Results 211 to 240 of 323
-
2017-03-20, 10:07 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2006
- Location
- Pittsburgh, PA
- Gender
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
Uhh... fumbles are terrible in anything but a pure slapstick comedy game and should die in a fire. They're not worth including in any way, shape, or form in a game of epic fantasy and larger-than-life heroes, MUCH LESS when you wind up adding mechanics and slowing down the game to add them.
Hill Giant Games
I make indie gaming books for you!Spoiler
STaRS: A non-narrativeist, generic rules-light system.
Grod's Guide to Greatness, 2e: A big book of player options for 5e.
Grod's Grimoire of the Grotesque: An even bigger book of variant and expanded rules for 5e.
Giants and Graveyards: My collected 3.5 class fixes and more.
-
2017-03-20, 10:24 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
YMMV.
I have a positive experience where it comes to fumbles.
If the DM does all the fumble rolls (a-synchronously) w/o nagging the players about every roll and just tells the players about fumble outcomes when they occure, "slowing down the game" is not really a factor.
"slowing down the game" is a factor only if the players argue.
-
2017-03-21, 08:54 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2006
- Location
- Wyoming
- Gender
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
One of the greatest things about table top gaming is you can adapt it to fit your group. I'm a firm believer in changing rules if they don't fit with with your style. Our group rarely plays high level characters (and we consider anything over 6th level high level) and I don't mind consulting charts. I started in the 70's with first edition, we used lots of charts back then. The goal is for everyone to have fun, and if that's happening, you're doing it right.
What is best in life? The open steppe, fleet horse, falcons at your wrist, and the wind in your hair.
-
2017-03-21, 11:19 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
If you have something that's handled by consulting charts and you can achieve the same result w/o consulting charts, then you've made an improvement with no drawbacks.
You have to admit that THAC-0 was an improvement over the BECMI hit chart. I myself came up with that solution (which stuck) long before we've examined AD&D.
I get what Grod is saying.
The reason why the majority of fumble rules pose a downgrade is because of random numbered percentage distribution of arbitrary collections of outcomes.
Having to consult a chart every time a fumble occurs adds a lot of gametime loss.
The solution I was looking for had to be something that's:
1. Easily memorized.
2. Makes sense in scope of scenarios.
3. Easy to implement w/o gameflow "context switch".
If one was to expand my proposal, the maximum I'd go for would be to use a d10 where:
1-2: Hit an adjacent square (left/right of target, or self).
3-4: Drop weapon
5-6: Rendered prone
7: Hit an adjacent square + Drop weapon (2 separate saves)
8: Hit an adjacent square + Rendered prone (2 separate saves)
9. Drop weapon + Rendered prone (2 separate saves)
10. All three (3 separate saves)
The above is easily memorizable w/o a chart.
I chose not to add more results because they're not really needed.
Example:
- Taking a hit or a serious hit depends on the damage rolled.
- Becoming stunned/dazed is not a realistic scenario of fumbling where adrenaline is involved.
And yes. Even the above rule would slow down combat somewhat, in situations where you fight a single Boss enemy and you wanna roll all attacks at once at once. I'm not a fan of rolling all attacks at once, so that's not an issue for me.
-
2017-03-22, 08:18 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2006
- Location
- Pittsburgh, PA
- Gender
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
The most important fumble rule, if you must use them? They only apply on the first attack roll you make each turn-- otherwise you get the situation where a high-level character (making lots of attacks each round) fumbles more than a low-level one. Also, the "1-3" condition means your fumble rules fail the target practice test-- if a hundred warrior stand in line and roll attacks against dummies for an hour, you'll have significant casualties.
Hill Giant Games
I make indie gaming books for you!Spoiler
STaRS: A non-narrativeist, generic rules-light system.
Grod's Guide to Greatness, 2e: A big book of player options for 5e.
Grod's Grimoire of the Grotesque: An even bigger book of variant and expanded rules for 5e.
Giants and Graveyards: My collected 3.5 class fixes and more.
-
2017-03-22, 10:30 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
That observation hasen't eluded me.
That's one of many reasons why in this system a score of 1 on a d20 roll is not an auto fail. This means that once a character has a total modifier of +14 on the Ref save (the save DC is 15), that character is effectively immune to fumbles (in the vein of "Yes, I'm that awesome").
Also, notice that self inflicted injury only occurs in about 1 of 6 fumbles (1/3 of 5/10 probability) - if you fail your save. In practice, no more than 1 in about 200 attacks - even at low levels. That's not very often.
As for attacking dummies - in such case I'd let it slide and skip fumble checks........ or - in the name of common sense - make a separate check for 01 on a d% roll (dummies don't fight back, so you're not busy defending yourself).Last edited by nonsi; 2017-03-22 at 10:31 AM.
-
2017-03-22, 08:50 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2010
- Location
- Rocket City
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
Mechanics should reflect flavor. Always.
