|
D&D 1
Oct 2, 2006 15:25:14 GMT -5
Post by dorkknight23 on Oct 2, 2006 15:25:14 GMT -5
OK, I've been taking a look at these changes thusfar and building "experimental" (i.e. attempting to make gamebreaking) characters with it, and thusfar they look pretty good to me.
This is pretty exciting stuff. I could definitely see this working towards the ends of a "fantasty-style" game. Either a sword-and-sorcery Conan-style Hyborean Age/Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser adventure game, or as straight up D&D, or even one of the established settings (FR, Eberron, Dark Sun, Planescape, etc.)
I'm also ready to start organizing some games. But first, perhaps, making write-ups for some monsters...
|
|
|
D&D 1
Oct 2, 2006 15:42:38 GMT -5
Post by dorkknight23 on Oct 2, 2006 15:42:38 GMT -5
Beholder
Int: 5 (i) Str: 1 Agi: 2 Spd: 1 Dur: 3
White: 3 Red: 10 (i)
Actions: Close Combat 1 (Strength bonus only; Bite) Flight 2 (Stones are free) Social Skills 2 (Beholders, Arrogance) General Knowledge 4 (Intelligence bonus; Arcane Lore) Eye Rays 5 (Charm Monster/Charm Person [Project Thoughts/Control Others,] Disintegrate [attack vs. durability or hardness,] Fear, Finger of Death [attack versus durability, 3x damage,] Flesh to Stone [attack versus durability to incapacitate,] Infect Moderate Wounds, Sleep [attack versus intelligence to incapacitate,] Slow [attack versus speed, does stun damage only,] Telekinesis)
Modifiers: Mental Defense (+3) Bite [as claws] (+2) Enhanced Vision 3 (See in Darkness) Anti-Magic Cone 3 (limited to 150’ cone in front of it, affects Beholder as well; can control whether it is active or not) Toughness (+4) Initiative (+2)
|
|
|
D&D 1
Oct 2, 2006 20:17:51 GMT -5
Post by dorkknight23 on Oct 2, 2006 20:17:51 GMT -5
|
|
|
D&D 1
Oct 3, 2006 15:44:49 GMT -5
Post by Manticore on Oct 3, 2006 15:44:49 GMT -5
Costing this "Magic" action...maybe needs to be reworked into something like this? Magic Cost level = Action Number + 4 (+2 Intelligence bonus) Dispelling Barrier Spells (Wall of Fire, Iron, etc.) Banishing Spells Summon Monster Create Matter Call Creature Magical Travel Detection Scrying Charm Spells Compulsions Figment Spells Glamer Spells Pattern Spells Phantasm Spells Shadow Spells Energy Spells (or "Insert Element Here"-spells, particularly Fire, Cold, Sonic, Acid, or Electricity Blasts of varying sorts) Necromancy Spells Enhancement Spells (improving an ability) Alteration Spells (transforming something into something else) I'm OK with most of those spell categories, but what do the following spells entail? D&D is not my gaming system of choice. I prefer not to buy the stuff wherever possible. Compulsions (Power word etc?) Figment Spells (??) Glamer Spells (??) Pattern Spells (??) Phantasm Spells (??) And I've already spotted two potential problems with this game system. The magic system is expensive for a low-level character. However, at high levels then the mage will be more versatile than the Silver Surfer and much, much cheaper. Also, Magical Defence is cheap and definitely open for abuse. Although a possible defence is the fact that if somebody buys really high magical defence then they will be good against mages but not much good against a sword-thrust, and their other abilities will be low level by comparison. Actually, even though my character sheet that I just sent you includes me trying to wangle free magical defence out of the Magic action, then I don't think it should be allowed. Reduce Jonelim's magical defence to the +1 that I paid for, DK!
|
|
|
D&D 1
Oct 3, 2006 16:16:36 GMT -5
Post by Beacon on Oct 3, 2006 16:16:36 GMT -5
Glamer Spells are just Shapeshifting. Not 100% sure about the others
|
|
|
D&D 1
Oct 3, 2006 18:28:52 GMT -5
Post by dorkknight23 on Oct 3, 2006 18:28:52 GMT -5
Compulsion: A compulsion spell forces the subject to act in some manner or changes the way her mind works. Some compulsion spells determine the subject’s actions or the effects on the subject, some compulsion spells allow you to determine the subject’s actions when you cast the spell, and others give you ongoing control over the subject.
