Homebrew DesignRoll up your sleeves and get working: there's lots of homebrewin' to be done! Post your custom creation for critiques or review those of your peers.
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eldan
People, stop the Alignment discussions. They never get anywhere, they are too much a matter of opinion, and we should focus on things we can actually work on right now.
Indeed. No offense to those who feel strongly on the issue, but... it's a topic that almost consistently spawns large, circular arguments. If we can't muscle past such things, no fix will ever be produced. Rest assured that at some point in the future, we will have to decide on an alignment system, and we will open the floor for discussion at that point.
__________________ STaRS-- The Simple Tabletop Roleplaying System; my attempt at a generic rules-light system.
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eldan
*snip*
i was saying that the blood war is more interesting without the Law-Chaos axis because then you can give it context, like it entirely started over say, a sweetroll
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord_Gareth
The important bit is that all of these situations are ones that cause arguments and trouble at game tables because of alignment. Ooooor we can dump alignment and the arguments too.
Allow me to clarify - Holy and Unholy would be properties that are less alignment and more connected to positive and negative energy. So, Holy Damage would be useful against, say, undead and demons regardless of the moral outlook of said undead and demons, simply because they are negative energy creatures. It's a way to handle damage types more than anything else, and given the presence of outsiders is probably necessary.
__________________
Fudge Assistant in the Playground.
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
This thread is for, well, discussion of everything you think needs discussing. So far, it's mostly design goals and basic system framework we want to achieve.
One thing I thought about. Someone brought up the idea of limiting total bonuses to a level-dependent total. I was thinking that, perhaps, we should limit kinds of bonuses and limit them each independently.
We have our perhaps 10 bonus types we mentioned earlier in a list. Out of these, not everything can apply to every stat (there's no armour bonus to saves (someone should make a table (that will probably be me(I like parentheses)))).
If we cap each individual modifier at, say, 2+1/5 levels, and more or less drop unnamed modifiers, that should give us a hold on the mathematics.
“Not a promise, not an oath, or a malediction or a curse,” I said, sounding calm, probably inaudible in the midst of the screaming. “Inevitable. Wasn’t that how she put it? I told them. Warned them.”
-Taylor Hebert. Yes, I'm a proud Skittle.
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
Capping individual modifiers helps a bit, I suppose, but (in most cases) the system already prevents them you from stacking similar modifiers. It helps prevent people from acquiring enormous, say, competence bonuses from something-or-other, but don't most optimized builds work by stacking different modifiers?
How 'bout this: divide modifiers into primary and secondary. Primary modifiers include things like BAB, base saves, armor, shields, ability scores, and maybe magic. Secondary modifiers include everything else-- luck, morale, competence, divine, and so on. Normal modifier stacking rules apply throughout, but the total boost from all secondary modifiers is capped at level.
(As a side note: flipping through a dozen+ pre-made characters in a folder I had lying around, I found maybe 4 numbers above level times 2*: a few knowledge skills, thanks to class features; a thri-keen dervish's Jump skill, and a truespeaker's Truespeak. These were not incredibly optimized characters, but I didn't slack off while making them either, and like to think I have a pretty good grasp of system mastery).
*Subtracting the base 10 from AC scores to get the original modifier.
__________________ STaRS-- The Simple Tabletop Roleplaying System; my attempt at a generic rules-light system.
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
Hey all, me again. I just wanted to give a heads up that I don't know when I'll get a real chance to look into all the discussion for this project in-depth. Real life and other things have been hectic and demanding my attention lately. I am still interested in this project, I just don't know when I'll get real time to devote to it.
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
I'm not sure about artificial.
I mean, it doesn't even have to show up anywhere in the written edition. We would just write up all the spells and abilities so that higher modifiers never occur.
“Not a promise, not an oath, or a malediction or a curse,” I said, sounding calm, probably inaudible in the midst of the screaming. “Inevitable. Wasn’t that how she put it? I told them. Warned them.”
-Taylor Hebert. Yes, I'm a proud Skittle.
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eldan
I'm not sure about artificial.
I mean, it doesn't even have to show up anywhere in the written edition. We would just write up all the spells and abilities so that higher modifiers never occur.
