Quote from: jhkim on January 31, 2022, 11:58:26 AM
On the rules front: I thought the Sword Coast Guide was decent, and Volo's Guide was OK, but Tasha's was terrible. Fizban's seems mediocre so far - but I haven't read it through yet. I do feel like the rules quality is decreasing, but that has been true for most games as they enter the "splat book" phase of releases.

I thought that the rules from the Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide were terrible, especially the cantrips (particularly booming blade) that got recommended for every power build and the racial variants (like winged tiefling).

I watched Crawfords interview talking about the new Mordenkainen's book on Races. And aside from the SJW sensitivities about race which are stupid, I rationally can understand why he wants races to not have cooked in stat modifiers... He says for years he wanted players to not min-max (my words) about stats and the importance stats have on Class mechanics with the implication that some races are better than others which leaves a bad feeling in his tummy... (aww...)

HOWEVER...

the implications of these mechanics means simply that there are no real cultural implications about these races, or for any of the settings these races are supposed to be native to. This notion that "not everyone is the same" is fine - but the pretense that the mechanical reality that underpins what a race has as attributes as a baseline average is silly because it's relative to humans and he pretends that's not it.

So setting lore and context don't matter as long as racial sensitivities which they promote as important are assuaged. Well this is the new 5e D&D. Enjoy!

Quote from: jhkim on January 31, 2022, 11:58:26 AM

Quote from: Omega on January 31, 2022, 02:42:00 AM
5e's writing has been all over the place. Overall ok. But around the advent of Essentials things started a slow decline. Then around Candlekeep a sharper decline. But you could say that of TSR too. Their product and modules were all over the place. Especially during 2e as they began to struggle with internal problems after ousting Gygax.

I agree that the writing is all over the place -- but I liked Candlekeep Mysteries more than the other adventures I'm familiar with - Lost Mine of Phandelver, Princes of the Apocalypse and Out of the Abyss. So I don't think I see the same pattern as you. I like the core rules, but I thought the initial adventures were mediocre at best.

On the rules front: I thought the Sword Coast Guide was decent, and Volo's Guide was OK, but Tasha's was terrible. Fizban's seems mediocre so far - but I haven't read it through yet. I do feel like the rules quality is decreasing, but that has been true for most games as they enter the "splat book" phase of releases.

I have the Starter, Essentials, the Tyranny of Dragons campaign pair, Tomb of Annihilation, Descent into Avernus, Curse of Strahd, and Wyld beyond the Witchlight. A player has Saltmarsh and one other cant recall at the moment. Think one of the Underdark ones.

Of these I've read through or DMed Starter, Essentials, Tyranny, Tomb and Strahd. Havent gotten much into Descent or Wyld yet.
Also I am trying not to count any 3rd party official modules. But it is hard to tell sometimes what is and isnt. The two Tyranny books were outsourced to Kobold for example and at least two other books were from third party groups that I know of.

Quote from: Pat on January 31, 2022, 12:55:01 PM

Quote from: Omega on January 31, 2022, 02:29:16 AM

1: This was actually a thing for BX and 2e D&D. BX had a Dragon article introducing a "create your own class/race" system that was actually not bad. 2e had in the core books a watered down and more convoluted version. And later Skills & Powers opened up options as well. Think the Complete Handbook for Wizards did too. If not there then there was at least one ckass kit that opened up the ability to wear leather or chain I believe. Not positive though. Been a few decades.

The create your own class system in Dragon was badly broken. Among other things, it tried to argue that magic-users were underpowered and needed a boost.

er? Where? I glanced through it and saw no such claims of MUs being underpowered. There is a extra spell progression table that gives a few more spells but no mention of why other than the option for more at a cost? More likely what we are seeing is the authors attempt to combine the clerics and MU's progressions somehow.

In X a MU will have a level 11 spread as follows. 4 3 3 3 2 1
While the VIa from Dragon has a spread of thus. 4 4 3 3 3 2
And in comparison the O, AD&D and 2e has this. 4 4 4 3 3 -
3e has a sort of mix of O and BX in an odd sort. 4 4 4 3 2 1
4e is its own thing.
And 5e bemusingly enough goes back to BX with. 4 3 3 3 2 1

Rather interesting the permutations just this alone has undergone.

