>DQ
I'd like to see Combat Reflexes as A) not a feat and B) tied in some way to BAB or level progression anyhow
Eschew materials
The two weapon fighting tree would probably be better as just part of the base rules
>DMQ
I reject the premise. Fuck core.
The only spell that really springs to mind as doing as much damage to the campaign setting as core spells is Mindrape.
>What are some spells you think make the campaign more interesting?
Stormwrack spells, for any sort of ship or sea stuff. Huge impact on fleshing out the campaign world.
Frostburn spells, for generally adding large AoE effects (that don't necessarily do direct damage) into the game. Control Foo spells in other books are also good for this reason.

>>94175616
TWF. TWF TWF TWF. Shitloads of feats for a subpar combat style that needs class features to hold it up. Absolutely no reason for it. TWF iteratives should just be a thing and TWF should bring down the penalties to the point of usability or make it baseline. Whirlwind Attack is bad too.

File: 1713920661543966.jpg (298 KB, 1137x1626)

298 KB JPG

>DQ:
>>94177811
>Combat Reflexes
Yeah? Just add more potential AoOs as BAB/Dex goes up, no feat? Could be interesting.

>Eschew materials
Stupid feat. Only useful if you get captured or someone disarms you of your component pouch midcombat, which are very rare situations.

>>94180793
>>94177811
> TWF
> two weapon fighting
Definitely. To-Hit Penalties; Feat Taxes; and paying double for weapon enhancement all combines to be too much of a penalty, needlessly. If you're spending twice as much on the magic items, you would expect it to do more damage than a THF weapon like greatsword.

>DMQ:
>>94177811
>I reject the premise. Fuck core.
If nobody can name the specific core spells that cause issues I might miss some whilst pruning the list. And we're not all inclined to dump out the entire PHB. (I have removed a bunch already though, and added in spells from other sources).
I think it would be good to have a revised list of "base" spells, that are good but not busted, though I dunno if we could get people to agree on such a list.

Personally I would rather try to keep most of the AD&D spells and tweak the spell levels add costly material components to try to get them right for the most part, because I like the AD&D setting stuff, but I know some people don't give a crap about the AD&D settings. But then, I've also been considering porting over some spells to 3e from 2e.

>Stormwrack spells, for any sort of ship or sea stuff.
Fair. I can see that.
I like some of the MotP spells. IIRC theres one for resurrecting dead outsiders. That was kindof neat.

>Frostburn spells, for generally adding large AoE effects (that don't necessarily do direct damage)
Ooh. I'll need to give those a reread. Can't say I've done much with that book.

>>94183448
>If nobody can name the specific core spells that cause issues
They've been named and shamed more times then you've spent weeks alive you disingenuous twat, don't act like the usual complaints are obscure.
Just scrolling through the srd so might miss some though this is hardly a difficult list to draw up:
>YBIYBI:
alter self
polymorph
antimagic field
polymorph any object
Gate - astral projection - shapechange - wish
>Can be reasonably houseruled if you're all boring losers with no investment in the game or setting:
animal shapes - wild shape
blasphemy/dictum/HW/WoC
nightmare - demand
mcdonalds lubrication - mnemonic enhancer
minor creation
>setting conceits that can totally rewrite how you play:
commune - contact other plane - divination - find the path - legend lore
scrying
contingency
enervation/energy drain
fly/etc.
freedom of movement
iron body
mind blank
invisibility
silence
knock
mcdonald's disc jockey
mcdonalds mansion - rope trick
resilient sphere
word of recall
major creation
miraclel
planar binding
teleport (greater) - plane shift
true resurrection
>no save just lose:
antilife shell
forcecage
>Shoutouts:
stinking cloud
solid fog
waves of fatigue/exhaustion

>>94183803
See, that's a reasonable list.
>YBIYBI; No Save Just Lose
Removed most of these. But not Alter self. I haven't had any issues in the past with alter self. I'll have to look into why it's a problem.

>Can be reasonably houseruled
Animal Shapes is on my to-reevaluate list, mnemonic enhancer on my "maybe remove" list; hadn't considered changing the rest.

>Setting Conceits that Change How You Play
Aside from True Res; Planar Binding; Commune; Contact Other Plane; Divination; and Plane Shift; Haven't touched these ones yet. I'll give them another look over. They definitely have an impact, but I'm not sure that impact is always a problem.

>Shoutouts:
I'll give those another once-over too.

>Followups:
What makes Alter Self a YBIYBI instead of just a "Setting Conceit" spell?

>>94184305
>What makes Alter Self a YBIYBI instead of just a "Setting Conceit" spell?
Arguably (and for alter self it is ambiguous, because there's an argument that spellcasting is EX which alter self wouldn't pick up) alter self can be used by non-humanoid PCs to cheat out racial spellcasting. Particularly, elan (abberation) -> red ethergaunt. That's the only reason to call it TO fodder. Most E6 tables don't ban it AFAIK.
>I'll have to look into why it's a problem.
Alter self isn't really a huge problem in core with core races (though it is above curve - +6 natural armor and claw/claw/bite on a 2nd level spell that's 10minutes/level is still nice, and it can give you a swim speed) but being a 'pick a monster' spell it's an ugly mix of setting conceit and wants-houseruling as the list of player options expands a lot with splat (humanoid goes to large size category, +7 nat AC just off the face of it). Flight at third level with 3.0 FR books. Non-humanoid player characters get much better options.

>Can be reasonably houseruled
>hadn't considered changing the rest.
Blasphemy is no-save-just-die if you scum your CL
Nightmare/demand have no range limit.
Minor creation can be used to scum out, in particular, poisons.

>but I'm not sure that impact is always a problem.
I mean, we usually play with most of them. But they do change the game, things like "are the PCs expected to be flying" feel like dip switches for your campaign.

Alrighty. Apparently there's not as much interest in a universal / multisystem / homebrew d20 thread as I thought. People were talking about it a lot for a few weeks, so I thought it might be enough interest to sustain a general (and it did for a couple weeks), but I guess that didn't sustain.

I'll take this down to an intermittent "when I have what I think will be a good discussion topic" thing going forward rather than try to keep a general thread up.

If someone else has something they want to discuss, jump in, I'm happy to discuss homebrewing or subsystems or whatever; but I'm not going to continually bump the thread multiple times in a row if it's not getting used.

I will throw out another discussion question to see if that revives the thread. If it doesn't, I'll let it drop.

>> GMery Qn:
> How would you add-in scifi stuff to a d20 Campaign? Would you grab anything from d20 Modern/Future? Stargate/Farscape? Star Wars? What's good? What's cool?

>>94192375
In my defense 4chan decided it didn't want to let me get past the captcha until now.

>>94192691
I hate when that happens.

Does that mean you are interested in discussing d20 outside the confines of the 3.5 thread's topical restrictions?

You want to go over this one as a bit of an activity (I'll check again in the morning)?
> How would you add-in scifi stuff to a d20 Campaign? Would you grab anything from d20 Modern/Future? Stargate/Farscape? Star Wars? What's good? What's cool?
(I have no immediate need for any scifi stuff, just thought it might be cool to hear about what SciFi stuff was actually good).

Or, you have something else to discuss?

>>94175616
>GMery Question:

Ban core. Add Spheres of Might, Spheres of Power, Spheres of Guile.

Done.

>>94192375
I, for one, would add Dragonmech. Not neccessarily the mechs themselves, but the coglayer class and Gizmo system (possibly steammage) could be really cool in a d20 modern game.

>>94194407
>Spheres of Power/Might.
Read those. They did not look even a little appealing as magic systems. I still want specific spells and spell slots, even if I'm picky about what the list of spells available is. But whatever floats your boat.

>>94194420
what makes this gizmo system good? is it much different from just artificer stuff?

>>94194407
I've always wanted to really like Spheres, but it gives powerful abilities way too early and way too often, like with the fact you can just turn your cures into potent 3d8+CL abilities you can spam basically all day, that can be triggered by allies, and revive anyone who just died... all less than 5 levels in. That's one huge qualm I have, besides that Lancer sphere is just grappling but you're able to just kill the opponent, and if they don't have reach on you, there's basically nothing they can do to you if you build it even mildly decently.
I genuinely used to love the concepts of the books, but in play a lot of the ideas fall flat and just end up with very early level munchkin builds being viable.

>>94183803
>resilient sphere
come on now

I was toying for my homebrew to insert an option - slowed down spell slot acquisition.
This is part of a larger effort to keep spells interesting but limit magic. Few spells would be nerfed slightly. The "most casters access most spells" would go away, with many spells available only to wizards of a certain school, sorcerers of a certain bloodline, druids of a certain circle, clerics of a certain domain).

Say a wizard would have "4" on all slots 1st-9th by level 30th (if you fancy to play at that level, we did) but by level 20th the slots would be
1st-3rd: 4 base slots
4th-6th: 3 base slots
7th-9th: 2 base slots
Sorcerer would be
1st-3rd: 6 base slots
4th-5th: 5 base slots
6th-7th: 4 base slots
8th-9th: 3 base slots
(all "6" by level 30. Same known spells)

Bonus spells for your Ability still present.
The bonus spell for the specialist wizard would be only available if you over-specialize (similarly as per the Focused Specialist, Complete Mage, but a single spell), and one would still acquire them slowly (by level 20th, only levels 1st-6th would get the bonus spell, level 7th-9th would get the additional slot.
Domain spells would go, but spell lists would be specific as described above.

