Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Pitiless_Interfector 06-09-07, 06:07 PM	Alright, now that the wait is over, it's time to begin the arduous process of picking through the Star Wars Roleplaying Game Saga Edition Core Rulebook and taking whatever goodies we can find to port over to D&D. Here's what I've got: Starting hit points: 12 + Con bonus: sorcerer, wizard, NPC 18 + Con bonus: bard, rogue 24 + Con bonus: cleric, druid, monk 30 + Con bonus: fighter, paladin, ranger 36 + Con bonus: barbarian Human racial traits: Replace extra skill points with one extra trained skill at first level. I'm sure there are a lot of direct ports from SWRPG you could make. I'm mostly concerned with things like spellcasting. I feel that would best be served by being made into an encounter-based system, a la Tome of Battle. Anybody else want to take a crack at it?
andinel 06-09-07, 06:56 PM	Skills Balance + Escape Artist + Tumble = Acrobatics Bluff + Disguise = Deception Endurance becomes a skill Initiative becomes a skill Listen + Search + Sense Motive + Spot (+ Appraise?)= Perception Diplomacy = Persuasion Hide + Move Silently = Stealth Track feat becomes a part of Survival (trained only) Find a way to convert class features into talents and you're set. I'll work on it on my own and post something later.
weasel0 06-10-07, 03:16 AM	LOL it's called GURPs!!
Krusk 06-10-07, 02:43 PM	Star wars did the Hp system like that, because they went from a system that used to use VP/WP. Meaning at first level their characters have always had many more hit points. This is because the average weapon in starwars does around 3d6 base. At first level without this every shot would pretty much be auto kill. It does not translate to dnd very well, not to bash your project but i know how things come out on the internet. Just wanted to throw out something to consider.
Lord Zeb 06-11-07, 04:31 PM	I like the HP system, very Hackmasterish at 1st level. (Hackmaster gives PCs a 20 HP bump at 1st level, since it's a pull no punches setting). Spells are my big ?? as well - I can see porting almost everything to Saga style, but spells would be a big project all by themselves. Maybe start with a hybrid style, and keep working on it?
lears_fool 06-11-07, 07:43 PM	Star wars did the Hp system like that, because they went from a system that used to use VP/WP. Meaning at first level their characters have always had many more hit points. This is because the average weapon in starwars does around 3d6 base. At first level without this every shot would pretty much be auto kill. It does not translate to dnd very well, not to bash your project but i know how things come out on the internet. Just wanted to throw out something to consider. Actually, I think it translates spectacularly well. Level-based systems are okay for MMORPGS, but when it comes to individuals having LOGICAL power levels compared to their peers Star Wars (and a surprising number of other games) have better systems. One of the bigger flaws with D&D has been that a 10th level character is virtually deific compared to a 1st level character. . to the point that they're almost different species. Even asleep a tenth level barbarian is more than a match for a dozen commoners. I think Saga's got potential The spells are more of a challenging. . they look to be feat-based, a bit more like a lesser version of Mage or old 2nd Ed Psionics. But hey, the Vancian memorization system is one of the other sacred cows of D&D that I wouldn't mind being put to pasture ;)
Steely_Dan 06-12-07, 06:31 AM	I've listed below all of the Saga mechanics I have ported over (for now) into my D&D campaigns, and it is working out beautifully. My only problem is the current mess of a magic system that is standard D&D magic. I want to go for something ala ToB, or even Saga force powers. -Charge is a standard action -Withdraw is a move action. -No 5 ft. step. -Diagonal movement is 2-2-2-2, rather than 1-2-1-2. -No iterative attacks – replaced by Double Attack, Triple Attack, Cleave, Great Cleave, Whirlwind Attack, Dual Weapon Mastery etc -No confirmation rolls for critical hits – a longsword automatically critical hits on a natural 20, a rapier automatically critical hits on a natural 19, or 20, and a keen rapier automatically critical hits on a natural 18, 19, or 20. -Half character level as bonus damage on attacks. -The skill system. -Spell-like abilities per encounter, rather than per day.
Steely_Dan 06-12-07, 06:34 AM	Star wars did the Hp system like that, because they went from a system that used to use VP/WP. Meaning at first level their characters have always had many more hit points. This is because the average weapon in starwars does around 3d6 base. At first level without this every shot would pretty much be auto kill. This is true, but maybe we could grant D&D characters double hp at first level to avoid the whole getting taken out by a gnome that throws a carrot at you?
Keyar81 06-12-07, 04:32 PM	This is true, but maybe we could grant D&D characters double hp at first level to avoid the whole getting taken out by a gnome that throws a carrot at you? If your character is getting taken out by a thrown carrot, then he probably had low hp to begin with and the gnome got lucky. even a lvl 1 sorcer has 4hp, ATLEAST. Im assuming your treating the carrot as an improvised dart. A carrot would definitely be a-4 penalty as an improvised weapon, but I certainly wouldn't allow it to do lethal damage. Maybe if it was frozen solid :D
Krusk 06-12-07, 11:40 PM	This is true, but maybe we could grant D&D characters double hp at first level to avoid the whole getting taken out by a gnome that throws a carrot at you? but then my master thrower gnome is out of buisness! I guess you could do that but it changes the system around a lot.
