Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
Playing the Game
Talking the Talk
Recruiting to playtest Steel Dragon's World of Orea RPG: D&D 1 & 2e base +
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="steeldragons" data-source="post: 6162179" data-attributes="member: 92511"><p>Ok. Well, first, I want to say to you all (and anyone who's reading along and/or might be interested in coming in), THANK YOU! This is part of the kind of stuff I'm hoping to expose and work through by playtesting this whole shibang. So this is all good stuff as far as I'm concerned...though, of course, don't want to spend all of our time speaking about game mechanics vs. actual playing and, hopefully, having fun!</p><p></p><p>Second, just to get it out of the way, [MENTION=48762]Leif[/MENTION], Weapon Specialization is a Theme available to Warrior clases (and those who can select it from their list). The fighter doesn't receive any "specialization" per say, thuogh the Combat Mastery bonus could certainly be viewed that way and at higher levels effectively acts that way. i.e. In the system, as is, using a weapon you are<em> not </em>proficient with carries a To Hit penalty of -4 on the roll. Now, even at 1st level, fighter PCs have their +1 CM to offset that. By the time a fighter has +4 CM (8th level?), they effectively use any/all weapons they can get their hands on without penalty, proficient or not (and only fighters get Combat Mastery, btw. Paladins/rangers/barbarians do not. CM is the fighter's "thing.") To me, that's not really over powered or imbalanced. A fighter of 8th level out to be able to pick up a hammer they are not proficient with, for example, and have as easy a chance to strike as any other character who is proficient with it. I think it speaks to the "feel" of the Fighter as "the best there is at what he does." And those "feel" concerns have always been a primary concern before maths/percentages/numbers "balance."</p><p></p><p>But there you go. If you want to be specialized, then you need to take the theme, multi or single classed.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>There's also 1) the slower acquisiton of Skill Points (thus fewer or less fast increasing of existing skills).</p><p>2) There is no inherent "To Hit" bonus per se beyond level. So the multiclass, rising in levels slower than others, actually (in theory/my mind) receives less/slower increase to their To Hit than the single.</p><p>3) I realize you guys haven't seen the XP charts. WoO takes a step back on that as well...with certain classes leveling faster than others. Fighters and Thieves, I believe, are basically the same (as purely non-magical classes). But it is also a sloping increase in levels. So you need 1000 to get to 2nd level. You need +1,000 more to get to 3rd. Then, at 4th and 5th, you need additional +1200 (I think it is, each), then +1500 to reach 6th and 7th. So increasing levels will [should] begin to fall behind, more noticeably than 1/2e. At least that's what I'm thinking/was hoping for.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Good question. And short answer, turning 2nd gets you nothing other than another d10 + Con bonus of HP. At third, I believe is when you gain another Skill Point, another +1 to your Skill Mastery, another roll + Con. for HP, your Sneak Attack damage does up to +10 damage...I don't think you get another Weapon slot until 4th.</p><p></p><p>Though turning 2/2 in the multiclass Ftr/Thf will also get you nothing but HP and take twice as many XP.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Thanky. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Ok. I see what you're saying with all of this. And yeah, makes sense.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Well, other than if you don't want to wait to increase your levels, no. I suppose you're right.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Apologies. But appreciated. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't actually know. But see above re: XP needed to increase level.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I might do that. You don't like the multiclasses choose 5 or 6 features at start of play from each class' options? I thought that soudned kinda fair...<img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/erm.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":erm:" title="Erm :erm:" data-shortname=":erm:" /> </p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p>Yes. Ok. Yeah that was a bit of hyperbole. And to be fair I have never played 3e. I only know what I've gleaned from reading what's available online. But I just do not like that a 4th level character could conceivably be a Fighter/Thief/Mage/Cleric. By 4th level you can do everything? you cover all of the archetypes of the game? Why do you need a party?! Or you want a barbarian who can sling arcane spells? Or a Druid/Assassin/Spellthief? Or you take 5 levels in Mage, not because you have this cool idea for a mage character, but just to take that uber-powered Prestige Class for your 6th...once you've got that, screw 'em, you're gonna be a ranger for some dual-wielding action...like the other ranger PC has had this whole time. Bastard.