[The Last Lands] - Looking for some feedback

[weem]

I've been doing work on my new setting/system over the last few weeks - I'm calling it The Last Lands.

I have recently posted a quick run-through of the character creation process. It's not really enough for playtesting, but it is enough to get the basic idea. I have kept everything as short and simple as possible and was hoping some of you could look it over and let me know if it is clear to you. Does it make sense, etc.

Here is the step by step process...

http://www.lastlands.com/forums/index.php?topic=6

I would really appreciate any and all feedback - I want to get all the feedback I can at this point before I move into a much more detailed and playtest-ready format.

Thanks!

[Mikael]

Hello

I had a quick read-through, and had no problems following the presentation. Partly because of the clear way it is set up, and mostly because I have seen the same concepts and near-identical rules in so many other games. For me to get excited and actually play this game, personally, there should be something different. If you want to understand where I am coming from, and if you have not yet read it, I recommend Ron's article on "Fantasy heartbeakers", accessible via the "Articles" link at the top of this page.

Regardless of where you want to go systemwise, I hope that you are not holding off the playtesting until you have the whole system written out with this level effort spent on the presentation. You do not and should not have anything like a finished product before taking it into play. If you do, then any changes that you want to make on the basis of actual play will take a lot of effort to implement - and you might end up not making changes that really would need to be done.

[weem]

and mostly because I have seen the same concepts and near-identical rules in so many other games.

Does this relate to the activation numbers and how they are used? If so, that's a real bummer. I understand everything else is pretty common in many games in one form or another.

As far as playtesting goes, I did not intend having everything done before playtesting. I just wanted to have more about races and a few other things there to try - nothing set in stone, but at least the framework.

Thanks so much for the feedback, I appreciate it.

[FrankBrunner]

Heya. I like the idea of activation numbers. I'm guessing that the activation numbers change depending on skill level, so that even though everyone hits on a 10 (in melee), the consequences of the hit change a lot in accordance with skill. I think that could work for ranged combat too, although you might have to define "hit" differently. Or maybe just scrap the "hit" idea altogether and make it a scale of activation numbers, so a 10 could do a lot of damage coming from a skilled archer, but would only cause you to drop one in the initiative count (say) for an unskilled archer?

[Mikael]

Yeah, sorry, no, I have not seen the activation number idea in lots of places. But one neat feature in the combat system does not make the game into a blockbuster, these days, so I am curious where you are headed with this system. Is it:
a) "Generic" system for any fantasy-ish game?
b) Lots of setting and color with a slightly personalized system?
c) Something else?

And since you are looking for feedback on clarity of presentation at such an early stage, do you have high selling ambitions, and if so, what do you think will be the key selling points for the game? The things that really set it apart from the competition, or just make you excited to be designing the game?

[weem]

@FrankBrunner

Heya. I like the idea of activation numbers. I'm guessing that the activation numbers change depending on skill level, so that even though everyone hits on a 10 (in melee), the consequences of the hit change a lot in accordance with skill.

The basic idea is this. Lower tier combat/defensive skills (those that are attained early on in other words) will be of two general types... They will either have 1) a more frequently roll-able activation number BUT a lower level of power - OR - 2) have a less frequently rolled activation number BUT a higher level of power. However, as you get to the higher tiered abilities (ones that will take some time to get to) there will be better (more powerful) combinations such as a more frequently roll-able activation number AND a higher level of power. When I say a more frequently roll-able activation number, I mean activation numbers that are higher along the curve and thus (statistically) are rolled more. Numbers such as 12, 13, etc as opposed to 15 and 16.

The short answer to your questions is, yes, exactly

I think that could work for ranged combat too, although you might have to define "hit" differently. Or maybe just scrap the "hit" idea altogether and make it a scale of activation numbers, so a 10 could do a lot of damage coming from a skilled archer, but would only cause you to drop one in the initiative count (say) for an unskilled archer?

I have been thinking about that for some time - that I would need to redefine what constitutes a "hit" as you said. Someone that has no skill swinging a bat will still be able to strike you a considerable number of times, as opposed to someone that has no skill with a bow, who will simply miss most of the time. There will indeed still be activation numbers and combat abilities attributed to them, though there will be some differences in other areas. I'm still working this out. If you have more ideas I would love to hear them (I have some forums set up over there).

@Mikael

...But one neat feature in the combat system does not make the game into a blockbuster, these days, so I am curious where you are headed with this system.

a) "Generic" system for any fantasy-ish game?
b) Lots of setting and color with a slightly personalized system?
c) Something else?

