The Unseen Servant forums

badams30 wrote:While he's waiting for the go-ahead, he turns toward the group and smiles, waving sheepishly at them like a dope.

Quoting badams30 from over in the game thread but I just wanted to say, you made me laugh out loud with that one. Classic!

- Bruce

Captain Kinkajou wrote:

badams30 wrote:While he's waiting for the go-ahead, he turns toward the group and smiles, waving sheepishly at them like a dope.

Quoting badams30 from over in the game thread but I just wanted to say, you made me laugh out loud with that one. Classic!

- Bruce

Ha. Thanks. Jasper is a one of a kind guy. Not too bright, not too energetic, but he's as loyal as a Retriever....

I want to summon a small humanoid of HD 1 or 2.

First question is: will the summoned creature obey me? I think it's implied, but isn't actuality stated in the rulebook.

Second question: what small humanoids appropriate to the setting could I summon? I'm thinking a goblin or imp or feral halfling, etc. Something with opposable thumbs that can be used as a guinea pig.

9littlebees wrote:I want to summon a small humanoid of HD 1 or 2.

First question is: will the summoned creature obey me? I think it's implied, but isn't actuality stated in the rulebook.

Second question: what small humanoids appropriate to the setting could I summon? I'm thinking a goblin or imp or feral halfling, etc. Something with opposable thumbs that can be used as a guinea pig.

Good questions! It is really becoming obvious that this is my first time playing with these rules. Sorry for bogging things down...

My thoughts are this: If you are to summon a specific type of creature (assuming one within 'reasonable' range), I would require that you take time to make an appropriate summoning circle, etc. The creature would then be bound therein for an amount of time (TBD), or until you release it from the circle (under your control or not - see below). Such a summoning circle couldn't be made out in the rain. Therefore, casting the spell without the appropriate summoning circle, would bring forth (if successful) a random creature appropriate for the area and of the specified HD.

It doesn't say in the rules anything regarding control, but I would require a separate Willpower check to assert control. This would then be treated similarly to the traditional 'charm' spell, e.g. will obey commands that don't obviously cause self-harm, etc. As for time under your control, good question. I might say each hour make a Luck check. If you fail, you need to make another WP check.

What do you guys think about this?

And as to general humanoids available, this world has no goblins, kobolds, orcs, etc. But there are Ape-men, serpent-men, and a devolveed, half-man type... more info on these to come!

That's cool. I envisaged being able to summon and control a creature who could move about independently.

What you describe is cool, but I wouldn't have chosen it for one of my first spells.

Can I please replace it with Ride Wind? Assuming I can use it to summon wind when indoors...

9littlebees wrote:That's cool. I envisaged being able to summon and control a creature who could move about independently.

What you describe is cool, but I wouldn't have chosen it for one of my first spells.

Can I please replace it with Ride Wind? Assuming I can use it to summon wind when indoors...

Sure, you could do that with Ride Wind. In reading the rules, I would say that it creates the wind to allow flight. This may cause things to blow around, etc., but could definitely be done inside.

And fair point about not knowing the details about the spells in advance. If you or Nitehood have any other spells in question, let's discuss and you guys can edit as appropriate. I don't want to be too hard on the rulings, but I am aiming for a certain vibe. I think having the summoning spell as a combi Charm/Gate is a little too powerful for what I am looking for (without the checks I suggested).

I am also open to other potential checks, if you have ideas?

All good, I really like the setting flavour you're going for! It's just a bit ambiguous with magic when the rules are so brief (not that I'm complaining!).

I think I might change my portal spell to (47) Sigil of Return. I think requiring a much harder Willpower roll to teleport the party works better for this setting. The portal spell is a bit too powerful with too little risk.

