_fichiers/nav_m.gif)
Call of the Horn | ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register ) | Resend Validation Email |
Pages: (2) 1 [2] ( Go to first unread post ) | ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Two Rivers Wolfbrother |
Posted: Jan 24 2004, 05:21
AM
|
![]() Great Fang ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 258 Member No.: 20 Joined: 15-January 04 ![]() |
Or just go with White Wolf's Storytelling system.
It's pretty simple and there aren't levels nor classes. And it's quite a
bit more realistic than d20. More realistic doesn't mean better, mind.
-------------------- This is an old thing, boy. Older than Aes Sedai.
Older than anybody using the One Power. Old as humankind. Old as
wolves. Current Projects: Encounters Handbook Wheel of Time 3.5 Homepage: www.towncenterproductions.com It's Funny! |
Axel |
Posted: Jan 24 2004, 03:23
PM
| ||
Freelance HTML coder (hint Aleshandre) ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 218 Member No.: 54 Joined: 22-January 04 ![]() |
No, what I want is fewer and more customizable classes. There is no need for Barbarian when you have Fighter. There is no need for Rogue at all when all the unique features of Thief were converted into skills and feats. What bothers me is that every possible character is rapidly getting his own class. Instead of making a Watchman a simple Fighter, he has to be a Watchman complete with useless abilities that no one ever uses. What I want is to go back to the days of unique character creation using imagination and a few basic classes. -------------------- Honorary Paladin of the Lawful Naughty If I seem to hate the d20 system, its only because I hate the system. Actually I just hate 3e, its biased me against the system. I rather like WoT. | ||
Aleshandre |
Posted: Jan 24 2004, 03:47
PM
|
![]() Elder Scholar ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Moderators Posts: 130 Member No.: 18 Joined: 15-January 04 ![]() |
Sounds to me like you would find D20 Modern to be
just your cup of tea (or hot chocolate, soda, beer - whatever you drink).
The base classes are simple strong, fast, tough, smart, dedicated and
charismatic. Everything else is a matter of how you multiclass (and your
starting occupation)...until you get into advance classes. To top that
off, magic is rare (requiring magic/psyonic wielding advance classes to
use it). The only changes that would be required to make a true fantasy
setting with it is to restrict access to modern feats/skills and to change
the name of Archaic Weapon Proficeincy to Martial Weapon Proficiency. If
you want to see an example of how it can be applied to any setting, DL the
Age of Discovery netbook from my website http://www.geocities.com/aleshandre@sbcglobal.net
-------------------- |
Axel |
Posted: Jan 24 2004, 03:54
PM
|
Freelance HTML coder (hint Aleshandre) ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 218 Member No.: 54 Joined: 22-January 04 ![]() |
Thanks but no thanks, I already have AD&D 2nd
Edition which has everything I just said. Partly the reason I dislike 3e,
they had everything I liked, then abandoned it.
-------------------- Honorary Paladin of the Lawful Naughty If I seem to hate the d20 system, its only because I hate the system. Actually I just hate 3e, its biased me against the system. I rather like WoT. |
Aleshandre |
Posted: Jan 24 2004, 04:02
PM
|
![]() Elder Scholar ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Moderators Posts: 130 Member No.: 18 Joined: 15-January 04 ![]() |
No offense, but have you even looked at modern? If
you want to have an unprejudiced opinion of it, you should atleast look at
it and see if it works for you. Otherwise, you are acting on a prejudiced
point of view, which is uninformed and ignorant of the facts. Seriously,
look at the MSRD and see if you don't find it to be actually
better than 2ed overall. I am not saying that modern has no faults (that
would also be ignorant), but I do find it overall better than any other
system that I have used so far. -------------------- |
LuciusT |
Posted: Jan 24 2004, 04:21
PM
| ||
Elder Scholar ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 123 Member No.: 19 Joined: 15-January 04 ![]() |
![]() OK, so play AD&D 2E if that's what you enjoy... but I think most of the folks here enjoy d20 Wheel of Time (it being a d20 Wheel of Time message board an' all) which is a completely different game from AD&D 2E or even D&D 3E. I've got nothing against your opinions, and you seem like a decent fellow, but sometimes you really do confuse me Axel. ![]() | ||
Axel |
Posted: Jan 24 2004, 06:34
PM
|
Freelance HTML coder (hint Aleshandre) ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 218 Member No.: 54 Joined: 22-January 04 ![]() |
I'm here for a simple reason, I rank the games in the
following manner 1. AD&D 2e 2. WoT 3. 3e Although WoT is only slightly different from 3e, those minor changes include many of the things I hate about 3e. Beyond the unbalanced class and magic systems, which I've mentioned many times, there also lies the fact that the WoT rulebook is simply better written than the 3e PHB. I'm currently working on combining all 3 into a rulebook containing what I think is the best from each. -------------------- Honorary Paladin of the Lawful Naughty If I seem to hate the d20 system, its only because I hate the system. Actually I just hate 3e, its biased me against the system. I rather like WoT. |
LuciusT |
Posted: Jan 25 2004, 02:41
AM
| ||
Elder Scholar ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 123 Member No.: 19 Joined: 15-January 04 ![]() |
Oh... sounds like an interesting project. | ||
The Dread Morg |
Posted: Jan 25 2004, 12:05
PM
| ||
![]() Learned Master ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 36 Member No.: 8 Joined: 17-December 03 ![]() |
And I agree with you on this. ![]() I likely didn't explain it well, but what I am planning on doing with the stripped down WoT set is pretty much what you mention in another post. I won't be using a hundred and one classes. Armsmen covers the base fighter stuff. Wanderer can be made to fit the rest of the base classes, and the initiate and wilder (still tweaking these two) make up the spell casters (which would include preistly magic in non WOT specific games.) As you say, a barabarian is a fighter with a different set of skills. A thief is a wanderer with certain skills, etc. I was thinking that the remaining classes would become "Careers"... sort of like a template that sits over the base class. IE. A priest is a career - a spellcaster (likely an initiate) would be a priest who could cast spells, but an armsmen could just as easily become a priest. Also, I am stewing on expanding the background template to include things that don't fit into the class system so easily. Not sure how to go about it yet, but a noble might be a good example of this. Any sort of character class might be a noble/aristocrat after all - why tie this to a class based system at all? The big toruble with all of this is that it snowballs. Change one thing, and then you have to change something else. Get's to be a large undertaking. ![]() -------------------- "The Right To Rule
is Yours by Birth; All You Need Do is Try and Claim It." Bloodsilver.com | ||
![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |