Need some opinions...

[Jazzdrummer]

Using a stealth mechanic entirely based on the monsters mind value works great as well. It's more comprehensive but that's not necessarily a bad thing. But also with your system, correct me if I'm wrong, the only roll for detection is done on the monster's turn? So hero would roll a D6 mind test for himself and then he is considered to be in stealth. At that point he can sneak in and no other rolls are made till the EW turn. There's nothing stopping him really from getting off that first strike. During one of my recent games rarely did I stay in stealth past 1 turn. I would go into it just to land a backstab as opposed to just sitting in the room waiting for the monsters to find me.

[mitchiemasha]

Using a stealth mechanic entirely based on the monsters mind value works great as well. It's more comprehensive but that's not necessarily a bad thing. But also with your system, correct me if I'm wrong, the only roll for detection is done on the monster's turn? So hero would roll a D6 mind test for himself and then he is considered to be in stealth. At that point he can sneak in and no other rolls are made till the EW turn. There's nothing stopping him really from getting off that first strike. During one of my recent games rarely did I stay in stealth past 1 turn. I would go into it just to land a backstab as opposed to just sitting in the room waiting for the monsters to find me.

Yeah totally. It only matters in the monsters turn as that is when they get to attack, which is what the skill is attempting to avoid. DeathStrike is a new thing you've brought to the table. My sneaking Hero had a much weaker BackStab, unlocked when a Hero saves enough gold to buy a hidden blade.

Unfortunately I can't use DeathStrike in my system as I've utilised the black shields for damage. I could however buy some of those colored dice to give a sneaking hero that Attack. However I wouldn't make his blow a killing blow if wounding the enemy. I do like that idea but against bosses and things, in my system it's be to OP.

Do you not have weapons damage in your game? How do you track that?

[Jazzdrummer]

Right now I'm playing the game purely vanilla. Trying to keep things as simple as possible while still adding some variety here and there. But you guys have given me tons of ideas which I appreciate. I have your character and armory rules right here on my desktop. Great stuff.

[mitchiemasha]

Right now I'm playing the game purely vanilla. Trying to keep things as simple as possible while still adding some variety here and there. But you guys have given me tons of ideas which I appreciate. I have your character and armory rules right here on my desktop. Great stuff.

We go over board some times, most of the time but it's all for fun. I love thinking about and discussing the different ways things could be. The underworkings, hidden logic of board games.

[Jazzdrummer]

I think it's great. This old and wonderful game is so easy to modify. I actually just received a 2nd copy of the game off of ebay because I wanted to have a second set of furniture...lol. I'm not sure how to explain it but the game just feels good to play. It's not perfect but it's very immersive for me and my wife actually likes playing it which is HUGE let me tell ya. But again my goal is simplicity right now. I'm just trying to make a few heroes that are balanced with the default ones. Trying to come up with an assassin has been a lot of fun but also quite difficult. I love characters that are thematic and feel unique but without being overpowered. I'm happy with the Thief and Rogue versions I listed. But I think Gold Bearer's version of the iconic death strike ability is pretty spot on. After playtesting my version a little bit more I'm starting to think he might be a bit overpowered. But that being said I listed another assassin on my initial starting post that I'm liking more and more as I play him. He also uses the unblockable hit idea but where it's a slightly harder to pull off. Let me listed it again but I think this might be a bit more balanced compared the other idea. This version is not mine. A guy uploaded it along with some others on boardgamegeek. But I really thought he had some nice ideas. He also had some custom artifacts for his characters. The one he had for this assassin is called assassin's dagger which simply allows him to roll 2 dice instead of 1 when making his bonus dagger strike.

Assassin

Body:
Mind:
Attack:
Defend:
Move:

Starting Weapon: Short Sword
Starting Armor: None
Restrictions: Can not wear plate armor or use two-handed weapons

Abilities:
1. Dual Wield - Can use a dagger in the OH that adds 1
2. Assassin's Strike - When attacking with your MH weapon, if a is rolled you may make a bonus attack with your dagger that is unblockable.

