Page 9 of 30 FirstFirst 12345678910111213141516171819 ... LastLast
Results 241 to 270 of 887
  1. - Top - End - #241
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Kryx's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default Re: Structural Class Changes (Mana, Talents, Clear gish structure)

    By their very nature martial characters will get less than spellcasters. Compare a Fighter vs a Wizard for example. On one end you have a mundane and simple class on the other you have one of the most complex classes. A Fighter will never be able to achieve the same things that a Wizard can. The ability to boost a Fighter is generally limited to combat with the ideas of exploration and social aspects better suited in other classes. It's unfortunate and I'd like to change that, but that's the reality of D&D.

    A martial monk and a spellcasting monk has similar problems. What do you give a martial monk so that it can compete with spellcasting?

    Though lets compare Kensi vs Open Hand:

    Level 1
    Kensei: Martial Weapons (Quarterstaff does 1d8 so the damage doesn't increase. +Wis to init.
    OH: No OAs from attacked enemies. +Wis to init

    Level 3
    Kensei: 4 ki features for combat, Maneuvering Strike and Riposte being shared with OH.
    OH: 3 ki features for combat. Crippling is quite strong - keep in mind a monk could use this on multiple enemies

    Level 6
    Kensei: Fighting Stance
    OH: Reaction to halve damage

    Level 10
    Kensei: Ki to add bonuses to hit and damage
    OH: Stunning Strike

    Level 14
    Kensei: Hit if you miss
    OH: Ki to do lots of damage

    Kensei gaining extra weapons has no mechanical benefit.

    As far as I can see the two martial subclasses are comparable. Drunken martial looks quite similar.

  2. - Top - End - #242
    Orc in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2016

    Default Re: Structural Class Changes (Mana, Talents, Clear gish structure)

    I haven't looked at Kensei to much, no interest in playing one, but it does look very weak. I'm just not sure what the access to some weapons could do, as there is the solid limit with the two-handed property. Hand Crossbow? At least that increases the ranged effectiveness of the martial monk I guess.

    Drunken Master: Prof in improved weapons is flavour. The other two are really interesting. Bonus action grapple, or free disengage if you go all out attack(Flurry of Blows) with an increase to speed.

    1. "During your turn, if you make a melee weapon attack against a creature, that creature canít make opportunity attacks against you for the rest of your turn." is weaker than....
    2. Disengage. is weaker than....
    3. "The target canít take reactions until the end of its next turn."

    Open Hand: It gets 1, which is like half the Mobile feat but without the movement. Drunken Master gets Disengage for free(costs other monks 1ki via Step of the Wind), and the +10 spd.

    Every monk gets Disorienting Strike, Knockback Kick, Patient Defense, Step of the Wind, Sweeping Strike. OH should be better at the basic martial stuff imo. It needs ways to either do it for free, free under certain conditions, more reliable at it, and/or more potent.

    eg
    * Once per turn, when you use Disorienting Strike, it doesn't cost ki.
    * Sweeping Strike only cost you 1 ki.
    * When you use Knockback Kick, the target has disadvantage on the Reflex saving throw, and the distance you can push them is up to 20ft.
    * You can add your Wisdom modifier to your initiative rolls. If you get the highest initiative, you can use Step of the Wind as a bonus action for free on your first turn.

    or
    * When you use Disorienting Strike, Knockback Kick, Patient Defense or Step of the Wind, it does not cost ki. You can use this Wis times per short rest.

  3. - Top - End - #243
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Kryx's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default Re: Structural Class Changes (Mana, Talents, Clear gish structure)

    Quote Originally Posted by Ugganaut View Post
    I haven't looked at Kensei to much
    You just compared the Open Hand Monk to the Kensei above, saying that it was weaker. It seems what you meant is that martial monks are weaker than spellcasting monks.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ugganaut View Post
    Every monk gets Disorienting Strike, Knockback Kick, Patient Defense, Step of the Wind, Sweeping Strike.
    Every monk is a capable martial artist, yes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ugganaut View Post
    OH should be better at the basic martial stuff imo. It needs ways to either do it for free, free under certain conditions, more reliable at it, and/or more potent.
    OH Monks are better at basic martial stuff. They have 3+ ki features allowing them to excel at combat whereas spellcasting monks have ki to cast spells.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ugganaut View Post
    * Once per turn, when you use Disorienting Strike, it doesn't cost ki.
    Disorienting Strike doesn't cost ki.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ugganaut View Post
    * Sweeping Strike only cost you 1 ki.
    Knocking an opponent prone is a huge benefit in a melee based group. For example it could offer you and your allies advantage on all attacks until the creatures turn. Or you could grapple the creature, effectively pinning it.
    These type of abilities are like spells in that a Wizard doesn't spend less mana to cast spells than a Warlock. The same is true here: these abilities have set costs. The benefit should be weighed against that cost.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ugganaut View Post
    * When you use Knockback Kick, the target has disadvantage on the Reflex saving throw, and the distance you can push them is up to 20ft.
    See above about set costs.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ugganaut View Post
    If you get the highest initiative, you can use Step of the Wind as a bonus action for free on your first turn.
    Not a bad idea, but it's very minor. Also first round abilities can easily be gamed or complained about. "I'm sticking back to avoid initiative", etc. I believe that is why they are nearly non-existant in 5e.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ugganaut View Post
    * When you use Disorienting Strike, Knockback Kick, Patient Defense or Step of the Wind, it does not cost ki. You can use this Wis times per short rest.
    Spellcasting monks have the ability to cast spells without mana as class features. If a martial monk has such a feature then they'd lose a feature that they currently have.

