|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 11, 2008 22:11:28 GMT -6
About 8 months ago...T. Foster a.k.a foster1941 wrote:WSmith wrote:Is anyone doing this right now in their games? It certainly sounds interesting and fits better the OD&D cleric's spell selection and spell per day capability. I think it will make both magic types more distinct, and give clerical magic a more divine feel. Game-wise, it also seems a very good house-rule. Most cleric spells are very situation specific, and in the end, players don't memorize then because they are too specialized. Thoughts? Discuss!
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 10, 2008 14:09:41 GMT -6
I'm playing around with the Kuo-Toa, and I wish to incorporate something similar to it as a PC class.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 18, 2008 23:15:37 GMT -6
The HD of my version of the thief is somewhere bewteen the Magic-user and the cleric. I'm using d6 HD for all classes, with some amendments. This has enabled me to put the thief class HD progression in a middle ground between Magic-user and the Cleric. EDIT
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 17, 2008 10:10:55 GMT -6
Either way would work. The thing with the dwarf and the hobbit is, they're limited in levels. So the +4 level thing doesn't unbalance the game. Humans would be unlimited, I would assume, so potential for something getting screwy down the line crops up. Yes. I had the same thought. Yes. The idea is to replace the "grey-green cloaks", with the appropriate clothing. In most cases, this will be the arquetypical black/dark suit with the black hood. You use that kind of dark clothing if you want to make use of this ability.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 17, 2008 0:13:33 GMT -6
So maybe just give him his own saving throw table:
Levels: 1-4
Death/Poison: 12 Wand/Polymorth/Paralisis: 13 Stone: 13 Dragon Breath: 14 Staves Spells: 14
Levels: 5-8
Death/Poison: 10 Wand/Polymorth/Paralisis: 11 Stone: 11 Dragon Breath: 11 Spells: 11
Levels: 9-12
Death/Poison: 7 Wand/Polymorth/Paralisis: 8 Stone: 8 Dragon Breath: 8 Spells: 8
Levels 13+:
Death/Poison: 4 Wand/Polymorth/Paralisis: 5 Stone: 5 Dragon Breath: 4 Spells: 6
What I don't like about is, is that I need bigger tables. So maybe it could be better to use saves from another class, but give him +1 or +2 on every roll. Thinking...
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 16, 2008 10:55:45 GMT -6
Excellent post Foster. You really cleared up the idea and went with it much further! Nice So, I've been thinking about:The thief should:- Have a HD progression that is higher than the M-U, but lower than the cleric.
- Attack progression as cleric.
- Use cleric saves, but add 4 levels when saving (too strong?? this is the dwarven ability)
- Become near-invisible as an elf.
- Detect secret doors as an elf.
- Hear sounds at doors as all demi-humas (+1 in 6)
- +1 to surprise others.
- Backstab
- Find traps as a dwarf.
- Armour limited to leather.
- Weapons limited to dagger, hand axe, sword, short bow, and light crossbow.
What do you think?? Too strong?? It would need 1800 XP to reach second level, and the following levels are based on this number.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 14, 2008 0:07:48 GMT -6
That is so 100% truth. I'm a natural tinkerer. And a flexible, open game, can provide countless of different and varied campaigns, because when you tinker with the rules, you are shaping the game world that is going to be presented to your players.
3E edition was really bad at allowing that freedom. I played 3E for about 4 years, cause my friends liked it. And it was really frustrating. I felt totally bounded as a DM and my creativity was dumbed by the game-system.
OD&D is all about freedom and letting your imagination go wild, because new stuff and ideas are SO EASY to implement. As an amateur, I find it so easy to create new things, it's a dream. I'm 22 years old, so discovering OD&D was a big thing for my hobby.
I'm really happy if that is the intended direction of 4E. Not because I'll play it, but because new generations of gamers will learn the game in a much richer mindset, and learn how to use their imagination and not succumb to the dictates of the original game designer.
I really hope the objectives of the 4E game designers are fulfilled, and that we can go back to the times of the famous TSR slogan: "Games of your imagination".
Nice to exchange thoughts with you Mike!
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 13, 2008 23:46:02 GMT -6
Thanks for your contribution! Neat idea that parry stuff. I can't believe a mayor designer of D&D 4th edition is commenting on my house-rules... ...a house-rule from a lost guy somewhere in Argentina! Cheers!
