I'm running the Reign of Winter camp with two players... I gave them the summoner's Eidolon (without any of the other abilities of the class) to make up for the reduced players. It's worked perfectly. Optionally, if the DM is really worried about it, use the Gestalt rules, the increase in abilities but no increase in actions, works well to balance out out the lack of players.
jump head first off buildings and survive etc.
This could only happen if it could happen in normal e6. HP is still going to be maxed out at 6d12, which any normal 6e barbarian can get.
meh, there could be a lot of creatures on the board, I can do worse with a straight summoner. 1d3 wolves + eidolon + other stuff.
...it does defeat the purpose of E6. If you dont like advancement stopping, then conceptually E6 isnt a good fit for you, and you need to look at something entirely different.
I'll agree to disagree. I think it takes care of a lot of the problems people have with the system (Higher level spells, multiple attacks, saving throws through the roof, etc.), while fixing the stagnation involved. The highest BAB is still going to be 6, the highest skill point level is still going to be 6 and the highest level spell is still going to be third, only cast by a fifth level wizard/cleric/witch or sixth level sorcerer/oracle.
I like the idea behind E6, but I find the stagnation of the character to be boring (I have the same problem with only 20 levels in a class). The character goes up 6 levels, then just stops, gaining some feats after that. The most they can hope for is a dm that is willing to turn the higher level abilities into feats. So, I came up with an alternate idea, of sorts...
It is a combination of E6, Gestalt and Dual-Classing (from second addition). Multiclassing under the current rules is out. But, when the Character hits 6th (or what ever max level the DM is using, for E8 etc.) they can start over in another class. HP, Skill points, BAB and Saving throws work like Gestalt, they are replaced with the higher value from previous levels. The XP to gain the next level would be the equivalent to what is needed to get to the new level in the class +1. (So 2nd level xp for the first level, and 7th level xp for the 6th level in the class)
An example: The 6th level wizard dual-classes into a fighter. The wizard does not get a +1 bab at 1st level, but the fighter does, so the characters BAB increases by 1. But when the character becomes a second level fighter, the wizard side already gives a +1 BAB, so the BAB is not increased. The bonuses replace, not stack, with the original bonuses of that level for the character, like a gestalt character.
This would continue to provide the same spell level limitations, BAB limitations and all the other limitations of e6.
One of the problems is Hit Points. Most people don't keep track of the Hit point amount they gain at each level. An easy alternate is to add two hit points per hit die increase. So the wizard in the above example would gain four hit points, increasing the max to 10.
Feats would still occur every other level, and ability score adjustment would also increase at 4th (realize that after the first time, it takes 6 levels to increase a score, not 4).
Special abilities would build up, but the power levels would still be lower powered. The number of skills would increase only horizontally, not vertically, and only when a class with higher skill points is taken. And the highest power magic items would still be incredibly limited.
Just a thought. Any input is welcome. :)
The Shining Fool wrote:
I know Language nerds, so I understand what you are saying. I am not a language nerd, I am sadly a math nerd. I grind to a halt as I try to pronounce out how to say some of these names. I can understand how markets work, economics is an interesting subject (I enjoy reading books on it) but give me a word to pronounce out loud, in another language and it's like throwing a stick of dynamite in front of a car, it disrupts the flow of movement, at least a little.
And the biggest problem is the "new" names. Names I have never heard before in any reading I have ever done. I pronounce them out attempted syllable at a time, then turning to the language nerd, in our group, spell it out so he can take a shot at it. It's frustrating.
You lucky S.O.B. The best I get from my players is that if they feel it is no direct threat they don't hunt it down and kill it. Ten-Penny looked at what they did and ran, they watched her go.
One of my players took the suggestion of the need of fire damage to heart, specialized in it to an extreme degree. He blasted the doll with an area effect spell... repeatedly....
I must start with stating my love of the AP's. I've ran two so far and played in many others. My exposure has been incredibly positive.
Now my suggestion: Something that would help me as a DM would be pronunciation guides after all the non-english words and more so after the made up words. Something as simple as (pro·nun·ci·a·tion) after the first time the word appears.
PLEASE, I'm begging you. It's disjointing for me and the players when I fumble over the imaginary (and Russian-ish in the case of Reign of Winter) words that the creative writers come up with.
Answer to the spoiler of Tangent101
From the Resurrection spell: The condition of the remains is not a factor. So long as some small portion of the creature's body still exists, it can be resurrected, but the portion receiving the spell must have been part of the creature's body at the time of death. (The remains of a creature hit by a disintegrate spell count as a small portion of its body.) The creature can have been dead no longer than 10 years per caster level.
