[Idea, Brainstorming] Homebrew Testing Gauntlet

[Zaydos]

Preamble/My Reasons: So as a person I like the idea of homebrew, enjoy encouraging it, and want to see it actually get tested so as to be improved upon. To do this we need some way to test it. My first thought, and one I'm already experimenting with, is running a module, twice simultaneously, with parties composed purely of homebrewed characters. This has potential problems (I've never run a module before, I do not know what a good module for these purposes would be, I do not know if there is such a thing, etc), but I felt it was worth trying.

My second thought, and what this thread is about. In its most basic form it's a group of DMs (not demons like I almost typed) each build a bare bones adventure designed to test a party of homebrewed characters and a group of players are gathered to play through these testing adventures.

tl;dr: I like homebrew. I want to see it tested. Here's an idea how.

The Plan: Everything below is subject to change; please offer suggestions as to how to improve upon the plan presented below.

Find X (4?) DMs and 9 players, including the DMs, each willing to make an adventure. A total of 8 homebrew classes will be put forward and each player will play a different one of these classes in each DM's game (exception the DMs will not play in their own games, hence 9 players for 8 classes) and each DM will DM two runs of their adventure simultaneously (each with a 4 person party).

We could technically have multiple of these gauntlets at once if there are enough DMs for it, and enough players.

System: 3.5. One because that's the system that I'm familiar enough with to try and test homebrew for, and because that's the system the lion's share of the homebrew on this site seems to be.

Classes: I'd say all classes should be those designed by people participating in the gauntlet or at least which are observing the gauntlet. This is not about rewarding the DMs running this (though I'm not condemning that idea), but for the practical reason that if the point is to provide playtesting feedback it is most effective if the creators are aware of it and provided information as to how it goes.

Adventure Design: I was thinking 10th level party. And (for what I'd design) something like 2 EL 8 encounters, 3 EL 10, 2 EL 12, and an EL 13 (possibly a single EL 15+ encounter). This is not counting totally non-combat encounters intended to test out of combat utility. I would suggest having some non-combat encounters if you can think of some, or potentially avoidable combat encounters (we need the key, either we can pick the lock, or steal it from the guard beast). I'm going to look over the Same Game Test for some inspiration even though I intend to be doing group encounters.

Other Notes: Pay attention to how a class can perform in non-combat challenges even if another class can out perform it. For example being able to teleport yourself 50-ft might allow you to get around a challenge, but if another party member has the ability to get the entire party around it, or do so in a more (cost) efficient way then you might not actually do it, but the fact that you could have should still be noted.

Closing Notes: So any suggestions, advice, or people who want in on this? Is this even a basically functional idea?

[Fax Celestis]

Definitely interested. I have a plethora of stuff that needs to get tested.

[Adam1949]

This sounds neat, but alas I don't have nearly enough cohesive homebrew to make it possible to test my own.

Still, I wish everyone else good luck and lots of fun!

((Unless there is room for my classes to be worth a shot))

[Erberor]

Great, now I'm going to have to finish my hero class to get in on this. Thanks a lot.

Just kidding. Sounds great!

[Surrealialis]

Hey,

What edition where you planning on running these campaigns in?

[Zaydos]

Hey,

What edition where you planning on running these campaigns in?

3.5 (D&D), will note that somewhere in the OP.

I really ought to have thought about stating that to begin with.

[TheFamilarRaven]

Would it matter if the homebrew classes are base classes or PrC's? Because a level ten party can consist of both.

Or, put another way ... is testing homebrew PrC's included in the goal?

EDIT: Also, I would be down to play and/or DM ... although I have plenty of experience in both. Except maybe DMing a play-by-post game, havn't done that ...

[Adam1949]

Also, important question: would this be a Play-by-Post game, a Skype, Roll20, or what? How would we do this? As, that might change the minds of some people.

[Zaydos]

Would it matter if the homebrew classes are base classes or PrC's? Because a level ten party can consist of both.

Or, put another way ... is testing homebrew PrC's included in the goal?

