[3.75] Project Phoenix

[EjoThims]

I was going to say "it's the same as a feat" but since it stacks with Imp Init, it's better.

It also grants 1d6 extra SA to the Boars.

Yeah, I changed TWF so it scales - there's only the base feat, and you gain additional attacks automatically.

I had thought so, but didn't see it updated to note that it actually scales up (though the improved versions were removed). Probably should note your desired interaction between it and sources of extra attacks.

Power Attack is an attack action - I never changed it.

I meant that Mighty Strike, as a standard action, couldn't be used with those options.

Way of the Bear:[spoiler]All around this feels the best so far. Mighty Strike is still per day, (with 6 max). I'd really suggest moving it to 1/encounter. In an average day, you'd actually be able to use it less, but if you're ever in that range where the Fighter actually shines (the 6+ encounter mark), the Fighter continues to shine.

I'd also suggest that Stunning Blow remove the 1/round restriction on Dazing Blow. By 16th level, it's not going to see much use either way, but it does allow for slightly more physical combat strategy in the class that is supposed to be good at it.[/spoiler]

Way of the Cat
[spoiler]New Greater/ Blinding Strike is nice.

Overall a big improvement, Greater Disarm is still not that well, great.  Perhaps simply allowing a follow-up attack Imp Trip style when disarming? And do you have anything else planned for the second Level 1 spot?[/spoiler]

Way of the Gorgon
[spoiler]I like the idea of Hold the Line, but what kind of opposed check does it require to stop a charge?

Other than the ability to use bucklers (which have no damage range listed, btw), Shield Fighting is identical to what anyone using TWF with a shield can do (and thus worse than the feat since it's more restrictive. Needs something to zazz it up a bit.

For Bulwark, if you removed the clause specifically stating that it does not occur when used as weapon, Imp Shield Bash would indeed allow it to affect your allies while making Shield Bashes, since the ability references solely your shield bonus, which you have through the feat. I'd personally have no problem with it still working while attacks were made, since you limited it to adjacent allies.

On Shield Rush, I'd either drop the "twice the shield's AC bonus" line and only give the list of bonuses, or I'd keep the line and drop the list, since a magic shield will have a higher AC bonus (you could also drop the list and just specify 'shield bonus to ac, but that would then take into account the improvement from the style).

Improved Parry is going to be a hassle to track, especially against multiple opponents, and especially with the '1 or 2 points' part, that at the very least needs to be dropped, since it doesn't even flavorwise represent the difference the shield would have made (it could be far higher with a magic shield and the style boost to shield ac). I'd recommend (if this style debuff is what you want to do) just making any miss against the fighter, or an ally protected by his Bulwark, give a -4 penalty to that creature's next attack. This gives the same flavor while being far easier to track and never outright denying opponents their attacks with just a passive effect.

Only one level 4?

Overall this style feels a lot more cohesive and effective, but there are definitely still some kinks.[/spoiler]

Way of the Wolverine

[spoiler]
For Pounce, I'd suggest still having it actually grant the pounce ability, but with the ability to jump as part of it an extra bonus.

I'd also suggest changing the wording of Kill the Opponent to this:

'If the fighter has successfully pinned an opponent and maintained the pin for at least one full round, he can then, on his next turn, attempt to instantly kill it as a standard action. The opponent must make a Fort save (DC 10 + 1/2 fighter's class level + fighter's Str mod) or die. This ability is not usable against constructs, elementals, incorporeal creatures, oozes, plants, or undead, but otherwise works against creatures that are resistant or immune to critical hits or death from massive damage.'

The way you currently have it worded, at the beginning of the round after the fighter had maintained the pin (and before anyone is allowed to take actions), the ability triggers automatically with no action required by the Fighter.

Other than that, it's looking very solid as a grappling style.
[/quote]

[Kerrick]

It also grants 1d6 extra SA to the Boars.

Oh yeah. I figure that a +4 unnamed bonus is good enough for my system; it means that a Cat fighter will go before just about everyone except a Wind-style monk or a high-Dex rogue, which is as it should be.

I had thought so, but didn't see it updated to note that it actually scales up (though the improved versions were removed). Probably should note your desired interaction between it and sources of extra attacks.

Oops. I streamlined the feat so the penalties are much cleaner, thus eliminating the TWF section in Combat, and I forgot to include the scaling rule.

I meant that Mighty Strike, as a standard action, couldn't be used with those options.

