Goodman Games

Fan Forums
It is currently Mon Jul 28, 2014 10:27 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Two House Rules
PostPosted: Thu Jan 03, 2013 12:02 pm 
Offline
Ill-Fated Peasant

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 10:07 pm
Posts: 5
Hello there! I am a new user to this forum, having joined just last night. And while I had the DCC RPG rulebook for a whiled now, I haven't had the opportunity to play it yet. Still, I enjoyed reading it a lot, and it seems that I will finally get the opportunity to try it out in the next few months. Because of that I was writing a few house rules and new spells/magic items/whatnot to use with the game. So, I am posting the two house rules I came up with up to now, hoping you guys can discuss them a bit. Maybe I am not seeing some unintended consequence, or maybe you have better ideas about how to accomplish the same thing.

My first houserule isn't so much of a new rule, but just an alteration as to how the deed die works. Now, the effectiveness of a deed is no longer dictated (but still influenced) by the die. Instead, it is dictated by the deed itself. The die just determines if the fighter can pull it off or not. For example, suppose a very strong barbarian wants to throw a boulder at a dragon's gullet right as the monster begins to inhale for its fiery breath. Now, since the monster isn't expecting anything of the kind, considering humans merely annoying ants, the DM could set the difficulty for the deed as 4, meaning the warrior needs 4 or more on his deed die. Then, the DM and the player would discuss how effective the deed is. The player might suggest that the stone will cause some damage and get lodged on the dragon's throat, stopping any breath attacks until it takes a round to spit it out (maybe with a con test). The judge might then also add that a roll of 6 or more would cause the dragon to choke and asphyxiate until he takes the time to take the stone out.

The reason for this rule is because I wanted player creativity and ingenuity to be much more important than the die roll. Players may still perform very might deeds that can change the tide of a fight, but they need to rely on having a really good idea for that. On the other hand, this also means that once a character has a good idea, he can work on its execution to make it work better. That is, he can change the variables to make it more easy to accomplish. In the above example, maybe the party's mage could cast an illusion spell so the rock looked like the barbarian, jumping toward the dragon's head. If the ploy was successful, the dragon would try align his head with the illusion (so the barbarian gets the full impact of his breath). Thus, maybe the difficulty would be lowered to 3 or maybe even 2! Or maybe the party thief will sneakily climb the dragon's back (which is a pretty impressive deed in itself) and stab its eyes right as the barbarian throws the stone, causing it to scram in pain and not see what is coming his way. On the other hand, maybe the dragon has some way to know what the party is thinking. In that case, the difficulty of the basic feat might be increased to 5 or maybe even 6. Maybe the party should find a way to hide its thoughts before facing the dragon.

The second change I want to make is removing the concept of known spells and adding back memorization, or preparation if you will. Now, I understand that wizards already got lots of toys to play with, so that being able to know all spells is a pretty big deal. But I really dislike the idea of a maximum number of known spells. It just seems silly a wizard can't learn a new spell he found until he gets another level, just like it would be silly if a fighter couldn't get a new magic weapon until he got enough experience to level up. I know this can be explained away as an intricacy of how magic works, but this kind of magic can stop a lot of what I consider fun about the wizard class, such as hoarding magical knowledge and learning a specific spell just for an special situation. So, here is what I am planning to do:

The known spells statistic for wizards and elves (I suppose for the clerics too, though I need to give them some more thought) become "spells prepared". At any time, a character can't have more than that number of spells ready to be cast. Anytime a character finds a complete description of a spell (or pieces one together), he may spend the time and money (in related experiments) to learn it. I don't have a full system ready, but I think learning time should be exponential to the level. So, like a first level could take 1 week to learn. A second level spell could take a month, a third level spell takes 4, and a fourth level takes an year and a half. This learning time could be greatly reduced based on the caster's level and on his specializations (a level 10 necromancer who rolled really well on his specialization roll probably can learn a 5th level necromantic spell in half a month, instead of 6 years).

Once a character learns a spell, he knows the basic forces that rule its usage. He will never need to learn it again (unless his memory is tampered with). However, he still probably needs his notes (unless he, for some reason, is able to memorize the entire contents of a thick book. And that is for second level spells) to prepare the spell. Still, even if he lost all his notes, a caster who learned a spell could probably recreate the spell with a bit of work (way less than needed to learn it, though). It is my intent that finding spells to learn, and then deciding on which to actually spend time on be a really big deal. Specially for high level spells, which can only be learned on a timely manner by those who specialized in that kind of magic.

