sentry0

I get where you're coming from, you want to run a game your players will actually like. The question is; will you like to run the type of game they want? If the answer is yes, go for it. Murder and pillage away. I joined a group of D&D players in highschool who were all playing evil characters. It was a real culture shock for me because the backstabbing, lying and outright hostility between players was unlike anything I had seen before. Tell them to be prepared and to have backup characters because an NPC or player may end up punching their ticket. Play how you want, just go in eyes wide open... this will probably cause some friction between people IRL, problems in game, and lots and lots of player driven drama.

I am familiar with resource pools in passing only; what are you thinking?

In another thread the topic of where can we find good art cheaply has come up. I have never used this site and am not associated with them in any way but I think it has potential - https://www.fiverr.com/. I have looked into them before for a hobby project I worked on but never actually used them because I couldn't justify the expense. It looks like it's an online marketplace for artists to hire themselves out as freelancers. Some of the sample art I've seen is remarkably good and easy on the pocket book. If anyone feels like sprucing up their books with some original artwork and has some spare cash, it may bear fruit. Of course, you would have to decide for yourself if you think you can recoup the money in sales 😁 It's also worth pointing out that we have artists within this community like Scott Ruggles who have already offered up their services. Some of these artists already have works that appear in published materials and I would be inclined to throw money at them first, personally.

Yeah, I came to the same conclusion about expendable foci early on in my design. I mainly don't like them because of book keeping tbh 😂. The reasons you list are just more reasons to dislike them. I'm using reusable foci but strongly debating removing them entirely at this point. I'm settling in on my design by using some of the constructive comments in this thread. I'm happy with how it's turning out so far. I'm trying to make the magic system flexible enough so that players have options when buying spells.

I think with your "duh" punctuation I'm done discussing anything with you. Thanks all, I have what I need.

Not that I want to die on this hill but do spellcasters learn spells in that scenario? You can literally take Archer boys bow from him in game and destroy it in front of him and it's gone forever*. How would you do that to a spellcaster if they have learned the spell? You can deny a spellcaster the ability to cast but not destroy their spell (without a transform, which is not in the same league as a simple Disarm maneuver). *To me paying points for something means that it can't be taken away permanently unless it's also Independent. If Archer boy paid points for his bow and I destroyed it in game he would be getting his focus back eventually... because he paid points for it.

Elaborate please.

My take is that if she requires a focus to cast the spell it would still cost her points regardless if the focus is expendable or just a standard focus. Expendable foci can be bought/found/stolen and a personal focus that is paid for with points can't be stripped from her forever... maybe if she put Independent on the spell then it would make sense. I would take the same stance if Wally Warrior wanted to buy his Vorpal Blade with points, it's a character defining trait at that point and I wouldn't take it away permanently.

There is a simple counter and it's you can't take Sally Sorcerer's Aether Arrow spell away from her. You may be able to deny her the ability to cast it by exploiting the limitations on the spell, but she will always have that spell. Wally Warrior can lose his Vorpal Blade permanently.

That is helpful, thanks. I would say spells are slightly above average compared to base weapon damage. That edge goes away rather quickly when you factor in things like Martial Arts, Deadly Blow, and Weapon Mastery. All of which I fully expect non-magic users to have in some combination. That makes me lean towards giving them a break.

I'm designing a magic system (fairly standard suff; no frameworks, foci, gestures, incantations, etc) and spells are coming in around 12 real cost on average, all in. Some magic systems (like The Turakian Age) will take that real cost and divide it by some number, let's say 3. I honestly cannot decide if I want to do this or not, I'm of two minds on the subject. Part of me says not to do it because magic is potent and someone who can shoot fireballs at will shouldn't get a point break for it. On the opposite side, I feel like spells may be a bit too expensive and spellcasters will end up feeling shallow compared to the source material as a result. What are your thoughts on the subject? Give magic users a point break or not? What worked for you in the past?

My money is on ninjas.

Agreed. We are also definitely not talking about the same thing 😁. I sincerely hope the Hall of Champions program helps alleviate some of the pain of setting up a campaign by providing interesting settings and canned adventures. Honestly, we have no one but ourselves to blame now that the gates are open to us. I also am a member of a Meetup group that runs weekly mini-cons and I've noticed that the 5e tables always fill up first. The non-5e tables? Good luck with that. That's sort of the problem with the hobby, the vast majority of people are only interested in playing D&D. Critical Roll is a big factor I think... people think that playing D&D is like that. Unpopular Opinion: the hobby is currently in a bubble that will burst. All the hipsters will run with their hands above their heads back to their craft breweries as they await the next trend. Calling it now 😝

Is it? I play in a weekly D&D 5e game and it's anything but fast playing and easy to learn. There are many, many rules, dice, and exceptions to rules just to make it appear to work. Where D&D shines is the ease of making a level 1 character. Once you get a few levels and archetypes, features, and spell slots come into play it frankly becomes a mess of horribly balanced spells, feats, and exercises in accounting. I play a simple Fighter (Cavalier) without spells or flashy abilities and I'm super underpowered compared to everyone in the group. My choice, but someone needs to take the hit. HERO, in comparison, has a painful character creation process rife with math. It's so time consuming and error prone that we've been using computer programs to do it for decades. Once you're in game, things are pretty straightforward I would argue. At the very least I would assert it's no worse than modern D&D.

How about an AoE Flash with invisible power effects?