[mitchiemasha]

That's easy enough. An auto wound. As worded, 'bonus attack' when rolling a you get to roll an extra Combat d6 if it's an auto wound.

In my system I'd have to make this 'if rolling all skulls', actually this would be too powerful a blow. Why would he need an auto wound with all those hits? How about all shields? Themed as the Assassin is taking a defensive stance to counter with his dagger. I do use all skulls to unlock the special of other weapons "MIGHTY BLOW!" But i'm liking the shields here.

Dual wield Dagger with a standard weapon
Assassins strike: Reroll 1Cd6 when rolling all white shields in melee attack, if auto wound.

Now there's no need to add all the extra clunky mechanics of what weapons he can and can't use, etc. You could give him a Broadsword but he's less likely to get that strike or not at all with a Battle Axe. He performs better with a 2Cd6 weapon, especially against high defence baddies. This is what I'm on about in the other thread, Hide the complexity of the character in his core, instead of adding loads of restrictions and text. It's up to the player to realise "oh yeah, he's deadly with 2d6 weapons" and to utilise him at his best, which isn't very hard to figure out. Now you're not closing off other parts of the game, should they choose to play differently for a bit. An Assassin could use any weapon it's just not going to be any benefit, the mechanic reflects this.

I also get to keep weapons damage. Which is usually the first mod brought to the table, it's the best.

[Jazzdrummer]

Interesting. So you're saying instead of rolling a to trigger the dagger strike, that rolling all would trigger the attack right? Hmmmmm. I like that and using the shields to trigger the attack thematically represents the dual wielding nature of the character since the dagger also gives him a defense die. Very interesting. You might be onto something here. Okay let me think for a minute... ...So using a short sword for example would give the assassin roughly a 11% chance of rolling while he would have a 28% chance of rolling a single . If I went with white shields to trigger the dagger strike it would trigger less often by a huge margin especially since the dagger attack isn't automatic. You still have to roll for it which is only a 50% of success. I would say how about allowing 1 rolled to trigger the dagger attack. This would cause the bonus attack to happen more often than if I used . I like the idea but an 11% for the possibility of an auto-wound seems pretty low to me. What do you think?

Original assassin's strike

-Assassin can use a broadsword or longsword. With 3 dice he has a 35% chance of rolling a which would trigger the assassin's strike.

Your version

-Assassin using a short sword has an 11% chance of rolling or if using a broad or long sword a 4% chance of rolling .

Variation of your idea using only a single as the trigger

-Assassin using a short sword or a broad/long sword has a 44% chance of rolling a single to trigger assassin's strike.

[mitchiemasha]

I would say how about allowing 1 rolled to trigger the dagger attack. This would cause the bonus attack to happen more often. What do you think?

That would work but the beauty behind the mechanic is, when you fail to hit, fail to roll any (which is bad) you actually get a chance at a better hit. If it's 1 the other might be a so you'd already have a hit, this is a little bit more clunky, as the opponent gets to defend 1 hit and you reroll for an auto wound. It also doesn't remove the need for weapon restrictions. The 'all shields' means the player will naturally want to use a 2Cd6 weapon. Using the 1 means he could still Assassin Strike with the broadsword. AND!!! more words would be needed for the rule, is that a strike for each shield!?! I always like to go for the least worded option.

[mitchiemasha]

Don't forget, the version, as written still isn't an auto wound. As the words used are 'Bonus attack', which implies a roll for the dagger. 1Cd6 50% chance of an auto wound, if rolling !

If you wanted to increase the chance of either version you could remove the roll for the dagger.
= Autowound / All = Autowound

[Jazzdrummer]

Okay I think I see what you're saying here is that normally 2 would indicate a miss. But for the assassin he now has a chance to roll for an auto wound. Wait...I just saw your new post. I was just going to say why don't we just remove the bonus roll. If the assassin rolls 2 the monster receives an auto wound. No roll. If I went with using a to trigger the auto wound then it might be better to limit the assassin to a short sword which would give him a 28% chance of success while a long/broad sword would give him a 35% chance of success. This would be somewhat like my original assassin.