PDA

View Full Version : Variant Rules for Homebrew World(Races, firearms, Smite Anathema)



Werewhale
2012-08-15, 09:25 AM
So I'm nearly ready to put up a recruitment post for an adventure in my homebrew world, but the fluff really took off and I found myself with a slew of houserules that I don't have the experience to see if they are balanced or not. So I'm posting them here to look for critique and advice. The variant races are very setting-specific but the firearms and anathema rules could certainly be used elsewhere, if you like them.

Feel free to only read and comment on one of the three parts rather than feel intimidated by the wall of text and go away without reading anything.

Races
No subrace has been created from scratch, but rather based off the traits of published races and then I replaced qualities with what I hoped to be equally powerful qualities. So I'll be presenting the races by comparing them to the standard iterations.

Sun Dwarf - Based mostly on the standard SRD Dwarf, and are not much different fluff-wise, except that they are more social.
{table=head]Sun Dwarf | SRD Dwarf
+2 CON -2 DEX | +2 CON -2 CHA
Medium Size | Medium Size
Speed 20'1 | Speed 20'1
Low-Light Vision | Darkvision 60''
Stonecunning | Stonecunning
Weapon Familiarity dw.waraxes and dw.urgroshes | Weapon Familiarity dw.waraxes and dw.urgroshes
Stability | Stability
+2 save vs. poison | +2 save vs. poison
+2 save vs. spells | +2 save vs. spells
+1 attack bonus vs. undead and goblinoids | +1 attack bonus vs. orcs and goblinoids
+4 AC vs. Giantkin | +4 AC vs. Giantkin
+2 Appraise rel. to metal or stone | +2 Appraise rel. to metal or stone
+2 Craft rel. to metal or stone | +2 Craft rel. to metal or stone
Cold Endurance | -
Favoured Class: Fighter | Favoured Class: Fighter
[/table]
1 Can move at this speed even when wearing medium or heavy armor or when carrying a medium or heavy load.


Ghost Dwarf - Based on the Duergar, but stripped of all psionic-related traits because there are no psionics in the setting. They are supposed to be rare, so I want to keep a Level Adjustment of one or two. Fluff-wise, they are cave-adapted Sun Dwarves(like Dwarf Fortress adaption), so they get darkvision and some magical powers.
{table=head]Ghost Dwarf | SRD Duergar
+2 CON | +2 CON -4 CHA
Medium Size | Medium Size
Speed 20'1 | Speed 20'1
Darkvision 120'' | Darkvision 120''
Stonecunning | Stonecunning
Weapon Familiarity dw.waraxes and dw.urgroshes | -
Stability | Stability
Immunity to paralysis, phantasms, and poison. | Immunity to paralysis, phantasms, and poison.
+2 save vs. spells | +2 save vs. spells
Spell-Like Abilities 1/day: mending, darkness, unseen servant | Psi-Like Abilities 1/day: expansion, invisibility.
- | +3 psi power points
+1 attack bonus vs. undead and goblinoids | +1 attack bonus vs. orcs and goblinoids
+4 AC vs. Giantkin | +4 AC vs. Giantkin
Sickened in sunlight | Dazzled in sunlight
+2 Appraise and Craft rel. to metal or stone | +2 Appraise and Craft rel. to metal or stone
- | +4 Move Silently, +1 Listen and Spot
Cold Endurance | -
Favoured Class Fighter | Favoured Class Fighter
Level Adjustment +2 | Level Adjustment +1
[/table]
1 Can move at this speed even when wearing medium or heavy armor or when carrying a medium or heavy load.

Wildelf - Based mechanically on the standard SRD Elf, but are a more nomadic folk in this setting, and tweaked for that purpose. Fluff-wise, they split from the other elves after a supernatural plague destroyed the old elven world-spanning civilization.
{table=head]Wildelf | SRD Elf
+2 DEX -2 CON | +2 DEX -2 CON
Medium Size | Medium Size
Speed 30' | Speed 30'
Low-Light Vision | Low-Light Vision
Immune to diseases | Trance
+2 save vs. enchantment | +2 save vs. enchantment
Weapon Prof.(scimitar, lance, longbow, shortbow) | Weapon Prof.(longsword, rapier, longbow, shortbow)
+2 to Listen, Search, Spot | +2 to Listen, Search, Spot
- | Auto-Search for secret doors
+2 to Ride and Handle Animal. Ride is always a class skill | -
Favoured Class Ranger | Favoured Class Wizard
[/table]

