One thing that bothers me about D&D as it stands is that there's no way for a character with a reach weapon to prevent another character from getting within that reach. At best, you get either an attack of opportunity, or a one-round respite before your opponent takes a 5 ft. step within reach. Then, your only option is to back off, which may not be a viable option.
That being the case, here's the system for a new combat option:
Warding
A character with a reach weapon has the option of readying to ward off opponents. Using this option allows the character to resist attempts by other characters to approach.
In order to pass beyond the outer edges of a character's reach, or to move closer in the case of characters with reach beyond 10 ft. (where the attacker may begin his movement within that outer edge), the character must pass on opposed check. Failure indicates that the character can move no closer to the character than his current position, or the outer edge of the defender's reach, whichever is closer.
For the purposes of this option, the stationary character with the reach weapon is the defender, while the character attempting to approach is the attacker.
In order to use this option, the defender must declare his intent to "ready to ward". Thereafter, whenever an attacker attempts to move closer to the defender than the outer edges of the defender's reach (or his current position, whichever is closer), the defender has the option to ward the character off, preventing him from approaching. Since doing so discharges the readied action, the defender may only ward off a single character each round, and so may not necessarily choose to block the first such attacker.
To resolve the ward attampt, the following sequence of events should be followed. Firstly, if the attacker's intended action would provoke an attack of opportunity from the defender, that should be resolved first. This applies regardless of the eventual success of the warding attempt.
Secondly, the attacker and defender make opposed attack rolls. If the attacker is intending to move a distance greater than 5 feet, he receives a +2 bonus on this check. If the attacker is intending to move a distance greater than his base movement, he instead receives a +4 bonus on the check. Finally, if the attacker is charging, the attacker receives a further +2 bonus; this applies in addition to whichever of the previous bonuses apply.
If the attacker wins this opposed check, he completes his action as desired. If the defender wins, the attacker's movement ends at the outer edge of the defender's reach (or his current position, whichever is closer). Ties favour the defender.
Example: Marcus is facing a dragon with reach of 15 feet. Marcus has a base movement of 20 feet (due to plate armour). He is currently standing 20 feet from the dragon. The dragon declares that it is "ready to ward". Marcus charges the dragon. (Marcus has a total bonus of +12 to attack rolls, the dragon has a total bonus of +14 with its bite.)
Firstly, the dragon receives an attack of opportunity against Marcus. This is made with the normal +14 bonus to the attack roll, and Marcus suffers the normal -2 penalty to armour class for charging. Not surprisingly, the dragon hits, but doesn't kill Marcus.
Next, Marcus and the dragon make opposed attack rolls. Here, the dragon still has a +14 bonus to the attack roll. Marcus has a total bonus of +16 (+12 base; +2 for moving more than 5 ft., but not more than 20 ft.; +2 for charging).
If the dragon wins this opposed roll, Marcus moves a total of 5 ft. closer to the dragon, placing him at the outer edge of the dragon's reach. If Marcus wins, he moves his intended 20 ft., and can immediately attack the dragon. If there's a tie, Marcus loses. (Obviously, if Marcus loses, he can't attack the dragon this round, as he doesn't have reach.)
Assuming Marcus loses, the dragon can opt to "ready to ward" again on the next round. If Marcus again charges, the same sequence of events again plays out; the dragon makes an attack of opportunity, then the two make opposed rolls, and so on.
If, instead, Marcus elects to approach the dragon more cautiously, and makes only a 5 ft. step towards the dragon, then the dragon does not get to make an attack of opportunity. However, the two still make opposed attack rolls. This time, Marcus only gets his base +12 bonus to the attack roll (as he's only moving 5 ft., and not charging). If Marcus wins, he moves 5 ft. towards the dragon. If the dragon wins, or there's a tie, Marcus does not move. Either way, Marcus cannot move more than 5 ft. closer to the dragon, nor may he now make a 5 ft. step in any other direction - he has already expended his 5 ft. step (or a move action), even though he was unable to change his position.
Assuming Marcus wins the second contest, and is now 10 ft. from the dragon, the dragon may yet again "ready to ward". On his action, Marcus chooses to approach 10 ft. and attack. The dragon again get an attack of opportunity (+14 to the attack roll; Marcus suffers no AC bonus as he's not charging). The two then make opposed attack rolls again. Here, Marcus has a +14 bonus (+12 base; +2 for 10 ft. of movement). If Marcus wins, he approaches the dragon and can attack. If the dragon wins, or there's a tie, Marcus remains where he is. He is not forced to retreat to the edge of the dragon's reach.
Consequences of Using this Option
If this option is used in the game, it makes reach weapons slightly more useful. It makes creatures with reach slightly more dangerous. However, it makes creatures with reach greater than 10 ft., or creatures with natural reach and reach weapons quite significantly more dangerous. Finally, it makes groups of creatures with reach weapons a lot more dangerous - some of the creatures can ready to ward, while others simply hold their action, then make full attacks against potential attackers who are held at bay.
That said, readying to ward is a poor choice for a single creature faced with several opponents. Such a creature will find itself rushed quite quickly, as it will have to discharge its ward against one of the attackers, and then will have no defence against the others (except any unused attacks of opportunity, of course).
It is unlikely that player characters will make extensive use of this option, as they also tend not to use reach weapons often, and tend also to lack reach greater than 10 ft., or to use group tactics as described above. However, town guards, who frequently do use reach weapons, and such group tactics, will benefit greatly from this option; and this can be considered a good thing in games where the PCs get just a bit too blase about their foes' capabilities.
Friday, 16 April 2004
Wednesday, 14 April 2004
Oh yes, the Gangrel
Many moons ago, when reviewing the book on Gehenna for Vampire, I lamented that I'd never find out just what Xavier said when he had the Gangrel succeed from the Camarilla. Well, I've been reading through the Clan Novel anthologies, which are fiction set about that time, and the fateful meeting has just taken place. And, alas, he said a lot more than the rumoured two words.
Now, of course, the fiction is not necessarily the single, canonical source of truth in the World of Darkness, but I expect it's the only official answers as far as this question is concerned.
