STILL Not Dead (Terrors & Tactics Updade)

Having given it some thought, I'm not sure that having a completely corrupt leader of the Free Cities is fitting with the superversive themes you're going for. Unless you include a sidebar that this sort of corrupt leader is best suited to political campaigns where you're trying to restore the precepts of the revolution that Blackthorne and his allies fought for.

I do like the idea of Warden Blackthorne stepping down of his own free will, though.

Yeah, I like the idea too, though I also appreciate the fact that all my realms have problems and the Free Cities was “has never had a successful peaceful transfer of power” where you have the biggest obstacle being a good man who’s worried about what happens when he does step down.

Perhaps the thing to do is spit the difference... and have Blackthorne establish term limits for the wardens such that he will have to step down in, say, two years.

Then take the six possibles (including the corrupt one) and make them the leading candidates for when Blackthorne steps down so there is time to aid or hinder any of them (or join the race yourself if that’s where the PC interests lie).

This would also make it easier to write adventures using Old Praetoria as there’s a consistent leader in place, but still offer up a way each GM can easily modify the setting.

* * * *
And vehicle rules are done. I opted to go for a much shorter list; airship, barge (cost by capacity with all the same features), caravel, small craft (by capacity and basically covers the light, medium and keelboat in terms of features), cart/wagon/sled (cost by capacity) and a carriage. If there’s room I’ll convert more (priorities on chariots and galleys then the steam boat).

This puts me back into the magic item section update where a number of miscellaneous items have now been folded into the vehicle rules. I’ve also realized that several distinct items can also be normalized using more generic items (ex. Endless Rations are just a variant of the Recharging Item... Endless Waterskin and Eternal Torches are just the Cantrip feature with a specific container).

I’m also thinking I need to do away with Wielded and Worn as specific categories and instead make them general use types... as in if you take the Cantrip property you then choose either wielded (i.e. you must hold the item in your hand to use the property), worn (you can use the property without needing a free hand as long as you’re wearing it) and, I’m thinking a third category of “blessing” (i.e. you neither need a free hand or to be wearing a specific item to use the property) with pricing based on wielded (cheapest), worn or blessing (most expensive).

Magic item limits would still apply (though I might up the cap by one since there’d no longer be a miscellaneous category that counts against your limits).

So that’s actually nearly done too... then back to wrapping up Realm Creation and the last of the terrain rules and I’m then, theoretically, DONE with all but some introductory fluff-text for the GM Guide.

I can’t believe the end is actually in sight (on the visible horizon anyway).

I like the "split the difference" idea best. Not only does it grant you consistency when writing adventures, it allows the players a chance to shape the setting through their in-game actions.

***

Hard to believe, isn't it. Six years of design work, and you're almost there.

You wanna see something REALLY scary... check out my oldest T&T sample PDF (a six page preview) from October 2014...

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8uzbbLvQJOLSC03dFcyNm5YeEU/view?usp=sharing

And here's the first what I'd call "playtest-able" version of the system (113 pages) from June of 2015...

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8uzbbLvQJOLYW9aU0tKTmJ3anM/view?usp=sharing

That was back when I was still using D&D terms... before the sprites ate the giants and dragons... before cyborg dwarves, halflings were still a thing as the shadows of murdered children, each spellcasting path had its own unique classes, monastic was still a background and the system still used +1/level to nearly everything.

You can see the 4E roots clearly at that point and see the seeds of where its going to end up... but there are times when it feels like practically a different system from where it is now.

What's really scary is that in a lot of circles, the June 2015 version would have been good enough to go to market, with some amateur art.

***

It basically is its own system at this point. The only thing it has in common with the old version are a few of the conditions and the focus/surges system, and the focus part is simply a renamed version of psionics.

Oh, it’s got more than that. It still plays remarkably like 4E at the table.

