Post/Author/DateTime	Post
ShinoAburame 12-04-06, 12:03 AM	Armor/Shields: It never made sense to me why armor/shields increases your AC. Armor/shields make it harder to move, so why is it harder for the opponent to succesfuly hit you? That deserves an implosion of the universe on abstract quagmires of physics. Instead, I reckon armor/shields offer damage resistance both magickal and non-magickal. Clearly the damage resistance has limits. (All attacks still do atleast 1 damage.) But immagine having a chain-skirt, that's already a -4 damage! Apparently to balance this I'd have to take away profficietcies from spellcasters, (as always, divine casters bennefit most from anything..) but ultimately I'd want to use the generic classes anyway. Class Changes: To makeup for now the warrior's gross advantage, and the expert's already weak comparison, I'd change the expert's hit die to d12. Action points: Like d20 modern you gain action points, however you gain a number amount differantly. You gain actionpoints equal to your charisma x wisdom modifier. I did this on purpose because wisdom/charisma are some of the weaker attributes. Now spellcasters actually have a reason to choose them over cheap intelligence. Wisdom for the will saves+action points, or charisma for the good modifiers in important skills+action points. Arcane vs Divine: Why would any spellcaster in thier right mind choose arcane over divine as it's currently introduced? As such the system is being changed a tad; Arcane components: Besides the normal costs of matireals in the spell itself, spellcasters must pay additional gold equal to the spell's level x2. That means a level nine spell even without matireal components is going to cost you 18 gold. Thus putting thier money where thier mouth is. (Assuming the spell doesn't have verbal components lol!) Also spellcasters suffer arcane-spell failure for wearing armor as normal. Divine reluctance: Divine magick is restrictive but in a very differant way. Firstoff, spellcasters must choose a diety, though they are not bound by alingments as I don't really give a crap about alingments, they must show thier loyalty in several ways... a) They can only wield the diety's favored weapon. They gain automatic profficietcy with it. (This can be good, but mostly bad.) b) Depending on the time of day, and of your DIETY'S alingment. You gain full spellcasting rights, but any other time of the day is subject to a 5% chance of spell-failure. Good gods: Daytime. 5:00am to 12:00pm. Neutral gods: Noon. 1:00pm to 8:00pm. Evil gods: 9:00pm to 4:00am. How's that sound?
SokenzanMarauder 12-04-06, 01:13 AM	Armor/Shields: It never made sense to me why armor/shields increases your AC. Armor/shields make it harder to move, so why is it harder for the opponent to succesfuly hit you? That deserves an implosion of the universe on abstract quagmires of physics. Try thinking of AC in terms of not trying to hit you, but trying to harm you. -Gene
calvinNhobbes 12-04-06, 12:38 PM	Try thinking of AC in terms of not trying to hit you, but trying to harm you. -Gene Ditto Gene, also, learn about what touch attacks are.
Chrono Nexus 12-04-06, 12:44 PM	Go to an SCA event if you have a local kingdom. Sit in to watch them fight. You'll see that shields are actually quite good for deflecting blows.
ShinoAburame 12-04-06, 01:02 PM	Ehhh, there was more to the innitial post then just shields/armor you know, I'm really more concerned about if that spell-system helps balance casters to non-casters.
hiryuu 12-04-06, 01:12 PM	Go to an SCA event if you have a local kingdom. Sit in to watch them fight. You'll see that shields are actually quite good for deflecting blows. Watch? Join in! It's the SCA, man! I know at least in Florida they're a very inclusive bunch.
Chrono Nexus 12-04-06, 01:36 PM	Class Changes: To makeup for now the warrior's gross advantage, and the expert's already weak comparison, I'd change the expert's hit die to d12. Warriors do not have a greater advantage over experts then they ever have before. These are npc classes, I can't see how they even impact game balance. Action points: Like d20 modern you gain action points, however you gain a number amount differantly. You gain actionpoints equal to your charisma x wisdom modifier. I did this on purpose because wisdom/charisma are some of the weaker attributes. Now spellcasters actually have a reason to choose them over cheap intelligence. Wisdom for the will saves+action points, or charisma for the good modifiers in important skills+action points. I'm against increasing power based on ability scores. That aside, action points are totally abstract. They would be more closely associated with fate then any ability. Also, this leads into the issue of negative action points. Arcane vs Divine: Why would any spellcaster in thier right mind choose arcane over divine as it's currently introduced? As such the system is being changed a tad; Arcane casters get more spells per day. And they get a better spell list. I'm all for balancing it with divine though. Arcane components: Besides the normal costs of matireals in the spell itself, spellcasters must pay additional gold equal to the spell's level x2. That means a level nine spell even without matireal components is going to cost you 18 gold. Thus putting thier money where thier mouth is. Fair enough. But this is going to become an annoyance for players. It really doesn't add anything to the game thematically, and it really doesn't accomplish anything at higher levels as a balancing factor. Divine reluctance: Divine magick is restrictive but in a very differant way. Firstoff, spellcasters must choose a diety, though they are not bound by alingments as I don't really give a crap about alingments, they must show thier loyalty in several ways... Your players might. I can't see a god of peace and healing granting spells to a bloodthirsty lunatic just because he prays to it and carries it's favored weapon. a) They can only wield the diety's favored weapon. They gain automatic profficietcy with it. (This can be good, but mostly bad.) If you want to impose balance for divine casting, you should start with armor, not what weapon they wield. Make divine casters subject to spell failure chance. Voila, balance. b) Depending on the time of day, and of your DIETY'S alingment. You gain full spellcasting rights, but any other time of the day is subject to a 5% chance of spell-failure. Good gods: Daytime. 5:00am to 12:00pm. Neutral gods: Noon. 1:00pm to 8:00pm. Evil gods: 9:00pm to 4:00am. How's that sound? It sounds overly complex and dissatisfying.