</p><p></p><p>I guess what I'm trying to say is to my eyes, 3e kinda took optimization and powergaming and made them their own thing...even the FOCUS of the game beyond "being the best you can be with what you are"....you change the very nature of what you are at every level! Yes, there have always been/will always be people looking to make their characters as powerful as possible/optimizing/powergaming. That's just the nature of humans, as you noted. In 1e you always wanted to get as much/higher powered magic stuff as possible. Since the game didn't increase your "power level" any other way. In 2e, as I recall, everyone was diving for the latest splat book to find the "coolest" kit that would give you all kindsa extra bells and whistles that a "normal/plain" thief/fighter/whatever wouldn't have. Dragon was always putting out this/that class, race, magic item, etc... that might or might not fit into a given game/campaign/world and/or might make things way outta balance/control.</p><p></p><p>But 3e seems to have taken them [optimizational thinking/powergaming] out of the box and given them an entire shrine all their own. It turned D&D into a game of "Character <em>Builds</em>" not character concepts or, as i draw the distinction, "Character <em>Creations</em>." What can I do to make my numbers the highest they can be...and who cares what the PC concept is, cuz "taking a level in this <em>gets me</em> that!" It became about stats and, well, "power" [hence "power-gaming"], not about imagination or creativity. </p><p></p><p>It's not really something I like/want to encourage...and as you note below, it goes to the flavor of the game...not the numbers or maths.</p><p></p><p>I know it did a lot to "balance" things across the board...but the cost was it lost, it seems to me quite a bit, of what D&D was.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>But the game is built around the rolling of dice. No matter how much codification there is to "balance" characters, the randomness of the dice can not be negated...which it seems the developers of 3e+ have been constantly trying to do.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Well, that says something, since I don't see/understand not choosing the best mechanical option as "giving yourself a -1." You're not giving yourself anything. you're being what your PC is. Your PC doesn't have it any "worse" because some other PC gets a +1 to this or that...and you have +1 to that and this which they don't have. By this thinking, picking a fighter instead of a mage makes you automatically behind because you can't cast spells. I've nerfed my fighter because he's not a magic-user? No, I'm playing a fighter. There's no reason she would WANT/know how to cast spells. That's not the character.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Absolutely. And that's the kind of thinking and playing, I said in the last post, there's nothing I can do about. Those people will do that, regardless of what I put in the system. In the case of multiclassing, I could just take it out and not have MC at all. That's the only way to stop that. But I think that detracts more than it protects...if that makes sense.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>And I very much appreciate it. All good food for thought.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>No. I haven't either. But I certainly don't want BF feeling his character has been "slighted" because he's single classed either.</p><p></p><p>The easiest solution, I think, is to just have Hygarr be a Fighter...with Weapon Specialization, as you said. With later themes, you might be able to take something which would give him a little roguey stuff (as a single-classed Fighter I think those options are limited to Assassin and Bounty Hunter, off the top of my head)...HOWEVER, you are free to use your Skill Points to acquire things like lockpicking, trap-finding/removing, stealth, sleight of hand, etc...and increase them along the way. So you wouldn't have a Rogue-theme, but could certainly choose and power up [almost any] rogue skills. </p><p></p><p>However, I will pose this...and only if there is no objection will we proceed with it...but a part of me, now, is very interested to see just how this would all pan out in actual play. I kinda want to see if the Fighter-Thief and a straight Thief (or straight Fighter) are somehow disproportionately endowed...,beyond the extra chunk of features at level 1. But if that's going to be "less fun" for either of you or spend the whole game thinking "well if I had been able to. multiclass, then I'd have had a +2 for blah blah blah..." every time you roll a die, then nevermind. I certainly don't want that.</p><p></p><p>...Eh...Scratch that. Perhaps my initial/gut thought/ruling for all single classes was the right in the first place. John stays a Thief, Leif's Dwarf can be a single Fighter, and Lwaxy's Gnome Illusionist.