The problem is I can buy the design philosophy but the actual implementations you bother to post don't seem to support that, and DnD3.x has other huge problems you haven't acknowledged yet.
Case in point: any cleric with random stats can be a cleric archer. They don't care about feats, their better offensive and defensive options come from spells, they can have 8s for stats down the line except wis. Additionally they have resource, overland map movement, skill use, puzzle monster solutions, divination and other bling that comes from the huge cleric spell list. To be as useful an archer as any cleric ever, melee classes have to book-dip hard, and might be able to do a few of the other things if they can consistently roll 20s.
The cleric should be buffing the fighter you say, and not stealing his thunder. Problem there is some of the best of the cleric buffs are self-only (which lots either ignore or change the rules on like tons of other stuff).
Castles and Cocks, the Basics.
Moderator: Moderators
-
Username17
- Serious Badass
- Posts: 29894
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Making the choice of what your character does to fight their opponents into a non-gameplay choice is idiotic. You're back at the same 4rry bullshit of characters forgoing the use of bows against harpies because their sword powers only worked with swords.Lord Mistborn wrote:The thing is that doesn't actually solve the "problem" it just makes the question "should you be dual wielding" unintuitive to new players. If combat style is less of a gameplay choice and more of a character customization choice (which I would argue it should be) then you don't want people to be asking "is dual wielding mechanically efficient for my character?" They should just be asking "do I want to play a character that dual wields" and if the answer is yes then they should be able to take a feat labeled "[Combat Style] Dual Wielding" and then feel good about their life choices.ishy wrote: A much better way to reward dual-wielding is to have a feat that gives you a free rider on every hit or something (assuming dual-wielding gives you extra attacks). That way, the character can go sword&board when the situation calls for it and still be useful.
If your feats are large, then your style feats are going to be large. And if your style feats are large, then your relative disadvantage for fighting outside your designated box is going to be large. And if your style feats don't stack, then when you have two style feats you will always be fighting outside your designated box. Which means you'll be carrying a large relative penalty all the time.
This is just shit design on several levels. The ability to fight well with two weapons cannot be one of a tiny number of selections from a list of powerful effects. It just fucking can't.
-Username17
Only if every feat you take is stacking linearly with every other feat. Like that's where 'small feat' systems tend to fuck up. Individually the feats are not worth as much but a bunch of feats that have been voltroned together can grant serious but extremely narrow power. Which of course creates a gap that is just as large between people with the 'right' and 'wrong' feats. Plus it fucks the fighting man be it encourages him to overspecialize.FrankTrollman wrote:If your feats are large, then your style feats are going to be large. And if your style feats are large, then your relative disadvantage for fighting outside your designated box is going to be large. And if your style feats don't stack, then when you have two style feats you will always be fighting outside your designated box. Which means you'll be carrying a large relative penalty all the time.
The goal is to always have the first feat that people spend on something be the most rewarding so players are encouraged to diversify. Obviously that means that there's a limit to the number of feats this system can support but we don't need to write unlimited feats.
I'm sure it makes lots of sense to you, but you don't provide enough information to figure out what you want here. Like I said in January, I know how Frank does DnD, but I don't know how you DnD.
Say there's a few styles. Each has a good trick against one enemy type and something ok against another, and you generally classify things into a handful of enemy types. I'd picture something like:
Two weapon style:
Mundane - You add say two plus enhancement bonus of each weapon as damage to each attack. Good against big, strong things, auto-scaling unless your dm runs DnD wrong.
Hero - Mundane + you may divide your full attack among targets (i.e. solve the monk problem--either mobile and get one hit or stand still, swing a lot then get your face ripped off if you don't kill the thing). Good against lots of weak enemies.
Paragon - Previous + you may parry an attack against you from something so many size categories larger as a reaction once per round, roll an attack and if result is higher than the attack against you, you parry it. This includes touch attacks, possibly scale this next tier with more uses.
Epic - think of something. Include ranged touch attacks to the parry option (screw you mailman) and remove the size limit--someone throws a mountain at you, you can parry that. Once per day, choose something: you ignore DR on that for the day (can be an adamantine mountain or Orcus, sky's the limit).
Now where would something like that fall along your power curve? Too much, too little, too generally useful? ETA I'd think that you'd also have another similarly powerful style that does other things.
Say there's a few styles. Each has a good trick against one enemy type and something ok against another, and you generally classify things into a handful of enemy types. I'd picture something like:
Two weapon style:
Mundane - You add say two plus enhancement bonus of each weapon as damage to each attack. Good against big, strong things, auto-scaling unless your dm runs DnD wrong.
Hero - Mundane + you may divide your full attack among targets (i.e. solve the monk problem--either mobile and get one hit or stand still, swing a lot then get your face ripped off if you don't kill the thing). Good against lots of weak enemies.
Paragon - Previous + you may parry an attack against you from something so many size categories larger as a reaction once per round, roll an attack and if result is higher than the attack against you, you parry it. This includes touch attacks, possibly scale this next tier with more uses.
Epic - think of something. Include ranged touch attacks to the parry option (screw you mailman) and remove the size limit--someone throws a mountain at you, you can parry that. Once per day, choose something: you ignore DR on that for the day (can be an adamantine mountain or Orcus, sky's the limit).
Now where would something like that fall along your power curve? Too much, too little, too generally useful? ETA I'd think that you'd also have another similarly powerful style that does other things.
Last edited by Lokey on Sat Jun 11, 2016 12:12 pm, edited 5 times in total.
Rereading, I probably broke my own rule, it's just parrying things seems like something two weapon fighters should be able to do. Maybe weaken that and put some stronger defense options on a shield style (which are usually not worth it unless dm lets you use two and stack tons of things that don't by the rules).
There's plenty of other things that would seem nice to use instead:
- Choose which weap type used for DR or other restriction purposes.
- Choose which weap you roll damage for.
- Pick a die size and roll it. You may use the result for every weap related roll that round if you wish.
Additionally there's still the extent power level question. For melee, I feel you already have a list of good abilities to pick from: the related epic feats (which as Frank says you outgrew at level 10 if not earlier).
There's plenty of other things that would seem nice to use instead:
- Choose which weap type used for DR or other restriction purposes.
- Choose which weap you roll damage for.
- Pick a die size and roll it. You may use the result for every weap related roll that round if you wish.
Additionally there's still the extent power level question. For melee, I feel you already have a list of good abilities to pick from: the related epic feats (which as Frank says you outgrew at level 10 if not earlier).
Last edited by Lokey on Sat Jun 11, 2016 12:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Also, LM, I think the first thing of all you (or anybody trying to write his own fantasy heartbreaker) needs to do is to decided what you actually want to accomplish, but your design points mostly seem to be how to accomplish... I'm not sure what. "More balanced DnD"? We all have houserules for that, customized for our specific tastes. There are shittons of those on the net already too. "DnD that raises power levels of everyone to that of properly played wizards"? There are Tomes for that and even if they were not complete the last time I checked, not like you even needed magic items with all the stuff they gave you to play with.
