Search results

She's gonna make it after all.

At the various least, I want the book (which, yes, I believe will still be fantasy Concepts) contain appendix of extra races, but if possible a race-creation guide would be nice. I really like the way a talent system erases the need for LA for most low-LA monsters. As an experiment, I decided...

Short answer: No. Long answer: It depends. There is not a requirement that the system needs to give each race two bonus feats and a bonus talent. It is just how we're doing it. So, each race essentially has ability modifiers, and some racial abilities, as in D&D-- it is just that two of those...

Always crit range 20, damage x2, and no roll to confirm.

As does White Wolf. I don't think it is necessarily right for d20, but thinking about ways to represent the fact that the deadliness of some weapons is based on Accuracy instead of damage, I had a bizarre idea: Be patient, this is just an idea, and it is something of a departure from Core. But...

Maybe I thought it was farther up the tree because in Saga the list talents alphabetically, rather than in the rough order you acquire them. Or maybe it was reading posts like this: (From this thread.)What is Particle_Man talking about exactly? I don't want to steamroll anybody on this being...

Well, if nothing else, I think the question of armor vs. damage thresholds drives home that a Rogue type character should get sneak attack at 1st level, as in D&D, as opposed to the Scoundrel who has to wait several levels.

While I am not yet 100% won over, you raise some very valid points. Part of the problem with all the mechanical variation is that some weapons never get used. Fair enough. I would prefer broad groups. Either way, I want to make it clear that in many ways I support Weapon Groups, for the reasons...

By randomness, do you mean the die rolls for damage? Or do you mean that the stats for weapons seem to have been assigned randomly, as in arbitrarily? I don't understand. Maybe they are not needed-- heck, you could run the game with every weapon doing a d6 and not even use crits-- but what is...

Why? Can I ask what the advantage is to having fewer choices? Streamlining is part of the point of this, but I want to do it in such a way that it increases options for PCs rather than removing them. I feel that a fantasy setting requires a much larger selection of weapons than vibroweapon...

If we could do what Saga does and have weapons do up to 6d6 damage, I might be more in favor of it. As it is, while I do think there is fat to be cut from the SRD weapon list (do we really need a glaive and a guisarme?), I still want a variety of weapons for PCs to use. I have yet to see any...

In an email I just wrote Flynn, I noted that the big lesson we can take from Saga is that, for spells and spell-like abilities, uses per encounter are what matters, not the current D&D paradigm of uses per day/game session. So, to my mind, that is the most important thing we can take from Saga...

The idea of a Force-like magic system has come up, and continues to be suggested-- the Star Wars designers really got it right this time-- but overall this idea is one Flynn and I have rejected. All the ideas seem to involve using a lot of non-algorithmic, non-OGC cognate elements from Saga, and...

I have a Weapon Mastery tree I wrote up for a Postmodern product that could be a starting point. I think we can use some of what Baron Opal's done, but we should be careful about the have talents that increase the multiplier of a critical hit-- since we won't be using the simplified Crit ranges...

I think what Baron Opal has done is pretty cool, but my strong inclination is not to use simplified Saga crits for this. This is one area where what is good for space opera is not good for the tropes of fantasy. In Star Wars, everyone has some kind of blaster or a lightsaber, or maybe a...

What about instead, of an armor bonus replacing your class bonus, gaining an armor bonus to Reflex Defense halves your class bonus? That would keep armor attractive as one goes up in level.

Not an option. For the character concept the GM and I have conceived, Rage makes no sense. We were very happy when we found the variant, and badly want to make it work.

So far it seems like the major fix options are: A) The second attack cannot be made against the same target as the first B) The second attack can only be gained with a full-round action (which, it seems, may be implicit in the existing rules) C) All of the above Any others?

See my above post responding to ainatan, which hopefully answers this. The 1st talent is essentially chosen for you, it is not optional. Specializing in your races aptitudes, however, is. Yeah, I don't like it much, but it's what I could think of at the time. Some of the names are sort of...

We talked about these when we did our talent books for Modern, and the reason why we include talents that provide feats is just for flexibility. Sometimes, it would just be a great help to get a certain feat at 5th instead of 6th. Also, it is at times desirable to offer a means for certain...