</p><p></p><p>As I said it's up to you guys, but I don't want to spend a ton more time with deciding this.</p><p></p><p>Leif, if you're good with a single Fighter (with some thiefy skills if you like), then let's just do that. BF, we copacetic?</p><p></p><p>...Ok, so I guess it's not up to you guys. hahaha. Apologies for the streaming consciousness of the passed few paragraphs.<img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/worried.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":-S" title="Uhm :-S" data-shortname=":-S" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="steeldragons, post: 6162179, member: 92511"] Ok. Well, first, I want to say to you all (and anyone who's reading along and/or might be interested in coming in), THANK YOU! This is part of the kind of stuff I'm hoping to expose and work through by playtesting this whole shibang. So this is all good stuff as far as I'm concerned...though, of course, don't want to spend all of our time speaking about game mechanics vs. actual playing and, hopefully, having fun! Second, just to get it out of the way, [MENTION=48762]Leif[/MENTION], Weapon Specialization is a Theme available to Warrior clases (and those who can select it from their list). The fighter doesn't receive any "specialization" per say, thuogh the Combat Mastery bonus could certainly be viewed that way and at higher levels effectively acts that way. i.e. In the system, as is, using a weapon you are[I] not [/I]proficient with carries a To Hit penalty of -4 on the roll. Now, even at 1st level, fighter PCs have their +1 CM to offset that. By the time a fighter has +4 CM (8th level?), they effectively use any/all weapons they can get their hands on without penalty, proficient or not (and only fighters get Combat Mastery, btw. Paladins/rangers/barbarians do not. CM is the fighter's "thing.") To me, that's not really over powered or imbalanced. A fighter of 8th level out to be able to pick up a hammer they are not proficient with, for example, and have as easy a chance to strike as any other character who is proficient with it. I think it speaks to the "feel" of the Fighter as "the best there is at what he does." And those "feel" concerns have always been a primary concern before maths/percentages/numbers "balance." But there you go. If you want to be specialized, then you need to take the theme, multi or single classed. There's also 1) the slower acquisiton of Skill Points (thus fewer or less fast increasing of existing skills). 2) There is no inherent "To Hit" bonus per se beyond level. So the multiclass, rising in levels slower than others, actually (in theory/my mind) receives less/slower increase to their To Hit than the single. 3) I realize you guys haven't seen the XP charts. WoO takes a step back on that as well...with certain classes leveling faster than others. Fighters and Thieves, I believe, are basically the same (as purely non-magical classes). But it is also a sloping increase in levels. So you need 1000 to get to 2nd level. You need +1,000 more to get to 3rd. Then, at 4th and 5th, you need additional +1200 (I think it is, each), then +1500 to reach 6th and 7th. So increasing levels will [should] begin to fall behind, more noticeably than 1/2e. At least that's what I'm thinking/was hoping for. Good question. And short answer, turning 2nd gets you nothing other than another d10 + Con bonus of HP. At third, I believe is when you gain another Skill Point, another +1 to your Skill Mastery, another roll + Con. for HP, your Sneak Attack damage does up to +10 damage...I don't think you get another Weapon slot until 4th. Though turning 2/2 in the multiclass Ftr/Thf will also get you nothing but HP and take twice as many XP. Thanky. :) Ok. I see what you're saying with all of this. And yeah, makes sense. Well, other than if you don't want to wait to increase your levels, no. I suppose you're right. Apologies. But appreciated. :) I don't actually know. But see above re: XP needed to increase level. I might do that. You don't like the multiclasses choose 5 or 6 features at start of play from each class' options? I thought that soudned kinda fair...:erm: Yes. Ok. Yeah that was a bit of hyperbole. And to be fair I have never played 3e. I only know what I've gleaned from reading what's available online. But I just do not like that a 4th level character could conceivably be a Fighter/Thief/Mage/Cleric. By 4th level you can do everything? you cover all of the archetypes of the game? Why do you need a party?! Or you want a barbarian who can sling arcane spells? Or a Druid/Assassin/Spellthief? Or you take 5 levels in Mage, not because you have this cool idea for a mage character, but just to take that uber-powered Prestige Class for your 6th...once you've got that, screw 'em, you're gonna be a ranger for some dual-wielding action...like the other ranger PC has had this whole time. Bastard. I guess what I'm trying to say is to my eyes, 