The idea is to make a game that's playable for 21 levels with minimal balance problems. In order to do that you can't just power up martial classes you also have deal with team casters more egregious bullshit.
Ok then this the first post with actual rules including the current version of Dual Wield. The current project is only going up to level 3 so all the feats don't have their full progression listed. Currently the plan is that combat syle feats get a new trick every odd level. Other feats get new stuff at lv 6, 12, and 18 (so once per tier essentially). Skills are still a work in progress but I'm definitely folding Hide/Move Silently into Stealth and Spot/Listen/Search. The current plan is that newschool skill points don't buy skill ranks. They just straight up buy a skill and it's bonus stays level appropriate forever.
Feats
This primarily a post about monster though which are being made first as required. A fantasy heart breaker is nothing with you things to stab in the face. Today we are introducing your forest friends (basic animals) and creepy crawlies (reworked vermin)
Forest Friends
Creepy Crawlies
a note on the modified vermin type they're not mindless anymore because fuck that shit. Like spiders still think, not very interesting thoughts mind you but still.
Ok then this the first post with actual rules including the current version of Dual Wield. The current project is only going up to level 3 so all the feats don't have their full progression listed. Currently the plan is that combat syle feats get a new trick every odd level. Other feats get new stuff at lv 6, 12, and 18 (so once per tier essentially). Skills are still a work in progress but I'm definitely folding Hide/Move Silently into Stealth and Spot/Listen/Search. The current plan is that newschool skill points don't buy skill ranks. They just straight up buy a skill and it's bonus stays level appropriate forever.
Feats
Combat Style: Dual Wielding
you wield two weapons
1 (Blade Rush) You receive no penalties for two weapon fighting. When you make a charge attack you may make two attacks (one with each weapon) instead of the normal single attack.
3 (Aftermath) If you hit a enemy with both weapons then until the end of their next turn they take a -2 penalty to attack rolls and cannot take 5ft steps
Combat Style: Phalanx
you fight in a disciplined formation
1 (Line of Battle) in combat you may chose to enter a formation with any number of allies who also have Combat Style: Phalanx. While in formation you act on the same initiative count and must move a a group. While in formation you may chose to make a “combined attack” on a single target. A combined attack makes a single attack roll with a +1 morale bonus per additional participant (to a maximum of +2 per tier). That roll applies to all attacks in the combination
3 (Wall of shields) you may share your shield AC bonus with an adjacent ally if they already have a shield bonus to AC it improves by 1
Combat Style: Mob Tactics
you fight with your friends
1 (Fair Fighting) You deal an extra 1d6 damage to enmies you have combat advantage on
3 (Teamwork) You gain combat advantage whenever you attack someone who threatened by an ally in melee
Power Charge the first attack you hit after a charge deals an additional 1d6 damage and you don't take penalties to AC for charging.
Lurker You gain a +3 bonus to stealth when not moving. In addition the round you leave stealth your first attack is at an additional +2 bonus and deals an additional 1d6 damage
Lightning Reflexes you gain +2 to reflex saves and initiative checks
Iron Will you gain +2 to will saves along with +3 to opposed social rolls
Toughness you gain +2 to fort saves along with 3 hp
you wield two weapons
1 (Blade Rush) You receive no penalties for two weapon fighting. When you make a charge attack you may make two attacks (one with each weapon) instead of the normal single attack.
3 (Aftermath) If you hit a enemy with both weapons then until the end of their next turn they take a -2 penalty to attack rolls and cannot take 5ft steps
Combat Style: Phalanx
you fight in a disciplined formation
1 (Line of Battle) in combat you may chose to enter a formation with any number of allies who also have Combat Style: Phalanx. While in formation you act on the same initiative count and must move a a group. While in formation you may chose to make a “combined attack” on a single target. A combined attack makes a single attack roll with a +1 morale bonus per additional participant (to a maximum of +2 per tier). That roll applies to all attacks in the combination
3 (Wall of shields) you may share your shield AC bonus with an adjacent ally if they already have a shield bonus to AC it improves by 1
Combat Style: Mob Tactics
you fight with your friends
1 (Fair Fighting) You deal an extra 1d6 damage to enmies you have combat advantage on
3 (Teamwork) You gain combat advantage whenever you attack someone who threatened by an ally in melee
Power Charge the first attack you hit after a charge deals an additional 1d6 damage and you don't take penalties to AC for charging.
Lurker You gain a +3 bonus to stealth when not moving. In addition the round you leave stealth your first attack is at an additional +2 bonus and deals an additional 1d6 damage
Lightning Reflexes you gain +2 to reflex saves and initiative checks
Iron Will you gain +2 to will saves along with +3 to opposed social rolls
Toughness you gain +2 to fort saves along with 3 hp
Forest Friends
Bear (Medium) (CR 2)
HD 2 (20 hp) Initiative +1 Speed 30ft
AC 14 (+1 dex +3 nat) Touch 11 FF 13
For +8 Ref +2 Will +4
Str 19 Dex 12 Con 15 Int 2 Wis 13 Cha 4
2 Claws +5 (1d4+4) Bite +3 (1d6+4)
Perception +4 Survival +4
Special: Scent
Feats Toughness, Iron Will
Now was the bear there before you rolled your perception check?
Boar (Medium) (CR 1)
HD 1 (14) Initiative +0 Speed 40ft
AC 13 (+3 nat) Touch 10 FF 13
For +6 Ref +0 Will +1
Str 15 Dex 10 Con 15 Int 2 Wis 13 Cha 4
Gore +2 1d8+3
Skills: Perception +4
Special: n/a
Feats Toughness
It's made of Bacon, you know what to do.
Cat (Medium) (CR 2)
HD 2 (17 hp) Initiative +5 Speed 40ft Climb 20ft
AC 15 (+3 Dex +2 nat) Touch 13 FF 12
For +4 Ref +6 Will +2
Str 15 Dex 17 Con 14 Int 2 Wis 13 Cha 4
2 Claws +4 (1d4+1) Bite +2 melee 1d6+3
Stealth +8 Perception +3
Special Pounce, Pinning claws, Scent
Feats Lightning Reflexes, Power Charge
Big cats are one of the few animals in the modern world that will hunt humans. In D&D land they're even more willing to do so. Note that we're not specifying what kind of big cat this, because fantasy world are full of smeeps that aren't directly analogous to real world animals. This stat block is good for any cat about the size of a human that might jump out of the trees and try to eat you.
Pounce (ex) a big cat can make it's full attack routine at the end of a charge
Pinning claws (ex) if a big cat hits with both claw attack then its bite attack is against flatfooted AC
Dire Eagle (CR 3)
Medium Animal
HD 3 (20) Initiative +5 Speed 20ft Fly 80ft (poor)
AC 15 (+3 Dex +2 nat) Touch 13 FF 12
For +4 Ref +6 Will +3
Str 16 Dex 17 Con 12 Int 2 Wis 14 Cha 4
Talon +5 (1d4+3)
Perception +7
Special n/a
Feats Flyby attack, Lightning Reflexes
Why didn't they just shoot the eagles with arrows?