In case you care, he said:
Very well, then. The Final Nights are at hand. I leave the blind to lead the blind. This is not the first time the clans of the Camarilla have shown their disdain for the sacrifices of the Gangrel. But it will be the last. See how well you find your way without us. Tell your masters if you wish. I'll tell them soon enough in person. Let the union be dissolved.
Now, of course, the fiction is not necessarily the single, canonical source of truth in the World of Darkness, but I expect it's the only official answers as far as this question is concerned.
In case you care, he said:
Very well, then. The Final Nights are at hand. I leave the blind to lead the blind. This is not the first time the clans of the Camarilla have shown their disdain for the sacrifices of the Gangrel. But it will be the last. See how well you find your way without us. Tell your masters if you wish. I'll tell them soon enough in person. Let the union be dissolved.
Reading Setting Material
The impression that I get, right or wrong, is that the majority of the players in the current game haven't read the bulk of the setting bible produced for the campaign. That's not a complaint, just an observation. I suspect further that a great many players generally don't read up on the campaign setting for the games in which they're playing (unless they also GM in that setting). Now, a large part of this is that they don't want to get into the campaign secrets (and published works are rather poor at segregating player knowledge from GM knowledge). Other reasons include a lack of time, or a simple lack of inclination. (And, let's be fair, most of the material just ain't that interesting - in order to properly flesh out a world you need to detail such things as the constellations, the calendars, measurement systems, and so on, which really aren't that exciting, and which generally get ignored during play.
I see this as having two consequences. Firstly, it means that games set in the Forgotten Realms, Middle Earth (if the RPG hadn't collapsed), the Star Wars, Star Trek or Babylon 5 universes (and latterly Buffy and Angel) have a significant advantage, in that many if not most role-players have had some exposure to these settings from other sources, whether the associated books, movies, series, or computer games. This means that players can instantly recognise some elements of a setting (Jawas are recognisable in a way that the Aspected never will be), and should have some sort of common ground from which to work. On the other hand, the players will also come to the table with some pre-set notions of what Star Wars really is, and if these differ from the GM's vision (or the GM deliberately wants to do something different), the result can be jarring and unsatisfying, not unlike the reactions many fans had to Episode I.
The other consequence of this is that a prospective world designer has to be aware of the mindset of players in the game. If you include elves in the setting, no matter how you detail them in the campaign bible, when a player portrays such a character you will almost certainly get Drizzt, Legolas, or the standard tree-hugging hippie. Dwarves will be hard-drinking Scotsmen, Halflings will either be Hobbits or Kender, and so on and so forth.
That's a large part of the reason that I wanted all-new PC races for the Tollis campaign (that and I really wanted rid of the 'gay elf' thing, a goal in which I succeeded). For the most part, the races in Tollis have analogues in the standard races, although they're not obvious (I used the rather interesting archetypology articles on rpg.net to get at the underlying themes behind the races, and then built new races on those same themes). Also for the most part, I was happy with the way that the races were used and were portrayed.
The problem with the new races, however, is that they don't have familiarity with PCs. Any D&D player (or person who has read or seen Lord of the Rings) can tell you what an Elf is. It's not so certain that they'll get what an Aspected is, as noted above. I think perhaps this is one of the reasons that the new group is almost entirely Human (although it's also entirely possible that everyone just wanted to play a Human, either way I'm not complaining).
In case anyone's interested, the analogues for the standard races are as follows:
Aspected are both elves and orcs. The source articles suggest that the elves were derived from angels, the orcs from the fallen angels. In both cases, they represent the better and worse aspects of humanity. The aspected embody both of these, or at least that was the intention.
Satorans are dwarves. The dwarf allegedly represents man's lust for possessions. The satorans instead represent man's lust for knowledge and for pleasure.
The Ogrekin represent gnomes, the trickster race.
The Sloth are hobbits. This one, I think, should be fairly obvious.
The Whimlings are kender. Much like the sloth, they represent the halfling, which in turn represents us (since they also see the world from the point of view of the 'little guy', and not the powers that be). However, whereas the Sloth is intimidated by the world and retreats from it, the Whimling is enchanted and curious.
The Vaggatz are closest to half-orcs, although with less of the being caught between two worlds thing, and more of the noble savage about them.
The other thing I had in mind was the notion of the generations in this. In this regard, Humans represented young adults, just taking their place in the world. The Ogrekin represent the older generation, having taught the young adults they now step aside. The Vaggatz represent the younger brother, a few steps behind you, while the Orcs are a much younger sibling, still wild and destructive. Whimlings are, of course, young children. The Aspected and Satorans are also young adults, but they are less mature adults than the Humans. The Aspected, under this system, represent the totally self-centred adult, more interested in getting ahead than helping others. The Satoran is the pleasure-driven loser who spends his time in a drink or drug-fuelled haze. Finally, the Sloth are those adults who just want to get their heads down, get on with their lives, and not rock the boat.
I see this as having two consequences. Firstly, it means that games set in the Forgotten Realms, Middle Earth (if the RPG hadn't collapsed), the Star Wars, Star Trek or Babylon 5 universes (and latterly Buffy and Angel) have a significant advantage, in that many if not most role-players have had some exposure to these settings from other sources, whether the associated books, movies, series, or computer games. This means that players can instantly recognise some elements of a setting (Jawas are recognisable in a way that the Aspected never will be), and should have some sort of common ground from which to work. On the other hand, the players will also come to the table with some pre-set notions of what Star Wars really is, and if these differ from the GM's vision (or the GM deliberately wants to do something different), the result can be jarring and unsatisfying, not unlike the reactions many fans had to Episode I.
The other consequence of this is that a prospective world designer has to be aware of the mindset of players in the game. If you include elves in the setting, no matter how you detail them in the campaign bible, when a player portrays such a character you will almost certainly get Drizzt, Legolas, or the standard tree-hugging hippie. Dwarves will be hard-drinking Scotsmen, Halflings will either be Hobbits or Kender, and so on and so forth.
That's a large part of the reason that I wanted all-new PC races for the Tollis campaign (that and I really wanted rid of the 'gay elf' thing, a goal in which I succeeded). For the most part, the races in Tollis have analogues in the standard races, although they're not obvious (I used the rather interesting archetypology articles on rpg.net to get at the underlying themes behind the races, and then built new races on those same themes). Also for the most part, I was happy with the way that the races were used and were portrayed.
