# E6 SRD - community project



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 6, 2011)

_Please see_* post#2 *_ for latest progress on this project._

@Gilladian , @NotZenon , @Nifft , @Lord Xtheth , @Sir Robilar , @Ryan Stou'n

I'd like to officially get this going in the open, so anyone who is interested in participating, feel free to jump in (or just watch with bemusement).  

In this and related threads, I'll be noting progress on this project.  If this ought to go elsewhere, also let me know and we can get it moved.

Following is an overview, and is entirely open for discussion & input!

*What's the goal?*

That's still TBD, but I think a good end point would be an online reference that contains the minimum necessary to run an E6 game.  This will include E6 applicable material from the official SRD (only), as well as ideas from the original E6 document by Ryan Stoughton.  One further iteration would include relevant info from other WotC OGC (from Divine, Epic, Psionic and UA).

That document (set of rtf, webpage, or whatever) would then be available as a basic reference for folks to do with as they please.  It would effectively be analogous to d20srd.org, but stripped down to only material applicable to a typical E6 game.

*How to get there?*

I'm open to ideas, but for now I'm thinking in terms of three milestones:


*Phase 0* - "Rough Draft" - This is a very quick and dirty first draft that basically chops the SRD down to a manageable size, and includes basic E6 material where it deviates from the SRD.
*Phase 1* - "Core E6" -  Starts with the Phase 0 document, and basically corrects (especially by including official errata) and re-organizes it, and includes common E6 options.  This is a serviceable E6 SRD.
*Phase 2* - "More E6 Options" - Takes the Core document and merges in E6-relevant material from the rest of WotC OGC.  At this point, the document is equivalent to d20srd.org.
That was the tl;dr version.  A much more detailed (and unsightly) overview that I'll be working from if no one objects is reposted below from another thread here:[sblock]E6 CORE SRD (by section)

phase 0: "Rough draft E6" - This is basically just the SRD rtfs from WotC converted to html; and index page to link it together; and everything that looks vaguley beyond E6 chopped out, plus the "official" stuff inserted where appropriate. There will be little thought to creating this, and it wil likely be rife with errors and inconsistency. It's basically the first draft, but it's also something that, once done, will have a fair bit of utility.

phase 1: "Core E6" - This contains material from the WotC's SRD rtfs and Ry Stoughton's original document only. It is the most conservative interpration of E6.
- Organization: should this include everything, or should it be even more stripped-down, sort of like a Basic Set? (ie, smaller spell, monster, magic item selection, simplified skills, etc)
- include E6 overview (plus links to Ry Stoughton's doc)
- add E6 "necessary feats" (eg, "Wondrous Rings", "Restoration", etc)
- Chop base class info above 6th level; and PrCs unattainable after 6th
- Chop spells above 3rd (or 2nd or 1st, depending upon class)
- Drop hazards, traps, and monsters above CR(?), and those with spell-likes above 3rd level
- Drop magic items of greater than CL6th
- Drop feats unnatainable at 6th level; move some feats over to "Monstrous Feats" section for those monsters that need them but PCs can't use
- possibly include UA gestalt rules (since "gestalt" is mentioned as a playstyle in Ry's docs)
- include official errata, if they exist.

phase 2: "More Advanced options" - This includes the rest of the OGC from WotC (making it more or less an E6 version of d20srd.org), as well as popular E6 concepts (eg, capstone feats and prestige feats).
- Organization possibilities:
- as "appendices": CorE6 + Other sections (similar to d20srd.org); or
- or "integrated": phase 2 material merged into the phase 1 material (eg, variant Barbarians presented under the Barbarian" section under "Classes", rather than in a separate "UA" section; and general feats from Divine merged into the "Feats" section, rather than in a separate "Divine" section; etc); or
- something else?
- items from Divine
- items from Epic
- items from Psionic
- items from UA
- "Advanced" E6 concepts - This needs some debate, as this stuff is not "official" E6 (ie, not in Ry's original docs), so a baseline of "most popular" needs to be found before inclusion.
- capstone feats?
- prestige feats (feat chains, feat trees, etc)?
- add OGC versions of select non-SRD iconic monsters? (eg, yuan-ti, mindflayer, etc)
- (TBD) Other stuff? Reintro select higher-level spells as E6 feats? Or just discuss this as possibility? Hawk UA "Incantations" as solution to higher level magics?

SPECIFICS:

Characters

* Basics and Ability Scores - bonus spells by level table to include only to 3rd level
* Description - no change
* Character Races - no change
* Basic Character Classes I - (Bbn-Mnk)
-cut advancement tables to 6th level, and cut corresponding ability/feature descriptions;
- cut spell tables (bard, cleric, druid) to top out at 3rd level spells;
- cut druid animal companion table back to 6th level.
* Basic Character Classes II (Pal-Wiz, and multi-classing rules)
- cut advancement tables to 6th level, and cut corresponding ability/feature descriptions;
- cut spell tables (sorc, wiz) to top out at 3rd level spells;
- cut spell tables (paladin, ranger) to top out at 1st level spells;
- cut paladin mount, sor/wiz familiar, and ranger animal companion table back to 6th level.
* NPC Classes
- cut advancement tables to 6th level, and cut corresponding ability/feature descriptions;
- cut spell tables (Adp) to top out at 2nd level spells;
* Prestige Classes - only include ones possible to achieve before or at 6th character level. Typically this means at best prereqs of:
- 3rd level spell casting ability
- +5 BAB
- 8 skill ranks
i believe the SRD PrCs that are available in CORE6 are: arcane trickster, assassin, dragon disciple, duelist, horizon walker (what about other PrCs either via featchains, or by lessening entry reqs to ones a 6th char level can handle?)
* Epic Levels - N/A to E6 deprecate. (?)
* Skills I - no change
* Skills II - no change
* Feats - chop ones with prereqs beyond 6th (character) level, eg:
- character level beyond 6th
- 3rd level spell-casting ability
- +6 BAB
- 9 skill ranks
- unattainable feat prereq. (though some will move over to section for "Monstrous Feats", as required for included monsters)
- (phase 1?) also include select General feats from Psionics, Divine and Epic WotC OGC material (see d20srd.org)
* Special Abilities and Conditions - no change

Exploration and Combat

* Carrying, Movement, and Exploration - no change
* Combat I (Basics) - no change
* Combat II (Movement, Modifiers, and Special Actions) - no change
* Planes - no change
* Traps - remove traps that reference spells beyond 3rd or CLs beyond 8th.(this is arbitrary)
* Treasure - change tables:
- "treasure values per encounter", cut back to 10th level (arbitrary)
- "treaure", cut back to 10th level (arbitrary)
* Wilderness, Weather, and Environment - no change

Equipment and Items

* Equipment - no change
* Special Materials - no change
* Magic Items I (Basics and Creation) -
- sections on "Rods" and "Staffs" go away because feat is too high level;
- replace "Rings" reference to "Forge RIng" with Ry Stoughton's "Wondrous Rings" feat.
* Magic Items II (Armor and Weapons) -
- remove items wth CL greater than 6th or spells greater than 3rd
* Magic Items III (Potions, Rings, and Rods) -
- drop "Rods" section;
- replace "Rings" with Ry Stoughton's "Wondrous Rings" feat;
- remove items wth CL greater than 6th or spells greater than 3rd
* Magic Items IV (Scrolls, Staffs, and Wands) -
- drop "Staffs" section;
- remove items wth CL greater than 6th or spells greater than 3rd
* Magic Items V (Wondrous Items) - remove items wth CL greater than 6th or spells greater than 3rd
* Magic Items VI (Intelligent, Cursed, and Artifacts) - remove items wth CL greater than 6th or spells greater than 3rd ((?) and 6th for artifacts?)

Magic and Spells

* Magic Overview - no change
* Spell List I -
- chop Bard spell list beyond 2nd level spells
- chop Cleric list beyond 3rd level spells; and chop domain lists beyond 3rd
* Spell List II -
- chop Druid, Sorc, Wiz lists beyond 3rd level spell
- chop Pal and Rgr spell lists beyond 1st level spells
* Spells A-Z - For all Spells A-Z, excise references to any full-caster classes (Clr, Drd, Sor/Wiz) for which the spell exceeds 3rd level; for Brd class, 2nd level; and for Pal and Rgr, 1st level. A couple will remain to cover E6 "necessary feats", ((?)but those are relocated to Feats section).

Monsters
Drop all monsters above CR12(?), and only keep select ones from CR9-12. Pay especial attention to spell-like abilities (ie avoid ones mimicking spells above 4th level), high SR, and other abilities that are hard/impossible to counter with 3rd level or lesser magic. However, keep iconics and mythics, and explicitly mention advancing monsters, as per rules below.
* Monsters Intro-A
* Monsters B-C
* Monsters D-De
* Monsters Di-Do
* Monsters Dr-Dw
* Monsters E-F
* Monsters G
* Monsters H-I
* Monsters K-L
* Monsters M-N
* Monsters O-R
* Monsters S
* Monsters T-Z
* Monsters: Animals
* Monsters: Vermin
* Types, Subtypes, and Abilities - no change
* Monster Feats - (?)move certain ones to character Feats section; chop spell-likes metmagics 4th level; also include "non-epic general feats" from Epic Feats Index (Epic Feats Index :: d20srd.org)
* Improving Monsters - no change
* Monsters as Races - no change

Phase 2: Variant Rules (UA, etc)
Races
- environmental and elemental racial variants
- racial paragon classes (to 3rd level)
- gestalts (? even in phase1, since gestalting is a mentioned playstyle in Ry's docs)
- (likely not "Bloodlines", as they are oddly balanced at low levels)
Classes - include all sections, but cut back to 6 char levels where appropriate, especially gestalts.
Building Characters - all sections?; except maybe "Spelltouched Feats"as they are high-level spells mostly.
Adventuring - TBD
Magic - TBD (likely keep "Incantations")
Campaigns - TBD
Divine, Epic, Psionics (TBD) [/sblock]
I think the project is simple enough that discussion & coordination could happen right here, though we could move it elsewhere if needed.  I think Phase 0 could be done in a few weeks, Phase 1 possibly in a few months.  Hopefully, Phase 2 could be done by the end of the year.

The resulting work would be downloadable for use offline, and could be embedded in a wiki, hopefully would become a community repository for E6-related houserules.

* Resources, references  & materials*

WotC's SRD RTFs (bundled download at bottom)
Ryan Stoughton's E6 documents (in PDFs section in middle)
The original E6 discussion thread
d20srd.org


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 6, 2011)

Below is a proposed starting point, just to get interested folks thinking.

_However, before any actual changes happen_, we'll need to figure out exactly how to coordinate this so people aren't duplicating efforts or messing up others' work.  

I'm willing to maintain a backup, hang on to docs as people finish them, pass them around for proofing, and the like (ie, coordinate), but if someone has a more specific or reliable suggestion I'm more than happy to hear it.  _Please_ let me hear it!  Otherwise, I need to sit down and work something out before this gets too far along.

Without further ado, then....

*GETTING STARTED*

I think the easiest place to start is to simply sort out the rules that won't change in E6 and set those aside.

Here's the list of all SRD section files at WotC (sblocked), roughly equivalent to sections at d20srd.org or chapters in the manuals:
[sblock]# Legal Information (14k RTF)
# Basics and Ability Scores (57k RTF)
# Alignment and Description (57k RTF)
# Races (17k RTF)
# Character Classes I (343k RTF)
# Character Classes II (327k RTF)
# Skills I (181k RTF)
# Skills II (183k RTF)
# Feats (168k RTF)
# Equipment (475k RTF)
# Special Materials (24k RTF)
# Combat I (Basics) (128k RTF)
# Combat II (Movement, Modifiers, and Special Actions) (149k RTF)
# Special Abilities and Conditions (146k RTF)
# NPC Classes (155k RTF)
# Prestige Classes (389k RTF)
# Magic Overview (90k RTF)
# Spell List I (77k RTF)
# Spell List II (68k RTF)
# Spells (A-B) (92k RTF)
# Spells C (114k RTF)
# Spells (D-E) (134k RTF)
# Spells (F-G) (93k RTF)
# Spells (H-L) (104k RTF)
# Spells (M-O) (95k RTF)
# Spells (P-R) (197k RTF)
# Spells (S) (259k RTF)
# Spells (T-Z) (115k RTF)
# Magic Items I (Basics and Creation) (169k RTF)
# Magic Items II (Armor and Weapons) (465k RTF)
# Magic Items III (Potions, Rings, and Rods) (261k RTF)
# Magic Items IV (Scrolls, Staffs, and Wands) (788k RTF)
# Magic Items V (Wondrous Items) (727k RTF)
# Magic Items VI (Intelligent, Cursed, and Artifacts) (264k RTF)
# Monsters (Intro-A) (311k RTF)
# Monsters (B-C) (251k RTF)
# Monsters (D-De) (433k RTF)
# Monsters (Di-Do) (258k RTF)
# Monsters (Dr-Dw) (617k RTF)
# Monsters (E-F) (414k RTF)
# Monsters (G) (438k RTF)
# Monsters (H-I)(326k RTF)
# Monsters (K-L) (297k RTF)
# Monsters (M-N) (409k RTF)
# Monsters (O-R) (364k RTF)
# Monsters (S) (461k RTF)
# Monsters (T-Z) (441k RTF)
# Monsters (Animals) (709k RTF)
# Monsters (Vermin) (274k RTF)
# Types, Subtypes, and Special Abilities (106k RTF)
# Improving Monsters (74k RTF)
# Monster Feats (26k RTF)
# Monsters as Races (53k RTF)
# Carrying, Movement, and Exploration (206k RTF)
# Treasure (171k RTF)
# Wilderness, Weather, and Environment (168k RTF)
# Traps (144k RTF)
# Planes (65k RTF)[/sblock]
 Of all of those (above), the ones that I'm guessing will have few, if any changes, for E6 follow:
[edit] The following files require no changes for E6 gaming, afaict.  This is an adjustment to the original list I had posted; a couple have been removed from the list, so we remember to modify them later:
[sblock]
*FILES WITH NO E6 CHANGES*

# Alignment and Description (57k RTF)
# Races (17k RTF) 
# Magic Overview (90k RTF)
# Skills I (181k RTF)
# Skills II (183k RTF)
# Equipment (475k RTF)
# Special Materials (24k RTF)
# Combat I (Basics) (128k RTF)
# Combat II (Movement, Modifiers, and Special Actions) (149k RTF)
# Improving Monsters (74k RTF)
# Monsters as Races (53k RTF)
# Carrying, Movement, and Exploration (206k RTF)
# Wilderness, Weather, and Environment (168k RTF)
# Planes (65k RTF)[/sblock]  These (above) shouldn't need many mods at all (though I might be wrong), and should be fairly close to ready for inclusion into an E6 SRD as is.  Put these aside, double check them later.

