|
 In honor of 4th of July and the launch of D&D 5th edition, I thought the July contest should focus on the previous edition of Dungeon and Dragons. Just as 3rd edition was for 2nd, the game changed alot from the previous edition. It's changes were praised by some and disliked by others. Regardless, it balanced martial and caster classes, had tactical combat, made good measures to ensure every player was competent in combat, and allowed for robust and unique character builds. For July's contest, I believe the goal should be to make a game using the 4th edition's engine or a derivation there of. How you see to alter it is on you. The changes can be mild or extreme. The games don't need to be perfect or complete, but they need to be finished enough to build a character and do a simple encounter. So, character creation rules, some combat rules (be it physical, social, etc.), and some rules for npcs. Obviously, no one submits to a contest without some expectation of a reward. The winner of the contest will receive a $25 voucher for drivethrurpg. Redeemable for many great games offered by the digital store. Questions 1. Is there a theme we have to stick to? Not really. The game can be about anything you want. Take the word "encounter" loosely. It can be straight up sword and spell combat. It could be a very tense argument where the wrong word could spell doom for you. Essentially, I think leaving this word open to interpretation invites creativity to the contest. 2. Page Minimum? Page Limit? While I'm sure most people don't have the time to write a book in the month, there is no page limit or minimum. The game can be as long or short as you want as long as the game uses the 4e system or a derivation of it. 3. You keep saying derivation, how far off can we get? This is something I'm going to keep to a case by case basis. I like creativity and thinking outside the box. That said, if you think your changes are going to far, just explain what your doing and I will respond as quickly as possible. The contest ends on July 31. I would like if all participants kept up with updates on your progress. Judging I'm judging on the following factors: Creativity (Difference from original while still being 4e. I want to reward those with good ideas, but also make sure they are using the 4e system), Practicality (How well the mechanics work), Presentation (How easy the rules are to parse: clarity in rules are important), Balance (How strong the classes/character options are in relation to one another), (possibly) Player Feedback (I'm trying to setup a group of non-bias individuals to run one encounter in each entry. This is a possible factor as attempts to set this up have not yet worked out) I wish everyone best of luck and hope you have fun with the contest. Final Submissions The final, submitted entries are: Dog Kisser: Land of Manitou Frankosity and Captain Hats: Erebus Pd0t and Error 404: Steakpunk Neonchamelon: 4th Trifold Fuschia Tide: Space Death The Results! Covok fucked around with this message at 05:52 on Aug 31, 2014 |
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 03:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 20:09 |
|
|
Covok posted:Obviously, no one submits to a contest without some expectation of a reward. The winner of the contest will receive a $25 voucher for drivethrurpg. Redeemable for many great games offered by the digital store. Lee's Lists will match this with $15 and $10 dtrpg gift certs for whoever Covok deems are runners up.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 04:19
|
|
|
So, no strict schedule for proposal/drafs/etc, right?
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 04:23
|
|
|
Man, am I in!