Journey: The journey of a thousand steps begins beneath your feet... (WIP)
-
2017-03-22, 09:45 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2005
- Location
- In the playground
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
Preface: I don't think I've ever put in as much work into a single project as you probably did with this thread. That's a lot of dedication imo.
Straight to the warrior:
Weapon and Armor Proficiency
A fighter is proficient with all simple and martial weapons and with all armor (heavy, medium, and light) and shields (including tower shields).Weapon and Armor Proficiency
A barbarian is proficient with all simple and martial weapons, light armor, medium armor, and shields (except tower shields).Weapons and armor proficiencies: Warriors are proficient with all simple and martial weapons . Theyre also proficient with medium armor and shields. Also, for each 3 Warrior levels, a warrior gains a bonus proficiency with an exotic weapon of his choice.
proficiencies -> proficiency
"martial weapons ." -> "martial weapons."
Rule stuff:
Unless you intended them not to be proficient with light armor, you may want to use the barbarian or fighter as a template.
Combat Threat Supremacy
The warrior can slay his foes with awe-inspiring ease. Whenever the warrior makes an AoO, it is treated as if against a helpless foe (Coup de Grace).
I see the skills and 4 skill points, but how good is this warrior outside of combat? Is it meant to be not good outside of combat? Is it more of a "If you're in a political campaign you might want to pick something else." sort of deal?
That's all my commentary for now.
EDIT: Under Warcraft, the table has an issue "Minimum Level + Other Requirements[/center]".Last edited by gooddragon1; 2017-03-22 at 09:49 PM.
There is no emotion more useless in life than hate.
-
2017-03-23, 06:31 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2015
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
Not sure if this is finished or not yet, but I'll give my opinion. I didn't read all of it, honestly, I just skimmed through. I think its really admirable what you did, some classes really needed some love. Honestly though, I still think I'd rather stick with regular 3.5. Magic has always been more powerful than the sword and always will be. Magic is something we don't have IRL and so its the imagination of people coming to life.
I think the magic item reliance especially for Fighters and Rangers and other weapon classes is not only fine, but also, realistic. In real life, a Dragon that is a few hundred feet long is going to weigh hundreds of thousands of pounds, perhaps millions. One swipe or stomp would literally crush a Fighter and the armor he's wearing like you see with that hydraulic press channel on youtube. Even if the armor was made of a material strong enough to not be crushed, your body would not survive the force of the hit. So it stands to reason he would need enchanted everything to go toe to toe with a creature like that.
I realize this is d&d, suspend disbelief, but there is simply no reason why any fighter, even like 40th level, with no gear, has any business taking on dragons or demons. Its like a wizard not memorizing spells, you aren't bringing the right tools for the job. Most encounters in D&D are designed for a party of 4 people, and I don't think 4 20th level fighters are gonna have much fun against the great wyrm X dragon. In fact I'd say if you had a proper DM playing that dragon to 100% of its ability, 10/10 times they would lose. A pit fiend could simply teleport around them and throw fireballs and its at will SLA's until the fighters die or give up. Their classes are naturally limited by what a person can do which is admittedly not much in the scope of D&D. Even if you pick a powerful race you are still limiting it to what real life people can do bar acts of extreme strength and agility. I'd be fine with lower tier class characters like 4th and 5th tier going gestalt to something with a bit of utility if there was a mage and a cleric in the party.Last edited by SecretlyaFish; 2017-03-23 at 06:40 AM.
-
2017-03-23, 07:53 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2005
- Location
- In the playground
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
I have one response to that:
Spoiler: Saitama
SaitamaLast edited by gooddragon1; 2017-03-23 at 07:53 AM.
There is no emotion more useless in life than hate.
-
2017-03-23, 08:20 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2006
- Location
- Pittsburgh, PA
- Gender
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
This is a perfect example of the Guy at the Gym Fallacy: if a real-life human can't do it, neither can a fantasy character, no matter how high level. And while it's a fine idea, D&D is not the place for it. D&D is the level based game. You don't just go zero-to-hero, you go zero-to-demigod. Forget what casters get to do; by monster CRs alone, a high-level character is supposed to be fighting titans, demon lords, elder dragons, and world-devouring engines of destruction. You've passed "adventure" and entered "myth," and your character's capabilities should match that. A 20th level Fighter isn't Conan, they're Hercules, or Beowulf, or Cϊ Chulainn, or Rama.
Hill Giant Games
I make indie gaming books for you!Spoiler
STaRS: A non-narrativeist, generic rules-light system.
Grod's Guide to Greatness, 2e: A big book of player options for 5e.
Grod's Grimoire of the Grotesque: An even bigger book of variant and expanded rules for 5e.
Giants and Graveyards: My collected 3.5 class fixes and more.