Steely_Dan 06-13-07, 09:01 AM	I guess you could do that but it changes the system around a lot. How so? And what about the dreaded, falchion wielding orc you may bump into at first level?
Keyar81 06-13-07, 12:30 PM	How so? And what about the dreaded, falchion wielding orc you may bump into at first level? At first level it would make a huge difference. Probably all the way up to level 10 or so you would have a gradually decreasing but still significant advantage than you would have had. 2 extra hit dice at maximum in addition to the one max hit dice you get at first level? I dont see why you need it. If your DM is throwing stuff at you at first level that you need triple hp just to survive every encounter, hes not doing his job properly.
Aubri 06-13-07, 03:20 PM	I tend to agree -- given that every idiot in Star Wars has a blaster pistol, the HP are necessary. In D&D they're not. I love the system of Throws in SW, as opposed to the various throwlike maneuvers in D&D. I suggest importing the condition track, even though it's a significant change. "Fatigue" is -1 on the track, "Exhaustion" is -2, stunning is -1, nonlethal becomes track damage*.... and then require a concentration check to cast a spell while suffering from condition damage. *Treat saps and unarmed strikes and such much like a stun blast.
lears_fool 06-13-07, 03:39 PM	I tend to agree -- given that every idiot in Star Wars has a blaster pistol, the HP are necessary. In D&D they're not. Considering that every idiot in D&D can get ahold of a club, it's not like it's THAT different. I actually think the way hit points ramp with level takes quite a bit away from the ability to view things intuitively and hurts the flavor of the game. . . which is why so many other non-CRPG systems don't do it that way. I'm not a huge fan of Star Wars, but they definitely do hit points better.
Krusk 06-13-07, 03:50 PM	club is d12, falchion is 2d4. Weakest blaster pistol i could find was 3d6-2. Much better than either of those. Now consider that most guns have auto or multi fire essentially giving more attacks at loss of to hit. Now consider that everyones AC is lower because Armor gives DR and they only get a small class based Ac boost to help that. we just started a star wars game, -old rules we dont have saga yet- amd my character a level 1 has 8 attacks at +0 to hit, each dealing 3d6+3 damage. There wasnt too much min maxing, i grabbed a race with 4 arms, an 18 dex with racial +2 and ive got a bab. the race has multidexterity, and for my feat i grabbed multiweapon fighting. In this system my character has a very good chance of at least 2 attacks hitting, for a totalt of 6d6+6 damage. That is much better than any falchion weilding orc dealing 2d4+~5 with one attack a round. This is why it changes the system. Also, it makes evocation spells even more useless. In standard dnd a decent tactic for one mage, was to magic missile the first opponent to cast a spell. chances are you can drop him right off the bat. Now that tactic is awful.
lears_fool 06-13-07, 03:58 PM	Also, it makes evocation spells even more useless. In standard dnd a decent tactic for one mage, was to magic missile the first opponent to cast a spell. chances are you can drop him right off the bat. Now that tactic is awful. And this is bad? My issue with the x hit points per level system is how quickly it ramps up. A 2nd level character has twice the hit points at first. . a fourth twice that. .and so on. Even though hit points aren't 'just physical fortitude' it's still somewhat silly for a wizard that's been on a few adventures to be far sturdier than a blacksmith or a woodsman. Your point on the magic missle is a valid one, but if one flawed system (Vancian magic) is the justification for another then it's not really good support. You may disagree, but IMHO a couple of sacred cows were kept in D&D that should've been kicked to the curb, it seems Star Wars is, at least mechnically, an indication that Wizards may be on a better path.
Aubri 06-13-07, 04:13 PM	Considering that every idiot in D&D can get ahold of a club, it's not like it's THAT different. Uhhh, the point is the horrible damage that a blaster deals. A character that would use a longsword or other one-handed martial weapon in D&D is using a 3d6 blaster pistol with a respectable range increment. The shortsword-weilding rogue has a holdout blaster (3d4) and the fighter's greatsword turns into a blaster rifle (3d8!), not to mention that pistol proficiency is much more common than martial weapon proficiency. A wizard with 4+Con HP at first level would get vaporized long before he reached 2nd. Thus Star Wars characters need a HP boost just to be able to survive; against goblins with spears... not so much. As for your complaints about HP ramping up with level... well, that's kind of the way d20 characters get tougher. You wouldn't complain, I suspect, about a high-rank Vampire being able to completely soak a Neonate's attacks or an Essence 10 Solar eating Dragonbloods for breakfast, but HP increases are exactly the same thing. To give a more realistic example, would you expect a soldier who's been in Iraq for 2 years to be better at "not getting shot" than a tourist? Why? He knows how to keep his head down and stay cool under fire. A wizard who's been through numerous battles SHOULD be able to hold off a sword-weilding orc longer than a woodsman who's never seen a fight more serious than a barroom brawl. And to be able to defeat him with a quick dagger strike when the woodsman would be dead before he swung his axe.
