# E6: The Game Inside D&D (with PDFs!)



## Ry

_This is E6’s fifth major thread here at EN World; this is started to reorganize our discussion.  The .pdf files for E6 and Raising the Stakes are attached to this post.  Enjoy!_

*E6: The Game Inside D&D*

*What is E6?*

Earlier this year Ryan Dancey suggested that D&D has four distinct quartiles of play:

Levels 1-5: Gritty fantasy
Levels 6-10: Heroic fantasy
Levels 11-15: Wuxia
Levels 16-20: Superheroes

There’s been some great discussion about how to define those quartiles, and how each group finds some quartiles more fun than others.

E6 is a game about those first 2 quartiles, and as a result, it has fewer rules, a low-magic flavor, and it is quick and easy to prepare.  I have playtested the system extensively with my crew, and it works as intended.  There seems to be a lot of lively debate about E6, and some real interest in how it works, so I've revised it here.

*How E6 works*

Like D&D, E6 is a game of enigmatic wizards, canny rogues, and mighty warriors who rise against terrible dangers and overcome powerful foes.  But instead of using D&D’s 20 levels to translate characters into the rules, E6 uses only the first 6.  E6 is about changing one of D&D’s essential assumptions, but despite that it doesn't need a lot of rules to do so.

In E6, the stats of an average person are the stats of a 1st-level commoner.  Like their medieval counterparts, this person has never travelled more than a mile from their home.  Imagine a 6th-level Wizard or 6th-level Fighter from the commoner's perspective.  The wizard could kill everyone in your village with a few words.  The fighter could duel with ten armed guards in a row and kill every one of them.  If you spot a manticore, everyone you know is in terrible, terrible danger.  Against such a creature, the wizard or fighter may be your only hope.  E6 recognizes that 6th level characters are mortal, while providing a context where they are epic heroes.

Levels 1 to 6 was the period where a character comes into his own, where a crash course in action and danger transforms them from 1st-level commoners into capable fighting men (or corpses).  Once transformed by their experiences, a character’s growth is no longer a continuous, linear progression.  There are still major differences between the master warriors and the veteran mercenaries, but it's not a change of scale.

*Rules*

Character progression from level 1 to level 6 is as per D&D. Upon attaining 6th level, for each 5000 experience a character gains, they earn a new feat.  A diverse selection of feats should be made available in any E6 campaign, however, feats with unattainable prerequisites under this system remain unattainable.  

For the purpose of experience awards, treat each 5 feats as +1 CR (or level), to an upper limit of 20 feats.  After this, a ratio of 10 feats to 1 CR can be used, as it becomes more and more difficult to bring all a character’s feats to bear in a given situation.  Alternatively, and at the GM’s option, player-characters with more than 20 feats can simply be always treated as if they were level 10 for experience and challenge purposes.

*For the GM*

E6 isn't just a change for the players:  Monsters are presented differently than in d20.  Just as level 6 parties in D&D aren’t expected to tangle with monsters higher than CR 10, the mighty monsters of E6 require special consideration for presentation in-game.  E6 characters aren't intended to go up against high-level D&D threats under the same circumstances as high-level D&D characters; those creatures, if they are defeatable at all, require the kind of resources and planning far beyond the typical D&D encounter.

In terms of raw rules, CR 7-10 monsters are an excellent guide for what E6 characters can handle.  As they rise to around the 20-feat range, the range is more like 7-12.  Beyond that, a DM should take monsters in the CR 7-12 range and use feats (and to a lesser extent templates) to advance them.  Hit die or class-based advancement beyond CR 12, or base monsters above CR 12 should generally be avoided as straight-up fights.

Of course, not every monstrous encounter is a straight-up fight. For example, insane horrors from another age might be a reason to run, and there is little a character could do in the face of an angry Titan. But these situations don’t call for direct confrontation, except with some special resource or amazing circumstance. Perhaps, in a special ritual with the presence of 20 mages, a Titan can be bound to the mortal realm (lowering its stats to an Aspect of Kord), with whom the players can do battle. Again, that's far from a straight-up fight with a CR 20 creature, but we can console ourselves with the fact that it's probably a very memorable encounter.

If, as a result of the restrictions on items, an item cannot be created, then it should not be distributed as normal treasure.  Like high-level monsters, such items should be placed carefully and built to make sense in the context of your game.  For example, a +4 sword can’t be made by a human wizard, but it could be crafted by a Titan (which makes for great god-stats).  That's a sword that no mortal can make.

E6 will always inherit d20's balance issues at the same level, especially issues that result from scenarios where those characters d20 characters have long periods of downtime.  The best approach is to be cognizant of these issues when considering what feats to allow in your E6 game.

[sblock=On Allowing Feats]There multiple philosophies on what feats to allow in an E6 game, but in any long-running E6 game some expansion feats need to be available for players to continue to grow their characters in different ways.  The different philosophies vary in their goals:  Some GMs see the benefits of multiclassing in E6 as too strong, and want to encourage single-classing - for these GMs, capstone feats are included in this chapter.  Others are more cautious, and happy to tell their players to work within a specific framework, choosing only those feats that match the style of their campaign.  A few GMs are highly concerned about internal world-consistency, and want to make sure that if an ability can be learned (i.e. is available before 6th level), that there is some feat chain towards that ability, so it can be eventually learned by other characters.  Many GMs make a real-world decision, allowing feats from publishers they trust, or all feats in the books the GM owns.  The decision on what feats to allow belongs to the GM, and should naturally vary from one E6 campaign to the next.[/sblock]
[sblock=Benefits of E6]1. Very fast play at every level of the campaign.
2. Focus on planning, not levelling. To defeat the black dragon Zolanderos, the CR 10 terror of Staunwark Island, the heroes will need help, special resources, and information. I want to further encourage party-directed adventuring, and if the heroes want to take on something 4 to 6 CR above them, then that's what they will require.
3. A low magic game that everyone knows how to play.
4. Never a need for meaningless encounters. The players can be involved in a dozen or so major combat scenarios (perhaps more than one encounter each) and have proven themselves and made a major accomplishment. See Lord of the Rings movies, or most fantasy novels.
5. Classic monsters stay classic throughout the campaign; Chimeras and Aboleths start scary, and stay scary. Dragons are always exciting encounters.
6. Even legendary heroes remain mortal; while a 6th level fighter who has taken toughness several times can take on a good mob, he isn't invulnerable. The sorcerer's 6d6 fireballs are phenomenal, but not so powerful that he can destroy a village and not fear retaliation.
7. Quicker prep. Make a 1st, 3rd, 5th, and 6th version of a sorcerer, and now you have a whole sorcerous dragon-cult that can last you through your whole campaign.
8. You can put what you've learned of the rules to good use. It's hard to know every 4th through 9th level spell out there; they're the ones we see the least. But we've seen 0th through 3rd level spells many, many times, and mastery over them is relatively simple.
9. E6 is a great system for on the fly GMing.  If you’re reasonably familiar with what a 2nd level threat looks like, power-wise, you can probably get away with running it without stats handy.[/sblock][sblock=E6 vs d20]
Here's how I see E6 vs standard d20, in terms of power levels. 

Character advancement in d20 is an upward sloping curve; levels are a linear, but the feats and magic items that get added on top makes the progression even faster.  As players get better and better combinations of items and feats and class abilities, they can combine them in better and better ways.  This leads to levelling out of the Heroic Fantasy quartile (6-10) and into the Wuxia quartile (11-15).  The Wuxia quartile is also more complex, which is another mark against it for some.







Levelling in E6 is like D&D till 6th level, and you always get the fun of advancing.  But the advancing after 6th is slower, and while you keep getting closer and closer to CR 10 power level, you're getting there more and more slowly; feats always add a mechanical benefit, but the combinations and permutations of the feats and items you've acquired don't "crack the top" of CR 10 power level.  





[/sblock]


----------



## Ry

_To the regulars: I changed Ability Training to provide a small benefit._

*Extra Feats*

The following feats have been created specifically with E6 in mind.

[sblock=For Ability Advancement]*Ability Training (General)*
You spend time honing one of your Abilities: Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma.
Benefit: Choose one Ability; treat that Ability as having a +2 bonus to that Ability Score whenever you are making an Ability Check.  This bonus does not count when making a skill check or for any other use of that ability. 
Special: You can gain this feat multiple times, its effects do not stack.  Each time you take this feat it applies to another ability.

*Ability Advancement (General)*
Your training pays off, and one of your Abilities increases.  
Prerequisite: Ability Training in the same ability.
Benefit: Choose one Ability.  You gain a permanent +2 bonus to that ability.  This bonus does nto stack with the benefit from Ability Training.
Special: You can gain this feat multiple times, its effects do not stack.  Each time you take this feat it applies to another ability.[/sblock][sblock=Capstone Feats]*Martial Veteran (General)* (comrade_raoul)
Prerequisites: Fighter level 6th.
Benefit: You may select feats with a requirement of up to fighter level 8, and with a Base Attack Bonus requirement of up to +8.
Special: A fighter may select Martial Veteran as one of his bonus feats.

Roguish Ability  [General]
Prerequisite: Rogue 6
Benefit:  You learn one rogue special ability.
Special: This feat may be taken only once.

Barbaric Resilience [General]
Prerequisite: Barbarian 6
Benefit: You gain DR 1/-- 

Skill Beyond Your Years
Prerequisite: Level 6
Pick a skill. Your max ranks rise from Level+3 to Level +5. 

Holy Strikes [General]
Prerequisite: Paladin 6
Benefit: Your melee attacks are considered good for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction.

Mighty Wild Shape [General]
Prerequisite: Druid level 6
Choose 1 Large animal. You can wildshape into that animal.

Bardic Inspiration [General]
Prerequisite: Bard level 6
The bonus granted by your inspire courage ability increases to +2.

Extra Domain Power [General] (Shazman)
Prerequisites: Wis 18 +, Cleric level 6, Knowledge (religion) 9 ranks, Skill Focus: Knowledge (religon)
Benefit: You gain the domain power of one additional domain associated with your deity.  You may only take this feat once.

*Extra Domain Access (General)* (Shazman)
Prerequisities: Wis 18 +, Cleric level 6, Knowledge (religion) 9 ranks, Extra Domain Power, Skill Focus: Knowledge (religion)
Benefit: You gain access to the domain spell list of one additional domain assciated with your deity.  This domain must be the same one as that chosen for the Extra Domain Power feat. You may only take this feat once.

*Restoration (General)*
Prerequisites: 6th level, ability to cast 3rd-level divine spells, Wisdom 18, Healing 9 Ranks
Benefit: You can use _Restoration_, as the spell (paying the material component), with a casting time of 1 hour.

*Swift Metamagic (Metamagic)* (Kunimatyu)
Prerequisite: Metamagic feats (see below), Caster Level 6
Benefit: When you take this feat, select a metamagic feat. As a swift action once per day, you may apply this metamagic feat to a spell you cast with no adjustment to the level of the spell cast.
Special: You must have a number of Swift metamagic feats equal to the level increase of your chosen metamagic, minus one, to take this feat. For example, Empower Spell, which boosts the level of a spell by 2, has a prerequisite of 1 Swift feat. Split Ray, which has an increase of 1, would have no prerequisites. This feat may be taken multiple times.

*Caster Training (General)* (Khuxan)
You become a more accomplished spellcaster.
Requirements: Character level 6, caster level 1 or greater.
Benefit: Your caster level increases by 4, to a maximum of 6.   Note this only affects Caster Level (i.e., more dice on your damage, no new spells or slots).

*Expanded Knowledge (General)* (PoeticJustice)
Prerequisite: Character Level 6th
Benefit: Choose a spellcasting class in which you have levels. You gain an additional spell known at any level you can cast from that class's spell list.

*Expanded Casting (General)* (PoeticJustice)
Prerequisite: Character Level 6th
Benefit: Choose a spellcasting class in which you have levels. You gain an additional spell slot at any level you can already cast.

*Stone to Flesh (General)*
Prerequisites: 6th level, ability to cast 3rd-level arcane spells, Intelligence 18, Craft (Alchemy) 9 Ranks
Benefit: You can use _stone to flesh_, as the spell, with an expensive and secret magical ingredient with a market value of 1000 gp and a casting time of 1 day.


*Excelling Flurry [General]*
Prereq: Monk 6
Benefit: You use Flurry of Blows with no penalty to your attack bonus. In addition, you qualify for feats that a Monk may take as 6th level bonus feats.

*Step of the Wild lands*
Prereq: Ranger 6
Benefit: You gain the Woodland Stride and Swift Tracking class abilities.

*Wondrous Rings (General)*
Prerequisites: 6th level, Craft Wondrous Item
Benefit: You treat rings as wondrous items for the purpose of meeting item creation prerequisites.  You must still meet caster level requirements for any ring you create.[/sblock][sblock=For Villains]*Mental Domination (General)* (Lord Tirian)
You're able to subjugate certain people's mind.
Prerequisite: Having charmed humanoid with HD equal or less than your caster level.
Benefit: Choose a humanoid with HD equal your caster level or less, you have currently charmed. Treat charm person as dominate person against this person.
Special: This feat can be taken several times. It applies to a different humanoid each time.[/sblock]


----------



## Ry

*Faq*

*The E6 FAQ*

*Using E6*

_Q: So characters just stop levelling at 6?_
A: That’s right.  Characters who have reached level 6 have proven themselves, but this extremely rapid growth does not go on forever.  Instead, they master specialized techniques, or become more versatile.  This stage of a character’s development is represented by gaining new feats.

_Q: Does E6 change the stacking rules?  For example, can I take Weapon Focus twice and have it stack?  Can I take Skill Focus twice and have it stack?_
A:  The stacking rules remain the same as in standard D&D.

_Q: What if I want there to be a higher level magical effect, but still use E6?_
The rules for rituals in Unearthed Arcana are an excellent fit for E6, to support things like opening portals to another dimension, higher-level divinations, and so on.  When a spell is a 3-day event requiring 20 mages, it’s more of a plot point than a spell itself, and that maeks it a great a springboard for challenging the players.

_Q:  As a DM, I like running things on the fly.  Can E6 support that kind of play?_
A:  Absolutely.  A DM that knows how to estimate the abilities of enemies in the low-level range can use that knowledge throughout the campaign.  Likewise, familiarity breeds mastery – and for feats, spells, and monsters, there is more chance for a DM to become familiar with abilities in an appropriate range to the PCs, even if he is using a diverse selection of monsters.  Furthermore, Dungeon Masters can get much more mileage out of their previous work: The stats of a 5th-level sorcerer written for 4th level PCs is still a useful tool months of gametime later against characters who are 6th level +10 feats.

_Q: Can you make high-level items as a low-level caster in E6? _
A: No, caster level requirements for magic items are treated as hard requirements.  

_Q:  If a character took multiple classes, or Prestige Classes, suddenly you've got a guy with saves that are seriously out of whack.  Is this a game-breaking issue? _
A:  If you multiclass that much, you're probably doing it to get the saves.  In that situation, your saves _are_ your special ability.  Moreover, saves are passive abilities; the player doesn't control when their character uses a save, which gives them limited appeal compared to stuff the player can control.  So if a player goes after them like crazy, and succeeds in having really exceptional saves – let them have their fun.

_Q: I prefer stopping at around 8th level, does that work for this system? _
A: The system will probably work about as well at 8th level, but note that “Epic 6th” characters do end up being more powerful than regular 6th level characters.  Epic 6th may be what you want for a game that sits at the power level for Level 8, and Epic 8th may cater more closely to Level 10 style play.

_Q: Does E6 work with a slower progression to level 6?  Does it work when characters are created at 2nd level?_
Yes and yes.  I've tried both during my playtesting period.  I'll be starting my new game at 3rd level.

_Q: I’m not a big fan of experience points.  Do you need a strict XP system to make E6 work?_
A:  An ad-hoc "gain a feat" approach would work absolutely 100% with this system.  I used to do that with other systems (power up when the story makes it appropriate) and given the fact that the upper end of the power curve flattens off, that method should go very smoothly with E6.

_Q: Can you use Prestige Classes with E6?_
A: I’d recommend taking the same approach you take in your regular D&D game.  If you allow Prestige Classes there, feel free to allow them here.  Of course, characters capped at 6th level can usually take at most 1 level of a Prestige Class.

_Q: With only 6 levels, how do races with a level adjustment work?_
If you use races with a level adjustment, the 6th level cap is a big issue. Use the point buy rules in the DMG as follows:
LA Point buy
+0 32
+1 25
+2 18
+3 10
+4 00

Thus, +LA races should start with zero LA, but use the point buy listed here.  Keep in mind the difference between LA and racial hit dice (the two combine to give starting ECL).

[sblock=Why is E6 designed this way?]_Q: Where did E6 come from?_
A:  E6 was inspired by the article _Gandalf was a Fifth-Level Magic User_ by Bill Seligman.  The article was published in The Dragon (which became Dragon magazine) in issue #5, March 1977.  When I first had the concept of E6, where we used the first six levels for the whole game, my very first step was pitching it to my players.  Some thought it was a great idea, and the rest were willing to give it a try, so I gave it a shot.  E6 worked really well for our tastes, and we've done lots of playing inside E6 since then. Back then E6 was a lot more convoluted than it is now: there were intricate quasi-gestalt rules and several other little things that weren’t so much about the cap as they were about my group’s thoughts on D&D class balance. Over time, we found that the only rules we were really using (on both sides of the screen) were the feat rules, and that was producing a great play experience. So when I returned to E6 just recently, that’s how I wrote it up: As it was actually played.

_Q: Why 6th level for the cap?  Why not 12th, or 20th? _
A: My experience in D&D is that at around 6th level the characters are really nicely balanced, both in terms of balance against other classes, and against the CR system.  Also, there was an element of setting assumptions; each class is strong enough that they're well defined in their role, but not so strong that lower-level characters don't matter to them any more.  

_Q:  How did you arrive at the cost of 5000 xp per feat post 6th level?_
A:  Originally, I considered that if I wasn’t giving level 7, maybe 2 feats for the same price would be a good comprimise (3000xp / feat).  That way they would have this great feeling of advancement without popping the top off the power level."  But in play, the players found it was so fast that they did not have time to enjoy their new abilities.  There just wasn't time in-game for their characters to grow, so I upped the cost to 5000 xp, and it works like a charm.

_Q: Why not use [system of character points / experience purchases / incremental gestalt rules] instead of E6?_
A:  Feats, if they don't work out in a particular case, are less controversial to tweak than, say, the XP table.  If you find out that the XP table, or stats, or whatever else you've changed doesn't work for some players, it's a big deal to change it because it then affects everyone - and sometimes has effects that cascade through the system.  

I have found that if a feat is too good, it's not that big a deal to say "Hey Ned, I think the feat I made for you is too good, but I don't want to take it away from you.  I think it should have a prerequisite, like Skill Focus (Knowledge - nature) instead of being straight-up available.  I'd like to leave you with it but say that your next feat needs to be that knowledge thing, rather than take it away now.  We could do that, or if you want you could swap it out for something else.  What do you think?"

It's important to me to keep the rule changes minimal, because players really don't want to read a lot outside of the game and they get frustrated if there's too many house rules.

2 years ago (before E6 was called E6) I worked up these complex gestalt XP-buy rules, but eventually my players and I realized that with all the options available all that was really getting used were feat purchasing, because they were so easy to approach.

_Q: Why not just stop advancement at 6th, and have characters just not advance after that, or slow experience down so much that you can game for years and never get higher than 6th level?_
A: In my experience, players prefer to have characters that can grow – and have that growth reflected in the mechanics of the game.

_Q: I like high-magic, high-powered campaigns.  Is E6 for me?_
A: Probably not.  Just as D&D can’t be all things to all groups, E6 caters to a specific set of tastes.[/sblock]


----------



## Ry

The most recent version of these house rules is in the Raising the Stakes pdf attached to the first post.  This post is just for the convenience of those who want to reference E6 and Raising the Stakes on one forum page.

[sblock=Raising the Stakes]These house rules go well with or without E6, and I recommend them.

I use these rules in my game to reduce lethality, make sure that the PCs are the stars of the show, and provide a stunt mechanic without slowing down play with new odds or modifiers.  These rules assume that Players Roll All the Dice, which I recommend for all campaigns, Epic 6th level or not. 

[sblock=Conviction]Player Characters have a pool of Conviction, which functions like Action points. All PCs get 6 Conviction. Conviction is replenished whenever the party has a night of complete rest. 

Conviction can be used in the following ways:



		Code:
	

Cost Result
1     Roll an extra d20, keeping the highest*
2     Re-roll a d20**
2     Take an extra move-equivalent action @
3     Take an extra standard action @
* Declare before any roll
** Declare after any roll
@ On your turn only

[/sblock]
[sblock=The Death Flag]The death flag is definitely designed for campaigns where characters can't come back from the dead.  This lets those campaigns get rid of random lethality without eliminating death altogether as a possibility.  This is done with a change in the "social contract" between players and GM.  Whereas in standard D&D the player is at the mercy of the DM and the rules, with the death flag the player decides when the stakes of a conflict are life and death.

As an Immediate action, a player character can choose to raise his Death Flag and gain 6 Conviction instantly (even if this brings their total Conviction pool above 6). 

When the death flag is raised, the normal rules for death apply. If the death flag has not been raised, then the character, if killed, is treated as reducing the player character to 1 hit point above death. The Death Flag can be lowered by spending 6 Conviction.

PCs, even if their death flag is raised, never regenerate to a total higher than 6 Conviction.  So if a PC raised their flag, they get 6 extra.  This gives them more than their maximum (6) they won't regenerate these extra; the extra points stick around till used but a PC won't regenerate past 6.[/sblock]
[sblock=Raising the Stakes]
At any time, a player can choose to make a 'raise' before rolling their d20s.  The terms of the raise are up to the player, but the GM can either accept ("Call") or decide "no bet."

For example: "I attack the goblin, raise you a decapitation frightening his buddies against me falling prone."   "Call."

"I attack the goblin, raise you 2d6 damage against 2d6 damage" "Call."

Modifiers will be left to the standard underlying rules, and raises based on odds that are too strong will simply be declined.  So if the fighter has a 95% chance of hitting the goblin, the raise of "I do an extra 5d6 or take an extra 5d6 damage." would be declined.  Instead, a raise could be : "OK, if I hit, I decapitate the goblin and his friends are frightened.  If I miss, I'm on the ground grappled by 5 goblins and I take 2d6 damage."

This can be used also to bypass other less fun mechanics "OK, I walk up to the sorcerer and hit him with my dagger.  I raise grappling him against getting knocked back 10 feet and taking 2d6 damage from cracking my head on the pillar."[/sblock]

*Reading the Players*
When a player spends Conviction, they're saying "Hey, this is important to me. I want my character to have been the one that pulled this off - or at least, put everything into trying."

When a player raises the Death flag, they're saying "This is worth staking my character's life on."

When a player Raises they're saying "Hey, I have an idea to make this more exciting.  What do you think?"

When a DM declines a Raise they're saying "Cool idea, but I'm not quite ready for that to happen right now."

*Playtesting*
I have used Conviction in many, many sessions, the Death Flag has been used a few times, and Raises have been playtested once.  I am using all 3 in my weekly E6 campaign.[/sblock]


----------



## Ry

*Links*

Here are some E6-related links:

*The OGC E6 Wiki*
http://esix.pbwiki.com/

*D&D Calibrating Your Expectations*
http://www.thealexandrian.net/creations/misc/d&d-calibrating.html

*mfrench's (mostly) free stuff E6 campaign*
http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=201425

*Netbook of Feats*
http://datadeco.com/nbofeats/


----------



## Ry

*Play Aids*

*Quick Templates for E6*
These templates up the CR of existing creatures quickly and easily by adding blocks of 5 feats.
http://esix.pbwiki.com/Monsters


[sblock=Khuxan’s discovery]Khuxan discovered that D&D Miniatures are well suited to E6. The vast majority are CR <10.  In fact, it's quite fun to look through the above-sixes and work out where each one belongs in a E6 campaign: 
the CR 11 Stone Golem that guards the entrance to an ancient kingdom... 
the CR 8 Warforged Titan whose creation ended a border dispute between two nations... 
the CR 9 Aspect of Orcus isn't an Aspect, it's the Orcus... 
the CR 8 Efreeti you hope stays in its lamp - because if it broke free, it could raze cities... 
the CR 7 Yuan-ti Abomination which heads the empire-spanning Slithering Cult... 
the CR 7 Bulette that destroys every caravan to venture through the Wastes... 
the CR 13 Huge Red Dragon that is the first dragon, the dragon from which all others sprung...
the CR 8 Treant which is the heart of the deepest forest in the land...[/sblock][Sblock=Evilhalfling’s list of Wondrous Items]Here is a list of all minor wondrous items that require only spells 3rd lvl or lower to create, 

 Elixir of love 150 gp
 Unguent of timelessness 150 gp
 Dust of tracelessness 250 gp 
 Elixir of hiding 250 gp 
 Elixir of sneaking 250 gp 
 Elixir of swimming 250 gp 
 Silversheen 250 gp 
 Elixir of truth 500 gp  
 Bag of tricks, gray 900 gp 
 Hand of the mage 900 gp 
 Bracers of armor +1 1,000 gp 
 Cloak of resistance +1 1,000 gp 
 Pearl of power, 1st-level spell 1,000 gp 
 Phylactery of faithfulness 1,000 gp 
 Salve of slipperiness 1,000 gp 
 Elixir of fire breath 1,100 gp 
 Pipes of the sewers 1,150 gp 
 Dust of illusion 1,200 gp 
 Brooch of shielding 1,500 gp 
 Necklace of fireballs type I 1,650 gp 
 Dust of appearance 1,800 gp 
 Hat of disguise 1,800 gp 
 Pipes of sounding 1,800 gp
 Amulet of natural armor +1 2,000 gp 
 Horn of fog 2,000 gp 
 Robe of bones 2,400 gp 
 Sovereign glue 2,400 gp 
 Boots of elvenkind 2,500 gp 
 Boots of the winterlands 2,500 gp 
Candle of truth 2,500 gp 
Cloak of elvenkind 2,500 gp 
Scarab, golembane 2,500 gp 
Necklace of fireballs type II 2,700 gp 
Stone of alarm 2,700 gp 
Bag of tricks, rust 3,000 gp 
Chime of opening 3,000 gp 
Horseshoes of speed 3,000 gp 
 Rope of climbing 3,000 gp
Dust of disappearance 3,500 gp 
Lens of detection 3,500 gp 57 
Bracers of armor +2 4,000 gp 
Cloak of resistance +2 4,000 gp 
Gloves of arrow snaring 4,000 gp \
Restorative ointment 4,000 gp 68 
Pearl of power, 2nd-level spell 4,000 gp 
 Circlet of persuasion 4,500 gp 7
 Slippers of spider climbing 4,800 gp 
Bracers of archery, lesser 5,000 gp 
Helm of comprehend languages and read magic 5,200 gp 
Vest of escape 5,200 gp 
Eversmoking bottle 5,400 gp 
Sustaining spoon 5,400 gp 
Boots of striding and springing 5,500 gp 
Wind fan 5,500 gp 
 Amulet of mighty fists +1 6,000 gp 
 Horseshoes of a zephyr 6,000 gp 
 Pipes of haunting 6,000 gp 
 Gloves of swimming and climbing 6,250 gp 
 Circlet of blasting, minor 6,480 gp 
 Horn of goodness/evil 6,500 gp 
 Bottle of air 7,250 gp 
 Periapt of health

Medium Items 
Bracers or armor +3 
Amulet of NAC +2 
Boots of haste 
Cloak of Arcadia
Minor cloak of displacement[/sblock]


----------



## Shazman

Does caster training increase your spellcaster level in all aspects (spell slots, known, etc.) or is it only supposed to increase the range, duration, and damage of the spells you can already cast (like practiced spellcaster)?  

I really like what you've done with the feats.  Martial veteran is a very simple and elegant way to give the fighter 6 a boost.  Now a fighter (and only a fighter) can get improved critical, weapon mastery, and greater weapon focus.


----------



## Ry

Caster Training should only affect Caster Level.  (i.e., more dice on your damage, no new spells or slots)


----------



## Shazman

You should probably change the text of the feat to make that specific.  As written, it sounds like a figther 4/wizard 2 would be have all of the spellcasting ability of a wizard 6 with this feat.


----------



## Ry

done


----------



## FrouzenIland

Skill Training (General) 
Benefit: You gain 4 additional skill points.

What about that?


----------



## TwoSix

FrouzenIland said:
			
		

> Skill Training (General)
> Benefit: You gain 4 additional skill points.
> 
> What about that?




The feat Open Minded already exists in the SRD, and gives 5 skill points.


----------



## FrouzenIland

TwoSix said:
			
		

> The feat Open Minded already exists in the SRD, and gives 5 skill points.




Nah, 4 is much better    

edit: sorry, but where is it? can't find the feat.  

found it. psionics! never cared about them


----------



## Ry

We can agree to disagree.  I used to use 6.


----------



## FrouzenIland

So I think most of the feat possibilites are pretty much covered. 
What about feats to reaise the BAB up to character level? 

Combat Training (General)
Benefit: Your base attack bonus increases by +1. Your maximum base attack bonus equals your character level.

I was also thinking about some feats that in a normal D&D game would be useless, but in E6 could be very interesting.


----------



## Ry

Edit: see below


----------



## Kunimatyu

FrouzenIland said:
			
		

> So I think most of the feat possibilites are pretty much covered.
> What about feats to reaise the BAB up to character level?
> 
> Combat Training (General)
> Benefit: Your base attack bonus increases by +1. Your maximum base attack bonus equals your character level.
> 
> I was also thinking about some feats that in a normal D&D game would be useless, but in E6 could be very interesting.




Sounds like a good idea on paper, but it'll be terribly broken in real play. In particular, it'll overpower caster-types -- why play a paladin when you can be a cleric and raise your attack bonus twice?

Keeping the 2/3rds BAB classes at +4 at the end is crucial to maintaining balance. Put another way, most of the feats we've created for E6 exist in some shape or form in D&D3.5 already. If a feat like the above one was a good idea, I think we'd have seen it in a splatbook at some point.

EDIT: Besides, with that feat, I can show you a Scout capable of dealing over 50 damage on a charge - without Power Attacking. It's incredibly abusable.


----------



## Ry

Kuni, can you expand on that abuse bit?  I don't have any experience with the scout, I'm just thinking the rogue.


----------



## Kunimatyu

Sure. Scouts have skirmish, which is basically sneak attack that requires you to move 10 feet, so no two-weapon fighting for double skirmish damage, for instance. At 6th level, a Scout will have +2d6 skirmish.

PHB2 has a feat called Two Weapon Pounce that allows for an off-hand weapon hit on a charge. The requirement is Dex 15, TWF, and BAB +6.

Miniatures Handbok has a feat called Hurling Charge that lets you throw a weapon as a free action during a charge. BAB requirement is +6.

Completely Adventurer has a normally fine feat called Improved Skirmish that adds +2d6 skirmish damage if you move at least 20 feet.

Now, let's take our Scout, give him Combat Training twice. Now he can qualify for feats he was never meant to qualify for, and can pick up Two Weapon Pounce and Hurling Charge. Depending on DM's interpretation, he might also need Quick Draw to grab an additional primary weapon after he Hurls the first one, but probably not, since you can draw a weapon as part of a move if you have a BAB over +1.

Now, our Scout charges a foe, first throwing a handaxe for 1d6+4d6 skirmish. Then he pounces and attempts to hit with each held handaxe for 1d6+4d6 skirmish each. Ignoring weapon bonuses, Strength, and other numerical modifiers, he's doing at least 15d6 (average: 52.5) on a charge, and all because he's qualifying for feats he couldn't get otherwise.

It's honestly worse with classes like Cleric and Druid, who can get that last 2 BAB for 2 feats, and then they're full casters in armor with full BAB, all for the price of two feats. Way way way too good - who wants to play a Paladin or Ranger when you can do stuff like that?


----------



## Ry

Well put.  Thanks for the clarification.


----------



## Shazman

You could also get a rogue that could do even more damage (20d6) by full-attacking a flanked target while using improved two-weapon fighting with two short swords.  

I didn't realize that two-weapon pounce had such low BAB requirements.  A two-weapon fighter or ranger suddenly seem more viable in E6 than I thought.


----------



## Kunimatyu

Shazman said:
			
		

> You could also get a rogue that could do even more damage (20d6) by full-attacking a flanked target while using improved two-weapon fighting with two short swords.
> 
> I didn't realize that two-weapon pounce had such low BAB requirements.  A two-weapon fighter or ranger suddenly seem more viable in E6 than I thought.




Wouldn't it be 16d6, since rogues would be dealing 1d6 sword +3d6 sneak damage with four attacks?


----------



## Shazman

Yeah, you're right.  I somehow got it in my head that 6th level rogues had 4d6 sneak attack.  Anyway, you get my point.  The feat is broken.


----------



## FrouzenIland

Kunimatyu said:
			
		

> Miniatures Handbok has a feat called Hurling Charge that lets you throw a weapon as a free action during a charge. BAB requirement is +6.




Ok, I agree that maybe my feat is broken because of the "clerics getting it" point.
But you are completely wrong about the scout thing.
The Hurling Charge feat lets you make a throwing attack during a charge, then draw a weapon and make the normal charge melee attack. The feat says you can't make more than two attacks, even if you could.


----------



## Kunimatyu

FrouzenIland said:
			
		

> Ok, I agree that maybe my feat is broken because of the "clerics getting it" point.
> But you are completely wrong about the scout thing.
> The Hurling Charge feat lets you make a throwing attack during a charge, then draw a weapon and make the normal charge melee attack. The feat says you can't make more than two attacks, even if you could.




Oops, missed the "only one attack" bit, so you can't pounce and throw a weapon. Regardless, the cleric/druid bit seals the deal, and makes the feat way overpowered.


----------



## Shazman

We've given some good examples of how it can be abused, and I'm sure there are even worse things an experienced optomizer can do with this feat.  There's a reason why scouts, rogues, and full casters don't have a full base attack progression.  They would be horribly overpowered compared to the martial classes that do get a full base attack progression.  You are more than welcome to use this feat in your games, but I'd keep a close eye on PC's that take this feat.


----------



## FrouzenIland

Yes it is overpowered. I was just trying to make a feat like the Caster Training, but the implications of increasing BAB are much more complex than increasing caster level.
BTW, can a 6th level paladin get the Caster Training feat and get caster level 6?


----------



## Kunimatyu

FrouzenIland said:
			
		

> Yes it is overpowered. I was just trying to make a feat like the Caster Training, but the implications of increasing BAB are much more complex than increasing caster level.
> BTW, can a 6th level paladin get the Caster Training feat and get caster level 6?




Yes it can, just like Practiced Spellcaster, though it doesn't do them a lot of good, as it just increases the duration of a few buff spells, and several of them(Divine Favor, Bless) have set durations of 1 minute already.

The key feat for a paladin spellcaster is Battle Blessing from Complete Champion, which lets them cast standard action spells as swift actions, though there's no way for a paladin to ever get 2nd level paladin spells in E6.


----------



## FrouzenIland

Kunimatyu said:
			
		

> Yes it can, just like Practiced Spellcaster, though it doesn't do them a lot of good, as it just increases the duration of a few buff spells, and several of them(Divine Favor, Bless) have set durations of 1 minute already.
> 
> The key feat for a paladin spellcaster is Battle Blessing from Complete Champion, which lets them cast standard action spells as swift actions, though there's no way for a paladin to ever get 2nd level paladin spells in E6.




Whoa that's a nice feat for the pallys. I don't have complete champion yet. 
Another feat most paladins will be getting a lot in E6 is the extra smite and extra turnings with those divine feats, don't you think?


----------



## FrouzenIland

> who wants to play a Paladin or Ranger when you can do stuff like that?




Smite evil gets better with every paladin level, use it in charging smite (PHB2), plus divine might and power attack. Get some extra smite/turn undead and you can do it all day long. It's still a pretty powerful build.
The same with Ranger and favored enemy.... nah... rangers suck 

But yes, Combat Training is still overpowered. Maybe in E5 it'd be ok


----------



## Dragonblade275

*E6 & The Massive Damage Threshold*

50 points damage would normally kill a lot of characters... without any massive damage rules in E6.

Should any variants to the Massive Damage Rules be considered for E6?


----------



## kaomera

Dragonblade275 said:
			
		

> 50 points damage would normally kill a lot of characters... without any massive damage rules in E6.
> 
> Should any variants to the Massive Damage Rules be considered for E6?



You could consider them, but you're just making the game a lot more deadly. One of the sets of rules that E6 removes is the various high-level save-or-die spells. Lowering the massive damage threshold by any significant amount could lead to a lot of saves...

Of course if you want that kind / level of "gritty", then go for it.


----------



## Kunimatyu

Dragonblade275 said:
			
		

> 50 points damage would normally kill a lot of characters... without any massive damage rules in E6.
> 
> Should any variants to the Massive Damage Rules be considered for E6?




Nah -- massive damage is unnecessary in E6, and isn't that well designed in the D&D3.5 RAW, for that matter.


----------



## FrouzenIland

Is there any niche for new feats not yet fully covered for E6? 

Yes, I have plenty of free time these days.


----------



## TheCrazyMuffinMan

Thanks Ryan! I intend to lead an E6 if I ever get my current campaign over with. Also, there may be some current epic feats that may still be usable in E6 without being overpowered (ex: Armor Skin [Maximum +5], Combat Archery, Dire Charge and others that have minimal prerequisites and either provide low, non game-breaking bonuses or waive certain restrictions).

Armor Skin for E6 would have the prerequisite: Con 15, +1 for each time it is taken.

@Kuni: Epic Prowess is a feat that grants +1 to all attacks and it seems to be over the top without the maximums also favoring certain classes. 

In the case of Combat Training, my fix to that would be to allow it to be taken a number of times equal to the maximum BAB for the taker's class at L6, and simply act like an ultralight version of Epic Prowess (+n to all attacks, not to BAB). Finally, I would grant these prerequisites:

Str 13+, Dex 13+, Weapon Focus with at least two weapons, maximum BAB for your class.

That way classes with full progression still get their due. Also, no extra attacks are gained.

Hopefully the above feats don't share this affliction.


----------



## Matrix Sorcica

TheCrazyMuffinMan said:
			
		

> @Kuni: Epic Prowess is a feat that grants +1 to all attacks and it's over the top. Hopefully the above feats don't share this affliction.



Is it really. It doesn't increase BAB, only attack bonus. If a PC really wants to spend all feats just on hitting, I think he'll miss out on so many other things it just might even out.

Of course, if the prereqs aren't severe, there's no need for weapon focus of any kind.


----------



## TheCrazyMuffinMan

Sorcica said:
			
		

> Is it really. It doesn't increase BAB, only attack bonus. If a PC really wants to spend all feats just on hitting, I think he'll miss out on so many other things it just might even out.
> 
> Of course, if the prereqs aren't severe, there's no need for weapon focus of any kind.




Good point. I edited the post after realizing some of the reasons -why- Epic Prowess earned its... um... epicity, and why it can be salvaged in E6 along with some others. Armor Skin kind of has this too, but Dodge is so underpowered it'd be worth -replacing- with AS (albeit at a power-level-appropriate cap).

I added prerequisites for E6 versions of both.


----------



## Kunimatyu

I don't have the time to try to figure out the conversion of Epic feats, but I do agree that it's a good place to start, especially as many are OGL.

I will say that regarding Epic Prowess, there is a world of difference between +1 to attacks and +1 to BAB.


----------



## Dragonblade275

*E6 Martial Prowess Feat Chain*

Epic Prowess would be perfect for a character that was a legendary archer or a swordsman of renown.  

Here's how I'd word it.  I'd change the name and make it a feat chain so as to avoid someone getting a +57 to hit.  Basically, I wouldn't want to see a feat like this be able to be taken multiple times.