  4. - Top - End - #244
    Orc in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2016

    Default Re: Structural Class Changes (Mana, Talents, Clear gish structure)

    Quote Originally Posted by Kryx View Post
    You just compared the Open Hand Monk to the Kensei above, saying that it was weaker. It seems what you meant is that martial monks are weaker than spellcasting monks.
    Yes. Although Drunken Master doesn't bother me so much, it looks really fun to play from level 1, and Drunken Technique looks pretty good. You get free disengage(+10spd) every round you use Flurry, so you can wobble around any battlefield all day long and it doesn't cost you a single ki.
    Kensei, at first glance, looks really weak. I'm not completely sure, because I haven't looked into to deeply. Maybe there is good talent support due to weapon choices, I don't know. I lost interest after I saw they can't use heavy weapons, ever, which is the only reason I could see to take Kensei(the monks that use the big polearms). One with the Blade looks like a level 1 fighter feature, but requires an action instead of a bonus action to switch stances - so worse.
    Open Hand seems like the generic hand-to-hand expert(all real world styles rolled into one), but its Open Hand Technique is underwhelming.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kryx View Post
    OH Monks are better at basic martial stuff. They have 3+ ki features allowing them to excel at combat whereas spellcasting monks have ki to cast spells.
    I think I'm a bit lost here. How are OH monks better at basic martial stuff? "Every monk is a capable martial artist, yes." They are all equal. Ki features aren't till level 3, that' s the more advanced stuff. I have no issue there, martials have martial ones, others have spell type ones, some have a mix. It's the level 1 stuff that looks weak, specifically in OH(and maybe Kensei, I'm not sure on that one as I said).

    Quote Originally Posted by Kryx View Post
    Disorienting Strike doesn't cost ki.
    It's at this point I realized I was reading the wrong document. I'm going through the last one before the theme spells modifications(around 4 weeks ago), I didn't think to check the non-casters and monks.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kryx View Post
    Knocking an opponent prone is a huge benefit in a melee based group. [...]The same is true here: these abilities have set costs. The benefit should be weighed against that cost.
    Normally, if you want to Disengage as a bonus action, you have to use Step of the Wind and spend 1 ki. The Drunken Master can use Disengage(+10spd) for free every round as long as he's using Flurry). So it has a set cost, but that cost is suspended. In this case, its as long as a very easy prerequisite is met each round. The Drunken Master is hard to pin down, so this is perfect mechanics imo, he's extremely mobile.
    Whatever the strengths of the Open Hand are, they should be reflected and amplified in the level 1 OH Technique. That's what I was trying to do, but clearly failing miserably.
    I'm not really sure what the strengths of the Open Hand are. The description just says masters whether armed or unarmed. There's no real style, like Drunken Master. If it was Tiger style, or Crane style etc, they have specific things they are good at. Open Hand seems to be the generic term for all martial styles that haven't been made up(Drunk and Kensei).
    So maybe, as a master of all, you could have a list of 6 options, and you could choose one at 1, 2, 5, 9, 13, 17. Some offense, defensive, utility, representing different styles that you master as you go up. Just thoughts.

    Maybe the martials should get a level 17 feature somewhere too - another option to spend ki. The base class gets nothing, but the casters get access to their strongest spell options.

  5. - Top - End - #245
    Orc in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2016

    Default Re: Structural Class Changes (Mana, Talents, Clear gish structure)

    A stance/style approach could be one solution. I tried to do one up, it's a bit rough of course.

