Amethyst - New campaign setting

[Dias Ex Machina]

Kaladhan -- Technology allows variety based on the fact that anyone can wield them. Technology has "yet" to trounce the wild card that is disruption, but remember that this is not steampunk. Technology also has railguns, hovercraft, gravity bikes, and power armor. You honestly saying you would take +5 plate mail over an Apostle Motor Slave that offers 100+ additional hit points and a 22 strength.

Aus_Snow -- The shipping from Lulu is steep but I do appreciate the packing. The book is wrapped in foam, shrink-wrapped to cardboard, and placed in a larger box. We also dropped the book by 5$ last month to encourage people to get the books over the PDF.

ShadowDenizen -- Thanks for the comments. It should be noted that we have not made a decision towards 4.0. I am surprised at the arguments for and against and how nearly divided the group is about going 4.0 or 3.5. We don't know yet...

Also, I am currently looking for an agent. I will say and hope for nothing more. But the story segments will be removed from the next edition (another reason to get this current version)

 

[Kaladhan]

From a DM point of view, I understand it. From a player point of view, where I have to force my team to have no magic user to insure that my tech mojo works, I don't get it. Plus, if I have an evil DM, he can screw my shining new power armor easily. Perhaps there's something in the rules that I don't get (after all, I didn't read any).

 

[Dias Ex Machina]

Well, I guess you would have to read the book to understand the extent of the variety of technology. We also wrote the book assuming your DM would not be douchebag. We have a section in our DM section where we say the following:

"The DM is allowed, if not encouraged, to play the EDF rules long and loose on the condition it not be abused. Just be aware that the two worlds don’t mix and only when the players are stupid should they be punished by EDF saves. The GM should not be constantly measuring distances from EDF fields to characters. Intentional EDF bursts from spells and EMP weapons should be taken seriously."

Our equipment section is 30 pages and lists a variety of items that replicate certain spell effects and can be used by any techan. You don't need a magic user for your variety of spells when every techan can donate something to that effect.

In addition, techans gain a lot more when in teams. They have group bonuses depending on their classes and their group's affiliation. For example, the Orobas offers the following:

"Orobas operatives receive additional training at 1st level. Whenever an operative strikes a target in combat, all other operatives of Orobas gain a +2 to hit that same target. This applies to both melee and ranged combat. This is not cumulative."

Players make techan characters that work together, that form a group. Characters are not singular...

They are part of a team...

 

[Voadam]

Is this designed to be balanced with 3.5 core or a slightly different baseline (like Pathfinder or Iron Heroes bumping PC class powers for various reasons)?

I'm more interested in reading new settings for fun and inspiration but actually mixing and matching mechanical stuff for direct or modified use in my existing 3.5 games.

 

[Ulric]

Besides, one thing everyone has been saying is that the setting defines a game, not its rules.

+1

Because lots of us are going to mine a book for idea anyway and use whatever system we like regardless of what's in the book...if the setting stuff is good enough and there is enough of it in the book.

 

[Dias Ex Machina]

Well, thats a lot of good advice to take.

If we go OGL instead of 4.0, we will be making some drastic changes to 3.5 rules, well more than the modifications we did to the 3.5 D20 STL version.

They will match the feel more of what we want because we could play with the rules to fit our needs instead of modifying the setting to mesh with their rules.

Some staff members have been discussing sacrifices we will need to make to the setting to squeeze it into 4.0. Some of you have said that making such sacrifices to the setting's integrity is exactly what you don't want. There is also the argument that if we are able to modify the rules in 4.0 GSL the way that Midnight played with the 3.5 ruleset, would people bother? Would they buy a 4.0 core book and then jump into a book that modified them?

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Some staff members have been discussing sacrifices we will need to make to the setting to squeeze it into 4.0. Some of you have said that making such sacrifices to the setting's integrity is exactly what you don't want. There is also the argument that if we are able to modify the rules in 4.0 GSL the way that Midnight played with the 3.5 ruleset, would people bother? Would they buy a 4.0 core book and then jump into a book that modified them?

Isn't that what is true for most OGL and d20 Games? People bought the original core rulebooks, and then picked up an d20 System or OGL game for their taste. The question is when it's the most opportune time to do this. I am not sure I am interested with a heavily tweaked 4E in the first half year, but beyond that, "mods" will probably be appreciated.

 

[ShadowDenizen]

Some staff members have been discussing sacrifices we will need to make to the setting to squeeze it into 4.0. Some of you have said that making such sacrifices to the setting's integrity is exactly what you don't want. There is also the argument that if we are able to modify the rules in 4.0 GSL the way that Midnight played with the 3.5 ruleset, would people bother? Would they buy a 4.0 core book and then jump into a book that modified them?

I'm not a businessman, so take my 2 copper with a grain of salt...

But I think Midnight came out at a time when people had (more-or-less) fully digested and assimilated the 3.5 rules. So, yes, some of the changes were sweeping, but it was still recognizable at it's core as 3.5.

To release "Amethyst" under the GSL, while people are still learning the core rules for 4.0? I'm not sure how that would work out...

But again, the most important thing is, as you said, is to remain true to your vision. Will 4E encompass how you (the creators) view the setting? And will the likely increase in sales make up for the sacrifices you have to make? (And, FWIW, I'd personally rather see you go the OGl route.)

But it's a tough call; I don't envy you guys.

 

[Alzrius]

This is completely speculative, so take it with a very large grain of salt, but I'm also concerned about what Amethyst would be able to do under the GSL(s).

You've already mentioned that you'll be removing the framing fiction from the chapters, which I'm guessing is due to the decency guidelines, right? If so, you might need to remove some other things too, such as the parts about (sex) slavery. From what I understand, that might also be considered "indecent."

My larger concern, however, is that there will be two separate GSLs. One for D&D (that is, Fantasy) and another for d20 (everything that isn't Fantasy, which means it'll most likely be for Modern and Future games). Now, we know that the Fantasy GSL requires you to use the Core Rulebooks, so it seems to follow that when the d20 GSL comes out, it'll require the use of some sort of Modern d20 book that WotC will put out first. However, that's not out yet, so if that's the case you might be forced to wait for the release of such a book, otherwise, if you put in sci-fi elements, WotC might be able to hit you elements that fall under the purview of the d20 GSL without actually using it - that is, that you've gone beyond what the Fantasy GSL allows.

In other words, using Modern/Future elements before the d20 GSL comes out - and especially in a book that uses the Fantasy GSL - might be very risky.

And even if you do wait, there's a chance that the GSLs will have a clause stating you can't use both at the same time in the same product (since that'd let you have the D&D and d20 logos at once).

I personally wouldn't mind seeing you keep Amethyst in OGL format. I know you said you'll be making some changes, but so long as it's not too deviant from the existing rules (to the extent that True20 or M&M is, for example) I wouldn't mind. In fact, you could add character creation and leveling guidelines (and despite what people say, the XP chart is not closed content, simply because a mathematical progression isn't copyright) and make Amethyst a stand-alone setting, which'd help in the post-4E market.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

This is completely speculative, so take it with a very large grain of salt, but I'm also concerned about what Amethyst would be able to do under the GSL(s).

You've already mentioned that you'll be removing the framing fiction from the chapters, which I'm guessing is due to the decency guidelines, right? If so, you might need to remove some other things too, such as the parts about (sex) slavery. From what I understand, that might also be considered "indecent.".

I thought Amethyst was a d20 System game? Doesn't this already include the "decency standard" clauses?

I don't think sex slavery as a general topic is against the clause, but I haven't seen it. I suppose depicting it or describing it "colorful" would probably be off-limits.