[SBLOCK]*MARTIAL PROWESS* [GENERAL] 
*Prerequisites:*  Dexterity 11, Intelligence 11, Base Attack Bonus +4 
*Benefit:* Gain a +1 bonus on all attack and damage rolls.  This bonus stacks with other bonuses on attack and damage rolls.
*Special:* A fighter may select Martial Prowess as one of his fighter bonus feats.

*IMPROVED MARTIAL PROWESS* [GENERAL] 
*Prerequisites:*  Dexterity 13, Intelligence 13, Base Attack Bonus +5, Martial Prowess 
*Benefit:* Gain a +1 bonus on all attack and damage rolls.  This bonus stacks with other bonuses on attack and damage rolls.
*Special:* A fighter may select Improved Martial Prowess as one of his fighter bonus feats.

*GREATER MARTIAL PROWESS* [GENERAL] 
*Prerequisites:*  Dexterity 15, Intelligence 15, Base Attack Bonus +6, Improved Martial Prowess, Martial Prowess 
*Benefit:* Gain a +1 bonus on all attack and damage rolls.  This bonus stacks with other bonuses on attack and damage rolls.
*Special:* A fighter may select Greater Martial Prowess as one of his fighter bonus feats.[/SBLOCK]


----------



## Ry

FYI, I have been going through the previous thread today for stuff that I missed.  I have updated the 4th and 5th posts of this thread, and I added one section about E6 vs. d20 at the bottom of the 1st post.


----------



## TheCrazyMuffinMan

Dragonblade275 said:
			
		

> Epic Prowess would be perfect for a character that was a legendary archer or a swordsman of renown.
> 
> Here's how I'd word it.  I'd change the name and make it a feat chain so as to avoid someone getting a +57 to hit.  Basically, I wouldn't want to see a feat like this be able to be taken multiple times.
> 
> [SBLOCK]*MARTIAL PROWESS* [GENERAL]
> *Prerequisites:*  Dexterity 13, Base Attack Bonus +4
> *Benefit:* Gain a +1 bonus on all attack and damage rolls.  This bonus stacks with other bonuses on attack and damage rolls.
> *Special:* A fighter may select Martial Prowess as one of his fighter bonus feats.
> 
> *IMPROVED MARTIAL PROWESS* [GENERAL]
> *Prerequisites:*  Dexterity 15, Base Attack Bonus +5, Martial Prowess
> *Benefit:* Gain a +1 bonus on all attack and damage rolls.  This bonus stacks with other bonuses on attack and damage rolls.
> *Special:* A fighter may select Improved Martial Prowess as one of his fighter bonus feats.
> 
> *GREATER MARTIAL PROWESS* [GENERAL]
> *Prerequisites:*  Dexterity 17, Base Attack Bonus +6, Improved Martial Prowess, Martial Prowess
> *Benefit:* Gain a +1 bonus on all attack and damage rolls.  This bonus stacks with other bonuses on attack and damage rolls.
> *Special:* A fighter may select Greater Martial Prowess as one of his fighter bonus feats.[/SBLOCK]





That's beautiful! It caps progression, gives fighters their intended edge and the fact that it works with damage too is golden. Thanks man.


----------



## Ry

(From 101 More Feats, which I will be putting in the section 15 of the E6 OGL)
*Skill Beyond Your Years*
Prerequisite: Level 6
Pick a skill.  Your max ranks rise from Level+3 to Level +5.  

(Mine)
*Mighty Wild Shape*
Prerequisite: Druid level 6
Choose 1 Large animal.  You can wildshape into that animal.


----------



## Ry

Also (not for the pdf because the warlock is closed)

*Improved Extra Invocation*
Prerequisites: Extra Invocation
Benefit: You gain a new invocation of the best type you can cast. 
Special: You may take this feat multiple times, but you cannot take this feat more times than you have taken Extra Invocation.


----------



## Matrix Sorcica

TheCrazyMuffinMan said:
			
		

> That's beautiful! It caps progression, gives fighters their intended edge and the fact that it works with damage too is golden. Thanks man.



I find it less beautiful. Why on Earth is there a Dex requirement? It only penalizes non Dex fighters for absolutely no reason. If you want to boost fighters, let the feat have a Fighter level 6 requirement and let it be possible to take the feat X times, X being whatever the DM will allow in his E6 campaign.

Plus, adding a damage bonus makes the feat better than Epic Prowess! Creat a similar feat as above, but let it affect damage.


----------



## Dragonblade275

*RE: E6 & The Massive Damage Threshold*

[sblock]







			
				kaomera said:
			
		

> You could consider them, but you're just making the game a lot more deadly. One of the sets of rules that E6 removes is the various high-level save-or-die spells. Lowering the massive damage threshold by any significant amount could lead to a lot of saves...
> 
> Of course if you want that kind / level of "gritty", then go for it.






			
				Kunimatyu said:
			
		

> Nah -- massive damage is unnecessary in E6, and isn't that well designed in the D&D3.5 RAW, for that matter.



[/sblock]Thanks, Kaomera and Kunimatyu.  I started thinking about various variants that I'd like to try (like Taint from _Heroes of Horror_ and Sanity from _Unearthed Arcana_ or _Call of Cthulhu d20_).

I'm definitely going to try using Taint.  I'll probably try Sanity, also.

As to the Massive Damage Threshold... I was considering using the Constitution plus HD plus size variant similar to how it's presented in Unearthed Arcana.

The Massive Damage Threshold would be equal to:Constitution
+/- 5 for each size category away from medium (small would be -5 and large would be +5)
+2 per Hit Die.​
The Fortitude DC would be:15 plus 1 per 5 points of damage dealt over the character's Massive Damage Threshold.​
Also, I'm thinking about changing death from -10 to the negative amount of the character's Massive Damage Threshold.*Example:*  A 6th level human fighter with a 16 Constitution would have a Massive Damage Threshold of 27 and would not be dead until reaching -28 Hit Points.  A 6th level halfling rogue with a 16 Constitution would have a Massive Damage Threshold of 23 and be dead at -23 hit points (due to being size Small).​It's a little more gritty, but also more survivable than having death at a fixed -10.


----------



## TheCrazyMuffinMan

Sorcica said:
			
		

> I find it less beautiful. Why on Earth is there a Dex requirement? It only penalizes non Dex fighters for absolutely no reason. If you want to boost fighters, let the feat have a Fighter level 6 requirement and let it be possible to take the feat X times, X being whatever the DM will allow in his E6 campaign.
> 
> Plus, adding a damage bonus makes the feat better than Epic Prowess! Creat a similar feat as above, but let it affect damage.




+6 BAB (to allow rangers and other full attack classes this feat), Str requirements at the same values the Dex ones were, and unlimited stacking wouldn't be a bad idea either. I guess it depends largely on what Ryan ultimately decides on.


----------



## GlassEye

FYI, The E6 pdf has the feat Expanded Spell Knowledge in it twice.  It looks like one is an earlier version and the other a revised/clarified version.


----------



## Dragonblade275

*RE: E6 Martial Prowess Feat Chain*



			
				TheCrazyMuffinMan said:
			
		

> That's beautiful! It caps progression, gives fighters their intended edge and the fact that it works with damage too is golden. Thanks man.



Glad you like it, TCMM.


			
				Sorcica said:
			
		

> I find it less beautiful. Why on Earth is there a Dex requirement? It only penalizes non Dex fighters for absolutely no reason.



My reasoning was that the archetypical heroes that I had in mind as those that might have had this feat were all quite dextrous.  Also, it needed another pre-req because of adding the damage bonus.  Clumbsy warriors wouldn't be able to pull off what it takes to get the extra edge in combat that this feat chain provides.  Honestly, it probably should have an Intelligence pre-req, too, that matches the Dexterity requirement at each level.


			
				Sorcica said:
			
		

> If you want to boost fighters, let the feat have a Fighter level 6 requirement and let it be possible to take the feat X times, X being whatever the DM will allow in his E6 campaign.



Each individual GM may houserule as he or she pleases.  However, I didn't want this feat to be only limited to Fighters.  I envisioned rogues and rangers possibly taking this feat chain, too.


			
				Sorcica said:
			
		

> Plus, adding a damage bonus makes the feat better than Epic Prowess! Creat a similar feat as above, but let it affect damage.



Indeed, adding the damage bonus does make it better than Epic Prowess, except for the fact that Epic Prowess can be taken over and over again, without limit.  Hence the Dexterity (and, now, Intelligence requirements).

Here's the revised version:
[SBLOCK]*MARTIAL PROWESS* [GENERAL] 
*Prerequisites:*  Dexterity 11, Intelligence 11, Base Attack Bonus +4 
*Benefit:* Gain a +1 bonus on all attack and damage rolls.  This bonus stacks with other bonuses on attack and damage rolls.
*Special:* A fighter may select Martial Prowess as one of his fighter bonus feats.

*IMPROVED MARTIAL PROWESS* [GENERAL] 
*Prerequisites:*  Dexterity 13, Intelligence 13, Base Attack Bonus +5, Martial Prowess 
*Benefit:* Gain a +1 bonus on all attack and damage rolls.  This bonus stacks with other bonuses on attack and damage rolls.
*Special:* A fighter may select Improved Martial Prowess as one of his fighter bonus feats.

*GREATER MARTIAL PROWESS* [GENERAL] 
*Prerequisites:*  Dexterity 15, Intelligence 15, Base Attack Bonus +6, Improved Martial Prowess, Martial Prowess 
*Benefit:* Gain a +1 bonus on all attack and damage rolls.  This bonus stacks with other bonuses on attack and damage rolls.
*Special:* A fighter may select Greater Martial Prowess as one of his fighter bonus feats.[/SBLOCK]I agree that the Martial Prowess feat chain would be too powerful without the Dexterity and Intelligence reequirements.  However, I did decrease the Dexterity pre-req's by 2 points each because of adding the Intelligence pre-req's.


----------



## Dragonblade275

*RE: E6 Martial Prowess Feat Chain*



			
				TheCrazyMuffinMan said:
			
		

> +6 BAB (to allow rangers and other full attack classes this feat), Str requirements at the same values the Dex ones were, and unlimited stacking wouldn't be a bad idea either. I guess it depends largely on what Ryan ultimately decides on.



I wanted to stay away from Strength as a requirement because a high Strength score already provides a similar attack and damage bonus with melee weapons.  For me, this feat chain is for those that are cunning and dextrous.  Not just the strong and possibly clumsy.  Warriors of martial prowess rely on technique, precision, cunning and speed more than raw strength to achieve their extra edge.

I could see substituting the Intelligence pre-req for Wisdom, too.


----------



## HeinorNY

What about this feat from Conan d20?

Diehard (General)
You can endure wounds that would drop another man.
Prerequisite: Endurance.
Benefit: When reduced to between –1 and –9 hit points, you 
automatically become stable.  You do not have to roll d% to see 
if you lose 1 hit point each round.


----------



## Felnar

ainatan said:
			
		

> What about this feat from Conan d20?
> 
> Diehard (General)
> You can endure wounds that would drop another man.
> Prerequisite: Endurance.
> Benefit: When reduced to between –1 and –9 hit points, you
> automatically become stable.  You do not have to roll d% to see
> if you lose 1 hit point each round.



isnt this in the PHB/SRD already?


----------



## pallen

TwoSix said:
			
		

> The feat Open Minded already exists in the SRD, and gives 5 skill points.




Quick question.  If a level 6 multi-classed character took this feat, which class list does he use when determining class skills vs. cross-class?


----------



## HeinorNY

There is another feat in Conan D20 that I think can fit E6 very well.
It's called Monster Slayer, it doubles the damage bonus from Power attack. when using a weapon two handed, the damage multiplies by 3.


----------



## HeinorNY

Web of Death (General)
You can spin your blade and endanger any who dare attack 
you.
Prerequisite: Base attack bonus +5, Combat Reflexes, Weapon 
Focus.
Benefit: When taking a total defence action, you spin your 
weapon so skilfully that you can make an attack of opportunity 
on anyone who attacks you.  The normal rules for attacks 
of opportunity apply.  This attack is resolved after your 
opponent’s.

Striking Cobra (General)
You can make surprise attacks even when your opponents are 
aware of your presence, using your body language to convince 
them you are no threat, then attacking with the speed and 
suddenness of a striking cobra.  
Prerequisites: Bluff 6 ranks, Dex 15, Cha 13, base attack 
bonus +6.
Benefit: So long as combat has not yet begun, you may 
attempt a Bluff check opposed by your opponents’ Sense 
Motive checks.  If you succeed, they are surprised and you 
may make a round of surprise attacks against them, though 
they may attempt Will saving throws (DC = 10 + ½ your 
base attack bonus + your Charisma modifier) to avoid being 
flat-footed during the surprise and subsequent rounds.  An 
opponent who had readied an action will lose that action if he 
does not beat your Bluff check with his Sense Motive check.


----------



## NilesB

FrouzenIland said:
			
		

> Combat Training (General)
> Benefit: Your base attack bonus increases by +1. Your maximum base attack bonus equals your character level.



If it required proficiency in all martial weapons and it couldn't be taken twice that might almost be balanced. 

At least then you'd need to choose between 3rd level spells and BAB 6.


----------



## Dragonblade275

pallen said:
			
		

> Quick question.  If a level 6 multi-classed character took this feat, which class list does he use when determining class skills vs. cross-class?



Whichever class the character took for his or her sixth level.


----------



## GlassEye

Dragonblade275 said:
			
		

> Whichever class the character took for his or her sixth level.




Can you give a reason?  Other than that it was the last level the character took?  I'm not very content with this answer because the concept of class skills vs. cross-class skills breaks down in this situation when the feat is gained without advancing a level in a class.


----------



## Ry

Just an FYI, the second session was excellent, although we're talking level 2 here.  Mostly the session was revolving around the stakes the characters set, which was fantastic.  It was stupidly little work on my part.


----------



## Dragonblade275

*E6 Improved Skill Knowledge Feat*



			
				GlassEye said:
			
		

> Dragonblade275 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pallen said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TwoSix said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The feat Open Minded already exists in the SRD, and gives 5 skill points.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Quick question.  If a level 6 multi-classed character took this feat, which class list does he use when determining class skills vs. cross-class?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Whichever class the character took for his or her sixth level.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Can you give a reason?  Other than that it was the last level the character took?  I'm not very content with this answer because the concept of class skills vs. cross-class skills breaks down in this situation when the feat is gained without advancing a level in a class.
Click to expand...


I see your point.  In my view, all the feats that are gained after 6th level are part of that level.  Therefore, any skill points gained from feats after 6th level would be distributed among the class and cross-class skills of whatever class was taken at sixth level.

There is a solution, though.  Another feat based on one in _Unearthed Arcana_ that I've adapted for E6:
*IMPROVED SKILL KNOWLEDGE* [General]
You gain access to new knowledge and abilities.
*Benefit:*  Choose any one cross-class skill (whether you already know it or not) and learn it, treating it as a class skill from that point forward.
*Special:*  If you are a multiclassed character, instead of choosing one cross-class skill, you may choose two class skills from one or more of your previous class skill list(s) (whether you already know it or not) and learn it, treating both skills as a class skill from that point forward.
You can gain this feat multiple times. Its effects do not stack. Each time you take the feat, it applies to a new skill or skills.​So, there is a feat to make a cross-class skill a class skill.  And, the same feat allows a multi-class character to treat two skills that were class skills of a previous class as though they were class skills for the class of the most recent level.


----------



## Miar

Invocations are spell like abilities could you just rephrase this to say spell like abilities.  Are there any other classes that have leveled spell like abilities (wizards or 3rd party)?  If there are another other classes that do this would seem to work if it doesn't break something else somewhere.  



			
				rycanada said:
			
		

> Also (not for the pdf because the warlock is closed)
> 
> *Improved Extra Invocation*
> Prerequisites: Extra Invocation
> Benefit: You gain a new invocation of the best type you can cast.
> Special: You may take this feat multiple times, but you cannot take this feat more times than you have taken Extra Invocation.


----------



## Matrix Sorcica

Dragonblade275 said:
			
		

> Also, it needed another pre-req because of adding the damage bonus.  Clumbsy warriors wouldn't be able to pull off what it takes to get the extra edge in combat that this feat chain provides.  Honestly, it probably should have an Intelligence pre-req, too, that matches the Dexterity requirement at each level.



Heh - still not convinced. What you're doing now is rewarding characters with good ability scores, giving them access to a overpowered feat other characters with lesser ability scores (and thus already at a disadvantage) can't take. In a way, the new requirements will make the feat even more unbalancing, since those who already have (high stats), gain more.

I'm fine with the feat being available to other than fighters. I just think that splitting it up in to hit and damage and setting a limit on the number of times the feat can be taken is the way to go.
Anyway, I think we may have threadjacked enough


----------



## TwoSix

GlassEye said:
			
		

> Can you give a reason?  Other than that it was the last level the character took?  I'm not very content with this answer because the concept of class skills vs. cross-class skills breaks down in this situation when the feat is gained without advancing a level in a class.




Good point.  After level 6, I'd probably just have the class skills of all your classes treated as class skills.  It's hardly gamebreaking.


----------



## Thaedrus

*Class Skill List*

I think that giving all skills for all your classes after 6th would be the way to go. Having cross class skills is a way of saying, "You have dedicated all of you time to advancing the skills of this class since you last leveled. You are unable to advance other skills as much."
Making a character only able to advance the skills of the class of the last level taken is saying that a character can never refocus their efforts, and is stagnant. This seems to be the  antithesis of E6. E6 promotes continuous broadening of skillsets, with an aknowledgement of what is absolutely (demi)humanly possible.
And as was previously stated, it would not at all be game breaking.


----------



## Ry

I will rewrite the Open Mind feat for E6 with that errata (superset of your classes' class skills).


----------



## Ry

*Rogue Special Ability*
Prerequisite: Rogue 6
Benefit: Choose 1 Rogue Special Ability.  You gain that ability.  This feat can only be gained once.


----------



## Morrius

Hi there.  Long time lurker, first time poster, so pardon me if this has already been answered.

How do you handle Raise Dead?  It's one of the most well-known spells in D&D, and one of the most sought after and useful.  Unfortunately, it's also 5th level.  How do you deal with raising a dead character in E6?


----------



## GlassEye

Dragonblade275 said:
			
		

> I see your point.  In my view, all the feats that are gained after 6th level are part of that level.  Therefore, any skill points gained from feats after 6th level would be distributed among the class and cross-class skills of whatever class was taken at sixth level.
> 
> There is a solution, though.  Another feat based on one in _Unearthed Arcana_ that I've adapted for E6:
> *IMPROVED SKILL KNOWLEDGE* [General]
> You gain access to new knowledge and abilities.
> *Benefit:*  Choose any one cross-class skill (whether you already know it or not) and learn it, treating it as a class skill from that point forward.
> *Special:*  If you are a multiclassed character, instead of choosing one cross-class skill, you may choose two class skills from one or more of your previous class skill list(s) (whether you already know it or not) and learn it, treating both skills as a class skill from that point forward.
> You can gain this feat multiple times. Its effects do not stack. Each time you take the feat, it applies to a new skill or skills.​So, there is a feat to make a cross-class skill a class skill.  And, the same feat allows a multi-class character to treat two skills that were class skills of a previous class as though they were class skills for the class of the most recent level.



I like this but I'll probably end up taking the easy way out and just consider all previous class skills as class skills after level 6.


----------



## Ry

Morrius said:
			
		

> Hi there.  Long time lurker, first time poster, so pardon me if this has already been answered.
> 
> How do you handle Raise Dead?  It's one of the most well-known spells in D&D, and one of the most sought after and useful.  Unfortunately, it's also 5th level.  How do you deal with raising a dead character in E6?




Hi Morrius!  Check out my Raising the Stakes pdf, particularly the Death Flag.  The idea is that in E6, death is death (no coming back).  But the Death Flag mechanic lets the players decide when their character is on the line (and give them an incentive to do so).  That way, although death is permanent, players aren't at the mercy of the DM and the dice.


----------



## Kunimatyu

Morrius said:
			
		

> Hi there.  Long time lurker, first time poster, so pardon me if this has already been answered.
> 
> How do you handle Raise Dead?  It's one of the most well-known spells in D&D, and one of the most sought after and useful.  Unfortunately, it's also 5th level.  How do you deal with raising a dead character in E6?




A couple of ways -- first, Ryan's Death Flag rules means that characters tend to only die in climactic scenes, so raising isn't as necessary.

Second, if you want to have death-raising an integral part of the plot, rather using a spell, you use an incantation: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/magic/incantations.htm

Rather than being just another spell, raising the dead with an incantation makes it a plot element with a chance of failure.


----------



## GlassEye

Morrius said:
			
		

> Hi there.  Long time lurker, first time poster, so pardon me if this has already been answered.
> 
> How do you handle Raise Dead?  It's one of the most well-known spells in D&D, and one of the most sought after and useful.  Unfortunately, it's also 5th level.  How do you deal with raising a dead character in E6?



Personally, I think I'll use Incantations from UA to recreate those select higher level spells that I want to include in my campaign.


----------



## GlassEye

A few Quick Templates that will likely see use in my next campaign...

*Sage*
Ability Training (Intelligence)
Ability Advancement (Intelligence)
Skilled Researcher (1)
Open Minded x2

*Leader*
Leadership
Ability Training (Charisma)
Ability Advancement (Charisma)
Inspired Leader (1)
Commanding Voice (1)

*Spymaster*
Ability Training (Charisma)
Ability Advancement (Charisma)
Investigator
Skill Focus (Gather Information)
Information Network (1)

(1) feats from _Dynasties and Demogogues_


----------



## Cheiromancer

GlassEye said:
			
		

> Personally, I think I'll use Incantations from UA to recreate those select higher level spells that I want to include in my campaign.




I would make it so the cost/difficulty the same as buying a scroll or hiring an NPC to do it.  In game terms you don't actually do this, but the time, gp and "special" (quest) components would be the same.

e.g. suppose in a standard game the high priest will _raise_ a dead party member of a 6th level party if the party pays 5,000 gp and fetches a McGuffin from a nearby dungeon.  Then in E6 the "ritual" requires 5,000 gp and a McGuffin from a nearby dungeon.  And only the high priest (a 6th level expert, say) knows the ritual.

You don't actually have to mess around with the rules for designing and performing incantations - you just do something mechanically equivalent to what a standard 6th level party would do.


----------



## GlassEye

Cheiromancer said:
			
		

> I would make it so the cost/difficulty the same as buying a scroll or hiring an NPC to do it.  In game terms you don't actually do this, but the time, gp and "special" (quest) components would be the same.
> 
> e.g. suppose in a standard game the high priest will _raise_ a dead party member of a 6th level party if the party pays 5,000 gp and fetches a McGuffin from a nearby dungeon.  Then in E6 the "ritual" requires 5,000 gp and a McGuffin from a nearby dungeon.  And only the high priest (a 6th level expert, say) knows the ritual.
> 
> You don't actually have to mess around with the rules for designing and performing incantations - you just do something mechanically equivalent to what a standard 6th level party would do.



Good point.  Here I was thinking that I'd have to create actual incantations (or steal incantations from someone else) when it only really needs to be simulated.


----------



## zag01

Hi, so I stumbled upon this E6 thing a few days ago (may have been yesterday actually).

Anyway, I'm really liking what I'm seeing as I can definately relate to the 'sweet spot', though for my group that spot seems to be around 7th-8th level, ie 4th level spells. I understand that part of the draw of E6 is that it makes things simple to run as a DM but my group and I know 4th level spells as well as we know 0-3rd.

With all the martial boosts for getting the prereqs of BAB 8 meet, how much would playing E8 wreck this system? Would it be that damaging?


----------



## Kunimatyu

E8's okay, but the presence of 4th level spells has started to skew things in favor of the casters, thanks to Evard's, Solid Fog, Greater Invis, Divine Power, and the like.

I would recommend tweaking things so that casters cannot gain additional spell slots or spells known of 4th level. That should be enough to preserve most of the flavor of E6 without letting things get too out of hand.


----------



## Dragonblade275

*RE: E6 Martial Prowess Feat Chain*

[sblock]







			
				Sorcica said:
			
		

> Heh - still not convinced. What you're doing now is rewarding characters with good ability scores, giving them access to a overpowered feat other characters with lesser ability scores (and thus already at a disadvantage) can't take. In a way, the new requirements will make the feat even more unbalancing, since those who already have (high stats), gain more.



If there weren't feats for raising ability scores in E6 and if there were not a precedent for making high ability scores pre-req's for feat chains, I might agree with you.

Consider the Two-Weapon Fighting chain.
[sblock]_From the SRD_
*TWO-WEAPON FIGHTING* [GENERAL]
*Prerequisite:* Dex 15.

*IMPROVED TWO-WEAPON FIGHTING* [GENERAL]
*Prerequisites:* Dex 17, Two-Weapon Fighting, base attack bonus +6.

*GREATER TWO-WEAPON FIGHTING* [GENERAL]
*Prerequisites:* Dex 19, Improved Two-Weapon Fighting, Two-Weapon Fighting, base attack bonus +11.[/sblock]
The only difference is that the BAB requirements in the E6 Martial Prowess chain were designed with the 6th level cap in mind.  The BAB requirements are definitely too low for 20 level DnD and I would have written it differently if I were writing it for use in normal 3.5 rules.


			
				Sorcica said:
			
		

> I'm fine with the feat being available to other than fighters. I just think that splitting it up in to hit and damage and setting a limit on the number of times the feat can be taken is the way to go.



Splitting it up into separate feats for attack and damage bonuses would still be too powerful without the additional ability score requirements (or some other requirements).  And, it would step on the toes of the Weapon Focus/Specialization chain.







			
				Sorcica said:
			
		

> Anyway, I think we may have threadjacked enough



Fair enough.  I'm currently of the opinion that the Martial Prowess chain is too powerful without the ability score requirements, unless some other pre-req's could be devised (perhaps some sort of skill ranks requirements?).

Also, there's Melee Weapon Mastery in the _Player's Handbook II_ which has pretty incredible benefits.  See this thread.
[/sblock]
</threadjack>


----------



## knight_isa

Kunimatyu said:
			
		

> E8's okay, but the presence of 4th level spells has started to skew things in favor of the casters, thanks to Evard's, Solid Fog, Greater Invis, Divine Power, and the like.
> 
> I would recommend tweaking things so that casters cannot gain additional spell slots or spells known of 4th level. That should be enough to preserve most of the flavor of E6 without letting things get too out of hand.




One positive thing about E8, though, is that it requires fewer changed/new feats to allow the higher level stuff that people seem to want (Improved Crit, Greater Weapon Focus, Large wildshaping).  If you don't want more 4th level spells, then you can use the Extra Spell Slot/Known feats from the Complete books instead of the ones here.

The only thing I'm not sure about with E8 is that it gives 3/4 BAB classes their second attack.  That may not be bad, though.  I wish I had a full group to test it with (I only have two players at the moment).


----------



## Kunimatyu

Random thought -- there should be a way for Monks to take feats that they can pick up as bonus 6th level feats.

Perhaps....

Martial Arts Master [General]
Prereq: Monk 6th
Benefit: You are considered to meet the prerequisites for any feat you could take as a 2nd or 6th-level Monk bonus feat. In addition, you gain the Stunning Fist feat if you do not have it, or 2 additional uses of your stunning fist if you do.


----------



## zag01

knight_isa said:
			
		

> One positive thing about E8, though, is that it requires fewer changed/new feats to allow the higher level stuff that people seem to want (Improved Crit, Greater Weapon Focus, Large wildshaping).  If you don't want more 4th level spells, then you can use the Extra Spell Slot/Known feats from the Complete books instead of the ones here.
> 
> The only thing I'm not sure about with E8 is that it gives 3/4 BAB classes their second attack.  That may not be bad, though.  I wish I had a full group to test it with (I only have two players at the moment).




I think it would indeed lower the amount/need for the modified/new feats. Yea the 3/4 BAB classes get another attack. Big deal, with all the extra feats anyone could take the 2-weapon feats to get it with E6. I don't find the extra attack to be too excessive.

I do like the idea of using the extra slot/known feats as published. Sure, you can have 20 3rd level slots, but the real meat and potatoes (4th level) you've got at most, what 3?


----------



## Ry

I would be very, very interested in hearing playtest feedback about E8, if someone runs it.


----------



## Ry

One thing I should say about E8; you'll end up sitting at the CR12+ range, I believe.  That's a work-heavy range for DMs, although the slower progression after 8 would let a DM ease into it.


----------



## zag01

rycanada said:
			
		

> I would be very, very interested in hearing playtest feedback about E8, if someone runs it.




I’m interested to hear of those as well. I’d run one myself (and may one day) but alas my group just started a SECR campaign and I don’t have the time for another group/game right now.

The more I think about it the more I’m talking myself into liking the idea of E8. You get a little more into prestige classes for those that like them. Also you’re firmly entrenched in the second quartile of the game with the chance to interlope into the third. With E6 you’re really just into the second with no real shot of seeing the action of the third quartile.

I really appreciate the work you guys have done on E6. I love ideas that get me thinking.


----------



## Morrius

I'm really liking this idea.  I think it'll mesh well with a low-magic campaign world I have in mind.  Are you constantly updating the list of new feats in the PDF and RTF files?

As long as we're making feats from some of the cleric spells out there, you might want to add Neutralize Poison to it.  It's 4th level for most casters, but 3rd level for Druids and Rangers.  Of course, Rangers don't get 3rd level spells till level 11...

Arcane casters could also use a source of sonic and cold magical damage, since Cond of Cold and Shout are too high level.


----------



## Dragonblade275

*E6 Neutralize Poison Feat*

*NEUTRALIZE POISON* [DIVINE]
You detoxify any sort of venom in the creature or object touched. 
*Prerequisites:*  Wisdom 14, Heal 9 ranks, Knowledge (Nature) 9 ranks, Ability to cast 3rd level divine spells
*Benefit:*  You may prepare and cast Neutralize Poison as the spell.  Neutralize Poison prepared and cast in this manner uses up two third level divine spell slots.
*Normal:*  Only Druids can normally cast Neutralize Poison as a third level divine spell.
*Special:*  Spontaneous casters need not prepare Neutralize Poison.  Rather, they cast it as they would any other divine spell (except that two third level divine spell slots are used).
Some casters may use Charisma, instead of Wisdom, for the pre-requisite at the GM's discretion.
This spell may be cast with a casting time of 1 minute (instead of 1 standard action) at the cost of one third level divine spell slot (instead of two)​


----------



## Kunimatyu

::shrug:: With the Heal skill and Lesser Restoration, I'm not sure how big a deal Poison is to begin with. Still, having the feat can't hurt, though I don't expect anyone to use it.


----------



## Dragonblade275

The thing I like about Neutralize Poison is that it protects from poison for the duration of the spell.  Very useful if going into a fight against poisonous or poison using opponents.


----------



## Kunimatyu

Dragonblade275 said:
			
		

> The thing I like about Neutralize Poison is that it protects from poison for the duration of the spell.  Very useful if going into a fight against poisonous or poison using opponents.




Sure, but chugging a flask of antitoxin provides most of the same benefits for a fraction of the cost. If you're a melee type in E6, you've probably got a +5 base Fortitude +3 Con + 2 cloak of resistance +5 antitoxin, for a +15 versus poison. Those are pretty good odds!

EDIT: Oh, and Delay Poison will keep you functionally immune to poison for 6 hours, which is probably long enough to confront whatever it is you're dealing with.


----------



## Dragonblade275

Good points.

But, I can see a sixth level cleric wanting access to it (whether it makes sense or not from a metagame perspective).  The fact that some might not want the feat probably indicates that it'd be balanced (as they say that if everyone wants it, it's too good).


----------



## Matrix Sorcica

One thing I've been thinking about, no less from the apparent lack of E6 character examples in the 'optimizing E6 campaigns' thread and Rya's comment about stat blocks not being fun.

Is there a better way to list E6 charaters? I mean, instead of writing weapon focus, greater weapon focus and power attack, cleave, great cleave - would it be better just to write greater weapon focus and great cleave. The prereq feats are included since you must have them, but their benefits are included in the better feats anyway. Same way, write Extra Spell Known 1st lvl x 3, 2nd lvl x 2) etc.

Of course, in some cases it does require a certain knowledge of prereq feats, but IMO since you don't use those feats anyway, I think the problem will be small.


----------



## Khuxan

Sorcica said:
			
		

> One thing I've been thinking about, no less from the apparent lack of E6 character examples in the 'optimizing E6 campaigns' thread and Rya's comment about stat blocks not being fun.
> 
> Is there a better way to list E6 charaters? I mean, instead of writing weapon focus, greater weapon focus and power attack, cleave, great cleave - would it be better just to write greater weapon focus and great cleave. The prereq feats are included since you must have them, but their benefits are included in the better feats anyway. Same way, write Extra Spell Known 1st lvl x 3, 2nd lvl x 2) etc.
> 
> Of course, in some cases it does require a certain knowledge of prereq feats, but IMO since you don't use those feats anyway, I think the problem will be small.




I don't like this idea at all. I've no objection to listing "useless" feats in a different place, or in brackets behind the relevant feats - but not listing Weapon Focus is just asking for someone to mistakenly assume 1) Greater Weapon Focus is a typo and should be Weapon Focus or 2) the character is owed an extra feat, since it should have more feats than are listed.

Something like Greater Weapon Focus (Weapon Focus) is fine by me.

EDIT: Also, I'm blocking out a new campaign using E6 and the reward, threat, resource and problem system rycanada describes in another thread. I thought, since it's relevant, I'd share the first (and at this point ony) page of a DM's aid I've been writing up. Lienars are centaurs, with a different name and no alignment (I don't play with it). Check it out!


----------



## Ry

What about a 5-feat quick template?  

*Offensive Fighter*
Weapon Focus, Weapon Spec, Cleave, Great Cleave, and Power Attack


----------



## Shazman

E8 would probably be just as viable as E6 as long as casters didn't get access to loads of 4th level spells.  It would require less special feats and allow people to take a few levels of prestige classes.  In E6, a huge amount of prestige classes are out of reach.  The few you can get, you can only take one level of, which generally isn't worth it.  It all depends on what you and your players decide what is best.


----------



## Ry

One thing in E8 that you lose, though, is the ability to use hit-and-drop easy to track mooks against the fully-functional cap+20 party.


----------



## Matrix Sorcica

rycanada said:
			
		

> What about a 5-feat quick template?
> 
> *Offensive Fighter*
> Weapon Focus, Weapon Spec, Cleave, Great Cleave, and Power Attack



I like that.

Khuxan: As reply to the possible issue of not knowing if a character has all the feats he's due (because of short form feat listing), one could just write the number of feats the characters has before the listing of feats - i.e. *Feats:* (5) great Cleave, Greater Weapon Focus.

And so on.


----------



## Matrix Sorcica

rycanada said:
			
		

> One thing in E8 that you lose, though, is the ability to use hit-and-drop easy to track mooks against the fully-functional cap+20 party.



?? I don't understand. Care to elaborate?


----------



## Ry

Well, in E6, I can use 1st level fighters as opponents against the PCs for the whole game.  They're going to go down fast, but they're still credible threats against 6th+20 feats.  

But 8th+20 feats?  Not so much.  That's when you're looking at level 3 or 4 fighters; they go down fast, but I find tracking their hit points and status effects is a lot more cumbersome than level 1 characters.  Also there's the element of world design; if level 3 and 4 fighters / thugs / whatever are so common that they are the "basic mook" of the campaign, where did this supply of level 3 and 4 fighters come from?  How did they get to level 3 while mostly spending their time patrolling?


----------



## Matrix Sorcica

Ah, I see. However, level 3 warriors (nps class) isn't that complicated, are they (BAB+3, 2 or 3 feats, hp 13)? They can hit and are a threat, but down in one hit they go.

But I get the point.


----------



## Morrius

In the style of some of the above posts, I've turned some of the mid-level class features from the core classes into feats.  What do you think, sirs?

Extra Rage [General]
Prerequisite: Ability to rage, base attack bonus +5
Benefit: You may use your rage ability one additonal time per day.
Special: You may take this feat multiple times.  Its effects stack.

Greater Rage  [General]
Prerequisite: Extra Rage feat
Benefit: When you rage, bonuses to Strength and Constitution during your rage each increase to +6, and your morale bonus on Will saves increases to +3. The penalty to AC remains at -2.

Extra Wild Shape [General]
Prerequisite: Ability to assume wild shape, ability to cast 2nd level druid spells.
Benefit:  You may assume wild shape one additional time per day.
Special: You may take this feat multiple times.   Its effects stack.

Extra Smite Evil [General]
Prerequisite: Ability to smite evil as a class ability, base attack bonus +5
Benefit: You may use your smite evil ability one additional time per day.
Special: You may take this feat multiple times.   Its effects stack.

Evasion  [General]
Prerequisite: Base reflex save +3
Benefit: If you make a successful Reflex saving throw against an attack that normally deals half damage on a successful save, you instead take no damage. Evasion can be used only if you are wearing light armor or no armor. A helpless character does not gain the benefit of evasion.

Improved Sneak Attack  [General]
Prerequisite: Sneak attack class ability, Hide 9 ranks, Move Silently 9 ranks
Benefit: Your sneak attacks deal an additional +1d6 damage.

Heroic Toughness  [General]
Prerequisite: Base Fortitude save +5
Benefit: You gain 5 hit points.
Special: You may take this feat multiple times.   Its effects stack.

Woodland Stride  [General]
Prerequisite: Survival 9 ranks
Benefit: You may move through any sort of undergrowth (such as natural thorns, briars, overgrown areas, and similar terrain) at his normal speed and without taking damage or suffering any other impairment.  However, thorns, briars, and overgrown areas that are enchanted or magically manipulated to impede motion still affect you. 

Swift Tracker  [General]
Prerequisite: Track feat, Survival 9 ranks
Benefit: You can move at your normal speed while following tracks without taking the normal -5 penalty. You take only a -10 penalty (instead of the normal -20) when moving at up to twice normal speed while tracking.


Sonic Boom
Evocation [Sonic]
Level: Sor/Wiz 2
Components: V, S, M
Casting time: 1 standard action
Range: Medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)
Area: 5 foot square
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving throw: Fortitude partial or Reflex negates (object); see text
Spell Resistence: Yes

This spell creates a small burst of sonic energy centered around a 5-foot square space.  Any creatre in that space takes 1d4 points of sonic damage per level of the caster, up to a maximum of 5d4, and is deafened for 1d4 rounds.  Any character within 5 feet of the effect takes 1d3 points of sonic damage per level of the caster, up to a maximum of 5d3, and is deafened for 1 round. A successful save negates the deafness and reduces the damage by half. 

Any exposed brittle or crystalline object or crystalline creature takes 1d6 points of sonic damage per caster level (maximum 5d6). An affected creature is allowed a Fortitude save to reduce the damage by half, and a creature holding fragile objects can negate damage to them with a successful Reflex save.

Material component: A small silver bell.


Freezing Blast
Evocation [Cold]
Level: Sor/Wiz 3
Components: V, S, M
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: 40 ft.
Area: Cone-shaped burst
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: Reflex half
Spell Resistance: Yes

Freezing blast creates an area of extreme cold, originating at your hand and extending outward in a cone. It drains heat, dealing 1d6 points of cold damage per caster level (maximum 6d6).

Arcane Material Component: A very small crystal or glass cone.


----------



## Ry

Extra Rage, Extra Wildshape, Extra Smite Evil - I think these are underpowered when you consider how good Extra Turning is.  

I'd say up them all to 2 or 3 times per day.

I think those spells are good, but rolling d3s is a pain.  Why not change Sonic Boom to 1d6 per 2 caster levels, adjacents take half damage, brittle/crystalline take double damage?


----------



## Morrius

rycanada said:
			
		

> Extra Rage, Extra Wildshape, Extra Smite Evil - I think these are underpowered when you consider how good Extra Turning is.
> 
> I'd say up them all to 2 or 3 times per day.
> 
> I think those spells are good, but rolling d3s is a pain.  Why not change Sonic Boom to 1d6 per 2 caster levels, adjacents take half damage, brittle/crystalline take double damage?




