All Fours: the Rule of Fours? the Game of Fours?

[Hassassin]

Thanks "Hass" (Do you mind if I call you Hass? )!

Hass works fine.

Which one do people like best?

Method 1. Roll 4d6. Drop the lowest. Player arranges as desired. Scores of 3-18 with bonuses from 15 and up. Most familiar for most player, I would think.

Method 2. Roll 4d6. Keep them all. Player arranges as desired. Scores from 4-24 with bonuses from...let's say, 20 and up.

Method 3: Roll 4d4. Keep them all. Player arranges as desired. Scores from 4 to 16 with bonuses from...12, I guess. 4-7 is considered "below average", 8-11 is average and 12-16 is "above average"/receives some game relevant bonus/es.

First, remember that dropping the number of abilities makes extreme individual ability scores less likely, but extreme overall results more likely.

Example: (How do you get one of those hiding spoiler thingies?)

			Lets assume for the moment method 1. Let's also not re-roll any poor results. With six abilities you would only 7% of the time get all abilities below 14 (3-13), the chance of that with four abilities rises to 17%. OTOH, chance of rolling all 12 or above rises from 6% to 14%. Similarly, with six abilities the chance of having highest ability 18, 17, 16 or 15 is 9%, 21%, 27% and 23%, respectively. With four abilities these drop to 6%, 15%, 22% and 22%.

This is something to keep in mind, because of these two issues:

1. Having a key ability score of N+ is less likely that in 6-ability D&D (matters for ability requirements for skills/feats/stuff).
2. There will be more variation between abilities of PCs (likelier someone will have a significantly weaker/stronger character than others).

That's why I would not choose method 3, which would make both these issues even more significant, since it has a wider distribution and a lower average.

Method 2 would raise the average, "correcting" the first. However, it too had a wider distribution so the second is even more significant.

Therefore, I'd choose method 1 or another method of ability score generation, like point buy or predefined array (16/13/12/8?).

 

[Hassassin]

If you could give me a 4th type of weapon damage you might even sell me on changing the weapons categories as they make a lot of sense for me. I prefer just assigning the basic damage...telling a beginner "You hit with your mace. Roll d8." vs. "You hit with your mace. That's d8 because it is medium-sized...and add another +1 because you're hitting a guy in plate mail with a bludgeoning weapon." I mean, is it true...yeah, I suppose it is...but why does that all need to be outlined/separated out into separate categories for X-Y-Z to play the game?

Maybe either ranged or reach could be a fourth "type" of weapons, but really, light/1-h/2-h/ranged already makes four categories.

Instead of having the type of damage confer bonuses depending on the opponent, it could just be a quick way to refer to a different threat range/critical modifier:

• Slashing weapons often open bleeding wounds: 18-20/x2 critical.
• Piercing weapons can punch through even small cracks in armor and can also puncture organs: 19-20/x3 critical.
• Bludgeoning weapons cause devastating injuries, shattering bones when they connect perfectly: 20/x4 critical.

Probably unnecessarily complicated, just an idea.

 

[steeldragons]

Just a few notes on magic, I'd been thinking of so far...specifically magic-user spells.

This basically goes back to the old breakdown, just thrown into a 4x4 block (and limiting it somewhat)

Read Magic is going to be a Skill, automatically given for MUs, no Skill slots needed. Basically, this is not a spell anymore. It is the basic ability/skill learned by years of apprenticeship and study, that you can Read Magic (magic, essentially becomes a language). For those spells with which a MU is unfamiliar, higher level than they can cast, a Skill check is basically in order.

Every MU has a base 80% chance of being able to read any magic scroll or spell. The MU rolls their Intelligence (however we end up categorizing that Ability) or lower with a modifier of -20% for each spell level above the caster's highest spell level.

So, for example, a 3rd level MU comes across a scroll that contains a 3rd level spell. The MU's top castable spell level is 2nd. So 80%-20%, the mage has a 60% chance of being able to read the spell.

That is not to say she can CAST it! But she can find out what it is/does and will be able to learn it when she is capable of casting 4th level spells (far far away at 7th level). She can always try to cast it off the scroll...with whatever the system/chances/dangers for casting spells one doesn't know there will be or is in your game/edition of preference.

I always liked cantrips. I like what the d20 SRD did with better than they were originally presented in Unearthed Arcana...and have been using those for a long time.

To get the MU on their feet...I would say a MU begins play with all cantrips/0 level spells at their disposal (there will only be 4, after all .

Then each level of spell will be broken down by "ye olde Offensive/Defensive/Utility" method.

