aramis
Level 4 Theurgist
Posts: 170 
|
Post by aramis on Aug 19, 2021 20:23:10 GMT -6
Robin's playtest draft was leaked. Issaries butchered nothing. Robin's a great mechanics guy, but not a great writing guy.
Hero Wars was brilliant, but only good if you were already on the storygame track of thought. I wouldn't be for another 5 years after I got it.
I enjoyed reading it, I never got any players willing to actually play it as it was conceptually too removed from traditional mode.
|
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Aug 19, 2021 23:52:07 GMT -6
Robin's playtest draft was leaked. Issaries butchered nothing. Robin's a great mechanics guy, but not a great writing guy. His design work is brilliant. However, I got his novel Pierced Heart in a bundle of stuff once. I couldn't make it past the first chapter. |
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on Aug 20, 2021 5:01:59 GMT -6
Robin's playtest draft was leaked. Issaries butchered nothing. Robin's a great mechanics guy, but not a great writing guy. Hero Wars was brilliant, but only good if you were already on the storygame track of thought. I wouldn't be for another 5 years after I got it. I enjoyed reading it, I never got any players willing to actually play it as it was conceptually too removed from traditional mode. I know what you are saying regarding the "rules document" that was released But the printed books (Players/narrators) were just as bad. I had penciled in a ton of errata in my print copies (long gone now). That was Issaries' job to make sure the books are correct before going to print, no? |
|
phantomtim
Level 3 Conjurer
13th Age Enthusiast
Posts: 85
|
Post by phantomtim on Aug 22, 2021 2:21:02 GMT -6
And he wrote a healthy chunk of the 3E/4E DMG II volumes. The 4e DMG 2 is one of my favorite GM advice books ever. Tweet & Heinsoo are big fans of Robin's works, so it was no wonder they were adding similar elements to 4E and 13th Age. Robin Laws is also a fan/designer for 13th Age. He wrote the fantastic starting adventure, The Strangling Sea, which I've run three times and played in once—each time with a very different outcome, showing Robin Laws' strength in designing non-linear adventures. Tying this back to the DMG 2's, Robin Laws also co-designed the first 13th Age supplement, 13 True Ways. Coincidentally, this book is like a DMG 2 in a lot of ways. |
|
phantomtim
Level 3 Conjurer
13th Age Enthusiast
Posts: 85
|
Post by phantomtim on Aug 22, 2021 2:32:36 GMT -6
Although I thought hard about it, most of the specific mechanical things I would swipe from 5E for OD&D actually saw their debut in 4E. I originally saw "Best/Worst of 2" used a fair amount in DW and 13th Age, so I don't strictly consider it a 5E thing, but after seeing it implemented in the NEXT playtest, I totally swiped the Advantage part for C&C instead of PRIMES and the 12/18 split. in OD&D this may be overpowered for those who like more "grounded" games, as it is essentially a +4 bonus (from what the Math Nerds say) This is genius! I'd never even considered handling C&C's prime attributes differently (other than using the +6 bonus, rather than the 12/18 split). But this would work nicely. I might be generous and bump the target number down a couple to compensate for advantage being a bit less powerful than a +6, on average. |
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on Aug 22, 2021 9:28:14 GMT -6
Although I thought hard about it, most of the specific mechanical things I would swipe from 5E for OD&D actually saw their debut in 4E. I originally saw "Best/Worst of 2" used a fair amount in DW and 13th Age, so I don't strictly consider it a 5E thing, but after seeing it implemented in the NEXT playtest, I totally swiped the Advantage part for C&C instead of PRIMES and the 12/18 split. in OD&D this may be overpowered for those who like more "grounded" games, as it is essentially a +4 bonus (from what the Math Nerds say) This is genius! I'd never even considered handling C&C's prime attributes differently (other than using the +6 bonus, rather than the 12/18 split). But this would work nicely. I might be generous and bump the target number down a couple to compensate for advantage being a bit less powerful than a +6, on average. Tim my version for C&C is thus Challenge Base is ALWAYS 15. Then add your Challenge Level as appropriate. PRIME simply allows best of 2. WAY less headaches than the 12/18 split. If you want to make the odds a bit better/more Heroic for PCs, simply change the Attribute modifiers from the B/X scale C&C normally uses to the "Modern scale" i.e. 12-13=+1, 14-15=+2,16-17=+3, 18=+4. |
|
|
|
Post by thegreyelf on Aug 22, 2021 9:44:03 GMT -6