Absolutely, and I don't have any great aspirations of this becoming a blockbuster as you say, or anything like that. This project would fall along the lines of option B in your example. The system is being built to be used in a setting that I am developing - aka The Last Lands.

And since you are looking for feedback on clarity of presentation at such an early stage, do you have high selling ambitions, and if so, what do you think will be the key selling points for the game? The things that really set it apart from the competition, or just make you excited to be designing the game?

No high selling ambitions. No selling ambitions in fact. I intend on this all being free (to anyone interested in it that is). This is something fun for me to do. I will be spending money on it here and there where I feel it would benefit from it. One example being art. I am a graphic designer (web designer/developer really) - that's my full time job so there is much I can do, but I can not produce the quality of artwork I would like to see included. However, these costs are simply the costs of my hobby as I see it, and not something I intend on passing on to anyone else. If I get to the point where I have a "product" that is of high quality and more than a few people seem to enjoy, I would consider adding donations as an option - but ONLY as an option.


Thanks again for the feedback guys - I really appreciate it and it helps me a lot - I'm flyin solo on this one so all the help I can get is great!

[Zachary_Wolf]

Hey Weem!

I like what you've got going so far. I can tell you're a designer because the ability tree looks top notch. I'm impressed.

As far as your mechanics, I like it so far. My question is, you talk about Abilities, but not Skills. How do skills come into play and influence the character's ability to accomplish a task? Using your example, your character has one remaining point in his Body tree. So let's say he puts that point into Swordmanship. Is there a pre-requisite for purchasing that skill? For example, does the character need to posess the SwordPlay ability?

So now the character has rank 1 in Swordsmanship, The Energy Ability, the SwordPlay Ability, and the Angled Slice Ability. How does the rank 1 in Swordsmanship affect the player's chances of scoring a hit? Does the player add the rank of the appropriate skill to the skill roll? So this particular character, would he roll 3D6 and add 1?

So now we basically have a static statistical chart that determines whether or not you can strike your enemy. Where does the enemy's skill at dodging come into play? Is it a roll that have they make? Or will it be a set number? For example, perhaps your enemy target has a Dodge Ratining of 3 - so whoever is attacking him gets an automatic -3 to their roll, giving the attacker a lower chance to hit.

Maybe I'm getting too far ahead, but these are things that pop into my head when reading your examples.

My only other concern is your choice of dice for the roll. 3D6 is kinda played out - GURPS uses 3D6 for their rolls if I'm not mistaken, as well as the good ol' D&D schtick of 3D6 for your Ability Scores. Not that there's anything really wrong with it, but in the interest of being original, you could use, say, D8's or D10's.

[weem]

I like what you've got going so far. I can tell you're a designer because the ability tree looks top notch. I'm impressed.

Thank you, much appreciated

My question is, you talk about Abilities, but not Skills. How do skills come into play and influence the character's ability to accomplish a task? Using your example, your character has one remaining point in his Body tree. So let's say he puts that point into Swordmanship. Is there a pre-requisite for purchasing that skill? For example, does the character need to posess the SwordPlay ability?

To clarify, in my example there is no Swordsmanship ability or skills so I'm not sure how to give you an answer without knowing a bit more about where you were imagining this ability/skill going. With that said, I do understand (I think) your question. Skills would be in the same tables/ability trees much like you see attributes in there now (those being Quickness, Balance, etc). So, for example, you may see a skill in there called "Horse Riding". This is a non combat related skill as it stands. It is a skill that allows you a certain bonus for control while riding a horse. Well, further down the ability tree, you may see a combat ability such as "Mounted Plunge" which may be described as "A forceful downward melee thrust +2 damage" with an activation of 16 and a pre-requisite of the combat "Angled Slice" AND the standard skill "Horse Riding".

You see where I am going? I would incorporate skills into combat abilities where they make sense. That's not to say all skills would eventually work their way into a combat ability (or spell) as a pre-requisite, but it gives you an idea of how they can interact. I hope that answers the question.

So now the character has rank 1 in Swordsmanship, The Energy Ability, the SwordPlay Ability, and the Angled Slice Ability. How does the rank 1 in Swordsmanship affect the player's chances of scoring a hit? Does the player add the rank of the appropriate skill to the skill roll? So this particular character, would he roll 3D6 and add 1?

