My opinion on mutated anatomy and martial arts is this:
If you’re already a practitioner of a form of self-defense ((All the way from Akido to Zui Quan)) you’re no doubt more than a little familiar with the important underlying concepts of said martial art. It’s more than just knowing how to do sweet kicks and cool poses, it’s the learned application of a wealth of important little details that are almost invisible to those without formal training. Thus I think it fair to assume no mutations hamper your martial arts beyond any bonuses or penalties they apply to everything else. Personally if I ever grew a mess of tentacles the first thing I’d do is sign up for a judo tournament.
Possibly book a flight to Japan…
As for the balancing of mutants being vicious close quarters combatants (Many of them at least) I don’t really think that’s an issue. Guns are still much more effective than any martial art, and rightly so. Just need smarter NPCs and some love for factions. I honestly can’t wait to get blown up by a fusion rifle…
I approve of the lupine and feline branches not getting Sapiovore. Particularly the former, given the strong historical bond between humans and canines in particular.
As far as the predator traits go, they amuse me a bit on one particular level: humans are already the apex predator, and far and away the most predatory creature on the planet, so “predator” traits added as a nonhuman thing are admittedly something I’ve always found kind of strange. Sure, a lot of modern humans in the first world have grown lazy on doing the predation themselves in practice, but I imagine the death of grocery stores would bring it back out quickly, as seen by the behaviour of completely non-mutant CDDA PCs mass-murdering, butchering, cooking, and eating anything and everything that drops meat. So I guess a faction of humans that is afraid of competition might get twitchy around Predators without Sapiovore, but hopefully the more reflective ones would understand that humans aren’t really so different in that regard.
I also admit I didn’t imagine that you yet had the infrastructure for MA styles/techniques to check for traits, but it seemed like something that might be able to be made as a solution to balance mixing and matching mutations with martial arts that, on the player’s end, feels organic and logical as opposed to “man all the MA trainers are racist against me.” It’d also rein in those bionic claws, which I’m inclined to think are probably an even bigger offender, unless I’ve misunderstood how “unarmed weapons” vs. static claws work. Logrin mentioned that a martial artist would be able to cope with claws, and I’m sure their Unarmed level wouldn’t be penalized, but would the techniques and bonuses of, say, Boxing, with its focus on closed fists, mesh well with giant claws? (The example of tentacles and judo meshing just fine is something that occurred to me, and it’s probably an example of a perfect marriage of mutation and martial art.)
Incidentally. You mentioned Beasts not being OK around humans. What are they, exactly? Were they a stand-in before more individuated beast branches were created that happened to get grandfathered in, or are they just Diet Chimera thematically? I’m going to guess that if it’s the latter there’s not that much canine/feline in them, or at least not enough to mollify their attitudes towards humans.
A quick snipped on boxing and claws. If a boxer could put his hand THROUGH you, he wouldn’t bother balling up his fist. It would just be bestial savagery with suspiciously fancy footwork.
Hmm. You’re right about the footwork; that would probably remain effective. I’m not so sure about Boxing’s striking skills, though. I’d wager the difference could probably stand to be as big as the difference between weapons for characters that use the weapon styles (which have some versatility, but still don’t work with all melee weapons).
My understanding of boxing is that it also involves reading your opponent’s body language, maneuvering in close quarters, and knowing how to dodge/block punches, along with putting punches together in effective combination; closed-fist strikes are kinda there to help protect your hands (which aren’t built for bashing things).
Beast is one of the original ones, and is pretty much a soft generi-carnivore mix as opposed to Cattle, the herbivore. If you’re familiar with disney movies, probably a smaller version of their take. (Beast looks like he’d be Large at least, and that currently isn’t in-category for Beast. I might put it there though.)
I’ve already read Water Finds A Crack, Llamageddon, and FWIW I never played the later Civs. But I liked 2 much better than 3.
It’s mostly videogame logic here, but it could probably be changed later on.
It would be cool to have multiple-mode weapons.
For example, halberd can stab and slash and should have different stats (and maneuvers) for each mode. War hammer can function as a hammer and as a war pick. Spear can be used as a short staff in a pinch.
Under the above model, claw would be simply punch-or-claw type “weapon”.
For now, there’s no way to have claws that do respectable non-bashing damage without unbalancing them.
Martial arts are about concepts, not simply some sequences of monements. And the one who really knows MA, can adapt his personal variation of style for any physical modifications.
If you want to find something to be mutually exclusive with MA - try armor (like pretty much every RPG did with monks ever). Let’s say that MAs cannot be used, when encumbrance of any part of the body is above certain threshold.
Really? Do I have to remind you that Lupines and Felines are not simply domestic cats and dogs?
Buddha did not “get Twitchy” in the presence of demons. Why are your monks such cowards?
My argument is that for some reason it seems that factions are going to regard character with “Psychopath” trait as some kind of walking “mass-murder just waiting to happen”, while this trait (as it is now) is not about this at all. And I think that the problem here is mental image associated with the word “Psychopath” due to its incorrect depiction in mass culture. Guiltlessness is entirely different thing and it should not be misnamed and misinterpreted like this.