This is genius! I'd never even considered handling C&C's prime attributes differently (other than using the +6 bonus, rather than the 12/18 split). But this would work nicely. I might be generous and bump the target number down a couple to compensate for advantage being a bit less powerful than a +6, on average. Tim my version for C&C is thus Challenge Base is ALWAYS 15. Then add your Challenge Level as appropriate. PRIME simply allows best of 2. WAY less headaches than the 12/18 split. If you want to make the odds a bit better/more Heroic for PCs, simply change the Attribute modifiers from the B/X scale C&C normally uses to the "Modern scale" i.e. 12-13=+1, 14-15=+2,16-17=+3, 18=+4. That's a fantastic approach to the SIEGE Engine. I like it a lot. In the original (first print) version of Amazing Adventures, I used CB 15 and +5 for Primes, as counting in 5's is more intuitive to most people and while not identical, it's statistically similar. Steve requested that with the second printing I bring it precisely inline with C&C to eliminate the learning curve (and he was right to ask me to do so). So I moved CB 15 / +5 to the GM's section as an option. I love the idea of bringing in Advantage for Primes instead, however. That's pretty ingenious. Not only does it still keep close to the statistical probabilities, it makes characters feel like real powerhouses when making Prime checks, as they get to roll TWICE and keep the better. |
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on Aug 22, 2021 11:18:14 GMT -6
Tim my version for C&C is thus Challenge Base is ALWAYS 15. Then add your Challenge Level as appropriate. PRIME simply allows best of 2. WAY less headaches than the 12/18 split. If you want to make the odds a bit better/more Heroic for PCs, simply change the Attribute modifiers from the B/X scale C&C normally uses to the "Modern scale" i.e. 12-13=+1, 14-15=+2,16-17=+3, 18=+4. That's a fantastic approach to the SIEGE Engine. I like it a lot. In the original (first print) version of Amazing Adventures, I used CB 15 and +5 for Primes, as counting in 5's is more intuitive to most people and while not identical, it's statistically similar. Steve requested that with the second printing I bring it precisely inline with C&C to eliminate the learning curve (and he was right to ask me to do so). So I moved CB 15 / +5 to the GM's section as an option. I love the idea of bringing in Advantage for Primes instead, however. That's pretty ingenious. Not only does it still keep close to the statistical probabilities, it makes characters feel like real powerhouses when making Prime checks, as they get to roll TWICE and keep the better. I was kinda pi$$ed when I saw that AA had gone back to the 12/18 split, Jason.  I knew why, and understand why the Trolls wanted it that way but I liked your 15/+5 better. I do think the version I posted above works the best of all that I have tried so far- not only math wise* , but it's so much quicker in play for both players and the CK/DM/GM/Ref/Judge blah blah blah... *The disparity in success rates between Prime/Non Prime which gets pretty bad as you get into the mid to high levels. |
|
|
|
Post by Desparil on Aug 22, 2021 11:28:42 GMT -6
*The disparity in success rates between Prime/Non Prime which gets pretty bad as you get into the mid to high levels. Honestly, that's one of my biggest complaints about 3E and 5E as well - how bad non-proficient saving throws get as characters get to the higher levels. |
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on Aug 22, 2021 12:20:53 GMT -6
*The disparity in success rates between Prime/Non Prime which gets pretty bad as you get into the mid to high levels. Honestly, that's one of my biggest complaints about 3E and 5E as well - how bad non-proficient saving throws get as characters get to the higher levels. 3E is the worst for sure. 4E was a little better w/ adding half your level, but the scaling DCs negates it pretty much. 5E had the potential to be better with the DCs not scaling like 4E, but yep you will blow through almost everything if you are proficient, and fail almost everything if non proficient, and so goes the metagame of targeting mechanical weakness. Years ago, I know for that one Champion Fighter ability where they get a re-roll or advantage on a save at like 10th level, I replaced with an "autosave" on any save twice per day or something. I feel like a high level fighter should be able to shake off nearly anything in a very limited capacity. |
|
|
|
Post by Desparil on Aug 22, 2021 14:21:59 GMT -6
Honestly, that's one of my biggest complaints about 3E and 5E as well - how bad non-proficient saving throws get as characters get to the higher levels. 3E is the worst for sure. 4E was a little better w/ adding half your level, but the scaling DCs negates it pretty much. 5E had the potential to be better with the DCs not scaling like 4E, but yep you will blow through almost everything if you are proficient, and fail almost everything if non proficient, and so goes the metagame of targeting mechanical weakness. Years ago, I know for that one Champion Fighter ability where they get a re-roll or advantage on a save at like 10th level, I replaced with an "autosave" on any save twice per day or something. I feel like a high level fighter should be able to shake off nearly anything in a very limited capacity. I mean in 4E the design goal was for defenses to scale so that hit rates remained relatively constant across all levels, neither getting better or worse, so the scaling DCs were intentional. The only bug that made it so that they didn't fully succeed was that you only got to increase two ability scores at levels 4, 8, etc. This meant that one of the three defenses would lag behind, possibly lagging behind your "primary" defense by as many as 8 or 9 without feats or magic items to prop it up. The main saving grace was that doing said propping-up wasn't too painful since feats were plentiful and under-leveled magic items were cheap (e.g., an 8th level Circlet of Indomitability for a 15th level character is pocket change) and there was at least one Common-rarity (i.e., purchasable) item for each of the three defenses. |
