Quote from: tenbones;1138130Tell you what...

for kicks and giggles I'm going to make a Fantasy Craft thread and I'm going to walk through the whole thing and compare it to Pathfinder and 3.5 (and maybe 5e) directly. I'll go section by relevant section so we can all discuss the pro's and cons.


Sound like a plan?

I look forward to it and will be happy to read along. Fantasy Craft reminds me of a d20 version of Rolemaster 2nd Edition and other 'Old School Baroque' works, and while I think it might be too much for me, I think there's a lot to be mined from it.

I haven't forgotten.

I got sidelined by work-stuff, writing stuff, which I've nicely tucked to bed with my editor and day-job boss.

I'm literally working on the post now... stay tuned.

Quote from: BarefootGaijin;1138348I HATE this F-ING argument. I hate ascending AC when playing D&D.

I tried playing 3.PF and could never EVER get BAB. Ever. Coming from BECMI as a teen and into 2E D&D AC worked and made sense, even if -for some- it seemed upside down and back to front. It felt more concrete.

(probably said elsewhere on the forum) I have walked out of 3.PF games because of it. I have stared at the character sheet, rolled a d20 and handed it to someone else so they could add all the bonuses and fiddly bits on because it came across as a monstrous mess. Because, you know "intuitive".

Sounds like you have cognitive issues if you can't do basic addition and comparing the total result to the actual number you need to roll to hit your target.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1138350I look forward to it and will be happy to read along. Fantasy Craft reminds me of a d20 version of Rolemaster 2nd Edition and other 'Old School Baroque' works, and while I think it might be too much for me, I think there's a lot to be mined from it.

Pretty much agree with that last point (never got to check out Rolemaster). From what I've seen so far there's a lot of stuff I wouldn't use in my game, but also a lot of ideas I think work better than baseline 3e.

If you have a +5 to hit and you roll a 15, it seems pretty straightforward to calculate what AC you hit.

I guess you could make your own To Hit Matrix.

I used to do that. Jot down the current to hit numbers for the ACs for quick reference.

At first I thought I wouldnt like 5e's system. But oddly enough rather like it alot. I think I initially went in thinking it would be a mess like 3e. 3e's system works but the ever growing BABs just felt oddly off kilter.

Quote from: Shasarak;1138369If you have a +5 to hit and you roll a 15, it seems pretty straightforward to calculate what AC you hit.

I find that calculate-after-roll increases my cognitive load (& thus brain stress), so I like to work out the target number on the d20 pre-roll. This is equally easy with ascending as descending AC IME. With ascending I deduct the to-hit bonus from the AC to work out the target number. With descending I deduct the AC from the THAC0 to work out the target number. Then roll.

I like D6 System where you just add up all the D6s to see if you reach the Target Number.

Quote from: S'mon;1138422I like D6 System where you just add up all the D6s to see if you reach the Target Number.

I like my d6's where they belong.  

With my Shadowrun set.

Quote from: Shasarak;1138430I like my d6's where they belong.  

With my Shadowrun set.

If you only knew the POWER of the dark side...

Quote from: Shasarak;1138430I like my d6's where they belong.  

With my Shadowrun set.

Counting successes > Adding up a bunch of variable numbers from 1 to 6 each, then maybe adding an extra +1 or +2 at the end

PS: d6 is still a fine system, but just saying

Quote from: VisionStorm;1138576Counting successes > Adding up a bunch of variable numbers from 1 to 6 each, then maybe adding an extra +1 or +2 at the end

PS: d6 is still a fine system, but just saying

I love playing it on Roll20, dice roller counts it up for us! Some of my tech savvier players even got the automated Wild Die function working.

I'm currently running The Halls of Tizun Thane on Roll20 with Mini Six - https://simonsprimevalthule.blogspot.com/2020/07/sp15-1212215-ar-tizun-thane.html - definitely feels like a match made in heaven! We lost our first PC Saya the Sword Sister when she chased a Night Thing into the forest; but it was cool when Ulfdin the Nimothan actually managed to hit one, spent three Hero Points on damage roll, and killed the unkillable. :cool:

Probably why Neverwinter Nights PC games were so popular. It did all the math for you and kept track of all the little quirks.

Quote from: Tom Kalbfus;1136657It is a lot simpler to roll a d20 add in your attack Bonus and see whether that equals or exceeds your opponents Armor class to determine whether you hit or miss, than to subtract your d20 roll plus your attack Bonus from 10 to determine whether you matched or went below your opponent's Armor class for hit determination the way AD&D did it. Why would you want to do that?

