PDA

View Full Version : d20 adaptation of the WarCraft universe



RedWarlock
2013-01-03, 02:17 PM
(And before you go there, I know about both the d20-WarCraft and WoW-RPG by S&S, I have them both, and they really suck, mechanically.)

I'm putting together the next campaign I want to run after I finish my current Eberron game. Its sort of a nostalgic concept for me, since the first campaign I DMed back in 2003 was a WarCraft game (that really didn't go very well, but my players liked it..) I want to do it right this time.

I've got a host of houserules and fixes I want to run the game through, basically taking about 2/3 of the content from d20/PF, plus about 1/4 from 4e, in new arrangements suited to the setting. Entirely custom classes, a new skill list (primarily constructed by taking the 4e skill list and adding the WoW tradeskills as Profession(x) and Craft(x) skills), and customized races for the setting.

The basic campaign concept is going to start the players off during the Third War (WarCraft III), having them play through as two or three distinct plot-line parties (a human-centric Alliance group, an Orc-centric Horde group, and maybe a Night Elf group) and have them advance through the plot of the game (including dealing with the Cult of the Damned, and perhaps having a traitor split off to join the Scourge), eventually dealing with the Legion, then the expansion (probably having those Scourge PCs wind up in the Forsaken).

The game will continue to advance, after the war finishes they'll go through the major points and wide-open world as defined in WoW, playing through two parties in alternating weeks, an Alliance-side group, and a Horde-side group. As new events and time-periods pass, they'll explore new worlds and deal with each expansion's content.

Now, just to be clear, I'm not looking to straight-up adapt WoW to d20. (If I wanted to do that, using 4e more straight-up would be more appropriate, with the limited/nonfunctional multiclassing.) I will take significant inspiration, but I'm already looking at splitting off some major concepts. This is d20 doing the WarCraft *universe*, not just the limited implementation of WoW.

For instance, I've got it currently in my concept that the Hunter will be broken down into two classes, the Scout, which will handle ranged marksmanship and military action, and the Savage, which will be an animalistic class that gains beastly features, and handles the Beast Companion. Multiclassing will allow the player to choose their mix for a given character. (Not all ranged-focused characters in WC, who get pigeonholed as Hunters, have pets, but the in-game class is so focused on the pet that it's hard to extricate.)

I'm also debating merging the Mage and the Warlock, alongside the conceptual Necromancer, into an Arcanist or some-other-name class, since WC's arcane magic is much more blended than they properly represent in the MMO. I've got other plans to avoid tier1-style domination, but it's a balancing act.

The Death Knight, for instance, will use maneuvers in the style of Bo9S, with a unique refresh mechanic. (I know someone had a DK class on here, if anyone can find it, please link, because it's a great starting point, though I've got some other ideas.) The idea I've got is that he would have all maneuvers available, but they're powered by his runes, which he gets at a distinct interval by rolling a d6, with something like 1-2=unholy, 3-4=frost, 5-6=blood. Maybe every time he takes damage he rolls a rune-die, rolling an extra die every 10 extra damage taken, sort of like the Crusader's delayed damage pool w/Furious Counterstrike.

Now there's also a few system-changes I'm going to make, independent of the 'content' changes (the skills, feats, classes, races), the topmost of which is taking the level scale to 30. One example is I'm planning on killing the full-attack action (and full-round actions as a whole) and instead having base damage with weapons increase by a factor at every 5-pt increase, kind of like 4e's epic damage increase, but on a higher scale. Then, too, with each increase the character also gets an extra d20 to roll to make their attack, allowing them to take the better of the two or more dice. These dice could be spent on any attack, even AoOs/OAs, or even spent to enable other stuff, like extra actions.

(Extra attacks would be more 4e-ish, either rolled into the basic action (like 2WF allowing an attack with both weapons) or as special, extra actions to use. So a tail-slap might be a move action, while a bite could be used for standard-action attacks, or as a swift in certain cases.)

