Page 9 of 10

Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 9:53 am
by Rigon
adaen wrote:
You might consider allowing the casting of all 0-level spells for free. I don't find that it unduly impacts on the power-level and allows the spell-casters to be somewhat useful once their main spells are gone.

I thought about that, but I the way I figure it, magic is a limited renewable rescourse. The caster still has to use good judgment in deciding which 0 level spells to cast.

R-
_________________
Rigon o' the Lakelands, Baron of The Castles & Crusades Society
The Book of the Mind

Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 10:27 am
by adaen
If part of your preferences in RPG's is the skillful allotment of resources, then I would go your route (limited 0-levels w/o prior prep).

From my perspective, there are other games that cater to my needs for resource management (actually D&D 3E is quite good for this). For most games, I prefer to remove as much from book-keeping type resource management. I don't like to keep track of the following:

1) Arrows

2) explicit amount of money

3) number of hp

4) mundane equipment (do I have chalk, or string, etc.)

I'd rather have a "Wealth" trait that I roll vs. to see if I can afford something or roll vs. a "Equipped" to see if my character remembered the rope. Explicit resource management does not facilitate a Heroic, High Adventure feel to games.....that is not to say that games that involve a lot of explicit resource management cannot be (feel) Heroic, they just do so in spite of this resource management (not because of it).

I'd be very interested in thoughts on this....Maybe I should start a new thread?

~AoB
_________________
~Adaen of Bridgewater, www.highadventuregames.com

Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 2:51 am
by Rigon
To go with your arguement, why keep track of memorized spells, levels, or xp. It's all just more bookkeeping.
I just think that spellcasters should have a limited number of spells they can cast per day as I think casting spells is a tiring process and they only have so much "spell energy" to use. Granted as a spellcaster gains levels, they become able to handle more "spell energy."

R-
_________________
Rigon o' the Lakelands, Baron of The Castles & Crusades Society
The Book of the Mind

Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 4:24 am
by jaguar451
Misc quick thoughts:

* I like that "fighting" classes get more attacks per round, although I tend to be of the school that the various fighting classes should be relatively close in combat ability and should be differentiated by other abilities (fighter needs some other abilities, IMO.) So, not sure I like the upgrade to weapon specialization for the fighter

* Ditch Medicine seems overpowered -- while I like the idea of natural healing, I'd think about specifying time needed (10 minutes? 30?) and a level based progression to healing ability. I think I've seen other systems where DMG is converted to subdual DMG, which is an interesting idea as well, IMO.

* Bards don't seem to get enough to make up for what they loose. And 'Jack of all Trades' does seem to do that -- few abilities but with the same proficiency as the core class for that ability. Maybe more abilities but at lower bonus' per class level (1/2 class level or CL - ? or ....)

Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 10:09 am
by Rigon
jaguar451 wrote:
Misc quick thoughts:

* I like that "fighting" classes get more attacks per round, although I tend to be of the school that the various fighting classes should be relatively close in combat ability and should be differentiated by other abilities (fighter needs some other abilities, IMO.) So, not sure I like the upgrade to weapon specialization for the fighter

The fighter still has the best BtH of the bunch, which is nothing to snicker at. But, I've also been toying with raising their HD to a d12. They are, after all, supposed to be the best warrior class.
Quote:
* Ditch Medicine seems overpowered -- while I like the idea of natural healing, I'd think about specifying time needed (10 minutes? 30?) and a level based progression to healing ability. I think I've seen other systems where DMG is converted to subdual DMG, which is an interesting idea as well, IMO.

I don't know about overpowered. A d6/individual/day is more of a stop gap for low level parties, as the ability decreases in usefulness as the party increases in level. Especially when compared to a Cure Serious Wounds spell (3d8).
Quote:
* Bards don't seem to get enough to make up for what they loose. And 'Jack of all Trades' does seem to do that -- few abilities but with the same proficiency as the core class for that ability. Maybe more abilities but at lower bonus' per class level (1/2 class level or CL - ? or ....)

I also added the Listen and Slieght of Hand (Pick Pocket) abilities as well, so that helps out a little. Even with the lower HD and BtH, the bard is still an effective warrior type, but by adding the Slieght of Hand, Listen, and Jack of All Trades abilities, I think the bard has some added versitility.

I was thinking of maybe increasing the rate at which the bard gains Jack of All Trade abilities. When I first came up wih the ability, I had thought the bard should gain it every 3rd level. But that seemed to quick to me. Thoughts on that?

Besides, my concept of a bard isn't the Norse skald, it's more like Gurney Halek from Dune. He's the guy the king trusts to teach his heirs what they need to know (history, politics, social skills, culture, and weapons skill) to become good kings.

R-
_________________
Rigon o' the Lakelands, Baron of The Castles & Crusades Society
The Book of the Mind

Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 10:26 am
by adaen
Rigon wrote:
To go with your arguement, why keep track of memorized spells, levels, or xp. It's all just more bookkeeping. R-

There are viable ways to make those things go away too. That being said, your point that the level of book-keeping that is appropriate or desirable is very much a matter of taste. My preference is to focus less on those things. Traditional D&D (and C&C) has a certain amount of focus on the resource management side of things. I just like a bit less for some games (and a lot more for others, but then I'm weird and inconsistent in my tastes).
Rigon wrote:
I just think that spellcasters should have a limited number of spells they can cast per day as I think casting spells is a tiring process and they only have so much "spell energy" to use. Granted as a spellcaster gains levels, they become able to handle more "spell energy."

R-


That is one way to look at it (and I do not wholly disagree). Another may be that spellcasters are inherently magical beings. Literature has examples of both ways of looking at it. I just think from a game perspective that it is nice for everyone to always have *something* that they can do....even if it is just a cantrip.
_________________
~Adaen of Bridgewater, www.highadventuregames.com

Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 2:09 pm
by Buttmonkey
I just had time to glance through it, but I saw a lot of things I like in your house rules document. I'm going to have to go over it in more detail later and steal the best parts.

Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 2:10 pm
by Buttmonkey
Oh, one thing I would probably change is to allow wizard/illusionist multiclassing. I get why you wouldn't want to allow fighter-barbarians, for example, but the wizard and illusionist classes seem complimentary.

Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 6:17 pm
by Rigon
Buttmonkey wrote:
I just had time to glance through it, but I saw a lot of things I like in your house rules document. I'm going to have to go over it in more detail later and steal the best parts.

Thanks. Feel free to take as much or as little as you want.

R-
_________________
Rigon o' the Lakelands, Baron of The Castles & Crusades Society
The Book of the Mind

Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 6:20 pm
by Rigon
Buttmonkey wrote:
Oh, one thing I would probably change is to allow wizard/illusionist multiclassing. I get why you wouldn't want to allow fighter-barbarians, for example, but the wizard and illusionist classes seem complimentary.

I did it mainly to better seperate the roles that each group plays in a party. Because, as you state, wizards and illusionist seem complimentary, so to does any warrior class seem complimentary to any other warrior class.

R-
_________________
Rigon o' the Lakelands, Baron of The Castles & Crusades Society
The Book of the Mind

Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 7:24 pm
by Rigon
I edited a couple of things:

1. Bard's Jack of All Trades: I increased the rate at which the bard gains a new ability. I went from the 2nd ability at 6th level and every 6 levels after to 2nd ability at 4th level and every 4 levels after. I did this to give the ability a little bit more usefulness.

2. Arcane Casting in Armor: I made the Int check the same for both Multi and Dual classed characters. I did this because it was stupid to have different ways to do this.

R-
_________________
Rigon o' the Lakelands, Baron of The Castles & Crusades Society
The Book of the Mind

Posted: Thu May 08, 2008 8:19 pm
by Matthew
So... is the Fighter's Extra Attack Ability stacking with Weapon Specialisation or not? [i.e. does a 7th Level Fighter get 2/1 attacks with his specialised weapon?]

With regards to Weapon Specialisation, you might consider making it go:

Levels 1-4 - +1 to hit, +1 to damage, 1 attack

Levels 5-8 - +2 to hit, +2 to damage, 3/2 attacks

Levels 9-12 - +3 to hit, +3 to damage, 2/1 attacks

Levels 13-16 - +4 to hit, +4 to damage, 5/2 attacks

Levels 17-20 - +5 to hit, +5 to damage, 3/1 attacks

...for a more even distribution of power (assuming that it doesn't stack with Extra Attacks.

Alternatively, you could make the bonus to hit and damage independent of the number of attacks, so that:

Levels 1-4 - +1 to hit, +1 to damage,

Levels 5-8 - +2 to hit, +2 to damage,

Levels 9-12 - +3 to hit, +3 to damage,

Levels 13-16 - +4 to hit, +4 to damage,

Levels 17-20 - +5 to hit, +5 to damage,

Levels 1-6 - 3/2 attacks

Levels 7-12 - 2/1 attacks

Levels 13-18 - 5/2 attacks

Levels 19+ - 3/1 attacks

Ranger's Ambush ability... interesting, but shouldn't he somehow mitigate the opponent's Surprise Roll. This mechanic is not actually benefitting his ambushing enemies, so much as his avoiding being ambushed, I think.
adaen wrote:
From my perspective, there are other games that cater to my needs for resource management (actually D&D 3E is quite good for this). For most games, I prefer to remove as much from book-keeping type resource management. I don't like to keep track of the following:

1) Arrows

2) explicit amount of money

3) number of hp

4) mundane equipment (do I have chalk, or string, etc.)

I can sympathise with that, and I used to do the same thing, but these days I actually enjoy tracking the details. That said, I quite often allow 0 Level Spells to be used 'whenever'. The Cure Minor Wound aspect caused a bit of trouble, but was eventually solved.
adaen wrote:
I'd be very interested in thoughts on this....Maybe I should start a new thread?

By all means; it is an interesting subject.
Rigon wrote:
The fighter still has the best BtH of the bunch, which is nothing to snicker at. But, I've also been toying with raising their HD to a d12. They are, after all, supposed to be the best warrior class.

I dunno, I alwaysfeel there should be 'somewhere to go' with Hit Dice. I can understand the desire, but I think of the Fighter as the 'standard', rather than the 'best'.
_________________
It is a joyful thing indeed to hold intimate converse with a man after ones own heart, chatting without reserve about things of interest or the fleeting topics of the world; but such, alas, are few and far between.

Yoshida Kenko (1283-1350)

Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 1:23 am
by Rigon
Matthew wrote:
So... is the Fighter's Extra Attack Ability stacking with Weapon Specialisation or not? [i.e. does a 7th Level Fighter get 2/1 attacks with his specialised weapon?]

No the 2 abilities can not be combined as the extra attack ability is only for non-specialized weapons. If you look at weapon specialization, you'll see that the fighter gets a faster and better attack progression than with extra attack.
Quote:
With regards to Weapon Specialisation, you might consider making it go:

Levels 1-4 - +1 to hit, +1 to damage, 1 attack

Levels 5-8 - +2 to hit, +2 to damage, 3/2 attacks

Levels 9-12 - +3 to hit, +3 to damage, 2/1 attacks

Levels 13-16 - +4 to hit, +4 to damage, 5/2 attacks

Levels 17-20 - +5 to hit, +5 to damage, 3/1 attacks

...for a more even distribution of power (assuming that it doesn't stack with Extra Attacks.