I neglected to remove the rank indicator from the "Blunt Offensive I" ability (basically forgot to remove the "I" so that it would simply read "Blunt Offensive") as I decided not to go the route of having ranks in each ability (at least for now). So I'm assuming that is what leads you to believe there will be an ability to purchase multiple ranks in one ability. That's not final and I may decide to go back to that idea, but for now it's not the way I'm looking to go and so your question is hard to answer. With that said, if I were going to allow for multiple ranks in an ability to be purchased (as I was considering previously) the benefits of doing so (for the player) would be 1) in increasing the power of the ability (more damage for example, or perhaps lowering the activation number, thus allowing it to come up more frequently) or 2) that an ability further down the line may require X number of ranks in an ability. In fact, as I write this, if I go back to this method of allowing purchases of multiple ranks in some abilities, it resolves a side issue I have been struggling with tonight - so thanks for making me think about this

So now we basically have a static statistical chart that determines whether or not you can strike your enemy. Where does the enemy's skill at dodging come into play? Is it a roll that have they make? Or will it be a set number? For example, perhaps your enemy target has a Dodge Ratining of 3 - so whoever is attacking him gets an automatic -3 to their roll, giving the attacker a lower chance to hit.

Skill in dodging, parrying, etc is reflected in DEFENSIVE combat abilities (one of which you can see on the ability tree called simply "Parry"). As described in the combat section, it's activation number must reflect the result rolled by the attacker... so, I swing at you rolling a 13. This would be a hit which applies X damage to you. Plus, I activate my ability "Angled Slice" (since it has an activation number of 13) and apply one more damage, for a total of X+1 now. THEN, since I rolled a 13, you as the defender can activate the Parry ability (since it had an activation of 13 as well) and reduce damage taken to you by one.

Of course things such as parry and dodging have a lot to do with your physical agility, etc so you can expect those kinds of abilities to also include (in some cases) an attribute pre-requisite (for example, Balance or, in the case of having ranks being able to be purchased, Balance II, etc).

Working offensive and defensive combat in this way, I can avoid (so far) applying modifiers to the attack roll which I would like to avoid entirely (though I'm not sure it will be possible). If I could, I want you to simply roll and know if you hit someone else - no modifier to the roll. Now will someone's defensive ability completely negate your damage, or reduce it? possibly yes, and this has the same effect as, say, lowering the attack modifier resulting in a miss.

Maybe I'm getting too far ahead, but these are things that pop into my head when reading your examples.

Oh by all means get ahead, get way ahead - I love the questions because they get me thinking as well

My only other concern is your choice of dice for the roll. 3D6 is kinda played out - GURPS uses 3D6 for their rolls if I'm not mistaken, as well as the good ol' D&D schtick of 3D6 for your Ability Scores. Not that there's anything really wrong with it, but in the interest of being original, you could use, say, D8's or D10's.

Yea, that's a tough one - and really, there is nothing original to be done with dice any more, so it wasn't really a concern. The 3d6 model provides a nice bell curve with plenty of potential outcomes - but not too many. It's easily managed without feeling confined. I did a lot of statistical research looking for various ways to manage the dice in a new way, but I wasn't happy with them. I am however happy that despite using the commonly used grouping of 3d6, I think I am adding something new via the activation numbers.

Thanks so much for the feedback Zach, I really appreciate it - got me thinking here and woke me up a bit (yes, I was beginning to doze off - not much sleep recently )

[Zachary_Wolf]

To clarify, in my example there is no Swordsmanship ability or skills so I'm not sure how to give you an answer without knowing a bit more about where you were imagining this ability/skill going. With that said, I do understand (I think) your question. Skills would be in the same tables/ability trees much like you see attributes in there now (those being Quickness, Balance, etc).

Sorry. For the sake of discussion I just basically made up the Swordsmanship skill to give us something to work with. So basically, a character's combat ability is not measured through a statistical score, but an accumulation of different combat abilities that he/she can employ? And Skills function somewhat like "non-weapon profficiencies", or any type of task that isn't directly related to combat?

If this is the case, how does a veteren fencer have an advantage against a novice? Essentially, because your combat scale is fixed, and there are no modifiers to the attack roll, the novice has the same chance of hitting his opponent as the veteren. Granted, the veteren's strike will be far more effective, because he would have more combat abilities and therefore a better chance that his roll will activate one. But statistically the veteren and the novice have the same chance of actually landing a blow. Is this intended?

