Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 7543069" data-attributes="member: 29398">There's some great stuff in this list.&nbsp; That said, one or two things leap out...#1 - one problem with trying to shoehorn everything into a unified system, as we've seen with 3e-4e-5e, is that there's simply too many times where a different system - an exception - would work much better for just that one application.&nbsp; Another problem is that for the kitbash-inclined DM an exception-based - a.k.a. modular - design is way easier to work with than a unified design in that there's far less potential for knock-on effects from changes to any one particular rule or system.#8 - danger, Will Robinson!&nbsp; At-wills are very iffy and tough to get right.&nbsp; If thsee spells are that useless, better perhaps to just drop them entirely or find a way to beef them up somehow.#10 - not entirely sure what you're thinking here; can you elaborate a bit?#11 - your overnight-rest healing idea really plays hard against the fighters and other high-h.p. types because it's flat across classes - recovery of 10 h.p. for a Wizard is a much bigger deal than 10 h.p. for a Fighter, assuming same level and Con bonus.&nbsp; Better is to make it based on a character's total h.p., as a straight fraction (which as a handy side effect is then trivially easy to modify if a DM wants a faster or slower overnight heal rate).&nbsp; What I use is 1/10 of your total, rounding ALL fractions up - a character with max 30 h.p. rests back 3, at 31 it goes to 4.&nbsp; Easy to change this fraction to 1/8 or 1/5 or whatever if a DM so desires.As for curing spells, I'd posit that the target's level shouldn't matter but the caster's maybe should, if level is to enter into it at all.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lanefan, post: 7543069, member: 29398"] There's some great stuff in this list. That said, one or two things leap out... #1 - one problem with trying to shoehorn everything into a unified system, as we've seen with 3e-4e-5e, is that there's simply too many times where a different system - an exception - would work much better for just that one application. Another problem is that for the kitbash-inclined DM an exception-based - a.k.a. modular - design is way easier to work with than a unified design in that there's far less potential for knock-on effects from changes to any one particular rule or system. #8 - danger, Will Robinson! At-wills are very iffy and tough to get right. If thsee spells are that useless, better perhaps to just drop them entirely or find a way to beef them up somehow. #10 - not entirely sure what you're thinking here; can you elaborate a bit? #11 - your overnight-rest healing idea really plays hard against the fighters and other high-h.p. types because it's flat across classes - recovery of 10 h.p. for a Wizard is a much bigger deal than 10 h.p. for a Fighter, assuming same level and Con bonus. Better is to make it based on a character's total h.p., as a straight fraction (which as a handy side effect is then trivially easy to modify if a DM wants a faster or slower overnight heal rate). What I use is 1/10 of your total, rounding ALL fractions up - a character with max 30 h.p. rests back 3, at 31 it goes to 4. Easy to change this fraction to 1/8 or 1/5 or whatever if a DM so desires. As for curing spells, I'd posit that the target's level shouldn't matter but the caster's maybe should, if level is to enter into it at all. [/QUOTE]

Verification