After Months and Months of not getting to it, I just figured: hey, I've got a few hours to spare, so why not update my stuff, after only 2 and a half years... ;)
I've been out of the loop for a while, and I don't know if Nytcrwlr has posted his own d20 material for Dark Sun, or if anybody else for that matter, but anyways, since I've been using it for a while, and it was just sitting there, so to speak, why not share it, especially if I can get some feedback other than from my players.
What I have posted on my website is a d20 conversion of Dark Sun, because I felt, and still feel, that the D&D system is far too limiting for Dark Sun, and at that, for a RPG as well. After trying out various systems, as well as other d20 settings (non-D&D), I've had quite a lot to shape make a Dark Sun Setting I could live with, and make the rules bend to it, not the opposite.
Anyways, here you are:
My Dark Sun Web Site and Conversion
I would very much like feedback, positive and negative, for those interested in this. Those who have provided me some when I posted my original material have greatly helped in developping this updated version.
I'll also answer any questions you might have here about the documents, since they are not totally complete, and might sometimes make references to things I have on paper notes here, but not necessarily on those documents. Or I might simply not have been clear too, heh.
I'll try to update other stuff later, when I get back to playing Dark Sun I guess.
So, enjoy, and hope you can use some of it to enhance your Dark Sun experience!
Hey guys.
After Months and Months of not getting to it, I just figured: hey, I've got a few hours to spare, so why not update my stuff, after only 2 and a half years... ;)
Dude!
Where have you been? Very busy I guess.
Missed you at GenCon.
I've been out of the loop for a while, and I don't know if Nytcrwlr has posted his own d20 material for Dark Sun,
Planning too once I get my site moved to a new server so I can install phpwebsite and totally redo my site. It's going to be more of a personal/Dark Sun D20 site so I won't be stepping on Athas.org's toes anymore and just directly submit the stuff I want to see official or more for D&D Dark Sun to them.
Btw, I deleted your email account, if you still want it let me know.
Or I can just send you a Gmail invite since I have tons of those still, heh.
What I have posted on my website is a d20 conversion of Dark Sun, because I felt, and still feel, that the D&D system is far too limiting for Dark Sun, and at that, for a RPG as well. After trying out various systems, as well as other d20 settings (non-D&D), I've had quite a lot to shape make a Dark Sun Setting I could live with, and make the rules bend to it, not the opposite.
I'll take a look at it again when I get a chance, but I remember us getting off to a good start when we were emailing each other back and forth on all of this.
Can't wait to see what was updated.
Dude!
Where have you been? Very busy I guess.
Aye, you could say that. Simple fact was that I decided to take some time away from internet message boards, since I spent a lot there, and did other stuff. Also, I haven't had the chance to play Dark Sun since september, so I didn't get back to my work either for some time.
Missed you at GenCon.
Yeah, really wished I could have been there. Close friend's wedding came up (didn't realise it was that weekend until she told me like 3 weeks before!)
Btw, I deleted your email account, if you still want it let me know.
If the need arises, I'll let you know.
I'll take a look at it again when I get a chance, but I remember us getting off to a good start when we were emailing each other back and forth on all of this.
Can't wait to see what was updated.
Aye, that worked well. I'll gladly help again with feedback or material ideas if you want.
Just a few questions/ideas from a quick review:
1: Trader PC has BAB of a Wizard. Shouldn't it be the same as a Rogue?
2: Not everyone has access to The Complete Warrior, maybe you could post what the abilities are for the Ranger.
3: In the Wizard section you have Table 3-13 Spells Per Day. Should that be Spells Known?
Keep up the great work.
R-
Shei-Nad, I just took a quick look at what you have and I like what I see.
Thank you very much, and thank you for posting your comments!
1: Trader PC has BAB of a Wizard. Shouldn't it be the same as a Rogue?
I have thought about doing the very same thing recently, though I'm not sure I should. There are 2 major reasons:
1. Flavorably speaking, the trader is basically a non-combattant class, with very little weapons training. The rogue, though not a "warrior" class, will be expected to fight, and has combat oriented abilities, even if he doesn't meet foes head on. Also, since classes such as the psychic warrior, for one thing, have a medium BAB, I thought it odd that a trader would get the same BAB.
2. Mechanically speaking, the trader class is very much based on the Courtier class from Rokugan (Oriental Adventures Campaign Setting, L5R) which is basically a diplomat, with abilities very similar to those of my trader. However, it is more social-diplomacy-influence oriented, where my trader is more bargain-money-influence oriented. Since the Courtier has a poor BAB, my original trader also did. I would point out however that the courtier only has a good Will save, whereas the trader has Will and Reflex. I thought this could be justified by his constant awareness and represent his "roguish" aspect as well.
Note that I have also playtested this class in 2 games (and playtested the Courtier in at least another 2 I can remember) and it works quite well (in fact they can really screw with a DMs plan with that mad diplomacy bonus... ;))
2: Not everyone has access to The Complete Warrior, maybe you could post what the abilities are for the Ranger.
I am failry certain that I cannot reproduce exact mechanics from a sourcebook unless only to describe a modified mechanic. However, that ranger basically gains the Fast Movement ability at 6th level, the ability to use a Dex, Con or Wis buff (the 2nd level spell) once per day at 10th, remove disease or neutralise poison at 13th level once per day, and Freedom of Movement once per day at 16th. In exchange, the ranger looses his ability to cast spells.
I really think a non-spellcasting ranger is more appropriate for DS. Those who want to do so should be multi-class druids or clerics, but I wont get into to much detail as to why for now.
3: In the Wizard section you have Table 3-13 Spells Per Day. Should that be Spells Known?
Actually, no, though it can be very confusing ;)
The best to understand how my wizard works is by thinking of him as a cross between a wizard and a sorcerer. Let me explain.
First, the wizard has to learn spells just as a wizard does. He needs to scribe them, copy, study, etc. He does, however, have less starting spells than D&D (only 6 0-level spells + 1+1/int mod point 1st level spells). He also only automatically learns (develops?) 1 free spell per level (as opposed to 2 for D&D). That said, he can, and will, learn new spells by scribing, just as D&D, though spells should be a lot harder to come by in a DS campaign than in say, magical forgotten realms. ;)
Also, the wizard needs to rest and prepare (memorise) spells as a D&D wizard. He can memorise as many spells of each level as is shown on table 3-12: The Wizard. This total is also influenced by intelligence, like normal D&D.
Now, here's the different part: The wizard can cast a number of spells equal to his SPELLS PER DAY (table 3-13), NOT his memorised spells, and he can cast any combinations of the MEMORISED spells just as a sorcerer would cast any combination of his known spells. In effect, the memorised spells of the wizard become exactly like the known spells of a sorcerer.
Example: Rudoris is a 3rd level wizard with an intelligence score of 16. He has just escaped his teachers grasp, and never got the chance to study additionnal spell scrolls or magical writings, and thus has only the meager knowledge the old man was willing to grant him:
Thus, Rudoris knows read magic + 6 other cantrips, 5 first level spells (1+3 (int) at first level, +1 at second) and 1 second level spell (+1 at 3rd level).
Any given day, Rudoris can memorise 4 cantrips, 3 1st level spells (2+1 for int) and 2 2nd level spells (1+1 for int). These spells are commited to memory until they are changed.
Now, Rudoric may cast 6 cantrips, 5 1st level spells and 3 2nd level spells each day (Table 3-13), with any combination of his MEMORISED spells.
Clearer?
There are several reasons for this:
1- I hate fixed spell slots. They just don't figure into RP well IMO, and none of my other spellcasters have fixed spell slots.
2- Since I play Dark Sun as a low magic setting, it would simply not be possible for the standard D&D wizards to gain spells at a "normal" D&D rate, and the balance of the class would be thrown off. No matter what some people claim, there is just no way you'll make me believe that a Dark Sun arcane spell caster has as much chance of finding spells, or worse, has the same magical resources as a Forgotten Realms wizard.
3- Like this, the wizard mechanically resembles the sorcerer, though still more limited than that class in some ways (weapons, hp, skills, risk of loosing spellbook), and better in others (slightly higher spell versatility, cast 2nd level spells at 3rd like regular wizard).