lears_fool 06-13-07, 04:18 PM	Uhhh, the point is the horrible damage that a blaster deals. A character that would use a longsword or other one-handed martial weapon in D&D is using a 3d6 blaster pistol with a respectable range increment. The shortsword-weilding rogue has a holdout blaster (3d4) and the fighter's greatsword turns into a blaster rifle (3d8!), not to mention that pistol proficiency is much more common than martial weapon proficiency. A wizard with 4+Con HP at first level would get vaporized long before he reached 2nd. Thus Star Wars characters need a HP boost just to be able to survive; against goblins with spears... not so much. No, I agree in part. A blaster does a lot more damage than a club. But let's look at this a bit differently. It's not like they HAD to put in hit point boosts because the weapons magically did more damage. They did both at the same time. They didn't discover that blasters did more damage and panic! Rather they increased the damage to adjust for the number of hit points. Why? Because, more realistically, in Star Wars a second level character doesn't have twice as many hit points as a first, and so on and so on. That's a huge mechanical improvement. You have a more gradual feeling of advancement rather than the runaway train you get in D&D. .yet at the same time that level 10 character still is very powerful. It's a far better balance IMHO
Krusk 06-13-07, 11:22 PM	And this is bad? My issue with the x hit points per level system is how quickly it ramps up. A 2nd level character has twice the hit points at first. . a fourth twice that. .and so on. Even though hit points aren't 'just physical fortitude' it's still somewhat silly for a wizard that's been on a few adventures to be far sturdier than a blacksmith or a woodsman. I see a firsty level character more as a young kid who is just staking it out in the world for the first time, dosn't really know much of anything. Once they hit 2nd level that represents their growing into someone who has seen a fight or two. They have some experience fighting and have learned how to not get killed. Commoners to me are generally level 1 characters at best. Most of the time they are 1hd classless characters. Imagine you, a commoner i assume, are in a store. Someone with 2 class levels gets out of bootcamp, and goes crazy on a shooting spree. There is no chance of you survivng. The diffrence in HP helps reflect that. Your point on the magic missle is a valid one, but if one flawed system (Vancian magic) is the justification for another then it's not really good support. I dont really see the vancian system as flawed, i sort of like it.
lears_fool 06-14-07, 01:17 AM	I see a firsty level character more as a young kid who is just staking it out in the world for the first time, dosn't really know much of anything. Once they hit 2nd level that represents their growing into someone who has seen a fight or two. They have some experience fighting and have learned how to not get killed. Commoners to me are generally level 1 characters at best. Most of the time they are 1hd classless characters. Imagine you, a commoner i assume, are in a store. Someone with 2 class levels gets out of bootcamp, and goes crazy on a shooting spree. There is no chance of you survivng. The diffrence in HP helps reflect that. Oh, I see that interpretation . . I just prefer a bit more of a 'solid' fantasy rather than high fantasy/final fantasy. So the idea of your average adult having half as much 'ability to avoid dying' as a sixth level scrawny wizard appeals to me more than the current system. I will admit it's IMHO, though I do find it a lot easier to identify with and it does eliminate some illogical silliness. (like the sleeping high level barbarian being able to withstand an assault from a dozen commoners) I dont really see the vancian system as flawed, i sort of like it. That's one I'm far more strongly against, I think the psionic system is infinitely more 'magical' feeling than the magic system. Even more so are systems like the one in Mage (which takes a bit to get used to, but the elegance of how it ties together is impressive once you get going) Of course, again, opinion, but it's one that's pretty popular. Even in literature if you take Vance and the D20 books out there, magic is rarely 'on this day you can cast these nine spells'
Steely_Dan 06-14-07, 04:35 AM	Even in literature if you take Vance and the D20 books out there, magic is rarely 'on this day you can cast these nine spells' Well this comes down, IMO, to the problem of the game being designed around the silly, assumed 4 encounters day, instead of being per encounter based. Some sort of cross between the ToB Initiator mechanic (manoeuvres etc) and the Force system of Saga might make for a nice magic system for D&D
Lord Zeb 06-14-07, 10:08 AM	I like the idea of PCs and "named" NPCs having the x3 HD multiplier at first level, but mooks and the like won't. It gives some meat to the lowly level 1 hero - who doesn't have to be a kid! It's just his 1st level of being a PC... Eberron delves into that idea a bit.
lears_fool 06-14-07, 10:14 AM	Well this comes down, IMO, to the problem of the game being designed around the silly, assumed 4 encounters day, instead of being per encounter based. Some sort of cross between the ToB Initiator mechanic (manoeuvres etc) and the Force system of Saga might make for a nice magic system for D&D I think they actually kind of fed off of each other, since in the end the resources consumed are primarily spells (and hit points, which roughly equate to healing spells). . so the encounters-per-day system was put into place balancing off of that. Not that other games don't have limited resources, but there's often a lot more you can do without tapping into those and more versatility with how they're used And yes, now that I've gotten a look at Saga some combination of ToB maneuvers/saga force could be really fun. The only thing missing there though would be something feeding the studious/scholarly magical types, something that would reward preparation while allowing magical types to be more magically. We know it's doable and it's been done, but that's the part that isn't filled in yet.
