| Welcome to World Of Geb. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Prospective Changes | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Feb 15 2012, 08:45 PM (312 Views) | |
| DM Dusk | Feb 15 2012, 08:45 PM Post #1 |
![]()
Dungeon Master
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Hopefully I'm not getting too ahead of myself here, but I'd like to hear thoughts on some rules transitions when we eventually change over to AD&D. The list below will probably be added to before we make the switch in any case. 1. Encumbrance. Figured I'd start with a big one here. I've overhauled and tweaked the item slots system a lot already, so suggesting this feels a little self-defeating, but nevertheless would people want to continue using the same slots system we have now, or switch to a traditional encumbrance? The advantage of traditional encumbrance is that it would probably allow for more to be carried, at the expense of having to monitor said weights. This will not have to be ulta-precise, and could be segmented (as Jamie M has suggested, into Armour, Weapons, Backpack and so on) for easier management. 2. Casualty of Battle Chart This, as named in my Rules pdfs, is what you roll on when you hit 0 (or less) Hit Points. It has a range of results that can be quite messy. Would people want to retain this, or switch to the simpler by-the-book AD&D method, wherein 0 Hit Points or less is always unconcious, with a character "bleeding out" to -10 (unless stablised) before death? 3. Skill Domains These are not entirely compatible with AD&D, though there is a list of "secondary skills" that I may use by-the-book or expand. I'm putting this up here in case people have any strong opinions on them. Many will be made redundant/incompatible due to them being more or less Class Features (e.g. Ranger or Thief). Feel free to bring up anything else that may occur and be relevant. |
| Offline Profile | Quote ^^^ |
| Pylon | Feb 15 2012, 09:16 PM Post #2 |
|
Secret Police
![]() ![]()
|
1) I know you put loads of effort into the inventory system, but I think encumbrance is at least worth a trial run to see how it plays, it appeals to me more, I get the feeling we'll be able to carry more in general. 2) I prefer your system, there's more flavour, and I think it gives us a better chance of survival. 3) I don't really have any strong opinion on this. I'd like to know what you'll be doing about spell components, I know you've discussed it a little bit, but something written down would be good. |
| Offline Profile | Quote ^^^ |
| Leonard | Feb 15 2012, 09:34 PM Post #3 |
![]()
Prestige Poster Level 1
![]()
|
1) I know it may piss some people off, but I agree at least trying it would be good. 2) Like your system, makes things interesting. 3) Only occasionally have skill domains been useful (admittedly ones that haven't been chosen could be more useful but we'll never know) so I'd be cool with dropping them, because (as you kinda said) some of them pretty much are classes. Kenn mentioned something about spell components during Dark Sun, but I can't remember much. |
| Offline Profile | Quote ^^^ |
| Alex | Feb 15 2012, 09:52 PM Post #4 |
|
Derp-Knight Extraordinaire!
