Please break my "gritty" rules set.

[Morandir Nailo]

I've been tinkering for a while with a major overhaul of 3.5; I'm looking to create a dark, gritty pulp-style game, where mighty-thewed warriors fight terrors from Beyond and decadent sorcerers call up Things Which Should Not Be to make unholy bargains. This is what I've got so far; I'm hoping that you guys can help me assess whether or not it's actually a workable system.

The biggest changes:

Allowed Classes
Barbarian, Binder, Crusader, Hexblade, Ranger, Rogue, Swordsage, Totemist, Warblade, Warlock. That's it.

Please note that there are no "traditional" casters; Vancian magic doesn't exist here. The Ranger and Hexblade use spell-less variants: the Ranger gets an Animal Companion as if he were a Druid, and can trade in the Combat Style feature for the Shapeshift Druid ACF from PHB2. Hexblades will get Warlock invocations (though far fewer than Warlocks, and no EB); in addition, their Curse is x/encounter, not x/day.

Allowed Races
The classic four: Human, Dwarf, Elf, Halfling. I want a very human-centric game. In the accompanying campaign setting, demihumans are a rare lot.

New HP/AC System
I'm going to be using the Grim 'n Gritty combat system, detailed here. It's definitely a much more lethal system (as you'll see if you read the sample combat at the end of the description), but obviously that's what I'm going for here.

Other Changes
-Stats will be rolled, in order, using the standard 4d6 -lowest method. You can reroll one stat and swap two. The idea is to create characters with interesting quirks, without totally gimping someone's concept. Full rerolls will be allowed if a stat set is truly horrible.

-For skills, I use the skill groups system from Iron Heroes.

-Rituals magic will exist, using the Incantation rules from UA. Magic item creation will require just such a ritual, albeit with rare components which will generally require questing to obtain. Rituals are found only in books; generally those with such books tend to guard them jealously.

-There will be no magic item economy whatsoever. Players will get items when they pry them from the cold, dead hands of their enemies, and they'll be getting fewer of them. To compensate, they'll get a feat every even level (and at 1st level), and two stat raises every third level. I definitely want to take an "it's you, not your gear" approach.

That covers the basics. Problem is, being just one person I'm sure there are probably glaringly huge holes in this that I've missed. So I'm hoping you guys can help me tear this apart and find all those broken combos that can result from what I've got here. Any questions/comments/criticisms are welcome and appreciated!

Mor

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Barbarian, Binder, Crusader, Hexblade, Ranger, Rogue, Swordsage, Totemist, Warblade, Warlock.

I'd take a closer look at this list.

I'm not the dude to do it, but some power players might be quicker than I to break your game by leveraging weaknesses between the various classes you've chosen. From what I understand, some consider the Bo9S classes to be a little more powerful than the Core warrior classes.

Assuming you're sticking with this basic list, though, I'd probably do a little work and combine the Hexblade and Warlock into one class, especially since your Hexblade was going to be spell-less anyway. Perhaps I'd give the Barbarian a couple of extra feats to bring it more in line with the Bo9S classes in power (if it needs it). I might also do the same with the Ranger & Scout (I know that wasn't on your list, but a good blending of those 2 would probably rock).

I find it a bit odd that you include only one MoI class on your list- its a bit of a sore thumb, really, adding a whole book for the use of one class.

 

[Morandir Nailo]

Yeah, the power difference between the three Bo9S classes and the three PHB classes is a bit of a concern, but I'm hoping that with the extra feats and the Barb's natural DR (which will give him a higher soak) and rage, it will balance out (not to mention shapeshifting rangers!). With the new combat system, Rage = +2 soak, +2 to hit, and +4 damage (since the hit bonus is going to be added to damage), so that's pretty impressive. I'm planning on doing some serious playtesting at some point, pitting PCs against each other and against monsters in both arena-style and dungeon combat scenarios to see how this plays out.

As for the Totemist - I just don't like the other two MoI classes (too alignment focused, and I'm really downplaying alignment). And I've done the same thing in the Binder's case; it's the only class I'm using from Tome of Magic (the other two just plain suck). The idea here is that the Totemist is a Druid replacement, a shaman-like class who takes on the attributes of magical creatures. Hexblade and Warlock are supposed to represent the invocation warrior and invocation caster - one is more combat focused, one gets more "spells." I could give the Warlock the Hexblade's curse ability, but I'm not sure what I would drop to balance it out. Actually, that's not a bad idea...I'll have to think on it.