Well. That'd be idea, certainly. I was referring to the sum of certain modifiers never exceeding certain limits, though.
__________________ STaRS-- The Simple Tabletop Roleplaying System; my attempt at a generic rules-light system.
“Not a promise, not an oath, or a malediction or a curse,” I said, sounding calm, probably inaudible in the midst of the screaming. “Inevitable. Wasn’t that how she put it? I told them. Warned them.”
-Taylor Hebert. Yes, I'm a proud Skittle.
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
Not alot of ppl respond to the magic thread with ideas unfortunatly.
I have put up a Spellresistance idea up there btw, for the ones interested.
As for the rest of the stuff, we can work with it I guess, but without suffient input is gonna be a rough ride.
__________________
A swordmaster never backs off, I'll cut you to ribbons with my almighty sabre! CHAOS DANCE!!
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
I mean, I feel pretty OK about the combat stuff I worked on. Less so about the magic system. It's not... terrible, but I don't think it's great, either. (Sorry, Eldan), and it's definitely not finished.
Anyone mind if I post a counter-idea?
__________________ STaRS-- The Simple Tabletop Roleplaying System; my attempt at a generic rules-light system.
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
I would like you all to vet the math first.
But I get the feeling that you guys don't care about my opinion on the matter.
(I suggest scaling everything at about the same rate as saves in the current system; I did a little envelope math earlier, and it seemed to work out better than "OMFG, WE GET A +30 FROM THIS ITEM, ADD IT TO MY +47 FROM OTHER STUFF!")
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amechra
I would like you all to vet the math first.
But I get the feeling that you guys don't care about my opinion on the matter.
(I suggest scaling everything at about the same rate as saves in the current system; I did a little envelope math earlier, and it seemed to work out better than "OMFG, WE GET A +30 FROM THIS ITEM, ADD IT TO MY +47 FROM OTHER STUFF!")
For what it's worth, I agree, and I tried to keep your points involved when working on the combat system. I'm not very good at core system math, though.
I made attack and AC both scale with BAB.
Spells and saves already both scale at about 1/2 level for a good progression, but it would be easy enough to upgrade them to scaling fully with level.
If we cap skill ranks at level, they scale in about the same way.
And we've agreed to try to limit modifier stacking and miscellaneous bonuses, though we're not quite sure of the best path to take on that account. (I like hard caps, maybe level+10, but others disagree)
__________________ STaRS-- The Simple Tabletop Roleplaying System; my attempt at a generic rules-light system.
“Not a promise, not an oath, or a malediction or a curse,” I said, sounding calm, probably inaudible in the midst of the screaming. “Inevitable. Wasn’t that how she put it? I told them. Warned them.”
-Taylor Hebert. Yes, I'm a proud Skittle.
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
I think the math needs to be vetted, and the combat and magic systems need heavy polishing. The combat subsystem is getting towards workable, but is far from done, the magic subsystem seems like it has more work to be done.
__________________
Fudge Assistant in the Playground.
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
Really, from the perspective of a programmer (or, at least, someone studying for a CompSci/Mathematics double major), it's best if you look at the core system like so:
Sit down, and figure out what chance you want someone of a given level achieving what someone with that level+x is able to achieve 50% of the time.
You have a d20, which gives you 100% to work with, in nice, regular 5% increments.
You want that chance to be 40%? Then you want to scale everything to be around roughly an increase in bonus of 2 per level.
You want that chance to be between 45% and 50%? Then you mess with the scaling until that works.
You might also want to look at "dice tricks", like the effects of rolling 2d20 and then taking lowest/highest, or having effects that make you treat rolls below Y as if they were Y; that kind of thing.
You might also want to, in your head, before you start the combat system, decide on how many rounds you want the thing to run, and how long you want your average round to take. That will greatly affect how many dice have to be rolled and tallied, overall chances of failure, and so on and so forth. It will also be a good start of you taking a nice, hard look at how HP scales.
Let me see... alright, here is a nice thread on the differences between ablative and binary defenses (i.e., the difference between HP and Save-or-Dies.)
Also, while you are designing systems, go ahead and ask people not involved in the project to take a look; having someone who isn't personally invested in the thing will help you iron out wrinkles with the more complicated systems.
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
Amechra brings up a good point we should clear first: the basic mathematics of the game.