The problem with the new races, however, is that they don't have familiarity with PCs. Any D&D player (or person who has read or seen Lord of the Rings) can tell you what an Elf is. It's not so certain that they'll get what an Aspected is, as noted above. I think perhaps this is one of the reasons that the new group is almost entirely Human (although it's also entirely possible that everyone just wanted to play a Human, either way I'm not complaining).
In case anyone's interested, the analogues for the standard races are as follows:
Aspected are both elves and orcs. The source articles suggest that the elves were derived from angels, the orcs from the fallen angels. In both cases, they represent the better and worse aspects of humanity. The aspected embody both of these, or at least that was the intention.
Satorans are dwarves. The dwarf allegedly represents man's lust for possessions. The satorans instead represent man's lust for knowledge and for pleasure.
The Ogrekin represent gnomes, the trickster race.
The Sloth are hobbits. This one, I think, should be fairly obvious.
The Whimlings are kender. Much like the sloth, they represent the halfling, which in turn represents us (since they also see the world from the point of view of the 'little guy', and not the powers that be). However, whereas the Sloth is intimidated by the world and retreats from it, the Whimling is enchanted and curious.
The Vaggatz are closest to half-orcs, although with less of the being caught between two worlds thing, and more of the noble savage about them.
The other thing I had in mind was the notion of the generations in this. In this regard, Humans represented young adults, just taking their place in the world. The Ogrekin represent the older generation, having taught the young adults they now step aside. The Vaggatz represent the younger brother, a few steps behind you, while the Orcs are a much younger sibling, still wild and destructive. Whimlings are, of course, young children. The Aspected and Satorans are also young adults, but they are less mature adults than the Humans. The Aspected, under this system, represent the totally self-centred adult, more interested in getting ahead than helping others. The Satoran is the pleasure-driven loser who spends his time in a drink or drug-fuelled haze. Finally, the Sloth are those adults who just want to get their heads down, get on with their lives, and not rock the boat.
Tuesday, 13 April 2004
Customising the Classes
A lot of the existing prestige classes seem to take the form of "an x, but focussing more on y", where x is one of the base classes, and y is one of the powers of the class. For instance, the Shifter is a druid with more focus on shapeshifting, and so on.
Instead of this, I would prefer to see more flexible character classes. And, to do that I'm going to once again take a page out of d20 Modern, and steal the idea of talent trees.
The basic idea is that each class should have a fixed progression at low levels. At higher levels (say above 8th), at each level the character chooses a power from a talent tree. In order to get the more powerful powers you need to get the weaker ones, of course.
So, for instance, the Wizard would have two trees, the Familiar Tree and the Arcane Mastery Tree. Each step on the Arcane Mastery Tree gives the character a bonus item creation or metamagic feat. Each step on the Familiar Tree grants the familiar new powers (as described on p.53 of the 3.5 PHB - essentially, the familiar becomes more powerful as the character goes up in level).
The Wizard would then have a fixed progression of powers for the first 6 levels, getting the first two steps on the Arcane Mastery Tree, and the first three on the Familiar Tree. Thereafter, at levels 7, 9, 10, 11, 13, 15, 16, 17, 19 and 20, the character may choose an additional step from either tree. (Actually, it should be 15th twice, instead of 15 and 16, but you get the idea.)
The Wizard would, of course, advance in spells as normal.
Then, instead of adding lots of Prestige Classes that are generally very similar, classes would be further customised by adding new talent trees. For instance, you might add a High Arcana Tree, which allows the character to permanently trade spell slots for special abilities, as described under the Archmage prestige class (on p.178 of the 3.5 DMG). You'd need to add appropriate prerequisites on the abilities of the High Arcana Tree, but that's hardly problematic.
Doing this removes the need for a Prestige Class that's a Ranger with more focus on favoured enemies, one with more survival skills, one with more spells, one with better two-weapon fighting, and so on ad infinitum. It would then, hopefully, allow people to start coming up with more interesting prestige classes, classes that fit more with the campaign setting, and it would also remove the need to assume that any character will obviously 'have' to develop towards a prestige class, as sometimes seems to be the assumption people are using (and which I really, really hate).
From a monetary point of view, of course, this makes really poor sense. Talent trees as I've just described take up less space than prestige classes, and require about the same amount of design work. Therefore, it's harder to pack a thivk hardback with them than with prestige classes doing the same thing. And since Wizards are the company most capable of doing the big classbooks of prestige classes...
Instead of this, I would prefer to see more flexible character classes. And, to do that I'm going to once again take a page out of d20 Modern, and steal the idea of talent trees.
The basic idea is that each class should have a fixed progression at low levels. At higher levels (say above 8th), at each level the character chooses a power from a talent tree. In order to get the more powerful powers you need to get the weaker ones, of course.
So, for instance, the Wizard would have two trees, the Familiar Tree and the Arcane Mastery Tree. Each step on the Arcane Mastery Tree gives the character a bonus item creation or metamagic feat. Each step on the Familiar Tree grants the familiar new powers (as described on p.53 of the 3.5 PHB - essentially, the familiar becomes more powerful as the character goes up in level).
The Wizard would then have a fixed progression of powers for the first 6 levels, getting the first two steps on the Arcane Mastery Tree, and the first three on the Familiar Tree. Thereafter, at levels 7, 9, 10, 11, 13, 15, 16, 17, 19 and 20, the character may choose an additional step from either tree. (Actually, it should be 15th twice, instead of 15 and 16, but you get the idea.)
The Wizard would, of course, advance in spells as normal.
Then, instead of adding lots of Prestige Classes that are generally very similar, classes would be further customised by adding new talent trees. For instance, you might add a High Arcana Tree, which allows the character to permanently trade spell slots for special abilities, as described under the Archmage prestige class (on p.178 of the 3.5 DMG). You'd need to add appropriate prerequisites on the abilities of the High Arcana Tree, but that's hardly problematic.
Doing this removes the need for a Prestige Class that's a Ranger with more focus on favoured enemies, one with more survival skills, one with more spells, one with better two-weapon fighting, and so on ad infinitum. It would then, hopefully, allow people to start coming up with more interesting prestige classes, classes that fit more with the campaign setting, and it would also remove the need to assume that any character will obviously 'have' to develop towards a prestige class, as sometimes seems to be the assumption people are using (and which I really, really hate).
