Ugh I hate those different walking speeds. It's so stupid and old. I hope that gets nixed in the playtest.
But I do love that you don't get points back for lowering stats.
I see it as mostly affecting combat - elves are slightly faster per move action, dwarves are slightly slower (even than halflings!) but don't get slowed down by other things - where a 4-square movement vs. 6 makes a difference.
Another thing I like:
Class feats are presented in level order: 1st-level feats, 2nd-level feats, etc.
But.
The whole section starts with them all listed alphabetically, and then tells you what level they are. Noice.
The layout may have cribbed a few things from 4e, but it is pretty far from the MMO-like power system that 4e had.
When I hear people go "It's just like 5e!" and other people go "It's just like 4e!", two systems that are really, really far apart I just want to say "Maybe it's neither but takes ideas from both?"
I think I like it so far. The playtest is raw, and I think there are some things that should be fixed (language is one of those. Way too many types of feats that I think some should be labeled something else even if they are really all the same thing).
HERO’S DEFIANCE POWER 10
Casting (Free Action) Verbal Casting; Trigger An attack would bring you to 0 Hit Points, and the attack isn’t disintegrate and doesn’t have the death trait.
You shout in defiance of your fate. Just before applying the attack’s damage, you recover Hit Points equal to 19d4 plus your spellcasting ability modifier. If this is enough to prevent the attack from bringing you to 0 Hit Points, you don’t become unconscious or dying. Either way, you can’t use hero’s defiance again for 1 minute.
The layout may have cribbed a few things from 4e, but it is pretty far from the MMO-like power system that 4e had.
When I hear people go "It's just like 5e!" and other people go "It's just like 4e!", two systems that are really, really far apart I just want to say "Maybe it's neither but takes ideas from both?"
I think I like it so far. The playtest is raw, and I think there are some things that should be fixed (language is one of those. Way too many types of feats that I think some should be labeled something else even if they are really all the same thing).
Well 4E's power system isn't MMO-like either so that was a pretty low bar to clear.
But silly pedantry aside I'm also growing cautiously optimistic about PF2.0.
The layout may have cribbed a few things from 4e, but it is pretty far from the MMO-like power system that 4e had.
When I hear people go "It's just like 5e!" and other people go "It's just like 4e!", two systems that are really, really far apart I just want to say "Maybe it's neither but takes ideas from both?"
I think I like it so far. The playtest is raw, and I think there are some things that should be fixed (language is one of those. Way too many types of feats that I think some should be labeled something else even if they are really all the same thing).
Well 4E's power system isn't MMO-like either so that was a pretty low bar to clear.
But silly pedantry aside I'm also growing cautiously optimistic about PF2.0.
Yet another system I'll probably pick up but never play.
KadokenGiving Ends to my Friends and it Feels StupendousRegistered Userregular
edited August 2018
Ye downed one of my players in DH tonight. Got burned by an ED209-style mechanized suit they mentioned in DH1E but never statted. She did not sneak super well, and also wasn’t fast enough to run away. She was hurt earlier so it was not a great night for her. She did sacrifice herself so a possible TPK didn’t occur. The map they’re on is so narrow they all would have been hit at the same time by the thing’s heavy flamer. Flame is some real shit.
Also I got to do a very James Bondy flattened stairway to a burning oven type trap. They probably would gave gotten really hurt if they didn’t keep their grapnel and lines (grapple guns).
I stil feel weird about environmental traps. There feels a lot more I have to do in my head vs hard cut rules so I feel the need to go soft with them somewhat. I don’t want it to feel unfair, although as a trap they are supposed to be unfair. Fall damage, because it feels really arbitrary, also makes me a little anxious to do.
Also there was a really good swordsman type guy who kept toe-to-toe with the best melee fighter in the party. Like near misses, perfect hits but perfect dodges, able to get around the usual things the player does. Doesn’t matter how good you are as a melee fighter if a dude’s holding a stormbolter a meter from you and gets all 8 shots on you though. Probably should have split his attention. They said it was a good fight, I thought it was fun, they liked the session as a whole so I’m happy.
3) At first blush, it seems somewhat impossible to build a character who stinks out of the gate; they'll all be reasonably competent individuals with decent stats in the "this helps me do things" ability scores for their class.
You can theoretically start out with a 10 in your primary stat. Start at 10, take a flaw to your primary stat, get the stat bump from your class, put no Free bumps in your primary stat.
