|
Post by merctime on Apr 30, 2015 19:00:21 GMT -5
I might offer another proposal for the hit dice? If it's just a matter of choosing flavor, why not just give everyone the same experience point requirements for leveling, as Ways states above? But, now... We have some potential over-power for the spell casters. Another simple possibility might be, have fighting-men level up every 1,500 xp (they have no real outside powers, other than fighting, unless you are keeping that they can sense invisible foes at 8th level and the thing about one attack per fighter hit die against opponents of 1 hit die or less). Theive's, maybe 1,750 (no real magical powers, but they might not be as tough as fighters so level slower and thus gain hit dice more slowly), and clerics and magic-users need 2,000 xp to level up (they have neat-O magical stuff that you might want them to gain a bit more slowly, or they might get powerful too quickly). Now, if you see your clerics as 'fight-y', like I do, you might have them level up as fast as thieves (1,750) so the thieve's don't out-hit point them (this might work especially well if level 1 clerics in your game don't get spells... They need to get to level 2 for a first level spell). I'm just tossing ideas out there Of course, I encourage you to play around with stuff and try new things, just like I hope anyone would encourage you! But I do know from some of my own experience that only changing one mechanical facet of a class/the classes, without looking at the effects that change makes to other mechanical facets, might toss things out of whack in ways that end out proving to not be too much fun during actual play, that might have been missed or overlooked during the rules-creation process. Stuff like saving throws, in particular, and earlier spell ability, will be wonky without taking some notes on the level spreads. Not to mention attack roll values needed. Incidentally, I think this is why the dwarf is capped only at 6th level by the book; He still has a respectable hit die total (just cross-reference this total with an 8th level magic-using elf, or a 4th level fighting elf, and you'll see what I mean!) BUT... That 6th level dwarf saves as a LEVEL 10 FIGHTER. If I'm not mistaken, that is the best by the book set of non-human saving throws, and is not to be undervalued! Again, brother, my posts aren't meant to be read as argumentative (and you've my truest apologies if they seem that way.. NOT intended), but only a friendly, respectful cautionary tone in one area, and just simple discussion at heart. The rest of your stuff sounds really fun, though!
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Apr 30, 2015 19:56:45 GMT -5
merctime, you said: Right, I do allow multiple kills by FM against low-HD creatures. A d6 indicates how many 1HD creatures a hero+ kills. Superheroes+ get to do that for 2HD creatures, and 2d6 for 1hd creatures, etc. Where are you getting that 8th lvl FM can sense invisible foes? How have I missed that? If that is in the LBBs then I am SO TOTALLY going to use that! So, yes, I still feel that my FM have sufficiently mad-skills not to worry about HD accumulation being different because of rates of level progression. Frankly, it is good to know your healer is going to last, especially since, in this quick rule-set, I've given them an AC limit of 4. That said, here is a salvo using the logic of the rules I've already devised: FM get to roll 2d6 and pick the highest of the two (not the sum) EACH TIME they lvl up. What do you think? waysoftheearth, is that better for you?
|
|
|
Post by merctime on Apr 30, 2015 20:13:04 GMT -5
tetramorph , you asked: "Where are you getting that 8th lvl FM can sense invisible foes? How have I missed that? If that is in the LBBs then I am SO TOTALLY going to use that!" My bad, bro... That's in Delving Deeper (page 15). While I'm almost totally sure that waysoftheearth ported that in from a fighting-man ability from Chainmail, I should wait for him to speak on that I think. (Especially since I don't own chain mail yet!!! So I can't really talk truthfully on where this comes from). I also love that ability myself, though... The 8th level fighting-man growing so competent at combat that he fantastically develops preternatural combat awareness! (Baldur the fighter) *Sniff sniff*. "Hey, something's not right... I smell sweat... and there is a weird air current in this room". (El Machismo the magic-user) "You've been sneaking into my spell component pouch again, haven't you, you Great sodden oaf??" *Slash! Smash! Whack...thud! ...A dead mind Flayer falls at Baldurs feet, carved up aplenty, where just before nothing was seen at all!!* "Put that in your pipe, wizard, and fetch me an ale". Fricken' awesome!!
