It will certainly change the pace and the feel of your game. Essentially, by mutual agreement (the players want to rest, and you want to allow it) the PCs will be able to enter every fight "fresh."
We're just codifying that style of play-- that "hand wave" agreement-- that probably already exists in most games.
And if you're not willing to allow them to rest, then a big upside for the DM is that you only have to "think ahead" in 10-minute chunks.
Quick question: If the PCs take more than ten minutes, let's say, 20 minutes, to rest, and it's a static dungeon, and they don't use Reserve points, do the PCs only get the benefits of the 10 minute rest regardless how long they really rested?
Quick question: If the PCs take more than ten minutes, let's say, 20 minutes, to rest, and it's a static dungeon, and they don't use Reserve points, do the PCs only get the benefits of the 10 minute rest regardless how long they really rested?
Each rest counts if it's needed.
There are reasons to take rests back-to-back. Sometimes one rest is not enough to bring the party back to full status; sometimes the spellcasters want to ready different spells.
Consider for example taking a rest to refresh spell slots and get some key utility spells (lesser restoration, key divinations, etc.). After the first rest, these spells are cast; then, the party rests again to switch those spells out and refresh the spell slots.
[*]Paladins get full access to the cleric spell list. (Bless Weapon and Holy Sword become class abilities.)[*]Rangers get full access to the druid spell list.[*]Paladins and rangers have "true" 1/2 caster level-- their spellcasting ability starts at 1st level (with 0-level spells) and can go as high as 5th level spells. (20th level Paladin = caster level 10.)[/list]
I am very happy to see that you are giving Paladins and Rangers 0 level spells at first level. Way back when 3.0 was released, I stated that, imo, the Paladins and Rangers should have had either received 0-level spells beginning at 1st level, no spells (and bonus feats at a lesser rate than the fighter), or have been PrCs.
On the other hand, I am not fond of Rangers getting full access to the druid spell list and Paladins full access to the Cleric's list. I think that I would prefer redistributing the current PHB spells over the new levels and throw in a few extra cleric or druid spells for the Paladin and Ranger respectively.
What are you having the Paladin and Ranger give up in exchange for the increased spellcasting rate?
__________________ "The designers of the newest edition built so much reliance on rules right into the game, to make it easier to play. As one of those designers, I occasionally think to myself, 'What have we wrought?' " -Monte Cook
" If the DM has to make a lot of judgment calls, the game is more difficult to learn. However, it's my belief that it's also more satisfying." -Monte Cook
"Don't let rules replace good DMing skills"- Monte Cook
There are reasons to take rests back-to-back. Sometimes one rest is not enough to bring the party back to full status; sometimes the spellcasters want to ready different spells.
Consider for example taking a rest to refresh spell slots and get some key utility spells (lesser restoration, key divinations, etc.). After the first rest, these spells are cast; then, the party rests again to switch those spells out and refresh the spell slots.
Gotcha. So the party could rest for 20 minutes and get their full hitpoints back without using a Reserve Point. However, they could not rest that 20 minutes without using an RP to regain more than Rote spells.
On the other hand, I am not fond of Rangers getting full access to the druid spell list and Paladins full access to the Cleric's list.
Then you're going to hate our "unified spell progression" fix for multiclass spellcasters.
The bottom line is that "known spells" is not really a particularly good way to balance classes against each other. It perhaps could be, without the bulk of additional sources of spells constantly changing the mix. But over time as more spells are added to the game, it's not doing much.
The question to ask yourself, in terms of balance, is how big a deal it is for a 10th level character to be casting 3rd level spells or a 19th level character to be casting 5th level spells.
If our "paladin" were instead a 10 Ftr / 10 Clr mix, or our "ranger" were a 10 Rog / 10 Drd mix, I am confident there would be folks telling me that was an unviable mix.
A 20th level character with a 10 caster level! Worse than lame. Useless!
Right?
Quote:
What are you having the Paladin and Ranger give up in exchange for the increased spellcasting rate?
Not a thing. They're getting an increased caster rate to bring them closer in line to the power that the cleric and druid currently enjoy.
(That's not entirely true-- they both lose something, but they didn't lose it "in exchange" for anything.)
We've brought the druid down a little bit and brought everyone else up accordingly. The class breakdowns will be completely laid out for your inspection so you can see how much everyone gained, and why.
Gotcha. So the party could rest for 20 minutes and get their full hitpoints back without using a Reserve Point. However, they could not rest that 20 minutes without using an RP to regain more than Rote spells.
any plans to preview other sections of trailblazer? would love to see how you balance out the classes, for example.
Tell me how you want them:
I can start previewing classes immediately, without the context of the class breakdowns and design notes (though you've seen the foundations of this in the GM's Day preview).
Or you can get them after I've finished all my design notes.
This is perhaps not surprising, but polishing up the design notes for presentation is actually the hardest part of this writing process. I'm a trained technical writer, but there's just so much I can do with 20-tab excel sheets.