WizO_Cat 06-14-07, 10:35 PM	Let's keep the posts on the topic of the thread, not other guests. Otherwise, it is considered Baiting which is against the Code of Conduct. Thank you.
Krusk 06-15-07, 01:13 AM	My view on vancian magic is that it isn't elegant but it gets the job done. For wizards i like it especially because to me a wizard spends an hour each morning practicing some spells and makes a note to remember X spells. Those are the ones he can do. I would rather it be he memorizes Y spells, and can cast any of those Y spells X times a day, but that is a little complex so oh well. I really like the system some of the classes get, where they get a limited spell list and can cast anything from that list X times a day. i sort of wish that is how wizards were done, I choose a new spell every time i level and can cast it or any of my other spells X times a day. Like dread necromancer format except a customizable list.
Aubri 06-15-07, 09:31 AM	No, I agree in part. A blaster does a lot more damage than a club. But let's look at this a bit differently. It's not like they HAD to put in hit point boosts because the weapons magically did more damage. They did both at the same time. They didn't discover that blasters did more damage and panic! Rather they increased the damage to adjust for the number of hit points. Sorry, lemme try this again with less vitriol... Yes, they DID have to put in HP boosts because weapons magically did more damage. Or rather, since they decided not to scale down the damage of 'conventional' weapons like clubs and swords (witness the weapon charts in Saga), and since a simple blaster pistol is capable of blowing chunks out of a concrete or metal wall, the blaster pistol MUST do a great deal of damage compared to a sword. It's a simple fact of the setting. In order for characters to survive in a setting that contains blasters and other high-tech weapons, HP boosts were necessary. In SW d20, those boosts came in the form of the WP/VP system that ensured you had around 10 extra "hit points" in the form on Wound Points. In SWSE, they come in the form of a couple extra hit dice at 1st level. D&D Saga Edition would NOT include these powerful weapons, therefore HP boosts are unnecessary.
Tolby 06-17-07, 08:00 PM	How about a system where you start with the 3 extra hit dice. But you do not gain any hit dice when you level up.
Lord Zeb 06-17-07, 09:47 PM	How about a system where you start with the 3 extra hit dice. But you do not gain any hit dice when you level up. What do you gain instead? Otherwise static HP would leave your PC a smoking ruin from the mid-levels on. Plus, your whole PC party would start off as Barbarians or Warblades for the d12 HD...
Ace_of_time 06-17-07, 11:27 PM	This is true, but maybe we could grant D&D characters double hp at first level to avoid the whole getting taken out by a gnome that throws a carrot at you? Why not just increase the HD for them. So wizard each level would get 2d4, 3d4, or 4d4. Depending on your power level of your world.
lears_fool 06-18-07, 12:55 AM	The difference is the variance between first and mid level characters. If you just increase the hit points based on a percentage (i.e. instead of x hit points you have x*2 or x*3 hit points) then things are exactly the same as they are in current D&D. So a tenth level character will have 5-9 times the hit points of a first level character. They could've done that and nothing would have changed really (except some weapons would be 'weaker') If you do what they do in Saga, then you have something closer to what you see in non-CRPGs. Where a tenth level character (or whatever the equivalent experience is) is maybe 3 times as sturdy instead. The difference is that the current way in D&D we have 'hit points' that encapsulate a random collection of luck, experience, and actual physical damage that are all considered 'health' by other mechanics. .which leads to some weirdness (like the high level barbarian that an entire village can't kill in his sleep yet the local priest can mend the bones of a dozen commoners in the time it takes to heal a few of his scratches) and a bigger power split between low and high level characters. However no major changes are needed to maintain precisely the same balance with spells (you just multiply them too) With the Saga way (and what you see in some other systems) the first level characters aren't complete pushovers but the higher level characters have the non-health damage avoidance expressed in other ways (one of a dozen things) along with a smaller hit point increase and increased damage potential. It's a lot more realistic and removes a lot of the insta-deaths at low levels. . but at the same time changes would have to be made to the current vancian magic system (as Saga does with their force powers) to make them work. So - end result. 1) Multiply hit points at every level - roughly equates to the status quo 2) Increased hit points at first level - more realistic, but requires more changes to the system to make it work
Tolby 06-19-07, 01:30 PM	What do you gain instead? Otherwise static HP would leave your PC a smoking ruin from the mid-levels on. Plus, your whole PC party would start off as Barbarians or Warblades for the d12 HD... You don't gain anything as you level up. You start gaining hp at 4th. You have plenty of warriors types starting off as barbarians at 1st in D&D then switching to ranger or fighter. If your afraid of the abuse don't use the rule.