Quote from: Omega on January 31, 2022, 07:18:52 PM

Quote from: Pat on January 31, 2022, 12:55:01 PM

Quote from: Omega on January 31, 2022, 02:29:16 AM

1: This was actually a thing for BX and 2e D&D. BX had a Dragon article introducing a "create your own class/race" system that was actually not bad. 2e had in the core books a watered down and more convoluted version. And later Skills & Powers opened up options as well. Think the Complete Handbook for Wizards did too. If not there then there was at least one ckass kit that opened up the ability to wear leather or chain I believe. Not positive though. Been a few decades.

The create your own class system in Dragon was badly broken. Among other things, it tried to argue that magic-users were underpowered and needed a boost.

er? Where? I glanced through it and saw no such claims of MUs being underpowered.

Look at the examples in the back, where they recreate the four classes. Their replica of the cleric takes 2,160 XP to reach level 2 (instead of 1,500 XP), while their magic-user takes 1,840 XP (instead of 2,500 XP). When you break up all the powers and try to assign them each an XP total that can be added up linearly to get the XP needed to advance, and then have one class who is poor at everything (with mediocre saves, poor attacks, poor attack progressions, poor HD, poor armor, poor weapons) except their primary shtick (magic), then either that shtick costs an obscene amount and is priced out of existence unless you have a class that really stacks on the negatives, or they have to pretend the magic-user is weak. Conversely, classes that are second best at everything but not particularly good at anything cost a lot.

More generally, the simple additive XP solution doesn't work when XP requirements follow a rough geometric progression (doubling each level, though 1e violates that more than B/X).

Quote from: Pat on January 31, 2022, 07:39:22 PM

Quote from: Omega on January 31, 2022, 07:18:52 PM

Quote from: Pat on January 31, 2022, 12:55:01 PM

Quote from: Omega on January 31, 2022, 02:29:16 AM

1: This was actually a thing for BX and 2e D&D. BX had a Dragon article introducing a "create your own class/race" system that was actually not bad. 2e had in the core books a watered down and more convoluted version. And later Skills & Powers opened up options as well. Think the Complete Handbook for Wizards did too. If not there then there was at least one ckass kit that opened up the ability to wear leather or chain I believe. Not positive though. Been a few decades.

The create your own class system in Dragon was badly broken. Among other things, it tried to argue that magic-users were underpowered and needed a boost.

er? Where? I glanced through it and saw no such claims of MUs being underpowered.

Look at the examples in the back, where they recreate the four classes. Their replica of the cleric takes 2,160 XP to reach level 2 (instead of 1,500 XP), while their magic-user takes 1,840 XP (instead of 2,500 XP). When you break up all the powers and try to assign them each an XP total that can be added up linearly to get the XP needed to advance, and then have one class who is poor at everything (with mediocre saves, poor attacks, poor attack progressions, poor HD, poor armor, poor weapons) except their primary shtick (magic), then either that shtick costs an obscene amount and is priced out of existence unless you have a class that really stacks on the negatives, or they have to pretend the magic-user is weak. Conversely, classes that are second best at everything but not particularly good at anything cost a lot.

More generally, the simple additive XP solution doesn't work when XP requirements follow a rough geometric progression (doubling each level, though 1e violates that more than B/X).

White lies published a build your own class suplement, it's free and their math works for the White Box FMAG based games.

https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/167842/White-Lies--Admin-Toolkit-Class-Creation-Guide

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 31, 2022, 07:46:33 PM

White lies published a build your own class suplement, it's free and their math works for the White Box FMAG based games.

https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/167842/White-Lies--Admin-Toolkit-Class-Creation-Guide

What approach do they use?

Quote from: Pat on January 31, 2022, 07:55:10 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 31, 2022, 07:46:33 PM

White lies published a build your own class suplement, it's free and their math works for the White Box FMAG based games.

https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/167842/White-Lies--Admin-Toolkit-Class-Creation-Guide

What approach do they use?