    Open Hand Technique
    When you choose this tradition at 1st level, you master one of the following fighting styles. You master another at levels 2, 5, 9, 13 and 17.
    As a bonus action on your turn, you can enter the stance for one style you know, that lasts until you enter the stance of another style.
    Monkey style: While in this stance, you can take the Disengage action as a bonus action.
    Crane style: While in this stance, when you use your action to take the dodge action, you also gain the benefit of the disengage action.
    Tiger style: While in this stance, when you roll your martial arts damage dice for an unarmed strike, you can roll one extra die and discard the lowest of the two dice.
    Leopard style: While in this stance, your unarmed attacks can score a critical hit on a natural 19 or 20. If you do score a critical hit, the target can not make opportunity attacks until the start of itís next turn.
    Snake style: While in this stance, you have advantage to hit creatures who have attacked you with disadvantage since the end of your last turn. Also, once on your turn when you take the Attack action, you can make a Charisma(Deception) check opposed by the targets Wisdom(Insight). If you succeed, you have advantage on the first attack roll you make against the target this turn.
    Mantis style: While in this stance, your reach for your unarmed strikes is 10 feet.
    Dragon style(Prerequisite: 17th level monk): While in this stance, you can adopt the benefits of any two styles you know. You can change which two styles you adopt as a bonus action on your turn.


    Another approach, could be an option to spend ki at 1, 2, 5, 9, 13, 17, equal to the same amount as spells at those levels, so increasingly more powerful. I didn't have many ideas on that(Stunning Strike would be a good option), so I tried to whip up the stance idea :) Again, the above probably isn't balanced, I'm trying to present the idea of styles/stances as a way to improve options as you increase level.

    Edit: Again, that "1, 2, 5, 9, 13, 17" is from the pre-theme version of the system. You get the idea though.
    Last edited by Ugganaut; 2018-04-30 at 10:33 PM.

  6. - Top - End - #246
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Kryx's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default Re: Structural Class Changes (Mana, Talents, Clear gish structure)

    Lets compare Burning Cinders vs Open Hand:

    Level 1
    Burning Cinders:: Ki blast. 1 Cantrip.
    OH: No OAs from attacked enemies. +Wis to init

    Comparison: Balanced. Relatively minor features in the grand scheme of things.

    Level 3
    Burning Cinders:: Can use its 3 ki to cast fire theme spells, with a limit of 1 ki per spell. Fangs of the fire snake is a reach and damage boost for 1 turn. Searing Arc Strike sacrifices Flurry for Burning hands
    OH: Can use its 3 ki to use its 3 ki features for combat. Crippling is quite strong - keep in mind a monk could use this on multiple enemies.

    Comparison: Balanced. Burning cinders can cast a few spells, but their power is quite limited. The spells also come at the cost of attacking which does quite a bit of damage. Ki features are surely in the favor of OH.

    Level 6
    Burning Cinders:: 1 ki to cause enemies to burn. 6 ki to spend on spells, though still limited to 1 mana.
    OH: Reaction to halve damage. 6 ki to spend on ki features.

    Comparison: Balanced. Nearly the same comparison as level 3 with OH getting better class features to make up for Burning Cinder's slight versatility lead.

    Level 10
    Burning Cinders:: Fireball (will possibly need to be replaced). 10 ki to spend on spells, though limited to 2 mana.
    OH: Stunning Strike (will need its cost rebalanced with the new mana system). 10 ki to spend on ki features.

    Comparison: Balanced. Burning cinders is looking a bit better with access to 2 mana spells. However stunning strike should be quite useful once I rebalance the cost (probably to 2). A stun has a huge impact on a round as the creature can't do anything and attacks have advantage.

    Level 14
    Burning Cinders:: Fire Aspect has a permanent 5 ft aoe for 1d10 and boosts fire spells. 15 ki to spend on spells, though limited to 2 mana.
    OH: Ki to do lots of damage (Ki cost needs to be rebalanced). 15 ki to spend on ki features.

    Comparison: Balanced. Burning Cinders can have a great encounter with Fire Aspect, though Quivering Palm can do a number on a solo boss.


    Overall Comparison: Overall I believe the limitation of 1 theme on spellcasters keeps them in check with the martial subclasses. The features are quite comparable imo, especially since the spellcasters split their ki between ki features and spells while the martials use all of their ki on ki features. It's a trade of versatility (often AoE) vs reliable and effective options for the martial subclasses.

    It seems you have no fully compared the two subclasses. Please do a more complete comparison before raising your balance concerns in the future.


    Some specific replies:
    Quote Originally Posted by Ugganaut View Post
    level 1 stuff that looks weak
    Level 1 features of all subclasses are very minimal. That's true for martial and spellcasting Monk subclasses, every Mage subclass, and every Rogue subclass. Please keep the whole system in mind when raising concerns.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ugganaut View Post
    The Drunken Master can use Disengage(+10spd) for free every round as long as he's using Flurry)
    Flurry assumes the Drunken Master isn't uising Burning Hands, Dodge action, or a bonus action from another class via multiclass. It'll be most rounds, but isn't to be assumed. The ability to avoid OAs is covered by other monks via Disorienting Strike.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ugganaut View Post
    Maybe the martials should get a level 17 feature somewhere too - another option to spend ki. The base class gets nothing, but the casters get access to their strongest spell options.
    Please see the comparison above. Martials are not behind. Additionally subclasses have been moving toward and will be solidified on fully comparable progressions. Meaning they will all gain features at the same levels.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ugganaut View Post
    A stance/style approach could be one solution.
    A solution to a problem that doesn't exist. You're after more flavor, but what features does the OH give up to get these stances? The options you've suggested are quite strong and would require the removal of features like Uncanny Dodge and possibly another.