You could do it that way, but I combined the btb Weapon Specialization and fighter extra attack and sort of combined them and then added in 1/2 attacks. IE, a btb 10th level fighter gets 2 attacks per round. If you extrapolate that, he would get 3 attacks per round at 20th level. My version still only gets 2 attacks at 10th level and 3 attacks at 20th level, I just gave him a little bit of umph in those "between" levels (5th and 15th).
Quote:
Alternatively, you could make the bonus to hit and damage independent of the number of attacks, so that:

Levels 1-4 - +1 to hit, +1 to damage,

Levels 5-8 - +2 to hit, +2 to damage,

Levels 9-12 - +3 to hit, +3 to damage,

Levels 13-16 - +4 to hit, +4 to damage,

Levels 17-20 - +5 to hit, +5 to damage,

Levels 1-6 - 3/2 attacks

Levels 7-12 - 2/1 attacks

Levels 13-18 - 5/2 attacks

Levels 19+ - 3/1 attacks

For the extra attacks ability, I was going for a 2e-like progression for all warrior types. That's mainly why I did it that way.
Quote:
Ranger's Ambush ability... interesting, but shouldn't he somehow mitigate the opponent's Surprise Roll. This mechanic is not actually benefitting his ambushing enemies, so much as his avoiding being ambushed, I think.

I just called it Ambush because I couldn't think of anything else to call it. Plus it goes back to 1e when rangers were extremely difficult to surprise.
Quote:
I dunno, I always feel there should be 'somewhere to go' with Hit Dice. I can understand the desire, but I think of the Fighter as the 'standard', rather than the 'best'.

Here I have to disagree with you, while the fighter is a "standard" class, he is also the "best" at a fall down, drag out, beat down. Therefore, I feel the fighter is the best at combat.

R-
_________________
Rigon o' the Lakelands, Baron of The Castles & Crusades Society
The Book of the Mind

Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 4:13 am
by jaguar451
Matthew wrote:
I dunno, I alwaysfeel there should be 'somewhere to go' with Hit Dice. I can understand the desire, but I think of the Fighter as the 'standard', rather than the 'best'.

Ditto. Although I think we're in the minority....

Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 4:24 am
by jaguar451
Rigon wrote:
I edited a couple of things:

1. Bard's Jack of All Trades: I increased the rate at which the bard gains a new ability. I went from the 2nd ability at 6th level and every 6 levels after to 2nd ability at 4th level and every 4 levels after. I did this to give the ability a little bit more usefulness.

Does make it more useful. Although my prejudice for a 'Jack of all trades' is that they aren't as good as the 'specialist' -- -1, -2, 1/2 lvl, ....

Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 11:01 am
by Rigon
jaguar451 wrote:
Does make it more useful. Although my prejudice for a 'Jack of all trades' is that they aren't as good as the 'specialist' -- -1, -2, 1/2 lvl, ....

I don't know; I feel that if you have a skill, wether from a racial ability or a class ability, you have a skill. And for simplicity, it is easier to track lavel than remember a formula such as level - 1.

R-
_________________
Rigon o' the Lakelands, Baron of The Castles & Crusades Society
The Book of the Mind

Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 12:05 pm
by Harry Joy
Rigon wrote:
1. Bard's Jack of All Trades: I increased the rate at which the bard gains a new ability. I went from the 2nd ability at 6th level and every 6 levels after to 2nd ability at 4th level and every 4 levels after. I did this to give the ability a little bit more usefulness.

I still don't think you've made up for what you took away, and frankly, I think you need to explain the nerf in the first place.

If I were in your game, and I wanted to play a Bard, I would argue all day for the original. I've played one, and it was one of the most enjoyable characters I've ever had. Fun in every way.

Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 2:46 pm
by Rigon
Harry Joy wrote:
I still don't think you've made up for what you took away, and frankly, I think you need to explain the nerf in the first place.

From an earlier post in this thread: "Besides, my concept of a bard isn't the Norse skald, it's more like Gurney Halek from Dune. He's the guy the king trusts to teach his heirs what they need to know (history, politics, social skills, culture, and weapons skill) to become good kings."
Quote:
If I were in your game, and I wanted to play a Bard, I would argue all day for the original. I've played one, and it was one of the most enjoyable characters I've ever had. Fun in every way.

I agree with you. They are enjoyable to play. I'm playing a bard in Tree's Monday Night Skype game and I like the class btb fine, but the concept doesn't fit with my way of thinking. Just like I don't have a barbarian class in my campaigns. Barbarian is a cultural concept, not a class concept. That's why I changed the name to berserker, still basically the barbarian, but without the cultural implications of the name.

R-
_________________
Rigon o' the Lakelands, Baron of The Castles & Crusades Society
The Book of the Mind

Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 11:04 pm
by Harry Joy
Rigon wrote:
Besides, my concept of a bard isn't the Norse skald, it's more like Gurney Halek from Dune. He's the guy the king trusts to teach his heirs what they need to know (history, politics, social skills, culture, and weapons skill) to become good kings.

OK, thanks for pointing that out. I'd missed it before. But Gurney Halek is considered a fine warrior, is he not? I've not read the book in twenty years, but I seem to recall that he was more of a Rogue/Bard, if I were casting him as an NPC. But, the character you describe seems more like an NPC, more than even the Gurney I remember.

Posted: Sat Aug 16, 2008 8:36 pm
by Rigon
I added Serleran's take on Darkvision. Thanks Serl.

R-
_________________
Rigon o' the Lakelands, Baron of The Castles & Crusades Society
The Book of the Mind

Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2008 6:46 pm
by Luther
You asked for opinions, so here you go. I hope your eyes don't fall out of your head before you get to the bottom...
Rigon wrote:
Attributes

Attribute Scores: Roll 4d6 7 times dropping lowest die roll each time, drop lowest score and arrange as desired.

Class Primes: There are no class specific primes.

Challenge Base: The CB for prime attributes is 10 and the CB for secondary attributes is 15.

