What are people homebrewing?

[Tony Vargas]

So who's next?

An idea for a 4e Battlemaster (that's the 5e fighter archetype if you're wondering, not the BattleTech 85-ton mech, which I'm guessing might be a tad OP), has been struggling to get out of my head lately...

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

An idea for a 4e Battlemaster (that's the 5e fighter archetype if you're wondering, not the BattleTech 85-ton mech, which I'm guessing might be a tad OP), has been struggling to get out of my head lately...

So, would you provide all the various maneuver/feat options that go with it?

 

[Tony Vargas]

So, would you provide all the various maneuver/feat options that go with it?

What, all 17 maneuvers? Nah, it'd have to be more than that.... I was thinking along the lines of the Berserker: re-working how the class interacts with it's own powers, and in order to change the role.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

What, all 17 maneuvers? Nah, it'd have to be more than that.... I was thinking along the lines of the Berserker: re-working how the class interacts with it's own powers, and in order to change the role.

I should really dust off my HotFW, we never really pulled much from it except pixies and Fey Beast Tamer theme. Just didn't get in enough play with enough people after that book came out to really delve in too deep.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I'm working on using 5e's basics to rebuild a streamlined 4e. It's slow going because I'm also building my own RPG, and it is VERY different from d20, but I think it will kick ass when done.

More accurately, it's a mix of 4e, 5e, and SWSE mechanics and concepts.

Bounded accuracy,

three defenses,
Disadvantage, Advantage, and Greater Advantage (SWSE style roll and take second vs roll and keep highest) replace +2 and +5 bonuses and penalties,
condition track+bloodied with a shorter list of distinct conditions,
Shake If Off mechanic to end conditions or move up the track quicker,
2 Swift Actions per round instead of all those fiddly action types,
The part that eats time is powers/talents.

 

[Cyvris]

So I assume then that themes would be out? My only concern is trying cut back on the sheer NUMBER of things that characters get, its rather daunting!

I'd probably jettison them. I like the idea of Themes, but they are sort of fiddly and distract from the design space of specific classes at times. They could probably fit with what I'm doing, or be mined for options. Like all editions, 4e really had some bloat at the end. The original Dark Sun incarnation of Themes was an interesting approach to character diversity and I'd rather see more of that than what they ended up as.

Either way, my current plan really is just to cull through the class feats, invent a few other options, and slap that together as class features. Feats like "Brutal Tactics" for the Fighter that would usually be completely overlooked are the sort of thing I want to bring in. It'll give some build diversity outside of A/E/D choices and allow players a little bit of that "Talent Tree" style of leveling, which is something I'm totally a sucker for. Honestly, I'm tempted to make the "Modify At-Will" feat lines part of this just because those don't see enough love, there are a bunch of them, and they go well with the idea of Martial characters having the greatest skill with basic exploits and weapons.

 

[C4]

I know the feeling. I have enthusiasm, but right now every time I sit down its like, "Oh, I have to do about 100 more boons and associated powers, snore...". I guess I get through one every couple days, but at this rate it will be a good while before things REALLY become playable.

Yeah, there have been whole weeks when things come up or I was simply unmotivated, and got nothing done. It's a looong process.

Not to detract from your originality, don't those kind of hark back to SWSE? I've never played or read SWSE, but I recall in all the great debates around 2008 there was a lot of talk about "why doesn't 4e use the SWSE condition track?" Of course yours may be architected way differently...

You know, I don't really know anything about SWSE either, and I wouldn't be surprised if I was beaten to the punch. Some of my condition tracks are simple, like the attack penalty track; there are five conditions in this track, each one a power penalty to a target's attack rolls from -1 to -5. Other condition tracks are much more wordy; for example I took Dazed and Stunned, and rejiggered them into five progressing conditions ranging from 'grants combat advantage' to 'truly staggered.'

The advantage of condition tracks is twofold: Rather than buffing controller powers, I've been able to split powers up by power source rather than class (less work and less thematic redundancy) and give each controller a feature that adds/improves conditions onto his/her attacks. Secondly, condition tracks have allowed me to bypass the stunlock problem. (Controllers can still potentially really rain on the elite/solo parade, but doing so is part of their shtick.) Elites and solos can downgrade conditions they're hit with due to being tougher, smarter, more skilled, etc.. And they can upgrade conditions they hit the PCs with! Vice versa for minions and goons.

The risk is that I've created a subsystem more fiddly than fun, but I can't wait to see how it works out in play! Also, players can simply not play controllers, and GMs can avoid this subsystem easily enough if they don't like it.

Hehe, yeah, I've been tempted to basically do the same thing, "Hey, guys, once you hit level 6 you're on your own, just follow the yellow brick road!" I still need to build a lot more powers and things even so, just to establish all the various design patterns, and then test them all enough to see what might be problematic and tweak it, otherwise what people layer on top may be pretty whacked.

Yeah, I definitely wanted a clear and consistently thematic foundation for others to build on, so I've been very conservative with the default powers. Individual groups can go gonzo, and I probably will too once my group gets to the coming-into-their-own levels, but I didn't want the foundation to be erratic.