But that has to be deliberate. Really, trollingly deliberate. And even then chances are you have at least a 14 in one of your secondary stats, so it's possibly still salvageable.
Looking over Pathfinder 2...there's a lot of 4e in that cake mix, but there's also some very questionable ideas mixed in.
If I'm reading this correctly hit die is racially based and not class based? Not sure how to feel about that, although it looks like they tried to balance that with racial bonuses.
Looking over Pathfinder 2...there's a lot of 4e in that cake mix, but there's also some very questionable ideas mixed in.
If I'm reading this correctly hit die is racially based and not class based? Not sure how to feel about that, although it looks like they tried to balance that with racial bonuses.
It's both. Your HP per a level is the number from your ancestry plus your class plus you con mod. Not sure I love how that'll work in play. Like Elven Fighters are going to be much more frail than Dwarven Fighters which both works and doesn't work for me.
Elf Fighter gets 6 HP plus 10 for Fighter with a -1 for Con to get 15 HP at 1st.
Dwarf Fighter gets 10 HP plus 10 for Fighter with a +1 for Con to get 21 HP at 1st.
That's like a third more HP. Investment in Con for both of them will reduce that percent but it looks like a lot for Elf stuff to make up.
Looking over Pathfinder 2...there's a lot of 4e in that cake mix, but there's also some very questionable ideas mixed in.
If I'm reading this correctly hit die is racially based and not class based? Not sure how to feel about that, although it looks like they tried to balance that with racial bonuses.
It's both. Your HP per a level is the number from your ancestry plus your class plus you con mod. Not sure I love how that'll work in play. Like Elven Fighters are going to be much more frail than Dwarven Fighters which both works and doesn't work for me.
Elf Fighter gets 6 HP plus 10 for Fighter with a -1 for Con to get 15 HP at 1st.
Dwarf Fighter gets 10 HP plus 10 for Fighter with a +1 for Con to get 21 HP at 1st.
That's like a third more HP. Investment in Con for both of them will reduce that percent but it looks like a lot for Elf stuff to make up.
From what I can tell, you only add ancestry at first level, after that it is just class+con (this is also how Starfinder works). So yes, at first level there is a decent difference but the difference will decrease as you level up. Also, don't roll a fighter with a negative Con modifier.
Looking over Pathfinder 2...there's a lot of 4e in that cake mix, but there's also some very questionable ideas mixed in.
If I'm reading this correctly hit die is racially based and not class based? Not sure how to feel about that, although it looks like they tried to balance that with racial bonuses.
It's both. Your HP per a level is the number from your ancestry plus your class plus you con mod. Not sure I love how that'll work in play. Like Elven Fighters are going to be much more frail than Dwarven Fighters which both works and doesn't work for me.
Elf Fighter gets 6 HP plus 10 for Fighter with a -1 for Con to get 15 HP at 1st.
Dwarf Fighter gets 10 HP plus 10 for Fighter with a +1 for Con to get 21 HP at 1st.
That's like a third more HP. Investment in Con for both of them will reduce that percent but it looks like a lot for Elf stuff to make up.
From what I can tell, you only add ancestry at first level, after that it is just class+con (this is also how Starfinder works). So yes, at first level there is a decent difference but the difference will decrease as you level up. Also, don't roll a fighter with a negative Con modifier.
The con modifiers was the delta, not the ultimate. A dwarf gets a +2 while a elf gets a -2. All else being equal their con scores will be 4 points apart. (Sorta, I'm simplifying.)
Anyways, this is the text I was basing "Race HP at each level" from page 42:
This tells you how many Hit Points your character gains
from her class at each level. To determine your character’s
starting Hit Points, add together the Hit Points she
receives from her ancestry, her Constitution modifier, and
the number listed in this entry.
Each time your character gains a level, she receives an
additional number of Hit Points equal to this number plus
her Constitution modifier. For more about calculating
your character’s Constitution modifier and determining
her Hit Points, see page 14
I lean towards your interpretation but the phrase "this number" is a very poor choice in rules text after just referencing four different numbers.
I definitely don't think they intended to close to double HP so just class per a level is probably right.
Eh, it's a way of reaching closer to that "comfortable starting hp" idea that cropped up for 4e. Just not sure I'm into racially binning hit points; it's such a tough thing to balance with.
