Previous Message: (3e MotP) What kind of campaign?
Next Message: Re: (3e MotP) What kind of campaign?
Month Index: September, 2001
From: Flits3 Frietmuts <j.w.van.den.heuvel@???????.com> Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 09:50:39 +0200 Subject: Re: Jamming suggestion
I Simply like it. In my group I'm still fuddling about with the system that "drains" one level per hour. Within a number of hours the casting levels are "drained" (Solely for spelljamming purposes... so the hit dice and stats remain teh same) and no further spelljamming is possible. Me also wants the draining of spells not to be total, so the lower level spells or healing spells could still be cast when the PC leaves the helm.... Interesting options you suggest! Greetings Flits3 3e is all about options. SJ 3e needs to be about options. SJ 3e still needs to be SJ. Based on these points here's a suggestion for how to use spelljamming/helming with only slight modification (this applies to standard helms). Max SR is determied by the total combined spell casting levels (arcane and divine) of the helmsman (a C3/W4 has 3+4 = 7 helming levels). Plug this number into your helm for level to determine maximum SR (so a minor helm has max SR 2 and a major max SR 3 using the example). Now the controversial change. A helmsman decides how many levels to sacrifice. So a C3/W4 can decide to sacrifice 1 W level to propel the ship at spelljamming speed and tactical SR 1. Spells memorized are reduced appropriately with specific lost spells being randomly determined. If the ship gets in a fight the helmsman can either choose to start firing off spells from his remaining allotment (note that effective caster level is also reduced, however) or sacrifice more levels to the helm. So our intrepid helmsman wants SR2 on his major helm but wants to save his healing spells to aid his comrades after the fight. He sacrifices all his remaining W levels to increase the ships speed but can still throw spells as a C3. Of course the "sacrifice" doesn't effect anything other than spells memorized and caster level and is negated after 12 hours (or rest or however you choose to play it). Finally touching a helm automatically requires the sacrifice of at least one caster level (to keep the spirit of the original rules). Lifejammers (including death helms) should always draw on the full life force of the individual. I suggest using CR or something that equates to levels but also equates other 3e factors for unusual races (so a troll might be +2 CR or whatever over its character level and this would reflect it) rather than just levels vs HD. Series helms have always worked off innate powers (though I prefer them to be psionic, but then I play 1e). So they still do. They drain all innate abilities from the individual and provide SR 1 per occupied seat just as in 2e. I really feel sorcerers fit this mold better than normal helming (minor and major helms) but they probably should use normal helms instead since they have levels and it allows them to operate the most common PC helms. On the other hand, perhaps they should be limited to series helms but can actually use their levels just as a normal helmsman does with a minor or major helm (only sorcerer levels would apply, of course). In this case creatures with innate powers but no sorcerer level are simply considered level 1 by the helm and have all innate powers drained. With 3es ability to infinitely multi-class I think this allows the most options. Now anyone can sit a helm if they want to take a level in a spell casting class while spell casters needn't dump all their powers (of course in 3e those spell casters coudl just chalk up a few scrolls to help them instead...). __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger http://im.yahoo.com ******************************************************************** The D&D; Homepage: http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Welcome.asp The Spelljammer Homepage: http://www.darkwoodforest.com/rpg/compendium/ To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@??????.???????.com with UNSUB SPELLJAMMER-L in the body of the message.
Previous Message: (3e MotP) What kind of campaign?
Next Message: Re: (3e MotP) What kind of campaign?
Month Index: September, 2001
| Subject | From | Date (UTC) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jamming suggestion | Thatotherguy | |||
| Re: Jamming suggestion | Flits3 Frietmuts |