Well, so what does it mean that a character has prepared a spell? In my game, in order to cast a spell, the mage must create or do something of mystical significance. This thing will power the spell energies that the mage needs to draw on to cast his magic. If a caster rolls the lost spell result, his preparation is undone. One interesting aspect of this is that if the preparation is physically undone, he also loses access to the spell. Each individual spells has its own preparation forms, which are randomly decided once the spell is found. For example, for the magic missile spell, I have these 3 up to now:

Preparation - Roll 1d3: (1) The wizard needs to hit the bullseye of a target in some sort of competition with some sort of stakes. It doesn't need to be much, a few silver pieces or regional renown are enough for this spell.The spell remains prepared as long as the arrow remains on the target, and losing the spell causes the arrow to fall down. (2) The sorcerer needs to inscribe a small sheet f glass with the appropriate runes for the spell. If the glass is broken, tarnished or written over, the spell is lost. However, if the wizard decides to unprepare the spell, or just loses it due to a bad roll, the sheet is merely wiped clean, being possible to reuse it. (3) The wizard merely needs to intone the magic words promising a worthy target to whatever forces or spirits rule over the spell. However, the first thing the wizard kills with his spell will have the magic missile lodge itself in its heart. The spell will remain prepared as long as the missile is there, and the missile will fall off if the wizard unreadies the spell. Either way, the creature will come back to life once this is done. If the magician loses the spell before he kills anyone, he needs to kills someone with some other ranged means (either mundane or magical). Otherwise, the next ranged attack against the caster will automatically be a critical success.

These preparations become more complex and elaborate at higher spell levels. So, the stuff to ready a magic missile is rather easy. A glass of sheet may cost a bit, but it can be reused. And the wizard merely needs a few nights at an inn to hit the bullseye (well, he will probably want to buy the target later, or bring his own ,but still, no big deal). On the other hand, stuff like Fecund Fungi could require that a number of fungi man chant a special song, including the mage's name in it, at all times. How the mage would accomplish this is probably an adventure in itself. Control fire might require an everburning coal, a mystical material made from trees with more than 1000 years through some secret alchemical process, to be inscribed with runes and placed on a dwarven forge (or a similar hot fire).

Casters can only have as many spells prepared as they would have spells knwon. They can, at any time, unprepare a spell so they can prepare another, but to later get the unprepared spell back, they would need to go through all this work again. This can, I think, create a lot of interesting hooks, both when dealing with spellcasting PCs and with spellcasting NPCs.

Finally, a caster may ready the same spell more than once. This has two effects. Frst, it makes the spell easier to cast (I am thinking of giving either +1 or +2 to die roll per memorization). Also, the spell ccan, of course, be lost more than once. Finally, if the spell is memorized enough, corruption, miscasts and patron taint may be avoided. I am not sure how many is enough for each yet, though. To make things a bit more interesting, spells can't be prepared more than once in the same way at any one time. So, to prepare a magic missile spell thrice, the caster would need to do all 3 of the preparation procedures above. This means that the mage would need to find different versions of the spell, or come up with his own.

So, sorry for the long post, but do you guys have any thoughts, opinions or criticism to the above house rules? Thanks in advance.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Two House Rules
PostPosted: Thu Jan 03, 2013 1:51 pm 
Offline
Cold-Hearted Immortal
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 5:42 am
Posts: 2236
Location: Chicago suburbs
alex wrote:
do you guys have any thoughts, opinions or criticism to the above house rules?
Sounds like you've put a lot of thought into this. 8)
1. You might try DCC as-is first, and house rule it second. Sometimes a tweak that seems to be needed when reading a rulebook turns out not to be needed so much once you experience the game itself.
2. I'll be interested to see how these two rules work for you in play. Hopefully you'll report back once you've run a few sessions.

