Coolness. So that's a few people who'd be interested.
Like I said, the system is still under heavy development. I can give some of the highlights:
The character building ends up being a combination of both level based and point-buy.
The main inspirations are True20, a bit of Big Eyes Small Mouth, a bit of Mutants and Masterminds, and D&D. So far I've really liked adapting the formatting lexicon from 4th Edition D&D in particular. Really makes for a concise, clear means of describing effects.
There are the six ability scores, as in d20. However, characters don't have a score ranging from 8-20 or so on. Rather, the ability score is expressed as modifiers are in D&D. A high Strength score would be 4 or 5, as opposed to 18 or 20.
There are a small number of class-like character orientations, and I am planning on making an optional class system that works like templates for those that prefer preplanned class paths. You gain ranks in powers and skills as you gain levels. In this system, a "power" is any special ability a character might have, whether something supernatural (telepathy, earth shaping, probability manipulation) to special techniques (throws, grapples, sneak attacks, etc.) to extraordinary qualities (super strength, regeneration, immunity to poison, so on). Each level, you gain a rank in a power that is favored for your character type, and a feat slot that can be used to gain a feat, skill rank, or another power rank.
As you acquire ranks in powers, the point-buy part comes into play. Each level you also gain a number of stunt points. Stunts can be passive or active. Active stunts are like a character's special attacks and tricks (not unlike powers in D&D, if you want a comparison), and passive stunts usually augment the effects of your powers.
For instance, there is a power called alternate form that lets you occasionally turn into a stronger version of yourself. If you spend enough stunt points on alternate form, you can acquire multiple forms to turn into in addition to the form you have already from knowing the power at all.
I'm making it span over thirty levels now, which I think is attractive for a number of reasons.
One of the key features of the system is that there is only one die to be rolled: a d20. In order to vary damage a bit, you make a damage roll with the d20. Each attack has something called a severity modifier, and all characters have a Toughness score. If your d20 + severity roll overcomes the character's Toughness, it deals extra damage. If it falls short, it does less damage.
So these are the nuts and bolts of the system, simplified.
All that I yearn for, for richer or poorer, is to be the light that you see. All that I yearn for, for richer or poorer, is to be the peace that you feel. All that I yearn for, for richer or poorer, is to fill your heart on my own.
But the rainbow is an image of hope for many reasons, as it is a brilliant sight coming out of oftimes dismal weather.
The nice thing about m20 is that you can build characters that are incredibly top-down in their concepts and still have them be very effective. m20 is much more gamist than say, the base True20 system, but it's also incredibly narrativist. You really can put together a character that is built entirely around a relatively obscure concept, instead of trying to build a character with available materials and then feeling frustrated when it doesn't quite fit. You can almost make any character from any fictional source and stat them up reasonably well.
Anyone playing FFIV DS, by the way?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
[16:23] Alacar Leoricar: maybe if you do it'll make the porn more meaningful
Mamelon, that sounds very interesting. I like your ideas and, since I play like you guys, any system that lets me make an effective character from concept down is good for me.
@Photon: I am probably going to add FFIV to my christmas list this holiday season, along with Chrono Trigger DS. I'm definitely going to look into it.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Banner and avatar by me.
Official Character Sheet Shredder of DAMNIT
DAMNIT: I should never have to shred my own character sheet in frustration.
I'm told it happens fairly often during Airborne School.
Anyone play White-Wolf systems in here at all, by chance?
I've gotten to do a decent amount of playing vampire, both the new and old system. I had the pleasure of having an excellent mind**** of a Storyteller for those games. And I think the WoD game system is my favorite system so far, though 4th ed. is really making me rethink what I think about d20.
I can do it without the Duct tape and the Basket as well. However, what's the point of killing earth with DAMAGE? I just fail to see the point. Save or Dies mean that earth still fails on 1/20 of them, assuming you can use powers that it isn't immune to. For example, if you can cast Animate on it, followed up by Awaken Construct, you can Psychic Crush it enough times for it to roll a natural one. Now, it goes to -1 hit points, and as a construct it dies when below 0.
Counting CR by HD, earth would have what? (6.5x10^19)/3 CR? Now, the real guestion here is if how much XP would you get from killing the earth?
Honestly, though. When you are in situation with awakened animated earth you know what you want to do.
Mind Switch, True
I think a reasonable ruling would be to say that planetiods simply have a higher-faceted hitdie, like a d4billion. that would make the earth a 2 or 3 hit die creature. Besides, killing the earth would just mean the end of the animation effect, as the earth is essentially lifeless i.e. dead right now.
Also I doubt anyone would survive even the most subtlest stirrings of the earth if you animated it. If it moved even stlightly, every living thing on the earth would simply die from the impact and tumult.
7th Sea is a secret favorite of mine, though I've never had an opportunity to play it, personally.
It's a great game and tons of fun. The setting and theme are so much fun and it's something you can really get into especially with all of the extra material they provide in the setting. I'm not normally one for precon adventures, but I really like the 7th sea NPCs and how fleshed out they make the world.
ALSO: I picked up the 4th edition core books and they are really living up to my expectations. It's a lot to take in (but RPGs always are) and it's much more different than I expected from 3.5. Some observations:
1) they were really smart to streamline things. From the languages to the skills to the weapons to the abilities, there are never too much or too little of anything.
2) still really wanting more from multiclassing. A taste is just not going to cut it, sorry. Maybe it will be better once I actually get to play. (also, I'm a little worried that any better muticlassing will cut into the awesomeness of the half elf's racial ability)
3) love what they did with the races. And the monster manual having that awesome cache of monster races in an appendix was a real treat too!