Mor

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I understand not liking the various classes for flavor or power reasons.

If you're OK with using a system that only benefits 1 class you're using, that's fine.

My concerns are things like:

1) Shapechanging rangers with critter sidekicks seem a bit...over the top. Especially in the context of the other, grittier classes AND making them a spell-less variant in addition. That's why I suggested giving them some Scout abilities instead.

Alternatively, you could even mesh the Brb, Rgr & Scout as a "Wilderness Warrior" class with different paths.

2) I understand why you picked the Totemist. That said, you might want to make the Totemist more the Shapechanger than the Ranger. If that's too much power for the totemist, make a dedicated Shapechanger class.

It could be a Totemic Barbarian- he only morphs into his tribe's totemic animals (which could solve the Barbarian's lack vis a vis the Bo9S classes).

It could even be a pure Shapechanger of some kind.

3) Similarly, the Hexblade question- presumably "How can I have a "gish" without Vancian magic?"- could be answered in a different way. Ditch the Hexblade (which you'd have to rework anyway), giving the stuff you like in it to the Warlock. A warlock with Hex sounds pretty good to me.

If you like Psionics, you could then fill the "gish" role with something like the Divine Mind, PsyWar or even Soulknife. Heck, you could even use a fleshed out (20 level) version of Bruce Cordell's Blade Manifester (a PrCl from Hyperconscious, his 3rd party expansion to the XPH). Also check out the Soulknife PrCls from CompPsi.

4) Of the Bo9S classes, I've found the most people commenting on the Warblade's balance in regards to Core warrior classes, calling its D12 HD and its scaling abilities to be truly overpowering in comparison. (This is just my observation of others' observations.) If you really want this class in your campaign, you may really need to boost the PHB warriors you're using, or tone down the Warblade.

 

[Nifft]

Allowed Classes
Barbarian, Binder, Crusader, Hexblade, Ranger, Rogue, Swordsage, Totemist, Warblade, Warlock. That's it.

Suggest you allow Fighter (as a one, two or four level dip, it can be quite useful). Suggest you allow racial paragon classes. Here's how I rank the classes you've chosen, in terms of raw power:

Barbarian: B
Binder: C-
Crusader: A
Hexblade: C- (assumes access to Spell Compendium)
Ranger: B- (Core, assumes access to Spell Compendium)
Rogue: B (assumes access to charged magic items)
Swordsage: A-
Totemist: C+
Warblade: B
Warlock: B- (assumes access to charged magic items)

As there are many spell-less variant Rangers, I don't know which exactly you mean; however, you will probably be reducing their power and flexibility.

Warlocks depend on charged magic items for much of their flexibility: they have several class features devoted to magic item use and creation. Most Rogues similarly bank on getting some benefit from Use Magic Device.

I'm going to be using the Grim 'n Gritty combat system, detailed here. It's definitely a much more lethal system (as you'll see if you read the sample combat at the end of the description), but obviously that's what I'm going for here.

With wonky healing (Crusader & Binder), I wonder how this will play out.

There will be no magic item economy whatsoever. Players will get items when they pry them from the cold, dead hands of their enemies, and they'll be getting fewer of them. To compensate, they'll get a feat every even level (and at 1st level), and two stat raises every third level. I definitely want to take an "it's you, not your gear" approach.

You've chosen some gear-dependent classes, so I suspect this will bite you. There are ways to get rid of magic gear entirely; I suggest you look into those ways. (First off would be nuking the "big six": enhancement bonuses on armor & weapons, resistance bonus items, ability boosting items, constant skill boosting items, and rings of protection.)

- - -

Class Suggestions:
- Barbarian
- Binder
- Dragon Shaman (PHB-II)
- Crusader
- Fighter
- Knight (PHB-II)
- Rogue
- Scout (C.Adv)
- Swordsage
- Totemist
- Warblade
- Warlock / Dragonfire Adept (Dragon Magic)

You might also consider my Spirit Binders, which seem more in-theme with your game than most WotC classes.