Monster HD would be gone, replaced with 4e-style combat-role classes that have minimal customization (IE brute, lurker, etc) but that are also player-accessible. Rather than have the Fighter (or its like) be the beginner's class, have the NPC classes, just as strong, but not as customizable, be available to players. The Adept, in particular, would inherit the Adept's, or maybe the Bard's, casting progression (assuming I use slots like that), and then able to choose arcane, divine, or primal casting classes, but then also a built-in Magic Blast SLA like the Warlock's EB.

Some of the content I'm not really going to change much, like aside from minor tweaks, I'll probably leave the Rogue alone (maybe), and aside from cascading changes from my system fixes, a lot of feats will be left alone. (I'm going to split the difference on d20 vs PF power attack, and go 1/2 of BAB, rounded up.)

So, what do you guys think? I'm going to keep posting, I've got some specific concepts I want to explore and lay out, but I want to hear some comments. If anyone has any content suggestions, please link them. (I mentioned someone had done a manuever-based DK, and I want to say someone made an incarnum-inspired tinker or artificer-type class. That's another idea I want to fiddle with.)

roguemetal
2013-01-03, 03:09 PM
(And before you go there, I know about both the d20-WarCraft and WoW-RPG by S&S, I have them both, and they really suck, mechanically.)

I'm putting together the next campaign I want to run after I finish my current Eberron game. Its sort of a nostalgic concept for me, since the first campaign I DMed back in 2003 was a WarCraft game (that really didn't go very well, but my players liked it..) I want to do it right this time.

I've got a host of houserules and fixes I want to run the game through, basically taking about 2/3 of the content from d20/PF, plus about 1/4 from 4e, in new arrangements suited to the setting. Entirely custom classes, a new skill list (primarily constructed by taking the 4e skill list and adding the WoW tradeskills as Profession(x) and Craft(x) skills), and customized races for the setting.

The basic campaign concept is going to start the players off during the Third War (WarCraft III), having them play through as two or three distinct plot-line parties (a human-centric Alliance group, an Orc-centric Horde group, and maybe a Night Elf group) and have them advance through the plot of the game (including dealing with the Cult of the Damned, and perhaps having a traitor split off to join the Scourge), eventually dealing with the Legion, then the expansion (probably having those Scourge PCs wind up in the Forsaken).

The game will continue to advance, after the war finishes they'll go through the major points and wide-open world as defined in WoW, playing through two parties in alternating weeks, an Alliance-side group, and a Horde-side group. As new events and time-periods pass, they'll explore new worlds and deal with each expansion's content.

Now, just to be clear, I'm not looking to straight-up adapt WoW to d20. (If I wanted to do that, using 4e more straight-up would be more appropriate, with the limited/nonfunctional multiclassing.) I will take significant inspiration, but I'm already looking at splitting off some major concepts. This is d20 doing the WarCraft *universe*, not just the limited implementation of WoW.

For instance, I've got it currently in my concept that the Hunter will be broken down into two classes, the Scout, which will handle ranged marksmanship and military action, and the Savage, which will be an animalistic class that gains beastly features, and handles the Beast Companion. Multiclassing will allow the player to choose their mix for a given character. (Not all ranged-focused characters in WC, who get pigeonholed as Hunters, have pets, but the in-game class is so focused on the pet that it's hard to extricate.)

I'm also debating merging the Mage and the Warlock, alongside the conceptual Necromancer, into an Arcanist or some-other-name class, since WC's arcane magic is much more blended than they properly represent in the MMO. I've got other plans to avoid tier1-style domination, but it's a balancing act.

The Death Knight, for instance, will use maneuvers in the style of Bo9S, with a unique refresh mechanic. (I know someone had a DK class on here, if anyone can find it, please link, because it's a great starting point, though I've got some other ideas.) The idea I've got is that he would have all maneuvers available, but they're powered by his runes, which he gets at a distinct interval by rolling a d6, with something like 1-2=unholy, 3-4=frost, 5-6=blood. Maybe every time he takes damage he rolls a rune-die, rolling an extra die every 10 extra damage taken, sort of like the Crusader's delayed damage pool w/Furious Counterstrike.