  7. - Top - End - #247
    Orc in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2016

    Default Re: Structural Class Changes (Mana, Talents, Clear gish structure)

    Quote Originally Posted by Kryx View Post
    Lets compare Burning Cinders vs Open Hand:
    Quote Originally Posted by Kryx View Post
    It seems you have no fully compared the two subclasses. Please do a more complete comparison before raising your balance concerns in the future.
    I don't know how. When comparing spending 1 ki on Crippling Strike(OH), or on Scorching Ray(BC), I don't understand how value is assigned. One is melee only, but has a strong effect that you can't save against. The other has a range of 120ft, can hit up to 3 targets. Fireball has a large area of effect. I don't know what value to get range, no save effects, size of AoE. I'm just guessing. You're much smarter than I am. Not much I can do about that sorry. I'm not trying to piss you off.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kryx View Post
    A martial monk and a spellcasting monk has similar problems. What do you give a martial monk so that it can compete with spellcasting?
    This is why I tried to present an idea that gave more options, you shut me down.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kryx View Post
    A solution to a problem that doesn't exist. You're after more flavor, but what features does the OH give up to get these stances? The options you've suggested are quite strong and would require the removal of features like Uncanny Dodge and possibly another.
    I was presenting an idea. I said it was rough. You're aware I'm not good at the balance stuff, so I present the idea to you, as you are good at the balance stuff. If the idea isn't good, so be it.
    Is more flavour bad? Is the stance option bad? Obviously the substance of each option is bad, but I'm sure you could balance that out. I was just trying to present an idea. I thought it was an interesting idea that could bring more flavor and options over time, to a bland start to a subclass(OH already has Disorientating Strike like all monks, as you mentioned for Drunken Master). Stances would allow choices over time, but only one at a time(with Dragon being an option if it ever became appropriate to have two at once like fighter stances). To change, you'd have to give up Flurry for the round. If each option was a little strong, you could remove the +wis to Init. But if it was so strong that you'd have to change the other class features, then I agree, its not a good idea.
    I'm sure stance options could be made that equal but don't exceed the total power of the current Open Hand Technique benefits, thereby giving the class increased options over time, but only one active at a time.

  8. - Top - End - #248
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Kryx's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default Re: Structural Class Changes (Mana, Talents, Clear gish structure)

    Quote Originally Posted by Ugganaut View Post
    I don't know how. When comparing spending 1 ki on Crippling Strike(OH), or on Scorching Ray(BC), I don't understand how value is assigned. One is melee only, but has a strong effect that you can't save against. The other has a range of 120ft, can hit up to 3 targets.
    A level 1 Monk with a quarterstaff does about 9 DPR.
    A 1 mana scorching ray does 4d4 (pdf is outdated). 4d4 = 10 damage * .65 = 6.5 damage, though it can crit so 6.8 damage. It also has some range which weights the damage to about 9.4 damage.

    So at level 1 attacking with unarmed strikes is comparable to a Scorching Ray after you consider range.

    Level 3 the monk does 13 DPR while Scorching Ray stays the same. Level 5 is 24 DPR. It's quite hard for spells to compete here actually. I'll need to consider how to change this - probably a spell as a bonus action as the other martial classes have.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ugganaut View Post
    Fireball has a large area of effect. I don't know what value to get range, no save effects, size of AoE.
    At level 9 when a Monk can cast fireball the monk does 24 DPR. Fireball does 5d6 = 17.5 damage * .55 = 9.9 + (17.5/2)*.45 = 13.5 damage to each target. That's a decent trade if you hit enough creatures. Thoguh at level 11 the monk goes up to 37 DPR so the trade is less good then. Though perhaps the bonus action I mention above can remedy the situation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ugganaut View Post
    I'm just guessing. You're much smarter than I am. Not much I can do about that sorry. I'm not trying to piss you off.
    Don't sell yourself short. You can figure out general damage numbers. Then just multiply attacks by about .65. Saves you multiply by .55 and then multiple half damage by .45.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ugganaut View Post
    This is why I tried to present an idea that gave more options, you shut me down.
    Ideas need to be rooted in understanding the current system and analyzing how the change would impact that. The ideas don't need to be perfect, but an idea has very little value without some measure of understanding and analysis.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ugganaut View Post
    Is more flavour bad? Is the stance option bad? Obviously the substance of each option is bad, but I'm sure you could balance that out. I was just trying to present an idea. I thought it was an interesting idea that could bring more flavor and options over time, to a bland start to a subclass(OH already has Disorientating Strike like all monks, as you mentioned for Drunken Master). Stances would allow choices over time, but only one at a time(with Dragon being an option if it ever became appropriate to have two at once like fighter stances). To change, you'd have to give up Flurry for the round. If each option was a little strong, you could remove the +wis to Init. But if it was so strong that you'd have to change the other class features, then I agree, its not a good idea.
    I'm sure stance options could be made that equal but don't exceed the total power of the current Open Hand Technique benefits, thereby giving the class increased options over time, but only one active at a time.
    Flavor is not bad, every class should have flavor. OH should probably be more flavorful, but it's difficult to dive in to the details of a subclass when the whole system is in flux. The whole system needs to be stable before I can start considering individual subclasses and their balance level.

