A New Edition of Dungeons and Dragons

[raith0]

[raith0]

New RuleConclusion

[RobbyPants]

Well, I still have a lot of reading to do, but I like the general direction.  I like the idea of the combat maneuvers.  There are a couple things I noticed on my first quick read-through:

It looks like you're handling specialization for the wizard by giving a +Int mod bonus to Caster Level.  At 1st level, that's huge, although it becomes less awesome at higher levels.  Blasting for 5d6 damage at level one is pretty potent.  Although, blasting for 14d6 at level 10 is not.  If you want to go the CL-boost route, consider capping the CL boost to your Int mod or your class level, whichever is lower.  This means that a wizard with an 18 Int is CL 2 in their specialized school at level 1, CL 4 at level 2, CL 6 at 3, and CL 8 at 4.  Every level thereafter, they're always 4 ahead (until their Int goes up).  I'm not saying it's a perfect fix, but I think it at least smooths out the rough spots.

Consider having the DR granted by Armor Focus and Shield Focus scale with level (or BAB).  A flat AC boost is fine for a feat, because it adjusts the success rate on the RNG.  That's fine.  Both the attacker and defender are assumed to be getting bonuses as the PC's level increases, so a flat boost has the same effect at all levels; however, DR works differently.  DR functions off a flat rate of damage not success of the attack.  As the PC gains levels, expected damage increases, so if DR sits static, it becomes more and more useless as the PC gains levels.

I'll have to read this all later.  This is huge.  If nothing else, my compliments on all the work you put into it.

[raith0]

Well, I still have a lot of reading to do, but I like the general direction.  I like the idea of the combat maneuvers.  There are a couple things I noticed on my first quick read-through:

It looks like you're handling specialization for the wizard by giving a +Int mod bonus to Caster Level.  At 1st level, that's huge, although it becomes less awesome at higher levels.  Blasting for 5d6 damage at level one is pretty potent.  Although, blasting for 14d6 at level 10 is not.  If you want to go the CL-boost route, consider capping the CL boost to your Int mod or your class level, whichever is lower.  This means that a wizard with an 18 Int is CL 2 in their specialized school at level 1, CL 4 at level 2, CL 6 at 3, and CL 8 at 4.  Every level thereafter, they're always 4 ahead (until their Int goes up).  I'm not saying it's a perfect fix, but I think it at least smooths out the rough spots.

Consider having the DR granted by Armor Focus and Shield Focus scale with level (or BAB).  A flat AC boost is fine for a feat, because it adjusts the success rate on the RNG.  That's fine.  Both the attacker and defender are assumed to be getting bonuses as the PC's level increases, so a flat boost has the same effect at all levels; however, DR works differently.  DR functions off a flat rate of damage not success of the attack.  As the PC gains levels, expected damage increases, so if DR sits static, it becomes more and more useless as the PC gains levels.

I'll have to read this all later.  This is huge.  If nothing else, my compliments on all the work you put into it.

thank you for the tips and i am still considering letting the shield and armor focus feats be stackable or scale.  the int to caster level does start out as a huge boon and a tapper off as you gain levels.  it is a consern of mine but even by level 5-7 range where most games end up being played you have the start of the diminishing returns.  so it may or may not be a big deal.  and thank you this was a lot of work but it has inspired me actually begin working on my own game.  but thats for the future.  with all of that said.  this is at the play testing stage right now.  most things should be okay mathmaticaly over course of 20 levels but i know that just a small group of my friends wouldnt be able to find all the flaws/problems.  thats is why i posted it here as well. 

i am currently working on a small revision of races and equipment.  but if you start playing before that is posted i would just stick to the players handbook and +0's out of the monster manual.  working on some more feats as well

[archangel.arcanis]

yeah this is a bit overwhelming to go through. There were some typo errors such as missing BaB on Monk i think. Once work settles down and i can really read this i'll try and give a constructive review.

[raith0]

yeah this is a bit overwhelming to go through. There were some typo errors such as missing BaB on Monk i think. Once work settles down and i can really read this i'll try and give a constructive review.

fixed the monk it was a lost in the copy paste and reformating of the texts from my word doc
take your time on looking over it it took me over 2 years of work on it to get to this point were i would like to see others oppinions on it. 

[raith0]

i noticed a few other things that i forgot to take out when i was typing out my notes.  Fighters have a lower CM bonus it cant get to +18 +BAB+STR anymore just +14+BAB+STR.  Rogues gained an extra Maneuver Known and i spellout a few of thier choices better.

