Ravenloft: A Return the Basics?
Ravenloft: A Return the Basics?
The upside to spending the day cleaning is that you have plenty of time to think. I've been pondering the Ravenloft campaign, and I'd like to propose something radical: go back to basics.
By this I mean:
1) We only use the Player's Handbook and the Dungeon Master's Guide (with all prestige classes approved by the DM).
2) We only use the errata for the core rules. By this I mean that changes to the books may have been published in something like Complete Divine or Spell Compendium, but unless it's in the errata, the DMG, or the PHB, we don't use it. Ignore what HeroForge has to say on the subject. In the case of differences between the d20 SRD and these rules, we go with the printed rules.
3) If Lance thinks is necessary, we use a small number of feats, prestige classes, spells, etc. from the Ravenloft source book, or specifically mentioned in it.
So ... why do this?
1) We have a novice DM who hasn't been playing a lot recently. Focusing on the core rules will help Lance immensely.
2) We have players who aren't clear on the 3.0/3.5 differences, and the confusion is only enhanced by the introduction of myriad additional rules from two dozen different (and more often than not, contradictory) source books. Refocusing on the core rules will help everyone learn the differences, and (with any luck) help combat the growing secondeditionitis.
3) From an aesthetic standpoint, focusing on the core classes helps evoke that classic 1st edition feel.
I'm not saying we do this for Westmarks, Dark City or Maure Castle; I'm just saying that when we're in Ravenloft, we're focusing on the core of the game, on the rules that we should know.
I expect we'll be playing 3.5 for another two years or so (assuming they announce 4.0 at GenCon 2007 and release it at GenCon 2008). We'll be playing with these rules for a long while ... wouldn't it be nice if we all got back on the same page again?
Ken
By this I mean:
1) We only use the Player's Handbook and the Dungeon Master's Guide (with all prestige classes approved by the DM).
2) We only use the errata for the core rules. By this I mean that changes to the books may have been published in something like Complete Divine or Spell Compendium, but unless it's in the errata, the DMG, or the PHB, we don't use it. Ignore what HeroForge has to say on the subject. In the case of differences between the d20 SRD and these rules, we go with the printed rules.
3) If Lance thinks is necessary, we use a small number of feats, prestige classes, spells, etc. from the Ravenloft source book, or specifically mentioned in it.
So ... why do this?
1) We have a novice DM who hasn't been playing a lot recently. Focusing on the core rules will help Lance immensely.
2) We have players who aren't clear on the 3.0/3.5 differences, and the confusion is only enhanced by the introduction of myriad additional rules from two dozen different (and more often than not, contradictory) source books. Refocusing on the core rules will help everyone learn the differences, and (with any luck) help combat the growing secondeditionitis.
3) From an aesthetic standpoint, focusing on the core classes helps evoke that classic 1st edition feel.
I'm not saying we do this for Westmarks, Dark City or Maure Castle; I'm just saying that when we're in Ravenloft, we're focusing on the core of the game, on the rules that we should know.
I expect we'll be playing 3.5 for another two years or so (assuming they announce 4.0 at GenCon 2007 and release it at GenCon 2008). We'll be playing with these rules for a long while ... wouldn't it be nice if we all got back on the same page again?
Ken
"Oh, I'm so sorry. Forgive me. I'll try and be a tad more quiet as I desperately struggle to break free -- and save all creation!" -- Doctor Strange
- EvilGenius
- Posts: 6722
- Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2006 1:09 pm
- Location: Allentown, PA
I'm perfectly fine with this approach, but I also don't feel that it's necessary and if the players aren't nuts about it, I'm sure I can muddle through.
I actually have DM'ed a lot back in the day, so I have the narrative experience, but what I'm not used to is running 3E. So, any advice about nuts & bolts systems that you guys use (how to keep track of initiative, stuff like that), will be very welcome.
I'm pretty familiar with the core 3E rules at this point (other than a few weird rules we don't use much - say a Bull Rush or something). That said, the only other non-core book I own is the 3.5 Complete Warrior and the 3.0 Masters of the Wild.
Because of this, I don't want to deal with new character classes, because I already know the 3E ones pretty well. I'm not too daunted by the feats from the builder books, because I do use those via Heroforge when I create my own chars now.
