Julian's D20 foray

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Sat May 31, 2008 11:27 am

This comes from a discussion I had with my wife about gaming. Basically we both agreed that we didn't spend enough time with 3e D&D to really know how it worked for us. We let the various problems we found online in forums override our experience.

I mulled this over and realized she was right. We only had a few months of play at a mid-level game before we switched out. So in order to see for ourselves we are going back in with just the core 3e books starting with the D20 Version of Erde as our world.

I have planned this in stages and am currently sorting the details out. Adventures will more than likely come from my Module collection so that I can spend time looking at play. Over time we will expand to the class splats which we both liked, and maybe look at Savage Species if things work out.

The few goals we have at this point is:

1) Were we right to drop the system not knowing enough about it.

2) How it plays with a 6 year old playing. A true acid test. There will be a 10 year old on occasion but that Grimmspawn does not live with us so her play will be on and off.

3) Do we like the results.

I'll post more as I get time and feel free to chime in with comments questions and suggestions. But please no bashing, we want an objective look at the system.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

DangerDwarf · Post by **DangerDwarf** » Sat May 31, 2008 12:20 pm

I'm fairly anti-3e but even I have to admit that a core books 3.0 game isn't that bad.

I'd suggest using some of the old NG modules thrown in as well. We had a blast running a d20 game with Crucible of Freya, Tomb of Abysthor and some of the other older NG mods. Extremely good gaming.

rabindranath72 · Post by **rabindranath72** » Sat May 31, 2008 1:35 pm

2The only "core 3.0 campaign I ran as a DM was set in the Grand Duchy of Karameikos. It was a fun game, and we had a good time. The game started to break down at high levels (10 or so), and creating NPCs started to be a chore. That's where the fun ended (at least for me).

I tried 3.0 with my little brother (8 at the time) but it did not work well. Too many details. Nowadays he still prefers Mentzer D&D.

Anyways, I would certainly give it another try if I found players.

moriarty777 · Post by **moriarty777** » Sat May 31, 2008 2:34 pm

Good for you Julian!

(and yes... I'm being perfectly serious)

I would certainly look forward to more news with your foray and objective looks into the 3.x system. May I suggest a blog of some sort (assuming you have the inclination or time).

I have kept my 3.5 books but was very selective with what I picked up for it. For the record, I generally agree in the switch to 3.5 from 3.0 but I was unhappy in the manner that they chose to do it in. That said, I believe that there is great value in the system and it was only a couple stumbling blocks in the design.

And no, I won't bother going into those details because they were primarily my issues and don't necessarily represent a flaw in the game.

Your approach is perhaps the best one, start with the core. I never bothered with the various complete books though I did get (and still have) the earlier 3.0 splat books.

I think AD&D and 3.x have more in common than any of those might have with 4th Ed, which admittedly may be a fine game in its own right but is too far gone from the models I enjoyed.

At any rate, please feel free to share your observations and if you do start up a blog somewhere, please let me know!

M
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com

rabindranath72 · Post by **rabindranath72** » Sat May 31, 2008 9:02 pm

moriarty777 wrote:
I have kept my 3.5 books but was very selective with what I picked up for it. For the record, I generally agree in the switch to 3.5 from 3.0 but I was unhappy in the manner that they chose to do it in. That said, I believe that there is great value in the system and it was only a couple stumbling blocks in the design.

And no, I won't bother going into those details because they were primarily my issues and don't necessarily represent a flaw in the game.

I would be really interested in hearing your opinion on this point. My opinion from 3.0 to 3.5 was that many things were made unnecessarily complex and "formalised"; and this I did not like at all. With the exception of some overpowered spells like haste, to me 3.0 was a good system (though prone to abuse).

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Sat May 31, 2008 9:33 pm

DangerDwarf wrote:
I'm fairly anti-3e but even I have to admit that a core books 3.0 game isn't that bad.

I'd suggest using some of the old NG modules thrown in as well. We had a blast running a d20 game with Crucible of Freya, Tomb of Abysthor and some of the other older NG mods. Extremely good gaming.

I don't have the NG mods. Sadly I hadn't known how good they were until after I left 3e. I am going to be watching for them next week since I am going to be at a game store.

I'm torn though between using Vakhund, Deezbagd and Falsthiem or Gaxmoor as the campaign.

moriarty777 wrote:
Your approach is perhaps the best one, start with the core. I never bothered with the various complete books though I did get (and still have) the earlier 3.0 splat books.