The main comment I would have about your specific rules is just that I have had mixed feelings about spell memorization for a long time. When I discovered OD&D back in the 1970's one of the first house rules we put in was to eliminate memorization because it seems like there are already quite a few obsticles for the magic-user to overcome, particularly at low levels where he has few spells. On the other hand, if you like the memorization rule I don't see it as being a problem as far as character balance goes, so go for it.

I'll have to ponder your deed dice rule. It sounds like it should work pretty well, but I'll have to think through some situations to see if it might be abused.

Oh, and welcome to the forums! :D

_________________
Marv / Finarvyn
DCC Minister of Propaganda; Deputized 6/8/11
Image
DCC RPG playtester 2011, C&C playtester 2003,T&T since 2003,
ADRP Since 1993, OD&D player since 1975

"The worthy GM never purposely kills players' PCs, He presents opportunities for the rash and unthinking players to do that all on their own."
-- Gary Gygax
"Don't ask me what you need to hit. Just roll the die and I will let you know!"
-- Dave Arneson


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Two House Rules
PostPosted: Thu Jan 03, 2013 2:29 pm 
Offline
Deft-Handed Cutpurse
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2012 6:03 pm
Posts: 192
I try to look at magic as not some nifty science formula that you can learn by going to wizard school but as a price that must be paid to have. :twisted: You can only give so much of yourself to magic. After a point there's nothing to trade. Ha ha ha ha!

_________________
Dark Cauliflower

--from deep night comes the cruciferiouz king!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Two House Rules
PostPosted: Thu Jan 03, 2013 2:39 pm 
Offline
Ill-Fated Peasant

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 10:07 pm
Posts: 5
finarvyn wrote:
1. You might try DCC as-is first, and house rule it second. Sometimes a tweak that seems to be needed when reading a rulebook turns out not to be needed so much once you experience the game itself.


I agree with you here. I usually try to do exactly that. However, I would rather not introduce such a big change on how magic work after the game has started, and I have one player I know will complain if I change how the deeds work after he has used it. Since this may well be my only chance to play for a while, I think I will go for broke and try it with the house rules. Still, if things crash and burn, I know I only have myself to blame. That said, I have some experience with both older editions older D&D and with D&D 3.5, so maybe this will be enough to guide these and any other changes I make.

finarvyn wrote:
2. I'll be interested to see how these two rules work for you in play. Hopefully you'll report back once you've run a few sessions.


Will do for sure! :D

finarvyn wrote:
The main comment I would have about your specific rules is just that I have had mixed feelings about spell memorization for a long time. When I discovered OD&D back in the 1970's one of the first house rules we put in was to eliminate memorization because it seems like there are already quite a few obsticles for the magic-user to overcome, particularly at low levels where he has few spells. On the other hand, if you like the memorization rule I don't see it as being a problem as far as character balance goes, so go for it.


I know a lot of people dislike that. But I really like how it makes planning ahead important for the wizard. Still, once a spell is prepared in this system, you can keep casting it until you lose it, so new wizards aren't as brittle as in the older editions. Also, I hope the idea of each spell having a preparation ritual will help make the notion less abstract and make magic seem more "realistic" (as much as magic can be such).

finarvyn wrote:
I'll have to ponder your deed dice rule. It sounds like it should work pretty well, but I'll have to think through some situations to see if it might be abused.


If you think of anything, please do post it!

finarvyn wrote:
Oh, and welcome to the forums! :D


Thank you!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Two House Rules
PostPosted: Thu Jan 03, 2013 3:31 pm 
Offline
Steely-Eyed Heathen-Slayer
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 2:23 pm
Posts: 652
Location: Montreal
The deed die: as I understand it, you're essentially taking out the scale of success (3-7), to instead present a set DC (difficulty check) to the deed, e.g. 3 ro 4 or 5 with a binary result: it works or it doesn't, and the result is discussed between player and judge (presumably utlimately decided by the judge). This means that for some deeds where you set the DC at 4 or higher, they won't work at all at lower levels but will work at higher levels, where with the original rule they would have worked at lower levels but with less efficiency perhaps. I don't really see how this improves on the current rule to be frank. To take your thrown boulder into the dragon throat example, with the current rules, if you think that it requires a 5 on the deed die to pull off (for whatever reasoning, including the humans-are-ants one), that's fine. Let the player roll, if he ends up with a 5, then pehaps the dragon implodes (or whatever suitable result you think appropriate). But if the player gets a 3 or a 4, you can still imagine another less important result, say with a 3 the barbarian brakes a tooth of the dragon (reduced damage on bite attacks) and on a 4 he blocks a nostril (reduced damage on breath attacks). Your rule, in my opinion and as far as I understand it, seems likely to effectively reduce the effeciency of warrior deeds since for some to be successful at all, the warrior will need a higher deed die roll.