Songelf - Based mechanically on the SRD Elf, but these are jungle-dwelling self-perfectionists and culturally very distant from the other races. Fluff-wise, they are what remains of the old elven empire, magically advanced and talented, but technologically and culturally crippled by fear of the plague that brought them to ruin.
{table=head]Songelf | SRD Elf
+2 INT -2 CON | +2 DEX -2 CON
Medium Size | Medium Size
Speed 30' | Speed 30'
- | Low-Light Vision
Trance | Trance
+2 save vs. enchantment | +2 save vs. enchantment
Immune to diseases | -
Weapon Familiarity(katana)1 | Weapon Prof.(longsword, rapier, longbow, shortbow)
+2 to Listen, Search, Spot | +2 to Listen, Search, Spot
Auto-Search for secret doors | Auto-Search for secret doors
Spell-Like Abilities 1/day: arcane mark, detect magic, mage hand | -
Heat Endurance | -
Favoured Class Wizard | Favoured Class Wizard
[/table]
1A songelf may wield a katana in one hand as a martial weapon, and is always proficient with a katana wielded as a two-handed weapon.

Gnome - Gnomes are more militaristic and organized in this setting, but mechanically based off the standard SRD Gnome.
{table=head] 'Brew Gnome | SRD Gnome
+2 CON -2 STR | +2 CON -2 STR
Small Size | Small Size
Speed 20' | Speed 20'
- | Low-Light Vision
+1 to attack rolls when using firearms | Weapon Familiarity(gnome hooked hammer)
+2 save vs. illusions | +2 save vs. illusions
+1 to DC of illusions cast | +1 to DC of illusions cast
+1 attack bonus vs. kobolds and goblinoids | +1 attack bonus vs. kobolds and goblinoids
- | +4 AC vs. Giantkin
+2 to Listen | +2 to Listen
+2 to either Craft(alchemy) or Craft(firearms), chosen at character creation | +2 to Craft(alchemy)
Spell-Like Abilities 1/day: Silent Image, ghost sound, prestidigitation, light | Spell-Like Abilities 1/day: Speak with animals, dancing lights, ghost sound, prestidigitation
Favoured Class Wizard | Favoured Class Bard
[/table]

Halfling - Halflings are downtrodden second-class citizens in the predominantly human empire, based off the standard SRD halfling. Still very similar to the original. I might skip the brewlings entirely, or at least allow interested players to play standard halflings if they prefer.
{table=head]'Brew Halfling | SRD Halfling
+2 DEX -2 STR | +2 DEX -2 STR
Small Size | Small Size
Speed 20' | Speed 20'
+2 to Bluff, Hide, Move Silently, Sense Motive | +2 to Climb, Jump, Listen, Move Silently
+1 to all saves | +1 to all saves
+2 to saves vs. fear | +2 to saves vs. fear
Penalty for improvised weaponry reduced to -1 | +1 to attack rolls with thrown weapons and slings
Favoured Class Rogue | Favoured Class Rogue
[/table]

Orcs - In this setting, Orcs are not evil savages ripe for xp-hunting, but have a continent-spanning empire of their own to rival that of the humans in both military and cultural terms. Pretty much built from scratch, but I present the SRD Orc for comparison anyway.
{table=head] 'Brew Orc | SRD Orc
+2 STR -2 DEX | +4 STR -2 INT -2 WIS -2 CHA
Speed 30' | Speed 30'
- | Darkvision 60'
- | Light Sensitivity
Weapon Familiarity(bastard sword)| -
+2 to Swim and Intimidate | -
+2 to Grapple Checks | -
Immunity to gaze attacks | -
+1 to attack rolls with thrown weapons | -
Favoured Class Cleric | Favoured Class Barbarian
[/table]

Half-races may be added sometime later, if I feel the need, as well as other normally savage races such as goblins and gnolls. But for now I'm focusing on these.

Do any of these races strike you as terribly unbalanced(whether they are overpowered or underpowered)? I'm not going for perfect balance here, just enough.


