Wednesday, 20 March 2013

New 52 Pages Draft Download

So I'm missing six pages of substance, four pages of examples, probably each page needs layout tweaking, and there are lots of overhauls I'd like to make, and redundancies I'd like to eliminate.


But seeing as there seems to be a popular demand for it, let me make available the latest update for my 52 Pages graphic system. The link on the right will give it to you as a pdf dowload through Google Drive.
Posted by at
Labels: ,

20 comments:

  1. 賈尼20 March 2013 at 14:59

    I love your use of colour.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Picador20 March 2013 at 18:25

    I love everything about this document. Wonderfully bold departures from the old systems to make the pieces fit together satisfyingly and intuitively and to give tactical depth and balance to it all.

    A few observations:

    1. Did you take out the bit about the Prophet's "sacred weapon" at some point? As well as the note about wizards only using "(c) = civilian" weapons? Right now the "(c)" designation has no explanation. I think that needs to go back in, in some form, as presently it looks like all classes can use all weapons freely.

    2. The fact that the dual-wielding rules also apply to shields has some delicious consequences that I imagine to be intentional. E.g.: a fighter with 16 Str would normally gain no Strength bonus from using a short spear (max +/- 0). However, paired with a shield (max +/- 2), he now gets +2 to hit from his Strength (although still no damage bonus). I like to picture this as the way fighting with a shield allows you to overpower and press a foe to open them up to attacks from your primary weapon. This makes the big Roman soldier using a shield with a spear or shortsword into a viable combat style.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Roger G-S20 March 2013 at 21:39

      1. Oops, yes, those went to make room for two weapon attacks. I was thinking I would put those into the revised class pages instead but never got around to it.
      2. Nice exploit ... though completely not intentional. I'll have to think more about balancing shield/two weapon/two handed weapon. Attacking with the shield is flavorful but may have to go for simplicity and balance.

      Delete
  3. Picador20 March 2013 at 18:44

    Two more observations:

    3. The dual-wielding rules also give rogues and fighters about twice as many chances for merciless strikes / opportunity strikes. This starts to seem like it might be slightly overpowered... or maybe not. A fighter with longsword and shortsword has the same to-hit chance and probably similar mean damage as the same guy with a greatsword (the math on that one would take a few minutes). Unless he has 18 Str, when the greatsword is a better bet (which makes sense, and which your rules encourage).

    4. The resistances of your "construct" humanoid monsters don't line up with your "no flesh / no vitals" resistances for monsters generally. Not that they have to. But I thought this might be an oversight or a place where rules could get consolidated.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Roger G-S20 March 2013 at 21:41

      3. Right, the dice bonus gives a little over half a point, so with dual wielding it goes up to a little over one point bonus. You're right about the advantage over the two-handed sword, though it should be lessened if you have to roll the bonus die before figuring the higher of the two damages.

      Delete
    2. Roger G-S20 March 2013 at 21:42

      4. Oops again, that page was created before the "no X" approach.

      Thanks for your diligent reading and feedback!

      Delete
    3. Picador22 March 2013 at 16:04

      Hey, thank you for this excellent game. I'm excited to see the last few pages when they're done.

      Delete
  4. Carmen21 March 2013 at 00:01

    I like it. You might consider tweaking the colors for copper and gold, though; they may be a little close. It wouldn't even occur to me if my husband weren't mildly colorblind. He can't differentiate between close shades. They're fine together in the conversion line, I think, but he'd be asking me "is that copper or gold" when looking at the actual prices.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Roger G-S21 March 2013 at 00:12

      Yes! Two gamers of my long-standing acquaintance are red-green color blind. It's just for this reason I made the copper icons in white numbers, and gold/silver icons in black numbers ... plus, prices are never given in gold pieces. I hope that helps.

      Delete
  5. Jack21 March 2013 at 02:53

    Question about page four. The attack modifiers under missile and melee: Do they mean that fighters get +2 for every point of modifier?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Roger G-S21 March 2013 at 08:46

      No, they just start with +2. Will look into clarifying that.

      Delete
  6. Eric21 March 2013 at 05:53

    This prints up small-but-legible in a 3x3 on 8.5"x11" paper in landscape mode. You could have an entire game system printed on a 5-panel DM's screen, with the examples and legal stuff on a spare sheet.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Roger G-S21 March 2013 at 09:47

      Better yet, put the character creation stuff on two sides of a handout, and the DM stuff will fit on three panels of that screen ...

      Delete
  7. Hanley Tucks21 March 2013 at 11:35

    Thankyou! Will comment after thought.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Gothridge Manor21 March 2013 at 23:29

    Hi Roger, I wasn't sure where to contact you so here I am. Could you send me an email, I have a certain bundle to give you.

    ReplyDelete
  9. scrap princess22 March 2013 at 02:13

    this is really good, was needing a quick version of d&d for teaching people and one I could leave a copy with them.

    Really like the replacing of skills with "backgrounds" . It's tidy and avoid so much blather.

    Love the comprehensive but simple rules regarding combat, magic, and situationally modifiers

    Had trouble understanding how the saving throws are meant to work though. Like is there a target number or are you trying to roll under the bonus?

    The other thing I had trouble grasping was the max/min strength/ dex modifiers for weapons. Like I still don't easily grasp the reasoning behind them and am unsure if I'm reading them correctly.

    So a dagger never has a modifier to its damage from a strength score, and a hammer , while having no limit to maximum applicable strength bonus, can never a greater penalty than -1 to its damage, is that correct?

    Although now that I think about it , it does make sense, its just something I would of never considered before

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Roger G-S22 March 2013 at 07:39

      Saving throws are explained on p. 2. You got the strength thing right, yes. Thanks, glad you like it!

      Delete
    2. Picador22 March 2013 at 16:12

      Wait, then I seem to have misunderstood the Strength/weapon rules. I assumed that "+/-X" meant you can have up to -X penalty or up to +X bonus from Strength using that weapon. This made sense to me, as the version proposed by scrap princess above would mean that you'd get your full Strength bonus with ALL weapons other than daggers, shortswords, and spears. I thought the point was that a very high strength would only give its full benefit if you used a big, heavy weapon... I took this to be another intentional way of encouraging use of different weapons for different people (and balancing, e.g., the longsword's cut/thrust versatility against the mace's higher potential Strength bonus).

      Delete
    3. Roger G-S22 March 2013 at 23:30

      Bah, I misread Scrap's comment. Picador is in the right, the number is a maximum for STR bonus as well as a minimum for STR penalty.

      Delete
    4. scrap princess25 March 2013 at 20:26

      Dang , can't believe I missed the saving throw bit.
      also now I now understand where I was misreading the damage strength thing. Cheers!

      Delete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)