HD, Saves, Weapon training, Armor Training, Skill training, Special Abilities & BAB are divided into poor, tipical, good, excellent. Depending on the category & the quality is the cost. Saving Throw Bonus is divided into: None, role specific, threat specific. None costs zero, RS costs 60 & TS costs 100.

When building your class you pick and choose among those things and write down the cost, at the end you add everything and that's the cost to reach level 2. XP needed to reach next level doubles (almost always, almost exactly).

Say you build a class with everything excellent: HD 400 XP, Saves 250 XP (Saving Throw Bonus 100XP), Weapon training 250 XP, Armor Training 300 XP, Skill training 400 XP, Special Abilities 250 XP & BAB 400 XP.

So your class has 2350 XP to reach second level. And requires at least 9 in their prime attribute.

Recreating their core classes (no wizard nor cleric obviously) the math works perfectly.

If you give a class 2 Specials each costs individually and the costs add up.

IIRC OSE also published their own Class builder, this one isn't free and I haven't bought it.

Quote from: tenbones on January 31, 2022, 03:38:21 PM
I watched Crawfords interview talking about the new Mordenkainen's book on Races. And aside from the SJW sensitivities about race which are stupid, I rationally can understand why he wants races to not have cooked in stat modifiers... He says for years he wanted players to not min-max (my words) about stats and the importance stats have on Class mechanics with the implication that some races are better than others which leaves a bad feeling in his tummy... (aww...)

HOWEVER...

the implications of these mechanics means simply that there are no real cultural implications about these races, or for any of the settings these races are supposed to be native to. This notion that "not everyone is the same" is fine - but the pretense that the mechanical reality that underpins what a race has as attributes as a baseline average is silly because it's relative to humans and he pretends that's not it.

So setting lore and context don't matter as long as racial sensitivities which they promote as important are assuaged. Well this is the new 5e D&D. Enjoy!

So he admits that OD&D and Basic D&D has handled this better since the beginning. 

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 31, 2022, 09:57:54 PM

Quote from: Pat on January 31, 2022, 07:55:10 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 31, 2022, 07:46:33 PM

White lies published a build your own class suplement, it's free and their math works for the White Box FMAG based games.

https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/167842/White-Lies--Admin-Toolkit-Class-Creation-Guide

What approach do they use?

HD, Saves, Weapon training, Armor Training, Skill training, Special Abilities & BAB are divided into poor, tipical, good, excellent. Depending on the category & the quality is the cost. Saving Throw Bonus is divided into: None, role specific, threat specific. None costs zero, RS costs 60 & TS costs 100.

When building your class you pick and choose among those things and write down the cost, at the end you add everything and that's the cost to reach level 2. XP needed to reach next level doubles (almost always, almost exactly).

Say you build a class with everything excellent: HD 400 XP, Saves 250 XP (Saving Throw Bonus 100XP), Weapon training 250 XP, Armor Training 300 XP, Skill training 400 XP, Special Abilities 250 XP & BAB 400 XP.

So your class has 2350 XP to reach second level. And requires at least 9 in their prime attribute.

Recreating their core classes (no wizard nor cleric obviously) the math works perfectly.

If you give a class 2 Specials each costs individually and the costs add up.

IIRC OSE also published their own Class builder, this one isn't free and I haven't bought it.

So it has the same fundamental flaw I just pointed out in the Dragon article: It uses a linear addition of XP in a system where XP grows geometrically.

Quote from: Pat on January 31, 2022, 10:51:02 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 31, 2022, 09:57:54 PM

Quote from: Pat on January 31, 2022, 07:55:10 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 31, 2022, 07:46:33 PM

White lies published a build your own class suplement, it's free and their math works for the White Box FMAG based games.

https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/167842/White-Lies--Admin-Toolkit-Class-Creation-Guide

What approach do they use?

HD, Saves, Weapon training, Armor Training, Skill training, Special Abilities & BAB are divided into poor, tipical, good, excellent. Depending on the category & the quality is the cost. Saving Throw Bonus is divided into: None, role specific, threat specific. None costs zero, RS costs 60 & TS costs 100.