4) Did they really need to charge me 35$ for the DMG? That book has the profile of a runway model (very thin) and seems to be filled with (albiet helpful) fluff.
5) Why is this game obsessed with critical hits? They are really going to happen very infrequently it seems, like 5% of the time, and yet epic feats are all over them (like 80% of the epic feats are there to double your threat range with a particular weapon type) and so much of the magical items are devoted to kicking ass with critical hits.
6) Seriously, why did there have to be three strikers and only one controller in core? Would it have been that hard to have two classes for each role? And though I have not played the game, the powers do seem to be all over the place in terms of the class role. I see controller abilites in rangers and warlocks look kind of controllerish in places as well. And yet wizards don't seem to stand out all that much in terms of controlling.
ALSO: I picked up the 4th edition core books and they are really living up to my expectations. It's a lot to take in (but RPGs always are) and it's much more different than I expected from 3.5. Some observations:
1) they were really smart to streamline things. From the languages to the skills to the weapons to the abilities, there are never too much or too little of anything.
"Of Anything" is a bit broad, there are for example too few classes and effective heroic tier feats for controllers. The skills are working really well, though, and so are armors and other such items. I could use a few more wands/implements with more versatile keywords, though.
2) still really wanting more from multiclassing. A taste is just not going to cut it, sorry. Maybe it will be better once I actually get to play. (also, I'm a little worried that any better muticlassing will cut into the awesomeness of the half elf's racial ability)
Agreed, the "Splash-Classing" just doesn't cut it. When there'll be more feats available to players, less and less people will actually multiclass. This is partially because not all multiclasses are beneficial at all. (Rogue/Wizard..? You can't even sneak with wizard powers.). And some of the multiclasses don't work as they should, because of artificial limitations. (No sneak with bows, for example, or in general rogue limitations on weapons allowed. Most of these don't make sense at all.).
4) Did they really need to charge me 35$ for the DMG? That book has the profile of a runway model (very thin) and seems to be filled with (albiet helpful) fluff.
5) Why is this game obsessed with critical hits? They are really going to happen very infrequently it seems, like 5% of the time, and yet epic feats are all over them (like 80% of the epic feats are there to double your threat range with a particular weapon type) and so much of the magical items are devoted to kicking ass with critical hits.
Wizards were afraid to print out abilities that were consistant in fear of optimizers stacking them, so they created critical-reliant abilities which make optimizing pointless, because if you're getting that critical already the opponent is gonna take ****load of damage, no matter if you had that crit-thing or not.
This is also hollywood-ism, no one wants to die to a normal attack, but dying to a cool critical hit?
6) Seriously, why did there have to be three strikers and only one controller in core? Would it have been that hard to have two classes for each role? And though I have not played the game, the powers do seem to be all over the place in terms of the class role. I see controller abilites in rangers and warlocks look kind of controllerish in places as well. And yet wizards don't seem to stand out all that much in terms of controlling.
No frigging idea, perhaps they feared that the game wouldn't be as much hack n' slash if there actually was a real controller. (Instead of AoE-nuker.).
Also, Cleric does wizard's job a lot better in almost any case, there is a thread about that in 4E CharOp board, where someone calculated effectiveness of the powers from the two classes, cleric came out on top by a fair margin. (Only real merit of wizard is sleep..)
In general, you just have to admit, wizard got shafted HARD. It lacks a real focus - It is there to deal damage, but can't deal much of it. It is there to hinder opponents, but can't do it better than other classes. Even the 'cantrips', while flavourful (And i <3 them. The best spells wizard has to offer, apart from sleep.) are useless when it comes to usefullness.
I actually really like the balance in having powers "all over the place", as you put it. The way I see it is that most class roles focus mainly on their primary path, but bleed out into other roles as well, which makes a huge amount of sense. For example, Warlord powers are quite heavily focused on boosting their allies, which makes perfect sense, yet have the occasional ability which reflects their position as a martial leader - just from a quick skim-through, Villain's Nightmare stands out as a good example. (In case you were wondering, Warlord was the first class that came out by opening the PDF and dragging to about halfway through the document).
I agree that it makes sense, but it also rises problems. Some powers from ranger for example, are better at controlling the enemies than most powers from wizard is. I agree that it makes sense for rangers to be able to stab their sword at pressure point and totally incapacicate enemy for a short while, but if wizard can't do something comparable to that then, it leads to game inbalance.
For example Confounding Arrows (Ranger Daily 15.) can deal 5[W]+3x Dexterity damage, and stun the target (Save Ends.). Considering that stun is the best condition you can cause on opponent, this is infact extremely powerful control asset. Only things from wizard that are about as effective as this are Sleep (It affects multiple targets, so it's good.) and Destructive Salutation (Bloodmage 20 Daily.)
The Sage is occupied with the unspoken
and acts without effort.
Teaching without verbosity,
producing without possessing,
creating without regard to result,
claiming nothing,
the Sage has nothing to lose.
2) still really wanting more from multiclassing. A taste is just not going to cut it, sorry. Maybe it will be better once I actually get to play. (also, I'm a little worried that any better muticlassing will cut into the awesomeness of the half elf's racial ability)
I would say being able to devote half of your power slots to your alternate class as being much more than "just a taste".
Also, multiclassing doesn't really cut into Dilettante, because Dilettante changes the functionality of the selected power pretty significantly by taking it from at-will down to encounter. Dilettante is also, for the record, considered one of the weakest racial features in the game thus far. Human is a much better multiclasser than half-elf, not that it is particularly amazing at it, either.
