|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | {{Code_Yellow}}
| + | #REDIRECT [[Journey:_Artisan_Disciplines]] |
| − | | + | |
| − | This page is still in its infancy. Brainstorming for now, essentially, but a basic framework is forthcoming...
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | =Basics=
| + | |
| − | Artisan specials are doing to be very tightly designed. Because of this, they will almost all be very low-costed, in terms of XP. Gaining versatility as an artisan will be more difficult, but ultimately more rewarding because of the impact of a more versatile artisan.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | I have a feeling, based upon our experiences with Warrior disciplines, that all non-Lorist roles are going to be significantly more narrow in scope. I think this accurately reflects what we're expecting Journey play to look like: the Lorist is the jack-of-all-trades, capable of doing anything and filling any role, while the remaining roles are significantly more focused and specialized.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | For artisans, in particular, their disciplines will all wind up looking incredibly similar. In fact it may be possible to summarize their specials in just a few basic discipline templates, with the player filling in the necessary details.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | I am worried that this will wind up being boring to play. I am not looking to design something uninteresting, here... I want players to want to play artisans. I don't want them to be the D&D cleric, where you have to have one or else you're screwed: I want a player to make the conscious decision of "I want to play an artisan," and have that choice be more rewarding than just... a singular list.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | {{Journey}}
| + | |