Keep in mind, at this beginner stage, all MUs are "general/universal" magic-users. There are no specialists in the game yet, so breaking things up by magic type/school isn't really necessary and, I feel, would simply be confusing.

The player rolls a d4 and adds their Int. modifier (if any). These are the number of spells the MU begins with in their spellbook.

A DM may decide whether they wish to roll for a MUs starting spells or let the player roll them himself.

Roll a d6. Results of 1-2, roll on the Offensive list. Results 3-4, roll on the Defensive list. Results of 5-6, roll on the Utility list.

For the sake of player fun and fairness to the seriously weak beginning MUs, a DM should make sure that a player has at least ONE offensive spell in their starting book.

0 Level Spells
Detect Magic
Produce Flame
Open/Close
Light

1st Level Offensive
Burning/Chilling Hands (basically the Burning hands spell but you can make it fire or frost/ice/cold damage)
Charm Person
Magic Missile
Sleep

1st Level Defensive
Alarm
Hold Portal
Protection from Evil
Shield

1st Level Utility
Comprehend Languages
Floating Disc
Identify
Spider Climb

2nd level Offensive
Darkness (20' rad)
Flaming/Icing Sphere
Stinking Cloud
Web

2nd level Defensive
Invisibility
Mirror Image
Misdirection
Wizard/Arcane Lock

2nd level Utility
Detect Invisible
Detect Thoughts (a.k.a. ESP)
Knock
Levitate

 

[Ed_Laprade]

Method 1. Roll 4d6. Drop the lowest. Player arranges as desired. Scores of 3-18 with bonuses from 15 and up. Most familiar for most player, I would think.

Method 3: Roll 4d4. Keep them all. Player arranges as desired. Scores from 4 to 16 with bonuses from...12, I guess. 4-7 is considered "below average", 8-11 is average and 12-16 is "above average"/receives some game relevant bonus/es.

Of course, for those looking for that "random/old skool" feel, a DM/group is perfectly welcome to use the "roll dice, use in order" alternative for generating Ability scores.

OH! And I'm figuring/thinking of the basic d20 mechanic when it comes to resolution stuff...Take your relevant Ability score + any modifiers there might be and roll under.

Method 1 or 3, which do you guys like better.

If you're sticking with a D20, I'd say method 1, with the 'old skool' option. But I've never cared for how swingy the D20 is, and would perfer using a D12. In that case, method 3 would work better, I think. Of course, many would howl in outrage at tossing the D20 (pun intended), but you can't have everything.

 

[Ed_Laprade]

The player rolls a d4 and adds their Int. modifier (if any). These are the number of spells the MU begins with in their spellbook.

A DM may decide whether they wish to roll for a MUs starting spells or let the player roll them himself.

Roll a d6. Results of 1-2, roll on the Offensive list. Results 3-4, roll on the Defensive list. Results of 5-6, roll on the Utility list.

For the sake of player fun and fairness to the seriously weak beginning MUs, a DM should make sure that a player has at least ONE offensive spell in their starting book.

Oh, definitely let the player roll! That way there can't be any animosity aimed at the GM for 'rolling badly for my character!' (I've never seen it happen for real, but I've heard of it happening in other games.) I would even go so far as to say that any starting MU who gets 3+ known spells be allowed the option to pick one Defensive, one Offensive and one Utility spell. (Being the generously benevolent sort that I am, I'd let them pick whatever they wanted, but a lot of people prefer to roll dem bones!)

 

[steeldragons]

If you're sticking with a D20, I'd say method 1, with the 'old skool' option. But I've never cared for how swingy the D20 is, and would perfer using a D12. In that case, method 3 would work better, I think. Of course, many would howl in outrage at tossing the D20 (pun intended),

yeah, I'm inclined to think/say the 20-sided die is a sacred cow I am unwilling to sacrifice.

but you can't have everything.

You can't?! Why NOT?! lol. (and nice job on the intended pun

Oh, definitely let the player roll! That way there can't be any animosity aimed at the GM for 'rolling badly for my character!' (I've never seen it happen for real, but I've heard of it happening in other games.) I would even go so far as to say that any starting MU who gets 3+ known spells be allowed the option to pick one Defensive, one Offensive and one Utility spell. (Being the generously benevolent sort that I am, I'd let them pick whatever they wanted, but a lot of people prefer to roll dem bones!)

Yeah, ya know, in looking at/thinking about it...in my own games, I'm more likely to let the player just choose, let alone roll themselves.

And there's some wiggle room for multiple options here.