While the Attribute scores modification is fine (although I prefer just six rolls, myself) having no primes for classes seems to take something away from the specificity and flavour of the archetypes for me. It's not like you can't create a dextrous fighter or strong rogue with the current system, and the idea of a fighter who is unathletic, a rogue who is not very agile or a wizard who isn't very bright might be great for a comedy game (Rincewind comes to mind) but seems to go against the heroic ideal of these classes.

And I like my base challenge levels where they are, giving a roughly 50% chance to those who are competent in them and a snowball's chance to those who aren't. It really accentuates the difference between two characters in the same class with different secondary (or tertiary) primes.
Quote:
Classes

Warrior Group

Fighter:

Weapon Specialization: At first level the fighter selects one weapon to become an expert with. The fighter gains the following benefits:

1st level: +1 to attack and damage rolls; 1 attack per round

5th level: +2 to attack and damage rolls; 3 attacks per 2 rounds

10th level: +3 to attack and damage rolls; 2 attacks per round

15th level: +4 to attack and damage rolls; 5 attacks per 2 rounds

20th level: +5 to attack and damage rolls; 3 attacks per round

Cleave: Beginning at 3rd level, if the fighter slays his opponent, he may make an immediate attack against another nearby (5 foot step) opponent. Cleave replaces Combat Dominance.

Extra Attacks: As the fighter gains in levels, he becomes more proficient with other weapons and gains additional attacks each round as follows:

1st level: 1 attack per round

7th level: 3 attacks per 2 rounds

13th level: 2 attacks per round

I quite like the Cleave idea as a replacement for Combat Dominance. It does the job of killing off low hp hordes without worrying about HD, levels, etc. I would change it to a SEIGE Check, however, with an increasing CL per extra attack to keep it sensible, especially at lower levels. For example:

CLEAVE/COMBAT DOMINANCE mk.2: If you kill your opponent, you may atack another opponent within 5' if you make a SEIGE check against STR at a CL of +6 for every extra attack after the first (so a STR Prime Fighter would have a CL of 12, 18, 24, etc.)

In addition, I'd still call it Combat Dominance (Cleave has a particular image and I would rather think of it as a frenzy of blows than a circular sweep) and I'd let fighters have it at level 1.

All the extra attacks leave me cold, however, as they are too complex. If you're going to give them extra attacks, make it one every 4 levels and have done with it, but personally, I think that Cleave/Combat Dominance mk.2 does the job fine on its own and using it in conjunction with extra attacks turns the fighter into a friggin' Quisenart, especially if he's using a great weapon.
Quote:
Ranger:

Ambush: The ranger has the ability to detect and set ambushes when in the wild. The ranger adds his level to any surprise roll.

Ditch Medicine: The ranger is able to use his knowledge of herbs and plants to make effective poultices. The ranger is able to heal 1d6 hit points of damage per individual per day.

Extra Attacks: The ranger gains extra attacks as the fighter ability.

Berserker (Barbarian):

Alignment: Since the berserker taps into his wild, chaotic nature, he can only be of Chaotic alignment.

Primal Fury: Fatigue lasts for 4 hours minus Con mod.

Extra Attacks: The berserker gains extra attacks as the fighter ability.

Knight:

Alignment: Since the knight must follow a strict code of conduct, all knights must be of Lawful alignment.

Extra Attacks: The knight gains extra attacks as the fighter ability.

Paladin:

Extra Attacks: The paladin gains extra attacks as the fighter ability.

Too many extra attack powers infringing upon the Fighter's niche. Give Cleave/Combat Dominance mk.2 to Barbarians, but if you want to give extra attacks to the Paladin and Knight, do it at twice the levels of the fighter (if at all).

I think ideally, give the Cleave/Combat Dominance mk.2 to the fighter without any extra attacks and then you can give the other fighterly characters extra attacks at, say, every 10 levels.

In the end, the fighter becomes the main warrior, with a better BtH, the ability to mow down lesser creatures and a lot of leeway when using the SEIGE system to do warrior skills (spotting ambushes, maintaining weapons and armour, etc.) at full level. The Barbarian/Berzerker can also mow down lesser creatures, but has a worse BtH and doesn't get to add his level to quite the number of situations a fighter might. The others get an extra attack at 10 and 20, but other than that are more leader types than fighter types and have their own abilities to compensate.

Finally, I think the Ditch Medicine ability is unnecessary as a special ability, as it can easily be duplicated in a standard SEIGE roll as something that 'rangers' do in much the same way as a fighter 'knows' how to maintain his weapons and a person who grew up on a river 'knows' how to swim. The brilliance of the SEIGE engine is that you can cover all of these things without having to resort to endless lists of abilities, skills, feats, etc.
Quote:
Rogue Group

Thief (Rogue):

Armor Allowed: Add studded leather and chain shirt to the list of allowed armors for the thief.

Assassin:

Base to Hit: Increase the assassins BtH to that of the cleric.

Armor Allowed: Add studded leather and chain shirt to the list of allowed armors for the assassin.

While studded leather is fine, I think chainmail is too noisy. And it looks like you're trying to turn the Assassin into a ninja, which would be a different class to me. I see the C&C assassin as an infiltrator, poisoner and backstabber not a sword weilding death machine.
Quote:
Bard:

Hit Die: Lower the bards hit die to that of the cleric.

Base to Hit: Decrease the bards BtH to that of the cleric.

Sleight of Hand: The bard has the ability to use quick and nimble hand movements to hide or misdirect small items. This works just like the thief ability Pick Pockets.

Listen: Add the thief ability of Listen to the bards ability list.

