I think each class having the maneuver mechanic should have a different die size equal to the size of his hit dice: example, the fighter should have 6 d10 expert dice at high levels, when the monk has 6 d8 and the rogue 6d6. Also, on the subject of weapon choices, every characters had time only to learn two (2) weapons in the list given to his class, except for the fighter, who his better trained with weapons, who learns how to use two groups of similar weapons. His damage with such a...
View full commentI think each class having the maneuver mechanic should have a different die size equal to the size of his hit dice: example, the fighter should have 6 d10 expert dice at high levels, when the monk has 6 d8 and the rogue 6d6.
Also, on the subject of weapon choices, every characters had time only to learn two (2) weapons in the list given to his class, except for the fighter, who his better trained with weapons, who learns how to use two groups of similar weapons. His damage with such a weapon are one dice size better than other character using the same weaapon: example, a longsword in his hands do 1d12 damage while in the hand of a rogue it will do 1d10. Melee weapons groups: blades, axes, flails, polearms (including quaterstaff), maces (including hammers), pikes. Ranged weapons: Thrown, Flails, Slings, crossbows, bows, siege machines.
Thirdly, fighters styles should be related to his weapon of choices, while the paladin styles should be related to his actions. Example: a fighter is an archer or a axeman, or a swordman, etc. A paladin is a defender or a slayer or cavalier, or a knight, etc.
To clarify, there is no difference between background and profession. More skills are needed, but profession is a category which helps define the character's skills. A woodcutter, for example, would be recommended to have the skills Climb, Drive, Gather Information, Plants Knowledge and Use Rope, while the ability of a woodcutter to fell trees would be described narratively, without specifying restrictive limits such as how long it takes or how much damage a falling tree would do. A character...
View full commentTo clarify, there is no difference between background and profession. More skills are needed, but profession is a category which helps define the character's skills. A woodcutter, for example, would be recommended to have the skills Climb, Drive, Gather Information, Plants Knowledge and Use Rope, while the ability of a woodcutter to fell trees would be described narratively, without specifying restrictive limits such as how long it takes or how much damage a falling tree would do. A character with two or more professions would use class feature substitution, noted under career path, training or what you may call it, to get more skills than the 6 or 8 options normally available. Similar substitutions available at more specific points in one's career could grant the character other races' traits, religious ordination, a bonus to a specific skill area such as desert survival or dragons, or more general scholarly expertise. It is encouraging to see skills of narrow scope such as Diplomacy and Use Rope emphasized.
"The DM controls what you get", while 100% true, is an awful excuse for bad design. Are we going back to the 3.5e days when the DM had to research all the game's exploits to know which prestige classes to ban?
Its not an excuse for bad design, Nalehw, the whole point is that different groups react differently, and different scenarios need different things. That is the point of having a DM. You give the DM all the tools he needs, and he decides what tools to use. That is "GOOD" design. Most players and DMs want to emulate the fantasy tropes out there in books and movies, and to do that, they need items that grant ungodly power sometimes, that are only there, then gone, once their done with their...
View full commentIts not an excuse for bad design, Nalehw, the whole point is that different groups react differently, and different scenarios need different things. That is the point of having a DM. You give the DM all the tools he needs, and he decides what tools to use. That is "GOOD" design.
Most players and DMs want to emulate the fantasy tropes out there in books and movies, and to do that, they need items that grant ungodly power sometimes, that are only there, then gone, once their done with their purpose. To do that, either the DM needs to build these items (always a possibility) or they need to be provided in the game.
To answer Klaus's concerns, it is expected that items given in a published adventure are in fact already balanced to the plot and intention of that published adventure, at that level, however, most publihed adventures tell the DM to read through the entire adventure before running it, and to make any necessary changes to adjust to their players and their campaign. The Adventure Designer doesn't know your table, your players, or your world, and just because you choose to use a pre-published adventure doesn't mean you don't have to do some prep work.
All kinds of magic items should be available to choose from, but ultimately, the DM does the choosing. They regulate the availability of items, they outlaw anything that flatly doesn't work in their game. They get rid of overpowered items when either they miscalculated their affect on the party's balance and fun, or as a planned thing, likve I've said before. The Staff that gives the Wizard the ability to fight like a 20th level fighter that was put there for the sole purpose of defeating the Demon Lord as he comes through the gate, is shattered in the final strike