When building your class you pick and choose among those things and write down the cost, at the end you add everything and that's the cost to reach level 2. XP needed to reach next level doubles (almost always, almost exactly).

Say you build a class with everything excellent: HD 400 XP, Saves 250 XP (Saving Throw Bonus 100XP), Weapon training 250 XP, Armor Training 300 XP, Skill training 400 XP, Special Abilities 250 XP & BAB 400 XP.

So your class has 2350 XP to reach second level. And requires at least 9 in their prime attribute.

Recreating their core classes (no wizard nor cleric obviously) the math works perfectly.

If you give a class 2 Specials each costs individually and the costs add up.

IIRC OSE also published their own Class builder, this one isn't free and I haven't bought it.

So it has the same fundamental flaw I just pointed out in the Dragon article: It uses a linear addition of XP in a system where XP grows geometrically.

How is this a flaw? You're determining the initial XP, unless you want perfectly balanced classes?

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 31, 2022, 11:44:09 PM

Quote from: Pat on January 31, 2022, 10:51:02 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 31, 2022, 09:57:54 PM

Quote from: Pat on January 31, 2022, 07:55:10 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 31, 2022, 07:46:33 PM

White lies published a build your own class suplement, it's free and their math works for the White Box FMAG based games.

https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/167842/White-Lies--Admin-Toolkit-Class-Creation-Guide

What approach do they use?

HD, Saves, Weapon training, Armor Training, Skill training, Special Abilities & BAB are divided into poor, tipical, good, excellent. Depending on the category & the quality is the cost. Saving Throw Bonus is divided into: None, role specific, threat specific. None costs zero, RS costs 60 & TS costs 100.

When building your class you pick and choose among those things and write down the cost, at the end you add everything and that's the cost to reach level 2. XP needed to reach next level doubles (almost always, almost exactly).

Say you build a class with everything excellent: HD 400 XP, Saves 250 XP (Saving Throw Bonus 100XP), Weapon training 250 XP, Armor Training 300 XP, Skill training 400 XP, Special Abilities 250 XP & BAB 400 XP.

So your class has 2350 XP to reach second level. And requires at least 9 in their prime attribute.

Recreating their core classes (no wizard nor cleric obviously) the math works perfectly.

If you give a class 2 Specials each costs individually and the costs add up.

IIRC OSE also published their own Class builder, this one isn't free and I haven't bought it.

So it has the same fundamental flaw I just pointed out in the Dragon article: It uses a linear addition of XP in a system where XP grows geometrically.

How is this a flaw? You're determining the initial XP, unless you want perfectly balanced classes?

If you don't care about balance, why bother with a system? Just pick a number.

Quote from: Pat on January 31, 2022, 11:56:03 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 31, 2022, 11:44:09 PM

Quote from: Pat on January 31, 2022, 10:51:02 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 31, 2022, 09:57:54 PM

Quote from: Pat on January 31, 2022, 07:55:10 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 31, 2022, 07:46:33 PM

White lies published a build your own class suplement, it's free and their math works for the White Box FMAG based games.

https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/167842/White-Lies--Admin-Toolkit-Class-Creation-Guide

What approach do they use?

HD, Saves, Weapon training, Armor Training, Skill training, Special Abilities & BAB are divided into poor, tipical, good, excellent. Depending on the category & the quality is the cost. Saving Throw Bonus is divided into: None, role specific, threat specific. None costs zero, RS costs 60 & TS costs 100.

When building your class you pick and choose among those things and write down the cost, at the end you add everything and that's the cost to reach level 2. XP needed to reach next level doubles (almost always, almost exactly).

Say you build a class with everything excellent: HD 400 XP, Saves 250 XP (Saving Throw Bonus 100XP), Weapon training 250 XP, Armor Training 300 XP, Skill training 400 XP, Special Abilities 250 XP & BAB 400 XP.

So your class has 2350 XP to reach second level. And requires at least 9 in their prime attribute.

Recreating their core classes (no wizard nor cleric obviously) the math works perfectly.

If you give a class 2 Specials each costs individually and the costs add up.

IIRC OSE also published their own Class builder, this one isn't free and I haven't bought it.

