[Compendium] Discussion Thread

[Barbarian MD]

<- Back to Table of Contents (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=12940741#post12940741)

Well, folks, I'm starting another Compendium. I know, I know, they always die off because the person who starts them stops updating them. That's why this one will be different.


It's user-submitted!

Basically, it's the Homebrewer's Extended Signature, with a formal format and broken into categories for ease of use.

Please limit all discussion, suggestions, etc. to this thread, and refrain from posting in the other threads except to submit your homebrew in the approved format.

Hopefully, it will self-bump itself to never fall too far down the list, but perhaps once it's going and has enough interest the Mods might sticky the Table of Contents thread. We'll see.

The point of this thread will be to gather input on ways to better the Compendium format, or to discuss the need for additional categories.

Currently started:
Base classes
Prestige Classes
Races/Templates
Items
Enhancements
Feats
Disciplines and Maneuvers
Spells and Domains
Invocations and Blast Shapes
Monsters

Still to start:
Subsystems
Vestiges
Soulmelds
Skills and Skill Usages/Tricks


If you have suggestions on how to format the entries for any of the above, please speak up. I'm going slowly with this so as to maximize the ability to plan the format out, rather than make changes midstream after people have started posting.

<- Back to Table of Contents (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=12940741#post12940741)

[Welknair]

Glad to see this is underway! I look forward to seeing how it develops.

Edit: Looking a Unosorta's response, I just remembered. I think you need a Martial Adept tag.

[Barbarian MD]

Yeah, I realized that as he was in the midst of writing his entry. It's been added as [Martial].

Definitely going to take some ironing out as this process unfolds. Unosarta, the [Melee] tag is for <20 BAB, as opposed to the

[B]EDIT: Does anyone have any suggestions for changes that need to happen to the [Tag] list for Prestige Classes? Otherwise I'll just use them as is.

[Milo v3]

Yeah, I realized that as he was in the midst of writing his entry. It's been added as [Martial].

Definitely going to take some ironing out as this process unfolds. Unosarta, the [Melee] tag is for <20 BAB, as opposed to the

[B]EDIT: Does anyone have any suggestions for changes that need to happen to the [Tag] list for Prestige Classes? Otherwise I'll just use them as is.

I like this and I've just submitted the base classes I've made.
As for the Prestige Class Tags could you put in [FullPrC]? Its where the Prestige Class has twenty levels instead of 5 or 10 and all my PrC's fit into that category.

[Barbarian MD]

I think the second tag will be [#], where # is how many levels the PrC is.

[Milo v3]

I think the second tag will be [#], where # is how many levels the PrC is.

Sounds good and will work for all Prestige Classes.

[Kane0]

Can I petition for a new tag: [Alt], for Alternate Rules?

It would encompass things like Spell Point casting, 2d6 instead of d20 and things like that.

[Xechon]

And also possibly [System], for all of the unique systems created here.

[Barbarian MD]

I'm assuming you mean a thread, rather than a [Tag]?

I think a System/Subsystem thread would be good, but I have no idea how to best format it (I hven't built or played anything other than 3.5).

I assume the first would be

[Sys]
Followed by [?]

[Sub]
Followed by [3.5/PF] [4.0] [D20] [?]

What other tags would that thread need? Doe it need a bunch of tags? Are there really that many systems and subsystems that tags would even be necessary/work?


Edit: And perhaps [Alt] would fit nicely in such a thread?

[Milo v3]

I'm assuming you mean a thread, rather than a [Tag]?

I think a System/Subsystem thread would be good, but I have no idea how to best format it (I hven't built or played anything other than 3.5).

I assume the first would be

[Sys]
Followed by [?]

[Sub]
Followed by [3.5/PF] [4.0] [D20] [?]

What other tags would that thread need? Doe it need a bunch of tags? Are there really that many systems and subsystems that tags would even be necessary/work?


Edit: And perhaps [Alt] would fit nicely in such a thread?

These two tags would probably fit into the Subsystem section
[MagFix] For subsystems that fix magic.
[NewMag] For subsystems that are whole new sections of magic.

[Jeriah]

I'd like to suggest a tag like [DivineGish] or [DivGish] vs [ArcaneGish]/[ArcGish] to differentiate the different Gish types.

[Milo v3]

Could we get [ProgTem] (Progessive gain of template) for Prestige Classes?

Also in the PrC area can you change the descriptions of the tags to say whether or not they increase caster level rather than spell levels.

[Barbarian MD]

I added the "progression" fix for casting. Good call.

I think rather than add a [Tag] for templates, I think it would be a better idea to put templates in the Races/Templates thread. I realize that some will progress by level whereas other won't, but I think they should stay together. Perhaps this calls for a tag in the Template thread, though...

Announcement: I've added a [SS] tag to the Races/Templates thread, denoting "Savage Species," for those monster templates that advance by level.

[Milo v3]

I added the "progression" fix for casting. Good call.

I think rather than add a [Tag] for templates, I think it would be a better idea to put templates in the Races/Templates thread. I realize that some will progress by level whereas other won't, but I think they should stay together. Perhaps this calls for a tag in the Template thread, though...

