[RCFG] RCFG Ongoing Development!

[Raven Crowking]

RCFG Preview #2 is a bit later than expected. The Paladin and Ranger are done, and I am working on the Rogue. Sorry it's late.

RC

[sohel1]

When fighting with two weapons, the fighter gains a +1 bonus to AC, as though he were using a shield. In addition, he can use his off-hand weapon as though it were a shield in conjunction with the Extra Shield Defence, Riven Shield Defence, and Shield Other combat skill bonuses.

Parry & Riposte: When fighting with a single one-handed weapon, the fighter gains a +1 bonus to AC, as though he were using a shield. In addition, he can use his weapon as though it were a shield in conjunction with the Extra Shield Defence, Riven Shield Defence, and Shield Other combat skill bonuses.

[Raven Crowking]

Originally Posted by sohel1

When fighting with two weapons, the fighter gains a +1 bonus to AC, as though he were using a shield. In addition, he can use his off-hand weapon as though it were a shield in conjunction with the Extra Shield Defence, Riven Shield Defence, and Shield Other combat skill bonuses.

Parry & Riposte: When fighting with a single one-handed weapon, the fighter gains a +1 bonus to AC, as though he were using a shield. In addition, he can use his weapon as though it were a shield in conjunction with the Extra Shield Defence, Riven Shield Defence, and Shield Other combat skill bonuses.

Is this being offered for inclusion/correction? If so, please email me and tell me how you want to be listed in the credits. ravencrowking at hotmail dot com. I'd like to include some acknowledgement of any & all who help to make this ruleset a reality.

Thanks.

RC

[pawsplay]

I like what you're doing here. I 'm taking my own project in a different direction, but you seem to have similar thoughts about taking old ideas and making them new again.

[Raven Crowking]

Originally Posted by pawsplay

I like what you're doing here.

Thank you.

I 'm taking my own project in a different direction, but you seem to have similar thoughts about taking old ideas and making them new again.

Is your project going to be OGL? My concern is to make the "best" game that I can, of the type that I am working on, so I'd be happy to use/credit ideas that fit with the overarching ruleset.

Right now, I've hit a block on RCFG Preview #2 because both the Sorcerer and the Wizard have Craft Item abilities, and I would like to include a better crafting system than exists in 3e. My specific goals include:

(1) It is not necessary to write rules on how to craft an item to introduce a new magic item in the campaign world, and

(2) It is not necessary to price each magic item in order to introduce it to the campaign world.

I imagine a game in which the 2e Magic Item Compendium is a usable resource, as well as magic items from later editions.


RC

[The_Warlock]

Originally Posted by Raven Crowking

My specific goals include:

(1) It is not necessary to write rules on how to craft an item to introduce a new magic item in the campaign world, and

(2) It is not necessary to price each magic item in order to introduce it to the campaign world.

I imagine a game in which the 2e Magic Item Compendium is a usable resource, as well as magic items from later editions.

RC

Out of curiousity, what would your answers be to the questions of import:

What does it COST to make a magic item?

Time, Money, and Vital Essence (XP) are the three most common.


How powerful and complex are magic items?

The simpler the item, the easier the rules for the system, since the items are less likely to upset predefined balances in the abilities and numbers of the base system. The more complex and interwoven the possible powers of the items, the more likely you get either 1) a high chance of balance breaking items or 2) a creation system that imposes checks and balances - usually in the cost department - to limit creation of extreme items.


Here's what I did in mine:

(Edited to prevent thread derailment)

Maybe something like that will allow you to be more loose in your rule creation for your system.

[Raven Crowking]

Originally Posted by The_Warlock

Out of curiousity, what would your answers be to the questions of import:

What does it COST to make a magic item?

Time, Money, and Vital Essence (XP) are the three most common.

I am thinking that I'd like to go along the lines of OSRIC/LL, and have magic item costs be unique for each item, with some form of baseline, and some form of negotiation between the GM and the player. However, I think that 3e is correct in having some level of "look, the PC gets to make the item" built in.

I just haven't figured out how to put that in rulespeak yet.

How powerful and complex are magic items?

Ideally, the DM picks up any resource from any edition and can easily port the item into the game.


RC

[The_Warlock]

Originally Posted by Raven Crowking

I am thinking that I'd like to go along the lines of OSRIC/LL, and have magic item costs be unique for each item, with some form of baseline, and some form of negotiation between the GM and the player. However, I think that 3e is correct in having some level of "look, the PC gets to make the item" built in.

I just haven't figured out how to put that in rulespeak yet.


Ideally, the DM picks up any resource from any edition and can easily port the item into the game.

RC

Ok, the only drawback there is that the costs in many of the previous editions were wildly varied across products and designers. I haven't looked at OSRIC or LL directly to see if they clarified or balanced the costs in any way.

