Feedback on variant rule set ideas [Archive] - Wizards Community

Feedback on variant rule set ideas [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Verueth_Havain
02-19-08, 02:32 AM I'm currently writing my own variant rule set and wish for some general feedback on some ideas I have. Here's a small list of what I'm cooking up right now in the set:

1) Ability scores are just modifiers (i.e. the standard elite array of 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, and 8 will now be just +2, +2, +1, +1, +0, -1). Instead of rolling dice, distribute six points among them, all of which have a base score of +0. You can take a penalty in one score to raise another by that much.

2) I'm currently writing up new classes for the set. I have 14 classes: the four "core" classes (Fighter, rogue, cleric, and wizard), four variant classes based on the core (so far I have an assassin [rogue] and shaman [cleric, very loosely based on the druid] for this set of classes), and six "hybrid classes" that are my own takes on combining two classes (so far I have the Skirmisher [ftr/rog "guerrilla fighter"], the battlemage [ftr/wiz], the crusader [ftr/clr, loosely based on paladin], and necromancer [clr/wiz]. I've yet to come up with concepts for the rogue/wizard and rogue/cleric combinations).

3) I'm using a hybrid of 3.0 and 3.5 rules that I find unique and effective, and I'm also delving back into the old editions (1st and 2nd) for more ideas and inspiration.

And by far the coolest thing I'm currently working on:

4a) A skill-based spellcasting system (I'm borrowing it from another d20 book). Every class that can cast spells gains the skill Spellcasting. Arcane casters get Spellcasting (arcane) and divine Spellcasting (divine). Whenever a spell is cast, the caster makes a Spellcasting check against a DC set by the spell's level. The number of spells that characters can cast per day become the number of spells that character can cast easily. When they go beyond this limit, every spell they cast from that level gains a cumulative +2 modifier to the DC, making them harder to cast. If they fail their Spellcasting check, they take nonlethal damage equal to the spell's level.

4b) Building on the skill-based spellcasting system, I want to build a system of spellcrafting based on the epic spell development system from the Epic Level Handbook. My idea: have various spell seeds with base DCs available for use. If a spellcaster wishes to make a spell of their own, they take the seed they wish to use as a base and add modifiers to the DC based on what they want the spell to do. When they are finished, they make a Spellcraft check against the final DC of their spell. If they succeed, they made the spell. If they fail, they can't try again until they gain at least 1 more rank in Spellcraft (like for copying spells). When the spell is made, they can cast it like any other spell they know, but they use the spell's creation DC rather than the static DC for premade spells (so if a 1st-level spell has a DC of 15 and they made their own 1st-level spell that had a Spellcraft DC of 18, they would cast that home-brewed spell using a Spellcasting DC of 18). This spellcrafting is only available to arcane spellcasters.

I know this is just a start, but I have a good feeling about it. What do you people think?
Asurya
02-19-08, 10:19 AM ok, I develop my own houserule set at the moment, so if I could spare you some pit I fell in:

1) the 1:1 ratio is not a good idea: it is TOO easy to min max (and considering you already trashed the odd scores uselessness, it's even better)

OTOH, you give too few "points", converted back in std-system, you actually are givieg your players a 12pts buy with a 1:1 ratio. Considering how 32pts buy are more and more common, at the very least give them +1 for their 6 abilities (it would end up like a 24pts buy), trading it as you see fit (bur see my point above).

2 & 3) wait & see

2) I dont see anything inherently wrong with your choice, but are you banning all the other classes? (I take that from the name 'crusader' you choose for your revised paladin). Beside, you took out one part of CoDzilla but not the other, why?

4a) although a good idea, ToM::Truenamer showed us how "easy" it is to reach "through the roof" bonus to one skill... caster under your system will invest everything they got in their casting skill, effectively allowing them to cast all day long without fear for the consequences.

4b) I know DnD introduced the impression that magic was reliable, but for truly good option (like the über spell so crafted), why not make the character build everything anew each time he wants that much power?

anyway, I hope I have been constructive in my remarks, just my :twocents:.
Dan Hemmens
02-19-08, 12:47 PM If I might suggest, with your Ability scores, have the costs pyrimidal. so +1 costs 1 point, +2 costs 3, +3 6 points and +4 10.

It reduces min-maxing, and it *also* better reflects the value of the scores in play (one +2 is flat out better than two +1s).