Magic Item Suggestions: "special effect only" magic items. A sword that deals +1d6 fire damage, with no Enhancement bonus, is a fine sword; as is an Adamantine sword (bypasses Hardness). If you take away all the constant magic item bonuses from everybody, then NPCs scale automatically; and if you're using Grim & Gritty, monsters are already inappropriate for their listed CRs, so you don't lose anything you haven't already given away.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Morandir Nailo]

What's funny is that I'm actually using three different systems; each magic user in this game uses a different system. I like variety in my games!

As for the ranger - I'm really not set on the idea of shapeshifters. I basically threw that in on the assumption that I'd encounter a player who just really liked turning into other stuff, and with no Druid around that wouldn't otherwise be possible. There's a spell-less Ranger variant in Complete Warrior, which I will probably end up using. Ditto the Totemist; it's a pretty powerful class as-is, and I think that adding shapeshifting would be too much. It's probably best to just drop the idea altogether.

Interesting idea: allow Barbarians to Rage every encounter. That would change things up a bit.

Actually, the Hexblade was mostly there to be an anti-mage warrior/debuffer, rather than a Gish. But I'm really digging this Curse Warlock thing. I think I'll be going with that. The Curse can replace the UMD-based abilities and the fast healing.

I definitely won't be using Psionics. I'm staying away from traditional magic systems altogether. Binder, Totemist, and Warlock only.

As for the Warblade, the d12 HD won't matter, since there's no HD in this system (every single creature in the game essentially has 25hp, and this never changes). The Bo9S stuff does represent the biggest challenge here, I know; some of the maneuvers (particularly those which allow the attack to ignore DR) will basically insta-kill any monster in this system. Those will have to be modified.

Mor

edit: Nifft, you posted as I was typing this reply. Some good points raised there, which I'll get to later (must go to work now). One thing to remember though is that UMD will basically be useless - no spells means no scrolls, wands, or staves. And I mentioned magic item replacement rules in my first post: extra stat boosts and extra feats. There will also be masterwork items which grant more than just the +1 to hit. More later!

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Listen to the wisdom of Nifft- I've never met him, but I've seen enough of his posts. I'd trust his power rankings of those classes like I'd trust Thanee to deliver a power-user's Wizard spell list.

I understand not using Psionics...but hear out this idea and hold on.

You found the other MoI classes to be too wrapped up in alignment for use in your campaign. Fine.

Soulknives are the least psionic of all the psi classes, and with a D10 HD, decent skill points, and light armor & shields, they are a classic skirmisher class. But most importantly for your purposes, they have a good flavor and a nasty (but arguably too-late acquired, and some argue underpowered) anti-mage warrior debuffer power- Knife to the Soul. It lets them do ability damage to casting stats- 1 point per 1d6 bonus damage given up.

With some minor work, they could be your non-vancian anti-mage debuffers.

First, ditch the psionic flavor- Feats & all, if you wish- and make the Soulknife into an Incarnum class and the Mindblade itself into an incarnum weapon- a specialized meld like the Incarnum Blade's. That really won't change much in the class. Then graft on the incarnum powers & progression from the Soulborn, but without the alignment strictures.

If you wish, you can beef up the Knife to the Soul by lowering its access to something lower than 13th level and/or increasing its damage (still exchanging it for the damage dice, but at a rate 1pt of stat damage per 1-2 rolled, 2 pt per 3-4 rolled, and 3 points per 5-6 rolled). Or combine the 2- lower the access point as written to KttS to...7th level?...then beef it up to my variant above at 13th...and maybe even 1-for-1 at 20th.

You could even expand it to being able to target any stat.

As for shaping the mindblade, there are feats that let you reshape it in CompPsi...but better ones in Dragon #341. Instead of only 3 feats allowing 3 specific exotic weapon reshapes, it has a single one that lets you reshape into a single specific weapon of your choice, another that lets you form a shield, etc. Instead of making the Soulknife take a PrCl like the Soulbow to get a ranged version of his weapon, allow that feat to make ranged weapons as well as melee weapons.

Also, don't use the rule about having a mindblade reset to shortsword whenever it re-forms- just let it stay in whatever shape it last manifested. After all, reshaping it is a full-round action, RAW.

End result- not only do you get your non-vancian anti-mage debuffer/gish, you get more use out of the nifty MoI rules.

Side note:

Given that this is a "gritty" and seemingly low-magic world, you might consider using an Artificer/Alchemist type- someone who uses "alchemy-tech" more than anything to get things done. Because many of his resources would be physical and depletable, it would be quasi-vancian in feel, I know...but it still fitting in with your setting since it wouldn't be true magic. Thus, its not "drainable," "debuffable" or affected by defenses against magical attacks (if any such exist in your world).