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
My two pence, as usual. 1) Math really isn't my strong point, so a bit cringe here at the various prospective workings out of stuff. The more simple, the better I think. I'll give it a shot, at least. 2) I quite like the present system, makes for an 'Oh god, what's gonna happen' when one of us gets owned, rather than the whole....oh, -10, you bleed out and die. 3) Well, sofar not many of the skill-domains have been useful. No strong feelings here. |
| Offline Profile | Quote ^^^ |
| Ludwig | Feb 15 2012, 10:38 PM Post #5 |
![]()
Prestige Poster Level 3
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
1. Encumbrance is relatively easy to deal with - bear in mind most characters have a core set of items and equipment that seldom changes and it really is only consumables and the odd bit of treasure that you need to track. 2. I'd like to playtest the -10 bleeding out system to see how folk who aren't used to it think it plays. I have my likes and dislikes about the current system. I like the random effects but dislike that even bringing you to a low negative number, even as little as -1 can kill you outright, which I believe has happened to Ketta. How about a combo - make the chart a bit nastier, but it only gets rolled on when you hit -10? There is also another option that I have used myself which is that you can bleed out to a number equal to your constitution. So if you have a Con of 12, you bleed out at -12. It means tough characters can hold on longer, surviving wounds that would kill the weak and wimps bleed out quickly. 3. Skill domains / secondary skills. Either works for me, though I feel I should point out that some folk have got pretty much zero use out of their skill domains thus far, whilst others have found them very useful. Maybe re-evaluate which ones to include? |
| Offline Profile | Quote ^^^ |
| DM Dusk | Feb 15 2012, 10:43 PM Post #6 |
![]()
Dungeon Master
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Spell components "by the book" of AD&D are pretty simple: Most spell components are small mundane items, or at least easy to get a hold of in civilisation. These are considered to be free, though they must be stated to be carried. A bag of these will take only a single slot in the current inventory system, and if using classic encumbrance will probably weigh no more than a couple of pounds. Specialist components are needed for some spells. These must be bought or obtained specifically, and should require some effort to obtain in order to cast the most complex/powerful spells. These will generally not take up much more space as they should be transportable e.g. a crushed pearl (worth 100gp) is not large. Under the current system they will be contained within the same single components slot (though should be noted somewhere seperately) and under classic encumbrance would have minimal or negligible weights. You may wonder why spell components become necessary if most are free, though this will not interfere with spell casting most of the time. There will be occasion however when a spellcaster may be without access to his items, or even lose his supply of components, and this could prove critical to gameplay, and give extra challenge. Side note: Though stated above to be free, if needing completely replaced there will probably be a nominal charge of a few gold pieces to fully replenish mundane spell components. This is to avoid a penniless spellcaster somehow "buying" items when he has literally no monies. |
| Offline Profile | Quote ^^^ |
| DM Dusk | Feb 15 2012, 10:53 PM Post #7 |
![]()
Dungeon Master
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
1. Interesting to see so many positive results for a classic encumbrance system, I don't mind us switching even if it is only for testing purposes. 2. My system favours random chance and at present it can range from much safer to much worse than the -10HP death system. If I were to combine them into something such as Dougal suggests, the results at -10 (say) would be much worse than at present, and for example, crippling results would be harder to heal (weeks/months of mundane rest or a Cure Serious Wounds or higher). 3. As designed some are more useful more often but others applying in a more specialised way. Warfare in particular is rarely useful adventuring, but would be critical trying to command an army. These mostly fold into Class Features in AD&D and I included them to add variety to a very small list of class choices. Using the more mundane Secondary Skills system under AD&D may satisfy, when there are more classes to define roles. |
| Offline Profile | Quote ^^^ |
| Ludwig | Feb 16 2012, 07:32 AM Post #8 |
![]()
Prestige Poster Level 3
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I think the problem with having Warfare as a skill domain is that the odds of it being useful at any point during low level play are slim. If you want to stick with skill domains, I would suggest offering a range of skill domains suitable for low level play and then at 10th level allow each player to pick a second skill domain that is suitable for high level play. Contrast: Tactics - take a round to study an enemy or monster to discern weaknesses, on a successful skill check get +1 to hit for the rest of the combat. with Warfare - commanding armies |
| Offline Profile | Quote ^^^ |
| Alex | Feb 27 2012, 09:26 AM Post #9 |
|
Derp-Knight Extraordinaire!