Also: let the players be creative as much as you like, whatever solution you use. If you think that the players should strive for funky results, invite them to do so. Setting half-successes with lower results (say, 3 ro 4 in the above example) doesn't take away your power to do what you want which can be achieved by setting a higher DC for a more significant result.

Re: spell memorization, you'll find at least a few threads on these boards that have discussed this house rule. I have introduced a house rule very similar to your own in my game (where the players are still level 0 however - I'm dragging the funnel a bit because it's fun :) ), wherein the wizard (or elf) may change spells when he finds new ones, as long as he spends a few weeks studying the new spells. This prevents abuse, but allows the wizard to swap a useless spell for a useful one once in a while. Or to prepare something specific if he's going on a mission where he thinks one spell will be particularly useful. I believe one idea behind the original rule is to further enhance the "magic is unpredictacle" aspect of the game. I have no problem with either way of playing, myself, but plan on still letting wizards change spells occasionally.

_________________
Maledict Brothbreath, level 4 warrior, STR 16 (+2) AGI 7 (-1) STA 12 PER 9 INT 10 LUCK 15 (+1), AC: 16 Refl: +1 Fort: +2 Will: +1; lawful; Armor of the Lion and Lily's Blade.

Brother Sufferus, level 4 cleric, STR 13 (+1) AGI 15 (+1) STA 11 PER 13 (+1) INT 10 LUCK 9, AC: 11 (13 if wounded, 15 if down to half hit points), Refl: +3 Fort: +2 Will: +3, chaotic, Robe of the Faith, Scourge of the Maimed One, Darts of Pain.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Two House Rules
PostPosted: Thu Jan 03, 2013 4:49 pm 
Offline
Ill-Fated Peasant

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 10:07 pm
Posts: 5
dark cauliflower wrote:
I try to look at magic as not some nifty science formula that you can learn by going to wizard school but as a price that must be paid to have. :twisted: You can only give so much of yourself to magic. After a point there's nothing to trade. Ha ha ha ha!


True, this is a nice way to look at it, and it also suggests all kinds of fun stuff you can do with magic, corruption and patrons. Still, I wanted to focus the challenges on planning and good ideas, and memorization can make the wizard really shine in this kind of situation. Still, I will keep this idea in mind for a next time.

Skyscraper wrote:
The deed die: as I understand it, you're essentially taking out the scale of success (3-7), to instead present a set DC (difficulty check) to the deed, e.g. 3 ro 4 or 5 with a binary result: it works or it doesn't, and the result is discussed between player and judge (presumably utlimately decided by the judge). This means that for some deeds where you set the DC at 4 or higher, they won't work at all at lower levels but will work at higher levels, where with the original rule they would have worked at lower levels but with less efficiency perhaps. I don't really see how this improves on the current rule to be frank. To take your thrown boulder into the dragon throat example, with the current rules, if you think that it requires a 5 on the deed die to pull off (for whatever reasoning, including the humans-are-ants one), that's fine. Let the player roll, if he ends up with a 5, then pehaps the dragon implodes (or whatever suitable result you think appropriate). But if the player gets a 3 or a 4, you can still imagine another less important result, say with a 3 the barbarian brakes a tooth of the dragon (reduced damage on bite attacks) and on a 4 he blocks a nostril (reduced damage on breath attacks). Your rule, in my opinion and as far as I understand it, seems likely to effectively reduce the effeciency of warrior deeds since for some to be successful at all, the warrior will need a higher deed die roll.

Also: let the players be creative as much as you like, whatever solution you use. If you think that the players should strive for funky results, invite them to do so. Setting half-successes with lower results (say, 3 ro 4 in the above example) doesn't take away your power to do what you want which can be achieved by setting a higher DC for a more significant result.