3e kinda took optimization and powergaming and made them their own thing...even the FOCUS of the game beyond "being the best you can be with what you are"....you change the very nature of what you are at every level! Yes, there have always been/will always be people looking to make their characters as powerful as possible/optimizing/powergaming. That's just the nature of humans, as you noted. In 1e you always wanted to get as much/higher powered magic stuff as possible. Since the game didn't increase your "power level" any other way. In 2e, as I recall, everyone was diving for the latest splat book to find the "coolest" kit that would give you all kindsa extra bells and whistles that a "normal/plain" thief/fighter/whatever wouldn't have. Dragon was always putting out this/that class, race, magic item, etc... that might or might not fit into a given game/campaign/world and/or might make things way outta balance/control. But 3e seems to have taken them [optimizational thinking/powergaming] out of the box and given them an entire shrine all their own. It turned D&D into a game of "Character [I]Builds[/I]" not character concepts or, as i draw the distinction, "Character [I]Creations[/I]." What can I do to make my numbers the highest they can be...and who cares what the PC concept is, cuz "taking a level in this [I]gets me[/I] that!" It became about stats and, well, "power" [hence "power-gaming"], not about imagination or creativity. It's not really something I like/want to encourage...and as you note below, it goes to the flavor of the game...not the numbers or maths. I know it did a lot to "balance" things across the board...but the cost was it lost, it seems to me quite a bit, of what D&D was. But the game is built around the rolling of dice. No matter how much codification there is to "balance" characters, the randomness of the dice can not be negated...which it seems the developers of 3e+ have been constantly trying to do. Well, that says something, since I don't see/understand not choosing the best mechanical option as "giving yourself a -1." You're not giving yourself anything. you're being what your PC is. Your PC doesn't have it any "worse" because some other PC gets a +1 to this or that...and you have +1 to that and this which they don't have. By this thinking, picking a fighter instead of a mage makes you automatically behind because you can't cast spells. I've nerfed my fighter because he's not a magic-user? No, I'm playing a fighter. There's no reason she would WANT/know how to cast spells. That's not the character. Absolutely. And that's the kind of thinking and playing, I said in the last post, there's nothing I can do about. Those people will do that, regardless of what I put in the system. In the case of multiclassing, I could just take it out and not have MC at all. That's the only way to stop that. But I think that detracts more than it protects...if that makes sense. And I very much appreciate it. All good food for thought. No. I haven't either. But I certainly don't want BF feeling his character has been "slighted" because he's single classed either. The easiest solution, I think, is to just have Hygarr be a Fighter...with Weapon Specialization, as you said. With later themes, you might be able to take something which would give him a little roguey stuff (as a single-classed Fighter I think those options are limited to Assassin and Bounty Hunter, off the top of my head)...HOWEVER, you are free to use your Skill Points to acquire things like lockpicking, trap-finding/removing, stealth, sleight of hand, etc...and increase them along the way. So you wouldn't have a Rogue-theme, but could certainly choose and power up [almost any] rogue skills. However, I will pose this...and only if there is no objection will we proceed with it...but a part of me, now, is very interested to see just how this would all pan out in actual play. I kinda want to see if the Fighter-Thief and a straight Thief (or straight Fighter) are somehow disproportionately endowed...,beyond the extra chunk of features at level 1. But if that's going to be "less fun" for either of you or spend the whole game thinking "well if I had been able to. multiclass, then I'd have had a +2 for blah blah blah..." every time you roll a die, then nevermind. I certainly don't want that. ...Eh...Scratch that. Perhaps my initial/gut thought/ruling for all single classes was the right in the first place. John stays a Thief, Leif's Dwarf can be a single Fighter, and Lwaxy's Gnome Illusionist. As I said it's up to you guys, but I don't want to spend a ton more time with deciding this. Leif, if you're good with a single Fighter (with some thiefy skills if you like), then let's just do that. BF, we copacetic? ...Ok, so I guess it's not up to you guys. hahaha. Apologies for the streaming consciousness of the passed few paragraphs.:-S [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
Playing the Game
Talking the Talk
Recruiting to playtest Steel Dragon's World of Orea RPG: D&D 1 & 2e base +
Top