There are only 3 options beyond the one that allows you to make the substitution.
Printable View
What I meant to highlight is that you could have dual (or more) damage types (fire and sonic for example). One or both of the types trigger the ability, and then you could replace both types with a singular energy type, even if one of the triggering dual damage types is the same as the damage type replacing both (fire replacing fire and sonic for example, though you could also interpret it as replacing only triggering damage types of dual typed damage).
But this niche case aside, wouldn't it be better/more accurate to say "may replace any instance of these damage types for that spell with one of these damage types"? This eliminates all of the rules ambiguity in that you clearly and definitively substitute the triggering damage types only with exactly one damage type of those listed on a per instance/case by case basis.
If less granular control is desired, simply substitute 'any' with 'all', minding your plurality :p.
Advanced Learning is, for better or worse, something I'd hoped to introduce to the casting classes. Mainly, I was hoping to offer a way to introduce non-core sources to the spell lists based on the source availability of particular groups, and allow players to customize their spell lists. You're right in that it can be abused (Alter Self does come to mind), but one spell per spell level hopefully won't be horrible. I initially had it at two, but decided to beef up the general spell list a tad instead.
General: A few more abilities will always be welcomed, and yes, I think an initiative bonus or a defensive casting bonus might definitely be possibilities. Advanced Learning is not replacing abilities - it's a straight replacement to the bonus spells offered by archetypes.
Blaster: I still think the general level 4 ability will be a bonus to monster identification, to aid with that specific concern. Red mages should be the masters of monstrous knowledge - can't kill something you don't know.
Buffer: Did you mean the moderate ability here? The lesser ability doesn't deal with adjacent targets. In any case, I meant adjacent to the red mage at the time of casting, since it's restricted to spells with touch.
Controller: Not quite sure what you meant by that. Controller's a bit less well defined than the other archetypes, I'm afraid - I want something that can still blast, but also manipulate the battlefield and opponents. Inflicting status effects seemed a way to do that. Whereas the blaster excels at single-target damage, the controller is less destructive but can keep his enemies corralled and docile.
Advanced Learning is an all or nothing proposition - either all the mage classes are going to get it, or none. The Blue Mage will likely have the largest pool to draw from, though - divination, enchantment, and illusion.
I've definitely been looking over your proposed suggestions, Surrealistik, and I'm toying with some kind of scaling energy blast. Allowing the red mage to blast basically forever does seem right up his alley, but I'm still working out the particulars. Likely, it will be 1d6 per two levels plus Charisma mod, chosen between acid, fire, electricity, or cold. An archetype might improve upon the base feature.
The Red Mage's proficiencies might stay, if only to make him feel a bit more martially-oriented than the others. He no longer has abilities that encourage him to wade into melee, though. At the very least, I think I'll leave medium armor.
I meant either "the other three" or "four." Coldball instead of Fireball, Acidic Ray instead of Scorching Ray, Firebolt instead of Lightning Bolt, Shocking Hands instead of Burning Hands, etc.
I've fixed the wording to "four" there. I hadn't considered the admixture case, though.
Ok, Advanced learning works, then. I thought it was replacing abilities, not adding to them (and replacing the bonus spells known from archtype works perfectly well for me.)
No thoughts on the skills?
As long as they can identify people.
Yup, moderate ability, my bad.
Controllers only get status effects at level 6 right now. Before that, Grease, Glitterdust, Pyrokinetics, Slow and Ice Storm are the only even vaugely controlling elements, and of those Grease is the only one for level 1/2, Glitterdust/Pyrokinetics for 3/4, and then finally Slow/Ice Storm levels 5/6. So I support the idea of controlling the battlefield, but look at adding a handful more of spells that inflict status effects, or have the lesser archtype ability add status effects to damaging spells.
Sounds good Gnorman, though I'd probably recommend dropping 'energy' and going for the more straightforward 'damage'. So:
"When casting any spell that deals acid, fire, electricity, or cold damage, the blaster may replace that spell's damage type(s) and their keywords with any one of these four."
In otherwords, you unambiguously replace all damage types of a triggering spell and the keywords of those damage types with exactly one of those four damage types. If keywords naturally arise from dealing damage of a certain type (I forget), then you can exclude that extra wording.
While you're revisiting the mages, I would strongly recommend you either replace Counterspell Mastery or improve it so that you can counter without readying at the cost of your Immediate Action and losing your next action of the type expended to cast the spell you countered, or your next Full-Round Action if it takes a Standard Action or longer to cast (whether you were successful or otherwise).