You make a good point, and maybe I should do exactly what you suggest. My point was not to make the system more binary (although, to be fair, my example is trinary:P). My point was more along the lines that what you can achieve with a 3 or a 5 of a 7 depends on the situation, and is not at all inherent of the numbers. For example, suppose you want to blind an opponent like the book's example. If you are trying to hit his eyes with sand,, he will never be permanently blinded. On the other hand, if you are using a dagger, even a result of 4 could poke the eye out. On the other hand, you would at most remove an eye, not two (well, maybe with a 7). Then again, if we are talking about a beholder, or a cyclops, it is easier to hit that one eye, so maybe you would have better results with a 6 than if we were talking about a human. That said, I still think that specially risky maneuvers might fail on a 3 or a 4.

Skyscraper wrote:
Re: spell memorization, you'll find at least a few threads on these boards that have discussed this house rule. I have introduced a house rule very similar to your own in my game (where the players are still level 0 however - I'm dragging the funnel a bit because it's fun :) ), wherein the wizard (or elf) may change spells when he finds new ones, as long as he spends a few weeks studying the new spells. This prevents abuse, but allows the wizard to swap a useless spell for a useful one once in a while. Or to prepare something specific if he's going on a mission where he thinks one spell will be particularly useful. I believe one idea behind the original rule is to further enhance the "magic is unpredictacle" aspect of the game. I have no problem with either way of playing, myself, but plan on still letting wizards change spells occasionally.


Nice, I will try to look around. Maybe the magic section? Anyway, I hope the preparation requirements for each spell will make players think twice before changing a spell, specially a high level one.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Two House Rules
PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2013 10:45 am 
Offline
Steely-Eyed Heathen-Slayer
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 2:23 pm
Posts: 652
Location: Montreal
alex wrote:
That said, I still think that specially risky maneuvers might fail on a 3 or a 4.


The super-result (i.e. risky manoeuver) might not succeed on a 3 or a 4, but a 3 or a 4 should give something to the character for his efforts. That's what the current rules say, and I repeat that removing that essentially nerfs the warrior and, as a player, I would question why the judge decides to arbitrarily remove such a rule.

There are several threads on mighty deeds on this forum, if you want to look around. It might refine your idea on this particular game mechanic. I had similar questions as your own about the mighty deed mechanic when first reading the rules.

My understanding of why you wish to houserule the mighty deed rule, is that you think that some results should be difficult to achieve. Everyone will agree with that. If the warrior says "my deed for this round will be to plunge my hand through the dragon's chest and pull his heart out", well, even if he rolls a 3 on his deed die, he won't one-shot the dragon (unless it was already close to death). Even a 7 on the deed die would probably not yield that result. The way I see this is as follows in my above example:

- the player states a result as part of his deed. Plunging his fist into the dragon's chest is the action; pulling out his heart is a result. Players cannot ask for results. So I would reply to the player: "ok, you wish to drive you fist into the dragon's chest - we'll see about the result - roll your die".
- when the player succeeds on his die roll, I'd probably then see what he rolled and decide on the result. On a 3, perhaps the warrior's punch was strong enough to push the dragon back. On a 5, perhaps the warrior's punch was enough to actually daze the dragon; and on 7, perhaps the warrior drove his fist into the dragon's chest and managed to rip a scale off! (Additional damage, and a week(er) spot that can be targetted.) If the dragon was already low on hit points and after the damage is dealt the dragon is left with say only 10 hit points, I'd probably allow the initial player-intended result of ripping the heart out to occur on a good deed die roll, because it's pretty darn cool! :)

The point being, you of course need to scale the results, but my suggestion is: don't remove a success on 3s or 4s, you're likely to get frustrated players. Just give some lesser success on 3s and 4s.

_________________
Maledict Brothbreath, level 4 warrior, STR 16 (+2) AGI 7 (-1) STA 12 PER 9 INT 10 LUCK 15 (+1), AC: 16 Refl: +1 Fort: +2 Will: +1; lawful; Armor of the Lion and Lily's Blade.

