|
P.d0t posted:Tying into both of these posts, I had been pondering/panning an idea that would sort of be a more "fluffy" extension of some of the designs I've already posted. Here's what I got so far. Huh, weird coincidence. I've been working on a 4e-inspired dungeon-brawler of my own where abilities are expressed as dice from 1d4 to 1d12. However, my idea isn't quite as ambitious as yours. First of all, my game has ability scores. Yeah, I know. Boo and hiss. But what I'm trying to go for is that everything is an ability check. All attacks are ability check vs. ability check, out of combat you have ability checks versus a GM-assigned difficulty die (1d4 for routine stuff, 1d12 for really hard to pull stuff). Skills are present, but what Skills do is "In an out-of-combat situation, mark a Skill to gain advantage on an ability check. Once you've marked all your Skills, you gain a benny." Advantage works just like in 5e, so roll two dice and use the better result. The idea is that I want something inspired by 4e's grid-based combat engine, but without all the exploding numbers. Basically, trying to do the flatter math of 5e with a 4e'ish combat system, where higher level monsters are not necessarily marked by bigger numbers but by having more varied attacks and tactics. Some things I'm currently struggling with: My original intent was to have each ability score be its own defense, the way 5e does it. However, this leaves Strength, Intelligence and Charisma without all that many defensive abilities related to them, and comes with the problem of Dexterity being god-stat (because it can be used as both an attack stat with finesse weapons and ranged weapons as well as being a catch-all "don't get hit" defense). I'll probably revert back to the 4e Fort/Ref/Will system, where your defense is the best of a pair of stats. I've been crunching the numbers a bit already, and even in corner cases like 1d12 attack stat (which should be rare, and reserved for really legendary creatures and high level charactes) versus a 1d4 defense the defender still has a small chance to succeed. In the most obvious corner case we're looking at the attacker having an approximately 87% chance of hitting their enemy, but were I to implement the above system of using the highest of a pair of stats for defense the chance of hitting a low defense (assuming a low defense of d6) on a d12 would be around 79%. While that's a pretty high chance of success, we're still not talking 3e levels of making the RNG completely unnecessary. With two average characters (d8 attack versus d8 defense) the chance of a hit is about 56%, which I feel is desirable. The chances of hitting an equivalent defense hang around the mid-fifties, except at d4 versus d4 where the chance to hit is around 62%. However, this shouldn't often come up. Damage is also something I'm thinking of. One idea I had was to have damage simply be the difference between the attack and defense roll. Haven't crunched the numbers as to how I want this to translate to hit points, but it seems like a solid starting point. This will, however, lead to a lot of situations where the difference between the attack and defense roll is 0. For these cases, the damage will be 0, but pretty much all attacks will have some effect that triggers beyond damage, only requiring you to match the attack roll with the enemy's defense. So, your Fighter might do their shield bash attack that deals damage and pushes the enemy, rolling a 6 on their attack. The goblin rolls their defense (probably Fort) and gets lucky, also getting a six. In this case, the goblin doesn't take damage, but is still pushed. The biggest problem I've got at the moment is how to deal with armor and weapons. I don't want all too many numbers shifting around, so I might make choice of arms and armor entirely narrative. That said, I've already got a really simple weapons and armor system in the works, but it's very unrefined at the moment.