Am I over-correcting?

>>94199816
you are over correcting for sure.
Have you tried something more simple first, like limiting the spell slots by reducing them by one max per level or cutting down the stats bonus spellslot or something less drastic?
It is usually not the amount of spells that are the problem for the casting classes but the strength of the spells.
If you make a class simply feel bad no one would want to play it and at that point point just ban it and appoint it to be npc territory only and be done with it

Spycraft 1e will always be my favorite d20 game.

>>94199816
What's the point? Not a pejorative question, what are you hoping to change with this? If you have TO magic then it solves nothing because what day you cast a spell on doesn't even matter, if you have well-ahead-of-curve magic (more a function of the optimization level of the rest of the group than anything else) then you're trying to reconstruct the daily nova playstyle, and if magic is inline with what other party members can do you're giving people shitty per-day requirements for no good reason. The only one of these that makes sense is enforcing the rest-nuke cycle and I personally don't really like to play that way.
>The "most casters access most spells" would go away
T3 sorcerers have been the solution for most magic woes for a long time. Nerfing them only makes sense if they're somehow still a problem intrinsically, which imo is more a problem with other characters underperforming.

>with many spells available only to wizards of a certain school, sorcerers of a certain bloodline, druids of a certain circle, clerics of a certain domain
We've always just used FS/SS and balled but 3/5ths of our table are TO nerds so maybe it's not as reasonable as I think. Writing up (spell lists for) actual homebrew splinter classes seems superfluous since you can just talk to your DM about what's appropriate and have your own spell list tailored to the character concept.

>>94192375
I've always said we should just expand the 3e thread to cover d20 in general. d20 doesn't really need two threads and there's basically no two 3e groups playing exactly the same game in the first place. /tg/ doesn't really theorycraft builds so the only really uniquely 3.5 topic we have are the arguments when some niggerfaggot starts saying that his 3.0 mudcore homebrew are the rules and default setting for 3.5. I would much rather talk to PF1e and d20 players since they actually, y'know, play games.

>>94199731
Walls of force in general are part of your setting definition imo.

So what happens to spells whose subject dies? Do they keep going on or are they dispelled? For example, if someone has polymorphed into an animal and then gets killed, would the corpse stay as animal? What about if the caster dies?

>>94203248
They keep going in both cases. If you get revived then ongoing spell effect should still be active, which is particularly relevant for things like geas.
There cases in fluff where spells are still active with a dead caster are pretty commonplace, so the fact that duration doesn't say they end is almost certainly intentional.
'Dead' characters aren't even 'dying' after they drop to -10 so things like not being able to take actions are technically houserules.

>>94201147
Thank you anon.
>by reducing them by one max per level
The ratio between Wiz and Sorcerer would skew toward the wiz. a non-specialist would have 3/5 of the sorc's slots instead of 2/3 (4/6).
>It is usually not the amount of spells that are the problem for the casting classes but the strength of the spells.
I think is a combination of many factors. Some specific spells should be nerfed for sure, but is not a general rule. Say, Meteor Swarm should be buffed (a bit).
>If you make a class simply feel bad no one would want to play it
This is solid advice, I am putting it out there to know how "bad" it feels. If you see how they changed the slots in 5e, this is still way more spells of higher level, and the 3e-style auto-scaling is still there.

An alternative would be to introduce the 5e-style "concentration" and call it something else. Actual 3e concentration would stay as-is, but some spell would need a swift action sustain to avoid stacking too much. In this case, slots would stay the same.
A problem with this other idea is that important "boss" (eh) enemies would be nerfed dangerously. I really wouldn't want to go in this direction.

Other points probably addressed in the other anon's answer. Thanks you anon.

>>94201358
>What's the point? Not a pejorative question, what are you hoping to change with this?
It's a quite drastic proposal anon, I would even understand strong reactions.
> If you have TO magic then it solves nothing because what day you cast a spell on doesn't even matter, if you have well-ahead-of-curve magic (more a function of the optimization level of the rest of the group than anything else) then you're trying to reconstruct the daily nova playstyle
If you reduce some options you make some choice important. I am perfectly fine with a caster casting a few big guns and then using normal low level slots (not reduced) to support the party. They were going to do that anyway.
But if you have too many high level big guns, you are going to solve EVERYTHING with the big guns.
>The only one of these that makes sense is enforcing the rest-nuke cycle and I personally don't really like to play that way.
This is the best argument against my proposal - I tend to write adventures that are not lenient toward this strategy, but I should remember this is not the norm.
Of note tho, that happens more at lower levels and lower level slots progress not that differently than the 3e norm. Is the higher level spells that are more like 5e - but still more.
>since you can just talk to your DM about what's appropriate
I always played like that but there are issues. First, after a few campaigns you realize you always have the same spells. Secondly, newbs can have option paralysis. But mostly is the former.
It also helps worldbuilding (a certain druidic circle or wizard school have specific secrets) and pushes the characters toward interacting more with NPCs and factions for specific favors and services.
Consider that I play without magic-mart. A given item can be available in a city but it's not in le magic shop, at least if it is high level. There will be favors to be done, or must be acquired in certain ways.

>>94183803
I can understand stuff like teleport, which can be regulated, and major creation, which i utterly despise, but Silence? Iron body?

>>94203842
Iron body is just important to make a conscious decision whether it exists or not because it's flat immunity. It's hard to put into practice in core because of what list it's on and what level it's at but the effect itself can be obnoxious if you're not aware of it.
Death ward should be in the same category as it and mind blank.
>but Silence?
Are you kidding? Even ignoring what it does to casters, silence disables like 1 in 10 monster abilities, two skills, and gives AoE immunity to one of the five standard damage types. It also completely reshapes how communication/detection works in the setting.

For reference, the only things on that list that were banned in our last game were the polymorph line (AS notwithstanding) and none of the players had any way to access them intrinsically, though gate/AS/wish were in theory policed by overdeity fiat.

>>94204008
>it's flat immunity.
With a load of limitations. In fact, Iron Body is how a well-designed flat immunity spell should be.
If mind blank was as well written, it would do something similar to your mind (say, a flat affect and a -20 on Cha skills).
>Are you kidding?
In its normal form if lasts 1 min/lvl.
>Even ignoring what it does to casters
If that was a big issue, we wouldn't talk about nerfing spells. I wish it was.
>silence disables like 1 in 10 monster abilities
You are over-estimating its impact beyond lower levels. Many monsters have workarounds or can be made to do so (see how the 3.0 and PF1e Banshees were designed as an example).
>two skills
Yeah, that's the point. Spells should have an effect.
>and gives AoE immunity to one of the five standard damage types.
When you have this immunity on you, you also incur into the caster issues you lamented, right? Additionally, Sound damage is resisted less often, it's a good thing there is some counter. These type of counters are among the elements that make this edition interesting.
>reshapes how communication/detection works in the setting.
No, it doesn't. Stuff like Scry does, Silence needs to be persisted to do so. if you Persist it, then you have the issues you first described. If those issues have workarounds for the players, the monsters also have those workarounds.

>>94204089
>trollposter doesn't even know what feats are in core or how persist works
ell emm ayy oww

>>94204107
I am afraid that you don't have counter-arguments, or you would have written something more substantial.
If you consider fucking Silence a problematic spells, you should avoid GM any game, ever.

>>94204142
Go on faggot, tell me how you're persisting silence

>>94204391
Oh now I see what you mean. You think that just because Persist is not Core (it's complete divine), my argument is weaker or invalid.
In case is stronger - it shows that you are even more incompetent if you think Silence is going to be a problem.

>>94204569
Why not read the text of Persistent Spell, faggot?

>>94204666
You are literally desperate. Zero arguments, only damage control.
Learn to GM, retard.

>>94199816
I'm doing something somewhat similar with my point buy thing.

I have slowed down AD&D-style slot recovery, because frankly, I just don't tax resources /daily/ to the extent that the game designers assumed I would (I find it hard to tax them that much daily on a consistent basis); but also, they buy up their CL and then have to buy spell slots. Still ironing out the point numbers, but they *probably* won't have as many slots as a 20th level 3e character. No free slots for high ability score, if nothing else. They're all individually purchased. Plus a pruned PHB spell list, with selective additions.

>>94201233
I've never played it. Tell me about it. What makes it better than d20 Modern? They fill a similar niche, right?

>>94205321
>I have slowed down AD&D-style slot recovery,
Could you please elaborate on this one anon?
I read this sometimes but I have no clue about how it works.

>>94205498
Sure.
Regardless of whatever rate *empty* you decide to make spell slots recover and become available for use through rest (all of them, by default, but we're discussing nerfing the magic progression).