Now there's also a few system-changes I'm going to make, independent of the 'content' changes (the skills, feats, classes, races), the topmost of which is taking the level scale to 30. One example is I'm planning on killing the full-attack action (and full-round actions as a whole) and instead having base damage with weapons increase by a factor at every 5-pt increase, kind of like 4e's epic damage increase, but on a higher scale. Then, too, with each increase the character also gets an extra d20 to roll to make their attack, allowing them to take the better of the two or more dice. These dice could be spent on any attack, even AoOs/OAs, or even spent to enable other stuff, like extra actions.

(Extra attacks would be more 4e-ish, either rolled into the basic action (like 2WF allowing an attack with both weapons) or as special, extra actions to use. So a tail-slap might be a move action, while a bite could be used for standard-action attacks, or as a swift in certain cases.)

Monster HD would be gone, replaced with 4e-style combat-role classes that have minimal customization (IE brute, lurker, etc) but that are also player-accessible. Rather than have the Fighter (or its like) be the beginner's class, have the NPC classes, just as strong, but not as customizable, be available to players. The Adept, in particular, would inherit the Adept's, or maybe the Bard's, casting progression (assuming I use slots like that), and then able to choose arcane, divine, or primal casting classes, but then also a built-in Magic Blast SLA like the Warlock's EB.

Some of the content I'm not really going to change much, like aside from minor tweaks, I'll probably leave the Rogue alone (maybe), and aside from cascading changes from my system fixes, a lot of feats will be left alone. (I'm going to split the difference on d20 vs PF power attack, and go 1/2 of BAB, rounded up.)

So, what do you guys think? I'm going to keep posting, I've got some specific concepts I want to explore and lay out, but I want to hear some comments. If anyone has any content suggestions, please link them. (I mentioned someone had done a manuever-based DK, and I want to say someone made an incarnum-inspired tinker or artificer-type class. That's another idea I want to fiddle with.)

I think this could work, though I'm not sure you are headed in the right direction with it. I've played all the Warcraft games short of WoW which I've played for only a short time, so may have some misconceptions or dated understanding, so correct me if I'm wrong about anything.

To start with, D&D already has the possibility to represent every WoW character via multiclassing in some respect. When I hear you talking about dividing hunter into two classes and having a nerfed wizard warlock hybrid, I ask how is this different than forced multiclassing, if not further pigeonholing your players. Combining Mage and Warlock into one class is a better direction. Warcraft, WoW, and most games work with each character providing a specific function FOR FAST PACED COMBAT that is necessary for their survival as a team. D&D has each character providing multiple functions to cover all the major hurdles they might encounter, and are not about becoming one trick ponies. Unless you set up a WoW style tier tree with reset capability... but how much work do you honestly want to put into this?

While D&D does allow for a Deathknight, someone who, correct me if I'm wrong, is a damage-sustained tank/dps, tanks have little place in d&d and are job better accomplished by predicting your opponent. Taking a hit is never something you should want to do with any class. Remember there are no good healer dedicated classes in D&D 3.5 because the damage-health ratio doesn't make healing useful more than once or twice a combat, and most debilitations aren't health based. Playing this as 4e may work, but then you're essentially playing Warcraft, and the only advantage to pen and paper is that out of combat interactions are open ended.

I do like the idea of monster advancement replacement, though be careful about considering their SLA changes.

Definitely set some restrictions and changes regarding crafting.

In lieu of what I've said, I think custom equipment, which is such an integral part of those games, can be the fix to most of these issues. While 3.5 skills and magic dominate over a high BAB, much of the Warcraft equipment balances the field for all classes, and has always given versatility to each character. Sitting down to really balance an extensive list of items of that kind will be an endeavor, but well worth it. Remember to address with your equipment the major concerns of D&D characters, and not concentrate on mimicking the damage potential or reduction the Warcraft items would provide. Sorry if I sound repetitive at this point, but I've seen conversions of this type fail so many times I'd hate to see it again.

AttilaTheGeek
2013-01-03, 09:16 PM
Preface: I was an avid WoW player for about a year, then I pretty much stopped, though I do still play on occasion. I played a Mage (Arcane), a Death Knight (Blood), and a Priest (Shadow) for the most part.