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 20:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 23:19 |
|
|
Uh, well, if you look at The Unnamed RPG, it does defenses as "everyone only has one" and you either add a big die and a small modifier or vice-versa, basically. Doing something like that might patch up some of the discrepancies in odds that your post talks about. But at that point, do you really want to have multiple defenses, if there isn't going to be much disparity between them? As for Fort/Ref/Will, I often thought tying Will to INT or WIS, Ref to DEX or CHA would be interesting. Most D&D people have an easier time imagining "Charisma as Willpower" and "Intelligence as reaction time," to justify the 4e status quo, but I just rethink it as "Charisma as Luck" and "Intelligence as mind power" ... As for the post I made, I like the idea of "each class uses a specific die for everything." It seems to follow in 4e footsteps, where it's pretty easy to learn Your Class without needing to know how everyone else operates. As a designer, it requires a little bit more mental exercise to make the smaller dice equally useful, but I think results in-play could be worth the effort.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 20:43
|
|
|
Would working on a video game influenced by 4e be relevant to this thread? Because that's what I've been working on. Even though 4e is already a video game har har har. I've got most of the framework of 4e combat done, most of what I have left to do is just implementing all the powers and monsters, and improving the AI from just bum rushing the players. (Although that AI would be fine for some monsters) And then I have to figure out how the out of combat part would actually function. So far, I'm just thinking of a choose your own adventure story style of thing with occasional dice rolling for the characters using skills. Anyway, if people are interested, I'll upload a tech demo when there's a little more to actually see.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 21:10
|
|
|
If there was a dungeon crawler where you could assemble all sorts of 4e parties and just fart around fighting increasingly unfair monsters with them, I would never stop playing it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 21:17
|
|
|
ProfessorProf posted:If there was a dungeon crawler where you could assemble all sorts of 4e parties and just fart around fighting increasingly unfair monsters with them, I would never stop playing it. I've been saying for years that they need to get a decent team together to make D&D 4E: the Video Game, because I love tactics games and I'd play the poo poo out of game using the D&D ruleset/etc. Edit: Ergonomix I will play the poo poo out of that game. Falcon2001 fucked around with this message at 21:57 on Aug 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 21:55
|
|
|
ProfessorProf posted:If there was a dungeon crawler where you could assemble all sorts of 4e parties and just fart around fighting increasingly unfair monsters with them, I would never stop playing it. The plan is to have a story mode, and then an arena/test mode where you can just choose the characters, enemies, and map and then have a fight. Falcon2001 posted:I've been saying for years that they need to get a decent team together to make D&D 4E: the Video Game, because I love tactics games and I'd play the poo poo out of game using the D&D ruleset/etc. I always wanted one, too. My understanding is that we never got a Baldur's Gate style game for 4E because of weird copyright issues, and now that 5e is out, it'll never happen. Might as well do it myself. I should add a disclaimer not to get too excited because I'm sure a combination of the Goon Project Curse and First Time Game Curse will fall on me at some point and destroy all the source code and all the backups somehow.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2014 22:36
|
|
|
ProfessorProf posted:If there was a dungeon crawler where you could assemble all sorts of 4e parties and just fart around fighting increasingly unfair monsters with them, I would never stop playing it. Agreed. A Co-op or single player computer game that used 4E's system (maybe with some streamlining) would be aces and I'd play it all the time. That Conclave game that enjoyed a brief bout of discussion a ways back was sort of like that, but it felt too simplistic to me. I think having a computer to handle most of the number crunching makes complexity generally a lot less onerous.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 00:01
|
|
|
I could have sworn there was a 4th Edition DnD game for the DS in development at some point, did I imagine that? EDIT - VVVVVV The one I was thinking of was Daggerdale: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dungeons_%26_Dragons:_Daggerdale Super Waffle fucked around with this message at 17:36 on Aug 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 00:21
|
|
|
Super Waffle posted:I could have sworn there was a 4th Edition DnD game for the DS in development at some point, did I imagine that? If there was it never came out. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Dungeons_%26_Dragons_video_games  they had the psp one but it was based on 3.5 and really clunky.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 01:51
|
|
|
