I really like the monk write up...but unfortunately I do not own most of the books in which the powers are referenced...
Do the rest of the classes rely on them as well?
As noted, we use a lot of closed-content sources in our home game. It should be possible to play using open content, by necessarily restricting the number of options. You could add stuff from closed sources that you normally use, though, to make up the gap.
Ok, so then it is meant as a CYA saying "we are not releasing anything not already released as OGC, as OGC" etc. but you are not stating that your own personal contributions are closed content.
Got it.
|
That's it exactly. Anything you see referencing WotC or Paizo products should have a note telling you where it is from, and through that you should be able to tell if it is OGL or not. Everything else, we are happy to share. We're just not going to put it out ourselves to avoid any legal issues.
Oh, I agree, Kirth's put a LOT of work into this (although I like to brag that I influenced some parts of it :P) and it's certainly a good set of rules, ones that I'd be happy to play in, even if they aren't quite a match for my own preferences.
I don't agree with all of Kirth's choices, but nothing I've had to deal with has made his game unplayable to me. For the privilege of sharing his table, I find it worthwhile.
I don't agree with all of Kirth's choices, but nothing I've had to deal with has made his game unplayable to me.
Tell me where else you disagree, please! I found your comments re: Dex to damage to be quite helpful.
Ok, so then it is meant as a CYA saying "we are not releasing anything not already released as OGC, as OGC" etc. but you are not stating that your own personal contributions are closed content.
Right. Whatever I personally devised, without reference to or drawing upon copyrighted material, is up for grabs for personal use. I've tried to make reference notes, but in the event that I missed one or more instances, let the user beware.
Here's the best statement on the matter that I can come up with at present:
Consider all original material to be closed content -- but I specifically will not object to people using it and/or modifying it for their own personal use, nor will I file suit except (a) in response to any such action threatened or brought against me, or (b) unless someone tries to use those ideas for their own commercial gain.
Hey Kryzbyn, what's your email address? (Any one will do, although if you have msn/yahoo messenger that would be ideal.)I really like the monk write up...but unfortunately I do not own most of the books in which the powers are referenced...
Do the rest of the classes rely on them as well?Also, in your "wound" houserules, would "orc ferocity" allow orcs or half-orcs to ignore the penalties?
kryzbyn at cox dot net.
MSN is kryzbyn at live dot com.|
|
I don't agree with all of Kirth's choices, but nothing I've had to deal with has made his game unplayable to me.Tell me where else you disagree, please! I found your comments re: Dex to damage to be quite helpful.
I will, once I've given my disagreement enough consideration to not just be kneejerk. :) I wasn't sure I liked the fatigue/exhaustion HP penalties, but in play they haven't given me too much trouble beyond remembering to apply them. So I will let you know. I've already made the point about finding a problem with our scaling feats locking some abilities to higher levels, but I think that may be a problem with some of the higher level abilities just not being as impressive as others and making me think 'why am I waiting until 11th level for this again?'.
Just sent you an msn messenger add request. If you don't show up in the next 5 minutes or so I'll be sending an email.Hey Kryzbyn, what's your email address? (Any one will do, although if you have msn/yahoo messenger that would be ideal.)I really like the monk write up...but unfortunately I do not own most of the books in which the powers are referenced...
Do the rest of the classes rely on them as well?Also, in your "wound" houserules, would "orc ferocity" allow orcs or half-orcs to ignore the penalties?
kryzbyn at cox dot net.
MSN is kryzbyn at live dot com.
Ok. I'm not allowed to use MSN at work :(
I'll look for the e-mail.
I think that may be a problem with some of the higher level abilities just not being as impressive as others and making me think 'why am I waiting until 11th level for this again?'.
That's a very legitimate concern. If 11th level is needed for two abilities, and all else is more or less even, then those two abilities should be roughly on a par with each other. Every time they're not is a design failure in that sense. Hopefully, given feedback, I can correct design flaws by means of errata and end up with a decent game.
Consider all original material to be closed content -- but I specifically will not object to people using it and/or modifying it for their own personal use, nor will I file suit except (a) in response to any such action threatened or brought against me, or (b) unless someone tries to use those ideas for their own commercial gain.
Unfortunately that is the exact opposite of what I needed it to say lol
As the d20OPenRPG system will ONLY use and provide 100% Open Game Content, anything explicitly declared as closed content can not be used, even with a promise not to sue etc lol.
That does not mean that I can not be inspired by your ideas, and then reword and reconfigure the content into a new form, but I would be prevented from any wholesale copy and paste actions.
Holy Christ! I thought you were joking about being Melee Edition, Kirth.
