#Project Horizon (5e rebuild)

1 messages · Page 4 of 1

dawn robin
#

I think it would be neat to have more non-slow firearms for a gunner to pick from, but I can't think of anymore unique variants without getting too modern. Like, I could slap a different name on a pistol and make it worse/better due to being more ancient/modern, but that's not what I want

#

as like I said, I am aiming for simplicity and "I wanna pew pew"

ionic dragon
#

might want to refrain from using the term "round", as that's a specific 5e term for a full rotation of turns
cartridge would be a more technical and distinct term

dawn robin
#

or I could be more generic and just say "piece of ammunition", but good note, I don't wanna have a conflicting term

frank python
#

Or just say bullet, because everyone will know what you mean

#

and remember to shoot the whole bullet

dawn robin
#

considering ammunition could also mean an arrow, I now wanna make a gun that is a mini hwacha

#

wait, isn't that just that ninja weapon basically?

#

this thing

1a20b3636602dbd9aa9e0803eea35b55.png
#

what are they called.... would it even be considered a gun? Or is it closer to a crossbow?

rough kite
#

wrist rocket

#

I’d call it a sling!

restive idol
frank python
#

I think that's a concealed hand crossbow if in a fantasy setting

dawn robin
rough kite
#

I’d agree hand crossbow is the closest existing comparison

restive idol
dawn robin
frank python
#

And in 5e that's just the Quick Toss Maneuver

restive idol
#

make it attacky, and roll to hit

dawn robin
#

an easily concealed multi-shot mini-crossbow...

restive idol
#

like 5x 1d4 attacks, takes ages to reload.
you can part load, but firing always fires all barrels

dawn robin
#

likely would need to be poisoned as no way that small thing is making much velocity

#

unless gunpowder

#

then recoil hurty

rough kite
#

a light dart in there could still do some damage if spring loaded

dawn robin
#

Another twist of topic, back to the Dying condition

#

The idea of the condition is that when a player hits 0, they can keep participating if they really want to. They will be suffering much debilitation so will not be as effective, but also won't be skipping their turn until a healer decides to toss em some HP

#

last time it was brought up it ended with the smart idea of having the "true end" of the dying condition, aka death, be utilizing negative HP

#

so, a 50 hp player when they hit 0 would enter dying condition, and would end the condition either by having 1+ hp, or having -50+ hp

frank python
#

-50+
expression

dawn robin
#

-50-, I guess

frank python
#

It wasn't exactly my intention, but honestly it's not a bad use of the rule. But also, dunno, getting to 0 should be highly undesirable, especially if we're fixing yoyoing. I'm perfectly fine with it being a downed (though probably not unconscious?) state, if only to save players from themselves

dawn robin
#

So, the only question that remains is, how would I readjust the X penalty

image.png
frank python
#

I'm not sure it really needs much adjustment. Simply retain what it is now - advantage on attacks against you and autocrit. So that it's terribly risky. Works well with HP not being meat points too, as it's just "getting your defense broken"

#

However, if you really go this way, what is -max? Is it instadeath? Or do you only get death saves then?

dawn robin
#

and auto-crit? Oh wait, I think I have an idea for this...

#

as for death saves, ye idk what to do with those yet

frank python
#

Well, that's what it is now, and I think it's fair. Advantage or even autohit alone would still make it a sizable extra pool of hp

#

I think a good option is to say that your hp isn't automatically restored to 0. If you went down to -10, you'll probably wake up after a short rest, assuming you had a couple hit dice to roll. Go down to -49? Even after a long rest you're still at 1 only

#

That guarantees you'll wake up after a long rest, but you won't necessarily wake up feeling well (unless additional healing of course)

dawn robin
#

Maybe getting a bit long but

image.png
#

and yah, atm I also have short rests have a flat healing amount (half your max), so if you are really dying, a short rest wouldn't get you out of the condition

#

and because the condition is all or nothing, aka no levels of severity, -1 and -100 are just as bad

#

ah I can remove the first line, since there's no severity anymore

dawn robin
#

in a weird indirect way, this is basically hit dice... lol

frank python
#

Well, if you let them keep fighting below 0, I think it's only fair. If 0 means downed, I'm not sure... Maybe it should be "halve, then restore max"

dawn robin
#

could even mean that they remain Wounded the next day, if the wounds were really bad. Wait that's cool, I could have certain debilitations like broken bones or such force you to stay under half your max, so you maintain your wounded condition until you break that debilitation!

#

though... this also begs the question... what is stabilized now?

frank python
#

Huh, that Dodge clause is interesting. But I feel like it kinda defeats the point

#

Well... is stabilized? I guess you're just either above 0 or not

dawn robin
frank python
#

You don't have passive bleedout a'la death saves here

dawn robin
#

yah...

#

should I?

frank python
ionic dragon
#

60% more bullet per bullet

frank python
dawn robin
#

what an expression filled face

#

though... bleed out... hmm

frank python
#

I mean, yeah, the option to go survival mode is valid if the alternative is to keep doing damage

dawn robin
#

ye, that's the goal

#

use your action to focus on living rather than keep fighting

#

though, maybe that action also stops them from making Death Saves, once I figure out where those go

frank python
#

I mean, I don't think you should have them

#

The condition shouldn't even be named Dying. It's just "guardbroken" or something, since you're hardly impeded. Just more vulnerable

restive idol
dawn robin
#

actually, that does give me an idea

ionic dragon
#

i was gonna say, that dying condition list was very long

frank python
#

Also maybe it should just be that every hit gives you a Wound? Or maybe just any crit should?

dawn robin
#

death saves are 50/50, roll at start of turn, on success you get an action, on fail you just spend the turn trying not to pass out

frank python
#

No seriously, that's a weird inbetween. I'd rather just choose one way and commit

dawn robin
#

not sure how I feel about it, as an unlucky player just suffers the same issue as before

#

so prob won't go the middle way just for that reason

#

but I do like the old 5e thing of "you can't just leave Fred over there dying, get over there and heal/medicine them"

restive idol
frank python
#

Well, you could just make it 25% of max hp bleedout per turn, but dunno

dawn robin
#

ironic, one of the few times hit dice would be useful...

#

eh, I could scale on player level I guess

#

take damage equal to your level (or 2x level) at start of every turn that you are not doing something to stay alive

#

if you receive healing or a successful medicine check from another creature, it also prevents this damage

frank python
#

Remember that you're remaking 5e, not making a whole new system. I think it's best to just do negative hp, no death saves, and enemies that threaten to attack the downed. It's not meant to be a lethal system after all

dawn robin
#

yes, I do need to be careful how deep I go

#

though, I don't think I'm too far gone yet

grizzled oceanBOT
#
Rachayz | Making a New Dawn
Condition: Unconscious

You are unconscious

Description
  • An unconscious creature is incapacitated, can't move or speak, and is unaware of its surroundings.
  • The creature drops whatever it's holding and falls prone.
  • The creature automatically fails Strength and Dexterity saving throws.
  • Attack rolls against the creature have advantage.
  • Any attack that hits the creature is a critical hit if the attacker is within 5 feet of the creature.
Rule | PHB 292
frank python
#

Well you're definitely starting to

#

There's this useful rule called KISS

grizzled oceanBOT
#
Rachayz | Making a New Dawn
Condition: Incapacitated

You can't take actions or reactions

Description
  • An incapacitated creature can't take actions or reactions.
  • You lose concentration on spells if you are incapacitated
Rule | PHB 290
dawn robin
#

so, old "dying" condition from 5e was 7 bullet points

#

ironically, my last pic was only 8

frank python
#

They were messily organized though

dawn robin
#

yah, but, that can be easily improved with time

#

rn we just getting the mechanics in place

frank python
#

Yeah, obviously

dawn robin
#

mine also includes 2 points for full dying + getting out of dying

#

so in a way, I only have 6 points

#

since 5e put those points in the rules rather than a condition

frank python
#

Imo it's either of the two:

  • downed at 0, can maybe crawl at best, vulnerable
  • guardbroken at 0, can act absolutely normally, but still vulnerable
#

And if you go with the latter, please please add a blurb that tells the players not to be morons

dawn robin
#

likely not final but a test of a new effect

#

gotta drive, will continue when I return

restive idol
frank python
#

Eh, that's weird. Annoying to keep track of, and totally random, which means you don't really get to choose to risk your life in a heroic way

restive idol
#

Also, as much as I like negative hit points (I do) oh I just realised... no con score anymore. xD
My thought was "negative con score works better for 5e" but we don't have that here.
hmm.

frank python
#

Negative Con score for what?

dawn robin
#

at low levels, that's basically negative HP

#

at high levels, that's nothing

frank python
#

Yeah, it definitely sounds weird

dawn robin
restive idol
dawn robin
#

ye

#

tho I think I'll scrap that part

restive idol
#

yeah.

1-9 - thing
10-20 - other thing
works better tbh

dawn robin
#

I'm still uncertain if I should totally remove death saves

#

like, just my last session I had a player nat20 their first death save, get up, and finish off the enemy that was about to destroy someone

#

its rare, but that's dnd, and I don't wanna fully take that away

restive idol
#

last session one of my players gave a stegosaurus PCP, which then trampled the rest of the party that had just stabilised the warlock who was on 2 passed and 2 failed death saves.

#

so that was funny

frank python
#

Well, you can just have death saves and negative HP separately

dawn robin
#

true

#

so, you die at 3 failed death saves, and you die at negative max?

#

and if you succeed 3... then what?