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 13, 2008 14:31:38 GMT -6
Is there a formulated mechanic for the elven ability to become "near-invisible in their grey-green cloaks"? Is there a formulated mechanic for the dwarven ability to find traps? If you search in the OD&D 3LBs, no mechanic at all is given for those abilities. So yes, it's up to the referee's ad hoc adjudication. It could be a roll of the die. But it's not necessary. Not all the time. And the player does no need (or should not) know the specific mechanic the referee is using. That's what OD&D is all about, isn't it? I'm just taking away demi-humans and giving their stuff to the thief class, since those abilities suit him well. The thief is "absorbing" those roles in my game. That way, I'm adjudication things in a pre-greyhawk fashion. I guess my concern would be as/for a player in said campaign what is the tangible reward for level advancement? The fighter as they go gains the ability to fight better and take more damage, the magic-user gains more spells, the cleric gains spells and better combat ability, what would the reward be for the thief that is a tangible reward other than "you just do it better". Again this not an attack on your idea because I find it very intriguing but I am playing the devil's advocate here. I think that the class needs some measurable way of saying at 5th level I am able to do the things my class does better than when I was at 5th level. That is a good point. I'll give you an answer now, but this had made me think. Maybe I'll have to reconsider some things. Answer:Well, you really get better by gaining HD, better attacks and better saves. Back-stab also improves. So, what do fighting-men gain as they level? Just that too: HD, better attacks, and saves. There are no feats or something similar in OD&D. Consider the thief to be a "light fighting man" with some special abilities.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 13, 2008 11:39:41 GMT -6
Is there a formulated mechanic for the elven ability to become "near-invisible in their grey-green cloaks"?
Is there a formulated mechanic for the dwarven ability to find traps?
If you search in the OD&D 3LBs, no mechanic at all is given for those abilities. So yes, it's up to the referee's ad hoc adjudication. It could be a roll of the die. But it's not necessary. Not all the time. And the player does no need (or should not) know the specific mechanic the referee is using.
That's what OD&D is all about, isn't it?
I'm just taking away demi-humans and giving their stuff to the thief class, since those abilities suit him well. The thief is "absorbing" those roles in my game. That way, I'm adjudication things in a pre-greyhawk fashion.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 13, 2008 10:18:58 GMT -6
But that's still the "hit a button and do stuff" problem of the greyhawk thief.
The idea is to get away from that, and handle things in the descriptive fashion of OD&D.
My attempt is to no longer have "thief skills". I just give the thief what elves and other races got in OD&D 3LB.
I give them the ability to become "near invisible" when using the appropriate clothing.
I will also give them the elvish ability to spot secret doors.
I'm also giving thieves the dwarven abilities of trap detection. Not as a skill. Just like it is described in the 3LB for dwarves. And nothing else is needed "rules-wise". Just that guideline for referee adjudication.
I also give thieves the +1 in 6 chance to detect noise at doors all demi-humans have in the 3LB.
I still think backstab is totally playable in a pre greyhawk OD&D game.
Here is what I have written for my OD&D Supplement Protect, Men & Magic section:
Thieves: this sneaky and stealthy characters can become nearly invisible in the appropriate clothing that melds with the predominant background. In dark, shadowy areas, this will typically be a black or dark suit. Camouflage clothing may be used in the wilderness. Thieves excel at finding secret doors as well as other secret or hidden things such as traps. They are also very good at opening locks without breaking them, if they got the right tools. A sneaky and clever thief that goes unnoticed can strike silently from behind, gaining two advantages: First, he adds a +4 bonus to hit this adversary. Secondly, he does double damage when he so attacks, rolling double damage die. A 5th level, he can hit for triple damage, rolling 3 die. Finally, at 9th level, he strikes for quadruple damage, rolling 4 damage die upon a hit. Note that if the thief is detected, this attack type is spoiled. Thieves can wear only leather armor and cannot employ shields. Their proficiency in arms is limited to the dagger, hand axe, sword, short bow, and light crossbow. Other information regarding thieves will be found in the appropriate sections of this booklet.
................................
His ability to detect secret doors will be described in the Underground & Wilderness Adventures section. Just in the same way it is done with demi-humans in the 3LB. I will also state the thief +1bonus to surprise others in that section.
I'm trying to re-do the thief with "3LB only" raw material. It should work.
Remember that I plan to play this thief in a "human only" campaign. So this class absorbs the roles demi-humans got in a normal OD&D 3LB only game.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 12, 2008 9:33:53 GMT -6
The idea is that the thief is using the Saving Throw mechanic from the 3LBBs and it use the descriptive system in that the system is designed around the idea that is the DM feels that none of the Saves are present/needed than the DM should roll 1d20, as long as a 1 is not rolled than the thief succeeds in their action, thus if the player can describe their plan well enough it will be successful. Oh, this really cleared up things for me. Your work is nice. I still prefer something more free-form. That's too many tables for my taste. Anyway, totally good what you have done. So, have you thought about XP progression? Here's a draft version for mine. XP is higher that the greyhawk thief, since I consider my developing version quite stronger. Thieves Apprentice 0 Footpad 1.800 Robber 3.600 Burglar 7.200 Cutpurse 14.000 Sharper 28.000 Pilferer 56.000 Master Pilferer 110.000 Thief 220.000
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 12, 2008 7:34:04 GMT -6
Interesting approach. Had never seen something like it. But don't you find it a bit too complicated? That's are lots of tables! I see hard work in there. But maybe situational modifiers can be adjudicated on the fly by the DM.
