Horse20

[Tangent_Jaerc]

If I'm focused as a characcter on non-combat encounters without using magic, which lineage is best for me?

[Hoers]

sparkletwist

I am not sure if "Adventurer" is really a good name for a lineage. I mean, isn't it kind of what everyone is?
This is just a nitpick, though. I do like the idea of a certain division of roles, with a more "martially inclined" and more "magically inclined" version of each one.

Since I often like playing gish type characters, I would think I could get that by playing a combat-oriented lineage with a caster class, right? Or would that be better served by a magic-oriented linage with a fighting class?
(Actually, what the difference between these two actually is might be something good to hammer out)

At the time I don't have another name for the lineage that I like more unfortunately . It should resemble the rogue and 3.5 scout's abilities, but feature good problem solving bonuses. I think bonuses to using improvised tools and weapons would be a good feature for this lineage.

You should be able to choose based on which ability you like better for the character. If Warrior and Warlock go the ways I see them going at the moment, for example, it'd be a choice between whether you wanted Challenge and a fighting style bonus (and one or two minor, unique talents to pick up related to them) based on your current equip (including a spell), or a magic bolt-type ability to turn mana into basic attacks and increased mana regeneration rate. The abilities should in the end both seem worthwhile and just a matter of whether you see the character spending more time swinging the weapon or casting the spell. Alternatively you could say that it treats magic a bit more like equipment that you make for yourself spontaneously. Crazy equipment that does bizarre things.

Tangent_Jaerc

If I'm focused as a characcter on non-combat encounters without using magic, which lineage is best for me?

Ideally whichever one you'd like to be there for when your character is in a "fight or die" situation. Part of the system is about trying to make characters feel more heroic and slightly superhuman, but still mortal (I like to think of the level of Hector and Achilles, Merlin and Arthur and whatnot). Part of what I try to do is give them a few more options skill-wise and increase the number of skills/feats they receive. I think a lot of the abilities of a lot of classes are better suited to something similar to feats, and that there should be scaling feats that improved based on your ranks in a certain skill, so I'm giving those ideas a shot. The only way I think that lineages will be tied to feats is that they'll probably each give a small passive bonus to a skill or two (probably only a +1 to each).

[Cheomesh]

Inspiration:  http://thesaurus.com/browse/Adventurer?s=t

I like pioneer myself.  Fits the rogue/scout concept in my headbrain.

This reads interestingly.  I'm not crazy about d20 variants anymore, but this one doesn't sound like it's heading somewhere negative.

Question:  Do all the classes gain their inter-level boon at the same time?  FREX:  Wizard and Warrior at 750XP gain X.

M>

[Hoers]

Ch30

Inspiration:  http://thesaurus.com/browse/Adventurer?s=t

I like pioneer myself.  Fits the rogue/scout concept in my headbrain.

This reads interestingly.  I'm not crazy about d20 variants anymore, but this one doesn't sound like it's heading somewhere negative.

Question:  Do all the classes gain their inter-level boon at the same time?  FREX:  Wizard and Warrior at 750XP gain X.

M>

I agree that Pioneer is a good name, but I am still on the fence with naming that lineage (not even sure I like Adventurer that much). As with 3.5/PF, all lineages will level at the same rate (there will actually be a base "class" that everyone belongs to that is a general measure of level, reputation and basic combat functionality), so provided there are no XP gaps between individual players (which I hope to eliminate), everyone will get an affinity at 25%/50%/75% of the XP required for next level.

[sparkletwist]

One thing I'd suggest would be to forget the sub-advancement because it's kind of confusing, and just make those the level breaks. Everyone's level would go up really fast, but players generally like that anyway.

[Cheomesh]

sparkletwist

One thing I'd suggest would be to forget the sub-advancement because it's kind of confusing, and just make those the level breaks. Everyone's level would go up really fast, but players generally like that anyway.

Agreed.  I was actually asking if they were at even breaks for this specific reason.

M.

[Hoers]

Sounds like a good idea. It will look a bit weird on paper where someone will only gain a "full" level every 3 or 4 times, but the advancement should be fast enough that it will be ok.

[LordVreeg]

I actually like the sub advancement idea.  It is an interesting and different mechanic, and I I believe will spread out the reinforcement of gaining ability.  I have seen how this kind of thing works, and I can say from my own experience lots of litle power breaks keeps stuff more controllable while still keeping the PCs happy.