Oh, right.

Way of the Bear: All around this feels the best so far. Mighty Strike is still per day, (with 6 max). I'd really suggest moving it to 1/encounter. In an average day, you'd actually be able to use it less, but if you're ever in that range where the Fighter actually shines (the 6+ encounter mark), the Fighter continues to shine.

I wasn't sure whether to go per-day or per-encounter with that one. Per-day allowed for more flexibility, IMO, because you could use it multiple times per combat if necessary, and it doesn't reduce the fighter's overall effectiveness - he gets it the same number of times per day regardless of encounters.

I'd also suggest that Stunning Blow remove the 1/round restriction on Dazing Blow. By 16th level, it's not going to see much use either way, but it does allow for slightly more physical combat strategy in the class that is supposed to be good at it.

Not a bad idea. I'll do that, and put in a caveat that multiple dazing blows don't stack.

Way of the Cat: New Greater/ Blinding Strike is nice.

Thanks.

Overall a big improvement, Greater Disarm is still not that well, great.  Perhaps simply allowing a follow-up attack Imp Trip style when disarming? And do you have anything else planned for the second Level 1 spot?

Greater Disarm is just a placeholder; I know it needs a little work, but I want to keep the overall ability. I was thinking for Cat style that one path focuses on speed (Sudden Attack, Blinding Strike, Rapid Strike, Greater BS), and the other on fancy maneuvers. Problem is, I can't think of any good maneuvers. Allowing for a follow-up attack on a disarm is a good idea; maybe an attack itself - you disarm and can make an immediate attack at the same BAB, which could be a simple attack, or a trip, or whatever.

Way of the Gorgon: I like the idea of Hold the Line, but what kind of opposed check does it require to stop a charge?

That was something I came up with on the fly, as I was writing the prereqs - I needed something for the second feat, and I didn't have any other shield-related feats. I think I'll just replace it with Indomitable (+2 to opposed checks to avoid being bull rushed, tripped, or thrown), which would fit the second path well enough.

Other than the ability to use bucklers (which have no damage range listed, btw), Shield Fighting is identical to what anyone using TWF with a shield can do (and thus worse than the feat since it's more restrictive. Needs something to zazz it up a bit.

Yeah... I'm drawing a blank as to what, though. Maybe an increased damage die? (Since light shields are 1d4, bucklers would be 1d3.)

For Bulwark, if you removed the clause specifically stating that it does not occur when used as weapon, Imp Shield Bash would indeed allow it to affect your allies while making Shield Bashes, since the ability references solely your shield bonus, which you have through the feat. I'd personally have no problem with it still working while attacks were made, since you limited it to adjacent allies.

Okay.

On Shield Rush, I'd either drop the "twice the shield's AC bonus" line and only give the list of bonuses, or I'd keep the line and drop the list, since a magic shield will have a higher AC bonus (you could also drop the list and just specify 'shield bonus to ac, but that would then take into account the improvement from the style).

Yeah, I wanted it to be just the base bonus, no enhancements or special abilities. I'll remove the redunancy; I kind of noticed it when I was writing it, but let it go.

Improved Parry is going to be a hassle to track, especially against multiple opponents, and especially with the '1 or 2 points' part, that at the very least needs to be dropped, since it doesn't even flavorwise represent the difference the shield would have made (it could be far higher with a magic shield and the style boost to shield ac). I'd recommend (if this style debuff is what you want to do) just making any miss against the fighter, or an ally protected by his Bulwark, give a -4 penalty to that creature's next attack. This gives the same flavor while being far easier to track and never outright denying opponents their attacks with just a passive effect.

Yeah, I know the 1-2 points thing doesn't properly model a shield bonus, but I wanted something that was a "fairly close" miss, as opposed to a "swing and don't even come near" miss. I'll just change it to any miss against the fighter gives the -4.

Only one level 4?

For the moment; I couldn't think of another.

Way of the Wolverine: For Pounce, I'd suggest still having it actually grant the pounce ability, but with the ability to jump as part of it an extra bonus.

So... you make a Jump check as part of a charge, and if you land within reach of an opponent, you can make a full attack?