I don't mind previewing them immediately, but there's a lot of moving parts that add context to some of the changes. You won't fully understand the spellcasters without understanding the unified spell progression; you won't fully understand the melee classes without understanding combat reactions; etc. There are also some even more subtle things-- take note of how many spells on the druid's spell list are Restricted (due to their long duration). That's a big balancing factor with the 10-minute rest-- druids spend more of their action points refreshing their spell slots.
Let me know-- and let me know if there's any particular order you'd like to see them in.
Let me know-- and let me know if there's any particular order you'd like to see them in.
You're a tech writer? Coolio? What field? I used to work in aerospace, then programming before burning out and switching to blogging. (Yes, you can make a living blogging.)
Regarding preview. Oh, my. Sure, let's take a look at them, starting with the core classes: cleric, fighter, rogue, and wizard. Maybe you can then post CoDzilla later.
Class Skills
The fighter’s class skills (and the key ability for each skill) are Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Handle Animal (Cha), Intimidate (Cha), Jump (Str), Ride (Dex), and Swim (Str).
Skill Points Per Level: 4 + Int modifier.
Spoiler:
Every class which previously received only 2 skill points per level, receives 4 skill points per level.
Weapon and Armor Proficiency: A fighter is proficient with all simple and martial weapons and with all armor (heavy, medium, and light) and shields (including tower shields).
Bonus Feats: At 1st level, a fighter gets a bonus combat-oriented feat in addition to the feat that any 1st-level character gets and the bonus feat granted to a human character. The fighter gains an additional bonus feat at 2nd level and every two fighter levels thereafter (4th, 6th, 8th, 10th, 12th, 14th, 16th, 18th, and 20th). These bonus feats must be drawn from the feats noted as fighter bonus feats. A fighter must still meet all prerequisites for a bonus feat, including ability score and base attack bonus minimums.
These bonus feats are in addition to the feat that a character of any class gets from advancing levels. A fighter is not limited to the list of fighter bonus feats when choosing these feats.
Punishing Strike: When you make an attack of opportunity, you receive a +4 bonus to the attack roll and add +1d6 to the damage dealt. The bonus damage increases at 5th, 9th, 13th, and 17th level.
Spoiler:
One major addition to the game is the readjustment and realignment of attacks of opportunity under the larger heading of combat reactions. Characters start with 1 reaction and gain an additional combat reaction at 6th, 11th, and 16th level—the levels at which they previously gained new iterative attacks.
Fighters gain a big boost in their effectiveness simply as a function of getting more combat reactions.
There are four main ways to spend your combat reactions.
Dodge: You can spend a combat reaction to dodge a single attack, adding ½ your BAB to your AC.
Block: You can spend a combat reaction to block an attack, gaining DR equal to ½ your BAB, plus your shield bonus.
Aid Another: If you and and ally are both in melee combat against the same opponent, you can spend a combat reaction to give an ally a +2 bonus to one attack roll, or a +2 bonus to his AC against one attack. (Note that there’s no attendant “vs. AC 10” roll required—just announce that you’d like to use the reaction, and the bonus is yours.)
Make an attack of opportunity: We’ve made it much easier to move around the battlefield, greatly simplifying the number of conditions which trigger attacks of opportunity. Moving into or within threatened squares no longer provokes an attack of opportunity, but moving out of a threatened area will. On those occasions, the fighter’s punishing strike ability helps him “hold the line.”
Expert Weapon Proficiency: At 3rd level, the Fighter gains Expert Weapon Proficiency with a single weapon. He gains this ability again at 7th, 11th, 15th, and 19th level. He can apply this proficiency to a previous weapon or choose a new weapon.
Spoiler:
An analysis of all of the melee weapons in the game shows them to be fairly evenly balanced against each other (with just a couple of exceptions—the dagger is pretty darn good for a simple weapon).
But all weapons share certain characteristics: base damage, critical multiplier and threat range, they may be light or two-handed, or they may allow you to perform certain maneuvers like trip, disarm, set vs. charge, and so forth.
Within all that variance among weapons, they nevertheless remain balanced against each other primarily by the feats required to use them: Exotic weapons are slightly better than martial weapons, which in turn are slightly better than simple weapons.
Expert weapon proficiency allows the fighter to alter the fundamentals of his chosen weapon. Each time he takes the ability, he can
Increase the damage die (up to 2d8)
Increase the critical multiplier (up to x4)
Increase the critical threat range (to 18-20)
Learn to perform a special maneuver with the weapon (trip, disarm, etc. e.g. flail)
Treat a one-handed weapon as light (as with the rapier)
Give a two-handed weapon reach, set, or mounted special function
Two high level fighters are likely to be equally deadly regardless of what weapon they’ve spent their careers training with.
You might notice that the table is missing the usual columns for saving throws. We’ve standardized saving throws to a character-based progression, rather than a class-based progression. At 1st level, every character chooses two Good saving throws and one Poor saving throw. This simple change allowed us to boost a few classes that were behind the others, and it neatly solves the multiclass saving throw problem. It also allows you to choose, for example, a more swashbuckling fighter type who happens to be good at Will and Reflex saves, if that’s your preference. Players (and NPCs…) can also mix things up to shuffle around their usual weaknesses and keep the enemy guessing.