The big part that changes is this:
> Spell Preparation Time
> After resting, a wizard must study her spellbook to prepare any spells that day. If she wants to prepare all her spells, the process takes 1 hour. Preparing some smaller portion of her daily capacity takes a proportionally smaller amount of time, but always at least 15 minutes, the minimum time required to achieve the proper mental state.
Instead, it takes a set amount of time per spell level. 15 min / Spell Lv as per 1e; or 10 min / Spell Lv as per 2e. IIRC L0 spells are counted as L1 for time, but I might be misremembering.

> 15 minutes, the minimum time required to achieve the proper mental state.
I kept this part, on top of the time to prepare spells. YMMV.

So (using 2e times) preparing a 1st level spell into a slot takes 10 minutes. preparing one 9th level spell into a slot takes 90 minutes. Higher level mages have access to higher level spells, but it takes them longer and longer to replenish them all, encouraging them to preserve them and making more of a case for items. Looking at the L20 Wizard and disregarding bonus spells: 36 + 32 + 28 + 24 + 20 + 16 + 12 + 8 + 4 + 4 = 184 Spell Levels.
That's 1840 minutes of spell prep to refill them all - or 30h and 40m. 2760 minutes (46 hours) if using 1e times. Either way, it will take you several days of downtime to recover everything at higher levels.
While out adventuring, it's probably reasonable to assume you won't have more than ~4h a day to prep spells. With the more generous 2e style prep times, that's 24 spell levels of spells prepared per day while out in the field, or 22.5 if the first 15 minutes is a writeoff. That might mean they recover four level 5 spells and a level 2 spell, or 7 level 3 spells and a level 1, etc.

>>94205693
>AD&D-style slot recovery,
Thank you anon, also for taking the time for elaborating this much.
This is very tempting.

One question though - how are you going to address the recovery time for Sorcerers?
I completely understand if you want to be the same, but I ask because in the base game spontaneous caster recover after 15 minutes (but they need to be rested of course).

>>94205719
I'm doing a point buy thing. I don't have the conventional classes, I have a couple buffets of setting-tailored class features with point-costs for each feature. A lot of stuff at the table will play like 3.5, and use 3.5 mechanics, but my character building doesn't look the same. To Start I grabbed a subset of the options in Eclipse: The Codex Persona, and have been tailoring it to my own campaign since then.

My "Classes" atm, are Universal; Arcane; Divine; Sylvan; Magic; Martial; Skill; Companions - and the players mix and match from those buffets with their available points to build characters (in play they need to actually train abilities, but can again, make the effort to learn any ability they find or find a teacher for).

I have some (almost complete) basic themed packages like GURPS profession templates (Arcane Archer, Druid, Priest, Inquisitor, Warpriest, Wizard, Ranger, etc), which take up a small portion of your overall point budget, and are a themed set of proficiencies and basic capabilities to get players started so they don't need to pick that stuff out 1-by-1, but that's more like the starting equipment packages. If they want to start from 0 I'll let them.

Circling back my answer to "what about spontaneous casters": I don't have spontaneous casters with spell slots. The closest I have are spontaneous mana powers, learned individually as well, but are more like a Cleric's Domain powers. I don't have Sorcerer / Bard casting (Also only 3 spell lists). But a character might learn a couple abilities they can cast using a Mana pool (purchased separately from slots, and less point-efficient but more flexible), and have access to those as many times as they have mana for, but you'll be limited to lower level effects that way. The mana also takes time to recover (haven't worked out the exact time vs slots, but it won't be way faster than for slots. The reason to get the mana powers will be the flexibility in use, not recovery time.

>>94205916
Gotcha. There is something similar, but less refined, even in the 3.5 SRD due to the OGL generic classes in Unearthed Arcana.

>>94205719
If you wanted to do it for Sorcerer and you're keeping the classes - the simplest answer would be to take your rest + prep time a wizard would need (say 30min/spell level, if empty wiz slots take twice the time to recover as they do to prepare spells to - such that a wizard always can prepare 22.5 Lvs / 4h.), and have the sorcerer slots recover at that rate. Sleep counts, but so does time relaxing. Let them recover whichever spontaneous slots they want, but at the same pace, just with no spellbook or meditation. the 12h the wizard spends sleeping and preparing to recover 22.5 SLvs would give the sorcerer the same recovery in slots, but they could use it for whatever spells they know. That would be a good starting point. But it's outside my personal usecase.

>>94205944
Yeah, that and GURPS Fantasy and GURPS Dungeon Fantasy were a good chunk of my inspiration. With a bit of RuneQuest and Rolemaster mixed in.

File: 1718077972477066.png (874 KB, 775x1002)

874 KB PNG

>>94205944
You *COULD* do what I'm doing just handing them Eclipse and saying "you have this many points, and this many hp, go nuts" but I think it would lack thematic cohesion, and that book is essentially a big pile of class features without any guidance or thematic grouping, and some parts aren't explained well, and I had to read his blog to figure out how some stuff worked. Useful tool, but not all that user friendly.

So I'm not handing them Eclipse, but I am using Eclipse to price out the abilities they are allowed to pick up, and in some cases, pulling abilities straight out of the Eclipse book. In some cases, I'm grabbing abilities from his blog and a few other blogs with Eclipse builds, and using them as-is as well, including the mana-power setup that he uses to build out the various published versions of Ninja and show how many leftover points they would have to buy other stuff compared to better classes, with suggested examples of stuff they could buy to be more competitive.

>>94206040
*and this many HD

>>94205195
NTA, but I'll spoonfeed you.

Persistent Spell:
>Spells with a fixed or personal range

Silence:
>Range: Long (400 ft. + 40 ft./level)

>>94206591
So even BETTER, Silence will never be an issue.
Thank you anon, I would have never made it without you.

File: 1729476729145887.jpg (665 KB, 1187x1610)

665 KB JPG

What are you guys' current projects?

>>94214605
ToB conversion.

>>94215020
>ToB conversion.
ToB Conversion to what?

>>94215047
My E6 homebrew. It took a lot of work since the principles work differently even if it was just 4 levels of maneuvers that needed converting.

Why are nogames so obsessed with persistent spell anyway

>>94215093
>even if it was just 4 levels of maneuvers that needed converting
But anon, a crusader/cleric/RKV/warblade/bloodclaw master/SwordSage with three bloodline levels has access to IL 18 SS manuevers :^

>>94215093
That's fair. I've been overhauling PHB Spellcasting (up to 5th level spells) for what feels like forever now (a couple weeks at least). It's also a lot of work.

>>94215136
It's a fun idea with a lot of possibilities, nothing wrong with pondering such things when you aren't in the midst of playing.

>>94192375
I'd absolutely add scifi stuff if that's the mood I was going for, but I'd never bother taking it from anywhere else, I'm too fucking picky about how these things should work. For example, too often are things like firearms made into "touch" attacks when that's literally the opposite of what they should be, they're moving too fast to dodge and it's only due to a thick hide and armor that one might avoid being damaged, a bullet getting lodged somewhere dense or deflecting off because it struck the plate or a shield at a lucky angle. Thus, they should target flat footed AC, making them suitably deadly in the hands of anyone who knows how to aim for a vital spot. True lasers would be the same, blasters, etc, anything that's highly accurate and closes the distance much more quickly than an arrow should be against FF, but every book and supplement and third party what-the-fuck-ever makes them into touch attacks and it bugs the shit out of me. Same goes for the usual damage choices, how they handle ammo, etc, so I gotta stat it all out myself to be satisfied.

>>94216776
Is this a bot reply? It's pretty fucking clear what I'm talking about from the context of the post

>>94216846
These were the exact complaints I had about the goddamn PF1 gunslinger, good sir. 100%

What about SciFi books for vehicles?

>>94215136
Imagine being so butthurt to post a cowardly passive-aggressive post days after.
My point stands even better, having problem with Silence means you shouldn't DM even 5e, let alone 3e.

>>94216846
It's not so much dodging the bullet as it is dodging the trajectory before it's fired.

>>94196455
It's modular. The gizmo system is a series of pieces and components the user can have built at a time. An example would be a device a coglayer in my game made once: With a Force Projector, he could create small, weak walls of force. Combining it with an automator, he basically wore a custom backpack that, once per round it would automatically place a shield in front of the first attack to try to hit him. Half the time the attack punched through anyway, so he later upgraded it with an Amplifier so that it would have more durability.

Later on, he spent some time to build a mining machine that would drill through rock and dump anything he didn't want into a cursed bag of devouring. It involved building a Vehicle, with Wheels, a 2x Drills, a Filter, Detector, and some other stuff I don't quite recall. But as a midlevel coglayer he could have like, 6+int components active at a time. The resources they got by taking that thing into the elemental plane of earth (after fighting off all the pissed off elementals) funded the rest of his crafting.

No two coglayers need to be played the same. You could have someone with a set of heavy power armor that has two articulated arms to help him two-hand two weapons, or a different coglayer can make a flamethrower with a bunch of attachments to make it fire bursts of flame in a line, or a cone, or catapulted globules.

>>94223151
Fuck, that sounds pretty cool. And that's in the Dragonmech books?

