So, anyone want to critique a 3-chapter steampunk preview?
- Thread starter Jack Daniel
- Start date
Jack Daniel
Legend
This is known as the 1st-reply, or "catalyst bump"
...and there's going to be one every time this topic falls to page 2 until someone says something!
...and there's going to be one every time this topic falls to page 2 until someone says something!
After a relatively quick skim-through, here are my impressions.
Setting material: Definitely shows potential, and is very different from most worlds, though there is not much to go off of. There's not much you can do about it at this point, but having no pantheon might be seen as being too similar to your main competitor for setting, Iron Kingdoms.
House Rules: Most of these look like they should help bring out the swashbuckling feeling of the campaign, though they seem like they could use some playtesting and fine-tuning in a few places, especially the armor section. There are a couple of places where the wording is unclear, and having rules and setting material mixed together within the same paragraph can make it hard to find what you're looking for sometimes.
Races: Look to be fairly solid mechanically for the most part, though more information on how they all interact would be nice. A couple of the races also seem like they might be better off at ECL +1 as well.
Classes: Most of your changes look like they should work, though a few don't really make sense to me (giving bbns TWF, for example). Also, throughout this and other chapters, there are a few things that seem to be insufficiently explained, such as there being no duration listed for the noble's command ability.
The technologist looks fairly similar to our version for the most part, though it is hard to tell without seeing the list of inventions and the rules for using them. As you may or may not know, I am in the process of writing a generic steampunk rules system to be usable in any campaign. It occurs to me that since our subject matter is similar, it might be to both our advantage to come to some sort of agreement rather than fragmenting the market. Let me know via email at spg[at]email.com if you would be interested in discussing it.
Setting material: Definitely shows potential, and is very different from most worlds, though there is not much to go off of. There's not much you can do about it at this point, but having no pantheon might be seen as being too similar to your main competitor for setting, Iron Kingdoms.
House Rules: Most of these look like they should help bring out the swashbuckling feeling of the campaign, though they seem like they could use some playtesting and fine-tuning in a few places, especially the armor section. There are a couple of places where the wording is unclear, and having rules and setting material mixed together within the same paragraph can make it hard to find what you're looking for sometimes.
Races: Look to be fairly solid mechanically for the most part, though more information on how they all interact would be nice. A couple of the races also seem like they might be better off at ECL +1 as well.
Classes: Most of your changes look like they should work, though a few don't really make sense to me (giving bbns TWF, for example). Also, throughout this and other chapters, there are a few things that seem to be insufficiently explained, such as there being no duration listed for the noble's command ability.
The technologist looks fairly similar to our version for the most part, though it is hard to tell without seeing the list of inventions and the rules for using them. As you may or may not know, I am in the process of writing a generic steampunk rules system to be usable in any campaign. It occurs to me that since our subject matter is similar, it might be to both our advantage to come to some sort of agreement rather than fragmenting the market. Let me know via email at spg[at]email.com if you would be interested in discussing it.
GnomeWorks
Adventurer
Indeed, Gareth, it is very similar to our technologist. There are a few significant differences, though.
The seven levels again, though... argh, am I ever going to be able to convince you that we need to have 10 levels for technology?
The seven levels again, though... argh, am I ever going to be able to convince you that we need to have 10 levels for technology?
cybernetic
Explorer
your probably going to want to do some checking on the d20 license....cause publishing the XP chart like you have is actually in breah of that license.....now if you decided to go all OGL and not mention d20 you can do that.....
then again..I'm not a lawyer....you may want to consult one to cover your own arse....
other than that I think that is some pretty good ideas/concepts
then again..I'm not a lawyer....you may want to consult one to cover your own arse....
other than that I think that is some pretty good ideas/concepts
Jack Daniel
Legend
Actually, publishing the XP chart is not in breech of the lisence. It specifically says you can print the XP, attack, and save charts as long as you don't describe the effects of leveling up (explaining hit dice, multiclassing, stacking the bonuses, etc.)
Similar Threads
