I'm going to use an example here. I like the ability + skills = how good at something you are system. Here's why. Let's say I want to be a meat-head. Good. But I want a meat-head who can crack into computers but only has an int of 9. To overcome his smart deficiency he can dedicate some of his training to cracking computers. Will he be good at doing other brainy things? No. But he can at least crack into a computer. It keeps the whole, anybody can learn anything, but not everybody can learn everything. The same could be said for the nerd who practices his jump skill... a lot. And that's all he does.
- Welcome to The Campaign Builder's Guild.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Pages1
#2
The Dragon's Den (Archived) / Stress
July 08, 2008, 02:40:46 AM
I like to go exercise or do martial arts or... punch stuff. Avoid walls. Avoid people, unless it's martial arts and a "Controlled" environment. Yadayada.
There was a point I was angry all the time... no idea why. But these are how I vented, and finding a vent is good... at least it was for me. Best of luck to finding a solution to the stress issue. :-/.
There was a point I was angry all the time... no idea why. But these are how I vented, and finding a vent is good... at least it was for me. Best of luck to finding a solution to the stress issue. :-/.
#3
Meta (Archived) / RPG dislikes
June 29, 2008, 12:25:58 PM
1. Magic: I want it to be mostly ritually based. Drawings of circles, mixing of materials, communing with Demonic/Angels/Gods or something that is inherently magical, or useing your own (or others) blood. Magic should take time. You won't see wizards and sorcerers casting fireballs and the like, but you might see them animating objects, raising the dead, blocking out the sun, etc.
2. Magic Items: Your +1 magical swords, bags of holding, and the like should be rare. They should be coveted. Think of how magic was handled in Lord Of the Rings, and that's about how I think these items should be. Magical Bread, cloaks, a sword, etc. Those magical rings took a long time to make... and they are coveted by those who have them. I want a system that expects you to give out maybe 3 combat enhancement items, and maybe 7 trinkets that do minor things that maybe could be put to use for greater things. You have magical armor against frost, a +1 sword, and bracer's of ogre strength +str. Then they have an orb of Elune's light (No more torches needed), a cloak that will keep you warm even directly at the south pole, a device that lets you see what was previously in this room in time, a rope that never breaks. That's the example of stuff I want. 3.X seemed to me to require you to hand out oodles of magic items to compete with monsters -.-.
3. Resurrection! Where's the sense of danger if you can't "die." When you're dead, you're dead. There are exceptions... but those would mean you're undead. Healing should take time. I'm willing to hand wave realistic healing though... Do you really want to spend a month waiting for your party to completely heal? Diseases and the like should be more than enough to show you're still not up to par and the like. Lately I've been deciding if having a "Limb Based" random target. This is so you could potentially lose an arm. But I also thought, would you want to play your character if he lost a leg, or an arm? I've pretty much nixed this idea.
4. A good mix of RP and Combat. I want a solid and good tactical combat system. It needs to remind me of playing Warhammer 40k, only on a smaller scale. Right now I like DnD 4.0's combat. Lots of sliding, manipulation, and on both sides. DM's and Players. The RP "system" needs to be lose. RP doesn't need rules, but it does need some stuff to help assist players who themselves lack traits their characters are supposed to have. Bob my player is not very charismatic, man he can't talk for crap, but he's supposed to convince the Shopkeeper to give him a discount, or he's supposed to get information etc. etc. He should be able to roll for this. I think 4.0 can make this workout as well, but no reason you couldn't do this with 3.X either. I saw a suggestion somewhere that said, if your players want to make a diplomacy check and the like and you want their "RP" to match their roll, you tell them to roll. Depending on how much they succeed or fail you tell them to role play the results.
5. A setting where every things happy go lucky. Where the only bad is outside the city walls. There should be just as much evil within a cities high court, as there is inside the vampire's keep. There should be enough interest in the world for players to want to go deal with politics to killing that massive dragon that's lived for way to long. A setting shouldn't have any secrets, because a setting that relies on these secrets and is the focus of the campaign, will not be the same if you revisit it from another place.