For those asking These are The feats you have to choice from for now.  some will be gaining prereqs  and other will be added as i get them worked out. i know its a small list, but it will be growing.

and to make a clarification a Characters CM Bonus = to his CM Known.  not his CM Known + his BAB. 

[archangel.arcanis]

I still haven't had time to make it though all of it but I have a few questions/comments.
*First I like the maneuver system you came up with. It seems both elegant and effective at a glance.
*How do you reconcile 2 higher level fighters trying to disarm each other? Their weapons fly back instantly and since fighters are the ones you really want to have disarmed it makes the ability to disarm rather diminished.
*Does prof. with all weapons mean all weapons or all non-exotics? Because there are some obviously superior weapons at all levels.
* I like the bards focus on sonic abilities. I felt those have been underutilized and are very thematic.
* I think rangers got nerfed a bit with loosing BaB, Skill points, and Spells (unless they are supposed to get them and that was left off) all the while only one path gets maneuvers. Though I do like the addition of the 2hf path as I felt that should have been included all along.
* Sorc. & Pal. are now Wizard and Cleric light in this. I don't necessarily think it is bad but a bit different. I'm on the fence if I like this or not.
* for clerics and wizards are they spontaneous casters with their books being the spells known or prepared with those as their daily choices.

[raith0]

I still haven't had time to make it though all of it but I have a few questions/comments.
*First I like the maneuver system you came up with. It seems both elegant and effective at a glance.
*How do you reconcile 2 higher level fighters trying to disarm each other? Their weapons fly back instantly and since fighters are the ones you really want to have disarmed it makes the ability to disarm rather diminished.
*Does prof. with all weapons mean all weapons or all non-exotics? Because there are some obviously superior weapons at all levels.
* I like the bards focus on sonic abilities. I felt those have been underutilized and are very thematic.
* I think rangers got nerfed a bit with loosing BaB, Skill points, and Spells (unless they are supposed to get them and that was left off) all the while only one path gets maneuvers. Though I do like the addition of the 2hf path as I felt that should have been included all along.
* Sorc. & Pal. are now Wizard and Cleric light in this. I don't necessarily think it is bad but a bit different. I'm on the fence if I like this or not.
* for clerics and wizards are they spontaneous casters with their books being the spells known or prepared with those as their daily choices.

yes i know that fighters trying to disarm each other is going to be a wash.  but they also have other maneuvers to use against each other at that point.  i havent looked over all the exotic weapons yet so i havent included them. they wont be available without a feat when they are ready to go.  the first two ranger paths are going to get thier own CMs but i am going to make them different ones so they are still in an unfinished state.  but ranger is the only class missing anything from being fininished and 4 maneuvers isnt that big of a deal.  clerics and wizards now cast spontanousely from thier books but spells able to be put into it may need to be downtweaked because of how many spells you can get at higher levels. 

thanks for the response.  Paladins and Sorcerers will take a bit of getting used to but they now have a niche and identity.

[archangel.arcanis]

will rangers be getting spells based on the druid list as the Pal. & Sorc. did for their full caster counterparts?

*I got to go through a bit more of it this morning and like the simplification of the skills, there were way too many before.
*The feats section seems concise and balanced, everything seems to scale pretty well aside from the DR Robby mentioned.
*Druid Shapechange is great, though I have to wonder how the numbers work out to make them effective in combat with their lowered BaB. If they use the ability and can hit fairly consistently then great if they miss most of the time then it will never be used.
*Evasion and Mettle as feats are a huge plus in my opinion. Now anyone who wants them can get them without having to change class.
*For spells not in the PHB you may want to note what book they are in.

[RobbyPants]

thank you for the tips and i am still considering letting the shield and armor focus feats be stackable or scale. 

Well, they need to scale, otherwise they will become less and less useful over time.  Remember: a static bonus to a roll that checks success works differently than a static bonus to damage.  Here are some numbers:

Lets say at level 2, you do an average of 10 damage per attack, and at level 10, you do an average of 50 damage per attack.  Now, if you have a 50% chance to hit, then at level 2, your average expected damage per attack is 5 (50% of 10), and your average expected damage at level 10 is 25.  This makes sense.