Lord Zeb 06-19-07, 06:58 PM	You don't gain anything as you level up. You start gaining hp at 4th. You have plenty of warriors types starting off as barbarians at 1st in D&D then switching to ranger or fighter. If your afraid of the abuse don't use the rule. I'm not a fan of that idea, but let us know how it works out if you try it. I say 3x HD at 1st level and advance as normal a la Saga would make for a smoother progression of survivability, and might just try it out next time I get to run my kitchen-sink homebrew (we had VP/WP last time around, maybe we'll port over Saga HP & Conditions instead - basing conditions on Massive Damage Threshold from d20 Modern).
Ace_of_time 06-19-07, 08:49 PM	Which ever way you do it you would have to do it for the monsters too!?!?
weasel0 06-19-07, 08:53 PM	Well of course not. We're trying to emulate a video game. You have to leave in the noobsauce mobs. :P
Ace_of_time 06-19-07, 11:25 PM	What about spells?
lears_fool 06-20-07, 01:43 AM	The hit point increase makes damage and healing spells less useful but doesn't have any effect on things like grease or hold person. The damage and healing aren't that big a deal (since they ramp with regular damage), but you run out of spells. I did a homebrew with a similar hit point system and we just increased the number of low level spells everyone had available and it worked pretty well. Probably better from a 'wizards and fighters staying viable as you level' standpoint. If I had to do it again though, taking the psionic system and turning it into the magic system and upping the power points would probably work better.
Lord Zeb 06-20-07, 08:52 AM	I like the idea of psionic system instead of standard D&D system for magic. Monsters are not "name level NPCs" or PCs, so do not qualify for the 3xHD bump. The mechanic is lifted from SW obviously, but I like the idea because of its roots in Hackmaster (+20 HP kicker at 1st level for PCs), not any "video game" idea.
weasel0 06-20-07, 09:55 AM	But Hack also gives that bonus to all creatures. Humanoid, monstrous, whatever. Everything gets the kicker, not just the PCs. I've got the 16 books to reference.
lears_fool 06-20-07, 10:18 AM	I like the idea of psionic system instead of standard D&D system for magic. I always thought the mechanics felt more 'magical', with the caster having to use more magic to make his spells more powerful and able to use that power and his experience to enhance them somehow. A fun and intuitively fitting idea on the hit points side might be to actually split up the 'physical damage' and 'luck/avoidance/heroism' sides of the formula. i.e. start players out with base MaxHP*2+con*4 'real' hit points and the hit points they get after that are 'heroic' hit points that replenish after every combat/hour. I figure the con*4 keeps con useful even if you don't have it apply to the 'heroic' hit points and having the first 'real' hit points apply to the first class because that's what you were for your life before the game started (just like skill points). You could leave healing spells as is and have them only work on 'real' hit points and maybe toss in some 'blessings' that temporarily grant 'heroic' hit points. That's just off the cuff with about 40 seconds of thought, but it'd be nice to have a way to make hit points make actual sense while at the same time making higher level characters better at not-dying.
Lord Zeb 06-20-07, 12:28 PM	But Hack also gives that bonus to all creatures. Humanoid, monstrous, whatever. Everything gets the kicker, not just the PCs. I've got the 16 books to reference. Ooh, didn't realize that. Hmm, guess that would apply for a beta run on Saga D&D then too.
weasel0 06-20-07, 06:17 PM	Oh, except Pixie Fairies. They only get 10.
Pitiless_Interfector 06-28-07, 08:45 PM	About spellcasting: I believe a point system a la psionics would be good to keep in mind. Psionics is usually considered more balanced than core magic, so it's probably a good system. The spell points work just like power points [and the spells will be updated with augmentation options], but you can regain all your spent spell points with 5 minutes of rest. Spell points will be more limited than power points; the numbers will be smaller; perhaps some elements from Magic of Incarnum could be ported over as well. A preparatory spellcaster selects which spells they wish to ready when meditating, but can augment their spells on the fly with spell points, similarly to the incarnum feats that "can't be reallocated for 24 hours." This gives them the option of making a spell more powerful when they need to. The concept of spell "levels" can be forgotten. The prep might, say, prepare a "fire spell," which can be either burning hands or meteor swarm depending on the spell point investment [similar to how force powers in saga become more effective when you spend a Force point or Destiny point], which will be capped at a value dependent on level, like soulmeld essentia capacity. Preps should also have the option of creating effects that are semipermanent, like soulmelds, that they can invest spell points in and later withdraw to power their 'expendable' spells, much like reserve feats, which have no use limit but become less powerful as you expend your spells. Preps should have the option of spending spell points to recover an expended spell. Spontaneous casters do not change their spells readied between encounters, however, their recharge time is only 1 minute, and they receive many special benefits when casting their spells that preps don't get. Sponts have a higher spell point limit, and can recover each of their spells once per encounter as a swift action without spending spell points. They can do this more than once with special feats, talents, etc. The Spellcraft skill should become considerably more important. It should become a lot like the Use The Force skill, where doing little tricks requires a skill check instead of a cantrip. Spellcraft checks should also affect the power levels of certain spells and other abilities, much like certain Force powers are more effective with a higher Use The Force