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 04:29
|
|
|
i will be the next pathfinder
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 04:30
|
|
|
zachol posted:So, no strict schedule for proposal/drafs/etc, right? No, there is no strict schedule for such things. I'm mostly interested in the finished entry. If you feel can make something can meet the criteria late in the game, so to speak, I have no qualms with that. That said, considering the time investment making a game can become, I'd suggest starting early.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 04:30
|
|
|
Covok posted:That said, considering the time investment making a game can become, I'd suggest starting early. Oh for sure.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 04:31
|
|
|
Dagon posted:Lee's Lists will match this with $15 and $10 dtrpg gift certs for whoever Covok deems are runners up. Wow, I didn't see that at first. That is extremely generous of you. Thank you for supporting this contest with your generous donation (is that what you would call this?) Asymmetrikon posted:Man, am I in! Hashtag Yoloswag posted:i will be the next pathfinder I'm glad to see you're both enthusiastic. I look forward to seeing your entries.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 04:34
|
|
|
Time to dust off Paragons and try again, this time with more clarity on what the players can do and maybe an adventure where the players don't instantly die to a single unlucky roll from the literal first enemy. I wonder if the rules are still up on that wiki.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 05:52
|
|
|
Mathfinder Here are some principles that are often cited as ways to build on 4e's design trajectory:
The name of the game here is unification and streamlining. Maybe also some flattening. Something that might go over well would be a "conversion guide," a set of rules that can take existing 4e content and make it usable in your own heartbreaker, much like how there's a straightforward formula to update old monsters to Monster Manual 3 math. Because most 4e content already conforms to fairly consistent numeric ranges, this might actually work. I'll probably have something of substance to contribute later, but for now I'll start by telling everybody else what to do.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 05:54
|
|
|
I have some notes on "Economy" that have been waffling around since earlier this year. The main idea at the moment is that the rate of attacks is super heavily moderated, avoiding the reactive attacks stuff and stacking damage bonuses. Characters are divided into the roles of anvil, hammer, and arm. Anvils position and lock down the enemy, hammers apply damage, and arms buff and augment the hammers. For example, the polearm fighter and the controller wizard are both anvils. Ability scores are set to a specific array and level progression. Your key offensive, secondary offensive, and key defensive modifiers can all be chosen at will, regardless of class, and abilities ultimately really just determine ability/skill checks, since players are explicitly instructed to make their highest score their KOM. Attacks and checks in general don't scale with level. Damage does, but that's generally specific to class features (like sneak attack), and abilities do gradually increase, which slowly leads to higher attack bonuses. Characters are divided into tiers (1, 2, 3); you get +10 when attacking a tier down, and automatically hit 2 tiers down, and the reverse going up. Engaging an enemy out of your tier is generally just covered by narration, since the outcome is almost certain anyway. The Next thread gave me an idea of simply packaging powers together into sets. There are a number of weapons/styles, and each class has a different set of powers for each weapon style. So the hammer/heavy style (which doesn't actually require you use a hammer within the fiction) produces a number of different power sets depending on which class uses it. Sets are balanced against each other, instead of having to worry about multiple power combinations. Finally there are some additional utility/self-heal/whatever powers tacked onto the end. Weapons don't provide bonuses. Instead, they grant their own, individual class-agnostic power set, as well as granting a specific tier for the purpose of attacks (you use your own if higher). Finding a weapon above your tier is unusual, mostly a narration thing. A legendary sword could grant immense power to a commoner, and that's captured here, but it's not included in the maths. Indeed, if you're happy with your power set and of the same or higher tier than a magic weapon, it's essentially worthless, never simply granting a +1 or whatever. Armor (or an "aegis," which includes things like protection amulets) has a more nebulous position, possibly granting a replacement utility power, as well as the reverse of weapons in terms of granting a higher tier for the purpose of defense. Again, this is more of a narrative consideration than anything that would be required. A PC finding a weapon or aegis above their own tier would be highly unusual, and almost certainly part of a quest or other plot point. I've also got some idea regarding "pawns" (pets, summons, etc). You get a limited number of dice per round (3, plus one more for OAs); in order for a pawn to attack, you need to assign one of those dice to it instead. Similarly, when a warlord grants a bonus attack, they need to give the target one of their own dice. Things like that, but they're much more nebulous. The core was the idea that dice are limited per turn, so regardless of what sorts of weird actions and attacks get added in later, it doesn't become overwhelming.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 06:13
|
|
|
 PROSPECTIVE GAME DESIGNERSI made, like, a very 4e-derivative game a while back so I likely can't submit it to the contest. BUT if there is anyone out there [like me] feeling like they don't have a whole new game in them, let me know. I'd be willing to collaborate and/or just bounce ideas back and forth, and maybe together we could make a complete, New Thing. Link to Old Thing. Link to  about Old Thing.
P.d0t fucked around with this message at 06:46 on Jul 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 06:39
|
|
|
Let's start pandering early, too. I'm going to make a bunch of new powersets because making powers for your psychic flying werewolf is the fun part of system design. First five suggestions I get I'll add to the list.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 06:56
|
|
|
Hnngh. I've been kicking around an idea for a 4e-based MechWarrior-style game for a while, but I really don't have time for another pet project. gently caress it, sign me up. Worse comes to worst, I'll just fail to deliver. ...also, either this version of IE or the SA forum software autocorrects mechwarrior to MechWarrior, which I wasn't expecting.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 08:47
|
|
|
I'm going to be doing Stars Without Number for 4th Edition.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 08:53
|
|
|
Covok posted:Questions Hey Covok, sounds interesting! Is work I've already done - but not published - admissable, or do I have to start from scratch?
