u/EaterOfFromage

In the Natural Fantasy book, Floralists can take the Skill "Chloromancy", which gives them access to a new type of magiseed for each level they have invested in it. It's also suggested in the section explaining Magiseeds that the GM can include new or additional Magiseeds as rewards, and that their value is approximately 1000z.

I found this kind of interesting, because this is effectively giving a class skill level as a reward (better, actually, because it doesn't count toward the Chloromancy skill level cap). This got me thinking: could the same logic apply to other skills? Would rewarding players with "skill levels" (but not giving them a level up) be too powerful?

I think in some cases, this seems reasonable. Probably the simplest example is Magic Skills, such as Elemental Magic - giving an Elementalist a new Elementalist spell as a reward (e.g. a fellow Elementalist offers to teach them) that is worth roughly 1000z seems fair. Generally speaking, I think any skill where each level gives you access to a new option from a list, where there are more options than levels, is fair game.

What about other situations though?

1. Can you give spells as rewards to someone with levels in the class, but not the Magic skill? For example, if a character has levels in Elementalist but no levels in Elemental Magic, is it still fair to give them an Elementalist spell?
2. Can you give skill level rewards to non-Magic skills that have levels? For example, could a Weaponmaster receive training that increases their melee weapon accuracy? If yes, should this count toward their level and skill cap for Melee Weapon Mastery and Weaponmaster mastery?
3. What about skills without skill levels? Can a Guardian learn Protect as a reward, and would it count toward his levels and mastery of the Guardian class?

In general, where should the line be drawn on this from a balance perspective? And what similar rewards can we give to classes that can't benefit from where the line is drawn? Have you given skill levels as a reward, and how did you handle it?

1. Will there be open strum notes? Haven't seen them yet, but haven't heard confirmation either.

2. Does karaoke mode only have vocals, no other instruments? Alternatively, is there a way to display lyrics alongside instrument charts without scoring the vocals (YARG does this and I really like it, great for casual singing alongside instruments).

3. Can you play with 5 instruments at once, assuming you have enough (ala RB3)? If you can play with 4 guitars at once, that must mean they have a 4 track design working - just add vocals in and you're golden?

4. How will the "sound cutting out when you miss a note" effect work with multiple people playing the same part? Will it cut out if even one person misses it?

Maybe a bit early to be asking specific questions like these but hoping maybe something is floating around.

Most party-based, turn-based RPGs, whether ATB, Wait, Active, whatever, follow a familiar formula: a character's turn comes up, you choose what action they take, they perform the selected action, then the next characters turn starts and the cycle repeats.

Are there any games that have you choose your entire party's actions before seeing the resolution? So you would pick actions that each party member will take during the "round", then watch as they all resolve?

I know some games like fire emblem have player "phases" where the player makes all their moves (then the enemy round starts and they make all their moves), but you're still selecting and resolving each character one at a time. I'm curious if any games have played around with full party planning.

And what do they do instead?

In this context, "MP" refers to any resource that each character has that can be consumed to fuel more powerful abilities. It is a resource that can run out, leaving you with only less-powerful non-resource-consuming options. It's purpose is typically to:

• force you to think strategically about managing your resources instead of simply spamming your best abilities

• enable simple vertical power progression of abilities (you get stronger abilities as you progress through the game, but they cost more MP)

Final Fantasy XIII fits this bill IMO. You are limited to 5 actions per turn, and different abilities consume different numbers of actions, but there's not really any way to "run out" of actions - they fully regenerate next round. There is also TP, but that is a shared resource across the party that fuels more niche, specific abilities rather than strictly more powerful abilities, and can basically be ignored completely if you want.

FFXII keeps tension high by instead turning every battle into a delicate balancing of buffs, debuffs, stagger generation, healing, and damage. The game does not give you "stronger abilities" to spam - rather, all abilities have a time and place, you need to find where it is. Abilities in the game are almost purely horizontal progression: the abilities you start with never lose relevance, you just get new tools in your kit that you need to now incorporate into your rotations.

What other games go with this approach? I'm especially curious to hear about any fully turn-based games that take this approach.

With Impossible Magic coming out soon and the final two classes being remastered (Magus and Summoner), have Paizo made any indication that they are done with remastering? Or, if not, when they will be done - if ever? Obviously, classes are not the only content - there are still many Ancestries, Archetypes, Spells, Items, and more that have yet to be remastered and republished.

Since water is 60% rat

I'll see myself out

Just wondering on the timing of this interaction. Anchoring Air is a new spell that, as a reaction, when an enemy **attempts a melee strike against you**, you can give a penalty to the incoming strike. If you have the Geomancer Archetype and are in the Sky terrain, when you expend a spell slot with the Air trait, you can fly 10 feet. Could you cast this spell as a reaction and fly out of reach, thus negating the Strike? Or would the Strike resolve before the geomancy effect? The part that's giving me pause is *attempts*, which sounds early enough to potentially disrupt (certainly, the effects of the spell will at least resolve before the strike, so I'm mot sure why the geomancy effect wouldn't as well).

So I bought and played through the original Trails in the Sky game, then bought the other two chapters shortly before the remakes were announced. I started in on the 2nd chapter, but got a bit burnt out on it after maybe 10 hours and put it down. Since then, the 1st chapter remake has come out to glowing reviews and 2nd one is coming out soon.

For those who have played both, would it be a jarring transition to start from the 2nd remake, having played the OG first chapter? Has anything changed meaningfully about the story in the remakes that might make jumping in on the second game confusing (ala FF7R)? Are there any benefits to playing the first chapter that I might miss, like expanded lore or carry-over options for having a completed save file?

I've been struggling with these for a while, and I've realized I'm not even sure what the best technique is.

I'm referring to three of the same 8th/16th notes in rapid succession. On its own, easy enough to hit. But there are two situations where I find it tricky that are slightly different.

1. A string of 8th notes at a high enough pace that I want to up and down strum, with a 16th triplet mixed in.

2. Multiple triplets back-to-back.

In the first case, if I try to simply maintain my up and down strumming, but speed up, I end up reversing my cadence - instead of my downstrum falling on the downbeat it will fall on the upbeat, which gets confusing. Otherwise I have to do a double downstrum (the last 8th note and the first 16th note) to keep the cadance correct, which does work but can be tricky for fast songs.

It's a similar decision with the 2nd case. I can try to downstrum the first note of each triplet, but that's hard on fast songs, or I can push through but have the confusing "down-up-down followed by up-down-up" .

Is there a recommended way to approach these two situations?