Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 xoxsen Dec 06, 2011 11:06:33	Hi all,    With 4E being out for as long as it has now, I would be shocked if someone (proabably many someones) hadn't taken a crack at a house-rules system that merged the finer parts of 3.5E and 4E. Basically, I've poked around these forums, but haven't found anything yet. (But there's a lot to sift through and I'm still sifting...) If anyone could directly me to anything like this, that would be greatly appeciated. For clarification, let me toss out some of the concepts about which I am curious.    Pretty much everyone who reads these forums has seen the ongoing flame wars between 3.5E advocates and 4E advocates. Each system has unique traits and benefits that appear more to different gamers. Just off the top of my head: 3.5E allows: more complexity, more character customization, different "rulesets" (memorized spells vs. specific at-will/encounter/daily stuff), magic items mean a lot more 4E allows: much more balanced system, easier for people to learn, fixes "required classes" issue (everyone can heal to some extent, etc.) and so on  I think 4E did wonders for classes that were woefully simplistic (and maybe boring?) - mostly the martial characters that spend their time moving and attacking or doing full attacks. The tactical depth that defenders and rogues now have is wonderful. However, at the same time, it's like a lot of the wonder and awe associated with casting classes went away. Part of it is an overall power reduction to the casting classes. But part of it is that the casting classes use an identical system (at-will etc.) as the non-casting classes. This gets me back to my original concept.  I'm curious if any house rules work has been done where character classes that share the same power sources (i.e. martial, arcane, divine, psionic, primal, etc.) would share a unique "ruleset" that was unique only to those classes. So, fighters and rogues and so on could all use exploits based on the at-will/encounter/daily system that has done so well by them in 4E. And mages and sorcerers would use their old daily memorization/spell slot system. Psi would use power points. Divine would use... well, I don't know yet. I wouldn't want them to share daily memorization with arcane, so I'd look for something different. (Or maybe there is no divine and it's just a different aspect of Arcane... choices, choices.) Some of the hybrid classes like Paladin and Druid would be problematic to fit into one rule set or the other, but that part of the fun of mucking with new rules systems... :-)        Class balance would not be a requirement. (I think a system like this would rely on the DM to balance game scenarios and situations so that all characters are equal protagonists in "story power" - even if one charcacter swings a sword and the other bends the rules of physics to their whim.) It's the desire to balance overall class power that led to the "sameness" of the 4E classes in the first place.   So, to summarize my original question, has anyone done any work along these lines and, if so, could anyone provide me a link to such work? Thanks in advance! - X
#2 rampant Dec 06, 2011 12:18:41	Here's the trick, a class that can only contribute because the DM decides to let it isn't a class it's a plot device. If the DM has to determine ahead of time which classes are gonna contribute and when, then the game loses its spontanaity. So I'd advise not tossing out class balance entirely. That said the rest of your idea is more workable. For the Divine characters I would suggest channeling type abilities So for example instead of casting cure or inflict, they have a daily pool of positive or negative energy they can dole out in various manners as they level up.
#3 lina_inverse Dec 06, 2011 14:51:07	Class balance would not be a requirement. (I think a system like this would rely on the DM to balance game scenarios and situations so that all characters are equal protagonists in "story power" - even if one charcacter swings a sword and the other bends the rules of physics to their whim.) It's the desire to balance overall class power that led to the "sameness" of the 4E classes in the first place. The purpose of the rules system is to minimize the GM&Players load, anything that forces more work to be done at the table is therefore self defeating. The basic concept however that each power source has unique mechanics however is sound, if a potentiol mind field in the threat that charecters may end up playing diffrent games.
#4 slobo777a Dec 06, 2011 15:39:10	The basic concept however that each power source has unique mechanics however is sound, if a potentiol mind field in the threat that charecters may end up playing diffrent games.  Think ShadowRun for an extreme version of this where a combat involving all characters might need to run with a real-world gun battle, vehicle support, cyberspace and the spirit world - 4 separate games! Not that SR made any pretences to game balance (or playability).