5) Why is this game obsessed with critical hits? They are really going to happen very infrequently it seems, like 5% of the time, and yet epic feats are all over them (like 80% of the epic feats are there to double your threat range with a particular weapon type) and so much of the magical items are devoted to kicking ass with critical hits.
Magic items aren't really devoted to critical hits, it's just that all magical weapons have extra utility when you score a critical hit. Very few magic weapons are actually oriented around critical hits specifically. I'm not sure why the critical hit was given such mechanical emphasis in epic, but when you consider a +6 weapon adds +6d6 or more to your already maxed damage with a critical, I can see why someone in epic would want to facilitate more frequent criticals.
6) Seriously, why did there have to be three strikers and only one controller in core? Would it have been that hard to have two classes for each role? And though I have not played the game, the powers do seem to be all over the place in terms of the class role. I see controller abilites in rangers and warlocks look kind of controllerish in places as well. And yet wizards don't seem to stand out all that much in terms of controlling.
The warlock was originally conceptualized to be a controller, but the powers put it strictly in striker territory. Fey warlock is still very much a controller, though.
All classes have a bit of potential to bleed into other territories. That should be fine, I don't think that all roles need to be strictly walled off into their respective classes at all times.
Also, since you have not played the game, I would withhold a lot of criticism on the power distribution until you actually see it, because how things look on paper are really very different from how they play out. Ranger is NOTHING if it is not a striker- in my experience and based on the experiences of others I have read, Ranger tends to be the most capable striker of the set, although Rogue has it beat for strict damage output most of the time. Both classes have some potential to control, but then again all classes have some potential to control. All classes have some potential to do everything, but each class focuses primarily on a certain role. A ranger or rogue may have a handful of powers on their list that could let them control a bit, but given the fact that you have far fewer slots than powers, you aren't likely to have more than 1 or 2 of such powers on the average character, unless you strictly focused on them.
Wizards, on the other hand, are ideal controllers. No one else handles big crowds like a Wizard, and so many Wizard powers have additional effects that lock down the crowd, and most of their powers lend themselves to controlling. They don't just have one or two that are control oriented, but rather have some way of handling the crowd or bogging down a foe at every level.
I should point out, also, that controller is widely considered to be the least vital of the roles. Couple this with the new attitude for non-symmetrical design, and suddenly only having one controller to start out makes more sense.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
[16:23] Alacar Leoricar: maybe if you do it'll make the porn more meaningful
Purely by math and logics, Ranger is the best damage output early on, whereas rogue takes the prize later.
Technically, though, 4E will get a lot better when more sourcebooks for it emerge, and some of the problems are addressed. (For Example: Some weapons have: "All damage dealt by this weapon is fire damage.". Now, according to PHB weapon never deals damage - The weapon damage is added to the damage you deal with your attack. Therefore, that function of the weapon is useless, unless someone comes up with a way to animate it into an animated object.. Somehow.)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The Sage is occupied with the unspoken
and acts without effort.
Teaching without verbosity,
producing without possessing,
creating without regard to result,
claiming nothing,
the Sage has nothing to lose.
Technically, though, 4E will get a lot better when more sourcebooks for it emerge, and some of the problems are addressed. (For Example: Some weapons have: "All damage dealt by this weapon is fire damage.". Now, according to PHB weapon never deals damage - The weapon damage is added to the damage you deal with your attack. Therefore, that function of the weapon is useless, unless someone comes up with a way to animate it into an animated object.. Somehow.)
Amadi, I'm just gonna say it-
You're a numbskull. That's all.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
[16:23] Alacar Leoricar: maybe if you do it'll make the porn more meaningful
I agree that they should really have been balanced out with two classes for each role. I think they sort of backed themselves into a corner with the way that all the classes were designed. Having both wizards and warlocks as the controllers would have seemed out of place, essentially creating a "magician = controller" distinction straight out of the gate rather than dividing up the different roles of magic. Rogues inherently couldn't be anything other than strikers of the four distinctions, and the enhanced focus on combat for rangers kind of pushed them into being strikers as well. Rangers and warlocks can certainly get some controller-ish elements, but I don't think there was any way around primarily having them as strikers. I think they would have had to drop a class in order to bring in another controller, and I'm guessing they didn't want the hassle of the uproar as they dropped any of the three classes who fell under striker.
I actually really like the balance in having powers "all over the place", as you put it. The way I see it is that most class roles focus mainly on their primary path, but bleed out into other roles as well, which makes a huge amount of sense. For example, Warlord powers are quite heavily focused on boosting their allies, which makes perfect sense, yet have the occasional ability which reflects their position as a martial leader - just from a quick skim-through, Villain's Nightmare stands out as a good example. (In case you were wondering, Warlord was the first class that came out by opening the PDF and dragging to about halfway through the document).
I do feel like a lot of the classes have a bleed in one direction or another or can be built in different ways. So what would have been so difficult about them changing another class to a controller with a striker lean? Warlock certainly could have gone there, as well as ranger, though it would have meant a rework of those classes. No epic ruination of the game would result, I think. Have the ranger focus on copnditions, poisons, nets, use of terrain, etc, or the walock focus on curses, traps, and miasmas.
"Of Anything" is a bit broad, there are for example too few classes and effective heroic tier feats for controllers. The skills are working really well, though, and so are armors and other such items. I could use a few more wands-implements with more versatile keywords, though.
It waits for splat books before complaining or it gets the hose again. I for one am glad they didn't include more classes. The ones that are in feel polished and basic, as core classes should.
