So far here is my list:
- Probably going to double all stats based on what they were in 1st box set. Half Giant and Tk will be the exception and will probably be ECL 5 characters.
- Going to find some way of including some of the exalted stuff. See my sig for joining the mailing list for this.
- Killing the XP/CR system and using it only for a rough estimate. Will be employing an XP system similar to what is in SWD20 and WoT though how much XP that gets handed out will be solely up to me and what went on in the encounter and how well the encounter was accomplished. This allows for roleplaying XP that I love to give out, which sort of broke the XP system before.
- Might include some of the vile stuff too, though I really haven't had a chance to take a good look at that.
- The whole "this is how much magic items you should have at level x" is going bye bye too, now characters will be lucky to get a metal weapon by 5th level, heh. Just going to have to learn to tailor the encounters more to the power of the players when doing this.
- Based on what the black books (AD&D 2.5) did with the ability scores and created sub-ability scores, I am doing the same thing, except that each ability score has three sub-ability scores. yes this does allow for some min-maxing, but it also allows for more character diversity.
That's it for now, though I'm forgetting a few that I was thinking about, oh well, can add to later.
Thoughts?
What are you doing for your DS campaigns?
Can't wait for this summer...Anyways, I'm going to update my d20 conversion then, so you'll be able to see better what ''house rules'' I use for my campaigns under the Dark Sun.
As for house rules, I entirely support, and use, the scraping of XP per kill and magic item per ton of D&D in my games, and I'm glad to see I'm not the only one.
On the stats thing., not sure I undertsnad you, Nyt, about doublings... I use old high DS stats (5d4 for PCs) and bigger racial adjustment for the core races.
I use some other variants of DS2e turned 3e, such as piecemeal armor and a variant harbinger system for psionic comnbat (though most of that system is now lost, much to my sorrow. Anyways I'm waiting for the XPsiHB and The Dragon/Dungeon issues of Dark Sun before working more on core elements of DS)
I won't have any exalted or vile stuff though, as those are mostly based on outsiders, or concepts, especially exalted stuff, which don't fit with DS, where paladins don't even exist.
Summoning creatures in my game simply teleport creatures of the same plane, hence from somewhere else on Athas. Thus, those creatures have no templates.
what else...
Oh, I'm using lots of Unearthed Arcana in any campaigns now, the main ones being Wound and Vitality points, Armor as DR, Facing, and vitalising and ''mana'' for spells. ''Players make the rolls'' is also a nice rule. Finally, a spell system that works for me in D&D.
I also instituted a house rule which allow for crits to be scored in other ways than pure luck. When a character hits a target by more than 10 points on his attack roll, that attack is considered a threat. A crit roll is still necessary.
With the wound system, that makes combat much more dangerous, I know, but I think combat is that dangerous. Anyways, it requires characters to be more careful on their facing and put more though into defense, especially when fighting many opponents. It also gives much more importance to archers.
Oh, and defiling is inspired from what Dave Noonan did in Dragon and mixed with the ''mana'' system of UA.
Hmm... that's pretty much it I think.
I'm curious Nyt, do you use any UA stuff?
Originally posted by Shei-Nad
I only wish I had a DS campaign...
Mine probably won't be till later in the year, but I am starting preliminary work on it now.
Anyways, I'm going to update my d20 conversion then, so you'll be able to see better what ''house rules'' I use for my campaigns under the Dark Sun.
Cool.
As for house rules, I entirely support, and use, the scraping of XP per kill and magic item per ton of D&D in my games, and I'm glad to see I'm not the only one.
Yeah, the XP/magic item system just trounces on too much DS flavor for my liking, any other campaign world and I will use that system, but not for DS.
On the stats thing., not sure I undertsnad you, Nyt, about doublings... I use old high DS stats (5d4 for PCs) and bigger racial adjustment for the core races.
Mean, racial modifiers, I am essentially doubling them, though there might be some slight alterations to that, especially in regards to HG and TK.
I use some other variants of DS2e turned 3e, such as piecemeal armor and a variant harbinger system for psionic comnbat (though most of that system is now lost, much to my sorrow. Anyways I'm waiting for the XPsiHB and The Dragon/Dungeon issues of Dark Sun before working more on core elements of DS)
Not sure about piecemeal yet. Liked the old harbinger system though, it just needed some fine tuning, oh well. I'll probably use what is in mindscapes instead.
But yeah, waiting myself to see what they do and take it from there, just getting the stuff in that I allow at this point and adjusting the races to my liking.
I won't have any exalted or vile stuff though, as those are mostly based on outsiders, or concepts, especially exalted stuff, which don't fit with DS, where paladins don't even exist.
The potential is there, it doesn't have to be based on paladins. I'm playing a 30th level monk/cleric type soon that is very exalted and it has nothing to do with me being a paladin.
Probably won't be able to get much in there, but some of it might be able to go, things like vow of poverty and non-violence and the peace, but maybe I'm being too hopeful, dunno, heh.
Summoning creatures in my game simply teleport creatures of the same plane, hence from somewhere else on Athas. Thus, those creatures have no templates.[q/uote]
My Athas is going to be closed off. It's going to be really hard to get anything from the outer planes past the gray. As for summoning what we have done for ToA and such should be a nice fill in for the fiends and all that. So I am just going to use that.I'm curious Nyt, do you use any UA stuff?