#5 rampant Dec 06, 2011 17:33:58	Well the trick is to pick your power sources and their mechanic. Arcane, Vanctian casting Divine, Channeling Martial, Exploits/maneuvers (at-will, encounter, daily) Psionic, Power points Ok now the next question is how to deal with primal. I.E. are they distinct from divine?
#6 xoxsen Dec 07, 2011 15:25:09	I wonder how many decent, distinct mechanisms could be generated? Primal could be a "reverse" point system where you start each encounter with zero and gain them by doing certain things or having certain things done to you (i.e. Barbarians taking damage gives them points with which to rage). Are these 5 (Arcane, Divine, Martial, Psionic, Primary) the only power sources in 4E?
#7 rampant Dec 07, 2011 16:32:14	Well elemental and shadow are kinda under developed right now.
#8 nb_nmare Dec 08, 2011 13:18:02	I did start on a system like this, though I was mainly focusing on class features rather than powers. Arcane: Arcane Lore (Implement Expertise would be an example of this), Cantrips Divine: Channel Divinity, Divine Devotion (as in the category of feats introduced in HotFL and HotFK) Martial: Martial Talent x2 (armor and weapon training) Primal: Wilderness Knacks, Primal Soul (the category of feats introduced in HotFK) Psionic: Psionic Augmentation, Telepathy, Wild Talents (ala the Dark Sun Campaign Setting) I was also playing around with the idea of assinging certain class features and types of powers based on role. For example, leaders would all get a Combat Leader/Ardent Mantle type feature, defenders would all have defender aura and their at-wills would all be stances, and strikers encounter powers would all be triggered.
#9 mhbjarkistef Dec 11, 2011 3:43:34	I've only just tinkered with 3.5 (*cough*pathfinder*cough*), what I seem to miss the most where the various utility spells (some of them are now 10 minute rituals) and how you could either select a utility or damaging sell in your spell slot.  What would actually work for getting just that effect would be to add lines like "Level 3: You gain an encounter or utility power of level 3 or lower" all over the place. This would make the at-will/encounter/utility/daily system work with the spell-slot system. This would work perfectly since most of the caster's utility powers are very castery, whereas the martial classes' utility power are all very tactical. We could even take it a step further and make a ladder remeniscent of the "minor-move-standard" ladder: utility-encounter-daily When you gain an encounter power you can take a utility power in it's place. And when you gain a daily power you can pick an utility power or encounter power in its place, although it can still only be used once per day. This tiny fix is what we call "safe", a scaredy-fix", a fix that does not change the whole system or disrupt any balance. Just adds little freedom and A LOT of choices (which some people (OP) seem to like) replies: Lina's point is really good. IMO homebrew that makes game more complicated is not worth using I don't recommend the "primal start at 0 then build up". That is more of a class feature (my lifestealer) or a video game thing (rage and combo points from WoW). nbnmare put cantrips under arcane. That makes me wonder why all casters can't use cantrips or use utility powers from the wizard's spell list. These are all just "basic" arcane tricks that I'd think any magician should able learn if he'd effort into it. a Warlock that can't make a make ball of light kinda feels like a sith lord that can cast lightings but not lift object with the force xD I think you are onto a very good discussion. Please keep going, I'd love to see how this turns out :D
#10 guest1458177341 Dec 14, 2011 3:36:28	I'd be interested xoxsen, except when you said class balance wasn't an issue. Balance must absolutely be top priority if we do this. No more having the Druid always being awesome and godly while the monk gets to be cool when the em carefully contrives some sort of situation when having a monk is somewhere close to half as useful as having a Druid.