Given our running "theme/style", forget rolling for number of spells to start...ALL MUs begin play with 4 spells in their spellbook.

Option 1: For those Players who like to do lotsa rolling/let the dice fall where they may: roll d4, 4 times: Result 1: Utility, 2: Defense, 3: Offense, 4: Players Choice. On rolls 1-3, then roll a d4 to see what spell on the list you receive. Again, the DM should make allowances (for the particularly unlucky player) to swap out one result so the player may begin with at least ONE Offensive spell...if the player so desires.

Option 2: Just let the player PICK 1 spell from each category (Utility, Defense, Offense). Then to randomly generate the 4th spell, the player rolls d6: 1 or 4: another Utility spell, 2 or 5: Defense, 3 or 6: Offense. Then pick or roll d4 to determine the final spell.

Option two offers the best of both worlds, player choice and getting to roll some dice.

It should also be noted that I (as I do and have in my games for quite some time) allow Int. modifiers by applied to number of spells cast-able per day.

So a 1st level MU does not have 1 1stlvl spell and they're done.

A MU 1 would have a beginning base of 2 cantrips/1 1stlvl spell.

Int. modifiers (assuming a 3-18 ability score spread, since that's what I've always had): Int. 15: +2 cantrips/day, 16: +1 1st level spell, 17: +1 2nd level spell, 18: +1 1st AND +1 2nd OR +1 3rd level (player's choice when studying/memorizing for the day).

Obviously (or maybe not so obvious, as I've had to correct players in the past), the bonus spells are only applicable once the MU can cast that level of spell. I have had the occasional MU PC with high Int. attempt to start play at 1st level with their: 4 cantrips/2 first/1 second and1 third. My but they do get grouchy when I say "Uhhhh, nuh-no." hahaha.

--SD

 

[steeldragons]

So, it seems, on the Ability front we have 2 votes for "keep it the original 6 abilities"...using the 4d6, drop one, arrange (or in order, depending on the DM).

I don't mind this, it certainly makes things easy for people/players who have played before. But it kinda flies in the face of "All Fours" that the most basic framework of the character gets 6 attributes instead of 4...

Would it be "easier", more palatable, for people to accept 4 Abilities by keeping the original terms (no reason we have to reword everything, right?): Strength, Dexterity, Intelligence, Presence (still combining Wis. and Cha. so the cleric still gets their own main attribute)?

Bonuses (assuming an 18 max Ability score)
Strength/Body (Str.): 15: +1 to hit, +1 HP (since Con. gets lumped in with Str.), +1 to Fort. Defense; 16: +1 to hit, +1 damage, +2 HP, +2 to Fort. Defense; 17: +2 to hit, +1 damage, +3 HP, +3 to Fort. Defense; 18: +2 to hit, +2 damage, +4 HP, +4 to Fort. Defense.

Dexterity/Agility (Dex.): 15: +1 to hit with missile wpns, +1 to AC AND Reflex Defense; 16: +2 to hit w/missiles, +2 AC & Ref. Defense; 17: +3 to hit w/missiles, +3 AC & Ref. Defense; 18: +4 to hit w/missiles, +4 AC & Ref. Defense.

Intelligence/Mind (Int.): 15: +2 0lvl spells/day, +1 Skill point; 16: +1 1stlvl spell/day, +2 Skill points; 17: +1 2ndlvl spell/day, +3 Skill points; 18: +1 1st and +1 2nd OR +1 3rd lvl spells/day (player's choice), +4 Skill points
(Note: the bonus Skill points are applied at beginning of play/character creation not applied every level)

So a MU with 17 Int. will begin play capable of casting 4 0lvl/2 1lvl spells per day. The MU's bonus 2lvl spell will be added when the PC achieves 3rd lvl, when they can cast 2lvl spells.

Presence/Heart (Pre.): 15:+1 1stlvl spell/day, +1 to Will Defense; 16: +1 1stlvl spell/day, +2 to Will Defense; 17: +1 2ndlvl spell/day, +3 to Will Defense; 18: +1 1st and +1 2nd OR +1 3rdlvl spell/day (player's choice), +4 to Will Defense
(Note: bonus spells from high Presence scores are for Clerics only! [at least as far as this stage. They will be applicable to Bards and Druids when these classes are introduced in the next tier])

So a Cle with 17 Presence (Pre.) will be capable of casting 3 1lvl spells per day.

