Godbound General /gbg/

Godbound General!

What is Godbound? It's a 3pp Pathfinder class that basically transforms Pathfinder into a brand new game, though still a d20 game.

In Godbound, you play a Godbound. You're a superpowered godling whom no mortal hero can stop, no matter how powerful they are. If you're a level 1 Godbound and the other guy is a level 20 mortal wizard, you'll win because your can fling your divine powers at them and they'll have no chance of resisting. Your only opposition comes from other Godbound.

What kind of Godbound can you play? Think of an Exalted type. Those are the playable Godbound, because Godbound's setting is actually just Creation from Exalted. So you can play a Solar Godbound, a Lunar Godbound, a Sidereal Godbound, an Alchemical Godbound, or whatever.

What do you do in Godbound? Take over the world, try to make the world better, or both. But don't worry, because this game doesn't have any clunky domain management rules to slow you down. You'll just have to trust in your GM to fiat how things work in downtime.

Sounds good?

Other urls found in this thread:

sendspace.com/file/046n0z
forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?773601-Sine-Nomine-Godbound-Staff-Pick&p=19988626#post19988626
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

autismofag/Colette really needs to calm down.
Let it die/

Which Words would you advise choosing to create a God of Civilization?

Artifice, Fertility, Wealth, Sun all seem relevant. Maybe Health and Command. Depends on your particulars, of course.

Good thinking, thanks.

Collette? As in Touhoufag?

Yeah, it wouldn't surprise me if he was starting these threads.

Why shouldn't I just play Gods and Monsters instead?

So, what's his deal?

From the OP it looks like he doesn't like the idea that GODS would have little trouble dealing with MORTALS in combat.

There is no way the OP copypasta is Touhoufag's writing, nor that he'd be reposting that. Absolutely not his style.

Also the OP is inaccurate on basically every single point. It's low-effort trolling.

Just sage and report until this faggot gets banned for trying to poison the well and flat out lying about the game.

You should have noticed by now how 2hu operates. Hint: it is not blatant shitposting.

so if OP is ful of shit can someone explain Godbound to mr as an exalted fan?

>It's a 3pp Pathfinder class that basically transforms Pathfinder into a brand new game

Seriously, what is this shitty meme.

After mankind invaded Heaven to ask God who's actually right about everything, they found God left long ago, if he was ever there. Then they started to build their own gods to fight it out and decide who's right about everything. This ripped the universe apart. A thousand years later fragments of divine power awaken in random people.

It's intended for sandbox play as realm-building and -redefining ascending gods in a world whose very physical laws are ever so slowly breaking down.

Mechanically, it has its basis in Basic D&D, with a resource management system (similar to motes, but less granular), immense superpowers, and a number of changes to the combat system layered on top. It also features a lightweight domain and faction management system, both to let PCs change their world in concrete ways and to let the GM play out events the PCs aren't directly involved in.

It's cool to hear that there are systems in place for actually rulinga nation. Most games just leave this to the GM. Are they good?

They're very freeform-y. Factions are definied by Features and Problems. Facts are things that are beneficial for them, Problems are things that aren't. If they get too many Problems compared to Features they break.
Faction conflict revolves around pitting Features against each other and rolling (with the GM optionally providing advantages for having a... well, better Feature, think a village with "Dozens of skilled hunters and warriors" vs an empire's "Army of divinely empowered mecha-crusaders")

PC interaction with factions, besides steering faction turns of their own, revolve around creating and improving features and reducing and removing problems.

---People not interested in 2hu's argument and the ensuing debate can skip this post---

So in the last thread, there were people saying: TAKE THIS, OR YOU SUCK, in regards to Unerring Blade and other maximize/autohit effort expending Lesser Gifts.

I was the guy who was saying, "no. No, that's not it at all." Not the shitposter, but the person who said that, essentially, Fists of Black Iron isn't terrible.

I'd like to say that, with this post, it is my intent to do away with the fallacy that choosing an effort-expending alpha attack gift is mandatory for low levels — though it can be nice.

First of all, I hold the following (sometimes basic) assumptions: All storytellers, or GM/DM what have you are different. I'll be referring to them as the Game Master or GM. The second assumption is that that a character will spend no more than five gift points on Divine Effort (granting an additional 3 effort) but they would only spend a single gift point on Divine Effort by level one. Since this is both an OSR game, and a game of Divine Might, we can assume reasonably that a character will be able to rest after each combat.

The attached image is a readout of the average damage a Might character of any given level will be able to deal if they have Fists of Black Iron granting them 1d12+4 damage. This outperforms 1d10+3 damage, on average, about 15% to 25%. A character instead using Steel Without End is going to be slightly less accurate than the Might Word enhanced character. It's possible that they could just increase their attribute to 19 with a miracle, depending on the GM, but most likely only for a scene at the expenditure of an effort for the day.

-continued in next post-

(Attached is the average damage of Steel Without End. The difference isn't as drastic as 15% to 25%, but roughly a linear difference of 0.3-0.4 damage.)

---People not interested in 2hu's argument and the ensuing debate can skip this post---

At level 1, a character only has 2, or alternatively 3 effort. Using the alpha-striking gifts, Unerring Blade or Bolt of Invincible Skill to hit 95% of the time as a primary method of attack would be, ultimately, fine - provided your character is only responsible for defeating three characters in a single combat.

But there are GMs who will pit you against more than 3 combatants per character. In fact, you might get attacked by dozens of mobs, instead of just a single enemy.

