Grim Tales? Anyone? Bueller?

Felon said:
Got the book Friday, and have pored over it extensively. I'm impressed. My only criticisms so far are A) the "crumpled page" look is a major impediment to legibility (trying to keep people from scanning into a text file or something?)

Never even registered as a concern. It was just a line look.

Fair warning in advance, then: Slavelords of Cydonia will not only probably use the same treatment, I felt that I could actually move the margins out another 1/2 inch without sacrificing legibility.

and B) Strong heroes don't get the Rage talent (even though other Talents are shared between classes when appropriate).

I didn't think it was appropriate. If you think otherwise, add it. Certainly the GT rulebook should give you the confidence to tweak the game however you like-- right?

But I would caution against adding everything you think is appropriate to every class, especially feats or talents that are at the beginning or end of a feat chain or talent tree. For example, Rapid Shot is certainly a good choice for a Fast feat. You'll notice though that Fast heroes don't get it-- you risk front-loading the class.

You might also want to do a count of how many abilities are available to each class. I think the Dedicated class has the most options, and if I recall Strong might actually be at the back of the pack (something like 20 to 16 or something). There's certainly room to add Rage, but again, I think you risk front-loading the Strong class. Certain feats and talents in combination with the raw numbers of certain classes (BAB, saves, Defense, etc.) can be, frankly, just too good.

Best example: Sneak attack belongs to the Smart class, though you could make a very good argument to offer it to the Fast class. I chose not to make Fast any more desirable than it already was. Likely, the same design consideration kept Rage away from Strong heroes.

I'd REALLY love to see some of D&D's core classes reverse-engineered into advanced classes. For instance, making rogues from smart & fast heroes, barbarians from strong & tough heroes, and monks from a trifecta of strong, fast, and dedicated heroes.

There are no advanced classes in Grim Tales. Nor are there any prestige classes. There is no need for them, and I'd recommend that a GM add feats or new talent trees to his game before he adds classes. One of the neat things about GT is character customization. It adds a level of power that is not only fun, but a level of survivability that is frankly pretty necessary in a low-magic game.

As (most) of the class abilities from D&D were converted to talents for Grim Tales, what exactly are you missing in order to do what you want to do? Are you simply asking for a couple of sample "builds" or templates to show how it could be done?

Neat idea-- if I had time I would do it. But I think as soon as you sit down to do it, you'll find it grows harder and harder to convert on a 1-to-1 basis. The d20Modern classes get a lot more feats (a class-specific feat every 2nd level in addition to a wildcard feat every 3rd level). Since most D&D class abilities are talent trees, not feats, you'll discover that although the GT-built character is on a par with the power of a D&D character, they become quite divergent in terms of the types of abilities they sport.

If you want to tackle the job in a seperate thread here or in house rules, I would love to jump in and discuss as time permits!

Wulf
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Wulf Ratbane said:
There are no advanced classes in Grim Tales. Nor are there any prestige classes. There is no need for them, and I'd recommend that a GM add feats or new talent trees to his game before he adds classes. One of the neat things about GT is character customization.

I've got a comment on this.

I like the D&D classes and am a big fan of prestige classes.

D20 modern moved the characters away from vocation based and into aptitude based. This was a clever thing. But then the advanced and prestige classes turn back to vocation. Now, this works fine. But GT seems to have picked up on the approach that aptitude classes greatly free up the characters to be a person rather than a job description.
That isn't a complaint against the vocation approach, but I really like the fleshed out aptitude approach as an alternative.
 

BryonD said:
That isn't a complaint against the vocation approach, but I really like the fleshed out aptitude approach as an alternative.
Conceptually, it also seems a lot closer to the way d20 works in practice, i.e., picking classes for what they offer rather than what they represent. Therein lay the true flexibility to be found in class-based d20 games, and is why I like the basic class concept from d20M so much.

I'm definitely going to pick up a copy of GT at Chicago Gameday.
 


I can see it now...

thalmin: "Buzz, what happened to that copy of Grim Tales Wulf sent us?"
buzz: (covering book-shaped bulge in shirt) "Uh, Grim Tales? What copy? I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT!" (runs)
 

Wulf Ratbane said:
There are no advanced classes in Grim Tales. Nor are there any prestige classes. There is no need for them, and I'd recommend that a GM add feats or new talent trees to his game before he adds classes. One of the neat things about GT is character customization. It adds a level of power that is not only fun, but a level of survivability that is frankly pretty necessary in a low-magic game.
Wulf

So would you say that joining group X or recieving training Y that is relatively prestigous, allows you then to choose talents from a special talent tree and or special feats. All of which have very specific pre-requisites in and of themselves such that a certain path of classes/talents/feats most easily leads to qualification? Thus providing the flexibility of the system but maintains the exlusivity of abilities that most people desire with the advanced/prestige class system.
 

Fenris said:
So would you say that joining group X or recieving training Y that is relatively prestigous, allows you then to choose talents from a special talent tree and or special feats. All of which have very specific pre-requisites in and of themselves such that a certain path of classes/talents/feats most easily leads to qualification? Thus providing the flexibility of the system but maintains the exlusivity of abilities that most people desire with the advanced/prestige class system.

It is a simple matter to make certain talent trees available to players only as they join or discover the proper resources. I see this as no different than the GM having tight control over which spells are available to learn in his game.

However, I am not generally a fan of having "group exclusive abilities." I tend to think in the majority of cases, you're looking at the equation from the wrong side.

John Strong doesn't suddenly gain access to Improved Critical because he has taken a level of Dragon Swordsman. Rather, because he masters his weapon and gains Improved Critical, he is eligible to consider himself a Dragon Swordsman.

Nor would it be fair to say that no one is capable of mastering Improved Critical unless they have some nominal attachment to the Dragon Swordsmen.

You could, however, extrapolate the bizarreness of the abilities to the point that it makes sense-- for example, one cannot learn the Five Points Exploding Heart technique except from a master of the technique. But there is nothing inherent to belonging to a particular prestige group that makes the learning of this feat or talent possible, from a rules standpoint, except in regards to finally discovering a source from which to learn.

But, this is a function of roleplaying and the GM's whim, not a game mechanic.

I sincerely hope that made sense...


Wulf
 

Wulf Ratbane said:
I sincerely hope that made sense...
Wulf

Yes, simply and eloquently. Some bovines are hard to let go, but I can freely set them free with this explaination. I had indeed being looking at the wrong side of the equation. Ths is part of why I am looking forward to Grim Tales so much. Thanks so much. Now I just need my copy to arrive :)
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Top