Beginning Defenses (PC levels 1-4)

CLERIC
Fortitude: 8
Reflex: 4
Will: 12

FIGHTER
Fortitude: 12
Reflex: 8
Will: 4

MAGIC-USER
Fortitude: 4
Reflex: 8
Will: 12

THIEF
Fortitude: 8
Reflex: 12
Will: 4

AC, of course is dependent on one's armor +Dex. modifier (if any of those apply). Starting with a base of 2. with a max possible of 18 (without magical assistance).

For armors, I'm thinking:
Leather=base AC of 4
some form of armor better than Leather but less than Chain= base AC 8
Chain=base AC 12
Plate=base AC 16 (and negates Dex. bonuses to AC)

Shield adds +1.

OR (for those who like more math)
Leather= +4 to the AC 2 base (effective AC=6?)
next armor= +8 (effective AC=10)
Chain= +12 (effective AC=14)
Plate= +16 (effective starting AC=18 but still negates Dex. modifiers)

Shiled still adds +1.

So a Fighter in non-magical Plate, with a shield, has an AC of 19.

hmmm...yeah...well, we'd have to make Plate VERY cumbersome/detrimental to movement, negates Dex. bonuses,
Combat
Roll "to hit" on a d20.

You need to roll the target's AC or higher.

A roll of 20 still always hits. A roll of 1 still always misses (since you can still hit a person/creature who is completely unarmored with no Dex. adjustments on a 2).

I dunno...is that all too wonky/complicated.

You'll have to forgive my ignorance. I have absolutely NO idea how the whole 3e "BAB" thing works or its relation to AC or anything like that.

I'm basically just looking at the AD&D/2e THAC0 and flipping it upside down so higher AC is better instead of lower (though I personally never had any issues with THAC0 or trying to get one's AC low).

But am interested in keeping "bonuses" [instead of penalties] and "+ to whatever" instead of some "bonuses" being "+" for some things and "-" for others.) Again, we're trying to keep things "simple" for the new player (and in 4's )

I want to maintain that "rolling HIGH is good" thing for combat. Keep that sense of utter ecstasy and elation when you see that Natural 20 come up on your roll.

I dunno...so, ok. What do we think about the 3-18 spread for Abiltiy scores? Can we "get down with" the 4 Ability model instead of the 6?

And how in the Nine Hells should combat work?! hahaha.

Gooooooood mornnnnnin' ENworld!
--SD

 

[Hassassin]

Would it be "easier", more palatable, for people to accept 4 Abilities by keeping the original terms (no reason we have to reword everything, right?): Strength, Dexterity, Intelligence, Presence (still combining Wis. and Cha. so the cleric still gets their own main attribute)?

I'm definitely for 4 abilities. Even Str/Dex/Int/Cha would work for naming after slight redefinition of their scopes, but Presence also sounds fine. I prefer Dexterity, since there doesn't seem to be a real reason to change it.

Bonuses (assuming an 18 max Ability score)
Strength/Body (Str.): 15: +1 to hit, +1 HP (since Con. gets lumped in with Str.), +1 to Fort. Defense; 16: +1 to hit, +1 damage, +2 HP, +2 to Fort. Defense; 17: +2 to hit, +1 damage, +3 HP, +3 to Fort. Defense; 18: +2 to hit, +2 damage, +4 HP, +4 to Fort. Defense.

<snip>

Intelligence/Mind (Int.): 15: +2 0lvl spells/day, +1 Skill point; 16: +1 1stlvl spell/day, +2 Skill points; 17: +1 2ndlvl spell/day, +3 Skill points; 18: +1 1st and +1 2nd OR +1 3rd lvl spells/day (player's choice), +4 Skill points
(Note: the bonus Skill points are applied at beginning of play/character creation not applied every level)

This seems very complicated. Is there a reason not to use 3e+ like modifiers that apply universally? Either a rule like 3e/4e (ability - 10)/2 or a custom modifier table would be easier to understand and memorize. Although getting something at each ability point instead of every other would be a welcome change...

Starting bonuses at 15 also means (assuming 4d6 drop lowest and no rerolling) that one in three PCs has no bonuses due to any abilities.

Also, how about penalties due to low abilities?

Beginning Defenses (PC levels 1-4)

CLERIC
Fortitude: 8
Reflex: 4
Will: 12

<snip>

AC, of course is dependent on one's armor +Dex. modifier (if any of those apply). Starting with a base of 2. with a max possible of 18 (without magical assistance).

It would be great to unify all the four defenses so that 15 AC and 15 Fort would be "as good". That way a trip or a dragon's breath weapon could simply be an attack roll against Reflexes, and a vampire's dominating gaze an attack against Will.