Firearms
In this setting, warfare has just advanced to the real-world equivalent of pike-and-shot tactics, so I want to make firearms viable weapons as wielded by a mass of barely-trained peasants, but not overpowering in the hands of skilled adventurers. In fact, they should benefit less from personal skill than bows and crossbows, due to the inherent inaccuracy of smoothbore guns, not to mention the long reload times. But I also want them to be more effective in piercing light-to-medium armor and thick hide. Finally, I want them to pack a hard punch and be slow to reload, but avoid the rather silly scenario of adventurers running around with twenty pistols on their belts(carrying extra guns is not ahistorical, but we have to be reasonable).

So! For revision, here are the stats for firearms lifted from the DMG:
{table=head] Exotic Weapons(Firearms) | Cost | Dmg(S) | Dmg(M) | Critical | Range Increment | Weight | Damage Type
{colsp=8}One-Handed Ranged Weapons |
Pistol | 250 gp | 1d8 | 1d10 | x3 | 50 ft. | 3 lb. | Piercing |
{colsp=8}Two-Handed Ranged Weapons |
Musket | 500 gp | 1d10 | 1d12 | x3 | 150 ft. | 10 lb. | Piercing |
[/table]
The Pistol and Musket both take a standard action to reload.

Here is how I would stat them:
{table=head] Martial Weapons(Firearms) | Cost | Dmg(S) | Dmg(M) | Critical | Range Increment | Weight | Damage Type
{colsp=8}One-Handed Ranged Weapons |
Pistol | 50 gp | 1d8 | 1d10 | x3 | 40 ft. | 3 lb. | Piercing |
{colsp=8}Two-Handed Ranged Weapons |
Arquebus | 75 gp | 1d10 | 1d12 | x3 | 80 ft. | 7 lb. | Piercing |
Musket | 100 gp | 2d6 | 2d8 | x3 | 100 ft. | 10 lb. | Piercing |
[/table]
Pistol: Standard action to reload, requires both hands to do so, and provokes an attack of opportunity. May be shot from one hand without penalties.
Arquebus:Full-round action to reload, requires both hands to do so, and provokes an attack of opportunity. This action may be split into a move action and a standard action, performed in separate rounds, but each action provokes an attack of opportunity. May be shot from one hand at a -2 penalty to attack rolls.
Musket:Full-round action to reload, requires both hands to do so, and provokes an attack of opportunity. This action may be split into a move action and a standard action, performed in separate rounds, but each action provokes an attack of opportunity. May be shot from one hand at a -4 penalty to attack rolls. Too unwieldy to reload from horseback, but can still be fired from a mount.
The Pistol still takes a standard action to reload, but the musket takes a full-round action. In addition, both weapons possess the firearm quality, which is a catch-all for several special rules governing their use.
The musket can not be reloaded from horseback.

Firearms are powerful but unpredictable weapons. Whenever one is fired, a d% is cast to determine if the weapon discharges successfully, wobbles, jams, fizzles, or explodes.
{table=head]Weapon | Explodes | Jams | Fizzles | Wobbles | Discharges Successfully
Standard Firearm | 1 | 2-4 | 5-9 | 10-15 | 16-100
Crappy Firearm | 1-2 | 3-7 | 8-15 | 16-25 | 26-100
Masterwork Firearm | 1* | 2 | 3 | 4-5 | 6-100
[/table]
*When a 1 is rolled, roll again. If it is a 1 again, an explosion occurs, otherwise it is just a fizzle.

Successful Discharge: The firearm operates as designed, and the attack proceeds normally.
Wobble: The bullet bounces around in the barrel and veers off course as it exits. It ends up in a square adjacent to the target, determined by throwing a d8, and makes an attack roll at +0 against whatever creature occupies that square. If nothing occupies that square, the bullet continues on in a straight line for d10 range increments until it finds something or if not, strikes the ground.
Fizzle: The bullet exits the weapon without enough force to damage anything, falling harmlessly at the shooter's feet. The attack is negated and the firearm must be reloaded before the next shot.
Jam: The bullet fails to exit the barrel, negating the attack. The bullet must be cleared before the weapon may be used again. Attempting to clear the barrel is a full-round action that demands a Dexterity Check against DC 8 for pistols and DC 10 for muskets. Failure expends the action without clearing the weapon for use. A successful check means the firearm is cleared and may be reloaded with the next action. When not under duress, the barrel can be cleared in a minute without making a Dexterity check.
Explosion: The firearm misfires catastrophically and explodes in the shooter's hands. The attack is negated. Muskets and pistols affect the user differently.