Announcement: I've added a [SS] tag to the Races/Templates thread, denoting "Savage Species," for those monster templates that advance by level.

I was more meaning something like Dragon Disciple where you get Half-Dragon eventually rather than templates which increase by level.

[Barbarian MD]

Sure, though I can't imagine it's going to be a very popular [Tag]. We'll call it [Temp]. I'll go add it now.

[Temp] - gain a template (usually as the capstone) of this PrC

[Barbarian MD]

Feat and Discipline threads added.

Next on the list: spells. I'm looking for help with the tag system. So far I'm thinking:

[Level] [Tag]

Where [Tags] would include:
Sorcerer/Wizard
Cleric
Ranger
Druid
Paladin
Bard
Psion
Wu-Jen
Artificer
Arcane (is this necessary?)
Divine (is this necessary?)
Epic

I know I'm missing a lot of non-SRD classes. Help me fill in the blanks, please.

EDIT: Created spell thread. Help me plug in holes.

[Madara]

questions for the spell compendium:

1. Should it include school tags like [Necro]?
2. What about spells with different levels for different classes? Should we include both levels?

Also, thank you for doing this :smallsmile:

Edit: I'm not bothering to ask for a Dread Necromancer tag, I don't think it'll be that common.

But if you asked,

Dread Necromancer
Beguiler
warmage
are three more

[Barbarian MD]

I liked how you handled differing levels. That's probably the easiest way.

I'll add those three tags.

As for schools, I think it'd start to get too cluttered. However, if you wanted to include it in the description, as in "a [Necro] spell that does x" or "a [Cold] spell that does y," I think it would be a good way to immediately tell people what they're looking at.

Edit: I'm modifying the format somewhat to unclutter tags with multiple levels and tags. I would like them to be individually searchable, so let's put tag-level / tag-level / tag-level. There's an example in the spell thread. I'm also going to have the tags on the level ABOVE the spell description, since it's going to start getting really ugly with lots of tags.

[DaTedinator]

For feat tags, might I suggest [Psionic] and [Tactical]?

Also, I just posted my feats; it's not even all of them, and it's a massive wall. Would sticking them in a table maybe be better? It would certainly be easier to read.

And I really think it'd be helpful to list prerequisites along with feats, though I can see how that could clutter things even more.

EDIT: Reading comprehension fail, just saw the psionic tag.

[Barbarian MD]

[Tact] tag added for Tactical Feats. Thanks for the suggestion.

If you want to try a table, you're welcome to it. It might indeed help with readability.

I would want to avoid adding even more text by putting pre-requisites in--the point of the Compendium is to pique interest and provide a link. If they like the basic concept in the description, they'll follow the link and read the material and the discussion of its balance, etc.

[Kane0]

Could we add a tag for each school for the spell compendium? My comtribution is a thread with multiple spells but they are all Wiz/Sorc Evocations.

[Barbarian MD]

As for schools, I think it'd start to get too cluttered. However, if you wanted to include it in the description, as in "a [Necro] spell that does x" or "a [Cold] spell that does y," I think it would be a good way to immediately tell people what they're looking at.

Still thinking the same way on this one. Include it in the description (an [Evocation] spell that does x") if it's that important, but I think it would take an already cluttered thread and make it worse to add yet another layer of tags.

Edit: what I would suggest in your case is to list each spell in the Compendium, with all of the links going to the same place. Enough description to get people in the door, but not enough that they don't need to click through. That would be more useful than the redundant evocation tag.

[Kane0]

Rightio, ill change it now.

[DonQuixote]

Some people seem to be making up custom tags on spells, rather than just using [Other]. Just what I've observed.

[Barbarian MD]

Just started Invocations thread.

Alright folks, I want to tackle the Systems/Subsystems thread next, but as I've never homebrewed a system or a subsystem, I could use some help with the [Tags].

I was thinking:

[System]
- [d20] - Compatible with the d20 system
- [3.5/PF] - Compatible with the 3.5 system (Pathfinder or Legend would be an example)
- [4.0] - Compatible with the 4.0 system
- [Fate] - Compatible with the Fate system
- [Cortex] - Compatible with the Cortex system
- [Exalted] - Compatible with the Exalted system
- [NEW] - completely new way of doing things

[Subsystem] (continue using the specific system tag next)
- [Magic]
- [Level] - the E6 system would be an example

[World] - this would be a catch-all for worldbuilding, since those aren't necessarily system specific


And I'm basically out of ideas at this point.

Examples:

[System][3.5]
[System][NEW]

[Subsystem][Fate][Magic]
[Subsystem][3.5][Level]

[Milo v3]

Snip

Seems like those would work with the subsystem I made so its probably fine.

[DonQuixote]

Might also want a [Mundane] tag for non-magical subsystems. The example being:

[Subsystem][3.5][Mundane] Tome of Battle: The Book of Nine Swords: Maneuvers and stances for martial characters.


Similarly, a [Fix] tag could be useful, for subsystems that are intended as rewrites of an existing mechanic.