4- It also makes the wizard truly distinct from the other spellcasters both flavor-wise and mechanics-wise.
Hope its clearer.
Keep up the great work.
R-
Thanks a lot, and please feel free to comment on what I just explained if it is still not clear, or if you don't agree.
I'm actually juggling with the trader BAB question right now... hmm...
Thanks again!
I still think that a Trader, bieng quite rogueish, should have the same chances in combat as his more combat-oriented kin, the Rogue. Just a hold over tribute to 2E.
When I get a chance I'll look more closely at your stuff.
Keep up the good work.
R-
I have thought about doing the very same thing recently, though I'm not sure I should. There are 2 major reasons:
1. Flavorably speaking, the trader is basically a non-combattant class, with very little weapons training. The rogue, though not a "warrior" class, will be expected to fight, and has combat oriented abilities, even if he doesn't meet foes head on. Also, since classes such as the psychic warrior, for one thing, have a medium BAB, I thought it odd that a trader would get the same BAB.
2. Mechanically speaking, the trader class is very much based on the Courtier class from Rokugan (Oriental Adventures Campaign Setting, L5R) which is basically a diplomat, with abilities very similar to those of my trader. However, it is more social-diplomacy-influence oriented, where my trader is more bargain-money-influence oriented. Since the Courtier has a poor BAB, my original trader also did. I would point out however that the courtier only has a good Will save, whereas the trader has Will and Reflex. I thought this could be justified by his constant awareness and represent his "roguish" aspect as well.
That's here I have a point. Maybe merchantman in cities are far from being near a figthing class. ALTHOUGH, Traders are the peoples that travel through the waste with or without a caravan. That mean that eventually they have to fight for their lives and not hiding between someone else. In the harsh desert, everyone is concern in a battle. So the athasian Trader will have much more opportunities to use is physical attributes (hey, just the desert, it's harsh to live by).
I'd stick with the rogue progression and not the mage prog for the Trader.
I'd stick with the rogue progression and not the mage prog for the Trader.
Same here since the poor Dune Trader can't hide behind spells.
But wow! It's the first time I visit your site and I have to say: Impressive... Most impressive. It's a wonder you're not part of the Athas.org templarate... or are you?
Trader BAB
The more I look at it, the more I'm inclined to agree with you. I just realised something too. NPC aristocrats and Experts have a medium BAB. Since traders are akin to those, why not him? And I do agree that the athasian trader has more chances of getting into a fight than the average D&D merchant.
Though I was concerned a bit about the balance, since it is based on the Courtier, but since the class is not combat oriented anyways, it shouldn't tip the balance in any direction, and at least it'll have a fighting chance in a fight.
Thanks for the feedback: The Trader BAB will be changed to medium. I will try to update shortly.
Thanks again, and I hope you'll continue commenting!
And no, I am not on the Athas.org templarate, but since my stuff differs to a good extent from theirs, and I do not want the constraints of D&D to interfere with my conversion of Dark Sun, I would not wish to be anyways, though they can feel free to use any of my stuff in their work.
And no, I am not on the Athas.org templarate, but since my stuff differs to a good extent from theirs, and I do not want the constraints of D&D to interfere with my conversion of Dark Sun, I would not wish to be anyways, though they can feel free to use any of my stuff in their work.
I think it is pretty obvious that Dark Sun was constructed to fit within the constraints of D&D 2E. Since those constraints are mostly lifted in 3E, you shouldn't have a problem.
I think it is pretty obvious that Dark Sun was constructed to fit within the constraints of D&D 2E. Since those constraints are mostly lifted in 3E, you shouldn't have a problem.
You misunderstand me. I was talking about the constraints of D&D 3e as opposed to d20.
D&D sets rules that determine the balance of the system and that cannot really be changed without changing D&D, while d20 offers a rules system that offers many different possibilities. Actually, D&D is d20, but d20 is not D&D. Let me give a few examples:
Abilities
D&D uses a 3-18 scale for abilities, and the racial and class abilities, and their progression are based on it. Using the basic D&D system, it is difficult to change these to get back to the original 5-20 if you do not change the way the rest of the system is balanced (ECL and CR-wise). Also, since D&D material all uses 3-18 for stats, it becomes difficult for athas.org to deviate from it.
Races and Abilities
You will notice that D&D uses only very slight adjustments to racial abilities, where other d20 products do not hesitate so much in using +4 or -4, and use many. Not only does the greater adjustements reflect the original DS work in some ways, but it just makes more sense. I fail to see why adjustments need to be kept so low in D&D, to the point that it becomes insignificant. For examples, look at the picture of a halfling and that of a dwarf, and tell me -2 Str is enough for a halfling.
In the athas.org conversion, the ability adjustments are in tune with D&D, but IMO, not Dark Sun, and in any case, they simply fail to recognise the nuances Dark Sun gave to races (higher str for dwarves, lower wisdom for elves) and in some instances, fail to recognise differences altogether (elves are just as agile as half-elves). d20 allows more flexibility, and better representation of Dark Sun.
Classes
Dark Sun has quite a different feel from other campaign settings, and without adjusting the classes to fit the setting, it becomes difficult to represent this acurrately. For example, elemental clerics are hardly recognisable as such if only domain spells are affected (1 spell per level) while their are other elemental spellcasters available for d20 (the shugenja inspired mine). Wizards also come to mind...
High Magic vs. Low Magic
D&D is a high magic setting, its as simple as that. In fact, magic items and accessibility to magic is INTEGRAL to the balance of D&D, and the DMG provides exactly how much magic item's worth a character should have, and prices for magical services at all levels, which is completely ridiculous when in Dark Sun (how many full plated +3, +5 weapon, +3 shield, 10 potions, +3 cloak, magic boots, helm, 2 rings, etc. fighters do you know in Dark Sun? I know at least a few dozen in Forgotten Realms) Since it is integral to the character's ECL, and thus the CR/XP system, it becomes impossible to play DS as a low magic setting without changing that system altogether. If you want to remain in touch with core D&D, it is not really possible to do this.
Anyways
I could find a full number of other examples and reasons I do not really want to work with D&D if I can use its basic rules with d20 flexibility, but sufficient to say that I personally like it better this way, and nothing prevents those who find it more simple to stick with D&D to play their own way, and even integrate some of my work without upsetting the D&D system too much.
To each is own, but I'll stick with d20 and let you decide if its better or worse.
As for abilities, it really doesn't matter that you can't have 4d4+4. It mattered in 2E, when 8-14 were the same score. They aren't in 3E.
For races, you're right that a halfling would realistically have much lower Strength than a human, but for playable races, it's not really a good idea to penalize some abilities too much.
For classes, I just don't feel that having spellcasting work the same as in 2E is very important.
I understand what you're saying, though the only point I think is really important is the High Magic / Low Magic thing. But as far as I can tell, your rules don't offer a solution to this problem. It's not easy to take the treasure out of D&D, but it's not just because of CRs. Without magic gear, fighter-types will fall way behind spellcasters, for example.
Though not fully presented here, my conversion takes Equipment completely out of the XP/ECL/CR system, which is absolutely necessary in Dark Sun, since if your characters get enslaved, a recurring theme in DS, they are instantly thrown out of the D&D XP system.
As for abilities, it really doesn't matter that you can't have 4d4+4. It mattered in 2E, when 8-14 were the same score. They aren't in 3E.
Though I have heard this before, none of this justifies NOT having the greater ability score, or the added distinction to DS character that it gives.
For races, you're right that a halfling would realistically have much lower Strength than a human, but for playable races, it's not really a good idea to penalize some abilities too much.
Why not? D&D states that you should never drop a character because of a low score, and it specifically states that it can be fun to play one. the very randomness of the abilities suggest that playing characters with a few low stats will happen.
By the way, it also suggests that abilities and balance aren't that much of an issue.
For classes, I just don't feel that having spellcasting work the same as in 2E is very important.
As I've said, to each his own.