Of the remainder, the items that I suspect are easiest to change to E6, with minimal house ruling & need for debate, are the base classes and spells (the main list, as well as domain and school lists).  Those files are:







> *SRD files TO DO:
> 
> *_in progress  |  needs attention  | finished  | not started_
> _
> ...



I think these are a good place to start modifications.  The work involved is tedious but straightforward and shouldn't require a lot of debate.

--and the rest of the files--
_(moved from post#60, to keep progress rept's in one place)_

The following is a list of the files that remain to be "converted" to E6. All other files are either finished, or else require no changes to convert to E6, afaict. Most of these will require some discussion before they get modified, so let's hold off on actually touching them until we're all on the same page. They're grouped by game function, except the first grouping which is simply "miscellaneous":


> *THE REMAINING FILES TO DO*
> 
> # Prestige Classes - the_orc_within/SuperChris - ?- removed from baseline SRD
> # Traps - the_orc_within/SuperChris - (orig) awaiting proofread
> ...


----------



## Gilladian (Jan 7, 2011)

I'm on vacation all next week, so I will be happy to grab a class file and do some chopping down, and see what happens. I'll post on Monday, probably, what I've selected to chop and then repost my results for critiqueing...

I think it might be a good idea if anyone starts work on a file that they "dibs" it here so we don't duplicate work. 

Gillian


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 7, 2011)

Sounds good, thanks.  When you choose a file, would you mind making a new post specifically for it, and putting its name at the top or in title of the post, maybe with a status of some sort, along the lines of "Classes I - dibs | editing | please proofread | etc".    I'll also make the annotation in post 2 in the to-do list; yell at me if I fail to update something there.

Hopefully that will make it easier to see what's going on at a glance.  At least let's try that system just so we can say that, yeah, we've got a system. 

I'm out of town for the weekend, but I expect to have time to do the initial little tasks:
 - really quick skim of the "no change" files (second sblock) just to make sure they're no change; if I catch one with big changes, i'll move it to the to-do list (3rd sblock)
 - file "Magic overview" (which I'm guessing is the easiest one)

When you pick a class file, Gillian, I'll take the other one.

James


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 7, 2011)

*file: Magic Overview*

file:  *Magic  Overview  *

status: Oops!  This file is actually a "no change" file!

comments:
I hope to get this completed & ready for proofread by 10 Jan or so.

Moved this file to the "no changes" list


----------



## Lord Xtheth (Jan 7, 2011)

Poking my head in. 
I'm working on notes and an outline for my project. Unless I get attacked by the killer lazy (a strong possibility) it shouldn't take too long to start the drafting process.


----------



## macrochelys (Jan 7, 2011)

*file: ClassesII*

file: ClassesII

status: dibs/ in progress

My seasonal employment is ending next Tuesday, and I'd like to jump in on this to keep me busy. Started editing already, and it's going pretty fast. Might be done this file late tonight.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 7, 2011)

Hi, macrochelys.  Great to see you hop in here!  Just try not to get _too_ far ahead, since I'm still trying to get a feel for how to keep this coordinated!  The system may change.

In any event, when you're done, attach the revised file in your post with a status of "please proofread" so others know to look it over.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 7, 2011)

*PROOFREADING*

When a file gets a status of "please proofread", feel free to take a look at it.  Make sure that tables are truncated to 6th level, and feature lists match what's in the table.  Hopefully, spelling and grammar aren't an issue, but go ahead and fix those too, if you find them.   

Don't worry too much about rules errata right now; that will get done at a later stage all at once.  

For those who proofread, go ahead and use the same system as for editing: write the filename bold at top of the post and some status like "proof-reading" or something. Try to be really careful on the proof read. There's no need to rush it!  If two people end up proofing the same file, it's not necessary at this stage, but certainly not a problem.

When you're done proofreading, attach the proofed file to your post or some sort of list of problems (as is convenient), update the status to "proofread finished", then "@ mention" me and the person who originally did it. I'll update the TO DO list, and you two can work out whatever you need to work out. I think it's less confusing for me if the finalized file ends up in the _original_ editor's post, with an annotation about who did the proofing. 

We'll probably go for a second round of proof reading all at once before "Phase 0" is declared done, but let's hold off on that for now.


----------



## macrochelys (Jan 7, 2011)

*file: ClassesII*

file: ClassesII

status: please proofread

Less to change than I expected. Hopefully I didn't miss anything glaringly obvious.


----------



## Gilladian (Jan 7, 2011)

*File: ClassesI*

Classes I is edited (I know, I never formally called dibs on it, but I did say I'd take "one of the class files" and since macrochelys took classesII and so quickly did it, I was "encouraged" to grab this one and do it. It took less than an hour to edit!

I had one minor rules question about bards. I'm not sure now's the time to bring it up, though.
Edit: Per Orc_Within, the rules question I have is about bards being able to swap out a spell they have learned at 5th (and higher) levels. The way the rules are written, they would only be able to do this ONE time, ever (at 5th level) and only a first level spell (they're restricted to swapping a spell two levels below their highest known level). Somehow this seems "mean" to me. We may want to address this as an optional rule (maybe a feat to allow other spell-swapping in some way...).

Status: Please Proofread


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 7, 2011)

That's great news!  It's good to hear the editing is going relatively quickly on these files.  


*RULES QUESTIONS*

On rules questions, I was thinking there will be a whole period devoted exclusively to incorporating errata as soon as this first draft is finished. 

However, if you want, you can certainly check the official PHB, DMG errata and see if it's addressed.  If so go ahead and make a note in your post.  I suppose you could correct now, but that might confuse the proofreading process a little.

If it's _not_ in the errata, let's avoid dealing with it for now.  Note the question in the post and that it's not errata'd, and we can come back to it.  I don't think there's any harm in pointing out potential problems like that, as long as we stick to the SRD & errata text for now.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 7, 2011)

*ON SPELL FILES*

I'm pretty sure you know this already, but just as a reminder (and, *ahem* because I keep forgetting this), there are a couple things to do when editing these "Spell A-Z" files.

1. Chopped spells are those above Sor/Wiz3, Clr3, Drd3; Brd2; Pal1, Rgr1.

2. For spells available to multiple classes, you may have to scrub the spell level line.  For example a level reading "Brd3, Sor/Wiz3" needs to be edited to read only "Sor/Wiz3" (because Brd3 is out of the range of E6).

I think that's the import points, but let me know if I forgot to mention something obvious about this.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 7, 2011)

*Spell List I*

file: *Spell List I *

status: please proofread
comment:
I went ahead and grabbed this since the last one i took was a "no changes" file.  I expect to be done before 10 Jan.

was easy to do!  done, and ready for proof.


----------



## Lord Xtheth (Jan 8, 2011)

So... I was going over my version of the spell list and something hit me. Why do we need to write spells out as 1st, 2nd, 3rd when the reason its done that way in the first place no longer pertains to anything?

Why not call them 1st, 3rd, 5th level spells... kinda like how 4e did. They're the same spells, but the refference is to the level you get access to them instead of what level they "are" especially when we're only dealing with 3 levels of spells.

The only answer that pops up in my mind is to make it other system compatable, which is a good reason, but the question may as well be asked. I mean there are no stupid questions right?


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 8, 2011)

That's definitely a good (and logical) approach to modernizing spell levels, and such an alternative level scheme would make a good variant, or even basis for a whole d20 game variant.

This iteration, though, ought to be just a simple, "by-the-book", stripped-down version of the full d20 SRD.  Changing spell levels is quite a deviation, and would effectively make any material (characters, adventures, campaigns) already created for a typical E6 game incompatible with this SRD.  I'd like to avoid that. 

Alternative rules should wait for a later version or wiki, in order to keep the present  core SRD as close to WotC's official core text as possible, and maintain compatibility as much as possible.


----------



## Lord Xtheth (Jan 8, 2011)

the_orc_within said:


> That's definitely a good (and logical) approach to modernizing spell levels, and such an alternative level scheme would make a good variant, or even basis for a whole d20 game variant.
> 
> This iteration, though, ought to be just a simple, "by-the-book", stripped-down version of the full d20 SRD. Changing spell levels is quite a deviation, and would effectively make any material (characters, adventures, campaigns) already created for a typical E6 game incompatible with this SRD. I'd like to avoid that.
> 
> Alternative rules should wait for a later version or wiki, in order to keep the present core SRD as close to WotC's official core text as possible, and maintain compatibility as much as possible.




Thats fair, I do want to keep "my version" compatable with previous ones as well as yours too... so yeah, I think I'll leave that unchanged. 
It realy is looking like we're both on the exact same track thus far.


----------



## macrochelys (Jan 8, 2011)

*file: NPCClasses*

file: NPCClasses

status: dibs/in progress

comment: should be done this by the end of Jan 8th


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 8, 2011)

*Classes I*

file: Classes I 

status: proofreading

comment: 
aiming to have proofread done by  10 Jan.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 8, 2011)

*Spells (A-B)*

file:  Spells (A-B)

status: in progress

comment: not sure how long this will take, but will try to be done by 12 Jan.


----------



## macrochelys (Jan 9, 2011)

*file: NPCClasses*

file: NPCClasses

status: please proofread


----------



## Gilladian (Jan 9, 2011)

PROOFREADING done on ClassesII. No changes needed...


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 9, 2011)

Formatting question:  When I look at the classes files, the tables (such as class feature progressions) are broken down into poorly-formatted lines of text-- basically same sort of thing that a formatted table cut'n'pasted into the post editor here on the forum would look. 

Is this the way it's supposed to be in these rtfs, or is my text editor chomping up the files?  

I just don't want to accidentally do something that will make these files any uglier than they already are.


----------



## macrochelys (Jan 9, 2011)

the_orc_within said:


> Is this the way it's supposed to be in these rtfs, or is my text editor chomping up the files?




Probably your text editor. This is what they look like for me:


----------



## Lord Xtheth (Jan 9, 2011)

the_orc_within said:


> Formatting question: When I look at the classes files, the tables (such as class feature progressions) are broken down into poorly-formatted lines of text-- basically same sort of thing that a formatted table cut'n'pasted into the post editor here on the forum would look.
> 
> Is this the way it's supposed to be in these rtfs, or is my text editor chomping up the files?
> 
> I just don't want to accidentally do something that will make these files any uglier than they already are.




I don't suffer his problem, but I have office 07. Mine copies the whole chart as a picture and pastes it in my document. What I've been doing thoug for this is just re-typing the whole thing in excel.

If you don't have excel, a word processor, or anything similar, I highly reccomend open office.
www.openoffice.org
It has everything you need, and it's free.


----------



## macrochelys (Jan 9, 2011)

*file: SpellListI*

file: SpellListI

status: proofread and edited

comment: I removed reference to max modifiers based on level that were above the level cap. eg:

Cure Moderate Wounds: Cures 2d8 damage +1/level (max +10).

became

Cure Moderate Wounds: Cures 2d8 damage +1/level.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 9, 2011)

Ok, thanks for the confirmation on the format issues.  I've switched to a dusty old version of MS Word, and it looks fine now.

And good catch on the Spell List I maxes, macrochelys, thanks.


----------



## Veven1290 (Jan 10, 2011)

macrochelys said:


> file: SpellListI
> 
> status: proofread and edited
> 
> ...





This is just a though, there is probably not that many ways to boost caster level but an E6 sorcerer/wizard/bard with the first level of the wild mage prestige class can get their caster level up to 9. If they took the arcane disciple feat they could get healing spells too. There might be some (probably cheesy) way to get another two caster levels on top of that for a total of 11. In really extreme cases like that it might be prudent to leave the caps in the files.

Again, just a thought though, i haven't looked through my books for E6 relevant stuff so it might not even be an issue, especially considering the Wild Mage is not OGC.

Edit: By the way, I love that you guys are doing this! If my work load thins out a bit on the home front I would love to lend a hand. I'll drop a post if I have any free time.


----------



## Gilladian (Jan 10, 2011)

*File: spells C*

Spells C 

Status: In progress


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 10, 2011)

Veven1290 said:


> This is just a though, there is probably not that many ways to boost caster level but an E6 sorcerer/wizard/bard with the first level of the wild mage prestige class can get their caster level up to 9. If they took the arcane disciple feat they could get healing spells too. There might be some (probably cheesy) way to get another two caster levels on top of that for a total of 11. In really extreme cases like that it might be prudent to leave the caps in the files.



[MENTION=86652]macrochelys[/MENTION] , [MENTION=89401]Veven1290[/MENTION] - I think this is a good point.  I understand that level caps are built in by design for balance purposes, so it might be safer to keep the existing full SRD's RAW level caps explicitly in place rather than take the effort to E6ify them-- even though a typical E6 game might never actually see such a level cap in play.

Doing so allows game groups that "lean up" and somehow support especially high CLs (via houserules, magic items, etc) to still be covered by RAW; at the same time, high caps has no effect on very strict or "cautious approach" E6 game tables.  Additionally, some monsters might have higher CLs for the their SLAs, and therefore need the damage, etc, caps above what typical E6 PCs would need.  Lastly, not changing these sorts of things means _fewer mods to the SRD_-- and therefore less potential for errors/inconsistencies down the line.

So I'm inclined to agree with this: spell damage caps (and really _all_ CL-dependent variable caps, where applicable) should remain as in the full SRD. I'm open to any other thoughts on this, but in the meantime....

_*Note to those modifying "Spell List" files or "Spell A-Z" files:*_

CL-dependent level caps (eg, damage caps) should *not* be changed for the E6 SRD.  This is to maintain consistency with the full SRD; to account for monsters with SLAs at at higher CLs; to include gamers that include CL-boosting PrCs, metamagics, items, etc, at the table; etc. 

I believe this is the safest way to go that injects the fewest unknowns into RAW, but _please_ let me know if you think otherwise!



> I'll drop a post if I have any free time.



Any time!  Every little bit is welcome and helpful, now or down the line as things mature a bit.


----------



## macrochelys (Jan 10, 2011)

*file: SpellListII*

file: SpellListII

status: please proofread



the_orc_within said:


> So I'm inclined to agree with this: spell damage caps (and really _all_ CL-dependent variable caps, where applicable) should remain as in the full SRD.




