Sword and Sorcery Saga v. 1.02 and NEW Adventure Conversion!

[The_Gneech]

Oh, and no, there's no arcane/divine schism in S&S Saga, it's all just "magic." As far as S&S Saga is concerned, a spellcasting priest is a sorcerer who has rank in the church (which is why the Priesthood Talent Tree is part of the Scholar class).

-The Gneech

 

[pukunui]

It should work for all of my Saga Edition kitbash games, actually, S&S Saga included.

Cool. And you're putting it out for free?!

That was my original idea too, but I decided I wanted to do something that would take it away from Star Wars a bit.

I didn't include anything that was specifically a crusader, just because it didn't seem to fit the sword-and-sorcery vibe. You could certainly make a paladin-like character via warrior/scholar multiclass. (The D&D conversion includes paladins.)

OK.

I figured Survival would handle that.

Fair enough, I suppose.

I've got the KotOR book but haven't read it; don't have FUCG yet, but I probably will before too long. If I spot something worth stealing, I'll definitely incorporate it; I looked at Threats of the Galaxy when working on my critter rules, for instance.

FUCG has some really great stuff in it.

Thanks. FWIW, I'm writing these things primarily for my own use, so I want to get 'em finished quickly and keep my campaigns rolling! As soon as my current Red Hand of Doom 3.5 campaign finishes, all of my games will be Saga Edition-based.

That's awesome that you're willing to give them to the rest of us for free.

Oh, and no, there's no arcane/divine schism in S&S Saga, it's all just "magic." As far as S&S Saga is concerned, a spellcasting priest is a sorcerer who has rank in the church (which is why the Priesthood Talent Tree is part of the Scholar class).

Yeah, I kind of figured. I suppose you could distinguish between priests and magicians through flavor ... a "fireball" type spell could be described in the traditional way for a magician but as a "flame strike" type column of divine fire for a priest. Something like that.

 

[The_Gneech]

Heehee. I got no choice! Saga Edition isn't OGL.

-The Gneech

 

[pukunui]

Heehee. I got no choice! Saga Edition isn't OGL.

-The Gneech

Ah yes. Of course. Well, it's all much appreciated. You could just keep it all to yourself ...

 

[pukunui]

Hey John,

I've got some questions for you regarding the upcoming v2 of your S&S Saga conversion:

1) Would you be able to give me some sort of summary of the changes you're making with v2? What aspects of 4e are you adding to the conversion? What other changes are you making? Will you be fleshing out your prestige classes?

2) I'm not very familiar with "low magic" fantasies like Conan the Barbarian. I take it, though, that there aren't really magic items in these settings. How would you suggest I go about adding magic items to the Saga system?

3) Does the "clerical investment" scholar talent provide any mechanical benefit? I don't really see the point of it ...

4) I'm curious as to your choice of prerequisites for some things ... for instance, why does the spell curse of the long death require the Remove Poison talent? Also, why did you choose to put minimum level requirements on some talents? AFAIK, there are no talents in SWSE that do this (although there is one Jedi talent that has a minimum BAB requirement). Just wondering why you chose to deviate from the SWSE standard?

5) How compatible/incompatible is 4e with the Saga d20 system? If I were to go with a fantasy-themed Saga conversion (whether it be yours or some other one), I would still like to be able to use 4e - particularly the monsters and magic items. The only stumbling blocks I can think of are AC and 30 vs 20 levels (as I realize that 4e isn't just the old 20 levels with another 10 stacked on top). The question is: how much of a stumbling block are those two things? Could I just take a 4e monster and just use their Reflex or would that mess things up? Could I just treat their AC as their Reflex score? And could I take a Saga class and tack another 10 levels onto it using the same progression and not have it mess things up too much? I'm not sure you can answer all of these questions, but I thought I'd put them out there anyway. Perhaps it would be best if I started a new thread on this topic.


Cheers,
Jonathan

 

[ValhallaGH]

Jonathan,

A partial answer to number 2. There are magical items in traditional sword and sorcery, but they don't fit the high fantasy mold. They tend to be plot devices (ancient artifacts that show up for one story, the only weapon that can slay the monster coming tonight to kill Conan, etc) and are taken away about as quickly as they are handed over. Their only purpose is to give the heroes a chance at victory, or the villains a nearly unassailable edge; actually achieving victory requires the heroes to be quick, skillful, smart, and a bit lucky.

If you wanted to add magic items, I would recommend using special effects rather than numerical bonuses. Fire, cold, lightning, necrotic, and other damage types; healing / harming powers; transportation effects, and so forth. This retains the wonder and style of magic without the risk of severe imbalance that comes from increasing numbers. And a sword of fire is more appealing than a steel blade because it is fire; however, if the PCs are reduced to a simple steel blade then they can still manage quite well.

 

[pukunui]

Jonathan,

A partial answer to number 2. There are magical items in traditional sword and sorcery, but they don't fit the high fantasy mold. They tend to be plot devices (ancient artifacts that show up for one story, the only weapon that can slay the monster coming tonight to kill Conan, etc) and are taken away about as quickly as they are handed over. Their only purpose is to give the heroes a chance at victory, or the villains a nearly unassailable edge; actually achieving victory requires the heroes to be quick, skillful, smart, and a bit lucky.

If you wanted to add magic items, I would recommend using special effects rather than numerical bonuses. Fire, cold, lightning, necrotic, and other damage types; healing / harming powers; transportation effects, and so forth. This retains the wonder and style of magic without the risk of severe imbalance that comes from increasing numbers. And a sword of fire is more appealing than a steel blade because it is fire; however, if the PCs are reduced to a simple steel blade then they can still manage quite well.

Thanks, Valhalla. That's actually exactly the kind of magic item I would prefer to have in my games anyway. I tried to strip magic items of any mechanical enhancement bonuses in my 4e game but my players rebelled. I offered them a sort of "generic enhancement bonus" instead but they didn't like the idea.

However, if it came as a default part of the game (as opposed to a house rule introduced mid-game), then they'd be probably more likely to accept it.

 

[ValhallaGH]

Glad I could help.

I actually agree, that magic items are far cooler (and actually useful at any level) when done that way.

Unfortunately, D&D requires the increasing numbers to survive. For 4e games, I'd suggest that you use the low magic option (give the item level / enhancement bonuses as inherit bonuses for your PCs, and then hand out Masterwork Armors as appropriate) and include magic items that are purely effects, instead of effects and bonuses.

Good luck and good gaming.

 

[pukunui]

I actually agree, that magic items are far cooler (and actually useful at any level) when done that way.

Yeah.

Unfortunately, D&D requires the increasing numbers to survive. For 4e games, I'd suggest that you use the low magic option (give the item level / enhancement bonuses as inherit bonuses for your PCs, and then hand out Masterwork Armors as appropriate) and include magic items that are purely effects, instead of effects and bonuses.

That's what I proposed doing but my players vociferously objected.

 

[ValhallaGH]

That's what I proposed doing but my players vociferously objected.

Wow. I wonder why. It's a power increase, so it shouldn't be a problem for some-time munchkins.

Maybe they just like being limited to total reliance upon various pieces of equipment?