Plan to, but not all of it, some of the different races and such just don't fit.
Definately using armor is DR, I was pretty peeved that 3.0 didn't switch to that and was told by Skip Williams that it was a bad idea, except not only had I been using it in 2e with great success, but several D20 products use it like that as well, and now suddenly that have it in UA as an optional rule. Time to eat your words Skip. ;)
Definately going to use Dave Noonan's defiler rules with what little tweaks you did to it, just fits the setting too much, but will probably still combine it with some of the stuff from athas.org.
What I ultimately want is one doc to compliment the Athas.org stuff with everything that I allow, that way all the players won't have to use my books etc all the time to make up characters and what not, it will all just be in their rules handout.
Not sure how that is going to work out though, heh.
Started out (like everyone, probably) trying to convert the gladiator, trader and defiler over to 3e. Soon drowned in sea of broken armor optimization, free weapon specialisations, surplus rogue abilities and bizarro spell progressions. Ditched it.
Decided that all 3e clerics were crappo and rebuilt the spell lists to make them more like the 2e spheres. Cleric class falls apart as a result. Ditched it.
Decided that it was the domains that were the trouble and fiddled with giving players twice the number of domains, or maybe having two spells per level instead of one. Cleric class falls apart even more to great derision. Ditched it.
(Discovered athas.org shortly after this. Saved!!!)
Figured that spontaneous domain casting instead of spontaneous healing spells was the way to go. Had the idea shot ful of holes on the boards and ditched it. Now I see it in UA so am now feeling all smug and vindicated. This one I will keep.
Used various versions of the kreen, including a Savage Species style monster class, a 2e version with all sorts of broken bonuses. Settled on the mm2 version but I guess the XPsiH will change all that again.
Wrote a new version of the trader, posted it to the boards, loved it for a couple of weeks and haven't used it since.
Use 4d6, drop lowest, assign to taste for ability scores and a version of the character tree. (All characters start at 1st level, except for the first PC on the tree, who starts at 3rd and gets 5d4 for abilities - they're mostly dead now, heh).
Using the Dragon rules for defiling, combined with Shei-Nad's tweaks and athas.org rules. Nobody will play a defiler so I am kinda chasing my own tail over this one.
Trying to decide which UA rules I'll use - armour as DR and health points sound cool, as do the variant spell systems. Have to find a way to fiddle with defiling even more.
Determined to find a way to represent advanced beings using the Prestige Race rules from Dragon #304. They seem tailor-made for this. Anyone wanna help? Bueller?
I use the standard xp system and assign roleplay encounters a CR to get xp value for them. I weight the awards, depending on relevance to the party - found that it balances out. After 12 sessions, we've gone from average party level 3 to apl 6. I had been worried that the pcs were levelling up too fast but this actually seems like an ok rate. Think I hit the mark on this one.
No favoured classes. Silly rule.
I use the ToA variants for summoned monsters and druid companions, for obvious reasons ;) Dunno if it's going to make it into next ToA release, but I use the "elemental" variant list that I posted a couple of weeks back instead of the celestial/fiendish version in the current release. Also love the UA idea of tailoring lists even more closely. A wizard in the game is about to take Shadow Wizard prcl so he'll get a new list. If he survives next session, that is...
Also fiddling with getting exalted and vile content into the game. Not sure how though. Join Nyt's exalted mailing list and lend a hand!
As for house rules, I entirely support, and use, the scraping of XP per kill and magic item per ton of D&D in my games, and I'm glad to see I'm not the only one.
Good lord I haven't done that in almost ten years! I thought it was stupid in 1E and remains so today. It simply advocates hack 'n slash mentality, games of naught but dicey combat sessions, min-maxing players, munchikinism, and inevitably, new fricking rules editions that I gotta shell out me hard earned cash for. Break they cycle! Rise up ma' brothas! Down with the MAN!
Might include some of the vile stuff too, though I really haven't had a chance to take a good look at that.
Vile is good, err, well its vile, but its good vile. Still don't have the Big Book of Fuddy-Duddys, but what kinds of things are you looking at incorporating?
Based on what the black books (AD&D 2.5) did with the ability scores and created sub-ability scores, I am doing the same thing, except that each ability score has three sub-ability scores. yes this does allow for some min-maxing, but it also allows for more character diversity.
I loved the ability score splits in 2e. Very interested in how your working this angle. Seems like it would be a nightmare, but a cool end result.
Probably going to double all stats based on what they were in 1st box set. Half Giant and Tk will be the exception and will probably be ECL 5 characters.
Subjective nonsense. But hey, its kewl.
The whole "this is how much magic items you should have at level x" is going bye bye too, now characters will be lucky to get a metal weapon by 5th level, heh. Just going to have to learn to tailor the encounters more to the power of the players when doing this.
Another example of WOTC mind controlling devices. Even in standard games, not one of my players had at 20th level the amount of goods they've assigned to 13th level crits. Well, except for Dragonlance, but that was running the WotL adventure series. I'm more than in favor in nixing it (and the XP and CR systems that tie in with it, they a trio of nastiness, I say).
Never did like the harbringer system. Too clunky (in 2e, Athas.org's innitial system, and Mindscapes). I'd rather keep psi combat to a minimum fuss and leave the psi scape/harbringer aspects to combat 'fluff' descriptions rather than hard core rules.