I always found it easier to subtract your d20 roll from your modified THAC0 to see what AC I hit. I'm still not sure it isn't faster.

Quote from: Omega;1138388I used to do that. Jot down the current to hit numbers for the ACs for quick reference.

At first I thought I wouldnt like 5e's system. But oddly enough rather like it alot. I think I initially went in thinking it would be a mess like 3e. 3e's system works but the ever growing BABs just felt oddly off kilter.

I really liked 5e a lot.  I was the first DM in our group to run it; I've never been a player.

What sunk it for me were the unlimited, damaging cantrips.  I *get* it, but it changed the idiom for me, if you will, of the fantasy rpg experience I was used to for 30+ years.  I like the "one and done" spellcasters at first level: strategic or desperate use of your one spell, then pull out your dagger and hide behind a rock.  

Instead, my first level spellcasters in 5e could repeatedly do 1d8 or whatever damage ad nauseum on a successful To Hit roll.  In a small thorp, they could be holy terrors on the populace.  I didn't like it.

Quote from: FASAfan;1140192Instead, my first level spellcasters in 5e could repeatedly do 1d8 or whatever damage ad nauseum on a successful To Hit roll.  In a small thorp, they could be holy terrors on the populace.  I didn't like it.

Versus the 3e paradigm of pulling out a crossbow (or longbow if you were an elf) and plinking away all day for... 1d8 or whatever damage?

At level 1 the difference between a wizard's +0 BAB and a fighter's +1 was negligible and wizards had every reason to make Dex their second highest ability score (because even an 18 Con wouldn't give you enough hit points to survive a max damage hit from a 1d8+0 attack) so they'd actually be reasonably good at firing that crossbow until they got enough spell slots.

This would be even further compounded in 5e's by its proficiency system and ranged weapons adding your Dex to the damage dealt... making the wizard easily as dangerous with their crossbow (now adding +Dex to damage with each hit) as the fighter. Hell, if your 5e wizard has proficiency in a bow they're better served using it than one of the attack cantrips until the increased damage (which lines up with when fighters get extra attacks) kicks in.

All the 5e cantrips do is create a more thematically cohesive class... the wizard shoots magic bolts from his staff instead of crossbow bolts from his crossbow at about the same rate of speed and for about the same damage (less generally since the cantrips don't get ability score and magic item bonuses to their damage rolls).

Also worth pointing out is how the media base of the players has changed since the 1980s. Everything from Harry Potter (the minor attack spells are no more tiring than swinging a sword to use... at-will for D&D purposes) to Dragon Age to World of Warcraft to name just a few use magic systems where being able to fire off a single target spell that hits about as hard an arrow or bullet does every few seconds is normal.

Indeed, one of my main complaints about pre-4E D&D (and why I migrated to Palladium from AD&D early on) was its utter inability to model any magic system as I'd read in novels, see on tv or in movies. The only magic system it could emulate was D&D magic.

4E's unlimited use of detect magic, ghost sound, light, mage hand, prestidigitation and magic missile (which wasn't autohit and did about as much as a crossbow bolt to a single target) was an infinitely better base for building the sort of spellcasters you'd see in literature.

I mean, how often does Harry Dresdan worry about if he's got enough magic juice/spell slots to light the candles on a table with a snap of his fingers? Does Harry worry about blowing his last slot on pulling a lever on the wall five paces from him with a quick word and a gesture or whether to conserve his last stunner spell for a later tougher opponent?

That's the experience new players coming into the game have with magic... and late 3e, 4E and 5e dealt with that via reserve feats/at-will spells/cantrips scaled to be balanced with the at-will abilities of other at-will abilities (like shooting a bow).

Quote from: Chris24601;1140204Versus the 3e paradigm of pulling out a crossbow (or longbow if you were an elf) and plinking away all day for... 1d8 or whatever damage?

Inded. IIRC, it was d10 with a heavy crossbow!

Quote from: Chris24601;1140204wizards had every reason to make Dex their second highest ability score (because even an 18 Con wouldn't give you enough hit points to survive a max damage hit from a 1d8+0 attack)

Slight tangent here -- I've heard this argument before, but I don't like that it seems to assume hit point damage is only sustained from melee attacks. I like damage to come from a variety of sources, some of which might not require an attack roll at all (and some which might be avoided by a constitution-based saving throw to boot).