R-
Shei-Nad, I've accessed your chapters on Race and Class, but for some reason I can't access any other chapters. I was wondering if anyone else had that problem?
R-
Oh no!
;)
I'm sorry, but I rechecked the links and they seem to have the right path. I can access them from here, but I'd like to check on another connection.
Does anyone else have this problem?
Can you suggest a solution?
I'll let you know if it does.
R-
I'll try tomorrow.
R-
The new Adobe seemed to do the trick. I got everything downloaded, except for chapter 8. I keep getting the "this pape is not available" screen of death.
I'll try tomorrow.
R-
Oh. That one is my fault. two word name differs from the source file. Will correct it right now.
Let me know!
- Added a Bonus Feat to the Half-Elf.
- Changed the BAB of the Trader to medium.
- Added Making the Kill ability to the Gladiator.
I don't know how much I care for a Bonus Feat for Half-elves. I'm more partial to Skilled Half-elves as explained in the House Rule Sidebar on page 40 of Unearthed Arcana.
R-
I did get to look at Chapter 8 and like most of the Variant Rules you have selected. The only one I don't care for is Armor as Damage Reduction.
Actually, the rule as presented is incomplete. With my games, players may opt to try to avoid the armored parts of his opponent, disregarding damage reduction from armor, at a higher AC. Its really simple to do: The character attacks versus standard D&D AC for armor.
So, if a creature with a natural armor damage reduction of 7 is attacked in that way, its AC increases by 7, but if hit, it has no damage reduction.
This option makes combat a bit more realistic in my view. Indeed, a full plate should offer very little protection against a Giant, and a small weapon will really not do any good against the shell of a giant antloid unless you manage to get it in the joints.
I don't know how much I care for a Bonus Feat for Half-elves. I'm more partial to Skilled Half-elves as explained in the House Rule Sidebar on page 40 of Unearthed Arcana.
Oooh. Thanks, never saw that one. Half-elves really are underpowered in D&D. And in my conversion, they end up with a negative ability adjustement, even if they do have interesting abilities to compensate somewhat. Hmm... I guess it could be done that way too... Thanks for the idea!
- Changed the BAB of the Trader to medium.
- Added Making the Kill ability to the Gladiator.
Both look good. I reeeaaalllyyy liked seeing the Trader with a medium BAB. Ain't nastalgia grand! :D
Have you ever thought about limiting classes to certain races?
Alot of the D20 Star Wars stuff I am looking at limits classes some, and I'm thinking of going that route.
Just thought I would bring it up.
Here's something of note Shei-nad.
Have you ever thought about limiting classes to certain races?
Alot of the D20 Star Wars stuff I am looking at limits classes some, and I'm thinking of going that route.
Just thought I would bring it up.
I had, but I must say I kind of like the idea of all races being able to join all classes. For several reasons too.
First, races whould not genetically be prevented from joining up most classes. The only one I can think of in D&D would be the wizard, because some races simply could not use arcane magic in 2e. While this could be done, I decided to go against it, not only because I liked allowing all races to play wizards, but the Pentad had Halfling Wizards too, even though the rules stated they could not cast. Now, I agree that hallings should not be very good spellcasters, since Rajaat used the Humans, but still, they can. As such, I added a penalty for arcane spellcasting for halflings and dwarves, sort of a reverse arcane prodigy, so they still can, but are limited.
Second, cultures do influence the choice of classes the races go towards, but its only an influence, it doesn't preclude them from anything. These become racial favored classes, and I tweaked the Regional favored class system to offer a benefit for characters starting with a class favored by their region (i.e. culture).
Third, prestige classes offer the possibility to offer classes which prohibit certain races from applying, so when proper, you can use these.
I almost decided to go with that class restriction when developping the bard, because a Thri-kreen bard just looks wrong IMO, but then, I reasoned that if a bard decided to take a Kreen as an apprentice and showed him his trade secrets, what good reason would prevent the Kreen from learning?
Anyways, I always make my players dig deep into their character's background when making their characters, so if a Kreen wants to be a multi-class bard/wizard, he has a lot of explainin' to do! ;)
Ah, a balanced 2e, heh.
Second, cultures do influence the choice of classes the races go towards, but its only an influence, it doesn't preclude them from anything. These become racial favored classes, and I tweaked the Regional favored class system to offer a benefit for characters starting with a class favored by their region (i.e. culture).
I need to check out your regional favored class system then, don't recall seeing that last I looked at your rules.
Anyways, I always make my players dig deep into their character's background when making their characters, so if a Kreen wants to be a multi-class bard/wizard, he has a lot of explainin' to do! ;)
Indeed, I do the same. My players love it.
I need to check out your regional favored class system then, don't recall seeing that last I looked at your rules.
I think it was somewhat shown in my earlier work. Just checking... Yup, it is, though not finished, and certainly not up to date.
I use a system similar to what the v3 edition of Forgotten Realms used:
1- If your race is favored in the Region you come from, you get access to its regional feats (you can also do this by taking 2 ranks in the appropriate Knowledge(local) skill).
2- If your class is favored in the Region you come from, you get access to one of its special equipment choice.
So not much difference. FR v3 used favored class to gain access to the feat, and class or race to gain access to equipment. I redid it by making it race for feat, since most regional feats are like personality traits or basic social abilities which have little to do with the profession of the character, and equipment for favored class, which sort of determines what equipment he uses, and regions more favorable to those classes will likely have equipment more readily available to outfit them.
Just a small benefit, but the extra 300cp's worth of equipment can be worth it, especially with my reduced Character Equipment value.
Note that they ditched this in FR v3.5, since apparently inciting players to play races and classes favored in the region they selected made too much sense for FR, so now Regions are just another cosmetic thing, like languages, for instance...
I use a system similar to what the v3 edition of Forgotten Realms used:
Ah, ok, I was expecting something different.
I plan on using it as well in my campaigns but I'm sure I will probably change it some.
I too hated the fact that they took it out for FR 3.5 and was hoping we would do it for the Athas.org Dark Sun but alas.
I skimmed through the rules, and I have one feeling in my guts: 2e in d20 cloak. Generally you re-introduced a lot of things from 2e, which is not neccessarily a bad thing, but I think the d20 system could have done more. 2e also had its limits on the setting, which now could be overstepped, but somehow it didn't happen.
I try to get some example to flesh out what I'm thinking of, it's just a feeling in me now. And I dont' want to be picky about your work, it's great you created this, I just try to give you some feedback.
Hi Shei-Nad,
I skimmed through the rules, and I have one feeling in my guts: 2e in d20 cloak. Generally you re-introduced a lot of things from 2e, which is not neccessarily a bad thing, but I think the d20 system could have done more. 2e also had its limits on the setting, which now could be overstepped, but somehow it didn't happen.
I try to get some example to flesh out what I'm thinking of, it's just a feeling in me now. And I dont' want to be picky about your work, it's great you created this, I just try to give you some feedback.
Interesting. I'm very much looking forward to your example of this, because that's exactly the kind of feedback which will be useful.
I would point out though that I did exactly try to bring Dark Sun 2e into d20 mechanics, though I'm not sure wether you mean Dark Sun 2e or D&D 2e in your comment. I feel that the athas.org conversion is too much like bringing D&D 3.5 into a Dark Sun cloak, if I may use your expression, and I did try to capture as much DS flavor as I could in my conversion instead of as much D&D rules I could fit within the Dark Sun setting.
Hmm. Not sure if that's understandable. Anyways, it should get clearer what we both mean when you give me your examples.
I'm especially curious of what you believe the d20 system could have done more with my conversion, especially with regards to the athas.org conversion.
..and to all other feedback as well! ;)
So here comes questions, comments, ideas, and everything in a wild bunch. Hope you will gain some insight from it. Races:
1) If you gave a penalty to dwarves and halflings to use arcane magic, it would be fair to apply their save bonus only against arcane spells.
2) The darkvision you use is different from the rulebooks, it doesn't give seeing in total darkness. Is that intentional?
3) I miss a listen bonus to elves and half-elves.
4) Half elves are harder than elves, so they get a +1 fortitude save: it also means that they are harder as any other race (including humans and dwarves) as these other races don't get fort save bonus.