-
2017-03-23, 09:29 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2015
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
Thanks for showing me that! I know from my own experience that wanting to play primarily magic classes usually comes from what I wish I had/lack in real life, so I'll always be biased. Its a pretty interesting phenomenon, with the characters people create in either D&D or video games, and you can of course read too much into it but, there's also some truth to it quite often as well. I really enjoyed reading that, and although I still think its sort of a valid point, it did change my opinion on it. Its a fastasy game where your wildest fantasies should be able to come true. I do think for the most part, I was wrong especially as it pertains to D&D, and I happy that you changed my opinion. Thanks very much Grod!
-
2017-03-23, 03:56 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
TBH, as far as hombrewing goes, I don't think anyone ever has
Suggestion accepted.
Fullcasters are neigh unreachable at those levels.
Monks hardly ever provoke at high levels.
Dragon evolutionist and Netherhost are way more powerful and possess fantastic Fort saves. Couple that with the crit-substitution rules and it's suddenly a lot less impressive.
Staying true to the path of a true warrior for 19 levels and investing 3 slots of one of the Warrior's more valuable assets - I say let him have his glory.
With a greater starting skill pool, an ability increase at each and every level and retroactive skill points accumulation, any character can be almost as skillful as you'd want them to be.
Fixed. Thanks.
-
2017-03-23, 04:00 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
Not even close. You should've read that line to the end.
1. D&D has never dealt with training rules. No point in starting now.
2. Training is done in a controlled environment, using safety precautions. That's why training accidents are relatively rare (thousands of soldiers training every day, and yet a fatality occurs only once every few months).
-
2017-03-24, 06:48 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2010
- Location
- Rocket City
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
I read it.
I was mocking you for wanting fumble rules in, but then saying you wouldn't use those fumble rules in a situation where it was demonstrated they would lead to utter fail.
At 20th level, the wizard casts wish... and the fighter still has a 1-in-20 chance of throwing his sword around like a bumbling idiot. Oh wait, but they get a Reflex save... yeah, because what d20 needs is more rolls made during combat.Mechanics should reflect flavor. Always.
Journey: The journey of a thousand steps begins beneath your feet... (WIP)
-
2017-03-24, 11:57 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
Oh, I see the root of the problem now. Utter fail was never meant to be viable.
A short time after deciding to add fumble rules I also decided that the Warrior should have good Ref saves. In my mind it already had long ago. It's just something that fell through the cracks.
This would practically guarantee that no later than 13th level a warrior becomes immune to fumbles, taking Combat Focus into account (assuming no 13th level warrior in this system is gonna have Dex lower than 14... and even if so, it's inevitable that they'd get there by level 16). And if a save is an auto-success, no point rolling it.
Problem fixed.
I also made the necessary clarifications in the Fumble rules.Last edited by nonsi; 2017-03-25 at 12:07 AM.
-
2017-03-25, 06:52 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2010
- Location
- Rocket City
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
Mechanics should reflect flavor. Always.
Journey: The journey of a thousand steps begins beneath your feet... (WIP)
-
2017-03-26, 02:52 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2012
- Location
- In the Playground, duh.
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
The main problems with fumble rules are that they make the weakest characters (martial classes) even weaker, they happen unrealistically often (I'm not a trained soldier let alone an accomplished world-saving hero, but I don't think I've ever dropped my weapon, tripped or worse hit myself during a fencing match - given that I should fail the reflex save most of the time, this should happen about one time in 30-35) and they can make attacking deadlier than, or almost as deadly as, being attacked. Oh, and they make the players feel really dumb whether they suffer them, their ally suffers them and accidentally hits them, or even if an enemy suffers them which cheapens the encounter. They're not realistic, they're not balanced, and they're not fun to have happen to you, not fun to have happen to your opponents, and not fun to have happen to anyone else either.
Also, breaking your expensive bow or crossbow is no fun.
To consider how realistic fumbles are, grab a pillow and have a pillow-fight with someone. Estimate how many attacks you each made, and then count how many times you dropped your pillows, accidentally whacked yourself, or tripped over (or all three at once!) during the fight, compared to how many times you hit. Chances are you did all those put together about once at most, and I don't think you're proficient with a pillow (or anything much else) let alone someone with real PC class levels (or any other kind of level with high reflex).
Also, if someone accidentally threw a maul 20 feet I'd be more impressed than anything else. Especially if they also managed to attack someone north of them, hit someone south-west of them, throw it to the south-east, and fall prone all at once. Oh, and tell me, does the enemy to the south-west get to make an attack of opportunity against someone who's clearly opened himself up to attack before or after he gets clocked in the face with 20 lbs of giant hammer?Last edited by Jormengand; 2017-03-26 at 02:56 PM.
-
2017-03-26, 03:20 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
1. If it's Limited Wish in specific that bothers you, notice that "Spell Tweaks" spoiler in post #4 says it's an 8th level spell now.
