Everyone has something in the game that doesn't gel with their particular style of play. I think I've found mine: the restrictions character creation and wealth-by-level (character advancement, in other words) puts on both players and GMs about how the game is 'supposed' to be played. For example, character concepts that have to wait until 2nd, 4th, or even 7th level before they actually start playing the way they were originally imagined (think of the multi-classing and/or heavy feat tax you'd have to pay to create a two-weapon fighting, sword and board rogue.) Also, how magic items can't really feel wondrous and rare because every adventurer needs to fill his slots up with the 'standard' equipment (cloak of resistance, belt of some physical stat, ring of protection, etc.) or not be as powerful as the CR rules think he should be. Finally, how, at least according to the RAW xp rules, if you're not fighting, you're not advancing. After some thought and investigation of these boards, I propose a small number of homebrew changes to fix these issues:
1. Every character begins with 2 extra feats and no traits. Players may always trade a feat for 2 traits.
2. I'll be using one of the Apprentice-level guidebooks for 1st-level multi-classing.(either SGG's or Tricky Owlbear's, I haven't read them and don't know which is better.)
3. 'Wealth by level' will be handled like feats and skills: something chosen by the player as they advance. Every player is allowed 1-3 'custom' magic items, and gain half their 'wealth by level' as free advancements to these items. These advancements are gained in a way appropriate to the character, as the player dictates (so, the barbarian can take trophies from their kills and be bolstered by them, the Paladin can get divine gifts from his temple free of charge, the rogue can have a family heirloom that gives him luck, or a family artifact that grows in power as he levels, and the wizard can craft a super-staff over time, always fiddling with it in his off-time.) For this purpose, combining effects won't increase the cost.
(I got this from the boards, and they even suggested giving a discount to combining effects into the same item to make sure the players stick to just 1 or a couple items. Still thinking about it.)
4. Rather than give out experience points in the usual fashion, I'll take a page from Pathfinder Society and give out experience points just for showing up: 1 xp for attending the session, plus 1 xp for making an important discovery, finishing a big mission, a personal quest, overcoming a difficult obstacle, or for an epic bout of roleplay or just making the table fun. 6 xp may be traded in for advancing a level, while you may also spend xp like hero points (1 for an extra action, 2 to cheat death, and maybe 3 or 4 to just GM fiat something.)
5. All magic items (other than the special ones mentioned above) cost twice as much to create, and are rare. They cannot be bought and sold. (technically they could, but good luck finding a king willing to empty his treasury just to pay you for a single magic sword.) Magic items are only practical for adventurers, and unless someone is rich and thinks it's worth it, aren't made for mass-creation.
Players can be who they want to be right from level 1. If they have a character concept dependent on multi-classing or a heavy feat investment, they no longer have to wait until level 5 to play their character the way they imagined him. If they don't have such a build in mind, they can just start with fun traits and feats to make their characters more interesting. They could even have the resources to take something like Spell Mastery, so I wouldn't feel like I'm punishing them by having enemies do, you know, smart things like sundering the wizard's spell pouch or spell book. Those sort of actions could be part of the story, rather than a taboo because no wizard has the resources to defend against such tactics.
Money is no longer tied to 'character advencement'. Instead, money is simply an in-game construct: build a tower, bribe a guard, spend it all on drink to improve your reputation; do what you want with it! This also frees the GM up: Player stuff can be lost, stolen, or sundered without it being some sort of personal attack on the player himself. Whole adventures can be built around a cool magic item or repairing their special magic item, because there's no magic gold count they are 'supposed' to be at for CR balance.
Suddenly there's a reason to use the crazier magic items, because they won't be taking up the space your save-booster or AC-booster magic item would normally be using. Magic items can be fun, flavorful, and rare again.
Looting will no longer take up half the session; if the enemy isn't carrying magic items, and what they are carrying can't be pawned off for much at the local market, we will no longer have to pause the epic action to catalogue what was or wasn't taken from each corpse. It's the dragon horde at the END of the adventure that's important, not what the guards were wearing.
Since character concepts no longer require a certain number of levels to play like themselves, leveling can be done at a more leisurely pace: leveling is about keeping the game interesting over an extended period, rather than finishing your build. Plus, players can do what THEY want, from running a game based on skill checks and avoiding combat, to running businesses and other Ultimate Campaign add-ons, to whatever they want; it won't keep them from leveling because it isn't combat focused. They are also no longer penalized for using Stealth and Diplomacy to get past encounters.
These are proposed changes that haven't been implemented anywhere yet. What do you think?
It's important to note that WBL is a power metric for the GM, not a hard and fast rule that constrains the GM's choices.