My 3e collection is pretty good size. I have most of the stuff up to the switch to 3.5 and only few after as well as a good sized FR run up to the switch. It's hard not to use something else right now but it has to be this way.

Quote:
I think AD&D and 3.x have more in common than any of those might have with 4th Ed, which admittedly may be a fine game in its own right but is too far gone from the models I enjoyed.

At any rate, please feel free to share your observations and if you do start up a blog somewhere, please let me know!

M

From what I have seen, and my experience with the Option books are limited, 3e is akin to 2e with the Option books added. I do know at the beginning I was playing 3e and having the same amount of fun that I did in my older games. Of course this was before I let the 3.5 thing taint my opinion.

As for 4e a game store close to me is having a release event for it next week to coincide with world wide D&D day or something. I'm going to see it in action and maybe play so expect a report on that.

rabindranath72 wrote:
The only "core 3.0 campaign I ran as a DM was set in the Grand Duchy of Karameikos. It was a fun game, and we had a good time. The game started to break down at high levels (10 or so), and creating NPCs started to be a chore. That's where the fun ended (at least for me).

I tried 3.0 with my little brother (8 at the time) but it did not work well. Too many details. Nowadays he still prefers Mentzer D&D.

I never made it that hight with my games. Something I want to see for myself is when it starts breaking up. However in my experience most level based games have a 'break point' at which the game changes or does break down. I think in 2e we found it at about 15.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Sun Jun 01, 2008 3:29 am

A bit more on the set up. I found my old Character sheet pack that came out around the game and put them to use. Also I dropped using Airdhe right now since it would pull me off the original goal.

I'm rolling up characters tonight, 1st level core races, no multiclasses for the first adventure. The adventure will be a a small dungeon crawl in a generic setting. This gives me a chance to really dig into the DM side and I will be trying to use the unmodified version of Experience to see how it works. I'm setting the adventure up to hopefully give a good feel of skills, combat and XP.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

DangerDwarf · Post by **DangerDwarf** » Sun Jun 01, 2008 12:43 pm

Julian Grimm wrote:
The adventure will be a a small dungeon crawl in a generic setting.

I think some of my best campaigns have begun like that. It reminds me of my initial days of D&D where we had a town and a dungeon and the world grew around us as we leveled.

moriarty777 · Post by **moriarty777** » Sun Jun 01, 2008 9:16 pm

rabindranath72 wrote:
I would be really interested in hearing your opinion on this point. My opinion from 3.0 to 3.5 was that many things were made unnecessarily complex and "formalised"; and this I did not like at all. With the exception of some overpowered spells like haste, to me 3.0 was a good system (though prone to abuse).

Well, I'll take a moment to clarify my statements... and then share some of my thoughts since you asked so nicely.
First off, the manner in which they did things did bother me. Though I agree with some of the changes, I did not agree in the manner which the core books were revised, and sold in lieu of 3rd Edition. Sure, they did a half-hearted attempt at putting out an update booklet, but this update booklet was not sufficient. It mentioned some of the changes but didn't give specific information for them.

However, aside from adjusting a couple of spells like Haste, the one big difference was duration for a bunch of the spells. Spells like Cat's Grace or Bull's Strength lasted A LOT longer in 3.0 -- an hour per level as opposed to 1 minute per level in 3.5

The Ranger and Bard classes were seriously shortchanged in 3.0 and needed (I felt) a boost. The Half-Elf was a bit underwhelming.

These were some of the things I started noticing pretty quick with 3.0 when it came out but they were all small things. It didn't need a whole new workup (which they did with 3.5). However, I feel that some of these little things were items that got at least improved.

To try and 'justify' the new 3.5 set, they threw in a few critters that were originally in MM2 in the new 3.5 MM and also expanded the DMG with material from the class splat books from 3.0 as well as a few odds and ends.

As for clarification (and formalizing) of certain rules, I didn't really notice much difference to be honest.

By the time that 3.5 came out, I largely ran it the way I did 3.0 in terms of combat and noting the few changes to race, class, skills, and feats. I also spent a lot less time with 3.0 than 3.5

When 3rd edition first came out, they had the lower price incentive. Each of the core books cost something like $20 each (new). I ran a few games, but life got really complicated and messed up and the game got shelved for years. At some point 3.5 came out and I started playing again, and since everyone was preferring the 3.5 set, I decided to adapt. I sold off my 3.0 set (and got $60 for them ... so I lost nothing) and bought the gift set for about $90 (new). So in all, the 3.5 upgrade cost me $30 (and the books came in a nice sturdy box).