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on Aug 22, 2021 14:42:45 GMT -6
3E is the worst for sure. 4E was a little better w/ adding half your level, but the scaling DCs negates it pretty much. 5E had the potential to be better with the DCs not scaling like 4E, but yep you will blow through almost everything if you are proficient, and fail almost everything if non proficient, and so goes the metagame of targeting mechanical weakness. Years ago, I know for that one Champion Fighter ability where they get a re-roll or advantage on a save at like 10th level, I replaced with an "autosave" on any save twice per day or something. I feel like a high level fighter should be able to shake off nearly anything in a very limited capacity. I mean in 4E the design goal was for defenses to scale so that hit rates remained relatively constant across all levels, neither getting better or worse, so the scaling DCs were intentional. The only bug that made it so that they didn't fully succeed was that you only got to increase two ability scores at levels 4, 8, etc. This meant that one of the three defenses would lag behind, possibly lagging behind your "primary" defense by as many as 8 or 9 without feats or magic items to prop it up. The main saving grace was that doing said propping-up wasn't too painful since feats were plentiful and under-leveled magic items were cheap (e.g., an 8th level Circlet of Indomitability for a 15th level character is pocket change) and there was at least one Common-rarity (i.e., purchasable) item for each of the three defenses. The issue for me (or rather my players) was the assumption of magic items plentiful and easily purchased- That was something I tossed immediately as an item rich game is not my cup of tea. I did use the increases for defenses and attacks and such as they suggested at every 5-ish levels, but indeed one would fall behind as you mention. I cannot recall off the top of my head but I seem to remember Essentials classes having fewer feat choices than core did, but many of the Essentials feats were defense bonus types to combat (NPI) this issue. For the Kids group I used the companion/quick character rules which eliminated the issue entirely as all defenses are the same and increase + 1 per level except for AC which is variable at the start based on the role (Defender, Controller, etc), but it also rises +1 per level thereafter. This option negated the need for magic items, and therefore they became very much a big deal to find one. So for example- a Fighter based on Striker would have an AC of like 15 + 1 per level. A Fighter based on the Defender role would have an AC of 17 ,+1 per level. Both versions would have FRW defenses of 12, +1 per level. Don't quote me on the staring numbers, but that's the gist of it. It's pretty much based on the monster creation math. |
|
|
|
Post by Desparil on Aug 22, 2021 14:58:22 GMT -6
The issue for me (or rather my players) was the assumption of magic items plentiful and easily purchased- That was something I tossed immediately as an item rich game is not my cup of tea. I did use the increases for defenses and attacks and such as they suggested at every 5-ish levels, but indeed one would fall behind as you mention. I cannot recall off the top of my head but I seem to remember Essentials classes having fewer feat choices than core did, but many of the Essentials feats were defense bonus types to combat (NPI) this issue. For the Kids group I used the companion/quick character rules which eliminated the issue entirely as all defenses are the same and increase + 1 per level except for AC which is variable at the start based on the role (Defender, Controller, etc), but it also rises +1 per level thereafter. This option negated the need for magic items, and therefore they became very much a big deal to find one. So for example- a Fighter based on Striker would have an AC of like 15 + 1 per level. A Fighter based on the Defender role would have an AC of 17 ,+1 per level. Both versions would have FRW defenses of 12, +1 per level. Don't quote me on the staring numbers, but that's the gist of it. Essentials had the same rate of gaining feats, just the variety of feats to choose from was much smaller. But you are right in a way, in that many of the defensive feats in those books were simply