Wolf (CR 1)
Medium Animal
HD 1 (11 hp) initative +2 speed 50ft
Ac 14 (+2 Dex +2 nat) Touch 12 FF 12
Str 13 Dex 15 Con 15 Int 2 Wis 12 Cha 6
Bite +2 melee (1d6+1 plus trip)
Stealth +4 Perception +3 Survival +4
Special: Trip, Scent
Feats: Mob Tactics
A single wolf can be a threat to a grown adult especially one with no combat training. Wolves tend to be dangerous because they hunt in backs and in D&D land they have little fear of humans.
Trip (ex) A wolf that hits with a bite attack can attempt to trip the opponent (+1 check modifier) as a free action without making a touch attack or provoking an attack of opportunity. If the attempt fails, the opponent cannot react to trip the wolf.
Worg (CR 2)
Medium Animal
HD 2 (17 hp) initative +2 speed 50ft
Ac 15 (+2 dex +3 nat) Touch 12 FF 13
For +4 Ref +2 Will +5
Str 13 Dex 15 Con 15 Int 10 Wis 14 Cha 12
Bite +4 melee (1d6+1 plus trip)
Stealth +4 Perception +3 Survival +7 Intimidate +4 Diplomacy +1 Sense Motive +2
Special: Trip, Scent
Feats: Mob Tactics, Iron Will
Worgs are basically just sentient wolves and we're just sort of going to roll with that. Seriously screw the magical type being a thing. They lead packs or regular wolves and work alongside goblins.
Trip (ex) A Worg that hits with a bite attack can attempt to trip the opponent (+1 check modifier) as a free action without making a touch attack or provoking an attack of opportunity. If the attempt fails, the opponent cannot react to trip the wolf.
HD 2 (20 hp) Initiative +1 Speed 30ft
AC 14 (+1 dex +3 nat) Touch 11 FF 13
For +8 Ref +2 Will +4
Str 19 Dex 12 Con 15 Int 2 Wis 13 Cha 4
2 Claws +5 (1d4+4) Bite +3 (1d6+4)
Perception +4 Survival +4
Special: Scent
Feats Toughness, Iron Will
Now was the bear there before you rolled your perception check?
Boar (Medium) (CR 1)
HD 1 (14) Initiative +0 Speed 40ft
AC 13 (+3 nat) Touch 10 FF 13
For +6 Ref +0 Will +1
Str 15 Dex 10 Con 15 Int 2 Wis 13 Cha 4
Gore +2 1d8+3
Skills: Perception +4
Special: n/a
Feats Toughness
It's made of Bacon, you know what to do.
Cat (Medium) (CR 2)
HD 2 (17 hp) Initiative +5 Speed 40ft Climb 20ft
AC 15 (+3 Dex +2 nat) Touch 13 FF 12
For +4 Ref +6 Will +2
Str 15 Dex 17 Con 14 Int 2 Wis 13 Cha 4
2 Claws +4 (1d4+1) Bite +2 melee 1d6+3
Stealth +8 Perception +3
Special Pounce, Pinning claws, Scent
Feats Lightning Reflexes, Power Charge
Big cats are one of the few animals in the modern world that will hunt humans. In D&D land they're even more willing to do so. Note that we're not specifying what kind of big cat this, because fantasy world are full of smeeps that aren't directly analogous to real world animals. This stat block is good for any cat about the size of a human that might jump out of the trees and try to eat you.
Pounce (ex) a big cat can make it's full attack routine at the end of a charge
Pinning claws (ex) if a big cat hits with both claw attack then its bite attack is against flatfooted AC
Dire Eagle (CR 3)
Medium Animal
HD 3 (20) Initiative +5 Speed 20ft Fly 80ft (poor)
AC 15 (+3 Dex +2 nat) Touch 13 FF 12
For +4 Ref +6 Will +3
Str 16 Dex 17 Con 12 Int 2 Wis 14 Cha 4
Talon +5 (1d4+3)
Perception +7
Special n/a
Feats Flyby attack, Lightning Reflexes
Why didn't they just shoot the eagles with arrows?
Wolf (CR 1)
Medium Animal
HD 1 (11 hp) initative +2 speed 50ft
Ac 14 (+2 Dex +2 nat) Touch 12 FF 12
Str 13 Dex 15 Con 15 Int 2 Wis 12 Cha 6
Bite +2 melee (1d6+1 plus trip)
Stealth +4 Perception +3 Survival +4
Special: Trip, Scent
Feats: Mob Tactics
A single wolf can be a threat to a grown adult especially one with no combat training. Wolves tend to be dangerous because they hunt in backs and in D&D land they have little fear of humans.
Trip (ex) A wolf that hits with a bite attack can attempt to trip the opponent (+1 check modifier) as a free action without making a touch attack or provoking an attack of opportunity. If the attempt fails, the opponent cannot react to trip the wolf.
Worg (CR 2)
Medium Animal
HD 2 (17 hp) initative +2 speed 50ft
Ac 15 (+2 dex +3 nat) Touch 12 FF 13
For +4 Ref +2 Will +5
Str 13 Dex 15 Con 15 Int 10 Wis 14 Cha 12
Bite +4 melee (1d6+1 plus trip)
Stealth +4 Perception +3 Survival +7 Intimidate +4 Diplomacy +1 Sense Motive +2
Special: Trip, Scent
Feats: Mob Tactics, Iron Will
Worgs are basically just sentient wolves and we're just sort of going to roll with that. Seriously screw the magical type being a thing. They lead packs or regular wolves and work alongside goblins.
Trip (ex) A Worg that hits with a bite attack can attempt to trip the opponent (+1 check modifier) as a free action without making a touch attack or provoking an attack of opportunity. If the attempt fails, the opponent cannot react to trip the wolf.
a note on the modified vermin type they're not mindless anymore because fuck that shit. Like spiders still think, not very interesting thoughts mind you but still.
Giant Mantis (CR 3)
Medium Vermin
HD 3 (23 hp) Initiative +6 Speed 40ft fly 60ft (poor)
AC 16 (+4 dex +2 nat) Touch 14 FF 12
For +3 Ref +9 Will +2
Str 14 Dex 18 Con 14 Int 1 Wis 12 Cha 4
2 Claws +6 (1d8+2)
Perception +4
Special Claw Scythes
Feats Lighting Reflexes, Combat Style Dual Wield
Giant Mantises like to attack with their natural weapons.
Claw Scythes (ex) the mantises claws count as manufactured weapons for the purpose using Combat Styles.
