Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Bronzebeard

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7
Homebrew and House Rules (D&D) / Re: DnD 5.3 - Sharing & Peer Reviewing
« on: February 17, 2018, 02:05:28 PM »
There would be much more to say, but, i didn't made a changelog so i think it's easier to Link the Book and leave you to read it.

I'm afraid this is a number of times more difficult then describing the changes.
Your book is 132 pages long. Reading and critiquing it is no small task to boot.

I'd hope you'll find time to construct some general bullets of what were major changes you made (mechanically. Thematics are no subject one can objectively criticize) and pointers to which page to find them.

Best of luck

I did it mainly because of the alert that the thread is very old and I shouldn't revive it unless i was reeeeeeealy sure. So, basically, I didn't want to ignore any instructions.
Also, I reckon it deserves it's own thread as it is a different title.

As for the subject at hand: I'm unsure as to energy types. If each key is the smallest denominator per se - then what is an energy Key? Is it damage? I already have harm Key. Is it a condition? Not every fire spell inflicts burning.
Energy usually contain thunder(sonic), acid, poison, lightning, ice, fire, radiant and necrotic.
Does these encompass everything? Are these the Primary colours which enable a user to create all?

So, as you can clearly see, this is not complete. There's quit a bit more to do.
But it is something. A big portion of the help came from these threads posted here. So thank you very much. And thank you for future help.
Tell me what you see that I don't.

In regards to the mechanic itself:
I imagine it so - you go over the 4 steps - deciding the target, casting range, duration and effects. Sometimes the order of pickings matters. Sometimes it doesn't.
Each picking has a score. You add them all up. That's the spell level. It is the base for calculation things such as spell DC.
If the spell score is too high, the caster can reduce it by having a very long casting time. Turning it to an out of combat Ritual of sorts.

I know that some of the effects are missing. I wasn't sure about them. But I think I got the bulk.
I, also, am not sure about spelling and such. I want it written down in the clearest, shortest and easiest most possible option. So, remarks for that are welcome as well.

You can also see that there is a term AEGIS. This because it was easier noting options in one step and balancing them afterwords rather then doing so all at once.

I would especially like to thank the thread about seedcasting and it's compilers. It greatly encouraged me when I was stuck with this list.

Constructive comments are more than welcome.

Homebrew and House Rules (D&D) / Discussion on Vancian Magic - Chapter 3
« on: January 18, 2018, 12:17:01 PM »
First part can be found here.
Previous part is here.

Creating a spell; rules.
Steps in designing any spell

The assumption, right now, is that the caster has access to a limited number of keys, along with few basic keys which are accessible to every caster from the start.

  • Pick target type:
    Determines the maximum distance a target (as chosen above) be, to be cast upon.

    Objectany inanimate matterSurfacepoint of origin located on feature from the surroundings.
    spreading using that surface as vector.
    Voida location in space from which the spell emanates regardless of obstacles.?
    Creaturean independent entity such as the living,
    automatons, golems, constructs, animals, etc'.
    Selfcaster himself0
    Naturala willing creature1
    Hostilean unwilling creature, enemy2

  • Pick casting range:
    Determines the maximum distance a target (as chosen above) be, to be cast upon.

    Sight~having open line of sight4

  • Pick spell's duration:
    The span in which an effect will be active.

    Instantaneousapplying effect when the casting concludes?
    Focusenables the caster to keep an effect in action while he concentrate on the spell?
    Shortapply for a short while after the casting and concentrating thereafter concludesabove+num'ofroundsafter

  • Pick occurring effect:
    Can be chosen multiple times.

    The effects available to chose from sometimes depends on the type of target.

    • (Mend/Repair) Restore AEGIS hit points to target material.
    • (Damage) Deduct AEGIS hit points of target material.
    • (Animate) Animate AEGIS of target material.
    • (deceive/illusion/phantasm/pattern) Create an illusionary image from nothing or change appearence of existing~~~~__mimics other KEYs~
    • (Supress)->(Dispel) Disable AEGIS of ongoing spell effect.* __does this belongs to all?__
    • (Harden) Grant target material DR up to AEGIS.

    • (Heal) Restore AEGIS hit points to target creature.
    • (Harm) Deduct AEGIS hit points of target creature.
    • (Regenerate) Improve condition on hp-wounds scale.
    • (Injure) Worsen condition on hp-wounds scale.
    • (Weaken) Worsen condition on strength-weakness scale.
    • (Bind) Worsen condition on dexterity-paralyze scale.
    • (Exhaust) Worsen condition on constitution-exhaustion scale.
    • (Confuse) Worsen condition on intelligence-confusion scale.
    • (Frighten) Worsen condition on wisdom-panick scale.
    • (Compel/Charm) Worsen condition on charisma-charm scale.
    • (Haste) Grants target additional actions.
    • (Slow) Withhold actions from target.
    • (Contact) Communicate with target.
    • (Know) Target creature understand chosen subject*
    • (Sense)->(Detect) Reveal up to AEGIS of a certain topic.*
    • (Figment/Glamour) target creature percieve a false sensation. __not sure if part of confuse or not __mimics other keys?
    • (Morph) Enhance creature's abilities up to AEGIS.