#

nat 20, do you restore back to 1 hp? Or regain a set amount?

frank python
restive idol
frank python
#

no, any roll expression

restive idol
dawn robin
#

I think multiples of player level work well here

frank python
#

yeah, probably

dawn robin
#

like, 2x level healing (up to 1) could be nice for nat 20

#

just 1x level damage for nat 1 maybe

restive idol
#

+/- Con

frank python
#

Not a bad idea, yeah

frank python
dawn robin
#

so, what about non nat 1/20's?

#

wait

restive idol
dawn robin
#

3x fail or nat 1 = 1x level - con damage
3x success or nat 20 = 1x level + con healing
there is no end
after getting 3x of either, reset and keep rolling

#

until you are stable, then you stop rolling

#

tho, 1x might be simpler

restive idol
#

eh, just do it per I'd say.
You've got 1+ hit points is still dying, but I think that's an extra layer when just, 1+ = not dying at all.

dawn robin
#

tho, 1x/2x level - con at low levels... can easily be 0

#

barb with +3 con immune to death until 4th level

restive idol
#

Healies Level + Con
Damage Level - Con
Double on crit/critfail would work out fine

dawn robin
#

what about negative con expression

#

or 0

restive idol
dawn robin
#

0 has problems still

frank python
#

I feel like the bleedout would be better with something like 25% of hp. Level just once is kinda not enough, and Con will scale weirdly. If anything, make it a Con save

restive idol
#

0 con just straight level up and down, it's fine

dawn robin
#

ye, prob best

#

tho, making it a con save isn't a terrible idea... but it makes it really hard for con save prof folks to die

#

I'd rather fate

restive idol
#

yeah, which is why it's best not imo

dawn robin
#

just straight up +/- Level is best ye prob

#

x2 if crit

frank python
#

Too insignificant imo. Most people have like 7x their level in hp, often more

#

3 turns is a myth, but combats aren't that long (and these will mostly cancel out)

dawn robin
#

well, its also including that you will be staying up and potentially fighting, so you will be taking combat damage at the same time

#

whatever just knocked you down is still in range

restive idol
#

I kind of like:
20 = heal 2x (Level + Con) (effects)
11-19 = heal Level + Con (effects)
2-10 = lose Level - Con (effects)
1 = lose 2x (Level - Con) (effects)

Negative could just be con mod x level instead of max too (though that has issues with neg con...)

#

smaller number feels... deadier

#

maybe half max neg?

frank python
#

At higher level Con doesn't matter, kinda weird

restive idol
frank python
#

Like, those +- levels will in most cases be just random fluctuations, adding unnecessary bookkeeping

dawn robin
#

alternatively, positive does nothing

#

which makes sense, you are dying

frank python
#

If you already allow fighting while below 0, you don't need your "heroically gets back up" mechanic, yeah. It's already there

dawn robin
frank python
#

Alright, that's it, I'm taking away your toys. Now you just die upon reaching 0hp, that's it.

dawn robin
#

lol

frank python
#

It... probably wouldn't be a horrible idea, at least in a less swingy system

#

But seriously, as a known overdoer, I'm telling you - you're overdoing this

dawn robin
#

😔 probably...

#

idk, players being hurt is like, 90% of the game. Players will go down. Combat takes a long time to resolve, and without fully remaking the system I can only improve that so much. It sucks to wait for your turn, and sucks 10x harder when you just roll a death save and skip your turn

#

I want a player to be able to do something on their turn, and unless the character isn't there or is fully dead or asleep, they should

#

If anything, a "last stand" mechanic feels like its the only possible way to handle this problem... but its necessarily complex... too complex...

#

.
Hm, ok, what if this is simplified to just a "If you would fall to 0, take a penalty and instead fall to 1"

#

like, max hp reduction till next long rest, exhaustion level, one limb is disabled till long rest, etc

#

you can choose to just fall to 0 and take the saves if you wanna be safe, but if you wanna pull a hero moment you can

#

does that sound more... simple @frank python? And achieve roughly the same goal?

frank python
#

Eh. Going down shouldn't be that common. Yes, not being able to do anything can be annoying, but it's not the problem you make it out to be. Just let them bleed out or lie there in peace

dawn robin
#

but is that a bad way to allow a "hero moment"?

frank python
#

It's not a bad idea for hero moments, yeah. Though I'm not sure if better than negative hp + vulnerability

#

I think it's gonna be hard to balance - either the cost is low and you do it always, or the cost is high and you just do it once per campaign. With vulnerability, it's more situation-dependent, I feel. That being said, this isn't a terrible idea

dawn robin
#

Lemme see what I can work out

frank python
#

Although wouldn't it be achieved just as well via the hit dice at 0 idea?

dawn robin
#

I think it would be quite different, as you pick your penalty, and there may be a sliding scale depending on how hard you died

frank python
#

For the record I do like how bleeding out forces you to save your friends

#

...what if it was saves as normal, but you can autofail to take an action?

#

obviously with failures persisting between downs and/or exhaustion for getting back up

dawn robin
#

One failure out of three is a bit too harsh imo

#

if it was like, 5, then maybe?

frank python
#

do you want heroic sacrifice or a tactic you use every second combat?

dawn robin
#

do you want revivify to be used every combat someone goes down?

#

also, healer just picks themselves back up via casting a heal spell expression

frank python
#

Honestly, that's another good thing about the negative hp guardbroken idea - it allows tactical use when you think you can sneak in a safe attack, but also doesn't devaule a heroic last stand likely to end in death

dawn robin
#

oi you can't say its too complex then congratulate it expression

frank python
#

I mean, your implementation is. Mine has like, 2 bullet points?

restive idol
dawn robin
#

What was yours Cube?

frank python
#

I literally just want:

  • track negative hp
  • die at -max
  • while at or below 0, attacks against you have advantage and autocrit (also saves I guess)
#

No weird action economy reductions or anything

dawn robin
#

so, what about buff spells? What about just healing yourself?

#

what about casting spells that force saves?

#

Can you just run around as freely as before?

frank python
#

Man I wish that was all under a single umbrella

dawn robin
#

ikr

#

I compiled many things into just "Dice Test", but DC's and Saves are harder

frank python
#

And yes, you specifically don't suffer any reduction to mobility or offense. You're only more vulnerable

dawn robin
#

but you could just like, stay that way forever?

frank python
#

It's kinda strong on casters I suppose

dawn robin
#

be at -10 and just keep going and don't care?

#

yah, you are starting to see :P

frank python
frank python
#

Point is, you added lots of complexity by limiting actions and movement and whatnot, which doesn't make sense

dawn robin
#

well, the idea is that you are dying, not just kinda sad

restive idol
#

you need a rod of sadness for that

dawn robin
#

if I wanted something that was just "you are kinda hurt", I'd have it trigger at low HP not negative

frank python
#

well if you're dying you're not going around attacking people at all

dawn robin
#

you are a hero, you can be dying and keep going

frank python
#

then make it heroic and not discount store actions

dawn robin
#

prototype

frank python
#

Yeah this is a decent option, pretty typical. Though the injury should only happen after the combat

dawn robin
#

Huh? That seems odd

frank python
#

Adrenaline and stuff

dawn robin
#

if the dragon just bit into you and broke your arm, you immediately suffer the penalty

#

you are alive, that's the adrenaline

frank python
#

that's more specific than 5e does though, there are no selective injuries like that, only general damage

#

If you want heroic last stands, they must be heroic, not wimpy. Hell, give advantage on tests. It's a cinematic last stand

dawn robin
#

Well, if its truly a last stand sure

#

but then that means, you die at the end of this

#

I did at one point have a mechanic like that, aka a "if you would die, choose to super-die, but only after 1 minute of being cool"

frank python
#

Well, these injuries would at the very least disqualify you from being an adventurer, no? Of course spells make limb restoration cheap, but that's another matter (and they make death cheap too)

#

This is probably the place in mechanics where realism matters least

dawn robin
#

Prob would be a "heal on long rest"

#

You already heal crazy wounds on long rest, why not this

frank python
#

not really, as hp isn't meatpoints

#

but eh, feels kinda lame this way. There's no risk or excitement

#

Like, sure, it could be made into a decent tradeoff mechanic, but I feel like death needs more than just decent

dawn robin
#

What if... you lose a class feature of choice

#

Martials are more likely to go down and thus have many more features too

frank python
#

for how long? expression

#

Also that's a horrible idea, you'd need to rework every class to some very strict standards

#

Also similar to that "features have hp" idea

dawn robin
#

yah, though... temporary damage to the player's "level" could be neat

frank python
#

Well, if you trust the balance...

dawn robin
#

didn't old dnd stuff do that?

#

level damage?

frank python
#

...maybe?

#

I still wouldn't trust it necessarily, but it may be the closest it gets to "general impairment"

dawn robin
#

ye, I think its a neat idea but one to keep on the backburner for now

#

I'll await the spontaneous inspiration

dawn robin
#

Thoughts on letting spells known casters swap out one spell per long rest?

