway for the boost for winning the challenge. So either it adds a weird penalty to winning the check, or they reveal anyway and now if they don't, everyone knows they were lying. Otherwise I love it. Maybe make npcs roll against dc to tell it's a lie/truth and players just like, play the game against eachother?
That's a great point! I realized a similar thing when editing of how the thief would want to fail the check if they're being truthful. It could certainly use a bit of tweaking, thanks for the suggestion! 😁
I would go with on a failed insight check the 'guard' doesn't know which was rolled, where as on a successful check the guard learns what was rolled. To be honest here the fact that the Guard is *forced* to do things based off the die roll makes it so that the correct play is to *always* halt because it doesn't matter if the rogue is using deception or diplomacy - the final result of the interaction is based off the check...
This being said I think it may be better for the rolls to be made in secret and GM informs players they either thing rogue is lying or not, and a failure by 10 or more causes guard to gain incorrect information.
It could definitely use a bit of tweaking and more play testing (from people who aren't just me and my friends), thanks for the suggestions! The idea was that it's a gamble to 'halt' since it could end up making the thief slightly richer, but it can be tricky to translate through to game mechanics - I'm still learning!
i had a pc talk his way to a mob boss by showing her a magic trick. he was proficient with cards.
Love it!