ARCHANICA - Mecanotechnics Handbook: The last power source for 3.5

[Debihuman]

Normally the OGL goes at the end of a product rather than the beginning. There's a lot of white space. Are there going to be pictures?

Page 5.

Footnote below chart doesn't seem to make sense as it's not linked to anything on that page. "Before growing old (check the race’s description)." I'm not even sure what that's supposed to mean.

Page 6.

Atlantean should be capitalized as it is a place (Atlantis) rather than just a racial name. You should probably note that somewhere in the beginning.

In 3.5 it is not a "Walk" speed that creature's have, it is a base land speed.

You should put the New Ability Types BEFORE you use them. Put them before Atlanteans to make it easier to reference. What is an "Sb" ability? Psionic abilities are Supernatural "Su".

Sloppy use of apostrophe for prime symbol for feet throughout. I recommend spelling out feet or abbreviating it to "ft." Likewise, spell out 20-foot square, 100-foot cone, etc.


Change: "Electric Lantern (sheds light in a 100’ cone or 60’ radium..." to Electric Lantern (sheds light in 100-foot cone or 60-foot radius).

Page 8
If kyri is both singular and plural, you should mention it. Note: I am not a fan of this.

Kyri's hair is weird and overly complex. How do you even pronounce "sbibbles" ? Do you use this unit of measurement anywhere else other than in the race traits? Because if you don't, you should reconsider this. Also, is Kyri both the singular and the plural? If so, you should mention this in the first sentence. Do Kyri have ways to prevent creatures from cutting off all their hair? By the way 1/4 of an ounce is approximately 7 grams. Sbibbles are a ridiculously small measure of weight. 40 = 1/4 of an ounce? Who wants to calculate that out? A sbibble weighs approximately .175 grams or 175 milligrams.

Page 10

If erron is both singular and plural, you should mention it. Note: I am not a fan of this.

Page 12

Ditto for fril. Frils, errons, and kyris make a lot more sense.

Psionic spark should be Su not Sb.

Page 24
Why doesn't the gunsmith have Craft (weaponsmithing) as a skill? He needs to be able to make his own weapons apparently.

Debby

[Quarian Rex]

Hey there. I've been looking forward to this for months now and from the limited amount that I've seen I'm still quite excited. I like the direction that you're going in here (the seperate levels for machines and technologies, basing everything on the Craft skill instead of some odd spellcasting analog, etc.) but there are some things that seem to be causing difficulties.

The main problem seems to be your extremely tight integration of the fluff with the mechanics of the system. You are trying to make a universal system for fantasy technology and yet you are writing rules that cripple a character that is not specifically made within your setting. For example, the cost of creating machines and substances is tripled when the crafter is not part of your guild. That is absolutely insane. Most games that use these rules will not actually be based around this system. A player will be bringing this into an established setting due to generous DM permission to test out new possibilities. The character will most likely be some lone mad genius or a stranger from a strange land where the guild may technically exist but has no functional presence in the campaign world. To say that such a character needs to pay triple to access his class abilities is unaceptable and grossly warps any form of game balance.

When designing these classes you need to make sure that they are balanced in a vacuum. You need the classes to be fully playable without the DM having to bend over backwards trying to figure out how to put a machine shop on the 7th layer of hell just so a player can progress his class. This sort of thing is doubly restrictive for the Mech Knight since, as you have written it, he cannot learn any technologies, and loses access to his entire Initiation class feature, if he is cut off from his NPC superiors in the Order. This needs to be changed. This kind of restriction is not functional inside of an actual game.

Remember, you can have all kinds of benefits to being in the Guild, it just has to be logical and functional. If you want guild members to have a (reasonable) discount in machine creation, fine. Add a High Science machine that provides such a discount and then say that all guild outposts are set up with one. That way an unaffiliated/exiled Inventor can make his own when he gets to a high enough level, perhaps even starting a rival guild, etc. That way the party can try to take over a guild outpost to usurp those benefits for a while before the guild mounts a counter attack. Do not just wave your hand and say that guild members get a massive discount 'just because'. That's the kind of thing that those namby-pamby mage guilds try to get away with with their nonsensical 'Wish' spells. Don't be like them. Science needs to make sense (sort of).

Another thing that stood out as needing to be addressed were the Antimagic Skills of the Inventor class. I see what you're doing here but saying that men of science (even fantasy science) would deliberatly turn their back on knowledge, any knowledge, completely breaks the concept. Don't exclude the Knowledge skills. While science may not be able to find a physical basis for undeath it will study the hell out of it trying to find one. Remember, the Knowledge skills only really cover the lore in their field and the weaknesses of their associated creatures, not the application of occult powers. TL;DR - saying Inventors cannot manipulate the occult with Spellcraft and UMD = good. Saying that Inventors willfully ignore info on the weaknesses of the dragons, golems, undead, and other monstrosities trying to kill them in their world = bad.