In the interest of creating a document that is simply an edited SRD and which makes no assumptions of a given game, I agree with this completely. The version of SpellListI originally posted for proofreading should then be taken as the proper version.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 10, 2011)

macrochelys said:


> In the interest of creating a document that is simply an edited SRD and which makes no assumptions of a given game, I agree with this completely. The version of SpellListI originally posted for proofreading should then be taken as the proper version.



Sounds good, thanks.  I've noted the proper file.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 10, 2011)

file: *SpellListII *

status: proofread complete

comment:
no problems, looks good.  macrochelys's file in post#31 is good; to do list updated.


----------



## Gilladian (Jan 10, 2011)

*File: spells C*

Spells C edit completed

status: Please proofread


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 11, 2011)

file: *Character Classes I*

status: finished proofread - DONE

comment:
[edit: re-uploaded with minor corrections]

@Gilladian , no changes in text; just fixed text align in a couple table columns, and chopped out the empty reference to 3rd level spells in the Bard table.

[EDIT] Re-uploaded, with better table formatting.

(Sorry this took me so long, btw.  I was out of town visiting family this weekend, but I'm back, and now can more reliably/quickly get stuff done.)


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 11, 2011)

In the "TO DO" progress list in post#2, files with status "done" now link to the post containing the finalized 'golden' version of that file.


----------



## Gilladian (Jan 11, 2011)

Thanks! I had tremendous trouble trying to edit those stupid columns. Every time I tried to remove the blank columns, the whole chart disappeared! Oh, well. I figured you or somebody would fix it.


----------



## Lord Xtheth (Jan 11, 2011)

I'm almost complete "My version" of phaze 0. The only things I have left to do is the Equipment section, and Magic spells, then I'll be done my Alpha E6PHB. 
I'm not looking forward to putting together "my" Alpha E6Monsters


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 11, 2011)

Heh... yeah, I'm not looking forward to monsters, either, Lord Xtheth.  I suspect we'll try to keep as many monsters in as possible, but coming up with nice neutral criteria will take work, and then squaring that set of monsters with the spells, magic items, feats, etc in the rest of the SRD.  It will be an exercise in frustration.   But we'll get there.

I know your goal, Lord Xtheth, is a print pub of your version, so I'll be curious to understand what direction you end up taking in paring down the heftiest chunk of the game into something printable.  Good luck with it!


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 11, 2011)

*file: Spells A-B*

file: *Spells A-B*

Status: awaiting proofread

comment: nothing to note.
.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 11, 2011)

Gilladian said:


> Thanks! I had tremendous trouble trying to edit those stupid columns. Every time I tried to remove the blank columns, the whole chart disappeared! Oh, well. I figured you or somebody would fix it.



Well, in all fairness, all I did was was clear the contents in one place, and twiddle with justification here and there.  The tables themselves are still big empty things, ready for 9 levels of spells but with only a few low-level columns filled.  We'll definitely have to fix that, I suppose, before the html version gets made.  I'll try to figure that out sometime this week and doublecheck all the done files, or just do them all at once in the final cleanup.

(edit: finally figured this out & fixed these tables, so these tables are good to go!  Looks like macrochelys has this under control too, so I think we're all good on the table formatting front.)


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 11, 2011)

file: *NPCClasses*

status: proofreading DONE

comment:  No changes made, noted as finalized version.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 11, 2011)

file: *Spells C *

status: proofreading DONE

comment:
Edited out a few references to a few greather than 6th class level spells (eg, Rgr2, Brd3, etc).  Also nixed a couple spells that snuck through for this same reason.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 11, 2011)

*file: Spells D-E*

file: Spells D-E

status: awaiting proofread

comment:
Some of the _detect_ spells refer to CLs, etc, that are higher than E6 PCs are capable of under ordinary conditions.  I did _not_ change these, since a DM is likely to use monsters and/or magic that may well have power levels beyond what PCs are capable of (basically, this is the same sort of reasoning used to keep spell damage caps, etc, in place even though normal E6 characters can't hit those limits, as discussed upthread.)


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 12, 2011)

*file: Spells F-G*

file: *Spells F-G*

status: awaiting proofread

comment: no notes.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 12, 2011)

*file: Spells H-L*

file: *Spells H-L*

status: awaiting proofread

comment: nothing to note.


----------



## Gilladian (Jan 12, 2011)

*file: spells M-O*

Spells M-O 
status: being edited


----------



## Gilladian (Jan 12, 2011)

*file: spells M-O*

Spells M - O 
status: ready for proofread


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 12, 2011)

Heh, I'm glad I'm not the only one who finds these edits are taking less than a half hour to complete.

file: *Spells M - O *

status: proofreading DONE

comment: fixed a couple references to non-E6 level spells (eg, Pal2 or similar).


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 12, 2011)

*file: Spells P-R*

file: *Spells P-R*

status: in progress

comment:


----------



## macrochelys (Jan 12, 2011)

file: *SpellsA-B*
status: Proof read
comment: Removed a trailing comma, added a missing space.

file: *SpellsD-E*
status: Proof read
comment: No change

file: *SpellsF-G*
status: Proof read
comment: No change

file: *SpellsH-L*
status: Proof read
comment: No change


----------



## Lord Xtheth (Jan 12, 2011)

Seeing as you guys already put the lists together, I've liberally "stollen" your spell descriptions, and will use them.

Thanks for the assist


----------



## Gilladian (Jan 12, 2011)

*File: Spells S*

File: Spells S
Status: being edited


----------



## Gilladian (Jan 12, 2011)

*File: Spells S*

File: Spells S 

Status: Please Proofread


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 12, 2011)

*file: Spells P-R*

file: *Spells P-R*

status: awaiting proofread

comment:


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 12, 2011)

File: Spells S 

Status: proofreading DONE

comment: 
no changes


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 12, 2011)

*file: Basics*

file: *Basics and Ability Scores*

status: awaiting proofread

comment: 
While I was skimming for "no change" files, I found this one which only had an easy table change, so I went ahead and did it.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 12, 2011)

duplicate post


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 12, 2011)

*file: Spells T-Z*

file: *Spells T-Z*

status: awaiting proofread

comment:


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 12, 2011)

And that's that, the first third or so of the rough draft.   Thanks for all your input so far!

The following is a list of the files that remain to be "converted" to E6.  All other files are either finished, or else require no changes to convert to E6, afaict.  Most of these will require some discussion before they get modified, so let's hold off on actually touching them until we're all on the same page.  They're grouped by game function, except the first grouping which is simply "miscellaneous":
[sblock]
*THE REMAINING FILES TO DO*

_(moved over to post#2, to be tracked with other files)_

 # Prestige Classes (389k RTF) http://www.enworld.org/forum/5428316-post74.html
 # Traps (144k RTF) 
# Treasure (171k RTF)

# Feats (168k RTF)
# Monster Feats (26k RTF)

# Monsters (Animals) (709k RTF)
# Monsters (B-C) (251k RTF)
# Monsters (D-De) (433k RTF)
# Monsters (Di-Do) (258k RTF)
# Monsters (Dr-Dw) (617k RTF)
# Monsters (E-F) (414k RTF)
# Monsters (G) (438k RTF)
# Monsters (H-I)(326k RTF)
# Monsters (Intro-A) (311k RTF)
# Monsters (K-L) (297k RTF)
# Monsters (M-N) (409k RTF)
# Monsters (O-R) (364k RTF)
# Monsters (S) (461k RTF)
# Monsters (T-Z) (441k RTF)
# Monsters (Vermin) (274k RTF)
# Special Abilities and Conditions (146k RTF)
# Types, Subtypes, and Special Abilities (106k RTF)

# Magic Items I (Basics and Creation) (169k RTF)
# Magic Items II (Armor and Weapons) (465k RTF)
# Magic Items III (Potions, Rings, and Rods) (261k RTF)
# Magic Items IV (Scrolls, Staffs, and Wands) (788k RTF)
# Magic Items V (Wondrous Items) (727k RTF)
# Magic Items VI (Intelligent, Cursed, and Artifacts) (264k RTF)

# Legal Information (14k RTF)[/sblock]For each file or group of files, I'll make a post to get discussion going on that topic. As we talk things out, we can assign who will do what, and work the whole edit/proofread cycle from there.  EDIT: See progress reporting in post#2 for this.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 12, 2011)

PRESTIGE CLASSES

We need to decide how to approach these.  As near as I can tell, only three PrCs can be attained at 6th level by the core base classes: Assassin, Dragon Disciple, Horizon Walker (correct me if I'm wrong on that).  A handful of others are _almost_ attainable (ie, they're acheivable as 7th level PrCs, or else certain monstrous races might qualify).

Again, in order to stick as close to the official SRD as possible in these core rules, let's not include things like "prestige feats"; down-powered or more inclusive PrC prereqs; or PrCs as base classes.  Those types of things can go into the expanded SRD with variants.

So the question is what to do?  A few ideas:

1. Don't bother with PrCs; save them for the expanded SRD with variants.

2. Only include the PrCs (first level only) that are strictly attainable by RAW at or before 6th level by PCs;

3. Include the PC-attainable PrCs; _and_ a selection of the (level 7-ish) "almost attainable" PrCs as "monstrous prestige classes" (similar to how certain feats are categorized as "monstrous feats")

Any other suggestions or comments on PrCs?


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 12, 2011)

*Traps*

file: Traps

status: awaiting proofread

comment: 
- Edited out references to spells that do not exist in E6, including 'magical device' or 'spell' traps;
- Did NOT remove traps with CLs greater than 6th, as long as the associated spells were of 3rd level or lower.  
- In one case, i changed the class (wizard -> druid) that constructs the trap in question in order to fit an E6 game (b/c the spell in question was Drd2, Sor/Wiz4 or something.)


--original post follows--

TRAPS

This will probably be pretty straightforward.  SRD traps top out at CR10, which is appropriate for E6.  I think the only consideration here is weeding out magical traps that rely on spells of greater than 3rd level (ie, those that have been edited out of the game).

The only problem I can foresee is that we may end up chopping too many traps at the upper end of the CR range; unless that actually proves to be a problem, though, I'm not too worried about it now.

Any other concerns or suggestions?

_*EDIT:*_ 
I went ahead and edited all references to spells higher than 3rd level, and removed those traps.  I can't really see that anything else needs to be done on this file.   Any feedback on this, either typos, missed edits or blatantly wrong/bad logic here?


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 12, 2011)

TREASURE

There are two tables in this file that account for treasure values/compositions all the way up to EL20.  That's not really a problem, in and of itself (aside from the fact that a good half of it is way beyond E6 play in the strictest sense). 

What may prove to be a problem is that starting at EL10, the tables refer to "major" magic items-- many/most of which will likely be cut out of the core version of this SRD (assuming we stick to E6 item creation rules).

One way to deal with this is to just truncate the tables at 12th level, or whatever we decide for the monsters.  Or we could just keep the full EL20 table and consider it done.

Any comments?

_
(And that's all the discussion-starter posts from me for a bit.  I'll wait a short while to get responses.  If no response, I'll just post my decisions so we can continue editing/proofread process on the files in question.)_


----------



## Lord Xtheth (Jan 12, 2011)

I was considering just not dealing with prestige classes at all for "my" version of E6RPG. I mean the ones you get to chose from are very few, and you only get a max of what? 2 levels in one of them.

As far as traps go, if the SRD has them cap out at CL 10, that seems fine to me to include all of them.

As far as magic items go, That's a whole new monster. I think I'm only going to include Minor magic items, because in my little mind, anything more powerful kinda defeats the purpose of the "low power" idea E6.
Artefacts are an even BIGGER, BADDER monster, because the power of them vary so much, it's hard to tell sometimes which ones should be included or not.
I also don't think that I'll be doing anything with intellegent items either. 

Thats my take on things anyway


----------



## Gilladian (Jan 13, 2011)

the_orc_within said:


> PRESTIGE CLASSES
> 
> We need to decide how to approach these.
> 
> ...




I would go with one of these two ideas. 

As a side note: When I run my E6 game, I will be using a few 3 level prestige classes, based specifically on MY campaign world. They'll be attainable at 4th level, and will not specifically relate to any of the standard classes, except by coincidence/role overlap. If we ever get a wiki up where we can add our own variants, I'll post them.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 13, 2011)

Lord Xtheth said:
			
		

> As far as magic items go, That's a whole new monster.



Heh, I haven't thought much about magic items yet, just generic treasure in the 'value per EL' sense.  We'll likely hold off on magic items & rules til after we've more or less sorted out monsters.


----------



## Gilladian (Jan 13, 2011)

the_orc_within said:


> TREASURE
> 
> There are two tables in this file that account for treasure values/compositions all the way up to EL20.  That's not really a problem, in and of itself (aside from the fact that a good half of it is way beyond E6 play in the strictest sense).
> 
> ...




We might just keep all the minor magics, omit all major magics, and inspect the medium ones for incompatibility.


----------



## Gilladian (Jan 13, 2011)

I just wanted to let y'all know I will be out of pocket for the next couple of days as my husband and I go off to celebrate our (hmmm... 28th...) wedding anniversary Thursday and Friday.

See you back here Saturday. Feel free to make any decisions you want without me...


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 13, 2011)

Gilladian said:


> I would go with one of these two ideas.



That's how I'm leaning, as well.  It feels a little silly to include include so few PrCs, especially without RAW options to expand them in any meaningful way. But in the interest of all those E6 Horizon Walkers in existence  , maybe they ought to be included purely for compatibility?  We could always remove them before the final 'phase 1' release, and just drop them back in for the following iteration if we later decided to excise them. Meh, one more look at the material and decide tomorrow.


> As a side note: When I run my E6 game, I will be using a few 3 level prestige classes, based specifically on MY campaign world. They'll be attainable at 4th level, and will not specifically relate to any of the standard classes, except by coincidence/role overlap. If we ever get a wiki up where we can add our own variants, I'll post them.



That would be very cool.  I've attempted similar low-level PrCs but was never satisfied with the results, so I'd be interested in hearing how yours work out, actually.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 13, 2011)

Gilladian said:


> I just wanted to let y'all know I will be out of pocket for the next couple of days as my husband and I go off to celebrate our (hmmm... 28th...) wedding anniversary Thursday and Friday.
> 
> See you back here Saturday. Feel free to make any decisions you want without me...



Happy anniversary!  Have a nice time, see you later!