So, for example, you may see a skill in there called "Horse Riding". This is a non combat related skill as it stands. It is a skill that allows you a certain bonus for control while riding a horse. Well, further down the ability tree, you may see a combat ability such as "Mounted Plunge" which may be described as "A forceful downward melee thrust +2 damage" with an activation of 16 and a pre-requisite of the combat "Angled Slice" AND the standard skill "Horse Riding".

If I understand correctly, in combat there will be no modifiers - just a fixed scale to determine whether or not your attack succeeds, and a certain level of effectiveness based off of your roll and any activated abilities. Is this correct?

You say that the Horse Riding skill will grant you a certain bonus for control while riding a horse. Does this mean non-combat related rolls will have modifiers? Or do you have a different system for handling task/resolution for non-combat actions?

I neglected to remove the rank indicator from the "Blunt Offensive I" ability (basically forgot to remove the "I" so that it would simply read "Blunt Offensive") as I decided not to go the route of having ranks in each ability (at least for now). So I'm assuming that is what leads you to believe there will be an ability to purchase multiple ranks in one ability. That's not final and I may decide to go back to that idea, but for now it's not the way I'm looking to go and so your question is hard to answer. With that said, if I were going to allow for multiple ranks in an ability to be purchased (as I was considering previously) the benefits of doing so (for the player) would be 1) in increasing the power of the ability (more damage for example, or perhaps lowering the activation number, thus allowing it to come up more frequently) or 2) that an ability further down the line may require X number of ranks in an ability. In fact, as I write this, if I go back to this method of allowing purchases of multiple ranks in some abilities, it resolves a side issue I have been struggling with tonight - so thanks for making me think about this

Actually, my assumption that you could purchase multiple ranks in an ability was unfounded; it was simply an assumption for the sake of argument again. But I understand where you're coming from now, and from the looks of it, you've reconsidered having ranks for certain abilities. Personally, I think you should have different ranks for abilities, but as you've indicated, the rank simply amplifies the effect, and doesn't act as a modifier.

Skill in dodging, parrying, etc is reflected in DEFENSIVE combat abilities (one of which you can see on the ability tree called simply "Parry"). As described in the combat section, it's activation number must reflect the result rolled by the attacker... so, I swing at you rolling a 13. This would be a hit which applies X damage to you. Plus, I activate my ability "Angled Slice" (since it has an activation number of 13) and apply one more damage, for a total of X+1 now. THEN, since I rolled a 13, you as the defender can activate the Parry ability (since it had an activation of 13 as well) and reduce damage taken to you by one.

So, let's take a character that has an uncanny ability to defend himself - this uncanny ability would be reflected by the character having lots of defensive combat abilities, therefore giving him a good chance that one will be activated by the attacker. Regardless of the fact that the character has lots of defensive abilities, it would seem that he's just as easy to hit as anyone else? Will there be defensive abilities that allow the defender to completely dodge an attack? Or would that be reflected by the defender negating more damage then what was done by the attacker, and only that way?

Furthermore, is there a limit to how often combat abilities can be activated? Maybe one per round or something? How does wearing armor effect the damage of your attacker? Realistically speaking, wearing a heavy suit of plate mail probably makes it easier for attackers to hit you, since you're not as agile, however the protection of the armor itself may prevent you from taking any damage. How do these ideas come into play?

Yea, that's a tough one - and really, there is nothing original to be done with dice any more, so it wasn't really a concern. The 3d6 model provides a nice bell curve with plenty of potential outcomes - but not too many. It's easily managed without feeling confined. I did a lot of statistical research looking for various ways to manage the dice in a new way, but I wasn't happy with them. I am however happy that despite using the commonly used grouping of 3d6, I think I am adding something new via the activation numbers.

Good points. If that combination of dice works well with the system, I don't see any reason not to use it.

Here's another question:

You have Offensive abilities and Defensive abilities. As I see it now, the higher the Activation Number, the more powerful the ability. On my attack roll, I roll an 18. This is a critical hit, because it's the highest I can roll. It's difficult to roll an 18, so my combat ability that is activated by 18 is very powerful (right?). So now I'm doing the most amount of damage my character can possibly do. On the defense side, is your best defensive ability also tied to 18? If this is the case, anytime I roll an 18 to hit you, the best possible offensive manuever, the defender is also putting up his best possible defense.