Giant Wasp (CR 2)
Medium Vermin
HD 2 (17) Initiative +3 Speed 20ft Fly 50ft (good)
AC 13 (+1 Dex +2 nat) Touch 11 FF 12
For +3 Ref +6 Will +2
Str 14 Dex 12 Con 14 Int 1 Wis 12 Cha 2
Sting +3 (1d4+3 plus poison)
Stealth +7 Perception +4
Special Scent
Feats Lighting Reflexes, Power Charge
This is a wasp. It does not make honey it does not pollinate things, it's here to ruin your day.
Poison (ex) DC 13 Initial and secondary damage is 1d6 Con
Monstrous Spider (medium) (CR 1)
Medium Vermin
HD 1 (10 hp) Initiative +3 Speed 30ft Climb 20ft
AC 15 (+3 dex +2 nat) Touch 13 FF 12
For +1 Ref +5 Will +0
Str 11 Dex 17 Con 12 Int 1 Wis 10 Cha 2
Bite +3 (1d6 plus poison)
Stealth +7 Perception +3
Special: Poison, Web, Tremmorsense 60ft
Feats: Lurker
The stuff of nightmares a monstrous spider about the size of an adult human. They're ambush predators that consider anything smaller or about that same size as a potential meal.
Poison (ex) Save DC 12 initial and secondary damage is 1d6 str
Web (ex). Monserous spiders can throw a web eight times per day. This is similar to an attack with a net but has a maximum range of 50 feet, with a range increment of 10 feet, and is effective against targets up to one size category larger than the spider. An entangled creature can escape with a successful acrobatics check or burst it with a Strength check.
Monsterous Spiders can also create sheets of sticky webbing from 5 to 60 feet square, depending on the size of the spider. They usually position these sheets to snare flying creatures but can also try to trap prey on the ground. Approaching creatures must succeed on a DC 20 Perception check to notice a web; otherwise they stumble into it and become trapped as though by a successful web attack. Attempts to escape or burst the webbing gain a +5 bonus if the trapped creature has something to walk on or grab while pulling free. Each 5-foot section has the hit points given on the table, and sheet webs have dr 5/—
A monstrous spider can move across its own web at its climb speed and can pinpoint the location of any creature touching its web.
Medium Vermin
HD 3 (23 hp) Initiative +6 Speed 40ft fly 60ft (poor)
AC 16 (+4 dex +2 nat) Touch 14 FF 12
For +3 Ref +9 Will +2
Str 14 Dex 18 Con 14 Int 1 Wis 12 Cha 4
2 Claws +6 (1d8+2)
Perception +4
Special Claw Scythes
Feats Lighting Reflexes, Combat Style Dual Wield
Giant Mantises like to attack with their natural weapons.
Claw Scythes (ex) the mantises claws count as manufactured weapons for the purpose using Combat Styles.
Giant Wasp (CR 2)
Medium Vermin
HD 2 (17) Initiative +3 Speed 20ft Fly 50ft (good)
AC 13 (+1 Dex +2 nat) Touch 11 FF 12
For +3 Ref +6 Will +2
Str 14 Dex 12 Con 14 Int 1 Wis 12 Cha 2
Sting +3 (1d4+3 plus poison)
Stealth +7 Perception +4
Special Scent
Feats Lighting Reflexes, Power Charge
This is a wasp. It does not make honey it does not pollinate things, it's here to ruin your day.
Poison (ex) DC 13 Initial and secondary damage is 1d6 Con
Monstrous Spider (medium) (CR 1)
Medium Vermin
HD 1 (10 hp) Initiative +3 Speed 30ft Climb 20ft
AC 15 (+3 dex +2 nat) Touch 13 FF 12
For +1 Ref +5 Will +0
Str 11 Dex 17 Con 12 Int 1 Wis 10 Cha 2
Bite +3 (1d6 plus poison)
Stealth +7 Perception +3
Special: Poison, Web, Tremmorsense 60ft
Feats: Lurker
The stuff of nightmares a monstrous spider about the size of an adult human. They're ambush predators that consider anything smaller or about that same size as a potential meal.
Poison (ex) Save DC 12 initial and secondary damage is 1d6 str
Web (ex). Monserous spiders can throw a web eight times per day. This is similar to an attack with a net but has a maximum range of 50 feet, with a range increment of 10 feet, and is effective against targets up to one size category larger than the spider. An entangled creature can escape with a successful acrobatics check or burst it with a Strength check.
Monsterous Spiders can also create sheets of sticky webbing from 5 to 60 feet square, depending on the size of the spider. They usually position these sheets to snare flying creatures but can also try to trap prey on the ground. Approaching creatures must succeed on a DC 20 Perception check to notice a web; otherwise they stumble into it and become trapped as though by a successful web attack. Attempts to escape or burst the webbing gain a +5 bonus if the trapped creature has something to walk on or grab while pulling free. Each 5-foot section has the hit points given on the table, and sheet webs have dr 5/—
A monstrous spider can move across its own web at its climb speed and can pinpoint the location of any creature touching its web.
Last edited by Mistborn on Sat Jun 11, 2016 11:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
more monsters
The undead Are class D&D adversaries. The unliving and dark minded subtypes have been stolen from the Tome of necromancy where the do the same thing as they did there. Also a note on weapon finesse. That's not a feat anymore. That's just something everyone can do, even monsters.
The undead Are class D&D adversaries. The unliving and dark minded subtypes have been stolen from the Tome of necromancy where the do the same thing as they did there. Also a note on weapon finesse. That's not a feat anymore. That's just something everyone can do, even monsters.
Humanoid Zombie (CR ½ {Deal with it})
Meadium Undead (unliving)
HD 1 (12 hp) int -1 speed 30ft
AC 11 Touch 9 FF 11
For +4 Ref -1 Will -1
Str 15 Dex 9 Con 14 Int – Wis 8 Cha 1
Slam +2 (1d8+2)
Special: Decay Slow Mindless
Feats: none
Zombies tend to either occur “naturally” or be the result of a necromancer who was phoning it in. Zombies are only ever dangerous when they show up in groups. Zombies are mindless and must be directed mentally by their controlling necromancer from within 100ft. Uncontrolled Zombies hunger for Braaaains and simply walk in a random direction and try to kill anything alive they come across.
Decay (Su) every week a Zombie takes 2 hp worth of damage. Eating part the brain of a dead humanoid restores the Zombie to full hp. (a single humaoid corpse usually "feeds" 4-5 Zombies
Slow (ex) zombies can make a move action or a standard action each round but not both (or a partial charge if there are enemies in range
Mindless (ex) Zombies automatically pass will saves vs mind-effecting abilities but automatically believe all illusions
Humanoid Skeleton (CR 1)
Medium Undead (dark minded)
HD 1 (11 hp) Initiative +1 Speed 30ft
AC 15 (+2 natural armor +2 heavy shield +1 dex) Touch 11 Flatfooted 12
For +2 Ref +1 Will +1
Str 14 Dex 13 Con – Int 2 Wis 12 Cha 1
Claw +2 (1d4+2) or shortsword +2 (1d6+2)
Special -
Feats: Combat Style: Phalanx
The humble skeleton is the workhorse of the averaged necromancer. They have crude sort of intelligence and follow simple orders well. Uncontrolled Skeletons bend that intelligence to killing as many living things as possible. This skeleton is equipped with a short-sword and heavy wooden shield.