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on May 1, 2015 2:21:10 GMT -5
Where are you getting that 8th lvl FM can sense invisible foes? How have I missed that? If that is in the LBBs then I am SO TOTALLY going to use that! (M&T p16) PIXIES: "They can be seen clearly only when a spell to make them visible is employed, although certain monsters such as Dragons and high-level fighters will be aware of their presence." Which reiterates what appears in Chainmail on the Fantasty Reference Table (p43), where superheroes are noted as having: "The ability to detect hidden invisible enemies"
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on May 1, 2015 6:11:55 GMT -5
FM get to roll 2d6 and pick the highest of the two (not the sum) EACH TIME they lvl up. What do you think? waysoftheearth, is that better for you? They're your rules tetramorph, I'm just here enjoying the ride Sure, fighters could do with an extra hp per level although you may already have that covered off via their better AC. Thing is, it's not just about number of hit points. The 0e fighter's advantage is also his greater number of hit dice. Maybe check out the sleep spell, since it's likely to come up in early play. Then the confusion spell, death spell, insect plague, and Air Elementals (and Djinn), and the ring and potion of human control... just to name a few off the top of my head. These things all affect figures according to their number of hit dice. I.e., having the most dice is a defense against these, while having the least hit dice is a vulnerability. Also worthwhile remembering that a heroic figure can hit stuff that is otherwise unaffected by normal weapons. I.e., dragons and zombies (and others) are unaffected by normal missiles, but a hero can hit and kill these without the aid magic weapons (see the Protection from Normal Missile spell, M&M p26, which restates the same effect appearing in numerous places throughout Chainmail). All academic, of course, but there it is
|
|
|
Post by merctime on May 1, 2015 8:58:54 GMT -5
Waysoftheearth said, "They're your rules tetramorph, I'm just here enjoying the ride!"
For truth and the record, this is precisely my position also!
And thank you, Ways, for breaking down where a fighters ability to detect hidden enemies came from. I just don't have the scholarly ability to reference that sort of thing, and definitely appreciate those of you who do! It just serves to assist in my own game, and hopefully the games of others.
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on May 3, 2015 12:32:08 GMT -5
The Red Baron, Admin Pete, waysoftheearth, merctime, scottanderson: This last Friday I had a chance to play-test my "rules-lite 0e" rules. I have to say, it was a great success. It was for a marathon session from 8am-6pm for graduating students of mine. The rules were so simple they never needed to look at a rule book. For whatever it is worth, the FM never complained that the CL's got a HD before them. They were all thankful that their CL could finally heal and was more likely NOT to need that healing for himself! Since it was a marathon one-off, I planted a magic dagger and two magic swords. The FM felt kingly wielding "The Sparkler," and "Lycanthrobane"! So, at least so far, I don't think the worries expressed so far really adversely affect the game. But we shall see what happens if I am ever able to take these rules to higher levels. Thanks for all the feedback.
|
|
|
Post by merctime on May 3, 2015 13:10:49 GMT -5
I don't think the worries expressed so far really adversely affect the game. Sounds like your house rules were a smashing success! Discussion is discussion, but the table is the proving ground, right? You have been found... A referee of excellence!
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on May 3, 2015 15:44:22 GMT -5
tetramorph glad to hear your game went really well, I am not surprised! Have an Exalt!
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Jun 6, 2015 8:29:30 GMT -5
I've returned to pondering waysoftheearth's points about HD and lvl progression. How does this sound to you guys: FM: +1 to every HD roll, each lvl. MU: Roll* for HP every odd lvl. Every even lvl +1HP. (*They will be allowed to continue to roll as they did for starting HP: 2d6 taking the highest of the two) CL: 1d6, as it falls, each lvl after the first HB: follow MU (I guess because of their diminutive size (remember, I am doing race as class b/c I like that)) DW: follow FM EF: follow CL May main goal is to develop a rule set with a simple "players ready reference sheets" document that contains everything a player would need to know about her character on one page, each. They note any class specifics and what will happen when they level up each time and a certain number of times and then they almost never need even to look at the sheets past creation and they never need ask me for anything when they lvl up except: "hey, what does this spell do?"
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Jul 26, 2015 13:41:38 GMT -5
New ponderations:
Cap all progression at lvl12 for human beings, lvl 8 for fay. Every lvl beyond 12 (8 fay) = +1HP.