File: gadgets.png (473 KB, 659x1037)

473 KB PNG

>>94223237
Yep!

Here's some example components. While you need water and heat to power your coglayer stuff, I could see creating a custom power source with, say, just the Blood Pump and the Bellows. Spray blood mist at people. Even better if you've captured something like a tiny fire elemental. Fix the blood pump to it, and you've got a flamethrower that doesn't need water or heat, since you're just spraying elemental essence at people.

>>94197901
The fact is, that requires talents. You need to devote talents into a school to actually get those abilities. If you spend all of your talents on Resuscitate and Deeper Healing, then you lack other abilities entirely. Making a munchkinned healbot is an option, but if you choose to do that then you're choosing not to do any number of other things.

Meanwhile, if you make a cleric, then you just get all the cleric spells and all of your domains for free. A wizard gets a bunch of spells every level, while an Incanter has to pick specific talents.

The Spheres system trades out flexibility for specialization, and that's part of what I love about it. If you want to make a pyromancer, then you don't have to fuck around with sorcerer bloodlines and fire domains and shit. You can just take a drawback on destruction that says 'I JUST BURN THINGS'.

As far as cheap shit like Lancer or broken builds, that's always been a part of the game. It's up to a competent GM to deal with that sort of situation. Even if part of that 'dealing' is by saying 'you have to wait until level 6 to get Deeper Healing' or something.

Plus, who's to say your antagonists can't start pulling out the same/similar stuff? I'm running a game with a ranged greatbow wielder who uses the Lancer sphere, a Weather specialist, a Living Weapon Armorist who uses the Warp sphere to self-buff his range into the stratosphere, etc, and the party is still pretty well-challenged despite using what would be 'powerful abilities'.

Need a hand with some ideas if anybody minds helping?

Im making a cleric of sarenrae (2e Remaster) who very much has the redepmtion aspect of his god. Any fun ideas for flaws or negative traits to give a cleric of sarenrae?

Also for anyone interested racially human/nephilim

>>94223409
Wrong thread. You want >>94203432

>>94223436
Ah shit mb, sorry

>>94223355
NTA (>>94194568 here)
Yeah; I can appreciate that. I'm just not a fan of "mix and match on the fly" magic systems, which is why I'm doing a nerfed & pruned spellbook & prepared spell slot thing instead. >>94205321; >>94205916. I also don't have any /free/ spells, and the players will have to buy each one and transcribe it into their spellbook, or find it as loot.

>>94223567
Yeah, that's completely fair.

How do you feel about the combat talents, or the guile talents? I know a lot might be too 'book of nine swords'ish for you, but modular abilities like the Scoundrel tricks and the fun stuff you can do with Athletics can really make characters feel more dynamic.

I have, actually, played an entire game as just a pacifistic acrobat in a 'thieves guild' game who only ever disarmed people and knocked them out via chokeholds. I never dealt lethal HP damage (except the one time I pushed someone off a building, and he lived anyway)

>>94223582
I'm good with the abilities, but I'm not a fan of encounter power refresh.

I'm adding in something like this framework for powers https://ruscumag.wordpress.com/2018/12/06/d20-ninja-and-eclipse-part-ii-the-complete-adventurer-and-pathfinder-ninjas/
>Ki Pool writeup

(I have something similar to this available for casters as well, and everyone has CL=HD/2 at minimum, like with BAB*)
Minor: SL <=2 (weak 2); Notable: SL2-3; Major: SL 4-5; Grandiose: SL 6-7 IIRC
Maximum # of Martial Powers known is BAB / 2.
The Mana pool for martials is a Stamina pool, which is also used for martial features like Rage instead of X/Day. (Arcane/Divine/Sylvan are the other three types)

But with the following changes:
1. My overall change to mana for slower recovery rate because I won't be putting a ton of combat into each adventuring day (no point break).
2. No Grandiose.
3. DCs are 10+BAB/2+Str/Dex(Whatever they're using for their weapons to-hit).
3. Like spells, none of them are free, they need to be bought, found, rented, borrowed, or invented*. They're currently 1pt each at chargen* (might make them 2, I will build some sample chars to see if that's too cheap), 1pt is a skill pt; 6pts is a feat. - Once the game starts, pts = downtime training required to learn something (with rolls). I'm leaning towards 1pt/wk. But I will test that a few times before I roll with it.
So to add combat powers / martial maneuvers from other sources, I just need to decide what level effect they are.

I'm also using the Martial Art [Martial Art] the skill, from Eclipse, where they get a technique every odd skill rank. Each Martial Art is a tech tree of talents (of which I will make several), some of the techniques may be martial feats; you can only benefit from one martial art style at a time, but you can switch styles as a swift action.

Between the powers, and the martial art skills, I think Martials will be doing alright (plus, they can learn some magic and become a gish if they want).

>>94223582

>>94223944
P.S. Getting Martial Feats as Martial Arts Techniques becomes an option starting at 7 ranks in a Martial Art. (Martial Arts never get rolled for anything, it's just a cheaper avenue for martial stuff). And rather than making a dozen super specific fiddly martial arts, I will probably just have broad styles of martial art [Archery; Polearms; Fencing; Dual-Wielding; etc. Haven't Ironed them out yet] and then have an assortment of techniques they can find. Between these and the powers, I'm hoping to see the martials get excited when they find beat up martial arts manuals on their opponents, etc.

I think it should be decent, but it'll look a bit different than a ToB or spheres setup. I will probably at least check out spheres of might to see if it has any good martial arts powers to include.

You have any suggestions of martial stuff I should look into?

Question to all 3.x/pathfinder anons.

Almost all spells require verbal and somatic components. I understand why this is so for a Wizard (whose magic is not inherent), but why must a Sorcerer still do esoteric hand movements and chant power words? Isn't he the primary fuel that makes the magic happen in contrast to the wizard?

>>94228516
Arcane Spellcasting is a process of manipulating the Weave in order to effectively 'order' a spell. Like pushing B and then 3 on a vending machine to order a specific candy bar, except infinitely more complex with precise movements and invocations required.

While this is something that can be deduced and learned by examining the weave in close, intricate detail, many creatures were created (or evolved or whatever) with an intrinsic, instinctual knowledge on how to do this. Dragons are the typical example- Among their many other powers, they have that instinctual knowledge.

Sorcerers are beings who have some of those instincts in their bloodline, schattenjäger style.

The distinction between why their sources of power are different (preparation vs spontaneous) isn't exactly explained, but I like to believe it's because a wizard's spell preparation involves some minor rituals while preparing his spells in order to generate the 'power' for the spells, while the sorcerer's blood just already contains that power.

>>94223944
Encounter power refresh?

Not sure what you mean by that. You might be talking about Martial Focus, but that's a thing that you generate and exhaust multiple times in combat by using certain moves and abilities.

Someone trained in athletics gets the ability to just Withdraw to regain it, while someone trained in cool kung fu stuff like Open Hand can just take a moment to steady themselves with a move action.

>>94228571
If the concept of verbal/somatic components is the process of "ordering" the spell, and its something both Sorcerers and Wizards DO to cast spells, then what's the difference?
If BOTH require magic hand jutsus and words to use their magic, then what makes the Sorcerer special? The fact he was born with some genetic memory on how to perform said components?
If this is so then why can't the Sorcerer learn new spells and is instead limited to a selection (which is supposedly potential abilities he inherently has that are unlocked by leveling up)?

>>94228641
>why can't the Sorcerer learn new spells
Well he can, he can just study and take levels in wizard

>>94228641
> what makes the Sorcerer special? The fact he was born with some genetic memory on how to perform said components?

Yes. That's the difference. If a bird is pushed out of a tree, it instinctively learns how to fly. If a sorcerer is pushed out of a tree, he instinctively speaks the arcane words to cast Featherfall. (And the wizard just lands on his ass)

>If this is so then why can't the Sorcerer learn new spells and is instead limited to a selection (which is supposedly potential abilities he inherently has that are unlocked by leveling up)?

It's a specific set of instincts for each individual spell, and he doesn't have all of them. Even dragons don't have all of them, and dragons are OP as shit. As he gains more power, his blood becomes more potent, and the faint, vestigial instincts for high-level spells end up getting clearer and clearer in his head until he can cast better stuff. Technically speaking, though, a sorcerer could learn new spells... except that would involve taking levels in wizard and learning them in the wizardly fashion- something he gains through studying the weave and the works of wizards.

>>94228683
>>94228686
So thematically speaking... The Sorcerer's "gift" is that he has a very limited Genetic Memory that allows him to learn SOME spells as part of his natural progression faster than a Wizard (and cast them spontaneously), even though a wizard can learn the same spell anyways and can continue to learn more spells while the Sorcerer is bottlenecked by his own oddly specific and limited Genetic Memory (hence the limited spells known, the slower progression to higher-level spells, etc) and has to rely on more mundane methods to be a better magic user (a.k.a be a Wizard)?

