Castles and Cocks, the Basics.

[Mistborn]

If you're writing a new spell list why are Planar Binding and Wish still in the game? Why not just take those effects behind the woodshed and blow their brains out? It's not like those effects have to exist and simply not including them is the easier path.

[spongeknight]

If you're writing a new spell list why are Planar Binding and Wish still in the game? Why not just take those effects behind the woodshed and blow their brains out? It's not like those effects have to exist and simply not including them is the easier path.

Because quite aside from the legendary abuses you can use them for they are iconic effects that a kitchen sink RPG setting absolutely should have. Fucking seriously, if you think cutting out summoning demons and wishes is a good idea, sit down for a minute and contemplate your life.

[Mistborn]

Because quite aside from the legendary abuses you can use them for they are iconic effects that a kitchen sink RPG setting absolutely should have. Fucking seriously, if you think cutting out summoning demons and wishes is a good idea, sit down for a minute and contemplate your life.

First thing, yeah we can fvcking do without Wish. Wish is a terrible spell and always has been a terrible spell and it does not belong in any story actually worth telling in D&D style RPG. How wish is actually supposed to work is that you have a 10 minute argument with the DM and then you either win or lose D&D. It has always been a stupid spell and the only existed so Gary Gygax could shove his cock in your face.

As for Planar Binding. Well having Summoned minions is thing indeed that players should have. There's even room for having some of your tiny men be demons. But the sort summoning rituals that Planar Binding represents don't have a place on the standard spell list. They probably ought to exist in some capacity but that isn't the sort of effects that's part of a balanced gameplay breakfast.

[erik]

So no genies or demon binding or open ended high level powers?

I can get behind rewriting them but not abolishing them if you truly want high level play.

[Mistborn]

So no genies or demon binding or open ended high level powers?

I can get behind rewriting them but not abolishing them if you truly want high level play.

Aladdin style genies are getting the boot because the cool to suck ratio involved is too damn high and they don't fit with the rest of the setting. Genies that simply have powerful magic like in the original mythology are fine.

Summoning extraplanar being to do stuff for you is obviously still a thing that should exist. However the classic demon summoning trope involves summoning something that is more powerful than your character. Which is obviously not something that can just go on your spell list. Some kind of summoning ritual likely needs to exist but it should probably be more like an adventure set piece than something that goes on your character sheet.

[Ice9]

Some kind of summoning ritual likely needs to exist but it should probably be more like an adventure set piece than something that goes on your character sheet.

Ehh - "adventure set pieces" are just not as satisfying as actual abilities. "Solve a problem by McGuffins" is a thing anyone can do and you're going to be doing anyway, so it's not giving you any new agency or options.

If you want a game where the mechanics stick to combat-scale and the big stuff is handwavium, I think 13A and Legend (the d20 one, not the Mongoose one) have that covered.

Those spells do need serious rewriting though; don't mistake me saying they're great as is.

[deaddmwalking]

So, back to my question. How does Legendary Bob the Uttercold adventure in the City of Brass.

I picked that as a semi-random example of a Legendary Adventure location, but you're free to pick your own.

What does a legendary adventure look like? What tools do characters have to have at that level to be effective?

It's okay if you get rid of wish and planar binding if you want, but if you do, you have to answer the question of what 'epic' looks like to you. You've been using 3.x as a guide, but when you deviate from it you have to explain what those differences are going to be.

So far, it sounds like you want it to be 'basically exactly the same' at low tier and 'magically balanced' at high tier, and I have no idea still what you even mean by that other than wizards will have a sphere list more similar to a Beguiler than a standard wizard.

[Mistborn]

Ehh - "adventure set pieces" are just not as satisfying as actual abilities. "Solve a problem by McGuffins" is a thing anyone can do and you're going to be doing anyway, so it's not giving you any new agency or options.

If you want a game where the mechanics stick to combat-scale and the big stuff is handwavium, I think 13A and Legend (the d20 one, not the Mongoose one) have that covered.

I was more thinking that sort of thing would be like making a magic item. Like you pile up a bunch of regents possibly with some set GP value, dump in some spells. Maybe roll a few skill checks and if all goes well some kind of outsider shows up and does stuff for you.