Brother Sufferus, level 4 cleric, STR 13 (+1) AGI 15 (+1) STA 11 PER 13 (+1) INT 10 LUCK 9, AC: 11 (13 if wounded, 15 if down to half hit points), Refl: +3 Fort: +2 Will: +3, chaotic, Robe of the Faith, Scourge of the Maimed One, Darts of Pain.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Two House Rules
PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2013 11:21 am 
Offline
Ill-Fated Peasant

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 10:07 pm
Posts: 5
@Skyscraper

I think that, on the general case, you are completely right. I just think that, maybe, it might be an interesting option for players to try things that, because they are so risky, have a lower chance of success. However, now that I think of it, maybe this should be done by changing the AC instead of messing with the deed die result itself. About ripping the Dragon's heart, I think it could be totally feasible... if the wizard cast a powerful strength spell on him :D. I would let the player know what kind of results he could get beforehand, though (unless, for some reason, his character would have no idea either).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Two House Rules
PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2013 12:41 pm 
Offline
Steely-Eyed Heathen-Slayer
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 2:23 pm
Posts: 652
Location: Montreal
alex wrote:
@Skyscraper

I think that, on the general case, you are completely right. I just think that, maybe, it might be an interesting option for players to try things that, because they are so risky, have a lower chance of success. However, now that I think of it, maybe this should be done by changing the AC instead of messing with the deed die result itself. About ripping the Dragon's heart, I think it could be totally feasible... if the wizard cast a powerful strength spell on him :D. I would let the player know what kind of results he could get beforehand, though (unless, for some reason, his character would have no idea either).


I hear you.

Thanks for starting this discussion, and good luck with your game! If you end up using one or both house rules, I'd love to hear how they play out.

_________________
Maledict Brothbreath, level 4 warrior, STR 16 (+2) AGI 7 (-1) STA 12 PER 9 INT 10 LUCK 15 (+1), AC: 16 Refl: +1 Fort: +2 Will: +1; lawful; Armor of the Lion and Lily's Blade.

Brother Sufferus, level 4 cleric, STR 13 (+1) AGI 15 (+1) STA 11 PER 13 (+1) INT 10 LUCK 9, AC: 11 (13 if wounded, 15 if down to half hit points), Refl: +3 Fort: +2 Will: +3, chaotic, Robe of the Faith, Scourge of the Maimed One, Darts of Pain.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Two House Rules
PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2013 5:43 pm 
Offline
Hard-Bitten Adventurer

Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 5:07 pm
Posts: 157
What about a mercurial use of magic roll every time the spell is relearned?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Two House Rules
PostPosted: Sat Jan 05, 2013 1:27 pm 
Offline
Ill-Fated Peasant

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 10:07 pm
Posts: 5
Rostranor wrote:
What about a mercurial use of magic roll every time the spell is relearned?


That is a pretty good idea. Thanks!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Two House Rules
PostPosted: Sun Jan 06, 2013 2:21 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2011 1:04 pm
Posts: 755
Location: Los Angeles
Hi, chiming in a bit late. But wanted to bring up a few things concerning your two rules.

Regarding Might Deeds, I think what you're talking about is pretty much the same thing, just presented differently. When a warrior, or any level, wants to cut off the arm of his foe, he very much can try. Mechanically it's impossible, but for narrative sake, say in a thought bubble, "I'm going to cut off the sword arm of this foe." At first level, this warrior will only get a d3 deed die, the best chance he has is knocking the weapon out of his hand. But several years of adventuring and experience, this same warrior will probably do it routinely since his deed die will be a d5 or better. Remember the 7 mighty deeds are only examples of actual number of mighty deeds possible. I like to throw out the number 666, but there is officially NO LIMIT. Creating Mighty Deeds could be fun, and should be a collaborative effort between the Judge and Player. It can be agreed upon on the fly, as it should be. But after the game, time could be spent creating this new "signature" move to share and use for future reference. Here's me just making up as I go, using your numbers:

Stuff The Dragon With Rocks:

3 The thrown object hits the dragon in the kisser. 50% chance of knocking out a tooth (reducing bite damage by 2).

4 The thrown object gets lodged in the dragon's mouth, preventing bite and breath attacks. Dragon may make a Fort save vs the Attack Roll to dislodge the rock on its turn.

5 The thrown object get lodged in the dragon's throat, causing great discomfort resulting in -4 in all attacks. The Dragon may make a Fort save vs the Attack Roll on its turn to swallow or spit out the object. Failure results in the dragon taking 1d6 damage each round.