>>94228774
It's not oddly specific and limited compared to the genetic memory of most things in the world though
Natural sorcerer casting is vastly more common than natural wizard casting and the only examples of natural wizard casting I can think of are actually just from education anyway

Otherwise yeah that sounds like a fair description of how it is in FR

>>94228587
Its been a long while since I looked at the ToB stuff, honestly, I'm a little fuzzy on how they work, I remember them being somewhat reminiscent of 4e encounter powers, which I didn't like at all. I more recently looked at skill tricks and the class in dungeonscape, which I didn't care for the resource setup for them.

But, basically, I've stepped away from having tons of individually tracked uses without inworld justification, with spell slots kept only because I've added the 2e style explanation in that you actually "prepare" each spell like ammunition, and then spend that ammunition. I wouldn't be opposed to something similar for martials, but those would similarly involve "building (or buying, I suppose) consumables" in advance.

Whereas something that's about general physical exertion where you would have some logical flexibility on how you tire yourself out or the magical equivalents, I'm doing as a more general stamina setup. If I were to give them "cooldowns" of a sort I would probably group them by "muscle groups" and make it so if you overexert you risk tearing a ligament and temporarily losing use of a limb or something.

I also considered making some big techniques with a chance of serious drawbacks /after/, inspired by some of the available modifiers in GURPS. So, yeah you can do this much more powerful technique, but you might risk paralysis that's not easily fixed by magic, and will take extended bedrest (or time in a magical bacta tank maybe) to fix. Haven't added those yet, but I'm considering it. Maybe as big buffs to BAB and HP and attack and damage, that last for like 30 minutes, but then you pay the price after sort of thing. Alternately, maybe inspired by how after Ichigo in Bleach overexerts himself it takes an extended magical recovery time to get back to normal.

I don't hate Anime-esque martial powers & powerups, but I want relatively in-charater resources.

>>94228774
that would be how you justify the mechanics.

https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/Jack_Ravenwild

Jack Ravenwild is the only infiction sorcerer I can think of. And he learns spells by visualizing the effect he wants and then just practicing.

So, per the FR fiction, Sorcerers do learn spells, just fewer of them, and they do it through a sort of exercise and self discovery practice, feeling it out.

My understanding: The main /advantage/ of being a sorcerer is not needing to prep your spells in advance; and not having a bog target on your back for your spellbook and needing to rent a safe deposit box in a guild for your main spellbook and also pay to have a backup travel spellbook you carry around. Remember 3e magic was designed by AD&D guys, as an extension, consolidation and revision of AD&D2. They did not anticipate that making WBL part of level progression would mean DMs would stop targetting equipment, I think they assumed you'd lose gear a lot and the DM would give you big paydays so you eventually catch up again.

>>94228587
>Encounter power refresh?
>
>Not sure what you mean by that. You might be talking about Martial Focus, but that's a thing that you generate and exhaust multiple times in combat by using certain moves and abilities.


I will have to give ToB another read. I was thinking each maneuver was 1/encounter, with only the paladin analogue having a means to refresh them mid-fight; but even then, still all individually tracked, 4e-style.

>>94231424
The ToB classes can refresh in the middle of combat, the Crusader is just the one that does it automatically. I think they're describing Spheres though because that's not how ToB works.

File: 1725102029654767.png (168 KB, 400x500)

168 KB PNG

Alrighty: So - in my (point buy) d20 game, I'm not using XP for levels.

Everything is improved through downtime and training, maybe also getting a teacher or buying manuals. The time it takes is based on the point value of the thing. Sometimes, you'll need to undergo magical augmentation through alchemy or incantation magic (or perhaps cultivation xianxia style, we'll see if I make that available) to pick up stuff you can't just learn, but the process will be similar (inspired by the ritual of unlearning / vitality in Savage Species).

They're hard-capped on hit-dice at RHD+6 (which is the most they can actually start with at chargen), if they don't use magic to go farther. If they want to learn skills, or feats, or class features, or whatever; they spend the time doing it and the money, and they're good, up to whatever the level cap is on stacking stuff.

If they want to increase their actual character level to raise their skill caps / saving throw caps / bab limit / hd limit, + minimums of those things by level, etc, that takes more than just fight some stuff. So far, so figured out. (I have character-point values on all that stuff already, I just need to write up the alchemical process to raise character level, which would raise your maximums, but then you'd still need to go out and learn the actual abilities. Maybe it requires "System Shock" style saving throws to withstand the augmentation, but with death being an unlikely outcome, unless you're **really** not prepared to level up).

What I haven't determined, is what I want to / should do with XP Costs on spells / magic items.

>> XP Costs:
> Extra Gold Cost (PF1 Approach)
> Extra Time?
> Convert it into a PF1-style negative level debuff that can't be easily removed and you need to take the time to recover from it?
> Convert it into an ability score style debuff that can't be easily removed and you need to take the time to recover from it?
> Something Else?

What are my better options here?

>>94237659
I'd go for Ability Burn/Damage/Drain or whatever else you want to call it. Make sure it cannot be simply cheesed by a Restoration Spell and similar.
Something arbitrary like 1 Point to one Score per 500 XP (minimum 1 Point of Ability Drain)

>>94238016
>Make sure it cannot be simply cheesed by a Restoration Spell and similar.
I may rework restoration to have expenses according to what needs to be restored. I'm also reducing the utility on the neutralize poison and disease spells, at least requiring a roll-off against the poison / disease, but probably also adding some material components according to the strength of the poison / disease.

How should I decide what ability score it is? Just stick it on Con because that matters to everybody?

>>94238176
>How should I decide what ability score it is? Just stick it on Con because that matters to everybody?
Ideally, I'd personally allow the player to choose (and kindly tell them no if it's their dump stat). I'd also allow them to divide the cost between stats for something heavy like Wish.

>>94238189
So far I don't have any spells above 5th level in the set (reducing the workload); but I take your point.

Maybe let them pick and it has to be one of their three highest ability scores (and then if they take enough damage to one that it's tied with the 4th highest, they can choose that one as well?)

>>94238210
Sounds reasonable, I have nothing else to add.

>>94238215
Okay. That's what I'll go with for the selection. What about the recovery?

https://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#abilityDamage

Add a third type of ability 'damage' that recovers 1pt/wk (double with bedrest)? Just make it ability damage and let it recover at 1/day but make it magic resistant? I feel like the regular 1/day might make it too cheap. But then, 500xp from combat wouldn't take that long to get in combat, either. Maybe making it a day of bedrest, and just making ability damage recover half as fast (1/day with bedrest, 1/2 days without), is sufficient?

I'm trying to dial-in "the right amount of punishing", you know?

>>94238257
I'd go for bed rest or some other form of downtime.
Ability Burn is already a thing introduced with Psionics (See Psychofeedback power), and iirc it can only be recovered by downtime and rest.
I honestly can't tell you what rate to use, the pacing is entirely up to you and your party.

>>94238290
>Psychofeedback
>Ability Burn
Oh. No shit. I've never had any players want to use psionics, so I've never used that book before (though I have both the 3.0 and 3.5 versions, they've just been collecting dust on my shelf for a couple decades). Ability Burn is exactly what I was looking for.

As for the pacing; I probably want to slow down the recovery of ability damage too - so I'll address those together.

Thanks anon. You've been a big help. Off to set it up.

>>94238290
Went with 1 Burn/250XP, with Simulacrum getting bumped up to 1 Burn / HD. Wish / Miracle cause 20 Ability Burn. Good chance of losing your spellcasting entirely for a couple weeks. Which, I'm good with, I think. Should prevent it from being used frivolously.

Why the FUCK pathfinder changed giant and elemental to subtypes?
It created a few issues and solved nothing.

>>94233146
Holy shit they are in the PFSRD now

Why the FUCK pathfinder changed the HD progression of Dragons?
High level dragons were supposed to be on the stronger side.

>>94239477
The whole thing or just parts of it?

>>94239354
dunno on both counts.

>>94239483
Dragons in 3.5 are stupidly under-CR'ed just because.

>>94239483
Dragons were intentionally under-CRed in 3.5. Their CR was inaccurate for a stupid reason. Just use higher CR dragons if you want tougher ones.

>>94239354
Giant is 'humanoid or monstrous humanoid, but big'. Elementals should have already fallen under the outsider purview and we've had arguments about that since 3.0 came out. It makes a lot of sense to fold them up for consistency; the mechanical issues are separate.

>>94239642
>The whole thing or just parts of it?
Choosing random ones to be honest, so far they are all in, try yourself.
Blessed be Ryan Dancey

>>94239642
>>94239672
This completely ignores the context. Dragons are often encountered alone, action economy is a big issue.
They NEED to be over CR'd to be memorable "boss" monsters.

>>94239688
>Giant is 'humanoid or monstrous humanoid, but big'.
Giants should be more than that. In mythologies, they challenge the gods. Should also Fey be merged to Outsiders? I don't think so.
Hell, most outsiders are vaguely humanoid. Should humanoid, monstrous humanoids and giants be merged with outsiders?

>Elementals should have already fallen under the outsider purview and we've had arguments about that since 3.0 came out. It makes a lot of sense to fold them up for consistency; the mechanical issues are separate.