----------



## Lord Xtheth (Jan 13, 2011)

Well, with the help of any of you who contributed to the spell descriptions, my Alpha stage E6RPG "book" is ready to have it's first read through and edit. 
That should keep me occupied for a little bit.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 13, 2011)

Lord Xtheth said:


> Well, with the help of any of you who contributed to the spell descriptions, my Alpha stage E6RPG "book" is ready to have it's first read through and edit.



Already!  That's zippy work!   

I'm focusing on this srd for now-- at least until its alpha-- but I might be able to take a look a little later down the line.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 13, 2011)

Ok, for the files/rules discussed above, let's go with the following:

PRESTIGE CLASSES:  Go ahead and put the few prestige classes in the SRD, just to maintain compatibility.  I believe those are: Assassin, Dragon Disciple, Horizon Walker.  If presented as examples, then hopefully it won't seem quite so odd.  Still, we might roll back this decision, or decide to include a couple of the "almost" E6 classes for "lean-up" or gestalt games (as those are mentioned in the original E6 doc), but that's unlikely.

TRAPS: As the file in post#62, assuming review at some point.

TREASURE: Truncate the tables presented at EL12, assuming monsters get trunc'd at CR10 or 12.  Treasures beyond that level in a strict E6 game are likely to be very special and not suitable for a randomizing table, anyway.

If someone wants to tackle any of this before I get to it, go ahead.  Let's use the same system as before, with file, status and comments.  I'll maintain the master progress list in post#60, using the same conventions as before.  And I'll continue posting discussion points as we move along, so folks can chime in whenever.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 13, 2011)

*file: Prestige Classes*

file: *Prestige Classes*

status: awaiting proofread

comment:
Assassin, Dragon Disciple and Horizon Walker are the three core PrCs that seem to be attainable by PCs in the strictest E6.  Removed all other PrCs, as well as chopped down remaining tables and feature lists to one level.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 13, 2011)

*file: Treasure*

file: *Treasure*

status: awaiting proofread

comment:
I simply truncated the relevant tables at EL12.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 14, 2011)

Another call for input, and more stuff to start thinking about....

FEATS

These are split across two files: feats for PCs, and feats limited to monsters.  I think the simplest thing to do at this point is just to sort out the feats that strict E6 PCs cannot attain, and move those over to the Monster Feats (but keeping them categorized). The E6-specific feats in Stoughton's original doc will have to be added in, as well.  

At some point (after monsters are sorted out, I suppose), we'll have to completely remove any unused feats.  However, aside from really obvious non-E6 ones, tracking down those unreferenced feats might be a hassle and something to keep an eye on in the long term.

[edit] Also, should we include the General feats from other WotC Divine, Epic, and Psionics rules?  (I believe there are fewer than 10 that I can find at d20srd.org, iirc. Actually, I just counted, and there are actually roughly 25 E6-appropriate feats from other WotC ogc.)  Ordinarily, I'd say no; however, because E6 is very feat-dependent, and because these are "official" WotC OGC, I'd like to consider this.

Any other ideas, comments or suggestions on how to handle/approach feats?


MONSTERS

Ugh.  This could get messy.   For starters, I think we ought to simply chop at some arbitrary CR, then add/delete later.  I'm leaning toward CR12 (because those are solidly "overpowering" at ordinary 6th level), but I'm open to other opinions.  According to the database at Pen, Paper and Pixel, there are 586 monster statblocks in the SRD (not really a monster count, but it's the quickest number I could come up with).  Chopping at CR12 drops that to 486, whereas chopping at CR10 drops it to 448.  Not a lot of difference.

Ideally, this will get pared down further by selecting other criteria to narrow things down (eg, spells referenced)-- but after skimming the various "MonstersA-Z" files, plus the two "SpecialAbility" files, I'm realizing that this _will_ be difficult; we'll likely have to return to this a few times to get it internally consistent.  

So for now, I think cutting at a specific CR is good enough, if only so we can continue making progress and get to that First Draft stage.  But in the meantime, be thinking about how to further prune the monster list down; and how/whether to reference monster special abilities or powers that reference non-E6 spells, class features, or other excised material. 

Seriously, I'm _more_ than happy to hear any and all suggestions on this, because it's potentially a big headache!


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 14, 2011)

Here's a first shot at arranging the feats according to E6 restrictions.  

The first two sections are the SRD Feats and Monster Feats, but with higher-level feats moved over to Monster Feats.  (Fwiw, only 10 feats moved so fas as I could find with a quick search.)  The second group consists of Stoughton's suggested E6 feats.  The groups after that are the E6-appropriate General feats from the Divine and Psionics rules (there were no new ones from the Epic rules).[sblock]*SRD E6-APPROPRIATE FEATS*

____General Feats_
          o Acrobatic
          o Agile
          o Alertness
          o Animal Affinity
          o Armor Proficiency (Light)
                + Armor Proficiency (Medium)
                      # Armor Proficiency (Heavy)
          o Athletic
          o Augment Summoning
          o Blind-Fight
          o Combat Casting
          o Combat Expertise
                + Improved Disarm
                + Improved Feint
                + Improved Trip
                + Whirlwind Attack
          o Combat Reflexes
          o Deceitful
          o Deft Hands
          o Diligent
          o Dodge
                + Mobility
                      # Spring Attack
          o Endurance
                + Diehard
          o Eschew Materials
          o Exotic Weapon Proficiency
          o Extra Turning
          o Great Fortitude
          o Improved Counterspell
          o Improved Familiar (? borderline ?)
          o Improved Initiative
          o Improved Turning
          o Improved Unarmed Strike
                + Deflect Arrows
                + Improved Grapple
                + Snatch Arrows
          o Investigator
          o Iron Will
          o Leadership (but must modify table)
          o Lightning Reflexes
          o Magical Aptitude
          o Martial Weapon Proficiency
          o Mounted Combat
                + Mounted Archery
                + Ride-By Attack
                      # Spirited Charge
                + Trample
          o Natural Spell
          o Negotiator
          o Nimble Fingers
          o Persuasive
          o Point Blank Shot
                + Far Shot
                + Precise Shot
                + Rapid Shot
                      # Manyshot
                + Shot On The Run
          o Power Attack
                + Cleave
                      # Great Cleave
                + Improved Bull Rush
                + Improved Overrun
                + Improved Sunder
          o Quick Draw
          o Rapid Reload
          o Run
          o Self-Sufficient
          o Shield Proficiency
                + Improved Shield Bash
                + Tower Shield Proficiency,
          o Simple Weapon Proficiency
          o Skill Focus
          o Spell Focus
                + Greater Spell Focus
          o Spell Mastery
          o Spell Penetration
                + Greater Spell Penetration
          o Stealthy
          o Toughness
          o Track
          o Two-Weapon Fighting
                + Two-Weapon Defense
                + Improved Two-Weapon Fighting
          o Weapon Finesse
          o Weapon Focus
                + Weapon Specialization

____Item Creation Feats_
          o Brew Potion
          o Craft Magic Arms And Armor
          o Craft Wand
          o Craft Wondrous Item
          o Scribe Scroll

____Metamagic Feats_
          o Empower Spell
          o Enlarge Spell
          o Extend Spell
          o Heighten Spell
          o Maximize Spell (? borderline utility; only applicable to cantrips)
          o Silent Spell
          o Still Spell
          o Widen Spell (? borderline utility; only applicable to cantrips)


*SRD MONSTER FEATS*

          o Ability Focus
          o Awesome Blow
          o Craft Construct  
          o Empower Spell-Like Ability
          o Flyby Attack
                + Improved Flyby Attack       
          o Hover
          o Improved Natural Armor
          o Improved Natural Attack
          o Multiattack
                + Improved Multiattack
          o Multiweapon Fighting
                + Improved Multiweapon Fighting
                      # Greater Multiweapon Fighting
          o Quicken Spell-Like Ability
          o Snatch
          o Wingover

____plus those moved over from the normal feats section:_
    - Stunning Fist
    - Improved Precise Shot
    - Greater Two-Weapon Fighting
    - Greater Weapon Focus
    - Greater Weapon Specialization
    - Craft Rod
    - Craft Staff
    - Quicken Spell


*E6-SPECIFIC FEATS FROM STOUGHTON'S DOC (7)*

Expanded Spell Knowledge
Expanded Caster Stamina
Restoration
Stone to Flesh
Wondrous Rings

Ability Training
Ability Advancement


*FEATS FROM WotC OGC DIVINE RULES (18)*

Blindsight, 5ft
Energy Substitution
Extra Music
Eyes in the Back of Your Head
Fleet of Foot
Hold the Line 
Jack of All Trades
Knock-Down
Persistent Spell
Plant Control
Plant defiance
Power Critical
Reach Spell
Repeat Spell
Sacred Spell
Sharp-Shooting
Subdual Substitution
Superior Expertise


*FEATS FROM WotC OGC EPIC RULES *
(I believe all of these are already included among the SRD Monster Feats)


*FEATS FROM WotC OGC PSIONIC RULES (7)*

Deadly Precision
Greater Manyshot
Open Minded
Rapid Metabolism
Reckless Offense
Sidestep Charge
Stand Still[/sblock]All the funky symbols are cut'n'paste artifacts.  Please let me know if anything looks amiss.  

And now that the actual list of (technically) non-SRD WotC OGC feats is out there, do they look worthy of inclusion at this point, or should they be kept on hold, until we get around to an expanded SRD with variant rules?


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 14, 2011)

more thoughts on... 

MONSTERS

After thinking more about it and briefly looking over the monster list, it's looking like it might easier to make the cutoff at a lower CR (for ex, at CR6, which shows 325 monsters in the PPP database) then add monsters to the list, rather than define a high CR cutoff and delete a lot of monsters.  

In either case, the most serious issue definitely appears to be determining how to include which monster spells/spell-likes that are excluded from PC use in the strictest E6 rule set.  Holding to only 6th level PC rules cuts out many otherwise excellent E6 creatures; but allowing higher-level powers means we have to decide exactly how they should be included (eg, a "Monster Spells" section? Inlined in the monster description text?  Tweak the monsters to fit E6, or a "conversion guide" for each monster? or...?).

Anyway, we're still not quite ready to actually start editing Monster files yet, just thinking about approaches at the moment.  As always, I'd love to here others' input and perspective on any of this!

Also, apologies for the long monologue of posts, here!


----------



## Lord Xtheth (Jan 14, 2011)

What I was thinking about with monsters is updating them, cleaning them up and including all the rules that pertain to them in their stat block. Taking 4e monsters as an example of how it should look. Don't change anything, so it is still compatable, but make sure all the rules for the monster are included with the monster. 
It'll take a little bit of work, but thats my plan for when I get to "my" E6Monsters write up.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 14, 2011)

I definitely think updating the statblocks to a more modern and inclusive style is in order-- especially for "public" presentations (eg, books or online references).  I do worry a bit about extra-long statblocks, especially for creatures with caster levels, and/or complex Types and a Subtype or two.  Even a modest, low-level outsider has a lot of references to references to references in their descriptions; when "unfolded" into a single statblock, that becomes quite wordy.  But hopefully it's doable with some clever formatting.

Of course, that's also a pretty good argument for including fewer monsters, rather than statting up the kitchen sink....

Gah, one problem always leads to another, doesn't it!   For the time being, I guess we'll just collate the info itself, and organize it later.


----------



## Gilladian (Jan 15, 2011)

*Monsters*

The nice thing if we're thinking about a wiki for our presentation is that it doesn't matter how long a statblock is. We have no space limitations.

Although scrolling through it might be a pain during play, and for those who actually PRINT things, they'd have to decide what to print/edit out. 

I wonder if there's a way to do a wiki page with "spoilers" so things could be opened out or closed up as the reader prefers. I guess it depends on what wiki software we end up using...

As far as selecting monsters for inclusion, I'd go with the idea of cutting off at CR 6 or maybe 8, and then "choosing to include" rather than exclude. Anyone can go back and add more if they don't have enough options. Weeding down even further becomes more problematic.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 15, 2011)

Gilladian said:


> The nice thing if we're thinking about a wiki for our presentation is that it doesn't matter how long a statblock is. We have no space limitations.



  Yeah, I'm not too worried about it for now. In the rtf bundle, _que sera, sera_; and the online offering will have all kinds of possibilities for changing the view (onscreen v print, etc), sblocking, popup definitions, and so on.  We've got time to work that out.



> As far as selecting monsters for inclusion, I'd go with the idea of cutting off at CR 6 or maybe 8, and then "choosing to include" rather than exclude. Anyone can go back and add more if they don't have enough options. Weeding down even further becomes more problematic.



The more I look over the monster list, the more I lean this way, as well.  Even doing that, though, a lot of really good monsters (even entire subtypes) will have abilities based on 4th level spells or higher, or have actual caster levels beyond 6th.  We'll have to consider how we're going to handle that: excluding those creatures, altering them to E6 standards, inlining the info in the statblocks, extending the special abilities glossary, or the like.  I'll pull out a few illustrations of these sorts of things at some point this weekend.

So let's plan on chopping monsters above CR 6.  But also take a look at the monster list to get an idea for several CR7-9, and a handful of higher level ones that might be appropriate in various roles in an E6 game, a dozen "favorites" or something.

BTW, feats:  Any opinion on including the extra General feats in the baseline SRD, as per the list upthread (post#77)?  They're technically not SRD, but they are bundled along with it.


----------



## Gilladian (Jan 15, 2011)

the_orc_within said:


> BTW, feats:  Any opinion on including the extra General feats in the baseline SRD, as per the list upthread (post#77)?  They're technically not SRD, but they are bundled along with it.




Include 'em!


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 15, 2011)

Right then.  I'll hack together the feats files and get those posted this weekend for proofreading.   And we may as well get started on chopping down the MonsterA-Z files, as well, using the same "dibs/proofread" system as before.

For now, just chop anything over CR6-- including secondary statblocks (eg, the scary troll hunter that's statted out in the Troll entry)-- and make some notes of what CR7-12ish ones you'd like to see included as well, so we can discuss those after and quickly add them back in when we're done.  If there's any problems with tables or formatting, mention it in the comments so that can get fixed up during proofread.

