Diet Reality Rewrite: d20 Reality, the CliffsNotes Edition

[Ziegander]

.

http://media.wizards.com/images/magic/daily/features/feature199_arcane.jpg

.

So, yeah, it's been quite a while since I've made any posts about my Rewriting Reality project. Not that I haven't been thinking about it! I've been very busy with my real world job, and game design has had to take a backseat. At the moment, before I return to the lofty essays and brave new worlds of the Rewriting Reality project, I want to refocus my efforts on something a little less grand and a little more readily within my grasp.

The aim of this thread will be to apply the concepts and design goals of the Rewriting Reality project to the existing d20 SRD. To be more precise, that is, I wish to keep almost every rule as is, but to use those rules to design a coherent setting and then expand upon those rules with better and more immersive player options.

At this time, the only things I mean to change are as follows:


Classes. These will designed from the ground up to fit the setting.
Skills. These will be condensed some a la Pathfinder.
Feats. These will be scraped and designed from the ground up to fit the setting and do be much more attractive options.


EVERYTHING else remains exactly as the d20 SRD has set in stone. I do plan to make Skills as important, or at least almost as important, as they would become in my proper Rewriting Reality project and I will be making Spell Points an everyman resource, BUT these are additive rules. So let's begin.

The Setting
We have dozens of magic items, perhaps hundreds. We have all sorts of supernatural special abilities. We have 8 schools of magic, which is important because it says to me that magic is given academic weight, and also there are carriages full of immensely powerful magic spells. Monsters are very diverse and range from mundane Earth animals to superbeings of godlike power. This is an incredibly magical world. There's magic in the bones of the earth and embedded spiritually in the core of the universe that it spins in. There are gods and extraplanar entities and all sorts of aligned, religious mojo cross-mojinating.

My first thought: Get rid of those boring Earthbound animals. This is clearly not the planet Earth, there shouldn't be Baboons or Camels. There should be weird semi-magical versions of such things. Right? And then my next thought is... the Fighter, and mundanes like it, are more akin to NPC classes in a setting like this. If you don't have magic, you have no business adventuring in a world that's literally full to the brink with it. This is a world where I'd expect many Commoners know at least some simple cantrips (and I certainly mean to make this possible with expanded "skill tricks").

So, then, I have to think about: What does society look like in a world that bleeds magic? What does the landscape look like, the plants and trees, etc? How do the smallfolk live? The Elite? These are more difficult and more interesting questions to answer. Before I get to those, let's get that skill list down: Acrobatics, Arcana, Athletics, Bluff, Diplomacy, Dungeoneering, Empathy (Handle Animal + Sense Motive + More), Engineering (Architecture & Engineering + Crafty Stuff + Disable Device), History, Intimidate, Investigate (Search + Detective Stuff), Linguistics, Nature, Perception, Performance Arts (Disguise + Perform), Religion, Ride (+ Vehicle Operation), Sleight of Hand (+ Open Lock), Stealth, Streetwise (Appraise + Knowledge Local + Profession), and Survival (+ Heal).

For me, most, if not all of those "knowledge" skills represent some sort of "magical power." Arcana is obvious, but Religion, being knowledge of divine and extraplanar esoterica should bring some skill with divine magic. Nature should lend itself toward Druid-y, Geomantic powers. Dungeoneering, well dungeons are the purview of Aberrations, right? So there's room for knowledge of forbidden-best-left-forgotten magic there. Engineering? This is where the mundane side can catch up to the magic with some MacGyver + Alchemy **** going on. Linguistics? How about Power Words and a little True Speech? Actual practical usage of spells or spell-esque abilities (not to be confused with spell-like abilities) would be available as skill tricks of such skills, while Spellcraft and Use Magic Device are each handled on a case-by-case basis determined by the type of magic and the associated skill. Does that sound good?

There's already a lot going on here, so I'll just let this sit and simmer for a while and see what people have to say before I dive right in and start writing about plantlife and cosmology and world culture, etc.