Admittedly, Outsiders are "made of the substance of their plane" - often at least. But elementals feel more primal and more associated with primary components of the planes, while Outsiders are more associated with higher concepts and ideas of freedom, oppression, chaos, cruelty, generosity etc at least the celestial and fiend ones.

>>94237659
>We'll see if I make Cultivation available.
You have put much emphasis on the Alchemical progression of characters, which is in effect Cultivation.

Guilds, Sects and Schools undermine and fight each other for the limited herbs, monster cores, ki sources and scrolls that will push their members towards the "next step". Is this any similar to your setting? (There's also the sex, but I don't think that's the scope of your system.)

>>94239722
No, you just need to use a higher CR one. Intentionally lying to the player is bad game design.

>>94239792
CR is an entirely DM facing tool. Telling your players the CR of things is meta gaming.

>>94239814
And the GM is still a player. Lying to them is bad game design.

>>94239751
And then you have xorns, which are shoe-ins for elementals but are outsiders. It's a fuzzy definition at best and it's easy to come down on the side of subtypes rationally.

Who the fuck thinks dragons were intentionally under CR'd in 3e
Did you read fiend folio
CR was assigned with a dartboard don't be retarded
also dragons are dogshit per-CR wtf are you talking about

>>94239968
The designers, who said as much? Anyone who looks at their INT score and capabilities and puts them together?

>>94239792
>Intentionally lying to the player
>>94239823
I mean people are willing to accept that the monster is stronger because... is a dragon.
And you are again ignoring the fact that the monster is often used as a solo "boss". That's not trivial at all.

>>94240048
NTA - Dragons also give more treasure.
BTW PF1e Dragons still give "Treasure: triple".
So now Paizo adjusted the CRs but not the treasure obtained.
Retards.

>>94239830
>which are shoe-ins for elementals but are outsiders.
That's because, like (say) Djinn and Salamanders, are more sophisticated in both shape and mind.
They don't indeed align with major concepts tho, admittedly.

>>94240060
The only differences between an equally powerful dragon if the CR is different is rewards, when the game says you might fight them, and the DM having a better handle on what they can fight.

>>94239968
>Did you read fiend folio
Not that bad on CRs
MM2 on the other hand...

>>94239715
Will do. I will say; although I really appreciate how the OGL got a ton of people making cross-compatible RPG products - fuck would I never take business advice from Dancey. What a garbagefire of a track record.
https://medium.com/@kaitave/whatever-happened-to-pathfinder-online-anyway-addd9ee51c81

> Choosing random ones to be honest, so far they are all in, try yourself.
0 for 6.

Ley Line Magic; Aboleth Glyphs; Rune Magic; Incantations; Ritual Spaces; Crafting Undead.

Good thing I have the PDF. But yeah, d20PFSRD is missing a lot of the book. Basically everything in there I might actually want.

File: 1702910563429576.png (33 KB, 306x200)

33 KB PNG

>>94239722
>They NEED to be over CR'd to be memorable "boss" monsters.
Then you pick a higher CR dragon, and it should be worth more XP.
A CR X vs Lv X class 1v1 should have ~50:50 odds of winning if played correctly* (*With NPC WBL). That's what CR means. That's why the CRs of NPCs are set how they are. If the monster is significantly harder than that, that means the CR is set wrong.

> "An encounter with an Encounter Level (EL) equal to the PCs’ level is one that should expend about 20% of their resources—hit points, spells, magic item uses, and so on. ... By contrast, an encounter of even one or two levels higher than the party level might tax the PCs to their limit, although with luck they might be able to take on two such encounters before needing to recover. Remember that when the EL is higher than the party level, the chance for PC fatality rises dramatically.

Following normal CR rules,It's a boss fight so there should be some risk, it's probably in my 15% of Very Difficult encounters, 1-4 CR higher than APL. Single monster, so I'll follow the single monster advice, also on p.49, prepping it's tactics, splitting up the party to take them on individually, in an environment that harms the party like a volcano, rush the players before they have time to get up their buffs, and use trickery to make the PCs waste their abilities on a decoy before the boss attacks.

Then my CR 13 Red Dragon TPKs the exhausted APL9-11 Party with an effective spell routine (DC 19 Stinking Cloud in the lair's killbox would definitely be on the list) breath weapon them to death while they're nauseated & out of good spells. DC18 Glitterdust to blind them all while they're nauseated, then DC18 Stay the hand on the Barb/Fighter once they get out of the killbox while you butcher their friends with breath weapons and many natural attacks. "Gee. How did they all die. It said 15% of the time they can take a CR=LV+1-4."

PF1 Dragons are just CR'ed honestly.

>>94239751
Outsiders are made of planar energy. They don't have organs or die normally & need special spells to resurrect. They have body and soul as a single unit. Their body is their soul. They can't become petitioners or ghosts after death.

>>94240463
>PF1 Dragons are just CR'ed honestly.
too bad the treasure is too much because they forgot that the 3.5 treasure was triple due to what you just wrote.
FYI - the volcano is going to increase the CR of the encounter.

>>94240466
>They don't have organs
They kinda do, they still are subjected to criticals, can eat (don't have to) and must breathe.
>Oozes eat and breathe, but do not sleep.

>>94240287
The OGL take in that blogpost is beyond retarded and willingly ignorant - albeit I see the points raised about CCG decisions.

>>94240287
>Ley Line Magic; Aboleth Glyphs; Rune Magic; Incantations; Ritual Spaces; Crafting Undead.
Are these spells or additional magic rules? I searched spells from their list.

>>94240492
>>94240466
lmao sorry
>Outsiders breathe, but do not need to eat or sleep (although they can do so if they wish). Native outsiders breathe, eat, and sleep.

Dunno what happened jumped at the wrong paragraph.

>>94239783
> You have put much emphasis on the Alchemical progression of characters, which is in effect Cultivation.
Similar, yeah, but not something you can do in yourself with a manual in a cave, you need rare reagents, etc. I have read all of Er Gen's up to AWE & a fair number of others. Currently reading World of Cultivation. I'm undecided whether I want any augmentations to be done through outright cultivating.

> Guilds, Sects and Schools undermine and fight each other for the limited herbs, monster cores, ki sources and scrolls that will push their members towards the "next step". Is this any similar to your setting?
It's a bit less backstabby, but they're under the thumb of a colonial empire, and they're on a new demiplane frontier settlement. Lots of guilds, and a single pantheon with a large amount of power.

The resources are less scarce than in a cultivation novel. They might have to fight dangerous beasts for rare materials, but probably not as much fighting other adventurers.

But there will be some faction conflict between clans in the lower ranks (the guilds and churches are more or less the state); as well as cultists. Actually, not entirely unlike World of Cultivation, the main competition for resources will come from other empires once they get going. But instead of Awakened Cultivating Beasts and Plants, one group of enemies will be a bit like a D&D version of "Beasts of Chaos" from WHFB (Beastmen led by fiends) and the other analogous of 1990s Phyrexians under Yawgmoth + Simic / Golgari / Lorwyn Elves - Doing similar alchemical advancement, but generally turning their people into full on horrors. They'll be an old planar splinter empire off of the empire the PCs belong to.

>>94240072
Treasure never matched CR across the board. If the PCs fight nothing but NPCs, they'll quickly have way too much wealth. You're supposed to balance the big payouts with a bunch of beast that pay out nothing.

>>94240516
Other stuff.

>Ley Line Magic;
Magical powersources you can tap into / get free metamagics from if in range.

>Aboleth Glyphs; Rune Magic;
Like... Domain Powers attained through feats.

>Incantations;
Slow-Multicaster Ritual Magic; no slots. Loosely based on 2e Elven High Magic.

>Ritual Spaces;
Special Spaces you can build to make Incantations Less prone to backfiring. A "Safe-Space" if you will.

>Crafting Undead.
Undead Creation as Magic Item Creation.

>>94240506
I like the OGL, but it had some side effects. It's hard to say it didn't.

>CCG Stuff.
And the massive flop of the PF1 MMORPG.

>>94240485
> 3.5 treasure was triple
Oh, right, fuck. I didn't even touch on treasure. That CR13 Dragon is now potentially also equipped with 39,000GP worth of gear. Not Lv13 PC wealth, sure, but more than LV9 PC Wealth. That likely includes some nasty wands / wondrous items.

> FYI - the volcano is going to increase the CR of the encounter.
Okay, that's fair. You get my point though. The CR isn't a good gauge of the threat. It has the defenses of a ~CR14, the attack bonus of a CR24, the damage of a CR22, plus the spells of a 5th level sorcerer.
(Looking at the stuff in these arrays) https://legacy.aonprd.com/unchained/monsters/step1.html
That's an absolute beast, and absolutely not what you would expect from anything CR13.

>>94240506
No, it's actually dead on. We got 3.5 because of what the OGL undercutting WotC product did to splat sales.

>>94240668
>the OGL undercutting WotC product
It sold more WoTC product more quickly than any other edition.

>>94240696
No it didn't.

>>94240621
And the hardware of a Mid-LV9 PC.