#

I'm thinking of making this change to allow those casters a little versitility rather than only being able to pick spells that are always useful

#

at least with sorc, I know that it can be very annoying to have so few options, have to pick things that are always a bit useful because you don't know what the next 3 weeks of adventuring might have, and have room for like, 1 or 2 non-universal spells by 10th level

frank python
#

Feels like it defeats the point, and slow changes like that are mechanically weird. I'd rather fix Sorcerer via metamagics and such

dawn robin
#

but MM doesn't solve the spell choices

#

you are locked out of flavorful choices

frank python
#

Well, make the metamagics flavorful expression

dawn robin
#

I can't change fireball into featherfall and major image

#

with just metamagic

frank python
#

But really, that's what Sorcerer is. In-game, you don't learn spells - you just have innate control of fire or minds or whatever. This may be a bit too much to represent mechanically without changing the entire system, but that's how it should work

#

Your Pyromancer shouldn't have Feather Fall

dawn robin
#

I mean, not fully? You were blessed/cursed with the ability to control magic

#

you cast spells, not evoke raw magic

frank python
#

Well sure sounds like the latter

#

But yeah, the system isn't built for it, so I guess we must work with spells

dawn robin
#

yah

#

That's why I think just one spell a day is fine, not a full "I'm a new person" swap that prep casters can do, but just a slow evolution of power

#

it also means that all casters can be considered "prep casters" in one way or another, greatly simplifying the learning any new player needs to do

frank python
#

Would be cool if each spell had tags or themes and then you'd just be limited to a few specific tags, depending on subclass

dawn robin
#

all casters are the same, just some prep a whole list, others only swap one, etc etc

#

and then there's Wiz

frank python
#

That's way more confusing than what we have now

dawn robin
#

how?

frank python
#

"You're totally a prepared caster, but you only swap one spell on a rest" isn't as intuitive as "you can prepare a new list every time" or "you permanently know these"

#

But I don't like stuff happening on a long rest like that. It causes weird decisions between "I'd like this for the long term" and "I want to prepare this for this specific encounter"

dawn robin
#

"pick a new spell on level up, also swap out a spell on level up" vs "you are the same as the last guy, but only swap 1 on long rest instead of full list"

#

I mean, 95% of their spell list remains "known" and fixed

#

just one spell can swap

frank python
#

It doesn't belong on a long rest, should rather be only on level up or something

dawn robin
#

but level ups can be weeks to months apart irl

#

if you have a situation suddenly happen because, I don't know, you are an adventurer, you have no way to pivot

#

your list is mostly fire damage and you gotta go to the plane of fire? Sucks

#

you find yourself in the arctic with cold damage mostly? 🤷

frank python
#

Well, yes, but that's life. You're not meant to be good at everything all the time. Didn't you literally limit weapon categories to classes?

dawn robin
#

I expanded the existing options, but yes

#

I'm cool with limits that you always have, but sorc does expand, they do change and alter their list

#

just so... rarely

#

and one spell isn't going to turn you from a fire mage to a lightning mage

frank python
#

Well if it's on a long rest, then kinda?

dawn robin
#

You likely have more than one damaging spell, I'm going to assume

frank python
#

Yeah, but it wouldn't take all that long to replace them all

#

I mean, I'm not against giving them a bit more options or something, but do it in a more fitting way. Metamagics are right there, you can come up with something better than just LR swaps

dawn robin
#

So, what if they had a "slot" for that specific alterable spell then?

#

aka, you pick your known list, +1

#

that +1 is the only spell that can be swapped

frank python
#

Yeah, possibly. Or a "cast an unknown spell" MM

dawn robin
#

Actually

#

so, if I have their spell sheet work like prep casters where they have all spells listed, a "1/day pick a spell you don't have prep'd and cast it" could be pretty cool

frank python
#

It's kinda weird, because a Draconic bloodline should totally be casting spells the way Wizard does, while an innate Pyromancer would literally just have control over fire

#

I suppose one option would be to make Sorcerer truly innate (like a Con caster but without the imbalance) and move the "yeah somewhere in my bloodline" flavor to Warlock

dawn robin
#

I did consider joining sorc/lock together at one point

#

they do share a very similar niche

#

what are invocations but metamagic, what are limited spell slots but limited spells known, what is a sugar daddy but an absentee father

frank python
#

Yes and no. You could literally split them across the innate/external line. But yes, merging them is workable too

#

But also saying that Invocations are Metamagic is extremely stupid lol

dawn robin
#

they are similar, but yes they are different

#

at least the invocations that modify EB expression

#

My players heartily disagreed with my proposal a while ago so I'm not actually going to do that

frank python
#

Still not expression

dawn robin
#

I do want 5e cross compat

frank python
#

I feel like Sorc should just focus more on the intrinsicness of the magic. More fine control, more instinctive uses, more alterations to their own being...

dawn robin
#

the issue is, to perfectly represent that you'd need a soft magic system

#

5e is anything but soft

frank python
#

Sure. But you could increase the reliance on metamagics still. Let them shape spells way more than they do now

dawn robin
#

the issue with that is "shape spells in cool ways" so often becomes "the sorc is casting 6th level spell effects at 5th level"

frank python
#

I mean, not really? But they should be good at avoiding allies and adapting to a situation

dawn robin
#

I’d have to get some pretty good ideas

dawn robin
#

I’ve been thinking about this and, I can’t figure any way to do this

#

Other than the existing ones like careful or the one that swaps damage types, which is “avoiding allies and adapting to the situation”

#

But you still have to pick spells that can be affected by these metamagics, and it doesn’t change your options or give you anything to do

#

If you are not fighting, you basically have nothing to do. You don’t have fancy skills, you don’t have room for niche spells, you don’t have requirements…

dawn robin
#

Interestingly, on a still sorc topic but different part, I've learned that doing 5 SP per level then shifting to 6 SP per level at 10th level almost lines up with a direct conversion from spell slots to SP

image.png image.png
frank python
#

Well, kinda?

dawn robin
#

For a new topic inspired by yesterday, spells. I haven't messed with their formatting for a while, this is the last I did with it

image.png
#

The issue is I couldn't find a good spot to include things like spell schools or other tags I might include

#

heh, just realized its old enough that the cast time is still "action" rather than "main" or something
But the question is moreso the formatting

languid galleon
#

Color or symbols could be used to denote the spell school. Or, you could put all tags in smaller text below the spell name.

dawn robin
languid galleon
#

Yeah. Why'd you have to cast fireball again?

dawn robin
#

moreso just filling space to see how it looks

#

sample text

languid galleon
#

Just joking.

#

(Although, I'm standing right next to the enemy, so please don't.)

restive idol
#

the circles symbols look so janked out though.
I know it's unicode, but it's basically using a 12x12 pixel image alongside HD stuff, and it looks rougher for it.
As a placeholder its fine, but for any publishing, replacing those with higher res images of it would help a lot imo.

image.png
dawn robin
#

Yah, I’ll probably do that by the end

#

Also, I just realized… why does Alarm say “tiny or larger creature”? Isn’t that just… all creatures?

dawn robin
frank python
#

Agreed, the idea looks good, but the circles suck even in good quality

dawn robin
#

A hater of circles? What have they done?

frank python
#

They just look weird, I can't explain it

#

speaking of which, did you rename spell levels to circles or something?

dawn robin
#

They are Orders atm

frank python
#

that sounds more like schools

dawn robin
#

1st order abjuration, idk I think it has a ring to it

frank python
#

1st circle of abjuration order sounds better

dawn robin
dawn robin
frank python
#

Less that levels, which every class has petr Also you can always rename druid subclasses

rough kite
#

blasphemous

dawn robin
#

Better to rename one thing than two things for the same result

frank python
#

I don't think subclass names come up often enough to be confusing

dawn robin
#

Less mental conversion needed for new players coming from 5e

frank python
#

eh, if that's what we're going for, we might as well keep levels

dawn robin
#

I can fix issues without making more confusions expression

languid galleon
#

I'm assuming some playtester said "wouldn't germs trigger my Alarm spell, since they're everwhere?"

ancient bolt
languid galleon
frank python
#

Do they? Not all of real life science is canonically true

rough kite
languid galleon
dawn robin
#

pretty sure the cannon answer is "magic" expression

frank python
#

In D&D, I'm pretty sure creationism is true

rough kite
#

yeah there’s direct evidence of the presence of deities

#

doesn’t mean evolution can’t also be there

#

look at sub races!

frank python
#

Yeah, but I'm pretty sure most races were directly created

#

Also I think someone said something about atoms not existing once?

dawn robin
#

afaik, races (at least the player races) are not actually "evolutions" in the irl sense, moreso magically changed from an Event ™️ or their god shifting them to better fit an area, or they were just... like that from the start

ancient bolt
dawn robin
#

like, cannonically elves are able to just shift their DNA around to fit the area they are in, should they be stuck in a more foreign area for long

languid galleon
dawn robin
#

takes a while and a lotta magic, but, can be done

#

also the most "pure" elves can swap their biological sex at will expression

#

dnd lore be weird

ancient bolt
dawn robin
#

ultimate understatement

frank python
dawn robin
#

would be a potentially interesting book, but prob not a system

frank python
#

Honestly, for a system, it just kinda doesn't matter. At worst you'll make something up. But I think it's safe to assume that things work the same way as in our world unless otherwise specified, but the why isn't necessarily the same

dawn robin
#

Would it be a bad idea to distinguish a passive material component and a consumed one? Like, have M always just mean "its a thing you have but don't use up", and like, C mean "a thing that is taken by the spell"?

#

I think it might clear up confusion where you didn't read enough of the small text to see "consumed" on the description

restive idol
dawn robin
#

not the fluidity being weird, just that... why is that what you get when you are pure?

#

you can't like, DNA yourself some wings or environmental resistances or something?

#

you just can change a couple sizes

restive idol
# dawn robin I think it might clear up confusion where you didn't read enough of the small te...

it's not a terribly idea, and would help clear things up.
The obvious would be something like M(C) or M[C], but you already have Concentration, so maybe something like M($) or M(€) type of thing, to represent.
though that also implies "has cost" which is... useful, so... maybe 2 markers...
One for "cost" and one for "concsumed"....
Hell, could use both...
M($) for has cost
M(€) for consumed
M($€) for has cost and consumed.
Or somethign along those lines

dawn robin
#

Or like this, where Conc is separate

image.png
restive idol
dawn robin
#

maybe

#

hmm

#

Sacrifice doesn't work (S)

#

Expended? (E)?