Works for me.


----------



## Matrix Sorcica

Morrius said:
			
		

> Extra Rage [General]
> Prerequisite: Ability to rage, base attack bonus +5
> Benefit: You may use your rage ability one additonal time per day.
> Special: You may take this feat multiple times.  Its effects stack.
> 
> Extra Smite Evil [General]
> Prerequisite: Ability to smite evil as a class ability, base attack bonus +5
> Benefit: You may use your smite evil ability one additional time per day.
> Special: You may take this feat multiple times.   Its effects stack.



Why only +5 BAB requirement? This will allow characters to dip into another non full BAB class, and still get to develop the core ability of barbarian/paladin. Is this intentional?


----------



## Ry

I don't think there's ANY BAB requirement for the equivalent WotC splatfeats.


----------



## Shazman

There's no reaon not to just use the extra rage and extra smite feats that already can be found in Complete Warrior.  The rest look good, except greater rage might just be too good.


----------



## Ry

Well, there's OGC to consider; I'd like to be able to put stuff in the E6 pdf where it's feasible and appropriate.


----------



## zag01

rycanada said:
			
		

> Well, in E6, I can use 1st level fighters as opponents against the PCs for the whole game.  They're going to go down fast, but they're still credible threats against 6th+20 feats.
> 
> But 8th+20 feats?  Not so much.  That's when you're looking at level 3 or 4 fighters; they go down fast, but I find tracking their hit points and status effects is a lot more cumbersome than level 1 characters.  Also there's the element of world design; if level 3 and 4 fighters / thugs / whatever are so common that they are the "basic mook" of the campaign, where did this supply of level 3 and 4 fighters come from?  How did they get to level 3 while mostly spending their time patrolling?




Well as for world design, I was thinking E8 was about the power level I liked for Eberron. What with all the veterans of the Last War you'll have plenty of reason to have a surplus of 2nd-4th level mooks. And I comletely agree with the comment on warriors. NPC classes should be the staple for most mooks.

I do see what you're getting at as far as complexity goes. But I think thats the big difference between E6, E8 and regular D&D anyway. Its the level of complexity you and your group are comfortable with.


----------



## Morrius

Shazman said:
			
		

> There's no reaon not to just use the extra rage and extra smite feats that already can be found in Complete Warrior.  The rest look good, except greater rage might just be too good.




To be perfectly honest, I haven't got anything except the core three books and UA.  I made all of these up off of the top of my head.     So if there's something similar in a splat, by all means share it.


----------



## knight_isa

Crystal Keep has a feat index for most of the WotC splats, along with the gist of what they do (so it's actually useful, as opposed to WotC's own index).


----------



## Shazman

rycanada said:
			
		

> Well, there's OGC to consider; I'd like to be able to put stuff in the E6 pdf where it's feasible and appropriate.




That's a good point.  I didn't think of that.


----------



## Matrix Sorcica

rycanada said:
			
		

> I don't think there's ANY BAB requirement for the equivalent WotC splatfeats.



Then I don't think there should be any for E6 either.

Now, I want to look at some defensive feats, that is, feats that relates to armor and shields.
I remember the AEG book 'Mercenaries' had a few in this regard.

Later,


----------



## Matrix Sorcica

zag01 said:
			
		

> Well as for world design, I was thinking E8 was about the power level I liked for Eberron.



E8erron


----------



## FrouzenIland

Has anyone considered to use an alternative magic system for your E6 game?
Since it's only about 3rd level spells, it could be easier to change it a little bit, without to much worry about game balance regarding the high level game breaking spells.


----------



## Matrix Sorcica

How about making an unofficial official appendix for E6 where just the names for E6 appropiate feats and the books they can be found in?

I was just going through some of the WotC splatbooks and for example found a way to cast an empowered Fireball as a 9th level caster (= 13 dice), without using special E6 feats taking the level 6 cap into consideration. And without Sudden Empower!!


----------



## Ry

Sorcica - do tell


----------



## Matrix Sorcica

Well, make that a 10 HD Fireball for 15 dice Empowered 

Fiery Burst (Reserve Feat from Complete Arcane): Increase Caster Level by 1 for Fire Spells.

Arcane Thesis (PHBII): Chose an Arcane spell you can cast. When casting this spell, you gain the following benefits: 1. effective Caster Level is +2;  2. when you apply a Metamagic to your Thesis spell, it increases the spell level by one less.
You may take this feat multiple times, each time with a different spell.

Metamagic School Focus (Complete Mage): Benefit: Choose a school of magic for which you have the Spell Focus feat, or the school in which you have specialized. Three times per day, you can reduce by one level the cost of a metamagic feat applied to a spell of the chosen school. If you prepare spells, you can have only up to three such reducedcost
spells prepared at any time.
Special: A wizard can select this feat as a wizard bonus
feat. This feat can be taken more than once. Each time you take it, it applies to a different school of magic.

Voila, 9th caster level  If we want the 10 levels, we add in a feat from Players Guide to Faerun:

Spell Thematics: Your spells have a visual theme, such as ‘sphere’ or ‘lightning’. Spells you cast have special effects based on your theme, such as Summon Monster I manifesting as the creature springing from a thrown sphere. 1. Since your spells look different, Spellcraft checks to identify what spell you are casting are at +4 DC; 2. For each of your current and future caster levels, you may designate one spell as a ‘thematic spell’, which is thereafter cast at +1 effective Caster level.
Note: you cannot make your spell invisible & the effects of your spells are not changed in any way.


Point is, a lot of what the feats that have been suggested for E6 to provide certain benefits for E6 characters are already out there, by Wizards themselves (which only makes E6 all the more genius IMO )

I'm positive we could do the same for Rogues, Clerics, Fighters and so on. And that's really what my suggestion was all about. Creae an appendix listing all feats that can't be included, but which are perfect for E6, perhaps even giving advice on 'Paths' using the feats, or at least what level 6 boundaries can be ..well, overcome, for lack of a better term.


Edit: Forgot to add: None of those have prereqs a 6th level character can't have.


Edit 2: I do think that melee'ers will need access to some damage dealing (the BAB +8 feats) still.


----------



## Matrix Sorcica

Since I myself are totally torn betwenn E6 and E8 (favoring E6, but.....) a compromise could be to only allow the 4th level spell slots to be used for Metamagic. So E8 without the troublesome 4th levels spells.

Thoughts?


----------



## knight_isa

Sorcica said:
			
		

> So E8 without the troublesome 4th levels spells.




Maybe I just haven't had enough playtime to see this, but I don't see too many troublesome 4th level spells, with the possible exception of scrying.  Maybe we just don't use them.  Have you seen otherwise?  Which ones?

_Edit: This is especially true if you use the WotC Extra Spell Slot/Known feats, which max out at 3rd level if you have a 4th level cap._


----------



## Shazman

I would say solid fog, evard's black tentacles, greater invisibility and divine power are at the top of the list.


----------



## knight_isa

The only one of those that I've seen frequently used is greater invisibility, and it wasn't too much of a problem.  I suppose that could change, but...

Although looking at divine power... heck, why bother with a fighter?


----------



## Matrix Sorcica

Polymorph is as far as I know the most troublesome 4th level spell, since every monster created from any source can alter the balance of the spell. But maybe the problem is severely lessened when the caster has max 6 HD. Maybe.


----------



## Kunimatyu

The big problem with 4th level spells is that the solution to most 4th level spells is another spell, so magic is only balanced with respect to itself, and not with non-magic-users.

Solid Fog is a death sentence for a non-magic type, unless you have the Dispel Magic, Gust of Wind, or Freedom of Movement to escape it, for example.


----------



## Matrix Sorcica

So, playing E8 and only allowing the 4th level slots to be used for metamagic. Would it shaft spellcasters? Would it shaft full BAB'ers, as 3/4' now will end up with two attacks?

Opinions?


----------



## knight_isa

Druid is okay, since they get Large wildshape.

For the other full spellcasters, though, unless they're metamagic junkies it makes the last level or two much less desireable.  If you use the E6 version of Extra Spell I think you'd see a lot of full-caster-6/something-else-2.  If you use the Complete version, that'd probably change to 7/1 (so the feat would still grant 3rd level spells).

I'm not sure about the 3/4 BABers getting the 2nd attack.  I imagine that would have to be playtested.


----------



## Hierax

Sorcica said:
			
		

> So, playing E8 and only allowing the 4th level slots to be used for metamagic. Would it shaft spellcasters? Would it shaft full BAB'ers, as 3/4' now will end up with two attacks? Opinions?



Simple, if with E8 the 3/4 bonus attackers getting the 2nd attack at 8th level is the problem, *go with E7* and you get 4th level Spells but only the Fighter (and fighter-ish) classes get the 2nd attack.


----------



## knight_isa

Just because I'm pondering the relative benefits of E6 vs. E8, what sorts of feats should be allowed in terms of the "lean upwards" approach in E6?  This is less of an issue for E8, since if I took that path I'd make 8th a hard cap, and stick with existing feats.

These are some class abilities that are gained at 7th and 8th levels that, AFAIK, can't be duplicated with existing feats:
 * DR 1/- (Brb)
 * Inspire Courage +2 (Brd)
 * Wild Shape-Large (Drd)
 * GWF (Ftr)
 * Wholeness of Body (Mnk)
 * Higher-level spell slot (2nd for Pal/Rgr, 3rd for Brd, 4th for Clr/Dru/Sor/Wiz)
 * Woodland Stride (Rgr)
 * Swift Tracker (Rgr)
 * +1d6 SA (Rog)
 * Improved Uncanny Dodge (Rog)
 * Improvements to Animal Companion/Familiar

I've seen some suggestions for some of these.  Should all of these be made into feats, in one way or another?  Are there some that shouldn't?


----------



## knight_isa

Hierax said:
			
		

> Simple, if with E8 the 3/4 bonus attackers getting the 2nd attack at 8th level is the problem, *go with E7* and you get 4th level Spells but only the Fighter (and fighter-ish) classes get the 2nd attack.




Of course no one would _ever_ take Fighter-7 in E7, and you'd still have to change GWF and Improved Crit if you wanted to allow them.


----------



## Cheiromancer

I'd like to make another plug for Eex, which requires exponentially more xp to advance.  You start at 3rd and advance at 5K (4th), 10K (5th), 20K (6th), 40K (7th), etc.  You get a feat at 5K intervals between advancing.

This means you have substantially more time at 6th level than in a standard campaign (20,000 xp instead of 6,000 xp) but when it stars to chafe you will be able to get to 7th and, eventually, to 8th.  I don't think class balance will fall apart in those two levels, and the fact that advancement is possible will keep people's multiclassing choices more natural.

In a way it will be like playing E6 for a while, then trying out E7 and, eventually, E8.

I really don't know if the 4th level spells need extra controls.  Is the transition between 6th and 7th level really such a big deal?


----------



## Khuxan

knight_isa said:
			
		

> Just because I'm pondering the relative benefits of E6 vs. E8, what sorts of feats should be allowed in terms of the "lean upwards" approach in E6?  This is less of an issue for E8, since if I took that path I'd make 8th a hard cap, and stick with existing feats.
> 
> These are some class abilities that are gained at 7th and 8th levels that, AFAIK, can't be duplicated with existing feats:
> * DR 1/- (Brb)
> * Inspire Courage +2 (Brd)
> * Wild Shape-Large (Drd)
> * GWF (Ftr)
> * Wholeness of Body (Mnk)
> * Higher-level spell slot (2nd for Pal/Rgr, 3rd for Brd, 4th for Clr/Dru/Sor/Wiz)
> * Woodland Stride (Rgr)
> * Swift Tracker (Rgr)
> * +1d6 SA (Rog)
> * Improved Uncanny Dodge (Rog)
> * Improvements to Animal Companion/Familiar
> 
> I've seen some suggestions for some of these.  Should all of these be made into feats, in one way or another?  Are there some that shouldn't?




These all look appropriate for feats, with the exception of Large wild shape (which rycanada has included in limited form) and the higher-level spell slots.

EDIT: 







			
				Sorcica said:
			
		

> Now, I want to look at some defensive feats, that is, feats that relates to armor and shields.
> I remember the AEG book 'Mercenaries' had a few in this regard.




I've not read them yet, but Five Element Games has just released The Art of Defence and the Art of Defence II as free downloads, and they seem to be what you're looking for: http://www.5egames.com/My_Homepage_Files/Page2.html


----------



## Ry

Hey Khuxan - I like the centaurs you made up (and I REALLY like how OGC it is).  Is their holy site 1 central place for all tribes, or does each tribe have its own holy place?


----------



## Khuxan

rycanada said:
			
		

> Hey Khuxan - I like the centaurs you made up (and I REALLY like how OGC it is).  Is their holy site 1 central place for all tribes, or does each tribe have its own holy place?




I based it off what I could remember of the pre-Islamic tribes of Arabia. Mecca featured the Kaaba, which collected 360 idols of the tribes. As I understand it, the tribes that settled down and occupied Mecca used it to house their idols, but other tribes that shared gods with the settled tribes also considered it sacred. 
In my campaign, some tribes will consider the Talaquin an abomination which cages deities, while others will want to claim it for themselves to show their loyalty to the gods.

EDIT: Also, your sig still links to the old E6 thread.


----------



## Ry

Sig should be fixed now


----------



## Tagnik

The way I'm currently running my E6 Campaign is without Multiclassing and no Prestige Classes.  I'm really just trying to make it as easy on myself as possible.

I use the Prestige classes as regular classes for my NPC's.  I have no idea how difficult they are to fight  (No frenzied berserker yet )

I "buffed" so many of my classes that I have a long house rules list, but it gives my players a lot of options and abilities.

Something I found useful was to just look ahead of the classes, take SOME of those abilities and make them feats, as Ry called them "Capstone" feats.

IE a barbarian taking Indomitable Will, a Spell thief taking Absorb Spell as a feat.  the only prereqs is that they are of their class level and level 6.

The reason I didn't make a lot of these Feats and just worked them into class progression is because I wanted my players to have their new abilities early to have fun 

don't know how to do the "Spoilers" thing, so I posted my house rules here
http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?p=3666681#post3666681


----------



## Matrix Sorcica

Cheiromancer said:
			
		

> I'd like to make another plug for Eex, which requires exponentially more xp to advance.  You start at 3rd and advance at 5K (4th), 10K (5th), 20K (6th), 40K (7th), etc.  You get a feat at 5K intervals between advancing.
> 
> This means you have substantially more time at 6th level than in a standard campaign (20,000 xp instead of 6,000 xp) but when it stars to chafe you will be able to get to 7th and, eventually, to 8th.  I don't think class balance will fall apart in those two levels, and the fact that advancement is possible will keep people's multiclassing choices more natural.
> 
> In a way it will be like playing E6 for a while, then trying out E7 and, eventually, E8.
> 
> I really don't know if the 4th level spells need extra controls.  Is the transition between 6th and 7th level really such a big deal?



See, I 've been considering something like this as well, since I can't make my mind up on E6 or E8. I also thought about adding a level after X thousand XP's and letting character's get the feats in the meantime. What's holding me back at this time is the fact that Sorcerers get shafted big time, as wizards (and clerics) will run around with the potentially troublesome 4th level spells for quite a while before sorcerers get the chance.

However, the solution is good for other classes, as we rogues get another sneak, and we don't need feats that give virtual BAB and a lot of those cool feats that require 12 ranks in a skill becomes available.

Man, this E-thingie is keeping me awake at night


----------



## Ry

Curses... can't... name... E6 campaign setting!


----------



## Cheiromancer

rycanada said:
			
		

> Curses... can't... name... E6 campaign setting!




Are you under an NDA?



			
				rycanada said:
			
		

> Hey Khuxan - I like the centaurs you made up (and I REALLY like how OGC it is).




What centaurs are these?


----------



## Ry

Cheiromancer said:
			
		

> Are you under an NDA?
> 
> 
> 
> What centaurs are these?




No NDA, just a mental block.  I need to name the setting just so I can stop saying "the setting" all over the wiki.

The centaurs are that .pdf Khuxan linked a few pages back.


----------



## GameDoc

*E6 is cool!*

I followed a link from over at the True20 site to the original E6 thread and have been absorbing this stuff for a couple of days now.

Really great idea, Ryan!

I did have a few thought to throw out for discussion:

1) As a benefit for sticking with one class and to give an option for some of the more popular class features that come at levels 7-10, why not  just make those features into feats with a prerequisite of class level 6 (i.e., Wholeness of Body is a feat that has Monk level 6 as a prerequisite)?

2) One quirk of E7 would be that wizards get 4th level spells, but sorcerers do not.  It might further differentiate the two classes.  Would that be a good thing or bad?

3) I was going to suggest making higher level spells work as incantations with materials that cost what it costs to have the spell cast in regular d20, but you guys beat me to it.

I am hoping the next new campaign my friends and I start will be an E6 or E7.  If I can sell them on it, I'll let you know how it works for us.


----------



## GameDoc

For anyone interested, here is one of the articles that gets a lot of discussions on the "sweet spot" going (and sometimes invokes a reference to E6 at some point)

http://www.thealexandrian.net/creations/misc/d&d-calibrating.html


----------



## iceifur

GameDoc said:
			
		

> 2) One quirk of E7 would be that wizards get 4th level spells, but sorcerers do not.  It might further differentiate the two classes.  Would that be a good thing or bad?





Bad idea. IMO, and IME, sorcerers get shafted (compared to wizards) as it is. No need to aggravate the problem.


----------



## Cheiromancer

rycanada said:
			
		

> I need to name the setting just so I can stop saying "the setting" all over the wiki.



I'd suggest "Ebrycan."  Which would be written E6rycan, of course.



			
				GameDoc said:
			
		

> One quirk of E7 would be that wizards get 4th level spells, but sorcerers do not. It might further differentiate the two classes. Would that be a good thing or bad?




You have to decide if 4th level spells are a bug or a feature.  If you *want* 4th level spells to be accessible (maybe banning a few, like _solid fog, polymorph_ and _black tentacles_) you might consider changing the sorcerer spell progression.  Make it equal to the wizard's spells per day plus 2, and sorcerers always know at least one spell of the highest level they can cast.  This is a little boost to sorcerers, but that's probably OK.

If you don't want 4th level spells, change the spellcaster progressions of wizards to be the sorcerer progression minus 2.  Do the same for clerics, druids, and other full casters. This weakens those casters a little, but that is a good thing if you are going to E7; at E7 the spellcasters have pulled ahead a little from the mundane classes, and this sets things right again.

I think you'd need a good deal of playtesting to see which way is better.


----------



## WhatGravitas

Cheiromancer said:
			
		

> You have to decide if 4th level spells are a bug or a feature.  If you *want* 4th level spells to be accessible (maybe banning a few, like _solid fog, polymorph_ and _black tentacles_) you might consider changing the sorcerer spell progression.  Make it equal to the wizard's spells per day plus 2, and sorcerers always know at least one spell of the highest level they can cast.  This is a little boost to sorcerers, but that's probably OK.



It is the strong stuff - solid fog, polymorph and their ilk. Right now, I've tested E7 with Arcana Evolved for two sessions... and it works, though I recommend to state, that the extra spell feats don't work for 4th level spells (but then, my players are hardly very good in optimizing).

Being able to cast a 4th level spell once or twice per day is a much nicer capstone, than getting an extra allotment of 3rd level spells - and since pure meleeists got their second attack on 6th, they get the chance to diversify their abilities a bit, by multiclassing (but getting the 7th level, means they're really good in their niche).

Of course, you have to watch out for classes, who have a totally dead level on 7th - they should get some kind of goodie.


----------



## Ry

I can see E7 working better with AE than with D&D.  If the wizard gets 4th level spells but the sorcerer doesn't, the sorcerer isn't a very happy camper.  

It does look like some "capstone" single-classing feats are popular here on the boards; I still think they are a better solution than going to E8.


----------



## Ry

Oh, and for the campaign; Ebrys.  Thanks Cheiromancer!


----------



## ajanders

A question for people using E6: how do you find this changes building pure casters?
If I was building a spellcaster in d20, I'd make darned sure they could get their 19 int/wis/cha so as not to lose 9th level spells. If you cap out at third level spells, you don't need so high a spellcasting stat.
Granted, you'll still want bonus spells, so a high casting stat is important, but if I were a sorceror or cleric, I'd be looking very hard at balancing my bonus spells and my bonus skills.

And any arcane caster will think about balancing bonus spells and bonus hit points.


----------



## Morrius

Getting back to E6 for a moment, another thing to consider for spellcasters is their key ability.  If the highest possible spell level for PCs is level 3, the a Wizard with 13 Int will be able to cast anything on the wizard list, and he'll get the maximum possible bonus spells at 16 Int.  Should this be tweaked as well?

(Edit: Wow, just a couple of minutes too slow.)


----------



## Ry

I like the idea of some good feats that require the higher casting stats for the respective casters, but that's all that I think is needed.


----------



## GameDoc

I really liked the suggestion of making 4th level and higher spells available as incantations using the OGL rules from UA.

Would you use a single feat?  For example (and keeping in mind some of this is arbitrary off the top of my head**):

INCANTATION (General)
Prerequisites: Cleric, Druid, Sorcerer, or Wizard level 6; Spellcraft 9 ranks; Score of 14 or higher on base spellcasting ability.
Benefits: You can cast 4th level or higher spells from your class spell list as an incantation.  The incantation takes 6 hours per level to perform and requires material components equivalent to the amount listed in the PHB under "Goods and Services" to have the spell cast.  To perform an incantation, your spellcasting ability score must be at least 10 + the level of the spell being incanted. 


Or you could require the feat be taken multiple times:


INCANTATION (General)
Prerequisites: Cleric, Druid, Sorcerer, or Wizard level 6; Spellcraft 9 ranks; Score of 14 on base spellcasting ability.
Benefits: You can cast 4th level spells from your class spell list as an incantation.  The incantation takes 24 hours to perform and requires material components that cost the equivalent to the amount listed in the PHB under "Goods and Services" to have the spell cast.  
Special: You can gait this feat multiple times up to your base spellcasting ability score - 13.  Each time you take this feat, you can cast the next highest level of spells on your list as incantations.  Each additional level adds 6 hours to the incantation and requires additional material components.

**(well... not so arbitrary, 9 ranks would be the max ranks a 6th level character could have in spellcraft).


----------



## Emryys

rycanada said:
			
		

> Oh, and for the campaign; *Ebrys*.  Thanks Cheiromancer!




Hmmm... I think I could develop a _brotherly_ love for the name...


----------



## iceifur

For the "higher-lvl spells as incantations" idea, I'd go with the existing system for spell research (DMG, page 198), or a variant thereof, to learn the blasted things. Basically, researching whether or not a given spell-as-incantation would be viable would take 1 week per effective spell level of the incantation, require a Spellcraft check (DC 10 + effective spell level), and cost 1,000 gp per week of research.

If you want to limit the ability to research and cast incantations (unlike the default option in _Unearthed Arcana_, which is, IIRC, not limited to only spellcasters), just tie the ability to research and use incantations into a feat (with prereqs of character level 6th and/or the ability to cast 3rd-lvl spells).

Your maximum number of incantations known could be equal to the number of times you've taken the aforementioned feat, or it could increase similarly to the *Psionic Talent* feat (max of 1 incantation known the 1st time, +2 incantations the 2nd, +3 the 3rd, and etc.].

Since the default DCs of the checks required to perform incantations are rather high (especially considering the fact that skills top out at 9 ranks at 6th level), with every purchase of the feat you could toss in a free minor bonus (+1 or +2; the bonuses would stack) on checks required to perform incantations. Alternately, you could set the bonus equal to one step less than the number of times you've taken the feat (as the increasing option listed above; +1 bonus the 2nd time you take the feat, +3 total the 3rd, +6 total the 4th, and so on).

If you limit the feat so it can't be taken more than 5 times, you have the following (after taking the feat all 5 times):


A maximum of 5 incantations known (or 15, if using the other option).
A +5 bonus (or +10 for either of the other options) on all checks made to cast incantations.

Just my 2 cp. Apologies all around if this comes across as a ramble.


----------



## Cheiromancer

How much time should be spent at levels 1-5 in an E6 campaign?  If the group goes through as many level appropriate encounters as in a standard 1-20 campaign, they'll spend 25% of their adventuring career in that interval; the rest will be gaining 20+ bonus feats.

I think that is a little lopsided.  I think some of the feats should be gained at lower levels (at 5K intervals).  That way it won't feel like such a slow-down when 6th level is reached.  And there will be less emphasis on the "lean upwards" or "capstone" feats; these feats, since they are aimed at gaining 7th or 8th level abilities, tend to defeat the point of E6.

I'd suggest starting at 2nd level, and leveling up at 5K, 10K, 20K and 40K.  At all other multiples of 5K you gain a feat.  So you gain one extra feat at 4th level, three extras feats at 5th level, and the rest of your feats at 6th level.  By the time you gain 15 more bonus feats (19 total) you should have done the equivalent of a 1-20 campaign; of this time, just over 50% will have been at levels 1-5.  

(I am gradually coming around to the E6 idea, but am still retaining something of the exponential slow-down in leveling up).

I am not terribly fond of the idea of "lean upwards" feats.  I think only feats that would be appropriate to a standard campaign should be in E6.


----------



## knight_isa

I was under the impression that E6 was purposely lopsided, the idea behind it being that ~6th level was the "sweet spot" for rycanada and his group (and obviously others as well).  The earlier levels are just there to provide backstory for the "epic" 6th level characters, and the later feats are to give the players the satisfaction of seeing the characters advance.

When I first saw Eex, I thought it was great.  It makes a lot more sense to me as an advancement scheme.  The more I thought about it, though, the more I realized that it puts too much play time at < 8th, when about 8th is my sweet spot.  So for me, the goal is to play as much in the ~8th level range as possible.  Thus I want to get to ~8th level as quickly as possible.

There seems to be two ways to accomplish this: lean-upwards E6 and E8.  At the moment I'm leaning toward E8, since the lean-upwards side of E6 is generating far too many custom feats and playtime focuses too much on < 8th.


----------



## knight_isa

On a somewhat related note, I'm wondering if these feats are really balanced for E6:



			
				rycanada said:
			
		

> *Expanded Knowledge (General)* (PoeticJustice)
> Prerequisite: Character Level 6th
> Benefit: Choose a spellcasting class in which you have levels. You gain an additional spell known at any level you can cast from that class's spell list.
> 
> *Expanded Casting (General)* (PoeticJustice)
> Prerequisite: Character Level 6th
> Benefit: Choose a spellcasting class in which you have levels. You gain an additional spell slot at any level you can already cast.




While stonger than the equivalent WotC feats, they're probably still okay for a normal d20 campaign.  In fact, they're probably a little weak unless you wait until 18th level or so to take them, since that bonus spell slot/known will become less and less valuable as the caster advances.  In E6, though, they're giving the caster more of his most powerful ability (which will never be superceded by a more powerful ability), and I'm starting to think that it may be too much.  Am I overthinking this?  Am I missing some other feat(s) for non-casters that will give them similar benefits?


----------



## Ry

knight_isa said:
			
		

> I was under the impression that E6 was purposely lopsided, the idea behind it being that ~6th level was the "sweet spot" for rycanada and his group (and obviously others as well).  The earlier levels are just there to provide backstory for the "epic" 6th level characters, and the later feats are to give the players the satisfaction of seeing the characters advance.




Precisely.


----------



## GameDoc

*Paladin and Ranger Spells*

Something else that occurred to me was that E6 could make paladin and ranger spells a hollow proposition.

Barring bonus spells for high Wisdom, you get one 1st level spell at 6th level - the point in time when primary spellcasters have already gotten into 3rd level spells - the most powerful kind available.

Even with a high wisdom, you get your one bonus spell at 4th level, when the major casters have 3 or more first level, plus some second level spells.

I wonder if E6 would be a good system to use the alternative from Complete Warrior that drops spells for these two classes in exchange for a class feature at 6th level (fast movement for rangers; blessed weapon for paladins).


----------



## ajanders

Well, remember E6ic (that's "Epic" in E6) characters can take feats to allow them more spells, more spells/day, and possibly even higher level spells -- it depends on how much leaning up you want to do.
But in terms of creating strong class archetypes, it seems like a good idea. PHB II has a similar class ability system that kicks in at sixth level for the fighter: that may be more special than giving them another feat.


----------



## GameDoc

iceifur said:
			
		

> For the "higher-lvl spells as incantations" idea, I'd go with the existing system for spell research (DMG, page 198), or a variant thereof, to learn the blasted things.




I hadn't though of that.  Its an interesting suggestion.

I guess it would depend on the feel you were going for in your setting.  If 4th level and higher magic was all but unheard of, it would make sense to require research.

OTOH, if you wanted high level magic to be well-known to exist (at least by wizards, clerics, and the like), but simply not easy to come by, something closer to the incantation rituals might suffice.

I do agree that you should probably rule that only primary spellcasters can do incantations (as opposed to anyone) if you are going to use them in this manner.


----------



## GameDoc

ajanders said:
			
		

> Well, remember E6ic (that's "Epic" in E6) characters can take feats to allow them more spells, more spells/day, and possibly even higher level spells -- it depends on how much leaning up you want to do.
> But in terms of creating strong class archetypes, it seems like a good idea. PHB II has a similar class ability system that kicks in at sixth level for the fighter: that may be more special than giving them another feat.




Hey, I had forgotten about that option in the PHB II.  Good call!  Of course, we are bringing in splat books in both instances and part of what Ryan was going for was something that could be 100% OGL.  I guess E6, like regular D&D, is something you could use supplements to flavor, or just go straight SRD.

As far as Paladins and Rangers using feats to advance their spells, it seems like that would only compound the diminishing returns, as their combat abilities would suffer.


----------



## Dragonblade275

*Another Way to Handle Higher Level Spells in E6*

I've been reviewing various alternate rules for use in my current DnD 3.5 campaign.  Tonight, I was looking over Monte Cook & John Tynes' d20 _Call of Cthulhu Roleplaying Game_.

The spells in that system don't even require the caster to have spell casting ability in the way that a cleric, druid, sorcerer, or wizard would have.  Almost anyone can cast a spell for a price (usually either temporary or permanent ability score damage and/or loss of sanity).

Perhaps, E6 could build along similar ideas for casting of higher level spells than normal?

For instance, suppose that a wizard wanted to cast a fourth level spell.  Rather than spending a spell slot, the caster makes a Spellcraft check equal to 20 plus the spell level being attempted.  If the check is successful, the spell is cast normally.  If the check is unsuccessful, the caster must make a Will Save (DC 20 plus spell level) or suffer temporary ability score damage of 1d4 plus the spell level.  The GM determines which ability score is temporarily damaged as appropriate for the spell (or randomly, if undecided).  Also, if the Will Save roll results in a natural 1 on the die, the ability score damage would be permanent, rather than temporary.

If using this variant, I might recommend that spells of not normally available to the character would have to be researched on a per spell basis (or discovered in spellbooks, scolls, or ancient tomes).  Also, certain spells might have special components to make the Spellcraft check easier.  Or, there could be certain days of the year, phases of the moon, special locations, rituals (including extra casters), etc... that affected the Spellcraft check.

Just some ideas that might be interesting to try in E6...


----------



## Ry

For the next little while I'm going to be focusing my efforts on my weekly E6 and the Ebrys campaign setting, rather than making an E6 book of feats.


----------



## Ry

I think one thing that has been overlooked as a viable approach for E6 play (and it's my approach).  Pick what sources of feats you intend to allow, and ask your players to look for feats they want.  Add feats only when there aren't feats they want.


----------



## Cheiromancer

rycanada said:
			
		

> I think one thing that has been overlooked as a viable approach for E6 play (and it's my approach).  Pick what sources of feats you intend to allow, and ask your players to look for feats they want.  Add feats only when there aren't feats they want.




I think this is very wise.  Don't waste time designing something that the players don't want to use.



			
				knight_isa said:
			
		

> I was under the impression that E6 was purposely lopsided, the idea behind it being that ~6th level was the "sweet spot" for rycanada and his group (and obviously others as well). The earlier levels are just there to provide backstory for the "epic" 6th level characters, and the later feats are to give the players the satisfaction of seeing the characters advance.




In the main threads about this, such as the discussion of Ryan Dancey's quartile post on rpg.net, or even Wulf Ratbane's Sweet Spot thread, the "Sweet Spot" has always been a range of levels, not a particular level.  5-8 is the range that kept coming up in Wulf's thread, largely because of the game changing spells available to 9th level casters (_raise dead_ and _teleport_, particularly).  Still, 9th level is appropriate for the end of a heroic fantasy campaign.  Maybe even 10th level.

My concern is two-fold.  First, feats might be not enough of a boost to players who are used to advancing levels at regular intervals; second, the lure of higher level abilities might be irresistible, leading to the proliferation of unbalanced "lean upwards" feats.  These two concerns are related, of course.  I think it would be better to intersperse bonus feats with level advancement- and maybe never stop level advancement entirely.

Problems like wizards getting spells a level early compared to sorcerers could be handled on a case by case basis.  For instance:

*Advanced Spellcasting*
You access higher level spells sooner.
*Benefit:* Choose a spellcasting class. When your spellcaster level in that class is an odd number, calculate your spells per day and spells known as if your spellcaster level in that class were one higher.  Advanced Spellcasting affects only your highest level of spells known.  It does not affect your caster level.

This allows a sorcerer to cast 2nd level spells at level 3, 3rd level spells at level 5, 4th level spells at level 7, etc., ensuring parity with the wizard (albeit at the cost of a feat).  I think this preserves the design decision that says the sorcerer should be a little behind the wizard, but would be better suited for an E7 game; or an E6 game where a sorcerer multiclasses.


----------



## Ry

One thing I like with the 6th level cap, and the switchover transition, is that I see things like that in fantasy literature and movies:  At the beginning, any given  character is unimportant and vulnerable.  A series of dangerous events transform them into a capable adventurer, and they are significantly more powerful (6th level) than their younger selves (1st level).  After this, they develop masteries and diversify their skills, but do not as a matter of course outpace others who have gone through a similar period (i.e., they gain feats, but not levels).  Against others of their power level, they must take advantage of their special strengths and techniques to overcome their foes; this leads them to even further development and again, this is not a linear progression beyond their peers (i.e. even more feats).


----------



## Cheiromancer

I think super-powered characters (like in comic books) also follow this progression.  Although they may regularly gain powers at first (like Clark Kent in the televesion series _Smallville_), this eventually stops.  Thereafter a super-powered character might devise a new trick or two, but don't gain entirely new powers.  They gain feats, but not levels.

Same for the folks in _Heroes_ - each hero has essentially one super-power, which they can learn to apply in new, but essentially similar ways.  No new powers (i.e. no leveling) but new tricks (feats).

I think we are talking nuances here - I want E6 to be a bit more gamist (allowing continued substantial rewards, i.e. leveling) while you seem to want it to be a bit more simulationist - simulating the switchover you describe.  E6 has both elements, but there is room, I think, for differing on what the exact mixture should be.

I like how E6 is easy to describe- as normal D&D until level 6, then a feat every 5,000 xp.  That's a big part of its appeal.  I haven't been able to define an alternative in such a concise and elegant way.


----------



## Ry

Cheiromancer said:
			
		

> I like how E6 is easy to describe- as normal D&D until level 6, then a feat every 5,000 xp.  That's a big part of its appeal.  I haven't been able to define an alternative in such a concise and elegant way.




Thanks, Cheiro.  That concision sure doesn't happen overnight.


----------



## Wiseblood

I was on my way to creating something similar. The sweet spot thread got me thinking.

My idea was to stop numerical advancement at level 10 (for PC not for monsters). HD, spells, attack bonus, saves. Also max skill ranks top out at 10 and are no higher than character level (It will become clear why later.)

Eliminate full round actions. Things instead break down into, standard, move, free and possibly swift. IMO immediate actions clutter things, also because they should be involuntary or reflexive. Full round action spells with a duration would be standard + concentration, instantaneaous would be 1 level higher than normal.

Eliminate AoO's for movement. This would aid melee types. Additionally I had considered only allowing fighters iterative attacks. That look like this. But I'm not so sure.



> +1
> +2
> +3
> +4
> +5
> +6/+2
> +7/+4
> +8/+6
> +9/+8
> +10/+10




Touch attacks would be handled like normal attacks.

AC and skill DC's stop at 30. Additionally apposed rolls are handled differently.

Ability scores top out at 24 plus any size modifiers.

After levels 1-10 I am trying to figure out how to give cookies so to speak.

Levels 1-10 characters are treated as heroic.

levels 11-15 they are treated as super-heroic.

levels 16-20 they are treated as legendary.

above 20 they are godlike, or demigodlike.

While skill DC's top out at 30 their meaning changes at super-heroic, legendary, and godlike.

DC's for actions go down for PC's that achieve super-hero status and greater.

*Move silently:* Heroic

DC: 10 moving cautiously

DC: 15 moving quietly.

DC: 20  moving steathily

DC: 25  very stealthily

DC: 30 Moving silently (no sound at all, beating this means  DC:30 Super heroic listen check = echo location)


----------



## Morrius

Cheiromancer said:
			
		

> I like how E6 is easy to describe- as normal D&D until level 6, then a feat every 5,000 xp.  That's a big part of its appeal.  I haven't been able to define an alternative in such a concise and elegant way.





It does have a very elegant simplicity to it.  Following in this vein, I think it would be a good idea to keep the list of feats as concise as possible.  I'm rather anti-splat, so I don't have access to the huge lists of feats that some of you do.


----------



## Ry

Morrius - I'm curious what you're planning.  I was thinking a lot of feats were pretty necessary for E6.  What do you think of as the minimum?  The ones I originally included in the pdf?


----------



## Morrius

Realistically, you can't plan for every possible way that someone will wnat to develop their character.  Limit the feats to only the way that the characters can naturally progress, and don't add too many new things.  Isn't the point to simplify things to avoid getting bogged down?


----------



## Ry

So, are you saying 

"Don't add a lot of feats to the E6 document because we shouldn't allow many feats, as it bogs us down"

or

"Don't add a lot of feats to the E6 document because what feats we allow should be done by the GM as situations come up, not a big dump at the beginning."

?


----------



## Wiseblood

rycanada, 
I have taken more time to evaluate E6. I like it a lot. Death Flag. 8)
If memory serves, monsters such as the Pit Fiend and Balor were substatially weaker in 3.0. 
Do you suppose they could be used in E6 with less tweaking? Reserving the 3.x stats for even more grandiose foes. (Arch-Devils and Such)


----------



## Ry

Hi Wiseblood; I do think those versions are much more E6-friendly, although they'd still require some tuning.  Actually, has anyone done a 3.0 fiends to 3.5 conversion, without making them uber?


----------



## zag01

Sorcica said:
			
		

> See, I 've been considering something like this as well, since I can't make my mind up on E6 or E8. I also thought about adding a level after X thousand XP's and letting character's get the feats in the meantime. What's holding me back at this time is the fact that Sorcerers get shafted big time, as wizards (and clerics) will run around with the potentially troublesome 4th level spells for quite a while before sorcerers get the chance.
> 
> However, the solution is good for other classes, as we rogues get another sneak, and we don't need feats that give virtual BAB and a lot of those cool feats that require 12 ranks in a skill becomes available.
> 
> Man, this E-thingie is keeping me awake at night




I don't think the sorcerers will feel that shafted. They're a level behind (by the books) and they know it.

My plan is to play a modified E6 but really cap at 8th. Since it takes another 5,000 xp to get from 5th level to 6th I was going to start the 5k benchmarks then. So 5k xp after 6th they get a feat, then 5k more = 7th level, +5k=feat, +5k=8th level, then just feats from then on.


----------



## Ry

There's the tradeoff:  E6 and the fighter discussion, E8 and the meatier mooks and the 4th level spells.


