Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="thullgrim" data-source="post: 754743" data-attributes="member: 8103">Thanks for the feedback, since you all were kind enough to take the time allow me.gpetruc:(1) Good point, am changing Channeling Check DC to equal the Spallcasting DC.(2) Yes, its intentional, since I don't have sorcerers.(3) You are potentially very correct here.  We use a point buy so I am hoping the point buy limits the stats sufficientl that a cleric is either going to be a very good combatant (buying up physical stats) or a very good spellcaster (maxing out wis) or average at both.  I have to see how that plays out though.  I may have to make some changes here, as to what changes I am not sure.  I am thinking of eventually changing the clerical spell lists so that each deity has their own list of spells.  That might balance out as the clerics will be able to cast a more limited list of spells albeit more efficiently....more thoughts on this issue would be helpful.(4) Also not something I considered.  Thanksmmu1(1) there was a change that made it into the players copy but not mine.  Your equation is correct.(2) Yes it was intentional.  I wanted to put a rein on high level spell casters.  After having experienced them both as a player and a DM I feel their dominance is inherent in the base system and so wanted to change that somewhat.  To balance that out, I made them much more flexible and more useful at lower level.(3) Am changing the DC of the channeling check but not the penalty.  Although I would entertain thoughts of alternate penalties.  Originally the penalty was a hit to the casting stat, but that was found to be much worse.IchabodHuge RM fan, if I could convince my group, thats what we would be playing.  In fact I am working on changing the D20 skill system to match RM's.  Stats yield development points, classes determine skill costs etc.  I really hope it translates well, but we'll see.  I was looking at a base 10-15% chance to fail a spell that was intentional and so far it has not been to bad.  It might be a little high I agree, but I am waiting for some more playtesting before I monkey with the spellcasting DC's again.Thanks all for the input it has been very helpful.  If you have more please feel free.Thullgrim</blockquote>

Verification