6. Lack of customization. Players should be able to play what they want, but it should also be balanced so that the DM has an easy time creating combat encounters and social. This is a hard balance to find :-/
2. Magic Items: Your +1 magical swords, bags of holding, and the like should be rare. They should be coveted. Think of how magic was handled in Lord Of the Rings, and that's about how I think these items should be. Magical Bread, cloaks, a sword, etc. Those magical rings took a long time to make... and they are coveted by those who have them. I want a system that expects you to give out maybe 3 combat enhancement items, and maybe 7 trinkets that do minor things that maybe could be put to use for greater things. You have magical armor against frost, a +1 sword, and bracer's of ogre strength +str. Then they have an orb of Elune's light (No more torches needed), a cloak that will keep you warm even directly at the south pole, a device that lets you see what was previously in this room in time, a rope that never breaks. That's the example of stuff I want. 3.X seemed to me to require you to hand out oodles of magic items to compete with monsters -.-.
3. Resurrection! Where's the sense of danger if you can't "die." When you're dead, you're dead. There are exceptions... but those would mean you're undead. Healing should take time. I'm willing to hand wave realistic healing though... Do you really want to spend a month waiting for your party to completely heal? Diseases and the like should be more than enough to show you're still not up to par and the like. Lately I've been deciding if having a "Limb Based" random target. This is so you could potentially lose an arm. But I also thought, would you want to play your character if he lost a leg, or an arm? I've pretty much nixed this idea.
4. A good mix of RP and Combat. I want a solid and good tactical combat system. It needs to remind me of playing Warhammer 40k, only on a smaller scale. Right now I like DnD 4.0's combat. Lots of sliding, manipulation, and on both sides. DM's and Players. The RP "system" needs to be lose. RP doesn't need rules, but it does need some stuff to help assist players who themselves lack traits their characters are supposed to have. Bob my player is not very charismatic, man he can't talk for crap, but he's supposed to convince the Shopkeeper to give him a discount, or he's supposed to get information etc. etc. He should be able to roll for this. I think 4.0 can make this workout as well, but no reason you couldn't do this with 3.X either. I saw a suggestion somewhere that said, if your players want to make a diplomacy check and the like and you want their "RP" to match their roll, you tell them to roll. Depending on how much they succeed or fail you tell them to role play the results.
5. A setting where every things happy go lucky. Where the only bad is outside the city walls. There should be just as much evil within a cities high court, as there is inside the vampire's keep. There should be enough interest in the world for players to want to go deal with politics to killing that massive dragon that's lived for way to long. A setting shouldn't have any secrets, because a setting that relies on these secrets and is the focus of the campaign, will not be the same if you revisit it from another place.
6. Lack of customization. Players should be able to play what they want, but it should also be balanced so that the DM has an easy time creating combat encounters and social. This is a hard balance to find :-/
#4
Meta (Archived) / The 4e GSL Topic
June 18, 2008, 04:05:34 PM
If you're going to invest a lot of money in a product, all to have the chance of it suddenly being told to destroy it? Not a very safe investment at all. I wouldn't do it if I was going for profit as a third party. I'd be more likely to create my own system.
Someone, at least on the WOTC forums said something about not being able to change the way magic/abilities worked. You can't change character advancement. E.g. if at level 1, you get X skills, X feats, X abilities, you can not change it.
I'm still more interested in what someone not selling a product is allowed to do. As far as what Non-Profit (E.g. Fan Sites) can do, we still have to wait and see. That's more pertinent to what people like the CBG and other sites can do.
Someone, at least on the WOTC forums said something about not being able to change the way magic/abilities worked. You can't change character advancement. E.g. if at level 1, you get X skills, X feats, X abilities, you can not change it.
I'm still more interested in what someone not selling a product is allowed to do. As far as what Non-Profit (E.g. Fan Sites) can do, we still have to wait and see. That's more pertinent to what people like the CBG and other sites can do.