[quote=“Stretop, post:67, topic:8589”]Martial arts are about concepts, not simply some sequences of monements. And the one who really knows MA, can adapt his personal variation of style for any physical modifications.
If you want to find something to be mutually exclusive with MA - try armor (like pretty much every RPG did with monks ever). Let’s say that MAs cannot be used, when encumbrance of any part of the body is above certain threshold.[/quote]
Are they that different from the weapon-based martial arts like silat, escrima, and fencing? Those all have particular lists of weapons they’re limited to, though those lists tend to allow for some adaptation, and most of the game’s martial arts don’t work with weapons (at least, not weapons that don’t have the “UNARMED_WEAPON” tag).
I should probably restate that mental based traits should be hideable, especially with anywhere abobe average Int and minor amounts of speech skoll. Just because our mutant CAN eat people doesn’t mean they will, right? What if our mutant is highly intelligent, and doesn’t give a damn about dumb primal urges?
Even then, a well fed mutant wouldn’t care about human flesh if they ate enough food to begin with.
[quote=“iceball3, post:69, topic:8589”]I should probably restate that mental based traits should be hideable, especially with anywhere abobe average Int and minor amounts of speech skoll. Just because our mutant CAN eat people doesn’t mean they will, right? What if our mutant is highly intelligent, and doesn’t give a damn about dumb primal urges?
Even then, a well fed mutant wouldn’t care about human flesh if they ate enough food to begin with.[/quote]
I’d wager that not all mental traits can be hidden as easily as others (Truth Teller comes to mind, though the monks probably wouldn’t mind that one and might even consider it a virtue), but for some (Skilled Liar would be the textbook example, even moreso than Psychopath) this does apply.
Admittedly your second point is also particularly important: even among animals without humanlike intelligence, just because a critter can eat another critter doesn’t mean that it will. Stretop brought up that wild felines and canines can and sometimes do attack and eat humans, but this doesn’t mean they always do or even that they can’t form packs together, otherwise dogs never would have happened–when humans and canines started forming their thousands-of-years-ancient bond, those canines were still wolves. On the flip side, humans can absolutely eat felines and canines, and in some societies they do, but in the West we tend to find it abhorrent.
I would say that if the feline and lupine branches were to gain Sapiovore, that there should probably be a Dog branch added specifically as a variant using domesticated canine DNA instead of that of wolves, for those who want to maintain a connection with humanity even as they become something separate from it. (There might be some physical differences, too, like the possibility of developing into a smaller breed instead of a larger one.)
And I would like to add to this, that post-threshold chimera, that drinks enough “Lupine Mutagen”, would be undistinguishable (on the ouside) from post-threshold lupine (while still having “Apex Predator” and “Sapiovore”). And even without such “exterior remodeling” how exactly monks are going to know that this big bad wolf is okay for them to interact with, but this big bad bird-lizard-cattle-beast is not okay for them to interact with? They both seem like they can rip human to shreds if they decide to do so. Does their enlightenment give them insight into game-code?
[quote=“iceball3, post:69, topic:8589”]Just because our mutant CAN eat people doesn’t mean they will, right? What if our mutant is highly intelligent, and doesn’t give a damn about dumb primal urges?
Even then, a well fed mutant wouldn’t care about human flesh if they ate enough food to begin with.[/quote]
This. This is my argument in a nutshell.
Yes. Those are just weapon techniques - they are about using a weapon. Same with Krav Maga and other “utilitarian” MA.
T’ai chi ch’uan or Kung Fu (for example), however is not about simply punching and kicking. Such martial arts are philosophies first and foremost - they are about achieving certain states of mind and body (regerdless of current form of said mind and body). And, by the way, both T’ai chi ch’uan[/url] and Kung Fu actually have entire classes of weapons associated with them in real life.
I’m just going to tip-toe around the talk of monks to bring up a thought…
Most immediate problems with NPC interaction should trigger by things they can see and hear. For example…
Visual:
*He’s freaking HUGE!
*TENTACLES!
*He’s DANGEROUSLY high!
*Why does he keep VOMITING?
*Slime. SLIME EVERYWHERE!
Auditory:
*He’s growling!
*He just threatened my life!
*TERRIBLE speech skill!
And be modified by observed actions, such as giving the NPC a really good deal (or free) stuff, protecting them from harm, completing quests and high speech skill. It should be easy for glorious, butterfly winged con artists to gather friends–up until the moment someone sees them butcher and eat a human corpse.
As for hiding the psychopath trait I’d suggest it being done like this. It’s invisible UNTIL someone sees you NOT take a morale hit from something that should effect you, and then it’s a problem. While not batting an eye decimating a school house would only be slightly worrisome (Eventually you get used to it as is) the stone faced murder of a ‘friend’ would be a big red warning flag. Expect trouble from the faction if your witness has a two-way radio.