6 The thrown object shatters teeth while it gets lodged in the dragons throat. The dragon takes an addition 1d6 points of damage from the shards of its own teeth and -4 in all attacks. The object is lodged in the dragons throat. The dragon may make a Fort save vs the Attack Roll on its turn to remove the object. Failure results in the dragon taking 2d6 damage each round until the shards and the object is dislodged.

7+ The thrown object is stuck in the dragon's throat, and the dragon begins to suffocate. The dragon immediately takes 1d6 damage each round and can't perform any actions except dislodge the object with a Fort save vs the Attack Roll. Failure results in the dragon taking internal damage due to the combination of suffocation and pressure equal to the damage of its breath attack.

Regarding Spell Limits. Remember that levels are abstract representation of power in game terms. People in real life don't gain levels, and watch their incomes, power, wealth and knowledge increase systematically or mechanically. Levels are simple abstract representations of these mechanical increases. That's why Titles are so key, and fun, in level based games (something lost in later editions) it's why levels affect numbers of hirelings and henchman, and why after only a certain level some characters can get their keeps and castles, and the land that goes with it. So in the case of Wizards, their levels (plus intelligence) represent how many spells a Wizard can actually know (and cast) at any time. When they gain levels, it represents that final epiphany of understanding a certain spell they've been studying since they found that book, or scroll, or whatever.

But, at the same time, it's not a big deal. It's your game, and you should play it the way you want to play it. I immediately came up with my own skills/ability system when I started playing DCC RPG, back in the BETA. But then came to realize it was a bit convoluted in actual play, and not particularly fun. So I returned to using the Rules As Written with only a "slight" modification. (I used to use all kinds of variables for determine skill checks, see Crawl#1 for details. Now I'm back to d20 if you're trained, and d10 if you're not. But I still use variable DCs.)

_________________
Reverend Dakota Jesus Ultimak, S.S.M.o.t.S.M.S., D.M.

(Dungeon) Master In Chief of Crawl! fanzine. - http://www.crawlfanzine.com/

"[...] there is no doubt that Dungeons and Dragons and its imitators are right out of the pit of hell." - William Schnoebelen, Straight talk on Dungeons & Dragons


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Two House Rules
PostPosted: Sun Jan 06, 2013 8:20 pm 
Offline
Steely-Eyed Heathen-Slayer
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 2:23 pm
Posts: 652
Location: Montreal
alex wrote:
Rostranor wrote:
What about a mercurial use of magic roll every time the spell is relearned?


That is a pretty good idea. Thanks!


I agree!

_________________
Maledict Brothbreath, level 4 warrior, STR 16 (+2) AGI 7 (-1) STA 12 PER 9 INT 10 LUCK 15 (+1), AC: 16 Refl: +1 Fort: +2 Will: +1; lawful; Armor of the Lion and Lily's Blade.

Brother Sufferus, level 4 cleric, STR 13 (+1) AGI 15 (+1) STA 11 PER 13 (+1) INT 10 LUCK 9, AC: 11 (13 if wounded, 15 if down to half hit points), Refl: +3 Fort: +2 Will: +3, chaotic, Robe of the Faith, Scourge of the Maimed One, Darts of Pain.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Two House Rules
PostPosted: Sat Jan 12, 2013 3:14 pm 
Offline
Far-Sighted Wanderer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2013 8:40 am
Posts: 27
Location: Sun Prairie, WI
Quote:
Preparation - Roll 1d3: (1) The wizard needs to hit the bullseye of a target in some sort of competition with some sort of stakes. It doesn't need to be much, a few silver pieces or regional renown are enough for this spell.The spell remains prepared as long as the arrow remains on the target, and losing the spell causes the arrow to fall down.


How many wizards routinely enter dart contests in your world?


Quote:
For example, suppose a very strong barbarian wants to throw a boulder at a dragon's gullet right as the monster begins to inhale for its fiery breath.


Or you could decide that the barbarian simply does it, and let a standard attack roll indicate how the dragon reacts to having a boulder thrown in his face. Does he hit the dragon's AC? If yes, then blammo! If not, then make up what the failure looks like. Awesome deeds are in the game's DNA, not a book of rules.

VS

_________________
http://vengersatanis.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 14 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group