From a monetary point of view, of course, this makes really poor sense. Talent trees as I've just described take up less space than prestige classes, and require about the same amount of design work. Therefore, it's harder to pack a thivk hardback with them than with prestige classes doing the same thing. And since Wizards are the company most capable of doing the big classbooks of prestige classes...
Abstract Wealth in D&D
Here's a modification of the rules for wealth in d20 Modern, applied to D&D. Using these rules allows characters to purchase an arbitrary number of cheap items, but a very limited number of more expensive items. It also makes the Diplomacy skill (and Charisma attribute) a lot more valuable, and also changes the tenor of adventures quite a lot (the DM can no longer have the group simply adventuring for big piles of gold - the party now either needs personal motivations for their adventures, or they need to be hunting for specific rare and expensive items). This may or may not be a good thing.
The Wealth Score
Each character has a Wealth bonus, which represents his ability to gather funds, haggle for good deals, and find and acquire the items he wants. This bonus is applied to rolls made to purchase items.
At character creation, the Wealth bonus is generated by rolling 2d4 and adding a class-based bonus. The Great Wealth feat (see below) adds a further bonus.
The class-based bonuses are as follows:
Monk: -3 (minimum Wealth bonus +0)
Druid: +0
Sorcerer, Wizard: +1
Barbarian, Bard: +2
Cleric, Rogue: +3
Fighter, Paladin, Ranger: +4
At each level beyond the first, characters may make a Diplomacy check to increase their Wealth bonus. They may not take 10 or 20 on this roll. The DC of the roll is the character's current Wealth bonus. Success by 0-4 points increases the character's Wealth bonus by 1, success by 5-9 points increases the bonus by 2, and so forth. For every 5 full points by which the character succeeds at this roll, the bonus increases by a further +1.
(Why Diplomacy? Well, this represents the character's increased reputation, his improved ability to haggle, and his expanding circle of contacts as he goes up in level. It also makes Charisma more useful, which is always a good thing.)
Alternatively, a character may determine his Wealth bonus using his Profession skill. For every 5 ranks possessed (or fraction thereof), the character has a Wealth bonus of +1. However, a character's Wealth bonus by Profession does not increase with his level, and does not include a class-based bonus.
Feat: Great Wealth
You are particularly wealthy.
Benefit: Your Wealth bonus increases by +3. Also, this bonus grants a +1 bonus on all Diplomacy checks to increase Wealth bonus.
Special: You may select this feat multiple times. Each time, both of its effects stack.
Buying Stuff
To buy things, a character must go to a suitable supplier, and make a Purchase check. This is a d20 roll, to which the Wealth bonus applies. A character may take 10 or take 20 on this roll as normal. If successful, the character acquires the desired item. (Note: A natural 1 on this roll is not an automatic failure, and a natural 20 is not an automatic success.) (Also, a character may not take 20 during character creation, although he may take 10.)
A character may freely purchase anything up to his Wealth bonus without consequence. However, purchasing items above a purchase DC of 15, or above the character's Wealth bonus, will reduce the character's Wealth bonus (representing him stretching his resources significantly). The reductions are as follows:
DC 15 or higher: reduction by 1.
DC 1-10 points higher than Wealth bonus: reduction by 1
DC 11-15 points higher than Wealth bonus: reduction by 1d6
DC 16+ points higher than Wealth bonus: reduction by 2d6.
If the DC is both higher than the character's current Wealth bonus and is higher than 15, both reductions apply. So, if the character's Wealth bonus is 14, and he wishes to purchase Chainmail armour (DC 19), his Wealth bonus will reduce by 2 points. A character's Wealth bonus cannot drop below +0, regardless of reductions.
As should be obvious, when buying stuff, you should always buy anything under your Wealth bonus (or 15, whichever's lower) first. Then buy the most important items first, as you may run out of Wealth before getting to the other items.
Selling Stuff
Most items may be sold at a DC equal to that used to by them, minus 3. So, used Chainmail is sold at an equivalent DC of 16. Selling stuff may provide an increase to the character's Wealth bonus equal to the reduction that would have been incurred for buying such an item. So, a character with Wealth bonus +14 who sold a suit of Chainmail would increase his Wealth bonus by 2.
However, if a character's Wealth bonus is 15 or higher, he does not qualify for the +1 bonus gained for selling items of DC 15 or higher. So, if a character with Wealth bonus of 15 sold the same suit of Chainmail, he would only increase his Wealth bonus by +1. Thus, it becomes harder for a character to increase his Wealth bonus as he himself becomes more wealthy.
Some special (and usually unique) items can be sold at their full normal bonus. Typically, these include gemstones and artworks, but also powerful and unique magic items, holy relics, and the like. This is determined purely at the DM's discretion. A standard longsword +1, for instance, would not be considered rare and unusual, but a holy avenger with a long and glorious history probably would.
Pooling Funds
Characters may attempt to purchase items together. One character will be the main purchaser, and the others will use the Aid Another action as usual (they make DC 10 purchase checks, if successful, the main character gains +2 to his roll). However, each character who succeeds at the Aid Another action reduces his Wealth bonus by 1, while the main purchaser reduces his Wealth bonus as normal for the purchase.
Costs of Items
The following DCs show how to convert items from a gold piece cost to a purchase DC. All DCs round up (so, an item costing 25 gp is DC 13, not DC 12).
DC 2: 5 sp
DC 3: 1 gp 2 sp
DC 4: 2 gp
DC 5: 3 gp
DC 6: 4 gp
DC 7: 5 gp 5 sp
DC 8: 7 gp
DC 9: 9 gp
DC 10: 12 gp
DC 11: 15 gp
DC 12: 20 gp
DC 13: 27 gp 5 sp
DC 14: 35 gp
DC 15: 50 gp
DC 16: 65 gp
DC 17: 90 gp
DC 18: 120 gp
DC 19: 150 gp
DC 20: 200 gp
Thereafter, increasing the DC by 8 multiplies the value by 10. So, a 2,000 gp item has DC 28. Most +1 magical items are DC 29.