#5
Meta (Archived) / The 4e GSL Topic
June 18, 2008, 03:09:26 PM
If anything has the same power / ability as in the core books, you are to reference it first in small caps. DUNGEON MASTERS GUIDE 4.0. Then italics. Dungeon Masters Guide 4.0. No page numbers. So if your paladin npc has smite, people buying / looking at your adventure must go look up the page numbers... ON THEIR OWN. It's inconvenient! -.-
Woot, I've got permission to use the d4, d6, d8, d10, d12, d20, d100 format. Because they have exclusiveness to that. As a matter of fact, I'm going to start a list here. [spoiler]
Unless I'm mistaken here on that file. I think that's what they were trying to say. But clearly some of those they can't claim exclusiveness too.
Next beef: Q: How will I know if a new version of the GSL has been Released?
A: There will be no formal notification process. You should periodically check blah blah blah for changes... -.-
Though heres a good thing for here. Until they release a "Fansite GSL type thing," here is a Q&A for you all.
Q:What do I do on my website if I can not use the GSL?
A: Wizards will release a fansite policy in the future that will offer a limited license for specified uses. Websites are NOT licensed under the GSL.
Q: Can I extend the definition of a term.
A: No. You cannot change the substance or meaning of the definition.
Diplomacy in the PHB is what Diplomacy is.
Q: Can I define a different method to determine ability scores?
A: No. It's part of character creation.
Some of these rules for third parties suck, and some of their claims are outrageous. Why can't I reference a page number? Because we might reprint the book and it will be on a different page number -.-. I understand them saying hey, you can't just reprint a class skill in another book, you have to reference to our books. But to not allow page numbers is crazily inconvenient.
We can just terminate the license at anytime, and then you have to burn all of your products you've made. You must stop selling them. That's the, what you've created is more popular than ours, so we're terminating your license :-P.
I think if I wanted to just change the fluff of an elf, to fit my campaign setting, I'd probably have to name it "xyz Elf." Change the fluff, and if I wanted to keep the stats I could. But I'd have to reference them to the PHB. You can't change the mechanics of character creation.
I don't like a lot of their stuff in the GSL.
Woot, I've got permission to use the d4, d6, d8, d10, d12, d20, d100 format. Because they have exclusiveness to that. As a matter of fact, I'm going to start a list here. [spoiler]
- Their owned terms that clearly aren't public use...
the d#'s
Ability Scores, Str, Dex etc.
Alignments (Cap anyways)
Racial Traits O.o
Vision types
Languages (Cause dwarven... bahhhhh)
Damage Types
Power sources
Mace
Dagger (Maybe the damages...)
Not going through the rest.
Unless I'm mistaken here on that file. I think that's what they were trying to say. But clearly some of those they can't claim exclusiveness too.
Next beef: Q: How will I know if a new version of the GSL has been Released?
A: There will be no formal notification process. You should periodically check blah blah blah for changes... -.-
Though heres a good thing for here. Until they release a "Fansite GSL type thing," here is a Q&A for you all.
Q:What do I do on my website if I can not use the GSL?
A: Wizards will release a fansite policy in the future that will offer a limited license for specified uses. Websites are NOT licensed under the GSL.
Q: Can I extend the definition of a term.
A: No. You cannot change the substance or meaning of the definition.
Diplomacy in the PHB is what Diplomacy is.
Q: Can I define a different method to determine ability scores?
A: No. It's part of character creation.
Some of these rules for third parties suck, and some of their claims are outrageous. Why can't I reference a page number? Because we might reprint the book and it will be on a different page number -.-. I understand them saying hey, you can't just reprint a class skill in another book, you have to reference to our books. But to not allow page numbers is crazily inconvenient.
We can just terminate the license at anytime, and then you have to burn all of your products you've made. You must stop selling them. That's the, what you've created is more popular than ours, so we're terminating your license :-P.
I think if I wanted to just change the fluff of an elf, to fit my campaign setting, I'd probably have to name it "xyz Elf." Change the fluff, and if I wanted to keep the stats I could. But I'd have to reference them to the PHB. You can't change the mechanics of character creation.
I don't like a lot of their stuff in the GSL.