[necroon]

I say cut the Knowledges out all together or meld them into skills where they make sense as you have done with the rest of the skills.
Seldom in any sort off (well-made/written) Fantasy advanture does a character go "Aha! Luckily I have a totally unexplained knowledge of how scythe traps work from my career as a baker!".
Have characters know things based on their background. Perhaps have them spend points of some sort? Or maybe use their INT modifier plus half their HD on "Knowledge checks"?
Personally I think a character should be able to find out information without relying on Knowledge skills but that's just my two cents.

[Bezzerker]

I don't see Engineering and Dungeoneering separated along the lines that you do. To me, Engineering is more of the creating of tools and building blocks, while Dungeoneering is how those building blocks fit together to create a structure.

I'd also put the 'knowledge of forbidden-best-left-forgotten magics 'with Arcana. Again, to me, Arcana is all about the pursuit of magical lore both mundane and esoteric. That's more where the Aberrations would be, as not all live inside dungeons. The classic Aboleth lives in Underdark lakes and rivers.

The best approach for what Arcana and Dungeoneering give as 'magical talents' would be, in my mind, the difference between a Sorcerer and a Wizard.

A character with a high Arcana knows magic so well, that he can tap into it with what seems to be little-to-no effort at all, throwing fireballs and lightning bolts with naught but a short word and a flick of the wrist. The exact nature of their magic changes depending on where they are, as different places have different 'flavors' of magic with which to work with.

Whereas a character with Dungeoneering is almost like a scientist in his approach to magic, carefully researching and testing his hypothesis of how magic works. The results of their hours of study are rituals and wands that contain the power to alter Reality as they see fit. The longer set up time for a character's spells is rewarded with more consistent outcomes, as the rituals can convert the surrounding energy into the type required by the spell.

A character with a high Arcana could find a place where the leylines intersect. A character with a high Dungeoneering could build a structure that taps into said leylines.

[erikun]

I generally like the idea behind a Background or Commercial Trade skill, as a skill that can be used for a number of talents that a character would reasonably have but without including dozens of minor skills for each little bit. Things like "Sailor" or "Town Guard" would include skills and interactions that don't make much sense in a Streetwise skill.

Your description of Dungeoneering seems a bit odd. I suppose I could see Dungeoneering including general construction and layout, although I'd likely see a different term in their use - and using it to mean "how buildings are put together" means it makes even less sense for aberrations.

[Ziegander]

I say cut the Knowledges out all together or meld them into skills where they make sense as you have done with the rest of the skills.

That would mean making pretty massive changes to how the SRD rules work and adding loads of skills into other skills in places where they make little if any sense.


Seldom in any sort off (well-made/written) Fantasy advanture does a character go "Aha! Luckily I have a totally unexplained knowledge of how scythe traps work from my career as a baker!".

That argument can be used for any individual skill, really. It's the nature of d20s skill system, and I don't mean to change how it works. Not for this project anyway.


Personally I think a character should be able to find out information without relying on Knowledge skills but that's just my two cents.

I do see where you're going with this, and I agree with the above. Fixing the way Knowledge skills work isn't beyond the purview of this project, and I'll be sure to look into ways of making this type of thing make more sense. Backgrounds aren't something I'll rule out entirely.


I don't see Engineering and Dungeoneering separated along the lines that you do. To me, Engineering is more of the creating of tools and building blocks, while Dungeoneering is how those building blocks fit together to create a structure.

Dungeoneering, as far as the d20 SRD is concerned, deals with knowledge of Aberrations, Caverns, Oozes, and Spelunking. So it's the underworld version of the Nature skill (which in a more sensible set-up would include the underworld, but whatevs, that's d20, this project isn't about changing it overly much).


I generally like the idea behind a Background or Commercial Trade skill, as a skill that can be used for a number of talents that a character would reasonably have but without including dozens of minor skills for each little bit. Things like "Sailor" or "Town Guard" would include skills and interactions that don't make much sense in a Streetwise skill.

