Dragon Hack

[NeilFord]

It just popped up in my news feed, I almost squeed in excitement! Thanks for doing this, it's really appreciated. The write up is awesome. Am going to have fun creating some gnome characters.

- Neil.

[JoJa]

Awesome! Glad you like it.

Actually, this brings up a point and I wanted to get feedback from the folks here who are likely to use and play Dragon Hack. I have been thinking a lot about AGE game design lately, and considering the way the Divine Gifts article added so much to the game through the use of talents has me wondering if there isn't a more elegant way to create a Pathfinder, or DnD conversion for AGE. What if you had racial backgrounds much in the way Pramas created his Freeport AGE backgrounds for Kobold Quarterly #13 and then each player got to select a class-background talent at first level a warrior could take the paladin or ranger talent, and the rogue the thief or bard talent, etc. Then, at sixth level they had the choice of new specializations that continued to build on that talent choice. Might be a simpler way to do the conversion without having to add new rules to the game. I would love to hear others' thoughts on seeing Dragon Hack in such a format. Thanks!

[Vaelorn]

That sounds familiar! I must seriously pull my finger out and starting posting some ideas on that...

[JoJa]

Well the idea certainly was also influenced by your thoughts on using talents for 4e race conversions. That and DMKnight's all-talent take on a dnd conversion opened up the idea for me, but re-reading the Divine Gifts article really hammered it home. I think the system is built to accept talents as add ons, and it makes sense to work within that paradigm.

[NeilFord]

I re-read the articles in Kobald Quarterly 13 & 18 and gave this some thought. I like the idea of being more AGE like. I'll write more later.

- Neil.

[Vaelorn]

I've just posted the following on my blog: https://vaelorn.wordpress.com/2011/08/02/notes-on-a-4e-conversion-for-dragon-age/. I'm going to try and post some examples of racial talents and class templates using these ideas during the week!

[NeilFord]

Oooh, interesting stuff. Will be following with interest.

- Neil.

[JoJa]

Vaelorn,

I posted a comment on your site. Exciting stuff indeed. I'm going to start laying out my ideas for a revised Dragon Hack on my own site soon. I hope you'll join the conversation.

[Saisei]

Vaelorn,

I posted a comment on your site. Exciting stuff indeed. I'm going to start laying out my ideas for a revised Dragon Hack on my own site soon. I hope you'll join the conversation.

What Joja said. Some really interesting ideas there. It's got my brain going already but I need to keep focused on what I'm working on!

The way fan development for AGE is going makes you realise how deep the system can actually be.


EDIT:

Joja,

Are you planning on taking the idea from the Dragon Age Oracle site about racial talents and applying that to your Dragon Hack? I think it would work exceptionally well, particularly with something like the Drow: Novice, they get their resistances and bonus to checks etc, Journeyman they get the globe of darkness?

Or alternatively rather than have the Backgrounds 'level up' make the bonuses you've given there Talents instead of something you get at level 1, 3, 5 etc.?

[JoJa]

Saisei,

I've tried to explain my thoughts better with a new post on my site, and I give a few examples of where I'm heading along the way. Essentially, a player would pick a background that was pretty much equivalent to a DA background, but will be based on a couple of flavors of standard fantasy race stuff. So, High Elf, Wild Elf, Mountain Dwarf, Hill Dwarf, Gnome, etc. Then they choose their DA class, and then they can pick a "class" talent, such as Paladin, Ranger, or Bard, that has the traditional Novice-Journeyman-Master structure. Those advance automatically at third and fifth levels. At sixth level, you choose a specialization that further defines your character, so a rogue with the Bard talent could chose a Spellsinger specialization that allows them a limited ability to cast magic, for example, or a Warchanter specialization that increases their skill in melee combat.

What I haven't fully decided on is the racial talent part. Vaelorn's ideas are starting to grow on me, though. The example I gave is that a character who picks any of the dwarf backgrounds also would begin play with the Novice level of the "Dwarf" racial talent. At novice it might grant a resistance bonus to tests to avoid poison damage. As the character levels up, they could expend one of their normal talent advancements (those they receive from their base class) and choose to purchase another level of dwarf (advancing to Journeyman and Master). The Journeyman level might grant the resistance to forced movement, or the unencumbered speed benefit, while Master would provide a bonus to attack rolls and defense versus large-size creatures.