Remember there are no good healer dedicated classes in D&D 3.5 because the damage-health ratio doesn't make healing useful more than once or twice a combat, and most debilitations aren't health based.
(emphasis mine)

But that's exactly the thing he's trying to change. (I think?) By allowing for dedicated healers and tanks, you change the in-combat roles from "Single target DPS", "AoE DPS", "Buffing/Debuffing/Control" and "Sustained DPS" to "DPS" (being a larger umbrella), "Control", "Healer", and "Tank". Personally, I think that's great. When I play a sword and board fighter, or a paladin, in D&D, I want to wade into the thick of combat and try to take hits for other people, not trying to dodge hits like the squishy wizard in the back.

toapat
2013-01-03, 09:23 PM
The first thing i would suggest, is to watch DnD 5th ed, which, if WotC can hold their promise, will be something that gets the Depth of 3.5, the balance of 4th, without the Bulldozer of 4th.

RedWarlock
2013-01-04, 01:18 AM
Those are all good points, but yes, I'm planning on addressing a lot of that.

First off, yes, much of it is accomplishable through multiclassing, but I'm not trying to force players to recreate warcraft characters, I'm trying to recreate warcraft power-concepts (like shaman magic being very different from druid magic, or paladins having a unique concept distinct from priests) and allow the players to explore on their own, through their own multiclassing.

For instance, this is my current outlay of classes, with *-marked ones possibly being PrCs:


Arcanist (single class combining Mage, Necromancer, and Warlock Warcraft concepts)
Death Knight*
Druid
Monk (eventually)
Paladin*
Priest
Rogue
Savage
Scout
Shaman
Tinker
Warrior
Wind Rider*


I am also looking at the WoW-style class structure of tank/healer/DPS, as well as the related 4e split of defender/controller/striker/leader. Both have their points (controller being present in WoW but less regimented) which I'll use for comparison.

For the Arcanist, my idea is that I'll add a minor per-spell prerequisite, using Arcana for Mage spells, Demonology for Warlock spells, and Necromancy for Necromancer spells. (if this doesn't work on some level, I might well split them back off, but keep some cross-learning possible, or use some kind of cross-class benefit between them, to make it easier between the two.) Maybe something akin to Psion disciplines, with a generic list shared, then a concentrated list for the sub-class. (though that goes into what they did with the WoW arcanist, same idea. (It's not horrible as-such, it just doesn't work as well for the divine classes, IMO)

Death Knight could be a prestige class, or it could be a base-class (I'm thinking prestiges are unneeded, either its a full concept worthy of its own 1-30 class, or simply a feat/ACF on a current class) since it takes special circumstances. I'm thinking along the lines of being a prestige-base class, where you meet the (story-driven) prereqs, then can do level-trading, either gradually(swapping one extra level every level-up) or immediately(like the DMG blackguard).

Paladin is maybe a prestige based on WarCraft lore, since the original paladins were priests and knights who were cross-trained in the other field, but I may skip that. (Draenei have paladins of their own, from a distinct cultural standpoint.) Plus I don't want confusion, since priests can choose one of several power-sources (Light, Shadow, Elune, and others) while Paladins only serve the Light. (plus, my main structure for the armor system has all spellcasting subject to a variation of arcane spell failure, which I'll explain below, so paladin magic was all going to be maneuvers or low-level spells.)

And yes, I'm planning on changing how healing works. 4e's healing surges are definitely an elegant mechanic in the running, but not the only one I'm considering. I'm thinking leader/healer effects will be based as much around condition-canceling or mitigation as straight HP-healing. Some classes like paladins, druids, and shamans will have a bit of forced multi-role capability, so even if nobody wants to build a dedicated healer, multiple of those classes can still keep people alive. (and the First Aid skill will be able to actually heal people!)

Toapat, I do watch the 5e development, but I'm actually thinking in the opposite direction in terms of where they're building now. I'm not really partial to the low-progression model their using. 4e wasn't bad in how their numbers built, they just made bad assumptions on where those numbers should be coming from. I don't like small, useless plusses either. (I like their Advantage system, that was some of where I got the idea for my multiple-dice replacement for iterative attacks.)