2. With Dex +5, fumble immunity is available to warriors at 8th level, and ability increase at each level makes this task reasonably obtainable if it's important enough for you.
3. If one finds it unreasonable for other classes not to have such benefit by 10th level or so, they can lower the save DC vs. fumble to 12. This would mean that most noncasters would overcome that issue midway after their transition from gritty to heroic (with warriors getting there at 6th with Dex +4, and other good-Refs having the option of getting there by 8th... sooner with Cat's Grace and other modifiers). Does that seem more reasonable to you?
-
2017-03-26, 03:53 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
Agreed. That's why my suggestion at #3 above is really starting to appeal to me. I believe that one takes care of this issue.
Controlled contests in an optimal environment are no measuring tools for RL fights 1-on-1 (or many to many) to the death.
- Any hit from your opponent could mean the end of your life. Meaning you're very busy avoiding getting hit.
- The above means that you're doing your very best to beat your opponent to the punch.
- Tension doesn't help with accuracy and motion control.
- The terrain is unfamiliar more often than not. Definitely not tailor-made for optimal mobility and zero obstacles.
- Most life and death conflicts don't occur after you've rested adequately and made proper warm-up stretches.
Not really. about 1 in 40 attacks you do something that doesn't advance your goals. That's a bit far from "almost as deadly as".
If it ain't fun for you - don't use it. End of discussion.
Even though an overhaul is one big mass (or mess ) of optional rules, I specifically tagged fumble rules as optional, knowing only too well that they're not for everyone.
Choosing pillowfights was a poor choice.
If you could find a coloring material that's transferred by contact but not by shaking the object, you'd be surprised how many marks from your own pillow end up on you... and I'm not even taking stains on your arms into account.
For someone who's both strong enough and proficient to use one efficiently, that wouldn't surprise me one bit. Throwing 15 ponds 6 meters is hardly impressive. I could do that w/o even moving my feet, and I'm just a bit stronger than the average person.
1. 6 seconds are a long time for someone that can attack twice in a given combat turn with an attack sequence.
2. D&D doesn't have facing per core rules, because it's unrealistic that you wouldn't change your facing as you move on the battlefield.
Good point. My answer would probably be "after", since fumbles pose unexpected results and you could only notice the opening after the fashion.
-
2017-03-27, 02:51 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2012
- Location
- In the Playground, duh.
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
I don't think I've ever punched myself or knocked myself prone in a spontaneous fight either.
Not really. about 1 in 40 attacks you do something that doesn't advance your goals. That's a bit far from "almost as deadly as".
If it ain't fun for you - don't use it. End of discussion.
Even though an overhaul is one big mass (or mess ) of optional rules, I specifically tagged fumble rules as optional, knowing only too well that they're not for everyone.
Choosing pillowfights was a poor choice.
If you could find a coloring material that's transferred by contact but not by shaking the object, you'd be surprised how many marks from your own pillow end up on you... and I'm not even taking stains on your arms into account.
For someone who's both strong enough and proficient to use one efficiently, that wouldn't surprise me one bit. Throwing 15 ponds 6 meters is hardly impressive. I could do that w/o even moving my feet, and I'm just a bit stronger than the average person.
1. 6 seconds are a long time for someone that can attack twice in a given combat turn with an attack sequence.
2. D&D doesn't have facing per core rules, because it's unrealistic that you wouldn't change your facing as you move on the battlefield.
Good point. My answer would probably be "after", since fumbles pose unexpected results and you could only notice the opening after the fashion.
-
2017-03-27, 10:23 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
Pardon the 3rd degree, but what's your background in MMA / street fighting / fighting for your life?
Do you realize just how much fencing duels in competitions differ from any of the above?
So, about 1 in 40 attacks is almost as deadly to the attacker as being attacked. I'm good with that.
I remember quite a few fumbles in MMA.
I also remember several fubles in the movies.
I've seen my share of fumbles in Karate competitions (I should know, my 15 year old son is a Karate black belt, with a wall filled with trophies).
My guess is that any DM that would abopt my proposed fumble rules have already made up their minds adopting some kind of fumble rules.
At the very least, no damage is done. More in the direction of damage control and for some an actual improvement.
Inappropriate example, methinks.
The majority of weapons (or "weapons", in the case of pillows) are not pole weapons and are not designed for utilization from parts other than their intended handle.
Pole weapons have other limitations and utilization issues to take into consideration.
Again. Although I'm stronger than the average person, I'm not exceptionally stronger.
20 feet is approximately 6 meters. I can throw a sledge hammer roughly 13 meters.
I'm assuming that weapons in the magnitude of sledge hammers were wielded in battle only by warriors who were significantly stronger than myself.
So yes. 6 meters don't seem outrageous to me.
Now that you mentioned it, when I think of it, an opponent that takes a hit that results in a fumble is not entitled to an AoO vs. the attacker. After all, taking a hit breaks your rhythm.Last edited by nonsi; 2017-03-28 at 08:55 AM.