I do feel that there is a lot more balance with their earlier 3.0 material than the stuff that came out with and after 3.5 which is also why I held on to my 3.0 splat books and never bothered with the complete 'whatever' books. I loved the Unearthed Arcana for it and the class variations they give and never was one to go into the optional class books much.

I have no beef with 3.x except for the manner which it seems to be played. It involved a lot more miniature use and a certain tactical approach (in terms of squares and attacks of opportunity, and so on) which got to be cumbersome.

I think this is why I'm also keenly interested in the Pathfinder RPG project by Paizo, the two books of Experimental Might by Monte, and other variants. 3rd Edition (overall) is not a bad system but needs a bit of work. A good DM can surely bring it all together and introduce certain rules and have a very fun and successful game.

In my case, I gave up trying and went to C&C instead because life is just too short sometimes.

Seriously though, I am interested in mechanics, points of views regarding the system and so on. I'm keeping my 3rd ed material and as much as I want to like the new game (4th Ed), I just can't bring myself to adopt a game that seems that alien to me.

M
_________________
"You face Death itself in the form of... 1d4 Tarrasques!"

Partner to Brave Halfling Publishing
http://www.arcanacreations.com

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Sun Jun 01, 2008 10:51 pm

A bit more on this: I have the initial PC's done we have a Human Fighter, Elf Sorceror, and Human Rogue. I used the PHB method of generation and no starting packages.

I couldn't not use a setting so I opted for one that didn't have extra rules info in it. So I broke out my LGG for use. I have only started laying out the adventure and will hope to have it done in the next night or two.

I want to say this for clarity: This is not an abandonment of C&C it's a break as well as something I need to do, And that is reexamine the rules from a more objective opinion. If it breaks down then I am back to C&C, If we like it then we have another system to play.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

DangerDwarf · Post by **DangerDwarf** » Mon Jun 02, 2008 3:45 am

Julian Grimm wrote:
I don't have the NG mods. Sadly I hadn't known how good they were until after I left 3e. I am going to be watching for them next week since I am going to be at a game store.

If you can get Crucible of Freya I HIGHLY recommend that one. You can usually get it for pretty cheap too.

It has an extremely large amount of official on-line support for it giving you countless sessions of gaming for a cheap price. I think it is the introductory module that all others should strive to be.

serleran · Post by **serleran** » Mon Jun 02, 2008 4:38 am

If I were to ever give d20 a shake, it would be 3.0 PHB and monster books only (the d20 DMG is worthless - the only thing in it that might be useful are prestige classes and maybe the rules for item creation, somewhat.) So, good luck.

Treebore · Post by **Treebore** » Mon Jun 02, 2008 4:43 am

The on line support alone for Crucible can be used for many, many, seeds of adventure.

I have to agree, Julian, that if I were to ever run a 3E game again it would be the core 3 books only. Anything beyond that would only be chosen by me because they add certain elements I want to the campaign setting, like my Runemark for C&C.

Honestly I haven't abandoned 3E, I just stripped down the key elements of what I liked about 3E and put it on a much simpler engine with which to run it.

The only reason I remember for preferring 3.5E over 3.0 was that they did a much better job of explaining AoO's.

BTW, I would recommend throwing out AoO's as 3E describes them and just using the rules for retreating in the C&C PH. Definitely wait and see if AoO's bother you first, who knows? You might love the AoO rules. I just know they helped drive me nuts!

Other than that I preferred the duration of spells in 3.0 and their deadlier nature. I do like the 3.5 Ranger better, but there are even better rangers than the 3.5 version out there as well. I'll see if I still have the downloads and post or PM them to you.

I know you and your wife are going to have fun. 3E doesn't SUCK! It just gets overwhelming the higher in levels you go. If you do the vast majority of your gaming in the 1 to 13 range you probably won't have much problems with 3E. Its doing a campaign from 13th level on that will make a DM crash and burn. The players have it easy. Even so, the paper work for their one character can get tedious even for the player.

If you get that high in levels let me know, I am pretty sure I still have some very handy excel spreadsheets for tracking those high level characters.
_________________
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

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Mon Jun 02, 2008 4:52 am

A few more prep tid-bits. This is from DD's thread on KoTS where I give a nutshell look at what I am doing with GH:

Quote:
I'll give the nutshell version: The pantheon has been removed and replaced with the Tenoric out of the Yggsburgh Folio. This Pantheon also forms a tightly knit church. If you have played FFXII you'll know how I am approaching this. Yggsburgh is part of the setting. The GH wars happened but stalemated and there was never a pact signed. The wars were kicked off partially by Rary and robilar betraying the Co8 in service of the Horned Society. Iuz was possibly there but has disappeared or was an imposter.