5) Climb speed to the Rhul Thauns: IRRC it's in the Monsters Manual if a creature gets climb speed, it can move upside down on celings as well, etc. Like a real spider. It's a bit much for Rhul Thauns IMHO.
6) Muls should get the 'unburdened' ability of the dwarves.
7) Thri-kreens: assigning to them the 'vermin' subtype instead of humanoid would make them more in line. (After all, they are intelligent bugs.) Also, they should be large size creatures.
8) Thri-kreen jump: it should be written, that their height is not a restricting factor for their jump distances
9) Thri kreen favoured classes: psion is not good here, maybe wilder, but the best would be psychic warrior (according to Thri-kreens of Athas).
1) I would remove swim as class skill from everybody (except water clerics).
2) Bard: in the bardic music you switch instill/invite words.
3) I think poisonmaking shouldn't be a bardic privilege. To give bonuses to the bard for it, it's ok. But a poisonmaker defiler is a too good thing to miss.
Also, the wild halflinges in the Forest Ridge also have bards to make their poisons? I don't think so...4) The memorizing/preparing/casting descriptions at the classes are very confusing. I simple couldn't get it. Needs clearer description.
5) Requireing the presence of the element for casting is too drastic. With that sun clerics are not able to cast in the night, fire clerics in a wind, etc.
6) If hide is a class skill for the druids than move silently also should be.
7) Druid currently has d6 hit die. d8 maybe?
8) If the druids get a guraded land at 1st level it very much restricts their adventuring possibilities. I like better the option to have a PrC for druids with guarded lands.
9) Does Gladiator needs to be basic class? A PrC is better for it IMHO. Everybody can fight in the arena. But only few are professionals=gladiators.
10) The not crowd-related Gladiator abilities would be nice to be available to the fighters as a feat. I don't see a reason why couldn't a fighter learn armor optimisation, or melee mastery.
11) Monk as basic class: well, I vote for a PrC for the monk. See the other topic here...
12) Trader is ok with rogue BAB, but 8 skill point is too much than. 6 would be enough.
13) Trader bribery-like abilities should not be based on a fix amount of money. It should be target dependant. To bribe a 1st level templar guard costs less than bribe a 10th level templar captain. Maybe 15cp x level or HD....
14) It would be nice if the bard could get some from the communicative abilities of the traders (like exploit weakness, read faces)
1) I would put knowledge (geography) as a class skill for the druid.
2) knowl (nobility) is not neccessary as a class skill for the psion.
3) I suggest you the have a spellcraft (arcane) and a spellcraft (divine) skill separately.
4) I would put a +2 bonus to the sense motive rolls for the fighter to assess combat tactics and the enemy.
5) Bargain skill is not needed separately. Diplomacy is enough.
6) Elves get a +1 to Bargain rolls, but the description says thay have uneasy realtionship with others. Than why the bonus?
7) Forgery: literacy is not always a neccessary requirement. A lot of stuff is not paper and writing based on Athas. Like ceramic identifying tokens, etc. There is a lot of things to forge without the need to know how to read and write. Art objects, money, tattoes, etc.
8) Survival hunting: salt flat and sandy wastes should be DC 30, the stony barrens is more lively then these (check the description in the Wanderer's Journal). Also, DC 15 for mountains seems to low for me.
1) At the item creation feats it should be stated that DMG gp=cp. (To avoid confusion.)
2) Metamagic feats: it's written: every spellcaster cast spontaneously.
Divine spellcasters as well?3) Blooded feat: should be available to muls as well.
4) Path Dexter and Sinister: I would warn you to give concrete spell lists here. Athasian spellcasters have more ecclectic spells in their 'spellbooks', it's not sure that they will get these, which reduces the feat's usefulness. Stick to schools only.
That's it so far!
So far I'm through races, classes, skills and feats, but I don't want to withheld water from the thirsty...
WOOHOOHOO!!! :D
Thanks for the really detailed feedback! Lets see...
1) If you gave a penalty to dwarves and halflings to use arcane magic, it would be fair to apply their save bonus only against arcane spells.
I had thought about it, but since there arcane and divine magic is not mechanically different regarding resistance from other spells or items (that I know of anyways), I though it was simpler that way, though I agree it does make sense. However, original material also had dwarves and halflings resist all magic because of their arcane resistance.
I think it could be flavorably reasoned out that these races are resistant to all magic, but it doesn't preclude them from benefiting from the elemental powers granted to them by the elementals. It does making tapping arcane magic more difficult however, since its comes from them, not from divine forces.
2) The darkvision you use is different from the rulebooks, it doesn't give seeing in total darkness. Is that intentional?
Yes, it is.
I used Darkvision from D&D for a few months, and then dropped it for this. There are two major reasons for this:
1- Darkvision really isn't practicle gamewise, since PC parties will very rarely all have access to it, and thus they need a lightsource with them, opposed to enemies who almost always have it, and thus can always see PCs coming, no matter what. Normal vision then became far more of an inconvenience as it should be, and even became a problem for all PCs in a party.
2- The biggest reason: Darkvision just doesn't make sense. If there is no light at all, you just can't see. There are no living beings who can see in total darkness, because seeing is simply the perception of light reflected on surfaces. If one percieves others in darkness in some other way, such as a bat's sonar, or the perception of heat, or even radiation, then it isn't sight, or rather, not vision. Such abilities would fall into the category of Blindsight, which is different from vision, and usually, much rarer.
This way, Darkvision is more realistic, and more playable.
3) I miss a listen bonus to elves and half-elves.
I thought about giving it, but I looked through Elves of athas and I couldn't find any mention of their hearing being better, though eyesight is mentionned ("seeing farther and in more detail", which explains the higher bonus). Also, elven senses seemed slightly less acute for elves, since they lose their ability to find secret doors (which also explains why I didn't give them a search bonus).
4) Half elves are harder than elves, so they get a +1 fortitude save: it also means that they are harder as any other race (including humans and dwarves) as these other races don't get fort save bonus.
No, because they have a -2 to Constitution. Their net Fortitude adjustement is thus 0, as Humans. However, they still have their -1 penalty to fatigue related checks and hit points, which represents the tiring nature of the elves (elves' Con penalty represents a kind of feline tiring nature IMO)
5) Climb speed to the Rhul Thauns: IRRC it's in the Monsters Manual if a creature gets climb speed, it can move upside down on celings as well, etc. Like a real spider. It's a bit much for Rhul Thauns IMHO.
Oh!. Hmm. I agree it would be too much, but the MMv3.5 does not mention this. It does state however that the climber must make a check against any slope with a DC greater of 0. I should think a ceiling would have an increadibly high DC, and thus prevent the Rhul-Thaun from climbing it anyways.
I gave the Climb speed after seeing that the Mountain... Spiritfolk? (don't remember the name, and don't have the book here) of FR: Unnaproachable East have a climb speed, and are humanoids. It seemed a good way to represent the Vertical Life of Rhul-Thaun. Surely if those humanoids could have a climb speed, the Rhul-Thaun could.
6) Muls should get the 'unburdened' ability of the dwarves.
Hmm... interesting idea. Especially since they have a level adjustment. Sold!
Thanks!7) Thri-kreens: assigning to them the 'vermin' subtype instead of humanoid would make them more in line. (After all, they are intelligent bugs.) Also, they should be large size creatures.
Actually, vermin do not have intelligence. If they do, they fall into the Magical Beats type, or in this case, Monstrous Humanoid. (MM)
Also, the large size is for creatures above 8ft tall or long. The way thri-kreen are built and stand, they still fit into normal size. In fact, both the official D&D conversion of the race and the athas.org has it as medium size. Finally, making them large size would also probably heighten their ECL, which I really do not want tot do.
8) Thri-kreen jump: it should be written, that their height is not a restricting factor for their jump distances.
Aye, sir!
Didn't see that part of the jump skill. Obviously has to go for TK. Also, I'm thinking running should be irrelevant to TKs when jumping, like grasshoppers.
Changing it now...
9) Thri kreen favoured classes: psion is not good here, maybe wilder, but the best would be psychic warrior (according to Thri-kreens of Athas).