So, if you guys decide you want to go for the old school feel, I'm very ok with that. IMO, there are still a *ton* of options in the core books. Maybe not enough to sassify us in all our campaigns, but certainly for one. If you all play classes that you typically don't, then that will also make things fresh. If we take this approach, I would also recommend that you play single-class characters. That fosters even more of a 1E feel.
If we decide to go with our typical uses of the other books, then as I've requested before, I want rules for characters drawn as follows:
I actually have DM'ed a lot back in the day, so I have the narrative experience, but what I'm not used to is running 3E. So, any advice about nuts & bolts systems that you guys use (how to keep track of initiative, stuff like that), will be very welcome.
I'm pretty familiar with the core 3E rules at this point (other than a few weird rules we don't use much - say a Bull Rush or something). That said, the only other non-core book I own is the 3.5 Complete Warrior and the 3.0 Masters of the Wild.
Because of this, I don't want to deal with new character classes, because I already know the 3E ones pretty well. I'm not too daunted by the feats from the builder books, because I do use those via Heroforge when I create my own chars now.
So, if you guys decide you want to go for the old school feel, I'm very ok with that. IMO, there are still a *ton* of options in the core books. Maybe not enough to sassify us in all our campaigns, but certainly for one. If you all play classes that you typically don't, then that will also make things fresh. If we take this approach, I would also recommend that you play single-class characters. That fosters even more of a 1E feel.
If we decide to go with our typical uses of the other books, then as I've requested before, I want rules for characters drawn as follows:
- Classes from 3 core books only (discounting Nate's Knight)
Feats and Spells from the Complete books are ok, but I want briefed on every non-core Feat and Spell you take so I am familiar beforehand.
Spells from Spell Compendium or "cheater books" ok if approved beforehand.
Prestige classes only if approved.
"This enemy you cannot kill. You can only drive it back damaged into the depths, and teach your children to watch the waves for its return." - Quellcrist Falconer
I think you were being sarcastic here, but if not, I don't think this is a very good idea for this campaign. If you decide you want to roll stats, then it will have to be 4d6 six times then rearrange, or whatever. Gimpy characters won't be fun in this campaign.EvilGenius wrote: Everyone roll 3d6 for stats, assign in order, no switching! Choose your class based on what you roll!
I'd recommend building stats with 30 points, then max first then roll thereafter for HP.
"This enemy you cannot kill. You can only drive it back damaged into the depths, and teach your children to watch the waves for its return." - Quellcrist Falconer
Just to try the old days... here's what I got:
9, 11, 13, 14, 13, 10
And I believe to 1st Edition the order would be: Str, Int, Wis, Dex, Con and Cha. I'm thinking 1/2 Orc Cleric / Assassin... which would be totally awesome character to bring to Ravenloft. To apply to 3rd I may have to go the Rogue/Cleric path.
LOL - Laughing now realizing that while there are no minimum stat requirements... "Why are you a fighter? Because I couldn't be a paladin." (required 16 or 17+ charisma).
And to get back on topic, I am fine with any of the rules/books.
9, 11, 13, 14, 13, 10
And I believe to 1st Edition the order would be: Str, Int, Wis, Dex, Con and Cha. I'm thinking 1/2 Orc Cleric / Assassin... which would be totally awesome character to bring to Ravenloft. To apply to 3rd I may have to go the Rogue/Cleric path.
LOL - Laughing now realizing that while there are no minimum stat requirements... "Why are you a fighter? Because I couldn't be a paladin." (required 16 or 17+ charisma).
And to get back on topic, I am fine with any of the rules/books.
- EvilGenius
- Posts: 6722
- Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2006 1:09 pm
- Location: Allentown, PA
One last thing: in the last two weeks we've had fundamental questions (and/or misunderstandings) about the abilities of basic classes (how bardic lore works, how ranger favored enemies work). Prior to that, we were all very surprised by the fact that paladins can summon and dismiss their mounts with a word. Hardly a week goes by when someone (and I think almost all of us do this) grumbles about 3.0/3.5 confusion
These are the *core* classes we're confused about. IMHO, it's time for a refrersher. I'll leave it at that.
(btw, I'm not advocating rolling for stats or even hit points; just constraining ourselves to the core rules).
These are the *core* classes we're confused about. IMHO, it's time for a refrersher. I'll leave it at that.