Other than that I have to reserve judgement until I see some specific Machines and Technologies. While I like what I'm hearing about the upgrade system and such there is no way for me to judge it till I see more.

While I'm not sure how critical I've been sounding so far, just remember that I'm really excited to see the rest of this. It looks like you are on the right track, I just haven't seen enough to tell if it works yet.

[Archanica]

First of all thanks everyone for the feedback.

Normally the OGL goes at the end of a product rather than the beginning.

Really? I've seen it in the beginning of some books.

There's a lot of white space. Are there going to be pictures?

What I presented in the EXCLUSIVE PREVIEW is just the text of the rules. We have some pictures but we'll add along with all the graphic design but that would be for the final version, not the previews or samples.

The white space is used to separate the different sections of the book.

Page 5.

Footnote below chart doesn't seem to make sense as it's not linked to anything on that page. "Before growing old (check the race’s description)." I'm not even sure what that's supposed to mean.

If you inspect carefully you'll notice the footnote refers to the number "1" next to the Fril's ability adjustment. They have +2 Str until they begin to grow old (feature's called "Red Dusk"), you have to check on the race descriptions for more information...

Page 6.

Atlantean should be capitalized as it is a place (Atlantis) rather than just a racial name. You should probably note that somewhere in the beginning.

Atlantean don't come from "Atlantis", in this case is just the racial name, there's no such a place called like that in our book... I could probably adjust the race's name to avoid confusing readers.

As for the races, there's much more background for all them in the book but we haven't translated that, we'll be saving it for the complete edition, we just put a few tidbits of background to give you an idea of what's the race about.

In 3.5 it is not a "Walk" speed that creature's have, it is a base land speed.
Sloppy use of apostrophe for prime symbol for feet throughout. I recommend spelling out feet or abbreviating it to "ft." Likewise, spell out 20-foot square, 100-foot cone, etc.

Change: "Electric Lantern (sheds light in a 100’ cone or 60’ radium..." to Electric Lantern (sheds light in 100-foot cone or 60-foot radius).

Well, sorry about that, it's my bad. I just want to make clear in the Spanish editions of D&D (mother language), feet are abbreviated as an apostrophe. I guess I forgot to correct that in some parts of the preview. Thanks for the clue.

You should put the New Ability Types BEFORE you use them. Put them before Atlanteans to make it easier to reference. What is an "Sb" ability? Psionic abilities are Supernatural "Su". Psionic spark should be Su not Sb.

Thanks for the suggestion, I want to make clear these text boxes I added are supposed to be similar to the "sidebar" section of the 3.5 PH.

And as for the "Su" abilities, yeah, my bad too, I forgot to translate that.

If kyri is both singular and plural, you should mention it. Note: I am not a fan of this.

Page 10

If erron is both singular and plural, you should mention it. Note: I am not a fan of this.

Page 12

Ditto for fril. Frils, errons, and kyris make a lot more sense.

Thanks a lot. Gonna fix that.

Kyri's hair is weird and overly complex. How do you even pronounce "sbibbles" ? Do you use this unit of measurement anywhere else other than in the race traits? Because if you don't, you should reconsider this. Also, is Kyri both the singular and the plural? If so, you should mention this in the first sentence.

Do Kyri have ways to prevent creatures from cutting off all their hair? By the way 1/4 of an ounce is approximately 7 grams. Sbibbles are a ridiculously small measure of weight. 40 = 1/4 of an ounce? Who wants to calculate that out? A sbibble weighs approximately .175 grams or 175 milligrams.

Alright. Going to check thatit.

Why doesn't the gunsmith have Craft (weaponsmithing) as a skill? He needs to be able to make his own weapons apparently.

Firearms are treated as machines and according to our system, machines don't require a skill check to be crafted, only have it on your "Known machines" list, just like spells.

The main problem seems to be your extremely tight integration of the fluff with the mechanics of the system. You are trying to make a universal system for fantasy technology and yet you are writing rules that cripple a character that is not specifically made within your setting. For example, the cost of creating machines and substances is tripled when the crafter is not part of your guild. That is absolutely insane. Most games that use these rules will not actually be based around this system. A player will be bringing this into an established setting due to generous DM permission to test out new possibilities.

Don't worry about this. The book actually contains a chapter for DMs to create the world of mechanotechnics that adapts better to their taste.
The main rules of costs we mention are based on the primary option, the "Guild" option, and they're recommended to contain a little whatever drastic changes machines and technologies can bring into the world, avoid extreme powergaming, among others.
But the chapter I'm talking about also includes other options that eliminate some restriction or let you combine magic and mecanotechnics through original character classes, in case you don't like too much advanced technologies in your game world.

Add a High Science machine that provides such a discount and then say that all guild outposts are set up with one. That way an unaffiliated/exiled Inventor can make his own when he gets to a high enough level, perhaps even starting a rival guild, etc. That way the party can try to take over a guild outpost to usurp those benefits for a while before the guild mounts a counter attack. Do not just wave your hand and say that guild members get a massive discount 'just because'. That's the kind of thing that those namby-pamby mage guilds try to get away with with their nonsensical 'Wish' spells. Don't be like them. Science needs to make sense (sort of).