#

feels weird

restive idol
#

I stand M for material with brackets is going to be clearest

dawn robin
#

Though some spells have both non-consumed and consumed components

#

how would that distinguish?

restive idol
#

so V, S, M*(€)
a yew leaf, that is consumed

dawn robin
#

without just, writting out the whole thing we already have

#

the goal is space saving

restive idol
#

so you have a quick reference in the box, then the info where the info is anyway

dawn robin
#

or like this?

image.png
restive idol
#

that feels bulkier than needed, and that it's consumed isn't really... seperate to me.
Just like

V, S, M (C)*
*A yew leaf, Consumed (a drop of human blood).
will cover it

dawn robin
#

though that somewhat confuses things

#

reading that, I might think the leaf is consumed

restive idol
#

thats what the brackets are for though.
Brackets mean "this is that thing".
And doubly so if at the explanation of spells it says "what's in brackets after consumed, is consumed)

dawn robin
#

it can, or it can mean that its separate

#

could be "A yew leaf, which is consumed" and "also a drop of human blood"

#

especially with 5e's passive voice putting commas everywhere

#

the goal here would be to make it instantly recognizable which is which

#

I don't think my method gets that yet either though

dawn robin
#

Was going to go to pathfinder to see how they did it, and it seems they just removed non-consumed material components. Like, the component M still exists, its just not explained

#

which, I guess for the sake of compression makes sense, its not a requirement, but seems like a cool flavor thing to just... fully cut

#

seems PF1e is like 5e when it comes to components

dawn robin
#

Just to have them avaliable for viewing

Screenshot_20240225_092906_Chrome.jpg Screenshot_20240225_092943_Chrome.jpg Screenshot_20240225_092956_Chrome.jpg
#

I think the only conversion needed to make it work in base 5e is for Faltering to become Frighten on save?

dawn robin
#

A topic I won't go deep on today as I don't have a lotta time but wanna get into the air:
I wanna replace multiclassing.
I'm tried of all the balance tricks and stuff you gotta do to avoid multiclassing imbalance, subclasses at 1st, PB scaling features, powerful combos, small dips for massive surges, etc are just... I don't know it can be fun at some tables but I'd like multiclassing to truly become as optional of a rule as variant encumbrance (at non digital tables) and I'd like something in core to try to replace that concept

#

the best idea I have thus far is how Pathfinder 2e does it with archetypes, but I'm not sure how well that concept fits into 5e

#

as PF can get away with it because they get like, 50 feats of different types by level 20 so you can easily sacrifice a few of those to dive into an archetype

#

while 5e has like, 5

#

Does anyone have any ideas as to how to do this in a 5e-like-frame?

ionic dragon
#

untie feats from ASIs and make PCs get both

#

you get a feat at 2nd, 6th, 10th, 14th, 18th or something like that

#

everybody has to go 1-20 in the class they picked from the start

#

make high level martial features worth a damn

#

then the "multiclass" would be a feat chain similar to what Izzy has thought about

ionic dragon
dawn robin
#

Hmm, maybe, but that would basically mean that you either get feats, or you get "multiclassing feats"

dawn robin
#

and while its still WIP, I do have the feat/ASI somewhat untied, at least its not one or the other anymore (talents are basically half-feats)

image.png
#

but that does still have the issue of, if the multiclass stuff is just a type of feat, you are super limited. Like, no "multiclassing" till 8th if you decide to get a full modifier improvement at 4th or get a non-multiclass feat

#

and if the MC feats are stapled on top, now everyone is multiclassing and there's no choice

#

idk, maybe the choice thing is ok, as long as every class has powerful stuff already its more of a "flavorful feat" sorta thing? duckthink I don't know

ionic dragon
#

i think it's fine to have to choose between normal feat and MC feat, if broadly speaking they're on the same power level

#

like for example, a cleric 1st MC feat might give you cure wounds and one other 1st level cleric spell and 1 "spell slot" to cast those with

then the cleric 2nd MC feat could be a choice between a 2nd level "spell slot" and a CD

dawn robin
#

I do have level 1 feats for all, so that does help alleviate this dip issue a bit

#

so a 4th level person could have 2nd level spells via that method, which is on track

ionic dragon
#

one thing that also interests me about PF2e is its lack of halfcasting. instead, the way they curb hybrids is by only giving 2 each of the 2 highest spell slot for their level

#

imagine if the paladin instead of going from 1st to 5th level spells, had 1st to 9th level spells like the cleric, but only had 1 and 2 slots of its highest and second highest spell levels

dawn robin
#

Do full casters get like, 4 slots?

ionic dragon
#

it depends on the caster, but generally it's like 2 of the highest slot level, 3 of the rest

#

the sorcerer gets 4 instead of 3

#

the weezurd can Drain Bonded Item to get extra slots, and also has extra slots for its school of magic

dawn robin
#

Harder to do in 5e where after 5th level full casters only get 1 slot

ionic dragon
#

the pyschic only gets 2 per but gets focus points to boost their cantrips

#

the idea essentially being that with these resources, the bounded spellcasters can still operate at nearly the full output of the fullcasters, but slightly worse because of proficiency, and they don't have the extra versatility have having the rest of those 15+ spell slots

#

which would very likely end up being used for utility or control spells that scale without slot level because their damage output would fall behind focus spells and cantrips

dawn robin
#

Interesting

#

I'm not sure if I'll follow that path, mostly for compatibility reasons, but it is a neat way to do it

ionic dragon
#

i think a big elephant you'll have to contend with is how much you want this to be a grindy attrition "survival" kind of system

dawn robin
#

Yah, I've taken steps to make martials have more "per Initiative" recharges so they are more resistant to attrition, hopefully to slightly curb the short rest spam and further divide them into the reliable side of classes

#

Casters hopefully will be the ones mostly hit by attrition, I've considered lowering their resources a bit purely to avoid the "6-8 encounters a day" thing

#

But atm I'm keeping them as is

#

While I've dreamed up much bigger changes, most would cause issues with 5e compatibility

#

Sadly 5e is an attrition style game, as much as I'd like to make it more of a heroic style game I can't change much

dawn robin
#

unless I made all casters SR/encounter based rechargable 🧠

#

but I think that's still too big a departure

frank python
#

I definitely think multiclassing is a necessary evil, and more evil than necessary

#

I suppose one way would be to just make "multiclassing subclasses" for everyone, but that's a lot of work

ionic dragon
#

i'd prefer to kill it where it stands, because reworking every class and subclass to not be really good on dips is more work and a complete headache whenever more elements are introduced

#

like "here's a new subclass for clerics" and it's substantially better than every other subclass dip for cleric is just not a fun problem to deal with (peace cleric)

#

i want to see features not be restricted by multiclassing, and multiclassing feats makes features way less multiclass abusable

restive idol
#

something I have thought tbat fixes similar things, and helps stop multiclass abuse, is like learning spells, make features linked to player level

#

so cantrips? caster level.
pb/rest features? class level pb

frank python
#

I agree that feats are the way to go. You'll want to increase the number of them anyway, because feats cool, so I guess you might as well have more stuff like Magic Initiate or Martial Adept and so on. It may make the class abilities feel a little less special though

ionic dragon
#

it really would be folding PF2e's archetype system into this

#

like you can't take the cleric 2 feat without taking the cleric 1 feat

#

i would just remove the whole "you have to take two archetype feats after you take the dedication feat before you can take another dedication feat"

frank python
#

Multiclassing subclasses are cool, because they make sure the mechanics actually work together at least a little, instead of just stapling them together. Like, Eldritch Knight gets War Magic, which a Fighter/Wizard multiclass doesn't. But if you're being throughout, that's like 156 subclasses you need, because only a few exist now

ionic dragon
#

i'm not interested in rebuilding 5e from the ground up like rachayz and ovion are, so that's not for me. but MC feats are certainly the proposal i'd go with, because as you pointed out, that's a ridiculous number of subclasses to make

#

and feats (feat chains) are a lot easier to make than full subclasses

frank python
#

You could probably use something like class groups to reduce this number significantly, but yeah, I definitely agree feats are easier. My fear is just that they can make unique class features feel a bit cheap, because now everyone can just learn Action Surge easily

dawn robin
restive idol
frank python
#

For example, you could just have four groups: Martial, Half, Caster, Expert, and then four subclasses for each class, with selectable options. For example as an EK you can choose any fullcasters spell list and get the matching casting ability

dawn robin
ionic dragon
#

i was going to say

dawn robin
#

maybe a feat that gives a "haste action 1/rest", but not the actual feature

ionic dragon
#

i don't like action surge in pretty much any capacity

#

and that's coming from me, whose favorite class is footur

dawn robin
#

I like it tbf, and I did buff it to 1/initiative rather than per rest

#

but ye if I give "class feats" I'd not let you just have the full features

#

you are not a fighter, you are learning a bit about how the fighter does things

ionic dragon
#

fighter 3rd tier feat be like "you get extra attack"

frank python
ionic dragon
#

actually now that i think about it, that could honestly work. spores druid has quite a few issues but one potential fix to have more ways of getting more attacks

ionic dragon
frank python
#

But I'd like to bring up the synergy point again. Just getting a feature from a feat ends up with it being kinda stapled on, and may lead to it being weaker than it should. But I suppose you could try to fix that while also fixing the "cheapness" issue at the same time

dawn robin
#

it should be roughly the power of a feat, so shouldn't be worth a whole class level, ever

#

as I don't want multiclass feats to ever be like, the only valid feats

#

"who takes polearm master when you could take the cleric feat" is a terrible thing that I'd never wanna hear

frank python
#

I'll do you one better. "Who takes X when you could just take Y" is a thing you never want to hear

#

That's literally what it means to be balanced

dawn robin
#

for certain builds its ok, like "you should take bow mastery instead of crossbow mastery if you wanna do XYZ build" is ok

#

but overall, yes

frank python
#

But that was more about the idea than a specific power level. So I guess more "why take Fighter when I can take its feats" is the problem we want to tackle

ionic dragon
#

in that case, it's because "taking fighter" is not an option

dawn robin
#

or do you mean "don't be a level 5 fighter when you could be a level 5 cleric with the fighter feat"?