You want to make something that could potentially be in the players toolbox but isn't their go to solution for all problems. Plus you want have a set of understandable rules in play when the Demon cult is summoning their dread master. That way PCs can make informed decisions about how to stop that summoning.

[deaddmwalking]

You want to make something that could potentially be in the players toolbox but isn't their go to solution for all problems. Plus you want have a set of understandable rules in play when the Demon cult is summoning their dread master. That way PCs can make informed decisions about how to stop that summoning.

No, you want to. And if you're serious about it, you should start explaining how you intend to do it. Because if you're making a new game and you want these understandable rules to exist, you'll need to write them. And it's mostly okay if you have a 'holder' for 'rituals to summon powerful outsiders go here', but you still have to consider what that means. If your intention is to let enough Tier 1 cultists summon Azagorgoth the Defiler then you have to consider whether that is acceptable in Tier 1. If your expectation is that it is only feasible at Epic Tier, it limits the types of stories you can tell.

What is your power-level? What does epic mean to you?

[Mistborn]

What is your power-level? What does epic mean to you?

I think we might have a philosophical disagreement. As far as I'm concerned end state is less interesting then the process. Epic or immortal are just words, what they actually mean is largely arbitrary.

What's important is that there is progression that each tear is both distinct from the one that came before it while there remains a strong sense of continuity with what came before. Deciding what "epic tier" looks like before "legendary tier" has been written and is reasonably functional is a pointless timewaster. It's like trying to build the top of a jenga tower before the bottom.

[Grek]

Demon summoning should be a power that the demon has, not individual wizards.

[PhoneLobster]

Deciding what "epic tier" looks like before "legendary tier" has been written and is reasonably functional is a pointless timewaster. It's like trying to build the top of a jenga tower before the bottom.

No... you really should plan as much as you can of what your tiers look like before you start filling in the details or you will lack differentiation and content for later tier development.

And your metaphor is terrible. It would be better to say that your current plan isn't building a jenga tower in order. Your current plan is to finish carpeting the floor on your new house before you even start the framework for the walls and roof.

[MGuy]

What is your power-level? What does epic mean to you?

I think we might have a philosophical disagreement. As far as I'm concerned end state is less interesting then the process. Epic or immortal are just words, what they actually mean is largely arbitrary.

What's important is that there is progression that each tear is both distinct from the one that came before it while there remains a strong sense of continuity with what came before. Deciding what "epic tier" looks like before "legendary tier" has been written and is reasonably functional is a pointless timewaster. It's like trying to build the top of a jenga tower before the bottom.

You still are failing to tell anyone what the fuck the difference between one tier and another even is. Even if you wanna fall back on the 'I want to do things in order' argument you'd still need to, before writing your damn abilities, figure out what the difference between being bob the farmer > adventurer > lord > demigod even is. What makes each distinct? Even if you weren't using arbitrary words to announce different tiers and you were just using levels you would HAVE to determine what the differences between levels 1 and 10 were. Right now I'm assuming that you don't know, which is why you keep refusing to tell anyone who's been asking.

[Mistborn]

Well a lot of what I have. Was written on the basic/heroic/paragon/epic paradigm.

But that said maybe something like this

Novice. Adventures are on more a local level, PCs are more integrated into the setting. Challenges are overcome primarily through mundane skills, monsters are overcome primarily through weapons and the occasional flask of oil.

Adventurer. PC have the enough power to stand out from the crowd. Casters and mundanes coexist here. Getting there is still a significant part of the adventure.

Legendary Tier. Serious mobility powers start to come online. Pure mundane characters stop being a thing. Saving/overthrowing nations stats being a thing that PCs do and this is the point where people start playing with the domain minigame and building armies of tiny men.

Epic Tier: Serious GTFO powers start cropping up. PCs and monsters can take on armies of tiny men themselves, and PCs that are serious about having minions start building a smaller elite team. Adventures increasingly span multiple planes.