Don't worry about that. The Guild has rules. They're better explained in the chapter I'm talking about

Another thing that stood out as needing to be addressed were the Antimagic Skills of the Inventor class. I see what you're doing here but saying that men of science (even fantasy science) would deliberatly turn their back on knowledge, any knowledge, completely breaks the concept. Don't exclude the Knowledge skills. While science may not be able to find a physical basis for undeath it will study the hell out of it trying to find one. Remember, the Knowledge skills only really cover the lore in their field and the weaknesses of their associated creatures, not the application of occult powers. TL;DR - saying Inventors cannot manipulate the occult with Spellcraft and UMD = good. Saying that Inventors willfully ignore info on the weaknesses of the dragons, golems, undead, and other monstrosities trying to kill them in their world = bad.

You make some great points here, we'll DEFINITELY reconsider changing that.

As for the machines and technologies, you can wait for our complete SAMPLE PACK very soon, as it will contain a selection of Level 1-2 machines and substances, as well as some Level 1 technologies. Or if you're curious enough, the Spanish EXCLUSIVE PREVIEW already included that (albeit in Spanish, obviously; sorry, we couldn't translate all that before the end of the year).


Thanks a lot, guys!!

[Archanica]

IMPORTANT.

Dear Audience:

We're still calculating the costs for the funding and it's more than USD$10,000, which we guess can be a hard goal to reach.
So, we're considering to propose a stripped down version of the MECANOTECHNICS HANDBOOK instead, with less material and less pages (right now it's 530 pages), to make sure we roach our goal.
It could be a letdown but we're insecure about because we don't see a response to the project.

Tell me, what do you think? The clock keeps moving... YOUR OPINION IS VITAL FOR THIS PROJECT.

(The image below corresponds to the FULL EDITION material)




CONTENT INDEX FOR THE FULL EDITION:

[Debihuman]

Personally, I find treating firearms as machines to be a very bad concept. It isn't intuitive and makes a core skill obsolete, which is not going to be fun for characters that take ranks in Craft (weaponsmithing). I never like sourcebooks that purposefully change mechanics for no good reason. Unfortunately, this means I wouldn't be able to give this project a good review. The more compatible with the core books a project is, the more interest it will generate as it appeals to the widest audience.

I sympathize with your plight but from what I can see this project is nowhere near ready. You still have a lot of editing and proofreading to do.

The cost vs. the number of people who'd be willing to pay for this does not look so good. You are competing with existing products already such as Etherscope, DragonMech, Iron Kingdom (the D20 version is available as a PDF) and OGL Steampunk, etc., which are easier to import into existing campaigns. Even Eberron has mechanics that compete with your concepts. And when someone looks for bombs and other technology related stuff on Pathfinder online (all of which is free online), they aren't likely to feel compelled to buy your product. In today's market, you need to be aware of the things that already exist, especially since you post bland teasers.

There are numerous gunslinging classes from established 3rd party publishers and mad inventors are hardly new. You need people to be wowed by your gunslinger, and you are missing that mark thus far.

Did you even read your race descriptions? Ugh. There was nothing eye-catching there. You need to make the descriptions dynamic.

The biggest obstacle that I see is that you are coming late to the game and aren't bringing your "A" game with you. The project isn't eye-catching and the language is clunky in spots. This isn't ready for public consumption.

Have you posted on other gaming site? What kind of feedback are you getting?

Debby

[Archanica]

First of all thanks a lot for the comments.

The cost vs. the number of people who'd be willing to pay for this does not look so good. You are competing with existing products already such as Etherscope, DragonMech, Iron Kingdom (the D20 version is available as a PDF) and OGL Steampunk, etc., which are easier to import into existing campaigns.

I'm aware there's a lot of professional competition out there, and maybe my ideas won't "wow" everyone, but I believe I'm doing something cutting-edge here: An all-encompasing system to develop and use technology, so I distinguish a little my book from the competition. And I think my book will be by far the easiest one to import into existing campaigns since that is the main idea.

As for the firearm rules, I'm no longer treating them as machines in the stricter term, but I agree with your indications and I can definitely understand your idea of changing the mechanics.

Even Eberron has mechanics that compete with your concepts. And when someone looks for bombs and other technology related stuff on Pathfinder online (all of which is free online), they aren't likely to feel compelled to buy your product.

I don't see that as much of a problem, considering in different books (all of them compatible) there's always different options, for "magic", for example, which compete each other. The warlock, to name something.
And I honesty think my sistem is appealing since it offers a higher degree of combination and customization of machines and science weapons along with a more familiar system of development and creation.

There are numerous gunslinging classes from established 3rd party publishers and mad inventors are hardly new. You need people to be wowed by your gunslinger, and you are missing that mark thus far.

Agree on that too. Let's see what we can do.

