Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Jack Daniel 01-25-07, 12:46 PM	So a while back, I put up a thread explaining why I wanted to re-write D&D. I was being all nostalgic, looking back to a simpler time. I have to say, I was very encouraged by the largely positive responses I got, and I'm still going through with this whole mad scheme. Now that it's starting to take shape, I'm realizing that I'm cobbling together a Frankenstein's monster of all editions. From 3rd edition, we keep the unified mechanic and the open multiclassing rules. From 2nd edition, much of the feel, especially where races and combat are concerned. From 1st edition... well, let's just say that magic in this game is going to look like a "what if", as in "what if AD&D 1st edition and Final Fantasy had an illegitimate lovechild?" And, of course, the inspiration for the whole thing is the basic game, OD&D, the version that I remember loving to play so much. http://mypage.iusb.edu/~jodhiggi/EnEpt1_preview.pdf Take a look. Tell me what you think. I'm really concerned about whether it captures that classic, Basic/Expert/Companion/Master/Immortal boxed-set version feeling of D&D.
Jack Daniel 01-30-07, 03:01 PM	...and while everybody was not caring, I went and finished all the character classes and severely tweaked the combat rules I'm going to use to make them a little more like old D&D. I'm particularly proud of the sorcerer class and the snazzy new cover. *crickets chirp* Anybody?
DreadArchon 01-30-07, 03:21 PM	Anybody? ...No, actually.
Jack Daniel 01-30-07, 07:02 PM	...No, actually. Lol, what the smeg is that supposed to mean? :D
Lord_Tirian 01-30-07, 07:24 PM	...and while everybody was not caring, I went and finished all the character classes and severely tweaked the combat rules I'm going to use to make them a little more like old D&D. Looked through it. Hard to judge, due to the total change in the whole thing (i.e. 36-level progression). And for a moment, I've thought, you'd brought THAC0 back O.o, but it's just the phrase to-Hit *phew* I'm worried 'bout the 9 HD cut: since people start to get more attacks 11+ onwards, this may be a world of hurt... and have you statted some 10th-level spells (true dweomers)? Just for comparison of the relative power levels... The entire thing looks nice, but quite radical, thus hard to balance with out-of-the-box d20 stuff... so radical, that (personally) I'd prefer something completely generic, but that's just my taste... more may come later, if I get more insights by staring at the cover (and the contents ;) ). And yeah, this thread would fit better into "House Rules", perhaps a WizO will swoop it, so probably no need for re-posting it there :)
Palin the Wizard 01-30-07, 07:39 PM	Can't open it for some reason.
Tequila_Sunrise 01-30-07, 08:00 PM	Just out of curiousity, why 36 levels, other than nostalgia? It's just weird number.
Jack Daniel 01-30-07, 08:07 PM	Looked through it. Hard to judge, due to the total change in the whole thing (i.e. 36-level progression). And for a moment, I've thought, you'd brought THAC0 back O.o, but it's just the phrase to-Hit *phew* I'm worried 'bout the 9 HD cut: since people start to get more attacks 11+ onwards, this may be a world of hurt... and have you statted some 10th-level spells (true dweomers)? Just for comparison of the relative power levels... The entire thing looks nice, but quite radical, thus hard to balance with out-of-the-box d20 stuff... so radical, that (personally) I'd prefer something completely generic, but that's just my taste... more may come later, if I get more insights by staring at the cover (and the contents ;) ). And yeah, this thread would fit better into "House Rules", perhaps a WizO will swoop it, so probably no need for re-posting it there :) Well it was either "cap hit dice at 9" or "keep d20 Modern style massive damage thresholds", and I decided that the latter instance was more of a needless complication than the former. In any case, monsters and spells are probably going to run along a more AD&D line of power level (damage from even 10th level spells will be capped at 20 dice, for example). It'll be deadly at high levels, I admit... without being too over-the-top. And, yeah, it's definitely not meant to be d20-compatible. Maybe Castles & Crusades compatible, but even that's a stretch. This is its own thing. Just out of curiousity, why 36 levels, other than nostalgia? It's just weird number. Meh. Nostalgia. Of course, as near as I can figure, the only reason that 36 levels was used in OD&D was, that was when they decided to say, "enough's enough, let's just come out with rules for letting characters become gods already."