So it has the same fundamental flaw I just pointed out in the Dragon article: It uses a linear addition of XP in a system where XP grows geometrically.

How is this a flaw? You're determining the initial XP, unless you want perfectly balanced classes?

If you don't care about balance, why bother with a system? Just pick a number.

Because I care about consistency?

Your complaint was that their system didn't manage to reproduce what was on the core classes, I sugested you one that does work with it's core classes. Now you say you want one that's geometrical and not linear...

What exactly is it that you want on a class builder system?

I think you're conflating 2 different issues:

1.- Being able to recreate the core classes and build others following a consistent system.

2.- A geometrical progression of the classes.

If the math of the class builder works your other complaint is easy to fix: Make the progression linear.

If you want perfectly balanced classes maybe you should try 4e? I hear at least some effort was made in that regard.

As for balancing the classes, doesn't the fact that the MU progresses slowly than the other classes balance them?

If you don't like that then make magic into a skill and allow everybody to ise it, remove weapon/armor limitations and have everybody play Paladins, Warlocks.

Quote from: Hakdov on January 31, 2022, 10:07:26 PM

Quote from: tenbones on January 31, 2022, 03:38:21 PM
I watched Crawfords interview talking about the new Mordenkainen's book on Races. And aside from the SJW sensitivities about race which are stupid, I rationally can understand why he wants races to not have cooked in stat modifiers... He says for years he wanted players to not min-max (my words) about stats and the importance stats have on Class mechanics with the implication that some races are better than others which leaves a bad feeling in his tummy... (aww...)

HOWEVER...

the implications of these mechanics means simply that there are no real cultural implications about these races, or for any of the settings these races are supposed to be native to. This notion that "not everyone is the same" is fine - but the pretense that the mechanical reality that underpins what a race has as attributes as a baseline average is silly because it's relative to humans and he pretends that's not it.

So setting lore and context don't matter as long as racial sensitivities which they promote as important are assuaged. Well this is the new 5e D&D. Enjoy!

So he admits that OD&D and Basic D&D has handled this better since the beginning.

I had the same thought.  And I also think we're better off without racial mods for ability scores: they're either too little to matter (AD&D's +/-1 in a game with a 7-14 on almost every attribute) or they're overpowered (+1 bonus to all d20 rolls on a broad range of actions) and encourage min/maxing.

But also Crawford can kiss my ass. Isn't he the guy who said women were put off by complexity in RPGs? (Way to stereotype!) And also the guy who made the BS official ruled that negative Con mods can push HP gain negative in 5e, and the solution was to just not roll hit points?

(It's been a few years, so I may be confusing him with someone else.)

Quote from: GeekyBugle on February 01, 2022, 12:06:57 AM

Quote from: Pat on January 31, 2022, 11:56:03 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 31, 2022, 11:44:09 PM

Quote from: Pat on January 31, 2022, 10:51:02 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 31, 2022, 09:57:54 PM

Quote from: Pat on January 31, 2022, 07:55:10 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 31, 2022, 07:46:33 PM

White lies published a build your own class suplement, it's free and their math works for the White Box FMAG based games.

https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/167842/White-Lies--Admin-Toolkit-Class-Creation-Guide

What approach do they use?

HD, Saves, Weapon training, Armor Training, Skill training, Special Abilities & BAB are divided into poor, tipical, good, excellent. Depending on the category & the quality is the cost. Saving Throw Bonus is divided into: None, role specific, threat specific. None costs zero, RS costs 60 & TS costs 100.

When building your class you pick and choose among those things and write down the cost, at the end you add everything and that's the cost to reach level 2. XP needed to reach next level doubles (almost always, almost exactly).

Say you build a class with everything excellent: HD 400 XP, Saves 250 XP (Saving Throw Bonus 100XP), Weapon training 250 XP, Armor Training 300 XP, Skill training 400 XP, Special Abilities 250 XP & BAB 400 XP.

So your class has 2350 XP to reach second level. And requires at least 9 in their prime attribute.

Recreating their core classes (no wizard nor cleric obviously) the math works perfectly.

