Basic Fantasy RPG Forums

Huh... wonder if that was 2d6 or 1d20?

d100

Changed the numbers a bit and corrected a few things in the layout. R4 now available.

Hey MT, I used my "class comparison" table to compare the actual progression of your ST, here is what I found out:

Clerics are slightly better at FORT ST that Fighters (they are equal for almost half of their XP gaining). The other values retain most of their priority.

One question? Why do the fighters have the lesser Will ST? Will saves against fear and temptation, It should be a good ST for Clerics and Fighters, then for Magic Users (just because of the "Will = ST vs Magic thing) and last for the Thieves.

Dimirag wrote:Hey MT, I used my "class comparison" table to compare the actual progression of your ST, here is what I found out:

Clerics are slightly better at FORT ST that Fighters (they are equal for almost half of their XP gaining). The other values retain most of their priority.

One question? Why do the fighters have the lesser Will ST? Will saves against fear and temptation, It should be a good ST for Clerics and Fighters, then for Magic Users (just because of the "Will = ST vs Magic thing) and last for the Thieves.

If you want I can make a new file comparing the Single ST values.

I've chosen which types of saves should be good or not by checking the modern games that use those. Maybe its not that logic, but generally people wanting the Fort/Reflex/Will system are coming from 3e/Pathfinder, and probably want something that resemble those games.

Speaking of the cleric VS fighter, in the core rules, the clerics have better saves than fighter. All of the number come from the official rules, where I've chosen 3 columns per class to represents the poor/average/good ST. I agree that maybe I could change the numbers a bit for the Fighter saves (better will/worse ref maybe ?), but overall, it looks pretty much like what I wanted to do with this supplement.

Let's say I work the tables a bit in the next days and send them to you by PM, and we check out what it looks like in a new comparison table ?

For the single ST tables, it won't be necessary, because the numbers are the average of the 5 saving throws per class. But doing it would probably show that clerics have better ST than the Fighter for much of the progression.

mTeasdale wrote:I've chosen which types of saves should be good or not by checking the modern games that use those. Maybe its not that logic, but generally people wanting the Fort/Reflex/Will system are coming from 3e/Pathfinder, and probably want something that resemble those games.

I din't check the 3.x or PF as they kind of run in a different scale (and have only good and bad ST, so I didn't thought you've used it for reference, in those games some of the BF classes has only one good save and two bad, so when adding a "mid ST" you are either increasing one or decreasing another).

mTeasdale wrote:Speaking of the cleric VS fighter, in the core rules, the clerics have better saves than fighter. All of the number come from the official rules, where I've chosen 3 columns per class to represents the poor/average/good ST. I agree that maybe I could change the numbers a bit for the Fighter saves (better will/worse ref maybe ?), but overall, it looks pretty much like what I wanted to do with this supplement.

I know you've used the numbers from the corerules, but don't be afraid to modified to better suit the 3 saves system.
Just by checking the initial and final values in each ST the cleric and fighter are quite balanced.

mTeasdale wrote:Let's say I work the tables a bit in the next days and send them to you by PM, and we check out what it looks like in a new comparison table ?

Feel free to send me the new values whenever you want.

mTeasdale wrote:For the single ST tables, it won't be necessary, because the numbers are the average of the 5 saving throws per class. But doing it would probably show that clerics have better ST than the Fighter for much of the progression.

I was editing my previous post uploading the Single Save table, it ends up with the Thief as the better saving class, but they are all almost at the same value.

How about if I make a 2 Values Saving Throw (based on project 74, yes Solo, I love that saving system)? We would end up with a 1, 2 and 3 values alternatives, if we make a 4 values and add the existing one we end up with 1-5 values

I'll work on that in the next days and send it to you !

I was also thinking about a 2 ST alternatives, something like physical/mental saves. What did you had in mind for those ? Maybe we can work on that together ? Let me know !

My take on the 2ST is one generic "good", and one generic "neutral"o "bad", then based on the class the GM tells if the save to use is one or another.

I know I'm not giving you guidelines for when to use one or another, but that is what I like about this system, is left at the interpretation of the GM. My guidelines would be: A save against the ability required by the class is saved as Good, and same for things related to the class.

And here it is:

Here is my take on the Triple Saving Throw:

Dimirag wrote:Here is my take on the Triple Saving Throw:

The attachment 3VST.png is no longer available

I'm not sure to understand why the thieves and M-U have ST so low. I personally think something like that would more in-line with the core rules (see attachment).