#11 rampant Dec 16, 2011 0:45:20	Thought, What if we allow prep casters to prepare some spells at different levels of usability. For example the classic Fireball: Upon reaching the appropriate level a caster can prepare Fireball as a daily or an encounter power. IF prepared as a daily power the damage dice and area jump, while an encounter fireball is smaller and less dramatic. Catch is you can't prep the same spell at different usabilities at the same time. An alternate model might be to skew the power allotments of the caster classes, cut an at-will, cut two of the encounter powers, and then add 3-4 dailies. Either one of these would need to be accompanied by some overhaul of course, but the third option requires essentially a new edition. 3.x contributes: Modular classes, non-power format abilities, prolly a bunch of other stuff. 4e contributes: Attack format for spells, mage classes needing gear like everyone else, standardized HP gain, multiple defenses, bunch of other stuff. What I'm seeing is a touch strange so bear with me. You know those charts in the players hand books where they show feat and/or ability increase over the course of x levels. Think something like that but a touch more involved. There would be a base feat progression, and ability score increases of course, but in addition skill allotment and healing surges would be doled out here. Class levels would modify these things (especially the current class level you're taking, and the one you chose as your first class) but not be the final arbiter. For example you would be allowed to select x number of skills to be trained in at level 1. Which skills are allowed would be determined by your class(es) list. In addition your first class (the class you took at level 1) probably gave away training in certain skills free, or maybe a bonus to certain skills. At later levels you would gain additional skill trainings (maybe 2 more at level 5, then 1 more at tenth, 2 at 15th, 1 at 20th, etc.) which at a certain point could be used to not only purchase new skills but as an alternative to purchase mastery of old skills unlocking additional powers and uses for the skill. Healing surges would increase based on this chart as well (with certain classes handing out bonus surges as part of their 1st level benefits and regular class abilities). Everyone would have cloth armor prof. 1/2 level would still be applied to every d20 roll.  Iterative attacks are gone. Each class would gain a set amount of HP at each level (and bonus at first). So a character taking a wizard as his first level would gain 5 HP, cantrip powers as at-wills (including acid splash and the like), free training in arcana, a smattering of 1st level spells  that could be cast as at-wills, encounter, or dailies depending on the spell and how you prep (maybe allow them a total of two prepped spells in any combo they like?), the character would also gain the ability to use wizard implements (wand, staff, orb, and tome). Since this is the character's first level the wizard's 1st level benefits apply, +5 HP, one additional free knowledge skill, +2 will defense, + some pitiful number of bonus surges, wizard weapon proficiencies, additional first level spell prepped per day (this would level up so that the appropriate level it increases to an additional level 2 spell prepped per day and so on). If the character were to then take a level of rogue it would have the first rogue level but not gain the rogue 1st level benefits. In addition to the standard benefits of reaching level 2, they would gain +5 HP from the rogue class, an expanded list of class skills for the next time they gain class skill training, the basic form of sneak attack, a +3 bonus on perception checks made to locate traps, and training in either stealth or bluff (if a character is already trained in stealth and bluff they may choose any other rogue skill, if there aren't any you're not already trained in and you're not high enough level to get advanced skill training you're SOL stupid), and a rogue exploit the character qualifies for. You do not gain +2 on reflex, free training in either stealth or bluff (a character who started rogue would get both free), +7 additional HP, rogue weapon proficinces, leather armor proficiency, + some not completely laughable number of bonus surges, buckler proficiency, an additional rogue exploit, or the ability to make melee attacks with a dex, cha, or int. Does that make sense to anyone else?
#12 mhbjarkistef Dec 16, 2011 5:00:02	This is an interesting experiment. A good start to get the 3.x feel is to start rolling for hit points again. I never did it so I don't know if that is "nostalgic" to anyone, but it's one of those things you can add to your game without giving the finger to balance. Everybody knows monster HP is relative anyways. I like the "You can prepare spells with variable amount of effort. An encounter power can fit any higher level daily slot, and if you choose to prepare an encounter power as a daily spell it gets added benefits, noted in the power's "Daily" line."-bit. Some, not all, encounter powers would have a Daily line. These lines would look something like this: Daily: The attack's burst is increased to burst 5. Daily: The attack deals 3d6 extra damage on a miss, 1d6 extra damage on a miss. Daily: You can sustain the effect as a minor action. Daily: Once before the end of your next turn you can use a standard action to repeat the attack. This means it'll take us no time to just downgrade most daily powers (MOST, not ALL) to give the right feel. We should leave encounter powers as they are. This makes your life easier and makes it easier to maintain balance. The Essential products did make these tables, and I really quite like having an overview of my class. I think this should be implemented to all the classes. Multiclass should stay as it is in 4e. It works, and since a class gets most of his benefits right at level 1 (as opposed to 3.x), it's best if we did everything else first before we starting ****ing around with the base of the system. Also, we must address how sacred to-hit is in 4e compared to 3.x. In every opt thread you find you'll see this: Weapon Expertise. It's basically a mandatory feat for EVERYONE. In 3.x however you had stuff like "trade to-hit for AC", which is just ridiculus in 4e. I do like skill progression. I think we could balance it by decreasing the amount of skill granted by all classes by 1, but no class ever starts with fever skills than 3. And then gain that skill "back" at level 5 and then one or two extra skills over the course of their lives. Or we could just say: Level 11: You gain a extra +2 background bonus to a skill of your choice. This is WAY more balanced than extra trained skills. Okay, I've thought about it. This makes sense. All classes gain -1 skill at character creations (except 3-skill classes). All classes get a free Skill Training feat during low Heroic (except 3-skill classes). Then at certain levels you gain a +2 background benefit to a skill of your choice, or can add one skill to your class skill list. I think we should look at this as "downgrading 4e" instead of "let's make a new system", if not only to make it compatible with our 4e games. Let's not try to re-invent anything, just look at how we can tweak things to make the more complicated (although this is against most housrule rules xD).