    In this case you has a presupposition that martials were weaker than spellcasters. After analysis that was shown to be the opposite situation. An OH monk could use more flavor, but you have to consider the subclass as a whole as it compares to other Monk subclasses and how those compare to other Classes and their subclasses. For example Uncanny dodge could move to the Monk class which adds more flavor there and opens up room for features in OH, though that has to be considered across all classes. That could work if I add more features to each base class.

  9. - Top - End - #249
    Orc in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2016

    Default Re: Structural Class Changes (Mana, Talents, Clear gish structure)

    This was my second pass at the stance idea, trying to tone it down a lot.

    Open Hand Technique
    When you choose this tradition at 1st level, you can take the Dash action as a bonus action on your first turn each combat.
    Also, you learn the basic techniques of one of the six known fighting styles.
    You learn another style at levels 2, 5, 9, 13 and 17.
    As a bonus action on your turn, you can enter the stance of one style you know, that lasts until you enter the stance of another style you know.
    Monkey style: While in this stance, if you make a melee weapon attack against a creature during your turn, that creature canít make opportunity attacks against you for the rest of your turn.
    Crane style: While in this stance, when you take the dodge action, you also gain the benefits of the disengage action.
    Tiger style: While in this stance, the first time you hit a target with an unarmed strike or monk weapon on your turn, you roll an extra damage die, and discard the lowest of the two dice. You also gain this benefit using your Flurry of Blows.
    Snake style: While in this stance, once on your turn before taking the Attack action, you can make a Manipulation check opposed by the targets Insight check. If you succeed, the next melee weapon attack you make against the target this turn has advantage, as well as your Flurry of Blows this turn.
    Mantis style: While in this stance, as a bonus action, you can increase your reach for melee weapon attacks to 10 feet this turn.
    Dragon style(Prerequisite: 17th level Monk): While in this stance, you can adopt the benefits of any two styles you know. You can change which two styles you adopt as a bonus action on your turn.

    How do you put value on things like this. Numbers is one thing, but reach on melee attacks, increased crit range for 1 attack per turn? The goal is to have them balanced against Monkey(the first of the OH abilities). That way you gain variety, not a spike in power per stance.
    I thought it was a decent idea, given that there aren't many martial subtypes that refer to the old MA styles. OH seemed like a good home for a "master of styles", while the other martials focused on weapons or alcohol :)

    Uncanny Dodge would fit in the monk base class in terms of flavor.

    But you're right, hard to do any balancing at all when its all up in the air.

    Edit: Updated to the latest version after you mentioned its a bit weak.
    Last edited by Ugganaut; 2018-05-04 at 12:17 AM.

  10. - Top - End - #250
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Giegue's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2009

    Default Re: Structural Class Changes (Mana, Talents, Clear gish structure)

    The new version looks AWESOME I must say. I am already dying to make a Charisma-based Death Domain Cleric who specializes in the life, death and undeath themes! (pun totally intended) Now I just want a chance to play with these rules. I do plan on giving them a spin as a GM for my friends, using them to run my Japanese mythology-inspired dystopian epic fantasy setting with them. While not the same as, you know, being a player under them, I will let you know how it plays once I complete a session or two with it.
    Last edited by Giegue; 2018-05-02 at 07:48 PM.
    78% of DM's started their first campaign in a tavern. If you're one of the 22% that didn't, copy and paste this into your signature.

    Mine started at a dinner party in the BBEG's estate.

  11. - Top - End - #251
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Kryx's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default Re: Structural Class Changes (Mana, Talents, Clear gish structure)

    The flavor of multiple attack styles is great. Though I can't currently place it at a level as the base structure is in too much flux. The lower power stuff is probably too inconsequential to be worth it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Giegue View Post
    The new version looks AWESOME I must say. I am already dying to make a Charisma-based Death Domain Cleric who specializes in the life, death and undeath themes! (pun totally intended) Now I just want a chance to play with these rules. I do plan on giving them a spin as a GM for my friends, using them to run my Japanese mythology-inspired dystopian epic fantasy setting with them. While not the same as, you know, being a player under them, I will let you know how it plays once I complete a session or two with it.
    Nice to hear that you're excited! Once the system is in a more stable state it'll be good to have more voices providing feedback.