In addition, expending the effort for the scene prevents a character from using an alternative alpha strike, or even if needed, a last-ditch Miracle that might make the difference between victory and defeat. But that's hypothetical, and thus unimportant. We must assume that a character has everything available in order to overcome the challenges they face.

Expending effort from the scene is objectively preferable to expending effort for the entire day. Though, scenes can drag. You may be required to strike more than 3/day.

-continued in next post-

(Attached is the average damage of 1d10+3 without Steel Without End or Fists of Black Iron. As you can see, the damage is closer to 15% to 25% lower across the board.)

The damage chart included is the alternative, in fact. You can expect Fists of Black Iron or Steel Without End to, at level 1, deal consistent, relevant damage against anything you face in a scene.

But honestly, rather than nit-pick here, I'd be more concerned about a Sky/Sorcerery/Sword Godbound at level 2 who takes Voice of the Winds, Wizard's Wrath, Shattering Hand, and the Path Through War.

They immediately become invincible to weapons/unarmed attacks, and automatically deal 2 damage to to everything within 100 feet by shouting any given action.

They can also create a gift that increases their Fray dice by a single step then deal 4 damage to all enemies within 100 ft., as an action any given round.

herp, forgot image.

Are they at all tied to the other rules? Or are they generic?

Wrong reply target

There are a few issues with your premises here. Firstly, all you are doing is presenting charts of average damage and saying that they are "good enough." That is virtually meaningless.

You are ignoring the actual damage increases that Fists of Black Iron and Steel Without End actually confer.

Fists of Black Iron is a Might lesser gift, which means a character needs the Might Word to take it. (They could purchase it cross-Word, but that doubles its price to a prohibitive 2 points. They could ask their GM to let them reflavor it and take it as a lesser gift of another Word, but that is GM fiat.) Might is what grants a character Strength 19.

Thus, it is completely disingenuous to compare 1d10+3 damage to 1d12+4 damage. You are effectively comparing "character without Might and without Fists of Black Iron" to "character with both Might and Fists of Black Iron," a much more intensive resource purchase.

Character with Might Word, a two-handed weapon, and no Fists of Black Iron: 1d10+4 damage. Average is (1 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4) / 10 = 2.9 average damage on a hit

Character with Might Word, a two-handed weapon, and Fists of Black Iron: 1d12+4 damage. Average is (1 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4) / 12 = 3.08333333333 average damage on a hit

Thus, spending the 1 gift point on Fists of Black Iron improves a character's average damage *on a hit* by a mere +6.32% damage. That is completely pathetic, and I have no idea why you would ever bother with this even at the higher levels.

This is a far, *far* cry from your proposed "about 15% to 25%."

The Sword Word's Steel without End is a little trickier, because a character with that gift may or may not have the automatic Strength 19 from the Might Word.

Character lacks Steel without End:
Dexterity 16 and dual-wielded weapons: 1d10+2 damage. Average is (1 + 1 + 1 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 4 + 4 + 4) / 10 = 2.3
Dexterity 18 and dual-wielded weapons: 1d10+3 damage. Average is (1 + 1 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4) / 10 = 2.6
Strength 19 and two-handed weapon or dual-wielded weapons: 1d10+4 damage. Average is (1 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4) / 10 = 2.9

Character possesses Steel without End:
Dexterity 16 and dual-wielded weapons: 1d10+3 damage. Average is (1 + 1 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4) / 10 = 2.6, increase of +13.04%
Dexterity 18 and dual-wielded weapons: 1d10+4 damage. Average is (1 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4) / 10 = 2.9, increase of +11.54%
Strength 19 and two-handed weapon or dual-wielded weapons: 1d10+5 damage. Average is (2 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4) / 10 = 3.2 +10.34%
Character also has +1 AC from using a shield, assuming they did not take an AC 3 gift.

In other words, Steel without End is unquestionably superior to Fists of Black Iron, full stop. It grants a greater damage increase, and assuming the character did not spring for an AC 3 gift, a +1 bonus to AC as they pick up a shield.

However, Steel without End is still a low-priority purchase and probably should not be taken at the lower levels. Why?

Steel Without End is objectively not superior to Fists of Black Iron. You're saying: "On a hit", but you're blatantly ignoring that some hits will miss, which was your argument for saying that Unerring Blade was mandatory — the original point of debate.

My average tables included accuracy, because a +4 attribute bonus is more likely to hit than a +3 attribute bonus. This is objectively true.

I disagree that these can be dismissed as low priority purchases for lower-level characters, and would say that if there were three priority levels, high, medium, and low, that these would be at least medium for a combat-focused character, especially at low level.

My reasoning being is that not all characters will choose to dual-wield, additionally not all characters will choose to use a two-handed weapon.

My approach, ultimately, is to fit the shoe to the foot as best as possible. It seems that yours is to fit the foot to the preferred shoe. I posit with my posts, however, that no shoe can fit every situation. You can certainly swim with loafers, but I truly don't think you should. To unweave the intended meaning of the metaphor: I mean that a character should build with an image or design goal in mind, and understand the habits of their GM. My argument is, ultimately: If they're facing large scores of enemies in any given encounter, a first level character will simply not be able to afford the effort expenditure that the alpha-striking gifts require.

What you spent almost two posts refuting was my methods. I'm not doing better, however, as I'm spending all this time refuting your approach.

Were I to build one, I'd definitely go with Artifice, Wealth, and Command. Command because any good civilization has clear lines of rule. Wealth and Artifice should be self explanatory, and also the two can work together to really make a shitload of materials useful for any army or kingdom

>However, Steel without End is still a low-priority purchase and probably should not be taken at the lower levels.