    • (Ward) Absorb AEGIS of hp damage directed at target
    • (Summon)(Conjure) Summon AEGIS.
    • (Banish)(Remove) Unsummon target up to AEGIS.
    • (Jaunt/Shift) Teleport target. AEGIS. 10ft' per level(?)
    • (Conceal) Hide features of target.
    • (Force) Push, Pull or hit (or float?) with AEGIS of magical force*
    • (Anchor) protects from teleporting~?~~~
    • (Flight)


    • (Fire) catches on fire. 1d4 dmg per round.
    • (ice) coat with ice.

    AEGIS = Appropriate amount for given spell level.
    * = Scope seems to be too general. Three options: leave it as is; force caster to choose specifics when memorizing/learning spell or KEY; break effect to multiple seperate KEYs.

The Scrolls of Lost Magic / Re: Arhosan Seedcasting Index & Discussion
« on: January 04, 2018, 10:07:20 AM »
Another thing:
How do you see the difference between spontaneous casting and non-spontaneous?

The Scrolls of Lost Magic / Re: Arhosan Seedcasting Index & Discussion
« on: December 28, 2017, 03:41:25 PM »
So I took the time to reread the text which breaks down the process of creating a seedspell.

I'm very impressed by the amount of work invested in this. It also got my juices flowing and made me go back to what I was trying to make myself. I'd soon write down something and you're invited to look at it, if you have spare time.

There are places that I found overly convoluted and unnecessary (your mile may vary).
If you go under the Emanation or Area titles; what's the difference between a bolt and a beam? or a stream? A cone AND a quadrant? Why does a dome cost more then a sphere? Also spread, cloud and burst (and sometimes Nova). Basically I argue that all of those can be reduced to some basic bolts.
I also didn't understand the functionality of Arc.

Also, for me personally, I tend to keep both descriptive (i.e. flavor) and informative text separate in a clear way. It's always nice to read a story, but when you have to go fish for numbers and formulas inside a wall of text... but that's just me.


The Scrolls of Lost Magic / Re: Arhosan Seedcasting Index & Discussion
« on: December 18, 2017, 12:41:07 PM »
In your opinion, have you:

  • covered all spells from the books (at least core)?
  • covered all possible (in theory) spell combinations? i.e. there are no spells this system cannot reproduce.
  • this ruleset is balanced?

Homebrew and House Rules (D&D) / Re: Initiative
« on: December 17, 2017, 04:22:29 PM »
Jesus christ! What in the blue bells name are you... what... how...

Like, I think you jest. I hope you jest.

Delay = 10
Plus die average rounded down.
Plus a d4 for every semi-unique trait your weapon has (like +2 to disarm).
Plus you take your total equipment weight divided by ten, minus your strength modifier, and add that (minimum 0).
Plus a negative modifier equal to your dexterity modifier.
Plus your action modifier, swift is +0, attack action is +2, move is +4, standard is +8.
Plus your terrain modifier, level ground is +0, small gravel is +1, rock is +2, etc.
Plus your environment modifier, no wind +0, light wind +1, etc.
Plus your sight modifier, normal +0, concealment +2.5, 3/10ths cover +3, etc.
Plus your size modifier to attack rolls (smaller creatures are faster).
Plus your conditional modifiers like lightly winded +1, fatigued +2, etc.
Plus you apply half your base attack bonus as a negative modifier.
Plus a 3d13-13d3 for randomness.
Plus your conditional modifiers like slow's x1.5.
Nah, not complicated enough.

Counter starts at 0.
Player roles d20 for initiative.
Plus static modifier for heavy equipment - (Heavy Armor, Great or 2H Weapon).
Plus penalty if you are encumbered or suffer a debuff.
Plus action's relevant modifier. (swift, full-round, etc.)

and that's it.

and you wrote slow twice.

The Scrolls of Lost Magic / Re: Arhosan Seedcasting Index & Discussion
« on: December 12, 2017, 03:10:18 PM »
This looks amazing, how close are you to finishing?

Homebrew and House Rules (D&D) / Re: Initiative
« on: December 10, 2017, 10:06:13 AM »
I completely agree.
Notice that light armor and armament doesn't make you lighter, it just doesn't hinder you, allowing you to move up to maximum speed.
Still, in aiming to create a simple smooth ruling, I'd rather denote a 'heavy' descriptor for weapons and armors which will incur a unified penalty for all.