FM get one HD per level PLUS an additional HD after every three (3):
So, e.g., lvl4 FM = 5HD, lvl7 FM = 9HD, lvl10 FM = 13 HD. MAX HD at "top level": lvl12 FM = 15HD.
MU get one HD every odd lvl, +2HP every even lvl. The HP bonuses DO NOT affect total HD count.
So, e.g., lvl 12 MU = 6HD +12HP (HP range 18-48, ave 33, only 3 more than average lvl12 MU in the LBBs).
CL get one HD per lvl, clean and simple.
Use HD for attack rolls and saving throws a la Delta's "Target 20" system.
Attack roll: d20 + HD (+ magic weapon bonuses) + opponent's AC > / = 20. Players may be instructed to add all but opposing AC, ref adds and tells if hit successful.
Saving Throws: d20 + HD + class bonus > / = 20.
Class Bonuses to Saving Throws:
FM = +2 MU = +6 / +8 magic CL = +4 Fay = + 6
Clerical Turn Undead "Target 6" system:
d6 (+ bonuses, if any) - undead HD > / = 6
+1 bonus all "baptized" (hence, lawful human) + CL HD Undead less than 1HD subtract nothing (0). Auto turn eliminated, only auto dispel.
Notes:
The Target 20 and "Target 6" systems reduce any need for consulting charts. I like switching (back, for me) to a "single" (roughly) saving throw per class as per S&W, especially for the "rules-lite" feel I am going for here. I think leveling out at 12 and 8 (fay), respectively, is easy to remember, corresponds to the "tiers" of D&D and keeps things from getting too over-powered at "end-game." A lvl 12 FM w/HD = to a purple worm seems powerful enough for me. It's the biggest single monster M&T has to offer, at least explicitly. They would only fail a save on <4 and they would auto-hit AC5 or less, without magic weapons!
What do y'all think?
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Jul 27, 2015 8:33:30 GMT -5
Some nitty gritty numbers to perhaps think about... By the book, fighting-men have a soft cap of 9 HD at 9th level (240k XP) and then progress to 10+1 HD at 10th level (480k XP). Clerics have a soft cap of 7 HD at 8th level (100k XP) and then progress to 8+1 HD at 12th level (500k XP). So comparitively, the cleric has 80% of the fighter's HD at around 500k XP. The proposed 10th level fighter (480k XP) will now have 13 HD, while the proposed 12th level cleric (500k XP) will now have 12 HD (as well as a serious repetoire of spells and turning). So comparitively, the proposed-cleric now has 92% of the proposed-fighter's HD. The proposed-cleric is relatively stronger (compared to the proposed-fighter) than is the BTB-cleric (compared to the BTB-fighter). I wouldn't normally fuss over 10% either way. But, if anything, I have always thought the BTB-cleric to be somewhat overpowered, so I'd be reluctant to inflate the cleric further. Personally, I would be more comfortable if the cleric were deflated slightly compared to the fighter--but that's just me Cap all progression at lvl12 for human beings, lvl 8 for fay. Every lvl beyond 12 (8 fay) = +1HP. This means fighters will earn hp slower than clerics and GH-thieves, because fighters require 240k XP per level above 9th, while clerics require 100k XP per level above 8th, and GH-thieves require 120 kXP per level above 10th.
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Jul 27, 2015 8:57:24 GMT -5
All I can say to all of this is that my own personal preferences would be to make the fighting-men much better than they currently are relative to the other classes at the higher levels and to redo the XP charts to either slow down the other classes as the levels increase and/or speed up the advancement rate of the fighting-men.
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Jul 27, 2015 17:20:01 GMT -5
my own personal preferences would be to make the fighting-men much better than they currently are relative to the other classes at the higher levels and to redo the XP charts to either slow down the other classes as the levels increase and/or speed up the advancement rate of the fighting-men. It's very easy to overlook/ignore the advantages the OD&D/CM fighting-men does have. The "diluting" of the original combat rules also makes the F-M appear relatively less potent than he would otherwise be.