Pistol: The shooter takes 1d4 points of fire damage and a -1 penalty to all attack rolls and skill checks involving the hand grasping the gun. If the hit point damage is negated somehow, due to damage resistance or immunity, the penalty is also negated. The penalty lasts until the gunman heals at least one hit point, either naturally or through magical healing.
Musket: The shooter takes 1d6 points of fire damage and a -1 penalty to all attack rolls and skill checks involving the hand grasping the gun. If the hit point damage is negated somehow, due to damage resistance or immunity, the penalty is also negated. The penalty lasts until the gunman heals at least one hit point, either naturally or through magical healing.
Furthermore, the shooter must make a DC 13 Reflex check or become blinded for ten rounds, or until he receives magical healing. He must also make a DC 13 Fortitude check or become deafened for ten rounds, or until he receives magical healing.


A firearm ignores any armor bonus provided by armor that does not have the bulletproof modifier. Normal breastplates, half-plates and full plates are bulletproof, unless explicitly stated otherwise. Other suits can be made bulletproof at the cost of 100gp and a -1 modifier to Armor Check Penalties and Maximum Dexterity.
A firearm ignores any armor bonus provided by Dexterity unless the target has moved its speed in that round or performed a Total Defense action, or has the uncanny dodge feat.
If a character carries a loaded firearm without grasping it and performs an action that involves significant movement(such as moving their speed, fighting in melee) or is otherwise forced to move about(being attacked in melee), there is a 10% chance per round of that firearm firing off. All normal checks are made to determine whether the weapon misfired. Depending on the location, there is a chance(50% if carried in a belt) that the character is hit by the bullet, in which case the weapon makes an attack roll of +0 against their flat-footed AC.


(The arquebus was added almost like an afterthought as an intermediate step between pistol and musket. Right now its only benefit over the musket is a lower cost and the ability to be reloaded from horseback. Further improvements are under consideration.)

Your thoughts on this please? Are the rules too complex? Are the drawbacks too heavy or the benefits too great? Would you consider using a firearm like this? Would you consider using any other ranged weapon when you could have a firearm like this?


Anathema, or How to Deal with Good/Evil Spells and Abilities in a Non-Objective Setting
Problem: I wanted to make a world without Good and Evil, where everyone is the "hero" of their own story and realpolitik outweighs idealism, you know, like the real world. On the other hand, I just really like paladins, but without any Evil for their abilities to target, how do they work?

Solution: So I came up, probably not the first to do so, with the idea of Anathema. Basically, any paladin ability that mentions Evil replaces that word with anathema(Detect Anathema, Smite Anathema), and so do any alignment-specific spells(Protect Against ALIGNMENT, Bless Weapon).

So what is Anathema? Anything that is in direct opposition to the deity granting the spell or power, or an affront to what they stand for. A god of happiness and growth may have undead and murderous psychopaths as an anathema, among other things. This system will require an extensive list of anathemas for every relevant god, and since not every circumstance can be prepared for, a Knowledge(religion) check* could be called for to determine whether something qualifies as anathema or not(the DM would rule on this and inform the player according to the Knowledge Check).

What could be an Anathema? Pretty much anything imaginable. Common anathemas include creature types, such as undead, outsiders, and vermin. Types of people could also be anathemas, such as murderers, thieves, or even seemingly innocent vocations such as moneylenders or hunters. Care must be taken not to make anathemas too expansive or unfocused. Foreigners, for example, will include nearly everyone in the world, but a xenophobic or patriotic god might instead define those working directly against the interest of their nation to be anathema. Socialists is difficult to determine. What one man may consider a socialist may be a centrist from another's perspective. A capitalist god may instead define members of a socialist party as anathema, or leftist extremists.

In the end, the DM will have to carry the final word on whether something qualifies as anathema, consulting the available info of the deity in question.

