Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="the Jester" data-source="post: 5505129" data-attributes="member: 1210">Hey y'all! In this thread I will discuss and post my homebrewed system, which draws a great deal from each edition of D&amp;D. It is, or will eventually be, the perfect system (for my taste). Let's start with a quick bit on design goals and intended playstyle.The playstyle I prefer is a very &quot;old skool&quot; kind of sandbox, with plenty of room for the pcs to encounter things way above (or below) their level if they venture into the wrong areas. This leads me to several primary design goals:1. EVERYONE STARTS AT 1ST LEVEL. The system must support this- in other words, a mixed level party must be viable. I have attempted to approach this with a combination of flatter math (in other words, lower attack bonuses and the like) and a &quot;more breadth than depth&quot; approach to leveling; it's harder to superspecialize on one thing (I think). 2. COMBAT IS PART OF THE GAME, BUT SO ARE OTHER THINGS. I want this system to support exploration, mysteries, politics, etc. However, I am being very careful to be mindful of another of my design goals.3. SCREW OPTION OVERLOAD. As much as possible, I want to avoid the problem of six thousand feats that both 3e and 4e have. To this end, after some agonizing consideration, I've dropped both feats and skills in the sense that they exist in both 3e and 4e. 4. PC WEALTH IS BASED ON PC ACTIONS. This means there is no such thing as &quot;expected wealth per level.&quot; Since every pc starts at 1st level, this presents no problems with starting gear, and given the math flattening, nobody will be 'behind' on their attack bonuses for lack of a +1 sword.5. COMBAT IS BOTH FAST AND TACTICAL. Among other things, there is a built in &quot;you're taking too long&quot; rule in combat and that, hopefully, condition tracking is significantly reduced. I'm still a little worried about bookkeeping on some stuff, though. We'll see how I did once I get a chance to playtest a little.EDITED to add attachment of the current version of the rule set.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="the Jester, post: 5505129, member: 1210"] Hey y'all! In this thread I will discuss and post my homebrewed system, which draws a great deal from each edition of D&D. It is, or will eventually be, the perfect system (for my taste). Let's start with a quick bit on design goals and intended playstyle. The playstyle I prefer is a very "old skool" kind of sandbox, with plenty of room for the pcs to encounter things way above (or below) their level if they venture into the wrong areas. This leads me to several primary design goals: [b]1. EVERYONE STARTS AT 1ST LEVEL.[/b] The system must support this- in other words, a mixed level party must be viable. I have attempted to approach this with a combination of flatter math (in other words, lower attack bonuses and the like) and a "more breadth than depth" approach to leveling; it's harder to superspecialize on one thing (I think). [b]2. COMBAT IS PART OF THE GAME, BUT SO ARE OTHER THINGS.[/B] I want this system to support exploration, mysteries, politics, etc. However, I am being very careful to be mindful of another of my design goals. [b]3. SCREW OPTION OVERLOAD.[/B] As much as possible, I want to avoid the problem of six thousand feats that both 3e and 4e have. To this end, after some agonizing consideration, I've dropped both feats and skills in the sense that they exist in both 3e and 4e. [b]4. PC WEALTH IS BASED ON PC ACTIONS.[/B] This means there is no such thing as "expected wealth per level." Since every pc starts at 1st level, this presents no problems with starting gear, and given the math flattening, nobody will be 'behind' on their attack bonuses for lack of a +1 sword. [B]5. COMBAT IS BOTH FAST AND TACTICAL.[/B] Among other things, there is a built in "you're taking too long" rule in combat and that, hopefully, condition tracking is significantly reduced. I'm still a little worried about bookkeeping on some stuff, though. We'll see how I did once I get a chance to playtest a little. EDITED to add attachment of the current version of the rule set. [/QUOTE]

Verification