Oups, thanks, that was a leftover from my earlier work. All athasian races have wilder (the wild talent progressing in his natural abilities) in my conversion.
As for the psychic warrior, I am aware that the official conversions have elected this class as favored, though how this has managed to supplant the ranger class is beyond me:
Mind Warriors. People read about Mind Warriors somwhere (is it even in TKoA?), which is like a few paragraphs, and somehow missed the parts about nature, hunting, tracking, hunting and some more hunting for the whole book. Moreover, a quick look at the Psionic Powers section shows that TKs are often psionicists, in the disciplines of telepathy and clairsentience. It even says few specialise in Psychometabolism. This info is even repeated in the Will and the Way!
But all of this seemed to have been overlooked by the need to have a "psychic warrior race". Anyways...
I do plan to make a Mind Warrior prestige class though, and I agree that there are Psychic Warriors among the kreen, but surely they are not that common, nor even inherent, to the race.
Thanks for all the ideas and feedback, looking forward to the next part!
1) I would remove swim as class skill from everybody (except water clerics).
Yeah, I did that too at first, but I figured the class skill doesn't always depend on what you character gets to do, but on how good he would be should he do it.
For example, physical skills for a fighter should be class skills simply because he can master them easily, his whole training getting him in great shape. Also, even if he gets Ride and Handle animal as a class skill, that doesn't mean he ever mounted an animal, or even been exposed to a mount.
Now, if a fighter never got near a body of water, which would be common on athas, he would not take ranks in swim, which makes him unable to take 10 on swim checks (i.e. he can't really swim). However, should he spend time near one, he would probably pick up swimming relatively easily.
But still, it could be done that way. I thought of the same thing too, since the line between ability and opportunity for skills being class or not is not all that clear in d20 mechanics. Might go back to that. Will have to check it again I guess...
2) Bard: in the bardic music you switch instill/invite words.
Its quite possible, but I can't find where...
Oh, do you mean I should replace instill by invite? Actually, I did use invite before, but it seems instill is a better antonym of Inspire.
3) I think poisonmaking shouldn't be a bardic privilege. To give bonuses to the bard for it, it's ok. But a poisonmaker defiler is a too good thing to miss.
Hmm... Didn't think I left it like that alone. I know I planned to make a Poisonmaking feat available, but its not there yet, and the abilities' description also suggests only bards will EVER get to make poisons, which obviously doesn't work...
Will have to fix that too. What would I ever do without you! :D
4) The memorizing/preparing/casting descriptions at the classes are very confusing. I simple couldn't get it. Needs clearer description.
Ok, granted. I'll have to reformulate that. But simply:
1- You can memorise X number of spells per day.
2- You can cast Y number of MEMORISED spells per day.
Didn't my wizard example above help?
5) Requireing the presence of the element for casting is too drastic. With that sun clerics are not able to cast in the night, fire clerics in a wind, etc.
Actually, the element acts as a Divine Focus, so not all spellcasting is barred. Also, sun clerics will have the option of selecting a feat (forgot the name, have that somewhere on my notes) which grants them the sun tattoo of Caelum, allowing him to cast in the dark (source: Prism Pentad).
It does certainly hinder clerics however, a balancing to their other abilities, and a flavorable way to keep them in touch with their elements, and with the original flavor of Dark Sun 2e.
6) If hide is a class skill for the druids than move silently also should be.
Druids got a hide (invisibility) power in 2e. I guess I just though they would stay hidden and observe, but not necessarily sneak around... Could go either way though.
7) Druid currently has d6 hit die. d8 maybe?
I want to make Druids my major divine spellcasters. In 2e, they got major access to Cosmos, 1 sphere and minor to another sphere (compared to clerics, which got major to one elemental and minor to cosmos, that is a HUGE difference). To do so, I sacrficed some of the "tougher" aspects of the class in favord of increased spellcasting and special abilities. That is a personal touch though, nothing canon.
8) If the druids get a guraded land at 1st level it very much restricts their adventuring possibilities. I like better the option to have a PrC for druids with guarded lands.
Oh, but I know, and if you read carefully, the guarded land does not limit the druid to these lands to gain powers. (in fact, the only related powers are a bonus to hide while there and trackless step, eventually). It does, however, determines any number of other abilities when out of it, which adds to its significance without limiting him to the lands themselves.
I also want to make a Guardian of the Land prestige class for NPC druids who stay on their guarded lands, which would get more of the Dark Sun 2e benefits of the Lands. Seems we have common ideas...
9) Does Gladiator needs to be basic class? A PrC is better for it IMHO. Everybody can fight in the arena. But only few are professionals=gladiators.
I decided to go with the base class for many, many reasons, as I also thought about the prestige class at first. Here are a few reasons:
1. If you make all fighters a soldiers, as they are descibed in Dark Sun, then he can’t also be a valid gladiator. A gladiator would have no reason to gain warfare related skills, or battlefield leadership, for instance.
2. Since Dark Sun offers the possibility of giving martials classes with very different styles, fighter learning soldiering and techniques, gladiator learning how to make use of every battle tactics and combat resources, rangers the survivalists, barbarians are just violent savages, it became an ideal occasion to give a real definition to the warrior NPC class. In D&D, warriors and fighters basically have exactly the same backjground, except that for some obscure reason, fighters are better. Now, characters which are just brutes, thugs or untrained guards get to be warriors. Those who train as soldiers are fighters, and those who train as gladiators are... gladiators.
3. Since the training would be different, and one can train as gladiator without learning any other fighting style, a base class came as a natural conclusion. If not, there would be no real class in which a 1st level character who turns out to be fighting in the arena all his life could gain levels in until he met the requirments for the prestige class.
4. It also captures the original flavor of Dark Sun, and offers a new class to players, which is often compared to the “paladin” of Dark Sun.
10) The not crowd-related Gladiator abilities would be nice to be available to the fighters as a feat. I don't see a reason why couldn't a fighter learn armor optimisation, or melee mastery.
While you could certainly make feats out of these abilities, like you could make feats out of most class abilities, I tried to give the gladiator abilities a different purpose than the fighter’s feat for a reason, and according to their original flavors. Let me explain.
The fighter is, in my opinion, a specialist. He learns to fight in units and learns warfare skills, but also develops quite specific fighting techniques which he hones as he progresses and drills. In fact, the character will more likely specialise in one or two feat paths, because he sticks to what works, and perfects the battle tactics his unit has been taugh.
However, the gladiator is a generalist. He learns a bit of everything, and learns to make the best of everything combat related. That is why his penalties for non-proficiency with weapons will dissapear, why he learns unarmed combat, why he learns to optimise the little armor he usually has, and why his melee expert grants him a small bonus on many combat manoeuvres at once. At one time or the other, gladiators are trained and have to use or react to all combat manoeuvres, where fighters will likely specialise in very specific techniques, and not in every possible manoeuvre, because their units needs to function as one most of the time, where the gladiator has to adapt alone to every situation.
Note, however, that the fighter CAN take something similar to armor optimisation with the armor or shield specialisation feats. (Which appear in... some d20 book... I don’t remember which! ;))
11) Monk as basic class: well, I vote for a PrC for the monk. See the other topic here...
I personnally would have barred the monk from dark sun altogether, until I saw Nytcrwlr’s take on it and the background info he (I think, though not sure if it was him alone) developed. The Mystic Wanderer I think it was called. Anyways.
Trouble with the prestige class is, again, what class would your character take before it? If a sensei takes a young apprentice and shows him his ways, what levels does he take until he gets to be a Monk? Warrior? Gladiator?
Like the gladiator, his training could very well start at first level. Also, since the class already exists as a base class, it simply is easier to convert this way.
12) Trader is ok with rogue BAB, but 8 skill point is too much than. 6 would be enough.
Here I strongly disagree, since the Trader is essentially a “skill class”. You will notice that his skills are considerably different from the rogue, sohe shouldn’t step on the latter’s toes, even with the same BAB. I don’t see what compensates for lowering his skill points, especially since he gains more class skills as he levels, which would strain his skill abilities even more.
