New Ruleset?

[Umbran]

My question is, would anyone would be interested? I'm not guaranteeing success, but I'd rather know that there was interest before doing the effort.

Fair enough.

My interest would be academic, at best. I'd have no plans to actually use the thing. I already have a huge number of different systems I'd love to play, but have no time for. This system wouldn't do anything I cannot already manage well enough with existing systems.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Isn't there already a stripped-down SRD out there? Might want to look at what they did, perhaps.

Dunno.

I just like tinkering with rules.

 

[Gentlegamer]

I'm down, being a rules experimenter myself.

 

[monboesen]

Nope. Just about all your listed goals are already solved for me by True20.

 

[shilsen]

Of course, it might be fun for some people to see me bite off more than I can chew, and create a lousy, unplayable mess. Then they can say "Nah, nah, RC! You suck!"

Wait a minute! We're not allowed to say that already?

Kidding aside, I wouldn't be interested except as maybe something to read on these boards. 3.5e with a few house rules works just fine for me.

 

[DeadlyUematsu]

Interesting idea.

Now if only someone would go and make a SRD based on the Warhammer Quest rules... that would really make my day!

Anyway, good luck to you, Crowking.

 

[Lanefan]

A few thoughts on your ideas:

(1) Retain a large amount of the character customization from 3e/3.5e. This is especially important to making it possible for PI players to use 3/3.5e modules.

How so? Do 3.x modules really key so much on having specific characters or character types go through them?

(2) Reduce stat block sizes for monsters. Reduce mathematical complexity of monsters. It would be best if it were possible to quickly convert monsters from 1e/2e/3e (this might take some work). IMHO, monster stats right now take up the lion's share of adventure prep time, especially if you want to use new creatures.

(3) Keep feats, skills, and unified XP progression from 3e. Make XP progression adjustable. Reduce the woo hoo magic factor slightly; make low-level PCs a little more hardy.

Can both 2 and 3 be done? Feats and skills represent a large chunk of the stat blocks, at least in 3.0. One way to cut down the block size (and to streamline combat) might be to get rid of or drastically curtail iterative attacks...a 1e monster write-up just says AT:3(claw-claw-bite),Dmg.1-4,1-4,2-12 (and its hit dice give you as DM its combat matrix); could a 3e monster's combat end up written as AT: (claw+8,claw+8,bite+11), Dmg.(d4,d4)+2,(2d6)+4? Or, to keep iteratives, have the iterative -5's just assumed, and only list the numbers for the best attack?

(4) Make combat non-mini friendly, and faster.

(5) Focus on location and exploration and multiple encounters over a few combats.

(6) Do something about buffs.

4 will take some work; I can't even imagine 1e without mini's, never mind 3e. Is 5 really determined by the ruleset? For 6, you might want to look at stacking in general, along with knock-on effects e.g. the amount of things that change when a stat gets buffed.

I'm certainly interested in seeing what you come up with.

Lanefan

 

[Faraer]

I'm afraid putting together the bits of the two systems that you like (no objective point of view is available to pick the unambiguous strengths) sounds like a fantasy heartbreaker.

 

[greywulf]

*cough* Microlite20 *cough*

 

[Treebore]

I presume you have already looked at all the systems to make sure one doesn't already exist?

There is Fudge/Fate, Basic Fantasy Roleplay, Castles and Crusades, and even more that came out after I decided what system I wanted to use.

Plus I kept feats in my Castles and Crusades, just heavily modified to be much easier to use.

Basically, if you do start this, make sure it doesn't already exist.