If you're happy with that, we can just say my carved rune is for that spell. Reading the rules for it (also ambiguous!), it seems I need to cast it when inscribing the sigil. But that leaves no tension when returning to it. I'd say we houserule it a bit. I can inscribe a rune which performs just like your rule for the portal rune (if left too long, it might be tampered with). Then I have to roll to Teleport people back to it, the more people, the higher the PL (as written). That puts the tension on the return action (probably in the midst of an encounter), rather than the inscribing action (probably during a period of rest).

What do you think?

The lack of normal "monsters" is neat, but I'm wondering if Jasper isn't perhaps one of the de-evolved men that you speak of? He does lack some social graces and common sense, but he does have opposable thumbs...

badams30 wrote:The lack of normal "monsters" is neat, but I'm wondering if Jasper isn't perhaps one of the de-evolved men that you speak of? He does lack some social graces and common sense, but he does have opposable thumbs...

I'm really liking the choice of "men, ape-men, serpent-men, and a devolved half-man type" humanoids for the setting too by the way. There's a great sword & sorcery vibe to these choices. So, nice one sonofotho!

Captain Kinkajou wrote:

Love it!

The Spells are a bit vague and dark, tho that is the flavor of the game setting, I guess.

I read Arcane Projectile (fire lightning,force,acid or other elemental element)
- as being able to pick the element when you cast it, to better suit your needs at the time. This fits with my shaman character

Supernatural Strength - as using the forces of nature to enhance a persons strength by tapping into the life force of nature around it. Hence the short duration. As I gain PL, I imagine my radius and attunement to the elements around me get better and larger.

Shadow Cloak was more of a fun way to blend into nature to hide.


Some spells seem very powerful, while others kinda lame.

I do have a great idea for my "Complication: Secret - Forbidden Knowledge" if I could figure out how to talk to the GM about it.... I am new to how this board works.

~Nitehood

LtTibbles wrote:

Captain Kinkajou wrote:

Love it!

Great! Although I still think you've got Jasper a bit too far up the ladder. It's something he can aspire to.

9littlebees wrote:All good, I really like the setting flavour you're going for! It's just a bit ambiguous with magic when the rules are so brief (not that I'm complaining!).

I think I might change my portal spell to (47) Sigil of Return. I think requiring a much harder Willpower roll to teleport the party works better for this setting. The portal spell is a bit too powerful with too little risk.

If you're happy with that, we can just say my carved rune is for that spell. Reading the rules for it (also ambiguous!), it seems I need to cast it when inscribing the sigil. But that leaves no tension when returning to it. I'd say we houserule it a bit. I can inscribe a rune which performs just like your rule for the portal rune (if left too long, it might be tampered with). Then I have to roll to Teleport people back to it, the more people, the higher the PL (as written). That puts the tension on the return action (probably in the midst of an encounter), rather than the inscribing action (probably during a period of rest).

What do you think?

I am ok with either one - your call! Just update your sheet accordingly and we can go with that!

Captain Kinkajou wrote:I'm really liking the choice of "men, ape-men, serpent-men, and a devolved half-man type" humanoids for the setting too by the way. There's a great sword & sorcery vibe to these choices. So, nice one sonofotho!

Glad you like it! Of course there will still be some traditional D&D monsters as well, but hopefully they all fit with the vibe!

badams30 wrote:

LtTibbles wrote:

Captain Kinkajou wrote:

Love it!

Great! Although I still think you've got Jasper a bit too far up the ladder. It's something he can aspire to.

I think I might agree!

Nitehood wrote:The Spells are a bit vague and dark, tho that is the flavor of the game setting, I guess.

I read Arcane Projectile (fire lightning,force,acid or other elemental element)
- as being able to pick the element when you cast it, to better suit your needs at the time. This fits with my shaman character

Supernatural Strength - as using the forces of nature to enhance a persons strength by tapping into the life force of nature around it. Hence the short duration. As I gain PL, I imagine my radius and attunement to the elements around me get better and larger.

Shadow Cloak was more of a fun way to blend into nature to hide.


Some spells seem very powerful, while others kinda lame.

I do have a great idea for my "Complication: Secret - Forbidden Knowledge" if I could figure out how to talk to the GM about it.... I am new to how this board works.