Sure, it doesn’t add +1/level to everything, but it’s still d20+mods vs. a target number and the number you need on the die at any given level is about the same (i.e. you still commonly need somewhere in the 8-10 range on the die to hit with an attack).

The damage and Edge scores are different values, but standard monsters still need about 2.5 hits to be dropped (with a well-built slayer/striker able to do about two hits worth every round) and there’s a finite amount of healing that can be done in a single fight and during a day.

It’s still got six ability scores whose starting ability mods range from -1 (8 ) to +5 (20) that are used as the basis for nearly every action and passive value, four defenses that map to armor, your agility and your physical and mental toughness and an action economy based on a primary action, a secondary action, movement and off-turn actions.

There’s still trained and untrained skills and combat and utility powers/feats as the core of building and defining a character. There’s even echoes of the paragon path and epic destiny features in the Hero’s Action (spend action point), Hero’s Rebound (when you spend a surge to heal) and Epic Hero (capstone) features. Rituals and magic items that aren’t defining features of a character are still there.

It still uses sizes ranging from tiny to gargantuan/massive and they may be called paces now, but everything is still effectively measured in squares. Forced movement is still very important to combat.

There’s still the four combat roles and five of the power sources (martial, arcane, divine, primal and shadow) with the non-magical classes fully equal with the magic ones and able to do interesting things every round.

I made a point of being sure than every race and class from 4E could be built from the options (and at some point I really need to do a revised conversion guide; attributes are a mostly direct port from their starting value, use half your 4E level (round up) then redo the race to species and class to class/background equivalents... Dragonborn are Dragosi beastmen, the Warlord is Military Captain, the Rogue is an Outlaw Brigand, the Cleric is a Religious Militant Astral Benedictor, etc.).

Similarly, the monsters also still have specific roles and origins and minion, standard, elite and solo are still how they’re built (you can also mostly convert 4E monsters by subtracting their level from their defenses and using half their level to refigure their Edge and damage; drop the numbers from resists and vulnerabilities; make force damage kinetic, radiant heat and necrotic either cold or toxic; dazed is dazed twice, stunned is dazed four times, combat advantage is flat-footed... leave everything else mostly alone).

And, most importantly, the PCs are still Big Damned Heroes facing terrible monsters no common warrior could hope to beat right from the start.

The change in presentation disguises a lot of it, but the heart, soul, skeleton and even most of the muscle groups of 4E are still there.

Ah. Not sure what I was thinking with my earlier remark. Still, you've come a long way.

To be fair to your remark though... it IS its own system; its just one that plays very much like 4E at the table.

That "at the table" part is key though, because the part that makes it its own system comes more in how the characters are put together than in how they're used once they are put together.

Species are much more diverse than any of the 4E ones and, due to how the classes are now structured, any species can be good at ANY class (though not always every option for that class).

Similarly, what in 4E is a class is, in my system, a mix of a class (for combat options) and background (for the skills and other non-combat options) and what in 4E are powers (combat and utility) and feats (which can be combat or utility) are instead combat talents and non-combat boons specifically siloed so that you're never sacrificing a combat pick to get something cool for the combat parts of the game.

The classes and backgrounds too are far more modular. The mix of combat style, combat focus, actual class and talents are far more diverse than 4Es fighter would be, even with the knight and slayer Essentials classes counted as part of them.

And a LOT of the equipment; including beasts, vehicles, structures and magic items are extremely modular "build your own" kits rather than spending dozens of pages laying out all the options I could think of (and no doubt leaving out something important).

Its a very "toolkit-y" system in some ways, just very focused rather than a generic point-buy system like GURPS, HERO or Mutants & Masterminds.

But all that is setup for the game at the table; which is where it still hopefully has the feel of 4E to its play style.

I'll admit I'm probably far too close to judge that though. If you think it doesn't play enough like 4E at the table, please share that too. I wouldn't be where I am now without all the constructive feedback. You definitely deserve a credit in the actual books for that.