Jack of All Trades: The bard learns a little bit of every thing in his travels. At 1st level the bard selects a class ability from the list below and adds it to his class ability list. The bard selects another ability at 4th level and every 4 levels thereafter (8th, 12th, etc). List of Abilities: Delay/Neutralize Poisons, Ditch Medicine, Ambush, Track, Survival, Climb, Hide, Move Silently, Open Locks, Traps, Disguise, Poisons, Nature Lore (edited)

Quite like giving them another ability from another class, but would only give them one per 4 levels, and it would start out at a level 1 ability when they picked it up and increase normally from there (so a class ability picked up by a level 12 bard would function as a level 8 ability when he reaches level 20). Everything else is superflous to this, so no need for Sleight of Hand and Listen as those are abilities he can pick up later.

And if you're trying to create a Gurney Halleck type character, remember that he not only taught history, ethics and so on, but was Paul's main combat master and Duke Leto's Warmaster, as well. So I think dropping their BtH down is going in the wrong direction for what you want to do.
Quote:
Mage Group

Wizard:

Minor Magic: The wizard does not need to prepare 0 level spells, but may still only cast the number of 0 level spells per day as indicated on the Wizard/Illusionist Spells per Day chart from the PHB.

Read Magic: The wizard may cast Read Magic for free a number of times per day equal to his Int bonus.

Maximum Spell Level: The wizard may only learn spell levels up to (rounded down) of his Int score (ex. Arodir has a 17 Int, so can only learn up to 8th level spells).

Illusionist:

Minor Magic: The illusionist gains minor magic as the wizard ability.

Read Magic: The illusionist gains Read Magic as the wizard ability.

Maximum Spell Level: The illusionist gains maximum spell level as the wizard ability.

I'm also of the 'Orison/Cantrips as basic abilities' school of thought. I think that having them as inexhaustable utility spells, taught as the basic building blocks of all magic, is the way to go. So many films and books show wizards doing things like Mage Hand (see Dragon Slayer for instance) without a word or much effort. And they really aren't that overpowering and do provide a wizard with something else to do besides hold up the proceedings as he rests 8 hours every two encounters.

I also include Read Magic in this group of infintely castable spells (actually, I treat it as a wizardly ability, not a spell) as well, having never seen the sense of a wizard unable to read magic unless he casts magic, which is silly as he never would have been able to read the first spell he ever learned in the first place in order to learn the others.

If you really feel that there should be a limit on Cantrips and Orisons., then make them infinite in use, but you have to make a SEIGE check to use them at a CL equal to the base + the number of times you've used Cantrips/Orisons that day. A first level wizard will shortly find himself exhausting his abilities if he relies on them too much.
Quote:
Priest Group

Cleric:

Spontaneous Cure/Harm: The cleric is able to swap out a prepared 1st thru 4th level spell and cure/harm 1d8 hit points per level swapped (ex. A prepared 2nd level spell can be swapped out to cure 2d8 hit points of damage).

Minor Magic: The cleric does not need to prepare 0 level spells, but may still only cast the number of 0 level spells per day as indicated on the Cleric/Druid Spells per Day chart from the PHB.

Maximum Spell Level: The cleric may only learn spell levels up to (rounded down) of his Wis score (ex. Kirdak has a 15 Wis, so can only learn up to 7th level spells).

Druid:

Ditch Medicine: The druid gains ditch medicine as the ranger ability.

Minor Magic: The druid gains minor magic as the cleric ability.

Maximum Spell Level: The druid gains maximum spell level as the cleric ability.

I like the swapping out of other spells for Cure spells. That was one of the better ideas from 3e. Consider it yoinked.

As for the rest, see my discussions on magic and Ditch Medicine above. By the way, if you really want to limit the minor cure spell, simply say that it can only be applied once per battle to a single character. You can't band-aid a band-aid.
Quote:
Monk:

Alignment: Since the monk is dedicated to harnessing the power of his mind and body, he can only be of Lawful alignment.

I like these alignment restrictions and the reasoning is sound. I actually enforce this sort of things in my games. Discipline is a Lawful trait, indeed.
Quote:
Starting Hit Points: All first level characters start with maximum hit points.

I think practically everyone does this.
Quote:
Multi-classing:

1. Any two to three classes from different groups may be chosen (baring alignment restrictions).

2. All EXP must be divided evenly between classes.

3. At 1st level, average hit points then add in Con modifier. At a level increase, roll appropriate HD, add in Con modifier, then divide by the number of classes (fractions with a 0.5 or higher round up).

4. Gain the best BtH bonus of all classes.

5. Use the least restrictive weapons list of all classes.

6. Use the most restrictive armor list of all classes (see Arcane Casting in Armor section).

7. Gain the abilities of all classes, but cannot combine abilities.

8. Use the average of all class levels to determine the bonus to saves (fractions round down).

Dual-classing

1. Must start with one class.

2. After gaining at least 2 levels in starting class, may switch to any class from another group (baring alignment restrictions). The character may not return to any previous classes.

3. Can gain only a total of 10 HD.

4. Gain the best BtH bonus of all classes.

5. Use the least restrictive weapons list of all classes.

6. Use the most restrictive armor list of all classes (see Arcane Casting in Armor section).

7. Gain the abilities of all classes, but cannot combine abilities

8. Use the highest class level to determine the bonus to saves.

I use the rules found in the Zagyg supplement, which are about the same.
Quote:
Arcane Casting in Armor

Multi/Dual-classed arcane caster can cast spells while wearing armor that is appropriate to their non-casting class.

1. The character makes an Int check versus a CC of the AC bonus of the armor worn + the spell level of the spell being cast.

2. Multi/Dual Classed characters add in (rounded down) of their non-casting class and all of their casting class to the check. (edited)

A good idea and it allows more versatility to create characters like Elric who often wear armour as well as cast spells. But I would also extend it to Bards in your syste, as they could possibly take Read Magic and then Cast Spells as two of their chosen abilities from another class.
Quote:
Races

Elf: Add the following ability to the elfs racial traits:

Magical Nature: Since elves are strongly connected to magic, a multi/dual classed elf adds a +2 to their Arcane Casting in Armor check.