better than the originals - Improved Defenses was just a straight-forward upgrade compared to Paragon Defenses, for example, it could be taken at Heroic and then scaled up at later tiers. As for ditching purchasable items - as much as they tried to offer alternatives, the assumption that once you reached upper-Heroic every character would have a magic item for every slot was really baked into the system. I ran a game without having freely-purchasable items myself (though certain items that I picked out would sometimes be on the market), but I was also putting in a lot of work to make sure there was enough loot - and the right loot - to keep all the characters equipped. And it still wasn't perfect, the Dragon Sorcerer in the group who dumped Dexterity and Intelligence considered his Reflex to just be a lost cause and focused his efforts elsewhere rather than even attempting to improve it. I never played with the quick start rules, they looked decently well put-together when I skimmed them, though. |
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on Aug 22, 2021 15:36:10 GMT -6
DesparilActually it was the "quick character" rules which was a (non official) work derived from the companion character rules in the DMG2. I found them on someone's BLOG Here is the link to the PDF 4E Quick Characters
|
|
|
|
Post by delta on Aug 22, 2021 18:33:08 GMT -6
A lot of the "great innovations" big name rpgs in general roll out are repackaged ideas yanked from smaller or lesser known rule sets, it seems. Which game was it in before 5e? My first encounter was the Marvel Super Heroes "Probability Manipulation" power (Jeff Grubb, Advanced Players' Book, p. 76, (c) 1986). Not 100% the same but close enough in my mind: when making a percentile roll (as the whole system was based around), swap the order of the d10's as appropriate. |
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Aug 23, 2021 0:31:42 GMT -6
A lot of the "great innovations" big name rpgs in general roll out are repackaged ideas yanked from smaller or lesser known rule sets, it seems. Which game was it in before 5e? Barbarians of Lemuria is the first game I remember using an "extra die" mechanic, and depending on whether a "Boon" or "Flaw" which got you the extra die, you counted the better or worse 2d6 of 3. Later editions renamed it to "Bonus Die" and "Penalty Die". Google says the Legendary Edition of BoL is from 2009, DriveThruRPG says it was added Nov 2008. That edition still uses the "Extra Die" name. |
|
phantomtim
Level 3 Conjurer
13th Age Enthusiast
Posts: 85
|
Post by phantomtim on Aug 23, 2021 0:50:50 GMT -6
That's a fantastic approach to the SIEGE Engine. I like it a lot. In the original (first print) version of Amazing Adventures, I used CB 15 and +5 for Primes, as counting in 5's is more intuitive to most people and while not identical, it's statistically similar. Steve requested that with the second printing I bring it precisely inline with C&C to eliminate the learning curve (and he was right to ask me to do so). So I moved CB 15 / +5 to the GM's section as an option. I love the idea of bringing in Advantage for Primes instead, however. That's pretty ingenious. Not only does it still keep close to the statistical probabilities, it makes characters feel like real powerhouses when making Prime checks, as they get to roll TWICE and keep the better. I was kinda pi$$ed when I saw that AA had gone back to the 12/18 split, Jason. I knew why, and understand why the Trolls wanted it that way but I liked your 15/+5 better. I do think the version I posted above works the best of all that I have tried so far- not only math wise* , but it's so much quicker in play for both players and the CK/DM/GM/Ref/Judge. I still use the CB 15 / +5 approach in my SIEGE Engine games—I'm so glad I came across that option back in the AA 1st printing several years ago. I really like the use of advantage, here. Who doesn't like to roll that extra die and take the highest result? |
|
phantomtim
Level 3 Conjurer
13th Age Enthusiast
Posts: 85
|
Post by phantomtim on Aug 23, 2021 0:52:42 GMT -6
Actually it was the "quick character" rules which was a (non official) work derived from the companion character rules in the DMG2. I'd never seen this before. Thanks for sharing! |
|
|
|
Post by thegreyelf on Aug 23, 2021 5:30:09 GMT -6
I was kinda pi$$ed when I saw that AA had gone back to the 12/18 split, Jason. I knew why, and understand why the Trolls wanted it that way but I liked your 15/+5 better. I do think the version I posted above works the best of all that I have tried so far- not only math wise* , but it's so much quicker in play for both players and the CK/DM/GM/Ref/Judge blah blah blah... *The disparity in success rates between Prime/Non Prime which gets pretty bad as you get into the mid to high levels. Believe me, I fought to keep the 15/+5, but in the end, compatibility won out. I did keep the 15/+5. I just moved it to the GM section as an option to simplify play. |
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on Aug 23, 2021 7:13:17 GMT -6