----------



## Morrius

I think I lost my train of thought somewhere...  I withdraw my statement.  :/


----------



## Ry

OK Morrius, if it comes back let me know


----------



## knight_isa

If I can talk my players into it, I'm thinking I'll start with E6 (hard cap, not lean-upwards).  We're about to start a new, thus-far-undecided campaign anyway.  We'll run it until about 6+5, and evaluate it.  If we're happy, we'll continue with E6, but if not, we'll bump it up to E8 (adding levels 7 and 8 before returning to feats) and try that out.  At the moment there's only two players, so our experience may vary from the normal-sized group, but I'll be sure to post feedback once I have some (probably several months out given our normal schedule).


----------



## Matrix Sorcica

rycanada said:
			
		

> There's the tradeoff:  E6 and the fighter discussion, E8 and the meatier mooks and the 4th level spells.



Don't know if I agree with the meatier mooks, as I've posted earlier. If you keep them NPC classes, they will be pretty mook-ey against an 8th level PC.

I'm really toying with the idea of giving out a level at +10 feats and another at +20. This will make PC's CR 12 and truly epic - heads and shoulders above anyone else, and capable of taking on nasties no sane man would stand against - but still mortal and vulnerable to mooks.

Since none of my players ever play Sorcerers, the problem of Wizards getting 4th level spells 50k XP before Sorcs is probably academic.

Also still toying with letting 4th level slots only be usable for metamagic.

(E6 still keeps me awake at night)

P.S. Knight Isa, that sounds like a great plan!


----------



## green slime

Started a game of GE6erron on the weekend.

Nothing interesting to reveal yet (only 1st level). Will get back in 6 months with results.


----------



## Ry

knight_isa said:
			
		

> If I can talk my players into it, I'm thinking I'll start with E6 (hard cap, not lean-upwards).  We're about to start a new, thus-far-undecided campaign anyway.  We'll run it until about 6+5, and evaluate it.  If we're happy, we'll continue with E6, but if not, we'll bump it up to E8 (adding levels 7 and 8 before returning to feats) and try that out.  At the moment there's only two players, so our experience may vary from the normal-sized group, but I'll be sure to post feedback once I have some (probably several months out given our normal schedule).




This is a very good idea.  Looks like about 6 months from now we'll start to see a deluge of playtesting feedback; this is a good thing.


----------



## Animus

I'm also running a GE6erron game. It's a solo game with 2 NPCs to fill the party, but I might be getting two more players. Currently at level 2.


----------



## Morrius

Something I noticed for your "Players roll all the dice" rule is that you add 12 to a monster's abilities to generate a score for them, while UA adds 11.  Why 12?  Other than it makes things a little harder.


----------



## Ry

If you do the math, 12 is the magic number, not 11, because the players win the tie.  Look for previous discussions of the Players Roll All the Dice variant for an expansion of that.


----------



## Rolzup

In a thread over at RPGnet, I came up with a variation upon E6.  It's one of those things that seems really neat in theory, but would probably not be workable in play.  Nevertheless, I thought that I'd offer it for consideration.

E6 represents normal "human" limits.  With human defined pretty loosely, admittedly....

There are areas, though, where the laws of reality are different.  Twisted, in a way.  Where higher-order magic becomes possible, where human limits are easily...casually broken.  These places are called "dungeons"....

Basically, you've got two versions of your characters.  You use the E6 character when you're not in one of these areas of broken reality, but you use the advanced version when you are in the "belly of the beast."

As I've said, it might be too unweildy, in the end.  But for a certain sort of game....  I dunno.  I like it.  A lot.


----------



## Shazman

To be honest, that system sounds a little wonky, but if you and your players like it, then give it a try.  I've been thinking of adding a twist for if I ever run an E6 game.  Characters gain levels normally until 6th, after 6000 exp, they get a level of an paragon class (unearthed arcana) appropriate for their race.  After another 7000 exp, they get the second level of their paragon class (or a level of a prestige class, if they really want it, and it's not broken/fits the character).  After that, it's the normal feat every 5000 exp.  I know this is essentially E8 and would allow some 4th level spells, but the idea intrigues me for some reason.


----------



## tvar

Have those of you who are trying E6erron (or E8erron) given any thought to Artificers emulating spell prerequisites for magic items?  Do you think you would allow them to use UMD to emulate spells higher than the highest level normally cast?  While it sounds easy to say "no" to that, what about spells which still exist as spell-like abilities granted by Dragonmarks?

I am personally thinking of trying out E8erron, and one specific spell on my mind is Teleport.  Obviously the spell wouldn't normally be in the game, but House Orion can get Teleport as spell-like ability with their Greater Dragonmark.  (There may be a good example for E6erron as well, but I haven't tried to find one.)  Though come to think of it the Teleport magic items require CL 9, so I guess no one could really create one in E8 (except members of House Orion itself, since their Greater Dragonmarks are CL 10), so even Teleport may not be a good example.

Anyone have any thoughts on this?

(Also, as a quick aside since I'm asking about Artificers, I think they should probably get to replenish their Craft Reserve each time they gain a bonus feat, as though they had just re-attained their highest Artificer level.  Is that reasonable?)


----------



## Dragonblade275

*More Feats for E6*

I found 8 feats that could probably be used in E6 on Monte Cook's site.
_Originally posted by Monte Cook._

*Eight New Feats*
Here are a few new feats. The first is a special one, usable only by the DM's permission. Dreamspeaking should only be used in campaigns where magical dreams of some importance are fairly common. Prophetic dreams are a frequently used plot device; this feat simply makes for a way to handle the plot device within the bounds of the rules. The rest are all inspired by existing D&D feats -- a number of them are based on the same idea as Alertness.

*Dreamspeaking * [General] 
Sometimes dreams are important missives sent from above, or from within. You can interpret the dreams that you have, or that others have. 
Prerequisite: Wis 15
Benefit: When someone tells you about a dream, or when you consider your own dream, you can tell automatically if it was a dream of importance, also known as a "sending" dream. If it is a sending dream, you can attempt a Wisdom check (DC 15) to interpret its meaning. If your Wisdom check succeeds, the DM should give you some clue as to the meaning of the dream. For example, a character might dream of a threatening rider dressed in black, surrounded by ravens. On a successful Wisdom check, the player learns that the dream foretells an encounter with a foe named "raven." Later the party does indeed go up against a villain named Kevris Killraven. Retries are not allowed.

*Ranged Expertise* [General]
You are trained at using your ranged combat skill for defense as well as offense.
Prerequisite: Int 13
Benefit: When using an attack action or full attack action with a ranged weapon, the character can take a penalty of as much as –5 on the attack and add the same number (up to +5) to his or her Armor Class against either ranged or melee attacks. This number may not exceed the character's base attack bonus. The changes to attack rolls and Armor Class last until the character's next action. The bonus to the character's Armor Class is a dodge bonus.

*Forced Swiftness* [General]
You can run when encumbrance and armor otherwise would not allow it. 
Prerequisite: Str 13
Benefit: You can run when the armor you are wearing or the amount of gear you are carrying normally would prevent you from running.

*Nimble Fingers* [General]* 
You have dexterous fingers and good hand-to-eye coordination.
Benefit: You gain a +2 bonus to Disable Device and Pick Lock checks.

*Athleticism* [General]* 
You use your physique and agility to their utmost.
Benefit: You gain a +2 bonus to Climb and Jump checks.

*Agile Limbs* [General]* 
You are limber and dexterous, allowing you to move gracefully.
Benefit: You gain a +2 to Balance and Move Silently checks.

*Outdoorsman* [General]* 
You are trained particularly well for life in the wild. 
Benefit: You gain a +2 bonus to Handle Animal and Survival checks.

*Magical Talent* [General]* 
The mystical and eldritch secrets are clear to you.
Benefit: You gain a +2 bonus to Knowledge (arcana) and Spellcraft checks.

*These last five feats work best when you adopt the house rule that the feat Skill Focus adds +3 to a skill rather than the listed +2.​Also, what do you think of his house rule for Skill Focus in E6?


----------



## Ry

Well, his house rule was before 3.5e 

3.5e changed Skill focus to +3 anyway.


----------



## green slime

tvar said:
			
		

> Have those of you who are trying E6erron (or E8erron) given any thought to Artificers emulating spell prerequisites for magic items?  Do you think you would allow them to use UMD to emulate spells higher than the highest level normally cast?  While it sounds easy to say "no" to that, what about spells which still exist as spell-like abilities granted by Dragonmarks?
> 
> I am personally thinking of trying out E8erron, and one specific spell on my mind is Teleport.  Obviously the spell wouldn't normally be in the game, but House Orion can get Teleport as spell-like ability with their Greater Dragonmark.  (There may be a good example for E6erron as well, but I haven't tried to find one.)  Though come to think of it the Teleport magic items require CL 9, so I guess no one could really create one in E8 (except members of House Orion itself, since their Greater Dragonmarks are CL 10), so even Teleport may not be a good example.
> 
> Anyone have any thoughts on this?
> 
> (Also, as a quick aside since I'm asking about Artificers, I think they should probably get to replenish their Craft Reserve each time they gain a bonus feat, as though they had just re-attained their highest Artificer level.  Is that reasonable?)




I consider that the use of a very limited number of higher level spells per day, gained through feat expenditure, is not overbearing upon E6, purely because of the extreme opportunity cost. Firstly, the Dragonmarks and other similar feats suggested here, only grant a single higher level spell 1/day.


----------



## tvar

green slime said:
			
		

> I consider that the use of a very limited number of higher level spells per day, gained through feat expenditure, is not overbearing upon E6, purely because of the extreme opportunity cost. Firstly, the Dragonmarks and other similar feats suggested here, only grant a single higher level spell 1/day.




Right, I am definitely not planning or toning down the Dragonmarks in any way.  I like the fact that a lower powered campaign makes the marks more powerful (and also more desirable for PCs).

My question is whether or not an Artificer can/should be able to emulate these spell-like abilities for item creation.

I thought of a better example than I had before:  True Seeing.  This spell would normally not exist in the world except as a spell-like ability possessed by House Medani and any creatures that get it.  But the spell is required to create a Ring of X-Ray Vision (requires CL 6).  Can/should an Artificer be able to use UMD to emulate True Seeing and create this item?


----------



## Cheiromancer

tvar said:
			
		

> Right, I am definitely not planning or toning down the Dragonmarks in any way.  I like the fact that a lower powered campaign makes the marks more powerful (and also more desirable for PCs).
> 
> My question is whether or not an Artificer can/should be able to emulate these spell-like abilities for item creation.
> 
> I thought of a better example than I had before:  True Seeing.  This spell would normally not exist in the world except as a spell-like ability possessed by House Medani and any creatures that get it.  But the spell is required to create a Ring of X-Ray Vision (requires CL 6).  Can/should an Artificer be able to use UMD to emulate True Seeing and create this item?




Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Eberron depicted as a campaign setting with very few high level characters?  If you needed a 9th (or 11th, or 13th...) level wizard in Eberron, how hard would it be to find one?


----------



## Nimloth

I just finished running a D&D campaign a couple of months ago where the characters ended up at  14th to 16th level (depending on La).  While it was fun, near the end it became a chore to create appropriate villians and encounters.  And don't even get me started on the high level spells issue.  So I was starting to think about my next campaign and I find E6.  This is a great  idea.  A whole box of cookies for rycanada.

Currently (details to be worked out with the players) I am planning on running either E6(lean upward) or E8 game with Gestalt characters.  Any particular concerns/thoughts about adding Gestalt.  

Details: I have 4 players, but most of the time only 3 at any 1 time (thanks to the Schedule Conflict Ogre).  If I do E8 I will limit magic to 3rd level spells, with 4th level slots available for metamagic spells.


----------



## Kunimatyu

Dragonblade275 said:
			
		

> I found 8 feats that could probably be used in E6 on Monte Cook's site.
> _Originally posted by Monte Cook._
> 
> *Eight New Feats*​





The world does not need more +2/+2 feats. Just create a feat called Talented that gives a +2 bonus to 2 skills of the player's choice and you're done.

Ranged Expertise is allowable I suppose, though it feels a little wonky. It's also somewhat overpowered with ranged touch attacks, since the caster can gain +5 AC and still generally hit with their attacks. I would probably not allow it -- I'm not big on letting ranged weapons get mirror versions of the melee feats, especially with things like Power Attack and Expertise.

YMMV, though...​


----------



## tvar

Cheiromancer said:
			
		

> Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Eberron depicted as a campaign setting with very few high level characters?  If you needed a 9th (or 11th, or 13th...) level wizard in Eberron, how hard would it be to find one?




Well, it would be _impossible_ to find one in E6 (or E8)...    

For those who don't know the specifics about Artificers, they basically are able to use a UMD check to "emulate" any spell prerequisite when creating magic items (DC is 20 + caster level of the spell).  This doesn't really cause any problems in a normal campaign, I'm just wondering what should happen if an Artificer attempts to emulate a spell that doesn't really exist by virtue of it being an E6 or E8 game.


----------



## Cheiromancer

tvar said:
			
		

> Well, it would be _impossible_ to find one in E6 (or E8)...




I very carefully wrote "Eberron", not "E6erron" or "E8erron".  

In any event, I would see what normal 6th level characters in the campaign setting could do.  If they have access to something, great.  If not, too bad.


----------



## Ry

I'd leave the dragonmark abilities out of what an Artificer can emulate, for flavor's sake.


----------



## Stalker0

I've been reading up on E6 for the 1st time and I definitely like some of the things going on. I am highly in the camp of 6th level being the best level overall, so sticking around at that point is a benefit for me.

I do have 1 question and 1 concern. How do you handle wealth at the 6+ level? What should a 6 + 2 feats character have in terms of money vs a straight up 6th character?

This concern evolves from my wealth question. A wizard's power is mainly wealth driven, as there spell access increases with wealth. A sorcerer's is level based, they only gain new spells with levels. Now I see there are feats to increase it, but I'm wondering if the wizard will just keep adding lots of new spells and getting new feats while the sorc gets left behind getting a new spell every once in a blue moon.

Also, let me say I love the raising the stakes mechanic. I'm going to try it in my next game!!


----------



## green slime

Stalker0 said:
			
		

> I've been reading up on E6 for the 1st time and I definitely like some of the things going on. I am highly in the camp of 6th level being the best level overall, so sticking around at that point is a benefit for me.
> 
> I do have 1 question and 1 concern. How do you handle wealth at the 6+ level? What should a 6 + 2 feats character have in terms of money vs a straight up 6th character?
> 
> This concern evolves from my wealth question. A wizard's power is mainly wealth driven, as there spell access increases with wealth. A sorcerer's is level based, they only gain new spells with levels. Now I see there are feats to increase it, but I'm wondering if the wizard will just keep adding lots of new spells and getting new feats while the sorc gets left behind getting a new spell every once in a blue moon.
> 
> Also, let me say I love the raising the stakes mechanic. I'm going to try it in my next game!!




My solution would be quite simply to track the total amount of XP the characters have accumulated, and compare that to what an non-E6 character with a similar amount of XP would have. I feel that this is the easiest manner, simply because slaying CR-similar foes will provide the majority of their loot.


----------



## Ry

We talked a lot more about wealth three threads ago... I'm trying to remember what was said. 

For my part, I don't have a lot to add to the discussion because I don't use the wealth guidelines much, and in the original E6 game my players' cash tended to funnel into things like buying a tavern, equipping a small army, irrigating a village's fields, stuff like that.


----------



## joela

*E6 and non-standard classes*

"A: My experience in D&D is that at around 6th level the characters are really nicely balanced, both in terms of balance against other classes, and against the CR system."

Has anyone examined the impact of including non-standard classes (i.e., duskblade, swordsage, psion, etc.) under the E6 variant? Are they still balanced against the standard classes or against each other? Or do they lose their uniqueness?


----------



## jjsheets

*E6 Amazing Idea*

I signed up just to post in this thread (thank Google... 

E6 is an amazing rule variant.  I've decided to use it for an upcoming campaign lacking magic of any sort, but with psionics.  The feel of E6 really fits the concept I have for my campaign, and I'm really glad I stumbled onto this thread.  Once I get the campaign background fleshed out and get ready to start the campaign, I'll be hosting the game over at rpol.net.

Again, awesome idea rycanada, et al.!


----------



## Matrix Sorcica

green slime said:
			
		

> My solution would be quite simply to track the total amount of XP the characters have accumulated, and compare that to what an non-E6 character with a similar amount of XP would have. I feel that this is the easiest manner, simply because slaying CR-similar foes will provide the majority of their loot.



I've been thinking about wealth following PC CR. So when they are 6+5, they have 7th level wealth, 6+10 they have 8th lvl wealth and so on.

Of course, your idea is valid too (and might even be better).

I think maybe the Wealth Feats from Mastering Iron Heroes could be useful in E6? That way, the players can keep finding treasure (non magic) and still get benefits from it, and at the same time stay at wealth level 6.


----------



## White Whale

Sorcica said:
			
		

> I've been thinking about wealth following PC CR. So when they are 6+5, they have 7th level wealth, 6+10 they have 8th lvl wealth and so on.
> 
> Of course, your idea is valid too (and might even be better).
> 
> I think maybe the Wealth Feats from Mastering Iron Heroes could be useful in E6? That way, the players can keep finding treasure (non magic) and still get benefits from it, and at the same time stay at wealth level 6.



What kind of magic items do you suggest to allow? Everything from the books with a caster level of 6 and lower? If so, aren't they relatively few and un-powerful for 6th+ level characters?


----------



## Matrix Sorcica

Guess so, but one of the things I perceive as a problem with high level play is the abundance of powerful magic items and the PCs' dependence on them, so for me I don't think there's a problem .

Be interesting to hear others' opinion?


----------



## Ry

I would limit market-purchaseable items to level 6, but only if I was looking for an Eberron-like game where there was a market for magic and 6th level characters were likely to have mercantile / craftsman leanings.


----------



## Ry

Nimloth said:
			
		

> A whole box of cookies for rycanada.
> 
> Currently (details to be worked out with the players) I am planning on running either E6(lean upward) or E8 game with Gestalt characters.  Any particular concerns/thoughts about adding Gestalt.
> 
> Details: I have 4 players, but most of the time only 3 at any 1 time (thanks to the Schedule Conflict Ogre).  If I do E8 I will limit magic to 3rd level spells, with 4th level slots available for metamagic spells.




A whole box of cookies?  Sweet!

If you go Gestalt E6 you might find there's more resources because a few other folks on the boards are doing the same thing.  The 6th-level characters in your campaign will be quite mighty - especially if you let lots of real, honest-to-goodness talking or fighting NPCs be 1st-level characters.  The ratio of PC awesome : DM prep time would be quite excellent.


----------



## Ry

joela said:
			
		

> Has anyone examined the impact of including non-standard classes (i.e., duskblade, swordsage, psion, etc.) under the E6 variant? Are they still balanced against the standard classes or against each other? Or do they lose their uniqueness?




Here's my POV for variant classes (and this goes for E6 and D&D as well).

The best way to use variants is to build them into the campaign world.  That amplifies their mechanical coolness with something the player (i.e. human being at the table) can really jam to.  That's what really lets those variants shine.  So I think a great approach to designing a campaign would be picking say, six really distinctive classes, three distinctive races, and building the situation around that.  My PTRR / amusement park method would really shine under that kind of tight design constraint.

[sblock=Example of using variants to define a setting]Imagine an intrigue-filled endless "wild west" set a thousand years after the collapse of a victorian steampunk era (not severe magic chaos like eberron's last war, just a general decline in central political authorities and technological craftsmanship). 

*Gunslinger*
(Ranger, no animal companions, must go ranged combat). Part of a brotherhood that has tremendous respect but very little political power. Code binds the gunslingers (i.e., must accept duels) but it's not alignment-based, so gunslingers can be on opposing sides of all sorts of conflicts. Code includes being impartial and sticking to the terms of a bargain. Non-gunslingers with guns are hunted down by the gunslingers, as are major violators of the code. Gunslingers must aid each other when someone breaks the terms of a gunslinger's contract. No weapons may be drawn in the presence of a gunsmith (gunsmiths are the non-combatant judges / craftsmen / trainers of the order).

*Shaman*
Setting's spirits are all incorporeal and unseen, but run the gamut from fickle tricksters to ancestor ghosts to nature spirits.  There are also demons in the world, but they're your enemies.

*Advocate*
(Ninja-like abilities, esp. momentary invisibility and lethal strikes) Played as trained members of Houses, which are like crime families in a world with no police to get in the way. Imagine if rather than the Cavalry showing up, all you could hope for in the wild west was the arrival of the currently dominant local crime family. They are the political powers of the setting. These Houses span the setting - so if you make enemies of a House in one place, you've got enemies in lots of places. Houses know better than to try to acquire firearms, and they know well enough to hire Gunslingers when necessary. Advocates' secret fighitng style, including their ability to move undetected and make deadly strikes is passed from one generation to the next in a kind of assassin's apprenticeship. Advocates reach the highest levels of power within their Houses, although Advocates don't reveal that they are anything more than other gentlemen belonging to their Houses unless they have to.

*Warlock*
(Somewhere between the concepts of warlock and binder in D&D) You made the deal, maybe under duress, or maybe for good reasons. Now you get the benefits. There are many demons in the world, and they can be used... but they can use you too. What's important, though, is that you stay alive, because you're not looking forward to what's waiting for you on the other side.

*Tetsujin (metal men)*
Paladin Warforged.  Played largely as-is (using stats for Warforged Paladins or whatever). They are found in some ancient ruins, and about a hundred years ago someone figured out how to wake them up. They don't know who they are, they don't know how they were made. Often this means they can be used by others, and they're sought after by the Houses.

*Artificer*
Primarily elans who are trying to revive the old arts, massively interested in the Tetsujin, highly uninterested in human politics and sometimes victimized by that disinterest.[/sblock]


----------



## Ry

Sorcica said:
			
		

> I've been thinking about wealth following PC CR. So when they are 6+5, they have 7th level wealth, 6+10 they have 8th lvl wealth and so on.




I like this approach as a rule of thumb for NPCs.  You may find in play that since players are spending more time going from 6+5 to 6+10 than they would from 7 to 8 that they actually have more money.  I do think it's a good idea in any game (but especially E6) to design ways that PCs can use their money on things that aren't gear.


----------



## Ry

jjsheets said:
			
		

> I signed up just to post in this thread (thank Google...
> 
> E6 is an amazing rule variant.  I've decided to use it for an upcoming campaign lacking magic of any sort, but with psionics.  The feel of E6 really fits the concept I have for my campaign, and I'm really glad I stumbled onto this thread.  Once I get the campaign background fleshed out and get ready to start the campaign, I'll be hosting the game over at rpol.net.




Post a link over here when you're ready!  I think E6 + psionics would be a fantastic campaign.  I'd love to play in that game.


----------



## Matrix Sorcica

rycanada said:
			
		

> I would limit market-purchaseable items to level 6, but only if I was looking for an Eberron-like game where there was a market for magic and 6th level characters were likely to have mercantile / craftsman leanings.



Meaning that if it's not an Eberron-like world you would do what?


----------



## Ry

I'd need more detail.  If you have a world like Middle Earth or various other fantasy novels where magic was not a commodity, I would say that magic items aren't bought and sold - they're considered too precious for that.  That means they're kept, used, or given as gifts.  In such a campaign I wouldn't have PCs be able to spend their cash on magic items except in situations justified by the game as played.

What I'm trying to say is that the best market-purchasable magic I'd allow in an E6 game is the ones that humans can create, which means CL 6 or CL 8 with an artificer.  The minimum is "no magic market whatsoever."  But the ideal requires a description of what else you're aiming for with your game.


----------



## Matrix Sorcica

rycanada said:
			
		

> I like this approach as a rule of thumb for NPCs.  You may find in play that since players are spending more time going from 6+5 to 6+10 than they would from 7 to 8 that they actually have more money.  I do think it's a good idea in any game (but especially E6) to design ways that PCs can use their money on things that aren't gear.



Thus my idea to use the Wealth feats from Iron Heroes. (Basically, the value of treasure you don't spend on equipment is considered spent on drink, food and wenching, allowing you to pick 'free' feats that increases your reputation and such stuff. I like it.
I will have to check, but seem to recall that OGL Conan has similar feats.


----------



## Ry

I don't have Iron Heroes handy (somewhere buried at home), but I'd be curious to see any wealth variants that you + OGL come up with, Sorcica.


----------



## Matrix Sorcica

rycanada said:
			
		

> I'd need more detail.  If you have a world like Middle Earth or various other fantasy novels where magic was not a commodity, I would say that magic items aren't bought and sold - they're considered too precious for that.  That means they're kept, used, or given as gifts.  In such a campaign I wouldn't have PCs be able to spend their cash on magic items except in situations justified by the game as played.
> 
> What I'm trying to say is that the best market-purchasable magic I'd allow in an E6 game is the ones that humans can create, which means CL 6 or CL 8 with an artificer.  The minimum is "no magic market whatsoever."  But the ideal requires a description of what else you're aiming for with your game.



Ahhhh 
But how about a limit on the power of magic items the PCs can find during adventures? I think there's an important difference here. If a 6+5 PC has 100.000 gp of equipment, IMO it will make a difference if this is in the form of +1 items and potions, or if it's few powerful (and thus expensive) items.
I think the limit should be that no item can cost more than the wealth the PC has at a certain CR. Even that may be too powerful.


----------



## zag01

tvar said:
			
		

> Right, I am definitely not planning or toning down the Dragonmarks in any way.  I like the fact that a lower powered campaign makes the marks more powerful (and also more desirable for PCs).
> 
> My question is whether or not an Artificer can/should be able to emulate these spell-like abilities for item creation.
> 
> I thought of a better example than I had before:  True Seeing.  This spell would normally not exist in the world except as a spell-like ability possessed by House Medani and any creatures that get it.  But the spell is required to create a Ring of X-Ray Vision (requires CL 6).  Can/should an Artificer be able to use UMD to emulate True Seeing and create this item?




I'd allow it as Eberron already has the flavor for it: Eldritch Machines.

When you get to this level of power your no longer a lone wizard/artificer working in a tower. You've got to have, essentially, a magic factory with lots of workers (or homunculi) and some serious cash flow to get it running. (and protect it from corporate espionage)

Make it a big deal in your campaign and that will limit its abusiveness.


----------



## Kunimatyu

White Whale said:
			
		

> What kind of magic items do you suggest to allow? Everything from the books with a caster level of 6 and lower? If so, aren't they relatively few and un-powerful for 6th+ level characters?




As long as you use the Magic Item Compendium, nope! The MIC has lots of useful, flavorful items that PCs will be excited about obtaining, and a staggering percentage are CL6th or even lower.

I know it's not really the case, but the newer WotC books, with the exception of PrCs, really seem to cater to E6 -- probably because WotC knows that the majority of D&D campaigns are in the early levels, so they produce more content for those.


----------



## Kunimatyu

rycanada said:
			
		

> Here's my POV for variant classes (and this goes for E6 and D&D as well).




Cool ideas, ryan! I very much like the gunslinger idea -- I'll be stealing that for my True20 game. The Advocate idea is neat, too.

In the campaign I'm setting up now, I'm altering sorcerors so that they can exchange their familiar for a Heritage or Bloodline feat, and they can cast spells from the cleric, druid, and wizard spell lists as arcane spells. Not only does this allow me to have sorcerors who can bestow curses and animate dead (as otherwise arcane casters can't do these things in E6), but it sets them up for a primary place in the setting.

I'd love to see that Warlock/Binder idea fleshed out - it sounds like an amazingly fun class.


----------



## Ry

Kunimatyu said:
			
		

> I know it's not really the case, but the newer WotC books, with the exception of PrCs, really seem to cater to E6 -- probably because WotC knows that the majority of D&D campaigns are in the early levels, so they produce more content for those.




I don't think it's an illusion - these are the levels that are easier to run, easier to playtest, and easier to design for.  Even for designers they're the most famliiar levels.  So it's no surprise that we've got lots of options that play nicely in that range.


----------



## tvar

Say, how do you calculate average party level?  Is it just 6 (once everyone reaches 6), or do you take feats into account the same you you do for CR...?


----------



## BRP2

I wouldn't mind reading opinions on people who have played this style.


----------



## Ry

tvar said:
			
		

> Say, how do you calculate average party level?  Is it just 6 (once everyone reaches 6), or do you take feats into account the same you you do for CR...?




The CR formula will be good, but you may find that hordes of CR 1 and 2 are still quite viable opponents, so I'd fill in that corner of the experience table 



		Code:
	

       CR 1    CR 2
8th    200     300
9th    150     225
10th   100     150


----------



## Jekolmy

Just a question as I have been reading this thread for a while and have been working on converting it to d20 modern..... has anyone tried to convert this to modern at all 
(I do not mean to derail this thread as more people play D&D than modern, but it makes sense in the real world that people aren't as high level)

Thanks


----------



## Ry

Jekolmy said:
			
		

> Just a question as I have been reading this thread for a while and have been working on converting it to d20 modern..... has anyone tried to convert this to modern at all
> (I do not mean to derail this thread as more people play D&D than modern, but it makes sense in the real world that people aren't as high level)




I don't run modern myself, but one of my players runs a d20 modern game.  He said he switched systems because he had 10th-level Tough heroes charging machineguns, and that he thought E6 would have been a nice fix if he'd thought of it when he set up the campaign.  There's a lot of modern feat pdfs out there from 3rd party publishers if you have a yen for that.


----------



## Ry

Shazman said:
			
		

> I've been thinking of adding a twist for if I ever run an E6 game.  Characters gain levels normally until 6th, after 6000 exp, they get a level of an paragon class (unearthed arcana) appropriate for their race.  After another 7000 exp, they get the second level of their paragon class (or a level of a prestige class, if they really want it, and it's not broken/fits the character).  After that, it's the normal feat every 5000 exp.  I know this is essentially E8 and would allow some 4th level spells, but the idea intrigues me for some reason.




I was thinking about this, and I think it sounds like a great way to encourage race or those few prestige classes to be important in the story/world itself.  That dovetails with what I posted about variant classes defining a setting (above) - about these things really shining in a situation/setting that plays to them.


----------



## Ry

I don't know what kind of editors are reading this thread, but if any are, I could really use some help rewriting the section about how epic the 6th-level characters are from the first-level commoner's perspective.


----------



## Narmical

*No sence making*

All the previous posters seem to be gushing over you ideas. To each his own. I must say, however, I feel your idea demonstrates poor design.

I understand the problem you have identified in out of the box d20 D&D. The feeing and nature of play changes as level increases. Fixing an inconsistency of flavor with an inconsistency in mechanics is not a well designed solution.

From your titling the system "epic" its clear you just applied the epic level concept with a lower level cap. This is not the super innovative idea that you, and other posters, seem to think it is. 

Why have "filler" feats? the idea of your feat picking system is to keep power low while still having meaningful advancement. filler feats are not meaningful.

In the case of your stat up feat and its associated filer, a better design would be to have just a stat up feat that reads.

Stat Up Feat
Choose a stat, you get +1 to that stat. 
This feat may be chosen 2 times per stat.

admittedly an odd stat value is almost meaningless (not a design flaw on your part but on d20s) it does open new feats. Most importantly the feat pick has an actual change to the sheet other than filler.

Is there any good reason to have the mechanics of level progression dramatically change at some point?

Was it simply that was how the epic level handbook handled things?

Having a game where the mechanics of something drastically change at some point during the game is poor design. You pointed out this kind of flaw in d20 D&D. You solution has the same flaw but in a different location.

In d20 D&D the basic resolution mechanic is d20 + bonus vs target number.
At levels 1 - 5 The die greatly dominates your bonus. This makes for a highly fortune based interaction. Your success or failure at anything is highly dependent on your dice roll. 
Similarly for damage dealing. You hitpoits on average are 1 to 5 times the damage of a weapon. This high fortune and highly lethal weapons lead towards the gritty feel.

At the other end levels 16-20 your bonus dominates the die roll. A level 20 fighter has a base attack bonus of +20. With his +5 sword and 20 strength his attack bonus is +30
Additionally weapon damage does not keep pace with hit points. 
Longsword 1d8
Longsword + 5 1d8+5
Level one Fighter HP 10
Level 20 Fighter HP 10 + 19d10 

This removes the lethality of a sword stroke.

At level one play is fortune based. Hoping i can make my roll. At level 20 its "how do i bring my ablates to bear to kill the monster".

That is bad design.

Your solution was to kind of freeze the game at the point where the bonus and the die contribute about the same amount to the resolution mechanic. That is a noble goal. That is what a well designed system should be, consistent. 

Your approach, however is misguided. Having a level advancement system that just changes midway through the game is inconsistent and poorly designed. 

To make an analogy its like raiding in MMOs. Its a totally different style of advancement and play. And if you really like that, sorry, you need to invest a year of playtime before you can get to that. At least if your the grind enjoying player you can just start fresh when you get board. But not for the raid loving player, they must grind to earn the right to raid.

That’s not fun.

You system has merit. I however believe all advancement should be feat based. Just have the level 6 mechanics locked in from the start. 

In my opinion you either level-up forever or feat pick forever. having one then breaking to the other is just plain bad design.

--Mitch


----------



## Ry

Narmical said:
			
		

> Your approach, however is misguided. Having a level advancement system that just changes midway through the game is inconsistent and poorly designed.




Hi Narmical.  You're definitely not the first to tell me E6 is misguided, or to say it's a bad idea (I'm guessing you followed from the "nice enworlders" thread where I posted about the positive).  The other posters who stick around tend to be pretty E6-positive, but if you look around at the older posts (especially the threads at therpgsite.com and the giantitp forums) you'll see that it is quite controversial.  

As to your specific idea that a changeover in advancement is bad design, think of it like this:  The genre I'm emulating features characters who have a major change in how they advance after an initial period of fast advancement.  Young fantasy heroes, and heroes in historical fiction books and movies, work this way:  



			
				An earlier post by me said:
			
		

> At the beginning, any given character is unimportant and vulnerable. A series of dangerous events transform them into a capable adventurer, and they are significantly more powerful (6th level) than their younger selves (1st level). After this, they develop masteries and diversify their skills, but do not as a matter of course outpace others who have gone through a similar period (i.e., they gain feats, but not levels). Against others of their power level, they must take advantage of their special strengths and techniques to overcome their foes; this leads them to even further development and again, this is not a linear progression beyond their peers (i.e. even more feats).




Having an rpg with a changeover point in advancement isn't bad design when the underlying world you're trying to describe has a changeover point.

*Edit: None of this is to say that an E6 game can't start at level 6, feature only level 6 characters, and so on.  I think that could be really cool (although I'd still use lower-level characters for the unimportant NPC types).*


----------



## Narmical

rycanada said:
			
		

> ... The other posters who stick around tend to be pretty E6-positive, but if you look around at the older posts (especially the threads at therpgsite.com and the giantitp forums) you'll see that it is quite controversial.




I just followed your link off the forge. So i didnt know about prevous threads.

A change in the speed of the increase in effectiveness doesnt need to be modled as a drematic rules change as you decided to use. for example, in straight D&D rules combat changes from high fortune to high stratagy with out a change in the game rules.

I think you could have a model simaler to this. I feel constant rules are of utmost importance.

do you remember how confusing AD&D 2ed was? combat, non-weapon profs, system shock, saves all had independent rules that were unrealted. It was needlessy confusing.


----------



## Ry

Narmical said:
			
		

> I feel constant rules are of utmost importance.
> 
> do you remember how confusing AD&D 2ed was? combat, non-weapon profs, system shock, saves all had independent rules that were unrealted. It was needlessy confusing.




Right, but consistency in the rules doesn't trump how those rules affect gameplay.    Depending on the gameplay you want, sometimes you need different rules for different situations.  I know there's some great single-mechanic games (I've played with them in some very long, excellent campaigns) but that's not an aim of E6.


----------



## der_kluge

I admit I'm coming into this topic late... I have to concur that I think this is an interesting idea.  Though, I can't help but wonder if 6th level is a little *too* low.  Like, maybe 9th would be good.  That makes 5th level spells the max.  I could see that as being just about the pinnacle of power.  For that matter, 10th would be ok, since from a spellcasting POV, it's not much more powerful.

Does E6 scale easily to this approach?  Like, if you made the cap at 10th, instead of at 6th?

I admit, I haven't read the PDF. I'll go d/l it now.


----------



## Kunimatyu

der_kluge said:
			
		

> I admit I'm coming into this topic late... I have to concur that I think this is an interesting idea.  Though, I can't help but wonder if 6th level is a little *too* low.  Like, maybe 9th would be good.  That makes 5th level spells the max.  I could see that as being just about the pinnacle of power.  For that matter, 10th would be ok, since from a spellcasting POV, it's not much more powerful.
> 
> Does E6 scale easily to this approach?  Like, if you made the cap at 10th, instead of at 6th?
> 
> I admit, I haven't read the PDF. I'll go d/l it now.




You can cap your "E" anywhere from 6-10, but the reason 6 is usually chosen is because casters and non-casters are balanced with each other at this level. An E10 game will still work, but your casters will be able to produce effects that non-magic-users cannot deal with through mundane means(wall of force/stone, solid fog, etc.).

The other particularly nice thing about stopping at 6 is that monsters in the 1-2 CR range still are a capable threat if encountered in large numbers. At 10th level, this is not so much the case.

EDIT: Remember that incantations are often used in an E6 game for higher-level magical effects like raise dead and banishment -- by making them incantations that require time and  effort, they become plot points, as opposed to powers that are casually tossed around.


----------



## der_kluge

Kunimatyu said:
			
		

> You can cap your "E" anywhere from 6-10, but the reason 6 is usually chosen is because casters and non-casters are balanced with each other at this level. An E10 game will still work, but your casters will be able to produce effects that non-magic-users cannot deal with through mundane means(wall of force/stone, solid fog, etc.).
> 
> The other particularly nice thing about stopping at 6 is that monsters in the 1-2 CR range still are a capable threat if encountered in large numbers. At 10th level, this is not so much the case.
> 
> EDIT: Remember that incantations are often used in an E6 game for higher-level magical effects like raise dead and banishment -- by making them incantations that require time and  effort, they become plot points, as opposed to powers that are casually tossed around.




Hmm, so I'm looking at the 4th level spell list (a cap at 8th level, say).  It includes stoneskin, Evard's black tentacles, and polymorph - which are probably the most powerful in that set.  I could see just removing polymorph outright.  Then I'd say a cap of 8th would be pretty reasonable.  They'd be strong, yes, but not ridiculously so.


----------



## Ry

There's been some interest in running E8 (I think Lord Tirian is running Arcana Evolved E7, some others are looking at E8 instead).  

Try this google, der_kluge

site:www.enworld.org e6 e8


----------



## Kunimatyu

der_kluge said:
			
		

> Hmm, so I'm looking at the 4th level spell list (a cap at 8th level, say).  It includes stoneskin, Evard's black tentacles, and polymorph - which are probably the most powerful in that set.  I could see just removing polymorph outright.  Then I'd say a cap of 8th would be pretty reasonable.  They'd be strong, yes, but not ridiculously so.




Remember that spells like Evard's and Solid Fog basically require magic to overcome (freedom of movement/gust of wind) and that spells like Divine Power serve to tip the balance in favor of magic users. Even spells like Improved Invisibility can cause severe issues, while 3rd level spells generally do not have this problem.

Most of us are operating on a "lean upwards" mentality, where we create feats that allow 1/day casting of non-broken 4th-level spells, like restoration, wall of fire, etc. Obviously, you can do what you want, but it seems like an 8th level cap would massively increase the workload for no real payoff.


----------



## der_kluge

Kunimatyu said:
			
		

> Remember that spells like Evard's and Solid Fog basically require magic to overcome (freedom of movement/gust of wind) and that spells like Divine Power serve to tip the balance in favor of magic users. Even spells like Improved Invisibility can cause severe issues, while 3rd level spells generally do not have this problem.
> 
> Most of us are operating on a "lean upwards" mentality, where we create feats that allow 1/day casting of non-broken 4th-level spells, like restoration, wall of fire, etc. Obviously, you can do what you want, but it seems like an 8th level cap would massively increase the workload for no real payoff.