*Possibly replace Knowledge(religion) with Wisdom since the Paladin is already strapped for skill points as is.

I'm wondering if anyone has any experience using a system like this or similar, or if not, if it sounds workable?

erikun
2012-08-15, 02:11 PM
Sun Dwarves: Why is there an attack bonus against undead and golbinoids? Why a dodge bonus against giants? There isn't much relation between undead/goblins, unlike orcs/goblins, and the giants just look more tacked on.

Songelf: Weapon Proficiency: Rapier would make so much more sense here. There is no orient and they don't come from the orient, so why the katana proficiency?

Gnome: Wouldn't Weapon Proficiency: Firearm make much more sense than just a +1 to hit? After all, the gnome's favored class (wizard) probably isn't proficient in firearms by default.

Orcs: My first impression is that your orcs seem more like D&D Hobgoblins. My second is that they just have a hodgepodge of abilities. What is it about them that makes them good with bastard swords and bonuses to thrown weapons? That makes them good swimmers? Immune to gaze attacks?


Anathema could work, but unless you spell out for each deity what is anathema to them, you'd likely get players arguing or upset because such-and-such they wanted an anathema bonus against doesn't count.

Spiryt
2012-08-15, 02:41 PM
Firearm rules are pretty much massively elaborate in the system where vast majority of weapons are being handled by like 4 numbers...

Some of this is pretty nicely done, and may feel somehow 'realistic' but it just doesn't seem right all around.

Swords may, chip bend, and so on, spears hafts will break, picks will get stuck in things, lances are broken/dropped after charge, crossbows may misfire when waved around pointlessly...

Giving plenty of additional rules only to firearms just doesn't seem neat.

I agree that some races just seems to have rather random abilities.

The Boz
2012-08-15, 03:40 PM
The Anathema thing? I like. A lot.

Zale
2012-08-15, 06:30 PM
I'm not sure the Ghost Dwarves are really LA:2.

And this should probably be in the Homebrew/World Building Section.

Kuma Kode
2012-08-15, 08:20 PM
Firearms are worthless to anyone with any skill. They might be okay for a mage or peasant to start, but they will be quickly dropped because of the fact that it's impossible to take multiple attacks with them. The game mechanics means that skilled people will prefer less technologically advanced options because they are, overall, more powerful.

This is weird. "Screw the guys with guns, the guy with the bow is the real threat."

This is similar behavior to when I played Silent Hill: Origins and the weapons broke really fast so after a while I said "screw it" and played the game beating most monsters to death with my fists. This is the exact opposite of what should be happening.

Ravens_cry
2012-08-15, 08:39 PM
Do you want people to use guns or not? If so, you need to craft rules that make guns a better option.
To keep things at least slightly within the bounds of reality, I'd make them mid to late 19th century equivalent, like revolvers and Enfield rifles. That way they can be reloaded fast enough to be of use.
Right now, the rules are sadly rather clunky from a kinaesthetic sense. All those rolls slow down combat and add frustration when that one roll doesn't come up.

Gnoman
2012-08-15, 09:25 PM
Your firearm rules are very mixed. Note that, while I'll be going largely from a simualtionist point of view, I'll be addressing game balance at the same time.

[QUOTE]Pistol: Standard action to reload, requires both hands to do so, and provokes an attack of opportunity. May be shot from one hand without penalties.
Arquebus:Full-round action to reload, requires both hands to do so, and provokes an attack of opportunity. This action may be split into a move action and a standard action, performed in separate rounds, but each action provokes an attack of opportunity. May be shot from one hand at a -2 penalty to attack rolls.
Musket:Full-round action to reload, requires both hands to do so, and provokes an attack of opportunity. This action may be split into a move action and a standard action, performed in separate rounds, but each action provokes an attack of opportunity. May be shot from one hand at a -4 penalty to attack rolls. Too unwieldy to reload from horseback, but can still be fired from a mount.
The Pistol still takes a standard action to reload, but the musket takes a full-round action. In addition, both weapons possess the firearm quality, which is a catch-all for several special rules governing their use.
The musket can not be reloaded from horseback.