In regards to this point, I feel that though the average damage increase is not great, part of the reason an auto-hit Gift is so good and necessary is because of the low base hit chance low level Godbound have, because of how the game's AC and hit chance systems work (static AC potential, 5% scaling hit chance)

If one were to implement the house rule you suggested last thread of simply increasing base hit rate, unmodified by stats or Gifts, by +3 as opposed to +1, would this not boost the value of non-effort consuming Constant damage dice boosting Gifts?

>It's like Pathfinder, but even worse.

>Steel Without End is objectively not superior to Fists of Black Iron. You're saying: "On a hit", but you're blatantly ignoring that some hits will miss, which was your argument for saying that Unerring Blade was mandatory — the original point of debate.

>My average tables included accuracy
This is completely and utterly irrelevant, because neither Fists of Black Steel nor Steel without End actually improve accuracy.

Suppose we have a "generic melee warrior" Godbound with the Might and Steel Words. They have some spare gift points left over from level ups, and they would like to take a no-Effort gift. They favor two-handed weapons, but would be willing to switch to a one-handed weapon.

Strength 19 and a two-handed weapon:
Neither Fists of Black Iron nor Steel without End: 1d10+4 damage. Average is (1 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4) / 10 = 2.9 average damage on a hit
Fists of Black Iron: 1d12+4 damage. Average is (1 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4) / 12 = 3.08333333333 average damage on a hit.
Steel without End: 1d10+5 damage. Average is (2 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 4) / 10 = 3.2, and the character gains +1 AC from using a shield.

So, with this in mind... why should the character even consider taking Fists of Black Iron? It deals less damage, and it lacks the +1 AC from Steel without End. Why bother?

>low priority purchases for lower-level characters
Fists of Black Iron is utter garbage. If Bolt of Invincible Skill and Unerring Blade did *not* exist and were *not* so mandatory, then yes, Steel without End might be a medium-priority purchase... but those two auto-hit gifts do exist and Steel without End fails to improve damage upon a hit with either of them, and thus Steel without End is low-priority.

Op's just shitposting because he doesn't like things that other people like.

Here's the PDF to see what it actually is.
>sendspace.com/file/046n0z

OP is trolling.
Also, Touhoufag's problem is the opposite: how much trouble Godbound have dealing with mortals according to setting expectations as presented

>not all characters will choose to dual-wield, additionally not all characters will choose to use a two-handed weapon.
You are correct: melee characters with Unerring Blade might opt for a one-handed weapon and a shield, because extra damage will not help with Unerring Blade. However, those same characters will probably not bother with Steel without End either, because Unerring Blade makes damage cap out at 4 anyway.

The only time I could see Steel without End being high-priority purchase is if the player would like to play a Dexterity-based shield-user. Dexterity 18 and a light weapon will result in only 1d6+3 damage, which is not enough to create 4 damage with Unerring Blade. Taking Steel without End would be useful for that character.

That is the only kind of low-level character I could remotely see Steel without End being a good purchase for, full stop.

>Wealth and Artifice should be self explanatory, and also the two can work together to really make a shitload of materials useful for any army or kingdom

The two do not have as much synergy as you would think, because Artifice can, by default, use any materials to create any object, even swords from dirt or heavy armor from grass. See here:
forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?773601-Sine-Nomine-Godbound-Staff-Pick&p=19988626#post19988626

Fertility or Journeying would be a better choice to go along with Artifice and Command for an empire-builder.

>If one were to implement the house rule you suggested last thread of simply increasing base hit rate, unmodified by stats or Gifts, by +3 as opposed to +1, would this not boost the value of non-effort consuming Constant damage dice boosting Gifts?

It would boost their value and lessen the necessity of Bolt of Invincible Skill and/or Unerring Blade for a martially-inclined Godbound, yes.

Yes, not only due to low-level Godbound accuracy vs. enemy AC, but also due to the ridiculous "sample dungeon encounters" in the book.

>Bandit Chief: Minor or Major Hero with a Skilled Mage lieutenant, a Large Mob of rabble and a Small Mob of veteran bandits

>Military Base: Minor or Major Hero with Vast Mob of soldiers, possibly other Hero lieutenants or Skilled Mage support

>Noble's Household: Minor or Major Hero with a Skilled Mage advisor, a Small Mob of guards, and possibly one or more other Heroes in their pay

Given that "minor heroes" and "major heroes" have the ability to mimic divine superpowers and that Skilled Mages are literal archmages who can likewise mimic divine powers, it seems rather unbelievable that any group of bandits or adventurous noble's retinue in a dungeon will include such mighty faux-divine wuxia warriors and mortal sorcerers supreme.

Attached: Might (+4 Str) with Steel without End

Nice quads — no, you're right, neither include accuracy, however Might does grant the improvement in Accuracy. I'm trying to assess these without being too prohibitive. If they get the Might and ...Sword? Or is there a Steel word? That would be pretty neat. I digress, if they have both the Might and Sword words, Steel Without End is a better choice than Fists of Black Iron. I will agree whole-heartedly this is true; yes even, full-stop.

Now, that said, a character with Might, Artifice and Endurance on the other hand wouldn't have a bad time if they choose Fists of Black.

>Fists of Black Iron is utter garbage. If Bolt of Invincible Skill and Unerring Blade did *not* exist and were *not* so mandatory, then yes, Steel without End might be a medium-priority purchase... but those two auto-hit gifts do exist and Steel without End fails to improve damage upon a hit with either of them, and thus Steel without End is low-priority.