DR and dodge bonuses are now an official part of my game. Sooo happy! Didn't think the players would have liked it, but I was wrong. We've not delved into testing out the wound/vitiality systems to see if they're up our alley. Not sure about it myself.
No favoured classes. Silly rule.
I use it, but agree, its dumb. Just a lame way to trump up humans and dumb down non humans. Reminds me of the absurdity of racial level limits in 2e. There's just no logic. Maybe in the next campaign, I'll ditch it entirely (assuming I even remember to . . . not like I'm getting old and senile or anything).
Figured that spontaneous domain casting instead of spontaneous healing spells was the way to go. Had the idea shot ful of holes on the boards and ditched it. Now I see it in UA so am now feeling all smug and vindicated.
Hey, I thought it was a great idea . . . at least, a good enough one that I've been using it for a while now ;)
I don't have celestials, but I do use the fiendish templates, along with most lower planar denizin, but they're from an entirely different plane alltogether and the flavor descriptions are altered greatly (more cthulhu and nightmare, less demon and devil). Summons are taken from Athas, the black, the grey, and the Ether (my little far realms/plane of nightmares all rolled into one).
PC and NPC defilers define their own ash radius. Hey, they're the ones drawing the energy, why can't they decide where they get it from? You can't tell me that some mage that can lob a house sized ball of flame can't figure out how to draw energy from under the feet of his enemies. I'm just not buying into it.
What I'd still like to do: find a slightly more appealing wound system, for more realistic combat, along with some kind of hit location stuff. Of course, I'd like to ge some good patchwork armor rules to go with it. I'm hoping for something that can more easily apply to both characters and creatures.
Wrote a new version of the trader, posted it to the boards, loved it for a couple of weeks and haven't used it since.
I'd also like to see some nice rules (not too heavy though) for running an entire merchant campaign. Did it once as a side bit and loved it (so did the players), but it was a book keeping headache once the different PCs started establishing themselves. I had some randomized tables and such (good crop seasons, mad SK taxation, Borys came and ate your caravan, etc), but they've been lost for some time.
Hey, I thought it was a great idea . . . at least, a good enough one that I've been using it for a while now
Heh, so you did. Sorry, I am just being a drama-queen :D.
I use it, but agree, its dumb. Just a lame way to trump up humans and dumb down non humans. Reminds me of the absurdity of racial level limits in 2e. There's just no logic. Maybe in the next campaign, I'll ditch it entirely (assuming I even remember to . . . not like I'm getting old and senile or anything).
lol - when I run my homebrew I'm going to put it back to see how it works out over a few levels. Compulsive fiddler.
Borys came and ate your caravan
lmao - worth doing just for the possibility of getting this result
.- I will use action points from the d20 Stargate game. This allows players to have critical successes (and failures
) on skills. I also use it for critical hits; if you threaten a crit it can only be confirmed by spending an action point.- I have my own write up for the gladiator which is a combination of things I came up with and some things from the athas.org gladiator. I felt that the athas.org version is a little weak, but that it had a lot of cool abilities, so I supplemented it.
- For the trader, I am working on converting the Coutier class from the Rokugan setting. Lots of skills and only minor combat abilities.
- For the Xp/CR thing, I will use the guidelines from the d20 Stargate book. Every 14 encounters is a level. Fewer if they are difficult, more if they are too easy. I still use CR as a guideline for what they can and can't handle. Also, an encounter does not have to be a combat.
- I will use the BoVD. Some of the stuff in there makes for nasty (in every sense of the word) villians. I don't have the exalted deeds book so I can't comment on that.
- I was tossing around the idea of instant metamagics for defilers before the Dragon issue with it came out. I like what David Noonan did, and I will probably use it with some tweaks. I absolutely loathe the way athas.org dealt with defilers and preservers (sorry guys; I like most of the rest of it though). Mostly because of their "need" for maintaining game balance. Athas is a bit too brutal to worry about balance, IMO.
That's all I can think of now. If I remember anything I'll post.
Originally posted by Mach2.5
Good lord I haven't done that in almost ten years! I thought it was stupid in 1E and remains so today. It simply advocates hack 'n slash mentality, games of naught but dicey combat sessions, min-maxing players, munchikinism, and inevitably, new fricking rules editions that I gotta shell out me hard earned cash for. Break they cycle! Rise up ma' brothas! Down with the MAN!
;)
Vile is good, err, well its vile, but its good vile. Still don't have the Big Book of Fuddy-Duddys, but what kinds of things are you looking at incorporating?
Join my mailing list beeyatch. We could use your brain to feast on and help give us a swift kick in the butt to get moving more, heh.
I loved the ability score splits in 2e. Very interested in how your working this angle. Seems like it would be a nightmare, but a cool end result.
I'll post it to my site (thanks Mach, heh).
http://crimsonsun.org/houserules/abilityscores.doc
Too lazy and busy to code in right now, so snag it from there if you like.
Subjective nonsense. But hey, its kewl.
Actually I think it's a neccessary evil in order for characters to have a better chance of surviving since they aren't getting the magic, and etc that they should have at x level, but that's just my personal opinion.
Cool thing is, this might bring Mul down to an LA +0, not sure I want that though. I kinda like the reasoning for them being an LA +1.