BTW, if anyone looks at it, I've moved the file progress list in post#60 into *post#2* with the others, just so they're all in one place.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 15, 2011)

*file: Feats, Monster Feats*

file: *Feats* and *Monster Feats*

status: awaiting proofread

comment:
Also including select [General] feats from OGC Epic, Psionics and Divine rules files.  A few notes on individual feats, things to look over and comment on:

SRD Feats

- Improved Familiar: merged alignment & type/subtype familiar tables and truncated to CL6, plus some rewording to account for table merge.
- Leadership: truncated to Leadership Score 14, and 2nd-level followers, plus rewording as needed.  _Would really like feedback on these mods._
- Maximize Spell, Widen Spell: not very useful in strict E6, but retained
- Forge Ring: removed, replaced with Stoughton's Wondrous Rings

Stoughton's E6 feats

- Wondrous Rings: reworded to almost exact text of Forge Ring
- Restoration, Stone to Flesh: reworded from Stoughton's original; inlined (approx) spell text.  _Would really like feedback on this one._
- Ability Training, Ability Advancement: reworded from Stoughton's original text.

Feat Moves and Additions

- moved following feats from Feats.rtf to MonsterFeats.rtf for being too high-level:
[sblock]Stunning Fist 
    Improved Precise Shot  
Greater Two-Weapon Fighting 
Greater Weapon Focus 
Greater Weapon Specialization 
    Craft Rod 
    Craft Staff 
    Quicken Spell [/sblock]
- added following feats from Divine and Psionics rules to Feats.rtf:[sblock]
 FEATS FROM WotC OGC DIVINE RULES

Blindsight, 5ft
Energy Substitution
Extra Music
Eyes in the Back of Your Head
Fleet of Foot
Hold the Line 
Jack of All Trades
Knock-Down
Persistent Spell
Plant Control
Plant defiance
Power Critical
Reach Spell
Repeat Spell
Sacred Spell
Sharp-Shooting
Subdual Substitution
Superior Expertise

FEATS FROM WotC OGC PSIONIC RULES

Deadly Precision
Greater Manyshot
Mind over Body
Open Minded
Rapid Metabolism
Reckless Offense
Sidestep Charge    //made this one [General], since it didn't have any specific [Psionic] reference
Stand Still[/sblock]- added following feats from Epic rules to MonsterFeats.rtf:[sblock]
*FEATS FROM WotC OGC EPIC RULES *

Improved Flyby Attack 
Improved Multiattack
Improved Multiweapon Fighting
Greater Multiweapon Fighting[/sblock]


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 15, 2011)

*file: Monsters Intro-A*

file: *Monsters Intro-A*

status: in progress

comment:


----------



## Animal (Jan 16, 2011)

first of all, let me hand epic kudos to you guys. this project will be of much use for many people across the globe, like myself.
secondly, seeing that you've recently tackled the monster manual, i'd like to note that a lot of higher level monsters might probably need a complete overhaul. for example, i can't imagine a D&D game without such BBEGs as liches or vampires. but they seem to be too high level for E6 campaigns. how shall you deal with such monsters? also, some generic monsters (invisible stalker, ogre mage, hill giant) will turn out pretty epic in E6, almost godlike. should they be toned down a bit?


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 16, 2011)

Animal said:


> first of all, let me hand epic kudos to you guys. this project will be of much use for many people across the globe, like myself.
> secondly, seeing that you've recently tackled the monster manual, i'd like to note that a lot of higher level monsters might probably need a complete overhaul. for example, i can't imagine a D&D game without such BBEGs as liches or vampires. but they seem to be too high level for E6 campaigns. how shall you deal with such monsters? also, some generic monsters (invisible stalker, ogre mage, hill giant) will turn out pretty epic in E6, almost godlike. should they be toned down a bit?



You're definitely right on all counts.  We're still trying to figure these kinds of questions out, at the moment.  Basically, the first pass will be a straight chop at CR6, plus add in a few more that "feel" appropriate-- just for the sake of making progress and getting to a working rough draft.  But I've noted that even those low-ish level ones will have lots of little headaches to consider (nymphs are Drd_7_ casters; all archons have Greater Teleport; erinyes have Trueseeing; etc); these issues will be considered in the second pass.

But really we're not going to be toning anything down, per se, as that requires a lot of deviation from existing SRD stats (which we're trying to adhere to as closely as possible).  Instead, we'll simply exclude monsters (etc), and leave it to the reader to power things up to taste.  If anything, we'll just end up doing one or more of the following:
- just keep the dinkiest monsters around, and inline whatever explanatory text is necessary (eg, SLAs); 
- do some very minimal "E6 conversion" on a _very few_ creatures (eg, maybe restrict the nymph's 4th level spell slot to metamagicked spells); 
- add some words on advancing lesser monsters to be more epic (or suggest substitutes); 
- simply point to other sources (or build an appendix) for more killer monsters, and provide guidance on tweaking them for E6.

Also keep in mind that we're hoping this is just the beginning.  Right now, we're only working on the most restrictive SRD-- a fundamental baseline that most E6 games have in common.  Eventually, though, we hope to make that bundle of ugly RTF files the core of a broader system around which a community website could be built, likely along the lines of a wiki.  At that point,  it will ideally turn into a "buffet" of options, as appealing to "grim'n'gritty" E6ers, as to high-power "superheroic" E6ers.  

Moreover, the baseline SRD rtfs will give an easier starting point for folks interested in creating out-of-the-box game products: instead of hacking the full SRD down to size, they can focus on tinkering rules, selecting/modifying their own selection of monsters, spell and items, uilding up their own rule system, and so on. 

Time will tell, of course. 

And please feel free to pop in at any time and jump into the conversation, grab a file to proofread, offer some opinions, give technical suggestions, or whatever.  The more folks joining in, the merrier!


----------



## Animal (Jan 16, 2011)

actually i'd very much like to help. not sure how though.
and looks like most of the monster feats are off limits for E6 monsters. i'm not sure i understand how the proofreading works, but i just highlighted the prerequisites that apparently can't be reached by E6 monsters and characters. 
View attachment MonsterFeats.rtf


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 16, 2011)

Ah!  Now that's useful... This will make a good reference for weeding out monsters and later removing unused feats. Thanks!


If you'd like to help, right now we're just taking monster files and chopping out everything above CR6; we'll re-add higher ones (and remove problematic lower-level ones, if any) later.  You could just grab a "MonstersA-Z" file and start chopping; or look through the SRD monsters and choose a handful of CR7+ monsters that seem appropriate to E6 with little or no modification (remember, PCs are restricted to BAB+6 because they're restricted to 6 levels... but monsters don't have that limitation on BAB from racial HD! ). The single most important thing to remember is that the point of this first "Phase 0" of the project is to keep as close to the existing SRD as possible, with few changes; cutting material is usually preferable to changing material.

You can take a look at the references in post#1 to see what info is being used as the baseline; and the master progress-report lists in post#2, to see generally what needs to be done (That list is _usually_ close to correct-- I try to keep it up-to-date-- but also double check the last page or two of the thread to make sure no one's already working on it).  

Proofing is pretty simple: Sprinkled throughout the thread you'll see notes in dark green like "awaiting proofread" or something. If you find one that hasn't been addressed (again, check post#2 or followup posts), basically look over the file, and make a post like:







> file: blahblah
> status: done (in bright green, so people can see it) (or "awaiting proofread", if you made a lot of changes and want another look)
> comments: any changes or comments you made, or a note that all is well.



And if you made changes, attach the new file to your post; or just note the problems and ask someone else to make changes; or something. It might also be helpful to @ mention the person who originally edited the file, so y'all can sort out any discrepancies or differences of opinion should they arise.

If you'd like to make a first round edit, just claim "dibs" by making a post like:







> file: blahblah
> status: dibs/in progress (in light blue, so people can see it)
> comment: usually empty, but you could also make a note of what youre doing if it takes several days, or something.



When you're done, make another post (or update the same post, if no/few other posts have been made since you chose a file), but change the status to "proofread please" (in dark green again, so people can see it). Hopefully, someone will see it, proof it, and either update or 'bless' it; feel free to @ mention me or pm, and I'll take a look if no one else does.

Ugh, that sounds horribly confusing!  There are lots of examples upthread of how it works, maybe that will help.

And if you dont want to venture into the mess with the files, just sticking your head in, double-checking the proofed files, making comments and asking quesions, offering opinions when questions go out, or the like is also extremely helpful.  You can always post your thoughts, PM me and/or whoever's responsible for a given file, or whatever.  It's all pretty informal-- and hopefully the first phase will be done in a couple weeks anyway.


----------



## Lord Xtheth (Jan 16, 2011)

I know this isn't much of an update, but I'm still going through "my" write-up, doing some minor edits and inserting my self-copied tables. 

Ps: MS word SUCKS for copy/pasting tables from excel


----------



## Gilladian (Jan 16, 2011)

*File: Monsters - Animals*

File: Monsters - Animals
Status: Dibs

I figure this will be an easy one!


----------



## Gilladian (Jan 16, 2011)

*File: Monsters - Animals*

Status: Awaiting Proofreading

removed:
Elephant
Octopus, Giant
Squid, Giant
Whale, Cachalot

Made no other changes (Edit: these were all between 7 and 9, had no real offending abilities, and are prime candidates in my book to go back in as useful, or scary but not overwhelming monsters).


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 16, 2011)

Hehe, so after that edit, there's nothing left in E6 with big scary tentacles?!?!    Yeah, I definitely think all of those are excellent candidates to go back in.

I also really like that you've posted the excluded monsters that are candidates for re-inclusion.  Let's keep doing that, to make it easier for folks to keep tabs on excised monsters.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 16, 2011)

*file: Monsters Intro-A*

file: *Monsters Intro-A
* 
 status: in progress

comments:
to be redone
Monsters chopped but might be considered for re-inclusion--

Aboleth - CR7
Animated object (Garg, Colossal) - CR7,10 (no new abilities over lesser ones)
Arrowhawk, Elder - CR8 (no new abilities over lesser ones)
Athach - CR8 (no magical abilities)
Avoral - CR9


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 16, 2011)

file: *Monsters - Animals*
status: proofread complete - *DONE*

comment: looks good, no changes.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 16, 2011)

*file: Monsters B-C*

file: *Monsters B-C*

status: in progress

comment:
to be redone

probably appropriate E6 monsters dropped --

behir - CR8 - nonmagical
bulette - CR7 - iconic!
chimera - CR7 - classical, mythological
chuul - CR7 - nonmagical


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 16, 2011)

*file: Monsters D-DE*

file: *Monsters D-DE*

status: in progress

comment:
to be redone

Cut monsters that may be appropriate to re-include:

demon, succubus - CR7
devil, erinyes - CR8

one or two slightly higher-level infernals (eg, vrock, bone devil)?


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 17, 2011)

*file: Monsters Di-Do*

file: *Monsters Di-Do*

status: in progress

comment:
to be redone

Dropped several animal types; probably to re-include, for same reasons as other animals --

dinosaur, elasmosaurus - CR7
dinosaur, triceratops - CR9
dinosaur, tyrannosaurus - CR8

dire bear - CR7
dire shark - CR9
dire tiger - CR8


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 17, 2011)

*file: Monsters Dr-Dw*

file: *Monsters Dr-Dw*

status: in progress

comment:
to be redone

Dropped the following monsters that might be re-included--

dragons CR7 to CR10 or so? (CR6 covers only young or lesser dragons)
dragon turtle - CR9 - iconic
dragonne - CR7 - mythological feel
drider - CR7 - iconic, 6th level caster ability


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 17, 2011)

file: *Monsters E-F*

status: in progress

comment:


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 17, 2011)

Looking for input/advice/comment on...

MONSTERS

Ok, after looking at several files, I'm seeing some distinct patterns.   It's looking like about 2/3s of chopped monsters are candidates to get added back in-- often just because they're more powerful versions of included monsters.  I imagine this pattern is emerging simply because most CR6 monsters aren't actually very challenging for a level 6 party; "very difficult" solos are expected to be CR10+. IOW, cutting at CR6 is removing all challenging monsters from the mix. 

Of the candidates for re-inclusion, I'm also getting the feeling that these fall into two groups: obvious 'no brainer' creatures-- such as beefy animals or giants-- which are challenging simply because they are bigger, meaner, faster, toxicker, etc;  and then other creatures that "feel" correct for re-inclusion (eg, for being iconic, mythological, etc) but possess abilities that likely outclass PCs, effectively increasing their CRs in a strict E6 campaign.

_* So I'm thinking we should change the approach to monster selection.*_ I suggest the CR cutoff be raised to CR10 or 12.  Then, instead of noting what ought to be re-included, just note creatures which are "highly magical" (likely outsiders, fey, some aberrations, creatures with caster levels of 7+); these would either be eventually discarded, edited slightly for E6ization, or else shifted to an appendix of more dangerous "lean up" monsters (or even just named but not statted, with a reference to the full SRD, and noted as "appropriate for higher power, lean-up E6 games").  End result will be a monster list including all monsters up to CR6; plus more mundane ones of higher CR; and as well as notes on potential problem creatures to excise.

I think this will make editing monster files a bit easier.  Instead of (for example) cutting 10 statblocks, then re-including 6 or 7 of them, we'll just cut 3 obviously non-E6 and weed out other ones on a case by case basis, either now or in the next phase. And those numbers-- cut 10, re-add 6-- are roughly what I'm seeing per file.   If nothing else, I really believe this will save time and reformatting headaches down the line.

I'll briefly hold off further monster edits for input.  If I don't hear anything, I'll re-do the files already done as discussed above.


----------



## Gilladian (Jan 17, 2011)

the_orc_within said:


> Looking for input/advice/comment on...
> 
> MONSTERS
> 
> I'll briefly hold off further monster edits for input.  If I don't hear anything, I'll re-do the files already done as discussed above.





I think your suggestion is perfectly valid. I'm seeing the same trend you are and have no problem with just listing with the posted document a short comment about which monsters maybe should be edited/given a second viewing.


----------



## ideasmith (Jan 18, 2011)

As I understand it, a single CR 6 creature is supposed to be a match for a single level 6 PC. The rulebook suggests setting a CR 6 as an average encounter on the assumption that most encounters should not be even. But since some encounters should, a party of 6th level PCs should sometimes fight a single creature of above CR 6. As I understand it:

A single level 6 PC is a match for a single CR 6 creature.

Two level 6 PCs are a match for a single CR 8 creature.

Four level 6 PCs are a match for a single CR 10 creature.

Eight level 6 PCs are a match for a single CR 12 creature.

In any case, leaving elephants out would be just ridiculous.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 18, 2011)

ideasmith said:


> In any case, leaving elephants out would be just ridiculous.



Hehe, agreed!     I believe the numbers you cited are the rationale behind the CR+5="overwhelming" rule of thumb: at that point, an encounter is more than 50% likely to be a TPK (assuming 4 PCs).