 

[Morandir Nailo]

Wow, has anyone else had trouble accessing this site? I haven't been able to get on since yesterday afternoon! Weird.

Anyway, on to the long reply:

I don't really see the point of allowing the Fighter. I know the intention is to garner extra feats, but I'm already giving extra feats (1st level and every even level, as in 4E); I think that should be enough.

I mentioned in my first post what I was doing for the Ranger to replace spells; a more powerful Animal Companion and the option to trade the Combat Style for Shapeshifting ala the Druid feature from PHB2. However, having thought about it, I'm beginning to consider just dropping the Ranger altogether in favor of the Scout, per your class suggestion. The extra damage from skirmish will be really helpful in penetrating high soaks, which is a good thing. Fighters relying on lots of attacks will get gimped in this system without a way to deal signifigant extra damage (as DR/soak is much, much higher).

Concerning charged items, I guess the groups I play with must have a very different style from yours, because they just don't come up that often. At the most, someone is toting around a wand of CLW for extra healing, or whatever is found in random treasure. So I really don't tend to think in terms of gear-dependency.

Crusader and Binder healing - this is a good point, definitely. I'll have to revise the abilities to bring them in line with the Cure spells as defined in the GnG system. It shouldn't be too difficult, but there are a few I'll have to watch.

And I probably need to clarify my stance on magic items. They'll exist, and players will have all the magic items that they need (they'll likely need more of the flat bonus type, considering the propensity for lower ability scores and the lack of Wish/tomes). However, they won't be bought and sold on the open market. Players will have magic items because they've braved the wild regions and ruined sites of the world, not because they're rich. People powerful enough to obtain items of power aren't going to be interested in auctioning them off. This means that typically, PCs will only find items that they would actually use (which does requre some suspension of disbelief, but good encounter design can help mitigate this). Furthermore, they can quest for ingredients to make their own items. There just won't be shops full of +1 Swords, that's all.

As for the other class suggestions: I'm loath to include anything that involves dragons (dragon shaman, dragonfire adept). Dragons in this setting are rare and tend to stay out of the way, being much more interested in gaining power among themselves - Dragons only grow by eating the souls of other dragons, in my setting. Thus the idea of Draconic anything being common is a bit odd. Racial paragon paths are a good idea though; I may have to include those.

The soulknife thing isn't a bad idea, but the soulknife just sucks, IMO, and would require too much reworking to be viable. Plus the idea of a guy who creates a sword from energy just doesn't really jive with the flavor of my setting. Plus, I really want to keep the fighter and magic-user archetypes separate; I love the Gish concept, but it doesn't work in the world I'm going for. Hexblade was always about the curse for me, but Warlocks are getting that part now.

And I want to stay away from anything involving technology, so no artificers/technomancers. I despise steampunk and anything remotely related to it. Magic-users can make alchemical items, but I don't want to go too far with it.

Thanks a lot for the suggestions guys, this is really helpful. Please keep 'em coming!

Mor

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

The soulknife thing isn't a bad idea, but the soulknife just sucks, IMO, and would require too much reworking to be viable. Plus the idea of a guy who creates a sword from energy just doesn't really jive with the flavor of my setting. Plus, I really want to keep the fighter and magic-user archetypes separate; I love the Gish concept, but it doesn't work in the world I'm going for.

Well, if it doesn't work for the setting, so be it!

However, read on- you'll find another MoI tweak for a different class below.

If you’re open to non-WotC products, consider:

1) Arcana Unearthed/Arcana Evolved: The Totem Warrior is much like the WotC Barbarian, but focuses on thematically-linked ability sets inspired by totemic animals. Thus, you have barbarians with a LOT more intrinsic variety. AFAIK, but for the actual skills & skill points, there are no mechanics you’d have to alter, and the solution to that is to use the Barbarian’s skills & points.

I know you said a gish won't work, but I'd be remiss in pointing out the Totem Warrior if I didn't also point out the Mage Blade- one of the better takes on a single-class warrior mage in the 3.X regime. Its a nice, balanced blend without being too much of one or the other. Among the other classes worthy of note- the Greenbond (reworked druid), Akashic (reworked rogue/bard), and the Oathsworn (reworked martial artist).