Basically, if the party is way under WBL, the GM might consider adjusting the APL down a bit. Likewise if the party is over, the GM might adjust the APL up a bit.
The most significant feature of the game is that it contains semi-accurate challenge metrics, but some people mistake the metrics for restrictions... I can tell you first-hand that running over or under WBL is not only doable, it's fun.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's not just being or not being at the appropriate WBL, it's about disconnecting money from character advancement. That way, money can become a fun thing used for down-time storytelling rather than a resource that needs to be saved and spent on getting better stuff. If I give them a dragon horde it's a fun part of the story as they figure out what to do with it, rather than something tied to mechanical benefits ("Add a +1 to all of our equipment, of course!") Also, I'd be at liberty to play with it, having things gets stolen or taxed, etc., without it being a direct blow to their character build and power level.
I have already disconnected money from character advancement AND character power in my game. The 'power' items that players 'need' as they level, they get, because they level. They can choose from feat like boons that grant bonuses to basic abilities, and get to add a suite of abilities to their class to mimic some of the versatility magic items grant.
I have also removed all the crafting feats (aside from consumables) from the game. Magic items dont have a gold value, and cant really be bought or sold except in particular markets. Think rare and exotic artifacts in the real world. Sure they are valuable, but you have to find someone willing to pay their value. There isnt an ancient egpytian artifact store you can go sell it at.
Its worked so far, and I dont have to play excel spreadsheet quest, the dnd side game of tracking gear and wealth that has been given, spent and shared among the party. It also has reduced the 'steal everything that isnt nailed down' and 'loot all the corpses!' mentality in my players.
See, that's what I'm going for, although I still want to make crafting an option in the game (I love crafting, I just want it to be rarer, a bigger investment, and something done for fun, rather than a shortcut to power and to getting those 'standard items'.) I'd love to see more detail on your system Kolokotroni, if you could post some examples.
The original rules are here. I am currently working on a more comprehensive version. So keep an eye out.
As for crafting. I like it, but it is something that I find problematic. It is one of the few kinds of feats/abilities that the campaign has to be shaped around in order for them to be used reasonably. Sure, I can make the components to craft quest items so you cant just pour money into a pot and get out a magic staff, but then I have ot CREATE the quest. I would rather crafting magic items be entirely plot based under GM control, and allow the GM to add them in or leave them out as he see's fit. Also the manipulation that my system does (eliminating +x bonuses) on magic weapons, armor, and ac items means that the crafting rules themselves would need significant revision for several key items. Hence why its better to just leave that in GM control.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's not just being or not being at the appropriate WBL, it's about disconnecting money from character advancement. That way, money can become a fun thing used for down-time storytelling rather than a resource that needs to be saved and spent on getting better stuff. If I give them a dragon horde it's a fun part of the story as they figure out what to do with it, rather than something tied to mechanical benefits ("Add a +1 to all of our equipment, of course!") Also, I'd be at liberty to play with it, having things gets stolen or taxed, etc., without it being a direct blow to their character build and power level.
Oh, you're preaching to the choir.
Kolo's method is good and crunchy. Mine is lightweight and designed to play nice with the APs. Kirthfinder uses a "mojo" system where you still spend gold but it doesn't represent an economic transaction (not entirely) it's just your increasing badassness, alotted as you see fit, in terms of what you could afford in the RAW.
Wealth-by-level is a tool for GMs to balance against the book CR — your problem is with the aesthetics of equipment-driven bonuses, not wealth-by level. As you can see, Kirth's system actually uses WBL to solve the aesthetic problem. WBL becomes a personal power rating, and all of that math just becomes more character advancement.
Those are the three variant systems I'm relatively familiar with, they each have pros and cons.
Even according to the RAW xp rules, fighting is not required. Overcoming challenges is.Most encounters present combat with monsters or hostile NPCs, but there are many other types—a trapped corridor, a political interaction with a suspicious king, a dangerous passage over a rickety rope bridge, an awkward argument with a friendly NPC who suspects a PC has betrayed him, or anything that adds drama to the game.All can be assigned a CR and awarded experience.
Story awards are also part of RAW experience.
But with no guidelines for how much xp is granted through those challenges, it's not something that can be banked on. I've never met a GM that gave out the same xp for spending an hour speaking your way past a suspicious king that you gained for an hour of killing monsters. My system just takes the xp system down to basics and makes everything-combat, social encounters, etc., worth the same amount.
But with no guidelines for how much xp is granted through those challenges, it's not something that can be banked on. I've never met a GM that gave out the same xp for spending an hour speaking your way past a suspicious king that you gained for an hour of killing monsters. My system just takes the xp system down to basics and makes everything-combat, social encounters, etc., worth the same amount.