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Jul 27, 2015 17:20:02 GMT -5
waysoftheearth and Admin Pete, I hear you, so here are my thoughts: FM = 1HD per lvl MU = 1HD every 3rd lvl (4,7,10) (+2HP in between) CL = 1HD every other lvl (+2HP in between) 12FM = 12HD = 42HP 12MU = 4HD = 30HP 12CL = 6HD = 33HP Save Bonuses per Class: FM +3 MU +6/+7 magic CL +6 Note in terms of spells: Remember, as above, I am assuming MU lvl = # of spells per day and spell lvls available So, a 12MU would have 12 spells a day, 2 each lvl, purchasable downwards, never upwards CL lvl -1 = # of spells per day and spell lvls available So, a 12CL would have 11 spells a day, 3 lvl 1 spells, 2 all other lvls, purchasable downwards, never upwards That powers spell-users up a bit in opening-game but down a bit for end-game and I like that. This suits me fine. This powers down the characters in an interesting way, keeping even high lvl characters vulnerable, in need of magic items, and, more importantly, PLAYER SKILL. Note about goal: I am not trying to map 0e exactly. I do not need to, I own the rules. If I needed a clone I already have one; waysoftheearth has already produced DD mathematically to map perfectly 0e. Here is what I am going for: chartless, table-less rules, especially for players. I want them to be able to write down the pattern on their character sheet and go for it. Delta's target 20 (and my target 6 for turning, inspired by a conversation I had with him) gets rid of attack matrices (and turn tables). No need to consult class tables either: you are an FM? you need 2K XP to lvl up the first time, double that each time thereafter, you get a HD per lvl; etc. as per each class. I do not need to map exactly mathematically to 0e as long as it feels in the range and produces similar play. Thanks y'all! The feedback keeps helping me to hone something more and more useable.
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Jul 28, 2015 3:23:33 GMT -5
I do not need to map exactly mathematically to 0e as long as it feels in the range and produces similar play. The "feels in the range" part is quite possibly achievable. You might consider starting from www.retroroleplaying.com/content/microlite74 and then honing it to taste. Or maybe you already did? On the otherhand, writing rules is all part of the fun edit: I just downloaded microlite74 "basic"; it isn't as "lite" as I anticiplated! Okay then, perhaps there is a genuine gap here. Hmmmm...
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Jul 28, 2015 9:39:33 GMT -5
waysoftheearth, I love the concept of Microlite74, but I find the delivery unsatisfactory. I want a smoothed out, table-less 0e that still gets the same "feel." I do not mind if some things change subtly. I do not mind a 10% difference here or there, or a bell curve getting slightly more smoothed out or slightly more increased. I want a short descriptive paragraph, per class / race that players consult upon roll-up, note on their record and never have to look at a rule book again, except, perhaps, for spell lists. (Ref can describe.) I want to ref with no tables but random monster encounters, and, perhaps, an occasional check list to make sure I am remembering to check everything I am supposed to check, etc. I want to have my cake and eat it too!
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Jul 28, 2015 12:05:30 GMT -5
waysoftheearth, I love the concept of Microlite74, but I find the delivery unsatisfactory. I want a smoothed out, table-less 0e that still gets the same "feel." I do not mind if some things change subtly. I do not mind a 10% difference here or there, or a bell curve getting slightly more smoothed out or slightly more increased. I want a short descriptive paragraph, per class / race that players consult upon roll-up, note on their record and never have to look at a rule book again, except, perhaps, for spell lists. (Ref can describe.) I want to ref with no tables but random monster encounters, and, perhaps, an occasional check list to make sure I am remembering to check everything I am supposed to check, etc. I want to have my cake and eat it too! For what its worth a few times when I was exhausted, I have run OD&D games without any reference to anything written. When the players rolled their d20 I told them if they hit or not without referring to a table and so forth. Evidently I was consistent enough and fair enough that no one said a word and they were all talking about how much fun it was and how fast it went afterwards.
|
|
|
Post by The Semi-Retired Gamer on Jul 28, 2015 13:31:06 GMT -5
I've read through this thread several times because it is fascinating. Looking forward to gibing these rules a test drive...
|
|
|
Post by Bartholmew Quarrels on Jul 28, 2015 14:22:44 GMT -5
I've read through this thread several times because it is fascinating. Looking forward to giving these rules a test drive... I will second motion, this is quite interesting watching it grow right before our eyes.