Actually it was the "quick character" rules which was a (non official) work derived from the companion character rules in the DMG2. I'd never seen this before. Thanks for sharing! No problem. I used these for the Kids game, but I would ad a couple more things to each class/character so that had a little bit more variety. It worked great for people who were not into the massive character sheets/cards of 4E. I think the 13th Age Companion/One shots are a better version (for a better game) but you can see the roots in this document. |
|
|
|
Post by robertsconley on Aug 23, 2021 10:52:34 GMT -6
*The disparity in success rates between Prime/Non Prime which gets pretty bad as you get into the mid to high levels. Honestly, that's one of my biggest complaints about 3E and 5E as well - how bad non-proficient saving throws get as characters get to the higher levels. 5e save works on bounded accuracy, So a CR 20 Lich has a DC20 spell save. Sound bad if you don't have a +6 proficency right? Well you still have your attribute bonus. Even with proficiency you often only have a 50-50 chance of making the save. Some high level abilities Lich, Paralyzing Touch DC 18 Con save Balor, Death Throes, DC 20 Dex save Tarrasque, Swallow, DC 20 Con Save Tarrasque, Frightful Presence, DC 18 Cha Save. Kraken, Tentacle, DC 20 Escape(Dex) Check And so on. The worse one I seen is the Kraken Ink Cloud which has DC 23 Con Save or take 3d10 damage. The cloud last one turn and take 3 legendary actions (so it the only legendary thing a kraken can do that round). Most of the other high level DC are in the 18 to 20 range. Yeah if you are non-proficient your odds suck, but they are not that much better even you are proficient. |
|
|
|
Post by Desparil on Aug 23, 2021 17:49:53 GMT -6
Honestly, that's one of my biggest complaints about 3E and 5E as well - how bad non-proficient saving throws get as characters get to the higher levels. 5e save works on bounded accuracy, So a CR 20 Lich has a DC20 spell save. Sound bad if you don't have a +6 proficency right? Well you still have your attribute bonus. Even with proficiency you often only have a 50-50 chance of making the save. Some high level abilities Lich, Paralyzing Touch DC 18 Con save Balor, Death Throes, DC 20 Dex save Tarrasque, Swallow, DC 20 Con Save Tarrasque, Frightful Presence, DC 18 Cha Save. Kraken, Tentacle, DC 20 Escape(Dex) Check And so on. The worse one I seen is the Kraken Ink Cloud which has DC 23 Con Save or take 3d10 damage. The cloud last one turn and take 3 legendary actions (so it the only legendary thing a kraken can do that round). Most of the other high level DC are in the 18 to 20 range. Yeah if you are non-proficient your odds suck, but they are not that much better even you are proficient. The ones you're proficient in are also likely to have higher ability modifiers. When it's stacked like that, the system works fine - a fighter making Constitution saving throws or a cleric making Wisdom saving throws can maintain a 60 to 70 percent success rate throughout all 20 levels. However, non-proficient saves sink from at least having something around a 40 to 50 percent chance of succeeding at 1st level, to truly abysmal odds at high levels. Even if you manage to bring that score up to a 16 for a +3 bonus - which is quite generous, seeing as you only have 10 points* to distribute among all six scores and typically at least 6 of those go into the "primary" and "secondary" scores used by your class - even with that +3, that's only a 30% chance to make a DC 18 save. That's a best-case scenario, and in practice it's more likely to fall between 15 and 25 percent, which is also a problem because the advantage/disadvantage mechanic starts to break down at such low success chances. Since each class is only proficient in one "major" saving throw (Constitution, Wisdom, and Dexterity), it gets really noticeable. That's why Resilient is considered one of the most important feats in higher-level play, though to the best of my knowledge you're not allowed to take it twice so you'll always be shafted on one of the "major" saving throws and two of the "minor" ones, unless you're a rogue or a monk. This hurts a lot more as a "feat tax" than the 4E feats that jeffb and I were discussing above, however, because in 4E you get a feat every even-numbered level separately from the ability score increase scheme, whereas in 5E most characters only have five chances to take a feat and doing so means relinquishing one or two ASI points. Depending what kind of foes you're facing, it can also make having a paladin in the group feel nigh-mandatory, what with their aura instantly doubling the chance of success for a vast swathe of saves for everyone nearby. * Fighters and rogues do a little better |
|
I knew why, and understand why the Trolls wanted it that way but I liked your 15/+5 better. I do think the version I posted above works the best of all that I have tried so far- not only math wise* , but it's so much quicker in play for both players and the CK/DM/GM/Ref/Judge blah blah blah... 