Wealth Bonus by Level
Typical Wealth bonuses by level are as follows:
1st: +7
2nd: +5
3rd: +6
4th: +7
5th: +8
6th: +8
7th: +9
8th: +9
9th: +10
10th: +10
11th: +11
Thereafter, it increases by +1 per two levels.
Typical Rewards by EL
The typical reward for a given encounter should be approximately equal to the encounter level +3. So, an encounter with four Orcs (4 x CR 1/2 = EL 3) would give an average reward equivalent to a wealth bonus of +6. If, instead, the DM wishes to combine the rewards for multiple encounters into a single award (the end-of-level bad guy), the reward for a sequence of encounters is calculated by totalling the rewards for the encounters taken sequentially, and then halving the total.
Normally, such rewards would be split amongst the group, so each of the four characters would get a +1.5 increase to their Wealth bonus, which rounds down to a +1 bonus.
Consequences of All of This
On average, a character won't be able to purchase a longsword +1 until 8th level, and then will have to wait for it a long time (take 20). This would seem to indicate that either the Wealth bonuses by level are too low, the purchase DCs are too high, or that characters should not be purchasing such items, but rather making them, or adventuring for them. I'm inclined to believe that the answer is somewhere between the first and the second: these rules were adapted from d20 Modern, where equipment is a lot less important. Therefore, although the core of the system is basically fine, the mechanisms still need work.
As noted above, under this system, adventuring for treasure really sucks (ooh, we found a +10 treasure!). Therefore, the DM either needs to motivate characters differently, or they have to introduce unique and special treasures for the adventurers to go after. So, you're not hunting for a generic holy artifact, you're hunting for the Lost Ark of the Covenant. Or whatever. I don't think that's a bad thing.
So, what do you think?
The Wealth Score
Each character has a Wealth bonus, which represents his ability to gather funds, haggle for good deals, and find and acquire the items he wants. This bonus is applied to rolls made to purchase items.
At character creation, the Wealth bonus is generated by rolling 2d4 and adding a class-based bonus. The Great Wealth feat (see below) adds a further bonus.
The class-based bonuses are as follows:
Monk: -3 (minimum Wealth bonus +0)
Druid: +0
Sorcerer, Wizard: +1
Barbarian, Bard: +2
Cleric, Rogue: +3
Fighter, Paladin, Ranger: +4
At each level beyond the first, characters may make a Diplomacy check to increase their Wealth bonus. They may not take 10 or 20 on this roll. The DC of the roll is the character's current Wealth bonus. Success by 0-4 points increases the character's Wealth bonus by 1, success by 5-9 points increases the bonus by 2, and so forth. For every 5 full points by which the character succeeds at this roll, the bonus increases by a further +1.
(Why Diplomacy? Well, this represents the character's increased reputation, his improved ability to haggle, and his expanding circle of contacts as he goes up in level. It also makes Charisma more useful, which is always a good thing.)
Alternatively, a character may determine his Wealth bonus using his Profession skill. For every 5 ranks possessed (or fraction thereof), the character has a Wealth bonus of +1. However, a character's Wealth bonus by Profession does not increase with his level, and does not include a class-based bonus.
Feat: Great Wealth
You are particularly wealthy.
Benefit: Your Wealth bonus increases by +3. Also, this bonus grants a +1 bonus on all Diplomacy checks to increase Wealth bonus.
Special: You may select this feat multiple times. Each time, both of its effects stack.
Buying Stuff
To buy things, a character must go to a suitable supplier, and make a Purchase check. This is a d20 roll, to which the Wealth bonus applies. A character may take 10 or take 20 on this roll as normal. If successful, the character acquires the desired item. (Note: A natural 1 on this roll is not an automatic failure, and a natural 20 is not an automatic success.) (Also, a character may not take 20 during character creation, although he may take 10.)
A character may freely purchase anything up to his Wealth bonus without consequence. However, purchasing items above a purchase DC of 15, or above the character's Wealth bonus, will reduce the character's Wealth bonus (representing him stretching his resources significantly). The reductions are as follows:
DC 15 or higher: reduction by 1.
DC 1-10 points higher than Wealth bonus: reduction by 1
DC 11-15 points higher than Wealth bonus: reduction by 1d6
DC 16+ points higher than Wealth bonus: reduction by 2d6.
If the DC is both higher than the character's current Wealth bonus and is higher than 15, both reductions apply. So, if the character's Wealth bonus is 14, and he wishes to purchase Chainmail armour (DC 19), his Wealth bonus will reduce by 2 points. A character's Wealth bonus cannot drop below +0, regardless of reductions.
As should be obvious, when buying stuff, you should always buy anything under your Wealth bonus (or 15, whichever's lower) first. Then buy the most important items first, as you may run out of Wealth before getting to the other items.
Selling Stuff
Most items may be sold at a DC equal to that used to by them, minus 3. So, used Chainmail is sold at an equivalent DC of 16. Selling stuff may provide an increase to the character's Wealth bonus equal to the reduction that would have been incurred for buying such an item. So, a character with Wealth bonus +14 who sold a suit of Chainmail would increase his Wealth bonus by 2.
However, if a character's Wealth bonus is 15 or higher, he does not qualify for the +1 bonus gained for selling items of DC 15 or higher. So, if a character with Wealth bonus of 15 sold the same suit of Chainmail, he would only increase his Wealth bonus by +1. Thus, it becomes harder for a character to increase his Wealth bonus as he himself becomes more wealthy.
Some special (and usually unique) items can be sold at their full normal bonus. Typically, these include gemstones and artworks, but also powerful and unique magic items, holy relics, and the like. This is determined purely at the DM's discretion. A standard longsword +1, for instance, would not be considered rare and unusual, but a holy avenger with a long and glorious history probably would.
Pooling Funds
Characters may attempt to purchase items together. One character will be the main purchaser, and the others will use the Aid Another action as usual (they make DC 10 purchase checks, if successful, the main character gains +2 to his roll). However, each character who succeeds at the Aid Another action reduces his Wealth bonus by 1, while the main purchaser reduces his Wealth bonus as normal for the purchase.