-
2017-04-07, 05:08 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2008
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
I love this post! It might get me back into playing after a 10 year hiatus (haven't played past 3.5).
My comments on the debates so far:
1. fumbles: while I don't like them, it seems like the probability is over-estimated by those objecting, and not really worth fighting over.
1.a. Judging by the most recent OoTS strips, fumbles clearly have a place in dramatic storytelling, and this seems like a fair enough way to incorporate them unless it simply being a DM-issued plot point without any roll.
1.b. I strongly like the idea of only the first or final attack being subject to fumble rules.
1.c. If warriors are subject to fumbles, then so should magic-users (see #10 below), which fits perfectly with the strain system.
2. Guy at the Gym fallacy: I think the easiest way to judge 'is it possible in our world?' is the monk speed bonus. A 6th level monk is fundamentally magic-free, and with the run feat, has a speed of 28mph (50*5=250 per 6 seconds) while carrying a light load of 58lb@str 14. Clearly 6th level is beyond the realm of mortals, and so anything beyond 5th level is in the realm of Hercules, Thor, etc. If you are killing supernatural beasts, that magical energy, translated as XP, infuses into the character, so even the 100% mundane warrior is quite supernatural.
3. Government vs Adventurer power: I see no reason why power can't sit behind the scene and help the noble class provide the stability. The higher levels get political protection by keeping the status quo of the king's lineage or power structure intact. I think the disparate power levels could be addressed better by the level of the masses:
3.a. getting through each season counts as ECL1. Therefore, the farmer that survives 35 years plateaus around level 4-5 before the xp returns do not help advance further.
3.b. If that farm is in a difficult area, swamplands, frequent attacks, call it ECL3-5 per year, plateaus around 6. If most people that survive to their 50s (few) are level 6, then it makes killing a kingdom at level 10 sound much more ridiculous.
3.c. http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Working..._Variant_Rule) is a different reference, more applicable to all professions, is more generous than the above, and can be extended to PC gains during downtime.
4. Everything you've said about prestige classes is accurate. I would argue that you are going too far to accommodate these arguments of "every PrC is replicable," though.
4.a. Anything that doesn't fit within the bounds of these limits should be done by character goals: each player gives the DM a list of 3+ things that they are trying to accomplish throughout the campaign that they are working on in their offtime.
4.b. These can be sparks for in-game ideas, quests, reward with feats, etc. The DM can then give periodic hints, possible things that could be done that could lead down that road. This restores the wonder that is lost with clearly delineated prestige classes, similar to the final fantasy argument about PrC.
4.c. The PC would write the desired benefit of the feat, and the feat(s)/skill points/GP/class abilities that will be committed to getting this effect. It would be up to the dm to re-write for balance and flavor. The same as researching a new spell, there would be a chance of failure determined by DM (especially if OP), but all committed feats/abilities would be released.
------------
My thoughts on the rest of your works:
5. avoiding death by damage: take random ability score damage to avoid excess damage that would drop you to "dying" or "death." This represents the heroic ability to take major wounds. Example: with 4hp left, you take 10 damage. Instead of the dying condition, would go to 0 (does this count as disabled), roll d6=1, and take 6 points of str damage. If taking another 10 damage, would take half (rounded down) to HP and the rest to another stat.
5.a. This would not apply to minions, but could be used to have bosses try to flee.
5.b. I don't know whether it would be worth letting the player decide how the damage would be split.
5.c. This would recover at one point per day, or doubled with a heal check
6. protection from death effects: All the classes seem to start getting insta-kill abilities between 15-20. I think it would be nice to have some abilities to counteract that: warrior 15, monk 15, rogue 17, netherhost 12, witch 13, etc: if you fail any save vs death, you instead take 3 ability score damage to all 6 stats. At the start of your next turn, roll again vs the same save or be staggered and only be able to take one move action per round for 24h.
6.a.This ability drain does not recover on its own and can only be reversed with a restoration-type spell (per point) or a successful heal check vs the original save dc. (1 stat per day)
6.b. only Regenerate or stronger magic can fully recover all stats. heightened to 8th level restores 2 points in one day, heightened to 9th level restores 3 in one day.
6.c Does 3 points sound like enough? would a d6 or something else be better? I would want to balance the significance of the damage happening once vs. multiple attacks in the same manner, which would get harder to resist.
7. it seems like you left a sentence out of "fractional saves" how do saves stack when multiclassing? would giving save values based on the racial 1HD fix this?
8. ability score damage: revert to 3.5e rules for unconsciousness vs death. I think it's a nice flavor that different ability scores result in different conditions.
9. ability score advancement: can you clarify what "you cannot push your racial ability-score limits faster than +1 per 4 class levels via level-progression alone." does that mean the scores penalized can't go up as fast?