Well, there are guidelines in the PRD. And it's exactly that: an encounter that challenges the party in a social sense, or any other sense, earns XP as though it was CR = Party's APL. So basically, anything challenging and non-combat is worth exactly as much as combat.
You're right, very few GMs I've seen actually do that. But it is technically the rule.
XP is one of those weird rules where I think different campaigns benefit from different methods. I play in one game that uses your method exactly, one game that does super-old-school xp crunching (kingmaker), and two games that use level-by-GM-fiat. I don't think any one system is best; all of those campaigns have different needs.
So, yeah, if it's right for your campaign, party on! But you couldn't use that system in Kingmaker, I don't think. Not without losing the je ne sais quoi of an xp-driven sandbox with random encounters and the like. There would be something left over, but I think xp's detractors are blind to how well Kingmaker fits together if you fetishize the random encounter generators.
You know, no one commented on my +2 feats at level 1. What do people think of that idea, as a way of letting people play their character concepts early, rather than waiting until level such-and-such to use the fighting style they were supposed to be using since they were a kid, etc.?
Its completely normal in my home games to let the players start with 4 feats, so i can tell you 2 isnt that big a deal, and the players do like more options.
You know, no one commented on my +2 feats at level 1. What do people think of that idea, as a way of letting people play their character concepts early, rather than waiting until level such-and-such to use the fighting style they were supposed to be using since they were a kid, etc.?I personally like these sorts of things, but I think the GM should pick them for the players based on back story.
All you will actually end up with is a bunch of people taking the next best power up, rather than feats the diversify their character based on history. You aren't going to get a two handed weapon fighter who is also a shabby horse archer because he grew up on the plains. He's just going to start with Weapon Focus, Power Attack, Cleave, Furious Assault and Step Up, instead of Power Attack, Cleave, Furious Assault, Mounted Combat, Mounted Archery.
Keep in mind that the dice don't dictate flavor text. Watch this.
My first level fighter attacks. d20+5=23. Damage = 6. My first level fighter stabs you once for 6 damage.
My first level fighter attacks. d20+5=23. Damage = 6. My first level fighter dances in a circle, feints left, and then stabs you three quick times for 6 damage.
Tuh duh - I'm playing my character on no feats at first level by describing what he is doing.
If you play with this rule, don't be surprised if EVERY wizard in your game has Improved Initiative and Combat Casting at level one on top of their trick.
Yeah, that's the point. The point is not to give them fluff, but to allow them the feat freedom to pick fluff down the line. At 1st level of course everyone's going to pick the big-hitters they need to get their build made: This way, they don't have to wait until level 7 or have obligatory dips into fighter to get the feats to make their funny/cool character concepts that are too feat-heavy to be practical, and the archer can get his obligatory feats down quicker and not be counting the levels until he's done with his mandatory feat trees.
There's nothing I hate more than waiting until my build solidifies. I'd much rather be enjoying the game.
What rules are you using, exactly? I've never played an E6 game before and I'd like to try it out, but as I understand it the accepted 'E6 rules' don't quite translate to Pathfinder.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What rules are you using, exactly? I've never played an E6 game before and I'd like to try it out, but as I understand it the accepted 'E6 rules' don't quite translate to Pathfinder.
E6 is basically the normal game but you dont level up after you get to 6th level, you just gain additional feats. And there are a few feats (some that the gm needs to create) to allow a few higher level abilities. Alot of people support E8 in pathfinder instead of E6 because 8th level has some cool abilities for most classes, making the 'capstone' easier to sort out. Others dont want 4th level spells in an E_X game so they manipulate spell levels of full classes. There isnt really an official ruleset or anything, but it translates to pathfinder just fine. I am playing an e6 game right now where we started at level 2 and recently got to level 6.
1. Replace standard equip bonuses with level-scaled bonuses that are lost if your equipment is unavailable for whatever reason.
2. Magic items only give situational or flavorful buffs, never a flat +x to whatever.
3. Eliminate XP. Players gain a level when the GM decides they've earned it, period.
4. Treat player wealth as a category, not an amount. If you have wealth X you can afford stuff Y on a typical trip to town, or item Z but only at the cost of reducing your wealth a step, etc.
5. Award treasure in the form of rare items rather than mere coinage, which means converting that to a wealth increase can be an adventure in itself. (The coinage is still there, it's just assumed to be accounted for in maintaining a steady wealth level in the face of typical party expenditures between adventures)
This is a terrible rule. Exhalted works this way and it always manages to ruin a game session. How much money do I have? I don't know, you have Z money. What does that mean? No one knows. I can't picture my character.
4. Treat player wealth as a category, not an amount. If you have wealth X you can afford stuff Y on a typical trip to town, or item Z but only at the cost of reducing your wealth a step, etc.