Ergonomix posted:Would working on a video game influenced by 4e be relevant to this thread? Because that's what I've been working on. Even though 4e is already a video game har har har. A Catastrophe fucked around with this message at 02:55 on Aug 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 02:53
|
|
|
And I've continued branching out and working out what the core engine does well. This is absolutely not in any way a Mass Effect hack. Cover based shooters work well with detailed positional games. And here's an essay on different playstyles that work.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 12:42
|
|
|
Ergonomix posted:I should add a disclaimer not to get too excited because I'm sure a combination of the Goon Project Curse and First Time Game Curse will fall on me at some point and destroy all the source code and all the backups somehow. Off-site. Redundant. Backups. Rendezvous with Rama that poo poo: triple redundancy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 21:25
|
|
|
neonchameleon posted:And I've continued branching out and working out what the core engine does well. I too am branching out (sort of), basically looking at doing a mashup with elements from Unnamed RPG and D&D5e. The preliminary stuff has already been mentioned in this thread, here and here, and have been received pretty positively by my co-conspirators. Basically, it'd be taking the D&D-ish skill system and breaking it into Skillsets, with Skills as a particular use of that skillset tied to one ability score. For Example: Deception(Charisma) might be used for Bluffing, Lying, or Disguise while Deception(Dexterity) might be used for Stealth or Sleight of Hand. Your class might grant you benefits with a Skillset or an Ability Score, or both, and would function differently based on your "class die." This basically would be a mashup of "Advantage" with things like Inspiration/Guidance and Expertise/Superiority dice. For Example: a Barbarian might be better at STR-based checks and Influence checks to Intimidate; when they make those checks, they also roll a d12 and use the higher result. A Rogue might be better at DEX-based checks and Deception checks; when they make those checks, they add a d6 to the roll. Click the links for some rough draft stuff. There's also some basic ideas for combat applications of "class dice" EDIT: and NO, I haven't done any math on any of this poo poo yet; I'm too busy doing math for important IRL stuff lately. P.d0t fucked around with this message at 03:13 on Aug 23, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2014 03:07
|
|
|
A Catastrophe posted:I've been working on something similar for quite a while. I'd be interested in seeing what you're got. I guess games should go in games, but CRPGs I think have a fair bit of crossover. Have you been reading the game dev games thread? I haven't, would you mind pointing me to it? Didn't see it in the first few pages. And also, here is the current working version of the game.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2014 21:41
|
|
|
I've been unhappy with D&D races since ... forever. But am wondering if borrowing an approach from AW:TDA is too distant from base 4e. Anyway, updated version with new approach to races/cultures - comments please? Including whether it's 4e enough.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2014 02:25
|
|
|
One thing I want to do for Untitled Space Opera 4e Project is have quick species creation and I'm curious as to how to balance special abilities and how much each gets. Seems it could get into point buy which would make things hella advanced.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2014 03:42
|
|
|
I've begun breaking down powers and while it's clear there was no one unifying formula there are strong enough commonalities that faking one will be feasible.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2014 17:55
|
|
|
I'd be interested to see your findings; as has been posted before in this thread, I just burned it to the ground and made my own formulas.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 01:12
|
|
|
Ergonomix posted:I haven't, would you mind pointing me to it? Didn't see it in the first few pages. http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3506853&goto=lastpost Took a look at your game, i like the music. What are you using to make it? I've been using Unity.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 05:34
|
|
|
A Catastrophe posted:Sorry, I haven't checked this thread in a while. I meant the thread in Games. The thread is here: And the music is the one thing I can't take credit for, haha. (it's by Kevin MacLeod at incompetech.com) I'm using GameMaker, I've been messing around with it for years so it's what I know best. I've been working on it since the last time I posted; got more powers implemented, improved things, fixed things. The big programming thing for the past couple days has been implementing monsters that take up multiple tiles. They're functional now, but their pathfinding can still do weird things. (There's some kind of joke about Pathfinder here) Once I've got something a bit more user friendly, I'll probably go ahead and move discussion of this to that other thread since it's a bit more relevant. On another note, the artist I was planning on working with has been super busy all the time, so I think I'm in the market for an artist to team up with. If any would be willing and able to work together, send me a PM.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2014 06:22
|
|
|
