You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 03, 2016, 04:00:08 PM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: D&D REDUX- Keepin' It Simple  (Read 791 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline RubySlippersTopic starter

D&D REDUX- Keepin' It Simple
« on: March 01, 2007, 02:49:59 PM »
I had this idea for a D&D game going back to BASIC D&D for inspiration. You can play a Fighter, Cleric, Rogue or Wizard. Races are the same. And no other rules for character slelection.

Character generation will be rolling 4d6 for stats in order and you may re-roll ONE STAT but must keep the result. And yes you keep 1's. And you start at Level 1.

ooc: Yes that means no barbarians, bards, paladins, sorcerors or rangers. I'm adding the GUCK rules for feats, skills and spells.

So anyone interested? Do not send characters or anything just getting a feel for the interest. World will be homebrew the LAND OF AROS setting in the province of Muriel Wood.

Offline Nanoki

Re: D&D REDUX- Keepin' It Simple
« Reply #1 on: March 01, 2007, 03:09:29 PM »
That's right up my alley, except mos ot the time when I play the orriginal AD&D I'm the DM, but I might play if you need someone.

Offline RubySlippersTopic starter

Re: D&D REDUX- Keepin' It Simple
« Reply #2 on: March 01, 2007, 04:27:33 PM »
Oh it IS 3.5 just I'm chopping off all but the basic four classes. My game world never used them most "Paladins" are either Clerics that focus on combat or Fighter/Cleric combinations or Fighters that are imbued by a cleric with spell abilities serving a faith. Rangers tend to be Rogues with a focus on woods lore- popular among the elven folk renowned snipers and ambushers. Barbarians are Fighters that hail from the hill lands and are well crass- think Norseman. Bards really are generally just performing focused rogues in may game or if they have spells either get them by imbuing if they are agents of a faith OR pick up some wizard training. Generally for me its role-playing and feat selection what your assumed vocation is.

Offline Jefepato

Re: D&D REDUX- Keepin' It Simple
« Reply #3 on: March 01, 2007, 04:34:16 PM »
You're banning about 2/3 of the core classes in order to "keep it simple," and then allowing the GUCK?

Offline RubySlippersTopic starter

Re: D&D REDUX- Keepin' It Simple
« Reply #4 on: March 01, 2007, 04:49:16 PM »
Well the feats, skills and spells if they want them. Its an adult site I'm adding in some elements.  ;D

But what were the original core classes the Fighter, Cleric, Rogue and Wizard. And again in my campaign world and I'm running it now those are the only classes for all races- save the NPC ones of Commoner and Expert. In fact most temples have just as many non-clerics running them as their are true clerics. The Temple of Magistro, Lord High Mage of the Gods has a Wizard as the High Cleric. And Blade, God of Battles and War has a Fighter with a smattering of cleric he just earned. So classes don't matter that much what one does is.

The Elven High Ranger Guard are made up of mostly rogues or fighter/rogues. The Circle of Druids are also all sorts of classes Fighters, Rogues, Clerics and even some Wizards. They just are servants of the Force of Nature hence Druids.

Offline Nanoki

Re: D&D REDUX- Keepin' It Simple
« Reply #5 on: March 01, 2007, 04:55:30 PM »
I had this idea for a D&D game going back to BASIC D&D for inspiration. You can play a Fighter, Cleric, Rogue or Wizard. Races are the same. And no other rules for character slelection.

ooc: Yes that means no barbarians, bards, paladins, sorcerors or rangers. I'm adding the GUCK rules for feats, skills and spells.


This is what threw me off about the version.  I am sorry about that.  I find it easier to get games started, and I find it easier to get players started quicker using v1, it's your game, and I am not criticizing, but that's just the way I find to do it.  I am not too framiliar with the 3.5 character sheet set up, since I have only played a few times.  I will try, though I may need some help.  XD  I am such an idiot...

Offline OldSchoolGamer

Re: D&D REDUX- Keepin' It Simple
« Reply #6 on: March 02, 2007, 04:48:52 AM »
I'm not terribly familiar with 3.5, but I'm willing to give it a try.

Offline RubySlippersTopic starter

Re: D&D REDUX- Keepin' It Simple
« Reply #7 on: March 02, 2007, 09:07:26 AM »
I'm converting my game and using Generic Classes you only have to choose an Expert, Spellcaster or Warrior. But are able to fit pretty much any character option.

Since the game will start for a time just in one province its easy enough.

www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/genericClasses.htm