10. strain modification: you can preemptively deal ability score damage to yourself to add to your strain save. roll 1d6 to determine the affected stat, then choose a number of d6. Subtract the result from the affected stat and add that number to your strain save. The damage does not occur until completion of the spell and wild magic effects. If you beat the DC by 5, you can choose to manifest a wild magic effect along with the successful spell. For every 5 points you beat the DC by, roll again, then choose which result happens.
10.a. feat: wild magic attunement: by taking this feat, you can choose to use strain modification after rolling but before resulting success/failure. This causes the strain gained to increase by 1 per die added.
10.b. wild magic: If the strain save is successful, the Spellcaster casts the spell as normal. If the save is failed, the spell can instead cause wild magic effects. Roll a d20, if this is less than (strain-tolerance), it causes unintended damage to the fabric of reality, see http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Wild_Ma..._Variant_Rule) . If greater, the spell fizzles with no effect and the Spellcaster takes damage equal to the spell's strain-toll.
10.c the ability score damage recovers at 1 point per day for all stats simultaneously, but cannot be sped up by any magical means. A successful heal check (with a + synergy bonus/spellcraft 5) vs (10+CL+highest SL) increases this to 2.
11. strain cost: I would adjust the cost downwards so lv0-1 cost 0 sooner and lv3 costs 0 later. The rest of the chart is beautiful. example for full caster:
Spoiler: strainCaster <------- Strain Cost by SL ------->
Level 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
================================================== ===============================
1 4 7 - - - - - - - -
2 3 6 - - - - - - - -
3 3 6 7 - - - - - - -
4 2 5 6 - - - - - - -
5 2 5 6 7 - - - - - -
6 1 4 5 6 - - - - - -
7 0 4 5 6 8 - - - - -
8 0 3 4 5 7 - - - - -
9 0 3 4 5 7 8 - - - -
10 0 2 3 4 6 7 - - - -
11 0 1 3 4 6 7 8 - - -
12 0 0 2 3 5 6 7 - - -
13 0 0 2 3 5 6 7 9 - -
14 0 0 1 2 4 5 6 8 - -
15 0 0 1 2 4 5 6 8 9 -
16 0 0 0 1 3 4 5 7 8 -
17 0 0 0 1 3 4 5 7 8 9
18 0 0 0 0 2 3 4 6 7 8
19 0 0 0 0 2 3 4 6 7 8
20 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 5 6 7
12. Warrior: I see no reason why combat focus could be re-activated in the same combat if voluntarily expended.
13. Druid: Resident of the elemental planes: A druid has a total number of *weekly* uses of this ability equal to his Wis-bonus (minimum 1).
Essence of eternity: The body reforms in the wild shape most commonly used. Though retaining his int/wis/cha, does not remember his true nature until 1d20 days, although contact with an ally can revert this. Contact with an enemy will let him remember his true form if making a will save with DC=10 + the enemy's character level. If slain in this animal form, he is permanently and irreversibly unable to take this animal form again, but still returns, as above, as a new animal form.
14. have you thought about rules for flaws and accordant benefits? like taking a flaw gives an extra feat?
-
2017-04-08, 03:08 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
.
Since I'm not going to take active part in an RPG anytime soon, my efforts are driven mostly by intellectual curiosity, so that's about the best news I can get when it comes to this project every time that it is put to actual practical use.
Use it if it works for you.
The reason I wouldn't, is because I view iteratives as more than just additional swings, but rather each additional attack is comprised of multiple actions. In my view, iteratives suffering attack penalties means that iteratives also represent the ability to find more combat opportunities than unexperienced characters.
This means that I wouldn't be able to rationalize such change, and I don't incorporate rules I can't justify (within the rationale of the game system).
I'm good with this analysis... to a point as long as no character becomes so powerful as to make threats trivial.
I have no quarrels with this approach. I'm just not interested in downtime-level-progression enough to formulate progression rules over it.
I don't remember ever using a term that could be interpreted as "every PrC is replicable". Not as is anyway.
I did say that every character concept is viable... except maybe the intentionally excluded quintet: Apostle of Peace, Dweomerkeeper, Hathran, Iot7fV and Planar Shepherd. The other 3e character concepts I've encountered are all acceptable AFAICT. See also my reply for #6 for further details.
I also didn't cover PF's Alchemist or Gunslinger. The former is a sort of mad scientist and the latter involves firearms both not very fantasy oriented in my view.
Given such things involve personal taste, I choose to leave such matters for each party to figure out.
I believe that everything in this project that involves feats provides a solid enough measuring tool for what feats should allow one to accomplish. What people bring on their own is on them to assess and game-test. No guidelines I'd add can replace common sense and evaluation of how things function until they're tested.