Ghoul (CR 2)
Medium Undead (Unliving, Dark Minded)
HD 2 Initiative Speed
AC Touch FF
For Ref Will
Str 13 Dex 15 Con 13 Int 12 Wis 14 Cha 12
2 Claws +3 (1d4+1) Bite +1 (1d6+1
Stealth +5 Perception +5
Special Paralysis, Ghoul Fever
Feats Lurker Lightning Reflexes
Ghoul tend to lurk in graveyards and eat people or turn them into more Ghouls. It's really obnoxious.
Ghoul Fever (Su) Disease—bite, Fortitude DC 12, incubation period 1 day, damage 1d3 Con and 1d3 Dex. The save DC is Charisma-based.
An afflicted humanoid who dies of ghoul fever rises as a ghoul at the next midnight. A humanoid who becomes a ghoul in this way retains none of the abilities it possessed in life. It is not under the control of any other ghouls, but it hungers for the flesh of the living and behaves like a normal ghoul in all respects. A humanoid of 4 Hit Dice or more rises as a ghast, not a ghoul.
Paralysis (Ex) Those hit by a ghoul’s bite or claw attack must succeed on a DC 12 Fortitude save or be paralyzed for 1d4+1 rounds. Elves have immunity to this paralysis. The save DC is Charisma-based.
Meadium Undead (unliving)
HD 1 (12 hp) int -1 speed 30ft
AC 11 Touch 9 FF 11
For +4 Ref -1 Will -1
Str 15 Dex 9 Con 14 Int – Wis 8 Cha 1
Slam +2 (1d8+2)
Special: Decay Slow Mindless
Feats: none
Zombies tend to either occur “naturally” or be the result of a necromancer who was phoning it in. Zombies are only ever dangerous when they show up in groups. Zombies are mindless and must be directed mentally by their controlling necromancer from within 100ft. Uncontrolled Zombies hunger for Braaaains and simply walk in a random direction and try to kill anything alive they come across.
Decay (Su) every week a Zombie takes 2 hp worth of damage. Eating part the brain of a dead humanoid restores the Zombie to full hp. (a single humaoid corpse usually "feeds" 4-5 Zombies
Slow (ex) zombies can make a move action or a standard action each round but not both (or a partial charge if there are enemies in range
Mindless (ex) Zombies automatically pass will saves vs mind-effecting abilities but automatically believe all illusions
Humanoid Skeleton (CR 1)
Medium Undead (dark minded)
HD 1 (11 hp) Initiative +1 Speed 30ft
AC 15 (+2 natural armor +2 heavy shield +1 dex) Touch 11 Flatfooted 12
For +2 Ref +1 Will +1
Str 14 Dex 13 Con – Int 2 Wis 12 Cha 1
Claw +2 (1d4+2) or shortsword +2 (1d6+2)
Special -
Feats: Combat Style: Phalanx
The humble skeleton is the workhorse of the averaged necromancer. They have crude sort of intelligence and follow simple orders well. Uncontrolled Skeletons bend that intelligence to killing as many living things as possible. This skeleton is equipped with a short-sword and heavy wooden shield.
Ghoul (CR 2)
Medium Undead (Unliving, Dark Minded)
HD 2 Initiative Speed
AC Touch FF
For Ref Will
Str 13 Dex 15 Con 13 Int 12 Wis 14 Cha 12
2 Claws +3 (1d4+1) Bite +1 (1d6+1
Stealth +5 Perception +5
Special Paralysis, Ghoul Fever
Feats Lurker Lightning Reflexes
Ghoul tend to lurk in graveyards and eat people or turn them into more Ghouls. It's really obnoxious.
Ghoul Fever (Su) Disease—bite, Fortitude DC 12, incubation period 1 day, damage 1d3 Con and 1d3 Dex. The save DC is Charisma-based.
An afflicted humanoid who dies of ghoul fever rises as a ghoul at the next midnight. A humanoid who becomes a ghoul in this way retains none of the abilities it possessed in life. It is not under the control of any other ghouls, but it hungers for the flesh of the living and behaves like a normal ghoul in all respects. A humanoid of 4 Hit Dice or more rises as a ghast, not a ghoul.
Paralysis (Ex) Those hit by a ghoul’s bite or claw attack must succeed on a DC 12 Fortitude save or be paralyzed for 1d4+1 rounds. Elves have immunity to this paralysis. The save DC is Charisma-based.
Your goals are terrible. I barely understand what you mean by your second quoted paragraph about the first feat being most rewarding so that people are encouraged to diversify (wtf?). I just know that it is wrong.Lord Mistborn wrote: Only if every feat you take is stacking linearly with every other feat. Like that's where 'small feat' systems tend to fuck up. Individually the feats are not worth as much but a bunch of feats that have been voltroned together can grant serious but extremely narrow power. Which of course creates a gap that is just as large between people with the 'right' and 'wrong' feats. Plus it fucks the fighting man be it encourages him to overspecialize.
The goal is to always have the first feat that people spend on something be the most rewarding so players are encouraged to diversify. Obviously that means that there's a limit to the number of feats this system can support but we don't need to write unlimited feats.
... and your execution is even worse.
You just posted a handful of sample feats that were entirely small bullshit bonuses that you would gather to "voltron" with synergistic feats.
I'd like to reiterate that all feats currently exist in an incomplete form lacking anything beyond what they provide at basic tier. All combat style feats give a new ability at every odd level. All other feats gain a new text at lv 6, 12, and 18. Level appropriate combat bonuses at levels 1-3 are kind of bullshit because the numbers are kind of tight already. Like remember this is the levels where you can potentially 100 to 0 someone just by having max Str and hitting them with a Greatsword.
Last edited by Mistborn on Sun Jun 12, 2016 12:30 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
deaddmwalking
- Prince
- Posts: 3595
- Joined: Mon May 21, 2012 11:33 am
It is my contention that choosing a Feat at 1st level that includes benefits at 3rd, 6th, 9th, etc is significantly more difficult than just giving out more feats so they can choose the abilities they want at each level.
If you create a feat that has a so-so effect at 1st level but a great ability at 6th level it's a difficult choice against a good feat at 1st level with a terrible ability at 6th.
One of the really frustrating things about Pathfinder is the pile of bullshit bonuses you have to dig through to know if your character is even done.
From a design point, building a scaling feat is significantly more work than stand-alone feats; ititerative property being what it is, you're almost certainly going to break the game sooner rather than later.
If you create a feat that has a so-so effect at 1st level but a great ability at 6th level it's a difficult choice against a good feat at 1st level with a terrible ability at 6th.