File: Clipboard Image.jpg (67 KB, 384x612)

67 KB JPG

>>94240463
>my CR 13 Red Dragon TPKs the exhausted APL9-11 Party with an effective spell routine (DC 19 Stinking Cloud
>casters with 6th level spells
>being tpk'd by DC19 level 3 spells
wew
>"Gee. How did they all die. It said 15% of the time they can take a CR=LV+1-4
Oh, you're actually just trolling
CR+4 is literally 50% chance of TPK for a party at full resources.

Dragons are weak for their CR
>>94240621
>the attack bonus of a CR24
>a CR 24
>+27 to hit
>a CR 24
The CR24 beatstick has +70 to hit. It also has base 70 strength, a 100ft permanent EX CL 25 (why does it even need a caster level when it's EX?) antimagic field it can toggle, and immunity to "all spells, spell-like abilities, and supernatural effects" other than a spell that can slow it for 1 round and a spell that restores all it's hit points.
a CR 21 outsider has the same to hit/AC (swapped, actually) as the CR21 red dragon
You have no fucking idea what you're talking about.

>>94240466
>they don't have organs

>>94241551
Shitty ELH monsters don't mean anything.

>>94228641
>If the concept of verbal/somatic components is the process of "ordering" the spell, and its something both Sorcerers and Wizards DO to cast spells, then what's the difference?
Spell preparation. Saying that wizards "memorize" spells at the beginning of each day is misleading – what they're doing is pre-casting most of the spell and leaving it in a state where they can trigger it relatively easily. Sorcerers don't need to bother with any of that crap.

>>94240530
That's not the point.

>>94240463
I find amazing that you don't consider fleeing an option.
The other anon addressed the rest better than what I could do.

>>94240668
No, that's wotc being dumb as always.
A lot of the ogl made concepts and even settings not available from wotc being bought by people that wouldn't have otherwise touched the core books.

>>94242187
One look at dragon mobility might explain that.

>>94242240
You are assuming A LOT of things but then again, this guy >>94241551
Already told you sufficiently for what concerns me.

>>94242240
A CR13 red is a young adult.
Young adults have level 5th caster level.
5th level sorcerers have max level 2nd spells.
Stinking Cloud is level 3rd. You are literally cheating here.

On top of that, I am pretty sure the 8th level caster in the party. has a few tricks against a 5th level one.

>>94242171
Sure it is. Wealth payout != difficulty measure. That's what CR is for.

>>94241551
>To-hit / Damage.
My bad. I accidentally read the mature adult rather than young adult line in the MM while writing that post and punching it into the calculator.
+27 / +22, seven attacks totalling 104 damage in natural attacks.
That's CR 17 on the to-hit, and the damage is about right for CR17 as well, albeit the guidelines suggest doing it in 3 attacks rather than 7.

>being tpk'd by... spells
Nah, that's just to fuck them up some more before killing them with above-CR melee damage, so they suck at defending themselves.

>CR+4 is literally 50% chance of TPK for a party at full resources.
I was assuming LV+2 with this example with APL11, but in the DMG table right on >>94240463 it says 15% of encounters should be APL +1-4. A rookie DM is going to read that and think +4 is workable for a boss fight. That's my point. So a Rookie DM will pick an APL+2-4 dragon, for their boss fight, just following the guidelines in the DMG without overanalyzing party math, and it will be a bigger threat than said CR should be.

>Dragons are weak for their CR
Still well above the CR13 DPR, + bonuses.

And I haven't given him gear yet. 39K should buy some nasty stuff for a dragon, even if you don't cheese the fact that it's his lair and have him spend a it on automatically resetting magic traps (perhaps beneficial ones, perhaps ones to mess up the party) (which a rookie GM could plausibly do for a boss fight.)

>a CR 24
Yes.
>CR 24
>Combatant Array
>1 at +35 (121), 2 at +30 (61)

>+70 to hit.
Not in the cited & linked stats-by-level table in Unchained it fucking doesn't. Get your ELH / Immortals Handbook / Whatever bullshit out of here.

>>94243318
>And I haven't given him gear yet. 39K should buy some nasty stuff for a dragon, even if you don't cheese the fact that it's his lair and have him spend a it on automatically resetting magic traps (perhaps beneficial ones, perhaps ones to mess up the party) (which a rookie GM could plausibly do for a boss fight.)
39k isn't how much the dragon has in total assets, it's how much it has in loot the party could plausibly take.

>>94242187
Fleeing is absolutely an option, assuming they're not locked in a boss-room of the dragon's lair with the dragon, which he set up as his preferred place to deal with intruders.

I am talking about how the DMG Guidelines, combined with the MM Dragons, will plausibly lead a rookie DM to set up a boss fight that's harder than the PCs can handle.

>>94242413
>5th level sorcerers have max level 2nd spells.
>Stinking Cloud is level 3rd. You are literally cheating here.
NTA, but I'm the one who posted the napkin example of a rookie DM making a dragon boss fight by CR guidelines and DMG writeup rather than checking the math and whatnot against his party. You're right, no Stinking Cloud on the dragon, that was an error, I went by my memory on that part, and I was thinking Wizard progression; 5th level means 3rd level spells.

But 39k - a self-resetting stinking cloud trap (made by a Wizard) is worth 7500gp, Well within budget for the dragon's 39k in equipment, and that's unlimited use. Only 1500 if it's 1/day.

>I am pretty sure the *[9th-11th]* level caster in the party. has a few tricks against a 5th level one.
He probably does. Those will have been designed to have been likely wasted before the boss fight per DMG p.49 "Single Monster Encounters".

I'm not saying:
>"A level 9 party at full resources can't possibly take on a 'CR13' red dragon"
I'm saying:
>"Combining a 'CR13' Red Dragon's well-above CR threat with the guidelines in the DMG, a newbie DM could reasonably TPK his party, & the odds of that unintentionally happening would be lower if the Dragon's CR matched its capabilities. (Like the Pathfinder Dragons, who have lower, more CR-Appropriate to-hit and damage), and that's why they lowered dragon stats for their CR to bring them more inline with other monsters of the same CR".

>>94243342
I was assuming the magic traps could reasonable be pried up out of the floor (as say, single spring-loaded floor tiles) and collected and resold, for the sake of this "how easy is it for a GM to accidentally TPK his party following the guidelines in the book using dragons" hypothetical, and thus they are indeed lootable.

But if the DM realizes magic traps are way too good, and doesn't ever include them as something lootable and houserules them out of the game - sure, that will reduce the odds of a TPK a bit. 39K in wondrous items and whatnot is still no joke though.

>>94243443
>But 39k - a self-resetting stinking cloud trap (made by a Wizard) is worth 7500gp, Well within budget for the dragon's 39k in equipment, and that's unlimited use. Only 1500 if it's 1/day.
You are reaching.
A noob DM is not going to do that, and the Dragon, played solo, will feel underpowered.
And expert group (players and DM) will deal with these things, but also have players that can take it.

>>94243787
Okay, fair, a Newb DM probably wouldn't build magic traps for the dragon, he'd probably just equip it with stock magic items, but wands would be fair game.

Either way, the main point isn't the exact effects, it's that the DM will follow the guidelines in the DMG and pick stuff that looks effective, trying to make a badass and memorable boss fight. They won't choose CR=LV encounters for a boss fight; and the Red Dragon is tough for a CR 13, with 39K in lootable gear.

So - Polymorph.

What's the better 'fix'?
PHB2 Style with Trollshape and Dragonshape and whatnot, or PF1 style?

I am leaning towards the PHB2 style, but am open to reasons to choose PF1 style instead.

>>94244017
Not an easy answer.
PHB2 style is probably more accurate in-universe - the spell truly transforms you in something pretty close.
The more you expand the monster roster tho, the more it becomes problematic. You end up barring the caster from assuming a form of a very similar monster (why no orange dragon if you can become a red dragon). If you DO allow that, the spell becomes increasingly powerful.

PF1e has a lot of advantages. For classes like the Druid, it forces you to go MAD. A Wildshape-focusing druid is not going to have the maximum spell DCs, as an example.
I tend to prefer this on practical terms, but I cannot help feeling it is a bit immersion breaking.

>>94242391
Yes, like the dragon not being completely retarded and using their 2 to 1 base movement speed advantage against the party.

>>94244114
Ah yes, yes, the only thing you can do at level 8th-9th is run.

>>94244153
Better hope you have a Conjuration Wizard or a Druid and favorable terrain to your escape plan, then, because it's still got a 40 ft base speed and 150 ft fly speed before it uses any spells.

File: 1721387198154509.png (898 KB, 700x703)

898 KB PNG

>>94244066
Part of what makes me like the PHB2 version is 1 spell 1 form.
That's the way I went with my replacement for summon monster / summon nature's ally.

>The more you expand the monster roster tho, the more it becomes problematic. You end up barring the caster from assuming a form of a very similar monster (why no orange dragon if you can become a red dragon).
> If you DO allow that, the spell becomes increasingly powerful.
What if the answer is "capture one alive and turn it over to the mage's guild to be researched for a new spell"? Does that address both problems?

(I could maybe see some spell having multiple forms, for really low CR beasts, like "you can become a squirrel, a rat, or any other CR <= 1/4 rodent").