All right then!  Let's shift gears and change the cutoff to CR12.  I'll redo the files I've already done.  Gilladian, iirc, the "Monsters-Animals" file tops out at CR10-ish, so it becomes a "no change" file, right?

For creatures in the range of CR7-12, just make a note of ones you think are likely more difficult in a strict E6 game than their CR would indicate (though if monster is obviously too difficult, feel free to just chuck it, even if it is less than CR12).  I'm guessing noted creatures will be those with two or three of:
- high DR; 
- high SR; 
- spells/SLAs/Su abilities that rely on 4th+ level spells (_especially_ save-or-die effects).  
- other stuff I've forgotten, probably

We'll figure out exactly what to do with these more problematic monsters during a later pass through the material.


----------



## ideasmith (Jan 18, 2011)

the_orc_within said:


> Hehe, agreed!     I believe the numbers you cited are the rationale behind the CR+5="overwhelming" rule of thumb: at that point, an encounter is more than 50% likely to be a TPK (assuming 4 PCs).
> 
> All right then!  Let's shift gears and change the cutoff to CR12.  I'll redo the files I've already done.  Gilladian, iirc, the "Monsters-Animals" file tops out at CR10-ish, so it becomes a "no change" file, right?



According to the monster filter (http://www.penpaperpixel.org/tools/d20monsterfilter/index.php) I checked, the highest animal CR in the SRD is 9 (4-way tie between triceratops, dire shark, roc, and giant squid). 


the_orc_within said:


> For creatures in the range of CR7-12, just make a note of ones you think are likely more difficult in a strict E6 game than their CR would indicate (though if monster is obviously too difficult, feel free to just chuck it, even if it is less than CR12).  I'm guessing noted creatures will be those with two or three of:
> - high DR;
> - high SR;
> - spells/SLAs/Su abilities that rely on 4th+ level spells (_especially_ save-or-die effects).
> ...



Abilities that rely or 4th+ level spells will need to be tagged in any case, since the spells involved will need to be included somewhere, possibly in a monstrous spells doc analogous to the current monstrous feats doc.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 18, 2011)

ideasmith said:


> Abilities that rely or 4th+ level spells will need to be tagged in any case, since the spells involved will need to be included somewhere, possibly in a monstrous spells doc analogous to the current monstrous feats doc.



Ugh, don't remind me.   We're still mulling over how to do this.

I've considered a "monstrous spells" doc as you've mentioned; or, isolating all monsters that need them, and refer to the full SRD; or else simply in-lining the ability (ie, the spell text, but 'harwired' to the requisite numbers) in the statblock.   Written out as spells, there's the advantage of, well, having the spells there in a format ready for "lean up" E6 campaign that want to provide PC access to them; this also minimizes edits to the official SRD text.

(Actually, on that note, how do we do that for the E6 feats "Restoration" and "Stone to flesh"?  I made a half-baked attempt somewhere upthread to sort of make spell-but-not-really-a-spell in the file Feats.rtf, but it's just a place holder with little thought put into it at this point.  Suggestions on handling that would be welcome.)

Another thing we'll need to consider is monsters that act like spellcasters  in excess of 6th level (eg, nymph casts as a Drd7, thus has a 4th level slot).  Do we limit that slot to metamagicked spells?  Do we add all 4th level Drd spells to the "monstrous spells" doc?  If so, then why not do the same for Clr and Sor/Wiz-- and where do we detail Drd7 (etc) casters?  Or do we modify the nymph to be a 6th level caster, with bonus feats to bring her power level back up to 7th? Or...?

But I'd like to finish up the monster list first, then get an idea of what's required.  I'm thinking we'll get the rough draft out the door, and come back to it later with fresh eyes.


----------



## Gilladian (Jan 18, 2011)

ideasmith said:


> According to the monster filter (d20 Monster Filter :: Pen, Paper, & Pixel) I checked, the highest animal CR in the SRD is 9 (4-way tie between triceratops, dire shark, roc, and giant squid).




Interestingly the triceratops and roc are NOT in the Animals file. Triceratops should be in with the dinosaurs, shouldn't it? I don't know why roc isn't with the other animals, except that despite being classed as "gargantuan animal", it clearly isn't "just" an animal. 

But yes, the animals file should/can be left untouched, as far as I'm concerned. Ephelants should not be extincted in E6!



ideasmith said:


> Abilities that rely or 4th+ level spells will need to be tagged in any case, since the spells involved will need to be included somewhere, possibly in a monstrous spells doc analogous to the current monstrous feats doc.




Orc_within has mentioned the complexities of 4th level spell casting monsters. I'm all for one of two methods of dealing with them - either just leave the 4th level spell slot open for metamagic (with a clear note that this is the intention), or replace that spell slot with a special ability that (somewhat) mimics a useful 4th level spell, but include a note for "lean up" dms that if they intend to allow 4th level spells, this slot should be reopened.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 18, 2011)

I'm going a bit slow on the redo here, just so I can really understand how pervasive all these higher level spell-dependent special abilities are. There are quite a few (even low-CR) critters with higher-level SLAs that will have to be incorporated into monster statblocks or "special abilities" files, so it's becoming a concern since we've been paying attention to minimizing edits to the official SRD up to this point.

So basically, i'm just making a couple lists: one of mainly mundane, minimally magical critters; and one of highly magical ones (with access to any special ability that references a spell of level 4+).  

Anyway, I'll try to prep and post these lists later today when I've got time.  Hopefully they'll be helpful in sorting out this monster chopping process.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 18, 2011)

Gilladian said:


> Interestingly the triceratops and roc are NOT in the Animals file. Triceratops should be in with the dinosaurs, shouldn't it? I don't know why roc isn't with the other animals, except that despite being classed as "gargantuan animal", it clearly isn't "just" an animal.
> 
> But yes, the animals file should/can be left untouched, as far as I'm concerned. Ephelants should not be extincted in E6!



Yes, I saw dinos and dire animals in the D-files, and I suppose a few other oddballs are scattered throughout.  I think ideasmith simply pulled all the "Animal" type creatures out of the database.  It's good to know they all top out at CR9.

Long live the Oliphant!


----------



## ideasmith (Jan 18, 2011)

the_orc_within said:


> (Actually, on that note, how do we do that for the E6 feats "Restoration" and "Stone to flesh"?  I made a half-baked attempt somewhere upthread to sort of make spell-but-not-really-a-spell in the file Feats.rtf, but it's just a place holder with little thought put into it at this point.  Suggestions on handling that would be welcome.)




I would suggest feats that enhance existing spells, without making things too easy. Possibly something like: 

Remove Negative Level [General]
Prerequisite: Ability to cast remove curse, Knowledge (religion) 9 ranks.
Benefit: You may use remove curse to remove negative levels.  This application of remove curse is not automatic. The caster makes a Knowledge (religion) check with a DC equal to (10+caster level of effect, or HD of affecting creature if no caster level). On a success, negative level is removed with no level loss. On a failure, the caster takes a negative level. 

Dispel Petrification [General]
Prerequisite: Ability to cast dispel magic, Knowledge (arcana) 9 ranks.
Benefit: You may use dispel magic to remove petrification.  This application of dispel magic only works on the birthday of the petrified creature.
Special: If you are off to fight a cockatrice, you just might want to tell your allies when your birthday is.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 19, 2011)

As promised, here's the list of monster info gleaned from the CR0-12 critters in the files MonstersA-F.  All of these guys have one or more references in their statblocks to a 4th+ level spell, and therefore technically doesn't exist in the strictest E6 sense.  Some of them (usu. marked as "in description" somehow) are reference spells that the creature is immune to, unaffected by: these things can probably just be edited out of the statblock. Others refer to healing/recovery details, and could also be edited out-- but they also likely indicate that critter is way of of E6's league. [sblock]
A        .

aboleth (refs at least 7 spells)

acherai (insanity)

archons (Subtype refs gr tport)

avoral (fear, dim door, trueseeing)

B-C        .

barghest (charm monst, crushin despair, dim door; plus wish, resurrection, etc in "feed" description)
barghest, gr (mass bull str, mass enlarge person)

blink dog (dim door)

D-De    .

demons--
- babau (gr tport)
- bebelith (plane shift)
- hezrou (gr tport, blasphemy, chaos hammer, unholy blight)
- quasit (commune)
- retriever (discern location)
- succubus (charm monster, ethereal jaunt, gr tport)
- vrock (telekinesis, gr tport)

derro (confusion, miracle,wish in madness description)

devils--
- hamatula (gr tport, orders wrath, unholy blight)
- barbazu (gr tport)
- bone (gr tport, dim anchor, wall ice)
- erinyes (charm monst, gr tport, unholy blight, trueseeing)
- imp (commune)

devourer (confusion, control undead, lsr planar ally, true seeing; plus several in "spell deflection" description)

Di-Do    .
none

Dr-Dw    .

dragons--
 - none at points where I chopped.

dryad (tree stride)


E-F        .
earth elemental (refs move earth in "earthglide" ability)

ethereal filcher (refs ethereal jaunt in "ethereal jaunt" Su)
ethereal marauder (ditto)

formian--
- taskmaster (dominate monster)
- myrmarch (charm monst, gr. tport, dictum, orders wrath)[/sblock]Looking over this (incomplete) sample, you can see that a few abilities are recurring (for ex, greater teleport, and maybe trueseeing and charm monster) and might be candidates for their own special abilities entries.

Really, though,I think this simply shows that it's a case by case thing.  So, I'll suggest at this point that we continue on with the monster file edits, simply chopping at CR12, but still noting ones with lots of SLAs or other mentions of 4th+ level spell references.  

When we're done, I'll generate a master list like this one (ie, finish the one sblocked above), so we can see where the biggest half dozen or so commonalities are and turn those into special abilities. After those powers are added to one of the "special abilities" files, monsters with only one other ability can have it in-lined (unless it's especially complex, or references something that references something else, etc).  And the rest we can just chuck, or relegate to the "critters that are a too tough or complicated to include in this SRD, but we'll mention anyway because they're cool" pile.  Unless that would eliminate someone's favorite badguy and make them cry, in which case we can talk about it.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 19, 2011)

*file: Monsters Intro-A*

file: *Monsters Intro-A
* 
status:  awaiting proofread  updated version of file elsewhere

comment: 
cut out--
 all Angels (umm, so do we nix the Angel subtype??); Trumpet Archon; aboleth mage; hound archo hero, and similar advanced variants.

probably ought to cut--
aboleth (too many SLAs)

borderline--
avoral

keep, with minor mods--
acherai
archons (subtype)


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 19, 2011)

*file: Monsters B-C*

file: *Monsters B-C*

status:  awaiting proofread  updated version of file is elsewhere

comment:
cut-- 
nothing

probably ought to chop--
abyssal greater basilisk (high DR, high SR)
greater barghest (many SLAs)

borderline--
bodak (save or die, DC15)
barghest (many SLAs)

keep, with mods--
blink dog (inline dimension door in statblock)


----------



## ideasmith (Jan 19, 2011)

the_orc_within said:


> file: *Monsters Intro-A
> *
> all Angels (umm, so do we nix the Angel subtype??)




I recommend keeping. Some other source likely has an e6-suitable angel.  Or someone might decide to design one.


----------



## Gilladian (Jan 19, 2011)

*File: vermin*

I went through the vermin file, and it needs no changes. Sorry for not dibsing it.

File: Vermin 
Status: edited 

There were several CR 12 vermin, but none had powers taht make them e6 incompatible. Just hellishly hard saves vs poison, and that's up to the DM to adjuticate.

I've never thought of Angels (or devils, really) as monsters that the PCs ought to FIGHT, anyway. I have no problem keeping the subtype. They can be used as plot-devices, if nothing else.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 19, 2011)

Okey doke, I'll add Vermin to the "done" list,  thanks.

The only thing about the Angel subtype is just that there will be this random Subtype out there with no representative creature in the monster list.  But I really don't have a problem with that, it's just a little odd.  But it's nice that someone can always just make a generic outsider and use the subtype to make his own E6 Angel; or as ideasmith suggested, there might be non-SRD ones out there already.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 19, 2011)

*file: Monsters D-De*

file: *Monsters D-De*

status: awaiting proofread

comment: 
cut--
- biggest demons and devils

probably ought to cut--
- demon, hezrou
- devil, hamatula
- devil, bone
- devourer

keep with mods--
- other demons and devils _(if gr.tport, charm monst, ether jaunt, trueseeing go into the "special abilities" glossary)_
- derro _(if just remove refs to magic it's immune to, or that can/can't cure it)_


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 19, 2011)

*files: Monsters Di-Do, Vermin*

file:
 - *Monsters Di-Do*
 - *Monsters Vermin*

status:  *DONE*

comment:
Biggest things are dinos, dire animals, vermin: all mundane, all at or under CR12. ==> No changes


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 19, 2011)

*file: Monsters Dr-Dw*

file: *Monsters Dr-Dw*

status: awaiting proofread

comment:
for true dragons, i chopped at "young adult" or "adult" to keep tables fairly consistent; for red, gold, silver this meant exceeding CR12 (13,14,13, respectively).  None have spellcaster levels in beyond 5th, and none have SLAs/etc above 3rd-level spells.

keep with mods:
- dryad (inline 'tree stride' ability)


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 19, 2011)

*file: Monsters E-F*

file: *Monsters E-F*

status: awaiting proofread

comment: 
cut--
formian queen

probably ought to cut--
formian myrmarch

keep with mods--
earth elementals (remove ref to spell move earth)
ethereal filcher, marauder (refs spell ethereal jaunt)

formian taskmaster (inline dominate monster text)


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 19, 2011)

*file: Monsters G*

file: *Monsters G*

status: awaiting proofread

comment:
cut for high CR--
- ghaele
- frost giant jarl
- storm giant
- iron golem 
- greater stone golem

probably ought to cut--
genie, djinni
genie, efreeti
giant, elder stone
golem, clay
golem, stone

could keep with mods--
- genie generic (plane shift)
- genie, janni (ether jaunt) (or subsume generic genie info into this)
- ghost (telekinesis; "malevolence"refs magic jar in description)
- gibbering mouther ("gibbering" refs confusion in description)


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 19, 2011)

*file: Monsters H-I*

file: *Monsters H-I*

status: awaiting proofread

comment:
cut for high CR--
- harpy archer (Ftr7)
- hydra, 11- and 12-headed
- inevitable, marut

probably chop--
- all inevitables

keep, with mods--
- hag
--- sea hag ("evil eye" refs dispel evil in description)
--- hag covey (6 of 8 SLAs based on hi-lev spells) 
- homunculus (construction refs arcane eye in description)
- invisible stalker (description refs trueseeing)
- half-celestial template (1of2 SLAs at 5HD are hi-lev; 1of2 SLAs at 7HD; all SLAs for 9+ HD) 
- half-fiend template (hi-lev SLAs at 5HD and at 11+ HD)


----------



## ideasmith (Jan 20, 2011)

the_orc_within said:


> comment:
> for true dragons, i chopped at "young adult" or "adult" to keep tables fairly consistent; for red, gold, silver this meant exceeding CR12 (13,14,13, respectively).  None have spellcaster levels in beyond 5th, and none have SLAs/etc above 3rd-level spells.




