E6 SRD - community project

[macrochelys]

file: NPCClasses

file: NPCClasses

status: please proofread

 

[Gilladian]

PROOFREADING done on ClassesII. No changes needed...

 

[Theo R Cwithin]

Formatting question: When I look at the classes files, the tables (such as class feature progressions) are broken down into poorly-formatted lines of text-- basically same sort of thing that a formatted table cut'n'pasted into the post editor here on the forum would look.

Is this the way it's supposed to be in these rtfs, or is my text editor chomping up the files?

I just don't want to accidentally do something that will make these files any uglier than they already are.

 

[macrochelys]

Is this the way it's supposed to be in these rtfs, or is my text editor chomping up the files?

Probably your text editor. This is what they look like for me:

 

[Lord Xtheth]

Formatting question: When I look at the classes files, the tables (such as class feature progressions) are broken down into poorly-formatted lines of text-- basically same sort of thing that a formatted table cut'n'pasted into the post editor here on the forum would look.

Is this the way it's supposed to be in these rtfs, or is my text editor chomping up the files?

I just don't want to accidentally do something that will make these files any uglier than they already are.

I don't suffer his problem, but I have office 07. Mine copies the whole chart as a picture and pastes it in my document. What I've been doing thoug for this is just re-typing the whole thing in excel.

If you don't have excel, a word processor, or anything similar, I highly reccomend open office.
www.openoffice.org
It has everything you need, and it's free.

 

[macrochelys]

file: SpellListI

file: SpellListI

status: proofread and edited

comment: I removed reference to max modifiers based on level that were above the level cap. eg:

Cure Moderate Wounds: Cures 2d8 damage +1/level (max +10).

became

Cure Moderate Wounds: Cures 2d8 damage +1/level.

 

[Theo R Cwithin]

Ok, thanks for the confirmation on the format issues. I've switched to a dusty old version of MS Word, and it looks fine now.

And good catch on the Spell List I maxes, macrochelys, thanks.

 

[Veven1290]

file: SpellListI

status: proofread and edited

comment: I removed reference to max modifiers based on level that were above the level cap. eg:

Cure Moderate Wounds: Cures 2d8 damage +1/level (max +10).

became

Cure Moderate Wounds: Cures 2d8 damage +1/level.

This is just a though, there is probably not that many ways to boost caster level but an E6 sorcerer/wizard/bard with the first level of the wild mage prestige class can get their caster level up to 9. If they took the arcane disciple feat they could get healing spells too. There might be some (probably cheesy) way to get another two caster levels on top of that for a total of 11. In really extreme cases like that it might be prudent to leave the caps in the files.

Again, just a thought though, i haven't looked through my books for E6 relevant stuff so it might not even be an issue, especially considering the Wild Mage is not OGC.

Edit: By the way, I love that you guys are doing this! If my work load thins out a bit on the home front I would love to lend a hand. I'll drop a post if I have any free time.

 

[Gilladian]

File: spells C

Spells C

Status: In progress

 

[Theo R Cwithin]

This is just a though, there is probably not that many ways to boost caster level but an E6 sorcerer/wizard/bard with the first level of the wild mage prestige class can get their caster level up to 9. If they took the arcane disciple feat they could get healing spells too. There might be some (probably cheesy) way to get another two caster levels on top of that for a total of 11. In really extreme cases like that it might be prudent to leave the caps in the files.

[MENTION=86652]macrochelys[/MENTION] , [MENTION=89401]Veven1290[/MENTION] - I think this is a good point. I understand that level caps are built in by design for balance purposes, so it might be safer to keep the existing full SRD's RAW level caps explicitly in place rather than take the effort to E6ify them-- even though a typical E6 game might never actually see such a level cap in play.

Doing so allows game groups that "lean up" and somehow support especially high CLs (via houserules, magic items, etc) to still be covered by RAW; at the same time, high caps has no effect on very strict or "cautious approach" E6 game tables. Additionally, some monsters might have higher CLs for the their SLAs, and therefore need the damage, etc, caps above what typical E6 PCs would need. Lastly, not changing these sorts of things means fewer mods to the SRD-- and therefore less potential for errors/inconsistencies down the line.

So I'm inclined to agree with this: spell damage caps (and really all CL-dependent variable caps, where applicable) should remain as in the full SRD. I'm open to any other thoughts on this, but in the meantime....

Note to those modifying "Spell List" files or "Spell A-Z" files:

CL-dependent level caps (eg, damage caps) should not be changed for the E6 SRD. This is to maintain consistency with the full SRD; to account for monsters with SLAs at at higher CLs; to include gamers that include CL-boosting PrCs, metamagics, items, etc, at the table; etc.

I believe this is the safest way to go that injects the fewest unknowns into RAW, but please let me know if you think otherwise!

I'll drop a post if I have any free time.

Any time! Every little bit is welcome and helpful, now or down the line as things mature a bit.