I have not looked at everything, but I like a lot of the options. You almost make D&D playable, Kirth. :)
That does not mean that I can not be inspired by your ideas, and then reword and reconfigure the content into a new form, but I would be prevented from any wholesale copy and paste actions.
I realize this is a pain in the neck, but I think it's best -- this way, you're forced to evaluate which parts of the stuff are original or open content (and hence OK to be lifted), vs. which parts represent potential copyright infringement if broadly distributed -- you do NOT want Hasbro coming after you!
When compiling these rules, I was envisioning personal use only, not large-scale adaptation. I therefore did not create them with pre-existing "open" vs. "closed" portions.
When compiling these rules, I was envisioning personal use only, not large-scale adaptation. I therefore did not create them with pre-existing "open" vs. "closed" portions.
I get it. I shall use it as inspiration and refrain from copying/importing anything "as-is."
As a sidenote, I agree with many of the others, you have done an excellent job and should be commended for your efforts.
Good stuff.
|
I haven't downloaded all the docs yet, just looking at the house rules, armor, focusing on the core stuff vs. the classes.
Did anything change with spell DCs and calculations? Stat point buys?
I saw the MAD from SAD change on the DC modifer to spells with regard to wizard (need CHA for DC and INT for the class), an interesting way to address the issue.
So far it looks good, I don't agree with all the choices - but it does look like it was put together with some thought and care.
|
I haven't downloaded all the docs yet, just looking at the house rules, armor, focusing on the core stuff vs. the classes.
Did anything change with spell DCs and calculations? Stat point buys?
I saw the MAD from SAD change on the DC modifer to spells with regard to wizard (need CHA for DC and INT for the class), an interesting way to address the issue.So far it looks good, I don't agree with all the choices - but it does look like it was put together with some thought and care.
We don't do point buy, just 4d6 drop the lowest. Point buy, in my experience, makes things too "same-y" within classes. Especially if you consider most/all of our regular group is fairly to very proficient at optimizing characters.
The fun randomness means I don't have to feel cheesy about putting a 6 in STR and an 8 in CHA for my wizard character, since, you know, I rolled those, I didn't buy them down for more points.
Did anything change with spell DCs and calculations?
Note that spell save DCs get progressively lower as the casters become injured. More importantly, the ability to hold an attack in order to selectively botch spellcasting is a huge difference.
And the DC to cast while threatened is equal to 10 + threatening opponent's BAB + 2x the spell level (I'm going from memory here, so I could be wrong.)
That's the base. Add 2 per additional threatening enemy, and then tack on a check penalty if you're wounded, and it's a pretty hard check to make. Avoiding it by taking a 5-ft. step back fails if the enemy has saved at least 5 ft. of movement with which to follow you (or has the No Retreat feat).
Why is casting in combat so hard? I think of Conan disrupting an enemy wizard's incantations by chucking a couch at him. Also, I think of 1st edition, only more so.
|
|
We don't do point buy, just 4d6 drop the lowest. Point buy, in my experience, makes things too "same-y" within classes. Especially if you consider most/all of our regular group is fairly to very proficient at optimizing characters.
The fun randomness means I don't have to feel cheesy about putting a 6 in STR and an 8 in CHA for my wizard character, since, you know, I rolled those, I didn't buy them down for more points.
Thanks Derek, I just saw the stat-rolling part.
Looking through this I can see some really good stuff, some very good ideas.
I do like the DC adjustments for casting in combat and the Battle Fatigue/wound levels is a great addition. A standard mechanic in every other rpg I run but D&D.
And the DC to cast while threatened is equal to 10 + threatening opponent's BAB + 2x the spell level (I'm going from memory here, so I could be wrong.)That's the base. Add 2 per additional threatening enemy, and then tack on a check penalty if you're wounded, and it's a pretty hard check to make. Avoiding it by taking a 5-ft. step back fails if the enemy has saved at least 5 ft. of movement with which to follow you (or has the No Retreat feat).
Why is casting in combat so hard? I think of Conan disrupting an enemy wizard's incantations by chucking a couch at him. Also, I think of 1st edition, only more so.
Ouch. Does that scale with level?
A lvl 1-5 wizard getting hit well once will make casting hard unless the cleric is on the ball...
Does that scale with level?
1d20 + caster level + spellcasting attribute modifier - fatigue penalties (if any). It's about as hard at 1st level as it is at 17th. The difference is that the 17th level caster has better defenses, but more held attacks leveled against him for when he starts to cast. And his enemies have the option of selecting means to breach those defenses, like the fighter's Pierce the Fog of War talent -- which hopefully adds an element of "rock-paper-scissors" to the usual rocket launcher tag.
|
|
A lvl 1-5 wizard getting hit well once will make casting hard unless the cleric is on the ball...