> PF1e has a lot of advantages. For classes like the Druid, it forces you to go MAD. A Wildshape-focusing druid is not going to have the maximum spell DCs, as an example.
That's fair. Mostly I remember finding it annoying in PF1 that you often didn't get the creature's abilities beyond natural attacks, even if they were low CR creatures, because "it's not on the list." But I did like it keying off of your own ability scores.

>>94244262
>Conjuration Wizard
Not the only one.
You sound like someone that knows this game by hearsay.

>>94244409
>What if the answer is "capture one alive and turn it over to the mage's guild to be researched for a new spell"? Does that address both problems?
I presume it's a solution, but it needs guidelines.

>Mostly I remember finding it annoying in PF1 that you often didn't get the creature's abilities beyond natural attacks
Let's see. BSI is level 3rd, add one level per increase.

>Beast Shape I: climb 30 feet, fly 30 feet (average maneuverability), swim 30 feet, darkvision 60 feet, low-light vision, and scent.
>Beast Shape II: climb 60 feet, fly 60 feet (good maneuverability), swim 60 feet, darkvision 60 feet, low-light vision, scent, grab, pounce, and trip.
>Beast Shape III: burrow 30 feet, climb 90 feet, fly 90 feet (good maneuverability), swim 90 feet, blindsense 30 feet, darkvision 60 feet, low-light vision, scent, constrict, ferocity, grab, jet, poison, pounce, rake, trample, trip, and web.
>Beast Shape IV: burrow 60 feet, climb 90 feet, fly 120 feet (good maneuverability), swim 120 feet, blindsense 60 feet, darkvision 90 feet, low-light vision, scent, tremorsense 60 feet, breath weapon, constrict, ferocity, grab, jet, poison, pounce, rake, rend, roar, spikes, trample, trip, and web. If the creature has immunity or resistance to any elements, you gain resistance 20 to those elements. If the creature has vulnerability to an element, you gain that vulnerability.

I presume that retards abusing Sandstorm's turtle ruined it for everyone.

File: 1715367609482799.png (1.03 MB, 780x779)

1.03 MB PNG

>>94244762
>I presume it's a solution, but it needs guidelines.
It definitely needs guidelines. Agreed. Here's what I had in mind. I reverse engineered /roughly/ the formula used to set the spell level on PF1 SNA Spells. (Once in a while my formula puts them one level higher than the official writeup, when they have multiple modifiers, which tells me they gave some of them fractional level values and then rounded up at the end, whilst I gave them whole level modifiers from the beginning. Haven't determined which ones they're pricing higher yet though.

Pic Related Sets which level conjuration a captured creature will end up requiring; while a little research subsystem is used to actually try to make the new conjuration (creation) spell. I was thinking I could perhaps do something similar for polymorph subschool spells, using this as my starting point.

>I presume that retards abusing Sandstorm's turtle ruined it for everyone.
Yeah, that sounds accurate. But also, they were running organized play and had to account for retards abusing RAW loopholes, while I do not. I can just run on the logic of "you get that if we agree this loophole is a thing, the enemies will start using the same cheap trick, right?" and then have the players veto it themselves.

>>94244913
And then they can collect new summons and polymorphs like they're collecting megaman powerups or pokémon cards.

>>94244762
► I wouldn't grant spellcasting (can't cheese it for free spell slots); but if the creature had spellcasting you could use its spellcasting ability to cast your own spells and would keep your slots.
Beyond that, I dunno. I just know I don't want to be overly restrictive in abilities, and I would prefer each spell to be for a single species, even if I follow the Paizo model of it being a buff spell with select modifications rather than a complete statblock swap.

I also like the idea of having them need to go out and get their new summons if they want something rare or weird that isn't for sale.

>>94244913
>>94244933
>>94245016
If you're considering a blend of both approaches, you might consider Displacer Form.

https://dndtools.net/spells/spell-compendium--86/displacer-form--4397/

It acts as a bunch of modifiers like PF1 Polymorph, but also one form, like the PHB2 & Later style polymorph spells.

>>94245212
I presume they were experimenting, am I right?
Perhaps a list of creature could really help.

So, what's the matter with Globe of Invulnerability?
Should similar spell progress like 5e ones, with an upcasting?
I understand this opens a can of worms, especially because of the overall caster power, and of spells like Summon X.
(or for the polymorph fixes discussed here I guess).

I just always found odd there is no Greater Globe of Invulnerability.
Lesser Globe is a 4th level spell, protects against 3rd level or lower
Globe is a 6th level spell, protects against 4th level or lower

If you were to design a Greater Globe, how would you make it? Following the logic above, I can observe that the second spell is 2 levels higher and protects against 1 level higher compared to the Lesser.

Therefore, a Greater Globe would probably be level 8th and protect against 5th level or lower - or even level 9th (add 3 instead of 2), able to protect against 5th level or lower .
What do you think?

>>94245499
Yeah, they tried several options, apparently weren't happy with any of them, and then in PHB2 they went with what they did, whilst organized play banned all polymorph stuff entirely.

https://web.archive.org/web/20081220113825/http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dd/20060216a

https://web.archive.org/web/20080607075344/http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20060501a&page=5

Paizo, on the other hand, clearly thought they were on to something with the Displacer Form design, and they iterated on that idea, but rolled back to large versatile polymorph spells.

>>94245561
I'd personally go for 8th Level and just follow the progression from Lesser to normal Globe (nice, linear 4th -> 6th -< 8th)

>>94244017
PHB2 style further reduced by making it take the statblock as modifiers instead of set-to. Turn into "you as the thing" rather than "A Thing", so the weak and frail Wizard will be weak and frail for a Troll, but still using the entire statblock instead of a wordy permissions list.

>>94244913
One thing to note with this is that since you're not getting the disposable HP and action economy of a summon, you can peg to a lower spell level than the Conjuration.

>>94245725
I see. I presume none would spend a 9th level slot on it anyway.

>>94245848
>"As Modifiers"
Looking at Dragonform & Trollshape now. You mean the temp hp, I assume? Because it ignores the wizard's ability scores everywhere else.

>>94245848
> since you're not getting the disposable HP and action economy of a summon, you can peg to a lower spell level than the Conjuration.
Right. Of course. That makes sense. I'll try to eyeball what summon troll would work out to, and then compare that against trollshape, and use that to estimate how much of a difference it is to not have the extra bodies. Good eye.

>>94245499
Spell Compendium came out a couple months before PHB2. It seems a safe bet that was the runner-up approach. Dragon Magic came out like 6 months after PHB2, and it used the PHB2 style.

>>94245937
You seem to have missed the "further reduced", meaning taking those spells from set-to to racial-replacement. See Frostburn's Primeval for a really terribly worded example.

>>94246455
> taking those spells from set-to to racial-replacement.
That... Does not appear to match the subschool phrasing nor the spell descriptions in PHB2.

I'm not debating that's how Primeval Form works, that seems pretty clear (though in Primeval Form I don't see anything about removing your own racial modifiers, it seems to be strictly additive).

But: where are you getting the idea that the PHB2 Dragonshape Spell works the same way?
>Subschool. p.95
>Unless stated otherwise in the spell’s description, the target of a polymorph spell takes on all the statistics and special abilities of an average member of the new form in place of its own except as follows:

>Spell, p.111
>You take on the form and abilities of a mature adult red dragon (see below for your new statistics).

What line am I missing that supports your interpretation that it works even a little like Primeval Form, rather than being a straight up replacement effect "Except as follows" from the strict list of exceptions in the subschool?

>>94245968
Here's the list I could assemble in both approaches of revised-polymorph.
►PF1 Style
> Doppelganger Transformation (RoE) 2005-04
CR 3, SL 7
> Displacer Form (SC) 2005-12
CR 4, SL 4
> Fiendform (SC) 2005-12
CR X (SM4), SL 5 (6?)
> Holy Transformation, Lesser (SC) 2005-12
CR 2, SL 4
> Holy Transformation (SC) 2005-12
CR 4, SL 7
> Infernal Transformation, Lesser (SC) 2005-12
CR 5, SL 4
> Infernal Transformation (SC) 2005-12
CR 9, SL 7
> Spiderform (SC) 2005-12
CR 7, SL 5

► PHB2 Style
> Trollshape (PHB2) 2006-05
CR 5, SL 4
> Dragonshape (PHB2) 2006-05
CR17, SL 9 (Loses Spellcasting)*
> Dragonshape, Least (DM) 2006-09
CR1, SL3
> Dragonshape, Lesser (DM) 2006-09
CR 6, SL6
> (Chimaera) Form of the Threefold Beast (CM) 2006-10
CR 7, SL 5
> Spider Form, Lesser (DotU) 2007-05
CR 1, SL 1
> Spider Form (DotU) 2007-05
CR 3, SL 3
> Spider Form, Greater (DotU) 2007-05
CR 7, SL 5
> Dridershape (DotU) 2007-05
CR 7, SL 5

>>94247236
I am saying that I'd CHANGE the PHB2 spells to work as racial-replacement. How the fuck did you not get that from "further reduced". and "taking those spells from"?