Eh, it's a way of reaching closer to that "comfortable starting hp" idea that cropped up for 4e. Just not sure I'm into racially binning hit points; it's such a tough thing to balance with.
Yeah, just make it something like 7 plus Con mod or something. That covers it really.
13th Age is truly fantastic, with a couple of exceptions: it relies too heavily on the default setting -- one of D&D's abiding issues is many of the people playing it are scared of deviation from the familiar -- and they tried to design classes on an ease-of-play spectrum with Barbarians and Paladins on the low end and Wizards on the high end. The end result is people who go for classes for role-play purposes end up with the wrong amount of crunch for their personal preference.
13th Age is truly fantastic, with a couple of exceptions: it relies too heavily on the default setting -- one of D&D's abiding issues is many of the people playing it are scared of deviation from the familiar -- and they tried to design classes on an ease-of-play spectrum with Barbarians and Paladins on the low end and Wizards on the high end. The end result is people who go for classes for role-play purposes end up with the wrong amount of crunch for their personal preference.
Yeah this is really the only complaint. The nice part is that certain classes can be made a bit more intricate if you want, but only a little. Paladins can pick up some Cleric goodies and gain a bit of complexity that way. I've long felt that rangers should be allowed to pick up like half of the Druid's talents, all of which bolt on class features (and I really, really hope a new edition of 13A basically has all classes working like the Druid).
Ranger just has so many archetypes bound up in it: the monster hunter, the wilderness guide, the animal companion trainer, the archer, and also somehow nature-magic warrior. Unfortunately I don't think any one of those on its own is enough to really base a class upon, which is why it's this weird amalgamation that ends up stepping on a lot of other archetype toes. On the other hand there are so many cool examples of the Ranger archetype in fiction that it's impossible to not have it as a class. I think WoW does it best with the differentiation between Warrior and Hunter.
Ranger just has so many archetypes bound up in it: the monster hunter, the wilderness guide, the animal companion trainer, the archer, and also somehow nature-magic warrior. Unfortunately I don't think any one of those on its own is enough to really base a class upon, which is why it's this weird amalgamation that ends up stepping on a lot of other archetype toes. On the other hand there are so many cool examples of the Ranger archetype in fiction that it's impossible to not have it as a class. I think WoW does it best with the differentiation between Warrior and Hunter.
Nature magic and animal companions are already the druid shtick. So in my ideal world I'd have rangers be focused all-in on the stalking targets part. Which lets you cast them as the monster hunter, or the actual monster (people) hunter, etc. Archer can be shared between classes honestly - rogues are also a traditional archer deal, and it plays nice with warrior types as well (in distinct flavors of stalker, soldier, or... rogue.). So I'd definitely focus on the monster hunter/wilderness guide aspects, mix in some fugitive tracking and such too. Give them abilities themed around focusing their specific target in the thick of a fight (e.g. firing an arrow through a fight so it hits the guy on the other side, or just ducking and weaving through to keep up with someone running away, etc).
Fighter suffers from being an all-in-one for all forms of weapon users. It sometimes feels like if you had a single class that was druid or cleric or wizard depending how you built/roleplayed it. On the other hand, there are so many variations on "fights well with weapon" out there. If anything is distinct about them it's that they're the guys with formal weapons training - be it nobles fencing or commoners who've gone through training with an army.
I think I'd rather have a class built around having a minion, but it would end up being all mechanics and no fluff since the archetypes would be so different.
Plus, then you'd just basically have the Pathfinder Summoner.
I like the ranger as an archetype to hang "Expert Fighter who is skilled in something besides just War". This worked better when the Fighter got jack for skills though.
I've honestly always thought the Ranger should just be a part of the rogue class. Unless they're magical, there's really so much overlap. Stealthy, super-precise damage, knows their way around snares and traps. Potentially has a pet dog is the only part that doesn't always line up, but that's fixable for the ones that want one.
Wizard = Wizard
Wizard but divine spells = Cleric
Wizard but nature spells = Druid
Wizard but they bring their guitar to class = Bard
Wizard but instead of books and spells they use swords = Fighter
Wizard but instead of books and spells they use swords and also are assholes = Paladin
Wizard but instead of books and spells they use smaller swords and are sneaky = Rogue
Wizard but they never study and always complain that no one understands them = Sorcerer
Wizard but instead of books and spells they have a really well-trained dog that people mistake for a wolf but it's just a dirty husky = Ranger
My players all confirmed they're good for my tabletop game this week that I haven't been able to play for a whole month. Now it's time to return to the small city of Crownsgate, which they had previously saved from some hydras, with the statue to prove it. Along with their statue, they have a boat of their own waiting for them, as well as the fabulous riches they were able to salvage from the boss: a large amount of adamant shards.