The only 4th level spells I can see causing huge problems are stoneskin and polymorph. The latter I can see just eliminating it entirely.  The former isn't that huge a deal, really. I could see it being about the only way a group of 8th level PCs could take a CR 12 dragon.


I am curious though - has anyone considered altering the spell advancement of wizards?  I mean, it seems like *the* thing to do would be to alter the wizard's spell advancements. When I say wizards, I refer to all spellcasters, actually, though perhaps not bards, rangers and paladins... Like, what would happen if wizards got a new spell level every 3rd level instead of every 2nd level?  You could reasonably push the levels out to about 11th level while still having to deal only with 4th level spells.  You could slow BAB advancement and reduce hit dice so that excessive hit points or BAB didn't overbalance things. 

Is the reason to maintain simplicity?


----------



## der_kluge

Kunimatyu said:
			
		

> The big problem with 4th level spells is that the solution to most 4th level spells is another spell, so magic is only balanced with respect to itself, and not with non-magic-users.
> 
> Solid Fog is a death sentence for a non-magic type, unless you have the Dispel Magic, Gust of Wind, or Freedom of Movement to escape it, for example.





...going back to read some of the discussion...

It seems to me that the fundamental difference between whether one would prefer E6 vs. E8 is one of how they perceive their PCs in terms of their relationship to the rest of the (peasant) populace.  A 6th level PC - as viewed by a peasant is a powerful force to be reckoned with, but who even caught off guard could still be taken down by a few thugs.  An 8th level PC would be an order of magnitude more difficult to kill.  Which, I think raises the game to a level that some people might not be comfortable with.

That is, if you view the "highest level" as being "badass peasants" than 6th level would be about right.  Otherwise, 8th level starts to approach the level whereby the PCs gain access to "other-worldly" magic.  I could see slowing the advancement between 6th and 8th, but I certainly believe that the world could support 8th level people - they should be rare.  In this sense, "Elminster" or other iconic type characters could be 8th, and PCs could attain that level. Remember though that spells at this level would be nigh impossible to come by for wizards.  So, in a way, the GM still has some control over what spells an 8th level wizard would have access to.

I'll have to read up on "ritual magic" as I'm not familiar with how that works.


----------



## Ry

Simplicity is the reason E6 doesn't have a ton of rules tacked onto it; I even made sure to keep Raising the stakes in a separate file.  I think E6 with the rule being "D&D to 6th, then feats." really delivers the goods.  Adding more options can then  customize your campaign nicely.  When you start tweaking the classes, it's hard not to tweak all the classes, and then your players have to learn a whole new game.  It was important to me that D&D players could sit down and know what to do as soon as their asses were in chairs.

That said, I think you could do a great E6 game with a smaller class list, where, for example, bards were the closest thing to a core caster.  That would be very midnight-like, and very awesome, game, without getting deep into class balance questions.


----------



## tvar

Another question...  What do you typically do for undead and golems (and any other creatures brought into being by magic)?  Do you usually just omit them, or do they exist by some other esoteric means?  I'm just curious since they are pretty staple D&D monsters.


----------



## TheCrazyMuffinMan

Maybe those who REALLY want Level 5s and others as a critical plot element, or a one-time event, can treat them like epic spells with Spellcraft DCs equal to (spell level x 20), with the appropriate seeds and costs. The research costs (time, money, XP) alone would sufficiently mitigate this for the Leaning-Upward sort. Other Epic Spells could get a +100 to their DCs on principle.

Would that be workable?


----------



## der_kluge

tvar said:
			
		

> Another question...  What do you typically do for undead and golems (and any other creatures brought into being by magic)?  Do you usually just omit them, or do they exist by some other esoteric means?  I'm just curious since they are pretty staple D&D monsters.





They need the Craft Construct feat.  Beyond that, there's nothing in the rules that say they can't make them.  I can't imagine what kind of slaughter a party of 6th level characters would have against an iron golem, though.  That'd be ugly.


Personally, I'd like to see Flesh Golems take on more of a "Frankenstein's monster" as I think they are intended to be. They are almost never portrayed that way in the game, though.


----------



## Evilhalfling

joela said:
			
		

> "A: My experience in D&D is that at around 6th level the characters are really nicely balanced, both in terms of balance against other classes, and against the CR system."
> 
> Has anyone examined the impact of including non-standard classes (i.e., duskblade, swordsage, psion, etc.) under the E6 variant? Are they still balanced against the standard classes or against each other? Or do they lose their uniqueness?




The Psion is fine, as long as wiz and sorc. can take feats for more spells per day - which the psion can do with the Psionic talent.  Combining this with psionic body will break the psion with ever larger number of feats.  Psions have lots of intresting things they can do with feats, so it would be most likely if one is created to start at high levels.  Perhaps just ban psionic body?  Otherwise it is a must have feat. ( I have an example psion character around this thread somewhere, and he will be reposted in plots and places) 

Duskblade is probably broken, my regular game duskblade6 is nearly broken, and the class  really shines in levels 3-8,  they pay for it in no wow spells later - which never come in E6. the 1/day quickened True strike + shocking grasp(5d6) cast as part of a standard action? he can throw a lot of shocking grasps in a day.  

No idea about Bo9S


----------



## tvar

der_kluge said:
			
		

> They need the Craft Construct feat.  Beyond that, there's nothing in the rules that say they can't make them.




No, they have caster requirements as well.  According to the SRD: Clay requires CL11, Flesh CL8, Iron CL16, Stone CL14.  Not to mention the spell prerequisites which may or may not exist in the E6 world (they are basically crafted just like magic items).

I am personally thinking about this from an E8 perspective since that is what I am thinking about running at some point.  And the CRs for these golems are only 10, 7, 13, and 11 respectively, so certainly not outside the range of E8.  I'm just curious what people think would be good explanations for why they exist since casters wouldn't be able to create them (except perhaps for the flesh golem).

Similarly for undead (except skeletons and zombies, which can be created just fine in E8 but not E6).


----------



## The Souljourner

Just stumbled onto this, and I think it's a fantastic idea.  I really like that level 1-2 guys are still a threat when in large numbers, and yet there's no ridiculous abilities that in a realistic game would have the PCs be able to take over the world.

I also like that it decreases the reliance on high stats and lots of stat-bonus magic items.  A 16 int gives a wizard a bonus to his highest level spell, and he can get that by starting with just a 15.

I'm wondering if anyone would ever choose to play a fighter, though.  4 feats is a lot at 6th level, but at 6+20, 4 feats isn't much at all compared to a ranger or paladin or barbarian who all get other significant class features.

-Nate


----------



## pallen

Narmical said:
			
		

> All the previous posters seem to be gushing over you ideas. To each his own. I must say, however, I feel your idea demonstrates poor design.<snip>
> 
> That is bad design.<snip>
> 
> That’s not fun.



Welcome to ENWorld.  First off, I'd point out that this system isn't theoretical.  It's been playtested and found to be enjoyable (by at least one group).  While it may not be up your alley, it's working for some people.

As you say, to each his own.



			
				Narmical said:
			
		

> Your approach, however is misguided. Having a level advancement system that just changes midway through the game is inconsistent and poorly designed.



If this were a homebrewed game system, I may agree.  However, E6 is a relatively simple fix to a problem that some people have with the D&D rules in running certain kinds of campaigns.   This fix involves a simple, easy-to-understand change to an existing (complex) rules set.  Given that the alternative is sweeping rules changes that would result in a much, much different game, I'm fine with this inconsistency.

As far as poor design goes, I think the problem lies more with D&D than E6.  It's a good game, but it has its issues.


----------



## der_kluge

tvar said:
			
		

> No, they have caster requirements as well.  According to the SRD: Clay requires CL11, Flesh CL8, Iron CL16, Stone CL14.  Not to mention the spell prerequisites which may or may not exist in the E6 world (they are basically crafted just like magic items).




Ah, you're right.

By extension, animated objects don't exist, either, since that's a 6th level spell.



> I am personally thinking about this from an E8 perspective since that is what I am thinking about running at some point.  And the CRs for these golems are only 10, 7, 13, and 11 respectively, so certainly not outside the range of E8.  I'm just curious what people think would be good explanations for why they exist since casters wouldn't be able to create them (except perhaps for the flesh golem).
> 
> Similarly for undead (except skeletons and zombies, which can be created just fine in E8 but not E6).




You could create an extra set of feat chains that would enable one to create the higher orders of golems.  Of course, the spell list would need to be revised since _limited wish_ is right out.  Or, it could be created via a ritual, although getting a group of folks together to create a clay golem seems a rather strange thing.


----------



## Nimloth

Narmical said:
			
		

> I understand the problem you have identified in out of the box d20 D&D. The feeing and nature of play changes as level increases. Fixing an inconsistency of flavor with an inconsistency in mechanics is not a well designed solution.



IMO, it isn't "Fixing an inconsistency of flavor with an inconsistency in mechanics".  Its fixing an mechanics problem with a mechanics fix.  When I found E6 I had just finished a campaign that went 7 years and 16 levels (1 to 16).  I had a list of game mechanics I wanted in a game and was thinking about switching to another game system to fit the list.  Most of the list were problems I had at higher levels.  I wanted;
-faster combat  (high level combat/adventures took alot of time)
-less Uberness of spellcasters/spells at higher levels (CODzilla...)
-quicker prep time (stating out a 16th Cleric was very time consuming)

E6/8 fit the list perfectly, and I don't have to worry about teaching my players a new system.  Keen gear.


			
				Narmical said:
			
		

> Stat Up Feat
> Choose a stat, you get +1 to that stat.
> This feat may be chosen 2 times per stat.



I am sure there is a reason to do it the other way (2 feats to get +2 to 1 stat), but I think I will do it, 1 feat = +1.


----------



## Kunimatyu

der_kluge said:
			
		

> Or, it could be created via a ritual, although getting a group of folks together to create a clay golem seems a rather strange thing.




Incantations don't require secondary casters -- an incantation that allows the caster to create a golem would actually be pretty easy to set up, and would make precisely as much sense as creating a golem in the core rules does right now.


----------



## iceifur

Kunimatyu said:
			
		

> Incantations don't require secondary casters -- an incantation that allows the caster to create a golem would actually be pretty easy to set up, and would make precisely as much sense as creating a golem in the core rules does right now.




IIRC, that's how it was done in D20 Modern (using incantations for golem creation). Might be worth checking out for some ideas.


----------



## Evilhalfling

Nimloth said:
			
		

> I am sure there is a reason to do it the other way (2 feats to get +2 to 1 stat), but I think I will do it, 1 feat = +1.




The reason for 2 feats for a +2 is that a feat to add +1 will give different benefits depending on your stats, many characters will only take the +1 to their odd stats and get the same advantages.  so with a good (lucky) starting build 3 feats will give one character +1 to 3 different ability mods, while another character only gets a + 1 to one stat mod.  
3.5 did away with odd stat modifiers, and with good reason.  

I personally like the version that the first feat gives your attribute +2 that only effects skill rolls, and the second feat actually changes the attribute - but YMMV.


----------



## jjsheets

*Rough Draft E6 Campaign Notebook*

I have put my rough/first draft of my planned no-magic/all-psionic campaign out on the web.  Check it out here.  I would appreciate any feedback PMs, whether on the site design/navigation, or the design of the custom/psionic E6 rules.  For those interested, I plan to start running the campaign on rpol.net sometime next week.


----------



## Ry

Hey jj, this link might help:

http://www.enworld.org/archive/index.php/t-198878.html

It's a thread where a few of us posted cultures, don't know if it might help what you're working on for Omnia Psionic.


----------



## Ry

The Souljourner said:
			
		

> I'm wondering if anyone would ever choose to play a fighter, though.  4 feats is a lot at 6th level, but at 6+20, 4 feats isn't much at all compared to a ranger or paladin or barbarian who all get other significant class features.




Welcome, Nate!  The fighter issue has been brought up several times in the forum-wildfire period of E6; so much so that I added a "capstone" feat for the fighter.  That allows the fighter 6 to treat himself as a fighter 8 with a +8 BAB for the purpose of taking fighter feats thereafter.  That means they can get Improved Crit and Greater Weapon Focus, which I think is a decent correction.  That said, I'm convinced that the fighter is weak in D&D, and E6 just makes it more obvious.


----------



## mfrench

Ryan:
I believe it was the first incarnation of this rules-set, but someone mentioned turning Prestige Classes into feat chains.  Have you considered this any more, or do you have a link to another thread about this?


----------



## Matrix Sorcica

[threadjack]
Curse you, Rycanada! Curse you!

Your E6 is wrecking sabotage to my elation at reading about Paizo's Pathfinder Chronicles. How am I to play the Pathfinder series when I'm at the same time is yearning to play E6 as my next campaign. How, I ask! HOW!

[/threadjack]


----------



## Ry

Google, guys.  Google 

site:www.enworld.org "prestige feats"

http://www.enworld.org/archive/index.php/t-98359.html

Sorcica, what's wrong with running E6 with the pathfinder material?  Especially the first bit.  Have you seen my Tars method thread in General?  Imagine first 3 Pathfinders + Tars method and you've got a campaign that can run for AGES, letting you ease into E6 versions of Pathfinder's wackier high-level enemies.  I'd be happy to advise, I'm in for at least the first few Pathfinders before my $ runs out.


----------



## Matrix Sorcica

Linky to Tars?

I will be back for advice after checking the thread out. I'm feeling very Pathfindery


----------



## Ry

http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=203128


----------



## WhatGravitas

Hmmm... currently, I'm identifying 'iconic' spells and convert them to incantations... as an example:

*Rite of Revival*
Conjuration (Healing)
*Effective Level:* 6th
*Skill Check:* Knowledge (Religion) DC 24, 6 successes
*Failure:* Attack
*Components:* V, S, M, F
*Casting Time:* 6 hours
*Range:* Touch
*Target:* Dead creature
*Duration:* Instantaneous
*Saving Throw:* None (see text)
*Spell Resistance:* No

This rare incantation is usually only available to large temples, where it is only taught to the upper ranks of priesthoods, as it grants power over life and death.
This incantation is cast on a dead creature, no longer dead than 12 days. The corpse is chained to the altar, and the priests chant sacred verses of revival, pulling back the soul of the deceased to the material plane, while slowly detaching and removing the chains around legs, arms and neck.
The soul must be free and willing to be raised and is automatically informed about the name and deity of all casters of this incantation.
If the soul accepts and the incantation is successful, the creature is brought back to life with 1 hp. Mortal wounds are closed, superficial rot is cured, but missing body parts are not regenerated, which may result in another death, if vital parts are missing.

*Failure:* The revival fails, and fell spirits from the world beyond are called into the world (1d3+1 wraiths).
*Material Components:* Sacred oils, worth at least 500 gp.
*Focus:* A marble altar, worth at least 5,000 gp.
*Backlash:* Caster and secondary casters are exhausted after the incantation.
*Extra Casters:* Six secondary casters, who chant sacred verses during the rite.


_Design Notes_: It's basically a _raise dead_, incantified. While incantations are usually specific, this one is generic - because the _raise dead_ spell is generic. Important points to note are:
It cares about body parts, hence it doesn't break the world that easily: Good assassins just take the heart - for a reason, meaning assassins have to come into range to cut the chest open, lop off the head and so on (and hence making assassins a better foe in an adventure).
Second, the consequences for a failure are quite dire, meaning NPCs are dis-inclined to use this incantation or require protection by the PCs (though a wraith-army can be a pretty dangerous thing, even for PCs, especially considering the exhaustion of the casters).

If anybody is interested, I'm going to do more incantation (or even do a DC-breakdown, using the incantation rules).


----------



## Hierax

*Incantations?*

Incantations? 

Which book(s) are these new-fangled spell-things from (source/reference)?

Thanks!


----------



## WhatGravitas

Hierax said:
			
		

> Incantations?
> 
> Which book(s) are these new-fangled spell-things from (source/reference)?
> 
> Thanks!



Oops... a link, like this would've been handy, eh? Sorry 'bout omitting it! 

And it is from _Unearthed Arcana_, a 2004 book full of variant rules (and OGL goodness!).

EDIT: I guess incantations have the problem, that they may re-introduce spell effects, people don't like, or like'em somehow restrained, so you may consider the following feat:

*Incantation Knowledge*
You have learned mysterious, strange rituals of magic.
*Prerequisites*: Ability to cast 3rd-level spells, Knowledge (arcana) 4 ranks, IN 13+.
*Benefit*: You learn incantations equal your IN-modifier.
*Special*: You can take this feat several times. You learn new incantations each time. You can only learn an incantation you have access to (in the form of a teacher, book or other documentation).


----------



## Khuxan

Hi Lord Tirian,

The 6-level-long variant d20 system I'm working on uses rituals (read: incantations for any level) as one of its cornerstones. I'm very interested in what you're doing. From the work you've done so far on incantations, have you found their layout and mechanics unwieldy? That's the impression I've gotten from my experiments. 

I haven't figured out how to fix it yet, though.

Cheers.

EDIT: Also, does anyone know of any incantations beyond those found in Unearthed Arcana and Urban Arcana?

EDIT 2: Something along the lines of 


> RITE OF REVIVAL
> Conjuration (Healing)
> Effective Level: 6th
> 
> Skill Check: Knowledge (Religion) DC 24, 6 successes.
> Ritual (6 hours): V, S; six secondary casters chant sacred verses during the rite; caster and secondary casters are exhausted after the incantation; focus is a marble altar worth 5,000gp or more; 500gp of sacred oils required as material components.
> Failure: The revival fails, and fell spirits from the world beyond are called into the world (1d3+1 wraiths).
> 
> Range: Touch
> Target: Dead creature
> Duration: Instantaneous
> Saving Throw: None (see text)
> Spell Resistance: No
> 
> This rare incantation is usually only available to large temples, where it is only taught to the upper ranks of priesthoods, as it grants power over life and death.
> This incantation is cast on a dead creature, no longer dead than 12 days. The corpse is chained to the altar, and the priests chant sacred verses of revival, pulling back the soul of the deceased to the material plane, while slowly detaching and removing the chains around legs, arms and neck.
> 
> The soul must be free and willing to be raised and is automatically informed about the name and deity of all casters of this incantation.
> 
> If the soul accepts and the incantation is successful, the creature is brought back to life with 1 hp. Mortal wounds are closed, superficial rot is cured, but missing body parts are not regenerated, which may result in another death, if vital parts are missing.




The classic format just confuses and frustrates me with all this information scattered around the place.


----------



## GameDoc

*Prestige Organizations*



			
				rycanada said:
			
		

> Google, guys.  Google
> 
> site:www.enworld.org "prestige feats"
> 
> http://www.enworld.org/archive/index.php/t-98359.html




This was an interesting discussion - especially with regards to the original concept of prestige classes as selective and elite societies. 

An idea I came up with a while back, but that I have yet to have an opportunity to test out in game play was to combine prestige classes with the affiliation rules from the Players Handbook II.  Basically you would require the initiation tests described in Unearthed Arcana.  Successful completion would yield an affiliation score.  Your affiliation score must increased by a certain amount before taking the next level in the PrC.  This ties advancement in the PrC back to how the character maintains ties and service to the interests of the PrC instead of just a function of gaining XP.

This might be a good basis for Prestige Feats in E6.  In addition to the prerequisite abilities, skills, feats, etc, a character must make sure he remains in good standing with his prestige organization to gain continued access to training in the feats that are the "trade secrets" of the organization.  As it turns out, Unearthed Arcana also has a system for doing initiation test for feats.


----------



## WhatGravitas

Khuxan said:
			
		

> From the work you've done so far on incantations, have you found their layout and mechanics unwieldy? That's the impression I've gotten from my experiments.



Unwieldy? Yes, mainly because the double grunt of aiming for a spell level AND consideration of the DC - which is independent of the level (at least as I read it) - it only determines necessary successes and casting time.

This has the by-effect, that most incantations get far too easy to make, at least in standard D&D, because the skill-DC is definitively made for d20 Modern (and even there, they get ridiculously easy on higher levels) - but E6 avoids this problem, due to the smaller span of levels/lower range of skill bonuses.

But I think the concept is a nifty thing for lower magic campaigns (as E6).

And for the format: Well, it is reminiscent of the original spell format, so it works for me. But it could be done better.


----------



## jjsheets

*Psionic Mending Feat for my E6 campaign*

I'd like some critique on a feat for my Psionics Only game:

*PSIONIC MENDING [PSIONIC]*
You have taken up the role of _Mender_, and are capable of healing yourself and others much faster than normal.
*Prerequisite:* Wilder level 1 or Egoist level 1.
*Benefit:* As a Psi-like Ability, you can spend power points to heal yourself, or another, as per the table below. You can spend up to your manifester level in power points per use of this ability. You can only target one person per use of this ability. Metapsionic feats cannot modify this ability.

1 power point, 1d3 healing
2 power point, 1d4 healing
3 power point, 1d6 healing
4 power point, 1d8 healing
5 power point, 1d10 healing
6 power point, 1d12 healing

_Note that it is more cost effective to take your time with this power, taking 6 rounds to heal 6d3, an average of 12 hit points, instead of 1d12 in one round. The situation may call for more rapid healing however.  For Menders healing themselves, it can be more cost effective to use the Body Adjustment power when spending 5+ power points (Assuming the character has that power)._


----------



## Evilhalfling

jjsheets said:
			
		

> I'd like some critique on a feat for my Psionics Only game:
> 
> *PSIONIC MENDING [PSIONIC]*




There is a power in the Compleate Psion [touch of healing] that is a lvl 1 power that heals 2hp per psp spent.it is an obscure powers list - so unless your acutally a divine mind (a weak new psionic class) it requires the expanded knowledage feat, ie the ability to manifest 2nd level powers. 

This would be a lot simpler than your idea - although more powerful than body adjustment - still far weaker than a cleric.


----------



## jjsheets

Evilhalfling said:
			
		

> There is a power in the Compleate Psion [touch of healing] that is a lvl 1 power that heals 2hp per psp spent.it is an obscure powers list - so unless your acutally a divine mind (a weak new psionic class) it requires the expanded knowledage feat, ie the ability to manifest 2nd level powers.
> 
> This would be a lot simpler than your idea - although more powerful than body adjustment - still far weaker than a cleric.



My Campaign lacks magic of any kind, so there's no need to worry about stepping on the toes of Clerics.  

Much like Ryan, I'd like to stay away from Non-OGL sources for my Campaign.  It is nice to know what other powers are out there and how they are balanced though.  I also prefer the feeling that rushing the healing makes for less healing.  Somehow that just feels right.  I also specifically want to make this power available even at first level, since without it, there'd be no way at all to heal up the PCs at that level...  

So I guess what I really want to know is... does this feel overpowered or underpowered to anybody?  (Though it is intended to be underpowered when rushing it...)


----------



## Khuxan

jjsheets said:
			
		

> My Campaign lacks magic of any kind, so there's no need to worry about stepping on the toes of Clerics.
> 
> Much like Ryan, I'd like to stay away from Non-OGL sources for my Campaign.  It is nice to know what other powers are out there and how they are balanced though.  I also prefer the feeling that rushing the healing makes for less healing.  Somehow that just feels right.  I also specifically want to make this power available even at first level, since without it, there'd be no way at all to heal up the PCs at that level...
> 
> So I guess what I really want to know is... does this feel overpowered or underpowered to anybody?  (Though it is intended to be underpowered when rushing it...)




I definitely like the idea that rushing healing decreases how much you heal - that forces characters to make sacrifices. Having said that, I definitely think it's underpowered. If you make healing so expensive, you'll get the same problem that currently exists with clerics - that one character can't do anything fun because they have to be the bandaid. A first level spell only healing 1d3 damage is pretty miserable.


----------



## jjsheets

Khuxan said:
			
		

> I definitely like the idea that rushing healing decreases how much you heal - that forces characters to make sacrifices. Having said that, I definitely think it's underpowered. If you make healing so expensive, you'll get the same problem that currently exists with clerics - that one character can't do anything fun because they have to be the bandaid. A first level spell only healing 1d3 damage is pretty miserable.




You got me thinking... for a feat it is underpowered... How about this:

*PSIONIC MENDING [PSIONIC]*
You have taken up the role of _Mender_, and are capable of healing yourself and others much faster than normal.
*Prerequisite:* Wilder level 1 or Egoist level 1.
*Benefit:* As a Psi-like Ability, you can spend power points to heal yourself, or another, as per the table below. You can spend up to your manifester level in power points per use of this ability. You can only target one person per use of this ability. Metapsionic feats cannot modify this ability.

1 power point, 1d8 healing (average 4.5)
2 power point, 1d12 healing (average 6.5)
3 power point, 2d8 healing (average 9)
4 power point, 2d10 healing (average 11)
5 power point, 3d8 healing (average 13.5)
6 power point, 3d10 healing (average 16.5)

_Note that it is more cost effective to take your time with this power, taking 2 rounds to heal 2d8 for 2 power points, instead of 2d8 in one round for 3, etc. The situation may call for more rapid healing however._


----------



## Khuxan

I like this version much better. You still need to clarify what range it is and what action it takes (standard, I assume?)


----------



## jjsheets

Khuxan said:
			
		

> I like this version much better. You still need to clarify what range it is and what action it takes (standard, I assume?)




Standard Action, touch range.  I'll add that to my campaign notebook.  Thanks for the suggestions/clarification-poking guys.


----------



## green slime

rycanada said:
			
		

> That said, I'm convinced that the fighter is weak in D&D, and E6 just makes it more obvious.




hmmm... interesting. 

Especially considering the martial adepts.

What else could be given to the fighter, in your opinion, (either beyond E6, or within it).


----------



## The Souljourner

Ahh, that capstone ability is pretty sweet for the fighter.  I was thinking about giving the fighter the ability to take feats that up his effective BAB for the purpose of qualifying for other feats.  But yours works pretty well without eating up another feat by the fighter.

Also, the fighter does get access to weapon specialization, which at 6th level is still a big boost.  If you allow that capstone, that allows even more feats only the fighter can take, and then it starts to look like the fighter is actually doing what he's supposed to do - just out-fight everyone else.

Is there a capstone for rogues as well?  Trap Sense +2 isn't really compelling.

-Nate


----------



## Kunimatyu

The Souljourner said:
			
		

> Ahh, that capstone ability is pretty sweet for the fighter.  I was thinking about giving the fighter the ability to take feats that up his effective BAB for the purpose of qualifying for other feats.  But yours works pretty well without eating up another feat by the fighter.
> 
> Also, the fighter does get access to weapon specialization, which at 6th level is still a big boost.  If you allow that capstone, that allows even more feats only the fighter can take, and then it starts to look like the fighter is actually doing what he's supposed to do - just out-fight everyone else.
> 
> Is there a capstone for rogues as well?  Trap Sense +2 isn't really compelling.
> 
> -Nate




The floated capstone for Rogues was the ability to select one of the 10th level bonus rogue abilities at 6th. The barbarian capstone was DR 1/-.

In this same vein, a swashbuckler's level 7 charge ability would be its capstone, and the hexblade's greater curse would be its capstone(by the way, hexblades, if you include the additional hexblade feats in Dragon, are actually a compelling choice in E6)


----------



## Doplegager

It looks like I've finally managed to get a few players excited running through an E6 campaign.  I'm brewing up a fairly dark lean-upwards E6 campaign, kind of a mix between Ravenloft and Call of Cthulhu in a high fantasy, low magic setting.  I'm porting a bunch of rules directly from BoVD, including the optional ceremonial sacrifices.  This means that spells like _Wish_ are still on the menu, but only if you're willing and able to make elaborate human sacrifices and sell your soul in the process.  I'm also porting the sorcery rules from the d20 Call of Cthulhu.  I might include a feat tree to increase to levels 7 and 8, but I'm thinking it would involve taking the Leadership feat and using all of your followers to fuel a huge sacrifice- 6th level is going to be a hard cap without the significant aid of unnatural forces.

(And all the active unnatural forces so far are decidedly evil.  Sucks to be a good guy, huh?)

I'm using levels both to measure characer potency as well as a gauge of narrative importance.  My interpretation of levels so far has been:
*6th:* Characters who are either very powerful or who drive the plot in significant ways.  If the campaign were laid out as a map, they're the capitols.
*4th:* Characters who are named, and may be powerful, but who mostly establish setting or provide resources.  They're important, but rarely instigate narratives like the 6th level characters.  In the campaign map, they're like major cities.
*1st-3rd:* These characters are the mooks.  They're like individual buildings or the tiniest of hamlets- there might be a few noteworthy or interesting ones, but you mostly stumble across them.  They're rarely on the campaign map.

Given the recent talk about PrC's, here's my take.  For the players, I'll probably use a feat-tree.  I have a _few_ NPCs that are designed using PrCs _instead_ of base classes.  I picture those NPCs as having a very niche role in the campaign that would'nt really be appropriate for most PCs.  For example, I have a 6th level Disciple of Mammon (BoVD) as the leader of a thieves guild.  Finally, a thieves guild led by someone for virtues _other than_ having the highest sneak attack.  

I'd be able to make the same character by using a feat tree, but then he'd have additional abilities from his base classes that would not only make him less unique but also make him more powerful than I want him to be.  Going straight to the PrC cuts my bookkeeping in half and gives my NPC a more specialized, unique feel while keeping him from being an uber-NPC.  When you get down to it, a lot of PrCs aren't nearly as potent if they aren't reinforced by base classes.

(Can anyone else see 'the chosen one' being a 3rd level Heir of Siberys (Eberron)?  Marked from birth, he's destined to be one of the most powerful people in the land- but right now, he's a teenager with only 3d6 hit points.  Sure, he hosts the most powerful magic known, but he's nothing against a 6th level character.)


----------



## Dragonblade275

Doplegager said:
			
		

> I'm brewing up a fairly dark lean-upwards E6 campaign, kind of a mix between Ravenloft and Call of Cthulhu in a high fantasy, low magic setting.  I'm porting a bunch of rules directly from BoVD, including the optional ceremonial sacrifices.



Sounds like it should be great!  Hope to hear how it goes.


----------



## jjsheets

*New E6 Play-by-Post Campaign starting.*

I have officially set up my Play-by-Post Psionics/No-Magic game over at rpol.net.  Anyone wanting to join will need to sign up for an rpol.net account (free and quick), unless you already have one, then read the Request to Join rules here.  I'd appreciate anybody willing to help playtest the rules.


----------



## TwoSix

Doplegager said:
			
		

> Given the recent talk about PrC's, here's my take.  For the players, I'll probably use a feat-tree.  I have a _few_ NPCs that are designed using PrCs _instead_ of base classes.  I picture those NPCs as having a very niche role in the campaign that would'nt really be appropriate for most PCs.  For example, I have a 6th level Disciple of Mammon (BoVD) as the leader of a thieves guild.  Finally, a thieves guild led by someone for virtues _other than_ having the highest sneak attack.
> 
> I'd be able to make the same character by using a feat tree, but then he'd have additional abilities from his base classes that would not only make him less unique but also make him more powerful than I want him to be.  Going straight to the PrC cuts my bookkeeping in half and gives my NPC a more specialized, unique feel while keeping him from being an uber-NPC.  When you get down to it, a lot of PrCs aren't nearly as potent if they aren't reinforced by base classes.
> 
> (Can anyone else see 'the chosen one' being a 3rd level Heir of Siberys (Eberron)?  Marked from birth, he's destined to be one of the most powerful people in the land- but right now, he's a teenager with only 3d6 hit points.  Sure, he hosts the most powerful magic known, but he's nothing against a 6th level character.)




You know, using PrCs right off the bat is a pretty interesting idea for a slightly higher powered E6 game...might have to think about this one.  Thanks!


----------



## joela

*PrC feat tree*



			
				Doplegager said:
			
		

> Given the recent talk about PrC's, here's my take.  For the players, I'll probably use a feat-tree.
> ...
> 
> I'd be able to make the same character by using a feat tree, but then he'd have additional abilities from his base classes that would not only make him less unique but also make him more powerful than I want him to be.  Going straight to the PrC cuts my bookkeeping in half and gives my NPC a more specialized, unique feel while keeping him from being an uber-NPC.  When you get down to it, a lot of PrCs aren't nearly as potent if they aren't reinforced by base classes.
> 
> (Can anyone else see 'the chosen one' being a 3rd level Heir of Siberys (Eberron)?  Marked from birth, he's destined to be one of the most powerful people in the land- but right now, he's a teenager with only 3d6 hit points.  Sure, he hosts the most powerful magic known, but he's nothing against a 6th level character.)




Could PrC be made into feat trees instead? For an E6 multi-classed cleric/wizard, for example, each take of the "Mystic Theurge Prestige Class" feat would simultaneously increase the number of spells they could prepare per day in each class until they reached the maximum of 4/4/4/4 divine/arcane. Such a system could both provide a unique flavor to a campaign ("no, the Order of the Crimson Archmage Prestige Class Feat provides these abilities") and makes it easy for players who don't want to browse thousands of feats to plan their swashbuckler or warrior princess concept.


----------



## The Souljourner

TwoSix said:
			
		

> You know, using PrCs right off the bat is a pretty interesting idea for a slightly higher powered E6 game...might have to think about this one.  Thanks!




Yeah, actually I was thinking that exact thing...  that maybe many prestige classes would be ok to take right off the bat.  Certainly not all, and probably most would have to be tweaked some, but I think it's a lot less overpowered than it may seem at first blush.

And they're certainly fine as NPCs >

-Nate


----------



## Shadowmist

rycanada said:
			
		

> _To the regulars: I changed Ability Training to provide a small benefit._
> 
> *Extra Feats*
> 
> 
> *Stone to Flesh (General)*
> Prerequisites: 6th level, ability to cast 3rd-level arcane spells, Intelligence 18, Craft (Alchemy) 9 Ranks
> Benefit: You can use _stone to flesh_, as the spell, with an expensive and secret magical ingredient with a market value of 1000 gp and a casting time of 1 day.




Is this feat intended specifically for Wizards?  It would be considreably harder for Sorcerers to qualify for it.


----------



## The Souljourner

Intelligence 18 isn't a good prerequisite.... stat prereqs are always odd, and for good reason - they may odd stats worth something.  Plus, as others said, it's not fair for sorcerers.   

I also think it's a bizarre feat in general.  I assume the only reason it exists because you feel there is an intrinsic need to be able to fix people who have been turned to stone.  I don't know, it just seems like a very specific and inelegant patch in an otherwise elegant solution.  I'd rather not have it, and if the PCs run into a medusa or something, make it part of a quest to get their fallen fellows back.

-Nate


----------



## Ry

The feat's been tossed around before; there's a few reasons it's the way it is.

1)  The 18 INT requirement is because 18 INT casters don't get an extra 4th level spell.  I wanted to throw them a bone, regardless of the "it makes odd stats worth something."  It's fine for other feats to do that but there's no rule about feats that says they need to have odd prereqs, it's just a convention that shores up the weakness of odd stats (which is still an overwhelming weakness in my view).  

2)  I put it in because there are legitimate CR enemies that have stone attacks, and DMs don't necessarily want those to be permanent.  This was a way to say "Hey, you're turned to stone, but if the party can get you back to this powerful wizardly alchemist, and he can reverse it."  

3) I made it a feat rather than a ritual or a plot point because I try to keep all my low-level tinkering with the rules at the feat level.  I think any other patch for removing petrification is going to be just as inelegant, if not moreso.  Changing existing spells in D&D, or making rituals a necessary part of E6 change its implied complexity.  I don't want to imply that if you add spells to E6 you need to rewrite them, or if you add monsters you need to redesign them.  That impression is something I want to avoid as much as possible - hence, here's a few feats that cover the bare minimum, and you're all set to run a game.  After all, E6's unofficial slogan is "Get out there and play, damnit!"

So that's my thought process on the feat.


----------



## GameDoc

In the RAW, it's a 6th level sorcerer/wizard spell, so it requires an ability score of 16.  You could change the requisite to "Score of 16 or higher in base spellcasting ability."

On the other hand, Ryan seems to have put a good deal of thought into his stuff, so I'd be curious to hear his thoughts behind the feat as he wrote it


----------



## Ry

GameDoc, I think you were typing your post just as I posted mine.  Check one page back.


----------



## Shazman

Hey Ryan, didn't you post a pdf of an E6 character sheet in an earlier E6 thread?  If so, I'd like  a link to it, or just tell me where I can find it.  Thanks.


----------



## Ry

It was just an image - it's definitely a play sheet more than a build sheet.  I mocked it up from a TOGC initiative card.  I'll see if I can find it for you.


----------



## Nimloth

*acquired LA*

If this has been considered, I don't recall having read it.  How would everyone "handle" an acquired template (like LYCANTHROPE) if it was acquired at level 6?  You wanted to deal with natural/starting LA by reducing starting point buy.  Make feats cost more exp?


----------



## Ry

Off the top of my head, I'd treat an acquired template as a big fat experience debt.  Not sure what the best way is; I haven't used lycanthropes since 2E.


----------



## joela

*E6 as a "light" DnD variant*

Suggested using E6 to a post requesting a less-rule intensive D20 system:

E6


----------



## joela

*Alternatives to Feat Progression*

loseth has suggested an E6 variant over at rpg.net that allows players, after 6th level, to choose ability score increases or skill points instead of feats for his campaign:

http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=348278


----------



## Ry

It's very cool to see people gearing up and actually running games with E6.  

My own weekly campaign is going strong, the players are starting to see the effect of being relatively big dogs at 3rd level.  Now I'm seeing again how the change in world assumptions really makes an E6 campaign different from a d20 campaign right from the start.


----------



## Kunimatyu

joela said:
			
		

> loseth has suggested an E6 variant over at rpg.net that allows players, after 6th level, to choose ability score increases or skill points instead of feats for his campaign:
> 
> http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=348278




Doesn't E6 already allow that, via the Open Minded feat (gain 5 skill points) and the two ability advancement feats?


----------



## Ry

I'm not sure the person at RPG.net has the pdf - I can't post files to RPG.net


----------



## Ry

I'm thinking that I should divide the included E6 feats into "Basic" and "Capstone" feats.  That should keep the number of feats at a minimum but still have some structure for what the purpose of the feats are.


----------



## jjsheets

Ryan, I have a question about the Skill Beyond Your Years feat listed back on page 2.

It seems a bit underpowered in comparison to say, Skill Focus.  Not to mention that after acquiring it, you need to then get Open Minded in order to have the skill points to fill up the higher limit.

Seems to need some tweaking.


----------



## The Souljourner

rycanada said:
			
		

> The [stone to flesh] feat's been tossed around before; there's a few reasons it's the way it is.
> 
> 1)  The 18 INT requirement is because 18 INT casters don't get an extra 4th level spell.



I actually went to my PHB and back before I realized that you don't mean that 18 int doesn't give a 4th level spell slot, which of course it does.  What you mean is, since by default no casters in E6 ever get 4th level spells, the bonus spell slot that 18 int does give, is totally wasted on E6 casters.

Sorry, I know it was obvious to you, but it was totally non-obvious to me at first, so I wanted it spelled out in case anyone missed the boat like I did 

So, I agree it sucks that 18 in a stat gives a caster in E6 no benefit to spell slots.  Not sure what to do about that.  Wrapping the stat bonuses around more quickly might not be a terrible idea.

+1  1
+2  2
+3  3
+4  1 x2
+5  2 x2
+6  3 x2
+7  1 x3
...

where x2 is 2 extra spell slots.  All levels are cumulative, so at +4 you actually have 3 bonus 1st level spells, a bonus 2nd, and a bonus 3rd.

I've always thought the spell slot bonuses for high stats were way too conservative anyway.

I know it's a departure from the simple "D&D until 6th, then feats every 5k", but it's not too bad.  Plus, you assume there's not going to be nearly the inflation of stats in E6.



			
				rycanada said:
			
		

> 2)  I put it in because there are legitimate CR enemies that have stone attacks, and DMs don't necessarily want those to be permanent.  This was a way to say "Hey, you're turned to stone, but if the party can get you back to this powerful wizardly alchemist, and he can reverse it."