Costs of Items
The following DCs show how to convert items from a gold piece cost to a purchase DC. All DCs round up (so, an item costing 25 gp is DC 13, not DC 12).
DC 2: 5 sp
DC 3: 1 gp 2 sp
DC 4: 2 gp
DC 5: 3 gp
DC 6: 4 gp
DC 7: 5 gp 5 sp
DC 8: 7 gp
DC 9: 9 gp
DC 10: 12 gp
DC 11: 15 gp
DC 12: 20 gp
DC 13: 27 gp 5 sp
DC 14: 35 gp
DC 15: 50 gp
DC 16: 65 gp
DC 17: 90 gp
DC 18: 120 gp
DC 19: 150 gp
DC 20: 200 gp
Thereafter, increasing the DC by 8 multiplies the value by 10. So, a 2,000 gp item has DC 28. Most +1 magical items are DC 29.
Wealth Bonus by Level
Typical Wealth bonuses by level are as follows:
1st: +7
2nd: +5
3rd: +6
4th: +7
5th: +8
6th: +8
7th: +9
8th: +9
9th: +10
10th: +10
11th: +11
Thereafter, it increases by +1 per two levels.
Typical Rewards by EL
The typical reward for a given encounter should be approximately equal to the encounter level +3. So, an encounter with four Orcs (4 x CR 1/2 = EL 3) would give an average reward equivalent to a wealth bonus of +6. If, instead, the DM wishes to combine the rewards for multiple encounters into a single award (the end-of-level bad guy), the reward for a sequence of encounters is calculated by totalling the rewards for the encounters taken sequentially, and then halving the total.
Normally, such rewards would be split amongst the group, so each of the four characters would get a +1.5 increase to their Wealth bonus, which rounds down to a +1 bonus.
Consequences of All of This
On average, a character won't be able to purchase a longsword +1 until 8th level, and then will have to wait for it a long time (take 20). This would seem to indicate that either the Wealth bonuses by level are too low, the purchase DCs are too high, or that characters should not be purchasing such items, but rather making them, or adventuring for them. I'm inclined to believe that the answer is somewhere between the first and the second: these rules were adapted from d20 Modern, where equipment is a lot less important. Therefore, although the core of the system is basically fine, the mechanisms still need work.
As noted above, under this system, adventuring for treasure really sucks (ooh, we found a +10 treasure!). Therefore, the DM either needs to motivate characters differently, or they have to introduce unique and special treasures for the adventurers to go after. So, you're not hunting for a generic holy artifact, you're hunting for the Lost Ark of the Covenant. Or whatever. I don't think that's a bad thing.
So, what do you think?
Sunday, 11 April 2004
Review: Medieval Player's Manual
This is the fourth book in Green Ronin's Mythic Vistas line. It details the middle ages for use in d20, with a focus on England and north-western France in the years following the death of William the Conquerer. This book claims to present the middle ages in a more realistic sense than is found in the typical RPG book, a goal in which it succeeds somewhat, although in doing so it opens itself up to some criticisms that would not otherwise apply.
This is a 126-page black and white softcover. As with other Green Ronin books, the editing is near-flawless, and the rules mastery is impressive. There are six chapters.
Chapter 1 is an overview of the setting, discussing the roles of religion, race and sex, and giving some guidance on using the book and using the setting. This is short; it runs to only 4 pages.
Chapter 2 deals with magic in the middle ages. This takes the form of astrology, theurgy, necromancy, and folk charms. The emphasis is on more subtle forms of magic. The existing magic-using classes are considered inappropriate, and are replaced with less flashy variants. In terms of balance, these appear to hit the right level; although less magically potent than the wizard, they usually have more spells per day (with limitations), or better access to skills. This material is well done, but it's a bit dry. This chapter runs to 29 pages.
Chapter 3 repeats the process for religion, with the emphasis squarely on Christianity. Indeed, Islam and Judiasm (the other relevant religions of the day) are barely mentioned, and the classes here aren't suitable for use in modelling followers of those faiths. The chapter presents some new classes, to supplement the Cleric and Paladin (the Druid is removed in this setting), and then has a whole new type of feat: the Charism. These are feats granted to the especially holy, representing drect gifts from God. This material is all well handled, and seems balanced. As before, though, it's rather dry, although less so than the previous chapter. This chapter is 28 pages long.
Chapter 4 deals with the world of the artist, the philosopher and the politician. It describes some new classes (that are best suited for use as NPCs, or in a distinctly unusual campaign), and rules for the creation of books, artworks, and so forth. There is a social combat/debating system that is similar to the combat system, for use in the non-standard campaign I've just mentioned. The chapter concludes with a discussion of campaign options using this material. The entire chapter is well done, but probably of limited utility in most cases. The chapter is 30 pages long.
Chapter 5 presents the history of the setting, from 1066 to the ascention of Henry Plantagenet to the English throne. The emphasis is definately on England and Normandy. The chapter also presents some key characters. All in 14 pages, which is probably enough.
Finally, chapter 6 is 14 pages about life in the middle ages. This also includes some key characters of the setting, focussing on thinkers and philosophers rather than kings and bishops.
The book concludes with a summary sheet of the feats presented herein and an index.
For the most part, the material here is fine. However, I have three key complaints. The first is that this is a very dry read. This is probably due to over-familiarity; this has been done before, and better, in Vampire: Dark Ages.
Secondly, this book runs into a problem with religion. There is an underlying stance that Christianity is the correct religion, for the most part. This is a fair enough assumption upon which to build a setting, and is appropriate given the focus of the book. However, it is not carried through. The book states that the Crusades feature clerics and paladins on both sides. If Christiantity is right, though, this can't be the case. Basically, they haven't followed through on the tenets of the setting.
I should note here that I don't object to the notion of there being Islamic paladins and clerics in the crusades. The explanation used by Vampire, that it is the faith of the individual that grants the powers, would be the ideal solution. It would also allow for there to be clerics and other priests of all alignments, which would definately be a good thing. However, having stated that Christianity is right, it should have been carried through.
Thirdly, the book goes to pains, in at least two places, to present the setting in such a manner as to be accomodating to female characters. One character "could be portrayed as a proto-feminist", despite the fact that this is not consistent with history. Another example goes to pains to show that the female thinker is clearly superior to her male counterpart, despite the fact that her own notions are as nonsensical as his.
