D&D General D&D 6e ala Steampunkette: Structural thoughts

[Clint_L]

So... further thoughts.

1) Crits as Maxed Damage Values
When you crit, you max out the damage of your attack, then roll it a second time and add that on top. This ensures that crits are meaningful and strong. No more rolling minimum damage on a critical hit. It also makes sacrificing gear to be a much more important choice, since you can negate some of the damage. I figure NPCs must always take the maxed out damage value, and players must always take the rolled portion of the crit. Just so that even if someone negates a player crit it's still a solid hit, and if a player negates a crit it's much more valuable.

This is a pretty common house rule. I use it in my home games, where everyone rolls actual dice, but it doesn't work as well with my beginner campaign at school, where everyone is on DDB.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

So I've talked a few times about what I'd want in a 6e game. Often enough that at 3am this morning I was plagued with thoughts of game design and couldn't sleep. So here's some of the stuff I'm looking at. Putting them in quotes to be easier to isolate and parse.

1) 10th Level Classes

Eh, fine. I’d go with either 9 or 12, myself.

2) Make Magic Users More Magical and Less Casty

A lot of this I dislike or would have to test, but I am 10000000% behind making utility magic more ritual oriented. Preferably by making anything that isn’t a flashy immediate effect into a skill use, whether it uses a spell slot or not.
I don’t like how restricted the spell list would be judging by your description here, and would rather see magic pushed into much broader design with risks and costs and such, based on skills and the use of components and focus objects and ritual implements, with ritual magic having requirements for advanced stuff where you need eg a base, a catalyst, a power source, a focus, and a circle or container, and then each spell school is a skill with description of what types of effects it can do.

3) Day 1 Psionics

Absolutely.

4) Warlords

Different name? Please? If not I will live but I have never hated a D&D class Name half as much as I hate that one.

5) Combat Maneuvers

Definitely not. This is one thing that turns me off Level Up. Combat Skills, sure. Broader use of maneuvers than 5e, definitely. But bloody well let me play without using maneuvers when I want to.
Let there be classes and subclasses that don’t rely on them.

Now if you want all classes to have tiers spell slots or maneuver dice, fine. Just give basic uses of both that aren’t more complex than “add the die to damage of an attack”, “add the die to your defense”, “add the spell die to your concentration check” etc.

Or, make every martial work like the monk with focus and 2-4 Focus Features for each class, and have optional Techniques you can learn that cost focus.

6) Spellcasting Mechanics Variety

Yeah sure. Make magic weird.

7) "Extra Attack" at 3rd with Caveats


8) Crit Protection as a Core Mechanic

I’d steal from Daggerheart. Having a track for every piece of equipment sounds tiring and not fun.

9) Exploration and Social Mechanics as Core

We can dream

10) Sensible HP Structures

I’d go further and have HP scale so little that a lucky goblin can wound a high level fighter.

What do you think about a system like this? Interesting package of alternate rules, overengineered nonsense, or nothingburger?

A lot of it isn’t to my preference, for sure. Also it’s hard to address since all the meat is in quotes and thus doesn’t get carried over when I quote you…

But I’d definitely be down to playtest such a game and give it a shot.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

In any setting where XP is granted by killing goblins or accomplishing goals, every Wizard School will have a headmaster who passes out daggers and staves and says "RIGHT! If you want to learn magic we need to go kill some goblins."

"But Master, shouldn't we study magic?"

"HAH! No. You'll never learn magic that way! You need to quest to learn spells!"

If only there were some way to make leveling up a Downtime activity, rather than the explicit and exclusive result of killing people and monsters or finishing quests...

In my game, Crossroads, you level incrementally as you play, gaining Experience and spending it during downtime on Improvements. When you gain Experience you also Mark Advancement, and when you have filled your Advancement widget, you can level next time you Full Rest (basically long rest in a safe place, for a full day or more).

I really like it.

Also you can learn Techniques in play from study, invention, tutelage, etc, and they are designed to give you more options not more direct power. Spells are a type of Technique. (Kinda, it’s more like if Rook’s Abjuration were a technique that grants a choice of a couple Abjuration cantrips, mage armor, and some other juicier Abjuration spells on a theme of being a gish, and the higher level stuff relies on you having the spell slots to use them)

 

[Horwath]

So... further thoughts.