Ah yes, we're back to our original argument without any advancement. Committing effort for the scene can be too cost-prohibitive at low levels for Godbound to use the gift as their primary mode of attack. Even later, it can still induce headaches. I concede, they will always out-damage, dealing an average of 3.8 (including the 5% miss chance) every other method of weapon-based combat that I'm am as yet aware of, but still they can only be used some of the time, rather than all of the time. Much like Divine Wrath, which is an objectively better use of Effort from level 4 on, thus making the alpha-strike attacks (precisely half) obsolete, unless the Godbound picks up a suitable Artifact weapon which can incentivize the use of melee/ranged weapons further.

The aforementioned combination of Sky/Sorcery/Sword I mentioned earlier works out better after level 2, but trying to push a canon Word/Gift advancement is restrictive and pedantic unto uselessness.

>
Given that "minor heroes" and "major heroes" have the ability to mimic divine superpowers and that Skilled Mages are literal archmages who can likewise mimic divine powers, it seems rather unbelievable that any group of bandits or adventurous noble's retinue in a dungeon will include such mighty faux-divine wuxia warriors and mortal sorcerers supreme.

Did you copy/paste this, or am I suffering from an immense case of Deja-vu? Please note, I wish to attach no negative connotation to the action of copying/pasting parts of a lecture/argument.

>Might does grant the improvement in Accuracy
In that case, you are not so much assessing the value of Fists of Black Iron as you are assessing the value of the Might Word *plus* Fists of Black Iron.

The Might Word, by itself, grants a character a sizeable accuracy and damage increase. This is good.

What is not good is taking Fists of Black Iron. It pushes a two-handed weapon up from 1d10+4 damage (average 2.9) to 1d12+4 damage (average 3.08333333333), for a +6.32% increase in *average damage on a hit*. That is deplorably bad.

If your Words are Artifice, Endurance, and Might, you are probably not going to be that offensively capable in combat until the higher levels. Taking Fists of Black Iron is not going to solve that due to the negligible damage increase. It would be much wiser to take Divine Wrath and/or Corona of Fury and open up combat with those. Enemies who can be hit only by magic weapons will have low ACs (the weakest of angels and parasite gods have AC 3), so you will want to autohit them with smites anyway.

>Committing effort for the scene can be too cost-prohibitive at low levels for Godbound to use the gift as their primary mode of attack.
Bolt of Invincible Skill and Unerring Blade are not "primary modes of attack." They are to be activated as an instant action whenever you would miss. In other words, you attack normally, and when you miss, you expend Effort for the scene to transform the miss into an automatic 4 damage.

>Much like Divine Wrath, which is an objectively better use of Effort from level 4 on, thus making the alpha-strike attacks (precisely half) obsolete

Actually, even at levels 4-5, Bolt of Invincible Skill and Unerring Blade can contend with Divine Wrath. This is because they are far more action-economical and Effort-economical, since they can be activated only upon a miss, thereby saving you actions and Effort.

It is only at level 6+ that Divine Wrath becomes the superior option.

I had indeed reposted.

>it seems rather unbelievable

Says you. I don't find it hard to believe.

You have a point in utilizing Unerring Blade and Bolt of Invincible Skill on a miss. This still doesn't make them mandatory. That said, I wasn't aware that your argument did include regular attacks. I suppose that's why I was so vehement in opposing it! I thought you were literally saying thus:

"One should only attack with BoIS and UB"

Still, there is some merit in the damage-boosting gifts, in that they will over time allow your character to deal more regular damage with their weapon attacks. In that, they provide two small advantages, that they make the weapon magical, and they increase the average damage per swing. If your character chooses to, for some reason, use a finesse weapon, or be an unarmed fighter, these gifts make those attacks that they make (which do hit, rather than miss) deal considerably more damage on average than they would otherwise have.

They are certain not the most optimal methods of attack. Neither is dual-wielding or wielding a two-handed weapon. Using weapons at all is less effective than Sky's Voice of the Wind and Sorcery's Wizard's Wrath, with Sword's Shattering Hand. On second level, if they get the Path Through War, they have a combination that also defends them from any weapon/unarmed attack.

I believe we both can agree that the above combination is far more optimal than even using Unerring Strike, or more optimal than using ranged/melee weapons at low level at all! Regardless, Godbound will and -should- still use Melee Weapons. They will still succeed in combat, and often will do so extremely handily. The 4HD well armored individual only needs to be hit once, twice, or maybe even three times before he dies horrifically against a first level Godbound. A tenth level Godbound would kill him with a single stroke, and probably all of his friends.

You're also right about BoIS and UB retaining usefulness after Divine Wrath overtakes them in DPS capability: especially if you're using them to shore up your misses.

Completely generic, as far as I remember.

From what I've read they seem pretty modular, which is in line with the whole OSR design ethos.
If you want something more detailed you could probably swap them out hassle-free for another OSR domain system, like the crunchy one in Adventurer Conqueror King, or the more top-down abstract one in Labyrinth Lord's sourcebook, An Echo Resounding.

Reading back... I fear I may have committed a rather blatant strawman, but I do not feel it directly corrodes my core argument. The term "mandatory" depends strictly on the GM, and this, ultimately, is true. It does not, however, exclude any of the other truths we've espoused, nor the opinions we've mislabelled as such.

My point: Saying something's trash or mandatory is objectively wrong when you consider any single game that does not fit within the scope for which you have in mind when you say that something is trash or mandatory.