Unfortunately, fame has two edges, and the Crownsgate militia will not be enough to deter a swarm of pirates who have descended on the town, asking about the jovial dark knight, who owes them rather a lot of money that they're come to collect.
In other party news, the snobbish wizard's nephew is about to be expelled from school, the assassin NPC currently with them as their employer's bodyguard has an offer to make the exiled vigilante, and the K-pop cleric needs to adapt to entering symbiosis with a suit of living cherry blossom tree armor.
Not to mention the incoming apocalypse less than 2 years out...
+1
Options
KadokenGiving Ends to my Friends and it Feels StupendousRegistered Userregular
edited August 2018
One of my players in DH keeps trying to make his guy more and more near invincible. He’s one armour under a space marine. He has crazy high dodge. It’s to the point a mook type of daemon can’t hurt the guy without max damage on most of its attacks. Regular-ass autoguns and lasguns don’t get through his armour. He’s too good at melee that unless the NPC has the talent that lets you evade twice, he will hit almost everything I’ve thrown at him to death on the second weapon attack. If he doesn’t, he’ll stun them with that fething power maul of his, which is why I resorted to giving my elites and named NPCs talents to have a chance to negate stun or drugs to negate stun.
It’s to the point I’m looking at Chaos dreadnoughts, chaos marines, daemon engines, and having to consider if they’re good enough.
I thought of having a package sent to his personal home that’s a birthday present with a melta bomb inside all Joker style and now thinking maybe that’s not a terrible idea. Or rigging the team’s car with demolition packs to Casino them while they’re inside. Or simply send in an apc or tank.
I mean the obvious thing to do is just mind control him point blank and make him shoot himself. He lost near every time to a sorceress who he decided to charge straight to and survived his attacks. I was just about to say have the techpriest shoot him, but the machine trait disallows mind control powers. Stupid cogboy being right that the flesh is weak.
This guy hasn’t had to burn a fate point in three years. Even he’s talked about playing other characters in the past.
I’m not angrily ranting, I just wanted to air that out.
Edit: also I don’t know if I said this before but i played the Pillarmen Theme for a new type of elite enemy because they are as fabulous and buff as them. Also one of the only enemies to give him trouble. https://youtube.com/watch?v=XUhVCoTsBaM
He also now knows the existence of this thread so he might have seen this. I’M COMIN’ FOR YOU
My first thought is "if a player decides he wants his character to be really good at something, let him rather than trying to beat him." It's really frustrating when the DM aims to stop your character from doing what you've designed him to do -- which is not the same as being put in situations where what your character is good at, isn't broadly helpful.
KadokenGiving Ends to my Friends and it Feels StupendousRegistered Userregular
edited August 2018
I’m not trying to stop him from what he’s designed to do, I’m trying to put something that as good or better than him at what he does against him. It’s not fun for me if there’s not tension, and it feels like I’m letting them down if the games are pure facile power fantasies.
Like the bomb stuff, I’m not that one GM I had who destroyed a landing pad and a ship because I chose not to check the ship underside for explosives. If I had done that demo pack stuff, I would give them a hint something’s up and have them roll an awareness test anyway. For the bomb present, already that’s pretty suspicious but even then I would ask the dude to scrutinize the package if he wanted. They’re doing a mixture of secret war spy stuff, detective story stuff, and pure action movie/game stuff so they would be on the look out for that making it fair.
Sheeit, I’m not telling him he can’t take talents or weapons from other books and get stuff by the game’s rules. I’m not taking his toys away.
Kadoken on
0
Options
Casually HardcoreOnce an Asshole. Trying to be better.Registered Userregular
Rangers should just be fighters and the players just role play the ranger part, but, noooooo
Everything needs to have stats because role playing is too hard.
Posts
But I do love that you don't get points back for lowering stats.
I see it as mostly affecting combat - elves are slightly faster per move action, dwarves are slightly slower (even than halflings!) but don't get slowed down by other things - where a 4-square movement vs. 6 makes a difference.