In addition, the feat Hands as Weapons allows an unarmed combat specialist to enchant his unarmed strikes as if they were manufactured weapons. That’s right- Flaming Fists & Vorpal Kicks, baby!

Mechanics: 99% portable into any 3.X game.

2) Dragon Compendium v. 1: Chock full of nice weapons and a host of feats that target martial artists, pole-arm using warriors and spontaneous casters.

Mechanics: 100% portable into any 3.X game.

3) Midnight 2Ed: Heroic Paths are a way to boost PC power without handing out magic items. They’re a set of thematically linked abilities spread across 20 PC levels…sort of an invisible second class that every PC has that help describe and predict his destiny. Some of them grant things that would otherwise be class abilities, like Lay on Hands, or Turn Undead.

Mechanics: 100% portable into any game.

4) Iron Heroes: Some very nice, gritty classes. The main downside- non-standard D20 mechanics.

Traits are similar to feats (or even certain templates), but each PC gets 2 and no more. Unlike most feats, they’re more centered on backgrounds and actual mental or physical attributes, not training. Some are quite useful, especially in rounding out a PC. Some of them you’d recognize as showing up in certain WotC products- Weapon bond is similar to racial weapon familiarity (but is limited to 1 weapon), Mighty Build is indistinguishable from Powerful Build.

Mechanics: 75% portable into any 3.X game.

5) Rokugan: Similar to its OA sister product, this is the D20 version of Lot5R. You might find the Void Use mechanic useful.

Mechanics: 90% portable into any 3.X game.

6) Oriental Adventures 3.5 update, Dragon #318: James Wyatt’s own update gives us classes are more in line with the 3.5 revision’s philosophy. Of note are the Sohei’s better ability progression and better Ki Frenzy (an amalgam of FoB and Rage), and the Shaman gaining the Monk’s scaling Unarmed Strike damage.

The Shaman deserves a moment of consideration here: It is a full divine caster with an animist mechanic in which the PC talks to spirits of the dead or nature and gets benefits from his relationship with them. Its not unlike the Binder’s communicating with Vestiges, but not quite as powerful. If you simply ditch the class’ divine vancian magic and replace it with the Incarnate’s Meldshaping progression, you’d have a class that 1) gets you more use out MoI, 2) have a “divine” class that bridges the gap between Incarnum and Vestiges… Not enough? Add some of the Monk's other gifts, say FoB, the Wis bonus to AC, a power or feat or two, and you'll have something pretty nifty.

Mechanics: 100% portable into any 3.X game.

 

[Morandir Nailo]

*smacks forehead*

I'm a big fan of pretty much anything that Monte puts out, but the idea of actually using it seems to have slipped my mind! Sheesh.

Anyway, the Totem Warrior is definitely a good idea, and well worth a perusal. The MageBlade is actually my favorite "gish" class, but there's that problem with spells...I'd have to rework the class to use one of the three "acceptable" sorceries, and I'm just too lazy. Iron Heroes definitely conveys the feel I'm going for (lots of fun little things for warriors to do); unfortunately I don't own a copy. I actually use Traits in my (now defunct) 3.5 game, but Mighty Build doesn't fit in this setting. I'm going for Conan, not Daiklaves - I'll save that for Exalted.

Still, those are good suggestions all, and I'll definitely be giving them some thought. I want to keep things very basic though (i.e. I don't want too many base classes, just a few that are generic/flexible enough to cover many archetypes), so I may have to drop other classes if I want to include some of those.

I'd really like to get it down to 9 classes - 3 magic users, 3 warriors, and 3 thief-types (i.e. sneaky guys with lots of skills). This is how I see the breakdown at the moment:

MU: Warlock, Binder, Totemist
Warrior: Warblade, Crusader, Totem Warrior
Skill-guy: Rogue, Swordsage, Scout

I like this breakdown because it has a nice symmetry, with each class being a combination of MU/Warrior/Skill and Independent/Religious/Nature-based. With a little bending, they also kinda fit on a Law/Neutral/Chaos axis (the Warlock, Warblade and Rogue aren't paragons of Destruction or anything, but they all have a self-centered feel to them). Since this is the AL system I'll be using for my game, I like that.

Going off to read through my copy of AU now, thanks so much for bringing that to my attention!

Mor