Agreed, the "Splash-Classing" just doesn't cut it. When there'll be more feats available to players, less and less people will actually multiclass. This is partially because not all multiclasses are beneficial at all. (Rogue/Wizard..? You can't even sneak with wizard powers.). And some of the multiclasses don't work as they should, because of artificial limitations. (No sneak with bows, for example, or in general rogue limitations on weapons allowed. Most of these don't make sense at all.). [/quote]
Yeah, there are these wierd restrictions in multiclassing as to what you can and can't get to work. It seems like many combinations just won't mesh well because they lack the level one frontloading of proficiencies and class features. And there are other wierd things, like how you cannot multiclass into warlock for eldrich blast until 11th level and four feats. Why does multiclassing have to be so restrictive? So much of the game was wonderfully free of arbitrary restricitons and complications but they were so afraid of a power monster that they left multiclassing to be an ultimately clunky experience with limited options.
[quote=Amadi;/comments/10076259]
Wizards were afraid to print out abilities that were consistant in fear of optimizers stacking them, so they created critical-reliant abilities which make optimizing pointless, because if you're getting that critical already the opponent is gonna take ****load of damage, no matter if you had that crit-thing or not.
This is also hollywood-ism, no one wants to die to a normal attack, but dying to a cool critical hit?
Exactly. It's gilding the lily and a lot of these weapons seem pretty normal when they aren't critting. *Yawn* Way to make things more generic. And this is not an easy thing to fix, either. Because they have obviously thought a lot about power level for each of these items and for some reason decided to place the most interesting and powerful elements on the fragmental chance you will crit.
No frigging idea, perhaps they feared that the game wouldn't be as much hack n' slash if there actually was a real controller. (Instead of AoE-nuker.).
Also, Cleric does wizard's job a lot better in almost any case, there is a thread about that in 4E CharOp board, where someone calculated effectiveness of the powers from the two classes, cleric came out on top by a fair margin. (Only real merit of wizard is sleep..)
In general, you just have to admit, wizard got shafted HARD. It lacks a real focus - It is there to deal damage, but can't deal much of it. It is there to hinder opponents, but can't do it better than other classes. Even the 'cantrips', while flavourful (And i <3 them. The best spells wizard has to offer, apart from sleep.) are useless when it comes to usefullness.
The wizard is less focused, but it is far from underpowered. I think the majority of the uproar is people reeling from the fact that wizards are not the be all end all of the game any more.
Hey everyone.... I have an announcement to make... As I have decided to make my own clan, with PurpleD, about books and reading, called [Pages], I will unfortunately need to move my status from Member to Friend here.. I am sorry, but I will still come and participate when I can. I am very sorry, but I know you understand, this being my passion and all. I will still be around though.
I'm afraid I'm going to have to go to friend status as well, with the main reason being you guys are getting so 4th edition-centric, and I've pretty much boycotted 4e altogether.
I can't contribute much in the way of meaningful discussion there. Now, I'm not saying it's a bad thing- I know you guys enjoy the heck out of it, and such. I'm just saying it's not for me, and I'll drop by now and then of course.
And yes, no incantatrix for you. Or anyone. That class makes puppies cry. Mostly because they are the former Big Bads who have been Baleful Polymorphed into said puppies. By you. Because you're an incantatrix.
Quote from Yukora »
This is Deraxas we're talking about.
Remember, the girl that just killed an aspect of herself before literally consuming her?
Yeah, I don't see her handling a pissing match in any way other than a duel.
Quote from RedDwarfian »
Yes mistress...
Quote from About epic-level D&D »
There are only so many epic, psuedonatural barbarian/blackguard half-dragon akutenshai vampire balor paragons they can throw at you, right?
Quote from Concerning breeding habits of humans in fantasy games »
I suppose it's true. Though the logistics implied in a human/Great Wyrm Prismatic Dragon pairing makes me shudder.
...Something tells me that even should all arcane casters in the world unite, that the Grease spell would NOT be sufficient.
Just because the topic is of something you have cut out completely doesn't mean you have to leave us. But it's really only a minor change--you're still more than welcome to post around here.
indeed, i, too will have to be freinded, there is a clan that much more fits my interests, however, i will still post my opinions here, when i understand what you guys are talking about
Yeah, I think it's just the new biggest thing right now and will probably become the accepted norm around here, so I can see how it would leave boycotters feeling outside the circle so to speak. But I don't think we have all forgotten about 3.5 that fast, so there's still plenty of discussion to be made there.
I for one really liked the Star Wars Saga edition I played. I realise it straddles the line between 3rd and 4th but it's pretty well made and was a lot of fun.
@Photon: I do agree that you can get a signifigant amount of powers from a second class, so in that way multiclassing feels sturdy. It's only the awkward limitations and non-funcitoning combinations that vex me.
NINJA EDIT: inb4 amadi posts that he will have to be friended because he found a min/maxing clan that focuses on strangely literal interpretations of RPG rules. /members droppin' like flies.
@wamyc: Wizards DO suck!. (Okay, even I have to admit that it is biased, but it does rise a few fine points. There are some good arguments both for and against wizards in the thread.)
Quote from Wamyc »
NINJA EDIT: inb4 amadi posts that he will have to be friended because he found a min/maxing clan that focuses on strangely literal interpretations of RPG rules. /members droppin' like flies.
I'm no member, I don't think I'm a friend either. (I'm a member of Shatter, even though the activity of that clan is somewhere between zero and amount of matter left in a world divided by zero.)
I could be a friend, though. Just to keep on with the friendlies trend.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The Sage is occupied with the unspoken
and acts without effort.