Half-elf: A half-elf character has the following traits:

Common Half-elf Abilities: As listed in the PHB.

Human Lineage Abilities: As listed in the PHB.

Twilight Vision: As the Elf ability.

Magical Nature: Since half-elves have their elven parents connection to magic, a multi/dual classed half-elf adds a +1 to their Arcane Casting in Armor check.

Gnome: Add the following to the gnomes racial abilities:

Magical Nature: Since gnomes are strongly connected to illusionist magic, a multi/dual classed gnome illusionist gains a +1 to their Arcane Casting in Armor check.

Makes sense.
Quote:
Starting Age/Ht/Wt: Use the following chart to randomly determine your characters starting age, height, and weight.

Race Age Ht (m/f) Wt (m/f)

Dwarf 25+1d8 54/52+2d6 130/110+4d10

Elf 25+1d12 60/58+2d6 100/80+2d10

Gnome 20+1d10 38/36+2d4 70/50+2d10

Half-elf 18+1d8 60/58+2d8 115/105+4d10

Halfling 20+1d8 32/30+2d4 50/30+2d10

Half-orc 14+1d4 62/60+2d12 170/150+6d10

Human 16+1d6 60/58+2d10 130/110+6d10

I've always wondered why they didn't include something like this in the PHB, but I guess they assumed that everyone would have their own ideas about how long certain races lived based upon individual campaigns. Good one.
Quote:
Darksight: Darksight allows a creature to see in any level of darkness. The following list defines the ranges of Darksight for the various races:

Dwarf: 120 feet -- stays most time underground

Elf: 60 feet -- stays most time above ground, in moonlight

Gnome: 90 feet -- mixes surface with subterranean, but lives underground

Half-Elf: 30 feet -- half an elf

Halfling (if ability possessed): 30 feet -- mixes surface with subterranean, but lives above-ground (a 12+ on a d20)

Half-Orc: 30 feet -- half a monster

Human (if ability possessed): 10 feet -- minor visual acuity (a 20 on a d20)

Monster: 60 feet -- standard, but some have longer visual range

I've never had a problem with the RAW, and I think they explain the differences flavourfully, so I stick with those.
Quote:
Equipment

Starting Gold: All characters start play with of maximum gold for their class. Multiclass character use of the average maximum gold for their classes.

Another common house rule, because it sucks to be an unarmoured fighter armed with nothing but a short sword just because you rolled poorly.
Quote:
Shields: Bucklers and small shields impart a +1 to AC. Medium and large shields impart a +2 to AC.

I like the granularity and specificity of how many folks you can hold off with a shield in the RAW, but I added the use of Parrying with an off hand weapon. Basically, if you have a one-handed weapon in the off hand, you can use it to add +1 AC against a single attack if you don't use it to attack with that round.
Quote:
Magic

Spell Preparation Time: All spellcasting characters need 8 hours of rest plus 30 minutes per spell level of study/prayer time to prepare spells for the day.

I went the opposite route and made it 5 minutes + 1 minute per spell level after a 6 hour rest. The way you have it, a Level 1 Wizard with an 18 INT will spend 9 1/2 hours just to get back up to speed. Once they reach 3rd, they'll be spending half the day in preperation. It will take a high level wizard days to memorize all their spells! I don't know about you, but I want my character's adventuring, not sitting down with a book and whiling away the weekend.
Quote:
Combat

Initiative: Roll initiative by the book (1d10). The character with the higher Dex score goes first in the result of a tie. PCs always win ties versus monsters.

Good. The way I'd do it, but I'd add their DEX bonus to the initial roll as well.
Quote:
Natural 20: A natural 20 is considered an automatic hit and deals maximum damage.

Natural 1: A natural 1 is considered an automatic miss and the character losses their next turn.

Easy to use and gives even low level monsters a chance of hurting the heavily armourd good guys, so charging a mass of Kobolds still has an element of danger. I also use outnumbering bonuses to really make mobs dangerous.
Quote:
Grappling/Overbearing: Attackers always add in their BtH when attempting a grapple/overbear. Defenders always add in their HD/level to the standard AC of 15.

I prefer to leave the Level Bonus to dedicated fighters like the Fighter, Barbarian and Monk. They are trained or have learned to brawl by dint of their professions. Everyone else gets the standard. Basically, I treat it like a typical SEIGE check.

In summary, I think when it comes to House Rules, less is more. I find that the SEIGE Engine is so flexible and so driven by old school ethos that it is best to limit house ruling to changes in existing rules, and rarely add new ones. So IMO, your list needs trimming a bit. Try to limit your changes to the established rules (Combat Dominance, Spell Casting Cantrips, etc.) and SEIGE rule the rest on the fly. And for those changes you do make, make them as simple as possible. That's my 2p...

Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2008 7:38 pm
by Treebore
I like it. The only thing I wouldn't try is how long you have spell recovery be. Do you realize how many days a Archmage would have to spend recovering his spells if he used most of them?

I would go more Luthers route myself.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2008 11:12 pm
by Rigon
Luther wrote:
You asked for opinions, so here you go. I hope your eyes don't fall out of your head before you get to the bottom...

Thanks for commenting.
Luther wrote:
While the Attribute scores modification is fine (although I prefer just six rolls, myself) having no primes for classes seems to take something away from the specificity and flavour of the archetypes for me. It's not like you can't create a dextrous fighter or strong rogue with the current system, and the idea of a fighter who is unathletic, a rogue who is not very agile or a wizard who isn't very bright might be great for a comedy game (Rincewind comes to mind) but seems to go against the heroic ideal of these classes.

And I like my base challenge levels where they are, giving a roughly 50% chance to those who are competent in them and a snowball's chance to those who aren't. It really accentuates the difference between two characters in the same class with different secondary (or tertiary) primes.