Another example of WOTC mind controlling devices. Even in standard games, not one of my players had at 20th level the amount of goods they've assigned to 13th level crits. I'm more than in favor in nixing it (and the XP and CR systems that tie in with it, they a trio of nastiness, I say).
Amen brother.
Never did like the harbringer system. Too clunky (in 2e, Athas.org's innitial system, and Mindscapes). I'd rather keep psi combat to a minimum fuss and leave the psi scape/harbringer aspects to combat 'fluff' descriptions rather than hard core rules.
It's more of a flavor thing for me. It shouldn't be too big of an issue to deal with mechanically.
I use it, but agree, its dumb. Just a lame way to trump up humans and dumb down non humans. Reminds me of the absurdity of racial level limits in 2e. There's just no logic. Maybe in the next campaign, I'll ditch it entirely (assuming I even remember to . . . not like I'm getting old and senile or anything).
I actually like it for this exact reason. I want there to be more reasons for someone to play human than some other race, and the FC ability does that nicely. Though I will probably one up it and give everyone a FC in one of the psionic classes.
In other news, the Trader class can go away and die for all I care, there are plenty of ways to make that type of character using the expert NPC class or the rogue class or a combo there of. ;)
What else? Oh, I'm going to be using the 4d6 drop lowest, don't reroll 1s and roll 7 times, not 6 for rolling up ability scores, something the current DM I am playing under came up for his Epic campaign.
I'll post it to my sight.
Kewl. While your holding it front of you, I'll read your mind ;)
Actually, not bad. I think it could do better as 2 sub stats instead of three, but maybe that's stemming from my own nostolgic mind.
Actually I think it's a neccessary evil in order for characters to have a better chance of surviving since they aren't getting the magic, and etc that they should have at x level, but that's just my personal opinion.
Not to nitpick at you, but if your ditching all the justifications (amount of treasure at X levels and CR), then umm, I don't get the reasons for it. You realise your contradicting yourself here.
Cool thing is, this might bring Mul down to an LA +0, not sure I want that though. I kinda like the reasoning for them being an LA +1.
Okay, I'm lost. How does increasing the power level of the mul drop its LA down?
Though I will probably one up it and give everyone a FC in one of the psionic classes.
Something that should have gone into the core rules doc. If every race has it, it counter balances itself out amongst everything else. Its still not the 2e 'everyone has wild talents', but its a step in the right direction perhaps.
That reminds me, I still want to tinker with that concept again (free wild talent feat for all PCs). Meant to do it at the start of the last campaign . . . forgot. Oh well, they'll all be dead soon anyhow.
I have my own write up for the gladiator which is a combination of things I came up with and some things from the athas.org gladiator. I felt that the athas.org version is a little weak, but that it had a lot of cool abilities, so I supplemented it.
I'd love to get a look at it. Post it up or shoot me a doc in mail. I agree with you that it lacks power in favor of extreme versatility, but I'm cool with that.
I was tossing around the idea of instant metamagics for defilers before the Dragon issue with it came out. I like what David Noonan did, and I will probably use it with some tweaks. I absolutely loathe the way athas.org dealt with defilers and preservers (sorry guys; I like most of the rest of it though). Mostly because of their "need" for maintaining game balance. Athas is a bit too brutal to worry about balance, IMO.
Yeah, I'm going to start using taint from UA, so I may need something to counter it. Not sure about metamagics on the fly, but I need to do something for em, poor lil guys getting the shaft by me and all. I've been thinking of allowing a small amount of spontaneous casting (mixed memorize + spont lists), but haven't worked out the kinks.
Just curious, because I really like the idea but some of those domain spells are pretty powerful.
Originally posted by Mach2.5
Kewl. While your holding it front of you, I'll read your mind ;)
Doh!
Actually, not bad. I think it could do better as 2 sub stats instead of three, but maybe that's stemming from my own nostolgic mind.
3 work better actually. Tried it with 2 back in the day and it was causing too many issues, the main one being balance.
The way I have it setup now, most spellcasters aren't going to be able to have everything they need in one subability, which is a good thing IMO.
Not to nitpick at you, but if your ditching all the justifications (amount of treasure at X levels and CR), then umm, I don't get the reasons for it. You realise your contradicting yourself here.
Don't know, maybe I didn't word it right.
I'll put up the stats too if I have to to explain it, but it doesn't really make the races more powerful, if anything is balances the abilities out more.
http://crimsonsun.org/houserules/races.doc
Okay, I'm lost. How does increasing the power level of the mul drop its LA down?
Check my rules.doc it doesn.t
The stats end up about the same except it's got more minuses to mental stuff now.
All I did for the most part was double what they got in DS1, that's it. HG and TK won't follow this pattern because I want them to be pretty tough.
Something that should have gone into the core rules doc. If every race has it, it counter balances itself out amongst everything else. Its still not the 2e 'everyone has wild talents', but its a step in the right direction perhaps.[/b]
Think I might give everyone a bonus feat that allows them to take wild talents, but not sure yet.
Also, I only did the psionic class FC thing to represent that every race had unlimited advancement in the psionicist class in 2e.
That reminds me, I still want to tinker with that concept again (free wild talent feat for all PCs). Meant to do it at the start of the last campaign . . . forgot. Oh well, they'll all be dead soon anyhow.
Let me know what you come up with, I am interested too.
I'd love to get a look at it. Post it up or shoot me a doc in mail. I agree with you that it lacks power in favor of extreme versatility, but I'm cool with that.