I'd also suggest changing the wording of Kill the Opponent to this:

'If the fighter has successfully pinned an opponent and maintained the pin for at least one full round, he can then, on his next turn, attempt to instantly kill it as a standard action. The opponent must make a Fort save (DC 10 + 1/2 fighter's class level + fighter's Str mod) or die. This ability is not usable against constructs, elementals, incorporeal creatures, oozes, plants, or undead, but otherwise works against creatures that are resistant or immune to critical hits or death from massive damage.'

The way you currently have it worded, at the beginning of the round after the fighter had maintained the pin (and before anyone is allowed to take actions), the ability triggers automatically with no action required by the Fighter.

Good catch. Also, that name is a placeholder - if you can come up with something better, I'd love to hear it.

Other than that, it's looking very solid as a grappling style.

Coolio. And thanks, a lot.


I mentioned Improved Finesse before, and how it requires Combat Reflexes, but works on two Dex and a Cha maneuver. Awhile back I wrote some altered rules for Demoralize (which will be split off from Intimidate) and Feint, and added Taunt (from NWN), but never implemented them. I decided to change Imp Finesse to require Weapon Finesse instead, and make a new feat that grants a +2 bonus to demoralize, feint, and taunt (all Cha-based maneuvers). Trouble is, I can't think of a name for it. Any ideas?

[EjoThims]

you could use it multiple times per combat if necessary

And then you'd be done. Your Fighter just novaed (poorly, but still). The Fighter's strength is supposed to lie in the ability to keep chugging all day long, and to me, it makes more sense to hold to that even if short rests are needed. And there's nothing to prevent you from doing 2/encounter.

and put in a caveat that multiple dazing blows don't stack.

It wouldn't anyway, because it's same penalty from the same source, but a note for clarity is always nice.

Way of the Cat: New Greater/ Blinding Strike is nice.

Thanks.

Problem is, I can't think of any good maneuvers. Allowing for a follow-up attack on a disarm is a good idea

Hrmm... I'm honestly not particularly sure. Might want to look at some of the Diamond Mind maneuvers from ToB for inspiration.

Maybe an increased damage die? (Since light shields are 1d4, bucklers would be 1d3.)

There's a feat (but not core) and shield spikes to increase damage already, but I'm really not sure what else might be appropriate.

For the moment; I couldn't think of another.

Ah. I'm sure something will come to you.

So... you make a Jump check as part of a charge, and if you land within reach of an opponent, you can make a full attack?

Sort of. This would be what I had in mind:

"You gain the pounce ability. Additionally, whenever you make a charge, you can choose to make a Jump check, with a bonus equal to X, as part of your charge. This allows you to leap over difficult terrain or up or down obstacles, provided your check is high enough to do so, though you still cannot exceed your standard movement."

You could alternately spell out: "If you charge a foe, you can make a full attack. Additionally, whenever you make a charge...etc."

Trouble is, I can't think of a name for it. Any ideas?

I am very bad at naming things. "Combat Manipulation" maybe?

[Kerrick]

And then you'd be done. Your Fighter just novaed (poorly, but still). The Fighter's strength is supposed to lie in the ability to keep chugging all day long, and to me, it makes more sense to hold to that even if short rests are needed. And there's nothing to prevent you from doing 2/encounter.

Yeah, true. You ever wonder if per-encounter mechanics were introduced simply to hand-hold less intelligent players and let their PCs be useful all day long, instead of making them THINK and budget their abilities? Or is it just me...?

It wouldn't anyway, because it's same penalty from the same source, but a note for clarity is always nice.

I was thinking of duration, not penalties. Besides, common sense isn't all that common, especially when it comes to gamers.

Hrmm... I'm honestly not particularly sure. Might want to look at some of the Diamond Mind maneuvers from ToB for inspiration.

I don't have ToB.

There's a feat (but not core) and shield spikes to increase damage already, but I'm really not sure what else might be appropriate.

Add full Strength bonus for shield used as an offhand weapon. It's not a huge thing, but this is a 1st-level ability. Or, reduce the penalties by -2 each when fighting with weapon/shield (so if you have TWF and a longsword and light shield, frex, your penalties would be 0/0).

Sort of. This would be what I had in mind:

"You gain the pounce ability. Additionally, whenever you make a charge, you can choose to make a Jump check, with a bonus equal to X, as part of your charge. This allows you to leap over difficult terrain or up or down obstacles, provided your check is high enough to do so, though you still cannot exceed your standard movement."

