More reasons to love Monte

[buzz]

Re: Re: More reasons to love Monte

Slaine and the Everquest RPG are already doing this by going directly OGL. There are also other d20 books with alternate classes/races, like Sovereign Stone, and WotC closed content products like Wheel of Time. I honestly don't see Monte's entry as anything at all new in the OGL/d20 world (I don't mean this negatively), but I still think it would be great to have more choices like this.

I would argue that Slaine and Everquest aren't really doing this. It seems pretty clear that Monte's book is intended as "variant stuff for your D&D game", and not "a new game based on the d20 OGL" like the ones you're citing.

Granted it's a pretty minor distinction, but I can see a difference between a product specifically designed to work with D&D (Arcana Unearthed), and a product designed to *supplant* D&D, or at least one that isn't concerned wtih compatibility (Everquest).

 

[Turjan]

Well, I don't mind alternate PHB classes, if they are done right. I'm not particularly fond of Monte's sorcerer, because it makes the class even less versatile than it is now. The opposite should be the goal. I felt that his alternate bard went too far away from the standard magic system for my liking. I would prefer a more unified spell list/attribute dependency for all spellcasters, and regarding the bard's music, I'd rather diversify his musical abilities.

His ranger doesn't do it for me, either, because it doesn't solve the main problem of the class (missing versatility). I'd prefer a solution as the "Book of the Righteous" delivered for the paladin class, converting it to a toolbox system called the "Holy Warrior". A similar approach for the ranger class would be nice.

Okay, you see, alternate PHB classes and an alternate, unified magic system would do it for me; if they were done right .

 

[Nightfall]

Finally, a real use for my sig.

LOL! Yes but unfortunately them Rangers aren't doing as well as Monte's!

 

[Agnostic Paladin]

I'm not really clear on this. Is the book going to be just Monte's existing alt.classes, or is it going to collect many alt.things?

I agree with Zappo; UA 3E could be cool. Give me a set of alternate classes, magic systems, combat systems all in one place. If it gets an alternate magic system similar to the weaves in WoT, I'll definately get it.

I've always wanted a magic system like the old Arena: Elder Scrolls game's, only dynamic and with the ability to push spells and caster harder and where having a book with details on what you're trying to do give a bonus to the skill check.

Give me an alt.psi system that's balanced against magic, but isn't exactly the same.

Give me DR armour, Grim & Gritty combat, decreasing combat effectiveness.

And have it all be under Optional Rule: headings and I'll give Malhavoc (or White Wolf or whoever actually gets the significant profits) money. And I'll sing their praises while I'm doing it.

Edit: A book like this could even be a place to offer up a classless D&D. Or even levelless for all you hard-core heretics.

 

[EricNoah]

I'm not really clear on this. Is the book going to be just Monte's existing alt.classes, or is it going to collect many alt.things?

From what I read of the interview, the idea is that you can use the book as a complete replacement for the PHB. Or you can just use bits and pieces. I believe the idea is all-new races, all-new spells, all-new classes, with none of the originals from the PHB included. So imagine a fantasy campaign without dwarves, halflings and elves, without wizards and rangers, without magic missile and cure light wounds and I think that's what the picture starts to look like. I think many of us will be pretty shocked at how much we mentally rely on these "old standbys" when thinking about D&D, and it could be very nice to see D&D done with a whole new set of assumptions about the "world" of D&D.

 

[The Sigil]

I would prefer a more unified spell list/attribute dependency for all spellcasters, and regarding the bard's music, I'd rather diversify his musical abilities.

*shameless plug* Have you checked out my Enchiridion of Mystic Music?

It's been interesting to see the way the bard has been handled by the sundry d20 publishers... WotC barely handled the bard at all, focusing on instruments rather than the bard itself in S&S.

Path of Magic opened up several new vistas for the bard (I especially loved the "bard a spotter for wizard/sorcerer" wherein a wizard/sorcerer allied with the bard can cast a spell at the bard, and then the bard can "ricochet" the spell to a new target as though he were the original caster - great for throwing fireballs around corners and so on).

Monte's treatment of the bard definitely gave the bard's magic more "musical" feel, and made it easier for bards to cooperatively cast.

My work took a different tack than Monte's and is probably a little closer to what is found in Path of Magic - instead of messing with a bard's spells, I chose to focus on his music abilities - upping the total from 6 possible uses for bardic music to 84. No new methods of magic to keep track of, just new uses for old skills, so to speak. I included methods on how to learn them (just giving them to the bard outright is unbalanced). I felt that a bard's magic and his music should be two very different entities - the music makes him unique, and the spells provide him with much of the flexibility he needs.

Is my treatment better? There's never an empirical standard for "Better" in something like this. But I do know I've written the longest work on bards out there, and if you like the kinds of things I detailed, the Enchiridion might just be for you.

http://www.cooleys.org/publishing/index.asp?view=stc001

--The Sigil

 

[Desdichado]

I agree, that would rock if done right. However, if it's too archetypical (like D&D) so that essentially it's its own game complete with too many built in assumptions, then it's probably not worth it.

AgPal, I'm surprised you said you'd buy it for a system like the WoT one -- why not just use the WoT one? It's not hard to convert the Wilder and Initiate classes into D&D compatible ones (essentially just ignore defense and reputation.)

 

[Apok]

I must agree with Sigil on one point; of all publisher's, he has done the most for the standard D&D Bard. The Enchiridion is truly an excellent suppliment for any Bard lover and I highly recommend it. It is also the only stand-alone Bard suppliment for 3e in existence, which says something. Given the relatively dissappointing treatment of Bards in S&S and the fact that the Quintessential Bard isn't even on the horizon, it's all there is.

Hey, Sigil, perhaps you should submit a proposal for the Quint. Bard to Mongoose yourself.

 

[Vince]

Imagine if Monte got together with Skip Williams and Jonathan Tweet to do their own, non-WotC versions of all three core books?

 

[Crothian]

Imagine if Monte got together with Skip Williams and Jonathan Tweet to do their own, non-WotC versions of all three core books?

That would be funny, and really cool.