    The current structure is not ready to be played with. It'll probably take another month or more to get it in a playable state.


    I'm quite far along with making a web version of these rules that make it much easier to navigate around.

  12. - Top - End - #252
    Orc in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2016

    Default Re: Structural Class Changes (Mana, Talents, Clear gish structure)

    Looking forward to it :)

  13. - Top - End - #253
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    gkathellar's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Beyond the Ninth Wave
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Structural Class Changes (Mana, Talents, Clear gish structure)

    You know, at some point you're going to have enough house rules for a whole new game.

    That's not a good or a bad thing, just an observation.
    Quote Originally Posted by KKL
    D&D is its own momentum and does its own fantasy. It emulates itself in an incestuous mess.

  14. - Top - End - #254
    Orc in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2016

    Default Re: Structural Class Changes (Mana, Talents, Clear gish structure)

    Quote Originally Posted by gkathellar View Post
    You know, at some point you're going to have enough house rules for a whole new game.

    That's not a good or a bad thing, just an observation.
    I've been calling it 5.5e when talking about it with my group, but after the new magic system, its 6e. Nothing Wizards brings out fits into it - archetypes, feats, and now spells. No point reading a lot of the homebrew stuff on the forums, because it no longer fits either. Anything I try to make up or convert I can't bring to the forums for the same reason, no longer fits(currently Rune Magic), and I can't bother Kryx with it because I annoy the guy enough with questions as it is I prefer most of Kryx's system over normal 5e, so its a small price to pay.
    Welcome to 6e

  15. - Top - End - #255
    Orc in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Belo Horizonte, Brazil
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Structural Class Changes (Mana, Talents, Clear gish structure)

    Question. Mage's Arcane Traditions still has features that recharges or only works on spells of certain schools (see Evocation and Conjuration, as an example). Do spells still has schools of magic, or the mage just haven't been updated yet? If there still are schools, then the spells are not categorized into them. Personally, I don't see the need for schools. They are classical, yes, but I think your grouping is better and smoother, and having both would be kind of redundant and hard to grasp, since some things would work related to themes and others to schools.

    Aside from that, I really like this. Well, it's a huge update, but I really like it. It's just a pity that martials suffer from bring deprived of such an amazing thing like the spells subsystem. Also, I think the Character Themes I'm design for my own game will work wonders with the mana system.

    Oh, one more thing. I'm not sure this is the place to ask about this, but will you update your Shaped Sheet on Roll20 to work with this rules update? I'm starting to think you will be doing a sheet for two different games in a single one, once spell's component, range, mana, and subclasses work quite differently.

  16. - Top - End - #256
    Orc in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Belo Horizonte, Brazil
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Structural Class Changes (Mana, Talents, Clear gish structure)

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcloure View Post
    Question. Mage's Arcane Traditions still has features that recharges or only works on spells of certain schools (see Evocation and Conjuration, as an example). Do spells still has schools of magic, or the mage just haven't been updated yet? If there still are schools, then the spells are not categorized into them. Personally, I don't see the need for schools. They are classical, yes, but I think your grouping is better and smoother, and having both would be kind of redundant and hard to grasp, since some things would work related to themes and others to schools.
    I think one way to approach that is to rework schools of magic and make them not about "which spells we cast", but rather "how we cast spells". This way, schools' features don't depend on the type of a spell, so no bothering with spell's school.
    In other words, two mages of different schools would obtain things casting spells based on how they are casting it, not on what they are casting. Spells don't have methods, a caster does. Abjurers wouldn't need to cast an abjuration spell to boost their shield, they know how to harvest the energy of any spell to do it.

    I'm not sure how far this would go, I am just throwing some ideas.
    Last edited by Marcloure; 2018-05-16 at 12:47 AM.

  17. - Top - End - #257
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Kryx's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default Re: Structural Class Changes (Mana, Talents, Clear gish structure)

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcloure View Post
    Question. Mage's Arcane Traditions still has features that recharges or only works on spells of certain schools (see Evocation and Conjuration, as an example). Do spells still has schools of magic, or the mage just haven't been updated yet? If there still are schools, then the spells are not categorized into them. Personally, I don't see the need for schools. They are classical, yes, but I think your grouping is better and smoother, and having both would be kind of redundant and hard to grasp, since some things would work related to themes and others to schools.
    Schools of magic no longer exist. They're still part of Mage Arcane Traditions as I haven't come up with the subclasses for Mages yet. Perhaps the new ones will be similarly themed, just without the school reference.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcloure View Post
    Aside from that, I really like this. Well, it's a huge update, but I really like it.
    Thanks! It's got some work to go, but the idea seems good. It's about executing that idea now. I've been mentally blocked on some aspects, but I think the more I work on it the more it'll become clear.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcloure View Post
    Also, I think the Character Themes I'm design for my own game will work wonders with the mana system.
    I'd love to have contributions and possibly even a collaborator on the whole project. I have many ideas, but such little time lately. For example I want to make a hemomancy theme based on blood.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcloure View Post
    It's just a pity that martials suffer from bring deprived of such an amazing thing like the spells subsystem.
    This system has martials on quite even footing imo. A Fighter for example has stamina which basically makes it a half caster in terms of resources. The resources don't scale, but can be used more and more.
    Though if there are specific improvements to that feel free to voice ideas.