I'm still working all the details out. At first I didn't like the idea of someone having to learn to be a better "dwarf" or "elf" but I could be persuaded that they are training to accentuate their races' natural abilities. Those are my thoughts right now. You can read more about it on my site, and help me define what is iconic about the Barbarian, Paladin, and Ranger classes while you're there.

[Saisei]

Oh great. I'll head over and read it now.

I think, even just from your short description there, it's the way to go. Just from reading that it feels balanced. And for yourself as well it'll be far easier to balance between Talents and the like.

Looking forward to Dragon Hack 2.0

[JoJa]

Thanks!

Saw your comments there, and responded. On the topic of "balance" I still have no intention of trying to make Dragon Hack characters have the same power curve as the core Dragon Age classes. I'm essentially adding a level 1-5 specialization to the game, as well as the possibility of racial talents. I just don't see how you can make a Paladin or Barbarian "class" and make them true to their roots if they don't add something that a base Dragon Age warrior does not have.

That said, yes, I'm hopeful the individual class talents balance, so the Bard, Paladin, and Ranger talents, for example, would be equally appealing to players. If that's what you meant. I look forward to discussing it with you more as it develops. Thanks again.

[Saisei]

That said, yes, I'm hopeful the individual class talents balance, so the Bard, Paladin, and Ranger talents, for example, would be equally appealing to players. If that's what you meant. I look forward to discussing it with you more as it develops. Thanks again.

Yep, that's exactly what I meant by balance. I know it's not gonna balance with a DA class but as long as they balance with each other that's all you need.

Hmm.... Paladin specific stunts... Ranger specific stunts... Dwarf specific stunts... No! Focus Saisei! Focus!

[Vaelorn]

Hmm.... Paladin specific stunts... Ranger specific stunts... Dwarf specific stunts... No! Focus Saisei! Focus!

Well, the Divine Gifts article had stunts specific to that, so you could probably do something like that! But there would be an awful lot of them!

[Vaelorn]

I just don't see how you can make a Paladin or Barbarian "class" and make them true to their roots if they don't add something that a base Dragon Age warrior does not have.

I've been leaning the other way: e.g. a Ranger is a regular Warrior with, say, Scouting replacing one of the Warrior's weapon talents. This would allow you to keep the "regular" DA classes - so you could have a "general mage" for example. But now I'm wondering if Josh has the right idea. I suppose it depends on what you see as a "class" and what it's for. This would have more flavour, I think, and be more in keeping with a Pathfinder type of conversion rather than a 4e one. Whilst I do like 4e you do run into the four roles quite a bit: a 4e Paladin is kind of the same as a 4e Fighter - they're both defenders but with different power sources.

[JoJa]

The only reason I didn't go with the Warrior being the Dragon Hack fighter, and the rogue, the Dragon Hack thief, etc., because I would have to figure out what to take away from the base classes to balance against someone playing one of the the other class types. To me, that seems more complicated than just adding a talent.

"Ok, your a warrior, but you can't do this normal warrior stuff, but you can do this other cool stuff" or "Oh, your a Bard, Ok you can do this neat stuff I've added, but not this, this and this, from the base rogue class."

Seems like it could get rather confusing rather quickly. My ideas to "balance" the base classes is to make them better at their "iconic" jobs than the other class talents. So the "fighter" talent would be the best at using weapons and armor. The "thief" talent, the best at light weapons combat and skill use, and the "Wizard" would start with a free magic school talent and a spellbook feature that would let him know more spells than a mage of another class talent at a given level. I hope it all works out, but I need to get it all written and start playtesting.

At the end of the day, I want players to pick a class talent because it fits their chosen character concept, not because its mathematically superior

That's my reasoning if anyone wanted to know.

[Hellebore]

I just don't see how you can make a Paladin or Barbarian "class" and make them true to their roots if they don't add something that a base Dragon Age warrior does not have.

