(Discussion) General Part V

[Kahuna Burger]

On another issue, how do people think we should deal with ECL races?

well, first by approving mine.

I'm in favor of swapping out characters who have been advanced at equal xp totals. Whether the swap is for a character concept with a "latent" period before it becomes really viable or one with an ecl race, sometimes a character just works better starting at a higher level. Since the consensus seemed to be to have all players start at level one, giving up an established character (and all gear, the net worth could still be starting gold for the lower gold class) seems like a viable trade.

Kahuna Burger

 

[Manzanita]

new races & classes

We could also start a PC w/no class@all, if he/she were of a +1 ECL race. KB's idea seems sound to me, though. We should also address (if we haven't already), the issue of PCs dying. If your PC dies, do you get to create a new one of equal experience points? I would say 'yes' since death is part of life, and I don't think players should be 'penalized' for the death of their PCs.

On general principles, I'm vaguely opposed to adding very many new races and classes. Maybe its just me, but I like the idea of keeping the campaign fairly easy for new players, and simple for the more involved players as well, by keeping it close to Core rules. I have nothing against any of the proposed races or classes currently on the table, but in general, I think we should only admit these types of things if there is significant consensus that it would substantially enrich the game.

 

[Creamsteak]

Once I get the proposed "proposal forums" approved, we can sort through everything and actually approve and disapprove items in a place where we can really see the changes we are making. It'll make it easier to control the introduction of too much extra material.

 

[GnomeWorks]

We could also start a PC w/no class@all, if he/she were of a +1 ECL race.

That's a whole can of worms right there.

What HD do they get? Saves? BAB?

It's too much of a hassle. You could say that it's like a racial level, and they get those like they were a Humanoid, or something, but still... too messy, IMO.

 

[Thomas Hobbes]

Something that's gone up on the Wizards website recently are "savage progressions," which are like the savage species progressions except for templates and such. They fit the "accesible to all" part of what we're going for, and would allow you to be, for example, a first level fighter/0 aasimar and then become a full aasimar at level 2, or you could start out as a paladin and become a paladin 1/half-celestial 1 at level 2, etc.

 

[Creamsteak]

I'm ok, after we approve the progressions. I REALLY want our sub forums so that we can get through all that stuff and some OGL material that I think is fairly generic and we can add to LEW without complicating things.

I'm willing to say, "Once you lose a PC, you get to roll one up of equal level." If the other judges are OK with that, it works.



Also, I've been wondering why I picked 30 point buy and not 32? Why is that?

 

[orsal]

I'm ok, after we approve the progressions. I REALLY want our sub forums so that we can get through all that stuff and some OGL material that I think is fairly generic and we can add to LEW without complicating things.

I'm willing to say, "Once you lose a PC, you get to roll one up of equal level." If the other judges are OK with that, it works.



Also, I've been wondering why I picked 30 point buy and not 32? Why is that?

Well, I can't say what you had in mind, but you might be interested to know I did a few calculations a little while ago, and found that the 4d6 method, with all lower rolls treated as 8s, produces on average a 29.13 point character. So you hit it pretty closely!

Personally, I don't like the idea of starting characters in mid-career, but if you all favour it it's not such a big deal. Not likely I'll ever take advantage of it, although I might use a non-LA 0 race.

 

[Creamsteak]

I agree that it seems awkward. It's not so awkward if they pick something where the level adjustment limits the character level to 1, but when you can just "die" and get a 6th level character that might be odd. However, I'm thinking that resurrection should be fairly common for characters of certain levels. I still think implementing a way to freely or cheaply revive a character at the tower of Positive energy might be interesting.

 

[Uriel]

I'm ok, after we approve the progressions. I REALLY want our sub forums so that we can get through all that stuff and some OGL material that I think is fairly generic and we can add to LEW without complicating things.

I'm willing to say, "Once you lose a PC, you get to roll one up of equal level." If the other judges are OK with that, it works.

I'm actually against this. I don't think that a player should be able to reach a certain 'level' and then again never have to start a lower level character, or decide that they want to play a new one and just ditch the one that they are playing. It seems to be just me, and we are a democracy, it seems (as much as I am not a fan of rampant Democracy), I will acquiesce to the majority,if need be.

Also, I've been wondering why I picked 30 point buy and not 32? Why is that?

I am finding that an odd numbered point, say, 31 (I like 33 now, with 39 for high powered games) is more enriching, as something ends up being an odd number (usually), and thus something gets improved at Level 4. This gives the feeling of actual gain in PbP, where advancement is pretty slow and one often feels that their character never gets to improve.

 

[Manzanita]

I like odd numbered point buys too. I also like high numbers. You'll never be able to build a Conan or Aragorn on a 30 point buy, let alone a 32 point buy. I don't see how we could really change it at this point, anyway.