1) Crits as Maxed Damage Values
When you crit, you max out the damage of your attack, then roll it a second time and add that on top. This ensures that crits are meaningful and strong. No more rolling minimum damage on a critical hit. It also makes sacrificing gear to be a much more important choice, since you can negate some of the damage. I figure NPCs must always take the maxed out damage value, and players must always take the rolled portion of the crit. Just so that even if someone negates a player crit it's still a solid hit, and if a player negates a crit it's much more valuable.

to reduce amount of rolling of a crit(yes, that might not be that fun) and what is maxed and what is not, I will tinker with the option that crit is 150% of max die value.

so crit with great axe/sword is 18 damage plus any modifier,
every dice of sneak attack is 9 damage on a crit.

d4 > 6 crit damage
d6 > 9 crit damage
d8 > 12 crit damage
d10 > 15 crit damage
d12 > 18 crit damage

option: rolling a "nat 1" on a saving throw triggers crit damage on any damaging portion of effect.
so rolling "1" vs fireball will damage you for 72 damage.

 

[Steampunkette]

This is a pretty common house rule. I use it in my home games, where everyone rolls actual dice, but it doesn't work as well with my beginner campaign at school, where everyone is on DDB.

It's definitely up there, yeah. So is the 3 Up 3 Down. I'm just saying make it core.

As far as DDB goes, yeah, that'd suck. But this would be a 6th edition, and therefore need it's own autoroller website! (Or not, if you wanna just check the rolled value and add in the missing damage if there is any)

Eh, fine. I’d go with either 9 or 12, myself.

I suppose 12 would be fine, I just don't wanna go lower than 10.

A lot of this I dislike or would have to test, but I am 10000000% behind making utility magic more ritual oriented. Preferably by making anything that isn’t a flashy immediate effect into a skill use, whether it uses a spell slot or not.
I don’t like how restricted the spell list would be judging by your description here, and would rather see magic pushed into much broader design with risks and costs and such, based on skills and the use of components and focus objects and ritual implements, with ritual magic having requirements for advanced stuff where you need eg a base, a catalyst, a power source, a focus, and a circle or container, and then each spell school is a skill with description of what types of effects it can do.

Can definitely understand the trepidation. I also -really- like the idea of using Skill Checks instead of Attack Rolls to clean things up a little, now that you mention it.

And having the 'ritual-like' castings rely on skill checks, as well, really makes the "Avoid Obstacle" spells into just kinda collapsing various skill checks into a single proficiency, which I -really- like as a concept, if nothing else.

I particularly like it for Clerics and Wizards. Both of whom could be automatically proficient in the Liturgical and Mystical languages as the basis of their ritual-like casting...

Could split the difference and have some specific stuff be bundled into class-tracks (Illusion, Necromancy, Etc) which unlock new uses of the bundle when you level up to represent 'spells' of that school, with rituals and skill checks to see if you can accomplish the goal, and have that be separate from the more esoteric and weird magic that gets squished down into class abilities.

Different name? Please? If not I will live but I have never hated a D&D class Name half as much as I hate that one.

I used the 4e name for convenience's sake for a D&D specific subforum. Personally I prefer "Marshal" or "Captain".

Definitely not. This is one thing that turns me off Level Up. Combat Skills, sure. Broader use of maneuvers than 5e, definitely. But bloody well let me play without using maneuvers when I want to.
Let there be classes and subclasses that don’t rely on them.

Now if you want all classes to have tiers spell slots or maneuver dice, fine. Just give basic uses of both that aren’t more complex than “add the die to damage of an attack”, “add the die to your defense”, “add the spell die to your concentration check” etc.

Or, make every martial work like the monk with focus and 2-4 Focus Features for each class, and have optional Techniques you can learn that cost focus.

Yeah, my idea was closer to the monk with around 4-5 different maneuvers over the course of leveling based on which martial tradition you picked, with classes being limited to specific packages except for Fighters who can pick any package.

Plus the ability to retrain packages as a downtime activity. With 10 levels there's just not enough room for the A5e martial traditions.

I’d steal from Daggerheart. Having a track for every piece of equipment sounds tiring and not fun.

On the one hand, sure. On the other: How many crits is a player character going to be taking between long rests? Probably one or two outside of the most unluckiest players out there. (Murph, I'm looking at you.)

We can dream

Even better: We can -design-.

I’d go further and have HP scale so little that a lucky goblin can wound a high level fighter.