#6
Meta (Archived) / Setting Stat-block
June 11, 2008, 11:28:50 PM
I don't think races, gods, or religions truly separate one setting from another. Do I really need to know that 10/12 fantasy worlds have some variety of elves? If you give a general feel for what your world is about, don't your gods, races, and religions directly or have a very keen similarity to the flavor?
For example, if your world is about evil and how awesome it is to be evil, won't most of the gods be evil. Then on top of that wont your religions believe in these gods, which in turns they commit evil. To further add to this, races become evil, or at least the majority of them. That same evil world could be 4.0's point of light idea. Mostly evil, with the few good surviving and struggling to push it all back. Or maybe one really strong dark god who has sapped all of the good gods powers and made them too weak to fight. But that still seems more like a campaign flavor and not a key to me.
Another example is Ebberon and Forgotten Realms. I had to dig deeper than races, religions, classes, gods to find out what made them two distinct from each other. It took me a long time due to just skimming over the races and classes and said meh, they're both just another fantasy setting. They're not however. The general feel for or description of what the worlds are like make a much better picture. High Fantasy and Billions of Drizzt clones to follow, or a DND setting set to high action high combat. I still like Ravenloft, and what I've read about Dark Sun. And that was just from the general description. But maybe it's because I put more importance in flavor than what other people would in their options for classes, races, faiths. Toe-may-toe, toe-mah-toe. *Shrug*
I actually like Lath's 10 word idea A LOT! Time to use words like imperturbableness and adiaphanous... Actually... useing fancy words that like .00001% of the world knows is a terrible idea.
Also, because I'm new here I may be confused.. but for further clarification, is this for wiki's or posts in some form. Or something entirely different. I assumed it was for the wiki but some posts seem to be relating it to something else that I'm just not seeing. As far as the wiki goes, finding a sci-fi setting would be tricky to find without reading through every single setting, which I haven't done yet. (There's a lot to read on some of them :-) ).
For example, if your world is about evil and how awesome it is to be evil, won't most of the gods be evil. Then on top of that wont your religions believe in these gods, which in turns they commit evil. To further add to this, races become evil, or at least the majority of them. That same evil world could be 4.0's point of light idea. Mostly evil, with the few good surviving and struggling to push it all back. Or maybe one really strong dark god who has sapped all of the good gods powers and made them too weak to fight. But that still seems more like a campaign flavor and not a key to me.
Another example is Ebberon and Forgotten Realms. I had to dig deeper than races, religions, classes, gods to find out what made them two distinct from each other. It took me a long time due to just skimming over the races and classes and said meh, they're both just another fantasy setting. They're not however. The general feel for or description of what the worlds are like make a much better picture. High Fantasy and Billions of Drizzt clones to follow, or a DND setting set to high action high combat. I still like Ravenloft, and what I've read about Dark Sun. And that was just from the general description. But maybe it's because I put more importance in flavor than what other people would in their options for classes, races, faiths. Toe-may-toe, toe-mah-toe. *Shrug*
I actually like Lath's 10 word idea A LOT! Time to use words like imperturbableness and adiaphanous... Actually... useing fancy words that like .00001% of the world knows is a terrible idea.
Also, because I'm new here I may be confused.. but for further clarification, is this for wiki's or posts in some form. Or something entirely different. I assumed it was for the wiki but some posts seem to be relating it to something else that I'm just not seeing. As far as the wiki goes, finding a sci-fi setting would be tricky to find without reading through every single setting, which I haven't done yet. (There's a lot to read on some of them :-) ).
#7
Meta (Archived) / 4E Playtest Session Coming Up...
June 11, 2008, 08:57:30 PM
I know that, it just doesn't seem as good or quite the same as the multi-classing from 3.x. It almost seems like a waste... But then again... I haven't tried it. I haven't thrown it out the window or anything crazy like that... yet. This is an example of the reason I need to playtest before Booooooing and burning and stomping on my books and then tossing the books out of my window.
#8
Meta (Archived) / 4E Playtest Session Coming Up...