I'm afraid I don't see the problem, except possibly with your game master. How much money does Tony Stark have? (Lots and lots, enough that it's not an issue.) How much money does Peter Parker have? (not much; he's a starving photographer, but enough that he can still afford the subway and/or lunch.) Do you really need it spelled out in shillings and pence?
I buy swords for everyone in town to get ready for the orcs.
That's, um, a hell of a lot of swords. Probably more than the town actually has. So it's quite reasonable that it will end up costing you an arm and a leg as you pay for rush jobs at the village blacksmith to turn crowbars into swords and whatnot. Economics gets wonky when you start looking at wholesale quantities. Sometimes you can buy stuff cheaper because people are happy just to move the stuff, sometimes it ends up more expensive because you're buying more than they can easily make.
Why? 100 swords cost less than a half dozen horses, but that's on the list of things I can have.
If you look at pathfinder prices, a half-dozen heavy horses are 1200gp; 100 longswords are 1500gp. So, prices as listed, no,.... but of course this was just an example. More to the point, I think it's much more likely that there are six horses available in a farming village than 100 swords.
Ultimately, the issue with wealth levels is that it makes GM control of item buying more explicit. You've never had the absolute right to buy anything at list price -- the GM could always say "I'm sorry, but that's not available because no one stocks it" or "the only person who has that is a collector, and she won't part with that for less than Xgp." The GM could also say "well, yes, he'll sell you the twenty swords he has in stock, but it will take him a month to make any more."
I'd suggest checking out Legend. It splits off progression into several tiers that advance on their own, including a magic item tier (that you can trade in for an additional class tier or race tier if you want to be a badass without magic items).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That's, um, a hell of a lot of swords. Probably more than the town actually has. So it's quite reasonable that it will end up costing you an arm and a leg as you pay for rush jobs at the village blacksmith to turn crowbars into swords and whatnot. Economics gets wonky when you start looking at wholesale quantities. Sometimes you can buy stuff cheaper because people are happy just to move the stuff, sometimes it ends up more expensive because you're buying more than they can easily make.
This is covered by the settlement's GP limit. If a village has a GP limit X, that's how many GP worth of swords they can actually sell you.
It's amazing how much great stuff is actually in the CRB.
|
There's no such thing as a PC who doesn't covet all the treasure he can carry, because it equates directly to future personal survival.
I'd disagree with you on this point from personal experience and the huge flame wars that erupted about Vow of Poverty not being "teh bezt thing ev4r."
As for shop-a-thons...
TURN IT INTO ROLE-PLAYING!
Actually force them to find shops populated by people and not just piddle around doing something they could easily be doing away from the table and just emailing you the figures on to check. Make them gain the trust of merchants or patrons to sell more valuable equipment or magic items. Have a random encounter or two for people who aren't just doing math. There are a nearly endless list of things to do in the game rather then to sit back and ignore all the rules that Evil Lincoln helps to point out.
In the PF rules-set, on the other hand, Conan would have spent all that treasure upgrading his loincloth, on the grounds that he was less likely to have somebody Improved Steal his loincloth than Disarm his broadsword. ;)
Loincloth of armor +6, fire resistance and haste ahoy!
considering it's conan I think greatsword is more appropriate.
Also I believe someone already showed the math on these boards that vow of poverty gave less than it took away, and was only viable for monks and druids.
Well why exactly can't that be simply part of your campaign Lincoln Hills?
Probably because making that entertaining rather than a chore would involve a number of major mindset shifts. You'd have to convince the party that socialization is as fun as grand adventure and adjust the way you hand out XP/Levels to adapt to this so they don't legitimately feel this is wasted time. You'd have to break away from "murder hobo" tendencies in order for towns to stop being just shops + quest hubs that inevitably become a sort of trap if you stay in them for too long. That's tricky when adventurers tend to be people who don't fit in with normal society in the first place which is why they'd even consider leaving a nice safe town to go risk life and limb on a get rich quick scheme that never seems to end. It also takes a lot more prep work on the GM's part to build believable, detailed towns with all kinds of social connections, rivalries, secrets and plots, along with the nagging thought that the players will just leave the area at any given moment and make all that work pointless.
In our group, we simply stopped tracking XP and the GM levels us on need. We've done several APs that way and it works fine and removes all the fiddly shenanigans.
We also pay zero mind to WBL and I make it semi hard to "custom outfit" PCs with the desired Christmas tree, found treasure is more important. I know some folks have no conception of how that could work but it's how we ran D&D for decades through 0e/Basic/1e/2e/3e till folks got obsessive.
Our game has been more fun and less accounting since just plain cutting out those two sections.