I get that, though it tends to result in knife-edge levels of panic-play which isn't fun for a great number of more casual folks.

A lot of it isn’t to my preference, for sure. Also it’s hard to address since all the meat is in quotes and thus doesn’t get carried over when I quote you…

But I’d definitely be down to playtest such a game and give it a shot.

Cool!

In my game, Crossroads, you level incrementally as you play, gaining Experience and spending it during downtime on Improvements. When you gain Experience you also Mark Advancement, and when you have filled your Advancement widget, you can level next time you Full Rest (basically long rest in a safe place, for a full day or more).

I really like it.

Also you can learn Techniques in play from study, invention, tutelage, etc, and they are designed to give you more options not more direct power. Spells are a type of Technique. (Kinda, it’s more like if Rook’s Abjuration were a technique that grants a choice of a couple Abjuration cantrips, mage armor, and some other juicier Abjuration spells on a theme of being a gish, and the higher level stuff relies on you having the spell slots to use them)

So a lot like Daggerheart's progression system but not the -same-. I can dig it. Probably not what I'd do for a theoretical 6e, to stick with sacred cows like XP and Class Levels, but it is neat.

Hmmm... I wonder if I could break out aspects of levels and do a DDO sort of "Partial Leveling" structure where you have lower XP thresholds to gain specific aspects of your class's next level before you get there...

But then it just feels like you have a level 20 game and half your levels are "Gain HP" or "Proficiency Bonus Increases" or something similar.

to reduce amount of rolling of a crit(yes, that might not be that fun) and what is maxed and what is not, I will tinker with the option that crit is 150% of max die value.

so crit with great axe/sword is 18 damage plus any modifier,
every dice of sneak attack is 9 damage on a crit.

d4 > 6 crit damage
d6 > 9 crit damage
d8 > 12 crit damage
d10 > 15 crit damage
d12 > 18 crit damage

option: rolling a "nat 1" on a saving throw triggers crit damage on any damaging portion of effect.
so rolling "1" vs fireball will damage you for 72 damage.

Honestly, years ago, when I was hanging around with an MMO developer he hit me with a massively important question: Why roll Damage if you're already rolling to Attack?

You're doubling the amount of time waiting for the dice to stop moving. It makes more sense if all weapons deal set damage and you're only rolling to see how well you did on the attack itself. -Or- assume every attack hits and then only roll damage. In either case play is streamlined.

So having weapons do 3-8 damage, plus modifiers, and Sneak Attack or Hex adds +4 damage per die where Smite adds +5 per die makes way more sense. And then crits just become "Double your Damage Value" which you determined in advance through set numbers.

Rapier: 5 damage
Dex: 3 damage
Magic: 1 damage
Sneak Attack: 12 damage

You've already got the 9 in your Rapier slot, just add 12 to it for a total of 21 when you sneak attack. On a crit it's 18 or 42 if it's a Sneak Attack.

MASSIVELY EASIER.

But. Folks -love- rolling a mess of d6s for their Fireballs so...

... huh. That could be an additional line of separation between Martial and Magical characters. And Martial and Magical weaponry if you only rolled any added damage. So a Flametongue longsword would be 5+Str+Magic+2d6 Fire.

... interesting thought, that. Fighty types get to roll lots of d20s. Magic types roll way fewer attacks but roll their damage?

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I suppose 12 would be fine, I just don't wanna go lower than 10.

That’s fair. I like 12.

Maybe spells past 5th level could be ritual-esque “big magic” that lives outside class and often requires some of your life force, or burning a magical component that could otherwise be used for something else, and/or additional casters?

Can definitely understand the trepidation. I also -really- like the idea of using Skill Checks instead of Attack Rolls to clean things up a little, now that you mention it.

And having the 'ritual-like' castings rely on skill checks, as well, really makes the "Avoid Obstacle" spells into just kinda collapsing various skill checks into a single proficiency, which I -really- like as a concept, if nothing else.

Nice! Those are two changes that I really want to see in D&D , while a lot of the other stuff I mention I can totally see as outside the wheelhouse of D&D .

I particularly like it for Clerics and Wizards. Both of whom could be automatically proficient in the Liturgical and Mystical languages as the basis of their ritual-like casting...

Tying secret languages to magic is such an S-Tier move I hate that no one does it.