#

ye, that's also something to avoid

frank python
ionic dragon
#

oh, i read "take fighter" as in "take fighter levels" instead of "be a fighter"

frank python
#

Basically the point is not to make Action Surge feel basic, because then Fighters feel less cool

#

(bad example perhaps, because it's an example of a feature that could be in some form universal, but you get the point)

ionic dragon
#

that's something that i've always had an issue with

#

action surge doesn't exemplify what it means to be a fighter to me

dawn robin
#

"Fighter" was always a very vague term, and while I have changed em up a bit (now called warrior, not only get extra feat levels they also get more talent levels, special exotic weapon profs, a tool prof, improved OA, and with all their attacks they can utilize more Strike actions than anyone else)

#

.
Also, with that in the passive background while I wait for a response, I'll note that I had a long convo yesterday with my friend about guns and crossbows and such and made the choice... to remove the Loading property entirely

#

In its place there is a "Slow Load" property for weapons like the blunderbuss or palm pistol that take extra long to reload, but I decided that for crossbows especially it just... wasn't a fun trait? It makes a weapon have a required feat tax for a fighter to use, and requires there be a feat that just says "ignore this part of the game"

#

I realized, if the only way to utilize a weapon to be even comparable to bows is to take a feat tax, that... sucks?

#

yes, realistically xbows take much longer than bows to reload, but not by a ton given mechanical assistance, and there's always "in the fantasy magic world someone made a better crows foot."

#

So now these two traits are the only ammo traits

image.png image.png
dawn robin
#

Though these changes and messing with firearms more made me remember I don't have a Weapon Master feat for firearms yet...

#

I can give it the same first trait I gave xbows/bows which is to double the effective normal range (not long) of the weapon, but... what else?

#

Maybe lower the misfire or slow loading trait of the guns?

ionic dragon
#

within the confines of 5e, the way fighters and other martial combat classes interface with the combat system is with attacks. so naturally, the fighter, who ought to be "the best" at combat, ought to be "the best" at attacking

5e already has fighters go up to 4 attacks per turn, but i think it can be pushed further. as to not step on the barb's toes of just straight up making attacks hit harder, fighter attacks can be improved in two other ways:

  1. fighters are the most accurate of all classes. take archery fighting style, and give it to all fighters instead. maybe even +3/+4 at higher levels. this is the PF2e approach, but is a simple enough design to work in 5e
  2. fighters are the most tactical of all martial classes. lots and lots of riders and alternative ways to use their attacks, that can be expanded upon. you could potentially do this by making fighting styles scale with fighter level, baking a SR-based or turn-based scaling battle master set into the class (ala laserllama's alternate fighter), that sort of idea. this has the benefit of producing more emergent gameplay but is much more complex
frank python
#

Yeah, Fighters should probably just be best at Combo

dawn robin
#

So, one way I could do that....

#

So you know how open hand monk has that thing where "each time you hit a creature with a FOB attack you can attempt to XYZ (basically combo action"?

#

what if Fighter had that on all attacks?

#

no "attack then spend another attack to combo", now its "attack and combo with the same strike"

#

alternatively, they gain a bonus to the DC for combo

frank python
#

Admittedly, yeah, maybe Monks should be Combo masters

dawn robin
#

(I already gave the new open hand monk Combo on FOB anyway)

frank python
#

I forgot, do you have Masteries?

dawn robin
#

weapon masteries?

frank python
#

yeah

dawn robin
#

atm no, though I am trying to make a weapon master feat/talent for each weapon type

#

I felt onednd masteries just didn't hit that itch for me

#

a step up from 5e, but not where I'd like to end

frank python
#

Yeah, agreed. They're cool, but the implementation sucks

dawn robin
#

I went with the "most weapon types have a common special property" route instead

ionic dragon
#

to summarize my issues with masteries:

  1. another choice made at chargen, not emergently during combat
  2. no scaling with martial levels (fighter 1 and fighter 20 are equally potent)
  3. too easy to pick up for non-martials, which means a non-martial is just as good at masteries as a mono-classed martial
dawn robin
#

ye, all three are true

#

they are just a little buff, but don't really make them more interesting. You still also end up with just 5 or so weapons being the only "good ones"

#

maybe with the new benefit of "if you are going for (specific build), you may wanna take X instead of Y"

#

but, I'd rather every weapon be somewhat valid, regardless of "build"

#

though a build should gravitate towards certain ones, they shouldn't all just be the same thing

#

though I hopefully have already resolved that issue with the properties system

dawn robin
ionic dragon
#

got a stinky cat right up in my face oof

#

so far you only have 3 combos, right?

#

cube pointed out that monks can be the best at them, but maybe fighters can have more combo options

#

and that would differentiate between the two somewhat

dawn robin
#

Hmm, the issue there is that Rogue already is being made to do that

#

they get Combo but get more options in their base class+subclass

#

(my version of doing cunning strikes from onednd)

#

Once again, fighter is suffering from being so... "average" that the specialists are taking the niches too fast

frank python
#

Well, you could also just lean into the simplicity, and make is just consistently great at all combat stuff

dawn robin
#

Maybe I could do a thing like BM and have them have a... pre-attack combo thing? Like, extend reach, taunt, etc?

#

or maybe each time they take the Combo action, they deal damage to the target? Just saveless attackless damage?

ionic dragon
#

if you're willing to dig up 4e, you can make fighter's niche more about defense, since 5e lacks "defensive" classes other than the pally

frank python
ionic dragon
#

these are also the two classes that get heavy armor

dawn robin
#

Maybe if they hit then take the combo action, they can roll the weapon dice again? No mods added, but that does boost their damage without actually breaking their damage limits

#

its worse than hitting twice, but they get the bonus of whatever the Combo action does

#

being tanky is also interesting, they could focus on being the "taunt martial" too

#

but should Paladin be more of a taunt focus?

frank python
#

It'd be neat to finally have a tank class, but I feel Fighter should be more of a "basic martial" than "tank martial"

dawn robin
#

what if there was a choice?

#

I could do both

#

sorta like how onednd gave a lotta classes a choice at level 2 to "specialize" in certain aspects of the class

frank python
ionic dragon
#

so split fighter down the middle like what 5.5e is doing with druids and clerics?

dawn robin
#

Like this thing they put on druids

image.png
#

yah

#

where you choose your "speciality"

ionic dragon
frank python
#

I do like the Boon/Order/Specialization system, but you can't make a satisfying tank/defender with just a selection

#

That being said, I wouldn't mind Fighter getting an offense/defense/mobility choice

dawn robin
#

moreso a sorta

  • Get tanky option
  • Get damagy option
#

pick one

ionic dragon
dawn robin
#

scaling FS could be interesting, though most scale on attacks which already scale

ionic dragon
#

which is honestly something I've been hoping to see from FSs for a while

frank python
dawn robin
#

choice 3: Become an EK expression

ionic dragon
frank python
dawn robin
#

actually, speed/nimble option isn't bad 🤔

frank python
dawn robin
#

I'm thinking

  • When you Combo off a Hit, you deal some damage again
  • (Something about better AC, and also lets you improve your armor more)
  • Mobile feat?
rough kite
#

deal damage even on a miss
shields give +1 AC
mobile feat, can’t drop below 30 feet speed

frank python
#

Alternatively, maybe this is where you get Exotic weapons proficiency? So you can either get them (because they're better than normal), or not get them and instead get a second style or something. Depends on what you did with them. Also, did you do anything about armor?

dawn robin
#

it shouldn't make the class any more complex at least, just a little specialization choice

frank python
#

Btw did you do something to make unarmed viable?

dawn robin
dawn robin
#

should I? An armorless fighter feels more like a monk or barb

rough kite
#

unarmed or unarmored?

dawn robin
#

oh woops

frank python
#

I think so, yeah. Sometimes you just wanna go unarmed without otherwise changing anything, and there isn't much of a mechanical reason not to allow it. But you seem to have less of an "allow everything viable" philosophy, so you don't have to

frank python
dawn robin
#

uh, no, they can get improvised weapon prof but otherwise are not unarmed fighters

#

but that again feels more of a monk thing

#

like, a fighter can, but its not the best option? I did make all fists do 1d4 at base so its a bit more viable