I've always used that attribute generation. Adventures are supposed to be heros, so let them have heroic attributes. I've tried the 3d6 method for my DL game and found that it left most of the PCs with "normal" range attributes.

I would still think that PCs would select the Prime most associated with their class anyways, this is just a fun way to tinker with the rules.

The lower CB numbers are because I refer my PCs to have a 50/25% chance of success rather than a 40/10%.
Luther wrote:
I quite like the Cleave idea as a replacement for Combat Dominance. It does the job of killing off low hp hordes without worrying about HD, levels, etc. I would change it to a SEIGE Check, however, with an increasing CL per extra attack to keep it sensible, especially at lower levels. For example:

CLEAVE/COMBAT DOMINANCE mk.2: If you kill your opponent, you may atack another opponent within 5' if you make a SEIGE check against STR at a CL of +6 for every extra attack after the first (so a STR Prime Fighter would have a CL of 12, 18, 24, etc.)

In addition, I'd still call it Combat Dominance (Cleave has a particular image and I would rather think of it as a frenzy of blows than a circular sweep) and I'd let fighters have it at level 1.

All the extra attacks leave me cold, however, as they are too complex. If you're going to give them extra attacks, make it one every 4 levels and have done with it, but personally, I think that Cleave/Combat Dominance mk.2 does the job fine on its own and using it in conjunction with extra attacks turns the fighter into a friggin' Quisenart, especially if he's using a great weapon.

The Extra Attacks show the progress that the fighter is making with his specialized weapon. Rather than just say at 10th level the fighter can now make 2 attaks per round (which mine still does), it allows the fighter to still remain relavent as her gains levels. Plus I don't mind that the fighter can combine Cleave with the extra attacks, he is supposed to be the most dominent warrior after all.

The extra attacks with all other weapons shows that warriors will become better at using the tools of their trade.
Luther wrote:
Too many extra attack powers infringing upon the Fighter's niche. Give Cleave/Combat Dominance mk.2 to Barbarians, but if you want to give extra attacks to the Paladin and Knight, do it at twice the levels of the fighter (if at all).

I think ideally, give the Cleave/Combat Dominance mk.2 to the fighter without any extra attacks and then you can give the other fighterly characters extra attacks at, say, every 10 levels.

In the end, the fighter becomes the main warrior, with a better BtH, the ability to mow down lesser creatures and a lot of leeway when using the SEIGE system to do warrior skills (spotting ambushes, maintaining weapons and armour, etc.) at full level. The Barbarian/Berzerker can also mow down lesser creatures, but has a worse BtH and doesn't get to add his level to quite the number of situations a fighter might. The others get an extra attack at 10 and 20, but other than that are more leader types than fighter types and have their own abilities to compensate.

Finally, I think the Ditch Medicine ability is unnecessary as a special ability, as it can easily be duplicated in a standard SEIGE roll as something that 'rangers' do in much the same way as a fighter 'knows' how to maintain his weapons and a person who grew up on a river 'knows' how to swim. The brilliance of the SEIGE engine is that you can cover all of these things without having to resort to endless lists of abilities, skills, feats, etc.

As part of the warrior group, these classes become better able to utilize weapons, hence the increase in attack ability. However, their extra attack does not ever equal the fighters specialized attack.

My reasons for Ditch Medicine are discussed in my own thread.
Luther wrote:
While studded leather is fine, I think chainmail is too noisy. And it looks like you're trying to turn the Assassin into a ninja, which would be a different class to me. I see the C&C assassin as an infiltrator, poisoner and backstabber not a sword weilding death machine.

I can see your point on the chain shirt issue, but I think it is nice for the rogue types to have a little bit better AC options than presented in the PHB.

Had I wanted the assassin to be like you described him, I would have increased his BtH to that of the fighter. However, as a dealer of death, I just wanted the assassin to have a little bit better chance to hit than the thief.
Luther wrote:
Quite like giving them another ability from another class, but would only give them one per 4 levels, and it would start out at a level 1 ability when they picked it up and increase normally from there (so a class ability picked up by a level 12 bard would function as a level 8 ability when he reaches level 20). Everything else is superflous to this, so no need for Sleight of Hand and Listen as those are abilities he can pick up later.

And if you're trying to create a Gurney Halleck type character, remember that he not only taught history, ethics and so on, but was Paul's main combat master and Duke Leto's Warmaster, as well. So I think dropping their BtH down is going in the wrong direction for what you want to do.

I thought that was still implied by the cleric BtH and HD, which is still decent. I could have dropped it to equal the thief.
Luther wrote:
I'm also of the 'Orison/Cantrips as basic abilities' school of thought. I think that having them as inexhaustable utility spells, taught as the basic building blocks of all magic, is the way to go. So many films and books show wizards doing things like Mage Hand (see Dragon Slayer for instance) without a word or much effort. And they really aren't that overpowering and do provide a wizard with something else to do besides hold up the proceedings as he rests 8 hours every two encounters.

I also include Read Magic in this group of infintely castable spells (actually, I treat it as a wizardly ability, not a spell) as well, having never seen the sense of a wizard unable to read magic unless he casts magic, which is silly as he never would have been able to read the first spell he ever learned in the first place in order to learn the others.

If you really feel that there should be a limit on Cantrips and Orisons., then make them infinite in use, but you have to make a SEIGE check to use them at a CL equal to the base + the number of times you've used Cantrips/Orisons that day. A first level wizard will shortly find himself exhausting his abilities if he relies on them too much.



I like the swapping out of other spells for Cure spells. That was one of the better ideas from 3e. Consider it yoinked.

As for the rest, see my discussions on magic and Ditch Medicine above. By the way, if you really want to limit the minor cure spell, simply say that it can only be applied once per battle to a single character. You can't band-aid a band-aid.