I still think it's ok to say that, but not have it be something PCs can do.  NPCs can always do wacky stuff PCs can't, this could be one of them.  



			
				rycanada said:
			
		

> 3) I made it a feat rather than a ritual or a plot point because I try to keep all my low-level tinkering with the rules at the feat level.




I think that's a good goal, and I agree that you don't want to tweak stuff too much, since then it stops being "D&D until 6th level" etc. 

I just don't think any player I know would ever take that feat unless they were in a game where there were unusually consistent encounters with stone-turning enemies.

Anyway.... Not really that big of a deal, I was more just trying to figure out exact motivations and hopefully stimulate some thought.


----------



## Ry

The Souljourner said:
			
		

> I still think it's ok to say that, but not have it be something PCs can do.  NPCs can always do wacky stuff PCs can't, this could be one of them.




Actually, I don't approach the game with stuff NPCs can do that the PCs can't, unless those NPCs are angels or gods or something.  If there's a secret ritual or recipe that can reverse petrification, I think it's fair game to say that a PC could learn or discover it if it's out there to be learned or discovered.  That's pretty consistent with 3e's approach overall.  So whatever other changes are made to the feat (such as writing _Special: The DM may require elaborate quest or research prerequisites before this feat can be learned._) I'm still planning on keeping the feat.


----------



## rabindranath72

Ryan,
nice work! I like the general idea of "trimming" the d20 system. I just used the 3.0 rules when they were published, and just for two campaigns. After that, I got really dissatisfied with the game: too unwieldy, too much number crunching. The only version of d20 I play these days is Call of Cthulhu d20, for which, incidentally, the conversion rules from the BRP system translate the topmost BRP character as a 7th level character. I like the feel of all this  I might even give 3.0 a second chance, after all.

Cheers,
Antonio


----------



## Ry

Thanks rabindranath72 !  EN World in general has been very kind to me and E6.  Has there been a fantasy campaign out there that you've thought about running but never tried?  There's some people running some very cool variant E6 games:

Gestalt E6 Eberron
Psionics-only divine-flavored E6
Martial Classes + Call of Cthulhu magic Sword and very evil Sorcery

I think it's easier to adapt E6 than D&D to different styles because you have fewer assumptions to change (i.e. "Death is a pain, but disintegration's a bitch and a half"  "What do you mean, you took a ship to cross the ocean?  You know we're 10th level, right?  Forget walking.")  My current campaign is very political, for example.


----------



## rabindranath72

Well, I have the d20 Conan game, but it suffers from the usual d20 rule bloat. Perhaps I might "tweak" it and compress all into 6 levels.
Recently, I prepared a Conan game using Call of Cthulhu d20 (as you say, Sword and Very Evil Sorcery  .) I have not played it yet, but I guess it would work fine.

Cheers,
Antonio


----------



## rabindranath72

I have a question: on pag. 10 of the pdf, how is the LA point buy system supposed to work? What does "Thus, +LA races should start with zero LA" means?

To advance an ability, one must essentially "buy" two feats (first ability training, then ability advancement)?

Thanks,
Antonio


----------



## Ry

rabindranath72 said:
			
		

> I have a question: on pag. 10 of the pdf, how is the LA point buy system supposed to work? What does "Thus, +LA races should start with zero LA" means?
> 
> To advance an ability, one must essentially "buy" two feats (first ability training, then ability advancement)?




1.  The suggestion is that if you want to have races with Level Adjustment (i.e. half-dragons, tieflings, aasimar, etc.) instead of changing the experience rules, you should change how many points they use in the initial ability point buy (i.e. don't roll stats, give the point buy per the DMG, but uber races get fewer points).  It's not a perfect system, but it's by far the best one I've seen to balance Level Adjustment races in the lower levels.

2.  Yes.


----------



## joela

*Re: Using PrC as NPC classes*

rycanada, would love your take on E6 and using PrC as regular classes:

Using PrC as NPC classes


----------



## Ry

I'd be more likely to create prestige feats and have the NPCs take those.  One of the things about using E6 is that you can obey the RAW and still get some great effects.  IMO, If I was going to get down to the nitty-gritty of comparing PrCs with Classes, or tweaking the races, or changing how the classes work, I might as well go all the way and make my own RPG to taste.


----------



## Ry

Right now I'm interested in capstones most of all - we're talking E6 here, not GE6 or AE7 or E8.  What do you guys think are good capstones for Wizards, Sorcerers, and Clerics?


----------



## joela

*prestige feats*



			
				rycanada said:
			
		

> I'd be more likely to create prestige feats and have the NPCs take those.




Prestige feats?


----------



## Kunimatyu

rycanada said:
			
		

> Right now I'm interested in capstones most of all - we're talking E6 here, not GE6 or AE7 or E8.  What do you guys think are good capstones for Wizards, Sorcerers, and Clerics?




In many respects the "additional 3rd level slot" feats are capstones for these guys, and given the number of metamagic options they have availabe via normal metamagic, the Swift Metamagic feat, and Arcane Thesis/Divine Metamagic, I'm not sure they need true capstone feats.

The only "capstone" feats that could really apply would be feats that grant the ability to cast a certain (non-broken) 4th level spell once per day. Restoration has already been mentioned, and I think Wall of Fire would be a good choice as well, along with possibly the alignment-smite spells (Holy Smite, Chaos Hammer, etc.).

I'm rambling a little -- one more thing: the Cleric capstone feat already exists, and it's the ability to pick up an extra domain, vis-a-vis Shazman's feats that you already have listed. For Sorc/Wizards, Arcane Thesis really is their capstone feat, since it lets them enhance one of their existing spells to a degree no one else can(for instance, an Arcane Thesis: Scorching Ray allows for 2 rays, since you get another ray at CL 7). Heh, for some real nastiness, Split Ray that spell(non-swift), for a level 3 spell that does 12d6 fire no save, provided you succeed on three ranged touch attacks.


----------



## oldlurker

*E6 Multi class clarification*

Old gamer, since 75 with the D&D boxed set, and long time lurker.  I got back into the 3rd and 3.5 ed and played a couple of times but was disillusioned with the increased, game-slowing complexity of upper level play and the pain involved with being a DM.  I have been casting around looking for a fix, True20, C&C, etc. but found E6 to be the best alternative for running the games that I prefer.  Thanks for contributing this approach.

The only question that I have involves multiclasses:  If 6th level is the suggested max level, couldn't characters continue to top out additonal classes to 6th level?  It would seem logical, from a setting viewpoint, that longer lived races could be truly diversified with multiple 6th level classes.  I accept that the cap may have been placed at a total of 6 levels but capping it in that way seems problematic to the player who asserts that his 5th level fighter, 1st level wizard still has more room for growth when compared to the 6th level wizard in the party.  

I have considered that the 'Laws of reality' may limit just what a pc can achieve and that using gestalt classes with 2 level steps (a la 6 fighter, 4 level wizard, 2 level rogue)  may work for any group that I may play with.   I was just wondering what Enworlders may think of this.  If it has been convered in another thread, sorry for the repitition.


----------



## Kunimatyu

The way I would handle the above problem is to let the Wizard1/Fighter5 take another level of Wizard if he wants...but his newfound magical prowess comes at a cost to his fighting skills, and he's now a Wizard 2/Fighter4, as you simply can't, as a mortal, be both the best caster and the best fighter in the world -- something's got to give. 

Essentially, you're allowing him to retrain a class level (you can find exact rules on retraining classes in Player's Handbook II -- a phenomenal book, probably the best non-core book WotC has released for 3.5).


----------



## Ry

I'm very sympathetic to that approach, oldlurker (and btw, welcome to EN World).  My original concept for E6 (back in '01-02) was something like that; up to six, then gestalt out.  But I found that trying to do so introduced a lot of accounting, and when the players had XP to spend it almost invariably went to feats because they were easier to use.  

The way I'd approach it now, would be by allowing feats that helped a character move up from their multiclass to something more like gestalt.  For example, a feat where a character gained "0" 2nd level spell slots if they have a few other magical capabilities.  That might be imperfect as a gestalt approach but I think it would make the game fair to both single-classed characters who would rather stick with their specialty and multiclass characters who want to shore up both sides of their multiclassing.  There's been a few mentions of retroactive-gestalting, as it were, but I have yet to see one that doesn't cause a lot of extra accounting figuring out what benefits a new retroactive-gestalt level grants.

That said, if someone comes up with a way, or figures out the wording of that feat chain, I'd be delighted to see it.


----------



## der_kluge

I keep forgetting to ask - what does the "E" in E6 stand for?


----------



## Dragonblade275

der_kluge said:
			
		

> I keep forgetting to ask - what does the "E" in E6 stand for?



I think it stands for "Epic."


----------



## Dragonblade275

oldlurker said:
			
		

> Old gamer, since 75 with the D&D boxed set, and long time lurker.  I got back into the 3rd and 3.5 ed and played a couple of times but was disillusioned with the increased, game-slowing complexity of upper level play and the pain involved with being a DM.  I have been casting around looking for a fix, True20, C&C, etc. but found E6 to be the best alternative for running the games that I prefer.  Thanks for contributing this approach.
> 
> The only question that I have involves multiclasses:  If 6th level is the suggested max level, couldn't characters continue to top out additonal classes to 6th level?  It would seem logical, from a setting viewpoint, that longer lived races could be truly diversified with multiple 6th level classes.  I accept that the cap may have been placed at a total of 6 levels but capping it in that way seems problematic to the player who asserts that his 5th level fighter, 1st level wizard still has more room for growth when compared to the 6th level wizard in the party.
> 
> I have considered that the 'Laws of reality' may limit just what a pc can achieve and that using gestalt classes with 2 level steps (a la 6 fighter, 4 level wizard, 2 level rogue)  may work for any group that I may play with.   I was just wondering what Enworlders may think of this.  If it has been convered in another thread, sorry for the repitition.



I'd considered that, OldLurker.

What I'd do is allow them to gestalt.  In other words, a fighter5/wizard1 could become a fighter5/wizard2, but he would only improve in those abilities for which a wizard2 was better than what he already had.
fighter5/wizard1
HD (5d10, 1d4) BAB+5 FORT +4 REF +1 WILL +2
fighter feats and 1st level wizard spell slots​
fighter5/wizard2
HD (5d10, 1d4) BAB+5 FORT +4 REF +1 WILL +3
fighter feats and 2nd level wizard spell slots​Only the Will Save and the Spell slots would improve because everything else is already better than what a Wizard2 would have.

That's my take... Others might do it in other ways.  But, it works for me for the elder races (elves & dwarves, etc...).  A legendary elf might be a fighter6/wizard6 with the following stats:
Elven Fighter6/Wizard6
HD (6d10, 0d4) BAB+6 FORT +5 REF +2 WILL +5
fighter feats and 6th level wizard spell slots​Notice, no d4's gained for hit dice because the d10's from fighter are better than d4's.

Again, this is all how I would do it.  Others might do it differently.

I might even allow that elf to become a fighter6/rogue6/wizard6 with the following:

Elven Fighter6/Rogue6/Wizard6
HD (6d10, 0d6, 0d4) BAB+6 FORT +5 REF +5 WILL +5
fighter feats, 6th level rogue abilities, and 6th level wizard spell slots​Notice, no d6's gained for hit dice because the d10's from fighter are better than d6's.  Also, only the Reflex save improves because fighter6/Wizard6 is already maxed out in Fort and Will saves.


----------



## Ry

Dragonblade is correct; E6 stands for Epic 6th.  In the .pdf and the first post, I talk about how 6th level characters are mortal, but they can also be epic heroes if you approach the game with the right mindset.


----------



## skelso

Hi, I've been reading the En World E6 discussions for a few days (actually joined so that I could see everything) and I have to say, I'm really impressed.  Thanks for developing this, rycanada, and everyone else who's been helping to develop it.  It's probably the most exciting D&D development to me since 3rd edition came out.

While I'm writing, I'd like to make a pitch in defense of my favorite core class, the Fighter.  It seems like the consensus is that the Fighter lacks balance and "single class" appeal.  That no one would ever take it in E6 without multi-classing at least a little.  I know that the perception that a class is weak is just about as powerful as actual class weakness, so I just wanted to point out some numbers to strengthen my case.  I'm writing this from a Powergamer perspective, but that's really what we're talking about.  If we're making our class choices based on character personality, it hardly matters at all if the classes are balanced.

The Fighter's detractors point out how few unique special abilities that the Fighter has that other classes don't.  Sure the Fighter has the option of taking Weapon Specialization, but nothing beyond level 4 to recommend it.  Everyone is forgetting the Fighter's true special ability that really makes them shine in a party.  In the case of E6, I call it the "Four Feat Advantage."  Specifically, whatever feat chain your character might be working on, the Fighter is going to complete that chain 4 feats (20,000 xp) sooner.  I realize that with the exception of Weapon Specialization, whatever feats the Fighter pursues can eventually be obtained by everyone, but by that time, the Fighter has moved on and begun and possibly finished another Feat Chain, growing his power substantially.

Take the Rage ability and compare it Weapon Specialization:
+2 to attack, +2 damage and +2 Will, -2 to AC, limited uses, short duration, tired afterwards
     vs.
+1 to attack, +2 damage, no limit, no duration, no fatigue

Sometimes Rage is better, but Weapon Specialization is your general best option.  I think the same goes in comparison to the Ranger's Favored Enemy or the Paladin's limited use Smite.

Of course, most people agree that Fighter 4 has it's advantages, but why carry it to 6?  Personally, I don't usually take Weapon Specialization in the first six levels.  I'd rather finish my Whirlwind Attack chain or an Archery chain or even Greater Cleave.  Finishing up a Feat Chain sooner rather than picking up a Rage or a Smite or a Favored Enemy is always the more powerful move.  The sooner you finish the chain, the more use you get from it.  That makes the one extra bonus feat at 6th well worth it, in my opinion.

I haven't really compared taking Fighter 6 to the option of picking up a couple of non-Full Attack Bonus classes like Rogue, Cleric or Wizard.  You're giving up your second attack for either Sneak Attack or a few spells, I think it's pretty balanced, to the point that no one would just automatically do it.

In short, I'm arguing that the Fighter is balanced enough that it doesn't NEED a capstone feat.  However, if you're giving everyone one anyway, that's cool.

Anyway, I've become a big fan of all the people discussing this topic.  You're not going to offend me if you tear my argument apart, though I think it's pretty solid.  Thanks for the good discussion.


----------



## WhatGravitas

skelso said:
			
		

> Take the Rage ability and compare it Weapon Specialization:
> +2 to attack, +2 damage and +2 Will, -2 to AC, limited uses, short duration, tired afterwards
> vs.
> +1 to attack, +2 damage, no limit, no duration, no fatigue



If the barbarian takes power attack at first level focus on 3rd level, it looks like this:

+1 to attack, +6 damage and +2 Will, -2 to AC, limited uses, short duration, tired afterwards
     vs.
+1 to attack, +2 damage, no limit, no duration, no fatigue

Rage is good, because it adds an attack bonus (due to higher strength), that you get back two-fold, due to power attack.


----------



## Ry

Welcome to the boards, skelso!  

The fighter is a topic of much debate around here.  My longstanding position (for something like 700 posts of E6 discussion over the last 2 threads and a few spinoffs) was that maybe the fighter was a little underpowered, but not so much so that it needed to be specifically addressed.  The topic continued for quite some time, and eventually I decided that, given how much energy was being put into that discussion I had better find an approach that would at least address it.  Since I was thinking of designing capstone feats for each class, it would be a good idea to post a strong fighter capstone and see if that got the debate about the fighter to simmer down a little.  That seems to have worked, which is a good sign that the feat is at least broadly acceptable.

That said, if you want to run an E6 game with none of my feats, or a totally different set of feats, I know that the game holds up.  I've had a blast running it, and I'm having a blast running it with my new group.


----------



## Ry

jjsheets said:
			
		

> Ryan, I have a question about the Skill Beyond Your Years feat listed back on page 2.
> 
> It seems a bit underpowered in comparison to say, Skill Focus.  Not to mention that after acquiring it, you need to then get Open Minded in order to have the skill points to fill up the higher limit.
> 
> Seems to need some tweaking.




The idea is that you've taken everything under the sun to enhance this skill already.  This lets you crack the skill cap off just a little, so it's meant to be a bit weaker than skill focus - just like the higher-end point buys are more expensive than lower-end ones.


----------



## Ry

The character sheet file was requested, but I'm getting a message that it can be found in this thread:

http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=200754


----------



## Shazman

Lord Tirian said:
			
		

> If the barbarian takes power attack at first level focus on 3rd level, it looks like this:
> 
> +1 to attack, +6 damage and +2 Will, -2 to AC, limited uses, short duration, tired afterwards
> vs.
> +1 to attack, +2 damage, no limit, no duration, no fatigue
> 
> Rage is good, because it adds an attack bonus (due to higher strength), that you get back two-fold, due to power attack.




Lord Tirian's arguement has merit if comparing a fighter 6 to a barbarian 6.  It breaks down a bit when comparing a fighter 4/barbarian 2 to a fighter 6.  The fighter/barbarian is only down one feat and can still get weapon specialization. Plus he's got rage, more hit points, more skills, fast movement, and uncanny dodge.  Without the capstone feat, a fighter 6 is left in the dust by the fighter 4/barbarian 2, especially if he takes extra rage.


----------



## Kunimatyu

skelso said:
			
		

> Anyway, I've become a big fan of all the people discussing this topic.  You're not going to offend me if you tear my argument apart, though I think it's pretty solid.  Thanks for the good discussion.




Here goes...

Your argument seems solid because you're only looking at initial damage output. Let's look at the basic level 6 abilities each class gets (ignoring capstones, just RAW)

Ignoring Rage/Weapon Spec...:

Barbarian:
+d12 HD
+4 skill points
+extra movement
+Uncanny Dodge and Improved Uncanny Dodge
+Trap Sense
-Only light armor

Fighter:
-d10 HD
-2 skill points
+heavy armor and tower shields
+4 feats

In a campaign with a ton of feats, Barbarian has really good abilities you can't get any other way, plus more hit points and skill points. Also, the Fighter's overall weakness is something D&D designers like Mike Mearls have talked about on these boards before, it's not just an E6 crowd thing.


----------



## White Whale

How powerful/weak the fighter is depends how far into "epic" you play. Fighter is generally thought to be quite powerful at low levels. Clearly, as the PCs get more feats, the additional 4 feats the fighter gets is eventually marginalized.


----------



## Ry

:sigh:

OK, so if we treat Cleric, Wizard, Sorc, Fighter, Rogue, Druid, and Barbarian as done, we're left with Paladin, Bard, Monk, and Ranger.  Any suggestions for capstones for these?  I'm not massively concerned since there are lots of feats out there designed for these classes.


----------



## Shazman

So we're sayin that arcane thesis is the capstone for wizard, DR 1/- for barbarians, Martial Veteran for fighters, a rogue special ability for rogues, 3rd level spells for sorcerers, and access to the domain feats for a cleric.  I think I missed the druid capstone.  Was it wildshaping into large creatures?  How about for a paladin something called aligned strike that treats all of their attacks as good aligned? Give inspire courage +2 to the bard.  Give the monk wholeness of body or improved evasion.  For the ranger give them an ability called favored strike that gives them a +1 to attack rolls versus favored enemies and allows them to overcome DR of favored enemies.  It may seem like I'm giving the ranger a lot, but unless they are lucky enough to pick favored enemies that will come up a lot in the campaign, they only get to use it about 20% of the time.


----------



## Ry

Druid capstone is picking 1 large animal to wildshape into.


----------



## Shazman

The really simple way to have capstones for the ranger and paladin would be to give them an extra favored enemy and smite per day.  That might be better than coming up with new class abilities, since we want to keep everything in line with PHB as much as possible.


----------



## GameDoc

I would be tempted to give the monk and ranger a class feature they wouldn't get otherwise due to the 6th level cap.

Perhaps Wholeness of Body and Woodland Stride respectively.  Those would be what they got at 7th level anyway, and probably wouldn't be too out of balance (although Swift Tracker might work for a ranger instead).

For that matter, you could go ahead and give the bard his +2 to inspire courage that he would have received at 8th if you didn't think it was too overpowered (or even inspire greatness).

You might consider giving a paladin a "Holy Strike" similar to a monk's Ki Strike.  All melee attack are considered good aligned for the purposes of overcoming damage reduction against evil outsiders and the like.


----------



## Aust Diamondew

I would suggest Woodland stride and possibly something else for rangers, as woodland stride isn't too strong of an ability.

Bard should get inspire courage +2, paladins could possibly get some lesser version of the Holy Sword spell 1/day as a spell-like ability.


----------



## Ry

OK, capstones for Bard and Paladin added to the post on the first page.  

Monk - wholeness of body?  

Ranger - woodland stride?


----------



## Dragonblade275

Would it hurt to give the Ranger both Woodland Stride and Swift Tracker at level 6?

Personally, I've always felt that the Ranger was lacking something next to the Fighter.  So, adding these two in at Level 6 for Ranger might help.


----------



## Cheiromancer

White Whale said:
			
		

> Clearly, as the PCs get more feats, the additional 4 feats the fighter gets is eventually marginalized.




Eventually, sure.  But only when the best feats have all been taken, which won't be for a while.  If a fighter capstone feat is the ability to treat his BAB and fighter level as two higher, then there are quite a number of excellent feats and feat chains that he can complete.  And the +2 to Str, Dex and Con will take 6 feats in themselves. By the time everyone has 30 or 40 extra feats then, yeah, sure, those extra 4 feats won't be very special.  But when there are only 12 or so extra feats?  Those 4 extra are still good then.


----------



## der_kluge

I'm curious as to how the E6 rules work with the Gestalt rules?  Could one use the Gestalt rules in conjunction with the E6 rules to create even more powerful characters, but still maintaining that "realism" limitation?


----------



## Ry

A few people are trying GE6, and I think it would be really cool.  I don't run that way myself but I can see how it would work but stay within heroic fantasy - as you say, more powerful characters, keeping the realism limitation.


----------



## oldlurker

The Gestalt approach really appeals to me.  It reflects the characters' ability to grow further and limits the depth of gestalt class related feats.  I had thought to cap additional levels to reflect the difference between a dedicated class and gestalt class but that fixes the issue that I had. Thanks Dragonblade, and thank Rycanada for "fixing" D&D and renewing my affection for the game. Now just to find a gaming group.


----------



## Ry

Well, there's meetup.com, and if you're in Toronto or Kitchener Ontario I know people who know people.


----------



## Ry

I'm working in another thread on an abbreviated SRD, and I did some work with Khuxan's classes .rtf file - here's the link.


----------



## Kunimatyu

rycanada said:
			
		

> OK, capstones for Bard and Paladin added to the post on the first page.
> 
> Monk - wholeness of body?
> 
> Ranger - woodland stride?




Maybe it's too much, but I think reducing the Flurry penalty to 0 wouldn't be overpowered for the Monk. The capstone should also definitely allow them to qualify for feats they could have taken as their 6th level Monk bonus feat.


----------



## Quartz

Wholeness of Body is pretty crap. How about Abundant Step?


----------



## Quartz

Just a thought about spellcasting beyond 3rd level spells: why not simply adapt the rules from the Epic Level Handbook?


----------



## comrade raoul

That's a neat idea, and you're totally right--it definitely wouldn't be overpowered. But maybe it's a little boring? It's basically "+1 to attack rolls on all your full attacks", since there's almost never any reason not to flurry if your penalty is only -1. (And why the feat qualification? Monks don't get to take advantage of the "Skip-The-Normal-Prerequisites" aspect of their bonus feats after 6th level, anyway.)

--Monk:  If the paladin gets Holy Strikes, maybe the monk should just get ki strike (lawful)?

--Ranger: I think evasion would be really fitting, actually. Here are some implementations of those abilities:







> *Axiomatic Strikes (General)*
> *Prerequisite:* Monk 6.
> *Benefit:* Your unarmed attacks are considered lawful for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction.
> 
> *Hunter's Reflexes (General)*
> *Prerequisite:* Ranger 6.
> *Benefit:* You gain the evasion ability: if you make a successful Reflex saving throw against an attack that normally deals half damage on a successful save, you instead take no damage. You can’t use this feat if you are wearing medium or heavy armor, or if you're helpless.



Let me also suggest a pair of alternatives to the paladin and ranger options--it might be fun instead to give them versions of their buff spells (which they'd get at 8th level, with their 2nd-level spells) as spell-like abilities once per day. (The alternate features in Complete Warrior also do this, note.) Thus:







> *Aegis of Chivalry (General)*
> *Prerequisite:* Paladin 6.
> *Benefit:* You may cast either _bull's strength_, _eagle's splendor_, or _owl's wisdom_ once per day as a spell-like ability, using your paladin caster level.
> 
> *Aegis of Nature (General)*
> *Prerequisite:* Ranger 6.
> *Benefit:* You may cast either _bear's endurance_, _cat's grace_, or _owl's wisdom_ once per day as a spell-like ability, using your ranger caster level.


----------



## Hrothgar Rannúlfr

I like the Aegis feats...


----------



## Kunimatyu

comrade raoul said:
			
		

> That's a neat idea, and you're totally right--it definitely wouldn't be overpowered. But maybe it's a little boring? It's basically "+1 to attack rolls on all your full attacks", since there's almost never any reason not to flurry if your penalty is only -1. (And why the feat qualification? Monks don't get to take advantage of the "Skip-The-Normal-Prerequisites" aspect of their bonus feats after 6th level, anyway.)




Monks need a little bit of an attack boost to be somewhat decent, so removing Flurry penalties helps. In addition, allowing them to qualify for more feats really opens up more E6-legal feats for them to take, as otherwise Monks can run out of options very quickly.


----------



## The Souljourner

Bards - give them Inspire Courage +2.  Suggestion is pretty worthless most of the time, and inspire courage makes all the players love the bard, as well they should.

Monk - improved evasion.  Wholeness of body is crap.

Paladins - Give them the [Good] and [Lawful] subtypes - makes their weapons automatically count as good and lawful.

Rangers - I like both swift tracker and trackless step. 

In my campaign, I intend to remove both classes' spellcasting, since it's so weak already, and only getting a couple levels of it makes it even worse.

-Nate


----------



## Morrius

I would give rangers both swift tracker and woodland stride as their capstone.

Paladins don't really get anything new after 6th level, so maybe a feat to give them more uses of Smite Evil?

What I think monks really need to take on higher CR opponents is more AC.  How about +1 AC as their capstone feat?  It makes sense while not adding any of the funky supernatural abilities that make them more than human at high levels.

Evasion, uncanny dodge, and improved uncanny dodge can be general feats at 6th level for any class.


----------



## der_kluge

Once upon a time, I worked up an alternate spell list whereby I broke the spell list up by character level such that spellcasters get a new spell "level" ever class level.  In essence, I broke up each spell level into two spell levels splitting what I felt like were the more powerful spells up a level.  Such that 1st level spells now become 1st and 2nd level spells, and there are 20 levels of spells overall.  This obviates the confusion some new players have regarding spell level <> caster level.

I was curious if there were any interest in such a thing here WRT to E6?


----------



## The Souljourner

I think that, for the most part, the point of E6 is to stick with generic D&D rules as much as possible.  While I think splitting up the spell levels is a fantastic idea for a house rule, I don't think that it really fits within the context of discussing E6.   One could certainly combine the two, however, and E6 could certainly work well with a more fine-grained spell system.

-Nate


----------



## Ry

This is around the point where I'd normally get the thread closed and start anew, but I'm really looking for a consensus on the monk and ranger before I do so.  

Right now I'm thinking of woodland stride and swift track as 2 separate Ranger 6 skills.  Wholeness of Body for the monk 6, and Improved Evasion for the Monk 6 or Rogue 6 also seems fair (since funny combinations can get it).


----------



## The Souljourner

Ryan - are we talking a feat requiring level 6 of the respective classes?  I think the list you gave are good feats.  Wholeness of Body is very weak, but I guess that's not a reason not to make it available.

Sounds good to me.

-Nate


----------



## Kunimatyu

rycanada said:
			
		

> This is around the point where I'd normally get the thread closed and start anew, but I'm really looking for a consensus on the monk and ranger before I do so.
> 
> Right now I'm thinking of woodland stride and swift track as 2 separate Ranger 6 skills.  Wholeness of Body for the monk 6, and Improved Evasion for the Monk 6 or Rogue 6 also seems fair (since funny combinations can get it).




Woodland Stride + Swift Track is better combined, as swift tracking rarely comes up that often in games.

For the Monk, Wholeness is (frankly) a lame passive ability that no one will take. Improved Flurry would interest people, and Improved Evasion would(though I'd almost leave that as a rogue signature ability). As I've stated before, letting the Monk qualify for feats he could have taken as his 6th level bonus feat is key, as there are a number of Monk feats they would lose access to otherwise, and the feats are clearly within acceptable bounds for E6.

I feel that capstone feats should always have a "Wow!" factor associated with them, and that they should be unique and grant abilities that a feat is unable to.

Barbarian getting DR 1/- is pretty signature, as is Fighter qualifying for Improved Crit and others(though some tiny additional juice would be good), but Wholeness of Body ain't it.


----------



## Shazman

I'm a bit confused why you keep saying that monk should be able to qualify for feats that he would normally qualify for at 6th level.  He already gets those feats (improved disarm or improved trip) at 6th level and doesn't have to meet the prerequisites (int 13+, combat expertise).  I think that a ranger should get another favored enemy at 6th level or increase his favored enemy bonus for existing enemies by +2.  Swift tracker and woodland stride are flavorful abilities, but I could count on one hand the number of times I've seen situations where they would have been useful.  A ranger with only two favored enemies is gimped. He will rarely get to use that ability unless he is lucky enough to pick favored enemies the campaign will revolve around.  I say reducing the monks flurry of blows to no penalty really helps.  That's definitely a worthwile capstone.


----------



## Kunimatyu

Shazman said:
			
		

> I'm a bit confused why you keep saying that monk should be able to qualify for feats that he would normally qualify for at 6th level.  He already gets those feats (improved disarm or improved trip) at 6th level and doesn't have to meet the prerequisites (int 13+, combat expertise).




In books like PHB2 and CW, there are a number of feats (with prereqs high enough that a monk couldn't normally qualify for them in E6) that a monk can take as his bonus 6th level feat. I think it's important to let him continue to take those.

I disagree with regards to the Ranger -- I think moving through natural difficult terrain with no penalty is actually quite awesome, and comes up more often than you'd think. Swift tracking, however, comes up once in a blue moon, and so combining them into one feat would be necessary. I'm hesitant to increase Favored Enemy since the ranger just got an upgrade at 5th, and there are several feats that can improved favored enemy or grant an additional one already.


----------



## Ry

OK, these are the likely capstones coming down the pike (let me know if you have objections):

Prereq: Monk 6 
Benefit: You use Flurry of Blows with no penalty to your attack bonus.  In addition, you qualify for feats that a Monk may take as 6th level bonus feats.

Prereq: Ranger 6
Benefit: You gain the Woodland Stride and Swift Tracking class abilities.


----------



## Nimloth

*RE: Ranger & Monk*

OK, so there are going to be multiple capstone feats.  If that is the case, then I would agree with 







			
				rycanada said:
			
		

> Right now I'm thinking of woodland stride and swift track as 2 separate Ranger 6 skills. Wholeness of Body for the monk 6, and Improved Evasion for the Monk 6 or Rogue 6 also seems fair (since funny combinations can get it).



I always got the impression that you wanted 1 capstone feat.  Multiple feats are cool with me.   

If you did only 1 Capstone Feat;
Ranger both WS & ST, but if you only want 1 - make it Woodland Stride.
Monk, Improved Evasion.  Especially if you allow rouges to get it. 

I had an idea for Fighters,
Fighter 6 feat; you now qualify for any stat based prerequisite on any feat on the fighter list(IE; they may now take Combat Expertise even if they don't have a 13 int)

Just something to kick around in the next thread.  Why do you close 1 thread and start another?  Wouldn't it be easier to just keep it in 1 place?

I was just ready to post (stupid slow fingers)and read







> OK, these are the likely capstones coming down the pike (let me know if you have objections):
> 
> Prereq: Monk 6
> Benefit: You use Flurry of Blows with no penalty to your attack bonus. In addition, you qualify for feats that a Monk may take as 6th level bonus feats.
> 
> Prereq: Ranger 6
> Benefit: You gain the Woodland Stride and Swift Tracking class abilities.



Those are good feats, but I still think if you give rogues access to improved evasion you should allow monks access as well.


----------



## Kunimatyu

Nimloth said:
			
		

> I was just ready to post (stupid slow fingers)and readThose are good feats, but I still think if you give rogues access to improved evasion you should allow monks access as well.




I kinda like having rogues as the only ones with improved evasion, even if monks do have normal evasion. Having two identical capstone feats for different classes doesn't seem as cool, especially as improved evasion isn't really a signature monk thing.


----------



## Ry

Nimloth said:
			
		

> Just something to kick around in the next thread.  Why do you close 1 thread and start another?  Wouldn't it be easier to just keep it in 1 place?




A 15+ page thread is hard to go through and if someone new is interested in E6 I don't want them to think they need to read this whole big thing.  When I start a new thread I try to update the FAQ as well based on that thread, so people can get up to speed and (hopefully) we can avoid retreading the same ground.  This thread has really been about capstones, and the new capstones will be included at the beginning of the next thread.  In the next thread I'm going to suggest that we have a rule of no fighter balance discussions... they've been done.


----------



## Hrothgar Rannúlfr

rycanada said:
			
		

> OK, these are the likely capstones coming down the pike (let me know if you have objections):
> 
> Prereq: Monk 6
> Benefit: You use Flurry of Blows with no penalty to your attack bonus.  In addition, you qualify for feats that a Monk may take as 6th level bonus feats.
> 
> Prereq: Ranger 6
> Benefit: You gain the Woodland Stride and Swift Tracking class abilities.



Ry,

(Dragonblade275, here... New username...)

I'm definitely in favor of the 6th Level Ranger getting both Woodland Stride and Swift Tracking.

Now, I have to ask... Are these capstones that you're thinking about feats that allow the character to qualify for class abilities or feats that they don't normally get or qualify for by 6th level?  Or, are you replacing (or adding to) the 6th level class abilities of the class?

For instance, does the fighter have to select the Martial Veteran feat to qualify for Improved Critical?  Or, does he automatically qualify because he's a 6th level fighter?  I think I already know the answer, but just to clarify whether we're re-tooling the classes or just adding feats for E6... (And, I think we're just adding feats, but...)


P.S.  I've followed various E6 threads for a long, long time... And, I appreciate the way that you close one thread, update the FAQ and open a new thread... It gets better with every incarnation.


----------



## Kunimatyu

Hrothgar Rannúlfr said:
			
		

> For instance, does the fighter have to select the Martial Veteran feat to qualify for Improved Critical?  Or, does he automatically qualify because he's a 6th level fighter?  I think I already know the answer, but just to clarify whether we're re-tooling the classes or just adding feats for E6... (And, I think we're just adding feats, but...)




It's been my understanding that we're adding feats, not actually altering the base classes(which is why I'd love it if MVet offered some small benefit, like say, +2 to resist special combat manuevers).


----------



## HeinorNY

Sorry if I missed some of the pages, but is the purpose of the capstone feats to give a benefit for the PC that go up to 6th lvl in the same class?
If so, than the capstone must be really interesting.
I don't think swift tracker and woodland stride fits for that.


----------



## Shazman

I strongly believe they should just be added to the 6th level class abilities instead of making them feats that only a ranger 6 or monk 6 can qualify for.  The following are my reasons for this:
1) Feats don't give class abilities. They improve existing class abilities, but they don't grant new ones.  For example, no feat gives turn undead, but there are feats that enhance it.  Similarly no feat gives rage or DR 1/-, but some do improve rage and DR.
2) These two classes are already at the bottom of the power curve.  Giving them access to class abilities they are already associated with a bit earlier won't break them.
3) If the goal is to get more PC's to take all 6 levels of a core class, getting these abilities without spending a feat for them is a lot more attractive than merely qualifying for a feat you may or may not want.


----------



## Ry

Sorry Shaz, I think your points are good but changing the underlying D&D rules  (i.e. the class features of a 6th level character) is off the table for E6.  It has to remain "D&D to 6th level, then feats."   The capstone feats are an addendum: "Here's some extra feats if you want to encourage single classing."  But just like any set of feats, because they're feats, a DM / reader knows that they're optional.  If a changed set of class features was listed in the main E6 document, the reader's natural assumption is "Hmmm... changed class features... I wonder what else needs to be tweaked in the rules."  So I'm restricting the tinkering to feats.


----------



## Ry

Kunimatyu said:
			
		

> (which is why I'd love it if MVet offered some small benefit, like say, +2 to resist special combat manuevers).




Tempting.  But that sounds like it might be too broad.  Is that how you'd word it?


----------



## Ry

Hrothgar Rannúlfr said:
			
		

> Are these capstones that you're thinking about feats that allow the character to qualify for class abilities or feats that they don't normally get or qualify for by 6th level?  Or, are you replacing (or adding to) the 6th level class abilities of the class?




The capstones are class-exclusive feats that 6th level characters who single classed can take.  A DM is free to use other feats or ignore them, and I'd expect them to be ignored by a DM who was using, say, E8 or Arcana Evolved.


----------



## Ry

Oh, the big thing I want to discuss in the next thread is how to talk to your players about E6.  A player in my group runs his own game, and found that players were rejecting the idea out of hand without even looking at it.  Of course, that's a group of D&D-only old school grognards, so it might be worst case scenario (they do play 3.5e though).  But I think that's the biggest thing that the main E6 document is lacking (god knows it took long enough to make it sound good to a select few DMs).

For now though, let's talk more about those feats.  So far Ainatan is the only dissenter on the Woodland Stride / Swift Track.  I like penalty-free flurry of blows for the Monk, and I certainly think it's featworthy.  Improved evasion for the rogue only is also planned (although a monk/rogue can get it honestly as well).


----------



## Shazman

rycanada said:
			
		

> Sorry Shaz, I think your points are good but changing the underlying D&D rules  (i.e. the class features of a 6th level character) is off the table for E6.  It has to remain "D&D to 6th level, then feats."   The capstone feats are an addendum: "Here's some extra feats if you want to encourage single classing."  But just like any set of feats, because they're feats, a DM / reader knows that they're optional.  If a changed set of class features was listed in the main E6 document, the reader's natural assumption is "Hmmm... changed class features... I wonder what else needs to be tweaked in the rules."  So I'm restricting the tinkering to feats.




I see why you wouldn't want to put those changes in print, but if I run an E6 game, I will totally make them 6th level class features.  It just seems to me that if you hand out a few class features as feats, you might as well hand out rage, wildshape, etc. and you've pretty much changed to a classless system since the disitnction between classes breaks down.  That's just my two cents.


----------



## Kunimatyu

rycanada said:
			
		

> Tempting.  But that sounds like it might be too broad.  Is that how you'd word it?




No, "special combat maneuvers" is far too generally worded to make sense.

How about: "Select a maneuver from the following list: bull rush, disarm, grapple, overrun, sunder, and trip. You gain a +4 competence bonus on the appropriate check when an opponent attempts to use your select manuever against you."

+2 to all maneuvers seems a bit general and bland, but it makes a lot of sense that a master fighter would have some training at avoiding a particular combat tactic, so I like the idea of a +4 to resist. Both are roughly equal in power level, but I think a player would prefer picking a manuever and getting a significant bonus to avoid its effects.

In the case of everything but grapple, complete immunity to a maneuver wouldn't even be that unbalanced, though I think that bonuses and penalties are generally the way to go, rather than complete immunity.