That's the short version. I'll reveal more as the campaign gets underway.

_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Mon Jun 02, 2008 5:19 am

Treebore wrote:
I have to agree, Julian, that if I were to ever run a 3E game again it would be the core 3 books only. Anything beyond that would only be chosen by me because they add certain elements I want to the campaign setting, like my Runemark for C&C.

This has been a long process. I have decided that about level 3 or so we'll

see the class splats introduced. I Liked them and most of the PRC's and such in them weren't that bad. They still followed the original 3e model which I liked. And of course MM2 and the FF. After that I'll just stick with them unless I need something else.

Quote:
Honestly I haven't abandoned 3E, I just stripped down the key elements of what I liked about 3E and put it on a much simpler engine with which to run it.

That is kind of what I am looking at doing as well. See what works and adapt to what I want. Also Like stated earlier I never played it enough to get a feel for it.

Quote:
The only reason I remember for preferring 3.5E over 3.0 was that they did a much better job of explaining AoO's.

BTW, I would recommend throwing out AoO's as 3E describes them and just using the rules for retreating in the C&C PH. Definitely wait and see if AoO's bother you first, who knows? You might love the AoO rules. I just know they helped drive me nuts!

Other than that I preferred the duration of spells in 3.0 and their deadlier nature. I do like the 3.5 Ranger better, but there are even better rangers than the 3.5 version out there as well. I'll see if I still have the downloads and post or PM them to you.

I'd like the new rangers. I know Monte Cook did one that I was fond of. I may see if it is still on his site. AoO's are out replaced with the C&C idea. That was one rule I wanted no repeats of.

Quote:
I know you and your wife are going to have fun. 3E doesn't SUCK! It just gets overwhelming the higher in levels you go. If you do the vast majority of your gaming in the 1 to 13 range you probably won't have much problems with 3E. Its doing a campaign from 13th level on that will make a DM crash and burn. The players have it easy. Even so, the paper work for their one character can get tedious even for the player.

If you get that high in levels let me know, I am pretty sure I still have some very handy excel spreadsheets for tracking those high level characters.

I agree. I have stated that initial 3e was good and I liked it well enough to swear by it. I don't actually see us going beyond 12th level really. Usually that is when most of my games in any edition gave up and we let the henchmen or next gen of PC's take over. All in all I do get a strong 1e vibe from 3e. That may be heresy for some but it is something I feel.

I almost went with 3.5 for this but backed off when rereading the books. The MM and DMG were nice and may be used but the PH didn't do it for me. Especially with the redone weapons rules. Seeing small/medium-large damages for weapons was one thing that turned me off.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Mon Jun 02, 2008 5:23 am

serleran wrote:
If I were to ever give d20 a shake, it would be 3.0 PHB and monster books only (the d20 DMG is worthless - the only thing in it that might be useful are prestige classes and maybe the rules for item creation, somewhat.) So, good luck.

The 3e DMG was better than the 2e but not as good as the 1e. I will use it since it does help with the system but more of a guideline.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

rabindranath72 · Post by **rabindranath72** » Mon Jun 02, 2008 7:55 am

Treebore wrote:
BTW, I would recommend throwing out AoO's as 3E describes them and just using the rules for retreating in the C&C PH. Definitely wait and see if AoO's bother you first, who knows? You might love the AoO rules. I just know they helped drive me nuts!

For my d20 d20 Conan game, I did exactly that. Actually, C&C has two situations which could be identified as AoO:

1) entering the range of a reach weapon or of an opponent of larger size.

2) retreating at more than half speed.

This list can be expanded if one is so inclined. I did so to accommodate some abilities of the d20 Conan classes, to include:

- inflicting a coup de grace

- unarmed attacks vs. an armed opponent

These are as easily handled as the C&C rules, without need to use a grid or such.

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Wed Jun 04, 2008 11:19 am

It looks like this may be going on hold for a bit.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

Lord Stinger · Post by **Lord Stinger** » Wed Jun 04, 2008 11:45 am

When starting a new group I preferred to only allow what was found in the PHB only until at least 10th level. By that point the players had spent countless hours looking at all the available abilities in every splat book out there. If you are truly trying to get a feel for the games style, dont get swallowed up by all the extra stuff floating around in the add on books. Stick to the core books until both you and the players get a good understanding for the game.