Another thing I like:
Class feats are presented in level order: 1st-level feats, 2nd-level feats, etc.
But.
The whole section starts with them all listed alphabetically, and then tells you what level they are. Noice.
Steam: Elvenshae // PSN: Elvenshae // WotC: Elvenshae
Wilds of Aladrion: [https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/comment/43159014/#Comment_43159014]Ellandryn[/url]
When I hear people go "It's just like 5e!" and other people go "It's just like 4e!", two systems that are really, really far apart I just want to say "Maybe it's neither but takes ideas from both?"
I think I like it so far. The playtest is raw, and I think there are some things that should be fixed (language is one of those. Way too many types of feats that I think some should be labeled something else even if they are really all the same thing).
HAHAH! 19d4.
Steam: Elvenshae // PSN: Elvenshae // WotC: Elvenshae
Wilds of Aladrion: [https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/comment/43159014/#Comment_43159014]Ellandryn[/url]
Well 4E's power system isn't MMO-like either so that was a pretty low bar to clear.
But silly pedantry aside I'm also growing cautiously optimistic about PF2.0.
Yet another system I'll probably pick up but never play.
Origin ID: Discgolfer27
Untappd ID: Discgolfer1981
Also I got to do a very James Bondy flattened stairway to a burning oven type trap. They probably would gave gotten really hurt if they didn’t keep their grapnel and lines (grapple guns).
I stil feel weird about environmental traps. There feels a lot more I have to do in my head vs hard cut rules so I feel the need to go soft with them somewhat. I don’t want it to feel unfair, although as a trap they are supposed to be unfair. Fall damage, because it feels really arbitrary, also makes me a little anxious to do.
Also there was a really good swordsman type guy who kept toe-to-toe with the best melee fighter in the party. Like near misses, perfect hits but perfect dodges, able to get around the usual things the player does. Doesn’t matter how good you are as a melee fighter if a dude’s holding a stormbolter a meter from you and gets all 8 shots on you though. Probably should have split his attention. They said it was a good fight, I thought it was fun, they liked the session as a whole so I’m happy.
I thought there was something about PF2e Fighters I liked
You can theoretically start out with a 10 in your primary stat. Start at 10, take a flaw to your primary stat, get the stat bump from your class, put no Free bumps in your primary stat.
But that has to be deliberate. Really, trollingly deliberate. And even then chances are you have at least a 14 in one of your secondary stats, so it's possibly still salvageable.
If I'm reading this correctly hit die is racially based and not class based? Not sure how to feel about that, although it looks like they tried to balance that with racial bonuses.
It's both. Your HP per a level is the number from your ancestry plus your class plus you con mod. Not sure I love how that'll work in play. Like Elven Fighters are going to be much more frail than Dwarven Fighters which both works and doesn't work for me.
Elf Fighter gets 6 HP plus 10 for Fighter with a -1 for Con to get 15 HP at 1st.
Dwarf Fighter gets 10 HP plus 10 for Fighter with a +1 for Con to get 21 HP at 1st.
That's like a third more HP. Investment in Con for both of them will reduce that percent but it looks like a lot for Elf stuff to make up.
From what I can tell, you only add ancestry at first level, after that it is just class+con (this is also how Starfinder works). So yes, at first level there is a decent difference but the difference will decrease as you level up. Also, don't roll a fighter with a negative Con modifier.
The con modifiers was the delta, not the ultimate. A dwarf gets a +2 while a elf gets a -2. All else being equal their con scores will be 4 points apart. (Sorta, I'm simplifying.)
Anyways, this is the text I was basing "Race HP at each level" from page 42:
I lean towards your interpretation but the phrase "this number" is a very poor choice in rules text after just referencing four different numbers.
I definitely don't think they intended to close to double HP so just class per a level is probably right.
Yeah, just make it something like 7 plus Con mod or something. That covers it really.
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
Seems like you could just have fixed base and move on no problem yeah.
Just give me a minute, I'm sure I'll figure out something else it applies to to make the distinction worthwhile.
13th Age uses "middle" of Con, Dex, and Wis and it is ... impactful!