That's kind of Kirth's goal. Let the classes keep their world-shaking powers (houstonderek wants to port 1e spell effects back in. Like, Finger of Death kills you instead of just dealing damage) but make it so if they aren't at their best, they're not likely to get those spells off.
If the cleric is healing the wizard to make sure the wizard has the highest save DC on his spells, he's not CoDzillaing anything. And if the wizard has to rely on the fighter to keep the monsters from disrupting his spells, he's not soloing encounters and making melee characters feel unimportant.
And if the wizard has to rely on the fighter to keep the monsters from disrupting his spells, he's not soloing encounters and making melee characters feel unimportant.
For example, the feats/talents that let you absorb attacks directed at an adjacent ally, to keep all those held attacks from hitting the caster as soon as he starts his spell.
Oh, I agree the mechanic is good, it was just kind of a shocker...
But, honestly, imho, a 1st level wizard new to the vigors of adventuring shouldn't be able to just shrug off a hit with a morninstar...
In 3.5 it was too easy.
A lvl 1-5 wizard getting hit well once will make casting hard unless the cleric is on the ball...That's kind of Kirth's goal. Let the classes keep their world-shaking powers (houstonderek wants to port 1e spell effects back in. Like, Finger of Death kills you instead of just dealing damage) but make it so if they aren't at their best, they're not likely to get those spells off.
If the cleric is healing the wizard to make sure the wizard has the highest save DC on his spells, he's not CoDzillaing anything. And if the wizard has to rely on the fighter to keep the monsters from disrupting his spells, he's not soloing encounters and making melee characters feel unimportant.
Yeah...I dunno. The save or die spells were always a pain in the ass as a player. One bad roll shouldn't do that. You play a character to 12th + level, play him smart and get a character you like for your trouble, then an NPC jumps out and says GOTCHA with a SoD...
I like the harm approach where it does 10 points per caster level.
Yeah...I dunno. The save or die spells were always a pain in the ass as a player. One bad roll shouldn't do that.
Yes; high-level fighters don't automatically fail saves on a "1." And have all good saves. And thigh-level barbarians can ignore death effects for as long as their rage lasts, etc. Also, hero points help.
EDIT: Ninja'd by TOZ!
Also, we like characters to die every so often; it lends verisimilitude to the idea that adventuring is in fact dangerous.
Yeah, that ain't so bad.
Yeah...I dunno. The save or die spells were always a pain in the ass as a player. One bad roll shouldn't do that.Yes; high-level fighters don't automatically fail saves on a "1." And have all good saves. And that high-level barbarians can ignore death effects for as long as their rage lasts. Also, hero points help.
EDIT: Ninja'd by TOZ!
Also, we like characters to die every so often; it lends verisimilitude to the idea that adventuring is in fact dangerous.
I prefer my characters to have died because of my actions, not just cuz (then it's nobody's fault but mine).
But I do see your point :)
Bwhahah, ninja skills strike again. :) On that note, 19th might be a little late in the game for Fighting Spirit, Kirth. Maybe 17th?
Maybe. I saw it as kind of a capstone ability: "I have become so awesome that I can't even fail a save!"
|
|
Yeah...I dunno. The save or die spells were always a pain in the ass as a player. One bad roll shouldn't do that.Yes; high-level fighters don't automatically fail saves on a "1." And have all good saves. And that high-level barbarians can ignore death effects for as long as their rage lasts. Also, hero points help.
EDIT: Ninja'd by TOZ!
Also, we like characters to die every so often; it lends verisimilitude to the idea that adventuring is in fact dangerous.
I prefer my characters to have died because of my actions, not just cuz (then it's nobody's fault but mine).
But I do see your point :)
Walking out the door to face danger (whether to save the world or loot a tomb) is an action. The world is a hostile place. Farming is easy. Adventuring is hard.
It ruins the whole game for me when a wizard gives me an evil sneer, cries out "DIE!!!!" and the dm says (after some dice hit the table), you take 46 hit points, save for half".
I thought the spell was "Finger of Death", not "Finger of kind of tickle you with some damage, no big whoop"...
;-)
Walking out the door to face danger (whether to save the world or loot a tomb) is an action. The world is a hostile place. Farming is easy. Adventuring is hard.
It ruins the whole game for me when a wizard gives me an evil sneer, cries out "DIE!!!!" and the dm says (after some dice hit the table), you take 46 hit points, save for half".