* * * *

I'm just about through with the magic items revision; I added all the features needed to build a flying carpet to the vehicle rules and was able to squeeze a flying carpet into the examples.

One change as a result of the updates though, and one that's probably better for the setting in the long run is that Dimensional and Teleportation Circles and the Dimensional Resonator items are now Artifacts (although relatively common ones), meaning new ones can't be built by default and their placement is completely subject to the GM's desires.

"Why is (insert realm here) an adventuring hub?" Because it has an intact Teleportation Circle, making it a place that adventurers can return to quickly and safely using the Teleportation ritual. It also means that any long term plans of rebuilding civilization using the Circles can't just be a matter of gathering enough resources to build new ones. You're going to need to find one and transport it to where you want it now or, if the GM desires it, an artifact-tier ritual that allows a new Circle to be built could be found (artifact rituals are intended to be mostly plot devices).

Anyway, once the magic section is done, I'm going to push out a new PDF document since I'd like more eyes on the revised vehicle and magic item rules. The Region Creation bits are more "guidelines" than rules so I'm less worried about something game-breaking in there, but vehicles and new ways to do magic items could actually break something so those need a solid look by multiple eyes.

The funny thing is that even a focused toolkit-y system can be used for other genres, with a few proficiency exchanges and limiting classes. For example, you could get a sci-fi setting for your character by giving the martial characters skill with projectors and advocating that they take the sentinel and sharpshooter classes instead of the defender and disabler classes, essentially making everybody use blasters Star Wars style. And if you're going full power-armor Space Marines like in WH40K, then you don't even have to remove the defender and disabler.

***

Making the teleportation circle and similar paraphernalia artifacts is a good idea. If they can be made with current materials, they can become commonplace and completely upend your setting. It's like your example of the bags of transportation bringing about the end of 4e's dark age.

First and foremost; the new PDF with the vehicle and magic item revisions is up (same link as before). This week I'll be continuing to hammer out the Region Creation guidelines (I hesitate to call them rules since they aren't required).

Second, yeah... depending on the amount of refluffing you're willing to do you can get pretty out there. The revised vehicle rules allowing vehicles that can climb, submerge and fly also opens up sci-fi options a bit more.

One reason the skill list IS so thin is precisely so it can be used in other settings. Arcana is really the only skill that wouldn't fit in Sci-fi and for that I'd swap it with "Science" and you'd be good to go; Acrobatics, Culture, Deceit, Engineering, Fitness, Insight, Intimidate, Medicine, Nature, Persuade, Science and Stealth.

The funny thing about the defender and disabler classes in sci-fi is, as much as guns are useful, there are still a LOT of times and places where someone able to beat the snot out of someone in close quarters will be useful.

Any time you're in a place that bans weapons for example, a concealed knife or just an improvised weapon is going to be easier to sneak in than a blaster with an easily detectable power pack.

Another is aboard a ship where they're delicate enough that putting a hole in the hull could be catastrophic will probably ban or severely limit the type of weapons you can use... but fists, a blade or bludgeon never go out of style.

And what cyberpunk dystopia would be complete without mono-molecular katanas and people who know how to use them?

I could also see a "Super-Science" variant of the Gadgeteer path to keep the spellcasting classes and options viable... maybe even a "Cybernetic", a "Nano-cloud", and a "Biotech" path.

The new changes look good. I like the simplified "minor/moderate/major" scheme, and having the worn items (and additional properties) go up in price compared to wielded items is a good idea - it lets the GM create them on the fly, but it forces the players to consider the cost.

***

As to using the system for sci-fi, like I said, you're 90% of the way there already.

In addition to the ideas you had for melee characters staying relevant in a sci-fi environment, I also remembered that Dune-style shields, shields that conserve their power for smaller, faster objects like bullets or blaster bolts while allowing relatively slower melee strikes through could be a thing.