Jump is already part of a move action; all this does. Really, all pounce is is a charge action that grants a full attack. Jump assumes that you get at least a 20-foot head start... so why don't we change it to a 10-ft. head start (whether or not you're making a charge)? So it'd be something like this:

"The fighter gains the pounce ability (can make a full attack on a charge). Additionally, he need only make a 10-foot running start when making a Jump check, and he gains a bonus to the roll equal to +2 per level he has in this style."

Looking at the Jump skill, I think this "20 feet for any length of jump" thing is ridiculous - I don't know about you, but I don't need  a 20-ft. head start to jump 5 freaking feet. I think I'll reduce the head start to half the distance you want to jump (round up to the nearest 5), and the furthest you can jump is 10 times your height - no 100-foot wuxia leaps. That would require changing the Wolverine's Pounce ability to, say, reducing the head start required by 5 feet.

I am very bad at naming things. "Combat Manipulation" maybe?

Yeah, so am I. That sounds good, though.

Okay, so I thought of new abilities to fill in the missing blanks in the Cat style.

L1: Lunge: Once per round as a move action, the fighter can make a combat stride and a single attack against any target within reach of the endpoint of his move. That target is considered to be flat-footed for that attack only. (I went with a move action here because a) it's only L1 - making it a swift action would enable the fighter to move AND get an attack AND lunge; and b) you can't take a combat stride in the same round as you move.)

L3: Improved Lunge: Once per round as a swift action, the fighter can make a combat stride and a single attack against any target within reach of the endpoint of his move. That target is considered to be flat-footed for that attack only. (Yeah, it's unoriginal - sue me. I figure that by L15, you should be able to do this; the Improved Combat Movement feat is around that level and lets you make a full move and a full attack. Move Quick Riposte up to L4, and the Cat would be done.)

Unfortunately, I couldn't remember if the missing Gorgon ability was offensive or defensive, so I couldn't think of anything for it. Maybe tomorrow.

[EjoThims]

You ever wonder if per-encounter mechanics were introduced simply to hand-hold less intelligent players and let their PCs be useful all day long, instead of making them THINK and budget their abilities? Or is it just me...?

That's certainly possible, but it seems more like it was introduced as a way to make "endurance" classes actually interesting and represent the need for a very short rest before performing great stunts again, instead of the large rest needed to perform the marvelous stunts given by /day abilities. Which is why I think rage is something eslse (along with smite and stunning blow) that needs to be moved to per enoucnter, they're made for endurance classes and they are NOT marvelous stunts.

I don't have ToB.

Nor do I at the moment, it's on my fried computer, but I'm sure someone around here would be able to lend you a copy.

Add full Strength bonus for shield used as an offhand weapon. It's not a huge thing, but this is a 1st-level ability. Or, reduce the penalties by -2 each when fighting with weapon/shield (so if you have TWF and a longsword and light shield, frex, your penalties would be 0/0).

Perhaps both, though just one or the other might be okay for first level. Remember, sword and board is the weakest style (next to fighting with a single one-handed weapon, which has 0 support outside of shitastic PrCs) under standard rules.

Jump is already part of a move action

But standard Charge allows up to a double move, not a move action. Unless you already changed that? It would be a good all around change.

and the furthest you can jump is 10 times your height - no 100-foot wuxia leaps.

Wuxia has nothing on Western mythology when it comes to absurd feats (netting every fish in the ocean with a single throw of an ordinary net, for example), and by level 20 a Fighter can outperform nearly all the heroes of legend. Skill check DCs in general need an overhaul to their scaling, but there really should be no hard cap upper limit on potential performance.

[Kerrick]

Nor do I at the moment, it's on my fried computer, but I'm sure someone around here would be able to lend you a copy.

Heh.

Perhaps both, though just one or the other might be okay for first level. Remember, sword and board is the weakest style (next to fighting with a single one-handed weapon, which has 0 support outside of shitastic PrCs) under standard rules.

I'm leaning toward full Strength bonus alone - I think it'll be sufficient. Single-weapon style is unsupported because no sane person would ever fight like that - even swashbucklers make off-hand unarmed attacks, so it's effectively TWF.

Edit: I still haven't come up with an offensive L4 Gorgon ability, so I think I might just toss in another defensive one. Stealing an idea from Oblivion: a miss vs. the fighter means the fighter can bash the opponent, staggering him (this is usable 1/round against a single opponent, and the use can be stated after the attack misses). In Oblivion, the way it works is that if you block a blow, you have a chance to automatically do a shield bash, staggering the opponent. This is probably closer to L3, but I could move the L3 ability up.