This may be a problem, as it seems that the more success the attacker has, the more success the defender has as well. Or will the defensive abilities be flip-flopped? Meaning, the best defensive abilities will be activated at lower numbers? This cannot work either, because this gives the defenders a better chance of using their more effective defensive abilities.

Do you see what I'm getting at? Perhaps the defender should have his own roll of 3D6, so that his level of success in defending is not directly tied to the offenders success in his attack.

Does that make any sense?

[Landon Winkler]

Hiya,

The system is definitely easy enough to understand with the visual examples there. Trying to explain it verbally might get a bit muddled.

I like the way the damage scales, using a single set number determined by the quality of the hit. This interacts well with the target number system.

My concern with the triggered abilities is that they should probably be larger in effect. With the chances of activation so narrow, it seems like a +1 isn't really the payoff you want. Obviously, the numbers aren't final, but it feels like the abilities should be "mini critical hits" if they're triggered rarely.

Using a single attack roll to trigger both offensive and defensive abilities seems like a good trick to me. If I were making a character, I'd probably make two little charts for myself with numbers and abilities for offense and defense.

On that note, it seems like you can only have an offensive or defensive ability trigger of a number, but not both. Is there any particular reason why that is? It seems more intuitive to me to have one of each.

One last thought on the ranged weapon question. Just a bit of brainstorming: what if you redefined the lowest numbers to "glancing blow" doing really low damage and probably never triggering offensive abilities (but having dodges and other defensive abilities that can totally negate them when triggered.) Then you can have ranged  weapons just have a glancing blow damage of "miss."

Cheers!
Landon

[weem]

I probably should have been working instead of typing this out... but oh well...


@Zach

So basically, a character's combat ability is not measured through a statistical score, but an accumulation of different combat abilities that he/she can employ? And Skills function somewhat like "non-weapon profficiencies", or any type of task that isn't directly related to combat?

Exactly right

If this is the case, how does a veteren fencer have an advantage against a novice? Essentially, because your combat scale is fixed, and there are no modifiers to the attack roll, the novice has the same chance of hitting his opponent as the veteren. Granted, the veteren's strike will be far more effective, because he would have more combat abilities and therefore a better chance that his roll will activate one. But statistically the veteren and the novice have the same chance of actually landing a blow. Is this intended?

That is intended at this point yes. Keep in mind however that (iirc) I did mention that I am not ruling a bonus modifier out via abilities further down the ability tree to represent great skill in various abilities. In this case, covering what you are talking about - the difference between someone not skilled vs someone greatly skilled. It could be that I will need to simply go with modifiers at all stages based on some other factors, but I want to keep them low. For example, a +4 modifier might be reserved for the very best.

You say that the Horse Riding skill will grant you a certain bonus for control while riding a horse. Does this mean non-combat related rolls will have modifiers? Or do you have a different system for handling task/resolution for non-combat actions?

Potentially they will yes, I have not ruled out modifiers in non-combat related rolls (and in fact assumed they would indeed play a part in some way)

Personally, I think you should have different ranks for abilities, but as you've indicated, the rank simply amplifies the effect, and doesn't act as a modifier.

Yea, but that's the thing, if I end up going the modifier route, then I would indeed apply ranks to the abilities as there is that added advantage to consider. So, this is not out of the question in other words.

So, let's take a character that has an uncanny ability to defend himself - this uncanny ability would be reflected by the character having lots of defensive combat abilities, therefore giving him a good chance that one will be activated by the attacker. Regardless of the fact that the character has lots of defensive abilities, it would seem that he's just as easy to hit as anyone else? Will there be defensive abilities that allow the defender to completely dodge an attack? Or would that be reflected by the defender negating more damage then what was done by the attacker, and only that way?

One thing to consider here is that I see narration of the combat coming after the roll and ability selection (on both sides) have been completed. So, for example, I roll a hit on you plus some damage from an ability, and then you choose a defensive ability that in fat causes me to do no damage. Well, this can be explained by the GM as a miss - which in effect is the same as having a modifier that may have lead to a miss anyway. So it was never a hit in the first place. Sure, the initial roll was a hit, but what matters is the outcome at the end, which was a miss.

Furthermore, is there a limit to how often combat abilities can be activated? Maybe one per round or something?

On your turn for combat, you can activate one for your attack roll - when you are being attacked, you can activate on on their roll - back and forth, etc. Being attacked by multiple people can you activate multiple defensive abilities before your next turn - I was imagining that no, you could choose one.

So basically in a long fight you will be alternating - one offensive, one defensive, one offensive, one defensive, etc.