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Jul 29, 2015 15:48:25 GMT -5
And, again, once more into the breach, waysoftheearth, Admin Pete and all: FM = 1HD per lvl MU = 1HD every other lvl (+1HP in between) CL = 1HD per lvl, skipping every third (4,7,10), with +1HP on skipped lvls 12FM = 12HD = 42HP 12MU = 6HD = 27HP 12CL = 9HD = 34.5HP I like this, the HD ratios remind me of the 12/9/6 ratios of move rates per armor class! Save Bonuses per Class: FM +3: yields a range: 16-5 in 11 increments MU +5/+6 magic: yields a range 14-9 / 13-8 in 5 increments CL +5: yields a range 14-6 in 8 increments This seems pretty close to M&M to me, but describable in one paragraph for players. Question: why do clerics progress so fast compared to FM and MU in the tradition? What is the thought there? Here is my wonder: I get why MU progress slowly: they become exponentially more powerful, so slow down the power curve. But based upon that same logic it seems that the FM should be the fastest progression, with CL as ½ way b/w FM and MU b/c they are the first example of "multi-classing," so to speak: fighting and spell capacities simultaneously, etc. Anybody know the reason behind this?
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Jul 29, 2015 19:55:59 GMT -5
12FM = 12HD = 42HP 12MU = 6HD = 27HP 12CL = 9HD = 34.5HP I like this, the HD ratios remind me of the 12/9/6 ratios of move rates per armor class! Yep, and if you like it that way it's all good. Be aware that the "12:9:6 look" is a bit of an illusion, since you can't really compare HD alone (unless all classes require the same XP per level). HD progression as it actually is in OD&D: 12th F-M 11+1 HD 12th Clr 8+1 HD 12th M-U 8+2 HD Which, due to different XP requirements, means the cleric's hp will lie somewhere bewteen the F-M and M-U's hp. Assuming you want to stick with approximately OD&D-esque XP requirements, then a "reasonable" simplification of the OD&D HD progressions could be something like: 12th F-M = 12HD = 1+½ HD per level: 1+1, 2+1, 3+2, 4+2, 5+3, 6+3, 7+4, 8+4, 9+5, 10+5, 11+6, 12+6 12th Others = 8HD = 2 HD / 3 levels: 1, 1+1, 2, 3, 3+1, 4, 5, 5+1, 6, 7, 7+1, 8 Even with this approach we've obscured the notion of top/name levels (before which HD increments are faster and afterwhich HD increments become slower), but this might be worthwhile loss for the gain in simplicity? In any case, it appears to work nicely enough for the pre-top levels. The top level fighters do get a bit of a boost, but I can live with that (they probably deserve it). In anycase, it all comes down to how "closely" you really want to emmulate OD&D here. It's in your hands
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Jul 29, 2015 21:59:16 GMT -5
waysoftheearth: Okay, very helpful. Just so that I read you right, and you me: When I give the HP additions, they are permanent and cumulative. Is that what you are doing above in your example, or are you writing in the style of the LBBs (do I even need to ask?)? Remember, I am capping progression for human characters at 12 and fay at 8. After that they just get +1HP per "lvl." So, even though CLs progress faster, it is eventually possible for all characters in a party to "catch up." So the way HD and HP and spells and STs even out at lvl12 is an important consideration for me. How about: FM lvl = HD MU 1 HD every other lvl, +1HP in between lvls (cumulative, so, +6 total) CL 1 HD most lvls, skipping every third (so, skipping 3, 6, 9, and 12) +1 HP for skipped lvls (cumulative, so +4 total) Once they all "meet": 12FM = 12HD = 42HP 12MU = 6HD = 27HP 12CL = 8HD = 32HP I feel like I am getting closer to the power curve, "class balance," and relative match to 0e that I am shooting for here.