But standard Charge allows up to a double move, not a move action. Unless you already changed that? It would be a good all around change.

Sorry, I meant it was a move, not a move action, which means you can make a Jump check anytime during that move. They made it a full-round action because it's a double move. Hmm... assuming it's a charge because you're moving faster than normal (but are restricted to double your normal move), you'd cover the ground more quickly, which would imply that it takes less than a full round to accomplish. Getting a standard action in addition isn't that big a deal - you can still only make one attack, or cast a spell, or use a class ability/improved feat. That latter is where things might break down; something like Improved Whirlwind, where you can make a WWA as a standard action, could be too much - charge up into a group of enemies, smack one, then do a WWA.

Wuxia has nothing on Western mythology when it comes to absurd feats (netting every fish in the ocean with a single throw of an ordinary net, for example), and by level 20 a Fighter can outperform nearly all the heroes of legend. Skill check DCs in general need an overhaul to their scaling, but there really should be no hard cap upper limit on potential performance.

Ranged weapons have an upper limit... why not jumping? I just want to tone down the whole "wahoo!" feel of epic - if you can leap tall buildings at L25, what do you do when you're L30? I can always add in a feat/ability to increase the cap. It used to be that jump height (and maybe distance) was capped by PC height, and the monk's Leap of the Clouds ability obviated this.

As far as skill DCs in general, I have to agree. I've fixed most of them already, but that one got by me for some reason.

[EjoThims]

something like Improved Whirlwind, where you can make a WWA as a standard action, could be too much - charge up into a group of enemies, smack one, then do a WWA.

You mean, the feat would actually be worth taking? 

I just want to tone down the whole "wahoo!" feel of epic

And that makes sense. I'm just saying it's better to do it with changing the way DCs scale than just saying "Nope, nu-uh. Ya can't do it, no matter how could you are."

It used to be that jump height (and maybe distance) was capped by PC height, and the monk's Leap of the Clouds ability obviated this.

And they changed it because it was silly that even with all the magic and power a level 20 character had they could never jump further than a level 6 or so, despite having many times the check result.

Also, I don't think that ranged weapons should be limited either. I do think that after a certain point it should be prohibitively hard to have any effect (like after the standard range increment, the penalty doubles for each one instead of simply stacking and crits/auto-hits are no longer possible), but if you're just that good, then you're just that good.

After all, if you really focus, you shouldn't need to have hundreds of hitpoints and dozens of feats and by nearing godhood to be able to do the one thing that you've dedicated everything to, including learning esoteric and seemingly unrelated ideas, philosophies, and practices just for a marginal increase (obscure cross-classing ftw), to do better than anyone else. Fantasy is full of such characters.

[Kerrick]

You mean, the feat would actually be worth taking? 

That feat is pretty worthless... I wonder if I ever fixed that.

And that makes sense. I'm just saying it's better to do it with changing the way DCs scale than just saying "Nope, nu-uh. Ya can't do it, no matter how could you are."

True. But that was the whole intent of the Rule of Three - you don't need caps, because the highest, most superhuman feats are nearly impossible to achieve.

And they changed it because it was silly that even with all the magic and power a level 20 character had they could never jump further than a level 6 or so, despite having many times the check result.

Also, I don't think that ranged weapons should be limited either. I do think that after a certain point it should be prohibitively hard to have any effect (like after the standard range increment, the penalty doubles for each one instead of simply stacking and crits/auto-hits are no longer possible), but if you're just that good, then you're just that good.

Yeah... but the weapon you're using, and its quality, should also factor in there. No one, no matter how good they are, should be able to pick up a normal longbow and shoot a half-mile with it. A specially made, massive-strength bow? Sure, I could see it. Unfortunately, such a rule would be too complicated to add. Although (thinking out loud here), maybe Strength bows could increase the number of increments along with the Strength bonus... or I could add "distance" as a mastercraft property, where the bow can shoot further. Interesting idea. Thrown weapons would be easy - simply insert a rule that high Strength increases range increments by, say, +1 increment per 4 points of Strength (so every other bonus point = +1 increment).

I like your ideas on doubling the penalty and no crits; it leaves an open door for special abilities or (very) high-level feats that enable someone to score a crit. I could see a high-level archer with Zen Archery, several levels in one or two archer PrCs, and a loaded-up bow make a shot against an enemy commander at a thousand yards - and kill him. That would be the subject of stories around the gaming table for years.