As a player I loved finding some new ability to try and customize my character. As a GM I hated it when a player wanted to bring some new found ability into the group. It usually meant that I needed to get a copy of whatever book they happened to be gathering it from and make sure it was not going to throw a wrench into anything. Then when the player used it, everyone else wanted something different as well.

Eventually this lead to a split in the way I GM and play. I wont GM anything that is not core books only until they reach 10th level. When I play, I will play whatever the GM allows me to get away with.

After all, when I am playing a character, its the GM who has to try and keep up with me. If you have no restrictions on which books are allowed, then you better be prepared to read to keep up with what I am going to throw at you.
_________________
Ruler of Castle Scorpion in the Kingdom of the Scorpion

Duke Stinger, Lord of the Battlemasters of Nighthammer Keep, Castles & Crusades Society

You just think I missed you, give it a sec.

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:08 pm

Luckily I have the benefit of controlling the books. So I can bring in what I want. The players are content with me doing the PC gen for right now as well and aren't that concerned with extras.

Also outside of the core and class books the only other two players books I am looking at is Psionics and Savage Species but that is way down the raod and pending a good look at the material.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Wed Jun 04, 2008 9:14 pm

Julian Grimm wrote:
It looks like this may be going on hold for a bit.

Yep this will be on hold. I was looking forward to it and will dabble some with it but for the time I'm going to relax with C&C and some conversions and such for it.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Sun Aug 24, 2008 9:01 pm

I'm back up and running with this. A few changes though. I caved to core 3.5 with my own setting. Also I am using some houserules and will continue to do so. I never have played RAW and see no need to start now.

Characters are done as is the first adventure. My initial reaction is wondering why I thought this was so hard. I adjusted some monsters easily enough and have been understanding how to tweak them as I need to.

Play will possibly be this coming weekend.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

DangerDwarf · Post by **DangerDwarf** » Mon Aug 25, 2008 12:24 am

Thats cool JG. If you end up checking out Pathfinder, let me know how it is too.

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Mon Aug 25, 2008 12:34 am

I DL'ed the new beta but my eyes feel raw after reading PDF's for too long so I may scratch some pennies together and buy the print version. My thoughts on PF are mixed from what I have read so far.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Thu Jan 29, 2009 11:57 pm

I thought I'd bring this off the back burner since 1) I am taking a break from C&C for awhile and 2) I need something new to play with.

I have the adventure and rules pretty much set. I got a lot of inspiration from the 3e UA book and lessened up on skills and feats. Leaving just class abilities and spells for most classes. I say most since the fighter will get use of bonus feats for class abilities.

That said. I stripped all AC down to one AC score. Not the three or for 3.x tries to use. I cut out crits and the crit rerolls making a natural 20 do full damage. I'm still just using the core books except I have added MM2 the Fiend Folio and Tome of Horrors to my monster stable and I am using Greyhawk as my setting. (576cy)

I also stripped monster stats down to a more basic level and cut out a lot of the extra fluff stats they had.

My few tests have been positive and still I notice a strong 1e vibe from most of the material. I could be wrong but it seems, at least for the core, 1e was consulted and channeled in the design. Yes, I just spoke herasy.
It looks as if our first game will be next week and I am excited and have had fun with this. Our first adventure will be a ruined fortress in the Cairn Hills inhabited by many goblinoid types.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Mon Feb 02, 2009 5:39 am

I did some more work on this today. I have played with designing cities out of the DMG and read up on some more rules stuff. I see what I want to streamline and what I want to keep. I may have a list of houserules up so that all who are interested can follow along.

That said, I am wobbling between Greyhawk and my own world. Partially because I had been working on a world for my old 3e games and found the notes and found ideas I wanted to use that wouldn't fit GH that well. It will be awhile before the outer world gets mentioned so I have time to decide.

Also I found some stuff on the Nentir vale online and really like the idea. I may use that for a bit.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Thu Feb 05, 2009 6:31 am

Changes, Cuts and Decisions

Well I am at T Minus two days before the official trial of this and I am making my final changes and tweaks. Tonight I finalized how skills will work, who gets feats and what classes will be used. Some of the changes go against the traditional model of the game but they were reasoned out between Mrs. Grimm and myself. The changes are to simplify the system but keep it's dynamics intact. Here's what we have:
Skills

Skills are going to be done as a hybrid between two systems given in Unearthed Arcana. The max ranks limited choices and the level based skills option. Basically, each class gets their starting skill points plus INT modifier in skills. Thus a rogue would get 8 skills plus X number of skills for the INT mod. Our rogue in the game has 11 skills.