------------
I wonder if you noticed that the HP rules already grant a lot of lasting power to begin with both in terms of initial HP and how far below ZERO you can drop before you're out... and any 1st level PC could go down to at least -2 and still auto-stabilized more with level progression.
I'm a bit hesitant in applying additional hard to memorize and hard to justify rules for increasing survivability even further than that. And I want there to still be a real and tangible threat of actually dying. The official game is a bit too gritty for my taste, but I still want to keep it gritty to a point.
I went a long way for granting all classes far better intrinsic defenses/resistances/immunities than the official classes.
Add to that:
- The improved save feats (Great Fort/Iron Will/Lightning Ref)
- Ability increase with each level progression
- The ability to purchase even further ability increase via feats
- The ability for each character with some RP and hard work for some to acquire (Sp) and (Su) abilities
The overall pictures is that it's a lot less trivial to insta-kill high level characters.
The above offset Char-op strategies and high dependence of gear with a bit of extra.
On top of that, a greater percentage of the classes has the ability to recover others that have fallen.
I'm concerned that adopting your suggestion would totally trivialize threats at high levels and reduce them to mere (hardly inconvenient) daily bumps.
Actually, "Fractional" refers to them both, but I rephrased as you suggested to prevent that question in the future.
ZERO level PCs have 1 racial HD and no save modifiers.
Monsters come with their save stats.
I haven't really thought about saves for PCs with extra racial HD. Probably according to their type, minus the initial 1 HD (in the name of simplicity for most PCs). I don't remember suggesting races with additional racial HD, so that one seems less relevant ATM.
Not sure what you're saying here and I prefer not to guess.
Simple. Each race has a maximum score for each ability at 1st level (most being 18, with some higher or lower, as specified for each race). That maximum can be pushed up by +1 for each 4 HD the character attains.
Basically, overtaxing is an undesirable predicament. Something that you have a shot at attempting and is mostly luck-based. I wouldn't want to encourage it.
Also, you directed me here from #1 and I don't really see what this has to do with fumbles.
I have this real issue. I'm a rationalist (can't help it).
This renders only one approach to wild magic from my standpoint, and makes the use of wild magic absolutely game-impractical outside of software-driven RPG.
It goes like this:
Wild magic (wild surges that is) is, well, wild. You can't gain any level of control over it.
The effects of wild magic can be anything that's within the scope of the SL used.
This means that a random SL is chosen between ZERO and the spell's actual level.
Next, a random spell is chosen from the entire spell list of that level for the given class (dozens of spells, if not hundreds).
Spell effects with personal range would target the caster.
Spell effects with range of touch would affect the caster unless a touch spell was cast and directed toward another, in which case the target is affected.
Spell effects with greater ranges fire off to one of 8 possible directions at random (or one of 6, if you happen to be using a hex grid). (or 9 and 7 respectively, if the caster is a potential target).
Ranged spells that are usually directed at specific targets have 50% miss chances (because the caster is not consciously directing them).
I'm guessing you can tell by now why I never touched wild magic in this project.
I prefer even progression, and 9th level is ok by me for gaining unlimited access to cantrips/orisons.
But still, I see nothing problematic with your suggestion. Use it if it suits you.
And FYI if you wrap your suggested table in a [CODE] [/CODE] block, it will align as you'd expected.
Spoiler: strain
Code:Caster <------- Strain Cost by SL -------> Level 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ================================================================================= 1 4 7 - - - - - - - - 2 3 6 - - - - - - - - 3 3 6 7 - - - - - - - 4 2 5 6 - - - - - - - 5 2 5 6 7 - - - - - - 6 1 4 5 6 - - - - - - 7 0 4 5 6 8 - - - - - 8 0 3 4 5 7 - - - - - 9 0 3 4 5 7 8 - - - - 10 0 2 3 4 6 7 - - - - 11 0 1 3 4 6 7 8 - - - 12 0 0 2 3 5 6 7 - - - 13 0 0 2 3 5 6 7 9 - - 14 0 0 1 2 4 5 6 8 - - 15 0 0 1 2 4 5 6 8 9 - 16 0 0 0 1 3 4 5 7 8 - 17 0 0 0 1 3 4 5 7 8 9 18 0 0 0 0 2 3 4 6 7 8 19 0 0 0 0 2 3 4 6 7 8 20 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 5 6 7
From my standpoint, because it's unfair that the one class most dedicated to combat tactics would only have one shot per encounter of enhancing its defenses. The Warrior is the one class that endures exclusively by merit of being combat smart this means finding your tactical edge each round anew, prioritizing between offense and defense. That's all the Warrior has beyond character built. I wouldn't take that away.
Ok, I'm fine with that. Changed.
Nice and flavorful. I like it.
The form must be one that's native to the material prime.
This one I don't like.
What I can do to reflect the scenario, is to have the recovery duration elevated to d20 + 20 days, and the DC to 15 + enemy's char-level.