Now, if you add a +2 boost to hit (affecting the success of the attack), this translates into a 10% boost to your success.  Now, the level 2 guys has an average expected damage of 6 damage per attack (60% of 10) and the level 10 guys has an average expected damage of 30 per attack.  Note how one guy increased his damage by one point and the other by five from the same +2 bonus to the attack roll.

Now, if instead, you were to apply that +2 to damage, one guy is getting a 20% boost to his damage (10 to 12) and the other is getting a paltry 4% boost (50 to 52).  That's five times the difference.  So, any static modifier to damage needs to scale with level or it will fall into obscurity.  Not scaling it only works in systems where you don't deal extra damage as you gain levels.

[raith0]

The Druid questions, they may have some problems its one of the big things that needs some seriouse numbers still but i did make all of the stat increases from the forms unnamed allowing them to stack with all the enhancement bonus's from spells.  so it should even out to be a okay in the long run.  you may need to pay more attention to strategy to make it be great but i feel it should be okay in the long run. 

Rangers- i am either giving them spells based off the druid list or thier own CM list based on weapon style choice.  when i get both of them typed up from notes the flavor part of the ranger CMs is giving me issues right now both can be used interchangeably.

Armor/shield Spec - m,y onlhy concern is BArabarians taking them and stacking things really high since they all ready get Dr 10/- as a class feature.  i may just figure out a scale or let them be taken and stack and it not stack with the barbarians class feature.

and all spells are in PHB or Spell Compendium. 

[RobbyPants]

i may just figure out a scale or let them be taken and stack and it not stack with the barbarians class feature.

I'd just do that.

Heck, if the barbarians had some sort of built-in armor bonus to AC as a class feature, they could run around in furs and no armor and still have a solid defense.  It works thematically.

[raith0]

i may just figure out a scale or let them be taken and stack and it not stack with the barbarians class feature.

I'd just do that.

Heck, if the barbarians had some sort of built-in armor bonus to AC as a class feature, they could run around in furs and no armor and still have a solid defense.  It works thematically.

the lack of armor on a barbarian was a thought of mine.  it may become a CM for them,  ill put some pen to paper on that ( probably just something to let them add con ontop of dex to ac similiar to a monk.  ill post an update here to the feats as well some time tonite.  im thinking of working on the Reserve feats tonite as well but i have a toddler so it may not happen for a few hours.


ron

[RobbyPants]

im thinking of working on the Reserve feats tonite as well but i have a toddler so it may not happen for a few hours.

I know how that goes!

[raith0]

im thinking of working on the Reserve feats tonite as well but i have a toddler so it may not happen for a few hours.

I know how that goes!

its a blast and i love my son but sometimes you cant get a minute till they go down for the night. 

on another note i have the charts for Fighter, Rogue, Barbarian, Monk, and Bard done.  i put the spoiler in for Sorcerer when i needed to take a brake so i should be back to finish it tonite.
Rangers will be done when i finish fleshing out the the Combat styles

the big three will be done by the weekend and a side note my first official play test will be a week from tomorow.

[archangel.arcanis]

im thinking of working on the Reserve feats tonite as well but i have a toddler so it may not happen for a few hours.

I know how that goes!

its a blast and i love my son but sometimes you cant get a minute till they go down for the night. 

on another note i have the charts for Fighter, Rogue, Barbarian, Monk, and Bard done.  i put the spoiler in for Sorcerer when i needed to take a brake so i should be back to finish it tonite.
Rangers will be done when i finish fleshing out the the Combat styles

the big three will be done by the weekend and a side note my first official play test will be a week from tomorow.

Sweet.

[raith0]

all Class charts are up and done

Two Weapon Style for rangers is done and i am hoping to get Archery done later today. 

and i have added a few feats over the last couple of days 

i will also leave a diary type post the day after every play test session please post if you use anything (within regular DnD or as a stand alone game)


Ron 

[raith0]

So i have one question for those keeping up at the moment before i start the first play test game. 

I hate being the DM who says no,  so saying that what do you suggest i do about prestige classes.  should i just redo ones that the group is interested in playing or should i just let them be played as they are and hope for the best?

[RobbyPants]

I hate being the DM who says no,  so saying that what do you suggest i do about prestige classes.  should i just redo ones that the group is interested in playing or should i just let them be played as they are and hope for the best?

That's certainly the least work.  That's how I like handling LA >0 templates.  I just tell the players that I'll write up something that doesn't suck and see if they agree.