D&D 3E/3.5 Changing 3e to d20 rules! Am I doing this right?

[WaterRabbit]

Final Quibble

Inflict spells ignore a target’s DR and deal
damage directly to WP.

My final quibble is this one. Inflict spells do damage. Just let that damage go against VP first, if the target has them. In the long run, it is an elegant solution to the Harm problem. Hit a character with Harm, it reduces them to 0 VP. Hit them with Harm again and it reduces them to 0 WP. Takes some of the punch out of Harm, but still keeps it as a viable spell.
Plus Inflict Critical Wounds does 4d8 +1 per level. It is a 4th level spell, so minimum caster level is 7th for an average damage of 16 points of damage. This represents a huge chunk of points.

On the other hand, you could just have both cure and inflict spells have the option of doing WPs equal to their Spell level +1.

 

[Kaptain_Kantrip]

Final quibble? Does that mean, otherwise my rules are balanced?

BTW: I've removed the thing about inflict spells going directly to WP as you suggested. Thanks!

 

[WaterRabbit]

Who knows?

I think that some play testing will help determine if it is balanced. In SW there are several classes that look good on paper, but don't translate well to many situations (The Noble class for one).
I would say they look like a reasonable starting point and then see how they work out in play. My two points of worry about doing any translation to the Wounds/Vitality/Defense/DR system are:
1) Damage Reduction for Armor
2) Magic might become too deadly at highter levels.

Unless a character has the ability to increase their damage, they essentially cannot effect an armored opponent. Fighters and Rogues with Sneak attack can overcome this. In SW, all players have access to blasters pistols which do form 3d4 points of damage to 3d8 points of damage (average 7.5, 10.5, and 13.5).
However, in D&D most weapons average under 4.5 points of damage without strenth bonses. That means Wizards and Clerics have no ability to harm an armored opponent without spells. Defense makes it harder to score hits with melee and ranged touch attacks.
OTOH, spells often go against saving throws and are energy attacks. Which can make them quite powerful. My guess is that most divine spells are neutral WRT to this changes and that arcance spells are enhanced. This would weaken the cleric slightly since their combat skill would suffer slightly under this system.
IOW, some play testing is in order to make sure that it all works.

Oh, and don't forget to add the 10 in the Defense calculation.

 

[Aaron2]

Bad idea

Wound points will really slow down combat. A horde of goblin now has the equivalent of 15 hit points. That's alot of hacking. Plus, it makes it hard to destinguish crappy and good fighters. A crappy Goblin has 15 hit points, a 2nd level goblin has 19 hit points. Not much difference relative to CR (which will now be totally screwed)

I've played in a campaign that had armor as DR. I will never do it again. You end up with -every- player having max Strength and walking around with the biggest two handed weapon they can find. Despite what you want, players will adapt and if you tell them (through the rules) that power is king, them they will respond.

Plus, two-weapon fighters get totally screwed.

 

[Kaptain_Kantrip]

Re: Bad idea

Wound points will really slow down combat. A horde of goblin now has the equivalent of 15 hit points. That's alot of hacking. Plus, it makes it hard to destinguish crappy and good fighters. A crappy Goblin has 15 hit points, a 2nd level goblin has 19 hit points. Not much difference relative to CR (which will now be totally screwed)

I've played in a campaign that had armor as DR. I will never do it again. You end up with -every- player having max Strength and walking around with the biggest two handed weapon they can find. Despite what you want, players will adapt and if you tell them (through the rules) that power is king, them they will respond.

Plus, two-weapon fighters get totally screwed.

Unimportant NPCs/creatures have only WP, so they take just as long to hack through as normal D&D3e. See "Thug Rule" in my original post for details.

I think you may be right about DR; perhaps if it were lowered so that more weapons had a chance to do damage? Hmmm...

It might not be enough, but I did reduce the DR of all but the heavy armors in my original post. Ideas?

 

[WaterRabbit]

On Wound points

The point of moving to Wound/Vitality/Defense type of system is to make combat more dangerous. In this system you don't fight hordes of goblins. You don't get experience for killing hordes of goblins either. Instead you get experience based upon story objectives.
This system doesn't screw two-weapon fighters anymore than the standard 3e system. You have to put more thought into creating a two-weapon fighter that a two-handed fighter. Which is as it should be since two weapon fighting is about finesse. These points have been debated ad nausea on these boards -- almost weekly there is a post about two-weapon fighting getting screwed.
Finally, just because you played in a campaign with DR, doesn't mean that all versions are created equal. How did the campaign you played in implement DR ? If you explained that, then Kaptain_Kantrip can avoid some of the pitfalls that you suffered.