Reading up, it brings him back as though the raise dead spell. Which changes some things. As the DM I'm ruling that the point is to have him come back at half hp, not to mimic the spell exactly. (But that's up to you)
Elemental Vulnerability (–2 RP)
Prerequisites: Outsider (native) with ties to an elemental plane.
Shadow Resistance (2 RP)
Change the Electricity resistance to not needing to make fort saves for cold weather and it seems balanced. Hell, by the points you don't even need to exchange anything off of the race abilities. The penalty is what balances out the resistance.
The sugars can not be converted until it is diluted to the point were it can go bad. It is the breaking down of the structure that allows it to be converted.
Containers with mead have been found to date back to before containers of beer.
Containers with beer have been found to date back to before containers with bread.
The first grain domesticated was barley, for making beer.
The Codes of Hammurabi have a least one law pertaining to beer, which at the time was made by the women of the household.
When Louis Pasteur discovered microbes and the pasteurization process, he was studying beer, not milk.
Before they used hops, a substance called grout was required for use in all beer made in England, it's recipe was a secret as it was used as the means for taxing beer consumption at the time. The recipe is now lost to time.
The reason Guinness was the biggest selling beer in Ireland was because it had the lowest alcohol content and was there for the cheapest. The level of alcohol dictated the tax on the liquid. When shipped to America and places like that, the alcohol content was upped.
23. "Let him die. At this point it'll just be simpler to raise/resurrect him."
I've actually said this. We were trying to rescue him from hell, so we put an arrow through his head rather than fight our way through the demons to rescue him.
41. Oh, s!&%, that was flame strike not cure light wounds....
I'd totally include this race in my setting.... Then I'd tell all the players that wanted to play it, they are unwilling to leave their "area" pick a race that would actually want to be a adventurer. Unless we are playing a game with only this race as an option, then let the non-magical role-play commence.
That forces every single Rogue ever to have 13 Intelligence (which is nearly worthless for them) and spend feats on Combat Expertise (which is worthless for them), Two-Weapon Feint (which doesn't nearly make them viable by itself), and Improved Two-Weapon Feint (which they can't take until level 9 at the earliest and which has 3 pre-req feats as well as high stat requirements). It also forces them into a two-weapon fighting style, because Improved Feint only allows them to make a single attack and Greater Feint actually does almost nothing for the Rogue that uses it.
Please do not tell me what is now "required" based on some rule changes. You'll find it's only required if your goal is to break the system, that I can do without help. The word you want is desired, it is desired to have a 13 Intelligence, and desired to have combat expertise, and all that other crap. The only thing that is required to live and die, and without one you can not do the other.
For the record, I always play rogues, and I always have as high a Intelligence as I can.
Ugh. That dramatically tips the scales towards heavy armor. It's basically impossible to kill a full BAB character in full plate with those rules unless you can bypass their armor DR. No, really, I mean it. Even a sneak attacking rogue averages to roughly one damage per attack.
It does, but the point of the rogue is to catch the fighter unaware, not just flank.
If you want it to lean a little more that way take away the BAB bonus to defense when he looses his dex (that's the other thing I did).
The best, yet slightly complicated, idea I've come up with is still:
Use the normal rules out of Ultimate Combat: non-magic bonus to dr/magic, ect
Add Con mod to this DR, whatever type it might be.
Add BAB to hit and to defense
Dex and other bonuses add as normal for touch and flat-footed, ect
Add armor magic bonus to DR and Defense, this balances with magic weapons adding to hit and damage.
This creates a system where,a 15th level fighter fighting a 15th level fighter both with +5 weapons and armor balance out and the dice are the important things... But if one is higher level or has better weapons they quickly become deciding factors.... Training and equipment matter.
If your worried about unarmored people, realize, that in life, unarmored people get killed real quick.
In this system I also suggest that the DC of caster spells are all changed to 1/2 caster level + 10 + casting stat, regardless of the spell. And realize DR even /- doesn't work for energy damage. Wizards with their lack of armor can do massive damage, but must look out for the fighter that can rip through their defenses.
Also this works well with the Wounds and Vigor system.
While you may have interpreted his post fine, you failed on mine, "Only speaking in character is very much old school." And yes, a lot of that has disappeared in the "new blood."
More direct: The active dis-allowance to speak out of character is something that players consistently did in the past, this is practically the definition of "Old School". It is also something that has not completely carried through to the new players. This does not stop the new players from doing the same, nor does it stop it from being good, nor bad. It does make it an old school thing to do.