I'm for the athas.org one, but I wouldn't mind taking a gander too.
Maybe we can tweak the athas.org one some more.
P.S. I need to take a harder look at UA cause I don't know about all these other rules like Taint and such that you guys are coming up with, heh.
Originally posted by Porkchops
Hmmm, I really like the concept of having Domain spells be spontaneously-cast instead of heals. How does this work for balance in DS, though? Does it throw anything out of whack, or does it work out pretty well?
Just curious, because I really like the idea but some of those domain spells are pretty powerful.
Yeah same here.
DS clerics don't yell "ultimate healers" to me like clerics from other settings do, so this might fit more flavor wise.
Originally posted by erasmus1634
- For the trader, I am working on converting the Coutier class from the Rokugan setting. Lots of skills and only minor combat abilities.
I did the very same thing, as I think, for having seen it played, that the courtier can be an effective non-combat oriented class. If you'd like some ideas, or a first draft of it for your own, you can have a look
here
If you have any comments, please make them on that thread, so we won't divert Nyt's thread. I'd like to read your comments though.
Originally posted by Shei-Nad
I did the very same thing, as I think, for having seen it played, that the courtier can be an effective non-combat oriented class. If you'd like some ideas, or a first draft of it for your own, you can have a look
here
If you have any comments, please make them on that thread, so we won't divert Nyt's thread. I'd like to read your comments though.
In StarWars, the technician class is A class, not a NPC one, it's no expert or "rogue" specialist. The trader deserve the same treament. There is a need for a non-combat oriented class. Although, it still can do things in battle.
I'm currently rewriting it fro the ground up, pulling things together and making it a bit smoother.
If I were using D20 though, I'd take a look at the new Conan rules. Combat is supposed to be pretty brutal.
I'd also borrow heavily from all the great work done at athas.org.
3.5e rules (vanilla) except:
From UA:
1. Vitality/Wound points (ala SW:RPG)
2. Defense Bonus
3. Armor as Damage Reduction
4. Variable bonuses/penalties (for d20-roll bonuses)
5. Bell-curve rolls (3d6 instead of 1d20)
6. Non-spellcasting Ranger
... (there are a few others that I can't recall at this time. My books are 2/3 across a continent from me right now)
My games start at 3rd level for Dark Sun. This means that TK and .5G start without any class chosen (only monster HD). Magic items are rare, almost as rare as metal items. However, Psionic items abound.
I have a crystal material available to be used in the construction of weapons, however it is almost exclusively used by psychic warriors (specifically psychic weapon masters).
In my games, there is no such thing as a "good" Defiler. Defilers cannot be of the "good" alignment. However, Preservers can be of any alignment.
Of course, my Dragon/Avangion rules are in effect in my games
Just how to figure them out is not presented to the players (they have to figure out how to start on the path without me simply telling them).I tend to run my campaigns pretty rough and gritty. On the average, depending on the length of the game, my players usually have to make at least one new character through the campaign since their first one had died. One of my older players actually went through about 12 different characters in a single campaign.... and actually liked that more than being stuck with a single character throughout the entire campaign.
Back in the day (check this out http://athas.org/downloads/snpsummary.rtf) I use to allow Draconians, Irda, Rakasta, Assiamar, Tieflings, Genasi, Sollux, and a few homebrew ones I felt were appropriate, all were tailored with an Athasian feel.
I'm nixing all but Genasi for right now. However, I was curious about how people felt about Rakasta and Sollux being added into the mix?
Sollux fits I think because of their elemental ties, Rakasta the same, though their's aren't as prominent. Plus I just really like both of these races.
Definately will have to be post-cleansing wars races, otherwise I am going to have to create two more champions, or at least one more, and I don't feel up to defining that area just yet.
So give me your thoughts on this and what other races you allow in DS.
Being what is in core and ToA, this should be enough, but I really want to find a way of adding the other two in without causing major pain.
P.S. to Mach: This gives something for the nekkid raging ratmen to be chased by, hehe. :D
I have a crystal material available to be used in the construction of weapons, however it is almost exclusively used by psychic warriors (specifically psychic weapon masters).
If you can find a copy (good luck), check out Skyrealms of Jorune (last printed in 92). A great sci-fi RPG with really crappy rules. A ton of great ideas though if you like the idea of using crystals (in the setting, crystals form basis for quite a lot of the low key magic and strange technology).
In my games, there is no such thing as a "good" Defiler. Defilers cannot be of the "good" alignment. However, Preservers can be of any alignment.
I don't really use alignments. I allow 'ignorant' defilers, but only during their early levels. You can only play dumb about the harm your causing for so long. Given enough time, you either develope a conscious about it, or succumb to the power.
So give me your thoughts on this and what other races you allow in DS.
Along with the ones that I've already posted, there's sha'az (from one of the forgotten realms monster compendiums, spider-like version of thri-kreen), yuan-ti, illithids once I get something more crafted out for them, a plant-based race, among others.
