Talk:Orion (3.5e Campaign Setting)

On all of the side bars, on the supplement pages, they say Corean Pantheon, you must change it or ask for the appropriate permission before using them. --Grim914 03:41, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh, sorry about that. I used the Cora campaign setting to figure out how to add that side bar, I guess I missed something. :)

Anyways, it's fixed now, thanks for pointing it out.--Vrail 13:03, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

No problem. --Grim914 03:02, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Level progression

This was discussed on the original E6 thread. It was suggested to just increase the amount of XP required for each level. The reason the idea was abandoned was because your players don't want to be left in stagnation. When you double all XP requirements it slows progression. If you are going to just dole out levels when you see fit rather than XP this is a moot point. but, if I was a player in your game I wouldn't like having to wait that long to just go up a level. - Sleaker 02:26, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for mentioning this. I actually had quite a bit of debating with myself to figure out if I should change it to this extent. In the end I decided to. When I was transitioning from AD&D (2e dnd) to 3.5e (I skipped 3rd edition) for a long time I retained the AD&D level advancement while using most other 3.5e rules. I found at least for myself this worked very well.

Also, when you start using this experience table, yes it may seem a bit much, but it also greatly changes the style of play. If players are ready to work at it, they could really get into this slow progression style.

Finally, characters are not completely stagnant. They can still gain experience and levels in skills (see the link for more info) more easily allowing for continued character advancement and encouraging role playing and more story telling styles of play so that campaigns can reach a deeper level and not just focus around combat. This can make the game a great deal more fun.

I will though reconsider the amount of experience needed to level up. I don't think a major change will be made, but under reevaluation I may decrease the amount of experience needed. Thanks for your input! (also, this could have probably gone in the discussion for the character creation section rather than the main page discussion)--Vrail 03:17, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I kind of like the slow leveling progression. If you're really excited to jump levels, you're probably meant for a fast-advancement campaign. Applying that sort of advancement to real life, with the speed that the standard character accomplishes most adventures, could have a farmer leave for his farm in the winter, and come back in the fall to find that the empires that ruled him have risen and collapsed three or four times. A person who doesn't want to wait would have the same problem with a DM who gives level-ups every time and just does it slower than other DMs.

Doubling the required experience to level (or something) would only leave a player in stagnation if they were the kind of people who complained the WoW only brought the level cap to 85, instead of making it 90. Honestly, if players can't enjoy the play at any level, either they're too hyped on "I gotta be awesome" juice, or the DM isn't providing interesting enough challenges. Either way, its the people ruining the game, and not the system. --For Valor 01:06, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Overview

Lots of history. Lots and lots. Like, World of Warcraft-level history. That's a lot. But, honestly, the game isn't here for the history. If you want to write history, you write a book; it's the campaign statistics that matter. I see in this campaign a race that gives +8 Con, a region that gives +4 Con, and then a stat system that gives beginning stats of 18. We're talking 18 + 8 + 4 = 30. Which means +20 Modifier. Which means a starting character can begin with forty-two hit points. That's ridiculous, especially seeing as this character is an LA +1, just like ALL of the other races, none of which get a racial bonus over +4. This caters to a much higher level of play, where the PC's could easily take on monsters 2 or 3 CR above their own and survive. If you want to do that, then just give some big level adjustments, so that the races and classes created can be transcribed with ease to other environments.

So game balance and flavor. Need work --For Valor 00:59, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

The game balance for this campaign is sorely in need of repair. Not only that, the flavor is mediocre at best with its contradictions and unjustifiable systems as written. The class system favors 1 race and two to four regions only,

Lol, I like writing history, I do a fair bit of writing. :) Anyways, first I'd like to point out that the formula for stat bonuses is (X-10)/2. Meaning that 30 is only +10. Second I would like to say that this setting is meant for a more powerful game, however you make a point, I should add a number more LA's for things so that monsters can be bettered geared towards the characters.

This campaigns balance is not sorely in need of repair, I just simply have to add some LA's. I strongly disagree that this setting has contradictions and unjustifiable systems as I have presented reasons and explanations for them on the corresponding talk pages. As such it is not in need of flavor adjustments. The class system does not favor one race, even though I am adding more races and changing the current ones. Yes, this setting does favor certain regions I agree, but that is done intentionally. Not all regions were made exclusively to be used, some, while they are options for use, present better role playing ideas rather than practical game aspects.

As has not become apparent yet since this setting is under heavy construction, it is designed to work well with role playing adventures, in some cases more so than kick in the door adventures.

Finally, thank you for all of your comments, they have all been taken into account and I will review my races and systems. I always enjoy getting feedback and making my work better.:)--Vrail 02:15, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

My bad on the +20 thing. That's a typo that kept going into the HP thing. Regardless, thirty-two hit points is big too. I'm glad you took the Con bonus down to +4. Concerning those regions... well, if you want them to be an option, they need to be viable. WotC didn't put "Warrior" or "Adept" into the PHB saying "well, don't play them. They're there for reference as to what you could be." All that matters is what the players are, and giving them options that are distinctly different is just a waste of space, and will bone over players who aren't paying as much attention (so they won't have as much fun. That's terrible.). As for the contradictions, well... I flamed all about those. There are opposites on the same page all over here, and I could go on to list them, but that's too much work that I don't feel like doing.

On a kind-of-related note: The great thing about multiple adventures within a single RPG is that they all translate. I could very easily take a Lesser Aasimar or Lesser Tiefling and throw it into a campaign anywhere without disturbing its function. I could grab feats from the Dragonlace campaign books (like "Dynamic Priest", a must-have for my Spirit Shamans and Favored Souls), and they'd integrate just fine. I could even take a "Monster's of Faerun" book and add it to a d20 Star Wars campaign! That's good synergy. However, if I took just about anything based around casting and put it in here, it would be functionally weak. I'm not talking the RP aspect, where magic is rare (I'm still not sure how that's going to work). I'm talking about making the Sorcerer a class. It would fail, since the only races in this campaign are based around meleemeleemelee. Strong casters would completely destroy--no magic means no magic weapons, so the Cleric who can use Great Magic Weapon or the Druid who gives their pet Magic Fang will be INCREDIBLY superior. Not only that, the monsters created by CR are normally meant to match up to a character with an enhancement bonus to his stuff equal to 1/3 his level. At level 10, that's 15% behind on everything. At level 20, 30%-35%. So monsters will not work, casters won't work (either they'll fail or kick complete ass), and the races are translateable easily since they all need to be LA +1 to keep up with evolution.

This place is just too toxic for any regular D&D material to survive. --For Valor 05:26, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Putting things in lists makes it all so much easier to respond to, so here goes another one. :)

1) I think having all of those region options is a good idea, first off the role playing aspect. Which you have referenced the adept, warrior, etc. for. However, these classes are still listed in the books, just like I have still listed the regions. As for players getting boned over, they should pay more attention. :)Using these regions can also increase customization in many ways.

2)Ok, I'm sorry to have to bother you, because I know you said it would be a lot of work, except... could I get a list of the bigger contradictions? I'm really trying to improve this setting and having a bunch of contradictions, which I apparently can't find by myself, will greatly limit how well this setting can do.

3) Magic... I am, as stated before, adding more to do with magic. I will add slightly more magic based prestige classes, I may also rethink the magic system, however the general idea I want to stay. I now understand that effectively creating a setting with this degree of variation will be difficult, however I still wish to stick with the idea. So, you do have a valid point here, but I'm working on improving this.

Hopefully this answers your concerns, and I thank you again for adding all of these wonderful comments on my pages, its great getting help with my setting. :)--Vrail 06:02, 18 May 2010 (UTC)