check. Certain powerful spells can be balanced without assigning spell levels by raising the DC of the Spellcraft check to use them; i.e., while any caster can manipulate reality in a nonlinear fashion, duplicating a wish requires a massive skill check. Spellcraft can even remove the need for setting DCs; just use the skill check vs. defense score mechanic and you should be fine. Spells should be almost entirely combat-related. Just like there's no maneuver that breaks the economy, so should casters have limits placed on their abilities. Spells are all about fireball and mage armor. Stuff like fabricate and plane shift should be the province of incantation-like mechanics: A key reason to be trained in Spellcraft; Spellcraft checks can control all the various utility things that you never use during combat, preventing wizards from taking advantage of the 5-minute recharge to greater teleport two dozen times in an hour. Metamagic feats can be applied on the fly to any applicable spell by spending spell points, which vary in cost from one feat to another [with Quicken costing more than Enlarge, for example]. Sponts inherently pay less for their metamagic, and can take feats and talents to further reduce the cost. Of course, it's possible to simply eliminate the distinction between spontaneous and preparatory casters entirely, and simply go the way of the spirit shaman and the erudite. That seems like a better option to me, IMHO. Just have them able to completely customize between each encounter, and then work with what they've got on the fly. Best of both worlds. And BTW, we're talking about a complete revision, here. If something's broken, then we can fix it by moving something else up, instead of limiting the option itself. Go out on a limb, people! Negative levels can be replaced with -1 condition track; the skill check penalty limiting your higher-end effects mimics the spell slot loss of the old system. Come to think of it, get rid of permanent level drain altogether; it does absolutely nothing to enhance the game and is simply a form of punishment that is vastly more harmful to PCs than NPCs, at least from the viewpoint of the players. Too far down the condition track can make you fall unconscious or die; that should be good enough.
Pitiless_Interfector 06-28-07, 09:34 PM	I'm not sure what to do about classes. I'm tempted to reduce the total to 3, like UA did with generic classes, then give them the talent/feat/talent/feat progression of any other class, with class features such as turn undead or a familiar becoming talents, but then the number of talent trees required to duplicate all of the other classes would become overwhelming. So, what do we do? And I'm considering making magical ability a feat usable by any class, like Force Sensitivity. That'd negate the need for Hexblades, Spellthieves, Paladins, Rangers, etc., etc., etc., though the ability to regain your spent spells and to receive bonus spell points would be restricted to the spellcaster class. And I've always found the distinctions between arcane and divine magic kludgey. There's nothing stopping a sorcerer PC from acting more religious than the party cleric, and the whole "it's not me casting this, it's him" thing puts me off. There should simply be magic; if you want to play a priest character, just RP it. There don't have to be direct game benefits. Of course, nothing's stopping you from saying your magic comes by the grace of the gods, so whatever. Maybe I'm just biased from playing Eberron for so long.
Aubri 06-29-07, 09:22 AM	Come to think of it, get rid of permanent level drain altogether; it does absolutely nothing to enhance the game and is simply a form of punishment that is vastly more harmful to PCs than NPCs, at least from the viewpoint of the players. Too far down the condition track can make you fall unconscious or die; that should be good enough. That's a great point! Negative levels are a persistent condition that goes away after 24 hours or when you receive the appropriate spell. And yeah, I've always hated negative levels too, even as a GM. Should Ray of Enfeeblement still inflict an ability penalty, or deal a condition hit? (Does Saga even have ability damage? I don't recall seeing anything that would cause it. Which doesn't necessarily mean we should rip it out of D&D.)
Pitiless_Interfector 06-29-07, 12:03 PM	That's a great point! Negative levels are a persistent condition that goes away after 24 hours or when you receive the appropriate spell. And yeah, I've always hated negative levels too, even as a GM. Should Ray of Enfeeblement still inflict an ability penalty, or deal a condition hit? (Does Saga even have ability damage? I don't recall seeing anything that would cause it. Which doesn't necessarily mean we should rip it out of D&D.) Saga's got ability damage: poison and radiation
Aubri 06-29-07, 12:29 PM	Saga's got ability damage: poison and radiation Oh? I thought poison dealt conditions. OK then. :)
Pitiless_Interfector 06-29-07, 03:57 PM	Now, again with the spellcasting system... I think we can agree that a per-encounter method is best, at least for combat-oriented spells such as fireball and mage armor. The power points and augmentation system of the XPH is probably the best way to go. Spellcasters are neither arcane nor divine; a given caster can use magic missile or cure light wounds equally well. The tradeoff is not being able to do both of these in a single round. Casters have a large pool of known spells; they can ready a percentage of these for combat with 5 minutes of rest. They can swap out these readied spells each time they meditate. Casters have a pool of spell points, which act similarly to both power points and essentia. These spell points are replenished each time they meditate. Spells function similarly to powers; however, they require verbal and somatic components. There is no spell failure for armor. Metamagic is retained; however, it takes on the trappings of metapsionics. Psionic focus mechanics are renamed to simply 'focus,' and form the backbone of many quasi-magical abilities open to many classes, such