One of the really frustrating things about Pathfinder is the pile of bullshit bonuses you have to dig through to know if your character is even done.
From a design point, building a scaling feat is significantly more work than stand-alone feats; ititerative property being what it is, you're almost certainly going to break the game sooner rather than later.
If you come up with an "option" that is pretty obviously superior to every other option or is critical to the validity of the character going forward you should just give that to the players instead and then offer some more colorful and less impactful options for them to take.
Because otherwise everyone who understands the game and where it is going is going to take the good option and anyone who chooses anything else is just screwed. And why the hell insert traps into character development?
Because otherwise everyone who understands the game and where it is going is going to take the good option and anyone who chooses anything else is just screwed. And why the hell insert traps into character development?
Last edited by kzt on Sun Jun 12, 2016 1:15 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
deaddmwalking
- Prince
- Posts: 3595
- Joined: Mon May 21, 2012 11:33 am
I should have expanded my answer to avoid confusion. First off, unless we're omniscient, some of the things we create are just going to be better than others. Some combination that we never expected or considered will show up and something moderately good will be very good - it's going to happen with any RPG. There are ways to limit it, but it's not always a bad thing, in any case.
In the case of Feats, LordMistborn's idea to avoid the 'feat treadmill' is good. He specifically mentions 'Two-Weapon Fighting' as an example. If we were playing 3.x and you said that Two-Weapon Fighting let's you make just as many attacks with your off-hand as your primary hand, it would not be broken. Instead it makes you pay a feat for another attack at -10. At that point, paying for the feat is ridiculous. If you have two-weapon fighting, you should be able to make secondary and tertiary attacks with your secondary weapon because you have Two-Weapon Fighting; you shouldn't have to pay again and again for the marginal utility of those additional attacks.
Now, I'm not sure if I understand what LordMistborn is trying to say with Combat Style: Phalanx - I'm not sure if the 'combined attack' hits everyone gets to deal their normal damage or if this is supposed to let a bunch of plebes stack attack bonuses to allow them to hit someone they normally couldn't (like aid another). But let's say my reading is correct and it allows 10 guys to stand next together, make a single attack roll at +10 and if it hits they all do their damage. Good? Great?
Probably not. If you have a group of 4 PCs, what are the odds that all four of them (or even two of them) take this feat? So what benefit do you get if nobody you know also takes it? Apparently none - at least, not until 3rd level. The Level 3 ability doesn't indicate it requires my adjacent ally to also have this feat and an additional +1 shield bonus is pretty much always helpful - so the utility of the third level ability is significantly better than the 1st level ability.
Now, it's also not clear to me if I take the Feat at 3rd level whether I get both abilities simultaneously, or if this feat advances as I do (ie, if I take it at 3rd level I don't get the 3rd level benefit until 5th), but I'm going to assume not, because that's stupid. So I don't take it at 1st level when it's useless, but I do take it at 3rd level when I get some marginal benefit.
But here's the thing. Why can't I share a shield bonus at 1st level? What makes that option so much superior that it should be held back? Clearly it is the 'same tier' as the 1st level feat. I'm not saying you have to have 'death touch' as a 1st level feat - it might be a tier IV feat, but I am saying you shouldn't have to take a feat that lets you sunder weapons at 1st level to eventually get death touch.
Among the many things that suck about monks, the one that frustrated me the most was Improved Trip. At 6th Level, the monk could choose Improved Disarm or Improved Trip as bonus feats. Without any shenanigans like flaws, a bog-standard human monk could have both feats at 3rd level. If you want to trip and disarm people, you pretty much NEED to start doing it before 6th level. Putting something on a high shelf shouldn't be done unless it needs to be 'you must be this tall' - and Phalanx Fighting/Shield Sharing don't qualify.
To avoid being completely unhelpful, if I decided that feats like this were appropriate for my game I'd probably do it like this:
Phalanx Fighting - Tier I Feat
You get an additional +1 attack/damage bonus for each ally that threatens your target. For each ally that also has Phalanx Fighting, the bonus increases to +2.
Shield Mastery - Tier I Feat
You gain an additional +1 shield bonus when equipped with a shield. You may grant an adjacent ally a dodge bonus to AC equal to your shield bonus. Selecting your ally is a free action on your turn; it cannot be changed until your next turn. An ally that ceases to be adjacent loses the benefit of this ability.
Personally, I can't see a reason that if you're giving Feats at least every other level you wouldn't let someone pick one or the other. It is certainly possible that there are balance issues, but I think that would apply even if you 'locked' them together so you automatically received the second after choosing the first. And of course, each of them provides a benefit based on the player's choice, not the choice that the player's friend made. So already that's a big improvement.
Edit -
For clarity, I am rejecting the initial claim that Feats should be character defining traits and that each character should have only a few of them; at least so far as the feats that LordMistborn have posted would qualify in that way. Honestly, I don't think 'phalanx fighter' should be a character defining trait almost as much as 'wizard' would be. If the things we consider class abilities such as 'RAGE' were available as feats, I might revise my opinion. I don't think there is a good middle-ground where you keep Rage as a class ability but you give out fewer feats and then try to pretend that they're important.
In the case of Feats, LordMistborn's idea to avoid the 'feat treadmill' is good. He specifically mentions 'Two-Weapon Fighting' as an example. If we were playing 3.x and you said that Two-Weapon Fighting let's you make just as many attacks with your off-hand as your primary hand, it would not be broken. Instead it makes you pay a feat for another attack at -10. At that point, paying for the feat is ridiculous. If you have two-weapon fighting, you should be able to make secondary and tertiary attacks with your secondary weapon because you have Two-Weapon Fighting; you shouldn't have to pay again and again for the marginal utility of those additional attacks.
Now, I'm not sure if I understand what LordMistborn is trying to say with Combat Style: Phalanx - I'm not sure if the 'combined attack' hits everyone gets to deal their normal damage or if this is supposed to let a bunch of plebes stack attack bonuses to allow them to hit someone they normally couldn't (like aid another). But let's say my reading is correct and it allows 10 guys to stand next together, make a single attack roll at +10 and if it hits they all do their damage. Good? Great?
Probably not. If you have a group of 4 PCs, what are the odds that all four of them (or even two of them) take this feat? So what benefit do you get if nobody you know also takes it? Apparently none - at least, not until 3rd level. The Level 3 ability doesn't indicate it requires my adjacent ally to also have this feat and an additional +1 shield bonus is pretty much always helpful - so the utility of the third level ability is significantly better than the 1st level ability.
Now, it's also not clear to me if I take the Feat at 3rd level whether I get both abilities simultaneously, or if this feat advances as I do (ie, if I take it at 3rd level I don't get the 3rd level benefit until 5th), but I'm going to assume not, because that's stupid. So I don't take it at 1st level when it's useless, but I do take it at 3rd level when I get some marginal benefit.