Erasmus1634's version of the Dark Sun gladiator class:
THis has parts from my own twisted mind and parts from Athas.org
Level BAB Fort Will Reflex Special
1 1 2 0 0 Improved Unarmed Strike
2 2 3 0 0 Mercy, Arena Guile +1
3 3 3 1 1 Master of Weapons, Improved Feint
4 4 4 1 1 Feat, Uncanny Dodge , Arena Guile +2
5 5 4 1 1 Armor Optimization +1
6 6/+1 5 2 2 No Mercy, Arena Guile +3
7 7/+2 5 2 2 Insightful Feint +2
8 8/+3 6 2 2 Feat, Arena Guile +4
9 9/+4 6 3 3 Improved Uncanny Dodge
10 10/+5 7 3 3 Vital Strike, Armor Optimization +2, Arena Guile +5
11 11/6/+1 7 3 3 Insightful Feint +4
12 12/7/+2 8 4 4 Feat, Arena Guile +6
13 13/8/+3 8 4 4 Parry
14 14/9/+4 9 4 4 Arena Guile +7
15 15/10/+5 9 5 5 Armor Optimization +3, Superior Feint
16 16/11/6/+1 10 5 5 Feat, Arena Guile +8
17 17/12/7/+2 10 5 5
18 18/13/8/+3 11 6 6 Improved Parry, Arena Guile +9
19 19/14/9/+4 11 6 6
20 20/15/10/+5 12 6 6 Feat, Armor Optimization +4, Arena Guile +10
Alignment: Any
Hit Die: d12
Skills per level: 2+ Int modifier
Class Skills: Bluff (Cha), Intimidate (Cha), Tumble (Dex), Perform (Cha), Sense Motive (Wis), Climb (Str), Jump (Str), Craft (Int)
Weapon and Armor Proficiencies: All simple and martial weapons, Light and Medium armors and shields.
Special:
Improved Unarmed Strike: Same as PHB
Mercy: The gladiator suffers no penalty when attacking with a weapon to inflict non-lethal damage.
Arena Guile: Starting at second level the gladiator adds one-half his level (rounded down) as a bonus to all Bluff and Sense Motive checks that deal directly with melee combat.
Master of Weapons (Ex): As a Full Round action, a gladiator can “acquire” the proficiency of an exotic weapon and can keep this proficiency for a number of rounds equal to the gladiator’s level; a 3rd level gladiator can use this for 3 rounds. After this time ends the gladiator will gain the penalties for non-proficiency until he uses another Full Round action to “acquire” this or another exotic weapon.
Improved Feint: The gladiator is adept at deceiving his opponents. He may perform a feint action as a move action.
Armor Optimization (Ex): The gladiator “learns” how to soften blows and redirect strikes against him by using his armor better. To show this the gladiator gains a +1 to his AC every five levels, starting at level 5, to a maximum of +4 at level 20. The Gladiator must be wearing armor to take advantage of this, however.
No Mercy (Ex): The gladiator can perform a coup de grace as a standard action instead of a full round action.
Insightful Feint: As improved feint but the penalties for non humanoids are reduced by 2. At 11th level this penalty is further reduced by 2.
Improved Uncanny Dodge (Ex): At 9th level and higher, a gladiator can no longer be flanked. This defense denies the rogue the ability to sneak attack the gladiator by flanking him, unless the attacker has at least four more rogue levels than the gladiator has gladiator levels.
Vital Strike (Ex): At 10th level the gladiator gains a further understanding of how to strike his opponents in vital spots. To represent this the gladiator gains a +1 increase to the threat range to any weapon used. For example, the threat range on a longsword is 19-20 normally, but in the hands of a capable gladiator this range is increased to 18-20. This stacks with the Improved Critical feat, but can only increase the threat range of a weapon by +1. If a creature is immune to critical hits, this ability will not work.
Superior Feint (Ex): At 15th level the gladiator can use Improved Feint as a free action, but only once per round.
Genasi I permit, for obvious reasons. I've been considering para-elemental Genasi as well.
Originally posted by xlorepdarkhelm
I allow races from Dark Sun. This includes any monster that could be playable as a race (like Jozal). Of course, this all depends on if the ECL for the race is too high or not. I generally don't allow for races that come from other worlds onto my Athas, unless the player not only convinces me of a good reason for that individual to be there, but also can roleplay that character correctly for a Dark Sun campaign. If the reason is flimsy, or the player simply cannot roleplay (and is using the race specifically to improve hack & slash ability) then I won't permit the otherworldly race.
Genasi I permit, for obvious reasons. I've been considering para-elemental Genasi as well.
I'm allowing genasi and para-genasi, going to use the ones in that one Dragon and adjust them some.
Most of the other races I allow from other worlds I try to find a way to make them fit into Athas and not just say them are an offworlder since my Athas is closed off.
Originally posted by xlorepdarkhelm
Rules I work with:
3.5e rules (vanilla) except:
From UA:
1. Vitality/Wound points (ala SW:RPG)
2. Defense Bonus
3. Armor as Damage Reduction
4. Variable bonuses/penalties (for d20-roll bonuses)
5. Bell-curve rolls (3d6 instead of 1d20)
6. Non-spellcasting Ranger
I'll soon be running my first ever game as DM and I don't want my rangers to be spellcasters. So does anyone has an old write-up of the 3.0 ranger from the DS3 doc, the one that was like two pages long?
I recently acquired Unearthed Arcana, yet I can't find a mention of a 'Non-spellcasting Ranger'. I'm lost.
...because it's in the Complete Warrior! The idea is no spellcasting ability but rangers gain additions per level. (Fast movement, Nature's blessing, Healing Touch, Freedom of Movement)
But the first version of the ranger at Athas.org was great... I try to find it... and I send it to you!