as ki talents. Just as certain abilities such as the elan's racial talents allow for the spending of PP for things besides powers, so can spell points be spent for all kinds of different abilities open to any class. Focus can be spent to regain a small quantity of spell points that I(ncreases with )L(evel, )T(alents, and)F(eats), or ILTF. Beyond spells, characters should also have access to dweomers, semi-permanent magical effects that function like a hybrid of soulmelds and reserve feats. They can be augmented with SP, just like a spell; however, those SP invested in them do not go away; they continue to provide an effect that can be used at will. This gives classes the mileage potential of the warlock. A few tactical decisions are required, however, because withdrawing spell points from dweomers requires an action; an action that wouldn't have been required if they had not invested the SP to begin with. Also, using the effects provided by dweomers means that you've spent an action that could have been used for a spell. Dweomers should be reserved for abilities similar to invocations, such as providing flight or invisibility. Some weaker dweomers can be activated with only a swift action, so they can be combined with standard-casting spells to provide a more tactical effect. In fact, many class abilities can be reconfigured to function as dweomers. Saving throw DCs can be replaced with the following mechanic: Use Magic check vs. (Fort/Ref/Will) defense. Spell Resistance [which is a joke after assay spell resistance and the like] can be replaced with a blanket bonus to all defenses that only applies vs. spells and certain other abilities. However, since skills increase at 1/2 the rate of defenses, and monster Dexterity, Wisdom, and [especially] Constitution increase far faster than character Charisma (The key skill, Use Magic [Cha], becomes a hybrid of Use Magic Device and Spellcraft, with Knowledge (arcana) covering skills such as deciphering scrolls and interpreting auras), this means that eventually the system gets out of whack. While being trained and focused in Use Magic provides a +10 bonus on checks, allowing a 20th-level character to make DC 35+ checks, at epic levels more feats and abilities that provide bonuses to Use Magic become necessary. However, for core, the system works admirably.
Ace_of_time 06-29-07, 11:10 PM	I'd like to see more like the force type spell casting each spell cost 1 HP per spell level.
Pitiless_Interfector 06-30-07, 12:37 AM	I'd like to see more like the force type spell casting each spell cost 1 HP per spell level. That sucked. :yuck: It forced multiple ability dependency: you needed a good Con or you'd die in combat, 'cause you're killing yourself a little each time you cast. To fix that you would have to give casters BIG hit dice, which leaves it open to abuse. That's why Saga got rid of it. NOW Force powers don't cost HP. :ahem: It's pretty simple, actually. :rolleyes:
Ace_of_time 06-30-07, 12:53 AM	That sucked. :yuck: It forced multiple ability dependency: you needed a good Con or you'd die in combat, 'cause you're killing yourself a little each time you cast. To fix that you would have to give casters BIG hit dice, which leaves it open to abuse. That's why Saga got rid of it. NOW Force powers don't cost HP. :ahem: It's pretty simple, actually. :rolleyes: I friend had a old star wars book and I read it. Haven't seen the new one yet. How does it work in the new one? It wouln't be that bad if you are switching to wound points. Atleast someone would finaly get some use out of Bar class. ha ha :D
Aubri 06-30-07, 08:09 PM	I friend had a old star wars book and I read it. Haven't seen the new one yet. How does it work in the new one? It wouln't be that bad if you are switching to wound points. Atleast someone would finaly get some use out of Bar class. ha ha :D If you're familiar with Tome of Battle, you already know it. You buy a set of force powers (like Force Push or Force Grip -- moving small stuff around and such are just skill rolls) for a feat, and you can use each one once per encounter (recharge 1 minute rest, or refresh one if you roll a 20 on a Use The Force check or spend a Force point).
Ace_of_time 06-30-07, 09:49 PM	I think I liked the hit points one better. I mean they had heal self. with a cleric around to heal and still limit them to spell per day. It could work.
Steely_Dan 07-02-07, 11:12 AM	If you're familiar with Tome of Battle, you already know it. You buy a set of force powers (like Force Push or Force Grip -- moving small stuff around and such are just skill rolls) for a feat, and you can use each one once per encounter (recharge 1 minute rest, or refresh one if you roll a 20 on a Use The Force check or spend a Force point). Now to bring the travesty of a mockery of a sham that is the D&D magic/spell system into a system like this.
Aubri 07-02-07, 11:31 AM	Now to bring the travesty of a mockery of a sham that is the D&D magic/spell system into a system like this. That's this thread over here: http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=873988
OgreBane99 07-03-07, 05:19 PM	I'm not a big fan of the spell point (aka psionic) system. It allows the PCs to blow more powerful spells more frequently than they would normally be "allowed" to do. I don't like that. I've always enjoyed the idea that spellcasters had to use their magic wisely and conserve what they think they would need for the encounters to come. I've also just begun running games with PCs using the ToB:BoNS and I have to tell you, I like it. I think it makes setting up encounters a bit more difficult... maybe different is a better word. You can certainly handle more things per day if you're getting all your abilities back each encounter. And it's not tough to use your "maneuvors" more than once an encounter too. I just don't want D&D to turn into WoW. I've got my computer based, mana-system, MMORPG when I want it. And I've also got my drastically different (better?) D&D game when I want it. I don't think D&D should go the way of the dinosaur and be converted to a table-top WoW system.