However, I was thinking there would be abilities that could be purchased allowing for more than one. Allowing you to, for example, us a combat ability - then, if you were attackked 3 times by three different people, instead of only being able to choose one to apply a defensive ability to, perhaps you could choose two. And in these cases you could wait until their rolls to decide. EX: Attacker 1 swing at you with a 14... you check and have 1 defensive ability activated on a 15, but it's not one you want to use here, so you wait. Attacker 2 swings with a 16, which is an activation number for an ability you liked better (fortunately for you) so you use it, etc. I hope that's clear.

How does wearing armor effect the damage of your attacker? Realistically speaking, wearing a heavy suit of plate mail probably makes it easier for attackers to hit you, since you're not as agile, however the protection of the armor itself may prevent you from taking any damage. How do these ideas come into play?

Short answer is I am still working on this I'm looking at having armor absorb damage - I don't like the idea of it applying a miss modifier.

You have Offensive abilities and Defensive abilities. As I see it now, the higher the Activation Number, the more powerful the ability. On my attack roll, I roll an 18. This is a critical hit, because it's the highest I can roll. It's difficult to roll an 18, so my combat ability that is activated by 18 is very powerful (right?). So now I'm doing the most amount of damage my character can possibly do. On the defense side, is your best defensive ability also tied to 18? If this is the case, anytime I roll an 18 to hit you, the best possible offensive manuever, the defender is also putting up his best possible defense.

This may be a problem, as it seems that the more success the attacker has, the more success the defender has as well. Or will the defensive abilities be flip-flopped? Meaning, the best defensive abilities will be activated at lower numbers? This cannot work either, because this gives the defenders a better chance of using their more effective defensive abilities.

This is a very good point. However, and I didn't mention it in this thread but I did in another, Activation Numbers should not be considered to be on the same level as the hit/miss chart. So what I mean is that while in the initial attack, the higher number is better (for example an 18) when it comes to an activation number, the activation number is at it's best when it is lower (because it is more frequently rolled). Higher activation numbers do not necissarily mean better abilities. In some cases it will mean this, in other cases it won't.

Why? Imagine that in this game you are considered a very powerful character. This means, generally speaking, that your attacks will more likely than not be quite devistating. In order for "more often than not" we must be talking about lower activation numbers (because they occur more frequently). A powerful character should not be doing extreme damage only rarely (on 17 or 18 actvations) but moreso in the 14-15 ranges. To reflect the power of the character you start bringing more damaging effects down into the lower activation numbers.

There is still a lot of work to do in this area and things can change - this simply reflects my current view, and please feel free to poke holes in this if/shen you see some opportunities

Thanks again Zach!

-----------------

@Landon

My concern with the triggered abilities is that they should probably be larger in effect. With the chances of activation so narrow, it seems like a +1 isn't really the payoff you want. Obviously, the numbers aren't final, but it feels like the abilities should be "mini critical hits" if they're triggered rarely.

As you noted, these aren't final, but I do agree. I kept the numbers low for simplification as well as the fact that I have not come to a conclusion on how to manage "hit points" and was considering a system where these (hit points) would generally be pretty low and only gradually (slowly) increase over time. Once I figure out how I want to handle that, those kinds of damage modifiers will be much more accurate (and probably more valueable).

Using a single attack roll to trigger both offensive and defensive abilities seems like a good trick to me. If I were making a character, I'd probably make two little charts for myself with numbers and abilities for offense and defense.

Yea exactly - I'm considering a few different ways of working this into a character sheet including giving a few different options (of character sheets) to choose from.

On that note, it seems like you can only have an offensive or defensive ability trigger of a number, but not both. Is there any particular reason why that is? It seems more intuitive to me to have one of each.

I liked the strateogy involved with deciding how offensively/defensively focused you were going to be in a particular fight. It seemed like a "realistic" way to handle it I suppose. I can see the point of allowing you to choose 1 of each for each activation number (should you have them) - I'm still open to allowing both.

One last thought on the ranged weapon question. Just a bit of brainstorming: what if you redefined the lowest numbers to "glancing blow" doing really low damage and probably never triggering offensive abilities (but having dodges and other defensive abilities that can totally negate them when triggered.) Then you can have ranged  weapons just have a glancing blow damage of "miss."

That's an interesting idea. I definately have some work to do with the ranged aspect. I have a few ideas being tossed around and I'll keep this one in mind as well.

Thanks Landon!