I'll concede that Major Heroes (and Skilled Mages) are very powerful, and will certainly give a lone level-one Godbound trouble. It will be a fight grand enough to force them to likely expend all of their effort for the scene, or even day without regards to what gifts they do or do not take to fight a Major Hero and a Skilled Mage alone. There is even a possibility that they will be killed. But these are the best of humanity in a swords and sorcery setting versus the least of divinity, a newborn Demigod.

But like the game puts it: "If the Divine Blade Queen wants to end the petty ruffian, the only question is exactly how she wants to disject his constituent parts. She is a goddess of Stab. Stab will happen." The game literally says that a combat round may not be necessary if it does not make sense that the opposition the Godbound faces is a trifling challenge.

There even stands at the beginning of the game's wording: "Low-level demigods might need to show some respect to mortal heroes and prowling monsters, but veteran Godbound are going to be able to sweep aside most mortal resistance with minimal effort."

>But these are the best of humanity in a swords and sorcery setting
You mean bandit chiefs in fucking dungeons and their archmage buddies.

>reading your reply
>squinting hard
> >You mean bandit chiefs in fucking dungeons and their archmage buddies.

...

HRM. I hadn't realized that they were talking about bandit chiefs. I mean, like, I've read it? But it didn't seem to sink in fully.

They're leading like 24 dudes. Lame dudes, at that. Or 12 elite soldiers. Yeah, okay, you got me there. But I wouldn't go so far as to houserule the primary combat resolution mechanics/the very makeup of Godbounds in general. I'd say that Bandit Chief be switched to Powerful Warlord or something.

Every OSR system I've ever played has the expectation that there are tough sons of bitches out there, and you'd best be cautious about dealing with them.
Also, Robin Hood was a bandit chief. I'd rather square off against someone like him than nameless cannon fodder that won't pose a challenge.

They're either minor or major heroes, GM's discretion.

I think, really, I was thinking that it was the consideration that minor/major heroes and skilled mages are troublesome. And they are certainly that.

Also, I'm going to run my solo adventure Godbound from level 1 through the Tomb of Horrors. The architecture will be different, but many of the traps/encounters? THE SAME.

Is this a fucking badretarded idea, or what?

Not every bandit chief in a dungeon is Robin Hood.

So Exalted: D20 editon?

Maybe in Acrem they are?

If they're ones who are important enough to be placed as an obstacle in a Godbound's path, then I think they ought to be.

The enemy list in the stock-a-ruin section is explicitly made of groups that might have a chance of challenging a Godbound pantheon, listed there for when the GM decides they need one. They're not random assholes you meet on the road.

Like it says a page before that, if it doesn't make sense that such an enemy would be in the place, don't put them there.

>explicitly
[citation needed]

You mean to say that all that autistic complaining about bandits being major or minor heroes was groundless after all?

Let us have a look at the typical ACs of enemies you might be facing, going by the bestiary:
1 HD "warrior": AC 7 to 5
1 HD "trained soldier": AC 6
2 HD "veteran": AC 5 to 3
3 HD "elite soldier": AC 4
10 HD "angelic ravager" or "weak [parasite] god": AC 3
15 HD "titanic beast": AC 2
15 HD "angelic ravager": AC 1

What are the hit chances of various level 1 PCs against such opponents:

Dexterity 16 (level 1 attack bonus +3):
vs. 1 HD "warrior": 45% to 55%
vs. 1 HD "trained soldier": 50%
vs. 2 HD "veteran": 35% to 45%
vs. 3 HD "elite soldier": 40%
vs. 10 HD "angelic ravager" or "weak [parasite] god": 35%
vs. 15 HD "titanic beast": 30%
vs. 15 HD "angelic ravager": 25%

Dexterity 18 (level 1 attack bonus +4):
vs. 1 HD "warrior": 50% to 60%
vs. 1 HD "trained soldier": 55%
vs. 2 HD "veteran": 40% to 50%
vs. 3 HD "elite soldier": 45%
vs. 10 HD "angelic ravager" or "weak [parasite] god": 40%
vs. 15 HD "titanic beast": 35%
vs. 15 HD "angelic ravager": 30%

Strength 19 (level 1 attack bonus +5):
vs. 1 HD "warrior": 55% to 65%
vs. 1 HD "trained soldier": 60%
vs. 2 HD "veteran": 45% to 55%
vs. 3 HD "elite soldier": 50%
vs. 10 HD "angelic ravager" or "weak [parasite] god": 45%
vs. 15 HD "titanic beast": 40%
vs. 15 HD "angelic ravager": 35%

No matter how you look at it, throughout the lower levels, you will miss *plenty* of times, even if you have the Might Word.

Thus, it is critical to have a reliable method of salvaging those misses and turning them into automatic, 4 damage hits. That is what Bolt of Invincible Skill and Unerring Blade are for, and that is why they are so crucial for martially-inclined Godbound.

>Godbound will and -should- still use Melee Weapons
By default, assuming that a Godbound invests in either no combat-related gifts or *only* Bolt of Invincible Skill or Unerring Blade, ranged weaponry vastly outclasses melee weapons due to great range and no drawbacks. A Might-bound Godbound will still prefer melee attacks, of course.

Page 115, under "Ruin Inhabitants"

"The next step in stocking a ruin is to pick out its inhabitants, including one or more Bosses for the place. A Boss is intended to be a foe capable of giving a meaningful combat challenge to the heroes, one appropriate to the peril of the ruin.

