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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="kenjura" data-source="post: 814063" data-attributes="member: 11321">Re: Re: A new d20 productI definately know what you're referring to.  This system started classless, and I decided to redesign it for classes to match d20 more.  3e is supposed to be part archetype and part custom, that's why they always harp about feats and skills.  So, half the time (odd levels) you get class-specific, flavored abilities (spellcasting, lay on hands, favored enemy, etcs), and the other half is customizability.  In my playtest experience, feats are usually used to complement a class, but can also provide alternate routes.  They fill in the gaps between classes, ideally.I decided to tackle the problem head-on.  There are over 100 feats in the system currently, and the majority are combat-related (just like regular d&d, heh).  These feats fit into 8 pages currently; very few of them have a description more than a couple sentences.  Example random feat:Canny Defense [Extraordinary]You are conscious of your opponent’s moves in combat and deftly dodge them.Prerequisites:  INT 15+, BAB 1+Benefit:  You gain a +2 dodge bonus to AC.Series: Each additional feat increases the dodge bonus by +2, the INT requirement by 2, and the base attack bonus requirement by 5.As far as solidity, most feats are based on real life, to a reasonable extent.  Here's one of the oddest feats I can find at a glance.Double StrikeYou strike twice in a single move.Prerequisites:  Two-weapon Fighting, BAB 5Benefit:  When taking a single attack (including attacks of opportunity), you may strike with both weapons.  Roll a single attack roll at a -4 penalty; if it hits, roll damage as if you hit with both weapons.I think your idea of feats and mine agrees greatly.  They should be as universal as possible.  I suppose I should've known that the majority of universal feats would be combat-related, but then, most feat are either combat- or magic-related in d&d anyway.I intend to address that separately, even going so far as to write up pre-processed archetypal characters for each class, with one or two choices of feat or special ability at each level, to simplify things.I designed the system to be as friendly as possible.  In many cases in playtest, material ranging from feats, spells, and prestige classes were merged seamlessly into the system.  As the DM of one game, I was able to use many d&d and d20 monsters without modifying their stats, except for a house rule in which all monsters received fortification (this was an epic game, so it needed it).  The CR's of monsters may be a bit inaccurate in conversion, especially since the monsters won't be taking advantage of any new feats or abilities.  However, if you run them as written, assuming any changes (such as the application of Combat Action to allow for multiple attacks per round) necessary, they play just fine.Prestige classes are a different animal.  When I first designed the system, I designed it so it wouldn't need them.  Wizards had "arcana", clerics had plenty of new domains with wonky powers, and the idea was that almost any reasonable prestige class ability could be converted directly into a class' special ability by a moderately competent DM.This is because I'm not fond of prestige classes.  I think a prestige class should only exist when the character concept simply cannot be expressed in class and feat selection.  I greatly dislike the majority of prestige classes; they are too commonplace, often underflavored, and nobody can decide if they should more or less powerful than classes (how about equal?).However, 3.5e is looking to revise prestige classes.  Hopefully, their ideas and mine will be far closer, and, if that is the case, I'll adapt my system to match.  I refuse to make prestige classes that are flavorless, to easy to get into, and either too weak or too strong.  But I have no problem with allowing interesting prestige classes, where classes and feats simply cannot provideEvery PC Cleric in my system started out hating it fiercely, and then they liked it. =)I've personally made 36 domains, each with one spell per spell level (including 0th).  There are less than 5 duplicate spells on all the lists.  There are three different healing domains.  Here's an example of a domain.Battle Domain            Lesser Domain Power: +1 morale bonus to hit/dmg, plus you gain 1 martial weapon prof per Int bonusGreater Domain Power: +2 morale bonus to hit/dmg (+3 at 12th-level, +4 at 16th-level) 0   Know Weapon: Gain proficiency for a short time. 1   Magic Weapon: As 3e 2   Battlemind: Gain +1 competence bonus hit/dmg, +1 dodge bonus to ac, +2d6 temp hit points, +1 competence bonus to Reflex saves 3   Greater Magic Weapon: As 3.5e 4   Magic Vestments: As 3e 5   Battletide: Gain +2 competence bonus hit/dmg, +3 dodge bonus to ac, +6d6 temp hit points, +2 competence bonus to Reflex and Fortitude saves 6   Blessed Weapon: As Greater Magic Weapon, plus you get an additional +1/4 levels of special abilities. 7   Blessed Armor: As Magic Vestments, plus you gain an additional +1/3 levels of special abilities. 8   Battle Mastery:  Gain a +4 competence bonus to hit/dmg, +6 dodge to AC, +12d6 temp hp, +4 competence to Ref and Fort saves 9   Mighty Arms:  1 target/4 levels gains +5 weapon and +5 armor as Greater Magic Weapon/Magic VestmentsA cleric with this domain can really kick some butt as a fighting cleric.  However, with only two domains to choose from at 1st-level (plus Good, Chaos, Evil, or Law for free), and the high demand for healing spells (which must be taken as a domain), it's a tough choice with all the other domains to choose from.Well anyway, that should address some concerns.  The website <a href="http://www.talarie.com/serious/index.html" target="_blank">http://www.talarie.com/serious/index.html</a> contains more information (or at least it will).</blockquote>

Verification