Fantasy Concepts: An OGL Fantasy Saga Project

[Baron Opal]

If you say it's balanced because of the feats, it's only balanced if someone takes the feats. If someone has to take the feats to regain a lost balance, then they shouldn't be required to take them.

I can appreciate that. Iterative attacks are only useful against mooks, in my experience, so giving a major bonus to damage to compensate for their loss seems to be trading apples for oranges, so to speak. You might hit a comparable threat with your -5 attack but not with your -10 attack. That's a reason why I really like feats like Rapid Strike which trades attack bonus for dice of damage.

When I was thinking about the SWSE rules and I saw the level based bonus damage that tracked well in my mind to the bonus gained for attribute bonuses and magic weapon bonuses. I can see that over the career of the adventurer the +1 to +10 bonus to damage tracked to the bonus from strength from girdles and gauntlets and from the +1 to +5 from weapons. I figured that the optional nature of iterative attacks was mitigated by the double to triple base damage from the weapons.

I would really rather not spend an action point for the iterative attacks. Especially since that in SWSE there really aren't iterative attacks, you gain bonus attacks for a flat penalty to all of them. I like the concept of being able to "spend" BAB to do cool things.

 

[SKid4]

In SW Saga, you were forced to choose between armor and the class bonus to Reflex. By reducing the class bonus to half, the armor bonus can be allowed to stack normally (more or less). You could also limit the total Reflex bonus to just character level to compensate, keeping the SW Saga values.

 

[Baron Opal]

At this amittedly nebulous stage, are there plans to keep magic items roughly the same or are you thinking of something else? Part of the design of SWSE is that there aren't too many modifiers to attributes or stats beyond armor.

 

[drothgery]

In SW Saga, you were forced to choose between armor and the class bonus to Reflex. By reducing the class bonus to half, the armor bonus can be allowed to stack normally (more or less). You could also limit the total Reflex bonus to just character level to compensate, keeping the SW Saga values.

Keep in mind that I'm pretty sure the designers want you to be able to use standard d20 opponents without too much hassle. Hitting AC 20 is not a problem of a CR20 monster. Hitting AC 30 is rarely a problem for a CR20 monster.

So I'd be inclined to make the Armor Proficiency feats function like Armor Prof + the Improved Armored Defense talent for that armor type.

 

[EditorBFG]

At this amittedly nebulous stage, are there plans to keep magic items roughly the same or are you thinking of something else? Part of the design of SWSE is that there aren't too many modifiers to attributes or stats beyond armor.

I think magic items need to stay as is, which is part of why halving defenses is probably the way to go. The two things that should not change substantially are spells and magic items-- too many are out there.

However, if saves are half level, my only concern is that if we do move to a skill-based spellcasting model-- as Flynn and I hope to-- a spellcaster's skill will be too high to ever fail to overcome defense. On the math Flynn came up with for average defense and what most spellcasters would have for skills, it was already pretty easy for a caster to win. With half level saves, it'll essentially be impossible for a character's defense to equal even a low skill-based roll to cast. Since it looks like the lower saves are the best option, we have to put some deep thought into spellcasting.

 

[Flynn]

I think magic items need to stay as is, which is part of why halving defenses is probably the way to go. The two things that should not change substantially are spells and magic items-- too many are out there.

However, if saves are half level, my only concern is that if we do move to a skill-based spellcasting model-- as Flynn and I hope to-- a spellcaster's skill will be too high to ever fail to overcome defense. On the math Flynn came up with for average defense and what most spellcasters would have for skills, it was already pretty easy for a caster to win. With half level saves, it'll essentially be impossible for a character's defense to equal even a low skill-based roll to cast. Since it looks like the lower saves are the best option, we have to put some deep thought into spellcasting.

I agree. We want to modify magic items and spells as little as possible, to increase the ability to use all those cool RPG books you've already purchased with a minimum of conversion. Therefore, we must look at the math to make sure that the system provides the same general output that we see in a standard D&D game.

It may come to pass that the target DC for casting a spell becomes 15+spell level, and then casters have to subtract 5 from the skill roll before comparing it to their target's defenses.

Defense: 10 + half character level + 2 (class) + stat

Skill Check: d20 + spell level (essentially half character level for highest level spells at any particular level) + 5 (training) + stat

To Overcome Defenses: Above result -5

Analysis: Essentially, to cast spells at your highest level of access, assuming your casting stat mod is the same as your target's defense stat mod (so that they wash), you have to roll a 7 to cast the spell, but a 12 to bypass defenses if your spell has a saving throw.

I am not looking at the impact of feats such as skill focus that effect the casting roll, nor feats that increase defense values, since that's a character resource and not a part of the base game. At the base level, it looks like it would work okay.

What are your thoughts, guys?

With Regards,
Flynn

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

Why make it a skill-based roll? Are you intending casters to fail casting spells sometimes? In conjunction with Vancian magic? That sounds a bit crippling. Why can't the magical attack roll just be d20 + spell level + stat? Tying it to a skill sounds like you'll make skill focus (spellcraft I assume) a must-have for any serious caster, which isn't really in the spirit of choice that we're aiming for.

 

[nobodez]

I had a really long post typed up, but then I realized Flynn had already hit everything on the head.

Why not just disallow magic as a trained skill? You can still get Skill/Spell Focus, but not training (perhaps as a class feature of the archmage class?). That is, i think, the problem, making the skill for magical attacks a trained skill.

 

[Flynn]

I had a really long post typed up, but then I realized Flynn had already hit everything on the head.

Why not just disallow magic as a trained skill? You can still get Skill/Spell Focus, but not training (perhaps as a class feature of the archmage class?). That is, i think, the problem, making the skill for magical attacks a trained skill.

Ummm... you do know what a trained skill is, right? Either you don't know it (untrained), you know it (trained), or you know it and are focused in it (trained and focused). You can't have skill focus without first having the skill as a trained skill.

Just Clarifying What Appears To Be Confusion,
Flynn

 

[Flynn]

Why make it a skill-based roll? Are you intending casters to fail casting spells sometimes? In conjunction with Vancian magic? That sounds a bit crippling. Why can't the magical attack roll just be d20 + spell level + stat? Tying it to a skill sounds like you'll make skill focus (spellcraft I assume) a must-have for any serious caster, which isn't really in the spirit of choice that we're aiming for.

Vancian in our case means having finite spells that do one distinctive thing. Thinks "Legends of Sorcery" or "Grim Tales Magic System". It is precisely the spirit of Saga (see the Use the Force skill in Saga and how it works with Force powers), and captures the flavor well, in my opinion.

Without it, you have to spend talents to get new spell levels and spell slots. Casters wouldn't take talents in anything else because of the desire to keep magic up to the max possible. We thought about that and decided we didn't want to railroad casters into that kind of straightjacket for character resources, so we came up with the skill-based casting instead.

Which approach would you rather see?

Hope this helps,
Flynn