(btw, I'm not advocating rolling for stats or even hit points; just constraining ourselves to the core rules).
"Oh, I'm so sorry. Forgive me. I'll try and be a tad more quiet as I desperately struggle to break free -- and save all creation!" -- Doctor Strange
- EvilGenius
- Posts: 6722
- Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2006 1:09 pm
- Location: Allentown, PA
Yeah yeah, they were both my goofs. Jon's the 3.5 expert, i don't even own the books. :p
I get what you're saying and your suggestion is acceptable to me.
I'm playing a cleric.
I get what you're saying and your suggestion is acceptable to me.
I'm playing a cleric.
NukeHavoc wrote:One last thing: in the last two weeks we've had fundamental questions (and/or misunderstandings) about the abilities of basic classes (how bardic lore works, how ranger favored enemies work). Prior to that, we were all very surprised by the fact that paladins can summon and dismiss their mounts with a word. Hardly a week goes by when someone (and I think almost all of us do this) grumbles about 3.0/3.5 confusion
These are the *core* classes we're confused about. IMHO, it's time for a refrersher. I'll leave it at that.
(btw, I'm not advocating rolling for stats or even hit points; just constraining ourselves to the core rules).
OK, hearing no major beefs with this approach after several days, we're going to follow Ken's proposal:
Nate, if you've already put a lot of work into your Knight, continue with him. To be fair though, restrict yourself to core book feats only (unless there's some Knight-only feats I don't know about yet). If you haven't actually started thoroughly detailing him on paper or Heroforge, then please pick something from the core books. Maybe you can go Knight with your next non-Rloft char to sassify your Knight jonze.
As I mentioned before, there is a RLoft-only prestige class (requiring divine spellcasting) available through play. It's a knightly-type class, and it allows divine spell progression every level after the first.
There will also be a special Rloft-only guild available through play. Depending on your class, joining this guild gives you the opportunity to change a few of your class abilities to make them more "Ravenlofty".
- Restrict yourselves to the 3 core books.
30 point stat buy.
Max HP 1st level, roll thereafter via the Crier's dice roller or at our first RLoft play session.
Prestige classes with DM approval.
Nate, if you've already put a lot of work into your Knight, continue with him. To be fair though, restrict yourself to core book feats only (unless there's some Knight-only feats I don't know about yet). If you haven't actually started thoroughly detailing him on paper or Heroforge, then please pick something from the core books. Maybe you can go Knight with your next non-Rloft char to sassify your Knight jonze.
As I mentioned before, there is a RLoft-only prestige class (requiring divine spellcasting) available through play. It's a knightly-type class, and it allows divine spell progression every level after the first.
There will also be a special Rloft-only guild available through play. Depending on your class, joining this guild gives you the opportunity to change a few of your class abilities to make them more "Ravenlofty".
"This enemy you cannot kill. You can only drive it back damaged into the depths, and teach your children to watch the waves for its return." - Quellcrist Falconer
- EvilGenius
- Posts: 6722
- Joined: Fri Nov 17, 2006 1:09 pm
- Location: Allentown, PA
I finished the knight, but it only took me like 30 min... I can whip up something else.
What has everyone else finally decided upon? it looks like if the below is accurate, we could use an arcane caster.
Bob: cleric
Jess: cleric
Damon: bard
Cory: bard?
Ken: rogue
Nate: ?
George: paladin?
Jon: fighter
What has everyone else finally decided upon? it looks like if the below is accurate, we could use an arcane caster.
Bob: cleric
Jess: cleric
Damon: bard
Cory: bard?
Ken: rogue
Nate: ?
George: paladin?
Jon: fighter
- Hardcorhobbs
- Posts: 5423
- Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2005 7:38 am
- Location: Fort Wadsworth
- Lars Porsenna
- Posts: 4783
- Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2005 5:34 pm
- Location: Manta, Ecuador
I forget ... wasn't it four classes for 1st edition (3 to prep, one actual bard?). Man, it's been freaking FOREVER. One of these days it would be fun to run a 1st edition one shot, just for the hell of it.Lars Porsenna wrote:I think if we're going to go with the old skool feel, then my Bard should pick up yet another class (and be triple classed...)
"Oh, I'm so sorry. Forgive me. I'll try and be a tad more quiet as I desperately struggle to break free -- and save all creation!" -- Doctor Strange