This is one thing I think 4e improved, but still somehow didn't perfect. For instance, I don't like the nomenclature: "AC defense" vs. "Reflex defense"? They also built in the magic item progression even more tightly than in 3e and inflated the numbers somewhat.

In any case, it would probably be a good idea to figure out a rough level progression for attack rolls and then base the speed of progression for defenses on that.

I dunno...is that all too wonky/complicated.

You'll have to forgive my ignorance. I have absolutely NO idea how the whole 3e "BAB" thing works or its relation to AC or anything like that.

I'm basically just looking at the AD&D/2e THAC0 and flipping it upside down so higher AC is better instead of lower (though I personally never had any issues with THAC0 or trying to get one's AC low).

I think the starting point should be figuring out what sort of bonus on rolls is "good" what "awesome" and so on. And it would be great for players if they knew +10 attack and +10 in whatever else are "equally good" in some sense.

(I.e. I like universal mechanics.)

E.g. in 3e a good attack bonus increases by one each level. A 1st level fighter might have +5 to attack and a 11th level one +15 (ignoring magic, feats etc.). If a fighter should hit another fighter around half the time, then a 1st level fighter should have about 15 AC and an 11th level one about 25.

In practice there's also hit points vs. damage to consider.

I dunno...so, ok. What do we think about the 3-18 spread for Abiltiy scores? Can we "get down with" the 4 Ability model instead of the 6?

And how in the Nine Hells should combat work?! hahaha.

Gooooooood mornnnnnin' ENworld!
--SD

4 abilities, the rest isn't that important.

 

[steeldragons]

I'm definitely for 4 abilities. Even Str/Dex/Int/Cha would work for naming after slight redefinition of their scopes, but Presence also sounds fine. I prefer Dexterity, since there doesn't seem to be a real reason to change it.

Oh, ok. I thought by your response that you were advocating the 6 abilities....cuz of the probabilities/statistics...my bad.

This seems very complicated. Is there a reason not to use 3e+ like modifiers that apply universally? Either a rule like 3e/4e (ability - 10)/2 or a custom modifier table would be easier to understand and memorize. Although getting something at each ability point instead of every other would be a welcome change...

I'm sorry, Hass. This made me laugh.

My ability is "X" and I receive "X bonuses to this or that" that is presented in a simple list of Ability Score tables is "complicated"? Moreso than "Take your ability, subtract 10, divide it by 2" or "a custom modifier table would be easier to understand"...?

I do think, getting something for each ability point makes sense...and is easy. Note how they/you end up with a max modifier of "+4" in any/all cases? All Fours D&D ( or "Fantasy game Throw Down", rather. lol.)!

Starting bonuses at 15 also means (assuming 4d6 drop lowest and no rerolling) that one in three PCs has no bonuses due to any abilities.

Luck o' the draw (dice), my friend. Luck o' the dice.

Nothing says a DM (or player can request), who wants a certain style campaign, can't allow re-rolls to Abilities. I would certainly not put anything in "rules" prohibiting it.

If I were a DM and my player was sorely unhappy with their rolls, I would most likely allow them to re-roll. Or re-roll the main attribute for the class they wanted to play, at least. The game is meant to be fun, after all. If the player is going to be pouty/upset/disappointed with their abilities, then there's no reason to force them to play it.

That said, some RPers LIKE having to play the challenges presented by the dice...plus it opens things up to quests to gain items to improve their "X" or "Y" ability.

The game was never assumed to allow players automatic "good" (bonus level) Abilities! Especially if you went strictly by the original "roll 3d6, in order" method of ability score generation.

Also, how about penalties due to low abilities?

I was thinking about this...and basically would consider anything below 8 "substandard/sub-average"...but at the same time...I don't want to penalize players for the luck of the dice...but it would seem to be a necessary "evil", if you would.

Commoners have 8-10 Strength, 8-10 Intelligence, etc. Adventuers/would-be Heroes are [supposed to be] a cut above.

So yeah, anything below an 8, figure the same things as presented in bonuses with -1 for a score of 7, -2 with a score of 6, up (or "down", rather) to -4 for a score of 4. These PCs (with a -4 penalty to any given score) would really be...detrimental to any party's success (if Role=layed to their abilities...which I would venture to say, "correctly").

I would expect, DMs (and, more importantly, Players!) would need/allow a re-roll for scores this low. You [as an adventurer] are supposed to be "above the average commoner/man" after all.

It would be great to unify all the four defenses so that 15 AC and 15 Fort would be "as good".

I'm not sure I understand...that they could be use different Defenses to roll against the same thing? I don't think I agree with that.