    Quote Originally Posted by Marcloure View Post
    Oh, one more thing. I'm not sure this is the place to ask about this, but will you update your Shaped Sheet on Roll20 to work with this rules update? I'm starting to think you will be doing a sheet for two different games in a single one, once spell's component, range, mana, and subclasses work quite differently.
    The Shaped sheet and script already support mana (spell points can be named several different things now - mana, psi, ki, etc). I'll have to update spells to allow the removal of schools, components, and other fields. I expect range will either be remembered or a formula entered for each spell. The class system will likely never expand beyond the core classes - there just isn't a good way to handle copyrighted content without a lot of work for me as a developer and for the user.


    Quote Originally Posted by Marcloure View Post
    Abjurers wouldn't need to cast an abjuration spell to boost their shield, they know how to harvest the energy of any spell to do it.
    This is the method I'm planning on using, ya.

  18. - Top - End - #258
    Pixie in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2016

    Default Re: Structural Class Changes (Mana, Talents, Clear gish structure)

    Any updates on this project?
    I was hoping to start a campaign with my group using your new rules and I check for updates daily :p

  19. - Top - End - #259
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Kryx's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default Re: Structural Class Changes (Mana, Talents, Clear gish structure)

    I'm unsure if I will complete the project. It has some way to go so it'd take an additional 20-60 hours probably.

    I've been playing other games like Kingdom Death: Monster and Gloomhaven over the last few months. I'm starting to think Gloomhaven is better designed and provides a better experience as well as much less cost in terms of prep time.

    We'll see if I follow up on this project, but it would need quite a bit more work.

  20. - Top - End - #260
    Pixie in the Playground
    Join Date
    Nov 2017

    Default Re: Structural Class Changes (Mana, Talents, Clear gish structure)

    You mentioned your desire to feature a hemomancy-themed school. I am working on a version that makes use of a mechanic called Amplify. The whole idea is that a normal, 3rd-level hemomancy spell might be a little weaker than your average 3rd-level spell, but if you Amplify the hemomancy spell by spending hit points equal to your character level (or twice your character level, not sure yet), it becomes stronger than your average 3rd-level spell.

    The whole idea is that it blends the concept of spending hit points, which has always been a central to blood magic, with the normal spell casting system that is already present. This helps keep the spell casting balanced with non-blood magic users.

    As for the spells themselves, I don't have that many typed up yet, if you are interested in this idea, I am more than willing to type one or two up on here for you.

  21. - Top - End - #261
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Kryx's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default Re: Structural Class Changes (Mana, Talents, Clear gish structure)

    There are some blood magic systems out there that I would consider if I were to expand some rules. I wouldn't aim for a system as you describe as one of 5e's design goals is that a 3rd level spell is a 3rd level spell. You could add augmentation on top via some others methods, but all 3rd level spells should be of equivalent power imo.

  22. - Top - End - #262
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    DruidGirl

    Join Date
    Jun 2017

    Default Re: Structural Class Changes (Mana, Talents, Clear gish structure)

    Everytime I stumble upon a major project like this I'm both worried, that someone has accomplished to fix the problems in dnd before me, excited, that the massive work needed to be invested in under the hood clunker****ery was already done, and anxious, that maybe the work didn't cover all the angles.

    In your opinion - do Martials and Spellcaster are balanced between them? Is the tier talk is irrelevant with your work?

  23. - Top - End - #263
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Kryx's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default Re: Structural Class Changes (Mana, Talents, Clear gish structure)

    Quote Originally Posted by Indigo Knight View Post
    In your opinion - do Martials and Spellcaster are balanced between them? Is the tier talk is irrelevant with your work?
    In my opinion the baseline of 5e is quite good on the martial/caster divide. Each role has their place and it is quite ok.

    There are several other divides that exist in RAW which are more problematic imo. Warlock vs Wizard is a good example of a divide that can easily be problematic depending on how much a group short rests. Another divide is between subclasses feats like GWM and other feats where GWM is significantly stronger than other options. With options like GWM other options (feats, classes) become much less viable in comparison. TWF is another divide - it's horrible by RAW. There are many other, more minor, divides in the game.

    I believe the rules I laid out, before the most recent 6 levels of mana system, addressed the vast majority of the problems with core 5e. The 6 levels of mana and related changes would improve upon that, but I'm unsure if I'll complete it.