You're looking at Profession as a collection of thematic skills and not as a stand-alone skill of its own. Sailor can't be a skill. In order to be a good sailor you've got to have Fair Acrobatic skill, Good Athletic skill, Fair Nature skill, Good Perception skill, and Fair Survival skill. Profession (Sailor), to use the d20 SRD usage of it, does not make you better at such tasks. All it does is provide you a means of income that is based on performing menial tasks upon a boat. The Streetwise skill would be a little more involved than that, but again, it also doesn't need to make you better at skills associated with any profession.


Your description of Dungeoneering seems a bit odd. I suppose I could see Dungeoneering including general construction and layout, although I'd likely see a different term in their use - and using it to mean "how buildings are put together" means it makes even less sense for aberrations.

Dungeoneering has never had anything to do with layouts or construction or knowledge of how building blocks fit together. It has always been about the underdark and aberrations. I don't understand where the confusion comes from. I'm using the term that the d20 SRD has always used for this skill. I could use a different word, but that seemed against the spirit of the project, which is to follow the d20 SRD as closely as I can.

All of that out of the way, I've decided on a few more setting-specific items...

Xorvintaal, the Great Game
A world in which Dragons are at the top of the food chain. They rule all lands of any significance and toy with the mortal races in a constant play for power. The world itself has been shattered by dozens of rebellions against the Dragon Tyrants, covered in deserts and tundras and covered over by all-but-constant storms of savage power. While there are a plethora of magic items, Dragons hoard most of them, and possess a near-monopoly on any of the powerful ones. Magic items of almost any variety are considered priceless Artifacts, and in fact, a keen knowledge of History can help a item-bearer to unlock its Legacy.

[erikun]

You're looking at Profession as a collection of thematic skills and not as a stand-alone skill of its own. Sailor can't be a skill. In order to be a good sailor you've got to have Fair Acrobatic skill, Good Athletic skill, Fair Nature skill, Good Perception skill, and Fair Survival skill. Profession (Sailor), to use the d20 SRD usage of it, does not make you better at such tasks. All it does is provide you a means of income that is based on performing menial tasks upon a boat. The Streetwise skill would be a little more involved than that, but again, it also doesn't need to make you better at skills associated with any profession.
The once concern I have - well, the major one - is that none of those skills provide the ability in things that a sailor should have understanding it: knowledge of shipworthiness, ability to steer a ship, familiarity with docking rules and regulations, and so on.

As long as you're aware of this and don't mind it being gone from the finished project.


Dungeoneering has never had anything to do with layouts or construction or knowledge of how building blocks fit together. It has always been about the underdark and aberrations. I don't understand where the confusion comes from. I'm using the term that the d20 SRD has always used for this skill. I could use a different word, but that seemed against the spirit of the project, which is to follow the d20 SRD as closely as I can.
I'm sorry if I was confusing or didn't state myself clearly.

What I meant is that your definition of Dungeoneering, what your system means by the skill, seems to use it to refer to the construction and design of buildings. My point was that this has little to nothing to do with the D&D used definition of Dungeoneering, and it makes an odd fit with other aspects of the D&D-defined skill.

[Bezzerker]

Dungeoneering, as far as the d20 SRD is concerned, deals with knowledge of Aberrations, Caverns, Oozes, and Spelunking. So it's the underworld version of the Nature skill (which in a more sensible set-up would include the underworld, but whatevs, that's d20, this project isn't about changing it overly much).

Huh, I didn't know that. I just looked up the skill in the SRD and in my copy of Pathfinder, to verify what you said, and you are indeed correct.

This skill was badly named then, in my opinion. The name Dungeoneering implies a wider purview than what is actually given in the skill. A better name for it in my opinion would be Knowledge: Underdark, reflecting your point of this skill being Underdark!Nature.

[Ziegander]

The once concern I have - well, the major one - is that none of those skills provide the ability in things that a sailor should have understanding it: knowledge of shipworthiness, ability to steer a ship, familiarity with docking rules and regulations, and so on.