The difficulty of a Boss should be keyed to what is logical for the ruin, rather than to the pantheon’s overall power level. A group of veteran Godbound should not be stumbling over powerful parasite gods in every crumbling villa and mournful tower just because they require such a foe to give them a good fight. Conversely, a group of novice heroes who strut into a shard of fallen Heaven shouldn’t be protected from encountering the kind of terrible entities that lair in such places just because they can’t reasonably expect to defeat them. If you build a consistent world with logical challenges where they ought to be, your players will be able to make rational decisions about the kind of perils they want to face.

Some ruins might not have a Boss. The danger of the place might be environmental in nature, or it might require wit or negotiation rather than sharp steel to pry out its secrets. Other ruins might have a few dangerous occupants, but nothing that’s particularly capable of overcoming a pantheon of Godbound. It’s perfectly acceptable to have ruins that don’t present a fundamentally martial challenge to the heroes, so long as those ruins give them some other sort of difficulty to face. A ruin with no meaningful challenge in it is something better handled by a few minutes of narration in which you let the heroes describe the way they handle the vastly outclassed inhabitants or trifling obstacles that the ancient builders left behind. If you do want a dangerous combat foe in your ruin, however, you want to start with at least one Boss to ensure that there’s something there that can put up a decent fight."

>
The difficulty of a Boss should be keyed to what is logical for the ruin, rather than to the pantheon’s overall power level. A group of veteran Godbound should not be stumbling over powerful parasite gods in every crumbling villa and mournful tower just because they require such a foe to give them a good fight. Conversely, a group of novice heroes who strut into a shard of fallen Heaven shouldn’t be protected from encountering the kind of terrible entities that lair in such places just because they can’t reasonably expect to defeat them. If you build a consistent world with logical challenges where they ought to be, your players will be able to make rational decisions about the kind of perils they want to face.

Uhhhh...

Doesn't that mean that the super-strong bandit chiefs and bandit archmages are there "logically" and not just because they would challenge a pantheon?

That's, like, the opposite of the point you were trying to make.

I've seen how he operates, and he's a creepy little weirdo. This honestly wouldn't surprise me if somehow this game put a bug up his ass.

Read the next part. Some ruins won't have one of these bandit heroes, because most foes are inconsequential.

Now, as for Voice of the Winds, Wizard's Wrath, The Path Through War, and possibly Greater Pavis of Rule (I think that Shattering Hand is an excessive purchase for this build and that the Effort and the 2 gift points should go elsewhere), yes, it is an overpowered build. It outshines the majority of fully combat-optimized Godbound, and it even has some noncombat utility from Voice of the Winds.

It is completely sickening how Kevin Crawford considers this perfectly fine and how the posters in Godbound's RPG.net thread likewise consider this fine, simply because "The character can do nothing but fight" (never mind that Voice of the Winds has noncombat utility), when the actual point is that it outshines a significant number of combat-oriented builds.

It is baffling why Kevin Crawford even approved of this in the first place. It is completely nonsensical that Voice of the Winds would *not* drop The Path Through War.

That said, the difference between the Voice of the Wind builds and just how mandatory Bolt of Invincible Skill and Unerring Blade are for martially-oriented Godbound is that "character who specializes in shoots people with ranged weapons" and "character who specializes in hitting people with melee attacks" are both extremely broad concepts that many players will gravitate to, and I do not think they should be pigeonholed into taking Bolt of Invincible Skill or Unerring Blade if they want to hit enemies an appreciable amount of the time.

It means that if you

A) Decide you need a combat challenge in this place, and...

B) ...you know it's where Huang Chao lives...

C) ...then use this encounter block.

If you have built your campaign world where every random bandit chief is a minor hero with Shattering Hand as a mimicked gift, then your results will differ.

>touhoufag does is his level best to ruin another system

Go away. I hate you.

>While it's possible to stock your ruin with a scattering of unrelated entities, in most cases a place will be occupied by one or more inhabitant groups. These collections of creatures will be those that fit together, either by nature or by plausible circumstance. Small ruins likely only have one group, while larger ones might have two or more, perhaps more hostile to each other than to potentially-useful intruders.

>The groups listed below offer some suggestions as to their constitu- ent members. Lesser foes usually appear in Mobs as described in the bestiary chapter, while major enemies can serve as Bosses for a ruin or as enemies so powerful that they become natural hazards to be avoided by the heroes. Not everything in a ruin has to be plausibly defeatable by the PCs, and sometimes the excitement lies in parley or flight rather than victorious battle.

The encounter groups in page 116 are tailored to "what makes sense" rather than "what would be an appropriate challenge for a pantheon."

In this case, then why are the "bandit chief," "military base," and "noble household" encounters clearly tailored towards "what would be an appropriate challenge for a pantheon"?

The Godbound book flip-flops back and forth between "encountered enemies should not be tailored to whatever would challenge a full pantheon" and "enemies should indeed be tailored to challenge a full pantheon, down to having multiple actions per round and multiple attacks per action."

Because if you have decided that this bandit chief, or this military base, or this noble household should be a challenge, it is nice if the book actually gives you that instead of pointing you at the bestiary chapter and telling you to work it out yourself.

Paperwork shit like that is why GMs go to the trouble of pirating RPGs instead of doing it themselves.

