|
I would appreciate a critical eye turned towards this.
Too much to repost here, but i would like some thoughts.
Chronocles of the Neomyth almost reminded me of Aria: Canticle of the Monomyth, similar name and what looks like a designer's desire to create something better than D20. I'll have to take a closer look at this, but my first reaction is creation needs a strong guiding hand and an online, co-op campaign may not have that.
Aria was a d10 system similar to the World of Darkness stuff (they even thank Mark Rein*Hagen for support and advice), but the main idea is to create a world/setting/idea that is created by both the game masters and the players and interactively play through many years in game time. I believe the game mentions somewhere that rather than focus on a sole character or adventurer, you can pay attention a lineage. The setting also becomes a cooperative character as time passes and wars, plagues and such ravage, revolts happen and government changes because all of this changes the setting and affects the people within that. As an example, a paladin type character grows up serving his king in a monarchy, but 20 years down the road, the king's nephew poisons the royal family and sets up a dictatorship almost overnight. It's pretty safe to say that the paladin's offspring are going to grow up very different from their parent.
This is my #1 favorite game that I have never completely played. The biggest reason for this because 2 heads (or 3 or 4) are not always better than 1. My players and I could never seem to fully agree on what type of setting, area, or peoples we would have populate our world.
My last campaign, though, I used a hybrid form of Aria and D&D in which the heroes rescued a small village, then aided this village in growth and development in an interactive way that I alone could not have done. This inspired the heroes to interact more fully with the environment as a whole and the village grew as they grew. There were flaws with this system, I didn't feel the time table vs the growth was realistic, but the players liked it and started to complain when adventures took them too far away from "home." In the future I would like to do something like this, but in a 50 to 100 year time period to set up a prequal feeling for the campaign.
If you're interested in combining the d20 system with another system, I would say break down the d20 system first. Characters, character creation, and character advancement are some of the most time consuming things I've run across when trying this, with combat being the brutal judge on how well you do. If combat is not fun, then the game breaks down into a group of friends telling stories to each other.
I've never fully converted 2 systems, but theoretically, the math is not that much different. A 16 in STR could be converted to a 4 in a five point system or an 8 in a 10 point system, with 17 being nothing different.
|
|
Well, historically, I put Chronicles of the Neomyth on paper before I encountered Aria, so it was parralel devlopment, but yeah, I noticed how close they were.
I also started this project way back when I was developing my first homebrew when I graduated into DMing second edition (soon after it came out) and discovered I had problems with the mechanics getting in the way of the stories I wanted to tell.
Basically I wanted grittier stuff where people can die, the system is corrupt, and any of a dozen other things which I couldn't create in 2e.
So i started writing mechanics to get me where I wanted to be.
Here over 10 years later, I have fallen back to 3.5 and the SRD for a lot of stuff. It is a lot easier to break the classes out, and run a skill focused game now then it was. And there is a heap of other things I have seen that gave me good ideas for the mechanics.
Not to mention that lumping things on top of the most widely known system (of today) makes it easier to sink my hooks into new people/players
It looks like you're on the right path. d20 is a pretty rigid system meant to keep the chaotic character creation and level gaining of 1st and 2nd edition D&D under tight reign. The major downfall of that system is character levels and experience = kill monster.
I like what you did with hit points/damage reduction and character skills. I noticed the Educated feat... do you have more feats like this to open up more skill groups?
On the feats, it looks like you added a few to provide more options to combat (i.e. parry, riposte). Have you changed much more with combat? How have the playtests gone?
I didn't see anything on character advancement. Are you intending on keeping the same xp guidelines? I suggest breaking down the xp needed to gain a level so an enemy defeated earns the same amount no matter what, rather than adding roleplaying xp options on a matrix. Maybe a gradual xp increase per level rather than about double.
Oh! Watch out for player exploitation of the skill = money system. I suppose if you're the designer you can slap players that take a single point in EVERYTHING just to rake in more money.
Setting seems to take a large role in your game. Maybe you could add a couple of feats that allow characters to tie themselves into that setting, like nobleborn, political favor, or So-and-soburg contacts.
When I get more time I'll take a closer look at the setting. Good Luck!
|
|
What remains of the old system (prior to the grand rewrite) is available in the downloads area. You have to register on the forums, but that is purely a formality, only spam you get from us is the (very) occasional confirm you ar still a member email.
The old combat system was clumsy, and I never got it refined. It was time based instead of initiative based, so faster weaopns struck more often (which cause head aches) and it was deadly
Worst of all it broke the other rules. Specifically by making dodge and parry opposed checks, then maxing out parry or dodge made you invulnerable, so in comes open ended percetages (fine by themselves, but ick with the rules i had) so it became an arms race for who could make the better battle bunny the dodger or the greatswordsman...
I am very proud of the magic system, I hope to get it shoved over to pseudo d20 in the not too distant future.
|
|
On the feats, it looks like you added a few to provide more options to combat (i.e. parry, riposte). Have you changed much more with combat? How have the playtests gone?
I brief history of CotN combat...
Original version:
percentile roll using your weapon skill. There were target numbers based on your opponents armor coverage. So succeed by a little hit them in the shield, succeed by more, hit them in the armor, yet more and bypass everything.
Damage was recorded in 4 columns, and anything that rolled off the buttom of one column was passed to the next layer in.
Second generation:
dodgeing and parrying were made into active skills, so now it became an opposed roll.
also the columns were done away with and everything had a structure value. Armor reduced damage by its DR, then took the remainder. If the remainder exceeded the structure, then anything over the structure passed down
Third generation
Same system as second generation, with dozens of tiny patches here and there to make things work more realisticly
new concept:
armor will be split into coverage and material. coverage gives you ac, material gives you DR. any attack that hits your touch AC will hit you somewhere. If it beats your full ac, it hits you without armor... and so on down the list.
so a character might have
AC: 11/13/18 -2FF
anything 18+ hits the body, 13+ hits the armor, and 11+ hits the shield
if you are hit in the shield, you apply the shields DR. if the damage exceeds the shield DR, your shield takes 1 point of damage, and whatever is left is applied to the shield.
same for armor
So, for example your character is using a DR 2 shield, and DR 5 armor, and you are hit for 10 damage. First the shields DR is applied (10-2=8) and the damage isn't 0 so the shield takes a point of damage, and the armors DR is applied (8-5=3) again not 0, so the armor takes a point of damage, and the 3 gets through to the character.
this way AC represents the chances of getting hit in the armor, and DR represents what is between you and the weapon trying to kill you