E6: The Game Inside D&D (new revision)

[DogBackward]

It's worth it, really. Makes pure melee combatants mechanically fun again. There are a few balance issues to watch out for, but it's mostly well done. The Swordsage is a little up in power level, and there are a few Maneuvers that could do with some nerfing, but other than that it's great.

 

[joela]

Could you...?

Bah.

-- doesn't own ToB.

rycanada, could you check with your players if they ever felt their E6 fighters were ever underpowered compared to the other classes?

 

[TheCrazyMuffinMan]

Rycanada, later on I might post a thread based on my idea for my level-less system, with rules details and the like. It may intrigue you, because it's got roughly the same idea behind it (minimizing abstraction, inflation and superheroism).

 

[Kunimatyu]

Rycanada, later on I might post a thread based on my idea for my level-less system, with rules details and the like. It may intrigue you, because it's got roughly the same idea behind it (minimizing abstraction, inflation and superheroism).

You have to admit, though, one of the strengths of the E6 system is that it doesn't really have a boatload of new rules, just a few new feats and the level 6 cap + feat advancement rules. Taking away advancement does get rid of one of the primary motivations people have for playing D&D.

 

[TheCrazyMuffinMan]

You have to admit, though, one of the strengths of the E6 system is that it doesn't really have a boatload of new rules, just a few new feats and the level 6 cap + feat advancement rules. Taking away advancement does get rid of one of the primary motivations people have for playing D&D.

I hear ya man. E6 is a very efficient system and it covers a lot of bases. I'm seriously considering running an E6 someday, if not several.

In the case of my levelless thing, advancement is done via XP purchases for class powers, feats and skills. Max HP is equal to Constitution, and Spell slots are based on the ability prime requisite for the class using that spell. Spell levels are replaced with spell XP costs and spell/ability prerequisites.

 

[Ry]

The players in my game thought it was a little underpowered but not importantly so. We still had a 6th level fighter in the mix (halfling with 2 short swords actually), as well as characters who took just 2 levels. I've made comments several times about how there are viable fixes if you want to fix the fighter, but I'm not going to drill down to the level of rebalancing classes in my own game.

The players appreciated Core+Small house rules that add on top of core instead of Core+Changes within Core that affect how Core interacts with everything else.

 

[TheCrazyMuffinMan]

The players appreciated Core+Small house rules that add on top of core instead of Core+Changes within Core that affect how Core interacts with everything else.

I take it the hypothetical Level-free thing would be a shining example of changes to the core. If so, I'll see what I can do to minimize side-effects to removing level-based advancement. This is my last comment on "E1" ITT unless you request a comment. I'm glad your players were satisfied with the overall experience.

 

[Ry]

TCMM - Your E1 system definitely would need its own thread; it would get lost here anyway. I originally was thinking of doing something similar to that but the level of playtesting I thought it would need was prohibitive - still, if you can make it work, go nuts! Some others have mentioned Buy the Numbers (EN Publishing product) and that might help as a backbone to what you're doing. Cheers!

 

[Shazman]

The players in my game thought it was a little underpowered but not importantly so. We still had a 6th level fighter in the mix (halfling with 2 short swords actually), as well as characters who took just 2 levels. I've made comments several times about how there are viable fixes if you want to fix the fighter, but I'm not going to drill down to the level of rebalancing classes in my own game.

The players appreciated Core+Small house rules that add on top of core instead of Core+Changes within Core that affect how Core interacts with everything else.

A halfling fighter with two short swords? A d4 plus minor strength bonus for damage? That would look underpowered no matter how you cut it. Though, it's good to see that your players enjoyed the campaign. That's what really matters.

 

[MidnightChampion]

Too much Conviction?

First off, E6 sounds like a fantastic idea. When it comes to system tweaking, striking a balance between "what makes sense" and "playability" usually results in "too many house rules."

I personally have no experience running higher level D20 campaigns; in fact, I'm in the process of running my first 3.x game, and the PCs are around 4th level right now - which basically means I don't have a clear feel for the problems that E6 "solves" related to higher-level campaigns. I am, however, running in a low-magic, gritty setting that E6 seems to fit quite well.

I did want to sound off on the Death Flag rule. I LOVE it. In a world where resurrection doesn't exist, and having been a player who's put loving time and effort into developing a character, I am loath to allow PCs to die due to bad dice rolls; and yet, I feel guilty at times for fudging things so that the PC can be saved.

The Death Flag answers these concerns for me nicely; it gives the player control over the destiny of the character, and allows them the opportunity to choose to make heroic sacrifices at dramatically appropriate times.

The thing I'm not too sure about is the number of conviction points. 6 per game day seems awfully high to me. I was curious to know how this has worked out in your playtesting/gaming experience. It seems to me that unless you tend to have more than one combat encounter per day, it gives a distinct advantage to the PCs when each one can, for example, roll twice for each of 6 attack rolls and choose the better. Perhaps it's just my perception, but I'd be grateful for some more explanation of your experience with it.