Skills-based casting ... difficult. At that point you're moving well beyond "D&D houserules" in my book and into "homebrewed D20 based game" - nowt wrong with that, but you might want to take a broader perspective.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Verueth_Havain 02-19-08, 02:32 AM	I'm currently writing my own variant rule set and wish for some general feedback on some ideas I have. Here's a small list of what I'm cooking up right now in the set: 1) Ability scores are just modifiers (i.e. the standard elite array of 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, and 8 will now be just +2, +2, +1, +1, +0, -1). Instead of rolling dice, distribute six points among them, all of which have a base score of +0. You can take a penalty in one score to raise another by that much. 2) I'm currently writing up new classes for the set. I have 14 classes: the four "core" classes (Fighter, rogue, cleric, and wizard), four variant classes based on the core (so far I have an assassin [rogue] and shaman [cleric, very loosely based on the druid] for this set of classes), and six "hybrid classes" that are my own takes on combining two classes (so far I have the Skirmisher [ftr/rog "guerrilla fighter"], the battlemage [ftr/wiz], the crusader [ftr/clr, loosely based on paladin], and necromancer [clr/wiz]. I've yet to come up with concepts for the rogue/wizard and rogue/cleric combinations). 3) I'm using a hybrid of 3.0 and 3.5 rules that I find unique and effective, and I'm also delving back into the old editions (1st and 2nd) for more ideas and inspiration. And by far the coolest thing I'm currently working on: 4a) A skill-based spellcasting system (I'm borrowing it from another d20 book). Every class that can cast spells gains the skill Spellcasting. Arcane casters get Spellcasting (arcane) and divine Spellcasting (divine). Whenever a spell is cast, the caster makes a Spellcasting check against a DC set by the spell's level. The number of spells that characters can cast per day become the number of spells that character can cast easily. When they go beyond this limit, every spell they cast from that level gains a cumulative +2 modifier to the DC, making them harder to cast. If they fail their Spellcasting check, they take nonlethal damage equal to the spell's level. 4b) Building on the skill-based spellcasting system, I want to build a system of spellcrafting based on the epic spell development system from the Epic Level Handbook. My idea: have various spell seeds with base DCs available for use. If a spellcaster wishes to make a spell of their own, they take the seed they wish to use as a base and add modifiers to the DC based on what they want the spell to do. When they are finished, they make a Spellcraft check against the final DC of their spell. If they succeed, they made the spell. If they fail, they can't try again until they gain at least 1 more rank in Spellcraft (like for copying spells). When the spell is made, they can cast it like any other spell they know, but they use the spell's creation DC rather than the static DC for premade spells (so if a 1st-level spell has a DC of 15 and they made their own 1st-level spell that had a Spellcraft DC of 18, they would cast that home-brewed spell using a Spellcasting DC of 18). This spellcrafting is only available to arcane spellcasters. I know this is just a start, but I have a good feeling about it. What do you people think?
Asurya 02-19-08, 10:19 AM	ok, I develop my own houserule set at the moment, so if I could spare you some pit I fell in: 1) the 1:1 ratio is not a good idea: it is TOO easy to min max (and considering you already trashed the odd scores uselessness, it's even better) OTOH, you give too few "points", converted back in std-system, you actually are givieg your players a 12pts buy with a 1:1 ratio. Considering how 32pts buy are more and more common, at the very least give them +1 for their 6 abilities (it would end up like a 24pts buy), trading it as you see fit (bur see my point above). 2 & 3) wait & see 2) I dont see anything inherently wrong with your choice, but are you banning all the other classes? (I take that from the name 'crusader' you choose for your revised paladin). Beside, you took out one part of CoDzilla but not the other, why? 4a) although a good idea, ToM::Truenamer showed us how "easy" it is to reach "through the roof" bonus to one skill... caster under your system will invest everything they got in their casting skill, effectively allowing them to cast all day long without fear for the consequences. 4b) I know DnD introduced the impression that magic was reliable, but for truly good option (like the über spell so crafted), why not make the character build everything anew each time he wants that much power? anyway, I hope I have been constructive in my remarks, just my :twocents:.
Dan Hemmens 02-19-08, 12:47 PM	If I might suggest, with your Ability scores, have the costs pyrimidal. so +1 costs 1 point, +2 costs 3, +3 6 points and +4 10. It reduces min-maxing, and it also better reflects the value of the scores in play (one +2 is flat out better than two +1s). Skills-based casting ... difficult. At that point you're moving well beyond "D&D houserules" in my book and into "homebrewed D20 based game" - nowt wrong with that, but you might want to take a broader perspective.