Now as for the equipment, I'm actually planning on modeling from WoW there a bit, by making the craft skills (blacksmithing, tailoring, enchanting, inscription, etc) individually create the different categories of items based on ranks in the respective skills, scaling all the way up. (though I'm probably going to break from WoW AND D&D tradition, and largely do away with item boosts to ability scores. Instead, I'm thinking I'll do regular ability gain from class levels.)

The other thing I'm planning on borrowing from WoW, which should make the tanking concept more easily borrowed into the game, is that I'm going to have the heavier armors use a fractional damage resist, meaning they take off a fraction of the damage dealt to the wearer. Right now I'm thinking categories of Cloth, Leather(Light), Scale(Medium), and Plate(Heavy). Cloth grants no resist, Leather would grant 1/4 resist, Scale grants 1/2 resist, and Plate grants 3/4 resist.

Then, too, to keep mages out of heavy armor, I've got this concept for putting spell failure on everything, in a different form. Rather than just a 'fail' check, it imposes a caster-level penalty on spells cast in armor, perhaps to a limit of half level, with a minimum CL required to even cast the spell. (this means a half-caster like a 3.5 paladin would take no penalty, while a priest who would normally get 9s is dropped to fractional effectiveness.)

So, just vague ideas floating in the nether, but what do you guys think?

Grimsage Matt
2013-01-04, 01:43 AM
Jarian has a D&D Paladin, Rouge Shaman and Death knight based off Warcraft (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10512914&postcount=109), might be intresting.

Intrested, and can help with some parts.

Also, for the Savage and the Warrior, this might be intresting (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=227466).

Just throwing ideas out there. BTW, the tinker, Goblin or Gnome? Might new two diffrent lists/sets of features.

toapat
2013-01-04, 11:31 AM
Jarian has a D&D Paladin, Rouge Shaman and Death knight based off Warcraft (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10512914&postcount=109), might be intresting.

although i assume that Jarien does balanced homebrew, she failed to make concise decisions to keep the feel without getting overly complex.

RedWarlock
2013-01-04, 11:49 AM
Hrm. I might mine those for mechanics, but yeah, WAAAY to complex. Not interested in replicating WoW's class specs. (They might get representation as feats, or maybe ACFs in a few cases, but not a forced set of extensive, game-changing choices.)

I'll post more later, busy at work.

Grimsage Matt
2013-01-04, 05:13 PM
There's also Derjuin's Maneuver based Death Knight (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=253368), which might be a bit more acceptable.

RedWarlock
2013-01-04, 05:38 PM
Whoo! Yes! That was what I was remembering. Thank you!

RedWarlock
2013-01-05, 10:12 PM
So I was thinking about it, and I've settled on some inherent mechanical changes for all characters:

When creating a character, before even selecting a class, you gain:


hit points equal to your Con score, adjusting as the score changes retroactively.
skill points equal to your Int score, which can be spent on any skill or skill-trick, to a max of 4 ranks per skill. (also adjusts retroactively when increased)

(Skills, for reference, are spent 1-for-1 whether class or cross-class, and otherwise cap at character level for class skills, or 1/2 level for cross-class skills, with a +3 bonus for class skills. That bonus can't take the ranks+bonus total higher than level+3, even if spent for such.)

As you level, you gain:


A Feat gained every odd level (1, 3, 5, 7, 9, etc)
1 point to the ability score of your choice every 4th level (4, 8, 12, etc)
1 point to one of three core stats associated with your class for every even level (2, 4, 6, 8, etc). These are typically 2 mental/physical, and then 1 physical/mental. So a Rogue might have Dex/Str/Cha, while a Shaman has Wis/Cha/Con (maybe) as the available choices. You also have to change it up, using no more than half the available increases on a single ability score, regardless of class. (Let's say Bob, level 12 character, has 6 increases. He can't spend more than 3 of them on strength.) Taking levels in a different class allows you to spend your increases on the stats associated with ANY of the classes you've taken, not just the most recent one.
Saves are calculated differently from 3.5/PF. Rather than specific progressions per-class, all saves are 1/2 level base, with the 'good saves' getting a one-time bonus of +2 which increases by 1 every 4 levels. (basically, if you have a 'good save', it's the same progression as medium BAB+2. At Level 20, the poor save would be +10, good save would be +17.) This bonus is gained at only first level. (Normally, anyway. I'm thinking there might be an option to spend a feat to gain another good save, if you've taken levels in a class that has that good save.)
My aforementioned replacement for iterative attacks, replacing the second attacks with an extra d20 spent to roll on any attack every 5th BAB point over +1, and +1x your weapon dice and strength damage. Full-BAB classes also get one extra die at their first level, as well. (non-stackable, meaning a warrior/paladin still only gets one extra from first levels. It might even be a 1st-character-level-only thing like the save bonus above, so a caster who takes a level in warrior doesn't get one for free, but could spend a feat to get one.)