Immortal Tier: immortal tier is partly defined but the fact that there is simply less stuff there. Immortal tier foes tend to be unique individuals like Gods or Demon lords and Immortal tier locations are not "natural occurrences" but rather were placed there for a specific purpose. Adventures are about breaking into the fortresses or prisons that have been built by other immortal tier entities.

[deaddmwalking]

Building a game is more like a skyscraper than a Jenga tower. In a Jenga tower, all the pieces are the same, and you're going to fit them exactly where they go - heck - you even know what the 'start game' looks like.

Your game is more like a skyscraper. It's okay to have people living and working on the first ten levels while you're constructing the higher levels. But it's not okay to build the first ten levels without a plan for the next ten levels. You can have a framework or scaffolding, but you have to know what the final building is supposed to look like. If it turns out that you have to switch to different windows or put your support beams in slightly different places, you'll be okay, but you still have to know what 'success' looks like.

And ultimately, if you're interested in posting here and soliciting accolades and not actually making your game (which is what I think you're doing), that's fine, too. I don't want to dissuade you from making something, but from your posts to this point in this thread and your angels rant, I'm 100% certain that whatever you make will fall well short of Pathfinder's quality.

[Mistborn]

The whole reason that I but a high priority on getting Basic out the door as quickly as possible is that having something complete and playable is way more important then wanking about what epic tier is "supposed to look like".

Talking about a blueprint is a waste of time and having endless arguments about blueprints is why we never actually get shit done. The important thing is writing actual fucking game content. Which is what this thread was supposed to be for, writing actual content for the first tier. Which involves writing monsters to set a benchmark and then writing PC classes that can meet that benchmark.

[Kaelik]

Talking about a blueprint is a waste of time and having endless arguments about blueprints is why we never actually get shit done.

As the person who has zero content, arguing with the people have made actual content, you aren't really in a position to say anything.

[Mistborn]

As the person who has zero content, arguing with the people have made actual content, you aren't really in a position to say anything.

That's a fair point but go suck a barrel of cocks anyway. There's no point in soliciting feedback until I have a complete game.

This thread no longer serves any purpose.

[Kaelik]

There's no point in soliciting feedback until I have a complete game.

Not if you are going to reject all possible feedback, which you clearly are.

[Lokey]

These are all the things we asked you about in January, and we didn't ask you about them to be dicks. Ok, not only to be dicks. It doesn't help that you deflect questions like a press agent.

Why are all your monsters as fast or faster than PCs? Why does everything have almost the same init? Why are your disablers game over (long range, repeated chances to fail and lose)? Unless there's other stuff going on, the first things I read on your content make me go wtf and wonder why the vague design theory which sounds ok is going so horribly wrong.

[deaddmwalking]

As the person who has zero content, arguing with the people have made actual content, you aren't really in a position to say anything.

That's a fair point but go suck a barrel of cocks anyway. There's no point in soliciting feedback until I have a complete game.

This thread no longer serves any purpose.

If your promise is to develop a game that delivers on meaningful tiers of power, then a rush to get a 'complete' low-level game out the door doesn't make any sense. 3.x already does low-level play well. Even with casters and non-casters.

Your premise and promise is to develop a game that continues that balance to higher levels. Getting a complete low-level game out the door is no indication of your ability to get these meaningful tiers complete.

If you want to make meaningful tiers, you start by describing what the tiers are (that helps you determine if you met your design criteria) and then fleshing them out. You probably want to start at the tier that you think is most important (not the beginning tier). You can scale power to that tier at least as easily as trying to power up from a 'base level'.

Again, I don't mean to discourage you from making something. But start with the thing you want (high level play) and work from there. Because frankly, your idea of 'low-level play' is fairly insulting. It is definitely not better than other games that exist today.

[Leress]

blueprint == plan/design.

If there is no plan/design how is anyone going figure out if your design are met or see blind spots in the plan/design. Hell the only reason people are arguing over minutiae is because that is the only thing you provided. Along with the vague design goals, it just sounds like you are doing some scattershot approach to making your "better 3.x" game.

[OgreBattle]

What kind of action economy system are you going to use, and how are player turns handled