Could split the difference and have some specific stuff be bundled into class-tracks (Illusion, Necromancy, Etc) which unlock new uses of the bundle when you level up to represent 'spells' of that school, with rituals and skill checks to see if you can accomplish the goal, and have that be separate from the more esoteric and weird magic that gets squished down into class abilities.

Absolutely.

I used the 4e name for convenience's sake for a D&D specific subforum. Personally I prefer "Marshal" or "Captain".

Captain is my favorite, but yeah marshal is good too.

Yeah, my idea was closer to the monk with around 4-5 different maneuvers over the course of leveling based on which martial tradition you picked, with classes being limited to specific packages except for Fighters who can pick any package.

Plus the ability to retrain packages as a downtime activity. With 10 levels there's just not enough room for the A5e martial traditions.

Ah okay, when I was rewriting the monk I did something like that. I never finished it though. Definitely feels cromulent to me.

On the one hand, sure. On the other: How many crits is a player character going to be taking between long rests? Probably one or two outside of the most unluckiest players out there. (Murph, I'm looking at you.)

Yeah true, but still I’d personally make it armor only, and give it one track, and maybe note that if you mark 3 armor damage, you have to choose whether your shield or helmet becomes useless, reducing your AC or losing the benefit of your helmet?

Even better: We can -design-.

I get that, though it tends to result in knife-edge levels of panic-play which isn't fun for a great number of more casual folks.

True, gotta find the balance.

Cool!

So a lot like Daggerheart's progression system but not the -same-. I can dig it. Probably not what I'd do for a theoretical 6e, to stick with sacred cows like XP and Class Levels, but it is neat.

Thanks, it works great for my game but yeah it’s out there for D&D .

Hmmm... I wonder if I could break out aspects of levels and do a DDO sort of "Partial Leveling" structure where you have lower XP thresholds to gain specific aspects of your class's next level before you get there...

But then it just feels like you have a level 20 game and half your levels are "Gain HP" or "Proficiency Bonus Increases" or something similar.

Yeah the DDO mini-levels are cool but require some thought. I’d specifically make the really boring stuff like HP and proficiency bonus only go up with actual level. The mini-levels would then be where you choose new class features from short lists of features and/or gain new subclass stuff.

Honestly, years ago, when I was hanging around with an MMO developer he hit me with a massively important question: Why roll Damage if you're already rolling to Attack?

You're doubling the amount of time waiting for the dice to stop moving. It makes more sense if all weapons deal set damage and you're only rolling to see how well you did on the attack itself. -Or- assume every attack hits and then only roll damage. In either case play is streamlined.

So having weapons do 3-8 damage, plus modifiers, and Sneak Attack or Hex adds +4 damage per die where Smite adds +5 per die makes way more sense. And then crits just become "Double your Damage Value" which you determined in advance through set numbers.

Rapier: 5 damage
Dex: 3 damage
Magic: 1 damage
Sneak Attack: 12 damage

You've already got the 9 in your Rapier slot, just add 12 to it for a total of 21 when you sneak attack. On a crit it's 18 or 42 if it's a Sneak Attack.

MASSIVELY EASIER.

But. Folks -love- rolling a mess of d6s for their Fireballs so...

... huh. That could be an additional line of separation between Martial and Magical characters. And Martial and Magical weaponry if you only rolled any added damage. So a Flametongue longsword would be 5+Str+Magic+2d6 Fire.

... interesting thought, that. Fighty types get to roll lots of d20s. Magic types roll way fewer attacks but roll their damage?

I like that.

 

[Horwath]

Honestly, years ago, when I was hanging around with an MMO developer he hit me with a massively important question: Why roll Damage if you're already rolling to Attack?

You're doubling the amount of time waiting for the dice to stop moving. It makes more sense if all weapons deal set damage and you're only rolling to see how well you did on the attack itself. -Or- assume every attack hits and then only roll damage. In either case play is streamlined.

So having weapons do 3-8 damage, plus modifiers, and Sneak Attack or Hex adds +4 damage per die where Smite adds +5 per die makes way more sense. And then crits just become "Double your Damage Value" which you determined in advance through set numbers.

Rapier: 5 damage
Dex: 3 damage
Magic: 1 damage
Sneak Attack: 12 damage

You've already got the 9 in your Rapier slot, just add 12 to it for a total of 21 when you sneak attack. On a crit it's 18 or 42 if it's a Sneak Attack.