I've been leaning the other way: e.g. a Ranger is a regular Warrior with, say, Scouting replacing one of the Warrior's weapon talents. This would allow you to keep the "regular" DA classes - so you could have a "general mage" for example. But now I'm wondering if Josh has the right idea. I suppose it depends on what you see as a "class" and what it's for. This would have more flavour, I think, and be more in keeping with a Pathfinder type of conversion rather than a 4e one. Whilst I do like 4e you do run into the four roles quite a bit: a 4e Paladin is kind of the same as a 4e Fighter - they're both defenders but with different power sources.

This sounds good to me. The DA specialisations also give examples of abilities that can work with the archetypes from other games. The Reaver for example seems pretty similar to a barbarian (at least with Rage).

Perhaps if using levels you can list each class ability at each level under the DA classes. ie a paladin is a warrior and so when advancing through the warrior levels at each appropriate point it lists the ability the 'warrior sub class' receives - so a paladin receives x, a barbarian y etc. Thus you use the DA 3 class system and each subclass progresses in the same way it's just when they reach a level where they get a class specific ability it lists one for each subclass.

Hellebore

[JoJa]

Sorry, I've been out of contact for a bit, but I just wanted to update that the change over to class talents is moving along on my site.

@Hellebore,

That's pretty similar to the format I started out with in the original version, which is still available from the link in Disemvowel's OP. Each of the "classes" was represented by its AGE base class, but then got additional "traits" or certain new powers, at certain levels. Ultimately I think moving the class abilities to AGE system talents creates better flexibility and works better within the framework of the game. Plus it's going to allow me to open up new combos that move the flexibility beyond what's available in either DARPG or Pathfinder, and should allow for something akin to multi-classing. More on that on my site in the next week or so.

[Saisei]

Really nice work man. It's really coming together.

[JoJa]

Real life has a way of effing with all my best laid plans, but despite delays, the revised Dragon Hack 2.0 playtest document is now available for download on my site! I hope folks will give it a spin and offer feedback. I'm really hoping it gives players and game masters a chance to mix the old race-and-class elements of older rpgs with all the awesomeness that is Dragon Age.

Anyway, follow this link to get a copy of the pdf on my website.

And stay tuned for an open call for new Specialization and spell conversion designs. Thanks everyone for your support!

[Saisei]

Just read through the draft. Some fantastic work gone into it again. I'm really excited to play it.

A couple of points and suggestions:

There seem to be a lot of backgrounds that can choose the Dexterity (Stealth) focus (Dark Elf, Wild Elf, Halfling, Hill Dwarf). Maybe it's just because the four are in quick succession when you read them but it felt like every other background had it. Just a sugestion but could you maybe swap Dexterity (Legerdemain) with Dexterity (Stealth) for the Halfling? Legerdemain is already on the 2D6 table so it wouldn't be a huge deal. I also think it actually fits better but that's just my opinion. As well as that for some reason I imagined the Dark Elves having Dexterity (Legerdemain) but that might be because I'm thinking of the Forgotten Realms Drow with their sign language.

For the Urban Human background it feels like they should really have Communication instead of Strength on the 2D6 table. It feels like it would better reflect the nature of living in a big city and conversing and bargaining with people.

On the flip side of that it feels like the Frontier Human should have Strength instead of Communication. This would reflect the long hours spent working the land and being away from alot of people. I think they should still have the Animal Handling focus though.

The Master level of the Cleric Talent seems really really powerful: 2D6 + Magic penetrating damage in an area AND 2D6 Healing? Seems crazy strong. Especially when compared to something like the Bard's Master level talent where they only gain a talent level and a new bard song. I know the Cleric attack has to be against undead but it still seems excessive. 1D6 maybe? Or not penetrating?

I'm also not sure of the Sorcerer master level. Double mana just to add 1D6 damage? I dunno. Seems steep. Just my opinion though.

The Novice level of Wizard says you gain spells equal to 3 + your Cunning. I presume this is the 3 you get for being a Mage + your Cunning, as opposed to 6 + Cunning? You just might want to reword it slightly.