That way a trip or a dragon's breath weapon could simply be an attack roll against Reflexes, and a vampire's dominating gaze an attack against Will.

And why wouldn't that be the case anyway?

I would certainly consider a trip a roll against Reflex (though I def. can't see myself making a PC roll for a "trip"). A roll against Dragon Breath would be a Reflex also. No matter how "smart" or "charismatic" you are, you're either within the area of "exhaled fiery death" or not...or partially in it. A vampire's "dominate gaze" would certainly be a Will roll (as would any "charm" effect.

This is one thing I think 4e improved, but still somehow didn't perfect. For instance, I don't like the nomenclature: "AC defense" vs. "Reflex defense"? They also built in the magic item progression even more tightly than in 3e and inflated the numbers somewhat.

Yeah, that's not happening...not in my games, anyway. The magic item thing, I mean.

You find what you find. You get (or sell) what you get (or sell). No "wish lists"! No "expectation of cool things." If you want an awesome magical "flaming sword of killing things dead and sucking their souls"...then you (or probably your MU) research it....you hunt for it...you find/win it or don't/die trying.

As for the Defenses thing...yeah, I'm not sure what you mean. Again, forgive my complete ignorance in the 3-3.Xe mode of doing things. Never played it.

In any case, it would probably be a good idea to figure out a rough level progression for attack rolls and then base the speed of progression for defenses on that.

Well, yes, each class would have its own progression...possibly with racial modifiers...but generally, things would increase...just guessing/off the top of my head, in increments of 4 every 4 levels.

...or if that seems too extreme an increase of power, as characters progress, how about increments of 2 every 2 levels?...so your score goes up 4 for every 4 levels you have. Means that PCs will be looking forward to that "bump up" at 3rd level in the beginner set...and receive another bump up at 5th (in the "Expert/Second Tier/Champion" rules.

Is that what you mean?

I think the starting point should be figuring out what sort of bonus on rolls is "good" what "awesome" and so on. And it would be great for players if they knew +10 attack and +10 in whatever else are "equally good" in some sense.

+10 (which would probably be couched as +8 or, next bump, +12) would be equally "good" in different things for different things! There is no reason someone who can hit well (+8 to hit/attack) would or should automatically be as effective in other things (+8 to Will, to borrow your vampire dominate example)

The idea is, at least as the perception I am working with, a Cleric (high Will bonus) will never (or only in rare instances) be as effective in combat as a Fighter (high Str./Fort. bonus). And a Fighter (high Fort. bonus) will never be as effective in avoiding charm/domination as a Cleric (high Will bonus).

Each character....each Class has their specialties and advantages. ..requiring the "balance" (and enforcing the trope) of a mixed-class party being the most effective/likely to succeed (Note: NOT "win", but "succeed"!).

Because your MU isn't as good as "diving aside from the incoming dragon breath" as the Thief, doesn't make your PC any "less" valuable a character...not to my mind/kind of game, at least.

You [the MU, let's say] are good at and capable of things the Thief is not...and that goes across the board, Fighters v. MUs, Clerics v. Thieves, Thieves v. Fighters, etc. etc...

(I.e. I like universal mechanics.)

I see that. hahaha...though I'm not entirely sure what that means.

Isn't a set of mechanics that applies across the board to all characters
/classes (some things better for some classes than others and vice versa) still "universal mechanics"?

Everyone is being offered the same bonuses or penalties...based off their ability score. Can a player with a Fighter have/choose to have a high(er) Int.? Or a Cleric with a higher Dex? Sure. Why not?

Seems to me, that's all for player choice and preference of the kind of character they want and how much into RPing they like/want to put into the "average Presence" Cleric or the "high Str" MU (because they want the HP bump and attack bumps for those unfortunate incidences when they are forced into hand-to-hand combat) or whatever.

E.g. in 3e a good attack bonus increases by one each level. A 1st level fighter might have +5 to attack and a 11th level one +15 (ignoring magic, feats etc.). If a fighter should hit another fighter around half the time, then a 1st level fighter should have about 15 AC and an 11th level one about 25.

In practice there's also hit points vs. damage to consider.

[Again, totally ignorant of 3e, but...] Yeah, for HP I was basically considering using the Basic model, automatic full at 1st level (+any Strength/Body modifier).

So, Cleric start with 8 HP +d8/level (possibly with modifiers), Fighters get 10 HP +d10/level (almost certainly with modifiers), MUs get 4 +d4 per level (unlikely to have any Str. modifier), Thieves get 6 +d6/level (possibly with a modifier...if the player was trying to create a "tough/thuggy thief" for example).

