|
Post by foster1941 on Aug 21, 2005 0:43:46 GMT -5
Don't get me wrong, I don't think you should include any of those classes either (and even if you do include a berserker-type class/ability it shouldn't be like the one in TD3 which was actually sort of a berserker-lycanthrope), I was just listing them for the sake of completeness -- every OD&D class presented in a TSR publication.
|
|
|
Post by WSmith on Aug 21, 2005 6:51:45 GMT -5
Understood. Concerning spells, okay, call me a heratic, but I like magic missile from SUP I, so I would include that. I would need to take a closer look at the others to see what I would include. I like some of Gary's current OD&D rules. I will cut and paste them here since my site is gone.
|
|
|
Post by foster1941 on Aug 21, 2005 23:09:34 GMT -5
I don't have anything against any of the "new" low level spells in Supp I and think that clerics in particular deserve the extra spells (sincw without them they only have 4 spells to choose from at a couple levels). What I don't like are the high level spells, MU level 7+ and cleric level 6+. I like the notion that spells like Disintegrate, Death Spell, Reincarnation, and Geas (for MUs) and Raise Dead, Commune, Dispel Evil, and Quest (for clerics) are as powerful as spells get, and anything more powerful is on the level of an artifact or an act of the gods, and I think that by including a whole array of more powerful spells these are decreased in significance -- they go from being "ultimate powers" to just another spell.
|
|
|
Post by foster1941 on Aug 22, 2005 0:41:17 GMT -5
Also worth considering if you're looking to add the extra MU spells from Supp I -- while adding a couple spells here and there won't make much of a difference, if you add ALL of the spells (even just all of the level 1-6 spells) that will potentially give the MU a very large array of spells to choose from (16+ spells each of levels 2-6) which is potentially unbalancing and probably requires the addition of something like the "Chance to Know" table (which, non-coincidentally, also debuted in Supp I alongside all those new spells) as a counter-balance. I don't like the Chance to Know table for OD&D for 2 reasons: 1) it adds extra complication and more bookkeeping, when the goal should be to keep the game as simple as possible, and 2) it places too much emphasis on high stats -- no longer is any Int score of 15+ (enough to get the +10% XP bonus) enough, now players will all want to have Int 18 to max out % to know (and, even more, players with Int scores of 15 or 16 will begin to feel "inferior"). Therefore I'd urge caution in including too many extra spells -- only include so many that you won't unbalance the class and require the institution of the Chance to Know table (or something similar).
|
|
|
Post by WSmith on Aug 31, 2005 19:04:51 GMT -5
I agree. I need to relook over SUP I. I think Magic Missile and maybe one other spell were all I would keep. I am with you on not having to deal with the chance to know. BTW, it was the low level spells I was talking about. I agree with your post about the higher level ones.
|
|