Did you even read your race descriptions? Ugh. There was nothing eye-catching there. You need to make the descriptions dynamic.

Well, I know I'm not the best writer, but thanks for the feedback.

The biggest obstacle that I see is that you are coming late to the game and aren't bringing your "A" game with you.

Yes, that is XD

The project isn't eye-catching and the language is clunky in spots. This isn't ready for public consumption.

It's been a long since we posted the teasers, and circumstances were not the best one for some of them (sorry if my English is not working right here, but I have a translator for official release). We have more promo and sample material already prepared but we're waiting the right moment to release it, along with the funding project.

And it looks like you're judging the book only by the teasers, my question here is: Have you checked the Official Preview I've posted, with the main "crunch" rules?

Have you posted on other gaming site? What kind of feedback are you getting?

Debby

You've been my only feedback so far. Thanks a lot.

[Quarian Rex]

Don't get discouraged by Debi. There is always a market for quality work. Worried that there hasn't been more buzz about the project? That is a side effect of there being so little useful info and the extreme length of time between updates. And remember, these are the homebrew forums. People come here to find interesting things that they can actually use in a game. As of right now you you haven't presented anything usable and so there has been little feedback/hype.

What you have released so far shows promise (it looks like it might be fairly comprehensive and like a lot of thought has gone into it) but here we are nine months after your initial announcement and I still have no idea whether you have a valid subsystem or not. Everything released so far has essentially been fluff and what rules have been revealed are just a very limited amount of support material, nothing to show whether you have something actually playable.

As an analogy, this is almost as if you were responsible for releasing the magic system and magic classes for the 3.5 Player's Handbook. You have given us info on the Wizard and Sorcerer classes, provided a spell list summary, and even provided the section on how to copy spells into a spellbook. But you haven't shown a single spell yet. Or meta-magic feats, or the magic item list, or anything else. Wizards and Sorcerers are useless and uninteresting without their spells. Inventors are useless and uninteresting without their tech.

We have more promo and sample material already prepared but we're waiting the right moment to release it...

The right time to release that was last August when you laid the expectation in July. Like I said, it has been nine months since the announcement and I still have absolutely no idea whether or not you have a valid system. Even looking at what you have provided so far it looks like you will need some heavy tweaking on some things. Everything I said in my previous post still stands. If you want to make a successful supplement you need to make sure that it is accessible to as many campaigns as possible (this is your stated intention after all) and yet your tight integration of the Guild with the mechanics of the classes forces the GM to make massive alterations to his campaign world to accommodate a single player. I know that you said there are options in the campaign section for GMs to remove Guild influence but you have it backwards. Provide the GM with options to restrict things if they so wish. Do not start with the restrictions. Remember, there were options to make Sorcerers learn their spells from dragons and outsiders and such, but those were not part of the base mechanics of the class for a reason. Even beyond that you need to be careful of feat bloat (you have the Two-Weapon Shot and Improved Two-Weapon Shot feats that are already covered by the Two-Weapon Fighting and Improved Two-Weapon Fighting feats) and such.

If you want to do this right I would suggest taking a note from Dreamscarred Press and posting an open beta like they have done with Path of War, Akashic Mysteries and Arcforge. Post the crunch of your system (Classes, Skills, Arsenals, Technologies, etc.) and let people find the weaknesses while you hold back on the fluff and campaign elements. They will get excited about it and you will come out of it with a much better product. You might be worried about this seeming like you are releasing your work for 'free' but it has only helped Dreamscarred's sales, and for good reason. By the time they release something it is some of the most well tested, well balanced, and thoroughly polished material available for the game. And geeks are willing to pay for that, even if they have been playtesting it for months already. Remember, GMs are sketchy about homebrew but tend to allow 3rd party material. We all know that having the finished book means that we might actually get to play the neat new thing we found.

And please give a slap to whoever is giving you marketing advice. Having a minor teaser campaign followed by dead silence is a great way for people to have their interest peaked, get bored, and then forget about you. Don't tell people that you have an idea. Everyone has ideas. No one gets excited about ideas. Show us that you can make your idea a reality. Then we can get excited. Don't wait for the right moment. That moment was last August. That moment is now.

[Archanica]

Thanks a lot for the comments, Quarian Rex, the problems in the marketing obey to different things but I have to apologyze because of the "big silence", that's entirely up to me and a few mostly fortunate circumstances, getting new jobs that require most of my attention while I had to put this as a side project.

As for the idea of an open Beta, the idea sounds good but the main problem is that we don't have the text in English, only in Spanish, and the translation can be expensive. And well, the Spanish RPG market is different to the international market and not too open to new systems, our attempts to sustain betas with said market have not worked.
But your suggestion is great, I had been planning the extended Beta to be an "early access" reward for backers, but you are right on your thoughts, I'll discuss with my partners the idea of making it open to everyone, that way we might have better results.

Thanks a million, guys, your ideas are really REALLY valuable.