Originally posted by Pennarin
I'll soon be running my first ever game as DM and I don't want my rangers to be spellcasters. So does anyone has an old write-up of the 3.0 ranger from the DS3 doc, the one that was like two pages long?
I recently acquired Unearthed Arcana, yet I can't find a mention of a 'Non-spellcasting Ranger'. I'm lost.
I'm sending you two earlier versions, one from Dec 2002 and one from Jan 2003. The latter uses the "virtual feat" idea and the former has the "dedication" system. Enjoy
GAME RULE INFORMATION
Hit Die: d10.
Class Skills
Same as in Player's Handbook.
Skill Points at 1st Level: (4 + Int modifier)
Originally posted by xlorepdarkhelm
The Non-spellcasting Ranger is in the Complete Warrior. The Ranger adaptation from Complete Warrior with the Favored Terrain variant from UA as an option works for me.
The complete warrior isn´t avaiable here in Brazil yet, I would like to have this one.
Just send an email to [email]dsd20-list-request@crimsonsun.org[/email] with "subscribe email_address_you_want_subscribed" without the quotes and that should do it.
If that doesn't work let me know and I can add you manually, but that should work.
Originally posted by NytCrawlr
Definately will have to be post-cleansing wars races, otherwise I am going to have to create two more champions, or at least one more, and I don't feel up to defining that area just yet.
I don't think the inclusion of another race requires another Champion. With all of the psionic breeding and altering of races that the SKs were known to do, and all of the unexplored lands outside the tablelands, it is easy to have a race that was simply undiscovered that has managed to recently come to attention. Or to have a Race that was "created" ie Half Giants and Dray.
OR, since Clerics have ties to their elemental planes, elemental type races can simply have filtered through these "connections" as time has gone by. Just because Athas is "closed off" doesn't mean that accidents couldn't have happened. (Maybe Dregoth isn't/wasn't the only one on Athas with a Planar Gate)
When my Buddy started our adventure, he allowed a Tiefling Ranger. Not that we knew it at the time because we started out memory-less, but we had went to New Guistenol, learned a bit too much and were mind wiped and cast out. The Tiefling was one of Dregoths attempts at finding an appropriate army to bribe into coming to Athas to help him lay waste to the surface, but this particular Tiefling seemed a bit too independant and anti-athority type, which Dregoth didn't want to chance that the entire race would be as difficult, so he was mindwiped and sold into slavery along with us. - Or maybe it was one of Dregoths henchmen badguys that actually sold us off, having been told to deal with us. . . can't remember, that game started over 3.5 years ago.
Depending on how you start your characters off it could be quite easy to create a reason why a race from a "closed off" world is present. Specially if you only have 1 player that wants to be that Race.
Cuz sure as rain is wet, Your players will be just fine when you give the "these are the Races available for you to choose from" and some will be excited and what's there, but someone eventually is going to ask "Yeah, but is it possible that I could play a XXXX"
Originally posted by Agonar
I don't think the inclusion of another race requires another Champion. With all of the psionic breeding and altering of races that the SKs were known to do, and all of the unexplored lands outside the tablelands, it is easy to have a race that was simply undiscovered that has managed to recently come to attention. Or to have a Race that was "created" ie Half Giants and Dray.
Guess you misunderstood what I said.
Any new race that was around during the Cleansing Wars would have a champion tied to it, with the exception of kreen and the rhul-thaun. That simple, doesn't make sense otherwise.
Now, if you allowed them post cleansing wars, then yeah, what you say is correct.
Killing it alltogether?
Adjusting it in some way?
Conforming to it?
What?
Pretty curious about this and debating what I'm doing with it since it's coming up in my rules soon.
Originally posted by xlorepdarkhelm
I like the Alignment system, however I'm also fond of the Allegience system in d20 Modern. I might migrate to that instead.
Hmm, got that and I haven't looked at it yet.
/me puts it on his list
Danke.
Question: How are people dealing with the alignment system in their Dark Sun games
Gawd damn roleplaying straight-jacket strictures. Beat it too a bloody pulp, douse it with gasoline and light it on fire to keep you warm on cold winter nights.
I still have a player or two who insist on choosing an alignment for their character and playing it out, and I'm fine with that. Mechanically though, I don't have things like detect alignment, smite evil, protection against good, etc. Using only two variables to define your entire world view? There's more to life than that; and how many people do you know that are 100% consistent with one particular kind of view? Alignments are nice for rough guidelines, but that's about it. Then you have such muddy concepts as abilities being tied to your world view. Monks and barbarians for example. Even the most savage tribe of northern Europeans (of which Jon is most surely a revivalist) still had tribal laws, restrictions, regulations, and taboos, all of which were to be followed by those members of the clan, tribe, or group. And traditionally, the martial artist (from which the monk derives) has its historical roots in a Asian counter-culture, rebellious against the law. Neither seems to fit with the archtypical alignment restriction that D&D places upon them in order to make them fit.
Lastly, although infered, I have to state it clearly, enforcement of alignments within the mechanics of the game leads to trimming down many more broad character personalities into cardboard cut out, 2 dimension people. That's simply no fun to me. If your player wishes to 'chose an alignment', let him. But don't penalise the players who, in keeping with their character's personality, do not fit so neatly into one of the nine alignments.