13) Trader bribery-like abilities should not be based on a fix amount of money. It should be target dependant. To bribe a 1st level templar guard costs less than bribe a 10th level templar captain. Maybe 15cp x level or HD....
But it does... For the bribe example anyways. For other abilities, you might have noticed that the trader must spend the amount of money it would have cost for a scroll with the spell of the same effect (ex.: Buy Loyalty = Charm Person) which is how I tried to maintain the mechanical balance. These cannot vary in price with the level of the target, since the spell would not either.
14) It would be nice if the bard could get some from the communicative abilities of the traders (like exploit weakness, read faces)
It might, but then, you take away from the trader when doing so. I tried to keep their abilities seperate as much as possible, just like I decided against giving rogue special abilities to the bard, which I had at first. (except Slippery Mind). In any case, bards can also make superb diplomats and exploiters in their own respect.
Thanks a LOT for the feedback! And please feel free to re-comment, contest or question, and especilly NOT agree with me!
Out of time for now, but I'll comment the rest tomorrow, and I'll try to upload your ideas when possible!
Thanks a lot! :D
Actually, vermin do not have intelligence.
In 3.5 they do.
Check the 3.5 MM for details.
In 3.5 they do.
Check the 3.5 MM for details.
but I just did...
Ok. Exception have an intelligence score, though they are usually mindless. So I guess it could be done that way.
However, they still seem to fit better into the Monstrous Humanoid type, since they are, after all, humanoids, to a good extent, and the official conversion of this creature has it as a monstrous humanoid (unless that also has changed with v3.5?)
It just seems wrong to put a "vermin" tag on the Kreen... ;)
Oh, and thanks for the comment Nyt, and hope to hear more from you on the whole thing!
1) I would put knowledge (geography) as a class skill for the druid.
Hmm. Indeed. Thanks.
knowl (nobility) is not neccessary as a class skill for the psion.
Not necessarily, but in my conversion the psion is the trained psionic manifester of the academies (or some other schools of psionics). Much like the psiologist (which I might actually make into a prestige class) of the Tarandan schools. As such, they would probably have access to that knowledge, should they wish it. Wilders would not.
3) I suggest you the have a spellcraft (arcane) and a spellcraft (divine) skill separately.
Actually, I always though D&D should have something like that as well, since I don't see why clerics should really know what a wizard is casting at him, but I never really made anyting about it. Maybe you could simply make all spellcraft checks between divine and arcane magic spellcasters at -10 against the other magic type... hmm... but then multiclassing....
No, I think your idea makes more sense actually, since even a high level wizard should have little idea of what elemental powers a cleric would use, and even multiclassing then would not make him an expert in water clerical powers, for example...
I'll add that to the list. Thanks.
4) I would put a +2 bonus to the sense motive rolls for the fighter to assess combat tactics and the enemy.
Is my knowledge(warfare) still there? Yep. You mean give it as a class bonus instead?
Actually, I kind of like the idea of the warfare knowledge, and the benefit is somewhat inspired by the Rokugan Battle skill. Not all warriors have a fair grasp of tactics and strategy, and this knowledge represents what a soldier, or an officer, needs to know to have one.
5) Bargain skill is not needed separately. Diplomacy is enough.
I don't agree. There is a big difference between being diplomatic relations and haggling over a price. In fact, many commoners would be great hagglers and knew how to bargain prices, but could probably not even grasp the subtelties and complex nature of diplomacy. I would even say that most ambassadors and diplomats were probably not all that good at haggling with merchants on the spot, with little things instead of grand schemes.
A common D&D example I had was the Dwarf, who should be pretty good at haggling over price, but would probably not be worth much as a diplomat.
Anyways, it also carries DS 2e flavor, and is somewhat necessary if you bring back the trader class...
6) Elves get a +1 to Bargain rolls, but the description says thay have uneasy realtionship with others. Than why the bonus?
Because elves are a lot like old car dealers. EVERYONE knows they shouldn't trust them, but somehow, they always manage to convince people they have a great deal for them...
It might be a funny analogy, but I always thought of elven traders a little like that. Elves like bargaining, haggling and putting on a smile and a friendly face... while ripping you off.
7) Forgery: literacy is not always a neccessary requirement. A lot of stuff is not paper and writing based on Athas. Like ceramic identifying tokens, etc. There is a lot of things to forge without the need to know how to read and write. Art objects, money, tattoes, etc.
A valid point. Didn't think of that.
8) Survival hunting: salt flat and sandy wastes should be DC 30, the stony barrens is more lively then these (check the description in the Wanderer's Journal). Also, DC 15 for mountains seems to low for me.
hmm... Ok. So I take the mountains and put them at DC20, leave the stony barrens at 25, and put salts and sands at DC30...
Works for me!
Thanks! Will respond to the rest tomorrow! :D
Oh!. Hmm. I agree it would be too much, but the MMv3.5 does not mention this. It does state however that the climber must make a check against any slope with a DC greater of 0. I should think a ceiling would have an increadibly high DC, and thus prevent the Rhul-Thaun from climbing it anyways.
I gave the Climb speed after seeing that the Mountain... Spiritfolk? (don't remember the name, and don't have the book here) of FR: Unnaproachable East have a climb speed, and are humanoids. It seemed a good way to represent the Vertical Life of Rhul-Thaun. Surely if those humanoids could have a climb speed, the Rhul-Thaun could.
I also checked the 3.5 MM. My memories came from 3.0 MM. Sorry, my bad. I'm with you on this one than.
Actually, vermin do not have intelligence. If they do, they fall into the Magical Beats type, or in this case, Monstrous Humanoid. (MM)
Also, the large size is for creatures above 8ft tall or long. The way thri-kreen are built and stand, they still fit into normal size. In fact, both the official D&D conversion of the race and the athas.org has it as medium size. Finally, making them large size would also probably heighten their ECL, which I really do not want tot do.
Vermins are immune to mind effecting abilities, and that's the main reason I suggest it. In 2e Hold Person and such didn't work on thri-kreens. If you change their types to vermin you can bring it back -if you would like.
Yeah, I did that too at first, but I figured the class skill doesn't always depend on what you character gets to do, but on how good he would be should he do it.
For example, physical skills for a fighter should be class skills simply because he can master them easily, his whole training getting him in great shape. Also, even if he gets Ride and Handle animal as a class skill, that doesn't mean he ever mounted an animal, or even been exposed to a mount.
Now, if a fighter never got near a body of water, which would be common on athas, he would not take ranks in swim, which makes him unable to take 10 on swim checks (i.e. he can't really swim). However, should he spend time near one, he would probably pick up swimming relatively easily.
But still, it could be done that way. I thought of the same thing too, since the line between ability and opportunity for skills being class or not is not all that clear in d20 mechanics. Might go back to that. Will have to check it again I guess...
I think swim is cross class for everybody as on Athas it's simply no way to get it learned properly (i.e. being a class skill to anybody except water clerics). If somebody somehow get it, he does it on a hard way (cross class skill way). And don't forget that swim is used to get out from quicksand (DC15 IIRC), so if swim is cc skill, quicksands and such become more lethal for even a higher level character. Which is good I think...
Its quite possible, but I can't find where...
Oh, do you mean I should replace instill by invite? Actually, I did use invite before, but it seems instill is a better antonym of Inspire.
In the name of the ability you use instill, in the description invite is written.
Ok, granted. I'll have to reformulate that. But simply:
1- You can memorise X number of spells per day.
2- You can cast Y number of MEMORISED spells per day.
Didn't my wizard example above help?
Yes, but it was not clear for me that the same goes with divine spellcasters.
It never hurts to be very 'put-into-the-mouth' in such description, especially if you write down unusual things. These rules (hopefully) will be read by a lot of different person with a lot of different mindset, but they should all understand it the same way. Basic rule of rulebook writing: be clear!
Actually, the element acts as a Divine Focus, so not all spellcasting is barred. Also, sun clerics will have the option of selecting a feat (forgot the name, have that somewhere on my notes) which grants them the sun tattoo of Caelum, allowing him to cast in the dark (source: Prism Pentad).