Also, the saves seem quite hard in the beginning levels! Don't you think?
The idea is very good, though maybe not what I'm looking for right now, because your system also departs, as Greyhawk did, from the OD&D way of playing stealth and finding stuff (the "descriptive way"). Your system is in essence quite similar, but changing the d100 for a d20, and using different tables for different situations.
What I'm trying to do, is to rebuild the class to better fit the 3LB, and without altering the type of game that derives from it.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 10, 2008 10:00:07 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 10, 2008 1:04:43 GMT -6
Ok, here is a first draft on Saves and HD progression. Fighting progression should be as clerics (every 4 levels)
Levels: 1-4
Death/Poison: 12 Wand/Polymorth/Paralisis: 13 Stone: 13 Dragon Breath: 14 Staves Spells: 14
Levels: 5-8
Death/Poison: 10 Wand/Polymorth/Paralisis: 11 Stone: 11 Dragon Breath: 11 Spells: 11
Levels: 9-12
Death/Poison: 7 Wand/Polymorth/Paralisis: 8 Stone: 8 Dragon Breath: 8 Spells: 8
Levels 13+:
Death/Poison: 4 Wand/Polymorth/Paralisis: 5 Stone: 5 Dragon Breath: 4 Spells: 7
.............................
HD Progression:
I - 1 II - 1+2 III - 2+2 IV - 3+1 V - 4 VI - 4+2 VII - 5 VIII - 6+1 IX - 7 X- 8+2
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 9, 2008 20:26:28 GMT -6
Long have we heard the problems with the greyhawk thief class. It changes how the game works. Fighting-men suddenly kinda lose their sneaking abilities, and thief abilities introduce a "skill-like" system that brings lots of problems into figuring out what can a character do and what he can't. Better explanation of these issues can be found here. <--- LINK. What I want to do, is to re-work this class, cause the concept is great, and loved by many of my players. I know that a Fighting-man who wears no armor, has high dex and does stealthy stuff can work just fine, but I want to make a class that better models the thief and clearly differs from a warrior-like and combat-oriented class. The final result may be very different from the greyhawk thief, and that's totally OK. I just want to create a new class that can be called: "thief", and adds a substantial contribution to the original trio. My objective is to create a thief class playable in a "pre-supplement I" D&D, without all the problems of the greyhawk thief. So, first, I have to warn you that I'm not into classic demi-humans right now. I play a "human only" campaign. So the thief class will be borrowing some of the demi-human stuff. This have been my initial thoughts for the class:1. They should fight like clerics (2nd class fighting ability). 2. They should have the best saving throws in most categories. This makes this class natural avoiders and evaders of danger. Maybe it reflects the sort of natural "luck" of the sneaky. In B/X and further, clerics have the best saves. This never made much sense to me. 3. Their hit points should be close to that of the clerics, maybe a bit lower. 4. Their weapon selection should be restricted to small, easy to handle (and hide) weapons. Now... unto the "special abilities". Certainly the hardest part of it all. Let's begin with "back-stab". This ability is totally usable in a pre-suplement I D&D and has no problem at all. A thief who gains surprise or otherwise gets behind an enemy can back-stab an opponent. It's in. Also, I thought about a crazy idea... As I don't use elves IMC, I thought that the thief could take some of it's stuff. One of them, is the elf's to ability detect secret doors. With this ability, the thief class becomes an awesome dungeon, castle, etc. infiltrator. He's a tomb looter, who finds it's way through secret passages and tunnels. I think this is a very cool ability for the thief to have. It gives him a nice flavor, that works well for heavy dungeon adventuring and contributes in a significant way with the party. So, this thieves, as master complex infiltrators, can: # detect secret doors 1-4 in 6. # notice secret door 1-2 in 6, when passing by them. Also, the thief class can use the +1 in 6 chance to listen at doors that all demi-humans enjoy. This ability is also a fine ability for them, and fits well. Remember, I play in a "only human" campaign. So this ability gives the thief a special scouting capability. Also, all of us know that OD&D elves are "nearly invisible in their gray-green cloaks(M&T p. 16)". Could this ability be taken by the new thief class?? It will certainly be cool to play it. We need to adapt the ability, and instead of "gray-green cloaks", we can say the thief needs "the appropiate clothing that melds with the predominant backround". Thus, in a dungeon, the thief can wear a black, stealthy suit. In the wilderness, appropriate camouflage clothing, etc. Finally, I was thinking something like "surprises 1-3 in 6", instead of the normal 1-2 in 6. This helps to model it's sneaky, ambusher nature. ......... So, what's out? So far, all the "%" abilities that cause so much trouble. They are out of this re-worked class. Many things are still to be done: 1. Is there another special ability that would be a good incorporation for the class? 2. Which would be an appropriate XP progression? I hope you like this ideas, and all suggestions are welcomed. Let's get the thief done right
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 17, 2008 10:12:14 GMT -6
You can just set the trap poison at a high strength level.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 9, 2008 20:34:28 GMT -6
Maybe this should be moved to the "Monsters & Treasure" board. Sorry for the trouble Z.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 9, 2008 18:49:41 GMT -6
Looking through old Dragon mags I found the best poison rules I ever saw. Simple, easy to use, balanced, generic, and specifically made for OD&D. They are just great. I like them a lot.