EDIT: Also, I would be down to play and/or DM ... although I have plenty of experience in both. Except maybe DMing a play-by-post game, havn't done that ...

Both. While base classes was the original idea, the potential to include PrCs was part of why Lv 10 was my first choice.

Also, important question: would this be a Play-by-Post game, a Skype, Roll20, or what? How would we do this? As, that might change the minds of some people.

PbP would be my natural inclination as I haven't done Roll20 and X simultaneous games in skype would be hard to do.

[JoseDeburo]

While I am more familiar with Pathfinder than I am with 3.5 I am still pretty good with 3.5, so I'm interested. I have got a few homebrews of my own if anyone is interested. one of them includes a mass effect 3 class made compatible for this. let me know when this starts

[Zaydos]

Looks like 5 or 6 people expressed interest in this, one specifically stating they'd be willing to DM. Any other interested DMs or any body got any suggestions to improve it?

[TheFamilarRaven]

off the top of my head, i suggest making a note that encounters should contain different monster groups (i.e Undead, magical beast, outsiders etc.), since some classes work better against certain monsters, while others are completely shut down by some groups. ...

On another note, (and I might be getting ahead of myself), is the gauntlet going to be a homebrew adventure, or a published one? I'm guessing homebrew because that'll allow the DM's to control the events and include everything we could want.

But that opens a few other questions. Namely, if it's homebrew, is it going to be the same adventure for each different run, or is a new adventure going to be written every run of the gauntlet? in any case, who designs the adventure? One person, everyone, individual DM's, a group of DM's?

[Belial_the_Leveler]

I am willing to DM.

I got classes I'd like to test.

I have a few small adventure modules for lvl 10 ready.
They're mostly horror-oriented.

My suggestion for testing the homebrew is to get the advice of at least one optimizer for the builds - you'd want to test more for the extreme uses of a class and potential flaws rather than the average ones.

[Vadskye]

I lack the time to play, but I would happily play the role of optimizer if you all decide that is something you want. There is a lot of potentially broken homebrew out there, and it is fun to find the holes.

[AttilaTheGeek]

I'd like to run my Temporalist through the gauntlet or watch someone else play it. It's not a regular martial class, though: its class features are all ways to mess with time. As such, it needs to be perfectly polished, and though I've been working on it for a while, I'm sure it's still got some holes for you to find, Vadskye .

[AkazilliaDeNaro]

I have 4 classes and 4(soon to be 5) monsters that need testing so I'd be willing to join as a player. Also i think (if it wasn't obvious aready) we should do some monster testing for encounters.

Volunteer Player
Class Cooper OR Walking Armory
Unwilling to be Player 9? I'm not sure what this part means.

[Zaydos]

Feeling nauseated at the moment, so some defective thought may be in the following. As such I apologize in advance.

off the top of my head, i suggest making a note that encounters should contain different monster groups (i.e Undead, magical beast, outsiders etc.), since some classes work better against certain monsters, while others are completely shut down by some groups. ...

I am planning to probably through at least 1 single combat, 1 large group combat, 1 swarm, 1 undead encounter, 1 construct encounter, 1 elemental encounter, 1 vermin encounter, and multiple encounters without major immunities (I might very well design the adventure to be performed over multiple days). I am not sure whether it is best to suggest that each person do this or allow for some more natural adventures and to take advantage of the 4 adventures set up (one is undead heavy, one is dealing with hobgoblins, traps, and a dragon, one is an insane mage's arena where you have to face creatures summoned into the room(s) and are each a different type of encounter, one...)

On another note, (and I might be getting ahead of myself), is the gauntlet going to be a homebrew adventure, or a published one? I'm guessing homebrew because that'll allow the DM's to control the events and include everything we could want.

I'd suggest homebrew due to its ability to have things like a mix of encounters that I am not aware of being common in published modules. That said I haven't read many modules and if someone has experience with them and my worry about them is unfounded I'd like to know.

But that opens a few other questions. Namely, if it's homebrew, is it going to be the same adventure for each different run, or is a new adventure going to be written every run of the gauntlet? in any case, who designs the adventure? One person, everyone, individual DM's, a group of DM's?

