Simplicity
Explorer
colonelthread said:
I'm just referring to the section that talks about dungeon "features" in the DMG1. It's not super long, but it's got some interesting stuff.
DMG II -- In my hands . . .
- Thread starter philreed
- Start date
I'm just referring to the section that talks about dungeon "features" in the DMG1. It's not super long, but it's got some interesting stuff.
Simplicity
Explorer
The running your own business section is really cool.
My next PC is totally going to start a University. The rule basically involves a starting capital investment, and a monthly profit check based on skill and modifiers (based on how risky the business is the profit/loss amount can vary widely). Businesses can be upgraded to affect their profitability, and a number of events are provided that affect the business' operation...
So, my university could run into a protection racket, or it could catch fire, or it might be visited by a silver dragon or something. The events typically affect profitability favorably or unfavorably until some condition is met.
My next PC is totally going to start a University. The rule basically involves a starting capital investment, and a monthly profit check based on skill and modifiers (based on how risky the business is the profit/loss amount can vary widely). Businesses can be upgraded to affect their profitability, and a number of events are provided that affect the business' operation...
So, my university could run into a protection racket, or it could catch fire, or it might be visited by a silver dragon or something. The events typically affect profitability favorably or unfavorably until some condition is met.
Mercule
Adventurer
DungeonmasterCal said:
I have nothing at all against point-based systems. I've played many and quite enjoyed myself on both sides of the screen. If fact, I took a 5-7 year break from D&D and played mostly Hero and WoD.
When I "returned", what I found was that classes aren't exactly realistic, but they can be an unobtrusive way to manage aspects of play. Rather like the D&D combat isn't realist, abstract. The abstractness of D&D is something of a signature, and I'd even say a strength. Adding in the feats and skill points with 3E gave some flexibility to the various archetypes without destroying them. This is a good thing, but completely removing the archetypal classes would pretty much kill one of the major identifying features of D&D.
That's why I say that if D&D ever ditches classes and levels, I'm going back to Hero. Hero has had a long time to work on the "right" way to do point-based development. It already has the XP to skill point or feat (perks or powers) in place.
What I'd rather see in a 4E (and what would get me to buy it in a heartbeat), is to have WotC realize that it's the class mechanism, not the classes themselves, that are the sacred cow. Then, they could review what the standard fantasy-fiction archetypes are and build the base classes around the broad archetypes, with skills, feats, and PrCs to refine things to narrower ideals. But, that's a topic I could probably go on about at great length, only some of it with lucidity.
Re: Mobs
1) Yes, it is a template, as it was in Dungeon.
2) Yes, the vulnerability to area attacks is +50% damage.
3) Yes, an opponent's DR applies to the Mob's attacks, which are non-magical unless the base creature has such a magical attack (a Mob of Demons, for example). The Mob's damage is specifically Bludgeoning, as well, by the way.
4) Mobs can grapple, but cannot be grappled. They are also considered expert grapplers.
Someone asked before how closely I was paraphrasing when I described the Mob as enraged:
also:
The mention of crowds reminds me that the mob appears in the context of a discussion of Crowds, and their effects.
1) Yes, it is a template, as it was in Dungeon.
2) Yes, the vulnerability to area attacks is +50% damage.
3) Yes, an opponent's DR applies to the Mob's attacks, which are non-magical unless the base creature has such a magical attack (a Mob of Demons, for example). The Mob's damage is specifically Bludgeoning, as well, by the way.
4) Mobs can grapple, but cannot be grappled. They are also considered expert grapplers.
Someone asked before how closely I was paraphrasing when I described the Mob as enraged:
DMG2 said:
also:
DMG2 said:
The mention of crowds reminds me that the mob appears in the context of a discussion of Crowds, and their effects.
Aside from the Mobs, there are other interesting pieces.
Weapon and Armor Templates are a nice idea. Modifiers for an item based on where and/or by whom it was made. Feycraft, Hell-forged, Soul-forged, and so on. An item can have one template. Each Template can adjust the qualities of the Armor or Weapon (there is a separate Template for each), and adds one or more "affinities". The affinities make certain armor or weapon magical abilities less expensive to add to that weapon. They also impart a special ability to the user.