Speaking exclusively in character has nothing to do with getting into the character.
Jessica "Babbit" Lagamorph
Went by Babbit, which was the last name of a customer I once had. Still a bad ass name. Her creation was fun, her name rocked and her story was the best. She's the character I bring out when I can't think of something I want to play, cuz she's always fun.
The key is she's a non-combat rogue, hates to fight, loves to use skills, while adventuring.
True, though I was just trying to explain the idea with a more modern example.
Use the gestalt rules, everyone is half monk. Except don't use, the monk bab or saving throws, the other class is the primary class with just the monk abilities tacked on.. but everyone in the world has this... you should also include armor as dr from ultimate combat...
Maybe also lose flurry of blows, requiring the character to invest in two-weapon fighting instead. (it works the same, it just requires feats)
I've always preferred the 2nd edition version of psionics. They were significantly different than wizards, not just wizards with spell points, which is what most of the current versions are. It had some issues, the whole telepathy thing, but I liked maybe not getting the power to work and wasting the action.
I'd turn it into more of a skill system, with powers known, and a skill check like thing to turn them on. remove the chance for critical failure and critical success from the 2e. and make it cost to keep the power active, but allow rejuvenation of the points when resting, not just at the beginning of the day/after a nights rest.
Instant effects, like fireball, is the domain of the spell caster, not the mind bender.
OH, and the one exception is wild talent, the 2nd ed wild talent did not work, no need to include that.
Another one is a decent designer and is fun to talk game designing with; but he couldn't role-play his way out of a paper bag, he thinks he's smarter then most people, so a moderate intelligence character (10-11) is REALLY stupid according to him.
We all have issues when it comes to role-playing, I'm sure I have my issues. And I almost always play strikers, it's just how my brain works. Every time I try something else I get bored or they change into them. The characters themselves are different in personality, as least as much as I can make them.
I love the gurps system in theory. Bell curves are THE AWESOME. But I still don't have running it down, so playing it is harder than other systems.
I play tons of D&D/Pathfinder, it's got a great easy running combat system, but the skill system leaves something to be desired.
And finally Shadowrun is a favorite because of the magic system and it's possibilities, I swear one of these days I'll rewrite that damned thing into a fantasy/steampunk setting/system... It'll be right after I rewrite FASERIP (another favorite) for simplicity and L5R into a Last Air Bender like setting.
An old school DM playing pathfinder would only allow the core book. period. no, I have this cool idea and stuff released to back up the idea and it's not even broken, i'm really a little underpowered.... CORE BOOK ONLY.
Just remember at the end of the story, you love me. Sometimes letting a Player be a jerk isn't a bad thing, it can make a good story better, not all heroes are nice about it.
To be honest, I haven't put anything down on paper. I just knew that is was there and was going to play it by ear. I just figured they would come across the town while making there way to the next encounter. Then throw ghouls at them until they run away. It wasn't a detailed plot. Mood would be the important part.
The easy way to play a wizard but covering the rogue stuff is to play a wizard, Detect Traps and Knock do all the stuff rogues do that no one else can do. I've already heard tell there is a new bard type that gets the trap finding abilities in UC. Play that.
Don't play an Arcane Trickster, it's the worse of two worlds and just doesn't keep up. (I've tried multiple times.)
I totally understand where your coming from, but I run a party of 7-8 players, and several of them get bored quite quickly. Sometimes I think the 10% exp penalty is the only thing keeping me from having to work a new character into the story and reasoning for why one left, every session, cause someone was kinda bored and wanted to try someting else.
I could see how that could be a problem that needed a house rule... Good Call.
Kyle Olson wrote:
Ok, Thanks for the help, I just turned it off as some point when I was pressing buttons. Once again this this is beautiful, THANK YOU.
I came up with the idea of combining the tiers of classes with multiclassing to make it work nice. the classes are separated into their tiers, then multiclassing works almost exactly like 2e; average of the two rolls, divide xp between the two classes, best of BAB and saves (not stacking).
I've played a lot of gestalt characters, an important part is the HP, roll two dice each appropriate for their class, add together and divide by two.
My general opinion is that Wizard, Druid and Barbarian go on the slow chart, Rogue (and possibly monk and bard) go on the fast chart, and everything else goes on the medium. But you should divide the classes as you wish among the tiers.
also if your including role-play xp, give a character more for acting "in a class," if he casts a bunch of spells or acts wizardly give him xp just for his wizard class, ect.