Introducing Enlightened Grognard

Fanaelialae

Legend
I have to say, of the many 3e variants I've read (Trailblazer, Pathfinder, Fantasy Craft, etc.) this is the only one that's seriously piqued my interest since I stopped playing 3e. The token system looks like an elegant solution to the issue of modifier bloat. I also really like your approach to area effects, and the way your class design embraces the modularity of 3rd.

I'm curious as to why you chose to allow Power and Speed tokens to boost Str & Dex attacks, but no other BABs can be boosted with tokens. Do you feel that this is needed to balance a disparity between classes that have / don't have magic, or is it for some other reason?

As written, Limited Wish appears to allow you to cast spells with a Frequency of 24 hours or more, once an encounter. I don't know that it is necessarily game breaking, but you may want to limit it to "Encounter or the Frequency of the spell cast, whichever is longer". While I haven't read the entire spell chapter, and therefore don't know if this applies, you may want to apply the same restriction to Wish and Miracle, to avoid abuse of spells with a Frequency of once per year.

I know this has been mentioned before, but I also find it very odd that both Search and Perception exist (after your skill merging, they're the only skills that strike me as redundant). If a Druid and a Ranger walk into an ambush, you end up with the strange scenario where the Druid notices the ambush automatically (assuming his Perception is high enough) while the Ranger only notices the ambush if the player says he is looking for an ambush. The Druid is poor at actively finding the ambush if his Perception fails, whereas the Ranger's only chance is to actively search. It creates weirdness, and I'd suggest the two be merged.

The biggest issue that I can find is that, as written, anyone without at least 1 rank in Perception has essentially no chance of noticing someone with even 1 rank in Stealth, which isn't the case for most opposed skills. Assuming equal Str, someone with 1 rank in Athletics has a significant advantage over someone with 0 ranks (avg 13.75 vs avg 10.5), but it's far from a guaranteed success. Against an untrained Stealth check, untrained passive Perception has very little chance of success (the average Stealth check will be 10.5, whereas passive Perception is 0). Even trained Perception doesn't have much of an advantage over untrained Stealth at level 1 (11 vs avg 10.5). Untrained passive checks don't seem to be of much practical value to the system, as far as I can tell. That, in turn, makes Bluff and Stealth more potent than skills normally opposed by a DC or an opposed check.

The problem, as I see it, is that trained skills roll a minimum of 10 (with a maximum of 20) whereas passive checks always "roll" either 0 or 10. Under your system, an untrained check averages 10.5, but a trained check averages 12.75. An approach that gives passive skills a slight advantage would be for untrained passive checks to be equal to 11 + modifier (note that it's still unlikely that this will beat a trained check). Trained passive checks would be 13 + mod (making it challenging but possible for an untrained check to beat it). Of course, at higher levels trained will beat untrained hands down (assuming you've been increasing ranks every level), but that applies to all skills. This change brings active/passive skills more in line with active/active and active/DC skills.

I hope this doesn't come across as overly critical, as I really do think you've done an amazing job with EG!
 

log in or register to remove this ad

amnuxoll

First Post
I was talking about non-magical item. Masterwork items precisely.

My answer was about crafting in general. EG is deliberately designed to discourage PC crafting.

But I think the last paragraph applies to your situation. If you want to create a character who is a blacksmith, then that's good grounds for a house rule.
 

amnuxoll

First Post
I have to say, of the many 3e variants I've read (Trailblazer, Pathfinder, Fantasy Craft, etc.) this is the only one that's seriously piqued my interest since I stopped playing 3e.
It's kind of you to say so.

I'm curious as to why you chose to allow Power and Speed tokens to boost Str & Dex attacks, but no other BABs can be boosted with tokens. Do you feel that this is needed to balance a disparity between classes that have / don't have magic, or is it for some other reason?

That's the primary reason. It's also easier for spellcasters to get more tokens. So, making them only increase weapon attacks it creates more teamwork. My home group has gotten savvy with this. For example, we know that the ranger/rogue is most effective when he has two power tokens (sneak attack) and 1 speed token (shield bash) every round so the druid and the paladin make a point of keeping him supplied with them. Combats feel like a team effort.