It does certainly hinder clerics however, a balancing to their other abilities, and a flavorable way to keep them in touch with their elements, and with the original flavor of Dark Sun 2e.
That's OK, but for me it came out thet they are not able to cast. Maybe clarification here would be good.
Druids got a hide (invisibility) power in 2e. I guess I just though they would stay hidden and observe, but not necessarily sneak around... Could go either way though.
Well, then give them invisibility as ability. But if you solve it with skills than it's a bit funny to give them only Hide, and not Move Silently. And anyway as Athasian druids are more "wilder" than their counterparts in other worlds, it is completly ok to give them both skill.
Oh, but I know, and if you read carefully, the guarded land does not limit the druid to these lands to gain powers. (in fact, the only related powers are a bonus to hide while there and trackless step, eventually). It does, however, determines any number of other abilities when out of it, which adds to its significance without limiting him to the lands themselves.
The main question is: why would the druid adventure, if there is a guarded as his responsibility? It was quite okay in 2e that druids wander a while (to certain level), than settle down on a guarded land. It can be followed, or simulated with a PrC, taken when the druid settles down. The benefit of the second option that it leaves place for druids who are constant wanderers. Guarded land is a good and unique Athasian thing for druids, but it doesn't hurt to leave place for other options.
I decided to go with the base class for many, many reasons, as I also thought about the prestige class at first. Here are a few reasons:
1. If you make all fighters a soldiers, as they are descibed in Dark Sun, then he can’t also be a valid gladiator. A gladiator would have no reason to gain warfare related skills, or battlefield leadership, for instance.
2. Since Dark Sun offers the possibility of giving martials classes with very different styles, fighter learning soldiering and techniques, gladiator learning how to make use of every battle tactics and combat resources, rangers the survivalists, barbarians are just violent savages, it became an ideal occasion to give a real definition to the warrior NPC class. In D&D, warriors and fighters basically have exactly the same backjground, except that for some obscure reason, fighters are better. Now, characters which are just brutes, thugs or untrained guards get to be warriors. Those who train as soldiers are fighters, and those who train as gladiators are... gladiators.
3. Since the training would be different, and one can train as gladiator without learning any other fighting style, a base class came as a natural conclusion. If not, there would be no real class in which a 1st level character who turns out to be fighting in the arena all his life could gain levels in until he met the requirments for the prestige class.
4. It also captures the original flavor of Dark Sun, and offers a new class to players, which is often compared to the “paladin” of Dark Sun.
According to the sentence at the Gladiator PrC in the Sword&Fist: you win a fight in the arena, and you can call yourself gladiator. Lot of good will it do for you...
My problem with the gladiator as a base class: it goes into the territory of other class, namely the fighter, making it a less viable option, as it does melee combat better. It's unheard at other classes. Wizard is the magician, nobody is better at it. Cleric is the divine spellcaster, nobody is better at it. Bard is the manipulator of people, nobody is better at it. (And here is the problem I have with the traders.) Rogue is the "skill man", nobody is better at it. Fighter is the best combatant, nobody is better at it. No, wait! The gladiator is better! So why play with fighter?
Fight in formation is a tactically valid thing, but frankly: 99% of the combats in any RPG is done at character level, where the gladiator overshines the fighter.
If you see the fighting classes at the PHB (not Dark Sun) it doesn't happen: the ranger, tha barbarian and the paladin is very different form the fighter. The gladiator is not as different to valid a core class. An easily reachable PrC (like the one in Sword&Fist), yes. Core class, no.
Also think about the following: if you move the fighter class from the "best combatant" position (now taken by the gladiator) to the "best combatant in formation" position than it looks a bit funny as for example a multiclass at elves. Elf preserver/fighter: the wizard and grunt of the tribe. Woww...
And I see the thing in reverse: IMHO the fighter is the generalist, and the gladiator is the specialist. Bit it's just me...
I personnally would have barred the monk from dark sun altogether, until I saw Nytcrwlr’s take on it and the background info he (I think, though not sure if it was him alone) developed. The Mystic Wanderer I think it was called. Anyways.
Trouble with the prestige class is, again, what class would your character take before it? If a sensei takes a young apprentice and shows him his ways, what levels does he take until he gets to be a Monk? Warrior? Gladiator?
Like the gladiator, his training could very well start at first level. Also, since the class already exists as a base class, it simply is easier to convert this way.
I found Jon's monk PrC a very good compromise.
But it does... For the bribe example anyways. For other abilities, you might have noticed that the trader must spend the amount of money it would have cost for a scroll with the spell of the same effect (ex.: Buy Loyalty = Charm Person) which is how I tried to maintain the mechanical balance. These cannot vary in price with the level of the target, since the spell would not either.
Mechanical balance is a good thing, but did you try to ever bribe someone? You don't have to answer...
But the higher the person is, the more it costs. 1st level templar is ok with 25cp. The 10th level templar captain isn't. And don't forget that this ability can be used unlimited times, the spell is not.Ok. Exception have an intelligence score, though they are usually mindless. So I guess it could be done that way.
Correct.
However, they still seem to fit better into the Monstrous Humanoid type, since they are, after all, humanoids, to a good extent, and the official conversion of this creature has it as a monstrous humanoid (unless that also has changed with v3.5?)
Oh, don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting they be vermin (though subtype of vermin might be interesting), just wanted to point out the error.
Oh, and thanks for the comment Nyt, and hope to hear more from you on the whole thing!
No problem, Nagypapi is doing most of my work for me, so I'm just seeing what he brings up and take it from there.
1) At the item creation feats it should be stated that DMG gp=cp. (To avoid confusion.)
Will have to redo that I guess.
2) Metamagic feats: it's written: every spellcaster cast spontaneously.
Haha! :D Yes, they do! Damn my unclearliness!!! ;)
I hate fixed spell slots, and divine spellcasters follow a system similar to the wizard...
I'll really have to do examples for each classes...
3) Blooded feat: should be available to muls as well.
I am actually working (from time to time, at the moment) on redoing the whole Regions section (which was never really finished, and certainly never edited). I could see that happening too.
4) Path Dexter and Sinister: I would warn you to give concrete spell lists here. Athasian spellcasters have more ecclectic spells in their 'spellbooks', it's not sure that they will get these, which reduces the feat's usefulness. Stick to schools only.
Hmm. could be done, though I felt summoning spells, for example, had no good reason to be boosted by defiling energies. I saw it more affecting death or destructive spells. Anyways. Maybe there is a way around it...
Thanks! :D
Vermins are immune to mind effecting abilities, and that's the main reason I suggest it. In 2e Hold Person and such didn't work on thri-kreens. If you change their types to vermin you can bring it back -if you would like.
Actually, monstrous humanoids are not affected as humanoids are, so problem solved!
Wait... are they? Nyt? ;)
In any case, I had thought about this too. It's also the reason I made Half-Giants Large humanoids, not giants, which grants them immunity to most mind-affecting powers which affect humanoids, hence negating their real known weakness against mind powers. It's actually funny that the athas.org guys made me aware of this problem, and then turned around to make them Giants anyways...
I think swim is cross class for everybody as on Athas it's simply no way to get it learned properly (i.e. being a class skill to anybody except water clerics). If somebody somehow get it, he does it on a hard way (cross class skill way). And don't forget that swim is used to get out from quicksand (DC15 IIRC), so if swim is cc skill, quicksands and such become more lethal for even a higher level character. Which is good I think...
Hmm... interesting. It would add to the flavor of the setting too I guess, without affecting much in any case, since most characters wouldn't really take swim ranks anyways.
Well, then give them invisibility as ability. But if you solve it with skills than it's a bit funny to give them only Hide, and not Move Silently. And anyway as Athasian druids are more "wilder" than their counterparts in other worlds, it is completly ok to give them both skill.
I guess it could be done, but I do grant them back a bonus to hide on their guarded lands. Like I said, I don't see them sneaking, just waiting in hiding. As for the invisibility power, I wanted to leave that to the guardian of the land prestige class, not to give a too big bonus on the guarded lands, since we want them not to be bound to it too much.