MASSIVELY EASIER.

But. Folks -love- rolling a mess of d6s for their Fireballs so...

... huh. That could be an additional line of separation between Martial and Magical characters. And Martial and Magical weaponry if you only rolled any added damage. So a Flametongue longsword would be 5+Str+Magic+2d6 Fire.

... interesting thought, that. Fighty types get to roll lots of d20s. Magic types roll way fewer attacks but roll their damage?

or if you intend to roll only attack, make it scalable of attack roll vs Armor.

have fixed damage,
unarmed 1, dagger 3, greatsword 8, or what not.
sneak attack +2 per rogue level, as you said, smite +5 per current d8.

then when you hit you deal said damage, but;

beat AC by 5, +50% damage
beat AC by 10, +100% damage
beat AC by 15, +150% damage
beat AC by 20, +200% damage(max)
option: miss by 5 or less deal only 50% damage, no on hit riders.

if people really like "nat 20" add that "nat 20" deal additional +50% damage
then Graze can be when you miss by 10 or less...

so your weapon deals 12 damage with modifiers;

hit AC: 12 damage
beat by 5: 18 damage
beat by 10: 24 damage
beat by 15: 30 damage
beat by 20: 36 damage
"graze"; 6 damage
"nat 20": +6 damage

I would keep spell damage rolled, magic is more chaotic.

 

[Distracted DM]

Re: mini levels, I did make an incremental advance rule for my dark sun game inspired by 13th Age's. 13A did it per session, I did it with XP, but I thought the idea was neat:

Incremental Advances:
When you've gained 25% of the experience necessary to reach the your character's next level, you may gain an incremental advance. This represents the knowledge you've gleaned in your adventures suddenly coming to light, whether taking a breather or in the midst of danger; unlike level-ups which require a Long Rest to complete, you can gain an incremental advance in-between sessions without rest. For multiclass characters, once you have taken an advance in a class you must take further advances in that class until you've leveled it up.

ASI/Feat - If your next level would grant an ASI/Feat, you can choose this.
Hit Die - Your character gains your next levels' Hit Die, increasing their max hp though not their current hp; this hit die is available for healing from short rests etc!
Feature - Your character gains a feature from your next level.
Spell Known - Your character learns a spell that they would learn next level, and can cast it once if they do not yet have the appropriate spell slot for it.
Spell Slots - Your character gains the new spell slots that they'd have at their next level.

 

[Steampunkette]

or if you intend to roll only attack, make it scalable of attack roll vs Armor.

have fixed damage,
unarmed 1, dagger 3, greatsword 8, or what not.
sneak attack +2 per rogue level, as you said, smite +5 per current d8.

then when you hit you deal said damage, but;

beat AC by 5, +50% damage
beat AC by 10, +100% damage
beat AC by 15, +150% damage
beat AC by 20, +200% damage(max)
option: miss by 5 or less deal only 50% damage, no on hit riders.

if people really like "nat 20" add that "nat 20" deal additional +50% damage
then Graze can be when you miss by 10 or less...

so your weapon deals 12 damage with modifiers;

hit AC: 12 damage
beat by 5: 18 damage
beat by 10: 24 damage
beat by 15: 30 damage
beat by 20: 36 damage
"graze"; 6 damage
"nat 20": +6 damage

I would keep spell damage rolled, magic is more chaotic.

I totally get where you're coming from, here, but I'd be inclined to make it a fairly flat progression. Maybe if you miss by 2 or less you do half your weapon damage (no sneak or smite or magic bonuses). And if you hit by 10 or more you deal an extra 5 damage. Something simple to deal with. Alternatively, take attribute mods off the damage value, altogether, and it's +1 damage per point you beat the target's AC by.

The other big benefit of this would be that enemy attack entries would be like:

Makes 2 attacks.
Longsword: Melee, +5, 8 damage
Dagger: Melee to 20ft +3, 6 damage.

 

[Horwath]

Alternatively, take attribute mods off the damage value, altogether, and it's +1 damage per point you beat the target's AC by.

this could get conversations, why do I only get +1 with my greatsword and that one gets +1 for the dagger?

The other big benefit of this would be that enemy attack entries would be like:

Makes 2 attacks.
Longsword: Melee, +5, 8 damage
Dagger: Melee to 20ft +3, 6 damage.

this is simpler and faster, yes.