Lord_Tirian 01-30-07, 08:21 PM	Well it was either "cap hit dice at 9" or "keep d20 Modern style massive damage thresholds" Ah, yes... why not some kind of Vitality/Wound Point system? Models the lethality as well, but makes it (IMHO) more interesting, and similarly intuitive.
Squangos 01-30-07, 11:11 PM	…Male Dwarves "keep long, elaborately groomed bears"?! Hope they eat all those elves… Seriously, it's an awful lot of stuff I'd have to work on wrapping my head around it (probably the good part of a day or so to understand what's there), but it's certainly different from what I'm used to.
Jack Daniel 01-31-07, 09:11 AM	…Male Dwarves "keep long, elaborately groomed bears"?! Hope they eat all those elves… Seriously, it's an awful lot of stuff I'd have to work on wrapping my head around it (probably the good part of a day or so to understand what's there), but it's certainly different from what I'm used to. LOL, duly noted and corrected.
tankschmidt 01-31-07, 09:52 AM	I like a a lot of the feel you have going on -- going to level 36, six different saving throws (that make sense!). The promotion classes remind me of the old bard, and I like that too. I think my favorite thing you did was to cap hit dice at nine. Are we allowed to call that "name level?" I'm curious how you will handle weapon proficiencies. I've got my fingers crossed for different levels of specialization, all the way up to grand mastery. In my book the science of weapon proficiency peaked with the D&D Rules Cyclopedia, baby.
Jack Daniel 01-31-07, 07:45 PM	I like a a lot of the feel you have going on -- going to level 36, six different saving throws (that make sense!). The promotion classes remind me of the old bard, and I like that too. I think my favorite thing you did was to cap hit dice at nine. Are we allowed to call that "name level?" I'm curious how you will handle weapon proficiencies. I've got my fingers crossed for different levels of specialization, all the way up to grand mastery. In my book the science of weapon proficiency peaked with the D&D Rules Cyclopedia, baby. Well, I just call it mastery, but the system is there, and totally inspired by the RC. I've just made it a whole lot simpler (and less over the top powerful). ===== And now, for my next trick... I've decided to implement an interesting variant on the magic system. Until now, I've just kind of been going with a genericized "everybody learns spells like a 3e wizard, scribing them into a spell-book, but they prepare them like a spirit shaman, readying a few and then casting those like a sorcerer." That... is just a little too Vanican fire-and-forget still. I want to keep something like memorization/preparation (it's a D&D tradition), but I hit upon a way to make it less central to the way magic works. Here's the house-rule: 1) Characters do not need to memorize their spells in order to cast them. All you need is to have your spell-book open to the appropriate page. Finding a given spell in your spell-book, regardless of how many spells you have or what page you're turned to at the moment, is always a standard action. That is, let's say you want to cast burning hands and you don't have it memorized that day. You have to take a standard action to flip through your spell book and find burning hands, but once you do that, you can keep casting burning hands round after round, so long as your 1st level MP hold out. If, on the other hand, it turns out that the baddie you're fighting is resistant to fire magic and you want to try magic missiles instead, you have to take another standard action to find that spell in your spell-book. 2) Characters can memorize a small number of spells, as a convenience, so that they don't have to read them out of their spell books in order to cast them. This has a lot of advantages: you don't need to be able to see your spell-book, or have it out and open (where it can get lost or destroyed), or even have it on your person, to cast the spells you've memorized. Also, since you don't have to hold your book with one hand and make somatic gestures with the other, you only need one free hand to cast memorized spells. The number of total spell levels that you can have memorized is your class level plus your ability adjustment, so a 10th level mage with an intelligence bonus of +3 could memorize 13 levels worth of spells (like two 5th level spells and a 3rd level spell, or 13 1st level spells, or 7 1st level spells and 12 cantrips) in any combination. I'm going to playtest this idea this weekend. It really has me intrigued!
Sphyre 02-01-07, 02:32 AM	I'd love to comment, but my browser says that server doesn't even exist... I look forward to seeing it, when the website comes up or something.
nonsi 02-01-07, 02:56 AM	I want to play an Elf Monk in your campaign.
Jack Daniel 02-07-07, 09:20 PM	Well, new version's up. Skills and weapons are done, and I've decided to radically alter the way critical hits work. The magic and combat systems are starting to take shape as something unique and apart from D&D now...
Jack Daniel 02-07-07, 09:24 PM	I want to play an Elf Monk in your campaign. I want to play an elf monk in my campaign too. Problem is, I'll probably only ever end up DMing it... :embarrass