I agree that those gifts shouldn't be mandatory, however I also say that they aren't mandatory. A level 1 Godbound fighting an angel or titanic beast is only as likely as your GM is to let it happen. Elite Soldiers/Veterans/Trained Soldiers etc, that's much more likely. Such enemies, however, are mooks. The Angelic ravager isn't. If we assume that characters deal on average of 2 on a hit against the ravager, and that there are four godbound, it's going to take 6-7 rounds to kill it. But hell, that monster is extremely powerful. It's also impossible to fight. +10 x 3 attacks with 1d10 bolts read straight? This is a very unlikely combat unless the players decide to explore a Shard of Heaven from the beginning, try to find a way into Hell, or otherwise look around the Night Roads for the strongest thing they can find.

Colette, you really need to learn how to read.

>A group of veteran Godbound should not be stumbling over powerful parasite gods in every crumbling villa and mournful tower just because they require such a foe to give them a good fight.

>Some ruins might not have a Boss.

>Other ruins might have a few dangerous occupants, but nothing that’s particularly capable of overcoming a pantheon of Godbound.

>A ruin with no meaningful challenge in it is something better handled by a few minutes of narration in which you let the heroes describe the way they handle the vastly outclassed inhabitants or trifling obstacles that the ancient builders left behind.

You are explicitly told up there to fill the world with a number of things from that table according to what makes sense for the world, not fill the world straight off of the table as if it were a representative sample of the world.
Not every person in the world appears on that table. Your reading comprehension sucks.

There is value in having obstacles that are easily overcome. It helps establish the fact that the Godbound really are pretty powerfu, and also helps to make the setting feel like a place that makes sense.

It's not an entirely unreasonable assumption to make. The book tends to lay down assumptions once, briefly, and never touch back on them. Other books might remind the reader of these assumptions in some way, shape or form.

The issue is that the encounter groups in page 116 are tailored to "what makes sense to be together," hence why one of the encounter group is nearly impossible even for a high-level pantheon:
>Trapped Made God: Made God with Eldritch high priest, Large Mob of worshipers and theotechnicians trapped there with it

In other words, the encounter groups are *not* supposed to be crafted with the assumption of "a balanced encounter for a pantheon of Godbound."

In this case, why are the "bandit chief," "military base," and "noble household" encounters actually constructed with the assumption of "a balanced encounter for a pantheon of Godbound"? Does that not go against the spirit of page 116's two introductory paragraphs?

If page 116 called them "mighty bandit chief," "powerful noble's household," or whatnot, then it would be easier to metaphorically swallow.

>There is value in having obstacles that are easily overcome.

Yeah, which is why the book tells you right there to do that. Don't use the tables, just let them have some simple enemies that they can steamroll.
See and his quotes again.
You may be clinically retarded.

That was my first post in this thread, in response to a post stating that a bandit chief who's placed as an obstacle in a Godbound's path should be comparable to Robin Hood, that is, a hero. I disagree with this. What's so retarded about that?

I think the Eldritch High Priest counts as a Lesser Eldritch. The Made God however is going to challenge everything and everyone. They are, afterall, the biggest bads possible. They deal 2-20 straight damage per blast.

I'm not sure, even, how to defend that without Miracles.

Okay, that was really rude, my bad. It just feels like you're not following the discussion at hand very well.
Seeing as I'm getting snippy for no good reason, I'll just bow out and let other folks do the talking.

If the encounter groups in page 116 are supposed to be "whatever makes logical sense" as opposed to "what would be an appropriate encounter for a pantheon of Godbound," then why are the "bandit chief," "military base," and "noble household" encounters constructed as "what would be an appropriate encounter for a pantheon of Godbound"?

Due to their automatic saving throws and their unlimited Effort, Made Gods are completely unbeatable short of GM fiat, or killing off their cults and waiting for the Made God to wither after an arbitrary amount of time.

If the encounter groups in page 116 are supposed to be "whatever makes logical sense" as opposed to "what would be an appropriate encounter for a pantheon of Godbound," then why are the "bandit chief," "military base," and "noble household" encounters constructed as "what would be an appropriate encounter for a pantheon of Godbound"?

Try to keep up. The encounter groups are just encounters, it's the *placement* of them which is the part that's supposed to be done according to logical sense.

The encounter groups themselves are also "whatever makes logical sense," as page 116 elaborates:

>While it's possible to stock your ruin with a scattering of unrelated entities, in most cases a place will be occupied by one or more inhabitant groups. These collections of creatures will be those that fit together, either by nature or by plausible circumstance. Small ruins likely only have one group, while larger ones might have two or more, perhaps more hostile to each other than to potentially-useful intruders.

>The groups listed below offer some suggestions as to their constitu- ent members. Lesser foes usually appear in Mobs as described in the bestiary chapter, while major enemies can serve as Bosses for a ruin or as enemies so powerful that they become natural hazards to be avoided by the heroes. Not everything in a ruin has to be plausibly defeatable by the PCs, and sometimes the excitement lies in parley or flight rather than victorious battle.

This could have been improved simply by calling some of the encounters "mighty bandit chief" or "powerful noble's household" as opposed to just plain "bandit chief" or "noble's household."

>Due to their automatic saving throws and their unlimited Effort, Made Gods are completely unbeatable short of GM fiat, or killing off their cults and waiting for the Made God to wither after an arbitrary amount of time.

Hit them with a pantheon's worth of max-level Divine Wraths from Words they can't defensively dispel. The trick, of course, being getting 4-6 10th level Godbound together with the right Words and the ability to get close enough to the Made God to hit them without giving it or its minions time to prep for you.