If you give a class 2 Specials each costs individually and the costs add up.

IIRC OSE also published their own Class builder, this one isn't free and I haven't bought it.

So it has the same fundamental flaw I just pointed out in the Dragon article: It uses a linear addition of XP in a system where XP grows geometrically.

How is this a flaw? You're determining the initial XP, unless you want perfectly balanced classes?

If you don't care about balance, why bother with a system? Just pick a number.

Because I care about consistency?

Your complaint was that their system didn't manage to reproduce what was on the core classes, I sugested you one that does work with it's core classes. Now you say you want one that's geometrical and not linear...

What exactly is it that you want on a class builder system?

I think you're conflating 2 different issues:

1.- Being able to recreate the core classes and build others following a consistent system.

2.- A geometrical progression of the classes.

If the math of the class builder works your other complaint is easy to fix: Make the progression linear.

If you want perfectly balanced classes maybe you should try 4e? I hear at least some effort was made in that regard.

As for balancing the classes, doesn't the fact that the MU progresses slowly than the other classes balance them?

If you don't like that then make magic into a skill and allow everybody to ise it, remove weapon/armor limitations and have everybody play Paladins, Warlocks.

No, in the very first post you responded to, I explicitly pointed out that the larger issue is a class design system based on linear additive XP doesn't work with geometric XP progression. You even quoted it:
https://www.therpgsite.com/pen-paper-roleplaying-games-rpgs-discussion/from-wotc-to-hasbro/msg1205091/#msg1205091

Though you clearly didn't read it, because you recommended a system that does exactly that.

Converting XP to a linear system is not the simple fix you're pretending it is. Geometric XP progression is fundamental to the system. You have to change everything from monster XP to how much XP is given out for gold. Making everything into a skills is another extremely radical suggestion that completely changes the fundamental mechanics, which you're presenting as a simple fix.

And I'm not sure why you're claiming I want perfect balance, when my last suggestion was to eyeball it. I recommended picking a number because it's a simpler solution, and a better one because it involves human judgment, which can easily forestall the problems with a rigid but broken mechanistic system.

Whether a class costs 1,800 XP to advance, or 2,000 XP, matters very little in the long run. From a practical standpoint, all it really means is the second class will level maybe a session later than the first class. That's one of the key things that people who design these simple additive systems don't recognize: An XP penalty or bonus doesn't mean much. If you play in a game where it takes 10 sessions to advance one level, then what that means is 9 out of 10 sessions the 1,800 XP and 2,000 XP classes will be exactly the same level. On the 9th session, the 1,800 XP class will advance, and be a level ahead for a single session. But at the end of that next session, the 2,000 XP class will advance, and they'll both be the same level again. This will recur every new level (until name level), with the 1,800 XP class being ahead 1 out of 10 sessions.

To create a consistent difference -- to set it up so a powerful class is always at least 1 level behind -- you need to double the XP requirement. That's how the elf class works in B/X -- 4,000 XP to 2nd level, compared to the fighter's 2,000. That means after the fighter reaches 2nd level, the elf will always be exactly 1 level behind (until name level).

But the elf shows why even such an extreme penalty doesn't have a reliable or consistent effect. Instead, the relative power level of the elf and fighter will vary drastically, over the levels. The elf starts out enormously powerful, with almost all the benefits of a fighter and a magic-user, plus some. But when the fighter advances to 2nd level, the elf will feel pretty weak, because the fighter literally doubled in HD (1d8 to 2d8), while the elf is still stuck at 1d6. But after that, the elf remains exactly one level behind, but 1 level behind means more at 2nd level than at 9th level (going from 8d8 to 9d8 is much smaller than going from 1d8 to 2d8). It gets really awkward, with a huge dead spot at 1st level.

This breaks even further if you look at silly extreme examples, like the munchkin class in Dragon 109, which has all the powers of every class. It's a class that will start really strong, but then lag far behind the rest of the party, only to become a powerhouse again at mid levels.

And that's not even touching on how level progression changes when XP plateaus at name level, or the problems with cherry picking abilities, or specific problems with the different systems, like Dragon 109's MU problem.