Also, I remembered the 21 foot rule that an author I follow, Larry Correia, talked about - within 21 feet, the guy with the gun's going to have a hard time putting the bad guy down before the bad guy can close the distance and start stabbing him.

As to paths using the spellcasting classes in a sci-fi setting, the purely technological gadgeteer is first in line, but I could also see psionics, a la the Force and Mass Effect's biotics, being a thing.

Cybernetics sounds like a version of shapeshifting to access special features, like what Matara Jadeaxe does (or like what dwarves and golems in general do with their artifices)

I'm looking at the vehicle rules, and I can't quite make sense of the carriage/wagon/sled example, specifically how to build a stagecoach-style carriage given the confusion regarding cabin size (the cabin you give in the example is 100 square feet, while ain't no way a normal carriage cabin is going to have that much space. And with the glass crew station I'm assuming that per square means per in-game pace, but I just want to be sure.

You might be better off breaking the small craft and carriage/cart/wagon into their own separate examples for ease of use.

Yeah, I was using in-game squares since a carriage would be large (2x2 paces). Similarly, the glass or enclosed crew stations represent the carriage’s windows that passengers can fire from with varying degrees of cover. The description under basic crew stations is that for passengers to have line of sight/effect to outside the vehicle, they need a crew station to do it from.

Where I see I wasn’t clear is that crew stations can overlap other spaces. A cabin can have windows that someone could stand and have line of sight/effect from while still being in the cabin.

So I’ve been cleaning that up, but am not quite there yet. The first change is that cabins will be clarified as “up to 100 sq. ft.” The second will probably be to separate out crew station feature from the cover feature. Full (with no hatch) and no cover both have trade offs so are “free.” Hatches, windows and cover/heavy cover while still affecting the outside world are where the cost needs to be.

So, I’ll keep hammering on that today. Hopefully the rest of the vehicle building systems are working okay.

Did you mean large or huge for carriage size? The cabin listing in the rules states that the host vehicle must be huge or massive.

Yeah, that was another issue of me just forgetting what I'd just written because I thought the cabin would be an elegant solution to the decorated interior of a carriage.

Not an issue anymore though because I completely redid the Vehicle Equipment section.

The first bit was to add a "Vehicle Layout" step that handles squares/cubes for mapping and assigning both open and enclosed spaces. It's also where "crew stations" are now handled with the only requirements on placement being that whoever is piloting the vehicle needs line of sight in the direction of travel and that to set sails the operators need line of effect to them.

Cabins have been reworked to be purchased by the square with seating/sleeping (two medium creatures per square) or larger rooms or even suites being possible layouts of those squares. Despite the name, cabins do not, technically have to be enclosed.

The covered and shielded stations became just "cover" in low (which gives cover unless the attacker is closer to it than you are) and heavy varieties that can be added to the edges of any open square (enclosed squares already having full cover) and are bought by the pace (so a square with cover on all sides would cost 4 paces worth). What's inside those squares the cover is on the edge of is irrelevant because they're walls not floors.

Likewise, the enclosed and glass stations instead became "firing hatch" and "glass window" which can be added to the edge of any enclosed space. What's in the enclosed space is irrelevant.

Cranes, lifting arms, siege engines and traps/hazards are unchanged.

Some prices and features adjusted the costs of some of the examples a bit and both the airship and caravel got Layouts added to their descriptions;

Caravel (17,840¢): a mid-sized sailing ship with three masts. It can make ocean voyages and travel up all but the shallowest of rivers. It has four cabins (two for passengers) and eight bunks (for sailors) and typically has a crew of 18 (captain, two pilots and fifteen sailors) so that it can sail 24 hours a day in three shifts normally and set the sails in a single round in an emergency; Base capacity 50 tons (3600 lb. crew, 1880 lb. equipment, 47 tons remaining); Features: resilient, rugged (2), improved water, sails (3); Layout: open (5x2 main deck, 5x2 aft upper deck), enclosed (10x2x1 hold, 10x2x1 lower deck, 5x2x1 aft deck); Equipment: low cover (24), cabins (16 good, 4 common), windows ( 8 ), crane (5 tons).