Game Design / Re: Gradual & Binary Defenses
« on: December 09, 2017, 07:28:24 PM »
If I may interfere;

I tried taking Sneer's idea and run with it. I liked what he came up with. After awhile it came down to this:

  • There are 7 scales: Str, Dex, Con, Int, Wis, Cha & hp.
  • Each scale has 5~6 steps: buffed->normal->debuffed(1st)->debuffed(2nd)->debuffed(3rd)->death.
  • This resembles SAGA scale and have the numeric values of [+2, 0, -2, -5, -10, -].
  • An ability that buffs move you one step left, an ability that debuffs moves you one step right.
  • Apart from numeric value, the scale steps are codified and are used for conditions dependencies (e.g. you can't fly into rage unless you're debuffed on the hp scale).
  • Saves are never changed by this buffs (to prevent death spiral), and the 3rd bad step is temporary, after few rounds or when the combat is over it moves automatically to debuffed(2nd).
  • I tried having a positive 3 steps as well but I kept having the players work more to gain buffs then attacking (for me it was annoying - but that's very subjective).

You could read it in the Abilities link down below.

Unfortunately, my group didn't have any more get togethers for a long time. So I wasn't able to test it further.

Board Business / Re: Cleaning Up Homebrew
« on: December 09, 2017, 06:57:23 PM »
Would bumping my own (very old) important (to me) thread is considered cheating?
And when all this is going to happen?

Homebrew and House Rules (D&D) / Re: Summoner
« on: December 09, 2017, 06:51:33 PM »
Wording could change a bit to explain that this is an ability against spells that ends the summoning.
What is it you'd want to see changed in the wording?

Dispel Ward (Ex): At 5th level, summoned creatures add the Summoner's Charisma bonus to saving throws against spells that attempt to remove them such as Dismissal or Banishment, as well as Summoner's caster level check.
Creatures called or summoned by the Summoner becomes much more difficult to dispel, banish, dismiss or the like.

Thanks for the input! :D
You're very welcome.

Game Design / Re: Implications for Spell List Mechanics
« on: December 09, 2017, 06:39:12 PM »
You touched on the problem of forwards compatibility; where old classes have to be revised when new material comes out in order to use it.
For that reason alone I prefer a list or a sublist connection.

Also, as Maelphaxerazz eloquently put it, spells problematic nature comes from what they can do. I'm trying to fix it by deconstructing spells and limit what each character can do so each player will bring something to the table (not trying to steal your thunder or anything, but if you have a minute check it out. I also am using keywords).

I'd say the D&D list fits the idea just fine, if you look at things right.
I second Lord's notion. Not only you should prefer the underlying mechanic over the overlaying fluffy part for the sake of betterment of the game, you should also not stick to habits just because these are the ways things supposed to be. Heck, take 20 years back and you play a game where elves can't play wizards. It's blasphemy!

Just as a rule of thumb, 2e divided all the priest spells into roughly 27 spheres and the current arcane spell schools can be divided into 3 or 4 distinct-feeling subschools on average, so between 24 and 30 descriptors totals is probably where you want to aim for so they feel neither too vague or too restrictive.
I really liked the 2e sphere thingy. I was gravely saddened when 3rd came around inrespect to cleric.

I'd love to hear where you got to.

Many threads have been made to redesign and rebalance feats. And for good reasons. Sometime the scope was a small set or groups of feats, othertimes it was aimed at all of them. I don't think I ever came upon writing which succeeded in the goals that it set for itself. Nevertheless, I would love to make it works.
So, bring it on.

If you're going to throw out the old system, then why rank whatever it is the exists today?
If we're honest for a moment, most if not all of d&d's problems stems from trying to come up with new things that either don't equal in power level to what already is in game, or serve a different purpose and therefore cannot be even compared. Examples include Natural Spell for druids which is a a must have, so much so that it shouldn't even be an option to not take it; Extra rage is a trap - it is more beneficial if you up your cons' score. Ride-by attack is bizarrely worded, a problem for some feats which because of RAW won't allow for combination with newer additions.
There are feats that mimic spells which seems to me like an unnatural duality because of undefined roles for both spellcasting and feats.
And not to mention the ungodly amount of splatbooks and extras that contribute to this giant mass.

My suggestion - create some sort of scaling meter to compare the material up against. What doesn't shape up when compared to the ruler isn't allowed in game.
Keep in mind that, like I mentioned above, it is highly advisable to declare in advance what is the role of feats. What are the boundaries. Who will gain access and when (you don't have to follow the fighter and/or wizard feat progression).

Now I see the 10 tiers you wrote down. My gripe with how it is presented is that it is so far away from math. It is also far from philosophical logic which is quantifiable and sometimes is used in a math-like way.
So, at least for me, this is not really usable.