I do not understand what you mean by "hit points v. damage to consider." Sorry.

4 abilities, the rest isn't that important.

Well, I would say the way bonuses/penalties are applied, Abilities and Defenses work/contribute and Combat rules are all "important" to a cohesive/enjoyable game.

But thanks for all of the attention and thought on the matter(s). It is all food for thought.
--SD

 

[steeldragons]

No one seems to have any qualms with the magic-user starting spells/spell choice...casting system or allowances...

So, let's talk Clerics.

Clerics need a deity. A god or goddess from which they draw their "holy (or "unholy") power and are granted their spells (prayers, invocations, what have you).

I would make it suggested in the Basic set that any pantheon be adopted for those DMs not interested or knowledgeable in world religions to create their own. Real world (Norse is very popular, as is Egyptian or Greek/Roman) or the 4e pantheon, Greyhawk's of Forgotten Realms'...my own campaign workd/setting of Orea is particularly thorough and evocative, if I do say so. and available here in ENworld...whatever you have access to.

That said, for the "All Fours" game, I figured why not develop a religious system for the game world. All set and ready to use. (Besides the fact that deity creation is one of my favorite elements of world-building and comparative and ancient religions is something of a favored hobby).

So, naturally, in the All Fours game, it seemed a "no-brainer" to break up the gods and goddesses into 4 "teams"....The most obviously, likely, mode of doing this (independent of "alignment-based" gods, "good/neutral/evil", since alignment would be an "optional" element to play)...was to break them up intothe 4 elements.

"The Sky Gods" (Lord and Lady of Air)
Amgur "The Sky Lord": An "All Father" figure/"King of the gods" sort like Odin/Zeus guy. God of the Sky, Lightning/thunder, seen as the bringer/ruler of "Civilization", Light, the Sun. He sees everything that happens in the mortal world (so also a god of knowledge/information). Hailed the world over as the most powerful god. For those using Alignment, Amgur is the Supreme god of Good.

Holy symbol is a billowing stormcloud, often portrayed with lightning bolts coming from it or just a lightning bolt alone.

Anwyr "The Star Maiden": Goddess of Night Sky, the Moon (or "Moons" if you like for your world design), the Stars, astrology/astronomy, who gave navigation to mortals (for ships/seafarers). Anwyr has a "dark side" (when the moon is new) and in this guise/these times, takes on a more sinister/unknown aspect as goddess of Darkness and Magic, "Mistress of the unseen" and prophecy.

Holy symbol is a crescent moon in a circle of 4-pointed (for the 4 elements) stars.

Collectively, they are associated with the "good", beauty, information, inspiration and creativity (the arts), the colors of White and Grey and the season of Winter.

Their clerics are known as "Sylphs" among men, after the supernatural servants of the god and goddess.

"The Earth Gods" (Lord and Lady of Earth)
Bellafryn "The Green Lady": The primary goddess of the element, above her consort. A "Mother Nature" figure, reigning over Nature, green growing things (thus, the Harvest), and prosperity (even in urban areas, the acquisition of monetary wealth as opposed to crops).

Holy symbol is an ivy leaf.

Burgonis "The Antlered One": Bellafryn's mythical consort, lord of animals, the wood, the hunt, and the "wild" aspect of Nature. Burgonis has a "Trickster" element about him, taking on the realms of "luck" (as in needed for hunting), and is thus seen in urban/built-up areas as a deity of gambling/patron of gamblers. He is known to delve into the deep places of the world and so is attributed some sway in the "hard" elements of stone and the mountains, where Bellfryn's "soft" green aspect falters. This lends him some affinity for "secrets" and "dark places" that are often extolled/worshiped by those of less than noble purpose.

Holy symbol is a pair of antlers or deer's head with antlers.

Collectively, the gods of Earth are associated with prosperity (either through Nature or otherwise), physical pursuits (lust moreso than love), day-to-day concerns/trials (like the acquistion of food) as opposed to the "lofty" pursuits of the Sky Gods, the colors of Green and Gold and associated with the season of Summer.

Their clerics are known among men as "Keepers", denoting their devotion to Keeping the Order of the natural/physical world. For those using the optional Alignment rules, they are granted/associated with those of Neutral Alignment but often with a "good" slant.