June 10, 2008, 11:19:47 PM
I know the feeling... I know of two people where I'm currently at who would play. One annoys the hell out of me though >.<. The other problem is I don't have a vehicle... and am pretty much stuck on a base. Right now I'm at the point where I think the only way I can experience 4.0 is to go ahead and try and get a group for "Maptool" from http://rptools.net/doku.php
I also lack the motivation to create something from scratch right now for 4.0 as making crap from 3.X was a pita... Why couldn't they get CR's right (Though reading through the new edition they may have gotten that right.) I probably will just end up running "another Keep on the Shadowfell" adventure. A one shot, play test of the system. The only change I'd probably make is, players have free reign over character creation. E.g. customize it from the PHB.
I do like the lower emphasis on rollplaying roleplaying in non-combat encounters. (I hope that made sense.) A lot of the skills got more generalized, and if all else fails find a skill that closest resembles what a character is trying to do. I also like the faster character generation, though hate the lack of customization. Where is the ability to multi-class!? I think the only way to multi-class will be to actually create a new "Class" and balance it out... My class is the "Fighter/Rogue", and I picked from the "Fighter/Rogue" skills, talents, etc. etc....
Things I don't like are some of the spells that have gone away from wizards and such. The ones that made you go, this spell is pretty crappy, but if I use it like this it might be good. E.g., turning an area into oil to make the monsters fall on top of one another. Then proceeding to toss your torch into the oil >:-). The other is skills you choose at the start, are the skills you'll have at level 30, and stay the same throughout. The only way to improve them is to improve your ability scores at the appropriate level...
But these are all things from just reading the book. This reminds me A LOT of D&D basic, of which I've never played but have almost all the books O.o. Maybe that's a good thing, keeping it simple might be better for roleplay...
I also lack the motivation to create something from scratch right now for 4.0 as making crap from 3.X was a pita... Why couldn't they get CR's right (Though reading through the new edition they may have gotten that right.) I probably will just end up running "another Keep on the Shadowfell" adventure. A one shot, play test of the system. The only change I'd probably make is, players have free reign over character creation. E.g. customize it from the PHB.
I do like the lower emphasis on rollplaying roleplaying in non-combat encounters. (I hope that made sense.) A lot of the skills got more generalized, and if all else fails find a skill that closest resembles what a character is trying to do. I also like the faster character generation, though hate the lack of customization. Where is the ability to multi-class!? I think the only way to multi-class will be to actually create a new "Class" and balance it out... My class is the "Fighter/Rogue", and I picked from the "Fighter/Rogue" skills, talents, etc. etc....
Things I don't like are some of the spells that have gone away from wizards and such. The ones that made you go, this spell is pretty crappy, but if I use it like this it might be good. E.g., turning an area into oil to make the monsters fall on top of one another. Then proceeding to toss your torch into the oil >:-). The other is skills you choose at the start, are the skills you'll have at level 30, and stay the same throughout. The only way to improve them is to improve your ability scores at the appropriate level...
But these are all things from just reading the book. This reminds me A LOT of D&D basic, of which I've never played but have almost all the books O.o. Maybe that's a good thing, keeping it simple might be better for roleplay...
#9
Meta (Archived) / Setting Stat-block
June 10, 2008, 10:49:18 PM
KISS (Keep it Stupid Simple)
---------------Your Settings Name------------------
Genre: (FIll in with Fantasy, Fantasy/Horror, SCI-FI, Western O.o?)
Rule System: DND X.X, GURPS, Custom, None...?
Quick Description: (LImited to maybe 4 to 5 sentences, and not ones that go on and on where you could just say, "Here be thy list of qualities: Strong, bold, amazingly awesome, etc... etc. etc." See this is now the beginning of sentence number two....
-----Power Levels-----
Magic: Low Middle High None
Characters: Die-a-lot, die some, never die
Those five things would tell you more than enough at a quick glance as to whether or not you'd use it. There might be some more general questions, but I think if you just kept it to a basic Genre, Rules, Quick Description you'd be more than good for an at-a-glance feel for what you're about to read.
I mean, if your group is dead set to only play DND 3.5, and you don't want to convert stuff from a setting built for GURPS 5e, why would you look at someones campaign built for that? I'm not saying one rule set is better than another however....
---------------Your Settings Name------------------
Genre: (FIll in with Fantasy, Fantasy/Horror, SCI-FI, Western O.o?)