After all, if you really focus, you shouldn't need to have hundreds of hitpoints and dozens of feats and by nearing godhood to be able to do the one thing that you've dedicated everything to, including learning esoteric and seemingly unrelated ideas, philosophies, and practices just for a marginal increase (obscure cross-classing ftw), to do better than anyone else. Fantasy is full of such characters.

Yeah.

[EjoThims]

True. But that was the whole intent of the Rule of Three - you don't need caps, because the highest, most superhuman feats are nearly impossible to achieve.

But even by level 10, characters are supposed to be accomplishing them on a regular basis.

Yeah... but the weapon you're using, and its quality, should also factor in there.

That's why range increment is based off weapon, but I don't think there should be a limit on the number of increments allowed, just a far less forgiving scaling penalty after the standard range.

[Kerrick]

But even by level 10, characters are supposed to be accomplishing them on a regular basis.

Depends on the system, and the power level. You're talking something closer to E6 or E8; I want something where the power level doesn't scale so quickly - a L10 can accomplish great feats, but not superhuman; a L20 can occasionally do superhuman things; a L30 can routinely do them. I have L40 as a soft cap for level advancement - beyond that level, it's really hard to support play, and stuff really starts to fall apart, but if you want to keep going, more power to you.

That's why range increment is based off weapon, but I don't think there should be a limit on the number of increments allowed, just a far less forgiving scaling penalty after the standard range.

Yeah... we've already got low-level feats Far Shot and Distant Shot, and the distance weapon enchantment (doubles the range increment); a L3 fighter with decent Dex can shoot three times as far for half the penalty (I think; I'm not sure if distance doubles the number of increments, or the length of existing increments). I think Distant Shot might need some better prereqs.

If we add in increasing penalties... say, -2 for the second 10, -3 for the third, etc. ... you could conceivably shoot a composite longbow 50 increments (that's 5500 feet, or 8,250 ft. with Far Shot) with a -75 modifier (with Distant Shot, the first 10 increments at -5 total, 11-20 at -1 each, 21-30 at -1.5 each, 31-40 at -2 each, and 41-50 at -2.5 each). Ouch. Course, a shot like that is once-in-a-campaign; a shorter shot like 15-20 increments (1,650-3,000 ft.) is only -10 to -15. I could see some definite potential for massive Strength bows, better enchantments, etc.

But still, there should be some point at which normal weapons simply cannot shoot any further due to limits on construction (we'll ignore thrown weapons, since they rely solely on the thrower's strength, and magical enhancements, since they effectively ignore the laws of physics). Crossbows, for example, are mechanical constructs - to shoot further, it has to be bigger, and once you get past a heavy crossbow/arbalest, you're getting into things that aren't transportable by normal means (the ballista). Bows, sure - you can increase the strength rating, but even then there should be a limit based on the weapon's size - as with crossbows, larger = better range, and larger also = more Strength you can apply to it. A bow can only take so much before it's either unpullable or it shatters when someone tries to draw it.

So the upshot of all that babbling is: I agree that max range increments could be increased (though it could give an already powerful combat type - the archer - an even greater boost), but it should still be capped at some point.

[EjoThims]

Depends on the system, and the power level. You're talking something closer to E6 or E8;

I'm talking core 3.5. That's the way power scales in the PHB. If you want to slow progression that much, the first change you need to do is double (or more) the length of time it takes to get spells, with 9th level not coming in until high level 30s. Then expand spells per day, so as to continue leveling benefits, and scale DCs quadratically (doubling) instead of linearly (adding).

So the upshot of all that babbling is

That you want to base physical characters off the laws of physics while allowing everyone else to break them?

This will always make me sad.

Style of fighting should not determine style of play. Ever. Either physics matter for everyone and even the weakest magic is tantamount to direct divine intervention, or physics is a formality and applies no real mechanical limits to the world.

3.5 DnD is written with the second assumption. This is why people can run as fast as they do (speeds even at first level in heavy armor are impressive, much less Monks and Barbarians) and why you can take a bath in lava as long as you are tough enough.

[Kerrick]

I'm talking core 3.5. That's the way power scales in the PHB. If you want to slow progression that much, the first change you need to do is double (or more) the length of time it takes to get spells, with 9th level not coming in until high level 30s. Then expand spells per day, so as to continue leveling benefits, and scale DCs quadratically (doubling) instead of linearly (adding).