Each template increases the cost of the base item (at least, I have not noticed one that decreases it).
Feycraft armor, for example, costs 500 gp extra, weighs less than normal, has reduced hardness and hit points, has reduced arcane spell failure chances, has affinities for the glamered and silent moves abilities (among others), and gives a morale bonus to the user's bluff checks (because the beauty of the armor increases his/her confidence).
Adjustments to hardness and hit points are less meaningful if the DM does not make Sunder attempts or track damage to objects. In such campaigns, it might be necessary to disallow some of these templates, or increase the price modifier.
Weapon and Armor Templates are a nice idea. Modifiers for an item based on where and/or by whom it was made. Feycraft, Hell-forged, Soul-forged, and so on. An item can have one template. Each Template can adjust the qualities of the Armor or Weapon (there is a separate Template for each), and adds one or more "affinities". The affinities make certain armor or weapon magical abilities less expensive to add to that weapon. They also impart a special ability to the user.
Each template increases the cost of the base item (at least, I have not noticed one that decreases it).
Feycraft armor, for example, costs 500 gp extra, weighs less than normal, has reduced hardness and hit points, has reduced arcane spell failure chances, has affinities for the glamered and silent moves abilities (among others), and gives a morale bonus to the user's bluff checks (because the beauty of the armor increases his/her confidence).
Adjustments to hardness and hit points are less meaningful if the DM does not make Sunder attempts or track damage to objects. In such campaigns, it might be necessary to disallow some of these templates, or increase the price modifier.
Elder-Basilisk
First Post
A few comments based on what I've heard about the mob rules so far:
It reminds me of nothing so much as the knights of the dinner table pack of doom storyline. If you get enough dogs together, they can use the pack rules and then they overwhelm everything. The mob template sounds pretty much like the hackmaster pack rules that are referred to there.
And: Mechanically, it makes no sense that great cleave, combat reflexes, and whirlwind attack--the feats designed for fighting large groups of weak opponents--suddenly become useless and Power Attack--the feat most useful for single combat--becomes effective against large hordes of weak foes. That's exactly backwards from the ordinary D&D rules where great cleave, etc. are useful for fighting hordes of foes but Power Attack just results in even more overkill than usual. Talk about a disconnect. Against single targets, fighter A is good. Against four to twenty nine (or however many), fighter B's skills are good. But as soon as you hit 30 enemies (as long as they're sufficiently riled up), fighter B's skills become useless and fighter A's skills return to prominence. That doesn't sound like good design to me.
It reminds me of nothing so much as the knights of the dinner table pack of doom storyline. If you get enough dogs together, they can use the pack rules and then they overwhelm everything. The mob template sounds pretty much like the hackmaster pack rules that are referred to there.
And: Mechanically, it makes no sense that great cleave, combat reflexes, and whirlwind attack--the feats designed for fighting large groups of weak opponents--suddenly become useless and Power Attack--the feat most useful for single combat--becomes effective against large hordes of weak foes. That's exactly backwards from the ordinary D&D rules where great cleave, etc. are useful for fighting hordes of foes but Power Attack just results in even more overkill than usual. Talk about a disconnect. Against single targets, fighter A is good. Against four to twenty nine (or however many), fighter B's skills are good. But as soon as you hit 30 enemies (as long as they're sufficiently riled up), fighter B's skills become useless and fighter A's skills return to prominence. That doesn't sound like good design to me.
gizmo33 said:
mcrow
Explorer
I just picked up the DMGII lastnight and it's great. I would say that it's the best $40 I have spent on an RPG book in atleast a year. I'm a fairly new GM (with d20 anyway) and this book along with the DMG make learning the tricks of running a game a lot easier. There also is a bunch of stuff that will make even the long time GMs lif easier.
TerraDave
5ever, or until 2024
DungeonmasterCal said:
Ah Ha!
My complaint: having race, class, skills, feats, PrCs, spells, items, replacement levels, teamwork benefits...to many player option mechanics...
Your response: just have skills and feats! See, this would simplify things...
...I don't know if I would go that far, but I could see flexible classes, skills and feats