[Quarian Rex]

Glad to hear about new job goodness. No need to apologize on that front, just remember that it has an effect on feedback and such.

A benefit of the open beta would be that by releasing only the crunch you would need less initial translation. Look at spells, most of the info is in the statblock whose base template can be copy/pasted. The actual text of the Arsenals/Technologies could be translated by you (seriously, your english is good) with any mistakes corrected by community feedback. The more costly bits of translation are going to be with the fluff and campaign bits to make sure that tone and such are carried over. Text for the mechanics can be much more basic, and indeed should be to make sure that the rules are clear.

Just some thoughts. And I'm still really looking forward to this.

[Archanica]

Glad to hear about new job goodness. No need to apologize on that front, just remember that it has an effect on feedback and such.

A benefit of the open beta would be that by releasing only the crunch you would need less initial translation. Look at spells, most of the info is in the statblock whose base template can be copy/pasted. The actual text of the Arsenals/Technologies could be translated by you (seriously, your english is good) with any mistakes corrected by community feedback. The more costly bits of translation are going to be with the fluff and campaign bits to make sure that tone and such are carried over. Text for the mechanics can be much more basic, and indeed should be to make sure that the rules are clear.

Just some thoughts. And I'm still really looking forward to this.

Thanks. And well, I still have to test if we have a big enough audience to justify an open beta, you know, I came to notice people usually cares more for a book project when they can already donate and demand a good work.

The idea here would be opening a beta after the funding is completed, and only for the backers, I think it wouldn't be fair that people who didn't donate for the book get the rules just for free, that could discourage people from donating.

And well, this is... well, let's say top secret, but this is an advance of the stat blocks format we plan to handle for machines:

Spoiler

Show

[GnomeWorks]

You are competing with existing products already such as Etherscope, DragonMech, Iron Kingdom (the D20 version is available as a PDF) and OGL Steampunk, etc., which are easier to import into existing campaigns.

Not to mention Steamworks from 12 to Midnight, Steam & Steel by Fantasy Flight, and The Fantastic Science by EN Publishing.

this is an advance of the stat blocks format

...okay, honestly? That's basically unusable, both from a form and a function standpoint.

Form: a lot of people play on paper. How do you expect them to transcribe this information onto a sheet, or even free-hand onto just a regular piece of paper? You have a ton of information in a presentation that is completely unlike anything I've ever seen used in a d20 product, on top of complex mechanics.

Function: Um... lots.

• "...and a +2 additional bonus." What kind of bonus is that? Did you intend it to be untyped?
• Why are you getting skill checks involved in these effects, with ludicrously low DCs for something that looks like it's ostensibly for... a 1st-level character? I can hardly read your layout. Skill checks to use primary class features - which, you're writing a tech-based set of classes, the tech is the draw here - is not cool. I realize you might think it's flavorful, but they got rid of Scry as a skill for a reason.
• Traction Disk again, still... the line about a Reflex save, in parens. What is that all about? Why is there a Reflex save? What is this tied to?... oh wow, I see, so not only do you require a skill check to use this thing, you make the PC have to make a Reflex save against their check or take damage? We're two rolls into this ability's resolution already, and we haven't even gotten to the actual attack roll! (I left my initial confusion there as an example of confusion over the layout here).
• I'm going to go ahead and assume that you didn't think that balancing mechanics with money was a good idea (I bring this up because you have things here with gp costs listed). Because it isn't. Do some research on the concept of the "Wish economy" to understand why in more detail.
• "...prevents targets from trying to trip you on a failed trip attempt as a free action." What, exactly, does this mean? Are you trying to say that failing to trip a creature does not allow that creature a free trip attempt against you in return? Because that... ah, okay, language-bits are dangling here, that's what's going on. You need a better editor or translator. Just copy-pasta the text from Improved Trip for this, it'll be way clearer.
• Everything about "Sticky Band" is horrible. No idea what kind of bonus this is. Creatures have to make skill checks to "stand up without being stuck again"? I don't even know what that means.
• "Finger Control" is a bad ability. Letting characters use skills in checks opposed by attack rolls is a very, very bad idea.

[qazzquimby]

Please thoughtfully consider: I suggest translating to English non-professionally, and releasing to the playground for free. If the content is interesting enough, people might be interested in improving it themselves. This is how I see the project becoming the most valuable. Given that it has so much quality competition and isn't getting terrific reviews from this thread, I think developing it into something impressive independently might be insurmountable.

Or, at the very least: Rather than posting things that have obviously taken considerable work, to have reviewers find things fundamentally wrong with it, work with the playground during development. The degree to which this would work partially depends on the degree to which you're willing to release the content here.

Hopefully I'm not out of line or anything. People should speak over me if I'm wrong.

[Archanica]

Thanks for the comments.

Form: a lot of people play on paper. How do you expect them to transcribe this information onto a sheet, or even free-hand onto just a regular piece of paper? You have a ton of information in a presentation that is completely unlike anything I've ever seen used in a d20 product, on top of complex mechanics.