As long as you're aware of this and don't mind it being gone from the finished project.

I don't mind it being gone, personally, but I think I can salvage a lot of the more interesting and useful aspects of such skills by making a selection of "tricks of the trade" for the Streetwise skill.


What I meant is that your definition of Dungeoneering, what your system means by the skill, seems to use it to refer to the construction and design of buildings. My point was that this has little to nothing to do with the D&D used definition of Dungeoneering, and it makes an odd fit with other aspects of the D&D-defined skill.

I don't get your meaning. I intend for Engineering to cover construction and design, but not Dungeoneering.


Huh, I didn't know that. I just looked up the skill in the SRD and in my copy of Pathfinder, to verify what you said, and you are indeed correct.

This skill was badly named then, in my opinion. The name Dungeoneering implies a wider purview than what is actually given in the skill. A better name for it in my opinion would be Knowledge: Underdark, reflecting your point of this skill being Underdark!Nature.

Yep. Agreed.

Anyway, what do we think about the bare bones setting ideas I put down? About "The Great Game?" I'm particularly happy with the stormy half-desolate world and the way magic items interact both with the world and its economy, but with the History skill on a mechanical level.

[Bezzerker]

Anyway, what do we think about the bare bones setting ideas I put down? About "The Great Game?" I'm particularly happy with the stormy half-desolate world and the way magic items interact both with the world and its economy, but with the History skill on a mechanical level.

I like it. It's a really good starting point, and I like how knowing the History of a particular Magic Item can help unlock its potential.

[erikun]

I don't mind it being gone, personally, but I think I can salvage a lot of the more interesting and useful aspects of such skills by making a selection of "tricks of the trade" for the Streetwise skill.

I don't get your meaning. I intend for Engineering to cover construction and design, but not Dungeoneering.
Alright, I think I was just confused (or perhaps confusing myself) over everything. If you intend for the background/profession skill to be gone, then your skill groups seem to cover pretty much everything I'd expect for a party to run across in the setting.


Yep. Agreed.

Anyway, what do we think about the bare bones setting ideas I put down? About "The Great Game?" I'm particularly happy with the stormy half-desolate world and the way magic items interact both with the world and its economy, but with the History skill on a mechanical level.
It is an interesting concept for a setting. There doesn't seem to be much there beyond "destroyed world" and "dragons run things", though.

I actually think that tying History (or Arcane/Nature/Religion as appropriate) to magic items would be a good mechanic to include in general, depending on how much you want to change magic items from the base D&D concept.

I could think that anything from discovering more abilities (+2 Quarterstaff that radiates a good-aligned aura, History DC 15: +2 Disruption Quarterstaff, History DC 25: +2 Holy Disruption Quarterstaff, History DC 40: +2 Undead-Bane Holy Disruption Quarterstaff) or in using a combination of History + Arcane (for Arcane-based items) to allow character to add magic bonuses and abilities to weapons. The later would mean that anyone with enough knowledge ranks would know how to produce powerful magical items from mundane materials, without forcing a gold sink or feat investment to do so.

Heck, you could just make them setting-specific rules that people are free to adopt as they are interested.

[nonsi]

My first thought: Get rid of those boring Earthbound animals. This is clearly not the planet Earth, there shouldn't be Baboons or Camels. There should be weird semi-magical versions of such things. Right? And then my next thought is... the Fighter, and mundanes like it, are more akin to NPC classes in a setting like this.

No offense, but that sounds just lazy to me and not so far off from starting a story with the climax.
Look, you sure pack a lot of great ideas in your toolkit, but you're rubbing your subscribers of the wonder of discovering magic a step at a time.
I mean, if every schmo can wield magic, than there's nothing special about it. If someone wanted to play a game where everyone has access to all the flashy stuff, they can just play a cyberpunk game.
Plus, you never struck me as someone who'd back away from the challenge of making noncasters count (which we both know is not an impossible task).

[Just to Browse]

I like worlds where everyone is magic. It does not rub me the wrong way.

[subscribed]