As written, Limited Wish appears to allow you to cast spells with a Frequency of 24 hours or more, once an encounter.

Nice catch! I will fix that.

I know this has been mentioned before, but I also find it very odd that both Search and Perception exist

I agree that the concept takes some getting used to, but once you do it seems to work well. The goal here is to make Perception less of "must have" skill by taking some of its capability and splitting it off into Search. So, when building your character you have to choose what you want to be good at (or invest in both skills). In your example, both the ranger and the druid will have moments when their respective skill investment pays off.


The biggest issue that I can find is that, as written, anyone without at least 1 rank in Perception has essentially no chance of noticing someone with even 1 rank in Stealth, which isn't the case for most opposed skills.

Well, you're absolutely right. This is an issue I've spent a lot of time ruminating on over the last 12 months. I have a friend who is a game designer who made a similar criticism to yours and I almost changed the system then but decided to give it a go as is. I'm glad I did. We've been playing the game for a while now and I think he's come to appreciate the current approach. (I'll ask him.) I certainly like it.

I've considered a number of different alternatives including using different base values as you suggested. I settled on this solution because: a) it's simple to use and remember b) it strongly rewards players who invest in skills. Drawing on your example, when that assassin with 1 rank in stealth approaches the party then when the ranger who has a rank invested in Perception notices him approach then it makes that ranger look heroic. It also makes the player feel rewarded for that investment. It also makes the ranger valuable to the party.

Also, remember that Perception is passive. So, it's not a case of everyone at the table rolling a die and being told that they aren't good enough. The DM simply announces "Ranger Rick, you detect the glint of moonlight off of a drawn dagger as a shadow detaches itself from the nearby alley." So it's not about who failed but isntead about who succeeded.

I personally believe that these sort of "spotlight moments" really improve the game, as long as every PC gets them in roughly equal proportion. If you ask me why so few players played pure rogues in D&D 3.5e, my answer is that skills didn't turn out to be as valuable as they were intended to be. These changes to the skill system are one move I made to correct that. And I think it's working. One of my playtesters, who is known for creating powerful builds, actually took the feat that lets him get additional skill ranks to spend. In 3.5e, taking a feat like that would have been seen as a wasted feat by most players.



I hope this doesn't come across as overly critical, as I really do think you've done an amazing job with EG!

On the contrary, it comes across as very well informed and thoughtful. You've touched on some points that really indicate a strong understanding and appreciation of what I've done here and I'm flattered by that.
 

Aloïsius

First Post
I will soon playtest EG (slightly modified for a less "dungeon heavy" gameplay), and, while reading the energy drain rules, I thought that it would be nice (and evil...) if the draining creature was able to drain token from its victim. This would inflict a penalty to a drained creature even if it does not die, and will give a boost somewhat more "active" to the draining attacker than mere hit point healing.


I'm also thinking about a way to convert the tome of battle (way of the nine swords) to EG. Its stances are more powerful than the stance feats in EG, and I don't know what to do with attacks and counters : make them work like the spells ? I guess the answer depends of the way I incorporate ToB classes, either as feat for the fighter/barbarian/monks or as entirely new classes.


(of course, this is also just another shameless bump, as I wish a lot of folk to read this thread and discover this system).
 
Last edited:

amnuxoll

First Post
D&D Next

I don't know if anyone still subscribes to this thread but...

Last week I had the chance to playtest the current draft of the D&D Next rules. The details of my experience are covered by an NDA (surprise, surprise) but I will quote this passage from the Introduction in Chapter 0 of the EG rules:
So, for my sake and yours, I'm creating the Englightened Grognard rule system in an attempt to bring the best of everything together. Let's hope it'll do until the pros step in with 5th edition.

Based on my experience, this prediction appears to be coming true. Of course, D&D Next isn't everything I wish it was but, overall, I am very pleased with what I saw.

The one nugget that I think really improves the game but won't be in D&D Next is the token-based bonus system. I expect that I will house rule it into my home games if my fellow players will agree to it.

Otherwise, my fingers are crossed that D&D 5e will make EG more-or-less obsolete so I can relax and just play my favorite game again.

:AMN:
 


Remove ads

Top