Well my original plan looks something like this: 4 DMs each make their own adventure. 9 players (including the 4 DMs) are gathered. 8 classes are chosen. Preferably each player will be willing to for the purposes of testing build a character of each of 4 different classes (some means used to determine who gets first pick for each adventure), but not actually necessary. Each DM will run the same adventure twice, dividing the 8 other players into 2 parties of 4 (the same combination 4 classes not being in a party together in any given game). 1 Player kind of gets the short end of the stick as they don't get a class in the game, but hopefully we can find someone willing to play homebrew classes without that bribe (or else I'll just end up volunteering). So each class would be tested in a total of 4 adventures. Hopefully that answered questions.

I am willing to DM.

I got classes I'd like to test.

I have a few small adventure modules for lvl 10 ready.
They're mostly horror-oriented.

My suggestion for testing the homebrew is to get the advice of at least one optimizer for the builds - you'd want to test more for the extreme uses of a class and potential flaws rather than the average ones.

Honestly I'd say you want to test the most common as well as the most extreme; I mean some forms of extreme optimization are classless (commoner optimization), and even with lower tier classes you can get stuff like uberchargers which can easily shatter combats not made with them in mind. That said you want to test for obvious ways to make things extreme, and you do want to get second opinions on builds so asking someone else to look over and advice is probably a good idea.

I have 4 classes and 4(soon to be 5) monsters that need testing so I'd be willing to join as a player. Also i think (if it wasn't obvious aready) we should do some monster testing for encounters.

My reaction would be actually that you probably don't want to do monster testing for this as it introduces an additional unknown variable which can heavily skew results (a badly CR'd monster) but I am also almost incapable of not making some new monster for an adventure so can't really tell others not to. That said I'd be against specifically advising it.

[Belial_the_Leveler]

I couldn't wait and decided to open up my own low-level homebrew playtest campaign;
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showt...php?p=17158193


You guys may want to look it up.

[malonkey1]

I'm pretty interested. I'll have to look back and see what 3.5 homebrew I can dredge up.

EDIT:
Quantum Mage: A fixed-list caster based around the pop-culture ideas of quantum physics
Legion Magus: A summoner/aura user with a spell list focused on battlefield tactics.
Rock God: A Truename Warrior fueled by the power of ROCK.
Remover of Disturbances: A divine invoker geared against undead and aberrations.

[Zaydos]

Alright let's start banging things out.

I'll update the OP with a table once we have a few people but if you are still willing to DM or play this (especially DM) post so in the following format:

What you are volunteering to be.
Class
If you are willing to be "Player 9" (i.e. the person without a class being tested); as a general rule I'd prefer to ask this of a player than a DM, but any suggestions on how to determine it fairly if there are multiple volunteers let me know (if there aren't volunteers I'll do it).

Example:
Volunteer DM
Class: Incarnation
Willing to be Player 9.

For someone who doesn't want to DM it would look more like
Volunteer Player
Class Incarnation
Unwilling to be Player 9.

Sound/look good?

[TheFamilarRaven]

Volunteer DM
class Voidscriptor
Willing To be player 9, cause it sounds like a snappy title

[malonkey1]

Volunteer Player
Class: Quantum Mage
Willing to be "Player 9"

[Kamai]

Man, this would be awesome, but all of my homebrew is Pathfinder.

[Kazyan]

Volunteer Player
Class: Delfire One
Willing to be Player 9

[malonkey1]

Man, this would be awesome, but all of my homebrew is Pathfinder.

It wouldn't be too hard to backport to 3.5. The later WotC books started to get into the Pathfinder class paradigm (e.g. Factotum).

[Zaydos]

Man, this would be awesome, but all of my homebrew is Pathfinder.

It wouldn't be too hard to backport to 3.5. The later WotC books started to get into the Pathfinder class paradigm (e.g. Factotum).

Most everything is convertible one way to the other. If people wanted we could do something like 3 3.5 adventurers and a PF one to see how the change in feats, skills, races, and combat maneuvers affect the class.