Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Amaroq" data-source="post: 1908513" data-attributes="member: 15470">Detailed! I appreciate it! I'm looking forward to hearing more from your players, as well.Doubtless! I developed a deep respect for the amount of thought you've put into it by going down the path "Well, those weight-for-abilities can't all be right - let's play with some of them..." which value modification of course never resulted in anything near the balance that you'd achieved.I'd love to stumble over somebody having done similar work for spell powers; I imagine a 'build a spell' construction kit which gives a 'level' cost for the many game components of a spell (casting time, duration, damage, range, area, etc); I could imagine a ninth-level spell doing fairly low amounts of damage (2d6, maybe?) but spread over a tremendous area: "And then the mighty wizard called upon the powers of the sky, and lightning flayed the earth for miles around, and all of the great (but 1st level) army assembled to assault his lair was laid low, save the six captains, who steadfastly advanced...." Do you mind posting a link - I'd like to lurk through some of those discussions, if you don't mind; if you're leery of posting it for fear of traffic or loss of signal-to-noise ratio, no worries.I was quite happy to see your TrueCore.zip, since I'm not using AU; that makes your body of work feel more relevant. I'd been trying to duplicate it myself (including d4 and 2 skill points) but as you pointed out its a ton of work! (Actual CP's wasn't bad, since I could drop the '10' option, so the calculations were still all correct.I'd also been thinking through the weighting for the 'specials', because I'm not sure, for example, that 'Weapon Focus' and 'Weapon Specialization' balance out the same as other 'Combat' feats and class abilities. For example, Focus gives +1 to hit in (nearly) every combat, while a Ranger's +1 from 'Favored Enemy' is only appropriate in some situations. Likewise, 'per day' combat abilities, such as a Paladin's Smite or a Barbarian's Rage don't have the immense re-usability value that the fighter's feats do. So I was thinking about expanding that section beyond none/general/combat to something more like none/once/general/semi/combat/free; the assumption that the fighter is a full feat-every-two-levels underbalanced sounded a bit strong to me.I did change 'average points' to not include first-level points, thus getting a different score for average per level, which I found a little more instructive.Anyways, all that's neither here nor there if I go over to a straight point-buy system.I'm thinking of running a 'let's play with the system and make sure we can all buy into it' session, which I'm imagining works like "Let's use the system to build first-level characters, knock out one combat; increase those characters to fourth-level, knock out a second combat; increase to six-and-a-halfth or so, and run through a third combat; try maybe one more if anybody's on the fence." Gives the players a chance to learn the system and make mistakes without being committed to them for the campaign, and gives me a chance to see what it looks like without being committed to a new system.Do you use the point costs straight off the DrSpunj's Balance sheet for charging characters as they build?</blockquote>

Verification