But here's the thing. Why can't I share a shield bonus at 1st level? What makes that option so much superior that it should be held back? Clearly it is the 'same tier' as the 1st level feat. I'm not saying you have to have 'death touch' as a 1st level feat - it might be a tier IV feat, but I am saying you shouldn't have to take a feat that lets you sunder weapons at 1st level to eventually get death touch.
Among the many things that suck about monks, the one that frustrated me the most was Improved Trip. At 6th Level, the monk could choose Improved Disarm or Improved Trip as bonus feats. Without any shenanigans like flaws, a bog-standard human monk could have both feats at 3rd level. If you want to trip and disarm people, you pretty much NEED to start doing it before 6th level. Putting something on a high shelf shouldn't be done unless it needs to be 'you must be this tall' - and Phalanx Fighting/Shield Sharing don't qualify.
To avoid being completely unhelpful, if I decided that feats like this were appropriate for my game I'd probably do it like this:
Phalanx Fighting - Tier I Feat
You get an additional +1 attack/damage bonus for each ally that threatens your target. For each ally that also has Phalanx Fighting, the bonus increases to +2.
Shield Mastery - Tier I Feat
You gain an additional +1 shield bonus when equipped with a shield. You may grant an adjacent ally a dodge bonus to AC equal to your shield bonus. Selecting your ally is a free action on your turn; it cannot be changed until your next turn. An ally that ceases to be adjacent loses the benefit of this ability.
Personally, I can't see a reason that if you're giving Feats at least every other level you wouldn't let someone pick one or the other. It is certainly possible that there are balance issues, but I think that would apply even if you 'locked' them together so you automatically received the second after choosing the first. And of course, each of them provides a benefit based on the player's choice, not the choice that the player's friend made. So already that's a big improvement.
Edit -
For clarity, I am rejecting the initial claim that Feats should be character defining traits and that each character should have only a few of them; at least so far as the feats that LordMistborn have posted would qualify in that way. Honestly, I don't think 'phalanx fighter' should be a character defining trait almost as much as 'wizard' would be. If the things we consider class abilities such as 'RAGE' were available as feats, I might revise my opinion. I don't think there is a good middle-ground where you keep Rage as a class ability but you give out fewer feats and then try to pretend that they're important.
Last edited by deaddmwalking on Sun Jun 12, 2016 1:59 am, edited 1 time in total.
And I think that's terrible.Lord Mistborn wrote:I'd like to reiterate that all feats currently exist in an incomplete form lacking anything beyond what they provide at basic tier. All combat style feats give a new ability at every odd level. All other feats gain a new text at lv 6, 12, and 18. Level appropriate combat bonuses at levels 1-3 are kind of bullshit because the numbers are kind of tight already. Like remember this is the levels where you can potentially 100 to 0 someone just by having max Str and hitting them with a Greatsword.
To put my own balls on the line for ridicule, here's what my recommended choices are for an adequate 3rd edition
- 5 stats. Bundle con and str
Int gives bonus starting languages but not bonus skills
Only have arcane spells (no divine/arcane distinction) and armor profs get rid of spell failure.
3e weapon sizes
Skills are just proficiency where you get char level +3 bonus
No such thing as cross class skills or skill lists
Classes just give a free skill and a number of allotments
No multiclassing (but prestige classes can exist via level substitution)
No alignments
No material components
No XP components
Sneak attack harms anything with anatomy (so all except oozes and swarms)
Power attack, TWF, combat maneuvers, etc. are all freely available
Iterative attacks pile up at -5. so +11/6/6)
Get rid of almost all bullshit bonus categories. and just grant magic bonuses by level
Skill boosting items either give ranks, or a small competence bonus if you have more ranks than they offer
condense skills
condense magic item categories
condense spell levels to 0-6 with at will cantrips
~ 12 classes (still with 20 levels)
~10 core races
races don't have stat penalties, each gives a free skill tho
all classes either have casting, or SLAs at higher levels
feats are character defining things mechanically akin to bundles of SLAs and racial traits; horizontal powers not vertical boosts.
undead, constructs et al. get HP boost via their strength mod
-
deaddmwalking
- Prince
- Posts: 3595
- Joined: Mon May 21, 2012 11:33 am
This is understood. I mention undead just to emphasize that everyone gets a stat mod applied to HP; no more stupid treatment of oozes, constructs and undead in that regard.deaddmwalking wrote:Just a nitpick, but if you combine Strength and Constitution, everybody gets a boost to HP based on their Strength, not just Undead.
Oh, and I forgot, but 3.5 DR rules over 3e
3.5 projectile enhancement bonuses too, unless someone can convince me that archers need more love.
I figure 6 and a half spell levels is enough granularity once you strip out bullshit buffs and stupid legacy spells.
I'd rid the world of spiked chains and duoms and anything else with 5/10 reach. kusari gama can just be 5' reach, chains can be lethal damage whips. Stop shoe-horning people into stupid weapons that are the best.
I have a lot more minutiae demands, naturally. But I think that grocery list gives some notion of where I stand.
I'll say what I said to Tenngu the other day. If you were really fixing 3e, all buffs would be balanced on a Heart of X type system, where you cast the buff, and it lasts all day, but you can expend it for a short term more powerful buff.
So that way, buffs can be balanced for all day, because they will be, and they can be balanced for one off fights, because they will be. And then also, when a monster forces you to use the one off buff (By grappling or webbing you so you need FoM or causing you to expend your fast healing spell for a Restoration effect or Burst Healing effect) there is some palpable actual resource loss, so you actually care about what happens during fights instead of just Persist Buffing to the Gills and going to town. And also it means Teleport Ambushes aren't even more powerful than not, because everyone will have all their buffs up all the time, and yeah, they can only transform one at a time into super buffs with swift actions or whatever, and you can have yours already turned, but they can just do something to buy a few rounds and be right back to even with you.
If you are going to rewrite all spells and especially buff spells because you are actually designing a new game (So not mistborn) you should do that.
So that way, buffs can be balanced for all day, because they will be, and they can be balanced for one off fights, because they will be. And then also, when a monster forces you to use the one off buff (By grappling or webbing you so you need FoM or causing you to expend your fast healing spell for a Restoration effect or Burst Healing effect) there is some palpable actual resource loss, so you actually care about what happens during fights instead of just Persist Buffing to the Gills and going to town. And also it means Teleport Ambushes aren't even more powerful than not, because everyone will have all their buffs up all the time, and yeah, they can only transform one at a time into super buffs with swift actions or whatever, and you can have yours already turned, but they can just do something to buy a few rounds and be right back to even with you.
If you are going to rewrite all spells and especially buff spells because you are actually designing a new game (So not mistborn) you should do that.
The U.S. isn't a democracy and if you think it is, you are a rube.DSMatticus wrote:Kaelik gonna kaelik. Whatcha gonna do?
That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.