I’d also propose a division of Faction and Personal preferences with interactions. If for instance the Faction’s stance on mutants is favorable but the NPC your talking to doesn’t like freaks you’d take a smaller hit to influencing them than if the group he’s with wants to eradicate all non-humans. Likewise you’d have an easier time if he really liked mutants or if you’ve a history of helping him or his faction.
This whole argument from the very beginning looked like yet another rise of “The game is too easy for me now, make it harder.”
Cataclysm’s biggest problem, content wise, is there’s a lot of end game gear but not challenge, so what ends up happening is 85% games will start off, last maybe a day, but ultimately die, and the other 25% are the ones where you get all the end game gear and spend the rest of the game rolling around doing nothing. In the beginning, when you first start playing the game, these numbers are more along the lines of 95% and 5%, and late game, once you know all the mechanics and how to survive the beginning five minutes, you’re left with the only dieing from the occasional rectal-exam tankbot/turret/mi-go at the start.
And this scares away a lot of players. Then, who it doesn’t scare away, eventually learn the dark truth of the game, in that there’s no late-game challenge. Which leads them to do one of two things: Go away until someone tells you on Tumblr some big changes have happened and you should give it another chance like an ex insisting they’ve changed. Or, alternatively, go on the forums and cry “IT’S TOO EASY. MAKE IT HARDER. NERF ALL THE THINGS, make zombies spawn on the dead dealers, make Mi-Gos spawn on dead soldiers/scientists, Have all the gun stores patrolled by columns of tankbots, remove Rivtech, remove bionics, remove mutations, remove anything that makes late game easy, but for the love of god don’t make late game more difficult.”
Sorry to derail the topic, but this train was already well on it’s way off-track.[/quote]
This is a really good point. Honestly, the lack of late-game content is a big problem. Perhaps there could be the nether / some very major area you can ‘transport’ to late game once you’ve prepared?
A) NOT showing the expected emotion is WHAT I’m suggesting makes you lose face with NPCs.
B) I don’t think that mask you’re wearing is big enough to conceal the cold blooded murder of another human being. That and the fact that everything from posture to the way you move your hands is emotive.
High speech skill and having a group or individuals owe you is how a psychopath should mitigate undesirable situations or unsavory player input. That or joining (or founding) a group of heartless murderers who couldn’t care less that you just offed Johnny–you brought back smores.
I can imagine someone downing a bottle of Raw Sewage after a murder in attempt to fake their emotions using real emotions.
“OH MY GOD WHAT HAVE I DONE” tears stream down face
"…why are you holding that onion?"
Lying skill should be useful for faking emotions, though so a truth teller would have a harder time pretending to be a cold blooded killer around their assasin buddies, or other similar situations in which the visibility of a morale shift is a concern.
I can imagine a sect of anti-cannibals who capture people, especially mutants, force-feed them human flesh knowingly, and execute anyone who has some semblance of a positive morale reaction.
And I am asking: What if you feel and do not show your feelings? What if you are disciplined and do not allow emotions to distract you. It would be like “You are our best operator, you have skills and discipline, maybe our very survival depends on you… But you did not cry enough over that bum over there, so we are going to risk horrible death without your expertise and send you away”.
Same as above. Why would people in the middle of world-shattering Cataclysm care about intricacies of someone’s emotional world?
And how about containing your murderous tendencies to murdering rival factions’ members?
Human beings are complex. Just because the world ended doesn’t mean everyone has discarded the prejudices, preconceptions and social stigmas that they’ve developed over a lifetime. If anything they’d have picked up more. We’re emotional and at time irrational, which is precisely why a faction could be conflicted over:
A)You’re one of our best operators…
B)…but your terrifying and no one feels comfortable when you’re around.
Ideally Factions would have their own politics, weighing how much individuals like/dislike you versus how much you’ve aided or harmed them.
As for WHY someone should care that you murdered a friend in cold blood, or ate a body, etc. People would still care, ALLOT. Either negatively (Murder is wrong, I knew them, how can I trust you, etc.) or positively (You’re strong, I hated him anyhow, I gave you a mission to kill them in the first place, etc.)
As for murdering other factions, NOT EVERY FACTION SHOULD BE COOL WITH THAT. Provided they find out of course.
This one is probably entirely about “How far can we really trust you?” Admittedly, actions are still probably more important here–and to some degree, the response to those actions. Obviously intentionally killing innocents would be a red flag even if the character feels bad about it, but something that’s more of a corner case might be an accidental killing: it’s possible that others might still stand by you if they believe it was unintentional and something you couldn’t have prevented and you show signs of being a human being that experiences remorse, but if you show no remorse whatsoever over it, that’s probably going to worry people. Even if you secretly feel remorse and simply put on a very good show of not caring about the consequences of your actions for others.
So yeah. Actions speak louder than anything else, obviously, but I can see cases where others might judge you by what they believe your intentions to be and whether you show remorse or try to make amends when you fuck up. Hell, even the criminal justice system considers things like intent and remorse (though the latter more for sentencing than finding of guilt or innocence).