Absurdly powerful dragons are a longstanding FRPG tradition. I'm for keeping these in.


----------



## ideasmith (Jan 20, 2011)

In a burst of impulse I have translated the wondrous items chapter.

file: Magic Items V (Wondrous Items)

status: please proofread

Changes Made:

1.	Removed all items above caster level 6
2.	Moved the few remaining major wondrous items to the medium wondrous item table
3.	Adjusted tables to account for removed items
4.	Lyre of Building: Toned down references to horn of blasting/disintegrate.
5.	Robe of Bones: Removed reference to robe of useful items and transferred info therefrom.

Possible Minor Artifacts:
1.	Bag of holding
2.	Carpet of flying
3.	Broom of flying
4.	Horn of Valhalla
5.	Wings of flying

Other Notes:

1.	Fixing the Deck of Illusions will have to wait until it is more settled which monsters will be included. 
2.          If I got the procedure wrong, please tell me.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 20, 2011)

I'll update the master file list with the status.  I can take a more careful look when Monsters are finished.  

To date, we've been approaching things topically, just so we're all on the same page and focused on the same aspect of the game at the same time.  I'd kind of like to stick to that, but if you're especially gung ho...   

One thing to note is that a lot of the E6 material on magic items has already been done.  I know there's a WotC or ENWorld thread somewhere that has identified all CL6 items, though I can't find it atm.  I've sblocked below what I cut'n'pasted sometime ago; sorry I don't know who to credit for it,  though.  [sblock]
E6 level wondrous items

Here is a list of all minor wondrous items that require only spells 3rd lvl or lower to create (and could thus be created by E6 characters)

minor:
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:
Bracers or armor +3
Amulet of NAC +2
Boots of haste
Cloak of Arcadia
Minor cloak of displacement

Other E6 level magic items:

ARMOR/SHIELD BONUSES
NOTE – Prices do not include cost of masterwork armor or shield.
+1 Enhancement Bonus: CL 3, 1,000gp.
+2 Enhancement Bonus: CL 6, 4,000gp.
Acid Resistance: CL 3, 18,000gp.
Arrow Deflection: CL 5, 4,000gp.
Cold Resistance: CL 3, 18,000gp.
Electricity Resistance: CL 3, 18,000gp.
Fire Resistance: CL 3, 18,000gp.
Shadow: CL 5, 3,750gp.
Silent Moves: CL 5, 3,750gp.
Slick: CL 4, 3,750gp.
Sonic Resistance: CL 3, 18,000gp.

SPECIFIC ARMORS
Celestial Armor: CL 5, 22,400gp.
Mithral Full Plate of Speed: CL 5, 26,500gp.

SPECIFIC SHIELDS
Caster’s Shield: CL 6, 3,153gp.
Spined Shield: CL 6, 5,580gp.
Winged Shield: CL 5, 17,257gp

WEAPON BONUSES
NOTE – Prices do not include cost of masterwork weapon.
+1 Enhancement Bonus: CL 3, 2,000gp.
+2 Enhancement Bonus: CL 6, 8,000gp.
Distance: CL 6, 2,000gp.
Merciful: CL 5, 2,000gp.
Thundering: CL 5, 2,000gp.
Throwing: CL 5, 2,000gp.

SPECIFIC WEAPONS
Dagger of Venom: CL 5, 8,302gp.
Javelin of Lightning: CL 5, 1,500gp.
Screaming Bolt: CL 5, 267gp.
Sleep Arrow: CL 5, 132gp.

RINGS
Animal Friendship: CL 3, 10,800gp.
Chameleon Power: CL 3, 12,700gp.
Climbing: CL 5, 2,500gp.
Climbing, Improved: CL 5, 10,000gp. (10 ranks of climb can be achieved with the Skill Beyond Your Years feat)
Energy Resistance, Minor: CL 3, 12,000gp.
Feather Falling: CL 1, 2,200gp.
Invisibility: CL 3, 20,000gp.
Jumping: CL 2, 2,500gp.
Mind Shielding: CL 3, 8,000gp.
Protection +1: CL 5, 2,000gp.
Protection +2: CL 6, 8,000gp.
Spell Storing, Minor: CL 5, 18,000gp.
Sustenance: CL 5, 2,500gp.
Swimming: CL 2, 2,500gp.
X-Ray Vision: CL 6, 25,000gp.
[/sblock]
That said, there's no need to reinvent the wheel-- just confirm it!  Beyond that I think the big job will be:
- identifying other non-E6 magic items from Monsters (that we don't cut) and add those to the list; 
- selecting specials, eg, artifacts, and possibly other 'iconic' items; (I really like your suggestions, btw; they hold nicely to the "classics".)
- editing text for consistency, dereferencing cut spells or monsters, switch Forge Ring to Wondrous Rings; and so on.

At least that's kind of how I've been thinking about it.  Haven't put much much thought into it or even put out a call for input, though, since I'm not quite there yet!


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 20, 2011)

ideasmith said:


> Absurdly powerful dragons are a longstanding FRPG tradition. I'm for keeping these in.



Hehe, agreed.  Also, the game is called "Dungeons & _Dragons_".  Seems fair to me to give them a little power trip!

Of course the _real_ reason was just to keep the max age categories fairly close to each other.  Still may have to think about that, though-- possibly equalize around size category instead of age (actually that would likely come really close to the intended CR cutoff).  

Meh, honestly I think it's just fine with super-scary dragons.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 20, 2011)

*file: Monsters K-L*

file: *Monsters K-L*

status: awaiting proofread

comment:
cut for hi CR--
- lammasu golden protector
- werewolf lord
- lich (reqs phylactery CL11th)

probably ought to cut--
leonal
kraken (borderline; CR12, has 2 SLAs of 4th+ spell lev)

could keep, with mods--
- lammasu (spellcaster as Clr7; plus gr.invis, dim door)
- lamia (charm monster)
- lillend (hallucinatory terrain)
- lycanthropes (section "curing lycanthropy" refs heal, break ench in description)


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 20, 2011)

*file: Monsters M-N*

file: *Monsters M-N*

status: awaiting proofread

comment:
cut for hi CR--
- mummy lord
- nightshade (all)

probably ought to cut--
- night hag
- guardian naga (Sor9)

could keep, with mods--
- nymph (as caster Drd7; plus, dim door)
- minotaur ("natural cunning" refs maze in desc)
- mummy ("mummy rot" refs break ench in desc)
- naga--
--- dark (as caster Sor7=>not E6, but no spells over 3rd!)
--- spirit (as caster Sor7)
--- water (as caster Sor7)
nightmare/cauchemar (astral projection [complex], etherealness)


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 20, 2011)

*file: Monsters O-R*

file: *Monsters O-R*

status: awaiting proofread

comment:

cut for high CR--
none

probably ought to cut--
- black pudding elder
- purple worm
- rakshasa 
- roper

could keep, with mods--
- ogre mage (cone cold, polymorph)
- phantom fungus ("greater invis" refs gr invis in desc)
- phase spider (ethereal jaunt)
- phasm ("alternate form" refs polymorph in desc)
- ravid (animate objects)


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 20, 2011)

*file: Monsters S*

file: *Monsters S*

status: awaiting proofread

comment:

cut for high CR--
none

probably ought to cut--
- salamander, noble
- swarm, hellwasp

could keep, with mods--
- satyr ("pipes" refs fear in desc)
- shield guardian (construction refs hi-lev spells)
- sphynx
--- androsphynx ("roar" refs fear in desc)
--- gynosphinx (legend lore, plus 7 symbol spells)
- spider eater (freedom of movement)
- sprite
--- grig ("fiddle" refs irresistibe dance in desc)
--- pixie (gr invis, permanent image, irresistible dance; "memory loss" refs hi-lev spells as cures in desc)


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 20, 2011)

*file: Monsters T-Z*

file: *Monsters T-Z*

status: awaiting proofread

comment:

cut for high CR--
- tarrasque
- titan
- unicorn, celestial charger


probably ought to cut--
- wraith, dread


could keep, with mods--
- treant ("animate trees" refs liveoak )
- triton (summon nature's ally IV)
- unicorn (gr tport)
- vampire template ("dominate" refs dominate person )
- vampire spawn ("dominate" refs dominate person )
- vargouille ("poison" refs heal )
- will o' wisp ("immunity to magic" refs maze)
- xorn ("earth glide" refs move earth)


----------



## Nifft (Jan 20, 2011)

Wow, lots of progress!

I'll take a whack at proof reading something this weekend.

Regarding Prestige Classes, I'm in favor of just dropping them. The major culprit is the Assassin: a Rogue 5 / Assassin 1 is just plain better than a Rogue 6, because of the +1d6 Sneak Attack damage. Normally that would filter out over the next few levels (so even though the Assassin gets the extra damage at 6th level, the Rogue catches up at 7th level), but not in E6.

Since Prestige Classes were originally intended to be an option rather than a core mechanic, I'm in favor of putting ideas for adaptations in an appendix or two.

Cheers, -- N


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 20, 2011)

Yeah, Nifft, that's a good point... And weeding Assassin out would bring SRD PrCs down to 2.  Heh, they're looking less and less worth including in the baseline.

If you decide to do a little proofing, the master file status list in the bottom half of post#2 might be helpful if you haven't seen it. 

The main things to note is that the Monster files don't really have much to proofread, per se; at this point, they're mostly just trunc'd at CR12, while their respective posts have a few notes on other monsters likely to be cut, and items to modify in others.  Likewise, rhe Spells files are also basically just trunc'd at E6 levels for the various class, though have a little bit more in terms of actual editing (to weed out references to higher level casters, other spells, etc).  The Feats files, otoh, have quite a bit of shifting around and incorporating of E6-specific material, so they could certainly use a look over and criticism.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 21, 2011)

Ok, another wall of text about...

MONSTERS

All the Monsters files have now had at least one pass, which has involved little more than chopping roughly 50 or 60 creaures above CR12 (with a few exceptions).  For the ones I did, I made some brief notes about what other probably ought to be cut; and how others might be modified.  All those are just my personal judgment calls, of course, based on a quick look at each monster, so feel free to disagree with any of this!  The following sblocks contain summaries:

*Monsters that probably ought to be cut* (25)[sblock]aboleth
basilisk, abyssal greater 
greater barghest 
demon, hezrou
devil, hamatula
devil, bone
devourer
formian myrmarch
genie, djinni
genie, efreeti
giant, elder stone
golem, clay
golem, stone
inevitables
leonal
kraken
night hag
guardian naga
ooze, black pudding elder
purple worm
rakshasa
roper
salamander, noble
swarm, hellwasp
wraith, dread wraith[/sblock]
*Monsters that could probably be easily modified* (39)[sblock]- acherai
- archons (subtype)
- blink dog (dimension door)
 - various demons and devils (easy if gr.tport, charm monst, ether jaunt, trueseeing go into the "special abilities" glossary)
- derro (remove refs to confusion; and hi-lev cure magics)
- dryad (tree stride)
- earth elementals (remove ref to spell move earth)
- ethereal filcher, marauder (ethereal jaunt)
- genie generic (plane shift)
- genie, janni (ether jaunt) 
- gibbering mouther ("gibbering" refs confusion in description)
- hag, sea hag ("evil eye" refs dispel evil in description)
- homunculus (construction refs arcane eye in description)
- invisible stalker (description refs trueseeing)
lammasu (spellcaster as Clr7; plus gr.invis, dim door)
- lamia (charm monster)
- lillend (hallucinatory terrain)
- lycanthropes (section "curing lycanthropy" refs heal, break ench in description)
- nymph (as caster Drd7; plus, dim door)
- minotaur ("natural cunning" refs maze in desc)
- mummy ("mummy rot" refs break ench in desc)
- naga--
--- dark (as caster Sor7=>not E6, but no spells over 3rd!)
--- spirit (as caster Sor7)
--- water (as caster Sor7)
- phantom fungus ("greater invis" refs gr invis in desc)
- phase spider (ethereal jaunt)
- satyr ("pipes" refs fear in desc)
- shield guardian (construction refs hi-lev spells)
- sphynx, androsphynx ("roar" refs fear in desc)
- sprite, grig ("fiddle" refs irresistibe dance in desc)
- sprite, pixie (gr invis, permanent image, irresistible dance; "memory loss" refs hi-lev spells as cures in desc)
- triton (summon nature's ally IV)
- unicorn (gr tport)
- vampire template ("dominate" refs dominate person )
- vampire spawn ("dominate" refs dominate person )
- vargouille ("poison" refs heal )
- will o' wisp ("immunity to magic" refs maze)
- xorn ("earth glide" refs move earth)[/sblock]
*Monsters requiring more extensive/complex modifications* (14)[sblock]- avoral
- barghest
- formian taskmaster (inline dominate monster text)
- ghost (telekinesis; "malevolence"refs magic jar in description)
- hag covey (6 of 8 SLAs based on hi-lev spells) 
- half-celestial template (1of2 SLAs at 5HD are hi-lev; 1of2 SLAs at 7HD; all SLAs for 9+ HD)
- half-fiend template (hi-lev SLAs at 5HD and at 11+ HD)
nightmare/cauchemar (astral projection, etherealness)
- ogre mage (cone cold, polymorph)
- phasm ("alternate form" refs polymorph in desc)
- ravid (animate objects)
- sphynx, gynosphinx (legend lore, plus 7 symbol spells)
- spider eater (freedom of movement)
- treant ("animate trees" refs liveoak )
[/sblock]

Lastly, in the interest of simplifying potential mods, a handful of spells fairly frequently pop up as SLAs or Su's, and so might be good candidates to be rejiggered into "special abilites" and added to one of the "Special Abilities" glossary files.