I thought the spell was "Finger of Death", not "Finger of kind of tickle you with some damage, no big whoop"...
;-)
I know, I get it. And deep down I agree.
It feels equally as cool to sneer at said mage when you DO pass the saving throw, with a look that says "You should not have done that" and he sees his own death reflected in your eyes...|
|
Walking out the door to face danger (whether to save the world or loot a tomb) is an action. The world is a hostile place. Farming is easy. Adventuring is hard.
It ruins the whole game for me when a wizard gives me an evil sneer, cries out "DIE!!!!" and the dm says (after some dice hit the table), you take 46 hit points, save for half".
I thought the spell was "Finger of Death", not "Finger of kind of tickle you with some damage, no big whoop"...
;-)
I know, I get it. And deep down I agree.
It feels equally as cool to sneer at said mage when you DO pass the saving throw, with a look that says "You should not have done that" and he sees his own death reflected in your eyes...
Oh, it is equally cool. It just doesn't feel as cool if I was just looking at some minor HP damage if I failed. ;-)
Oh, it is equally cool. It just doesn't feel as cool if I was just looking at some minor HP damage if I failed. ;-)
Yeah I meant that in favor of the save or die scenario :)
I still think that the ideas presented here deserve some merit as Variant Player's Handbook in some capacity. This is all IMO, of course :)
Say... is your opinion connected to any sort of offer for paid work? I'm about tapped out as far as free labor goes! ;)
@ kyrt -- so far you're a better proofreader than all my players combined! Thank you!!! Resultant errata have been added to the list.
Specific replies:
1. In the Houserules file, Light Wounds mentions becoming fatigued whether or not the save is successful, however there is no save DC or effect of a failed save mentioned, unlike the heavy counterpart below.
2. Also, in the little note on having fatigue/exhaustion cured by magic, it notes not regaining HP 'except for temporary HP lost due to constitution drop.' The problem, is that the actual fatigue and exhaustion rules within the document discuss penalties that 'simulate reduced stats' but never actually mentioned penalizing HP. In my personal opinion, I think penalizing HP from that is just a big mess that would complicate the mechanic, but it's up to you Kirth, I'm just pointing out the flaws in the presentation.
3. Regarding Tricky Maneuvers 'Dirty Trick'... I realize that the APG has the Dazzled condition option, but it seems kind of pointless to me when Blinded is also an option. Dazzled is kind of the red-headed stepchild of conditions that nobody really cares about.
4. Parrying costs BOTH an attack preemptively reserved AND an immediate action? Is that intentional, or perhaps a piece of the old rules that slipped through?
5. Hey Kirth. The Tactical Movement section still talks about trading attacks with two weapon fighting. Thought you should know.
6. Hey Kirth? As opposed to allowing other threatening enemies to make aid another checks (which cost actions unless that's been changed) to 'drive up concentration DC's' have you considered simply adding +1 to the DC of the Highest BAB threat for every additional threat? One less set of rolls required, and it's a nice compromise between the higher potential DC boost that aid another could give, and the fact nobody's likely to have the actions to spare.
7. The counter-spelling section says that counterspelling is only automatic if the spell used is the same as the spell being countered. Does that mean you're taking out the 'opposite spells' concept, like haste vs slow?
1. Correct—there is no chance of dazing with a LW.
2. I agree. Delete the offending paragraph entirely.
3. I agree. In fact, I’d removed that at one point; dunno how it creeped back in. Thanks.
4. Instead of “for use as immediate actions,” it should read “for immediate use.” Same rules as an immediate action, but not actually costing an action (other than the one held).
5. Argh. Good catch. Delete that paragraph.
6. I agree. Change the sentence to read “Multiple threatening opponents can choose to apply an Aid Another bonus (a specific bonus type, for keeping track of what stacks) equal to +1 per additional threatening creature, to drive up the DC of defensive casting.”
7. Another good catch. Amend the sentence to read, “You may use any spell to counterspell, but success is automatic only if you use the same spell as the one being cast, or one of equal level or greater with effects that are exactly opposite (e.g., haste vs. slow).”
Man, I love your houserules. I saw some of this stuff on your website before (linked from TOZ, I believe), but it seems like you've updated/revised even more since I last looked at it. This is the first time I've seen the weapons/weapon proficiency section, and it's incredible. Fantastic job.
One question, so that I can better gank your houserules for my own games: Some of your weapons have the "entangle" quality, but what does that actually do? It's not described anywhere; does it provide bonuses for the Dirty Trick maneuver, or work kinda like the net?