It would seem almost remiss, after having seen how closely and tightly you have modeled the classes toward a specific feel and power level, to not have as tight a system for introducing magic items into the mix.

This is especially true since many of the items across editions are strongly high fantasy, while many of your class abilities and your levelling schema gives a seemingly much lower upper limit. Thus magic items look like they could significantly impact the play experience you are trying to forge.

Maybe there should be a small ruleset for the creation of items "in system", and a subsection on bringing in other edition magic items with upper limits on gold piece value per other edition if the gamemaster and players wish to remain focused on the basic tone you are trying to provide.


Artifacts, Relics and other McGuffins excluded, of course - the GM gets to place them at his or her whimsy.

[Raven Crowking]

Originally Posted by The_Warlock

Ok, the only drawback there is that the costs in many of the previous editions were wildly varied across products and designers.

This is a pretty big problem, but should not be insurmountable.

It would seem almost remiss, after having seen how closely and tightly you have modeled the classes toward a specific feel and power level, to not have as tight a system for introducing magic items into the mix.

Yet, I have worked very hard to avoid the "homework" aspect of 3e. IMHO, roughly 80% of prep should be thinking up cool , 15% making notes, and 5% figuring out how to make it work within the system.

So, on one hand, it is important that the prospective GM can just pick up a module of any era, make a few notes (mostly cutting & pasting monster stats), and run with it.

On the other hand, it is okay if figuring out how a PC makes a magic item takes a bit of game time. After all, such things can be done outside of the normal flow of the game, such as between games.

This is especially true since many of the items across editions are strongly high fantasy, while many of your class abilities and your levelling schema gives a seemingly much lower upper limit.

I definitely want a different feel between what is mundanely possible, and what is magically possible. Rather in keeping with older editions. That magic items placed as treasure by the GM could significantly impact play experience is fine; that magic items decided on by the players can do the same thing is not.

Maybe there should be a small ruleset for the creation of items "in system", and a subsection on bringing in other edition magic items with upper limits on gold piece value per other edition if the gamemaster and players wish to remain focused on the basic tone you are trying to provide.

This sounds like a good idea.

Thanks for your input, and keep it coming!

RC

P.S.: The last two classes to write up are the Sorcerer and the Wizard (including specialist wizards!), both of which can create items. I am thinking of updating Preview #1 to include all class/race info when completed, and then making Preview #2 Skills & Combat. How does this sound?


RC

[Raven Crowking]

BTW, again, anyone who participates on this thread, and would like to see their participation credited in the final product, should email me at ravencrowking at hotmail dot com, identify themselves, and let me know how you wish to be credited. I am hoping for a Core Rules Alpha Release next year, as well as The Big Book of Monsters. The GM's Handbook might take a bit longer.

You may have noticed that the preview has no artwork. There will be B&W and colour artwork in the completed product. There are some art samples on my webpage, showing roughly the kind of work I am capable of. If anyone wishes to donate artwork to the project, please be kind enough to email it to the account above, with something indicating that you are donating the work without compensation (sorry) and how you would like to be credited.

Artwork will be listed as Product Identity, and the copyright for artwork will remain in your name.

As soon as the first two books are out, I will also begin producing adventures for the system. There will be an open, free, non-expiring license for others to do the same.

I am hoping to be able to include a short guide on the website for converting RCFG adventures & materials to OSRIC, LL, and Basic Fantasy...maybe even Pathfinder, although I haven't contacted anyone about this yet (too early in the "creating RCFG" stage) and vice versa.

Thanks,

RC

[ExploderWizard]

Interesting stuff. I checked out the preview but haven't read it in detail yet. I shall post again when I have had the chance to do so.

My own project is going in a somewhat different direction. It will be cool to compare them when we get done.

[pawsplay]

On the magic item front, my thoughts were in the direction of the old High Level Handbook. Basically, based on an item's level and complexity, you would need to find a number of components. At the DM's option, you might be able to purchase some minor components, but you usually quested for them, and the rarest components, used to make permanent items, could usually only be purchased once you had either made the component available yourself or previously commissioned a similar item. It was also the DM's purview for the recipe to change from time to time.

Scrolls and potions used to take time and money. I think that's a fine approach. The limitation on using them is that you have to hold them in hand and can usually only ready one at a time, while your stockpile had finite limits of space and weight.

XP costs I think are just not a good idea... anything that causes XP to go down is more trouble than it's worth.

EDIT: Magic items generally need costs reflecting their utility and rarity. Obviously, heroes, powerful organizations, and rulers would do some trade in such items. I'm comfortable with fairly generic costs.

I'll comment from a general design perspective on an OGL game in a moment.