Likewise, the carriage issue was sorted as;

Carriages, Carts, Wagons and Sleds (4¢/50 lb. + 50¢ or more for carriage): Various wheeled vehicles pulled by a creature that can handle their capacity. Base capacity as purchased; Features: resilient, rugged, improved ground (medium or ice/snow). Equipment: none normally, but carriages have two or more spaces of common or better cabin (seating for four) and, if the passenger area is enclosed, two or more glass windows or firing hatches.

The revised version is up... hopefully this will fix any issues the previous version had.

For some reason, when I try to open the PDF, it just keeps loading, with no file displayed. Weird.

***
Having a vehicle layout section is a good idea, just to provide the GM with a mental picture of what he's creating.

The pdf opens for me on my tablet, so it’s either an upload or permissions issue. I’ll check it out and try reuploading it if necessary.

Upon investigation, it appears there might be some address issues with Google... when I got a new sharable link the file "name" was the same, but the surrounding stuff was a little different.

So I sent a new link and hopefully that will work.

Honestly, at this point (and with as few people as visit here), I'm almost wondering if I shouldn't just go to "open beta" in the sense of just putting the link on the thread here for anyone who wants to read and comment on it.

Any thoughts?

I'm still getting the same issue. it's not the tab itself that's still loading, but the PDF itself, in the center of the screen. I apologize for my tech illiteracy.

***

I'm not sure that open beta's the best idea just yet. I know that you've accepted the inevitability of piracy, but I'm worried that somebody might try to steal your work before you go to market. It's not a strong possibility given the low traffic on the site, but it's still more than zero. You've put too much work into this to have it stolen like that.

Not a problem. That sounds like a browser plug-in issue; possibly related to using google cloud storage. Have you tried it from a different browser or device (ex. I just pulled it down onto my iPhone from the link in the PM I sent you to see if operating system might be an issue)?

Also, thanks for the input. Its something I wonder about because I've seen fairly open betas of other systems so I often wonder if my present holding it back is the wisest course or not.

For now I'll keep access as is.

You're welcome. I figure that once you're ready to go to market, then you can live with the piracy, but it'll have your stamp on it, instead of being stolen and mutilated.

As to the PDF itself, we're good - I just had to log out of and back into my google account, so the problem was on my end. Sorry for wasting your time. Anyway, I'm looking over the new changes now.

Glad it was an easy fix. Lemme know if the updates make more sense... in the meantime, back to realm creation guidelines for me (still a lot of pages left once you factor in all the descriptions).

Sorry to pull you back over to the vehicles, but the caravel seems a bit narrow to me. I know that they're tiny ships, but it feels like 2 paces wide for the deck is going to be a bit tight for battle space. I looked up the La Pinta as an example caravel, and it's saying that the deck was 56 feet long and 17.6 feet wide, so the length is good, but the width could probably use one more pace to give the players and GM a bit of elbow room.

Sorry it took this long to respond - I've been going back and forth on the caravel width.

Easy enough fix; though the geometry isn’t quite as obvious (to the point I should probably throw a generic map in).

New dimensions are; overall 10x3x3 (not counting masts), main deck 6x3, aft quarter deck 4x3, hold 4x3x1, lower deck 9x3x1, interior aft quarter deck 4x3x1. Total internal volume of 51 cubes.

It’s laid out in a side view ([ ] as enclosed space) as;
.....................[ ][ ][ ][ ]
[ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ]
.......[ ][ ][ ][ ]

The waterline would be between the hold and lower deck.

I like the new layout - it's much more natural, with each deck following the ship's design. The hold's new size works better, and the wider deck solves the space issue nicely. Having a map for the ship's decks is a good idea as well.