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 10:43
|
|
|
Bongo Bill posted:Here are some principles that are often cited as ways to build on 4e's design trajectory: I propose that anyone who doesn't do at least these things be immediately disqualified. I suck at these contests, I always drop out after the first round, but what the hell, I am going to try again. In addition to the above, my Not4E will try to do the following:
There are other ideas I have as well, but if I can't do the above I see no reason in even trying.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 10:57
|
|
|
P.d0t posted:
Sanglorian posted:Hey Covok, sounds interesting! Is work I've already done - but not published - admissable, or do I have to start from scratch? Originally, I felt that submitting work you've had time to work on before the contest might be an unfair advantage. However, I feel most contests of this type tend not to discriminate on that factor. The norm seems to be accepting of those entries. I hope this isn't a problem for anyone.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 15:35
|
|
|
I've made a bare bones levels 1-10 D&D based of the Gamma World ruleset. I've gotta type up some words about combat and actual character creation, but it's a functional game right now. What's going on with this poo poo:
Yeah, so look forward to that. I'll try to write it so you won't need any knowledge of the GW rules. I'll post it as a google doc some time this coming week.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 19:18
|
|
|
You're all going to have big shoes to fill. Not 4e's, but Jimbozig's The Sacred BBQ. Link to its old thread, requires archives
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 20:42
|
|
|
I plan on cribbing whole chunks of 4e that will be altered for the slightly different system. Is this cool?
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 22:06
|
|
|
Lord Frisk posted:I plan on cribbing whole chunks of 4e that will be altered for the slightly different system. Is this cool? I don't really follow. If you mean your using a derivative system of 4e or borrowing alot of 4e then that is allowed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 22:11
|
|
|
Countblanc posted:You're all going to have big shoes to fill. No, in this thread we're trying to make good games. Probably gonna go a bit more traditional - 4e-as-I'd-like-it. Keep the concept of discrete key worded powers, but change all the little stuff that annoyed the hell out of me.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 22:20
|
|
|
Hashtag Yoloswag posted:i will be the next pathfinder This. *Posts Dungeon World* Serious Edit: P.d0t posted:
I am down, hit me up via PM or something, I'm definitely in kind of a setting/fluff mode lately, and not doing mechanics from scratch is appealing. 
Error 404 fucked around with this message at 00:32 on Jul 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 00:27
|
|
|
Covok posted:I don't really follow. If you mean your using a derivative system of 4e or borrowing alot of 4e then that is allowed. I'm using the Gamma World system, itself a stripped down derivative of 4e. You answered my question dead on without really knowing what I was asking, so kudos.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 01:40
|
|
|
Bongo Bill posted:Here are some principles that are often cited as ways to build on 4e's design trajectory:
Countblanc posted:You're all going to have big shoes to fill. Not 4e's, but Jimbozig's The Sacred BBQ. This might be any good if its DM advice was.
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2014 06:14
|
|
|
Guess it's time to finally get off my rear end and do that 4e/Xcom mashup I've been talking about for years. Count me in on this.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 00:00
|
|
|
Not sure if I'll have time this month, what with a newborn and all, but I've really been wanting to make a system with powers determined by what gear your character was carrying. 4th Edition seems like it'd be a good engine for this, so I'll see what I can slap together. Question: How much can we assume the players know of 4th? Like, if I cover character creation rules and guides for encounter building/enemy creation, can we assume that the player knows how the 4th edition combat, skill, etc. mechanics work? I would assume yes, since otherwise this would be a nigh impossible project to finish in a month, but just want to make sure. Edit: I was also planning to make this a sci-fi conversion, so hopefully I don't hate myself after trying to convert things to mostly use ranged powers. Here we go!
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 01:58
|
|
|
lord_daeloth posted:Not sure if I'll have time this month, what with a newborn and all, but I've really been wanting to make a system with powers determined by what gear your character was carrying. 4th Edition seems like it'd be a good engine for this, so I'll see what I can slap together. As I have access to the rules compendium and the PHBs -- as well have played the game -- I will allow contestants to rely on my access to the rules. If your system, by the way, alters those rules, please state that it does so.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 02:01
|
|
|
Covok posted:As I have access to the rules compendium and the PHBs -- as well have played the game -- I will allow contestants to rely on my access to the rules. If your system, by the way, alters those rules, please state that it does so. Cool. And yeah, that's what I figured. I won't be changing too much, just how power are allocated, but resolution mechanics should all be the same. Essentially, my system idea just changes character creation rules and will add some fluff. If I can manage to get that much done, then I'll consider doing other wacky stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 03:06
|
|
|
To sorta see where the boundaries are - would 13A qualify here, or would it be too different from 4e?
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 05:55
|
|
|
I'm not the judge, obviously, but 13A really isn't much like 4e mechanically. Like, I guess it is inasmuch as it has a d20 and attack rolls, but it's a lot closer to 3.5.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 13:52
|
|
|
As far as I am concerned, any game that is tactical enough, plays on a board representing the physical battleground, is class-based and has solid math and action economy should be considered a spiritual successor to 4E. Or I am just saying this because my entry will try to hit just those particular notes from 4E.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 13:58
|
|
|
Asymmetrikon posted:I'm not the judge, obviously, but 13A really isn't much like 4e mechanically. Like, I guess it is inasmuch as it has a d20 and attack rolls, but it's a lot closer to 3.5.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 14:42
|
|
|
Rexides posted:[*]No out of turn actions. This covers anything from opportunity attacks to moving to buffing etc. Basically no player should ever interrupt another player's (or the DM's) turn to fiddle with his powers. Isn't the fighter's ability to immediately smack a marked creature who doesn't attack them kind of key to their usefulness? It's certainly one of the most rewarding things to be able to say "Not in my house!"
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 16:50
|
|
|
MadScientistWorking posted:I said this in another thread but really 13th Age isn't missing much from 4E that can't be added back into the game. Certainly if you want to be all properly OGL about it, the Archmage SRD is a good framework for reintroducing certain elements associated with 4th, like recoveries/surges and per-battle powers and so on.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 16:52
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:To sorta see where the boundaries are - would 13A qualify here, or would it be too different from 4e? I did say 4e and systems derived from 4th edition D&D. So, technically, 13A is partially derived from 4e. It's also derived from 3e. That said, it does have A/E/D powers (If you didn't see encounter powers, its because they are usually in a paragraph preceded by "once per battle"), healing surges (in a very limited way), use ability vs defenese for attacking instead of BAB, has three defenses, a universal, (usually) unmodified saving throw system, as well as other similarities. So, while it does have differences -- relative distances, not every class has powers, lack of a skill system, etc. -- , I'm going to allow it as it shows its 4e roots. That said, Archmage is as far removed from 4e as I'm going to allow as far preexisting systems are concerned.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 18:27
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:Isn't the fighter's ability to immediately smack a marked creature who doesn't attack them kind of key to their usefulness? It's certainly one of the most rewarding things to be able to say "Not in my house!" I plan to have a mechanic called "lockdown", where during his turn the fighter lays down tokens in the area around him (not necessarily adjacent) that cause damage to monsters if they are ignored. It might not have the "feel" of delivering a solid attack with a d20, but it should get the job done.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 20:27
|
|
|
Rexides posted:I plan to have a mechanic called "lockdown", where during his turn the fighter lays down tokens in the area around him (not necessarily adjacent) that cause damage to monsters if they are ignored. It might not have the "feel" of delivering a solid attack with a d20, but it should get the job done. Steal a piece of Dungeon World, have them straight up 'deal damage' from these tokens.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 20:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 20:09 |
|
|
I always thought it would be much simpler to have a "lockdown" mechanic just say that the target can't move away. So a weaponmaster could base an archer and the archer could still shoot someone else, but couldn't escape to safety without shifting.
|
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2014 21:29
|
|