#

(monk gets 1d6 at base)

frank python
#

Does it? Monks don't really do the "brawler" thing well

dawn robin
#

maybe a fighter subclass, hopefully can do it better than onednd

#

but prob not a core thing

frank python
#

Personally, I just go for "1 less than an equivalent weapon". So a Heavy Two-Handed "punching style" is 1d10 for example (but if you're holding something, you only get to have one style)

frank python
#

Also, have you settled on something for damage types? That sounds like another part of the system the Fighter could be better at

dawn robin
#

The Combo action is what messes with BPS atm, nothing else

frank python
#

Maybe that's a viable paradigm - just have the fighter interact stronger with all parts of the system, making it simple yet naturally tactical

dawn robin
#

Its so hard to make something interact more with an existing system without just saying "ignore limitations of system"

frank python
#

Is it? You can always just say "you double the bonus from <thing>"

dawn robin
#

"gain expertise in attacks" expression

frank python
#

Like, double bonus from status effects, double bonus from flanking, and so on

ionic dragon
#

if you remember that Ashenlad guy, he looked at my rogue work and was like "not good enough" and when i asked him to clarify, he said some tangent about tying debuffs to sneak attack (which i don't particularly like because what if you don't want to debuff your sneak attack target, and sneak attack can miss), when i pointed that out he just went "oh i give rogues expertise in attacks so they're the most accurate so missing sneak attack is not an issue"

#

right there i already knew we were playing two different games with two different philosophies

dawn robin
#

heh

#

(tbf I like the idea of debuff rogues but want a different angle that doesn't sacrifice damage)

frank python
#

Another day of bounded accuracy sucking

ionic dragon
#

come take a look at my rogue project then

#

you don't sacrifice sneak attack dice to be able to do cool things

frank python
#

Personally I kinda don't like debuff Rogues, but I don't know what to offer as an alternative

dawn robin
#

Sure, I'll take a peek, have you seen mine? Zotewall

ionic dragon
#

i've seen bits but for the most part i'm just in here to flesh out some foundations of your system more than look at classes

#

i'll look later when i'm not eating

frank python
#

What do you mean, eating is the best time to be looking at stuff

ionic dragon
#

rogues are tricky outside of combat. why can't they be tricky inside combat?

frank python
#

Yeah, but I've always felt like Rogue should be the one utilizing opportunities, and not creating them

#

But I'm not very into Rogues either way

ionic dragon
#

sneak attack utilizes those opportunities. the other parts of rogue create them

dawn robin
#

mine utilizes the opportunity of "enemy just got stabbed by you" expression

ionic dragon
#

it's also why i've left out steady aim

dawn robin
#

I also did, but also gave them extra attack so they can be a martial like the rest of em

ionic dragon
dawn robin
#

Is here, tho only really messed with the 1-5 so far, beyond is maybe's and untouched

image.png image.png
#

I haven't gotten to the point of posting links just yet, mostly as I keep bouncing between places. Once I get a more firm grasp on the foundation I'll dive deep into specific topics

ionic dragon
#

i see, my project was a full class overhaul + many subclasses as well

#

i share the same sentiment that the gap from 3rd to 9th is a bit much, but unfortunately i stuck to it because i ultimately want my rogue to be compatible with all of the other rogue subs out there

frank python
#

Yeah, the gap sucks

ionic dragon
#

just not a fan of having people come to me to ask me "how do i adapt this to your thing"

dawn robin
#

do people do that?

#

if so I'd honestly be honored lol

#

unless its just theoreticals

ionic dragon
#

because i see it on a different homebrew server where somebody made classes with different sub levels (or just a different class frame to begin with, like turning bard into a halfcaster), and responding with "well this is the basic gist, but here are the things that need to be accounted for..."

dawn robin
#

Yah... that is the pain of a system rebuild

ionic dragon
#

it can easily become annoying as i'm just doing more design work, and possibly for free and might not even be a design i'm particularly happy about

dawn robin
#

I've already accepted that some things will fall through the cracks, and the "compatibility" is moreso a "you can play a 5e rogue with 5e subs or you can play a PH rogue with PH subs" in the same party

#

but I'll do my best to convert all the RAW subs (where I can, SRD is limiting)

ionic dragon
#

the 3rd and 6th levels having both a base class and subclass features seems odd to me

dawn robin
#

The idea is that the subclasses would add onto them

ionic dragon
#

those are going to be some powerhouse levels, alongside your 5th level having extra attack

dawn robin
#

So, 3rd has cunning strikes, and the subs all add a new cunning strike

#

Same for 6th

#

For thief as an example

#

It's sorta like how cleric CD works

#

Where base gives basic option, sub gives specific more flavorful option

ionic dragon
#

i'm a little more lenient on turn undead because it's quite situational

#

cleric sub CDs tend to be more broad in their use cases

#

but i get what you mean

dawn robin
#

The goal would be to have openly usable options on all, ye

#

Cool things that only are usable 1/50 fights are not cool

ionic dragon
#

(poisoned condition :^) )

#

a little understandable though, since poisoned inflicts disadvantage on attacks iirc, and is a pretty low cost for PCs to inflict

dawn robin
#

I'm making less things resist poison at least

#

But ye

ionic dragon
#

anyway, here's my rogue
#1194940429024641104 message

#

featuring a full rogue base class overhaul, and many subclass alterations. a couple of design goals at work here, if you have any questions, i'll be around to answer them

dawn robin
#

#quick_questions message
Made a vote for what order you make characters in, will decide the order I put them in in my new PHB stuff

#

if any of y'all wanna vote (if you haven't already)

dawn robin
#

Also, does this read right?

Alignment

Your alignment is how your character is seen by and interacts with the world and is on two sliding scales; Law vs Chaos and Good vs Evil.

Law embodies your adherence to a code, rule, or literal law of the land. Chaos represents the opposite, the desire to break codes, rules, and laws of the land.

Good embodies the desire to help others over oneself, to make the world a better place through means that cause no harm. Evil is the opposite, the desire to help oneself over any other, to take joy from the world where one can and have no care for causing harm or wronging others.

Between these two pairings of extremes lies neutrality, where one feels no desire either way. Most characters will not lie on the furthest of extremes as listed above, as they are spectrums and not defined points. It is recommended not to create a character that is fully neutral in both spectrums, as an adventurer should have some form of desire that is pushing them forward.

Regardless of your choices, your alignment does not make the choices for your character, instead it is a guide as to how your character would typically react to situations. This alignment may even change over time as you gain new experiences, and can be altered at any point.

frank python
frank python
dawn robin
dawn robin
#

its also sorta traditional at this point, and doesn't detract from the game. I find it about as important as filling in the "bonds/traits/flaws" boxes

frank python
#

I guess? In such a case you should probably write more than that

dawn robin
#

alignment I put inside of the backgrounds section of the "building a character" list, so its next to heritage, language, and bonds/flaws/traits

#

Making this whole thing

image.png
#

its already the longest individual section of all of them too zote

#

though, I'm sure the ability score generation section will be the longest

frank python
#

Well, right now it's not terribly useful

#

Either make it big enough to genuinely be helpful, or don't do it at all

dawn robin
#

alignment does one thing that others don't, which is: What does your character want on a broad level

#

do you want to make the world better? Are you doing this for yourself? Do you help when asked, do you betray? Do you follow the rules, do you seek to break them?

frank python
#

Well, maybe there should just be a "goals" box then. Honestly, why isn't there one?

dawn robin
#

But its kinda beyond goals, its more like... life direction

#

your goal isn't to help the local orphanage, but if you see one and know you are a very strongly "good" character, its now your goal

#

your goal wasn't to get involved in the nearby gambling ring, but when you heard of it and know your character has a very chaotic nature, now its a thing you wanna do

#

you don't need something on your character sheet saying that, but you also don't need a background telling you what you used to do, you don't need a flaw to say what you are bad at. But those are useful to reference

#

especially when its been a while since you picked up a certain character sheet

dawn robin
dawn robin
dawn robin
#

I am worried that Opportunist, while the DPS option of the three, may be the least useful due to requiring a much less common situation than the other two

#

but maybe its ok, as its still a good pick for certain builds like Sentinel or whatever?

#

its also "any strike", so you could like, trip or whatever, unlike 5e

#

actually, this is close enough to core that I could ask the wider discord, lemme post that

frank python
#

Deflect probably shouldn't scale, because why would it?

#

Backstep may be a bit much, a full movement every time? It's good enough to be worth it to ask your Ranger to shoot you for a speed boost. Also, it should avoid AoOs/Engagement, otherwise it's mildly pointless

dawn robin
#

technically they all kinda scale, your attack mod scales with time (as does damage sometimes), and your movement speed can boost

frank python
#

Well, attacks are meant to scale. AC, not really

#

In fact, this does nothing to address the fact that AoOs become worthless at high levels for most classes

dawn robin
#

and there is other movement options now too! (note, Jump is still WIP wording)

image.png
dawn robin
frank python
#

Is it needed if you can just grapple or trip?

dawn robin
#

grapple is not an option, but trip is

#

tho an attack may be better than a save, depending on the foe

frank python
#

Huh, why isn't it? I think even One allows grappling on AoOs

dawn robin
#

wasn't an option in 5e at least, and I've removed the grapple condition atm. Though, that was mostly because old Engaged used to basically be Grappled but has changed since then

#

though, Trip on AoO might be too strong... as atm standing up from prone takes your whole movement

#

which is also something I wanted to work on, but we shall see

#

ya know, I was looking through the Onednd docs, I couldn't find anywhere that they rewrote how OA work

#

like, I know they made unarmed strikes able to grapple, but I haven't seen how they reworked OA, and if that would invalidate it

#

I suppose I could say that normal OA are an attack, while the fighter OA is a Strike, and that's the super power

frank python
frank python
dawn robin
#

well, normal OA sure, but the opportunist feature doesn't require Engagement

#

and would mean the fighter can try to trip someone leaving their reach, basically doing a Sentinel that prones?