Speaking of BAB, all three normal types, high (equal to level), medium (3/4 level), and low (1/2 level), all exist, but as a help for multiclassing, your BAB is always at LEAST 1/2 your level. So taking first levels in several different non-full BAB classes doesn't need to suck.
I'm also thinking one of these extra dice are what's spent to use the basic combat actions (trip, pushback, etc), rather than imposing a penalty the way 3.5 does.



Toapat, you were mentioning 5e before, honestly, if I was doing 5e, I'd make the multiple-d20s thing what's used for fighter combat superiority dice, instead of what they've got here. It doesn't blow out the numbers like BAB would, but it does improve reliability of those attacks. (I was half-debating cutting BAB increases off all together and just using 4e's 1/2 everything, with these bonus dice making fighting-types more attack-reliable, but that's a little too far off for my motives.)

toapat
2013-01-06, 12:19 AM
3 things:

1: you make spells with saves useless
2: Your System for extra attacks is overly complex and is rather messy.
3: Your changes, actually as you want them:

PF style feat acquisition
+1 Attribute every even level, You can spend no more then 1/4 your level (rounded up) in a single attribute
Saves as AC/All dice rolled by the active player/DM. 1/2 BAB to AC
1/2 your itteratives (rounded up) are allowed to be made as a standard action. (Attack 1+2 reliably hit already)
TWF is a single feat, granting all offhand attacks and the ability to make dual attacks in a single action.
Generally improved Feats and feat balance
Strength mod to Spell Resistance, SR checks are made from BAB+ Cha-Mod, not CL. Base, not Errata/ruined Spell resistance rules

RedWarlock
2013-01-06, 02:40 AM
3 things:
Sure, let me respond piece by piece. Some parts are right, others are out-of-the-blue.


1: you make spells with saves useless
Not at all, I'm planning to make up much of the difference in class numbers. One of the ideas I've got is to integrate the 4e ability to multiclass and take high-level abilities from other classes without needing to earn them the long way. A rogue who dips into druid, for instance, could learn the druid's highest-level abilities, but not be as good at them as the full-level druid, because the druid has his own built-in ability and spell-focus style buffs to his casting.


2: Your System for extra attacks is overly complex and is rather messy.
I don't agree, but I think you haven't read the rules properly, because there are no extra attacks here.

Here's a quick example:


I'm level 1, I have +1 BAB, a 16 str, and I've got a sword that does 1d8+3. Because I'm a melee-combat class, I get a bonus d20 1/round. So I make an attack, and decide to use the extra die, rolling two dice. I get a 6 and a 14, so my result is 18, and I deal 5+3, 8 damage.
I'm level 8, I have a +8 BAB, a 20 str, and I've still got that sword that does 1d8 normally, but because I'm past level 6, it now does 2d8, plus my str bonus is doubled along with the dice, for 2d8+10 on any attack. I now have bonus d20s 2/round, so for my basic attack roll, I roll 3d20, getting a 3, an 11, and a 16. That 16, plus my +13 attack bonus, gives me a 29 total, and I deal 8+10, 18 damage. (that's before power attack or anything else)



3: Your changes, actually as you want them:

PF style feat acquisition

Yeah, no argument there, though I don't know what you mean by 'as you actually want them'. I know what I want, and while some of it sounds complex here, it's really not.