BrianD 07-09-07, 04:24 PM	You know what I'm planning on porting in? Everything. I'm working on fantasy classes (currently the Mage, Noble, Priest, Rogue, and Warrior) with talent trees drawing from both Saga Edition talents and D&D class features. It's probably gonna take me a while.
Keyar81 07-09-07, 05:15 PM	You know what I'm planning on porting in? Everything. I'm working on fantasy classes (currently the Mage, Noble, Priest, Rogue, and Warrior) with talent trees drawing from both Saga Edition talents and D&D class features. It's probably gonna take me a while. Good luck on that man, as a bit of advice, if your planning on porting everything over, it might be easier to just start with SWG saga ed. and port over the stuff from D&D to it like classes magic items, the stuff that makes it fantasy flavor, instead of star wars sci fi flavor. Or you could just make a chocolate flavor game where all the 'heroes' just eat the bad guys. :D
BrianD 07-10-07, 07:28 PM	Yeah that's definitely more of the approach I'm taking. Here are my Saga-style dwarves. DWARVES Ability Modifiers: +2 Constitution, -2 Dexterity. Medium Size: As Medium creatures, dwarves have no special bonuses of penalties due to their size. Speed: Dwarf base speed is 4 squares. Armor Familarity: Dwarves with the Armor Proficiency (medium) feat are proficient with heavy armor. Craftsman: Dwarves may choose to reroll any Craft check, but the result of the reroll must be accepted even if it is worse. Darkvision: Dwarves ignore concealment (including total concealment) from darkness. However, they cannot perceive colors in total darkness. Great Fortitude: Dwarves gain a +2 bonus to their Fortitude defense, accounting for their great physical resisistance. Conditional Bonus Feat: A dwarf with Craft as a trained skill gains Skill Focus (Craft) as a bonus feat. Automatic Languages: Common, Dwarf.
robitusinz 07-20-07, 11:41 AM	I'm not a big fan of the spell point (aka psionic) system. It allows the PCs to blow more powerful spells more frequently than they would normally be "allowed" to do. I don't like that. I've always enjoyed the idea that spellcasters had to use their magic wisely and conserve what they think they would need for the encounters to come. I've also just begun running games with PCs using the ToB:BoNS and I have to tell you, I like it. I think it makes setting up encounters a bit more difficult... maybe different is a better word. You can certainly handle more things per day if you're getting all your abilities back each encounter. And it's not tough to use your "maneuvors" more than once an encounter too. I just don't want D&D to turn into WoW. I've got my computer based, mana-system, MMORPG when I want it. And I've also got my drastically different (better?) D&D game when I want it. I don't think D&D should go the way of the dinosaur and be converted to a table-top WoW system. I also like the resource management aspect of spellcasters, but, unfortunately, once you hit higher levels with a spellcaster, everything goes ballistic. You've got spells that can literally end encounters by themselves or make them incredibly trivial. Even if those can be cast relatively few times per day (once to thrice per day), how much *stuff* can you possibly do in one day to keep things challenging? IMO, the pseudo-linear advancement of spellcasting is the biggest problem in D&D. If you took all spells up to 4th level and left them "as is", but then all spells from 5th and up got turned into class abilities, or feats, or some other static, limited format, then magic would be no problem at all. i.e. Clerics get X spell points, and their spell list maxes out at 4th level spells at caster level 7. Every 2 levels after that, the Cleric can select one spell from higher level lists which he can cast at the cost of 2x whatever a 4th level spell costs. Stuff like Wish, Miracle, Time Stop, or all of the other game-changing spells should simply be axed. I personally don't see the point of these spells, and I've played high level campaigns. Every caster who was eligible to get these kinds of spells just passed over them. Nobody wanted to bother hearing the groans when the words "I cast Wish" are uttered. Personally, I don't need to go beyond 4th or 5th level spells to have a "cool" factor in playing a Wizard. Everything beyond 4th just seems situational or an "I Win" button vs. some sort of encounter. The only difference is in the POWER, which I don't think should have anything to do with the spell level. I'm totally in agreeance with having a Wizard just learn "Fire", and then having a series of "effects" that depend on his caster level to achieve. i.e. "Fire" cast by a 1st level Wizard is Burning Hands...while the same spell cast by a 10th level Wizard is "Flame Storm". BTW, I also play, love, and advocate the Mage (White Wolf's Mage: the Ascension) system of spellcasting. That system is similar to what I've just finished describing. Your character is rated in different "forms" of magic, but the magnitude of the effects possible are only limited by his own personal power. You can be super powerful, yet have limited knowledge in your magic skills, and thus be able to pump out very powerful low-level effects. If you were to take the D&D system, and flip it on its side so that Abjuration, Transmutation, Conjuration, etc. were all simply "magic skills", and you had a "casting power" trait that was basically measured against your class level, you could end up with a similar system. "I use my knowledge of Abjuration to create a force shield around myself...my casting power is 10, thus it gives me a +2 to AC."