#

I'll make Backstep also half your movement when you do the action

#

so you don't just, zoom everywhere

frank python
#

I think Backstep should ouright avoid any AoOs from the triggering creature, it's weird otherwise. Potentially not affect the others though

dawn robin
frank python
#

That'd make sense. But I feel like it should be at least worthwhile on all martials (including Ranger, Paladin and such)

#

Or course you could also modify Engagement in some way

dawn robin
#

I also have a higher level feature on the fighter to give them polearm master OA (make attack when creature enters reach)

#

Though compared to the others… it’s still lacking. Actually, with extra attack being fighter’s thing, maybe their bonus isn’t more versatile choice but they can multi attack on their OA? Doesn’t work as a 2nd level feature tho

#

But I might change their extra attack feature to include a “on OA you also multiattack”

#

Which upgrades Opportunist too

rough kite
#

reaction turning into a full action is a big boost later on

dawn robin
#

Quite, especially when they get the improved OA (polearm style)

#

Maybe I’ll max the OA to two attacks rather than continuing to scale, that’s still pretty good

frank python
#

Have I mentioned how much I hate 5e's pointless scaling already? expression

dawn robin
#

Yes, but as I’m not trying to flip the system on its head I gotta keep it somewhat

frank python
#

I know. Just means you gotta compensate for it everywhere

dawn robin
#

Yah… 😔

frank python
#

I still believe a conversion wouldn't be that hard though

dawn robin
#

Go for it then expression

frank python
#

Honestly the main problem is spells, as spellcasting progression is probably the most scaling part

dawn robin
#

Yah… I wonder why I’ve left it for last painsmile

#

Hey so, here’s a question on a new topic: should you be able to willingly fail any save or check?

rough kite
#

yes

dawn robin
#

Even ones that you can’t really influence, like whether you are poisoned by a drink of alcohol?

#

Might do this

Extra_-_Project_Horizon_-_The_Homebrewery.png
rough kite
#

I think if the PC is aware of the save, or the effort required to save the effect, you should be able to fail it

#

jump into the fireball, open your eyes to the blinding light, give in to the whispers in your brain

#

drinking poison is one you’re likely not aware of, I agree

frank python
#

I suppose willingly fail any check other than Con would make sense?

dawn robin
#

I'm also starting a dictionary doc for all the new terms

image.png
frank python
#

Smart

dawn robin
#

So many docs...

image.png
frank python
#

That's just because you're smart about it. Worst case, you can make docs of docs

dawn robin
#

I'll prob do Barb next just so I still don't have to mess with full casters for as long as possible lol

#

spells and feats/talents are def going to be 90% of this project though...

#

as I do plan to individually go through each one, and I've got the ol SRD issue

frank python
#

I mean, at least you're not reworking the paradigm itself. In most cases it could be a pretty straightforward rebalance

#

Do you need to care about the copyright issues so much?

dawn robin
#

No, but if I do wanna make it big and public it would cause a lotta issues

#

and I do wanna heavily rework artificer so I can just make it a "new thing"

#

and its pretty easy to dodge copyright there, as you can't really copyright mechanics so I can just rename things slightly

#

pull a pathfinder expression

#

tho eventually I prob do need to start working on swapping up the CSS formatting of everything to avoid trade dress issues

dawn robin
#

Decided to toy with monsters a bit today, reworked the formatting a little. But the more important part is that I want to try to make a part of monster stat blocks that players learn, using a new action (study/recall knowledge/insight check/whatever). This is my first attempt

image.png
frank python
#

This is one case where a special symbol would make sense

dawn robin
#

✎ maybe?

frank python
#

Dunno, more like eye or something

dawn robin
#

⚶⛯◉

restive idol
dawn robin
#

⊙ ⊚ ⊛ ↂ

#

🛈 might be a classic actually

dawn robin
#

unless there's stuff to fill in the gap its a weird hang

frank python
#

👁️

dawn robin
#

⚶ isn't bad either, apparently is the symbol for Vesta, the eternal fire of Rome?

#

kinda looks like a book

frank python
#

It's interesting at least

dawn robin
#

Vesta itself came to mean chaste, pure, or virgin, based from this goddess.
weird meaning tho

frank python
#

Not that anybody actually knows this

#

I guess book or eye make the most sense

frank python
#

Does that mean you can never learn save bonuses?

dawn robin
#

You prob can via features that let you, like battlemaster fighter, I could prob make some talents/feats that expand what you can learn too

#

though, maybe there is no symbol

#

I just note in the "study" section what you can learn, it may be totally detacted from its mechanical features too

#

like, maybe you can use Nature on an owlbear to learn what kinda meat it likes

dawn robin
frank python
#

how about horizontal?

restive idol
frank python
#

The coloring is still confusing, but yeah, it's fine. But horizontal could be even better

dawn robin
#

Horizontal could be more clear, but it'd also take up way more space

#

Could make one table have opposite order of fill in

frank python
#

Would it? AC nor HP aren't wide enough

#

saves would need to be on top though (but that's better anyway)

dawn robin
#

So, like V3?

image.png
#

Could also reorder the stats so they align with the save that they modify

image.png
frank python
#

Something like these

#

Though I was thinking you'd keep them in line

#

If you put the saves on top, I think it'll fit

dawn robin
#

no way to do that without pushing over new lines

frank python
dawn robin
#

look at V3, any wider and I've got new lines

frank python
#

Yes, but look at V1. The stats would fit in one line if the gaps weren't as huge

dawn robin
#

huh?

#

I think I need an example, I'm not sure what you mean

frank python
#

it's a very quick example

#

Alternatively, put the stats horizontally in their own line, and saves vertically

#

Why are you even trying to compress it this much anyway?

dawn robin
#

moreso to just see what I can compress

#

hmm, though doesn't that put us back to the original block?

#

but slightly worse as its harder to read

frank python
#

still a bit more compressed, and it has the new saves

#

well, it's always gonna be better, as it doesn't need to separate stats and modifiers

dawn robin
frank python
#

Might be best for clarity, yeah

dawn robin
#

Would it be best to like... have all the mods be transparent background and the names orange-ish?

#

Graphic design is my weakness

frank python
#

nah, easier to have them separated like in a table

dawn robin
#

Like, each set has a gap between them, but is otherwise identical to above?

frank python
#

no, like alternating colors

image.png
#

the name and corresponding number must always be on the same color

dawn robin
frank python
#

Well, yes

#

Now just align it somehow between rows

dawn robin
#

ah, the ol "do it somehow" expression

frank python
#

I mean, should be easy enough

#

Should actually be the default state

#

But worst case, just add whitespace characters expression

dawn robin
#

that is the default state, nothing special is done

#

you'd think with all equal characters it'd line up perfect

#

but I think some characters are "wide" and others "narrow"

frank python
#

I think I've done this once... maybe you need to remove the colons or something?

#

Well I mean the end result isn't in monospace

dawn robin
#

nah that just left/right aligns the text, doesn't change the boxes themselves

#

only way would be... break them into multiple tables I guess

frank python
#

Oh, right, they're two separate tables... Can you like, merge table cells?

#

Alternatively, just set a strict width - it'll look better if it's exacly 1/6th of the total anyway

dawn robin
#

sadly not that easy, I think

#

at least on something like this

frank python
#

Weird, but I'm no markdown expert

dawn robin
#

gimme a min, I think I can do something with the idea of strict widths...

frank python
#

Write your own renderer just to be extra sure you won't get sued expression

#

Or, on a more serious note, make it in Latex?

dawn robin
#

Latex?

#

homebrewery has no relation to dnd, its just a markdown generator. There is no suing

#

almost

image.png
#

alternatively

image.png
#

Hmm.... I could even do it such that the "highlighted" stat is the one that's feeding their save

frank python
#

Pretty neat

dawn robin
#

so like, if something were to affect their INT, it would affect their WILL, but not if something affected their CHA

frank python
#

Eh, I wouldn't

dawn robin
#

alt version

image.png
#

prob not but, had to try

dawn robin
#

maybe even some spells better target one or the other... 🤔

#

the nerdy wizard is pretty resilient to charming magic, but is completely distracted by the mesmerizing hypnotic pattern

#

I got the new tables by breaking it apart further painsmile

image.png
frank python
frank python
frank python
dawn robin
#

I mean, kinda, for conversion purposes int/wis/cha saves are all now "will saves", but now wis is used for "reflex saves"

#

a bit backwards, but it makes the pairing thing work

#

I'm gonna post a vote in #quick_questions

#

#quick_questions message bam

#

tbh, even with all these changes and stuff... v2 might be the winner in my book so far, albeit with a couple small changes

frank python
#

where's V2?

dawn robin
#

#quick_questions message

#

in the post in quickquestions

frank python
#

oh yeah, it's good

dawn robin
#

How much would the system break if I replaced 5 ft increments with 1 meter ones instead?

#

I prob won't due to cross compat and all, but its a thought 🤔

restive idol
# dawn robin How much would the system break if I replaced 5 ft increments with 1 meter ones ...

pretty rough for a lotta things.
30ft walk/double is actually pretty accurate to irl, and a lot of things are built around things.
30ft ~9.1m, 5ft = 1.5m
So replacing 5ft with 1m would be 6m - everything loses 1/3 the distance.
replacing 3ft with 1M would be ideal.