As it stands, counterspelling even with the 'silence' effect is pretty damn niche. I might even consider expanding it to deal with item cast spells and SLAs/Supernaturals that replicate spells.
hello
is it ok with you if i take the parts i want from here to make a witcher-based game (not actually familiar with witcher, but a friend of mine is)?
i'll have to translate the entire thing to hebrew to do that, so i thought asking before doing that would be polite
Hi everyone, I'm thinking of running an E6 game and I was wondering what have people's experience with Gnorman's E6 variant been? Initially it looks mostly positive, but I'm hestitant about jumping into it, the group (if it gets started) has only ever done D&D with a few non-core books.
Sorry folks, school started up again and my free time took a sharp nose dive. But I haven't abandoned the project!
Solid ideas. Counterspell Mastery is an ability I've wanted to upgrade/replace for a long time, likely in favor of an affect that improves enchantment/illusion spells.
Go for it! Someone translated my work into Italian, so the precedent's been set.
I can't speak for the experience portion of this (it would be a bit presumptuous of me) but I have tried to keep the system relatively close to core-only. The engineer and the hunter have subsystems that may be a bit complicated, and I might shy away from the psionic classes if your group has little or no experience with psionics. But generally, they should be pretty easy to pick up. The magic classes are probably easier for a new player than the wizard/druid/cleric, if only because you have less to keep track of, bookkeeping-wise.
Thanks for responding! That definitely sounds positive. In your experience, do the classes play well together? Do they feel around the same power level when they're in play? By that, I don't mean do they feel the same all the time, but do they all get times to shine and (if possible) never have a feeling of uselessness?
If I do decide to use this, I'll try to start a campaign journal on this forum to keep track of my experiences. Thanks for all this work!
I can't speak from personal experience, because I don't typically run games. One of my major design goals was to lower the ceiling for casters and raise the floor for mundanes, though. Hopefully I succeeded, at least partially - other posters might be able to give you some perspective on that.
Hey Gnorman, does the Inventor get bonus inventions based off a high ability score? Do the mages for that matter? If no, it might be worth consider.
No, and I have no plans to change that - the Engineer is already officially Really Good (at least according to the data I've seen thrown out). It's the closest thing to a prepared caster in the project, so I believe it needs to be reined in a bit. Limiting inventions per day is my way of doing so.
Hey Gnorman, I'm starting work on my own E6-geared campaign. I'm doing a lot of development and whatnot for it, and I'm borrowing a lot from you. It's possible I won't borrow any specific content, but I'm certainly borrowing mechanics like Archetypes and their advancement milestones.
I noticed you don't yet have a martial adept designed in your compendium yet, and I'm actually starting work on two of my own. A Sublime Warrior, who is the token ToB combat class, and a more hybrid, skill-based, Swordsage-inspired class.
I've hardly played with ToB (I mean, I have, but those characters didn't "last" very long...), so I'm open to any guidance and suggestions--especially regarding maneuvers/stances known/readied. Also, would you tweak the level intervals for maneuvers any if converting to E6?
Hey Gnorman, if you intend for the Generic Classes to be playable, remove the stacking phrase from the Rogue Artificer Archtype. When you say cost reducers stack with other cost reducers, you start this big ugly mess where if you have that ability and a +5 Int bonus and 4 feats to invest in Extraordinary Artisan, Legendary Artisan, and a pair of Magical Artisans, things cost 8 hours to make. Just 8 hours. If you just say the cost is reduced, then normal cost reduction rules apply and you end up with the maximum potential from the ability being a 55% reduction in final price if you invest a whole ton of resources into Intelligence (assuming you only can use the Compendium races).
Also, quick question, does the Demonologist Black Mage archtype use the Undead control pool for rebuked outsiders, or a separate pool?
All good here? Seems like Blueiji's solved the issue. But I will go ahead and move those archetypes into a more obvious place, as this is not an uncommon question.
As far as a base class goes, I'm certainly not opposed to it! There is probably enough conceptual space to get two, maybe even three classes out of it. I suppose one could consolidate it into a single class, but that may be too much of an oversimplification.
I wouldn't tweak the maneuver progression much at all, beyond possibly making a sort of "Capstone Maneuver" ability that allows the once-a-day use of a 4th-level maneuver. If I've already opened the door to 4th-level spells (something I honestly consider changing!), it seems fair.
1. The artificer archetype (and generic classes in general) are basically just a big ol' mess that I kind of ignore. But you make a good case for at least taking the time to axe that particular ability.
2. I assume it would get a separate pool, including separate restrictions on use. Isn't that how the cleric domains that offer alternative options handle it? The wording is admittedly unclear and I will correct it. Perhaps the Demonologist should rebuke outsiders INSTEAD of undead, as opposed to IN ADDITION TO, but that may seem unnecessarily punitive. I think outsiders probably see less action in E6 than undead (~80 evil outsiders with a CR of 10 or less; ~100 undead).