Thought 12-04-06, 03:28 PM	Armor/Shields: It never made sense to me why armor/shields increases your AC. Armor/shields make it harder to move, so why is it harder for the opponent to succesfuly hit you? To quote Fight Club, "You are not your armor class. You are not how much you paid to enchant your shield. You are not the dodge feat taken at 3rd level. You are not your chainmail. You are not your freaking dexterity score. You are the all-fighting, all-spellcasting player characters." AC determines how hard it is to hit you, as in the squishy pink part of you, not the metal tin-can shell. Armor increases your AC because it is harder for the baddies to get past it and slice you up. But in reality, there is very little effective difference between properly balanced AC and DR. With a high AC, you will be hit less often for more damage, while with DR you will be hit more often for less damage. A properly balanced DR will occupy the same region as AC on a damage bell-curve, thus not really all that different. Class Changes: To makeup for now the warrior's gross advantage, and the expert's already weak comparison, I'd change the expert's hit die to d12. As mentioned, the effective result of a balanced implementation of DR should not be terribly different from AC (unless you are allowing magic to utterly bypass it?). As such, A warrior's "advantage" isn't so gross and the expert therefore doesn't need to be bumped up. Besides, I would say a d12 is a little too good for the class anywho. Why would any spellcaster in their right mind choose arcane over divine as it's currently introduced? As such the system is being changed a tad; Because Arcane has greater variety, flashier spells, and more bang for buck? Besides the normal costs of matireals in the spell itself, spellcasters must pay additional gold equal to the spell's level x2. That means a level nine spell even without matireal components is going to cost you 18 gold. Thus putting thier money where thier mouth is. (Assuming the spell doesn't have verbal components lol!) Also spellcasters suffer arcane-spell failure for wearing armor as normal. But if you can cast a lvl 9 spell, 18 gold is nothing. Calling down meteors from heaven for an extra 18gp? That is a good deal. Divine magick is restrictive but in a very differant way. Firstoff, spellcasters must choose a diety, though they are not bound by alingments as I don't really give a crap about alingments, they must show thier loyalty in several ways... a) They can only wield the diety's favored weapon. They gain automatic profficietcy with it. (This can be good, but mostly bad.) b) Depending on the time of day, and of your DIETY'S alingment. You gain full spellcasting rights, but any other time of the day is subject to a 5% chance of spell-failure. Good gods: Daytime. 5:00am to 12:00pm. Neutral gods: Noon. 1:00pm to 8:00pm. Evil gods: 9:00pm to 4:00am. You misspelled Magic. And while you don't care about alignment, what about your players? Besides, if you are trying to improve things, it is rather slipshod to toss aside a core mechanic with so little revision. Why must a divine magic user wield his or her deity’s favored weapon? These gods need to lighten up if they are that obsessed over their long swords and maces. As for casting times and chance of failure, I thought you just said you didn't care about alignment. One or the other, please. And what happens between noon and 1, 8pm and 9pm, and 4am and 5am? Is all magic "out of sync" or does no magic work? Is this a transitional time? What is the reason for it? Sorry if this seems overly harsh, but I guess I just don't see the reason behind these changes, or how they will logically improve the game.
ShinoAburame 12-04-06, 08:06 PM	Quite simply it was an attempt to nerf spellcasters and increase the potential of non-spellcasters. Magick is very cheap. An amatuer mage could spin circles around a well-equipped fighter.
Chrono Nexus 12-04-06, 08:41 PM	Quite simply it was an attempt to nerf spellcasters and increase the potential of non-spellcasters. Magick is very cheap. An amatuer mage could spin circles around a well-equipped fighter. I hate to disagree with everything you say, but I do. An amateur spellcaster, I assume, would have selected sub-optimal spells. A fighter is more than his equipment- an intelligent player can defeat an average spellcaster. As for Cleric.. well... they are powerful, yeah. They need to be nerfed. Spell failure chance would nerf heavily armored clerics. However, nerfing all spellcasting does not make nonspellcasters better. It makes parties as a whole weaker. A better approach might be to allow Bo9S- but I havev't read it. I can't vouch for whether or not it would make nonspellcasters broken or not.
Millennium 12-11-06, 09:31 AM	Armor/Shields: It never made sense to me why armor/shields increases your AC. Armor/shields make it harder to move, so why is it harder for the opponent to succesfuly hit you? Because the blows start bouncing off the armor (or, depending on the type of armor, possibly getting caught in it) without doing any significant harm. I wouldn't call such hits successful.
steventirey1985 12-11-06, 11:55 AM	Because the blows start bouncing off the armor (or, depending on the type of armor, possibly getting caught in it) without doing any significant harm. I wouldn't call such hits successful.. You could also look at it as the hit was successful, but the damage reduction of the armor negated all of the damage. Of course, that's assuming you use the Armor as DR rule.
CroBob 12-12-06, 04:53 AM	Quite simply it was an attempt to nerf spellcasters and increase the potential of non-spellcasters. Magick is very cheap. An amatuer mage could spin circles around a well-equipped fighter. I see, so the fighter who can swing his sword all day is the level one wizard or sorcerer's *****, because the mage can cast a single spell that does 1d4+1 damage, unerringly wounding the fighter, and the fighter... um... can't hit the wizard's rediculously low AC to kill him in one hit, not losing that ability until he reads a book the next day?