There will be special log sheets for the characters, something like this:

Spoiler

Show

"...and a +2 additional bonus." What kind of bonus is that? Did you intend it to be untyped?

First of all: All 4 "sub entries" marked with numbers are upgraded functions for the machine, just in case someone got confused here.
Sorry if the sheet doesn't make it clear but format is supposed to be explained in another part of the book (which is, indeed, present in the "text only" sample pack), this one's actually just a sample of the digital format used only for show (in matters of how the book is going to look like). The next Sample Pack (already finished) contains the whole explanation on how to read machine and upgrades entries.
Again, apologies if I didn't include the whole context for you to interpret the sample sheet.

And well, as for the "... +2 additional bonus". It's just a bonus provided by the machine because of its design, I think that's not always specified when it comes to objects, for example in the ranseur in PHB1 if simply says it provides you with a +2 bonus for disarm and trip attempts, doesn't specify the kind of bonus.

Why are you getting skill checks involved in these effects, with ludicrously low DCs for something that looks like it's ostensibly for... a 1st-level character? I can hardly read your layout. Skill checks to use primary class features - which, you're writing a tech-based set of classes, the tech is the draw here - is not cool. I realize you might think it's flavorful, but they got rid of Scry as a skill for a reason.

I'm not sure what you mean, but the DC checks are low because they're indeed for 1st level characters.
An inventor character is going to have it easy to use special attacks depending on the skill because they're already proficient with machines they crafted by themselves, while non-trained characters which are using Low Science machines (treated as exotic weapons) are going to have it a little harder.

Traction Disk again, still... the line about a Reflex save, in parens. What is that all about? Why is there a Reflex save? What is this tied to?... oh wow, I see, so not only do you require a skill check to use this thing, you make the PC have to make a Reflex save against their check or take damage? We're two rolls into this ability's resolution already, and we haven't even gotten to the actual attack roll! (I left my initial confusion there as an example of confusion over the layout here).

Well, I apologyze for the confusion, the description of the weapon and special attack was indeed longer but we reduced it a bit to fit it better into more compact stat blocks. It's clear this is not working out quite well. I'll be more careful with that after this, gonna ask for more opinions before going forward with descriptions so we can complete it better.
About the special attack, I think you may be right, doing two rolls in order to see the outcome of the attack might be too much. But it's important to limit the ease of performing it for non-proficient characters. I guess we can simply put the skill check as a requirement for non-proficient characters, while a proficient character can perform the attack without having to perform a skill check first. That's going to work better.

I'm going to go ahead and assume that you didn't think that balancing mechanics with money was a good idea (I bring this up because you have things here with gp costs listed). Because it isn't. Do some research on the concept of the "Wish economy" to understand why in more detail.

OK, gonna check that.

"...prevents targets from trying to trip you on a failed trip attempt as a free action." What, exactly, does this mean? Are you trying to say that failing to trip a creature does not allow that creature a free trip attempt against you in return? Because that... ah, okay, language-bits are dangling here, that's what's going on. You need a better editor or translator. Just copy-pasta the text from Improved Trip for this, it'll be way clearer.

It means that you can cut the rope as a free action so you won't be subject of a trip attempt after you failed. And don't blame on the translator here, my initial phrasing was not clear enough.

Everything about "Sticky Band" is horrible. No idea what kind of bonus this is. Creatures have to make skill checks to "stand up without being stuck again"? I don't even know what that means.

OK, I thought it was pretty clear. The bonus is because of the material and nothing more, not sure if there's a kind of bonus linked to that.
A tripped opponent who is in the floor shall make an Escape Artist check in order to get up and not being stuck again (as they were stuck with the initial tripping).

"Finger Control" is a bad ability. Letting characters use skills in checks opposed by attack rolls is a very, very bad idea.

Well, if you think so, we may revamp the mechanics of Finger Control for the final release.

Please thoughtfully consider: I suggest translating to English non-professionally, and releasing to the playground for free. This is how I see the project becoming the most valuable. Given that it has so much quality competition and isn't getting terrific reviews from this thread, I think developing it into something impressive independently might be insurmountable.
Or, at the very least: Rather than posting things that have obviously taken considerable work, to have reviewers find things fundamentally wrong with it, work with the playground during development. The degree to which this would work partially depends on the degree to which you're willing to release the content here.

Not trying to be rude or anything, but I think there's no chance of doing non-professional translation. Amateur takes a lot longer and it's not easy to find anyone willing to do it for no money, also things get messier when you have different people working in the project in an informal way.
I, for myself, have the commitment to coordinate everything to make it work, and we have devised ways to do it so.

In the draft for our project we make clear that we're going to coordinate extended testing to receive feedback from backers, so everything that players might find problematic may be fixed before the official release. But first thing we need is a little support for the translation; after that, everything's going to be easier.

Hopefully I'm not out of line or anything. People should speak over me if I'm wrong.

Not at all, man. Really really appreciated.


