Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="doghead" data-source="post: 6272720" data-attributes="member: 8243">I have recently been looking around for a more streamlined game that simpler play and plays faster. Ideally I am looking for something with 3rd edition roots to ease transition and maintain compatibility with much of the material I have. The description of 13th Age seems to suggest it was a good candidate. I particularly like the following from Jonathan's essay:  Fast and loose is good.Yeah!An interesting mechanic. As someone who likes to see a in game reason for the mechanics, a little problematic maybe. But I can work with it. I like the intention.Exactly. The Weapons as Qualities thread here is an excellent houserule that makes the wielder more important than the weapon.Already thinking of porting this into my PF game. So, so far so good. I decided to wonder over to the SRD and have a look.I am not so keen on the explosion of HP's. A starting base of 18 for a 1st level character,  Personally, I would have gone the other way with something like Ken Hoods Grim and Gritty system - fewer hit points, but a separation of AC into Defence (avoiding getting hit) and Soak (ability to absorb hits). But the 13th Age system at least provides some counterbalance through mechanisms like DoaM, allowing melee character to wear an opponents hp down even if not carving chunks out of them. I can work with this.Then I wondered over to the character generation. It was all looking pretty interesting until I got to the feats. A forest of small conditional bonuses (as opposed to bonus that always apply, like +1 to hit, or +1 Reflex Save). It was worse when I got to the Ranger, with 1001 ways to get a +1 to critical threat range; the first time you strike, if you roll an odd number, if the opponent is wearing a pointy hat, +2 if wearing a pointy hat and odd socks. OK, I might not be nailing the details, my eyes were glazing over at this point.So, perhaps not what I was looking for. Or am I missing something? Is the total less than the sum of its lots of little parts?thotd</blockquote>

Verification