The simple truth is that the middle ages did not include many women in prominent positions. This can be demonstrated quite simply - for every such woman who can be named, you can probably name half a dozen equally prominent men. If you're going to present the setting in a 'realistic' sense, you simply have to acknowledge this. Hell, it's not even as if there's a big problem - adventurers are inherently a special breed, so there's absolutely no reason why you can't simply assume that women are equally populous within this breed.
One more, minor, point popped up when I was reading this book. I couldn't help thinking that perhaps d20 Modern might be a better system for this sort of game than D&D itself. True, you would need to add new equipment lists, and remove the firearm rules, but that's hardly a problem. d20 Modern also involves the supernatural in a much less prominent position than D&D, which would seem appropriate here.
Unfortunately, I can't recommend this book. I think the setting is better handled elsewhere. I think the setting can be better modelled with d20 Modern, and I have a few specific issues with the setting as presented here. Finally, it's rather dry. Unfortunately, this is also the third book in this series that's less good than its predecessor. Testament was great. Skull & Bones was also great, although not quite as good. Mindshadows wasn't anywhere near as good as either of the others, and this book is less good still. I just hope the next one (which deals with a werewolf-ruled kingdom) is better.
Not recommended.
This is a 126-page black and white softcover. As with other Green Ronin books, the editing is near-flawless, and the rules mastery is impressive. There are six chapters.
Chapter 1 is an overview of the setting, discussing the roles of religion, race and sex, and giving some guidance on using the book and using the setting. This is short; it runs to only 4 pages.
Chapter 2 deals with magic in the middle ages. This takes the form of astrology, theurgy, necromancy, and folk charms. The emphasis is on more subtle forms of magic. The existing magic-using classes are considered inappropriate, and are replaced with less flashy variants. In terms of balance, these appear to hit the right level; although less magically potent than the wizard, they usually have more spells per day (with limitations), or better access to skills. This material is well done, but it's a bit dry. This chapter runs to 29 pages.
Chapter 3 repeats the process for religion, with the emphasis squarely on Christianity. Indeed, Islam and Judiasm (the other relevant religions of the day) are barely mentioned, and the classes here aren't suitable for use in modelling followers of those faiths. The chapter presents some new classes, to supplement the Cleric and Paladin (the Druid is removed in this setting), and then has a whole new type of feat: the Charism. These are feats granted to the especially holy, representing drect gifts from God. This material is all well handled, and seems balanced. As before, though, it's rather dry, although less so than the previous chapter. This chapter is 28 pages long.
Chapter 4 deals with the world of the artist, the philosopher and the politician. It describes some new classes (that are best suited for use as NPCs, or in a distinctly unusual campaign), and rules for the creation of books, artworks, and so forth. There is a social combat/debating system that is similar to the combat system, for use in the non-standard campaign I've just mentioned. The chapter concludes with a discussion of campaign options using this material. The entire chapter is well done, but probably of limited utility in most cases. The chapter is 30 pages long.
Chapter 5 presents the history of the setting, from 1066 to the ascention of Henry Plantagenet to the English throne. The emphasis is definately on England and Normandy. The chapter also presents some key characters. All in 14 pages, which is probably enough.
Finally, chapter 6 is 14 pages about life in the middle ages. This also includes some key characters of the setting, focussing on thinkers and philosophers rather than kings and bishops.
The book concludes with a summary sheet of the feats presented herein and an index.
For the most part, the material here is fine. However, I have three key complaints. The first is that this is a very dry read. This is probably due to over-familiarity; this has been done before, and better, in Vampire: Dark Ages.
Secondly, this book runs into a problem with religion. There is an underlying stance that Christianity is the correct religion, for the most part. This is a fair enough assumption upon which to build a setting, and is appropriate given the focus of the book. However, it is not carried through. The book states that the Crusades feature clerics and paladins on both sides. If Christiantity is right, though, this can't be the case. Basically, they haven't followed through on the tenets of the setting.
I should note here that I don't object to the notion of there being Islamic paladins and clerics in the crusades. The explanation used by Vampire, that it is the faith of the individual that grants the powers, would be the ideal solution. It would also allow for there to be clerics and other priests of all alignments, which would definately be a good thing. However, having stated that Christianity is right, it should have been carried through.
Thirdly, the book goes to pains, in at least two places, to present the setting in such a manner as to be accomodating to female characters. One character "could be portrayed as a proto-feminist", despite the fact that this is not consistent with history. Another example goes to pains to show that the female thinker is clearly superior to her male counterpart, despite the fact that her own notions are as nonsensical as his.
The simple truth is that the middle ages did not include many women in prominent positions. This can be demonstrated quite simply - for every such woman who can be named, you can probably name half a dozen equally prominent men. If you're going to present the setting in a 'realistic' sense, you simply have to acknowledge this. Hell, it's not even as if there's a big problem - adventurers are inherently a special breed, so there's absolutely no reason why you can't simply assume that women are equally populous within this breed.
One more, minor, point popped up when I was reading this book. I couldn't help thinking that perhaps d20 Modern might be a better system for this sort of game than D&D itself. True, you would need to add new equipment lists, and remove the firearm rules, but that's hardly a problem. d20 Modern also involves the supernatural in a much less prominent position than D&D, which would seem appropriate here.
Unfortunately, I can't recommend this book. I think the setting is better handled elsewhere. I think the setting can be better modelled with d20 Modern, and I have a few specific issues with the setting as presented here. Finally, it's rather dry. Unfortunately, this is also the third book in this series that's less good than its predecessor. Testament was great. Skull & Bones was also great, although not quite as good. Mindshadows wasn't anywhere near as good as either of the others, and this book is less good still. I just hope the next one (which deals with a werewolf-ruled kingdom) is better.
Not recommended.
Saturday, 10 April 2004
Advanced Dungeons & Dragons (d20)
One of the trends for the year appears to be the production of 'advanced' books for the d20 system. Both Sword & Sorcery Studios and Green Ronin are doing advanced books, and Wizards have already put out Unearthed Arcana, which seems to do a very similar job. Truthfully, I view these projects with a little apprehansion (insofar as I care; I'm well aware that I can just not buy these products. But it's hard to get a good rant going from a position of apathy).