I suggest that the basic probability of achieving a level-appropriate standard task should be 55%. That's 10+ on a d20. From there, I'd like an about 10% change per level up or down, that seems good to me.
Now, let's look at how fast modifiers grow. I'll start with the modifier table I said I'd make.
I suggest the following modifiers: Arcane, Armour, competence, dodge, divine, luck, morale, Shield, Size
Notes: Alchemical is gone. Arcane is what used to be called Enhancement, and also includes Resistance, which, as far as I can tell, was just enhancement for saves. Competence includes Insight. Divine is what used to be called Sacred or profane (differentiated now by wording like "This ability gives good creatures a +2 divine bonus to AC against attacks made by evil creatures"). Shield includes the former deflection and applies to touch AC. Dodge is very specialized, I'm thinking about folding that into competence as well.
That's a nice 9 types.
I find the following things these can apply to: Abilities, AC, Initiative, Saves, Attack, Damage, Skill checks. Tell me if I forgot any.
So, what applies to what?
Name
Ability
AC
Initiative
Save
Attack
Damage
Skills
Description
Arcane
Yes
Yes
?
Yes
Yes
Yes
?
Spells and magic items
Armour
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
Mundane armour
Competence
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Class features
Dodge
No
Yes
No
Reflex
No
No
No
Evading
Divine
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Divine power
Luck
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Just that lucky
Morale
Yes
No
No
Will
Yes
Yes
?
Just that motivated
Shield
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
Deflecting attacks
Size
No
Yes
No
No
?
No
No
It makes a difference
Total:
4
8
2-3
4-5
5-6
5
3-5
And here we run into problems. Namely, that we have many more modifiers on some kinds of checks than others. Which makes scaling difficult. Furthermore, modifiers on abilities have wide-ranging effects on many others. How do we solve this?
“Not a promise, not an oath, or a malediction or a curse,” I said, sounding calm, probably inaudible in the midst of the screaming. “Inevitable. Wasn’t that how she put it? I told them. Warned them.”
-Taylor Hebert. Yes, I'm a proud Skittle.
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amechra
Let me see... alright, here is a nice thread on the differences between ablative and binary defenses (i.e., the difference between HP and Save-or-Dies.)
Interesting. And, it would seem to me, dead accurate. How to address... we were earlier talking about the idea of "condition tracks." They already sort of exist for things like fear (shaken/frightened/panicked/cowering). If we expanded so that most conditions fell on tracks like these... Specifically, I'm looking at M&M's Affliction power, the one-stop shop for messing with other people.
The rule: spells and abilities start you sliding down the appropriate track. If you fail the save, you start at the first step. If you're already affected, you go farther down the track. If you fail the save by enough (2 points? 3 points? 5?), you start at a lower step.
I can take a poke at making the condition tracks, unless anyone else wants to try. (Fair warning: I may just back-adapt Affliction and the related conditions, rather than try to make sense of D&D's mess)
__________________ STaRS-- The Simple Tabletop Roleplaying System; my attempt at a generic rules-light system.
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eldan
And here we run into problems. Namely, that we have many more modifiers on some kinds of checks than others. Which makes scaling difficult. Furthermore, modifiers on abilities have wide-ranging effects on many others. How do we solve this?
First thing that comes to mind: it looks like most stats have around 5 modifiers, so might as well go with that. Fold dodge into competence, since that affects only AC (which already has a ton of modifiers) and Ref saves (which keys off the "god stat" of Dex and really doesn't need any specific boosts. Allow Arcane and Morale to apply to skills, and that gives 5 modifiers each for Saves, Damage, and Skills. Size bonuses should apply to attacks if they do to AC, for symmetry's sake: two creatures of the same size have their attack and AC bonuses cancel out, making it as easy for a halfling to hit a halfling or a giant to hit a giant as it is for a human to hit a human, which makes sense. That makes Attack have 6 modifiers, fairly close.