----------



## Kunimatyu

rycanada said:
			
		

> Oh, the big thing I want to discuss in the next thread is how to talk to your players about E6.  A player in my group runs his own game, and found that players were rejecting the idea out of hand without even looking at it.  Of course, that's a group of D&D-only old school grognards, so it might be worst case scenario (they do play 3.5e though).  But I think that's the biggest thing that the main E6 document is lacking (god knows it took long enough to make it sound good to a select few DMs).
> 
> For now though, let's talk more about those feats.  So far Ainatan is the only dissenter on the Woodland Stride / Swift Track.  I like penalty-free flurry of blows for the Monk, and I certainly think it's featworthy.  Improved evasion for the rogue only is also planned (although a monk/rogue can get it honestly as well).




Are you sure you don't want to allow the rogue to simply choose a special rogue ability? None of the others approach the power level of Improved Evasion, but I could see some rogues wanting Skill Mastery and the like.


----------



## Nimloth

rycanada said:
			
		

> Improved evasion for the rogue only is also planned (although a monk/rogue can get it honestly as well).



Would you  please elaborate on how a monk/rogue can get it.  If you're thinking it is worded like uncanny dodge, it isn't, 2 evasions do not become improved evasion.  So what am I missing?


			
				SRD said:
			
		

> Evasion (Ex): At 2nd level and higher, a rogue can avoid even magical and unusual attacks with great agility. If she makes a successful Reflex saving throw against an attack that normally deals half damage on a successful save, she instead takes no damage. Evasion can be used only if the rogue is wearing light armor or no armor. A helpless rogue does not gain the benefit of evasion.
> 
> Uncanny Dodge (Ex): Starting at 4th level, a rogue can react to danger before her senses would normally allow her to do so. She retains her Dexterity bonus to AC (if any) even if she is caught flat-footed or struck by an invisible attacker. However, she still loses her Dexterity bonus to AC if immobilized.
> If a rogue already has uncanny dodge from a different class she automatically gains improved uncanny dodge (see below) instead.



Also, monks get improved evasion at level 9, 1 level earlier than rogues.


----------



## Matrix Sorcica

rycanada said:
			
		

> Oh, the big thing I want to discuss in the next thread is how to talk to your players about E6.  <snip>  But I think that's the biggest thing that the main E6 document is lacking (god knows it took long enough to make it sound good to a select few DMs).



I think maybe some kind of blurb similar in style to the blurb from more gritty games than D&D? When I read the blurb for most campaign settings, I actually start imagining adventures in the E6 style - that is, high adventure and daring deeds, but the protagonists are _mortal_.

Take a look at the introduction to FR, Eberron, Scarred Lands, Wilderlands, Known Realms and many others - none of these says "battle Balors and Tarrasques". Actually, many campaign setting introductions sound sort of Sword & Sorcery like - and E6 does indeed give me that S&S Vibe!

Then all that's needed is saying "Now you can actually play this - with 3.5 rules!!"

If I get a little spare time, I might try and see if I can piece something together, stealing heavily from campaign settings all over.

Edit: Also, I think it's a good idea to cater to the player that wants FEATS and diversity and is tired of having seven feats (which more or less must be certain feats to make the PC capable).


----------



## White Whale

rycanada said:
			
		

> "Here's some extra feats if you want to encourage single classing."



Why is it that you want to encourage single classing? The 3.X system was pretty much designed to multi class.


----------



## Ry

White Whale said:
			
		

> Why is it that you want to encourage single classing? The 3.X system was pretty much designed to multi class.




Boils down to the fact that it's something that's been asked for repeatedly.  There've been a lot of posts of "but a Class 4/ Otherclass 2 is better than Class6 that's supposed to cover that niche!"  The capstone feats are an attempt to answer those concerns without changing E6 itself.  If you don't like the idea of capstone feats or don't want to encourage single-classing, I'd say leave them out of your game (just like you'd leave out ability advancement feats if you thought abilities shouldn't advance).


----------



## White Whale

rycanada said:
			
		

> Boils down to the fact that it's something that's been asked for repeatedly.  There've been a lot of posts of "but a Class 4/ Otherclass 2 is better than Class6 that's supposed to cover that niche!"  The capstone feats are an attempt to answer those concerns without changing E6 itself.  If you don't like the idea of capstone feats or don't want to encourage single-classing, I'd say leave them out of your game (just like you'd leave out ability advancement feats if you thought abilities shouldn't advance).



I see what you mean, but even in normal D&D single-classing seldom is the "optimal" progression.

I just think that the beauty of the E6 system lies in its simplicity. Adding customized feats (that IMO are not needed) weakens this aspect.  :\


----------



## Shazman

White Whale said:
			
		

> I see what you mean, but even in normal D&D single-classing seldom is the "optimal" progression.
> 
> I just think that the beauty of the E6 system lies in its simplicity. Adding customized feats (that IMO are not needed) weakens this aspect.  :\




The main reason single-classing in regular D&D isn't optimal is because of prestige classes, most of which are more powerful than base classess.  This is especilly true for casters.  If my PC can get the full-spellcasting ability of a wizard or cleric (or maybe lose just one level) plus a bunch of prestige class goodies, it's a no-brainer to take that class.  There are also classes like the frenzied berserker which will own any other melee class.  You also have some feats in complete adventurer and complete scoundrel that allow you to multiclass and progress some of the more potent abilities of both classes.  E6 eliminates a lot of prestige classes and the more potent abilities of the ones it does allow.


----------



## White Whale

Shazman said:
			
		

> The main reason single-classing in regular D&D isn't optimal is because of prestige classes, most of which are more powerful than base classess.  This is especilly true for casters.  If my PC can get the full-spellcasting ability of a wizard or cleric (or maybe lose just one level) plus a bunch of prestige class goodies, it's a no-brainer to take that class.  There are also classes like the frenzied berserker which will own any other melee class.  You also have some feats in complete adventurer and complete scoundrel that allow you to multiclass and progress some of the more potent abilities of both classes.  E6 eliminates a lot of prestige classes and the more potent abilities of the ones it does allow.



I agree with all of the above, but I don't see how it adresses the introduction of "capstone" feats.

This is what rycanada stated was the reason for "capstone" feats:


			
				rycanada said:
			
		

> but a Class 4/ Otherclass 2 is better than Class6



Why is this bad? Do single class characters have to be better than multiclass characters?

I guess it's a matter of personal preference.


----------



## Ry

White Whale said:
			
		

> I guess it's a matter of personal preference.




I agree that it is 100% a matter of personal preference.  Capstone feats exist because that preference has been frequently expressed by those interested in E6 - but E6 runs just fine without them (I have done this).


----------



## Ry

Nimloth said:
			
		

> Would you  please elaborate on how a monk/rogue can get it.  If you're thinking it is worded like uncanny dodge, it isn't, 2 evasions do not become improved evasion.  So what am I missing?




I think Ryan is getting things confused.  Ryan is tired.  Ryan has been working long hours.  Ryan may leave an improved evasion feat out of E6.


----------



## Quartz

White Whale said:
			
		

> Why is this bad? Do single class characters have to be better than multiclass characters?




In D20, classes get cool powers early on. They're front-loaded. IPOF almost all the SRD classes are defined by L4 (Druid's wildshape at 5th being the exception). This is one reason I prefer the breakpoint to be at 8th or even 10th level - you can take two non-spellcasting classes to L4. E.g. Ftr 4 / Kt 4 or Kt 4 / Pal 4 or Rog 4 / Ftr 4. But that's the nice thing about E6 - you can change it if you don't like it. It still works as E8 or E10 (if you limit spells to 4th level).


----------



## Shazman

Single-classed characters don't have to be better than multi-classed characters, but they should be a viable option.  It shouldn't be a no-brainer to multi-class for a quick power boost.  With core only books, pretty much all of the multi-classed combos are equal to single -classed characters (except pure casters, but that's a different story).  When you throw 2 dozen splatbooks into the mix, single class characters become extremely rare.


----------



## joela

*E6 setting*

FYI:

http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=349227


----------



## White Whale

Shazman said:
			
		

> Single-classed characters don't have to be better than multi-classed characters, but they should be a viable option.  It shouldn't be a no-brainer to multi-class for a quick power boost.  With core only books, pretty much all of the multi-classed combos are equal to single -classed characters (except pure casters, but that's a different story).  When you throw 2 dozen splatbooks into the mix, single class characters become extremely rare.



The only complaint related to this (that I could find) is that "the Ftr4/Brb2 is better at fighting than a Ftr6". The argument goes that the extra feat the Ftr6 gets is worth "nothing" in the E6 system, since feats are so abundant. While true in the long run (far into epic E6), clearly the feat has some value at level 6 and a few levels afterwards (so a Ftr6 isn't strictly inferior to a Ftr4/Brb2).


----------



## Kunimatyu

White Whale said:
			
		

> The only complaint related to this (that I could find) is that "the Ftr4/Brb2 is better at fighting than a Ftr6". The argument goes that the extra feat the Ftr6 gets is worth "nothing" in the E6 system, since feats are so abundant. While true in the long run (far into epic E6), clearly the feat has some value at level 6 and a few levels afterwards (so a Ftr6 isn't strictly inferior to a Ftr4/Brb2).




Reluctant as I am to discuss the poor Fighter again, I will point out that you're setting up a strawman. The extra feat isn't worth "nothing", just very little in comparison to rage, fast movement, uncanny dodge, and 4 skill points, ergo, Ftr6 is inferior to Ftr4/Brb2.


----------



## Hrothgar Rannúlfr

Kunimatyu said:
			
		

> ergo, Ftr6 is inferior to Ftr4/Brb2.



Though I agree that Fighter4/Barbarian2 is more powerful on paper than Fighter6, I don't think I'll likely ever see it as a PC in my group.  Here's why... It doesn't fit the concepts that I've seen my players use, so far for their characters.  The one fighter that we currently have in our group, right now, is an Elven Noble.  She is unlikely to multiclass, at all (as we don't use prestige classes unless special access is gained via roleplaying).  Furthermore, she's a very lawful character.  The barbarian (berzerker) archetype doesn't fit with her character concept.  And, that's why I don't believe there will be an over-abundance of ftr4/bbn6's compared to ftr6's in E6.  Character concept.  Not everyone will want to play a raging chaotic warrior.

Now, as NPC's?  Yes.  I'll be using them.  they make for beautiful orc seargents (or an orc war-chief in E6).

My question, though, is this:  Is Barbarian6 more powerful than Fighter4/Barbarian2?  My gut reaciton is yes, but I've not seen the two in play side-by-side.  Though, I do see the ftr6/bbn2 as being more versitile than bbn6.


----------



## slingbld

*What do you guys think of these....*

Expanded Metamagic Knowledge
Prerequisite: Ability to cast 3rd level spells; Caster Stat 17
Benefit: You gain 4th level spell slot. This can used for a spell modified by a metamagic feat. It does not actually allow the ability to cast a 4th level spell. This feat can be taken up to 3 times. Each selection granting an additional 4th level slot.

Expanded Metamagic Mastery
Prerequisite: Expanded Metamagic Knowledge (selected 3 times); Caster Stat 19
Benefit: You gain a 5th level spell slot. This can used for a spell modified by a metamagic feat. It does not actually allow the ability to cast a 5th level spell.
This can only be selected once.

This is my 1st attempt at creating new feats. I felt this would allow the use of many of the metamagic feats that characters of level 6 can get. This would basically allow a 1st level feat to use a metamagic feat that is a +4 adjustment without actually granting access to the higher level spells....

So, what's wrong with 'em (I know I'm, gonna get ripped apart, I'm ready for it!!!)

Slingbld~
aka Patrick


----------



## Hrothgar Rannúlfr

slingbld said:
			
		

> So, what's wrong with 'em (I know I'm, gonna get ripped apart, I'm ready for it!!!)



I don't intend to rip it apart... Just make a suggestion or two.

Perhaps the pre-requisites could be fine-tuned?  Say Knowledge (Arcana) 9 ranks and Spellcraft 9 ranks for arcane casters or Knowledge (Religion) or something similar 9 ranks and Spellcraft 9 ranks for divine casters???  These would be in addition to your other requirements.

My take is that the ability to cast 3rd level spells isn't enough to qualify for these feats.  Even with a superior casting stat, it's still not enough.  Knowledge skill ranks and Spellcraft skill ranks indicate a study of the method and applications of spellcasting that might lead to a character developing the skills that are the benefits of these feats.

Any thoughts?


----------



## Kunimatyu

Hrothgar Rannúlfr said:
			
		

> I don't intend to rip it apart... Just make a suggestion or two.
> 
> Perhaps the pre-requisites could be fine-tuned?  Say Knowledge (Arcana) 9 ranks and Spellcraft 9 ranks for arcane casters or Knowledge (Religion) or something similar 9 ranks and Spellcraft 9 ranks for divine casters???  These would be in addition to your other requirements.
> 
> My take is that the ability to cast 3rd level spells isn't enough to qualify for these feats.  Even with a superior casting stat, it's still not enough.  Knowledge skill ranks and Spellcraft skill ranks indicate a study of the method and applications of spellcasting that might lead to a character developing the skills that are the benefits of these feats.
> 
> Any thoughts?




I'm not positive that E6 needs those two (though it clearly needs a way to use metamagic feats with 3rd level spells; we're on the same page here).

For spells with a 1-level increase, simply taking the PHB2 feat Arcane Thesis will allow you to apply a 1 level metamagic increase as if it did not increase the spell's level at all. This takes the place of the "bonus 4th level slot" without, say, players whining for actual 4th level spells in its place.

For a bigger metamagic boost once per day, take a look at my Swift Metamagic feat(already a part of E6), which allows you to apply a metamagic feat, usable as a swift action with no level increase, though the prereqs are steep if you want a high-level metamagic feat.


----------



## pallen

White Whale said:
			
		

> Why is this bad? Do single class characters have to be better than multiclass characters?



I gotta agree.  I've never been a fan of new feats meant to "balance" single class characters.  D&D characters are inherently unbalanced at different levels, and multiclassing only adds to the problem.  Introducing an artificial level cap just highlights the balance issues at a certain point (level 6 in this case).  All the extra feats in the world aren't going to balance all of the possible class choices.

For example, the "martial veteran" (or whatever it's called now) feat may help balance a Fighter 6 vs. a Barbarian 2/Fighter 4, but now they're both superior to the Barbarian 1/Fighter 5.  What feat can we add to the 5th level fighter to fix this??  

If I ever get the chance to run E6, I think I'll just stick with core+splat book feats.  If everyone multiclasses, so be it.


----------



## Kunimatyu

pallen said:
			
		

> If I ever get the chance to run E6, I think I'll just stick with core+splat book feats.  If everyone multiclasses, so be it.




With the exception of the extra spell slot feat(which is a crucial component of spellcaster advancement), that's a completely viable approach, and why keeping the "capstones" as feats is so important -- if you like them use them, and if you don't, no big deal.


----------



## Ry

Even the caster feats you could get away without, but you'd need to find something else interesting for casters since metamagic is closed to them.  That or tell Gandalf to pick up a sword.  _As if._


----------



## Ry

I am really excited by the 4E announcement, and I have a feeling that 4E will keep enough sacred cows that E6 will still be a good tweak (it's early yet, but I have a feeling the new game will have at least 20 levels, raise dead, gear that is powerful and important, and the wish spell will still exist).    Depending on wording of the Gleemax terms of service, I may make an E6 gleemax site while keeping an OGL version once 4E comes out.


----------



## Kunimatyu

rycanada said:
			
		

> I am really excited by the 4E announcement, and I have a feeling that 4E will keep enough sacred cows that E6 will still be a good tweak (it's early yet, but I have a feeling the new game will have at least 20 levels, raise dead, gear that is powerful and important, and the wish spell will still exist).    Depending on wording of the Gleemax terms of service, I may make an E6 gleemax site while keeping an OGL version once 4E comes out.




The big question is whether they seriously gut the higher-level spells. That is, in my eyes, the big determinant of the need for 4E6.


----------



## Shazman

rycanada said:
			
		

> I am really excited by the 4E announcement, and I have a feeling that 4E will keep enough sacred cows that E6 will still be a good tweak (it's early yet, but I have a feeling the new game will have at least 20 levels, raise dead, gear that is powerful and important, and the wish spell will still exist).    Depending on wording of the Gleemax terms of service, I may make an E6 gleemax site while keeping an OGL version once 4E comes out.




I think in the press release blurb that's been floating around, there are actually 30 levels in core 4E.  I don't know if the last 10 levels are the same as the first 20, but they obviously wanted epic levels to be a core part of the D&D experience.  That's kind of the opposite of what E6 is about.  It also said that they were using some elements of book of nine swords and star wars Saga.  I believe that means more streamlining, and more per encounter vs. per day mechanics.


----------



## Hrothgar Rannúlfr

One of the pages that I read on 4E says that they're stretching out the "sweet spot."  Perhaps, this means that someone at WOTC has been paying attention to why there are so many of us that like E6?


----------



## Emryys

Hrothgar Rannúlfr said:
			
		

> One of the pages that I read on 4E says that they're stretching out the "sweet spot."  Perhaps, this means that someone at WOTC has been paying attention to why there are so many of us that like E6?




Noticed this too...


----------



## joela

*Sweet spot*



			
				Emryys said:
			
		

> Noticed this too...




Likewise. Will the next incarnation of Rycanada's E6 be E9?


----------



## Kunimatyu

Bah. I'd rather get my E6 campaign up and running atm. When 4E comes around, then we'll see what's up.


----------



## der_kluge

joela said:
			
		

> Likewise. Will the next incarnation of Rycanada's E6 be E9?




I've heard them describe the sweet spot as 4-14 in 4e.

So, E6 will become E14.


----------



## joela

*spells*



			
				der_kluge said:
			
		

> I've heard them describe the sweet spot as 4-14 in 4e.
> 
> So, E6 will become E14.




good point. personally, i think it'll depend on where the "genre changing" spells such as fly, teleport, open portal, fly into the 30 levels. that, or how the possible "spells per encounter" system works out. it's one thing to cast fireballs after a period of rest/meditation. it's quite another to be able to cast teleport at every encounter!


----------



## Ry

From the way they're talking about it, I'm not sure exactly what my personal sweet spot is.  For example, if "heroic" here: 

Heroic 1-10
Paragon 11-20
Epic 21-30

refers to Heroic Fantasy then my choice is obvious - I want to extend the Heroic period.  So that might be E6 just as it is.  Might mean the game is great as E10.  We'll have to see as details emerge.


----------



## Hrothgar Rannúlfr

Enworld's Front Page said:
			
		

> Iron Heroes vs. 4th Edition – Mike: Yes, there are some similiarities, ie, putting more emphasis on the class vs. the items for characters.



This sounds good, to me, for games in the spirit of E6.

This is one of the good things about E6... The limit on what magic items can be made.  If 4E really emphasizes class over magic items, then that should extend the sweet spot a bit.  But...


			
				Enworld's Front Page said:
			
		

> Increase of magic across the board in all aspects of the game.



This could change the game in unexpected ways that will probably make an alternative like E6 still desirable.


----------



## Ry

der_kluge said:
			
		

> I've heard them describe the sweet spot as 4-14 in 4e.
> 
> So, E6 will become E14.





To clarify: They're saying that 3e's sweet spot is 4-14, and the goal with 4E is to make something like the whole game (1-30) the sweet spot.

However, I've got a feeling that what's going to happen is that 1-20 is going to be the sweet spot, and 21-30 is where the silly superheroes will get pushed to.  Meanwhile, I'll be enjoying a 4E6/8/10 game focusing around the heroic potential, and if all goes well it will be a game that runs faster and is easier to introduce new players to.


----------



## der_kluge

rycanada said:
			
		

> To clarify: They're saying that 3e's sweet spot is 4-14, and the goal with 4E is to make something like the whole game (1-30) the sweet spot.
> 
> However, I've got a feeling that what's going to happen is that 1-20 is going to be the sweet spot, and 21-30 is where the silly superheroes will get pushed to.  Meanwhile, I'll be enjoying a 4E6/8/10 game focusing around the heroic potential, and if all goes well it will be a game that runs faster and is easier to introduce new players to.




No - I think I heard someone, somewhere mention that 4E's sweet spot would be 4-14.  

But, obviously we won't know for sure until the book is in our grubby little hands and we play in an actual campaign with it.


----------



## Ry

Der, do you have a quote?  I heard the exact opposite.


----------



## Pierce_Inverarity

*sweet spot*

From EN Worlds own D&D 4th Edition News Page:

"The very first thing they said to me was that the core rulebooks will span levels 1-30. Not only that, but those levels are supposed to extend the "sweet spot" of D&D, which WotC guesstimated at currently being levels 4-14ish."

This is why I want to see E6 to continue to evolve and be play tested.  This isn't where my taste and style of play line up.   I find that things get increasingly silly and cumbersome at levels greater than 10.  I'd guess that a lot of the folks here who like the E6 model would agree with that statement.  

Ryan- Your work is far from done...

My fear is that just as what happened when 3.5 was announced, the announcement of 4th edition has taken the wind out the sails of anybody trying to do anything different.  Let's keep this E6 thing rolling.  I'm getting ready to playtest a new campaign.  I'm interested in how the existing playtests have worked.  Let's hear some feedback!!


----------



## Kunimatyu

Pierce_Inverarity said:
			
		

> From EN Worlds own D&D 4th Edition News Page:
> 
> "The very first thing they said to me was that the core rulebooks will span levels 1-30. Not only that, but those levels are supposed to extend the "sweet spot" of D&D, which WotC guesstimated at currently being levels 4-14ish."
> 
> This is why I want to see E6 to continue to evolve and be play tested.  This isn't where my taste and style of play line up.   I find that things get increasingly silly and cumbersome at levels greater than 10.  I'd guess that a lot of the folks here who like the E6 model would agree with that statement.
> 
> Ryan- Your work is far from done...
> 
> My fear is that just as what happened when 3.5 was announced, the announcement of 4th edition has taken the wind out the sails of anybody trying to do anything different.  Let's keep this E6 thing rolling.  I'm getting ready to playtest a new campaign.  I'm interested in how the existing playtests have worked.  Let's hear some feedback!!




I'm planning my campaign, which should kick off mid-September; it's using the Sorceror supplement Dictionary of Mu, retooled a bit for D&D. It's going to be nine kinds of pulp awesome!


----------



## Ry

I am running a weekly E6 game as well, though I expect I'll switch to an E6 version of 4e when it comes out.


----------



## F4NBOY

Is 4E10 a possibility?


----------



## Ry

Definitely a possibility.  Of course, I'll have to see it first.


----------



## Elergan

Hi, 
I have been looking for various ways of solving the very same problem of heroism vs superheroism for quite a long time, being totally fed up since a  recent game with my 15th level players...
You have exactly pondered the same issues but you have managed to reach a conclusion I haven't (I've been browsing through a lot of OGL products like _A Game of Thrones, Black Company, True 20_...): instead of curbing the level progression or adding new rules (like hit points/wound points, etc) why not stop the level increase  ?

Wonderful and so elegant and simple !
I'm looking forward to tweaking my group and implement the E6 rules. I'm running a Forgotten realms campaign using _Red Hand of Doom _ with a group having just reached 8th level, so I guess it won't be that much of a hassle to retroadapt them into 6th level + 2 feats...
It seems it would also be a perfect system for such a low-magic/low-monster environment as _Midnight_.

A question comes to my mind, though...
In E6, how would an archvillain (say an archmage or a lich, since in the Realms you can't throw a dead goblin without hitting one   ) translate into E6 stats ?
What would make him so deadly (as far as magic is concerned, since 6th level heroes have the same type of spells ) ?
By giving him feats allowing for more spell pe day ? 
By giving him Incantations prepared in advance for magical protections and boosts ?

Anyway...your system is by far the one to solve all the problems I had with D&D...

(and by the way, I apologize for any mispelling or syntax error, being a French DM...Excuse my  French as the saying goes...  )


----------



## Kunimatyu

So, the question is, what would make an archmage or a lich a capable foe in E6?

First off, for a lich, the DR, fear aura, and paralyzing touch really help, but that's not really answering the question.

The way to make a memorable magic-user final battle is to give them a number of extra slots, Arcane Thesis(PHB2) for their signature spells, and then some Swift Metamagic feats(you'll find that feat on the first page of this thread) to customize their spells. Between their extra spells, their metamagicked spells, and some sort of powerful magical bodyguard, you'll have a memorable encounter. A few Toughness feats might also help with their survivability, so that they have HP over 50.


----------



## Elergan

Okay, I see...so basically, he will fight the PCs with the same spells, although these will be metamagicked and he will be able to cast more of them...


----------



## Ry

Welcome to ENWorld, Elergan!  

Kunimatyu is pointing you in the right direction.  For those kinds of opponents I like to lay a lot of feats on, and with that you can really get the punch of a lich with a 6th-level sorcerer/wizard in an E6 universe.


----------



## Elergan

Merci, Ryan, and keep up the good work !!
Imagine that, your masterpiece has crossed an ocean   (well I guess it didn't need me to do so )...next step, transplanar game...


----------



## Will

Been away for a while, just twigged to this thread and only read a few pages, so apologies if mentioned already...

I've been having a REALLY enjoyable time playing in a gestalt campaign. What do people think of gestalt E6?

Seems to offer a decent flexibility and breadth without running into the usual power issues, bumps the effective CR range by 1 or so.


----------



## Ry

Two or three people are running Gestalt E6, two of which are set in Eberron.  That sounds like a wicked-fun campaign.  My existing campaign is "pure" E6, which will be turning into 4e E(?) once I can see 4e and how it works.


----------



## BRP2

I have this wild plan adapt a videogame(Final Fantasy 11, the MMORPG one) to a tabletop game. E6 / E8 has been perfect as a base to work on.

I was wondering has anyone tried maneuvers(from Nine Swords) and Iron Heroes or elements of Iron Heroes with this system?


----------



## winterwolf

*E6 class changes*

First off, it’s been a while since I posted on these boards, but I just can’t resist praising you on E6. I’ve been bored with standard D&D at high levels (I just retired a 29 wizard…he was a blast for a while, and then it began to be same-old, same-old) and I think that E6 will be a nice change of pace…I just introduced it to a new group I’m running for some friends of my brother (he and I will take turns running it)
Some of the stuff I'm doing with E6, and some of the thoughts I've had for later stuff:

Due to misreading the rule in the DMG about what caster levels are required for magic weapons/armor (thought it was 3x the total modifier, not treating the enhancement and special abilities separate) I stated that the most a weapon can be is +2, or +1 with +1 special ability. In this situation, named/special weapons become much more beneficial (typically +1, special ability, AND a modifier), and the same with armor. I like the fact that, in E6, a Flame Tongue or Frost brand becomes so much more cool...because honestly, in a normal game those weapons aren't that useful for very long, except in special circumstances. Due to the level requirements of those weapons, I'll probably stick one in a dragon horde somewhere, or cause it to be part of a dragon-slaying quest (ie to slay the fierce red dragon, you need to talk the titan RAWRRANDOMTITAN into fixing the legendary weapon Frost brand...but first, you need to find the broken sword itself!). 
Anyways, I have a chart of all the allowable enchants (and keen, frost, fire, etc. are all too high a caster level to be put on a mortal weapon...those are the enchants of legend!).
To compensate for the power of weapons being slightly reduced from +2/+2 special to +1/+1 special, I've allowed the use of augmentations from the Magic Item Compendium (crystals that you put on your gear, 1 per weapon/shield/armor, to gain a special effect to that weapon). So far, nobody has any issues with the reduced power of weapons...then again, most of the group is brand new to this game, and don't know any better...)
On top of that chart for weapons, I actually set up a chart for all the allowable magic items in the game, from a variety of books: first, the DMG3.5, then Magic Item Compendium, and then any items from the Arms and Equipment guide, Relics and Rituals 1&2, and the Magic of Faerun that fit within E6, and aren't translated in the MIC. I ended up with something like 3 minor wondrous item charts (using the Wondrous Ring rule, I folded all appropriate rings into wondrous items), messed a little bit with the wand chart, and changed the scrolls around a bit.


----------



## winterwolf

*E6 Magic*

Other things we did: most of the core classes from other books are allowed...in fact, our current party consists of a warlock, knight, fighter, rogue, necromancer (I'll go into the necromancer later), wizard, and cleric (Possibly, that player hasn't entered the game yet, and he hasn't heard about the spell casting system we use).
As to the necromancer: Raise dead is a 4th level spell for Wizards, 3rd level spell for Clerics. As such, wizard necromancers are obviously pointless, right?
Well, we chose to use the optional Necromancer variants from Unearthed Arcana: instead of gaining bonus spells from specializing, and a familiar, the necromancer specialist starts off with a skeletal companion with boosted stats, and any undead he creates also gain boosted stats. Also, we took a spell from some book (one on necromancy, can’t remember which one) which lets a first level character animate one skeletal or zombie companion. In essence, the wizard necromancer gains 2 skeletons with superior stats (extra hit points, more strength, dex, etc.), while the cleric necromancer gains an army of lesser undead. Quality v. quantity. As a side note, we also took the Hollowfaust idea (from Scarred Lands campaign setting) and set up a group of necromancers who are not evil, so much as curious…they are really good physicians (switched out Heal skill for Craft skill), and tend to use only criminal remains, etc. Still creepy, feared, etc, but not immediately killed except in certain areas. 
We also use the Recharging Magic system from the SRD. For those of you who don't want to read it, this system means that when you cast a spell, you lose access to that spell level for a few rounds, but can then cast that spell or any other spell you have memorized (or know, for spontaneous casters) again. It's something like 1d6 rounds if it's your highest level spell, to 1d4 rounds for lowest level (spontaneous casters recharge faster, but know less spells as always...core classes that spontaneously cast yet still know all the spells of that type, such as beguiler, etc, use the wizard recharge table). Under this system, we stated that using a scroll activates that recharge time (using a scroll of fireball activates the 3rd level spell recharge time) but using a wand doesn't. In this manner, scrolls are useful for casting spells you don't know/don't have memorized (like usual). We're considering making it so that wands can only be used if you can spontaneously cast that spell/have it memorized, but it doesn't trigger the recharge time, and can be used even if that spell slot is on recharge. 
Anyways, a couple of reasons for using that magic system: we want the game to be slightly more heroic and faster paced, which means we want to reduce downtime...but without really overpowering the group. We figure that in a combat, unless the combat lasts for a while, you'll still only be casting a spell once, maybe twice, before the combat is over...ie, no blowing off 3 fireballs in one combat, unless you have a wand of fireballs (which is what, dc 14 to resist? Most lvl 4+ monsters have at least a 50% chance to take only half damage from that). At the same time, healing becomes a bit of a concern...do you as the cleric want to cast an offensive spell, general buff spell, or healing spell? 
Remember, you might not be able to cast a healing spell of that level again for a couple of rounds, unless you have that wand... it makes combat a bit more hectic at times, and could lead to death.
So far, nobody is wanting to play a psion, and I'm not sure if I want to go to the trouble of fixing them up for it (making them work with recharging magic, for example)...however, I've been thinking a bit of doing something like, using 3.0 psionic rules, with power points recharging at a rate of 1 point per level per round in combat, and 3 points per level per round when out of combat (after a 1 minute period of non-combat). Would use the same recharge time as a sorcerer. I might use 3.5, but I'm not as knowledgeable at it (ran a 3.0 psion, never really ran a 3.5 psion, haven't looked through the books as much as I should)...I do, however, know that there is a way to over-charge 3.5 powers, and since power points are rechargeable, I don't want that really happening... maybe balance it out by saying that, by overcharging, you take double the time to recharge the power? Dunno.

We also handle metamagic feats separately. When you take a feat, you can spontaneously apply that feat to a number of spells per day equal to (6 divided by the spell level modifier of the feat, rounding down), and this doesn’t modify the casting time. Therefore, you can silence or still a spell 6 per day, but maximize it only once. There is no way to adjust that level modifier, either. You can take the feat up to three times, and it’s effects stack. Spells cannot be memorized with metamagic feats attached…the feat can only be used spontaneously. Also, you can never use a feat (or combination of feats), of more than +4 level modifier, or your current caster level, whichever is lower. IE, no extending/maximizing/silencing a spell, but silencing/stilling a spell is possible.


----------



## winterwolf

*Death in our game*

We make death a bit harder to come by: From level 1-2, you go down to -10, you die. Every level afterwards, you can go down another -5 hp before dying, to a maximum of -30 at level 6. This means that yes, you can be knocked down by a couple of lucky hits...but any overpowered hit that knocks you out most likely won't kill you at later levels...it takes a bit more effort to do that. And FYI, we have it so that Diehard (you know, the feat that keeps you conscious until -10) works, and it can be bought several times...each time, keeping you conscious for another -5 hp, maximum of -30 hp.
In our game, there are also ways to remove death: however, all of them are pretty bummer for the characters.
As a note, we use a suggestion from here on the EN boards concerning death: Upon resurrection, you don't lose a level; instead, you are energy drained (-5 hp, -1 attack, skills, etc.) until the next time you gain a level  (or 5000 experience, if you've already leveled to 6).
First, and the one that costs no experience: Philosopher Stone. In the DMG2, under artifacts, the book states that the philosopher stone is equivalent to like, 40k gold. As such, we designed a 1 use magic item worth 40000 gold that, when mixed with the appropriate potion (curing potions, or w/e) restores life. We figure that 40000 gold is a serious hit to anyone's pocket. 
The second way: Similar to an incantation, this idea comes from Encyclopedia Arcana: Demonology. That book gives methods of summoning outsiders (demons and devils, primarily) to do a specific task. In my game, high priests can use certain rituals to summon a solar celestial, who will resurrect the selected person. This is a very expensive ritual of course, and so it costs 20000 gold plus a quest owed to that church (can be called in for later adventure ideas, and the general idea is that all the players will want to help the questing player, because next time it might be THEM who die and owe a quest). Also, it costs a bit of experience: you lose whatever experience you gained since your last level, or the last time you bought a feat...could be up to 5000 experience, or more if you horde experience (for what, I have no clue).... I prefer this summoning idea over the idea of an incantation, but that's just me.
The third way: Experience debt. In this method, your character refuses to die, and burns experience to make it so. In a situation in which your body is not totally destroyed (acid pits are bad, mmkay), and life could still go on (no decapitation, etc.), you spend 10000 experience points and "live" for up to 48 hours. You are so close to death, however, that for all intents and purposes you count as dead. Spells that monitor health, or a successful heal check (dc 20), will reveal that you are in fact alive. Your body can sustain up to a total of -100 hp of damage, at which point it fails. Also, being eaten, decapitated, etc, kills you too. 
If you do not have 10000 experience to spend, you can instead choose to lose the next 15000 experience. Needless to say, I doubt my players will use this...but there's always that choice. This is also the only way to avoid the energy drain effect of resurrection: since you never die, you never gain the penalty. However, you are considered exhausted upon being healed back to a positive total. Also, if you die from other causes than HP loss, this option isn't available.
The 4th way to come back from death: I "borrowed" this from a feat I saw on some site...possibly the great netbook of feats. Anyways, this option makes healing a more useful skill: If you, a healer, can get to someone who has died within the last 5 rounds, you can attempt to resuscitate them. You make a heal check equal to the amount of damage they've suffered over the minimum health they have (ie dc 30 if a 2nd level character goes to -40 damage...that's 30 points over the -10 they can go to before death). If your check is successful, that character makes a fortitude save (same DC), and if that save is successful, then they are returned to 1 hp above the point of death (ie, if you go to -10 before dying, it returns you to -9 hp, and stabilized). Healing effects gain a bonus to this: if the person doing the heal check is willing to "charge up" a heal spell (ie cast cure light wounds to charge their hands right before the heal check), they gain a +1 bonus per 3 hp cured to the check, and the target gains +1 to fortitude saves for the check, per 3hp cured. Laying on hands gives +1 to check and save, per 2 points spent...I give Lay on Hands more of a bonus because it lets the paladin rub his hands together, shout "CLEAR!!!" and then hit the target...plus, recharging magic means that cure lt. wounds can be cast all day, whereas there is still a limit on lay on hands). Anyways, if your character is brought back to life due to this, then he is exhausted for the rest of the day. Walking wounded, etc.


----------



## Ry

Welcome, winterwolf, and thanks for the kind words for E6!  That's a lot to take in, and I don't have a ton to say about it, but I'm glad you're having a chance to play E6 and the mechanics you're using sound neat!  

Are you using modules, or designing your own world, or some combination of the two?


----------



## winterwolf

*Monsters and templates*

A couple of notes I had, as well as a creature template:

First off, regarding clay golems: it would be a great idea to have them be able to be created by a cabal of clerics, as that's fundamentally the origin of the golem idea: according to wikipedia, they (golems) were a creation of those who were very holy and close to God. A very holy person was one who strove to approach God, and in that pursuit would gain some of God's wisdom and power. One of these powers was the creation of life. No matter how holy a person became, however, a being created by that person would be but a shadow of one created by God.
Anyways, as someone suggested earlier, make it an incantation (though I personally don't like the ideas of incantations) to create clay golems, possibly an even more detailed one to make stone golems. Use the same cost as normal creation, possibly require "craft construct" as the prerequisite to making a golem, etc.
For iron golems, I like the ideas put forth in the Ravenloft campaign setting (I only have 3.0, alas, so I don't know what happened to golems in 3.5): anyone insane or obsessed enough can bring forth the spark of life in the inanimate, leading to such constructions as iron golems. Frankly, an iron golem is enough of a challenge without adding in a wizard capable of creating it: makes it much more balanced to have, say, an iron golem and the level 2 expert who created it. In Ravenloft, most constructs have a flaw (ie. forced to dance when music is played, etc.). The campaign might focus on finding out that one flaw, with the final battle as the climax.
Flesh golems might follow the same rules above (mad scientist uses lighting or chemicals to reanimate the body of his love, which then goes horribly wrong, etc., etc.) or perhaps make it an incantation only knowable to necromancers or those with spell focus (or even greater spell focus) necromancy.
For this game, I've also toyed with the idea of a proto-lich (I have no idea if that name is already taken for a monster somewhere, but I don't care, so nyeah): A 6th level wizard, sorcerer, or cleric (but no other class, as of right now) can spend 120000 gold and 5000 experience (as well as requiring the Craft Wondrous Items feat) to gain a form of semi-lichness. There is no level penalty from becoming a proto-lich in my E6 game.
Proto-lich: armor: gains +3 natural armor.
Attacks: gains a touch attack for 1d8+3 cold damage (replaces negative energy touch), and stuns for 1 round (dc 13+ charisma modifier), fortitude saving throw for half damage and to negate the stun.
Fear Aura: affects creatures of up to 4hd, acts as a fear spell to creatures of up to 2hd, and  causes 3hd creatures to be _shaken_. Will save dc 13+ charisma modifier to negate the effect. If the opponent saves, it cannot be affected by that lich's fear aura for 24 hours. This aspect of fear aura can be repressed.
Animals of less than 5hd are _shaken_ in the presence of a proto-lich, and the lich gains -20 to ride and handle animal checks. This aspect of fear aura cannot be repressed. Fear aura also causes mortals to be creeped out by the presence of a proto-lich. As such, proto-liches are automatically detected as "unnatural" without a disguise (plus, the lack of flesh, etc., doesn't help), and take a -20 to disguise checks. This aspect also cannot be suppressed.

Turn Resistance +2
Damage reduction 5/bludgeoning and magic
Undead immunities, as well as the lich immunity to cold, electricity, polymorph, and mind-affecting attacks.
+2 intelligence, wisdom, charisma, as well as the standard lich bonuses to skills.
And the primary reason to be a proto-lich: Unless a proto-lich's phylactery is destroyed, the proto-lich reforms 1d10 days after being destroyed, as per the standard lich rules.
Alignment: DM option, but I say that if your character is played right, he could theoretically become a proto-lich without becoming evil (IE the archliches of Monsters of Faerun: humanoids who give up their life for unlife, to further a goodly cause, or to protect the family).

