NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 6301962" data-attributes="member: 29398">(side note) we once had a player in our games whose in-character motto was "Where the map is blank, I'll go."  He caused a lot of map drawing! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />  (/side note)I'm vaguely aware of these and, truth be told, find them rather sad.  Oh sure, in 1e at 3rd or 5th character level (depending on class) you could get access to Continual Light, but at least there'd be a couple of adventures where you had to worry about resources (torches, oil for lanterns, etc.) and-or the finding of a decent light source would be a big deal.  The benefit of this would be to set the tone early that resources can't be taken for granted and at least some caution needs to be used in expending them.I was never a big fan of the D-lance adventures in part for just this reason.... unfortunately.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />That sounds like my game, to some extent - sure I have a story in mind when it starts but I've no idea if that'll end up being the story that gets told in the end.==========================================================================And here's a series of questions well worth answering:Not me, to a large extent, though the theory can be fun to kick around in discussion.Closer to OD&D or 1e. Sort of neither.  You need reasonably comprehensive *guidelines* that each given DM can modify or shape to her tastes and those of her players.  And this "guideline" aspect needs to be made loud and clear on every page of the PH, to pre-emptively shut down the rules lawyers.Yes, to a greater or lesser degree. (and see next question) Yes and yes; in that there should be 2 types of h.p., one for each issue noted.One is fatigue points, representing luck, fatigue, nicks, scratches, minor bruises etc. that are relatively easy to patch up and don't generally incapacitate the victim.  FP go up with level as always.  The other is body points, always representing actual physical injury.  Harder to heal by any means.  BP are locked in at roll-up and only ever change thereafter in the most unusual of circumstances.  Most adventuring types have about 2-5 BP.Your h.p. total is your FP + BP.  And yes, this means 1st-level types will have a few more total h.p. than the original game would have it; the difference becomes less relevant as levels advance.Absolutely!  And there should also be a chance that mixing them gives some unexpected benefit; or have nothing untoward happen at all.  There also must be a strong note in either case that mixing the same potions on different occasions is not in the least guaranteed to produce the same effect twice.I'm not so fussed about this one, in part because the weights of items in D&D have always been out to lunch as well.  And I don't mind the Hercules archetype in play.Slots (or spell points) are fine, but all spells need to be made *much* more interruptable than 3e/4e have them (look to 1e for what I mean here), and interruption needs to be given the possibility of interesting/humourous/useful/nasty/deadly side effects.  Ditto for magic items; they need to be made breakable, with possible consequences when that magic is released in unexpected ways.If you're thinking of a DCC-like system where any spell can fail and all casters eventually end up looking like twisted wrecks, that's overkill.Lan-"mixing potions is like mixing drinks - fun at the time, but the hangover will kill you"-efan</blockquote>

Verification