  24. - Top - End - #264
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    DruidGirl

    Join Date
    Jun 2017

    Default Re: Structural Class Changes (Mana, Talents, Clear gish structure)

    Quote Originally Posted by Kryx View Post
    In my opinion the baseline of 5e is quite good on the martial/caster divide. Each role has their place and it is quite ok.
    Really?!
    I felt that the backpedaling from four to five also resurfaced some of the old system's problems - Especially the ones about casters & non casters differences.


    Could you, please, elaborate about the changes with the Mana system?
    What it changes, what's players feedback (if there is), what it's supposed to eliminate?
    (Or simply link to where you already answered this)

  25. - Top - End - #265
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    DwarfClericGuy

    Join Date
    Oct 2017

    Default Re: Structural Class Changes (Mana, Talents, Clear gish structure)

    Quote Originally Posted by Kryx View Post
    Nice to hear that you're excited! Once the system is in a more stable state it'll be good to have more voices providing feedback.

    The current structure is not ready to be played with. It'll probably take another month or more to get it in a playable state.

    I'm quite far along with making a web version of these rules that make it much easier to navigate around.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kryx View Post
    It has some way to go so it'd take an additional 20-60 hours probably.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kryx View Post
    Öbut I'm unsure if I'll complete it.
    I have really enjoyed the changes you've introduced (particularly short rest casters), but I would understand if you decide to shelve the project. If there may be any encouragement to continue, I'd wish to extend it! If the project is unlikely to be finished, then if I may ask,

    1. What work still needs to be done?
    2. Is there any work that others could do to help tackle the unfinished portions?

  26. - Top - End - #266
    Pixie in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2016

    Default Re: Structural Class Changes (Mana, Talents, Clear gish structure)

    I have the same questions.
    I was really excited about this project and I am willing to work alone on what needs to be done for my table that were also interested in this.

  27. - Top - End - #267
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Kryx's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default Re: Structural Class Changes (Mana, Talents, Clear gish structure)

    Sorry for the delay. I just got back from vacation.

    The work remaining is not small - it'd take a month of two of difficult structural work to get all classes on the same progression path and balance all the options. If you like the ideas that I've presented I'd encourage you to work them in to your games the best you can.

  28. - Top - End - #268
    Pixie in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2017

    Default Re: Structural Class Changes (Mana, Talents, Clear gish structure)

    Quote Originally Posted by tyresias11 View Post
    I have the same questions.
    I was really excited about this project and I am willing to work alone on what needs to be done for my table that were also interested in this.
    It would be great if you share your work here or in another thread. I really like mana/spell themes system, but many themes are incomplete.

  29. - Top - End - #269
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Kryx's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2013

    Default Re: Structural Class Changes (Mana, Talents, Clear gish structure)

    My work is all contained in some json/markdown files. They're also half way in progress as I didn't end on a releasable point so some of it is in json some of it markdown. It'd take some work to get them aligned and shared.

  30. - Top - End - #270
    Pixie in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2016

    Default Re: Structural Class Changes (Mana, Talents, Clear gish structure)

    I am planning to make your version my standard version and slowly enrich it with various other options. I already did a huge overhaul with flatlining the casters, make nearly every talent available to everyone (my goal here is to allow certain martial to be able to produce/have access to certain magic tricks and effects (fitting to my setting), as well as adding my own personal talents, that most often than not is a spell (with limitations) under the disguise of a talent.

    I aim to allow each individual player to basically grab a class and and utilize the toned done and more hollow than normal base classes, and then slowly build the character in a personalized way that does not adhere to the traditional class stereotypes, but a more open ended and broader concept of magic wielders. (it is intentional to have barbarians and fighters occasionally have access to certain spell like effects, as the campaign is big on social themes and I want them to have also cool stuff they can do every now and then)

    I found the overwhelming amount of spell themes, as well as the unfinished spell lists, a really daunting challenge. I have so far managed to merge several of such themes i deemed insufficient (fate, planes, and other themes u could easily merge into bigger ones) or ones that are very closely related (frost + water, nature+ plants+ beast, fire+light).

    I ended up with an imbalanced amounts of spells in certain themes compared to some others, I begun repurposing some spells and either copy an appropriate themed copy in another Theme, or simply move it somewhere else to avoid having themes with 40 spells and themes with like 15 spells.

    However, I understand how far down I am in basically defeating the purpose of relying on your meticulous balance and math-centric system, which is frankly what made me focus on your Version instead of the standard one.

    Do you have any advice on how to carefully incorporate spells from other sources and expansions?
    One of my bigger issues from adapting other spells is the mana system and the six max mana, dictating the max level a spell can reach.

    I know this is super vague and something along the lines of "why don't u play something else then" is understandable but it's also not what I am interested.
    Any advice on what I should be mindful of, I'll appreciate deeply.

    Ps: I hope I make sense. English is not my first language 😌
    Last edited by tyresias11; 2018-07-23 at 03:04 PM. Reason: Typos

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •