v3.0 suggestions

[JoeCarr28]

I'm on the fence on this.
As I said before (in this same thread I think) I'd like for 3.0 to be just a bug-fix release.
On the other hand I'd like to see an Advanced version of BFRPG that takes material from the Supplements without diverging too much from the original game.

My feelings exactly. (1) Just a bug-fix for BFRPG. (2) 'Advanced Fantasy Role-Playing' that integrates the best of the supplements into one coherent ruleset as a separate project - kind of an update to 1E AD&D in the same way that BFRPG updates B/X whilst retaining the spirit of the original rules.

[SmootRK]

I'm on the fence on this.
As I said before (in this same thread I think) I'd like for 3.0 to be just a bug-fix release.
On the other hand I'd like to see an Advanced version of BFRPG that takes material from the Supplements without diverging too much from the original game.

My feelings exactly. (1) Just a bug-fix for BFRPG. (2) 'Advanced Fantasy Role-Playing' that integrates the best of the supplements into one coherent ruleset as a separate project - kind of an update to 1E AD&D in the same way that BFRPG updates B/X whilst retaining the spirit of the original rules.

I have made suggestions regarding ability score use (above), but overall I agree with this. That said, it would hurt nothing to expand certain parts that do not affect rules themselves... for instance, more equipment, more spells, more magic items, and more monsters, would all be very very welcome additions to the core rules. There can be tweaks here and there (and of course, fixes) but leave most of the monkeying around with the actual rules, the addition of non-essential classes (or stuff like the Quasi-Classes, special skill mechanics, etc) to Supplements or a special "Advanced" book.

For instance, I am working on my own Houserule set, that is, in effect, a sort of Advanced (Basic) Fantasy Role-Playing Game... I even tweaked the name to "Smoot House-Rules for Advanced Character Options and More. I think a Supplement like this, or something similar is a better venue for such modifications and add-ons that go beyond the rules as already written.

That said, bring on the stuff... more spells in core, more gear, more magical items... more More MORE!

[Hywaywolf]

Due to the fact that I already own 3 copies 1st edition and 2 copies of 2nd edition, I am not sure I will buy the 3rd edition (of course, I am sure I will print one out and bind it just for the heck of it. I agree with the above posts about not mucking around with it too much. I don't want my other 5 books to be "obsolete"

[Sir Bedivere]

Well, Solomoriah suggested he'd like to see ideas, so we thought some up and tossed them out. If he decides to incorporate any of them, I'm sure he'll do it with a lot of consideration for backwards compatibility. On the other hand, if he doesn't add any of them, there will have been no harm done in thinking about them. I'm happy either way.

What I really want is a bug-fix version with some mildly expanded equipment lists.

That said, there is a kind of hole in the effects of prime requisites. Fighters have a good reason to want a high strength, but MUs and Clerics have no real reason to want more than the minimum required INT / WIS. In fact, given the fragility of the MU, he should go for high CON for the HP bonus first, then high STR and DEX for the combat bonuses, then, to keep the flavor of the class, a good INT. It's similar to DEX for Thieves, but DEX has combat bonuses, so everyone wants a high DEX.

This doesn't necessarily need to be fixed, and maybe none of the ideas put forward resolves the problem while at the same time retaining the old-school flavor, which is an important consideration. However, small changes like adding WIS bonus to turning undead rolls and healing spell effects, INT to MU spell damage, and DEX bonuses for thieves skills wouldn't seem to make previous rules obsolete.

To those worried about breaking the core rules or making past rules sets obsolete, what do you think? Would these changes break the system for you?

[Solomoriah]

Adding the Wisdom bonus to Clerical Turning and the Dex bonus to some Thief abilities is fine with me. It's the Intelligence bonus to damage I don't care for. I agree, there should be some way to promote higher INT among magic-users, but I'm not sure what it is.

[Hywaywolf]

Would adding cantrips (or whatever they are called) for MUs based on the intelligence bonus help any?

[artikid]

Well I guess we all have our favorite house-rules/supplements. I have my printed and bound "advanced" version of bfrpg as well. It includes:

• Core rules 2.0
  Half-humans
  Gnomes
  Druids
  Thief options
  Backgrouns Skills (the one by Omer Golan, it closely resembles AD&D's Secondary skills instead of NWPs or 3.x skills)
  Equipment Packs
  Armors and Shields
  New spells (only those that appeared in a version of the original game)
  Combat options
  BF Field Guide (only monsters that appeared in a version of the original game)
  Sentient Weapons

What did I add?

• Monks (made by me)
  Dexterity modifier applies to ranged attack damage
  Clerics add Charisma(!) to TU
  Material components (simplified, made by me: works on 1 gp per spell-level-to-be-cast base)
  Spellcasters may use spell slots to memorize spells of lower levels (eg use a 3rd level slot to memorize an extra web or Magic missile)
  Counterspelling

The last two are actually from 3.x but do not change the feel of the game very much, also they make spellcasters a bit more flexible without changing the game mechanics in a significative way.
All in all you can see I was trying to make an "AD&D lite" kind of game.

What I'm thinking about adding?

• Illusionists
  Clarified Combination class rules

What would I remove/change?

• I'd change the way HD caps for demi humans work (I'd give a maximum number of HD instead of a maximum HD size)

Regarding bonus spell slots: it's actually something I liked about 3.x and I'd probably put them in a revised 3rd printing.
However, since Solomoriah does not like this rule, I suggest either allowing spellcasters to apply their Prime Attribute Bonus to an enemy's Saving Throws or using it as a bonus to a spell's range (+1 = +10') or duration (+1=+1 time unit given for the spell's duration).

My 2cp
artikid

[Solomoriah]

Cantrips are 1.5E... no way they go in the core.

[SmootRK]

Perhaps for MU, we must simply go through the complete spell list, finding where INT can modify each spell appropriately (I guess same for Cleric with WIS and perhaps also CHA). Some spells might be Duration, others get range consideration, some might get a damage perk, and yet others (those that get 'to hit rolls') might get INT bonus to chance to strike (not unlike a fighter gets).

This way, the complexity of choosing is eliminated and yet the idea can be incorporated into the game design (behind the scenes) in a very balanced and controlled way. The idea could be expanded to give a little weight to other ability scores... individual spells might be modified by Wisdom at times, Charisma at other times (charms seem especially appropriate for CHA modification). This adds complexity to ability score use, but it is all predetermined by game designers, so it does not impact the actual Basic nature of game play itself.

Just more thoughts to toss around

[Hywaywolf]

A few questions. How long before V3 is ready on lulu if there is a v3. How long before some other modules are ready on Lulu? What is the difference between the two BF1s on Lulu. I know the first one is perfect bound, but what is different about the 2nd one?

Due to shipping cost I like to buy in bulk from LULU.