Figment: A figment spell creates a false sensation. Those who perceive the figment perceive the same thing, not their own slightly different versions of the figment. (It is not a personalized mental impression.) Figments cannot make something seem to be something else. A figment that includes audible effects cannot duplicate intelligible speech unless the spell description specifically says it can. If intelligible speech is possible, it must be in a language you can speak. If you try to duplicate a language you cannot speak, the image produces gibberish. Likewise, you cannot make a visual copy of something unless you know what it looks like. Because figments and glamers (see below) are unreal, they cannot produce real effects the way that other types of illusions can. They cannot cause damage to objects or creatures, support weight, provide nutrition, or provide protection from the elements. Consequently, these spells are useful for confounding or delaying foes, but useless for attacking them directly.
Glamer: A glamer spell changes a subject’s sensory qualities, making it look, feel, taste, smell, or sound like something else, or even seem to disappear.
Pattern: Like a figment, a pattern spell creates an image that others can see, but a pattern also affects the minds of those who see it or are caught in it. All patterns are mind-affecting spells.
Phantasm: A phantasm spell creates a mental image that usually only the caster and the subject (or subjects) of the spell can perceive. This impression is totally in the minds of the subjects. It is a personalized mental impression. (It’s all in their heads and not a fake picture or something that they actually see.) Third parties viewing or studying the scene don’t notice the phantasm. All phantasms are mind-affecting spells.
|
|
|
D&D 1
Oct 9, 2006 17:42:28 GMT -5
Post by dorkknight23 on Oct 9, 2006 17:42:28 GMT -5
Temporary idea (currently in playtest):
Animal companions/familiars/etc. will cost 1/2 total stone cost in creation, this will allow the creation of druids, paladins, wizards with familiars etc. without going overboard on it.
|
|
|
D&D 1
Oct 16, 2006 3:01:55 GMT -5
Post by Manticore on Oct 16, 2006 3:01:55 GMT -5
Browwiw is pushing to play a scenario using these new MURPG fantasy rules for 'A Song of Ice and Fire'. I too would like to GM a team game involving these new rules, once they are properly playtested. I am not sure yet which world I would like to adapt. I have several ideas. One was that I would attempt to hack into the Baldur's Gate mythos by holding a Forgotten Realms campaign based around the exploits of the Bhaalspawn. The second was to hold a campaign based around Joe Dever's Magnamund Universe. Yes, there is already a series D&D sourcebook dealing with Magnamund characters and campaigns, but I am not happy with them because the rules in the sourcebook are a simplified version of what I would call D&D standard, and so the character classes presented are much tougher (when given feats) than the ordinary classes of the core books. The third option was to invent a world of my own. But that seems like too much work considering that most of my players will have skipped out by the second week of play. Now I would like some feedback, please. Here are some useful links that may help if you have not heard of some of the topics mentioned above. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baldur%27s_Gate_2en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lone_Wolf_%28gamebooks%29en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnamund
|
|
|
D&D 1
Oct 16, 2006 3:33:59 GMT -5
Post by dorkknight23 on Oct 16, 2006 3:33:59 GMT -5
I'm up for a game set in FR, for one, although I admit I've never played any of the Baldur's Gate games.
|
|
|
D&D 1
Oct 16, 2006 17:24:27 GMT -5
Post by browwiw on Oct 16, 2006 17:24:27 GMT -5
Browwiw is pushing to play a scenario using these new MURPG fantasy rules for 'A Song of Ice and Fire'. Well, cat's out of the bag. Guess I'll have to beat it to death with a hammer...
|
|
|
D&D 1
Oct 19, 2006 11:41:53 GMT -5
Post by Manticore on Oct 19, 2006 11:41:53 GMT -5
Note: Remember that we are not trying to duplicate the D&D classes. For example, in MURPG rules a fighter can put lines towards developing good thieving and social skills as well, and anything else that might be appropriate, with little penalty. MURPG is excellent in that it doesn't contribute to the 'dumb fighter' stereotype easily.
If you're building a character, don't kill yourself worrying about how you're going to get an animal companion, wildshape, turn undead etc in a 15-stone character. MURPG doesn't work like that. It's OK to forget that the D&D rules say that certain classes should have this or that. On the surface a Fighter may appear to be much more powerful, in MURPG, than a mage or cleric, but remember that magic is much more versatile.
|
|
|
D&D 1
Oct 22, 2006 15:39:02 GMT -5
Post by Manticore on Oct 22, 2006 15:39:02 GMT -5
As for which world I'd like to GM...?
