3PP Release New release: Single-Class Synergy, Volume 1: The Core Four

[Timespike]

Sure - that makes sense.

So this leaves me as a third-party creator with a bit of a problem: by system convention, both the "multiclass helper" and "transform yourself" feat chains use a common name. I don't want to sow additional confusion, but some already exists here; as you said, the proverbial cat is already out of the bag.

These feats are intended to synergize with the mechanics of a specific class and each other, so I think I can still justify the use of "synergy," even if I did get the technical terminology definition wrong in that I had associated "chains of feats" automatically equals "synergy feats" in my earlier post.

If this style of feat proves to be popular enough to do more of them for other classes, I may try to come up with some other name for the collected volume with more of them, much like I did in the transition from Thematic Toolkit to Multiclasser's Manual.

 

[Timespike]

Also, Morrus: you're keeping notes of these house rules for the day when Level Up gets a second edition, right?

Because I can totally get on board with the idea of feats at first level. I enjoyed that about 3e/3.5e/PF1e.

 

[Grant at Broken Synapse]

Your new book is great!

Yall, if Peter doesn't make more of these because yall won't let the title thing drop, I'm going to be so bummed out. And let me use my best parent voice: "not mad, just disappointed"

 

[Corinnguard]

That, like heritage gifts which got kinda morphed into 'subraces' these days (a concept we were trying to actually remove, not emphasize), wasn't the original vision.

The only heritage in the Adventurer's Guide where this appears to have happened is the Planetouched heritage IMO. The other heritages look okay to me.

 

[Morrus]

The only heritage in the Adventurer's Guide where this appears to have happened is the Planetouched heritage IMO. The other heritages look okay to me.

Yeah, it's more a trend since then. Though I'd argue that the halfling options are more subraces than gifts.

 

[Morrus]

Also, Morrus: you're keeping notes of these house rules for the day when Level Up gets a second edition, right?

Because I can totally get on board with the idea of feats at first level. I enjoyed that about 3e/3.5e/PF1e.

I think we can do that a lot sooner than any hypothetical 2nd edition, either via errata or via an article/expansion to the rules.

In my games it's just choose a heritage gift or a feat (which is also why heritage gifts as subraces doesn't work--a heritage gift is how you're different to your sibling, not a different biology altogether; individual talents, not evolutionary branches, and you don't want to ban yourself from entire evolutionary branches because you took a feat) and I haven't run into any issues, but the sample size is very, very small! I don't know how balanced it would be rolled out more broadly.

So an elf who chooses the Newblood feat instead of, say, the Mystic Rapport gift, starts play as an elven vampire! And through the feat chain can become more vampirey as they increase in levels--it basically works as a template at the point of character creation. Allowing a feat instead of a gift at first level is so simple and elegant, but opens up character creation tenfold.

 

[Timespike]

I think we can do that a lot sooner than any hypothetical 2nd edition, either via errata or via an article/expansion to the rules.

In my games it's just choose a heritage gift or a feat (which is also why heritage gifts as subraces doesn't work--a heritage gift is how you're different to your sibling, not a different biology altogether) and I haven't run into any issues, but the sample size is very, very small! I don't know how balanced it would be rolled out more broadly.

Sounds like something for the community to try playtesting, maybe?

Also, if I may be so bold: A5E is a mature enough system where an "Unearthed Arcana" style product with a bunch of variant rules might be something the community enjoyed; again harkening back to ye olde days of 3e, I sure had fun with the 3e version. (Of course, you could also argue those of us in the 3pp community are essentially filling that space as well.)

 

[Morrus]

Sounds like something for the community to try playtesting, maybe?

Also, if I may be so bold: A5E is a mature enough system where an "Unearthed Arcana" style product with a bunch of variant rules might be something the community enjoyed; again harkening back to ye olde days of 3e, I sure had fun with the 3e version. (Of course, you could also argue those of us in the 3pp community are essentially filling that space as well.)

I think that's kind of the space that GPG holds right now (at least for ENP's content).

Ironically, A5E was originally intended as a UA type product. It wasn't going to be a standalone game. It was going to be a single hardcover UA-style book (still called 'Advanced Something Or Other'). But things happened, and the scope grew.

 

[Corinnguard]

Ironically, A5E was originally intended as a UA type product. It wasn't going to be a standalone game. It was going to be a single hardcover UA-style book (still called 'Advanced Something Or Other'). But things happened, and the scope grew.

Good thing it did expand.

 

[noodohs]

Sure - that makes sense.

So this leaves me as a third-party creator with a bit of a problem: by system convention, both the "multiclass helper" and "transform yourself" feat chains use a common name. I don't want to sow additional confusion, but some already exists here; as you said, the proverbial cat is already out of the bag.

These feats are intended to synergize with the mechanics of a specific class and each other, so I think I can still justify the use of "synergy," even if I did get the technical terminology definition wrong in that I had associated "chains of feats" automatically equals "synergy feats" in my earlier post.

If this style of feat proves to be popular enough to do more of them for other classes, I may try to come up with some other name for the collected volume with more of them, much like I did in the transition from Thematic Toolkit to Multiclasser's Manual.

My own two cents here, I'm certainly of the mind that the title doesn't really make sense to me, but I also understand there's no changing it now. And honestly, it has some intrigue to it anyway. I know that when I read it, my first thought was "What even is that?" That drove me to click on it, which is good! The problem is that the blurb/summary didn't really help me understand what it actually meant, but this thread has. Just including something that makes it clear these are feat chains would probably be good enough.

Also, it has been said already but that cover is amazing!