The skills are listed then ability mod plus class level is added to give the full modifier for the skill. Thus a 3rd level rogue with an 18 in Dex would get a +7 to sleight of hand. If there is a multiclass PC then the first class get the Skills+Int bonus but the second would only get the skills.

Note that in the system we are using there are no cross class skills.

Also some skills have been rolled into one skill. Listen, Search and Spot are now the Detect skill. Hide and Move Silent are now Stealth. And one new skill has been Added and that is Acrobatics (dex).
Feats

No class will get feats. The only exception to this will be the Fighter and Ranger. The reasoning on the Ranger will be given later. The reason fighters get their bonus feats is that most of their class is tied to this. But I have given a restriction to this. The fighter can only choose from combat related feats or the listed fighter bonus feats. I may rewrite this as a list of optional class abilities and remove feats all together.

Feats given to classes, such as the rogues evasion, are treated as class abilities and not feats. Also there is the issue of Item creation and meta-magic and ranger tracking. In the case of the former these abilities have been rolled into part of the wizards Spellcraft skill. Thus broadening the skills effect and use. Spellcraft is a skill only available to Wizards. In the case of rangers track has been turned into an automatic part of the survival skill. 1
Classes

This was the subject of much debate but in the end we agreed that this fit the style of campaign we wanted. First and foremost there have been some cuts and one change. I'll talk of the cuts first and give their reasoning.

Clerics, Druids,Bards and Sorcerors have been cut. The reasoning is that having so many spellcasting classes ruins the mystery of magic in general. In the case of the Cleric we found nothing in the game that removing them would affect. (See the Misc. Section below) And we reasoned that we could do more with Wizards in this respect than having several lite-mages running around.

Monks have been banished. I don't want eastern monks in a western style game.

Paladins are out. Without Clerics these guys make no sense. They will be replaced with Arcana Unearthed's Knight class.

Rangers are spell-less. This is purely C&C inspired. The new ruling is that when the Ranger would have gained a new spell level he gains a fighter bonus feat.

Barbarians are out as there is nothing really with them that cannot be done with a fighter or Ranger.

That leaves the following classes as playable:

Fighter

Ranger

Wizard

Rogue

Knight

This was our final list though I will note that the Knight is on a trial basis. I feel this may create some redundancy with the fighter class.
Monsters

I will note here that monster stat blocks are waaaay to long in 3.X. Thus I have reduced the block to a basic level. Thus the block I use, or more accurately read, consists of Hit dice, attacks, special abilities, Saves, treasure and CR. I may reference ability scores if needed.
Misc.

Other things of note but not in any section are:

There is one AC. That is the AC used for all values including grapple and touch attacks.

Starting HP is the Con score plus modifier.

Since there are no healing spells Healing surges from 4e are being used.

There is no alignment thus no protection from alignment, detect alignment or other alignment based spells.

There are no resurection or raise dead spells.

That is about it for what I have. I am still finalizing XP and CR and this has proven tricky. But the d20 system of CR always has been wonky.

Any questions or comments are welcome.
1 I am experimenting with skills that are only for certain classes. Spellcraft for wizards, traps for rogues, etc. Also some of the skills may be renamed as needed. Spellcraft may become something like Magica or something similar.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog

Julian Grimm · Post by **Julian Grimm** » Thu Feb 05, 2009 9:26 pm

Some notes on the world

I have decided to use my own generic world for now. That way I do not have to get my mechanical changes to agree with published material. I found some info on the Nentir Vale online and am using the map of it and Fallcrest for my beginning area.

The one major thing that needed to be done is explain why there are no Clerics,Druids or Paladins in the world. That was a problem until an answer came. The reason is because the god of the world has not revealed himself yet. Most people know he exists but he is not active as of yet. If the decision is made to include clerics (Or the Dragonlance mystic.) later then it will be come a major campaign event as suddenly there appears the first prophets (Clerics at this point) and a church is established. But that is an if for now.

As for tone and feel it is mainly going for something akin to the LOTR movies. (but with better magic :p ) That is for my wife and daughter who are huge fans of the movies.

In the past there was a dark lord named Balor who was the first goblinkin. He was obviously deposed. After that great kingdoms arose and then came the Kingdom of Karthem led by Azarik. This was an attempt to revive Balor's empire. The end came in a series of catclysms that destroyed the old world. Now it is many years later and the world is recovering and finding itself again.

That is the basic theme.
_________________
The Lord of Ravens
My blog