The Sea Gods (Lord and Lady of Water)
Crashurre "The Lady of Waves": She is, essentially, a female Poseidon. There is a great deal of randomness to her attentions/affections. She can be the calm, gentle sea or the raging tidal waves and hurricanes (Crashurre and Amgur vying for control of the weather). Her domain is the water, the sea, rivers, rain...anywhere there is Water, Crashurre "Is." Thus, she is warranted devotion as a Mistress of Knowledge and Information, though less so than Amgur. She is often associated with the elements of "growth", increasing power (the stream to the river to the sea), and vies for attention with Anwyr as patron of sailors, though let's navigators revere Anwyr without malice. She has a "secret" aspect about her, those things among her "hidden depths" that some prefer to Burgonis, who knows nothing about the sea. In her kinder, gentler aspect, she is the "Giver of Life" and "Keeper of secrets" (whereas Burgonis' secrets can/might be found/learned).

Holy symbol is a cresting wave or multiple waves sometimes portrayed with a fish beneath them.

Clambesh "The Knight of Tides": The Lord of Water is attributed more account as a Warrior...he is forever in combat with the gods of Fire, to protect his Lady, Crashurre. He, also, may be perceived through the raging sea and great storms as he battles the Sky Gods to allow his Lady to control the weather over the sacred waters. He is considered a god of protection, a defender, stability (the regularity of the Tides, reigning in his Lady's chaotic impulses), devotion, and a patron to fishermen.

Holy symbol is a clam shell sometimes portrayed with a spear behind it (at a diagonal angle).

Collectively, the Sea Gods are associated with duality, stability (Clambesh) and/vs. impulsiveness (Crashurre), chaos (Crashurre) vs./and order (Clambesh), capriciousness, those that make their lives in and by water, Emotion instead of intellect (perceived as the purview of the Sky Gods), especially romantic Love (as opposed to the lust of the Earth gods), devotion (to another), the colors Blue and White and the season of Spring.

Their clerics are collectively known as "Undines", harkening to the supernatural/elemental creatures which are said to serve them in their palace deep beneath the sea. They will strive, always, to bring down/defeat/expunge the followers of the gods of Fire.

For those using the optional Alignment rules, the Sea Gods are generally associated with Neutrality, though Clambesh is often viewed as a "Good" and Crashurre as "Good" and/or "Evil" depending on her temperament and interpretation by the particular religious organization.

The Fire Gods (Lord and Lady of the Flames)
Damoter "The Demon Lord": Damoter is not kindly looked upon. He is the bringer of chaos, the Destroyer, domination, god of war and the bringer of pain, a lord of the Underworld (Master of those whose lives he ends), volcanoes (where/when Fire usurps Burgonis' Earth). He is also toted as the greatest warrior among the gods (next to Amgur, of course, though followers of Damoter would disagree and Clambesh strives endlessly to best him) and thus maintains a popular following among/is a patron of soldiers, mercenaries and warriors of all types, and those that make their living by war and arms. He is believe to be the Master of All Evil (particularly by clerics of Amgur, Anwyr, Bellafryn and Clambesh), and the Lord of Demons.

Damoter's holy symbol is a skull within a stylized flame with 6 points (one to burn each of the other gods of the other elements).

Delthainna "the Lady of All that Burns": She is the soot and smoke that covers the truth/reality, brought about by Damoter's flames. She is the goddess of shadow (cast off by the light created by Damoter's Ever-present Fire), corruption, temptation, lies, the mistress of disease and the undead servants which she creates from Damoter's slain enemies. To her is attributed the acquisition of power through others (in her own case, Damoter), rather than the gaining/striving for power, oneself. She was deemed, by Damoter, command over Devils, instead of the Demons Damoter himself prefers. Delthaina is more "appeased" than "worshiped". She has an oracular order devoted to the (keeping more than) telling of "secret knowledge" and thus is awarded some consideration as a goddess of prophecy. Assassins, Necromancers (regardless of their personal alignment) and evil thieves revere her above all others.

Her holy symbol is a stylized flame with only 3 points (presumably for/to burn the 3 other elements).

Collectively, the Fire Gods are attributed the realms of death, power, innovation (creating that which has not yet been, and subsequently using it up!), demons and devils, and those dark impulses from which most humans (and other races) strive to work against the colors Red and Black and the season of Autumn (when the natural world turns red and dies, bonfires are used in the Harvest festivals/holidays and burned to appease the evil that comes with the increasing darkness).

Their clerics are called "Reapers" in the realms of men and are often given a wide berth.

For those using Alignment in their games, the Fire Gods are almost always associated with Evil...if not "Ultimate Evil."

And there you have the gods of the world of All Fours...maybe we chould call it Quartem? lol.
--SD