PDA

View Full Version : D&D 3.x Other Mythclad: an over-the-top D&D 3.5 total converstion



NichG
2020-07-23, 07:41 AM
This basically started as theory-craft about alternative ways of doing prestige classes, but I sort of ended up building an entire system around the thing. Mythclad rewrites most of D&D 3.5's systems, to make a broad game which is about sky pirates or delving into Lovecraftian horrors or rebuilding the cosmos in your characters' image or ascending to become a new generation of gods (and possibly a couple other things besides). Pillars of Eternity was a significant mechanical inspiration for some elements of this.

The main premise is that characters are avatars of existing Myths (Mythclad) - the setting equivalent to deities - who can take those myths in new directions as a mechanism by which the Myths change and grow. These Mythclad are all over the place, but many will have stories that get cut short or not go anywhere, while those who build legends around themselves can influence the direction that their patron Myth evolves or even supplant them entirely.

Here's the link (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-Jb-bbEfNNvFsKCroV1ONaJ4umTOTTQ_/view?usp=sharing), before I get too far into descriptions.

The system is intended to produce highly versatile characters, giving multiple ways for any character to obtain that versatility. The Mythic powers are quite open-ended and invoke dramatic editing effects, and can be combined arbitrarily with what the character gets from class levels from 9 base classes (3 martial types, 3 spellcasting types, 3 gadgeteering types, all of which have extensive ability lists), as well as a sort of socketable alternative to prestige classes which are explicitly based on organizational membership, and grant extra abilties at particular character levels when that membership is being socketed. So basically everyone is intended to be Tier 1 regardless of character archetype, and max level characters should be doing things like redefining the nature of reality not just fighting wars. The spell/maneuver/etc lists have been redone from scratch, so some broad things (like Wish) aren't there, but other sometimes broader things have replaced it.

Probably the thing I'm most concerned about in terms of being a big design risk is that I've replaced the standard/move/swift/immediate action framework with an action-point framework designed to be used as an alternative to full attacks and to make for more interesting combo-based gameplay for martials. This means that everyone's action economy has a bit of flex to it - just as you might make multiple strikes in a round, someone else might cast multiple spells, etc. It also means that an exploit to get very high Dexterity for example would do a lot more than in d20. I think I have a rough idea of where the numbers go (expect e.g. 1k damage per round potential from optimized Lv20 characters in the absence of mitigation), and I might tweak that a bit, but if it turns out to be 10 or 100x what I'm expecting I'd rather know before I start running this than after. Monsters definitely need to be written from the ground up for this system, or at least all CRs above 8 or so are going to need to be dropped by a lot.

I'll probably do a campaign in this system with my group starting either late this year or early next year, so I guess I'll see how it runs then.

Glimbur
2020-08-23, 04:28 PM
Action points are interesting. I like how it encourages movement... which is then limited by Engagement from enemies. But not as restrictive as d20 because you can only threaten so many folks... it's an interesting split. Defense action seems pretty terrible.

Capping X stat to Y should reduce number inflation, that's nice.

Ooh, armor hits AP directly. That's interesting. Makes the lightly armored skirmisher versus the heavily armored tank a larger change.

I like the split between maneuvers, spells, and gimmicks. Mana being a daily resource is not my favorite approach, it drives you to make spells bigger because they are more limited but actions are also limited. You're a pretty good designer though so I'm not too concerned.

It's nice to have guidelines for creating new maneuvers/spells/gimmicks but do we need them so early in the document?

It looks like a cool system, I only skimmed the world building but it seemed primed for adventure. And PC's. I'll read more later, just wanted to keep your thread alive.

NichG
2020-08-25, 08:50 PM
Thanks!

With armor and AP, it feels a bit tricky because a few points of AC from heavier armor are very significant early-game (where AP is also scarce) but then in the late game what you can do with AP is probably more valuable than a static AC bonus; however by that point there are various ways you can invest to negate the AP penalty. So that's something to keep an eye on, since it risks falling into the 'feat tax' type of category if it leans too much in some directions.

For maneuver/etc creation things, that's probably more because of an ongoing theme in the campaigns I've run/been in that part of the intended gameplay involves dynamically changing the rules in various ways, and ability creation is the basic form of that. The campaign I'm running currently basically says 'all abilities must be invented during play' but that was a bit much (people forgot to do it), so this tries to keep some of that spirit while providing a hefty list of existing abilities to choose from for players who aren't interested in writing all their own stuff.

Similarly, the X stat to Y modification is a holdover from an old fix following a few campaigns where stacking multiples of either Cha or Wis combined with a more generous suite of ways to invest directly in stats led to a sort of standard operating procedure that everyone had to follow or fall behind. I'm not sure there's actually enough sources of multiple overlapping X stat to Y left in Mythclad for the limit to matter, but it makes it easier for me to say yes if someone wants to invent a feat or ability that swaps around stat influences to support of their character concept.

In terms of daily things, there are some ways to flex the limits on Mana, so they should hopefully not be quite as restrictive as Vancian spell slots. There's definitely a design intent of casters charging up (by storing their slower-generating AP over multiple rounds into a pool with a higher upper limit due to Int/Wis/Cha dependencies) and then firing off a big effect. Also, between sources of Mana Discount, a few ways to make Mana repositories, and one thing in a newer version of this document which lets you set up environmental Mana pools that can contribute 1 or 2 points a round in exchange for gold, I *think* higher level casters should be able to treat at least their lower level spells as more or less at-will at a certain point, or could at least do so in prepared sanctums.

I'm a bit more concerned with the Strategist Gimmicks personally - several are passive, so they don't feel like abilities necessarily, and among the other ones there's a danger of picking a combination of 1/encounter and situational Gimmicks that might leave you looking for things to do even if you technically have a few left that you could fire off. But at least one of my players says it looks playable so it'll probably have to wait to playtesting.