So far, not bad. Only criticism is that muskets of the sort you're suggesting here shouldn't be able to be fired with one hand at all, and should require a rest to avoid penalty. (When the musket was first introduced, it was an extra-heavy weapon deployed almost exclusively against cavalry. Later improvements resulted in the musket of the 18th century that had the same power in a more portable form, replacing the arquebus completely.)



Successful Discharge: The firearm operates as designed, and the attack proceeds normally.
Wobble: The bullet bounces around in the barrel and veers off course as it exits. It ends up in a square adjacent to the target, determined by throwing a d8, and makes an attack roll at +0 against whatever creature occupies that square. If nothing occupies that square, the bullet continues on in a straight line for d10 range increments until it finds something or if not, strikes the ground.
Fizzle: The bullet exits the weapon without enough force to damage anything, falling harmlessly at the shooter's feet. The attack is negated and the firearm must be reloaded before the next shot.
Jam: The bullet fails to exit the barrel, negating the attack. The bullet must be cleared before the weapon may be used again. Attempting to clear the barrel is a full-round action that demands a Dexterity Check against DC 8 for pistols and DC 10 for muskets. Failure expends the action without clearing the weapon for use. A successful check means the firearm is cleared and may be reloaded with the next action. When not under duress, the barrel can be cleared in a minute without making a Dexterity check.
Explosion: The firearm misfires catastrophically and explodes in the shooter's hands. The attack is negated. Muskets and pistols affect the user differently.

Far too complicated. If you want to include the unreliability of early gunpowder, the much-maligned critical failure mechanic would be the best fit. Natural 1 misfires, rolls to confirm. Natural 1 on confirm explodes. Much simpler, no need for a table. A flat -2 or -4 on attack rolls is a much better fit than the wobble mechanic you've come up with.

It's excellent work, but an entirely separate mechanic is excessive.


A firearm ignores any armor bonus provided by armor that does not have the bulletproof modifier. Normal breastplates, half-plates and full plates are bulletproof, unless explicitly stated otherwise. Other suits can be made bulletproof at the cost of 100gp and a -1 modifier to Armor Check Penalties and Maximum Dexterity.

This works well enough, but ignores the chief reason why the heavier guns were used. It's also excessively powerful, as it's a touch attack against the vast majority of targets.

A -2/4/6 to AC (or other suitable value) from armor would give the anti-armour benefits of firearms, weaken pistols, and generally give all three weapons a niche.


A firearm ignores any armor bonus provided by Dexterity unless the target has moved its speed in that round or performed a Total Defense action, or has the uncanny dodge feat.

Far far too powerful. It means that going for a Full Attack is total suicide, epecially for Sneak Attack classes at low level. (SA classes rarely rare armor that's bulletproof under your system as it interferes with their dexterity. Denying them dexterity as well makes things nearly an autohit.) It also makes no sense from a simulationist point of view, as the Dex bonus represents in-square movement making it hard to hit as much as deliberate dodging.

As things are, your guns are just plain too good for adventurers (Even low BAB classes will be able to one-shot PCs at low levels), and too bad at pike and shot tactics (in which the combatants will generally be wearing heavy armor, negating the advantage of firearms.)

awa
2012-08-15, 10:45 PM
remember in the real world a highly skilled bowmen was better then someone armed with a primitive firearm particularly when it comes to rate of fire.

personally i never like the touch attack guns idea. in the real world the massive raw power of animals like say an elephant would ignore armor to a much greater degree then a gun.

edit the game is fairly abstract with combat this much detail is unnecessary guns arnt that different from crossbows that they need this many special rules

Werewhale
2012-08-16, 03:50 PM
Thanks everyone for your replies!


Sun Dwarves: Why is there an attack bonus against undead and golbinoids? Why a dodge bonus against giants? There isn't much relation between undead/goblins, unlike orcs/goblins, and the giants just look more tacked on.
I've been trying to balance the races by switching out abilities, so in this case I just switched out orcs for undead. But you're right, there's a relation between orcs and goblinoids, unlike undead and goblinoids. I think I'll just remove the goblinoids, keeping the undead in. The latter is a fairly expansive group, after all. The AC bonus vs. Giants there just because they are in SRD. I think I'll just remove it, dwarves are fairly powerful anyway.