 

[Kaptain_Kantrip]

Okay, how about this for a quick and easy compromise grim-n-gritty, combat is deadly type of game?

Everything in the game stays the same, except:

Hit Points = CON + Class HD (at 1st level only, maxed) + size modifier + Toughness feats + misc. modifiers.

NOTE: CON modifier is not added to HP, just Fort saves/skills/ability checks. You may only take the Toughness feat once per level, and not more times than your CON modifier (so a PC with an 18 CON could take Toughness four times).

You only get class HD as a 1st level character, so the type of class you start in determines how many extra HP you get for the rest of your character's life.

Assuming a CON score of 10 with no toughness feats:
The average commoner, sorcerer or wizard will have 14 hit points.
The average expert, rogue or bard will have 16 hit points.
The average warrior, cleric or druid will have 18 hit points.
The average fighter, paladin, ranger will have 20 hit points.
The average barbarian will have 22 hit points.

The max hit points anyone could probably have at 1st level would be a human barbarian with one toughness feat and an 18 CON. He would have 33 hit points (18 CON + 12 HP + 3 from Toughness).

When you level, you gain class features as normal, except no new hit points are rolled.

Magic damage would not scale per level to account for the lower hit points, so a fireball or lightning bolt would only ever do 5d6 damage. Spells that give you extra attacks at higher levels (like magic missile) would still gain the extra attacks, but not any increase in base damage.

Armor provides AC as normal 3e.

Any thoughts on this? It seems even easier to implement than the VP/WP mechanics...

Together with DNDChick's Critical Effects chart, combat would be scary as hell, and the game's power level would stay on par with the middle (generally considered to be the "most fun") levels, since hit points can't go through the roof.

 

[bardolph]

Vitality/Wounds: This system allows Player Characters to take LOTS of punishment, especially considering how fast Vitality recovers.

Cure spells need to be re-thought. In Star Wars, there aren't any cure spells, so the Vitality Point system is essential. Maybe introduce a new Restore Vitality line, which replaces the old Cure spells, and use the lower WP numbers for the Cures. Clerics can spontaneously cure wounds, but they cannot spontaneously restore Vitality.

I would call the "Quickness" feat "Extra Vitality" instead. Vitality doesn't necessarily equal quickness -- it encompasses several factors.

Critical Hits: Two (different) suggestions:

#1: don't mess with criticals. They do LOTS of Vitality damage, and if they break through, they do Wounds.

#2: leave the same threat range/multipliers, and on a successful critical, apply 1/2 of the damage after DR directly to wounds.

-----

I disagree with having special "armor-piercing" rules for crossbow bolts and arrows. They are doing damage to Vitality, anyway. (and let's be honest, most weapons are "specially designed to pierce armor" anyway...)

DR should apply to Vitality hits as well as Wound hits. This simulates "glancing blows."

Defense seems okay, but playtest this one carefully. Fighters get a +1 BAB every level, while Rogues only get +1 Reflex every two levels. Classes with poor Reflex saves will get hit almost every time.

Defense/DR systems will require more die-rolling, and therefore combat will be a little slower.

Also, it will get VERY frustrating for people who use small, light weapons, as they will NEVER penetrate that stupid armor!

 

[Kaptain_Kantrip]

Hmm. I think I will go ahead and use Ken Hood's Grim-N-Gritty rules http://www.sleepingimperium.rpghost.com first before messing with my own system. They seem sound and are playtested (I hope!).

 

[Larcen]

Originally posted by Kaptain_Kantrip
LUCK POINTS
PC/NPC: 1d4+1 per level.
Monster: Half hit dice, rounded down.

At the risk of people saying that I am being unfair and unbalancing to the monsters, I would like to suggest that only PCs get Luck Points. After all they are the heroes of the story, not that monsters. A lucky monster? I don't think so. That's not part of good heroic fiction.

Also it would add more complexity to encounters if the DM has to constantly decide whether a given monster would, could, and should use up Luck Point for every single roll it makes.

In fact, I would even go so far as to say that except for extremely rare cases, even NPCs do not get them. Just my thinking.