I'm currently working on a good old fashioned Halfling Fleshraker Beastmaster build, and I am now noticing that the racial weapon are martial ability of the halfling is (in official D&D) 100% useless since there are actually no weapons at all with halfling in the name. Might I possibly recommend adding Talenta weapons, or possibly the skiprock and war sling? Even both wouldn't be too much really.
EDIT: Also, would you use the Deadly Aim ability have you replace Str or augment it with your Dexterity when using a sling? My gut says to treat them as thrown weapons.
1. That's a good point. To be fair, only the orc, gnome, and dwarf get advantages from the ability in core D&D - there are no "elven" weapons in the SRD. It's probably just not a very good ability in general.
2. Deadly Aim replaces the strength bonus when using thrown weapons. If you have a higher Strength, you can stick with it - I just wanted to give an option for low Strength users (such as halflings). Given that composite bow users would get the advantages of both, this may unfairly disadvantage thrown weapons users.
High (16) STR, mediocre (12) DEX with thrown weapon: +1 to hit, +3 to damage.
High STR, mediocre DEX with composite longbow: +1 to hit, +4 to damage
Mediocre (12) STR, high (16) DEX with thrown weapon: +3 to hit, +3 to damage
Mediocre STR, high DEX with composite longbow: +3 to hit, +4 to damage
It's not a huge difference, but the attack roll keys off of DEX either way. I suppose it incentivizes high DEX hunters, with a bit of strength if you can afford it (and use a composite bow). It's mostly a wash, but for consistency's sake I can see your point.
A few more things I'd like to bring up.
- The esoteric only has 2 skill points per level, but they aren't Intelligence based casters
- If you're planning on removing all the Generic Classes, who the hell is going to make magic items? Especially with all casters being fixed list, there's a notable lack of spells that are needed to make some good items.
- The Demiurge's middle two powers and most of their Archetype Powers kinda suck. Might I possibly recommend granting them Psicrystal affinity as a bonus feat?
- Building on the second point, since you split half the artificer off into the engineer, maybe split the other half off into another class? Perhaps one focused on creating permanent magical effects, with each Archetype focused on a different type of item, with the capstone being able to make items with a CL of 9th in their specialty. A psionic version would be a simple cut and paste.
- I haven't always based skill points on whether or not the casting was based on Intelligence - usually, I tried to make a direct translation from the base class. So historically, I gave cleric-types low skill points. Considering that I bumped the White Mage up to 4, though, doing the same for the Esoteric seems fair.
- The magewright?
- The Esoteric in general (and most of its associated archetypes) kind of suck, to be fair. It's due for a revamp.
- I think I'll probably refrain from making an artificer, seeing as it's a base class not based on OGL content. And I might try to back off of the whole "gaming the item creation" theme, as it might run counter to some of the goals of E6.
hEY THERE WOULD THIS WORK FOR THE WARDEN ACHTYPE IN THE HUNTER CLASS.
Warden
SpoilerLesser Archetype Power: An Warden gains the ability to cast a small number of spells from the green mage's spell list, as outlined in the table below. In all respects, an Warden casts spells just as a Green mage would, though he may ignore the arcane spell failure chance of all armor and shields. In addition, an Warden's class features key off of Wisdom instead of Charisma.
Moderate Archetype Power: Starting at 3rd level, a warden leaves no trail in natural surroundings and cannot be tracked. She may choose to leave a trail if so desired.
Greater Archetype Power: A warden of 6th level can use the Hide skill in any sort of natural terrain, even if the terrain doesn’t grant cover or concealment.
Spells Per Day
Level
0
1
2
1st 2 - -
2nd 3 0* -
3rd 3 1 -
4th 3 2 0*
5th 3 3 1
6th 3 3 2
* provided that the warden has a high enough Wisdom score to have a bonus spell of that level
When reworking the bonus spells, might I suggest the inclusion of something akin to the Signature Spell ability of the generic mage? It's still limited to 4th level spells (which aren't the craziest around) while giving you the ability to pick your capstone with a bit more fidelity.
Well, it certainly would work. I'm not thrilled by the moderate and greater archetype power, but if you're going Warden, you're probably doing it for the spell access.
Yes, I'm probably going to just make it like Advanced Learning (or eliminate 4th-level spells entirely - not quite made my mind up on that yet).
Also in the works in the next few days: a new class combining the best aspects of the Zealot and the Sentinel.
