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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="osarusan" data-source="post: 7107710" data-attributes="member: 13950">I really like these ideas. You're right in that it starts sounding like a reworking of the whole game system though. I'm not sure if that defeats the purpose of making it "for 5e" though... If it relies on too many new rules, the effects start to ripple throughout the whole game, and things like monsters and environments have to get reworked too. The challenge lies in finding that middle ground, where it feels like an optional module for the system that doesn't change the overall game mechanics.I like this idea as well. The one caveat is that it opens up a bag of worms that could bog down combat as the player fishes for the right reaction. Maybe the best way to approach this would be to make those different forms of resistance tied to different spell seeds. For example, within the "charm humanoid" and "illusion humanoid" lists you could select various effects along the lines of "mind maze," "charm," "psychic domination," "puppetmaster," and things like that. Each of these spells could function as a mirror of the existing grappling system, but tied to different ability scores. For example:mind maze - you construct a mental maze that traps the victim's psyche. You make an attack roll using intelligence (insight), and they make a defense roll using wisdom (insight). As long as you maintain concentration, they have to keep making this save until they get free.charm - this could work the way charm works now, with a wis save or view the target as a friend (or view a friend as a foe, perhaps?)psychic domination - you try to mentally convince the character that something is true or false. You make an charisma (deception) or (persuasion) check, and they have to make a wisdom (insight) check or believe it.puppet master - you make an Charisma check vs their Str (athletics) check. If you win, you can control their movement that round; if they win, they can use an action to break free, or act normally. You can retry the check each round you maintain concentration.There's a lot of possibility by just recycling/reframing the current grappling rules. You can even eliminate the need for some saving throws, or just modify it so that if they fail their save, you can continue to act upon the spell each round. That way it feels more like a lingering magical effect instead of a one-off attack. You get more drama in the combat, and since it uses the existing grapple rules with just different stats substituted, there's no new mechanic to learn, making it very easy to slip into the system.I may be alone in the world on this, but I actually like 5e's grappling system. It removes the attack rolls and boils it down to 1 opposed check. Yes, its very vague and doesn't allow for specific moves, but so is the entire combat system. It's a vast improvement on earlier editions' grappling rules which were always overly complex and very slow to resolve in-game. Mechanically, what the above translates into is that you would just make a few different spell effects that mirror existing rules but use different opposed checks to accomplish the same things; but the MP cost of those effects might be different depending on what opposed stats you use, since not all stats are going to be fairly balanced.I definitely like the idea of swapping out INT for DEX on your AC, even attack rolls (having a telepathic bond with your foe that lets you can predict where he will move). One thing I think you want to avoid is allowing too much on-the-fly substitution of which saves/stats to use. There's a risk not only of slowing the system down, but abusing the rules. If you force enemies to save using intelligence or charisma all the time, it becomes too easy to quickly dispatch creatures by forcing them to use the uncommon saves or only relying on your strongest stats, allowing for extreme min-maxing. I would suggest forcing these into their own secrets, or making them have specific MP costs, which forces the players to treat them as a trade off for a different effect. And I would define the parameters of each spell ability specifically instead of giving players free reign to select whatever ability scores they want.</blockquote>

Verification