+1 Attribute every even level, You can spend no more then 1/4 your level (rounded up) in a single attribute

No, that's not right. I want the two separate progressions for a reason. Plus you cut the max per-stat in half from what I said. Remember that I say above that I'm going to reduce or remove stat bonuses on equipment all together, so this makes up for that.

Specifically, my version reads: "Every other level, you get a +1 ability score boost from your classes, spending no more than half of them on any one score. Plus, at every 4th level, you get a second +1 boost, which you can spend anywhere." That's not so complex, is it?




Saves as AC/All dice rolled by the active player/DM. 1/2 BAB to AC

The former, sometimes, yes. Mostly just on abilities that are single-target. I found rolling 10 different attacks versus the monsters' reflex in 4e for a fireball to be really annoying.

The later, BAB to AC, not really, that never entered my plans. I've got other defensive ideas. Where did you get the idea I wanted this, anyway?




1/2 your itteratives (rounded up) are allowed to be made as a standard action. (Attack 1+2 reliably hit already)

No, I'm getting rid of iteratives all together. I find them annoying and distasteful.




TWF is a single feat, granting all offhand attacks and the ability to make dual attacks in a single action.

I've actually got a TWF version written up over on minmax, if that wasn't down I'd go grab it to show you. Here's what I remember:


Without the TWF feat, in order to use both weapons on any attack (instead of only using a single), I have to attack with both weapons as one roll at a -2 penalty, dealing the main-hand weapon's damage, with str mod as a 2-handed weapon, plus the off-hand weapon as a bonus damage die. (thus unaffected by crits) If the off-hand isn't light, the attack is at a -4.
With the TWF feat, I can either make two attacks as a standard action (including on opp-attacks), at a -2 penalty each, dealing damage seperately, or make the single attack as above at NO penalty. If the off-hand isn't light, the two attacks are at -4, or the single attack is at a -2.

Accounting for my bonus d20s rule from above, having the feat also get two bonus d20s per increase instead of just one, but I have to spend them 2-for-1 if I make the combined attack.




Generally improved Feats and feat balance


Of course, I'm doing a total re-balance anyway. All feats are going to do something or change something, there's never going to be feats that are bonus-only. Even something like Great Fortitude or Lightning Reflexes will add something to the mix. My current idea is the save feats modify the die roll directly, meaning you can't fail on a 1, and are far more likely to get a natural 20. (I might do the same thing for Weapon Focus.)




Strength mod to Spell Resistance, SR checks are made from BAB+ Cha-Mod, not CL. Base, not Errata/ruined Spell resistance rules

Huh? Where is all this coming from, and what makes you think I want it? I think SR is a POS set of rules, and I'm not inclined to use it at all. Magic is going to be chopped down a good deal in these rules, so it's not needed as a countering factor.

RedWarlock
2013-01-07, 04:17 PM
Okay, so, anyway, let's move on for my next concept: the races.

I'm going to go with the PF standard of two +2s and one -2, with a few exceptions. (mostly on the order of three +2s & two -2s, and maybe some +4, +2, -2, -2.)

Mostly this is limited right now to WoW PC races, and some of these, as I've mentioned, will be unavailable earlier in the game. (For instance, my intent is to have one or more of the characters from the Alliance party either defect to the Scourge or be slain and raised as an undead of some sort, then eventually get split off with the Forsaken during the Frozen Throne era, to eventually join the Horde.)
{table=head] Race | Size | Abil. Adjusts | Favored Class | Other Features
Human | Medium | +2 to any one | Any | Bonus feat
Draenei | Medium | +2 Str, +2 Cha, -2 Dex | Paladin
Dryad/Keeper | Large | +2 Str, +2 Con, +2 Wis, -2 Dex, -2 Int | Adept (Druidic) [NPC] | Quadruped
Dwarf, Ironforge | Medium | +2 Con, +2 Wis, -2 Dex | Warrior
Dwarf, Wildhammer | Medium | +2 Con, +2 Wis, -2 Int | Scout
Elf, Blood/High | Medium | +2 Dex, +2 Cha, -2 Con | Arcanist (Mage)
Elf, Night | Medium | +2 Dex, +2 Wis, -2 Con | Scout
Gnome | Small | +4 Dex, +2 Int, -2 Str, -2 Wis | Tinker
Goblin | Small | +2 Dex, +2 Int, -2 Str | Rogue
Orc | Medium | +2 Str, +2 Cha, -2 Int | Shaman
Pandaren | Medium | +2 Con, +2 Wis, -2 Dex | Monk
Tauren | Large | +4 Str, +2 Con, -2 Dex, -2 Int | Shaman | Gore natural attack
Troll, Forest/Ice | Medium w/PB | +2 Dex, +2 Con, -2 Int | Brute [NPC]
Troll, Jungle | Medium | +2 Dex, +2 Wis, -2 Int | Scout
Worgen | Medium | +2 Str, +2 Wis, -2 Int | Savage
[/table]