#13 rampant Dec 16, 2011 8:41:26	Making things more complex for complexity's sake doesn't help. You have to make them more complex in the right way or you're just being a pain. MOdular leveling is something most people I've talked to are more interested in than rolling hit points (which is a dumb idea to begin with). Feat based multi-class ala 4e standard doesn't work unless there's some level of parity between the power structures, i.e. that one classes's encounter powers are vaguely in line with another classes. Since the proposed alteration to the power structure is not in fact one that would leave encounters, dailies, and at-wills at parity accross the classes the power swap format for multi-classing goes out the window.  As for the first level benefits of classes that's why I created the distinction between features gained at the first level of the class, and the features gained at the first level you take. Ok sure a clever player could probably still get all sorts of abilities by dipping a level or two in each class, but they wouldn't be very good abilities since they don't get the improved versions from later levels, or enough levels in a single class to get the good powers/feats/etc.
#14 mhbjarkistef Dec 17, 2011 9:26:27	Actually, I've considered this, and I kinda like the idea of "modular leveling".  I like it if we agree that the secondary class levels differently then the "favoured" class. Just like we have Warlord (Hybrid) we should not give a person ALL the level 1 benefits of a class just by taking one level. We can actually use the existing Hybrid classes, since they do look balanced enough. So I can essentially do this: Character level  -    Class level     1                  -     Fighter 1     2                  -     Figther 2     3                  -     Fighter 3     4                  -     Warlord 1 (Hybrid)    At this level I still get ability score increase, at all the benefits of a hybrid warlord. What about feats? Since we get feats at 1 AND 2, taking 2 levels of a different class is essentially gaining an extra feat. Should feats be tied to character levels, or should you get feats at level 1, 3, 5 etc like before? Character Levels is what makes Class Levels worth it, since a character still gets ability score boosts at certain levels and still gets to choose a paragon path at lvl 11, this makes everything balanced. I'm more than willing to lose a single encounter power in order to gain all the hybrid benefits of a different class, since my character will still be as strong (attack bonus, skills, paragon paths all come at the appropriate character levels). I do however hope that one can still only have as many at-wills as his favoured class, and I still hope you can only take levels from one different class.
#15 rampant Dec 17, 2011 21:30:20	What are you talking about? My proposal had feats, surges, ability scores, and skills mostly on a total level system so that your combined levels determine most of those. Class levels progress you in class each class would have unique or semi-unique power structures so simple swapping doesn't work. Hybrid doesn't make sense since you take levels like in 3e. However each class has special benefits if you take it as your first class to prevent the cherry picking from 3e. The defense boost, weapon/armor prof, extra skills and surges, plus other stuff, are only handed out to characters who take the class as their first class. A wizard who takes a level of rogue gets the first level of sneak attack, the initial trapfinding boost, a portion of the skill training a mono class rogue gets, and maybe half the exploits they'd have gotten if they took the rogue class first. No weapon or armor prof, no ref bonus, no bonus surges. This makes the hybrid system irrelevant.
#16 mhbjarkistef Dec 18, 2011 10:44:04	Touché