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Jul 30, 2015 8:00:06 GMT -5
Here are the pertinent 0e progressions presented another way: Note how level advancement is really only "neat" up to 5th. Then, the M-U rockets thru 6th-11th level relative to the other classes. Then, the Cleric rockets thru the levels above 10th relative to the other classes. By the time the F-M achieves 12th level, the M-U is 13th level, and the Cleric is 16th level. Note how, with roughly equal XP, there is only ever a few HD difference between all the classes. For the F-M's hit dice note that: * The F-M is roughly equal to the cleric thru his 1st-4th levels. * The F-M is roughly 1 die ahead of the cleric thru his (the F-M's) 5th-8th levels. * The F-M is roughly 2 dice ahead of the cleric thru his 9th-12th levels. * The F-M is roughly equal to the M-U at 1st level. * The F-M is roughly 1 die ahead of the M-U thru his 2nd-3rd levels. * The F-M is roughly 2 dice ahead of the M-U thru his 4th-12th levels. For the Cleric's hit dice note that: * The Cleric is roughly equal to the M-U at 1st level. * The Cleric is roughly 1 die ahead of the M-U thru his 2nd-3rd levels. * The Cleric is roughly 2 dice ahead of the M-U thru his 4th-7th levels. * The Cleric is roughly equal to the M-U thru his 9th-14th levels. Although high level M-Us have roughly equal HD to high level clerics, the significant gap in AC makes all the difference.
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Jul 30, 2015 8:16:15 GMT -5
are you writing in the style of the LBBs (do I even need to ask?)? Yes, I was writing in the style of the 3LBBs. If someone wanted to simplify/emulate the 0e HD progression, it might be worthwhile to set the top level for HD progression to, say, 9th level and gain only extra hp per level thereafter. This might produce something near-ish to the OD&D HD progression...
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Jul 30, 2015 15:08:39 GMT -5
waysoftheearth, Okay, thanks again. 1. Why do you suggest lvl 9 as cap (I can't see what you are seeing)? 2. One of my simplifications is that each lvl is simply double the XP per the previous lvl until reaching 12/8. Then it is reaching that last number again for each "lvl" thereafter. Each lvl thereafter granting +1HP, no affect on progressions. So I still want differentiation in the hypothetical situation that an entire party has reached lvl12.
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Jul 30, 2015 17:28:37 GMT -5
waysoftheearth, Okay, thanks again. 1. Why do you suggest lvl 9 as cap (I can't see what you are seeing)? 2. One of my simplifications is that each lvl is simply double the XP per the previous lvl until reaching 12/8. Then it is reaching that last number again for each "lvl" thereafter. Each lvl thereafter granting +1HP, no affect on progressions. So I still want differentiation in the hypothetical situation that an entire party has reached lvl12. 1. BtB HD progression slows significantly beyond "top level" (aka "name level"). E.g., F-M gain 1 die per 2 levels after 9th. M-Us gain 1 die per 4 levels after 11th. Clerics gain 1 die per 4 levels after 8th. In later editions, these post-name-level gains were limited to hp only; no further HD were gained. 2. It may be worthwhile jotting down the actual numbers of XP on the back of a beer coaster. Continuing to double the XP requirement every level up to 12th will result in some very big numbers. If my quick caclulations are correct, a cleric would require 1,536,000 XP to reach 12th, and a further 1,536,000 XP per level thereafter. A M-U would require 2,560,000 XP to reach 12th and a further 2,560,000 XP per level thereafter. Whereas, if you choose to cap XP doubling earlier (at say, 9th level), the resulting numbers will be more achievable, and also nearer to what actually appears in OD&D. E.g., a cleric would require 192,000 to reach 9th, and a further 192,000 XP per level thereafter, so a total of 768,000 to reach 12th. A M-U would require 320,000 XP to reach 9th, and a further 320,000 XP per level thereafter, so a total of 1,280,000 to reach 12th. Doubling XP up to 9th would result in F-M and M-U numbers reasonably close to BtB. The cleric would loose his superfast advancement to the highest levels, but I would be comfortable with that (basically it would "fix" a mathematical anomoly in the original rules).
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Jul 30, 2015 19:09:14 GMT -5
Okay, waysoftheearth, I see your points. I am glad this would "fix" something w/regards to CLs! I think I am okay w/lvls near and past 12th becoming fairly astronomical. I really want 12th to be a "limit point," and such high numbers encourages that. I like the traditional tiers based upon groupings of 4 lvls; so 12 stops at a nice even three tiers for humans, while 8 stops at a nice two tiers for fay. Again, for MU, using my simplified spell accrual system, this allows a 12MU to have 2 of each lvl of spells. That feels fair and even to me. In terms of accruing XP, if we have a lvl limit as 12 w/no "name lvl" requirement on benefiting from wilderness strongholds, then they should start gaining XP from gold accrued through realms. They will need to spend it on armies of course! But they still get to benefit from the XP. So it is not just dungeons or wilderness lairs that will be providing them the gold for XP, but, hopefully, a pretty "steady source." If a player asks "how the heck am I gonna get all that XP," I would just smile and say, "time to build and defend a barony." So, for all that, I still like my 12/8 human/fay lvl limits w/ FM 12HD, MU 6 HD and CL 8 HD as limit points. This powers down CLs in a good way, powers up FMs in an equally good way and also keeps MUs nice and squishy relative to their peers at the tops. Thoughts? waysoftheearth, can I send you the document I am working up?
