Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
Throwing ideas, seeing what sticks (and what stinks)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 6960000" data-attributes="member: 82106"><p>Problem with 13a is lack of really unified class mechanics. There's a pretty consistent basic structure, but 'powers' are sort of grafted almost willy-nilly onto classes and use a whole variety of different mechanisms to govern their usage. Honestly I would consider 13a to be closer to 3e than 4e. I think TotM is a concept that probably plays more naturally than tactical wargame in a card-based paradigm though, so such a game might be more reminiscent of 13a than 4e in some respects. The archetypes stuff could also inform card-based build structures in a nifty way.</p><p></p><p>Overall I think your view of it could definitely be a good approach. I'm not sure about the 'weight' thing, how would you do that? Also, would it really be necessary? I mean cards could in effect provide an offense and defense number (at least standard use cards, there could also be interrupts and whatnot that work in other ways). Maybe a given card is sort of 'double ended' like a few oddball magic cards. One half is an attack/defense, and the other half is some other related function, maybe useful in non-combat situations or to produce some other non-damaging effect (IE a Telekinesis power might be useful as an attack, tossing opponents about the battlefield, and as a way of leaping great distances or lifting people/things, etc). </p><p></p><p>I'd also think that various cards could operate synergistically. This could produce 'combo' effects or 'build up' to a big finale, etc. It would obviously also reinforce specific themes. Some cards could be things like basic tactics, 'take cover', 'flank', 'charge', etc. Alternatively maybe each character declares a basic tactic, say in reverse initiative order, and lays out a card, face down to go with it, then play proceeds from highest to lowest order, something like that. So charging would be a tactic, but not a card. Different classes might have a specific unique tactic, or one(s) that they are better at (rogues sneak around doing stabby stabby for example).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 6960000, member: 82106"] Problem with 13a is lack of really unified class mechanics. There's a pretty consistent basic structure, but 'powers' are sort of grafted almost willy-nilly onto classes and use a whole variety of different mechanisms to govern their usage. Honestly I would consider 13a to be closer to 3e than 4e. I think TotM is a concept that probably plays more naturally than tactical wargame in a card-based paradigm though, so such a game might be more reminiscent of 13a than 4e in some respects. The archetypes stuff could also inform card-based build structures in a nifty way. Overall I think your view of it could definitely be a good approach. I'm not sure about the 'weight' thing, how would you do that? Also, would it really be necessary? I mean cards could in effect provide an offense and defense number (at least standard use cards, there could also be interrupts and whatnot that work in other ways). Maybe a given card is sort of 'double ended' like a few oddball magic cards. One half is an attack/defense, and the other half is some other related function, maybe useful in non-combat situations or to produce some other non-damaging effect (IE a Telekinesis power might be useful as an attack, tossing opponents about the battlefield, and as a way of leaping great distances or lifting people/things, etc). I'd also think that various cards could operate synergistically. This could produce 'combo' effects or 'build up' to a big finale, etc. It would obviously also reinforce specific themes. Some cards could be things like basic tactics, 'take cover', 'flank', 'charge', etc. Alternatively maybe each character declares a basic tactic, say in reverse initiative order, and lays out a card, face down to go with it, then play proceeds from highest to lowest order, something like that. So charging would be a tactic, but not a card. Different classes might have a specific unique tactic, or one(s) that they are better at (rogues sneak around doing stabby stabby for example). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
Throwing ideas, seeing what sticks (and what stinks)
Top