The main question is: why would the druid adventure, if there is a guarded as his responsibility? It was quite okay in 2e that druids wander a while (to certain level), than settle down on a guarded land. It can be followed, or simulated with a PrC, taken when the druid settles down. The benefit of the second option that it leaves place for druids who are constant wanderers. Guarded land is a good and unique Athasian thing for druids, but it doesn't hurt to leave place for other options.
I agree, but I would have thought that the Guardian of the Land prestige class would have helped carry that difference between wandering druids learning about the world (see the Lore of the Land abilities of my druid) and the Druid who decided to finally devote himself to its original guarded lands. In any case, stripping the class of its guarded lands at low level really tears down one of the major aspects of the Druid, its very reason to exist actually. Dark Sun made it clear all druids were protectors and guardians of nature, and they also stated that they would wander for a while. You could even argue that young druids might choose guarded lands who are still guarded by their mentors, allowing them to go without too much worry for a time.
My problem with the gladiator as a base class: it goes into the territory of other class, namely the fighter, making it a less viable option, as it does melee combat better. It's unheard at other classes. Wizard is the magician, nobody is better at it. Cleric is the divine spellcaster, nobody is better at it. Bard is the manipulator of people, nobody is better at it. (And here is the problem I have with the traders.) Rogue is the "skill man", nobody is better at it. Fighter is the best combatant, nobody is better at it. No, wait! The gladiator is better! So why play with fighter?
In Dark Sun 2e, that (gladiators being better than fighters) was certainly true, but I do not think my gladiator is better, because he won't have the ability to chain feat as well as a fighter. The gladiator sort of becomes a jack-of-all-trades of combat, where the fighter is more specialised.
As for classes infringing on others, what about sorcerer vs. wizard in D&D? They don't necessarily infringe on each other, because of mechanical differences in how they learn and cast magic. I think this can be done with the Gladiator as well.
Fight in formation is a tactically valid thing, but frankly: 99% of the combats in any RPG is done at character level, where the gladiator overshines the fighter.
Oh, I agree, which is why I completely discarded the idea of unit fighting, which actually doesn't even have a mechanics in Dark Sun, and replaced it with the tactical feat which allows fighters to use "formation" tactics on a much smaller scale. Other fighter bonus feats, on a charisma chain, such as Battlefield Leadership, can also be added to offer the "officer" type fighter.
Even then, there is still a significant difference in the way the figter and the gladiator learns his skills. I was actually thinking of changing the Fighter name to Soldier, to make it more obvious, but it is really accurate either.
If you see the fighting classes at the PHB (not Dark Sun) it doesn't happen: the ranger, tha barbarian and the paladin is very different form the fighter. The gladiator is not as different to valid a core class. An easily reachable PrC (like the one in Sword&Fist), yes. Core class, no.
But then, what class is a 1st level "gladiator" character, if a fighter is a soldier? You would have to dump this aspect of the fighter as well to make the fighter the only base fighting class. Anyways, I wanted to maintain the flavor of Dark Sun in those respects, and I really liked the idea of having a real difference between a Warrior and a Fighter, difference which is inexistant in D&D.
Also think about the following: if you move the fighter class from the "best combatant" position (now taken by the gladiator) to the "best combatant in formation" position than it looks a bit funny as for example a multiclass at elves. Elf preserver/fighter: the wizard and grunt of the tribe. Woww...
I would think elven combattants would be rangers, and not fighters. if they have no other training than the need to survive, anyways. If they have no specific training, they should be warriors, not fighters. Not in Dark Sun, anyways, according to the original material. Note that a non-spellcasting rangers allows this without weird developments at higher level, when the fighting elf suddenly learns to cast spells... ;)
I found Jon's monk PrC a very good compromise.
Again, from what class does the monk hail? What class levels can a 1st level "monk" apprentice take?
Mechanical balance is a good thing, but did you try to ever bribe someone? You don't have to answer... But the higher the person is, the more it costs. 1st level templar is ok with 25cp. The 10th level templar captain isn't. And don't forget that this ability can be used unlimited times, the spell is not.
The Master of Bribes ability scales with levels, and does not assure success. As for other abilities, higher level characters will have a higher Will save bonus, which would require the trader to double the amount of cps used to compensate. The thing is, if it costs more with levels of the target for the same ability result, and the target has a better chance of refusing it anyways, it becomes a bit difficult to balance properly. However, the way it is used, a low level templar would have a lower chance of resisting the ability than a high level one.
Keep 'em coming!!!!
Actually, monstrous humanoids are not affected as humanoids are, so problem solved!
Wait... are they? Nyt? ;)
Not seeing anything that says Monstrous Humanoids are immune to Hold Person or other mental affects. Looks like they are just as vulnerable as humanoids are.
Not seeing anything that says Monstrous Humanoids are immune to Hold Person or other mental affects. Looks like they are just as vulnerable as humanoids are.
hmmm... I figured when they talked about humanoids as targets they referred to that type, but I'm not sure wether it includes monstrous humanoids or not... would have to find the right FAQ I guess...
I wouldn't mind if it did not protect the Monstrous humanoids though. Since they have a will save bonus anyways, Thri-kreen would be more resistant to mental attacks, but not in a completely different class...
Hmm... Would giants also be considered humanoids?
Need to find that FAQ...
No problem, Nagypapi is doing most of my work for me, so I'm just seeing what he brings up and take it from there.
Parasite... :D
;)
Hmm. could be done, though I felt summoning spells, for example, had no good reason to be boosted by defiling energies. I saw it more affecting death or destructive spells. Anyways. Maybe there is a way around it...
Thanks! :D
Maybe you could use the 'damage dealing' term for boosted conjuration spells.
I guess it could be done, but I do grant them back a bonus to hide on their guarded lands. Like I said, I don't see them sneaking, just waiting in hiding. As for the invisibility power, I wanted to leave that to the guardian of the land prestige class, not to give a too big bonus on the guarded lands, since we want them not to be bound to it too much.
Well, they have to get to their hiding spot undetected somehow. Here enters the move silently skill...
Oh, I agree, which is why I completely discarded the idea of unit fighting, which actually doesn't even have a mechanics in Dark Sun, and replaced it with the tactical feat which allows fighters to use "formation" tactics on a much smaller scale. Other fighter bonus feats, on a charisma chain, such as Battlefield Leadership, can also be added to offer the "officer" type fighter.
Even then, there is still a significant difference in the way the figter and the gladiator learns his skills. I was actually thinking of changing the Fighter name to Soldier, to make it more obvious, but it is really accurate either.
Well, you could always go with the fighter as base class, the gladiator and the soldier (formation fighting specialst) as a PrC.
Here is the point I mentioned, when the 2e legacy hinders the capabilities of the d20 system. Classes are mostly more flexible, not rigid system. As a fighter starts at 1st level, and starts acquireing the needed feats and skills to get the PrC he becomes more and more closer to the real gladiator or, soldier. He can still call himself a gladiator or soldier, even if he is just a wannabe with on the path to collect the reqirements for the PrC. It has nothing to do with the class name, which is a rule system thing.
If I may put an analogy: a first level wizard can call and consider himself a defiler, even if he still doesn't get the taint points, maybe not even a single one at the beginning at the game. He knows he will get it, and he looks at himself accordingly. So I see no problem with 1st level characters being 'monks', 'gladiators', etc. He will be as one later, ruleswise. But if a character is really inclined toward a specific path (=PrC) he starts to go that direction and mindset way before.
But then, what class is a 1st level "gladiator" character, if a fighter is a soldier? You would have to dump this aspect of the fighter as well to make the fighter the only base fighting class. Anyways, I wanted to maintain the flavor of Dark Sun in those respects, and I really liked the idea of having a real difference between a Warrior and a Fighter, difference which is inexistant in D&D.
With flavour I can't dispute.
Again, from what class does the monk hail? What class levels can a 1st level "monk" apprentice take?
Depends on the PrC requirement. Fighter, psychic warrior or psion is the most possible. But the good thing in PrCs is that the background can be anything, even a wizard can become a monk if puts the effort to it.