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Jul 31, 2015 11:49:11 GMT -5
Here are the pertinent 0e progressions presented another way: Note how level advancement is really only "neat" up to 5th. Then, the M-U rockets thru 6th-11th level relative to the other classes. Then, the Cleric rockets thru the levels above 10th relative to the other classes. By the time the F-M achieves 12th level, the M-U is 13th level, and the Cleric is 16th level. Note how, with roughly equal XP, there is only ever a few HD difference between all the classes. For the F-M's hit dice note that: * The F-M is roughly equal to the cleric thru his 1st-4th levels. * The F-M is roughly 1 die ahead of the cleric thru his (the F-M's) 5th-8th levels. * The F-M is roughly 2 dice ahead of the cleric thru his 9th-12th levels. * The F-M is roughly equal to the M-U at 1st level. * The F-M is roughly 1 die ahead of the M-U thru his 2nd-3rd levels. * The F-M is roughly 2 dice ahead of the M-U thru his 4th-12th levels. For the Cleric's hit dice note that: * The Cleric is roughly equal to the M-U at 1st level. * The Cleric is roughly 1 die ahead of the M-U thru his 2nd-3rd levels. * The Cleric is roughly 2 dice ahead of the M-U thru his 4th-7th levels. * The Cleric is roughly equal to the M-U thru his 9th-14th levels. Although high level M-Us have roughly equal HD to high level clerics, the significant gap in AC makes all the difference. Thanks for posting this, waysoftheearth. I fixed it in my revisions that I am working on so that it requires magic-users the most experience to advance between levels at every level, so it requires the cleric to gain the 2nd experience to advance between levels at every level and the fighting-man the least experience to level up at each level along with a lot of other revisions.
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Jul 31, 2015 11:58:11 GMT -5
Okay, waysoftheearth, I see your points. I am glad this would "fix" something w/regards to CLs! I think I am okay w/lvls near and past 12th becoming fairly astronomical. I really want 12th to be a "limit point," and such high numbers encourages that. I like the traditional tiers based upon groupings of 4 lvls; so 12 stops at a nice even three tiers for humans, while 8 stops at a nice two tiers for fay. Again, for MU, using my simplified spell accrual system, this allows a 12MU to have 2 of each lvl of spells. That feels fair and even to me. In terms of accruing XP, if we have a lvl limit as 12 w/no "name lvl" requirement on benefiting from wilderness strongholds, then they should start gaining XP from gold accrued through realms. They will need to spend it on armies of course! But they still get to benefit from the XP. So it is not just dungeons or wilderness lairs that will be providing them the gold for XP, but, hopefully, a pretty "steady source." If a player asks "how the heck am I gonna get all that XP," I would just smile and say, "time to build and defend a barony." So, for all that, I still like my 12/8 human/fay lvl limits w/ FM 12HD, MU 6 HD and CL 8 HD as limit points. This powers down CLs in a good way, powers up FMs in an equally good way and also keeps MUs nice and squishy relative to their peers at the tops. Thoughts? waysoftheearth, can I send you the document I am working up? My experience point revisions are I think pretty similar to yours, I have doubled all of them up to 6th leve ( starting Fighting-Men at 2000, Clerics at 2250 and Magic-Users at 2500) then at 7th level there is a small discontinuity and then continue doubling up to 11th level. after than you just add the experience required for 11th level to the previous total for each class. This way you can go all the way to 16th level as a max, but 10th to 11th is kind of an unofficial cap based on the total amount of experience needed. Also the way I have changed it no one races anywhere and the oddity of the cleric requiring the least experience to advance is fixed.
|
|