The overhaul does not specify (optional) rules to which I have no suggestions. Use them or not at your own judgement.
.
-
2017-04-25, 11:28 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2005
- Location
- In the playground
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
Dragon Evolutionist
You may need to specify what sort of action the breath weapon requires.
Powerful build: Are they treated as being large if they are medium? Or do they actually become large? If they have powerful build do they become huge? Or do they actually become large right away even though they were normally medium? Or are they treated as huge even though they are medium?
Under wings:
Gliding: Starting at 4th level, A dragon evolutionist can use his wings to glide, negating damage from a fall from any height and allowing 20' of forward travel for every 5 feet of descent. The dragon evolutionist glide at a speed of 30' with average maneuverability. Even if a dragon evolutionist's maneuverability improves, he can't hover while gliding. A dragon evolutionist can't glide while carrying a medium or heavy load.
If a dragon evolutionist becomes unconscious or helpless while in midair, her wings naturally unfurl, and powerful ligaments stiffen them. The dragon evolutionist descends slowly in a tight corkscrew and takes only 1d6 points of falling damage, no matter the actual distance of the fall.
Claws, Bit & Tail -> Claws, Bite & Tail
Interesting stuff altogether. Just figured I'd help out a little.Last edited by gooddragon1; 2017-04-25 at 11:29 PM.
There is no emotion more useless in life than hate.
-
2017-04-26, 10:41 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
Done - via link.
Ditto.
Now that the Goliath's "Powerful Build" trait is explained, the Dragon Evolutionist's feature of the same name and "Size Increase" should be fully resolved.
Fixed.
Fixed
Thanks
-
2017-09-03, 06:32 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
.
Bumping - to circumvent thread-necromancy.
-
2017-09-03, 11:39 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2017
- Location
- Vancouver <-> Dublin
- Gender
Re: 3.5e Overhaul Fixing ALL 3.5e's problems (P.E.A.C.H)
Last edited by rferries; 2017-09-03 at 11:40 AM.
-
2017-09-03, 04:59 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2014
Re: Warlock
First of all, please let me start off by saying I love what you've done to alter Warlock for the better.
The one thing that I would highly suggest... A minimum of one invocation per level. Even Assassins and other prestige classes with very small spell selections (with the exception of maybe 1 or 2) get more spells in 10 levels (Especially Ur Priest) than the Warlock in their entire career, even with extras from feats! Yes, Invocations can be used virtually at will, ad infinitum, but that shouldn't mean they shouldn't have at least 1 invocation per level that they've been able to 'master'. Most classes that give spells allow those spells to be changed out, whereas Warlock doesn't have that luxury. They are stuck even more than a Sorcerer or Bard with their selections. Yes, they can change them out, at certain levels, but you're still left with a paltry few that you've spent you're entire career to master... In my time playing Warlock (and now playing Avowed) it's not game breaking in the least.
Other than that, and my personal feelings on Imbue Item, aside I feel it looks really awesome and I would love to play it in virtually any game!Last edited by AOKost; 2017-09-03 at 05:11 PM.
-
2017-09-04, 01:00 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
Re: Warlock
In a way, yes, I guess
Of course. It's awesome. Ignoring it would be criminal neglect on my part
First of all, I'm glad that you like the general direction.
I'm always looking for ways to condense as much as humanly possible into a class w/o making it lose its elegance of design.
That said, I'm a bit hesitant to add more invocations, for several reasons.
1. If I was to count them by CArc standards, my Warlock already gives level+1 invocations. I consider shapes and essences a tad bit below other invocations, because invocations are upgraded spells in many ways (durations, repetitions, improved effects etc), so in the overall count, the average spread over 20 levels roughly equals an invocation per level.
2. I needed the "Shapes & Essences" separate progression to justify Split Blast and Dual Essence. As a bonus, this also ensures that a novice player doesn't screw up his character by neglecting EB.
3. Spectral Blast and Penetrating Blast are bonus essences that join other essences. This easily trumps 2 essences in any way by my count.
4. Split Blast + EB-iteratives easily trumps any 3 shapes.
5. Eldritch Eyes is an evolved magical perception compared to the official Warlock.
6. Aspect of Power + Heritage feats = even more SLAs.
7. The official Warlock doesn't get SR.
8. If all the above is not enough, you also have Eldritch Reattunement that wasn't an option before. I'd spend those 4 feats w/o hesitation.
Starting at mid-levels, all the above amount to 2 solidly built CArc warlocks working together in terms of power and to 4 CArc warlocks in terms of character versatility.
In the overhaul project I tried to come as close as possible to make it impossible to choose between the different classes in terms of what you're getting for your money's worth.
I feel that if I push the Warlock further than it already is, that would make it more attractive than the other classes.
I'm looking for hearing from others if there's any room left to give the Warlock more w/o making it an obvious choice.Last edited by nonsi; 2017-09-04 at 01:01 AM.