The rules are inside an Alchemist Class article in Dragon #2. But these rules work without the need of the Alchemist class, and work well for OD&D. I just like them!
I though others would find the good too.
ON POISONS
Animal poison is usually one level strength per die. Trap poison is variable. If the level of the poison is equal to or greater than the number of dice the victim has, the victim must save vs. poison or die in 3 melee rounds.
If the poison level is less than this but half the number of the victim’s dice or more, the victim must save vs. poison or suffer the effects of the “slow” Spell (the effects last until a constitution/ resurrection check is successful, rolling once each hour).
If the poison level is less than that, there is no effect, but the poison accumulates. Note: this penalty might have been removed without reducing the poison level in the body by the FTR making his constitution check at the beginning of the next or subsequent hours.
EXAMPLE: A Level 7 FTR is bitten several times by a 3-die poisonous spider. Assume two bites and one missed saving throw. The FTR is moving at “slow” speed (4½ out of 7). If he is bitten again and misses his saving throw he is dead; but in any case the fourth bite will kill him.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 10, 2008 10:58:39 GMT -6
Well, I certainly don't want to create 23+ new classes. And I agree with your "class variant" approach in most cases. Right now, I just need 2 more and I think I'll just stop there . The Thief , and the Psion. The only additions I really want/need for my game. I just want those two done as right as possible.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 9, 2008 15:55:05 GMT -6
I currently want to create some new classes for OD&D. Particularly a psionisist class.
I also want to re-work the thief, so as to make him fit in a "pre-supplement I" context.
How would one creature a nice, roughtly balanced class?
Any method detailed somewhere?
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 11, 2008 16:09:20 GMT -6
Thanks you sir!
No. I just use the three armor types: Leather (light), Chain (Heavy) and Plate (Plate).
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 11, 2008 12:41:44 GMT -6
This is the write-up of the Archer sub-class for my OD&D supplement:
........
Fighting Men: In addition to regular fighting-men, the Archer sub-class is available. Archers use dexterity instead of strength as their prime attribute (this will influence, for example, the experience boost given for a high score).
Archers can fire an extra arrow per combat round if they don’t move farther than half their movement rate. Archers wearing Plate or heavier armor or shields fight at -1 penalty in melee and can’t fire their extra shot.
.......
Comments? Suggestions? Grammar errors ? (English not my native language) Remember that I only allow 1 shot per round (while Chainmail allows 2 if the archer does not move).
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 9, 2008 20:01:08 GMT -6
Would you do it in another way? Suggestions are welcomed!
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 9, 2008 3:52:19 GMT -6
Archers are just a fighting-men that use dexterity astheir prime requisite instead of strength (influences XP bonus determination for example).
They don't get bonuses for high strength (assuming you have house ruled that)
They may fire twice in a round with a bow (IMC, normal rate of fire is 1/round)
¿What do you guys think?
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 17, 2008 21:15:55 GMT -6
I'll be giving an extra 1d6 on the starting gold roll to characters with CHA 15 or higher.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 13, 2008 8:51:24 GMT -6
Some have suggested a damage bonus only for fighting men. The issue I have with this is that then strength is doubly useful for fighting men and mostly useless for other classes. I want to make the strength 15, wisdom 13 character interesting to play as a cleric. So I'm inclined to have a +1 damage bonus for 15 strength across the board. That's a nice insight I had not considered. Good reasoning.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 12, 2008 9:37:45 GMT -6
I also try to keep attribute checks at a minimum. They should be the last of things I rely on to solve any given situation. I usually make more use of HD and level. Rolling a number of die = to level. A high stat may give you an extra die for the roll. Anyway, again, I try not to rely on it, and not make the player's think that everything is solved by rolling.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 10, 2008 13:50:18 GMT -6
With regards Strength, I only give +1 damage bonus for STR 15+ and only for the human and dwarf fighting men. No attack roll bonus, and the damage bonus is not enjoyed by other races.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Feb 9, 2008 21:31:48 GMT -6
I think they have +2 damage bonus IIRC.
|
|