Rule System: DND X.X, GURPS, Custom, None...?
Quick Description: (LImited to maybe 4 to 5 sentences, and not ones that go on and on where you could just say, "Here be thy list of qualities: Strong, bold, amazingly awesome, etc... etc. etc." See this is now the beginning of sentence number two....
-----Power Levels-----
Magic: Low Middle High None
Characters: Die-a-lot, die some, never die
Those five things would tell you more than enough at a quick glance as to whether or not you'd use it. There might be some more general questions, but I think if you just kept it to a basic Genre, Rules, Quick Description you'd be more than good for an at-a-glance feel for what you're about to read.
I mean, if your group is dead set to only play DND 3.5, and you don't want to convert stuff from a setting built for GURPS 5e, why would you look at someones campaign built for that? I'm not saying one rule set is better than another however....
#10
Campaign Elements and Design (Archived) / 4e Druid and Barbarian
June 10, 2008, 12:05:23 AM
Druid Ideas...
Just calculate in the pets damage, special abilities, and health into the "Class." Albeit the pet is not the character, but does effect how powerful a character is. You'll also need a chart showing how the pet advance in level as well as the Druid. I'd also suggest making a couple of different types of pets... Wolf, Bear, some magical beast?
Things to calculate in for the druid.
HP with Pet.
Damage with Pet in consideration.
Skills/Spells with pet in consideration.
The problem with the damage/health etc. getting calculated into the class is it will force you to take a pet, whether your character wants it or not... make a distinction between a pet less druid, and a druid with a pet. I don't think the pet should share hp with it's controller however.
Barbarian Ideas...
Barbarians to me were the idea of I'm going to have a high amount of hp, wield a big two handed weapon, and get angry... a lot.
Totems are not that interesting to me. Seems too much like wow shamans >.<...
Rage when bloodied? The whole gain temp hp, and deal more damage because you've made me bleed my own blood sounds better.
They should cause fear in their enemies.
They might be a striker with control... knocking down enemies, grappling enemies, fighting dirty...
Actually... a defender with a mix of control might work better for the "Rage..." Or maybe have skills that would allow a barbarian to either go Striker/Defender, Defender/Control, Controler/Striker....
An example Paragon path could be the Tattoo/Scarification (Better name?) Barbarian. Where the barbarian will scar himself to represent past encounters, battles, memories, and ties to important events through his life. These tattoos would grant him special powers tied to them... most of the tattoos have some form of spiritual tie to them to explain how they work....
Just my Two Cents...
Just calculate in the pets damage, special abilities, and health into the "Class." Albeit the pet is not the character, but does effect how powerful a character is. You'll also need a chart showing how the pet advance in level as well as the Druid. I'd also suggest making a couple of different types of pets... Wolf, Bear, some magical beast?
Things to calculate in for the druid.
HP with Pet.
Damage with Pet in consideration.
Skills/Spells with pet in consideration.
The problem with the damage/health etc. getting calculated into the class is it will force you to take a pet, whether your character wants it or not... make a distinction between a pet less druid, and a druid with a pet. I don't think the pet should share hp with it's controller however.
Barbarian Ideas...
Barbarians to me were the idea of I'm going to have a high amount of hp, wield a big two handed weapon, and get angry... a lot.
Totems are not that interesting to me. Seems too much like wow shamans >.<...
Rage when bloodied? The whole gain temp hp, and deal more damage because you've made me bleed my own blood sounds better.
They should cause fear in their enemies.
They might be a striker with control... knocking down enemies, grappling enemies, fighting dirty...
Actually... a defender with a mix of control might work better for the "Rage..." Or maybe have skills that would allow a barbarian to either go Striker/Defender, Defender/Control, Controler/Striker....
An example Paragon path could be the Tattoo/Scarification (Better name?) Barbarian. Where the barbarian will scar himself to represent past encounters, battles, memories, and ties to important events through his life. These tattoos would grant him special powers tied to them... most of the tattoos have some form of spiritual tie to them to explain how they work....
Just my Two Cents...
Pages1