Bottomline: I apologyze. We are no professional writers and this is our first try, so the start may be a little rocky, but we're committed to improve and solve any problem and our schedule is going to allow us to take and implement all kinds of feedback. Almost everything's subject to change if someone's not convincing enough.

Thank you everyone for the feedback, you're helping a lot to keep us on check.

[qazzquimby]

I've never done a massive translation or anything, but I would do this:

1. Find all keywords in spanish and find/replace with the keyword in English.
2. Use an online translator to hard translate everything.
3. Edit to be comprehensible and fit game terms.
4. Edit to be polished.

Somewhere between 4 and 5 release to playground.

The attention you've got so far is more than I would have expected, and rather than risking it fizzling out, I think you should try to build a community of editors and contributors. That will naturally happen if really interesting content is posted here (there are many great examples).

Anyway, good luck with whatever you do.

[Archanica]

Thank you.

[GnomeWorks]

There will be special log sheets for the characters, something like this:

Spoiler

Show

Having a prebuilt sheet is well and good, but again, this is a lot of information for someone to put down on a piece of paper. I don't recall the last time I had a player that used a prebuilt sheet; I know one of my current players is using a single sheet of regular printer paper.

And well, as for the "... +2 additional bonus". It's just a bonus provided by the machine because of its design, I think that's not always specified when it comes to objects, for example in the ranseur in PHB1 if simply says it provides you with a +2 bonus for disarm and trip attempts, doesn't specify the kind of bonus.

As a counterpoint, from the SRD: "If you drink antitoxin, you get a +5 alchemical bonus on Fortitude saving throws against poison for 1 hour."

Items do not always give untyped bonuses.

I would argue that the existence of untyped bonuses is bad design, but that's a bit beyond the scope here... I suppose since this is an actual item you have to hold, you won't run into the stacking problem that spell buffs would. I still don't like it, but it's not wrong or inconsistent with the rest of d20, so... whatever, I guess.

I'm not sure what you mean, but the DC checks are low because they're indeed for 1st level characters.

...sigh.

Okay. So now let's take a look at a 20th-level $tech-class. He still has to make a DC 15 Sleight of Hand check to use this device in this way, despite that check either being (1) difficult because he still has no ranks in it, or (2) laughable because he has enough ranks in it to not care.

But wait! The Reflex save DC to avoid cutting yourself for 1d4 damage (kind of a big deal at 1st, laughable at 20th) is equal to the check result. This means that your goal in using this device is to get a bonus such that you always make the check, but by as little as possible. That is patently absurd. The better you are at being sneaky and deft with your hands, the harder it is to avoid cutting yourself? That is some backwards logic, and makes no sense from a versimilitude standpoint.

An inventor character is going to have it easy to use special attacks depending on the skill because they're already proficient with machines they crafted by themselves, while non-trained characters which are using Low Science machines (treated as exotic weapons) are going to have it a little harder.

I fail to see why a Proficiency feat would obviate skill checks? Unless your feats are weird.

About the special attack, I think you may be right, doing two rolls in order to see the outcome of the attack might be too much. But it's important to limit the ease of performing it for non-proficient characters. I guess we can simply put the skill check as a requirement for non-proficient characters, while a proficient character can perform the attack without having to perform a skill check first. That's going to work better.

...is there any particular reason you feel it necessary to punish a lack of proficiency more than it is already punished by standard Proficiency rules?

It means that you can cut the rope as a free action so you won't be subject of a trip attempt after you failed. And don't blame on the translator here, my initial phrasing was not clear enough.

"Cut the rope." What rope? You mean the thing in the flavor text? Because it's mentioned literally nowhere in the rules text of this machine. There is no reason that "cutting the rope as a free action" has any effect whatsoever on anything, because you have not described why that matters, or even the fact that there is a rope. Flavor text is not rules text, yo.

OK, I thought it was pretty clear. The bonus is because of the material and nothing more, not sure if there's a kind of bonus linked to that.

Alchemical, most likely. But again, most bonuses have types, to avoid bonus-stacking and to avoid rolls flying off the RNG. So most likely it does not particularly matter what kind of bonus it is, just so long as it has one.

A tripped opponent who is in the floor shall make an Escape Artist check in order to get up and not being stuck again (as they were stuck with the initial tripping).

Okay, this seems like a language problem. "and not being stuck again" is a completely unnecessary clause in this sentence. Just saying "The target must succeed on a DC 15 Escape Artist check to stand" is sufficient.

But then, as I write that, I have no idea what kind of action the target has to spend to do that. You should maybe include one.

Well, if you think so, we may revamp the mechanics of Finger Control for the final release.

Well okay then.

[Archanica]

Having a prebuilt sheet is well and good, but again, this is a lot of information for someone to put down on a piece of paper. I don't recall the last time I had a player that used a prebuilt sheet; I know one of my current players is using a single sheet of regular printer paper.

