Microlite20 : the smallest thing in gaming

[MeepoDM]

I was of the opinion in my first playtest that the Rogue was a tad on the weak side as well. So I ruled that he did get a Sneak Attack, and that the damage bonus was simply his Subterfuge rank. I thought it worked well and gave him a nice little boost.

 

[Wik]

You know, thinking about it....

Here's how I'd do the classes.

***WARRIOR***

As written, although I'd factor in a damage bonus similar to power attack into his stats. Or, keeping with feats, you could set up multiple "fighter options".

Option #1 - Damage
Every odd level, the fighter's damage increases by 1. (the fighter would be improving his attack with weapon focus, anyways, so this is okay...)

Option #2 - Attack
Every odd level, the fighter's attack bonus increased by 1.

Option #3 - Defense
Every odd level, the fighter's AC bonus improves by +1.

(note - these aren't hard and solid, or anything... just ideas)

***ROGUE***

The rogue receives an additional skill group of his choice (either Mind, Physical, or Communication).

If the rogue makes a sneak attack (an attack against a target that is already engaged in melee combat or is unaware of the rogue's presence) against a target, he can add his subterfuge rating to the damage.

If a rogue makes a saving throw to avoid damage, than if he succeeds, he takes no damage, instead of half damage.

***WIZARD***

A wizard can cast a number of spells per encounter equal to his MIND rating. Note that level isn't a factor - a wizard with a MIND of 5 can cast 5 first level spells, 5 2nd level spells, two 1st level spells and 3 2nd level spels - whatever.

As an option, a wizard can only cast two spells per encounter that are of her highest spell level - thus, a 1st level wizard can only cast 2 first level spells each encounter.

***CLERIC***
Same spellcasting rules as for Wizard, including the Mind prerequisite (thus, clerics can cast fewer spells per encounter). This will even up the spellcasting variability (wizards are better casters than clerics, I'd say). To even up the "clerics can fully heal the group in between encounters because there's no limit to spells per day", I'd suggest some sort of heal limit... or I'd just throw in reserve points (from UA) and get rid of heal spells altogether. Plus, it's simpler!

 

[Pbartender]

"If the total bonus is +6, a second attack can be made at +1. If the total bonus is +11,
three attacks can be made at +11, +6 and +1."

Consider a simple change to something like...

"Character's may take additional attacks, but each extra attacks suffers a cumulative -5 penalty to its attack roll. For example, if your total attack bonus is +6, you may take a second attack at +1, a third attack at -4, etc..."

I like the idea of allowing lower level characters to use the extra attacks, but it might give too much leeway for endless wild swings. Would this rule be a practical option?

 

[Wik]

"If the total bonus is +6, a second attack can be made at +1. If the total bonus is +11,
three attacks can be made at +11, +6 and +1."

Consider a simple change to something like...

"Character's may take additional attacks, but each extra attacks suffers a cumulative -5 penalty to its attack roll. For example, if your total attack bonus is +6, you may take a second attack at +1, a third attack at -4, etc..."

I like the idea of allowing lower level characters to use the extra attacks, but it might give too much leeway for endless wild swings. Would this rule be a practical option?

It's a great rule, but you have to put a penalty n it for players using the option, or else every first level character will make four attacks - because there's no penalty for trying.

 

[greywulf]

Yipe! I go and sit down and watch TV for two whole minutes and look what happens

Ourstanding Greywulf. Now if you can create a giant table of monster stats corresponding with the SRD monsters, then I wouldn't have to think as a DM at all!

Y'know, I started work on an M20 Monster Manual (M20MM?) earlier today, then decided There Has TO Be An Easier Way. I remember seeing the Monsters from the SRD as an excel spreadsheet someplace. I'm sure I could take that, remove the non-M20 stuff, add in skills and kick it out as a 5 page PDF. Shouldn't be too hard, eh? Same for spells too, thinking about it.

Meantime, if you want to keep adding your own critters, then please go ahead. It might take me a day or two to sort out the formatting and stuff.

I'd be tempted to just include the top 30-ish critters to keep the zen-like simplicity going, but that's just personal taste.