Overall I think it's brilliant. I'm really excited to play it and thanks for all the work.

[JoJa]

Saisei,

Thanks for the feedback. Your thoughts on the background bonuses is well taken, and I'll take another spin through them. The urban human and frontier human still contain some trappings from when they were the Militarist and Outlaw backgrounds (though there were some changes) and can use another run through. A lot of the backgrounds that have Dexterity (Stealth) do so because the race gains a bonus to the Stealth Skill in Pathfinder, which is of course the basis for the conversion. I'll do a once over, however.

Points of clarification: The master level Cleric ability is an OR not an AND. The cleric must choose whether to heal allies or harm enemies each time he or she uses the power. Because it can only damage undead, and thus is a corner case, the penetrating damage doesn't seem out of line to me. (And fits the iconic cleric Turn Undead ability) Also, because the character would be fifth level before gaining the ability, the 2d6 doesn't feel out of line, either, but perhaps it could be a straight 2d6 and not 2d6 + Magic? I'll have to think on it.

Sorcerer is a tough balance because I want to make them the blaster-types of Mages, who can do more damage but are less versatile (Otherwise I don't see much of a reason for a second caster class) but if you allow extra damage to be granted by a static number of mana, Mages eventually get so much mana where it's for practical reasons not a limit on its use at all. The compensation is that sorcerers get more mana than a regular Mage, so have an easier time expending that extra cost. Again, I need more feedback before I make a decision here. I would love to her other thoughts on how to make the Sorcerer more blastery.

I probably need to redraft the Wizard section, but I thought it was clear that the 3+ Cunning was instead of that gained by the Magic Training class ability. This is because the number of spells gained is later referenced against the number of spells the Wizard can choose to remember each day (which is the number of spells granted through the class ability.) But just to be clear for all concerned: A Wizard character can pick 3+ Cunning spells to learn at first level, instead of the number of spells granted by the Magic Training class ability. However, no Mage can memorize a number of spells per day greater than that granted by the Magic Training ability. Thus, a first level Wizard with a 3 Cunning would be able to pick 6 spells they know at first level (OMG 6 Spells!) but would have to choose each morning which 3 of those spells to cast that day in addition to Arcane Lance.

It makes the Wizard class more versatile, but no more powerful than the other caster types. (That's the hope anyways).

So I hope that answered your questions and the questions of those who had similar thoughts when reading through the playtest. This is exactly why feedback is so important during the design process. I'll make sure all these points are clarified in future revisions.

Thanks again!

[Saisei]

Points of clarification: The master level Cleric ability is an OR not an AND. The cleric must choose whether to heal allies or harm enemies each time he or she uses the power. Because it can only damage undead, and thus is a corner case, the penetrating damage doesn't seem out of line to me. (And fits the iconic cleric Turn Undead ability) Also, because the character would be fifth level before gaining the ability, the 2d6 doesn't feel out of line, either, but perhaps it could be a straight 2d6 and not 2d6 + Magic? I'll have to think on it.

Ahhh! I mis-read that then! In that case I'd say it's fine the way it is. I wouldn't change it.

That's what I get for not reading carefully!

[JoJa]

Saisei,

In each case the relevant section can be more clearly worded, so it's still good feedback.

[Kaltharion]

I just have to say I love this, but I do have some questions...

Half-elves seem to have lost the adaptability of their human parentage. Was this intentional? I did notice in the Racial traits that the Half-Elf background was listed as a requirement for the human racial talent, but then I noticed that it is also under the gnome racial talent. At first I thought it might have been a "Choose either Half-Elf, or Human" but now I'm not too sure.

The Elf racial talent entries of Novice and Journeyman somehow seem reversed to me. Would it be more in line to swap them so they match the Half-Orc?

The Wizard class master talent is interesting. Why did you decide to make scribe scroll as a one slot talent instead of making it a crafting talent similar to poison-making? Just curious

On the whole though, this is AWESOME. I can't wait to see everything else you have planned for Dragon Hack!

Thanks for all your hard work!