You might be able to defend against the blasts with an Endurance ally, so long as the gift Elemental Scorn is tailored for the Made God's attack. Doubtful. Blasting it repeatedly with Divine Wrath (decent damage, avg. 1.25 per level) would kill it after three or so rounds assuming a group of four. Staying alive those three rounds? Hard to imagine.

One on one?

I have absolutely no clue.

That could actually work.

However, Made Gods have "one or more Words," so trying to bypass its defensive dispelling would work only against a Made God with one or two defensively narrow Words. Against a single-Word-bound Made God of Fate, Luck, or Time, a pantheon is left without recourse.

Defensive dispelling can negate Divine Wraths as long as the Made God uses an appropriate Word. Some Words, like Fate, Luck, or Time, are virtually always appropriate for defensive dispelling.

That would be fucking difficult to deal with. In that case, blast repeatedly with Sun's greater gift? Is there anything to reduce such a bastard's defenses?

Nothing stops Sunstrike from being defensively dispelled.

>Is there anything to reduce such a bastard's defenses?

Nothing that could not be defensively dispelled itself, I believe.

>Defensive dispelling can negate Divine Wraths as long as the Made God uses an appropriate Word. Some Words, like Fate, Luck, or Time, are virtually always appropriate for defensive dispelling.

Only if the GM decides that's the case. There's nothing magical about Fate, Time, and Luck that lets them defensively dispel All The Words, just a GM's decision that they should be able to.

Also, you can't defensively dispel self-buffs like Loosening God's Teeth or Unerring Blade, or buffs that you apply to an ally.

What about Offensive dispelling?

Fate and Luck could conceivably defensively dispel anything as some contrived circumstance arises to cancel out an attack.

Time, likewise, could probably defensively dispel just about anything ala King Crimson. This would even fit the description of the Time Word:
>Miracles of Time can alter the past and rewrite prior events, but it is generally necessary to manipulate specific events rather than simply decree a broad swath of history.

Loosening God's Teeth and Unerring Blade would have to actually hit, and being hit can be negated by a miracle as per page 27.

>Made Gods embody the ideals of their creators, usually expressed through one or more Words. They have effectively unlimited Effort, and may use gifts and miracles of those Words freely. Made Gods cannot offensively dispel gifts, however; they can only dispel defensively.

>Fate and Luck could conceivably defensively dispel anything as some contrived circumstance arises to cancel out an attack.

Again, that is purely a GM's call. The rules do not give those three Words blanket immunity to everything. It's the GM deciding that, "Oh, random luck can save you every time from everything."

Personally, as a GM, I get tired of too many powers that run purely on GM's call. Gets really tiresome honestly.

If we are leaving it all to the "GM's call," then there is no sense in trying to determine what or will not work against any given Word's defensive dispelling.

As do I, and that is why it rankles me that Kevin Crawford on RPG.net is so swift to justify vaguely-written abilities with "it is the GM's job to adjudicate that."

>If we are leaving it all to the "GM's call," then there is no sense in trying to determine what or will not work against any given Word's defensive dispelling.

If the GM is incompetent, mentally ill, or socially crippled, nothing a game designer can write is going to fix them. It's better to write for people who can function at a table than to try to cure autism in 240 pages.

Would you prefer a long list of all the miracles, coupled with which words are able to dispel them, as well as which variety of miracles of each word can be dispelled by a given word?

that one was

Yeah, but closed to AD&D than 3.5 or later. Skills are fairly freeform and there aren't Feats per say.

This. There will always be situations where the rules don't cover something or won't work right for a situation or result in silly outcomes.

People have tried to fix this by writing more rules, (the 90s were all about this) but that doesn't fix the problem, just push it back a little at the cost of making everyone at the table learn a ton of rules.
The only fix possible is to have the GM use his brain and say "Nah, here's what happens" based on what makes sense., because GMs are able to react situationally, which rules can't do. OSR games like Godbound embrace this, because who wants to have to either look up or memorize a giant table of what words interact how?
Wait, don't answer that.

If you give an aggravated straw-man it can detract from your opinion. Why don't we let the memey insult: "autism" go ahead and die now?


I partially agree, and disagree. But it's my personal opinion. It can make things harder, or easier, depending on how willing you, as a GM, are to lay back and let things happen. There's a lot of explicit information in the newer schools of thought when it comes to RPGs. A whole lot. In some older D&D things, and similar, I find that it was an extremely bipolar mix of the explicit, implicit, and outright vague. With Godbound, I feel, there's a better mix of explicit and implicit, with a few rare (while crucial) articles become vague.

>who wants to have to either look up or memorize a giant table of what words interact how?
Battletec-
>Wait, don't answer that.
nevermind.

>I literally cannot give my opinion unless it directly opposes someone else and I can call them autistic/retarded/a faggot at will from the beginning to the end of a thread/general otherwise its just not worth wasting any of my grossly copious free-time.

It would actually be interesting and helpful for each Word to have a list of other Words it could feasibly dispel.

>As do I, and that is why it rankles me that Kevin Crawford on RPG.net is so swift to justify vaguely-written abilities with "it is the GM's job to adjudicate that."

Yes, we get it touhoufag, you're an autist. If you can't handle GM adjudication,, you should not, under any circumstances, be playing an OSR game.

you know, with everyone in here bitching about the game, has anyone actually run it yet?

I played in a one-shot. It works well, assuming you expect OSR mechanics.

I've ran and played it and discussed my experiences in the last thread.

It's quick and easy to adjudicate in play, and with a diverse group the amount of shenanigans and strategy you can mess with in battles is an absolute blast.