Probably Magnamund. I'm familiar with Forgotten Realms but I'd probably slip up on some important details and be penalised for it. The downside is that Magnamund was A) most popular in Britain and B) most people are unlikely to be familiar with it anyway. But that suits me. Most games on this board start that way.
|
|
|
D&D 1
Jan 12, 2007 19:38:08 GMT -5
Post by dorkknight23 on Jan 12, 2007 19:38:08 GMT -5
Charisma: (Cost Level = +2) Free Modifier #'s worth of stones for Social Skills, or other actions related to force of personality (for example, the "con artist" specialty of Thieving. GM caveat as to what should work and what shouldn't.) (+2 to cost level) = free stones help with Magic. For those aspiring Sorcerers out there.
Also, I have a setting of sorts abrewin'. More details as they develop, and I see how many players I have.
|
|
|
D&D 1
Jan 13, 2007 15:30:59 GMT -5
Post by dorkknight23 on Jan 13, 2007 15:30:59 GMT -5
Invoking: (+1 to Cost Level)
Advantage for Magic. This entails taking power from powerful entities, allowing free stones up to your AN for your spells. These stones, however, have to be RP-ed for with a deal with the power in question you're bartering with, which could be relatively minor or major, depending on who you're talking to and the GM's whims.
Example: Morthos the Warlock has Magic at AN 2 and the Invoking option. He consults with his demonic master, Jubilex the Faceless Lord, to empower his eldritch blast. Jubilex demands a sentient sacrifice to an ooze or jelly by the next full moon, and gives Morthos an extra 2 stones to blast an opponent. Now Morthos needs to find a sentient sacrifice by the next full moon, or else Jubilex might revoke his favor (or worse.)
|
|
|
D&D 1
Jan 14, 2007 17:01:27 GMT -5
Post by t0mahawk on Jan 14, 2007 17:01:27 GMT -5
If I were doing this I'd change the D&R chart, say make each stone of strength like:
0 - child or very old lift 20lbs 1 - young or old lift 50lbs 2 - lift 100lbs (most normal people without difficulty) 3 - lift 150 lbs (this is over the head lifting, not dead lifting. How many can honestly say they could lift this much over their head?) 4 - lift 200lbs (you'd have to be strong to do this) 5 - lift 300lbs (large Orc, Hobgoblin, Bugbear, Vampire) 6 - lift 500lbs (Ogre, Troll, Vampire Lord) 7 - lift 1000lbs (Hill Giant, small dragon) 8 - lift 1 ton (adult dragon, elephant, stone giant) 9 - lift 3 tons (old dragon, mountain giant) 10 - lift 5 tons (Storm Giant, Ancient Dragon, minor deity)
For the other stats the distances/levels would be spread out in a similar manner, so that the fastest sprinter (supposedly 40mph) would need a speed of 5 or 6. I know I personally don't run anywhere near as fast as I used to, but going by the D&R chart it's supposedly 20mph. I'd be having a heart attack at those speeds these days...
When you're dealing with low stats from a supers game, everyone looks the same (they all have 3 str, 3 speed, 3 agil etc). So most fighters would have 3 strength and could press 1000lbs? The Grey Mouser as strong as Conan?Hmmm. I'd put mouser at 2, Conan at 5, Maybe 6, or change the strength ratings on the D&R chart to give more seperation, maybe a 400lb level.
For classes maybe have CL +2 to buy Int for fighters, CL+1 for strength and durability for Wizards (they have magic to back them up, and the intelligence option) and so on, using 40 stones to pay for characters, so that a) they have decent durability scores and fights last a few rounds and b) again, so that characters don't all look the same. And with skills, divide them into categories, so there's no Close Combat skill, but Close Combat - Swords, Close Combat - Daggers, Close Combat Bows, Close Combat - Axes so each has to be purchased seperately. A Viking fighter would be raised from young to handle an axe. If given a dagger they'd probably snort and toss it aside to use their hands, or use it at best clumsily (use a related skill at -2 AN or non related Close Combat skill like axes at -3 AN).
For skills I'd break up all the 'catch all' skills like Thieving and Close/Ranged combat, hunting/tracking etc into seperate skills, to make a big list of skills. Specialisations would then take the form of (in Close Combat/Swords case for instance) different weapons/situations (so swords would be 2 handed, Broadsword, Longsword, Bastard Sword, Cutlass, Scimitar). If you don't have the specialisation, you suffer -1 AN when using that weapon. Furthermore you could become expert in one weapon at the cost of 2 specialisations, gaining +1 AN (needs a red stone to pay for it mind) when using that weapon.
I realise that all this would probably need a rewrite of various rules/charts etc, but I'd rather do it this way than see a party of near identical characters stroll out and batter near identical (all 3 or 4 strength) opponents.
|
|