Replacing it with "move" that's 5ft a unit, but you're moving 6 spaces base would be fine.
or if you make 1 move 1m, and you divide all distances by 3 (round up), so you're moving 10 spaces base would work fine without screwing with things.
1m/3ft squares on maps would be OK too.
Though ideally to work within existing gridmaps, you'd want ~2.5ft squares, meaning you'd move 12 spaces base

dawn robin
#

that adds up

frank python
#

I mean, you could just call them "spaces" and that's it

#

I think it does make sense to keep using fantasy units though, they match the feel better. Meters would be out of place

#

also please do hex maps

restive idol
frank python
#

And conversions aren't too bad either. A meter is roughly sqrt(10) feet, which means that 3 feet are close to a meter and 3 meters are close to 10 feet

#

A pound is just half a kilogram, and a gallon is something like 4l

languid galleon
#

You could put information in the description of the monster.

dawn robin
#

Well, I'm down to two options

image.png
#

a couple variants

image.png image.png
frank python
#

I think the coloring in v2 should connect name and number

#

But v1 may be neater anyway

dawn robin
#

its interesting that by a quirk of CSS, if I try to color the same element with the same mostly transparent color it actually darkens it, which leads to a nice tiling effect

frank python
#

Sounds like standard color stacking tbh

dawn robin
#

pretty much yah, since the opacity isn't full it stacks

frank python
dawn robin
#

yah, I think I'll do something to connect the abilities to saves on the player sheet, but its really not needed on the monster side

#

the DM isn't writing up the monsters, they are prebuilt

#

(unless they are in which case they should know what they are doing)

frank python
#

unless you want them to dynamically be changed in combat, yeah, no reason to have it

dawn robin
#

not messing with stats directly would be a plus imo, things like keeping track of STR drain from shadows is already annoying enough

#

especially on the player side, which... I don't think anything does so rn? I don't think any player features can drain/alter monster stats, I mean

frank python
#

It's 5e, best stick to disadvantage

dawn robin
#

agreed. I'm doing some static debuffs to rolls, but debuffs to stats would just be a headache

dawn robin
#

Note, Persuasion and Intimidation are often confused for one another ("I wanna persuade this person to help us or I will hurt them, but I'm doing it nicely").

Could there be a better name for them to better distinguish them? Or perhaps even... combine them into one?

#

I feel like they'd have roughly the same talent requirement to do either, they both are kinda doing the same thing. Unless you are going for a "I show them my muscles to intimidate them" in which case... maybe intimidation should be a STR skill

dawn robin
#

Alternatively, I could further decouple skills from abilities, not having any particularly linked to one or another… though that doesn’t work for some like History

rough kite
#

I’ve let people use STR for intimidation in the past, and INT for deception if the situation called for it

#

maybe codifying some optional ability scores for skills would help that transition, rather than fully decoupling

dawn robin
#

Indeed, halfway may be the route

frank python
#

I think the separation is pretty natural. Persuasion is nice, Intimidation is aggressive, Deception is sly

dawn robin
#

Though you could have combinations easily, like what if you are intimidating someone via deception?

#

"We have a legion already heading to your HQ, just fess up now and we won't have trouble"

#

"The wizard hasn't been able to cast a fireball yet today, and you look pretty flammable" (said wizard not having fireball slots)

frank python
#

Well, I guess

dawn robin
#

heck I could even see an INT based deception, using what you know about a subject to pretend to be more knowledgeable, or using your past knowledge to intimidate someone "do you know how many bones are in the human hand? I do, and I know how to break each one"

frank python
#

Well skill exchanges aren't a problem

dawn robin
#

ye, but when its two skills combined its weird

#

because its not just "you are smart so you can intimidate", its "you know medicine, so you can intimidate"

frank python
#

Yeah... But I think that's always going to be a problem no matter what you do

dawn robin
#

I mean, I could find a solution

#

I could say maybe having a "multi-skill check" is a thing, and you... use your higher of the two bonuses, and if you are prof in both you also add +1 or have advantage or something

#

or, better distinguish the skills with more accurate names?

#

persuasion being like, "charm" (ik overlapping just an example) to indicate its more of the "nice guy" side?

#

tho I think a multi-skill check would solve it imo, and also encourage players to be creative with skill combinations

#

like STR based intimidation would be combining Athletics and Intimidation

frank python
#

Eh, if you make a double check, someone's gonna have a problem with a triple one

dawn robin
#

Could handle it like, double adv just negates one disadvantage, but adv is adv

#

the only fear would be overuse

frank python
#

Yeah, it does sounds like it'd end up spamming the DM with requests

dawn robin
#

hmm, going to have to think about that, can't be a good reward + easy to do or it gets spammed, can't be bad reward or it is never used....

#

The thing I gotta battle is that, on the player sheet it says "-1 intimidation", so the player is automatically deincentivized from trying. But there should be some number there for quick reference and so they don't have to do math every check.

#

so even if I just say "yah you can use any ability for a skill as long as it makes sense", it won't do much for the automatic response

frank python
#

some things are better left to roleplay

dawn robin
#

but roleplay is still mechanicalized here, it goes beyond the social skills (though they are the primary issue)

#

so... would it be bad to actually numerically decouple skills from abilities?

#

like, skills don't have a number next to them, just a tick of "yes prof/no prof/yes expertise", so the player sees "I have prof with intimidation, I'll add PB to <relevant ability>"

#

but still group the skills next to the abilities they typically line up with, or similar

rough kite
#

unless you’re feeling particular skills aren’t used enough, I don’t know that there would be a huge benefit to adding multi skill checks

#

seems like you could give some loose rules about selecting a skill / ability score to use and leave the rest to the dm

dawn robin
#

yah, but I feel like 5e already has so much "leave it to the DM" stuff, if I can remove any weight off their shoulders I want to

dawn robin
#

I asked for some help in #brew_14 and didn't get to stay there long but, I'm trying to figure out how to make combat a little more interactive. I've already taken good steps imo by making the Combo action and other combat actions other than "bonk", but I also want monsters to interact with the players more too

#

I hate vulnerabilities as they just melt the monster, and 99/100 of them just basically let the wizard instagib the enemy and don't let the martials do anything. I want some other forms of interaction, like how the vampire has specific situational weaknesses (which still benefit casters way more but its something)

#

This was my first take of the block with the "study" section below it

image.png
#

the goal would be the player can take an action (this is an issue we will get to) to learn about useful skills, or make a check using a useful skill to do something to the monster. In this way, the players learn about the foe, and use that to exploit it. This wouldn't be on every enemy (like, NPC guard prob won't have much, but owlbear would), but I'd wanna put em on as many as possible to let there be a new approach to combat.

Hopefully this also would allow me to throw even stronger monsters at a party, basically forcing them to find a weakness in order to win or find a way to appease the monster (like they might learn the owlbear is hungry and just needs to be fed to make it leave them).

#

.
Now, the issue I noted above is... if it takes an action to learn something, you are not contributing to the fight. Sure if the enemy is unbeatable without knowing a weakness that would force it, but otherwise... just bonk the goblin? Even if it only took a bonus action, many classes value that bonus action highly

#

especially if it requires one check to learn your options, then another to use them

rough kite
#

this feels right up the watcher alley for sure

#

but for a common monster like a goblin it’s probably well known they’re fearful

#

so maybe just for harder / more rare enemies?

dawn robin
#

Like, Ranger probably specializes in learning this stuff tbh

#

but I'd like some form of interaction from everyone beyond le bonk, even if it looks nothing like what I have rn

#

And I'm still unsure if I'm going to put Watcher in the rebuild or keep it in 5e, if not I'm already planning to take parts off it and put it on ranger

ionic dragon
#

looks just like recall knowledge from PF2e

rough kite
#

what about the option for a group X check to discover properties about the enemy on initiative?

#

then your investigator classes can use a bonus action to do it or have bonuses to that check

ionic dragon
#

for example, these are the recall knowledge DCs for a level 1 plague zombie

image.png
#

that being said, i'm a little of the opinion that everybody should be able to do this study thing at a baseline, but rangers ought to either be significantly better at it, make better use of it, or have significantly broader applications of their own studying niche

#

one of the things i had in mind for a ranger rework a while back that i think i mentioned before was turning hunter's mark into a ranger feature, with a lot or limitless uses, but a slightly more minor effect, like +2 to weapon attack rolls when you target the creature, and then each subclass gets additional riders on top of that. so you could bake this study thing into the hunter's mark feature or something like that

frank python
#

It already is a feature to be honest

ionic dragon
#

in the same way that eldritch blast is a warlock feature?

frank python
#

Yeah

dawn robin
#

does PF tell you what those checks actually give you btw?

#

or just let the DM know "give specific lore"

ionic dragon
#

pre-remaster, the GM decides what to tell the player

#

post-remaster, i'm not sure. but i've rewritten the rule instead as "the player can ask anything to the GM, and the GM answers truthfully" and on a crit success, the player can ask 3 questions instead

#

as you can probably imagine, it'll be questions like "what's the AC" or "what's the monster's weakest saving throw", things like that

dawn robin
#

neat

#

I did similar for my Watcher, I could make that a universal thing 🤔

#

These being the two, a standard feature and an "invocation" thing you can pick up to get even more gritty

image.png image.png
restive idol
#

any idea why these are breaking in excel? 🜛🜚 @dawn robin

#

iunno if I've somehow screwed up the unicode

dawn robin
#

maybe those fonts are not installed on that version of excel

#

maybe need an update or something

restive idol
#

oh OK so, digging - excel itself supports ot.
But almost no fonts do

#

there goes my clever idea for marking gold/silver.
Probably better this way. xD

dawn robin
dawn robin
#

#homebrew message and posted, this is a corner that I may not get feedback on but I think something along these lines would be really good to have

dawn robin
#

Added the "falling onto creature" part

image.png
#

and monk's modified version of slowfall

image.png
#

wording's a bit rough atm tho, but it works

ancient bolt
ancient bolt
dawn robin
#

When you fall and use your reaction to reduce the damage you take from the fall, you also reduce the damage from the fall an amount equal to five times your level regardless of if you succeed or fail.
like that?

ancient bolt
dawn robin