P.d0t posted:I'd be interested to see your findings; as has been posted before in this thread, I just burned it to the ground and made my own formulas. Preliminary results/generalizations/etc.: Attack powers are generally built on a base die roll for damage + some bonus effect related to the class's thing. This is most obvious in the At-Wills- so, for example, the fighter has an at-will that does 1[W] + push the target one square and you can shift into its old square. (For powers that don't rely on weapon damage, a d6 tends to be the default but this can easily be stepped up). The base die of damage tends to increase by tier. At Heroic, at-wills do 1D, Encounter powers tend to do 2D, and Dailies do 3D, all + a small perk. They can do less if the tack-on effect is bigger, and here's where it tends to get complicated; multiple tack-ons can be worth a die, or you can do fewer dice but step up the die type, and some status effects are bigger deals than others. This I may have to examine in more detail and it's probably where playtesting will have to show most of the differences. (How much "ranged" is worth is going to be a vital question, since I've already decided the Warlord-esque class in my game will be reliant on firing blasters and telling other people where to shoot.) Paragon powers tend to have Encounters starting at 3D+small perk (so the dailies at level 9 are still better than the Encounter powers you get at 13, at least on paper), Dailies bump up to 4D. At Epic it's a little trickier- Encounters go up to around 4D + perk (but I think clerics average 5D so I may be totally off here, need to double check), and Dailies average 6D but there's always one level 29 Daily that does 7 + usually a basic effect, for pure "SMASH ITS FACE IN!" impact. Within a tier, increasing-level powers of the same type (AED) tend to have beefier tack-on effects so there's always some improvement, and it cycles over with the next tier. So, again, the dailies at the end of a tier are still worthwhile when you get encounters at the start of the next. With some classes it's fairly straightforward, defenders tend to work out fine, controllers are tricky, but oddly enough it's the strikers where I see a lot of weird variance. High level Rogue powers seem kinda muted in terms of raw damage, giving up dice for imposing debilitating status effects and ongoing save-ends damage, but then you also remember that sneak attack starts at 2d6 and does 5d6 at high levels. Rangers keep getting more and more attacks which gets crazy, and Warlocks seem to jump up to rolling d10s regularly. Of course here you have to consider that the strikers tend to be squishy, ditto the controllers, whereas the PHB1 defender and leader types are all well-armored and beefy. So there may be some variance here. So for building powers I'm basically going with the basic numbers above. It's nowhere near MM3 on a business card since, again, I haven't even begun to weigh just what the perks are worth. (Since I don't have a staff or a math degree or anything I may dumb it all down and have fairly simple powers, but that would mean less variety.)
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2014 05:18
|
|
|
It's worth noting two things: big perks are worth lots of dice. 1[W]+Stun for a round is an excellent E13 for the hammer-using Fighter. And unless it's fixed in a putative retclone, 3x1[W] >>>>>>> 1x3[W] in terms of damage. Die size is nearly irrelevant after mid-heroic.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 18:51
|
|
|
thespaceinvader posted:It's worth noting two things: big perks are worth lots of dice. 1[W]+Stun for a round is an excellent E13 for the hammer-using Fighter. And unless it's fixed in a putative retclone, 3x1[W] >>>>>>> 1x3[W] in terms of damage. All of that seems to check out, yeah. The big debilitating status effects can indeed be huge, which is why the Rogue's progression is especially wonky on paper. Stun is a big one, blinded and immobilized also stand out, and ongoing damage can be worth a few dice.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 23:10
|
|
|
On the contrary, ongoing damage shouldn't really be worth much at all. If the party is being tactically optimal, things will die before they take it, and even if not, it's relatively unlikely to have much impact unless it's of MASSIVE size or the monster has vulnerabilities.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2014 23:24
|
|
|
What's the consensus on costs for rituals? I know they're too drat high RAW but should they be chopped or totally done away with? Are rituals balanced just by not being able to be cast on the fly? I'm definitely going to have some Psychic Meditations and maybe adapt something like Martial Practices. Maxwell Lord fucked around with this message at 20:32 on Oct 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2014 20:29
|
|
|
The problem with the cost for Rituals isn't that they are too high or too low. It's that the cost starts out as extortion and becomes pocket change at higher levels and the rituals themselves become spammable. With 4e's exponential gold standard there is literally no way I can see to balance rituals using gold as a cost. And I must get back to Trifold - but I also have in my head the seeds of Microlite 4e - which starts by taking my Trifold, using only d6s, and removing damage rolls (and dividing hp by approximately 4). Character sheets cover only one side of a page of A4 this time. Would this interest anyone?