But don't stay your hand. I'd love to see something of this nature succeed.

@Eldritch_Lord: Well done for this explanation. It is very well made and presented. You win a star.

Homebrew and House Rules (D&D) / Re: Initiative
« on: November 13, 2017, 03:17:51 PM »
Well, how about this then.  Strength no longer gives bonus damage.  Instead, for each point of strength you have beyond 10, you treat all weapon delay modifiers as 1 point lower (to a minimum delay modifier of +2).

Wouldn't that be better suited to dexterity?
I thought of linking strength with pushing, pulling, gripping, maybe? not sure. Point being that I don't want damage to be the be-all-end-all. Combat could end if I trip and pin to the ground or if I knock someone unconscious.

I'm trying for something that is a bit unorthodox so maybe I'm not explaining myself as well as I should. Just ask me anything that comes to mind and also think of all the times you didn't enjoy in d&d's combat and lets address those.

Homebrew and House Rules (D&D) / Re: Initiative
« on: November 04, 2017, 07:15:04 PM »
daggers hitting 4x as often as hammers would work if hammers deal 4x as much damage as daggers.
In essence, yes. However, I'm more interested in making the combat more versatile.
Redesigning the combat rules and ending with only damage difference to compare is (in my opinion) a waste of time. I want to bring something else, something new to the table.

Take, for example, a scenario where you are confronted by a mage. You are armed with a giant and heavy axe. The mage start casting. While you have the option of attacking him with your axe for a max' amount of damage, you decide that it would be better for you to strike fast with a small blade in order to fizzle his spell, as a swing with an axe might take too much time.

Other options for when addressing action times are (not a full list):
Concentrating on an action.
Embracing for a charge or a spellcast on you (including counterspell and parry).
Taking time to aim.

Using some sort of formula or lookup table to figure out what X is
I'd much rather ditch strength bonus then extending combat time with lookup tables or math more intricate then simple addition.

you should probably account for two-weapon fighting somehow.
My answer for twf (for now) is to not give it a special treatment. Meaning that the character is simply armed with two items and when it's her turn to act she can use either one the items as she chooses. No attacking with both at the same time. You can use succesive attackes with the same side or alternate between them as you see fit.

Homebrew and House Rules (D&D) / Re: Initiative
« on: November 03, 2017, 07:34:45 PM »
FFX's system in a simplified explanation is to say initiative count is infinite and everyone gets to go as many times as their number comes up. Their number is their base delay (based on speed) plus the delay of their chosen action. So say Bob has a base speed of four and chooses to attack each round which has a +2 modifier. His first turn is on 6, then 12, then 18, and so on. Tom has a base speed of four as well but he chooses to cast spells which has a modifier of +4. He'll get to go on turn 8 and then turn 16. By then, Bob would have already attacked three times through.

Modify the attack delay modifier by weapon and rescale some numbers and you've got what you're looking for. Like maybe base delay is 10, daggers are +2, massive hammers are +8, & casting is +10. Then you can introduce special modifiers on the system. Like in FFX Quick Attack consumes Magical Power but it's faster than a normal attack.  Just watch break points. FFX's Quick Attack is horrendously broken. You could cast a Spell that consumes a ton of MP to deal 99,999 damage before you opponent got to take his turn, or you could attack like eight times for a tenth of the cost for 799,992 damage before your opponent got to take his turn.

That seems workable.
What'd you reckon? personally? Would you try out something like this?
And if quick attack is a problem then what are the options to fix it? I guess that one way is abolishing it at all.

Homebrew and House Rules (D&D) / Re: Initiative
« on: October 21, 2017, 08:01:33 AM »
Have I popped in this thread and said AD&D used to do this? Also in combat FFX changed your turn order based on the speed of your action, something I think was semi-kept in the newer games.

I don't think so, no. But wasn't the AD&D was opposite? Like, you had to go the lowest to be better or something? I think I played it 20 years ago or something.
Never played final fantasies, thou, so can't really use unless you elaborate. Are the rounds treated stand alone? This was talked about above, but I can rewrite it again:
Say one person acts quickly, jabbing a small knife. Another one smashed slowly with a massive 2hander hammer. If the rounds are treated separately then each will get 1 attack every round. Even thought the quicker one could act fast enough to strike one more time now and then.

Homebrew and House Rules (D&D) / Re: Initiative
« on: October 10, 2017, 07:38:01 AM »
If you do want to design a system where guessing wrong about future events makes you waste your time, I suggest you start by playing InuYasha: Demon Tournament.  It's the only game I can think of that works like that.

Not exactly what I intended; I don't aim for any kind of guessing. You declare movement the moment you act. And any act isn't wasted. Maybe if you're enthralled. Otherwise that's a quite a let down for the player.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7