There are, as I see it, two ways to do an 'advanced' D&D game. The first is to layer on more rules, more systems, and generally make things more complex. The second is to add more options, more customisation, and make character management/adventure creation more complex. Of these, my definate preference is for the second, but even then, I feel wary.
The last thing the d20 system needs is more rules. The game is complex enough without trying to add 'realistic' combat rules, initiative rules including speed factors or weapon reach as defining factors, detailed spell component systems, or whatever. If anything, I'd like to see systems being removed where they don't help the game in play. And, in that regard, I viewed 3.5 as a step forward; a lot of the special combat manoeuvers were adjusted in the new books to make them consistent with one another. So, it's safe to say that option 1 does not appeal to me at all.
The second option, adding more options, is something I could see myself liking. Certainly, Green Ronin's "Advanced Bestiary" appeals, as it's a big book of templates, which should increase the available range of monsters far beyond the gains achieved by adding, for example, Monster Manual II.
Likewise, I would like to see options for customising the skill lists for the existing classes, and the addition of one or two new base classes to fill gaps in the existing system (a skill-based Cleric, a spontaneous divine castrer, and a warmage spring to mind). Also, since many prestige classes are "a ranger (or whatever) with more focus on special enemies (or other power)", if a mechanism was in place for classes to be customised in this way, without recourse to the prestige class, I would be very happy.
The down-sides of this are that adding customisation of this sort makes prep time for adventures much greater (since adding templates can't easily be done on the fly), makes character management more difficult (so levelling-up requires more effort, and takes more time from actual play), and presents compatibility problems with existing material.
Here's what I mean by that last: a lot of the existing prestige classes are intended for specific classes to enter. There is also a background assumption that you shouldn't get into a given class until a specific level. However, this last is controlled not by assigning a minimum level, but by requiring a minimum BAB, of skill ranks, or whatever. So, perhaps there's a Cleric-intended PrC with a mimimum BAB of +5. This effectively requires the character to have 7 levels of Cleric before entering the class (or to multiclass with Fighter to get a quicker BAB progression). If you allow customisation, however, one of the options is likely to include a faster BAB progression, meaning the Cleric can get into the class more quickly. This may (or, indeed, may not) cause problems with balance.
Likewise, many of the Fighter-intended PrCs control access by requiring ranks in cross-class skills. If the Fighter can customise his skills list, these are likely to become class skills, and thus afford the Fighter much easier access to the class. Again, this might or might not cause a problem.
The last problem with adding lots of options, and it's a problem that already exists and is only getting worse, is that the DM needs to vet the material that is and is not in use in the campaign. In the latter days of 2nd Edition, it became near-impossible to keep track of what books would be used, what house rules governed the use of that material, and so on.
With 3rd Edition, the need to use house rules was greatly reduced (although not eliminated outright, alas), and it became easier to add new material. However, it remains the case that not all the available material is balanced and sensible (this is an inevitable result of the d20 license), so the DM must keep track of which options are used and which are not. 'Advanced' books will add to this burden, probably requiring additional house rules to retain the balance in the campaign.
There are, as I see it, two ways to do an 'advanced' D&D game. The first is to layer on more rules, more systems, and generally make things more complex. The second is to add more options, more customisation, and make character management/adventure creation more complex. Of these, my definate preference is for the second, but even then, I feel wary.
The last thing the d20 system needs is more rules. The game is complex enough without trying to add 'realistic' combat rules, initiative rules including speed factors or weapon reach as defining factors, detailed spell component systems, or whatever. If anything, I'd like to see systems being removed where they don't help the game in play. And, in that regard, I viewed 3.5 as a step forward; a lot of the special combat manoeuvers were adjusted in the new books to make them consistent with one another. So, it's safe to say that option 1 does not appeal to me at all.
The second option, adding more options, is something I could see myself liking. Certainly, Green Ronin's "Advanced Bestiary" appeals, as it's a big book of templates, which should increase the available range of monsters far beyond the gains achieved by adding, for example, Monster Manual II.
Likewise, I would like to see options for customising the skill lists for the existing classes, and the addition of one or two new base classes to fill gaps in the existing system (a skill-based Cleric, a spontaneous divine castrer, and a warmage spring to mind). Also, since many prestige classes are "a ranger (or whatever) with more focus on special enemies (or other power)", if a mechanism was in place for classes to be customised in this way, without recourse to the prestige class, I would be very happy.
The down-sides of this are that adding customisation of this sort makes prep time for adventures much greater (since adding templates can't easily be done on the fly), makes character management more difficult (so levelling-up requires more effort, and takes more time from actual play), and presents compatibility problems with existing material.
Here's what I mean by that last: a lot of the existing prestige classes are intended for specific classes to enter. There is also a background assumption that you shouldn't get into a given class until a specific level. However, this last is controlled not by assigning a minimum level, but by requiring a minimum BAB, of skill ranks, or whatever. So, perhaps there's a Cleric-intended PrC with a mimimum BAB of +5. This effectively requires the character to have 7 levels of Cleric before entering the class (or to multiclass with Fighter to get a quicker BAB progression). If you allow customisation, however, one of the options is likely to include a faster BAB progression, meaning the Cleric can get into the class more quickly. This may (or, indeed, may not) cause problems with balance.
Likewise, many of the Fighter-intended PrCs control access by requiring ranks in cross-class skills. If the Fighter can customise his skills list, these are likely to become class skills, and thus afford the Fighter much easier access to the class. Again, this might or might not cause a problem.
The last problem with adding lots of options, and it's a problem that already exists and is only getting worse, is that the DM needs to vet the material that is and is not in use in the campaign. In the latter days of 2nd Edition, it became near-impossible to keep track of what books would be used, what house rules governed the use of that material, and so on.
With 3rd Edition, the need to use house rules was greatly reduced (although not eliminated outright, alas), and it became easier to add new material. However, it remains the case that not all the available material is balanced and sensible (this is an inevitable result of the d20 license), so the DM must keep track of which options are used and which are not. 'Advanced' books will add to this burden, probably requiring additional house rules to retain the balance in the campaign.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)