I think of /Orisons/Cantrips as basic ability, however they are a limited ability because all magic is stressful to use and wares on the body.

Read magic is essentially a cantrip under my rules.
Luther wrote:
I like these alignment restrictions and the reasoning is sound. I actually enforce this sort of things in my games. Discipline is a Lawful trait, indeed.



I think practically everyone does this.



I use the rules found in the Zagyg supplement, which are about the same.



A good idea and it allows more versatility to create characters like Elric who often wear armour as well as cast spells. But I would also extend it to Bards in your syste, as they could possibly take Read Magic and then Cast Spells as two of their chosen abilities from another class.

Bards don't gain spells in my campaigns, as of yet. I'll include them if I decide to go that way.
Luther wrote:
Makes sense.



I've always wondered why they didn't include something like this in the PHB, but I guess they assumed that everyone would have their own ideas about how long certain races lived based upon individual campaigns. Good one.



I've never had a problem with the RAW, and I think they explain the differences flavourfully, so I stick with those.

I never had a problem with the RAW either, I just liked the simplicity of Serl's take.
Luther wrote:
Another common house rule, because it sucks to be an unarmoured fighter armed with nothing but a short sword just because you rolled poorly.



I like the granularity and specificity of how many folks you can hold off with a shield in the RAW, but I added the use of Parrying with an off hand weapon. Basically, if you have a one-handed weapon in the off hand, you can use it to add +1 AC against a single attack if you don't use it to attack with that round.



I went the opposite route and made it 5 minutes + 1 minute per spell level after a 6 hour rest. The way you have it, a Level 1 Wizard with an 18 INT will spend 9 1/2 hours just to get back up to speed. Once they reach 3rd, they'll be spending half the day in preperation. It will take a high level wizard days to memorize all their spells! I don't know about you, but I want my character's adventuring, not sitting down with a book and whiling away the weekend.

Actually a 1st level spellcaster needs 8 1/2 hours to prepare spells (8 hours for rest + 1/2 hour for 1st level spells), while a 20th level spellcaster would need 13 hours (8 hours rest + 1/2 hour for 1st + 1/2 for 2nd + 1/2 for 3rd + etc). A little bit better than RAW.
Luther wrote:
Good. The way I'd do it, but I'd add their DEX bonus to the initial roll as well.



Easy to use and gives even low level monsters a chance of hurting the heavily armourd good guys, so charging a mass of Kobolds still has an element of danger. I also use outnumbering bonuses to really make mobs dangerous.



I prefer to leave the Level Bonus to dedicated fighters like the Fighter, Barbarian and Monk. They are trained or have learned to brawl by dint of their professions. Everyone else gets the standard. Basically, I treat it like a typical SEIGE check.

In summary, I think when it comes to House Rules, less is more. I find that the SEIGE Engine is so flexible and so driven by old school ethos that it is best to limit house ruling to changes in existing rules, and rarely add new ones. So IMO, your list needs trimming a bit. Try to limit your changes to the established rules (Combat Dominance, Spell Casting Cantrips, etc.) and SEIGE rule the rest on the fly. And for those changes you do make, make them as simple as possible. That's my 2p...

I did the grapple rules for ease of memory, as in my game I noticed that when someone wanted to do a grapple there was always a discussion wether or not to allow the BtH to be added.

Again, thanks for your insights and comments.

R-
_________________
Rigon o' the Lakelands, Baron of The Castles & Crusades Society
The Book of the Mind

Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2008 11:15 pm
by Rigon
Treebore wrote:
I like it. The only thing I wouldn't try is how long you have spell recovery be. Do you realize how many days a Archmage would have to spend recovering his spells if he used most of them?

13......hours not days. It is 1/2 hour per spell level. If the caster can cast 5th level spells, they need 8 hours of rest + 2 1/2 hours to recover spells.

R-
_________________
Rigon o' the Lakelands, Baron of The Castles & Crusades Society
The Book of the Mind

Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2008 11:18 pm
by Treebore
Rigon wrote:
13......hours not days. It is 1/2 hour per spell level. If the caster can cast 5th level spells, they need 8 hours of rest + 2 1/2 hours to recover spells.

R-

Ah! I read that as meaning each spell, not the levels. Much better.
_________________
The Ruby Lord, Earl of the Society

Next Con I am attending: http://www.neoncon.com/

My House Rules: http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/viewtopic ... llordgames

Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2009 2:05 am
by Rigon
Treebore wrote:
I'm up to playing using SKYPE. I would just like to get involved in a game that actually keeps going. I've joined 4 and they all died pretty quickly.

2 and a half years later and we are still going.

This is the original thread that the Tuesday crew used when we still played on Mondays. There's some good reading in here.

R-
_________________
Rigon o' the Lakelands, Baron of The Castles & Crusades Society
The Book of the Mind

Re: Player begging on knees to join online game.

Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2009 9:21 pm
by slimykuotoan
slimykuotoan wrote:
I'm seeking to preferably play through 'Skype' -I type one finger style, and find chat a little boring.

I'm really flexible where hours are concerned, live in the Mountain time zone, and am relatively friendly.

If no one's tried Skype, it's free, takes 3 minutes tops to set up, and I'll walk you through it, etcetera...

Holy blast from the past.
_________________
Society Member
http://www.cncsociety.org/

Posted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 1:50 am
by Rigon
Yep, look what you started.
R-
_________________
Rigon o' the Lakelands, Baron of The Castles & Crusades Society
The Book of the Mind

Re: Player begging on knees to join online game.

Posted: Tue Mar 15, 2011 7:10 pm
by Treebore
Resurrected for 4th year anniversary.

Re: Player begging on knees to join online game.

Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2014 4:22 pm
by Rigon
How about a 7th year resurrection?

That's 7 years....

R-