I'm going to be playtesting the system over at DNDOG in the OpenRoleplaying forum. The thread is named Microlite20, which should be public for anyone who wants to watch the game. I typically only post every other day, to every third or fourth day, but I never leave my games completely dead. I'll keep this thread updated to my research.

Wow! I'll keep a close eye on proceedings (silently, of course) to see how things are going. Thanks.

 

[MeepoDM]

I'd be tempted to just include the top 30-ish critters to keep the zen-like simplicity going, but that's just personal taste.

I think this is an excellent idea. The MM should not be larger than the rulebook, after all!

 

[Pbartender]

It's a great rule, but you have to put a penalty n it for players using the option, or else every first level character will make four attacks - because there's no penalty for trying.

Well... there is a penalty... Cumulative -5s to hit.

A good strong 1st level fighter would have +5 to hit. Four attacks in one round would come as +5/+0/-5/-10. He's going to have a real hard time hitting anything with goes last two attacks.

Thinking it over, I think the main problem would come from automatic hits on a 20.

Technically, with my rule a player coudl essentially "Take 20" on an attack roll. Once you get past -20 it doesn't matter... you just keep attacking until you hit a natural 20 and critical.

Never mind, then.

 

[greywulf]

More feedback Yum! Thanks, Wik

1) I think rogues should have an extra skill of their choice, to make them "equal" to other classes. So, they'd get subterfuge and Mind if they wanted it, ot subterfuge and physical. I think that'd be fair.

Take a re-read of the rules Wik - Rogues get Subterfuge as their +3 skill; which stat bonus gets added to it depends on the situation at the time. I left it at just that for Rogues because Subterfuge covers a massive in-game skill area from hiding, moving silently, opening and disarming locks and all manner of thiefly pursuits.

For folks that think Rogues are short changed, I suggest trying them out in-game. If you still feel they need an extra oomph, give them +1 initiative (to reflect their quick-thinking and supicious nature), or add in some form of sneak attack - though we handle sneak-up-and-knock-someone out as a simple sub+STR roll. Whatever works for you, though.

2) Spellcasting as you have it is, um, BRUTAL. Why not just have it set up so that characters have a "max spells per encounter" or something? As it stands.... I'm not a fan.

Brutal. I like that

As I've said earlier in this thread, spellcasting as it stands works surprisingly well in-game. As it's Hit Point driven, the Mages and Clerics tend to be very selective with their spellcasting so when it's used, it is Very Effective. Kinda like giving them the keys to the candy store, but they can only eat three sweets. Yes, your typical 1st level 13HP Mage could cast any 1st or 2nd level SRD spell, but it's unlikely he'll be happy going below 6HP, especially as this can't be magically healed. That's only 3 first level spells/day, or 6 zero-level (or a combination thereof).

We found it worked much better than expected, with the Magi and Clerics thinking far more tactially than their "real" D&D counterparts.

 

[greywulf]

Technically, with my rule a player coudl essentially "Take 20" on an attack roll. Once you get past -20 it doesn't matter... you just keep attacking until you hit a natural 20 and critical.

What's a "Take 20"? I don't see no rule for that in Microlite20?

 

[greywulf]

"If the total bonus is +6, a second attack can be made at +1. If the total bonus is +11,
three attacks can be made at +11, +6 and +1."

Consider a simple change to something like...

"Character's may take additional attacks, but each extra attacks suffers a cumulative -5 penalty to its attack roll. For example, if your total attack bonus is +6, you may take a second attack at +1, a third attack at -4, etc..."

I like the idea of allowing lower level characters to use the extra attacks, but it might give too much leeway for endless wild swings. Would this rule be a practical option?

I agree the existing working is kinda kludgy. Maybe taking your wording but adding the caveat that all multiple attacks must still be at least +1 to be allowed, so +6/+1 is ok, but +6/+1/-4 isn't. That sets the limit to number of attacks without being too rules heavy.

"Character's may take additional attacks, but each extra attacks suffers a cumulative -5 penalty to its attack roll. All multiple attacks must still be at least +1 to be allowed. For example +6/+1 is ok, but +6/+1/-4 isn't."

Hmmmmmmmmm.......... that's still a bit unwieldy. Can anyone suggest a better turn of phrase?