[pawsplay]

My project:

Originally, I had the idea of pre-empting 4e with a SW Saga inspired game, but apparently I was not the first person to have that idea, or the one with the most free time. Also, I've become less enchanted with some aspects of that game over time, although it does to me represent a better implementation of some of what d20 Modern tried to do. I discarded the idea of doing 3.5 "but fixed" because a) I'm not sure how much interest there is out there for my personal house rules, b) Pathfinder is doing this in a much more ambitious way, albeit in a different direction, and c) I really like a lot of variant ideas that popped up in Unearthed Arcana and other d20-based games. So I wanted to go under the hood and really rebuild a game from a 3.5 type core, but not necessarily a retread.

My main goals:
Reduce complexity, especially concerning high level characters with TOO MANY options.
Bring down the wahoo factor, aim more for the chivalric romance/swords-and-sorcery roots of D&D
Unify mechanics
Simplify character creation
Adhere to the older mythos, especially BECMI D&D and AD&D 1e and ealy D&D imitators like Palladium, T&T, etc.
Use mainly the 3.5 core, breaking only what I need to
Keep high level play viable without simply dialing PC abilities to nightmarish levels (a la Epic Handbook)
Keep numbers down
Do something with henchmen, followers, and strongholds
Reduce the prevalance of magic items to 1e levels, where a Death Knight had a 50% chance (gasp) of having a magical sword +1 or better. Not a nerf, but simply making permanent or multi-use items a little more rare, distinctive, and perhaps quirky to use.
Fix open-ended spells and abilities while keeping them flexible.

Some specific thoughts I've had:
I like the idea of unified defenses (Fortitude, Reflexes, Will) rather than "saves" and I like the SW Saga idea of AC perhaps being related to Reflexes.
I also like the idea of "roll and escape" saves so I have decided to keep saves in a different form. Ever read The Arcanum and all that? In that game, an "ability save" was what 3e calls an ability check. So saves are now all tied to abilities: Str save to break bonds, Con save to overcome nausea, etc.
I'm limited rolled hit dice and Con bonus to 10 levels.
I like the idea of class powers and feats.
Energy drain is now just damage that won't heal naturally but requires divine magic to easily be rid of.
Base a lot more effects on damage.... maybe petrify does petrification damage, and if it takes you out, you turn into a statue instead of just dead.

Two dilemmas I've had:
Do fighters need "class powers" or is it ok for their power to be feats?
Spells: Keep the 1st to 9th spell structure, or take a more Palladium/Vancian approach of spells being what they are, with some more powerful spells entailing greater difficulty, cost, or risks?

[Reveille]

Originally Posted by pawsplay

Energy drain is now just damage that won't heal naturally but requires divine magic to easily be rid of.

Can you please elaborate on this? I'd like to do the same for my homebrew but don't know how to approach it. Feel free to fork this if necessary.

[ExploderWizard]

Originally Posted by pawsplay

My project:

Unify mechanics

I would use caution before putting this in the design goals. In my own project there are things that a d20 just doesn't handle as well as another mechanic. I found myself trying to shoehorn concepts to fit the mechanic rather than building the right mechanic for the concept.

For example a 1d anything has no bell curve whatsoever. When trying to decide on a skills roll mechanic I scrapped 1d20. A talented and trained expert rolling a 1 just blows.

Having said that, If you can get a unified mechanic to handle your concepts well, then you have a real treasure. Good luck.

[pawsplay]

Originally Posted by Reveille

Can you please elaborate on this? I'd like to do the same for my homebrew but don't know how to approach it. Feel free to fork this if necessary.

Are you familiar with the Book of Exalted Deeds/Vile Darkness? Not my favorite sourcebooks, but they did sneak in some good ideas. One of those was vile damage. It's damage that is not merely evil but vile, and so it cannot be healed except by using curative magic inside a hallowed area. I wasn't thinking of anything so specific, but I had the idea that maybe energy drain could be healed by restoration or something.

[pawsplay]

Originally Posted by ExploderWizard

I would use caution before putting this in the design goals.

Oh, naturally. But as an example... we already use Spellcraft checks to overcome planes with impeded magic, so why not use it for caster checks? It handily solves the multiclassing/caster check problem, too.

[Raven Crowking]

First off, don't feel compelled to fork your discussion. Nothing is set in stone in my ruleset yet, so I'm happy for the discussion & inspiration.

Second, the Ranger preview is now appearing on my web page.

RC

[Raven Crowking]

Preview class write-ups are done, and I will be updating the website so you can download the revised (Race & Class) preview in about an hour and a half from now.

I am especially hoping to hear some comments about the RCFG sorcerer and specialist wizards, both of which differ from 3.x.


RC

[Raven Crowking]

The update is now live.