Second on the list.
i need to give 13th age a try sometime, I just need to find a DM
Yeah this is really the only complaint. The nice part is that certain classes can be made a bit more intricate if you want, but only a little. Paladins can pick up some Cleric goodies and gain a bit of complexity that way. I've long felt that rangers should be allowed to pick up like half of the Druid's talents, all of which bolt on class features (and I really, really hope a new edition of 13A basically has all classes working like the Druid).
Origin ID: Discgolfer27
Untappd ID: Discgolfer1981
Nature magic and animal companions are already the druid shtick. So in my ideal world I'd have rangers be focused all-in on the stalking targets part. Which lets you cast them as the monster hunter, or the actual monster (people) hunter, etc. Archer can be shared between classes honestly - rogues are also a traditional archer deal, and it plays nice with warrior types as well (in distinct flavors of stalker, soldier, or... rogue.). So I'd definitely focus on the monster hunter/wilderness guide aspects, mix in some fugitive tracking and such too. Give them abilities themed around focusing their specific target in the thick of a fight (e.g. firing an arrow through a fight so it hits the guy on the other side, or just ducking and weaving through to keep up with someone running away, etc).
Fighter suffers from being an all-in-one for all forms of weapon users. It sometimes feels like if you had a single class that was druid or cleric or wizard depending how you built/roleplayed it. On the other hand, there are so many variations on "fights well with weapon" out there. If anything is distinct about them it's that they're the guys with formal weapons training - be it nobles fencing or commoners who've gone through training with an army.
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
Plus, then you'd just basically have the Pathfinder Summoner.
Wizard = Wizard
Wizard but divine spells = Cleric
Wizard but nature spells = Druid
Wizard but they bring their guitar to class = Bard
Wizard but instead of books and spells they use swords = Fighter
Wizard but instead of books and spells they use swords and also are assholes = Paladin
Wizard but instead of books and spells they use smaller swords and are sneaky = Rogue
Wizard but they never study and always complain that no one understands them = Sorcerer
Wizard but instead of books and spells they have a really well-trained dog that people mistake for a wolf but it's just a dirty husky = Ranger
Nerdy Wizard
Healy Wizard
Leafy Wizard
Singy Wizard
Punchy Wizard
High-horsey Wizard
Stabby Wizard
Lazy Wizard
Drizzty Wizard
Unfortunately, fame has two edges, and the Crownsgate militia will not be enough to deter a swarm of pirates who have descended on the town, asking about the jovial dark knight, who owes them rather a lot of money that they're come to collect.
In other party news, the snobbish wizard's nephew is about to be expelled from school, the assassin NPC currently with them as their employer's bodyguard has an offer to make the exiled vigilante, and the K-pop cleric needs to adapt to entering symbiosis with a suit of living cherry blossom tree armor.
Not to mention the incoming apocalypse less than 2 years out...
It’s to the point I’m looking at Chaos dreadnoughts, chaos marines, daemon engines, and having to consider if they’re good enough.
I thought of having a package sent to his personal home that’s a birthday present with a melta bomb inside all Joker style and now thinking maybe that’s not a terrible idea. Or rigging the team’s car with demolition packs to Casino them while they’re inside. Or simply send in an apc or tank.
I mean the obvious thing to do is just mind control him point blank and make him shoot himself. He lost near every time to a sorceress who he decided to charge straight to and survived his attacks. I was just about to say have the techpriest shoot him, but the machine trait disallows mind control powers. Stupid cogboy being right that the flesh is weak.
This guy hasn’t had to burn a fate point in three years. Even he’s talked about playing other characters in the past.
I’m not angrily ranting, I just wanted to air that out.
Edit: also I don’t know if I said this before but i played the Pillarmen Theme for a new type of elite enemy because they are as fabulous and buff as them. Also one of the only enemies to give him trouble.
He also now knows the existence of this thread so he might have seen this. I’M COMIN’ FOR YOU
Like the bomb stuff, I’m not that one GM I had who destroyed a landing pad and a ship because I chose not to check the ship underside for explosives. If I had done that demo pack stuff, I would give them a hint something’s up and have them roll an awareness test anyway. For the bomb present, already that’s pretty suspicious but even then I would ask the dude to scrutinize the package if he wanted. They’re doing a mixture of secret war spy stuff, detective story stuff, and pure action movie/game stuff so they would be on the look out for that making it fair.
Sheeit, I’m not telling him he can’t take talents or weapons from other books and get stuff by the game’s rules. I’m not taking his toys away.
Everything needs to have stats because role playing is too hard.