Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
A magic pool - ideas wanted
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 5637575" data-attributes="member: 4937"><p>Sorry, bit autistic and all. Don't mean to be confrontational except in the sense that I'd like to provoke thinking about the problem in a different way. </p><p></p><p>I program for a living. You are asking for a system (code) without actually describing what you want (specs). What I was showing was that different specs would produce radically different products while all meeting the overly loose requirements of, "Create a system for arbitrating the outcome of a magic pool"</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't usually formally track loot, but one way to look at this is that they are taking magic items out of the pool and hense increasing their wealth level. So, if the benefits are largely positive, you have to count this against their expected wealth by level. If you do that, then the system is as balanced (or unbalanced) as D&D's wealth by level system and CR/EL system itself. Nothing else is needed in theory. I mean, "Can use overland flight 1/day" is more or less giving the character an item that can do that for practically all purposes. </p><p></p><p>Now, if your system is truly Gygaxian, then it basically balances itself in the sense at least that it balances reward with risk. And yours seems to offer lots of risk with the rewards, so as long as your are fine with some players getting screwed and others getting rewarded, then you are balanced.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>You are running all of these as if they are quirks, but they are all special cases of 'looks like a freak'. In my game, I usually run 'freak' disadvantages as either a penalty on diplomacy checks with first acquaintances (once people get to know you, they stop judging you by your looks), or by asserting that everyone reacts to you one step more negatively (ei, normally indifferent characters are unfriendly, and normally unfriendly ones are hostile). I tend to prefer the latter, though in some cases they stack.</p><p></p><p>I don't know the mechanics of most of the citations you make, but I'd be inclined to consider 'looks like a freak' a default drawback to many of them, and I'd be especially tempted to apply the drawback as an additional drawback whenever 2 or more physical mutations were picked up.</p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p>Shouldn't this be tied to character alignment? I'd probably run the above as, "If you are Chaotic, gain smite Law, otherwise suffer 3d8 anarchic damage." or something along those lines.</p><p></p><p>Also, if you are going the Gygaxian route, I find the idea of 'player's choice' which you use in some cases to be odd. In practice, that's probably a bad idea, in that negatives don't in fact balance with positives in those cases. Boosting your skill in something you do all the time is very difficult to balance against a negative in a skill you never use and rarely if ever would have to use because some skillful person will be nearby to do it for you.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I would consider that overly harsh. I would only apply such costs to being able to <em>choose</em> from the table. So, maybe one entry is, "Lose 1500 XP. Player gets to choose one benefit."</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 5637575, member: 4937"] Sorry, bit autistic and all. Don't mean to be confrontational except in the sense that I'd like to provoke thinking about the problem in a different way. I program for a living. You are asking for a system (code) without actually describing what you want (specs). What I was showing was that different specs would produce radically different products while all meeting the overly loose requirements of, "Create a system for arbitrating the outcome of a magic pool" I don't usually formally track loot, but one way to look at this is that they are taking magic items out of the pool and hense increasing their wealth level. So, if the benefits are largely positive, you have to count this against their expected wealth by level. If you do that, then the system is as balanced (or unbalanced) as D&D's wealth by level system and CR/EL system itself. Nothing else is needed in theory. I mean, "Can use overland flight 1/day" is more or less giving the character an item that can do that for practically all purposes. Now, if your system is truly Gygaxian, then it basically balances itself in the sense at least that it balances reward with risk. And yours seems to offer lots of risk with the rewards, so as long as your are fine with some players getting screwed and others getting rewarded, then you are balanced. You are running all of these as if they are quirks, but they are all special cases of 'looks like a freak'. In my game, I usually run 'freak' disadvantages as either a penalty on diplomacy checks with first acquaintances (once people get to know you, they stop judging you by your looks), or by asserting that everyone reacts to you one step more negatively (ei, normally indifferent characters are unfriendly, and normally unfriendly ones are hostile). I tend to prefer the latter, though in some cases they stack. I don't know the mechanics of most of the citations you make, but I'd be inclined to consider 'looks like a freak' a default drawback to many of them, and I'd be especially tempted to apply the drawback as an additional drawback whenever 2 or more physical mutations were picked up. Shouldn't this be tied to character alignment? I'd probably run the above as, "If you are Chaotic, gain smite Law, otherwise suffer 3d8 anarchic damage." or something along those lines. Also, if you are going the Gygaxian route, I find the idea of 'player's choice' which you use in some cases to be odd. In practice, that's probably a bad idea, in that negatives don't in fact balance with positives in those cases. Boosting your skill in something you do all the time is very difficult to balance against a negative in a skill you never use and rarely if ever would have to use because some skillful person will be nearby to do it for you. I would consider that overly harsh. I would only apply such costs to being able to [I]choose[/I] from the table. So, maybe one entry is, "Lose 1500 XP. Player gets to choose one benefit." [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
A magic pool - ideas wanted
Top