I've toned down some of the worst offenders, as far as spells - SoD, raise dead, and plane shifting spells were bumped up, frex. I've already got rules for extending the progression past 9th level.

That you want to base physical characters off the laws of physics while allowing everyone else to break them?

This will always make me sad.

I'm glad you're around to poke holes in my arguments and make me see the sheer lunacy of my suggestions.

3.5 DnD is written with the second assumption. This is why people can run as fast as they do (speeds even at first level in heavy armor are impressive, much less Monks and Barbarians) and why you can take a bath in lava as long as you are tough enough.

You can actually swim in plate mail in the real world - it's a lot less encumbering than people would have you believe. As for lava... that's a ridiculous rule. I think you can strike a reasonable middle ground, though the inclusion of magic will always tip the balance toward the "physics is a guideline, not a law" side of the spectrum.

[EjoThims]

I've toned down some of the worst offenders, as far as spells - SoD, raise dead, and plane shifting spells were bumped up, frex. I've already got rules for extending the progression past 9th level.

The problem is that many, many of even the first and second level spells allow for things you seem to want o not happen until at least level 15+.

I'm glad you're around to poke holes in my arguments and make me see the sheer lunacy of my suggestions.

S'why I'm here. 

As for lava... that's a ridiculous rule.

It only does 20d6 per round.

the inclusion of magic will always tip the balance toward the "physics is a guideline, not a law" side of the spectrum.

Exactly. Just don't forget to also let those limited to physical abilities also break the physics barrier, as long as they're doing so through physical strengths instead of (or with the help of) mystic ones.

[Kerrick]

The problem is that many, many of even the first and second level spells allow for things you seem to want o not happen until at least level 15+.

Well.... I'm not aiming for something as low-power as you seem to be implying. I want something about two steps up from Greyhawk - where magic is a known quantity, though not pervasive, and adventurers are fairly common. Your comment about being able to achieve superhuman feats at L10 got me thinking. The reason that's so is because L20 was "the end" - there were no rules for anything beyond that, so leaping tall buildings in a single bound at L10 was perfectly reasonable. Then the idea for epic levels came along, and the designers said "Well shit... what do we do now?" And thus we ended up with the ELH. 

Since I wanted to incorporate the epic rules into the core, I had to slow the scaling a bit, like I said. Thus, superhuman feats at L10 are possible, but not likely. But a L10 can still do things that a L1 could only dream about.

It only does 20d6 per round.

Heh. I prefer "You fall in, you die - no save."

Exactly. Just don't forget to also let those limited to physical abilities also break the physics barrier, as long as they're doing so through physical strengths instead of (or with the help of) mystic ones.

Of course not. It'll just take a little more work for them to get there. I mean, I've seen people accomplish amazing feats, like breaking the 8th block in a stack of 10 (or shattering all 10), or hauling massively heavy weights, or incredible feats of dexterity (there's a group in France called "wall jumpers" or "wall climbers" or something.. they run around jumping over, around, and through railings, fences, walls... it's really cool. Some of the stuff was so dangerous they couldn't show it on TV.). This isn't the sort of thing a L1 could do, but a L5 or L10? Sure - that's what feats and skills are for.

[EjoThims]

Since I wanted to incorporate the epic rules into the core, I had to slow the scaling a bit, like I said. Thus, superhuman feats at L10 are possible, but not likely. But a L10 can still do things that a L1 could only dream about.

It only does 20d6 per round.

Heh. I prefer "You fall in, you die - no save."

Which means that dropping anything into lava is the appropriate way to destroy it, even when Cl 600+ divine interventions would be stopped. If it's not quantified, it always works, even if it shouldn't. If it is quantified, eventually it doesn't work any more.

This is, of course, different in actual play, as it's under the DM's discretion. But when making a ruleset, you're making a guideline for all potential DMs, so incorporating your personal discretion on each case by case scenario is nigh impossible while still allowing open ended flexibility of games.

I prefer guidelines to be quantified, as there's always the potential someone or something in a game or a rule surpasses it. Just like lava, most characters would be vaporized at 20d6 a round without spells to protect them, but those that wouldn't should be allowed to swim in it freely (though painfully, that's still potentially 120 damage).