:D
Going to check out the Allegience system and see what that entails first though, hehe.
Up to 3 parts to it instead of 2 - You can have as few as none at all, or one, two or three allegiances selected for a character.
They are in order of importance for the character. So a Chaotic Good character and a Good Chaotic character have different priorities and aren't quite the same thing.
Besides moral & integrity ranges (good, evil, chaos, law), it could be to an organization, an ideal, a person, etc. So you could have a Templar character which has the allegiances of "Hamanu, Law", while a Cleric with the allegiance of "Fire, Passion", or some such thing, a Halfling Druid could be "Halfling Culture" (heh), and one Defiler could be "Law, Evil", while another could be "Evil, Law" (the former would follow the laws even if they aren't evil, while the latter would only follow laws if they were evil).
At each level, a character can remove one allegiance, however a character can add a new allegiance at any time.
It's another "roleplaying crutch" (as I call it), which is not as hard-coded as the standard D&D alignment, and actually can be rather benefitial in designs. This makes them a lot more flexable, while also adds in a little more complexity to the character.
Will have to take a gander when I get home tonight.
Hitler would probably be considered evil, since he organised genocide, racist propaganda, and wars (or a world war, actually). However, even he was said to be very pleasant, and he was engaged to a woman, which he insisted on marrying before his fall, and by all accounts, was very nice with her. He was also vegetarian, didn't smoke and rarely had a drink, which shows he still had some sorts of principles. Therefore, Hitler could probably be classified as Lawful Evil. But that doesn't mean that on occasion, he couldn't commit good acts, nor show chaotic behavior.
The reason alignments there is actually to allow powers such as detect evil, or protection vs good, or smite chaos, etc. With such classifications, the fight between good and evil becomes something even more tangible, and part of the magic of fantasy worlds. I actually think that's a good thing.
Now, what I always keep saying to my players is:
What's important is not that you play your character according to the alignment you chose, but that you choose an alignment according to how you play your character. In short, the alignment doesn't define the character, its the other way around.
If you have you lawful good character kill without remorse or hesitation, that's not bad roleplaying, its simply bad alignment choice. Your alignment choice should reflect how you play your character. That's it.
Basically, I put it in an order of priority: Survival first, then alignment. I figure even the best person will bend if their life depends on it. I'll give bonus points to players who put their characters in jeopardy playing their alignment, but they normally don't survive it, so it's kind of an empty gesture...
However, people can be generally classified into one or the other, I should guess.
Some basic archetypes defy the definition of alignment itself, especially in cross cultural analysis. A revolutionary for example, would certainly be considered chaotic in D&D. Yet in real life, most revolutionary groups are highly organised and disciplined militias (at least many those outside the U.S. are). For a more DS specific example we have the thri-kreen. Killing sentients for no reason at all is generally considered a cruel and evil act. But not if you simply think of other mammal sentients as a basic food source. Some aspects of an individual or culture are situational. While a general alignment may pose at least 50% of that person/cultures views, other aspects may drift into any one of the other alignments. Militant religeous fanatics throughout history have been glorified in the confusion of doing some of the most benevolent acts one day, while performing some of the most heineous the next. Anyhow, that's enough from me ;)
So in this case the normal D&D alignment system simply doesn't work.
Even when I used it I really wasn't using it. I stuck to what I thought was right for each alignment and let the players know that.
Also in DS you have things like cannibal halflings and Thri-kreen that eat other sentients because they see them as nothing more than food. While using the D&D alignment system this would make both races very evil.
The problem with the alignment system in D&D is it's univerrsal instead of set up to deal with each different culture on it's own cultural level, and IMO that's the way it should be, setting it to a universal standard IMO just causes problems, something the real world has been seeing for some time.
Originally posted by NytCrawlr
The problem with the alignment system in D&D is it's univerrsal instead of set up to deal with each different culture on it's own cultural level, and IMO that's the way it should be, setting it to a universal standard IMO just causes problems, something the real world is seeing now.
Well to be fair, when alignment was first invented, people were playing heroes like knights and wizards, not "monsters" like kreen and canniblistic halflings. It was meant for a western european mindset, not post-apocolyptic Athas
Moral systems kinda break down in a world where morals have long been forgotten :DOriginally posted by Nightdruid
Well to be fair, when alignment was first invented, people were playing heroes like knights and wizards, not "monsters" like kreen and canniblistic halflings. It was meant for a western european mindset, not post-apocolyptic Athas
True, but that's all the more reason to change the way it works.
Like some systems have already done.
Originally posted by NytCrawlr
True, but that's all the more reason to change the way it works.
Like some systems have already done.
Hey, don't disagree...heck, in Athas "good" might be *not* killing someone before stealing their water
Originally posted by Nightdruid
Hey, don't disagree...heck, in Athas "good" might be *not* killing someone before stealing their water
Works for me!
Originally posted by NytCrawlr
Question: How are people dealing with the alignment system in their Dark Sun games?
Killing it alltogether?
Adjusting it in some way?
Conforming to it?
What?
Pretty curious about this and debating what I'm doing with it since it's coming up in my rules soon.
I don't use alignment in any of my games. The idea that "evil" or "good" or "law" or "chaos" are objective principles is simply ridiculous. Characters in my games don't have two-word alignments. They have personalities, which generally take more than just two words to describe and are much more useful in gameplay.