~Nitehood

Hey Nitehood - I think your spells are all straightforward and make sense. I would say that Shadow Cloak doesn't even require too much 'nature' to use.

And regarding your complication, please feel free to PM me with your thoughts. I wrote a few days back that I will pick and choose the best time to introduce the complications just so we don't end up with the story going off into too many directions. But please feel free to send me your thoughts and we can discuss.

As far as I understand the rules, it is a 'roll under' mechanic to determine success. In some situations you may have a positive or negative die. With the positive die, you roll twice and take the better of the two (the lower one). If you have a negative die (i.e. you are disadvantaged for some reason), you roll twice and take the worse of the two (the higher one).

Isn't this correct, or am I totally off?

Rules question for you guys...

Do you want to play with crits and fumbles as written in the rules? I will go with what the majority of you want. Just want to ask the question up front!

sonofotho wrote:As far as I understand the rules, it is a 'roll under' mechanic to determine success. In some situations you may have a positive or negative die. With the positive die, you roll twice and take the better of the two (the lower one). If you have a negative die (i.e. you are disadvantaged for some reason), you roll twice and take the worse of the two (the higher one).

Isn't this correct, or am I totally off?

Ah, okay, I was a bit confused when I read it, but now that you explain it, that does sound right. (I'm learning this new ruleset plus white box and Pits and Perils at the moment, so my head is a rules mess)

As for crits and fumbles, I'm fine with them as in the rules or as the majority rules. I'm flexible...

sonofotho wrote:As far as I understand the rules, it is a 'roll under' mechanic to determine success. In some situations you may have a positive or negative die. With the positive die, you roll twice and take the better of the two (the lower one). If you have a negative die (i.e. you are disadvantaged for some reason), you roll twice and take the worse of the two (the higher one).

Isn't this correct, or am I totally off?

Not sure if you're asking this before or after my response in the other thread, so apologies if I am repeating myself but, as I understand it (and I'm new to 4S too), it is roll under and (for rolls with a positive die) you do take the better of the two rolls but for resisted tests or attacks you may well take the highest roll, if it is equal to or under your target number (usually your attribute score).

This is because, for resisted (vs opponent) rolls the highest successful (under attribute) roll wins, and for attacks it's true because if you score equal to your attribute it's a critical and if you are doing a manoeuvre your opponent has to roll over your roll.

sonofotho wrote:Rules question for you guys...

Do you want to play with crits and fumbles as written in the rules? I will go with what the majority of you want. Just want to ask the question up front!

Personally, I think I'd prefer to try the rules as written. If they prove unwieldy for some reason we can subsequently house-rule them.

Captain Kinkajou wrote:

sonofotho wrote:As far as I understand the rules, it is a 'roll under' mechanic to determine success. In some situations you may have a positive or negative die. With the positive die, you roll twice and take the better of the two (the lower one). If you have a negative die (i.e. you are disadvantaged for some reason), you roll twice and take the worse of the two (the higher one).

Isn't this correct, or am I totally off?

Not sure if you're asking this before or after my response in the other thread, so apologies if I am repeating myself but, as I understand it (and I'm new to 4S too), it is roll under and (for rolls with a positive die) you do take the better of the two rolls but for resisted tests or attacks you may well take the highest roll, if it is equal to or under your target number (usually your attribute score).

This is because, for resisted (vs opponent) rolls the highest successful (under attribute) roll wins, and for attacks it's true because if you score equal to your attribute it's a critical and if you are doing a manoeuvre your opponent has to roll over your roll.

sonofotho wrote:Rules question for you guys...

Do you want to play with crits and fumbles as written in the rules? I will go with what the majority of you want. Just want to ask the question up front!

Personally, I think I'd prefer to try the rules as written. If they prove unwieldy for some reason we can subsequently house-rule them.

I'm with you now. I misread your original post!

And now that makes 2 votes for crits and fumbles...