In my opinion, the 120000 gold cost and the experience penalty offsets the minor abilities a proto-lich gets... the only thing that the proto-lich gets that is fairly unique is the ability to come back from "death". Everything else can be duplicated by a spell or effect (except, I suppose, the undead qualities...but even those can be partially duplicated by the graveborn feats (or whatever they are) in the Libris Mortis book). Also, the inability to ride normal animals (meaning that summon mount must be known or memorized for a mount), the effect upon normal animals in the area (dogs bark or cower before a proto-lich, etc.), and the "bad vibes" that a proto-lich gives off tends to lead to all sorts of issues. Also, spending 120000 gold is going to be noticed, and those who recognize what materials are being bought, might be curious as to who plans on becoming a proto-lich. 
Also, over centuries of time, it might be possible for a proto-lich to develop into a true lich...and it might be possible for those true liches to learn spells of up to 5th level (ie, gain levels up to 9th)...this wouldn't happen to PCs, but perhaps there are a couple of true liches sitting around in the world, plotting nefarious deeds for the players to eventually stop...

Anyways, those are just some thoughts I had for the E6 game I'm running...critiques are welcome


----------



## winterwolf

rycanada said:
			
		

> Welcome, winterwolf, and thanks for the kind words for E6!  That's a lot to take in, and I don't have a ton to say about it, but I'm glad you're having a chance to play E6 and the mechanics you're using sound neat!
> 
> Are you using modules, or designing your own world, or some combination of the two?




Yeah, I know, it's not just one but FOUR walls of text!!!
Anyways, I'm sort of combining a couple of modules into my own world, based on a number of other worlds I've played in...
Mostly, the world is undefined at the moment, with us filling it in as needed. Someone needs to come from a town that specializes in tin mining? Well...there wasn't such a town moments ago, but there is now!!! That kind of thing.


----------



## Will

I'm wondering if I'd need to set up some special rules for treasure. I just have this vision of a party with a slew of +1 this, that, every minor item, several keeps filled with potions, etc.

Or do the caster level caps keep things mostly under control?

Oh, and to 'me too' a bit, gestalt and E6 have made me more excited with D&D than I've been in a very long time.


----------



## winterwolf

Will said:
			
		

> I'm wondering if I'd need to set up some special rules for treasure. I just have this vision of a party with a slew of +1 this, that, every minor item, several keeps filled with potions, etc.
> 
> Or do the caster level caps keep things mostly under control?
> 
> Oh, and to 'me too' a bit, gestalt and E6 have made me more excited with D&D than I've been in a very long time.





I've set up a magic item chart, mostly works for minor items atm, medium and major probably needs a bit of tweaking but that's a ways in the future. The way I figure it, in E6 major items are going to need to be either special, or hand-picked by the DM. For example, you might consider putting a +3 sword in as a major treasure, or a +2 keen (keen is caster lvl 8, iirc)...that's not something you'd want to roll up, it's something you'd need to place. 
I set up a major wondrous item table, as well as a major table for weapons, for armor, etc. I don't know what the copy write rules state, since some of the items are from other books (just list prices, names, book locations)...I don't know if I can post an attachment due to that or not. For weapons, I have something like a chance for it to be +1, or +2, or special material. Medium weapons are +2, or +1 Special, or +1 and special material...major can combine all three abilities, etc. Same for armor. Wondrous items are easy for minor, since I combined items from a whole lot of books (ended up with almost exactly 300 minor wondrous items+ rings). There are slightly fewer medium wondrous items/rings (about 50), and most of the major items I have are items that normally wouldn't be major, but are still outside of caster level requirements. Ie, a bag of holding type 4 is major in this campaign, because it's a higher caster level than 6. Theoretically, it'd have to be made by a dragon/titan/w/e. Some minor staves, rods, etc, are thrown in...ie. a rod of wonder is major, as is a staff of healing.
I knocked 10-15 points off of randomly rolling up medium potions, and put in least weapon augmentation crystals (from Magic item compendium), and knocked the same number off of medium scrolls to put in Least armor augmentation crystals. Did the same for major potions/scrolls and Lesser augmentations. My rolling charts for major items aren't defined yet, same with medium (aside from what I mentioned above), but we're only level 3 in the game so I still have time 

Edit: oh, I also made lvl 1 scrolls minor, lvl 2 scrolls medium, lvl 3 scrolls major, same with potions and wands...there will be no rod/staff/ring rolls, either...
yes, I know that this means that scrolls rolled up for medium and major items will be worth less than normal treasures of that value...but you can reroll if you don't like it, or place your own treasure, or w/e...and lvl 2-3 scrolls and wands are the same value as medium/major potions in standard dnd, iirc.


----------



## Ry

Hi Will.  

For magic items, I think the key is how you present the world's demographics.  If there's a 6th level wizard in every major town, then yeah, there's a lot of low-power magic items, but I don't think they unbalance the game at all because they can't be pooled together to buy massively powerful items for cash.

But if 6th level characters are rare, so are weapons that require a 6th level character to make.  They aren't made lightly, and they aren't made factory-style.

So it depends on the approach.


----------



## joela

*How low is 'low fantasy' in E6?*

Over at rpg.net, a reader submitted a post  asking for a low fantasy setting. I was about to reply from him to use E6 in any DnD campaign when it dawned on me that an E6 campaign may be too high. 

Think about it. Fly is a 3rd level spell; same with Water Walk and Call Lightning, none of which are exactly found in traditional fantasy literature. A PC, depending on how s/he handles 0 to 1st level commoners, could convince them they're a demigod. And an E6 fighter with 3 feats would be a near-wuxia figure of death depending on her/his choices. Would it be better to use E4 or even lower for a "low fantasy" campaign?


----------



## Will

I've been thinking of running an E6 low fantasy game, and what I'm contemplaying is removing spellcasters altogether.

Instead, I may add a 'touch of the healer' feat that stabilizes damage and increases natural healing, and possibly an elemental power feat that gives people damage similar to regular weapons, just conjured by hand.

Also, some way for scholars to create magic items, in particular scrolls, so that someone can Fly if they manage to create a scroll of Fly or ring of Flight.

Another possibility is only allow Adepts and others with lower spell levels (Bards, paladins...)


----------



## joela

*spellcasters*



			
				Will said:
			
		

> I've been thinking of running an E6 low fantasy game, and what I'm contemplaying is removing spellcasters altogether.




ouch. what have your players said about such a ruling?


----------



## Will

Haven't told them, yet.  More seriously, I'm still considering options (like my other thread about Injuries).


----------



## Ry

I'd say E4 would be a pretty rough game even for the martial classes.  I'd suggest as an alternative to say that full-caster classes (Clerics, Druids, Sorcerers, Wizards) are off-limits (except for NPCs that made a deal with the devil or something).  

The Bard then becomes the best caster, and I think that can be a great vibe for a campaign.

Also, for a great way to do martial emphasis, check out Reserve Points from Unearthed Arcana (part of the Sovelier-Sage SRD as well).


----------



## Hrothgar Rannúlfr

*E4?*



			
				joela said:
			
		

> Would it be better to use E4 or even lower for a "low fantasy" campaign?



I'm running a campaign, right now, where the characters have just gotten to 4th level.  There are eight PC's:[sblock]4th level Ranger
4th level Cleric
4th level Rogue
4th level Fighter
4th level Champion (AE)
4th level Mageblade (AE)
4th level Swashbuckler
3nd level Warlock (joined the party late)[/sblock]The group is fairly tough.  Each character started with a 32 point buy (which is where I put the top end of a point buy without crossing over into a level adjustment).  And, yes, they're pretty tough.  Encounters of the appropriate challenge for their level just don't seem to be tough enough.

I think E4 could work, but I'd imagine there might be a limited amount of feats that characters could qualify for at 4th level.  Even more so than E6.

I'd trim the spell list and play E6, myself.  However, flying, water walking, and calling lightning are part of real world legends, myths, fables, etc...

What source literature are you referring to for your ideal low fantasy setting?


----------



## Grimstaff

*E6 High Magic Variant*

I'm intrigued by E6, but my campaigns often feature higher-level magic, at least into the range of Raising dead, Teleportation, summoning elementals, etc, so I would add this feat to my game (for the standard 5k exp buy):

Advanced Magic - 
Prereq - 6 total class levels
Benefit - Each time you take this feat (to a maximum of 5 times) you add one caster level to current spell-casting class you posess. You gain the appropriate spells per day.

With this feat, a 6th level Wizard could eventually cast 6th lvl spells, and a Sorcerer up to 5th level. Additionally, multi-class casters wouldn't be stunted for the rest of the campaign. On paper, a Wiz6 with 10 feats (5 devoted to Advanced Magic) does not come out substantially more powerful than a Fig6 with 10 feats, especially when you figure in save buffs like Iron Will, Lightning Reflexes, etc, but the slight edge the wizard may gain over time is nicely in keeping with the old-school ethic of wizardry being the hardest profession to survive early on, but having the most powerful payoff if you survive into higher "levels". A Rog3/Wiz3 with 10 feats (say, 2 devoted to Advanced Magic) may lag behind a little, but would still be versatile enough to stand alongside his fellows.

Obviously, this variant would mainly be of use to DMs who want to include the stereotypical mighty archmages and diabolical high priests in their E6 campaigns, but even heroic-style campaigns need their Merlins and Medeas.


----------



## Hrothgar Rannúlfr

*Advanced Magic - Am I Reading This Right?*

Am I reading your post right?

A Fighter5/Wizard1 can gain the equivalent of the casting ability of a 6th level Wizard (with 5th level Fighter abilities) through taking this feat 5 times?

A Wizard6 can gain the equivalent of the casting ability of a 11th level Wizard through taking this feat 5 times?

Am I reading this right?


----------



## Will

Does E6 require control of the feat Toughness? It hit me that 'I take 5 Toughness feats' is a bit out of balance (+30 hit points for +1 LA, effectively?)


----------



## Ry

Difference between hit points (or extra spells) and new spell levels: One is about the ability to stay in the fight, the other is about direct application of power.  That's why there's no +BAB feat in E6, for example.


----------



## Elergan

Another question for you , Ryan (I know I'm a bit thick-skulled sometimes)

How are you supposed to run monsters with spell-like powers : are they limited to 3rd level equivalent spells or should they keep their _Dimension Doors _ ,_ Fire Shields _ or _Prismatic Sprays _ ?

In other words, should I keep monsters by the book or tweak them ?

As far as spells are concerned, I'm planning on allowing multiclassing as suggested in some earlier posts (taking only what's better in the additional levels beyond the sixth, as in the examples of a fighter 6 / wizard 1 a few posts before)
Same with Prestige classes. As some of these (Arcane Trickster, for example) give a +1 to the level of in a pre-existing spellcasting class, they would allow characters to get additional slots some of them higher than 3rd, which could allow for metamagic feats applied to 3rd level spells. 
Would you also allow these slots to be used to memorize lower level spells ?

If that so, there should be some feats allowing for the same increase in spellcasting class level for single-class spellcasters...
I figured out that this hypothetical feat or even "gestalt" levels beyond the first 6 should cost more than simple feats (I was thinking along the lines of 10 000 XP, instead of the regular 5 000 Xp for a feat, since class levels usually get you some class ability along with better BAB or Save bonus than the one you had so far )

What do you think ? Am I straying too far from the E6 road or not ?


----------



## Ry

I play the monsters by the book, but I try to stick to CR1 to CR 10 creatures as the "base creature" and add feats or straightforward templates after that.


----------



## Ry

Sorry about the fewer and shorter responses from me lately, I'm completely overwhelmed at my day job.


----------



## joela

*Variant E6: E6Jump*

I'm thinking of applying an experience point system to my E6 campaign where, once the PCs achieve 6th level, their xps drop to zero and, for every 5k earned, they get a new feat (as per standard E6 rules). 

Once, though, they've obtained enough xp to achieve 7th level (I think it's 21k), their xp drops to 0 again and the cycle begins all over.

Thoughts?


----------



## Kunimatyu

I think that if you want to cap things at 6, you should do so, and if you want to play D&D at higher levels, you should so, but ultimately your solution is just slowing things down, which is vastly different than E6 "as written".

Not that it's a bad thing, mind you -- it's just not really E6 per se, not even "lean upwards".


----------



## Grimstaff

Hrothgar Rannúlfr said:
			
		

> Am I reading your post right?
> 
> A Fighter5/Wizard1 can gain the equivalent of the casting ability of a 6th level Wizard (with 5th level Fighter abilities) through taking this feat 5 times?
> 
> A Wizard6 can gain the equivalent of the casting ability of a 11th level Wizard through taking this feat 5 times?
> 
> Am I reading this right?



Exactly.
The feat gives your F5/W1 the option of continuing to focus on improving his magical skills if he would rather do that than just take fighter feats for the rest of the campaign. Regardless, he'll never be as good as the single class Wiz.
The Wiz 6, on the other hand, will not have to worry about becoming increasingly irrelevant as the martial classes are slowly able to handle greater and greater challenges and he is still stuck with the same old 6d6 lightning bolt, and the Wiz would actually get to use his metamagic feats. Even with the feat, there still wont be any wishes or infallible ressurections, as the spell level limit is 6th.
Personally, I would still cut the spell selection to maybe 12 4th and 5th level spells of my choice per class and maybe 6 or 8 spells of the 6th level, the ultimate pinacle of sorcery!


----------



## Hrothgar Rannúlfr

*RE: Advanced Magic*

Thanks, Grimstaff.

It seems much more powerful than most of the other E6 feat suggestions, so far.  My gut instinct is that the feats you suggest are too powerful for E6 without some additional requirements.  Though, I can see it working for the idea that you have in mind of magic really rewarding the devotion of its truest students...  As long as there was some additional cost/danger.

In a world with these feats available, I'd think that the general population would be extremely wary of wizards/sorcerers.  In fact, the practice of magic might be illegal and/or considered immoral.  Especially if such feats required unspeakably vile pacts with the Dark Masters of the Forbidden Arts.

Rules such as those from _Heroes of Horror_ or _The Book of Vile Darkness_ for things like Taint and Corruption (or Dark Side Points like in _SWSE_) might be useful, too, in fleshing this out.  I'm beginning to implement them into my current campaign (non-E6, but the group's only 4th level).


----------



## Kunimatyu

Grimstaff said:
			
		

> Exactly.
> The feat gives your F5/W1 the option of continuing to focus on improving his magical skills if he would rather do that than just take fighter feats for the rest of the campaign. Regardless, he'll never be as good as the single class Wiz.
> The Wiz 6, on the other hand, will not have to worry about becoming increasingly irrelevant as the martial classes are slowly able to handle greater and greater challenges and he is still stuck with the same old 6d6 lightning bolt, and the Wiz would actually get to use his metamagic feats. Even with the feat, there still wont be any wishes or infallible ressurections, as the spell level limit is 6th.
> Personally, I would still cut the spell selection to maybe 12 4th and 5th level spells of my choice per class and maybe 6 or 8 spells of the 6th level, the ultimate pinacle of sorcery!




Grimstaff, your feat is -way- overpowered for an E6 game - if you want straight-up castable level 6 spells, I'd recommend an E12 game. It'll be way higher-powered, but it'll work better than introducing your feat into E6.

The thing is, one of the reasons that magic is capped at 3rd level spells is because 3rd level spells -- despite being very powerful from the perspective of a normal person -- are not yet completely unbalanced when compared to martial classes. For higher-level "pinnacles of sorcery", incantations(check the first page of the thread) or single-use items like scrolls are a decent way to go.

If you want to "power up" the wizard from 3rd level spells, take a look at the Arcane Thesis feat from Player's Handbook 2, and my Swift Metamagic feat from the first page of this thread -- the two combined can produce some powerful casters without tipping the balance into 4th level spells. For multi-classed Wizards, Practiced Spellcaster(Complete Divine and I think Arcane as well) and the E6 feat that grants you an additional spell slot should do the trick.


----------



## joela

*Where...?*



			
				Kunimatyu said:
			
		

> If you want to "power up" the wizard from 3rd level spells, take a look at the Arcane Thesis feat from Player's Handbook 2, and my Swift Metamagic feat from the first page of this thread -- the two combined can produce some powerful casters without tipping the balance into 4th level spells. For multi-classed Wizards, Practiced Spellcaster(Complete Divine and I think Arcane as well) and the E6 feat that grants you an additional spell slot should do the trick.




Kunimatyu, where's that feat where, if taken by a spellcaster, grants half the CL in number of spells (i.e., 6th caster can either select 1 3rd level spells or 2 2nd level spells or 3 first level spells)?


----------



## Kunimatyu

joela said:
			
		

> Kunimatyu, where's that feat where, if taken by a spellcaster, grants half the CL in number of spells (i.e., 6th caster can either select 1 3rd level spells or 2 2nd level spells or 3 first level spells)?




I think it got changed to a feat that simply grants an extra spell known + spell slot, with a prereq of Level 6 in a casting class.

EDIT: Here they are:

Expanded Knowledge (General) (PoeticJustice)
Prerequisite: Character Level 6th
Benefit: Choose a spellcasting class in which you have levels. You gain an additional spell known at any level you can cast from that class's spell list.

Expanded Casting (General) (PoeticJustice)
Prerequisite: Character Level 6th
Benefit: Choose a spellcasting class in which you have levels. You gain an additional spell slot at any level you can already cast.

Personally, while it was more complicated, I like the CL/2 thing, as otherwise 1st level slots are too costly to pick up.


----------



## Ry

Grimstaff said:
			
		

> The Wiz 6, on the other hand, will not have to worry about becoming increasingly irrelevant as the martial classes are slowly able to handle greater and greater challenges




I want to clear something up right away:  This doesn't happen in any of the E6 games I've run.  The Wizard remains powerful and interesting throughout E6 games.  The martial classes do not outpace the wizard in any of the playtests I've run.

That said, if you think 6th level spells are part of the sweet spot for D&D, consider E12 as was suggested above.


----------



## Elergan

Something I don't understand when you say that "_otherwise 1st level slots are too costly to pick up_"...
There's no point in getting 1st-level spell slots, since, unless I'm mistaken, you can memorize a lower-level spell with a higher spell slot if it suits you.

So with the Expanded Casting feat, you should always get an extra slot for the highest level you can cast.

How about a feat granting an additional level in the spellcasting class but only as far as spell slots are concerned?  (That is without granting access to spells higher than 3rd level.)

For exemple, a 6th level wizard taking this feat 3 times would be considered (as far as slots are concerned) as à 9th level spellcaster and so would go from a daily spell selection of 4/3/3/2 to 4/4/4/3/2/1, thus gainging more slots at usable levels (1 first-level, 1 second-level and 1 third level slot plus 2 "fourth level" and one "fifth level" slots  that he could use for the purpose of applying metamagic to 1-3rd level spells). 
Maybe you could also allow those "higher level slots" to be used to memorize lower level spells as usual.
Thus, a "high level " E6 wizard would be superior to his less experienced fellow mage because he can cast a lot more spells or can metamagic spells.

I don't think it would be overbalanced, and it could convey the feeling of the "archmage", not because he can disintegrate you (non available in E6) but because it will take some time before he runs out of spells adn thus can cast a variety of spells...


----------



## Grimstaff

rycanada said:
			
		

> I want to clear something up right away:  This doesn't happen in any of the E6 games I've run.  The Wizard remains powerful and interesting throughout E6 games.  The martial classes do not outpace the wizard in any of the playtests I've run.
> 
> That said, if you think 6th level spells are part of the sweet spot for D&D, consider E12 as was suggested above.



The idea behind the feat was to allow a few more levels of spells into the campaign while still maintaining the fun 6th lvl cap. A 6th lvl Wiz with 3 Advanced Magic feats will be able to cast up to 5th lvl spells, and should be able to use most of his metamagic feats. Even if you forbade 4th and 5th lvl spells, the feat would still be useful if only for the metamagic purposes. And any spells you feel would unabalance or complicate the game would simply be left out, such as save or die spells.

Also, don't forget gaining 2 spells is a benefit of gaining a class level, not a caster level. Those higher level spells would be jealously guarded and kept highly secret and exclusive. Whole campaign plots could evolve around the quest for a lost spellbook containing 2 5th level spells, or completing a mission for the Guilde Majicka to gain access to the "special library". 

And all the while, the Wiz6, while having a few more tricks up his sleeve, still has the hp, saves, and probably most importantly, Spellcraft and Concentration checks of a 6th level wizard. It's going to be that much more challenging to use high lvl spells in combat or learn them.


----------



## Kunimatyu

Grimstaff said:
			
		

> The idea behind the feat was to allow a few more levels of spells into the campaign while still maintaining the fun 6th lvl cap. A 6th lvl Wiz with 3 Advanced Magic feats will be able to cast up to 5th lvl spells, and should be able to use most of his metamagic feats. Even if you forbade 4th and 5th lvl spells, the feat would still be useful if only for the metamagic purposes. And any spells you feel would unabalance or complicate the game would simply be left out, such as save or die spells.
> 
> Also, don't forget gaining 2 spells is a benefit of gaining a class level, not a caster level. Those higher level spells would be jealously guarded and kept highly secret and exclusive. Whole campaign plots could evolve around the quest for a lost spellbook containing 2 5th level spells, or completing a mission for the Guilde Majicka to gain access to the "special library".
> 
> And all the while, the Wiz6, while having a few more tricks up his sleeve, still has the hp, saves, and probably most importantly, Spellcraft and Concentration checks of a 6th level wizard. It's going to be that much more challenging to use high lvl spells in combat or learn them.




For what you're saying here, I think that rather than introducing your feat, you'd be better off creating feats that allow the casting of a 4th or 5th level (that was determined to not be crazy powerful like Evard's, Solid Fog, or the like) spell, much the same way Ryan has feats for restoration, stone to flesh, etc, etc. I personally feel that a Wall of Fire feat would be a good idea, as it's not hideously broken and shows up a lot in fantasy literature.

Extra "empty" slots for metamagic purposes can be functionally handled by the Swift Metamagic feat (really!), and it'll annoy your players less than empty slots will.

Furthermore, look into incantations a bit -- they allow the sort of higher-level spells that could form the cornerstone of a campaign, as you said.

Now, if your feat works for you, great, but I think you need to look into the basics of E6 a little more, because my impression is that you're trying to solve a problem that actually isn't there - wizards can be amazingly potent and fun in E6, even if they're capped at 3rd level spells.


----------



## Grimstaff

Kunimatyu said:
			
		

> For what you're saying here, I think that rather than introducing your feat, you'd be better off creating feats that allow the casting of a 4th or 5th level (that was determined to not be crazy powerful like Evard's, Solid Fog, or the like) spell, much the same way Ryan has feats for restoration, stone to flesh, etc, etc. I personally feel that a Wall of Fire feat would be a good idea, as it's not hideously broken and shows up a lot in fantasy literature.
> 
> Extra "empty" slots for metamagic purposes can be functionally handled by the Swift Metamagic feat (really!), and it'll annoy your players less than empty slots will.
> 
> Furthermore, look into incantations a bit -- they allow the sort of higher-level spells that could form the cornerstone of a campaign, as you said.
> 
> Now, if your feat works for you, great, but I think you need to look into the basics of E6 a little more, because my impression is that you're trying to solve a problem that actually isn't there - wizards can be amazingly potent and fun in E6, even if they're capped at 3rd level spells.



For me its more a question of flavor than solving any kind of mechanical problem. I curently use core books only, and am attracted by the power level of E6, but would like to retain some of the classic D&D high level spells, without having to rely on a bunch of other books and feats to achieve the same end result only in a more roundabout way. Why try to finesse 8 or 9 different feats into doing the same thing I can accomplish with 1?
This is the same issue I have with all the official and unofficial attempts at creating a properly balanced "gish" fighter/wizard. I threw away a dozen prestige classes, alternate classes, and feats and replaced them with one simple feat: Armored Casting (using this feat allows the use of arcane spells while wearing light armor without the normal chance of arcane spell failure). One simple feat removed the need to waste several levels qualifying for some prestige class or other just to wear armor while you cast a spell. 
For me, as a DM, keeping it simple is my motto. That's why E6 appeals to me. So when looking for a way to keep spells like Heal, Dimension Door, and Telekinesis in my game, I want the simplest, quickest, and most direct solution.
One easy feat.


----------



## Kunimatyu

Grimstaff said:
			
		

> For me its more a question of flavor than solving any kind of mechanical problem. I curently use core books only, and am attracted by the power level of E6, but would like to retain some of the classic D&D high level spells, without having to rely on a bunch of other books and feats to achieve the same end result only in a more roundabout way. Why try to finesse 8 or 9 different feats into doing the same thing I can accomplish with 1?
> This is the same issue I have with all the official and unofficial attempts at creating a properly balanced "gish" fighter/wizard. I threw away a dozen prestige classes, alternate classes, and feats and replaced them with one simple feat: Armored Casting (using this feat allows the use of arcane spells while wearing light armor without the normal chance of arcane spell failure). One simple feat removed the need to waste several levels qualifying for some prestige class or other just to wear armor while you cast a spell.
> For me, as a DM, keeping it simple is my motto. That's why E6 appeals to me. So when looking for a way to keep spells like Heal, Dimension Door, and Telekinesis in my game, I want the simplest, quickest, and most direct solution.
> One easy feat.




If simplicity is your goal, how about only having higher level spells (ie. level 4+ spells) as scrolls that have to be found, or require a (titan/deity/outsider) to make them for you? That way, higher-level magic is present but rare, relics of a forgotten age, not something casually thrown around every encounter.

If you allow wizards to cast disintegrations, walls of force, et al several times per day, not only will every single PC be tempted to take 1 level of wizard just to get all of that(and taking the feat ten times to get 6th level spells really isn't that hard in E6), but you'll completely wreck the balance of your game, and lose the flavor of E6 -- you'll just have "lower level D&D that doesn't work and has a really high death rate".

I'm not trying to be negative here, and I can certainly understand the desire for simplicity, but I'm afraid your solution will result in a wrecked campaign, so I'm trying to give the best advice I can.


----------



## Grimstaff

Kunimatyu said:
			
		

> If simplicity is your goal, how about only having higher level spells (ie. level 4+ spells) as scrolls that have to be found, or require a (titan/deity/outsider) to make them for you? That way, higher-level magic is present but rare, relics of a forgotten age, not something casually thrown around every encounter.
> 
> If you allow wizards to cast disintegrations, walls of force, et al several times per day, not only will every single PC be tempted to take 1 level of wizard just to get all of that(and taking the feat ten times to get 6th level spells really isn't that hard in E6), but you'll completely wreck the balance of your game, and lose the flavor of E6 -- you'll just have "lower level D&D that doesn't work and has a really high death rate".
> 
> I'm not trying to be negative here, and I can certainly understand the desire for simplicity, but I'm afraid your solution will result in a wrecked campaign, so I'm trying to give the best advice I can.



If you look at the feat again, you'll notice it can only be taken a maximum of 5 times. The highest level spellcaster in the campaign will only be equivalent to an 11th level Wiz, minus the attendant hp, saves, bonus feats, etc. And unless they somehow get their Int up to a 22, you're looking at a max of 1 6th lvl spell a day for the most powerful Wiz in the campaign (2 for a specialist). And of course, that Wiz will be shy 5 feats of metamagic, toughness, etc.
Here's an NPC, 6th level plus 10 feats (50,000 xp):
Gansley, Elf Fig4/Wiz2, AC17, hp37, CG, Atk melee+8 (longsword+1, dmg1d8+3) ranged+10(longbow, dmg1d8), Init+7, Move30’, Fort+4 Ref+6 Will+4, Str13, Dex16, Con11, Int15, Wiz10, Cha11; Skills Jump+8, Climb+8, Intimidate+6, Spot+5, Search+3, Hide+8, Spellcraft+4, Concentration+8; Feats Weapon Focus(longsword), Weapon Specialization (longsword), Advanced Magic (x3), Armored Casting, Combat Casting, Skill Focus (Concentration), Improved Initiative, Extend Spell, Lightning Reflexes, Improved Initiative, Point Blank Shot, Weapon Focus(longbow), Empower Spell, Toughness; 
Equipment +1 Longsword, Elven Cloak, Elven Boots, MW Longbow, MW Chain Shirt, Wand of Flaming Spheres (CL5).
Spells (4/4/3/1): 0-mage hand, prestidigitation, light, detect magic; 1st-sleep, charm person, true strike, floating disk; 2nd- levitate, knock, shield(extended); 3rd- Displacement.

Hardly a campaign wrecker, especially not next to the raging 6th level barbarian with 2 attacks per round!


----------



## Kunimatyu

Grimstaff said:
			
		

> Hardly a campaign wrecker, especially not next to the raging 6th level barbarian with 2 attacks per round!




We're just going to have to agree to disagree here, I think -- that elf is for all intents and purposes a gestalt character, and you're touting it as balanced with a Barbarian 6.


----------



## Hrothgar Rannúlfr

Kunimatyu said:
			
		

> that elf is for all intents and purposes a gestalt character



Indeed.

And, Gestalt characters are the best solution that I've seen for creating "gish" characters.  If I get to run E6 (probably in 4E), I'd like to try it with gestalts.


----------



## Kunimatyu

Hrothgar Rannúlfr said:
			
		

> Indeed.
> 
> And, Gestalt characters are the best solution that I've seen for creating "gish" characters.  If I get to run E6 (probably in 4E), I'd like to try it with gestalts.




Supposedly Ryan's first E6 game involved gestalts, and worked pretty well.

I'm a huge fan of gestalt games, provided everybody's gestalt, otherwise things get messy.


----------



## Grimstaff

Kunimatyu said:
			
		

> We're just going to have to agree to disagree here, I think -- that elf is for all intents and purposes a gestalt character, and you're touting it as balanced with a Barbarian 6.



Well, the gestalt would have a +6 BAB, 2 atk per rnd, another 15 or so hp, better saves, another 2nd and 3rd lvl spell, and 2 more bonus feats (and still barely a match for the angry barbarian   ) but I get your point.

I'll agree to disagree, but imho the Advanced Magic feat is a good way to go if you don't want to fuss with a clutter of other feats or bump up the power level to gestalt octane (whilch still wont get you the 4-6th lvl spells, btw).


----------



## Will

Can you copy scrolls with Scribe Scroll, if they are spells you don't know?

If so, then it's a perfect way to introduce higher level spells:
Step 1, find a cool scroll.
Step 2, copy it so you can keep making them as needed in the future.
Step 3, cast spell from scroll and hope you don't flub it (see rules for casting higher level spells).


I'm actually debating running an E6 game with no mages at all, and doing something like allowing people to take item creation feat with Spellcraft as a prereq instead of caster level, but I'm still tinkering.


----------



## Kunimatyu

Will said:
			
		

> Can you copy scrolls with Scribe Scroll, if they are spells you don't know?
> 
> If so, then it's a perfect way to introduce higher level spells:
> Step 1, find a cool scroll.
> Step 2, copy it so you can keep making them as needed in the future.
> Step 3, cast spell from scroll and hope you don't flub it (see rules for casting higher level spells).
> 
> 
> I'm actually debating running an E6 game with no mages at all, and doing something like allowing people to take item creation feat with Spellcraft as a prereq instead of caster level, but I'm still tinkering.




By the rules as written, no. It is, however, a nifty idea -- perhaps a look at the artificer class from Eberron might provide you with some good guidelines on scroll-based casting? Just remember that 20 scrolls of Disintegrate is in many ways worse(game balance-wise) than actually having an 11th level caster who knows Disintegrate.

(I will say that the constant XP/gold cost thing will probably get old very quickly, but there could be workarounds for that, especially for "temporary" scrolls or the like)


----------



## PoeticJustice

Kunimatyu said:
			
		

> I think it got changed to a feat that simply grants an extra spell known + spell slot, with a prereq of Level 6 in a casting class.
> 
> Personally, while it was more complicated, I like the CL/2 thing, as otherwise 1st level slots are too costly to pick up.




Personally, I like the other version too, but I'm running E6 on Eberron and have a group which would buckle under the added stress of more complicated feats.

A question for RyCanada: As I have just started running an E6 Eberron game, I'm most inerested in whether or not you plan on using the "capstone feats" in your games. They seem kind of cheesy and I wonder: did you make them because you wanted them, or because they were asked of you?


----------



## Kunimatyu

While I can't respond for Ryan, I will say that the idea of a capstone feat is to give players a reason to stick with a single class, as many of the classes have "dead levels" at 6. Typically, a capstone feat is created by grabbing one ability that the class gets between levels 7-9, and making it a level 6 feat. They are not strictly necessary for an E6 game unless you want to encourage single-classing.


----------



## Ry

I wrote / compiled the capstone feats specifically because the same issues kept coming up over and over again whenever I discussed E6, and I realized that if I wanted to focus E6 discussion on world assumptions, designing E6 games, and so forth, E6 needed to have an answer to those issues.  

The feats that we've posted now are feats that I'm comfortable allowing in my campaign, but I'm not making any kind of special effort to point them out.  Right now my players have a lot to think about build-wise with the wealth of WotC feats available to them, and they're definitely happy with that.  Part of the reason that's working for me is that I encourage players to look for things about their characters that they can develop besides raw power, and they're very receptive to that approach.  I do this especially when certain regular players start to outpace avid, but irregular players in my game - when they're 4 or 5 feats up on fellow players, my players don't mind getting (for want of a better term) "roleplaying feats" - i.e. things that aren't part of a "build" but which reflect a character's real development.  An example of this would be a sorcerer taking martial weapon proficiency longsword because he's being trained by the fighter in the party to be able to "handle himself a bit better"


----------



## PoeticJustice

Thanks for your quick replies (they are useful as session 2 of the campaign commences in about  4 hours).
Also, I asked this a while back and it got lost in the shuffle of other questions, but how does everyone feel about rewiring Metamagic feats so that they become a function of Action Points?

For instance, having the Maximize Spell feat would allow you to burn 3 action points to maximize a spell rather than raise its effective level by 3.

Thoughts?


----------



## joela

*Using APs to activate metamagic feats*



			
				PoeticJustice said:
			
		

> For instance, having the Maximize Spell feat would allow you to burn 3 action points to maximize a spell rather than raise its effective level by 3.
> 
> Thoughts?




Personally, I don't see why not. There's a sorceror variant -- I think "metamagic specialist" -- which uses similar points in lieu of spell slots to activate its MM feats.


----------



## udalrich

PoeticJustice said:
			
		

> Thanks for your quick replies (they are useful as session 2 of the campaign commences in about  4 hours).
> Also, I asked this a while back and it got lost in the shuffle of other questions, but how does everyone feel about rewiring Metamagic feats so that they become a function of Action Points?
> 
> For instance, having the Maximize Spell feat would allow you to burn 3 action points to maximize a spell rather than raise its effective level by 3.
> 
> Thoughts?




While it's better than not being able to use it at all, it's still fairly weak.  (I'm assuming Eberron action points.  If there's a different style that I missed, my comments may be completely wrong.)   At 6th level, I think you get something like 7 action points.  (Don't have my books nearby at the moment.)  Since it nominally takes 13 encounters to level, that's 1/2 action point per encounter.  You could empower 3 spells during the entire level, or maximize 2.  That's not  a whole lot of use for a feat.

Metamagic seems difficult to use in E6, and I don't have any good ideas for fixing it.  Maybe E6 is just a world where Still Spell and Energy Substitution (and other +0/+1 metamagics) are the cool ones that everyone uses.


----------



## GrolloStoutfoam

> Metamagic seems difficult to use in E6, and I don't have any good ideas for fixing it.  Maybe E6 is just a world where Still Spell and Energy Substitution (and other +0/+1 metamagics) are the cool ones that everyone uses.




Actually there is a feat from Dragon Magazine #325 p62, Easy Metamagic. "Choose a Metamagic feat you know with at least a +2 Level Adjustment. When preparing or casting spells with this feat, treat the Level Adjustment as being one lower than it actually is (min +1). For example, Easy Metamagic could reduce Maximize Spell from +3 to +2. You may take this feat multiple times. Each time it applies to a new Metamagic Feat."  

Also the Sudden Metamagic feats allow once per day casting of a metamagicked spell without a level increase.  Taking Maximize Spell, Easy Metamagic (Maximize) and Sudden Maximize spell allows a caster to cast Maximized 0th and 1st level spells and once per day a 2nd or 3rd.  Combine the feats with Arcane Thesis and one 2nd level spell can be maximized for a +1 level adjustment.  Pretty cool way to distinguish one's wizard from the rest.


----------



## udalrich

Is the general consensus that these feats are balanced?  Casting an empowered fireball with a third level slot seems strong.  It does cost three feats, but a wizard could still have it at 5th level.  (Probably not a wizard that was played from first level though.)


----------



## PoeticJustice

udalrich said:
			
		

> While it's better than not being able to use it at all, it's still fairly weak.  (I'm assuming Eberron action points.  If there's a different style that I missed, my comments may be completely wrong.)   At 6th level, I think you get something like 7 action points.  (Don't have my books nearby at the moment.)  Since it nominally takes 13 encounters to level, that's 1/2 action point per encounter.  You could empower 3 spells during the entire level, or maximize 2.  That's not  a whole lot of use for a feat.
> 
> Metamagic seems difficult to use in E6, and I don't have any good ideas for fixing it.  Maybe E6 is just a world where Still Spell and Energy Substitution (and other +0/+1 metamagics) are the cool ones that everyone uses.




These are valid concerns, ones that I can't actually fix without tacking on more rules. In order to make metamagic more accessible, I'm thinking about this:

Action Points are tied to CHA (4+1/2 Char. Level+ Cha modifier).
Action points refresh every level and at every 5000 XP after level 6.
There will be a feat available to increase a character's Action Point pool.


----------



## Matrix Sorcica

Like I posted in a post waaaay back (I'll go looking for it...) it's possible to cast 15d6 fireballs in E6 multiple times. All by using only WotC 3.5 feats (and not feats from Dragon, which isn't balanced all the time).

Edit: Here's the post

Throw in sudden empower, and we're talking 20d6 fireball at 6th level.   That should finish most E6 fights.


----------



## Ry

PoeticJustice said:
			
		

> These are valid concerns, ones that I can't actually fix without tacking on more rules. In order to make metamagic more accessible, I'm thinking about this:
> 
> Action Points are tied to CHA (4+1/2 Char. Level+ Cha modifier).
> Action points refresh every level and at every 5000 XP after level 6.
> There will be a feat available to increase a character's Action Point pool.





Hey guys, can I suggest looking at the Raising the Stakes.pdf linked off the first post?  You might find that the Conviction / Death Flag mechanics in there work for the action point dilemma.  I've used Conviction to spice things up for about a year and a half now and it works great.


----------



## joela

*Making E6 appealing to players*



			
				rycanada said:
			
		

> Oh, the big thing I want to discuss in the next thread is how to talk to your players about E6.  A player in my group runs his own game, and found that players were rejecting the idea out of hand without even looking at it.  Of course, that's a group of D&D-only old school grognards, so it might be worst case scenario (they do play 3.5e though).  But I think that's the biggest thing that the main E6 document is lacking (god knows it took long enough to make it sound good to a select few DMs).




I'm prepping to run a one-shot pseudo-OA adventure this coming Saturday. If the players like it, I'm hoping to introduce the idea of E6 for future games. The PC, for example, will start at 6th level though I'm debating maybe even E6+1 feat. 

For those DMs running E6 campaigns, what techniques (outside of threats/bribery) did you use to convince your players to give E6 a shot?


----------



## Kunimatyu

For those wondering how to get metamagic in E6, please take a look at the Swift Metamagic feat on page 1 of this thread -- it's sort of a "template" that allows you to turn any Metamagic feat into the equivalent of a Sudden feat, though the prerequisites become steeper if you angle for the higher-level metamagics.


----------



## Ry

OK, thread's over.    Thanks everybody, now it's time to move on to the bigtime.  The newly revised thread is in General, as per discussion with PirateCat a month or so ago.  Please go there - especially if you want to talk about your home game, because I want to hear about it!  

http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=206323


----------