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Warfare has cropped up a couple times for Keta, I remember asking questions about the bigger forces we've faced, and got some details from Kenn, nothing game-changing though. |
| Offline Profile | Quote ^^^ |
| Ludwig | Feb 27 2012, 11:22 AM Post #10 |
![]()
Prestige Poster Level 3
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Yeah, I've never seen you actively use it the way it's meant to be though. The right circumstances just never crop up at low level. It would be just as easy to say it is a class feature fighters gain at 9th level along with followers and let a fighter choose something else. Personally, as a GM I like to run battles narratively - gauging the relative strengths of the two forces and then throwing some pivotal events or encounters at PC's that allow them to change the course of the battle. Legend Of The Five Rings actually incorporated this into its ruleset. At the start of the battle both generals roll off their tactics skills and the winner has the advantage. Each turn there is a 'tides of battle' roll to see if anything grievously injures each player participating such as stray arrows or being unhorsed(rather than rolling dozens of tiresome combats, damage is reduced by various skills and equipment so hardcore heroes are proper juggernauts here and seldom get wounded by peons) and then there is a roll on the 'heroic opportunity' chart which essentially generates mini random encounters mid-battle such as duels between champions, seizing banners, attacking officers, etc... Worth a look for a much more exciting and less 'wargamey' system. I have NEVER had a player come away feeling anything less than a Big Damn Hero (tm) after a mass battle in the 3 year campaign I ran. It's very similar to how I run mass battles in Star Wars d6 as well, though I run those via pure narrative and make up the 'heroic opportunites' myself as you can go fairly crazy with what you can do in Star Wars. |
| Offline Profile | Quote ^^^ |
| Alex | Feb 27 2012, 11:41 AM Post #11 |
|
Derp-Knight Extraordinaire!
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Yeah, that's true. Though, we've never lead any military units, so it's kinda fair I guess. That sounds pretty awesome, actually. ![]() And yeah, Star Wars is really nuts. xD Force Points make things totally epic, not to mention just the setting itself. |
| Offline Profile | Quote ^^^ |
| DM Dusk | Mar 1 2012, 01:21 PM Post #12 |
![]()
Dungeon Master
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The Skill Domains system wasn't originally intended to be tied-down to any specific rules or bonuses, though some of them ended up that way once they needed ways to be implemented during actual play. The point of them was more to add flavour and a little extra diversity to a small set of classes, while not hugely changing or breaking the game already set out. When we move to AD&D they'll happily be dropped in favour of the Secondary Skills (which are similar in that they're not tied to particular mechanical rules) and added Class Features since there will be a wider range of classes and more laid-out abilities per class. So, I'm not planning on reforming the Skill Domains before then. |
| Offline Profile | Quote ^^^ |
| DM Dusk | Oct 13 2012, 06:48 PM Post #13 |
![]()
Dungeon Master
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Updates regarding rules + I'm customising the "secondary skills" rule for AD&D to bring it closer to my Skill Domains (so we'll see a partial return of those) + 0HP, Unconcious -10HP, Death - we've been using this since we switched to AD&D but what may not have been fully covered are (by-the-book): -6HP or less means potential permanent scarring or limb loss. "Bleed" -1HP per round until dead or stabilised (wound-binding or magical healing) Characters fully resting for four whole consecutive weeks are restored to 100% of HP +Not by-the-book, but informed by: Revived characters can take minimal actions for 1d6 rounds (ignore for magical healing) Revived characters are Fatigued for one week unless: Rested for one full day or healed magically (in addition to revival) Characters heal half their level in HP per day +/- Con modifier (Note these replace harsher by-the-book methods) +Critical Hits: These have been back-and-forth for a while, and I'm not changing it yet. Do people prefer +Level (or Hit Dice for monsters) to damage or the X2 multiplier? + FIGHTERS (including multi-classed): Roll Save VS Paralysis to stay concious on 0HP to -3HP Deal maximum damage on a Critical Hit (no dice roll) + Experience Points (by-the-book): Split between ALL victors (including NPCs). The exception to this are monsters "solo'ed" - killed by a party member on their own, without the presence of the rest of the party or any other assistance. + NPC's advancing (not by-the-book but closer to): Gain full participating XP (not halved). This applies only to proper henchmen or NPCs who can advance in a class. |
| Offline Profile | Quote ^^^ |
| Pylon | Oct 13 2012, 08:49 PM Post #14 |
|
Secret Police
![]() ![]()
|
I'd say that I prefer adding your level for critical hits. |
| Offline Profile | Quote ^^^ |
| Alex | Oct 14 2012, 01:01 PM Post #15 |
|
Derp-Knight Extraordinaire!
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Max damage criticals, woo. |
| Offline Profile | Quote ^^^ |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Game Mechanics · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2








12:13 AM Jul 11