As promised, albeit in WIP form, here's the new paladin. Combining the active defense mechanics of the Sentinel with the passive group buffs of the Zealot, the Paladin should be an able replacement for either. I've always felt that both the Zealot and the Sentinel were a little narrow, design-wise, and would be better served as a combined class. The class focuses on healing, buffing, and defending their allies and punishing foes when they attack those allies. As such, they'll be getting the familiar "give cover to your allies" mechanics from the Sentinel, as well as auras that heal and ward allies. The Paladin will be able to shrug off mighty blows, and deliver punishing attacks of opportunity when opponents attempt to attack his allies. Primary statistics will be Strength, Constitution, and Charisma, so it should be significantly less MAD than the 3.5 version. I have yet to create archetypes, but I imagine you will see a Templar-type (primarily defensive: can protect allies from hostile spells, spell resistance, etc.), a Cavalier-type (primarily offensive: bonuses when attacking fiends, dragons, the undead), and an Initiate-type (primarily supportive: bonuses to auras and healing, possible spellcasting). Let me know what you think!
The Paladin
HD: d12
Class Skills: Balance, Climb, Concentration, Craft, Diplomacy, Intimidate, Heal, Jump, Knowledge (history), Knowledge (local) Knowledge (nobility and royalty), Knowledge (religion), Listen, Profession, Ride, Sense Motive, Spot, Swim
Skill Points: 4 + Int per level (4x at 1st)
{table=head]Level|BAB|Fort|Ref|Will|Special|Auras Known
1st|+1|+2|+0|+2|Archetype Power (Lesser), Bonus Feat, Peerless Defender|-
2nd|+2|+3|+0|+3|Combat Endurance, Intervention, Project Aura|1
3rd|+3|+3|+1|+3|Archetype Power (Moderate), Determination|1
4th|+4|+4|+1|+4|Martyrdom, Unassailable|2
5th|+5|+4|+1|+4|Bonus Feat, Retributive Strike|2
6th|+6/+1|+5|+2|+5|Archetype Power (Greater), Knight Errant|3[/table]
Proficiencies: The Paladin is proficient with light, medium, and heavy armor, as well as all shields (including tower shields). He is proficient with all simple and martial weapons.
Archetype: At 1st level, the Paladin chooses an archetype from the list below. He gains the advantages and abilities of the archetype at the appropriate levels, as indicated in the list. Once made, this choice is final.
Bonus Feat At 1st level, and again at 5th level, the Paladin gains a bonus fighter feat. He counts as a fighter of his own level for the purposes of selecting feats. Once every 24 hours, the Paladin may swap out his current bonus feat(s) for any other that he qualifies for.
Peerless Defender:
Combat Endurance: The Paladin may make an additional number of attacks of opportunity equal to his Constitution bonus. In addition, the Paladin may no longer be flanked or caught flat-footed.
Intervention: The Paladin may make an attack of opportunity against an opponent he threatens when that opponent attacks an ally of the Paladin. This attack of opportunity resolves before the opponent's attack on the ally.
Project Aura:
Determination: The Paladin gains damage reduction X/-, where X is equal to his Constitution modifier or his class level, whichever is lower.
Martyrdom: If an opponent successfully attacks an ally adjacent to the Paladin, the Paladin may choose to have any damage resulting from that attack redirected to himself.
Unassailable:
Retributive Strike: The Paladin deals additional divine damage (which is not subject to damage reduction) on any attack to opponents who have attacked (either in melee or at range) an ally of the Paladin within the last round. This bonus damage is equal to the Paladin's Charisma bonus plus his class level. This bonus damage applies even if the opponent misses the ally.
Knight Errant:
Toying around with another idea for a new base class: how would you folks feel about a shapeshifting barbarian warrior? I know that shapeshifting is more the purview of the druid-type, but to me, the combat abilities involved seem to really favor adding it to a barbarian. Perhaps it would work only as a specialized archetype, but I thought I'd kick it around and see the response. At any rate, I really would like to add a dedicated Barbarian class, as I've always felt that's a gaping hole in the compendium.
Taking a cue from the Shapeshift Druid ACF, a Shapeshifter archetype might get a wolf form at level 1, an eagle form at level 3, and a bear form at level 6.
This would mean that the Green Mage loses shapeshifting, though it would gain an appropriate ability to compensate it, perhaps in the form of better summoning, better buffing, or some kind of spirit animal power.
Thoughts?
I would like to see that sort of thing, yes. I'd actually be interested in seeing what sort of abilities that you give the Green Mage and the new class.
One possible balance concern, level 3 flight might be iffy. It might be a good idea to have secondary benifits at higher level (e.g. level 1 you get wolf form and a bite attack, level 3 or 6 you get the effects of improved trip while in wolf form). Food for thought.
Could have sworn that at one point a number of these classes gained martial maneuvers and stances ala tome of battle. Was there a massive change made to the compendium recently?