Fantasy Concepts: An OGL Fantasy Saga Project

[Chris_Nightwing]

Yeah, I've realised that with the number of ways skills can be modified, they just won't work. Am I correct in thinking that your 'casting check' is going to be d20 + half caster level, rounding up? Or are you including the stat modifier too (to represent the 3.5 bonus slot mechanism)?

Both of these work numerically, I think, depending on exactly how much power you want to grant your casters. My only concern would be the complication of using 'half caster level' as another number to work out, and that rounding up makes the even caster levels rather rubbish. If you use caster level as the check, 10 + minimum caster level for the spell as the DC and increase the DC by 1 per spell cast that day or hour or whatever, it looks quite nice. A bit like the scroll system in 3.5. I'm still not entirely convinced that slots aren't easier, but I do see reasons to dislike them too.

I forgot to include casting on the defensive in my uniting-all-spellcasting-into-one-roll statement earlier - having that increase the DC too makes everything even neater!

 

[EditorBFG]

Yeah, I've realised that with the number of ways skills can be modified, they just won't work. Am I correct in thinking that your 'casting check' is going to be d20 + half caster level, rounding up? Or are you including the stat modifier too (to represent the 3.5 bonus slot mechanism)?

I was hoping to use d20 + half caster level (rounding up) + stat modifier, yes. As you say, eliminates the need for a bonus spell chart based on ability scores. Also, keeps the saves essentially the same as in D&D (although in D&D, it is 10 + Spell Level + stat, so higher level casters now do better with low-level spells than before-- this I think I can live with )

Both of these work numerically, I think, depending on exactly how much power you want to grant your casters. My only concern would be the complication of using 'half caster level' as another number to work out, and that rounding up makes the even caster levels rather rubbish.

Well, this is why I was not sure about calling it caster level. Basically, I think the highest level spell you can cast and the modifier to your check be the same number, and have that be the only number you ever use as a caster. Spell Resistance would convert over (halved) as a bonus to your defense against casters, and would grant the equivalent of Evasion for all defenses against spells-- basically, if the spellcaster fails to overcome your defense, you experience no effects, rather than experience the normal made-your-save effect. This emulates Saga's streamlined philosophy, and scales casting ability with the half-level defenses.

And thank you for all your math work on this. Busy with other things, Flynn and I have not looked at the DCs since back when we were both still working under the assumption that casting would be skill-based.

 

[Emryys]

I wonder how the 4E announcement will affect proceedings...?

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

Well, 4e stuff screws a lot of projects. It's worth waiting to see what's actually happening. From my point of view now I want to help Wizards design that hehe.

Back to the difficulty of choosing the right numbers. If the rules state something like, "to cast a level X arcane spell you must have a caster level of at least 2X-1 and a mage level of at least X" then you can make the DC 10 + spell level (+ 2 per repeated casting if you want that aspect) and the roll itself d20 + relevant stat + highest level spell you can cast (subtly working around caster level). My fear is that as your stat increases you get far more high-level spells than low level, so another possibility is d20 + relevant stat + difference between your highest level and the level you're trying to cast - er, which is mechanically the same as making the DC 10 + twice spell level. This just weighs the impact of a high stat slightly differently, so each +4 you obtain gives you another top level spell slot.

 

[EditorBFG]

Back to the difficulty of choosing the right numbers. If the rules state something like, "to cast a level X arcane spell you must have a caster level of at least 2X-1 and a mage level of at least X" then you can make the DC 10 + spell level (+ 2 per repeated casting if you want that aspect) and the roll itself d20 + relevant stat + highest level spell you can cast (subtly working around caster level).

I don't see the advantage to keeping caster level. Why have two numbers, one of which is half the other? Just seems confusing, and the opposite of Saga's streamlined approach. I think there needs to be one number.

On the 4E thing: Well, I certainly think we need to get this to market faster.

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

Don't forget that many spells require caster level to determine dice etc.
You could make this class level instead, perhaps.

 

[Horacio]

I hope 4e announcement doesn't affect this project too much. I've just read the thread, and my head is turning with all the ideas, I would love to see this finished.

 

[The_Gneech]

Of possible interest, my sword-and-sorcery conversion of Saga is ready for perusal here:

http://www.suburbanjungle.com/saga_players_guide_web.pdf

If nothing else, you might find the beast writeups helpful; they should be directly usable in SWSE.

In order to avoid derailing the Fantasy Concepts thread, please address any feedback regarding my version in its own thread, here:

http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?p=3705994

Let me know what you think!

-The Gneech

 

[Flynn]

I'm back from Gen Con now, and Jeremy and I are engaged in a conversation offline in regards to how 4E might and might not impact the Fantasy Concepts project.

I think the biggest impact on our decisions will be whether or not there's still public interest in moving forward with the Fantasy Concepts project given the 4E announcement last week. (I think there is sufficient interest, but it's hard to be sure this soon after 4E is announced.)

So help us out here. Are you guys still interested in seeing what we can come up with for Fantasy Concepts, assuming we can put something out by October (or November at the latest)?

With Regards,
Flynn

 

[Matrix Sorcica]

I will be honest and say that if you finish developing it, I will buy it as promised. However, I am already now impatiently waiting for 4E. I won't start a new campaign before 4E, rather finishing the current one (should fit fine with July 08).

Since there probably will be some things in 4E that I would have done differently, it might be nice to have inspiration from Fantasy Concepts for house rules, though.

But honestly, I think it might be best to wait and see how 4E turns out, and if there's still room for Saga-like improvement, start Fantasy Concepts up once again.