Songelf: Weapon Proficiency: Rapier would make so much more sense here. There is no orient and they don't come from the orient, so why the katana proficiency?
I must disagree. Katanas, in my opinion, do not necessarily have to be from a Japanese or Chinese or other Eastern culture, but rather just someplace exotic, emphasising the cultural difference from the focus of the setting(which is more European). It also ties in with the fluff of songelves, which is that, as a result of their fear of the insanity-inducing plague, their culture encourages individuals to stick to tradition, find a trade and perfect it. Like the Japanese, they only have access to fairly poor iron, so they invented the same intricate sword-forging techniques to make up for it, resulting in the katana. Furthermore, there is something fitting about monk-like master swordsmen wielding katanas.

On the other hand, I relate rapiers to Renaissance urban culture, wielded by people in puffy shirts in duels. All of which is very far from the culture espoused by the songelves.


Gnome: Wouldn't Weapon Proficiency: Firearm make much more sense than just a +1 to hit? After all, the gnome's favored class (wizard) probably isn't proficient in firearms by default.
A very good point, I may just implement this.


Orcs: My first impression is that your orcs seem more like D&D Hobgoblins. My second is that they just have a hodgepodge of abilities. What is it about them that makes them good with bastard swords and bonuses to thrown weapons? That makes them good swimmers? Immune to gaze attacks?
Good point about the Hobgoblins, but they already have a place in the setting. And they seem to have a hodgepodge of abilities because... well, they kinda have a hodgepodge of abilities:redface:. I had given them the skill bonuses and bastard swords and felt they were uninteresting, so I pretty much tacked on a bunch of stuff to make them more colourful. The Swim bonus is there because their home country has a lot of small lakes, so nearly everyone grows up by a body of water. I was thinking bastard swords were distinctly orcish weapons the same way waraxes are dwarven. The immunity to gaze attacks, bonus to grapple and throwing weapons were tacked on with little thought.

Do you think they are fine as they are without these? If not, can you offer any advice on how I can make them more interesting, such as where to find examples of traits I can give them?



Anathema could work, but unless you spell out for each deity what is anathema to them, you'd likely get players arguing or upset because such-and-such they wanted an anathema bonus against doesn't count.
Yes, I would list anathemas for each deity the same way as each deity has a list of associated domains.


The Anathema thing? I like. A lot.
Yay!


I'm not sure the Ghost Dwarves are really LA:2.

And this should probably be in the Homebrew/World Building Section.
You mean they are more like LA+1, then? Or LA+3?


Firearm rules are pretty much massively elaborate in the system where vast majority of weapons are being handled by like 4 numbers...

Some of this is pretty nicely done, and may feel somehow 'realistic' but it just doesn't seem right all around.

Swords may, chip bend, and so on, spears hafts will break, picks will get stuck in things, lances are broken/dropped after charge, crossbows may misfire when waved around pointlessly...

Giving plenty of additional rules only to firearms just doesn't seem neat.

I agree that some races just seems to have rather random abilities.


Firearms are worthless to anyone with any skill. They might be okay for a mage or peasant to start, but they will be quickly dropped because of the fact that it's impossible to take multiple attacks with them. The game mechanics means that skilled people will prefer less technologically advanced options because they are, overall, more powerful.

This is weird. "Screw the guys with guns, the guy with the bow is the real threat."

This is similar behavior to when I played Silent Hill: Origins and the weapons broke really fast so after a while I said "screw it" and played the game beating most monsters to death with my fists. This is the exact opposite of what should be happening.


Do you want people to use guns or not? If so, you need to craft rules that make guns a better option.
To keep things at least slightly within the bounds of reality, I'd make them mid to late 19th century equivalent, like revolvers and Enfield rifles. That way they can be reloaded fast enough to be of use.
Right now, the rules are sadly rather clunky from a kinaesthetic sense. All those rolls slow down combat and add frustration when that one roll doesn't come up.