-
OgreBattle
- King
- Posts: 6820
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 9:33 am
What do you expect feats to do that class, race, and skill doesn't? For example you have combat styles as feats, what will make the "heroic warrior" unique as a class then?
Will feats also cover things like "blood of dragons: grow wings at hero tier" or is that a race thing? Will feats cover things like "landed nobility: has a henchman at level 1" or would you have a princess class?
Do I need a feat to walk on clouds, or will that be a function of skill ("rank X acrobatics lets me tumble through the sky")? Or both?
I'd like to know what the defined boundaries of class, race, skills, and feats are before seeing more examples of feats.
Will feats also cover things like "blood of dragons: grow wings at hero tier" or is that a race thing? Will feats cover things like "landed nobility: has a henchman at level 1" or would you have a princess class?
Do I need a feat to walk on clouds, or will that be a function of skill ("rank X acrobatics lets me tumble through the sky")? Or both?
I'd like to know what the defined boundaries of class, race, skills, and feats are before seeing more examples of feats.
-
Username17
- Serious Badass
- Posts: 29894
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
You say what Int isn't for, but not what it is for. Am I right in assuming that you still don't have a good idea as to what Intelligence is for such that it isn't a dump stat for everyone who doesn't arbitrarily need it to cast spells?Erik wrote:Int gives bonus starting languages but not bonus skills
Int in 3rd edition is in a very weird place. Its affect on adventuring is pretty much nothing. You don't add your Int modifier to anything except some skills. And unless you are a Rogue or a sage, those skills are pretty rarely used. All Int does is give you more skill points. Now, more skill points turns into a larger bonus to skills than any stat modifier is ever going to be in a few levels. So by the time you're level 7 or so, having +1 to your int modifier is a bigger bonus for a Face than having +3 to your Charisma modifier. And that's all kinds of fucked up.
But while I think we can all pretty much agree that the Int Mod to Skills makes for a weird and bad dynamic and is one of the many reasons that skills in 3e D&D are weird and bad - it's still also the only thing that Intelligence is good for in that system. If you're going to take skill points away from Int, it's a dead stat. And then you should probably cut up Wisdom and put some of it in Charisma and some of it into Intelligence. On account of Wisdom being a much dumber name than Int or Charisma, not because it isn't a much better stat than Charisma or no-skills Intelligence. I mean, perception + Will saves is a legit stat from a game mechanical standpoint, it's just a stupid name and if you were cutting one of the mental stats that would be the obvious choice.
-Username17
Int for skills and casting stat mostly. I did throw it a bone in my 3e++ version by giving scroll casting as an Int skill.
This is cribbed from my "advanced d20 fantasy" spreadsheet
Spellery allowing you to cast from scrolls (and the skill in fact being all you need to use scrolls) makes it a handy stat for anyone who wants to do that. Now if it isn't your casting stat and you have no interest in casting from scrolls or disarming traps, then yeah, it's a total dump stat. Same goes for charisma if you're not casting from it or doing social skills.
[edit: made the spreadsheet copypasta in legible table form]
I fucked around with int and wis on several skills as the keen observer may note
This was from my vague notes to self, so I doubt it is 100% coherent, but may serve for the purpose of illustrating what life Int can have if it doesn't give you bonus skills.
This is cribbed from my "advanced d20 fantasy" spreadsheet
| Animal Ken | Cha, Dex | handle animal, ride |
| Athletics | Str | balance, climb, jump, swim |
| Coerce | Str | intimidate, change NPC attitudes |
| Craftsman | Int | crafts, forgery (1 per rank) |
| Deceit | Cha | bluff, innuendo |
| Disguise | Cha | disguise (1 per rank) |
| Escape | Dex | escape artist, use rope |
| Heal | Int | autopsy, heal |
| Knowledge | Int | appraise, deceipher script, knowledge (1 per rank) |
| Maneuver | Dex | tumble, ignore terrain |
| Notice | Wis | listen, spot, read lips |
| Perform | Cha | perform (1 per rank) |
| Professional | Wis | professions (1 per rank) |
| Search | Wis | investigate, search |
| Sense Motive | Wis | sense motive, innuendo |
| Sociable | Cha | bargaining, NPC attitudes, gather info |
| Spellery | Int | knowledge arcana, spellcraft, concentration, scroll use |
| Stealth | Dex | hide, move silently |
| Survival | Int | survival (1 terrain per rank), tracking |
| Tinker | Int | disable devices, locks, machines |
| Trickery | Dex | sleight of hand, feint |
Spellery allowing you to cast from scrolls (and the skill in fact being all you need to use scrolls) makes it a handy stat for anyone who wants to do that. Now if it isn't your casting stat and you have no interest in casting from scrolls or disarming traps, then yeah, it's a total dump stat. Same goes for charisma if you're not casting from it or doing social skills.
[edit: made the spreadsheet copypasta in legible table form]
I fucked around with int and wis on several skills as the keen observer may note
This was from my vague notes to self, so I doubt it is 100% coherent, but may serve for the purpose of illustrating what life Int can have if it doesn't give you bonus skills.
Last edited by erik on Sun Jun 12, 2016 7:23 am, edited 2 times in total.
-
Username17
- Serious Badass
- Posts: 29894
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Basically feats are your path to getting stuff you want that wasn't included in your base class. Essentially bonus class features that you select yourself. So some feats exist as an alternative to the old 3e open mulitclassing system which is stupid, unworkable, and impossible to balance.OgreBattle wrote:What do you expect feats to do that class, race, and skill doesn't? For example you have combat styles as feats, what will make the "heroic warrior" unique as a class then?
Will feats also cover things like "blood of dragons: grow wings at hero tier" or is that a race thing? Will feats cover things like "landed nobility: has a henchman at level 1" or would you have a princess class?
Do I need a feat to walk on clouds, or will that be a function of skill ("rank X acrobatics lets me tumble through the sky")? Or both?
I'd like to know what the defined boundaries of class, race, skills, and feats are before seeing more examples of feats.
Growing wings could totally be a feat, you could even take it at level 1 and it could give Raptoran style flight that starts lame and eventually becomes real flight. Walking on the clouds could totally be something a feat gives you but I'm not sure that's specially a thing you'd want on your character sheet. Like seriously just fly or something. Like that sort of thing is the reason the fighter class ends at level 9.
Sort of. Phalanx isn't a feat designed for PCs rather it's designed for mooks so it's less obnoxious when they show up in groups. So when three skeleton mooks try to stab your fighter they only roll once (with a bonus) and then if that roll hits they all hit and deal normal damage.deaddmwalking wrote:Now, I'm not sure if I understand what LordMistborn is trying to say with Combat Style: Phalanx - I'm not sure if the 'combined attack' hits everyone gets to deal their normal damage or if this is supposed to let a bunch of plebes stack attack bonuses to allow them to hit someone they normally couldn't (like aid another). But let's say my reading is correct and it allows 10 guys to stand next together, make a single attack roll at +10 and if it hits they all do their damage. Good? Great?