I took a peek at HoML, and I'm chagrined at the similarities I see. One big difference is the shadow power source, which PoL lacks. (I do have an illusion theme, but it's an arcane option.) At one point I was fiddling with summoning class options, including undead-creation, but I never got it to the point of a four-role mechanic. It may require a revisit, or maybe I'll use rituals for summoning and creature-creation...

Also, I've been thinking I want to have a monster morale option but don't have much direction. Yours looks interesting, but it's a bit unclear...how's it work?

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Yeah, there have been whole weeks when things come up or I was simply unmotivated, and got nothing done. It's a looong process.


You know, I don't really know anything about SWSE either, and I wouldn't be surprised if I was beaten to the punch. Some of my condition tracks are simple, like the attack penalty track; there are five conditions in this track, each one a power penalty to a target's attack rolls from -1 to -5. Other condition tracks are much more wordy; for example I took Dazed and Stunned, and rejiggered them into five progressing conditions ranging from 'grants combat advantage' to 'truly staggered.'

The advantage of condition tracks is twofold: Rather than buffing controller powers, I've been able to split powers up by power source rather than class (less work and less thematic redundancy) and give each controller a feature that adds/improves conditions onto his/her attacks. Secondly, condition tracks have allowed me to bypass the stunlock problem. (Controllers can still potentially really rain on the elite/solo parade, but doing so is part of their shtick.) Elites and solos can downgrade conditions they're hit with due to being tougher, smarter, more skilled, etc.. And they can upgrade conditions they hit the PCs with! Vice versa for minions and goons.

The risk is that I've created a subsystem more fiddly than fun, but I can't wait to see how it works out in play! Also, players can simply not play controllers, and GMs can avoid this subsystem easily enough if they don't like it.

Well, I think that's one thing that is good about these homebrews, you can just go wild and try something. I mean you might spend a bunch of time on something that doesn't turn out, but it isn't like with a big market game where if they don't like part of it there's no real way to excise it. You can just go in and say "eh, trash this!" there's no huge player base that will get steamed about it. If you even have a player base they'll likely just tell you to pound sand and use it anyway if that's their preference.

Yeah, I definitely wanted a clear and consistently thematic foundation for others to build on, so I've been very conservative with the default powers. Individual groups can go gonzo, and I probably will too once my group gets to the coming-into-their-own levels, but I didn't want the foundation to be erratic.

I want mine to be somewhat innovative though, so I want a consistent approach that teaches what is and isn't the 'HoML Way', but still does a bit of crazy. Honestly I'm far from really realizing a holistic vision in that sense yet.

I took a peek at HoML, and I'm chagrined at the similarities I see. One big difference is the shadow power source, which PoL lacks. (I do have an illusion theme, but it's an arcane option.) At one point I was fiddling with summoning class options, including undead-creation, but I never got it to the point of a four-role mechanic. It may require a revisit, or maybe I'll use rituals for summoning and creature-creation...

Also, I've been thinking I want to have a monster morale option but don't have much direction. Yours looks interesting, but it's a bit unclear...how's it work?

Hehehe, great minds think alike! I like Shadow. OTOH I ditched 'Arcane', it just means 'knowledge' anyway, and I wanted power sources to be rooted in some specific aspect of the game cosmos, not just "I know a lot of cool stuff." You can know lots of cools stuff about shadow, life, sprit, etc! hehe. Besides it kind of removes some of the danger of a kitchen-sink wizard. Truthfully though, with the ease of pulling in boons from any thematic source in HoML its kind of hard to restrict a character to a limited repertoire anyway. I may want to consider some sort of way to encourage thematic coherency, but I'm not sure how to do it and yet encourage people to create new and different combinations of elements. I never liked the way in 4e some things are just hard to do for purely thematic reasons.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Also I like none of their MC systems. Instead, I'm thinking about using themes, backgrounds and paragon paths to cover a lot of it, while something like 4e's power swapping does the rest.


Also, the plan is to do 30 levels, but without the epic power jump. Instead, the epic destiny will cover that, and be designed to not care what level you are. The DM/group decides when the campaign becomes epic, and whether that is at level 1, or level 2, the character get epic destinies.

 

[C4]

Hehehe, great minds think alike! I like Shadow. OTOH I ditched 'Arcane', it just means 'knowledge' anyway, and I wanted power sources to be rooted in some specific aspect of the game cosmos, not just "I know a lot of cool stuff." You can know lots of cools stuff about shadow, life, sprit, etc! hehe. Besides it kind of removes some of the danger of a kitchen-sink wizard.

Oh man, I've been in homebrew-land for so long I've started to forget where I diverged from D&D! My arcane source is about light/darkness, charm/fear, illusions, and force effects, for just the reasons you mention. My themes are what 4e calls builds. My encounter-power effects use (save ends) durations just like dailies, for the consistency reason you mentioned earlier in the thread. Lots and lots of little changes.

Truthfully though, with the ease of pulling in boons from any thematic source in HoML its kind of hard to restrict a character to a limited repertoire anyway. I may want to consider some sort of way to encourage thematic coherency, but I'm not sure how to do it and yet encourage people to create new and different combinations of elements. I never liked the way in 4e some things are just hard to do for purely thematic reasons.

I've made PoL options all very tightly thematic, but I've also made it easy to cross boundaries via multi- and dual-classing. Which reminds me, I should add those things to the 'heartbreakers' section of my intro doc...