[QUOTE=Werewhale;13730527]
Your firearm rules are very mixed. Note that, while I'll be going largely from a simualtionist point of view, I'll be addressing game balance at the same time.

snip

So far, not bad. Only criticism is that muskets of the sort you're suggesting here shouldn't be able to be fired with one hand at all, and should require a rest to avoid penalty. (When the musket was first introduced, it was an extra-heavy weapon deployed almost exclusively against cavalry. Later improvements resulted in the musket of the 18th century that had the same power in a more portable form, replacing the arquebus completely.)

snip

Far too complicated. If you want to include the unreliability of early gunpowder, the much-maligned critical failure mechanic would be the best fit. Natural 1 misfires, rolls to confirm. Natural 1 on confirm explodes. Much simpler, no need for a table. A flat -2 or -4 on attack rolls is a much better fit than the wobble mechanic you've come up with.

It's excellent work, but an entirely separate mechanic is excessive.

snip

This works well enough, but ignores the chief reason why the heavier guns were used. It's also excessively powerful, as it's a touch attack against the vast majority of targets.

A -2/4/6 to AC (or other suitable value) from armor would give the anti-armour benefits of firearms, weaken pistols, and generally give all three weapons a niche.

snip

Far far too powerful. It means that going for a Full Attack is total suicide, epecially for Sneak Attack classes at low level. (SA classes rarely rare armor that's bulletproof under your system as it interferes with their dexterity. Denying them dexterity as well makes things nearly an autohit.) It also makes no sense from a simulationist point of view, as the Dex bonus represents in-square movement making it hard to hit as much as deliberate dodging.

As things are, your guns are just plain too good for adventurers (Even low BAB classes will be able to one-shot PCs at low levels), and too bad at pike and shot tactics (in which the combatants will generally be wearing heavy armor, negating the advantage of firearms.)


remember in the real world a highly skilled bowmen was better then someone armed with a primitive firearm particularly when it comes to rate of fire.

personally i never like the touch attack guns idea. in the real world the massive raw power of animals like say an elephant would ignore armor to a much greater degree then a gun.

edit the game is fairly abstract with combat this much detail is unnecessary guns arnt that different from crossbows that they need this many special rules

Answering the four of you together since you're discussing the same topic.

You've convinced me that these mechanics are just too complicated for play, so I think I'll scrap them entirely and start from scratch. Playability and fun trumps realism. I'll keep the misfire chance just for the mass-produced, less well-crafted guns used by larger military units, while adventurers will be using more delicately made(and expensive) guns that will only explode in their faces on Critical Failures(not a flat 5% chance, but I'm not going to discuss those rules now).

What I want from guns is a sort of force-equalizer. In the hands of the unskilled, they should be more powerful than crossbows and bows, but they don't benefit as much from skill as bows do, especially as characters gain extra attacks.

The -2/-4-/6 to AC from Armor sounds like a nice replacement for armor negation, I might implement that.

I'm going to stick to 16th-century firearms because I want firearms to be a viable option while still allowing for co-existence with more medieval weaponry.

I'll put up a new table later as my pollen allergy is acting up again and I want to curl up and pity myself for awhile. I aim to make guns deal about one dice step more damage than crossbows, as befits their status as martial weapons, and muskets will require a stand for aiming or suffer a -2 or -4 penalty(setting up the stand or removing it will each be a swift action)

I've toyed around with the idea of introducing a homebrew feat giving a gunman with a BAB of +6/11/16 the opportunity to take a penalty to their attack roll in exchange for extra dice of damage(essentially allowing them to make both their attacks in one roll), in order to make them more competitive with regular bows. So far I'm leaning towards scrapping the idea altogether but if you have any opinions about it I'd like to hear them.

Gnoman
2012-08-16, 04:05 PM
One thing you might want to look into is the large number of experimental weapons produced in the early days of the gunpowder era. The early breechloaders, for example, failed primarily because the mettalurgy of the day wasn't able to make barrels strong enough. With things like mithril or adamantine available, that will be less of a problem. If you want it to be.

Werewhale
2012-08-16, 04:19 PM
One thing you might want to look into is the large number of experimental weapons produced in the early days of the gunpowder era. The early breechloaders, for example, failed primarily because the mettalurgy of the day wasn't able to make barrels strong enough. With things like mithril or adamantine available, that will be less of a problem. If you want it to be.

I haven't given thought to adamantine, but mithril does exist, but is very rare. If breechloaded guns can be made from mithril, its value would rise exponentially. Thank you, that's very interesting.