[Cheomesh]

Back in my golden age of DMing my players, another DM and I discussed the concept at some length.  It was popularly recieved, though it was more ad-hoc.  If I remember, your upcoming level had its features (feats, class abilities, stat improvements, skill points, whatnot) dividing the amoung of XP needed to reach the next level.  This defined the bracket and when you reached the milestone you got to pick (on the fly) which one you got.  Broke down a bit with Casters, who tended to get a tonne of "features" (spells) at certain points - If I remember, we divided the spells into two or three groups and rolled with it that way.  Working example:  If you get 4 skill points, a feat and some class ability (3 features total) at level 2, and level 2 is 1k XP, you get a thing every 1000/3 or 333 skill points.  It worked for us, probably a bad method to try and base the whole game around.

M.

[sparkletwist]

Another thought I just had (so I have no idea how it'd work) would be letting players get certain class features/powers "early" but at a penalty. So, you can try to cast your next level spells, but they're at -4 (or something) because you're still learning how to actually do it. I kind of like this for spontaneous casters, especially, because it'd kind of ease the sting of them being a level behind the prepared casters in spell progression, and it models the power slowly accumulating in them and them gaining mastery of it.

[Hoers]

LordVreeg

I actually like the sub advancement idea.  It is an interesting and different mechanic, and I I believe will spread out the reinforcement of gaining ability.  I have seen how this kind of thing works, and I can say from my own experience lots of litle power breaks keeps stuff more controllable while still keeping the PCs happy.

Thanks! I am hoping it works that way. I like the idea of characters gaining something small during most or all individual sessions, so this should help a bit.

Ch30

Back in my golden age of DMing my players, another DM and I discussed the concept at some length.  It was popularly recieved, though it was more ad-hoc.  If I remember, your upcoming level had its features (feats, class abilities, stat improvements, skill points, whatnot) dividing the amoung of XP needed to reach the next level.  This defined the bracket and when you reached the milestone you got to pick (on the fly) which one you got.  Broke down a bit with Casters, who tended to get a tonne of "features" (spells) at certain points - If I remember, we divided the spells into two or three groups and rolled with it that way.  Working example:  If you get 4 skill points, a feat and some class ability (3 features total) at level 2, and level 2 is 1k XP, you get a thing every 1000/3 or 333 skill points.  It worked for us, probably a bad method to try and base the whole game around.

M.

Worth considering, though. I think my system will end up being a bit different but it is good to look at other examples.

sparkletwist

Another thought I just had (so I have no idea how it'd work) would be letting players get certain class features/powers "early" but at a penalty. So, you can try to cast your next level spells, but they're at -4 (or something) because you're still learning how to actually do it. I kind of like this for spontaneous casters, especially, because it'd kind of ease the sting of them being a level behind the prepared casters in spell progression, and it models the power slowly accumulating in them and them gaining mastery of it.

Indeed. The way I'm hoping to get the mana system working for spells should actually function similarly to this, as I want to remove having lesser/normal/greater versions of spells in favor of making metamagic a normal thing. I would prefer to see base spell functions that can be heavily augmented so that a player can try to use a more powerful effect at the cost of wiping out more of their mana or even their HP. Not sure about how I'd do it with non-casters, though.

[sparkletwist]

Horse

The way I'm hoping to get the mana system working for spells should actually function similarly to this, as I want to remove having lesser/normal/greater versions of spells in favor of making metamagic a normal thing. I would prefer to see base spell functions that can be heavily augmented so that a player can try to use a more powerful effect at the cost of wiping out more of their mana or even their HP. Not sure about how I'd do it with non-casters, though.

I like this. I've probably mentioned it before, but I'm generally in favor of removing spell levels in general. Some spells are more powerful, but those could simply cost more mana. I also think that there are quite a few spells in D&D that are simply more powerful versions of lesser spells, even when not overtly tagged with something like "Greater." For example, there are all sorts of blasts, with various elemental properties, but they're really just increasing amounts of damage and effect. So, these could probably all be merged into a single continuum of powers.

I like the idea of spending HP to dig deep for a greater reserve of power. Asura does something similar. It seems more in line with a lot of the fiction that inspires these games than "sorry, I used up all my power for the day."