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2014 03:53
|
|
|
neonchameleon posted:The problem with the cost for Rituals isn't that they are too high or too low. It's that the cost starts out as extortion and becomes pocket change at higher levels and the rituals themselves become spammable. With 4e's exponential gold standard there is literally no way I can see to balance rituals using gold as a cost. I'm interested in basically anything Microlite, but doing one for 4e D&D particularly interests me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2014 08:41
|
|
|
neonchameleon posted:The problem with the cost for Rituals isn't that they are too high or too low. It's that the cost starts out as extortion and becomes pocket change at higher levels and the rituals themselves become spammable. With 4e's exponential gold standard there is literally no way I can see to balance rituals using gold as a cost.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2014 09:54
|
|
|
I submitted a game for the Better D&D contest a year or so ago that had a system for skills + ability scores that i really liked Each skill is placed in a category for one of the three defences Fort will and reflex Fortitude Skills Might, Athletics, Endurance, Nature, Intimidate, Dungeoneering Reflex Skills Acrobatics, Stealth, Streetwise, Perception, Bluff, Thievery Willpower Skills Arcana, History, Heal, Insight, Diplomacy, Religion By choosing to train in a skill it increases that defense by +1 and those numbers could even be used as secondary riders on powers for a +to hit i would just use d20+level though i think.
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2014 10:27
|
|
|
The Belgian posted:How about rituals longet than 1 hour can only be cast once ser extended rest, rituals shorter than 1 hour can only be cast once per short rest (or maybe once per hour) and no cost? It gets rid of the cost problem and prevents them from being spammed. This just makes the five-minute work day worse rather than fix the problem. :-/
|
|
#
?
Nov 12, 2014 16:56
|
|
|
neonchameleon posted:
About this, I'd like to say that while the way descriptive fluff is written & layed out may be bad, the very clear separation between fluff and mechanics and the way a lot of mechanical stuff is actually really good & helpful in my opinion and something that should be kept.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2014 22:23
|
|
|
neonchameleon posted:And I must get back to Trifold - but I also have in my head the seeds of Microlite 4e - which starts by taking my Trifold, using only d6s, and removing damage rolls (and dividing hp by approximately 4). Character sheets cover only one side of a page of A4 this time. Would this interest anyone? I am a huge fan of microlite type games and a big (conceptual) fan of 4E, so yes, I think that'd be very interesting
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2014 23:54
|
|
|
So, I took awhile off from working on my 4e-based video game. I've gotten back into it, but I'm considering a change that would require some fairly big reworking. Basically, I'm thinking of abandoning the grid and going to a zone based map, like FATE (and Dungeon World to some degree). This was prompted by a combination of difficulty with making an AI in the grid system and not being satisfied with how the grid works from a game design point. Having the grid gives the player dozens of options for movement every turn, yet only a couple of them are actually viable so why not just condense that decision down to the options that matter? In my experience running 4e and testing this game, battles usually come down to the melee shuffling around trying to flank each other while the ranged characters just sit back and lob attacks in. Obviously, there are things you can do to break that up, but the point is that knowing the exact position of every character involved rarely adds anything significant to the gameplay. Flanking would be replaced by gaining CA when outnumbering the enemies in a zone. Different zones would have properties relating to the terrain in the zone. Like "Full of Pillars" would give characters in the zone a bonus to defenses against ranged attacks from outside the zone. "Narrow passage" would lower the outnumbering bonus. "Spike traps everywhere" would make characters take damage on a miss when in the zone. This has gotten a bit rambly, but I was wondering about other people's opinions on zone-based combat systems. Good idea, y/n?
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 00:55
|
|
|
I think 13th Age works with "Nearby", "Far", etc. As far as I know, it's a good compromise between the grid and theater of the mind.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2014 02:05
|
|
|
Accidentally posted this in the general 4th thread, I'm getting good feedback there but I'm curious as to what you guys all think: Started writing up guard powers- mostly fighter rewordings but I have hope that as I get more used to the ad hoc formulae I'll be able to come up with more original ones with similar effects. (I'm trying to simplify some of the weapon specific ones though). Observation- a lot of fighter powers would be good for a pro wrestler type if you gave them something to bypass the "requires weapon" bit. Feat or class/theme feature? (I'm trying to really limit growth of the former.) Basically thinking that the guard shouldn't be quite as weapon dependent- your Worf types may have a favorite Bat'leth or whatever, but they do a lot of just plain brawling too. I'm already axing/revising a lot of the "if you're carrying an axe/polearm/mace" conditional powers mainly because that feels much more like a D&D thing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 00:25
|
|
|
Ergonomix posted:So, I took awhile off from working on my 4e-based video game. I've gotten back into it, but I'm considering a change that would require some fairly big reworking. Basically, I'm thinking of abandoning the grid and going to a zone based map, like FATE (and Dungeon World to some degree). This was prompted by a combination of difficulty with making an AI in the grid system and not being satisfied with how the grid works from a game design point. Having the grid gives the player dozens of options for movement every turn, yet only a couple of them are actually viable so why not just condense that decision down to the options that matter? My 2 cents is that the grid is a large part of 4e's 4e-ness, specifically because it helped enable forced movement, zones, and terrain effects. Off the top of my head, the grid and powers based around the grid let characters I've ran: teleport enemies into a damaging zone I had setup, forcibly cluster targets so another player could hit more targets with a powerful area attack, push enemies off of cliffs (or into grinding gears), and keeping a target stuck to me while an ally used a reach weapon to attack them with impunity. Part of the reason these were all fun experiences is that I wasn't told how to do them. I was just given the rules and a scenario, and figured out the interactions myself. I'd also caution against making too many choices for the player. There is a subtle but important difference between seeing columns on the map, and knowing that being behind stuff gives you cover, and that therefore you can get behind columns to get cover versus simply being told to stand here to get cover. It seems something akin to playing a FPS versus playing a railshooter. But that's a tough question to answer in a vacuum. Partially, its a question of how closely you want to mirror the 4e experience vs take your favorite bits from 4e. It's also a question of which system lets you generate the coolest maps and combat set pieces. If all the combat grids are just empty 8x8 planes, then yeah, the grid isn't doing anything for the game. Likewise, if most fights take place in 4 zones, but 1 of them is tagged with "Roll strength to make a rail kill," then I'm not sure zones are doing all that much good either. Edit: My personal dream for a 4e computer game has been something that worked like the first X-Com game, with a big emphasis on terrain destruction and interaction. wallawallawingwang fucked around with this message at 02:30 on Nov 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 02:21
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:Accidentally posted this in the general 4th thread, I'm getting good feedback there but I'm curious as to what you guys all think: Depends how important you want weapons to be. I'd definitely give pro-wrestlers a bonus to improvised weapons so they are only just weaker than edged weapons if I didn't abolish weapon stats entirely.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 02:37
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:What's the consensus on costs for rituals? I know they're too drat high RAW but should they be chopped or totally done away with? Are rituals balanced just by not being able to be cast on the fly? If you're doing a full redesign, chop the cost entirely. Instead, all rituals need a Focus, which is related to the ritual itself. Divine rituals almost always just need a holy symbol, possibly a holy book. Bardic rituals generally can be performed with just an instrument or voice as the Focus. Other arcane and primal rituals require various interesting bits and pieces. Powerful rituals burn the focus in the process (for example, the Focus for a powerful divination ritual could be a feast for the entities you're asking, which is eaten in the course of the ritual), or they require surges from the participants (a bardic song which drains vitality from the singers to direct people's attention away from them), or they take extended lengths of time or space to complete (summoning the Rambling Citadel of Airygard requires drawing out 1:8 scale silhouettes in chalk). Obviously, you need a way to rank the power of rituals, at least internally, but it shouldn't be by level. The main advantage of this is that it's something that provides flavor and gives a more concrete sense of how the players do things (especially by making the main Focus for simple rituals be the character's implement) and also allows for gates that seem less arbitrary, particularly by focusing on the practice end rather than the fetch-quest end.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 03:20
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:Accidentally posted this in the general 4th thread, I'm getting good feedback there but I'm curious as to what you guys all think: I think for a space adventure, that's a good idea, I'll be doing the same thing for my 80's Video Game brawler.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 05:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 23:19 |
|
|
I've got the core of the microlite 4e rules written but with minimal formatting. Next I need a couple of character sheets I think.
neonchameleon fucked around with this message at 03:17 on Nov 24, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2014 03:12
|
|