The BMB column is "Base Magic Bonus" and part of our fix for multiclass spellcasters. The fighter has a 1/3 progression.
The changes here look simple and almost understated, perhaps because they interface directly with other 'core mechanics' of the game. This is a design philosophy that we tried to apply to all of our class changes: more abilities that scale with level, and work in ways the players are already familiar with (rather than lots of new, smaller, exception-based class features scattered throughout the advancement table).
These changes bring the fighter's total value almost even with the class leader (druid).
Going in a completely different direction with questions for a minute...
How "backwards compatible" is this going to be. In other words, say I want to bring something like Tome of Magic, or Heroes of High Favor: Elves, or... I dunno, the Dragon Shaman from PHB 2, and plop it into Trailblazer. How much work is it going to be to make things play nice?
Given that "backwards compatibility" isn't a goal in the same way for Trailblazer as it is for Pathfinder, I do realize there's likely going to be more work. But one of the reasons for staying with a 3.x based system is the ability to continue to use books you've already got.
A bit more backwards compatible than my impressions of Pathfinder so far.
EDIT: And let's be totally clear here. I don't mean that as a condemnation of Pathfinder at all. Generally speaking my opinion on backwards compatibility is "Man up already."
All I mean by this comment is that we have not changed very many spells (dispel magic being the main one) nor have we redesigned monsters (though we will break them apart so that you can do so), nor rewritten magic items, etc. I tried very hard not to change "individual" things, but rather to limit myself to systems. Where individual things are concerned, they're mostly written down on the players' character sheets. Change the PCs-- fine. Don't change the whole world.
For the most part, be prepared to be the most pliant where it concerns the player characters. You need a new set of assumptions when it comes to the PCs-- chiefly, that the PCs don't have to play by the same rules as the NPCs and vice versa.
You should be able to use the Trailblazer classes and they will interface into your existing d20 "stuff" without conversion on the DM side of the screen.
Spells, items, monsters, NPCs, adventures-- just keep using what you have. (Though where monsters are concerned-- use more of them. Heh.)
Quote:
In other words, say I want to bring something like Tome of Magic, or Heroes of High Favor: Elves, or... I dunno, the Dragon Shaman from PHB 2, and plop it into Trailblazer.
The class breakdowns are applicable to any class from any source you may have. I will show you how all the numbers are derived, so if you want to use prestige classes or alternate classes from other sources, you'll know if they need a bump. (Unlikely.)
You will want to convert spellcasting classes over to the unified spell progression with the applicable base magic bonus. That would be the one big exception to using a class "as is."
Quote:
How much work is it going to be to make things play nice?
Very little. Much less work than, for example, Grim Tales. You should know your way around the 3e ruleset. If you have the skill to read a statblock and apply a template under the 3e system, you'll be fine.
One of my design goals was to make 3e easier to run; inasmuch as you'll have to shake free of some old rules and then relearn a few things, I'm confident we've hit that goal.
A bit more backwards compatible than my impressions of Pathfinder so far.
Really? Interesting. Would love to hear your opinions but at a later time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wulf Ratbane
EDIT: EDIT: And let's be totally clear here. I don't mean that as a condemnation of Pathfinder at all. Generally speaking my opinion on backwards compatibility is "Man up already."
All I mean by this comment is that we have not changed very many spells (dispel magic being the main one) nor have we redesigned monsters (though we will break them apart so that you can do so), nor rewritten magic items, etc. I tried very hard not to change "individual" things, but rather to limit myself to systems. Where individual things are concerned, they're mostly written down on the players' character sheets. Change the PCs-- fine. Don't change the whole world.
Ah, thanks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wulf Ratbane
For the most part, be prepared to be the most pliant where it concerns the player characters. You need a new set of assumptions when it comes to the PCs-- chiefly, that the PCs don't have to play by the same rules as the NPCs and vice versa.
No problem with that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wulf Ratbane
You should be able to use the Trailblazer classes and they will interface into your existing d20 "stuff" without conversion on the DM side of the screen.
Could I, if creating a new campaign, use Trailblazer to replace the PH or that section of the Pathfinder RPG?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wulf Ratbane
(Though where monsters are concerned-- use more of them. Heh.)
Can't wait. Especially dragons
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wulf Ratbane
I will show you how all the numbers are derived, so if you want to use prestige classes or alternate classes from other sources, you'll know if they need a bump. (Unlikely.)
Sweet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wulf Ratbane
You will want to convert spellcasting classes over to the unified spell progression with the applicable base magic bonus. That would be the one big exception to using a class "as is."
That's fine. I like, for example, how Pathfinder got rid of the Turn Undead table and replaced it with Channel Energy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wulf Ratbane
One of my design goals was to make 3e easier to run; inasmuch as you'll have to shake free of some old rules and then relearn a few things, I'm confident we've hit that goal.
Trailblazer is now available.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