That leaves 4 mods for Abilities, 2-3 for initiative, and 7 for AC. I think fewer mods for abilities is fine, since you don't want ability-stacking to get out of hand. I would say leave Arcane off initiative, it doesn't need any more mods, and I'd also suggest leaving Arcane off AC. Very few things in 3e add an enhancement bonus to AC, and where they do it's generally an enhancement bonus to your armor/natural armor/shield bonus rather than a direct enhancement bonus to AC. Making Arcane unable to affect AC while still allowing for magic to increase or grant armor and shield bonuses still allows for mage armor, shield, and magic arms and armor, but prevents a generic AC boosting spell from slipping through later.
So that leaves you with 4, 7, 2, 5, 6, 5, 5. Close enough for government work, I think.
Of course, each of those stats also adds an ability bonus, which raises the questions of (A) what should ability scores apply to by default (do you want to keep Dex as the god stat, leave Cha dumpable, etc.), and (B) how easy should it be to sub in stats or stack them (should light weapons use Dex by default or should there be a Weapon Finesse feat or neither, should Divine Grace add Cha to saves or replace other stats with Cha for saves, etc.).
__________________
Better to DM in Baator than play in Celestia
You can just call me Dice; that's how I roll.
Sig of Holding
Spoiler
Quote:
Originally Posted by abadguy
Darn you PoDL for making me care about a bunch of NPC Commoners!
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
Updated table:
Name
Ability
AC
Initiative
Save
Attack
Damage
Skills
Description
Arcane
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Spells and magic items
Armour
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
Mundane armour
Competence
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Class features
Divine
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Divine power
Luck
No
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Just that lucky
Morale
Yes
No
No
Will
Yes
Yes
Yes
Just that motivated
Shield
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
Deflecting attacks
Size
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
No
It makes a difference
Total:
4
7
2-3
4
6
5
5
Ability bonus. The first thing that comes to mind, for me is this: do we still want them, and if yes, how often? We said we wanted to drop most generic +X to Y items, which would include the Enhancement bonus to ability items. That leaves, in core, shapeshift magic, buff magic and a barbarian's rage I can think of right now. It's not exactly much.
“Not a promise, not an oath, or a malediction or a curse,” I said, sounding calm, probably inaudible in the midst of the screaming. “Inevitable. Wasn’t that how she put it? I told them. Warned them.”
-Taylor Hebert. Yes, I'm a proud Skittle.
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eldan
Ability bonus. The first thing that comes to mind, for me is this: do we still want them, and if yes, how often? We said we wanted to drop most generic +X to Y items, which would include the Enhancement bonus to ability items. That leaves, in core, shapeshift magic, buff magic and a barbarian's rage I can think of right now. It's not exactly much.
Also, level-up bonuses. Those should probably still be a thing.
__________________ STaRS-- The Simple Tabletop Roleplaying System; my attempt at a generic rules-light system.
“Not a promise, not an oath, or a malediction or a curse,” I said, sounding calm, probably inaudible in the midst of the screaming. “Inevitable. Wasn’t that how she put it? I told them. Warned them.”
-Taylor Hebert. Yes, I'm a proud Skittle.
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
Quote:
Originally Posted by toapat
Shields dont deflect, they ablate
Making shields do more than just add a few points to AC is vital to making sword-and-board a viable choice of combat style. Even with adding BAB to AC makes the +2 worth significantly more.
__________________ STaRS-- The Simple Tabletop Roleplaying System; my attempt at a generic rules-light system.
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
Well, what else could shields do? Some kind of parry mechanic? I must admit, I don't like that much. Uuh... double dex bonus to AC if you have a shield? Sounds too good for some, and horrible for others.
“Not a promise, not an oath, or a malediction or a curse,” I said, sounding calm, probably inaudible in the midst of the screaming. “Inevitable. Wasn’t that how she put it? I told them. Warned them.”
-Taylor Hebert. Yes, I'm a proud Skittle.
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eldan
Well, what else could shields do? Some kind of parry mechanic? I must admit, I don't like that much. Uuh... double dex bonus to AC if you have a shield? Sounds too good for some, and horrible for others.
I was thinking in terms of the [style] feats we touched on in the combat threads. Add to AC, yeah, but also things like making parry attempts, shield-bash-his-sword-aside, maybe spend Advantage to boost your own AC...
__________________ STaRS-- The Simple Tabletop Roleplaying System; my attempt at a generic rules-light system.
RSS Feeds: 
Re: Gaols and Giants - The Playground rewrites third Edition