Teaching without verbosity,
producing without possessing,
creating without regard to result,
claiming nothing,
the Sage has nothing to lose.
since apparently there's quite a bit of interest for it, the sign-ups for my Slayers D20 game are finally up!
also, I'm looking at the system Mam has posted...I'd like to get in on that if it comes up.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Top 16 - 2012 Indiana State Championships Currently Playing: GBStandard - Golgari Safari MidrangeBG RBWModern - Mardu PyromancerWBR RLegacy - Good Old Fashioned BurnR
@wamyc: Wizards DO suck!. (Okay, even I have to admit that it is biased, but it does rise a few fine points. There are some good arguments both for and against wizards in the thread.)
Yes, I have actually been looking at that very thread and its lovely counterpart (Wizards DON'T suck). I like the discussions going on there and I'm learning a lot about the game. I don't have anyone to play with at the moment so the best way to acually metabolize the class information is to see what people are saying about it.
And while I haven't played the game much, I can tell that a lot of the math and formulae invoked on either side are pretty skewed and limited in scope. Still, I would go so far as to say that it seems like Wizard is probably not one of the more powerful classes, though as caveats to that:
1) the power levels of the classes are a hell of a lot closer now so even the most powerful class and the weakest are still somewhat comparable.
2) there is still a lot of testing to be done and I think the just is still out on the matter.
Since I haven't bought any 4E stuff and don't plan to any time soon, I can hardly contribute to most of the discussion going on, but I'll stay a member because this place is great. And because I might be able to add something to a discussion at some point in the future.
Everything scares me... kitties scare me... squirrels scare me... corpses....corpses bring forth a pletora of confusing feeling which i prefer not to dwell on...:p
Since I haven't bought any 4E stuff and don't plan to any time soon, I can hardly contribute to most of the discussion going on, but I'll stay a member because this place is great. And because I might be able to add something to a discussion at some point in the future.
Thank god someone isn't bailing!
In the video game horizon I think I'm going to snap up Ys book I&II when it is released on the Virtual Console this month. I have never played them but all I hear is great things (like that they are like Crystalis, my favorite NES game and that it has a great soundtrack.) Has anyone here played it?
EDIT: I am also tempted [strongly] to pick up "no more heroes" for the Wii. Any recomendations or warnings about the game?
Also, Mam, I am interested in your system though I don't have the time to play in a P&P game. It does sound like a very interesting mix of influences. I think I'm going to check that link you emailed me for hopefully updated info on the mechanics. This is the same system, right?
Uh huh, it's the same system, Wamyc mein Freund, but it's been going through a lot of development. So it's quite different now, but the info I sent you before should still let you get a feel for it.
I'm planning on some kind of document or PDF that should cover the following things:
1. The basic mechanics, of course. This includes all the rules for play, lists of powers, feats, skills, and stunts.
2. An optional class system. I'm imagining three main game "settings." One is where there is no strict class setup except for a very, very loose one, in which most things are available to everyone just with variation in how easy it is for a given character to have a particular kind of thing. The other extreme is a defined set of classes that work like templates, each with class powers, special feats or bonuses that are granted based on class, and a set of stunt paths for each class. The medium option is where you can mix the two types and have some characters using a class and some not using one, but still allowing characters to "opt out" of following a class's preset path if they want to mix it up a little (kind of like easy multiclassing).
3. A section on player guidelines, including a "How to Build the Character You Want" sort of thing. Notes for what makes an appropriate stunt, what the powers are good for accomplishing, benchmarks and rules of thumb, modifiers and optional rules, and examples of how to accomplish specific archetypes would all be included. If you're wondering, "How can I make a guy that can turn into a wolf, but only at night?", or "How do I make someone whose magic gets really powerful when she's angry?", I'd like this section to be able to give you helpful answers.
4. A section on Narrator/GM guidelines. Advice on stuff like how to tailor rules to fit a genre (like high fantasy or superhero), how to quickly customize or invent new powers, optional rules on stuff like money and gear, all that would go in this section. I'll probably need a lot of help and input for this part.
5. Examples. A section full of 'em, including premade monsters and baddies, premade characters, variant classes and powers, and so on.
This will all take a long time to do, and I'm still working on the mechanics. It'd be fun, I think, to check it with others as I go, getting feedback and almost making it a kind of group project.
On another note, I'm sad to see people go and activity decline, but I also have to agree that a lot of the discussion about 4th Edition has been kind of thicket-y, not to mention very much focused on arguments and criticisms and defenses.
Really, D&D seemed to be the focus of this clan even before 4th. Some people have voiced involvement or interest in White Wolf, M&M, not to mention video games, but D&D seems to be what gets talked about the most. And even then, it usually isn't D&D game recaps or anything, more like D&D gamer culture. Those are fine topics, but it is true that they dominate somewhat more than other ones.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
All that I yearn for, for richer or poorer, is to be the light that you see. All that I yearn for, for richer or poorer, is to be the peace that you feel. All that I yearn for, for richer or poorer, is to fill your heart on my own.
But the rainbow is an image of hope for many reasons, as it is a brilliant sight coming out of oftimes dismal weather.
No More Heroes is an excellent game. the story is weird and wonky, but the combat controls are definitely great. It's not an incredibly difficult game, but it's very fun.
I'm afraid that I'm not going anywhere. I'm gonna stay right here in Natural 20, you are all stuck with me, :-p.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Banner and avatar by me.
Official Character Sheet Shredder of DAMNIT
DAMNIT: I should never have to shred my own character sheet in frustration.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Like I said, the system is still under heavy development. I can give some of the highlights:
The character building ends up being a combination of both level based and point-buy.
The main inspirations are True20, a bit of Big Eyes Small Mouth, a bit of Mutants and Masterminds, and D&D. So far I've really liked adapting the formatting lexicon from 4th Edition D&D in particular. Really makes for a concise, clear means of describing effects.
There are the six ability scores, as in d20. However, characters don't have a score ranging from 8-20 or so on. Rather, the ability score is expressed as modifiers are in D&D. A high Strength score would be 4 or 5, as opposed to 18 or 20.
There are a small number of class-like character orientations, and I am planning on making an optional class system that works like templates for those that prefer preplanned class paths. You gain ranks in powers and skills as you gain levels. In this system, a "power" is any special ability a character might have, whether something supernatural (telepathy, earth shaping, probability manipulation) to special techniques (throws, grapples, sneak attacks, etc.) to extraordinary qualities (super strength, regeneration, immunity to poison, so on). Each level, you gain a rank in a power that is favored for your character type, and a feat slot that can be used to gain a feat, skill rank, or another power rank.
As you acquire ranks in powers, the point-buy part comes into play. Each level you also gain a number of stunt points. Stunts can be passive or active. Active stunts are like a character's special attacks and tricks (not unlike powers in D&D, if you want a comparison), and passive stunts usually augment the effects of your powers.
For instance, there is a power called alternate form that lets you occasionally turn into a stronger version of yourself. If you spend enough stunt points on alternate form, you can acquire multiple forms to turn into in addition to the form you have already from knowing the power at all.
I'm making it span over thirty levels now, which I think is attractive for a number of reasons.
One of the key features of the system is that there is only one die to be rolled: a d20. In order to vary damage a bit, you make a damage roll with the d20. Each attack has something called a severity modifier, and all characters have a Toughness score. If your d20 + severity roll overcomes the character's Toughness, it deals extra damage. If it falls short, it does less damage.
So these are the nuts and bolts of the system, simplified.
All that I yearn for, for richer or poorer, is to be the peace that you feel.
All that I yearn for, for richer or poorer, is to fill your heart on my own.
Gaymers | Magic Coffeehouse | Little Jar of Mamelon | Natural 20
Also, the Slayers d20 is incredibly awesome, yet I've never actually gotten to play a game with it. I'd be up for that anytime.
Anyone playing FFIV DS, by the way?
@Photon: I am probably going to add FFIV to my christmas list this holiday season, along with Chrono Trigger DS. I'm definitely going to look into it.
I've gotten to do a decent amount of playing vampire, both the new and old system. I had the pleasure of having an excellent mind**** of a Storyteller for those games. And I think the WoD game system is my favorite system so far, though 4th ed. is really making me rethink what I think about d20.
I think a reasonable ruling would be to say that planetiods simply have a higher-faceted hitdie, like a d4billion. that would make the earth a 2 or 3 hit die creature. Besides, killing the earth would just mean the end of the animation effect, as the earth is essentially lifeless i.e. dead right now.
Also I doubt anyone would survive even the most subtlest stirrings of the earth if you animated it. If it moved even stlightly, every living thing on the earth would simply die from the impact and tumult.
It's a great game and tons of fun. The setting and theme are so much fun and it's something you can really get into especially with all of the extra material they provide in the setting. I'm not normally one for precon adventures, but I really like the 7th sea NPCs and how fleshed out they make the world.
ALSO: I picked up the 4th edition core books and they are really living up to my expectations. It's a lot to take in (but RPGs always are) and it's much more different than I expected from 3.5. Some observations:
1) they were really smart to streamline things. From the languages to the skills to the weapons to the abilities, there are never too much or too little of anything.
2) still really wanting more from multiclassing. A taste is just not going to cut it, sorry. Maybe it will be better once I actually get to play. (also, I'm a little worried that any better muticlassing will cut into the awesomeness of the half elf's racial ability)
3) love what they did with the races. And the monster manual having that awesome cache of monster races in an appendix was a real treat too!
4) Did they really need to charge me 35$ for the DMG? That book has the profile of a runway model (very thin) and seems to be filled with (albiet helpful) fluff.
5) Why is this game obsessed with critical hits? They are really going to happen very infrequently it seems, like 5% of the time, and yet epic feats are all over them (like 80% of the epic feats are there to double your threat range with a particular weapon type) and so much of the magical items are devoted to kicking ass with critical hits.
6) Seriously, why did there have to be three strikers and only one controller in core? Would it have been that hard to have two classes for each role? And though I have not played the game, the powers do seem to be all over the place in terms of the class role. I see controller abilites in rangers and warlocks look kind of controllerish in places as well. And yet wizards don't seem to stand out all that much in terms of controlling.
"Of Anything" is a bit broad, there are for example too few classes and effective heroic tier feats for controllers. The skills are working really well, though, and so are armors and other such items. I could use a few more wands/implements with more versatile keywords, though.
Agreed, the "Splash-Classing" just doesn't cut it. When there'll be more feats available to players, less and less people will actually multiclass. This is partially because not all multiclasses are beneficial at all. (Rogue/Wizard..? You can't even sneak with wizard powers.). And some of the multiclasses don't work as they should, because of artificial limitations. (No sneak with bows, for example, or in general rogue limitations on weapons allowed. Most of these don't make sense at all.).
/agree
Yes, it contains poisons, so you need it to play.
Wizards were afraid to print out abilities that were consistant in fear of optimizers stacking them, so they created critical-reliant abilities which make optimizing pointless, because if you're getting that critical already the opponent is gonna take ****load of damage, no matter if you had that crit-thing or not.
This is also hollywood-ism, no one wants to die to a normal attack, but dying to a cool critical hit?
No frigging idea, perhaps they feared that the game wouldn't be as much hack n' slash if there actually was a real controller. (Instead of AoE-nuker.).
Also, Cleric does wizard's job a lot better in almost any case, there is a thread about that in 4E CharOp board, where someone calculated effectiveness of the powers from the two classes, cleric came out on top by a fair margin. (Only real merit of wizard is sleep..)
In general, you just have to admit, wizard got shafted HARD. It lacks a real focus - It is there to deal damage, but can't deal much of it. It is there to hinder opponents, but can't do it better than other classes. Even the 'cantrips', while flavourful (And i <3 them. The best spells wizard has to offer, apart from sleep.) are useless when it comes to usefullness.
I agree that it makes sense, but it also rises problems. Some powers from ranger for example, are better at controlling the enemies than most powers from wizard is. I agree that it makes sense for rangers to be able to stab their sword at pressure point and totally incapacicate enemy for a short while, but if wizard can't do something comparable to that then, it leads to game inbalance.
For example Confounding Arrows (Ranger Daily 15.) can deal 5[W]+3x Dexterity damage, and stun the target (Save Ends.). Considering that stun is the best condition you can cause on opponent, this is infact extremely powerful control asset. Only things from wizard that are about as effective as this are Sleep (It affects multiple targets, so it's good.) and Destructive Salutation (Bloodmage 20 Daily.)
and acts without effort.
Teaching without verbosity,
producing without possessing,
creating without regard to result,
claiming nothing,
the Sage has nothing to lose.
I would say being able to devote half of your power slots to your alternate class as being much more than "just a taste".
Also, multiclassing doesn't really cut into Dilettante, because Dilettante changes the functionality of the selected power pretty significantly by taking it from at-will down to encounter. Dilettante is also, for the record, considered one of the weakest racial features in the game thus far. Human is a much better multiclasser than half-elf, not that it is particularly amazing at it, either.
Magic items aren't really devoted to critical hits, it's just that all magical weapons have extra utility when you score a critical hit. Very few magic weapons are actually oriented around critical hits specifically. I'm not sure why the critical hit was given such mechanical emphasis in epic, but when you consider a +6 weapon adds +6d6 or more to your already maxed damage with a critical, I can see why someone in epic would want to facilitate more frequent criticals.
The warlock was originally conceptualized to be a controller, but the powers put it strictly in striker territory. Fey warlock is still very much a controller, though.
All classes have a bit of potential to bleed into other territories. That should be fine, I don't think that all roles need to be strictly walled off into their respective classes at all times.
Also, since you have not played the game, I would withhold a lot of criticism on the power distribution until you actually see it, because how things look on paper are really very different from how they play out. Ranger is NOTHING if it is not a striker- in my experience and based on the experiences of others I have read, Ranger tends to be the most capable striker of the set, although Rogue has it beat for strict damage output most of the time. Both classes have some potential to control, but then again all classes have some potential to control. All classes have some potential to do everything, but each class focuses primarily on a certain role. A ranger or rogue may have a handful of powers on their list that could let them control a bit, but given the fact that you have far fewer slots than powers, you aren't likely to have more than 1 or 2 of such powers on the average character, unless you strictly focused on them.
Wizards, on the other hand, are ideal controllers. No one else handles big crowds like a Wizard, and so many Wizard powers have additional effects that lock down the crowd, and most of their powers lend themselves to controlling. They don't just have one or two that are control oriented, but rather have some way of handling the crowd or bogging down a foe at every level.
I should point out, also, that controller is widely considered to be the least vital of the roles. Couple this with the new attitude for non-symmetrical design, and suddenly only having one controller to start out makes more sense.
Technically, though, 4E will get a lot better when more sourcebooks for it emerge, and some of the problems are addressed. (For Example: Some weapons have: "All damage dealt by this weapon is fire damage.". Now, according to PHB weapon never deals damage - The weapon damage is added to the damage you deal with your attack. Therefore, that function of the weapon is useless, unless someone comes up with a way to animate it into an animated object.. Somehow.)
and acts without effort.
Teaching without verbosity,
producing without possessing,
creating without regard to result,
claiming nothing,
the Sage has nothing to lose.
Amadi, I'm just gonna say it-
You're a numbskull. That's all.
Yes. It is irreconcilably absurd. They are tiny little tater tots who should be able to do nothing.
I do feel like a lot of the classes have a bleed in one direction or another or can be built in different ways. So what would have been so difficult about them changing another class to a controller with a striker lean? Warlock certainly could have gone there, as well as ranger, though it would have meant a rework of those classes. No epic ruination of the game would result, I think. Have the ranger focus on copnditions, poisons, nets, use of terrain, etc, or the walock focus on curses, traps, and miasmas.
It waits for splat books before complaining or it gets the hose again. I for one am glad they didn't include more classes. The ones that are in feel polished and basic, as core classes should.
Exactly. It's gilding the lily and a lot of these weapons seem pretty normal when they aren't critting. *Yawn* Way to make things more generic. And this is not an easy thing to fix, either. Because they have obviously thought a lot about power level for each of these items and for some reason decided to place the most interesting and powerful elements on the fragmental chance you will crit.
The wizard is less focused, but it is far from underpowered. I think the majority of the uproar is people reeling from the fact that wizards are not the be all end all of the game any more.
Magic Coffeehouse!
Come in, sit down, relax, get to know somebody!
Open Three and a Half Years as of October 19, 2009!
Banner by PurpleD and avatar/custom by Tanthalas
I can't contribute much in the way of meaningful discussion there. Now, I'm not saying it's a bad thing- I know you guys enjoy the heck out of it, and such. I'm just saying it's not for me, and I'll drop by now and then of course.
Peace
"I am in the arcane, and the arcane is in me."
Official Matron Mother of Clan Planar Chaos
Awesome Avatar and signature by DarkNightCavalier
Deraxas, Dark Maiden of Shimia,, still oddly obsessed with a mindmage.
Like freeform roleplaying? Try Darkness Befalls Us
Ryttare Kelasin Luna Orelinalei
I for one really liked the Star Wars Saga edition I played. I realise it straddles the line between 3rd and 4th but it's pretty well made and was a lot of fun.
@Photon: I do agree that you can get a signifigant amount of powers from a second class, so in that way multiclassing feels sturdy. It's only the awkward limitations and non-funcitoning combinations that vex me.
NINJA EDIT: inb4 amadi posts that he will have to be friended because he found a min/maxing clan that focuses on strangely literal interpretations of RPG rules. /members droppin' like flies.
I'm no member, I don't think I'm a friend either. (I'm a member of Shatter, even though the activity of that clan is somewhere between zero and amount of matter left in a world divided by zero.)
I could be a friend, though. Just to keep on with the friendlies trend.
and acts without effort.
Teaching without verbosity,
producing without possessing,
creating without regard to result,
claiming nothing,
the Sage has nothing to lose.
also, I'm looking at the system Mam has posted...I'd like to get in on that if it comes up.
Currently Playing:
GBStandard - Golgari Safari MidrangeBG
RBWModern - Mardu PyromancerWBR
RLegacy - Good Old Fashioned BurnR
Clan Contest 3 Mafia - Mafia Co-MVP
Yes, I have actually been looking at that very thread and its lovely counterpart (Wizards DON'T suck). I like the discussions going on there and I'm learning a lot about the game. I don't have anyone to play with at the moment so the best way to acually metabolize the class information is to see what people are saying about it.
And while I haven't played the game much, I can tell that a lot of the math and formulae invoked on either side are pretty skewed and limited in scope. Still, I would go so far as to say that it seems like Wizard is probably not one of the more powerful classes, though as caveats to that:
1) the power levels of the classes are a hell of a lot closer now so even the most powerful class and the weakest are still somewhat comparable.
2) there is still a lot of testing to be done and I think the just is still out on the matter.
{Magic: The RPG}
Thank god someone isn't bailing!
In the video game horizon I think I'm going to snap up Ys book I&II when it is released on the Virtual Console this month. I have never played them but all I hear is great things (like that they are like Crystalis, my favorite NES game and that it has a great soundtrack.) Has anyone here played it?
EDIT: I am also tempted [strongly] to pick up "no more heroes" for the Wii. Any recomendations or warnings about the game?
Also, Mam, I am interested in your system though I don't have the time to play in a P&P game. It does sound like a very interesting mix of influences. I think I'm going to check that link you emailed me for hopefully updated info on the mechanics. This is the same system, right?
I'm planning on some kind of document or PDF that should cover the following things:
1. The basic mechanics, of course. This includes all the rules for play, lists of powers, feats, skills, and stunts.
2. An optional class system. I'm imagining three main game "settings." One is where there is no strict class setup except for a very, very loose one, in which most things are available to everyone just with variation in how easy it is for a given character to have a particular kind of thing. The other extreme is a defined set of classes that work like templates, each with class powers, special feats or bonuses that are granted based on class, and a set of stunt paths for each class. The medium option is where you can mix the two types and have some characters using a class and some not using one, but still allowing characters to "opt out" of following a class's preset path if they want to mix it up a little (kind of like easy multiclassing).
3. A section on player guidelines, including a "How to Build the Character You Want" sort of thing. Notes for what makes an appropriate stunt, what the powers are good for accomplishing, benchmarks and rules of thumb, modifiers and optional rules, and examples of how to accomplish specific archetypes would all be included. If you're wondering, "How can I make a guy that can turn into a wolf, but only at night?", or "How do I make someone whose magic gets really powerful when she's angry?", I'd like this section to be able to give you helpful answers.
4. A section on Narrator/GM guidelines. Advice on stuff like how to tailor rules to fit a genre (like high fantasy or superhero), how to quickly customize or invent new powers, optional rules on stuff like money and gear, all that would go in this section. I'll probably need a lot of help and input for this part.
5. Examples. A section full of 'em, including premade monsters and baddies, premade characters, variant classes and powers, and so on.
This will all take a long time to do, and I'm still working on the mechanics. It'd be fun, I think, to check it with others as I go, getting feedback and almost making it a kind of group project.
On another note, I'm sad to see people go and activity decline, but I also have to agree that a lot of the discussion about 4th Edition has been kind of thicket-y, not to mention very much focused on arguments and criticisms and defenses.
Really, D&D seemed to be the focus of this clan even before 4th. Some people have voiced involvement or interest in White Wolf, M&M, not to mention video games, but D&D seems to be what gets talked about the most. And even then, it usually isn't D&D game recaps or anything, more like D&D gamer culture. Those are fine topics, but it is true that they dominate somewhat more than other ones.
All that I yearn for, for richer or poorer, is to be the peace that you feel.
All that I yearn for, for richer or poorer, is to fill your heart on my own.
Gaymers | Magic Coffeehouse | Little Jar of Mamelon | Natural 20
I'm afraid that I'm not going anywhere. I'm gonna stay right here in Natural 20, you are all stuck with me, :-p.