[Subsystem][3.5][Fix] Truenaming: Words of power that aren't power words.



Also, to prevent confusion, I think that we should establish rules on whether or not [Subsystem] materials would also be posted in other [Compendium] threads. My gut says no--if you need to read the entire subsystem in order to understand the base class, you shouldn't be linking to the base class without the subsystem.

[DaTedinator]

Similarly, a [Fix] tag could be useful, for subsystems that are intended as rewrites of an existing mechanic.

I was actually just thinking about recommending a [Fix] tag for the class compendiums (or really, I suppose, any/all of the other compendiums, too).

[Jeriah]

Something that just occurred to me... Perhaps you should request that people disable their signature for their posts in the compendium to keep the whole thing more neat and orderly? If you think it's a good idea, I'll gladly disable mine in my posts.

[Barbarian MD]

I didn't even realize you could selectively disable a signature. Yes, that's a fantastic idea! When I get home I'll edit all the posts to request it.

[Jeriah]

Yep, just unclick the "Show your signature" option under "Miscellaneous Options" just below the first set of Submit/Preview buttons.

As much as I want to advertise my homebrew (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=223595) (see sig), I'll go disable my sig in the posts I've made in the Compendium right now. :smallsmile:

[Barbarian MD]

An update to say that all of the threads (and future threads) now contain the following:


*Note: Please disable your signature when posting to this thread. To do so, uncheck the "show your signature" box under additional options when posting (or editing).*

I don't want to go through and PM everyone that has already posted, but if you happen to see this, please go back and edit your post to disable your signature. It should make the threads looks a lot more consistent.

[DonQuixote]

Also, to prevent confusion, I think that we should establish rules on whether or not [Subsystem] materials would also be posted in other [Compendium] threads. My gut says no--if you need to read the entire subsystem in order to understand the base class, you shouldn't be linking to the base class without the subsystem.

Any word on this one?

[Mystic Muse]

Where would Monster classes fit?

[Jeriah]

I would think that monster classes fit under Monsters.

[Barbarian MD]

Speaking of, Monsters thread is now up.

As for the interaction of Subsystems and the other threads, my opinion would be: If it's playable independently, feel free to post it. If your base class can fit in a standard 3.5 game, even if it has a whole new system that accompanies it, go for it. If you've totally changed the way that classes progress or something to the point that they're incompatible, no. For instance: Chaos Mage and Chaos Magic--very different than anything currently out there, but still compatible as it doesn't overwrite anything in Core. Gnorman's E6 classes, which by their very nature progress differently, not compatible.

Huh, that reminds me: I should probably create a tag for things that AREN'T 3.5/PF, so that people can post 4th ed. classes and such... Or we can just pretend that those don't exist. :smalltongue:

[Jeriah]

I'm all for pretending 4e doesn't exist...

[Barbarian MD]

Does anyone have any suggestions on how to keep this more active? I really feel like this will work once it gains a certain critical mass, but it hasn't gotten there yet. Is there some tweak that I could make that would make this more attractive to homebrewers?

[Madara]

Well, when we PEACH someone, or comment on something, we could suggest they add it to the compendium.

[TheWombatOfDoom]

I'm all for pretending 4e doesn't exist...

4e? O.o What is this of what you speak??

As for the compendium, if I had anything PEACH-able, I'd input some, but alas, I do not.

[DaTedinator]

Well, when we PEACH someone, or comment on something, we could suggest they add it to the compendium.

That is a great thought. I don't really comment a whole lot, but I'll mention the compendium when I do.

I think you're right, mhvaughan, we just need to get it a little more traction, and then it should be (mostly) self-sustaining.

I'll drop a link in my sig for the time being. Maybe if enough of us do that?

[Madara]

I'll drop a link in my sig for the time being. Maybe if enough of us do that?

I'll join the group, Peer-pressure is the way to go :smallcool:

[JeminiZero]

So I'm thinking of sticking my life's work homebrew base class (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=234951) in the base class compendium.

But I am at a loss as to what tags I should add. Any thoughts?

[Barbarian MD]

Jeez, I don't know. There's always [Other], but that just doesn't seem to do it justice. I suppose, for both ease and sheer hilarity, you could tag it with all of the tags. I give you permission to do that if that's the way you want to run with it. :smalltongue:

[Temotei]

I added the muse and sentinel to my post. The muse is probably super unpolished and likely sucks because I was very tired while making it and I'm loathe to try to fix it myself without critiques, but whatevs. Some day, perhaps.

Also, I labeled the muse with [Util], though [Other] might fit better. I'm not sure.

[Madara]

I think adding a [type] tag to the monsters thread would be effective, but no one has posted there yet.

[DracoDei]

What would the creature entries for True Dragons look like? 12 different entries in a row for 12 different CR+RHDs?

[Madara]

What would the creature entries for True Dragons look like? 12 different entries in a row for 12 different CR+RHDs?

Considering that we break up and list each spell individually, you probably should do 12 different entries.

[Barbarian MD]

Yep. Multiple entries