This isn't the sort of thing a L1 could do, but a L5 or L10? Sure - that's what feats and skills are for.

Yep yep.

Remember though, each of your examples is being done by a level 3 (tops) commoner or possibly expert with all skill points and feats retrained into focus on that one thing. If you can see it done in our world, it should be achievable by a dedicated character by level 3-4 in DnD.

[Kerrick]

Which means that dropping anything into lava is the appropriate way to destroy it, even when Cl 600+ divine interventions would be stopped. If it's not quantified, it always works, even if it shouldn't. If it is quantified, eventually it doesn't work any more.

This is, of course, different in actual play, as it's under the DM's discretion. But when making a ruleset, you're making a guideline for all potential DMs, so incorporating your personal discretion on each case by case scenario is nigh impossible while still allowing open ended flexibility of games.

Ah... it's easier to make a less restrictive rule so the DM can make it more restrictive if he chooses.

Yep yep.

Remember though, each of your examples is being done by a level 3 (tops) commoner or possibly expert with all skill points and feats retrained into focus on that one thing. If you can see it done in our world, it should be achievable by a dedicated character by level 3-4 in DnD.

My quote says JaronK. 

Anyway, I don't know about that L3-4 thing. I mean, it's what E6 is predicated on, but if you think about it... a Special Forces soldier (or SAS, Marine Recon, SEALs, whoever) is a hell of a lot higher than L4. These guys have been everywhere, seen everything, fought a hundred battles... if you think strictly in terms of feats and skills, it's easy to consider them 8th or 10th level. Even a legendary computer hacker, someone with the skill to break into the DoD mainframe, who can type on two keyboards at once like that guy from Goldfinger - he'd be a L6 or 8 tech.

The disconnect comes when you try to quantify how hard they are to kill - a huge number of hit points doesn't quite translate into reality. I mean, sure, you could use the example from the 1E DMG, where Gygax explains that hit points are represented by bumps, bruises, and broken bones, but I think (for Modern games, anyway) that a condition track is the best way to go. Human beings can take an amazing amount of abuse, but a computer nerd with 80 hit points just makes me go .

Something I've been meaning to ask: From what you've seen of the rules so far, where would you put the overall power level? Is it close to my stated goal?

[Kerrick]

I was thinking about NPCs last night, and I got an idea: NPC classes are capped at 10 levels, and their HD advance at a slow rate than PCs, based on their BAB. An adept or commoner gets a new HD every other level, an artisocrat and expert 2/3 levels, and the warrior every level. This makes it so that you don't have uber-NPCs (i.e., a commoner with 30 hit points) - they're still fragile, even if they somehow make 6 or 8 levels, and it makes PCs more special (as they should be) without making them into demigods by L10.

[EjoThims]

Anyway, I don't know about that L3-4 thing... a Special Forces soldier (or SAS, Marine Recon, SEALs, whoever) is a hell of a lot higher than L4... Even a legendary computer hacker... he'd be a L6 or 8 tech.

They'd certainly be higher level in d20 modern or a similar game, and indeed that game has a more modern day appropriate feel.

But DnD works on a different scale.

Something I've been meaning to ask: From what you've seen of the rules so far, where would you put the overall power level? Is it close to my stated goal?

Spells in general are still a problem, and I haven't been able to look at monsters yet, but it still, I think, scales up faster than you realize.

And I don't see hitpoints, even for NPCs being a problem. Hitpoints are an abstraction of when you reach the point of death, even from blows that do hurt, not a track of how much it actually takes to kill you. A bullet through the brain is going to kill any normal man, but James Bond is going to take a few grazes, even from a high level opponent, before that happens, where the measly peon is going to just be shot in the back of the head and keel over.

[Kerrick]

But DnD works on a different scale.

Yeah.

Spells in general are still a problem, and I haven't been able to look at monsters yet, but it still, I think, scales up faster than you realize.

I just fixed the most egregious offenders in the spell section. Some of the things that people say are "OMGBROKEN!!" I just don't see (like darkness). Since the monsters are now rated by ECL and not CR (and much more accurate, IMO), you can combine more into an encounter, making for much more dynamic (and difficult) fights. This is really the part where playtesting would come in handy, to see how it all fits together - if the classes' power levels are on par, if the spells are still too powerful, and how the monsters fare against the PCs.

[EjoThims]

Haven't had the chance to do anything more in depth, but I was wondering if you'd mind my posting links to the classes here?