{table=head] Template | Applicable Races | Abil. Adjusts
Felblood | Draenei, Orcs, Blood Elves | +2 Str, +2 Cha, -2 Int, -2 Wis
Undead (Forsaken) | Humans, High Elves | +2 Cha, -2 Dex
[/table]
Felblood is for making Eredar, Fel Orcs, and Felblood Elves. If I do have PrCs, I'd do a feltainted class as well. If not, there will be [Fel] feats that build on the Felblood template.
Forsaken is for making both the WoW forsaken humans, and the Dark Rangers and other high elves who are also undead. (I thought about adding nerubians to the list, I'd like them as a playable race, but they don't show up amongst the Forsaken society at all.)
I also thought about making Worgen a template, but non-human Worgen are almost non-existent (a couple night elf worgen do exist), and PCs almost certainly wouldn't be playing pre-curse Gilneans, so not much point.

I'm thinking each race will have a main active-use ability, ala 4e and WoW, sometimes per-encounter, or at will, probably not per-day. The Tauren's Gore, for instance, will be a swift-action attack, at-will, but at a -4 penalty. Also useable as a main attack weapon with no penalty, but because I removed full attacks, it takes over the whole action.

RedWarlock
2013-01-19, 03:39 AM
Okay, reviving this thread from negative hitpoints.. (It wasn't totally dead yet, so it's not necromancy!)

I'm thinking I may tweak my class distinctions a bit. I need to alter how I'm breaking things down.

Right now, I think I'm a bit too merged in terms of classes. Flexibility is okay in some cases, but the over-merged arcanist, for instance, faces the Wizard problem, getting access to *everything* and getting to pick the best of all options. The limiter between the concepts for Mages, Warlocks, Necromancers, and whatever else is too easy to break down when it's all under one class, without making it so hard-locked that dabbling is impossible. So I'm thinking I'll break it down, go to distinct Mage, Warlock, and Necromancer classes, but have them share some interoperability, like sharing one mana point pool, and having caster levels stack. (plus maybe expanded-knowledge/eclectic-learning ways of dipping into the other arcane spell lists.) The main thing is that the more advanced tricks of each class become locked to the individual classes, requiring exclusivity to reach. There'd be less gatewaying, though.

I also want to split the Warrior into a few different classes, because WoW warriors do one or two jobs, but WC-lore has more distinctions available. One warrior class could do this, but it might start to feel either pidgeonholed towards one direction, or too divided.

The different roles I can think of include:


The Soldier (skilled at fighting in a group, providing circumstance and assist bonuses to allies, natural high defenses, maneuvers tend to be tactical, giving up one advantage to gain another benefit, with the ability to advance into command options)
The Berserker (wild fighter, quick-moving and heavy-hitting, better at fighting apart from allies rather than in cooperation, more of a shock-trooper, with some kind of rage mechanic. Very barbarian-esque, without treading on the toes of the wilderness scout.)
The Warlord (leader of troops, born to lead and command others, perhaps even built with Leadership-esque minions, 3e Marshal+4e Warlord. This one could be a PrC if I was using them)
The Rider (mount-focused, gaining a skilled mount and riding-related tricks. This could be another PrC.)


I'm almost wondering if some of these classes, the Warlord, the Rider, and a few others, might be better as limited base classes, sort of prestige classes without the 'prestige' part. Limited to only 10 levels versus the other classes' 30, good for dipping to access particular features, but not suitable for going 1-30.