Rules of machines are not as complicated as spells, because machines are usually simple weapons with a few special properties. I devise the log sheets to just take note of a few keywords. But if you think so, I guess we can make the space for properties bigger and fit three spaces for machines per sheet instead of four :)

Okay. So now let's take a look at a 20th-level $tech-class. He still has to make a DC 15 Sleight of Hand check to use this device in this way, despite that check either being (1) difficult because he still has no ranks in it, or (2) laughable because he has enough ranks in it to not care.

You are right on that. We will change it, then, to make everything smoother.

But wait! The Reflex save DC to avoid cutting yourself for 1d4 damage (kind of a big deal at 1st, laughable at 20th) is equal to the check result. This means that your goal in using this device is to get a bonus such that you always make the check, but by as little as possible. That is patently absurd. The better you are at being sneaky and deft with your hands, the harder it is to avoid cutting yourself? That is some backwards logic, and makes no sense from a versimilitude standpoint.

It's not to prevent cutting yourself, the opponents in the line of attack must do a Reflex check to avoid receiving the 1d4 damage.
So, I guess you were right, compressing the description of the machine made the writing very confusing.

I fail to see why a Proficiency feat would obviate skill checks? Unless your feats are weird.

Well, you're right, they may sort of overlap.

...is there any particular reason you feel it necessary to punish a lack of proficiency more than it is already punished by standard Proficiency rules?

Using the more special functions of machines should be a little harder than the regular ones, but as I said above you're right and we can make it smoother.

"Cut the rope." What rope? You mean the thing in the flavor text? Because it's mentioned literally nowhere in the rules text of this machine. There is no reason that "cutting the rope as a free action" has any effect whatsoever on anything, because you have not described why that matters, or even the fact that there is a rope. Flavor text is not rules text, yo.

OK... shame on me again, then.

Alchemical, most likely. But again, most bonuses have types, to avoid bonus-stacking and to avoid rolls flying off the RNG. So most likely it does not particularly matter what kind of bonus it is, just so long as it has one.

I don't know if a regular glue substance can be considered alchemical... more like "chemical" maybe?

Okay, this seems like a language problem. "and not being stuck again" is a completely unnecessary clause in this sentence. Just saying "The target must succeed on a DC 15 Escape Artist check to stand" is sufficient.

Fine.

But then, as I write that, I have no idea what kind of action the target has to spend to do that. You should maybe include one.

Okay. Gonna check that again.


Thank you very much.

[GnomeWorks]

Rules of machines are not as complicated as spells, because machines are usually simple weapons with a few special properties. I devise the log sheets to just take note of a few keywords. But if you think so, I guess we can make the space for properties bigger and fit three spaces for machines per sheet instead of four :)

I'm not talking about the sheet you have... I'm talking about someone writing this stuff down free-hand on not-your-sheet-paper.

What you have there is probably fine. It looks comparable to what I recall standard 3.5 sheets looking like. But that's not what I'm getting at; I mean it kind of is, what with the potential look-up times, but I'm more concerned about how players would transcribe this stuff onto regular paper.

It's not to prevent cutting yourself, the opponents in the line of attack must do a Reflex check to avoid receiving the 1d4 damage.
So, I guess you were right, compressing the description of the machine made the writing very confusing.

Um... yes, then. If that was the intent, then yeah, that language was not clear.

And in that case: you're setting a saving throw DC by using a skill check? There is no world in which that is not terrible.

I don't know if a regular glue substance can be considered alchemical... more like "chemical" maybe?

The goal of typing bonuses is so that players can't stack them to fly off the top-end of the RNG and stomp everything.

If you want to give it a weird bonus type, go nuts. Call it chemical, nutritional, Bob Dole, whatever. But you have to keep in mind other mechanical elements the player may - or may not - find and use to combine with that bonus, to achieve over-the-top numbers.

[Archanica]

The goal of typing bonuses is so that players can't stack them to fly off the top-end of the RNG and stomp everything.

If you want to give it a weird bonus type, go nuts. Call it chemical, nutritional, Bob Dole, whatever. But you have to keep in mind other mechanical elements the player may - or may not - find and use to combine with that bonus, to achieve over-the-top numbers.

Yes, I was suggested that once, I guess I'll have to implement it.

[Debihuman]

My criticism isn't that you have a bad product but that your product isn't ready yet. You have to make a lot of changes still and finish translating. That is a lot for one person. I wish you all the best on this project. I hope it turns out great. And I look forward to seeing it completed

[Archanica]

We launch our official website :D

http://archanica.com/

Official Indiegogo project in matter of days...

[DracoDei]

I'm late to the party, but I'm just going to leave this here as another point of comparison...
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showt...neer-3-5-PEACH

[Archanica]

Our INDIEGOGO project has finally launched!

https://igg.me/at/archanica

Take a look to everything we offer, download our SAMPLE PACK and pledge if you feel like!

Give us your suggestions. Help us to spread the news about ARCHANICA and suscribe to www.facebook.com/archanica for updates and extra sneak peeks about the MECANOTECHNICS HANDBOOK.