E6: The Game Inside D&D

[Committed Hero]

Perhaps it's because I prefer d20 Modern, but it seems to me that that skills get the short end of the deal. Any thought about allowing increases to ranks, too?

 

[joela]

rycanada

Secondly, it is introducing a new mechanic, which rycanada was quite specific about trying to avoid.

Uh, what's your point? rycanada was also quite specific in pointing out that his system will not be for everyone and everyone is also welcome to add/modify their own options into E6.

 

[green slime]

Rather than introducing a whole collection of rather strange feats, my opinion is now that people who want to achieve the kind of things we have been discusing lately (that is to say dealing with multiclass restrictions in a manner that allows the character to achieve their "full" 6th level potential) is to instead use Gestalt characters in this E6 environment.

That way, combat hogs can go Fighter//Paladin or Fighter//Barbarian, while Cleric//Wizard and Fighter//Rogue, Fighter//Wizard all remain feasible.

This, I think, will be the manner in which I run my next campaign.

No PrC's, obviously.

 

[Ry]

OK, I think there are some great ideas coming up but there's some clashing over how people want to use E6. So here's what I think we should do:

Basic E6 doesn't fix any issues on its own. If a Basic E6 GM wants to fix something, they can fix it their own way. There's lots of 3rd-party sources that have feats that address the problems we've brought up here.

Core E6 is Basic E6 plus some feats we design here that preserve level 6 abilities as a hard cap. These can include our best effort attempts to deal with the multiclassing issues, and I'd like it to include the Restoration and Ability upgrade feats as well.

Finally, Expanded E6 has feats built around attaining level 8 equivalent abilities (4th level spells, +8 BAB) but these are still gained incrementally, via feats.

So rather than argue because we have different ideas of what we want E6 to look like, why don't we just classify our suggestions and playtest experiences into BE6, CE6, and XE6?

 

[Mark Causey]

I just noticed the E6 hits exactly where Leadership comes into play.

Maybe instead of worrying about expanding a character past 6th level, you could worry about raising the levels of your companions?

 

[Ry]

Uh, what's your point? rycanada was also quite specific in pointing out that his system will not be for everyone and everyone is also welcome to add/modify their own options into E6.

No worries. Here's what I think the issue is: On the one hand there are good suggestion for how to use E6 with some other house rules to get a desired result. On the other hand, there's suggestions for what should be going into an E6 .pdf.

When I said I'd like to keep this free of new rules (except new feats) I'm talking about the latter. Would I be correct in saying that when you posted those rules you're talking about the former?

 

[Cheiromancer]

I kinda see 6th level as more the beginning of the sweet spot, which goes to around 9th level or so. If I were to tinker with the E6 system, I think I'd allow a limited amount of advancement.

For example, I might try an E5+ as follows:

Up to 10,000 xp (5th level) everything is as normal. After 10,000 xp, gain a feat every 5,000 xp except at 20K, 40K, 80K and 160K; at those xp totals you gain a level instead.

At 210,000 xp (20th level) a character would have 9 class levels and 36 extra feats.

I think this allows some breathing room with regard to prestige classes, multiclassing, skill rank caps, etc., without detracting too much (imho) from the OP's design goals.

[edit] The most recent posts weren't up when I started composing this. My suggestion would take basic E6 and run with it in a different direction. Instead of requiring feats to solve all the potential problems, it would allow a limited amount of level advancement instead.

 

[Ry]

[edit] The most recent posts weren't up when I started composing this. My suggestion would take basic E6 and run with it in a different direction. Instead of requiring feats to solve all the potential problems, it would allow a limited amount of level advancement instead.

I get that. One thing I notice in this system is that at 5th, 7th, and 9th Sorcerers lag behind Wizards because of those highest-level spells. Would you be discouraging Sorcerers in your campaign by design?

 

[knight_isa]

I kinda see 6th level as more the beginning of the sweet spot, which goes to around 9th level or so. If I were to tinker with the E6 system, I think I'd allow a limited amount of advancement.

For example, I might try an E5+ as follows:

Up to 10,000 xp (5th level) everything is as normal. After 10,000 xp, gain a feat every 5,000 xp except at 20K, 40K, 80K and 160K; at those xp totals you gain a level instead.

At 210,000 xp (20th level) a character would have 9 class levels and 37 extra feats.

I was thinking about something similar this morning, only ending at 8th level. The problem I saw, though, is that it kinda screws the sorcerer compared to the wizard (in your example, he'd have to wait 20k xp for that next level of spells).

EDIT: rycanada beat me to it.

 

[Cheiromancer]

One thing I notice in this system is that at 5th, 7th, and 9th Sorcerers lag behind Wizards because of those highest-level spells. Would you be discouraging Sorcerers in your campaign by design?

I'd give them 1 spell known and 0 spells per day (plus bonus spells) at odd levels. At even levels they'd be just like in the book.

I'm also thinking of some kind of mechanic for getting access to higher level spells - mechanically much like buying scrolls, but with less strain on the believability of the campaign world. (i.e. how could you buy a scroll with a 6th level spell if no one in the campaign world is 11th level?) Limit it to PHB spells equal to or less than the PC's character level, make it take 1 hour/level to perform - stuff like that.