*Spells commonly used as special abilities:*[sblock]ethereal jaunt
confusion
charm monster
greater invisibility
true seeing
dimension door
fear
greater teleport (which itself refers to teleport)[/sblock]

With all that said, there are now quite a few possibilties to finishing out the Monsters.   First, I'm just going to assume that we'll agree on some version of the "probably ought to be cut" list and simply cut those monsters out.

The easiest thing to do is to simply chop _*all*_ of these monsters (or practically all of them), and forget making any other mods to the official SRD text.  (I haven't actually counted, but I believe all these listed plus the ones above CR12 already cut accounts for around 25% of the monsters in the full SRD.)

Quite a few of them actually involve very little modification, and could be E6ified by deleting a single sentence, term, or subsection.  For ex, shield guardian, iirc, could be fixed simply by removing its construction info.  In the notes above, I tried to indicate nearly trivial mods like that with a pattern like: _"special ability" refs spellname_.

Other mods are more involved, and generally fall into two categories:

1. A very few monsters are casters at 7th level or above, some of which get 4th level slots.  Easy fix is give the monster a metamagic feat, and limit that 4th level slot(s) to a metamagicked spell.  Another fix, also mentioned upthread, is to change those slots into SLAs.  Either way, this is fairly straightforward.

2. The vast majority of mods, however, involve references to specific spells that doesn't exist in E6.  An easy approach, as has been mentioned upthread, is to just make a list of "Monstrous Spells for Spell-like Abilities", and leave it at that.  Another approach is to actually convert spells into special abilities somehow; this is potentially problematic (spell variables; spells referencing other spells; and so on), but we can discuss later.  And if we go this route, I think adding the most common ones to one of the "Special Abilities" glossary files is wise (even if we end up in-lining all the info into statblocks for an online presentation later on).

Anyway, take a look at some of the monsters I've called out above, and try to get an idea of the magnitude of some of these sorts of changes.  Frankly, I think that's easier than reading more of my blather.   Then we can decide exactly what to do a little later.

I'm looking forward to whatever input you've got!


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 21, 2011)

A little bit about 

MAGIC ITEMS

Should be fairly straightford.  Bascailly, I think this just boils down to a few things:

- cut items with a CL greater than 6th (including all Staffs and Rods, and their feats).
- change feat Forge Ring to feat Wondrous Rings
- re-include whatever magic items that can't be created in E6, but that monsters might possess (as per the Monster mods we end up with).
- decide on other special items to include (eg, artifacts).

Ideasmith has already taken a crack at the file "Magic Items V" (Wondrous items), so feel free to build on that momentum.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 21, 2011)

Finally, I'll be out of town for the next few days, so I won't be spamming posts for a while.   I'll check in whenever I can.  

Feel free to do whatever; I'll try to keep track of  goings on and contribute as I get time.


----------



## Lord Xtheth (Jan 21, 2011)

Working on my edits still. Should have my E6RPG Alpha done by Monday though. 
Does anyone know any good free layout software? I can't quite get my re-done tables to fit properly onto my pages in MSword.


----------



## Gilladian (Jan 21, 2011)

*Spells: P-R*

Status: proofread

Looked fine, no changes needed.


----------



## ideasmith (Jan 21, 2011)

Concerning magic items available to likely e6 monsters but not meeting normal e6 standards: 

I count 6 of these. Here is the list with my suggestions: 

Bralani: +1 holy scimitar; +1 holy composite longbow (suggestion: +1 merciful scimitar; +1 thundering composite longbow)

Devil, Erinyes: +1 flaming composite longbow (suggestion: +1 thundering composite longbow)

Satyr: Pipes (suggestion: minor artifact)

Sprite, Grig: fiddle?? (suggestion: minor artifact)

Sprite, Pixie: arrows (suggestion: minor artifact)


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 22, 2011)

Lord Xtheth said:


> Working on my edits still. Should have my E6RPG Alpha done by Monday though.
> Does anyone know any good free layout software? I can't quite get my re-done tables to fit properly onto my pages in MSword.



I'm not aware of any free layout software, though I've never actually looked.  Have you asked in the Computers/Software (or whatever it's called now) forum?  Someone there might have a suggestion.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 22, 2011)

Gilladian said:


> File: Spells P-R
> Status: proofread
> Looked fine, no changes needed.



Great, thanks!  I've updated the master list.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 22, 2011)

ideasmith said:


> Concerning magic items available to likely e6 monsters but not meeting normal e6 standards:
> 
> I count 6 of these. Here is the list with my suggestions:
> 
> ...




Only 6?  That's good news, I was fearing there would be many more than that.  

As for the erinyes and bralani weapons, changing the enhancements as described is a good possibility.  The only other thing I can think of is to in-line the holy & flaming qualities (minus creation info) in the monster statblocks and call their weapons minor artifacts.

As for the satyr and sprite ones, is it necessary to classify those as magic items?  I think in RAW they're Su effects, so it's basically up to the DM how to handle them in a game, anyway.  I don't know that we need to add any more info than what's in the statblock.

(Aside: I'd forgotten how limited the weapons/armor enhancements are in strict E6.  I couldn't believe flaming wasn't one!)


----------



## ideasmith (Jan 23, 2011)

file: Magic Items I (Basics and Creation)

status: please proofread

Changes Made:

1.	Removed all references to items above caster level 6
2.	Removed all references to staves, rods, and intelligent items (missed that last when doing wondrous items. Oops)
3.	Adjusted tables to account for removed items

Other Notes:

1.	Perhaps we should add some sort of ‘lesser staff’, since wizards using staffs is iconic?


----------



## ideasmith (Jan 23, 2011)

the_orc_within said:


> Only 6?  That's good news, I was fearing there would be many more than that.



Me too.


the_orc_within said:


> As for the erinyes and bralani weapons, changing the enhancements as described is a good possibility.  The only other thing I can think of is to in-line the holy & flaming qualities (minus creation info) in the monster statblocks and call their weapons minor artifacts.



That is another possiblility.


the_orc_within said:


> As for the satyr and sprite ones, is it necessary to classify those as magic items?  I think in RAW they're Su effects, so it's basically up to the DM how to handle them in a game, anyway.  I don't know that we need to add any more info than what's in the statblock.



That does make sense.


the_orc_within said:


> (Aside: I'd forgotten how limited the weapons/armor enhancements are in strict E6.  I couldn't believe flaming wasn't one!)



Some sort of Flaming Sword would make a good minor artifact.


----------



## ideasmith (Jan 23, 2011)

A quick look at TypesSubtypesAbilities:

Alternate form: References polymorph

Angel Subtype: References lesser globe of  invulnerability

Archon Subtype: References greater teleport

Elemental Type: References raise dead and other such spells

Fear Special Ability: References fear spell

Incorporeal Subtype: References ghost touch

Native Subtype: References raise dead and other such spells

Outsider Type: References raise dead and other such spells

Special Abilities: References antimagic field

Swarm Subtype: References disintegrate

Undead Type: References raise dead and other such spells


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 23, 2011)

ideasmith said:


> 1.    Perhaps we should add some sort of ‘lesser staff’, since wizards using staffs is iconic?



I've been thinking about this as well.  At his point, I didn't think adding an entirely new class of items is appropriate, but we could gin up a few examples of Wondrous Items useable only by specific classes with a handful of thematic x/day powers, &/or a continuous passive power or two.

Other than that Wondrous Item, I'm not sure what else to suggest.  I think a E6 variant of the staff as a class of items is actually  a good idea (a couple 3pps have such items), and would fit nicely in the expanded version of this SRD.


ideasmith said:


> Some sort of Flaming Sword would make a good minor artifact.



Agreed.  That's exactly the sort of iconic-but-not-E6 item that ought to be added to the list, imho.  


ideasmith said:


> A quick look at TypesSubtypesAbilities:
> .
> [snip]
> .



Good list.  At a glance I'm not sure which can be dropped completely, and which ought to be in-lined into the Type descriptions, though.  I suppose those get added onto the to-do list of monster special abilties.

I'm still out of town atm, so my time to work on this is limited.  I expect to be back up to speed in a few days.


----------



## ideasmith (Jan 23, 2011)

Noticed a bad cut and paste error: My recent translated file is Basics and Creation, not Wondrous Items. (Wondrous Items was redone, but I dealt with that by editing the original post.)


----------



## ideasmith (Jan 23, 2011)

the_orc_within said:


> Good list.  At a glance I'm not sure which can be dropped completely, and which ought to be in-lined into the Type descriptions, though.  I suppose those get added onto the to-do list of monster special abilties.




My gut feeling is that:

Fear, minor globe of invulnerability, and polymorph should all be in-lined.

Greater teleport should get its own entry - it seems to show up a lot of places.

The references to antimagic field and the 'raise dead' family should be 'vagued out' so as not to refer to specific spells.

The reference to disintegrate should be replaced with a reference to a different single-target spell.

The reference to ghost touch should be dropped.


----------



## ideasmith (Jan 23, 2011)

file: Magic Items II (ARMOR & WEAPONS)

status: please proofread

Changes Made:

1.	Removed all references to items above caster level 6
2.	Removed all references to intelligent items.
3.	Adjusted tables to account for removed items

Possible Minor Artifacts

1.	Weapon of Slaying (+2, Bane, Slaying)
2.	Weapon of Flame (+2, Flaming, Flaming Burst)
3.	Weapon of Ice (+2, Frost, Icy Burst)
4.	Vorpal Weapon (+2, Keen, Vorpal, Wounding)
5.	Weapon of Guarding (+2, Defender, Merciful)
6.	Weapon of Lightning (+2, Shock, Shocking Burst)
7.	Weapon of Thunder (+2, Thundering, Smiting, Throwing) 
8.	Weapon of Draining (+2, Life-Drinker, Nine Lives Stealer)



Other Notes:

1.	On the possible minor artifacts, I didn’t specify weapon types, feeling that should be campaign-specific.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 23, 2011)

ideasmith said:


> My gut feeling is that:
> 
> Fear, minor globe of invulnerability, and polymorph should all be in-lined.
> 
> ...



That sounds about right to me.  Fear might merit its own entry, depending upon what the final cut of the monster list looks like.


----------



## ideasmith (Jan 24, 2011)

the_orc_within said:


> That sounds about right to me.  Fear might merit its own entry, depending upon what the final cut of the monster list looks like.




The fear special ability already has its own entry. Said entry references the spell of same name.


----------



## ideasmith (Jan 24, 2011)

file: Magic Items III (POTIONS & RINGS)

status: please proofread

Changes Made:

1.	Removed all references to items above caster level 6

2.          Removed all references to rods.

3.	Adjusted tables to account for removed items

Possible Minor Artifacts

1.	Ring of Djinni Calling
2.	Ring of Spell Turning
3.	Ring of Three Wishes
4.	Rod of Rulership
5.	Rod of Splendor
6.	Rod of Wonder


----------



## ideasmith (Jan 24, 2011)

file: Magic Items IV(SCROLLS & WANDS)

status: please proofread

Changes Made:

1.	Removed all references to items above caster level 6

2.          Removed all references to staves.

3.	Adjusted tables to account for removed items


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 24, 2011)

Thanks for all these item list edits;  master list is updated. 


ideasmith said:


> The fear special ability already has its own entry. Said entry references the spell of same name.



Ah, of course, that makes sense.  I was thinking in terms of a handful of monsters that refer to the fear spell directly.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 24, 2011)

MONSTERS

I'd like to get the monster list pruned, so I'm going to start chopping more from the existing lists as posted over last week.  

I think this process ought to be very E6-strict and should remove more rather than less, as I think this is easiest and leads to the fewest inconsistencies.  Unless anyone really disagrees, I'll cut _everything_ on the summary lists I posted upthread, _except_ for monsters with very trivial edits (namely material that refers to how a monster is affected by a non-E6 spell).  In a few cases, I might "vague out" certain references rather than cut entirely.  In any event, I'll note exactly what gets edited.  

After that draconic weed out, we can see what's left and re-add a few monsters that "feel" appropriate for E6 but require more extensive edits and deal with each on a case-by-case basis.

I should be back up to speed on Wednesday, so I'll start then if I don't hear otherwise.


----------



## ideasmith (Jan 24, 2011)

file: Magic Items VI (CURSED ITEMS & ARTIFACTS)

status: please proofread

Changes Made:

1.	Made Intelligent Items explicitly artifact-only, therefore removing random generation rules.
2.	Removed cursed items above caster level 6
3.	Adjusted cursed item tables to account for removed items
4.	Removed Artifacts that seemed too much trouble to adapt, which turned out to include all Major Artifacts.
5.	Adapted powerful items as ‘new’ Minor Artifacts, upgrading and renaming as I went along. 

Other Notes:

1.          I only adapted ten items as 'new' Minor Artifacts to start with, pending opinions on what needed adapting.

Further changes via editing

1.          Put most of the cursed items back in.
2.          Indicated that most cursed items can't be built by known means.
3.          Fixed various typos.


----------



## ideasmith (Jan 24, 2011)

the_orc_within said:


> MONSTERS
> 
> I'd like to get the monster list pruned, so I'm going to start chopping more from the existing lists as posted over last week.
> 
> ...




I hope that the following monsters stay in:

Ghost - Just drop malevolence, it is on a lengthy list that the ghost only gets three items from anyway. 

Lycanthrope - The references to heal and break enchantment can be dropped.

Unicorn - Greater Teleport would have to be inlined or given its own special ability entry, or maybe some sort of lesser unicorn could be added.


----------



## SuperChris (Jan 25, 2011)

Hello folks, nice project you have going on here. I noticed a couple odd bits of text that probably should be altered.

Classes II

* Paladin, under spells class feature, says "To prepare or cast a spell, a paladin must have a Wisdom score equal to at least 10 + the spell level." As they can only cast level 1 spells, this could reasonably be changed to "To prepare or cast a spell, a paladin must have a Wisdom score of least 11."

* Ranger has the same wording as the Paladin under their spells.

* Rogue mentions "If a rogue already has uncanny dodge from a different class she automatically gains improved uncanny dodge (see below) instead." Might want to cut the "(see below)" part and/or provide a reference to improved uncanny dodge somewhere (Barbarian?).

Keep up the good work!

-SC


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 25, 2011)

SuperChris said:


> Hello folks, nice project you have going on here. I noticed a couple odd bits of text that probably should be altered.



Thanks for pointing these out!  I'll make sure the fixes get incorporated when I can have a sit down to do so.  Or if you like you can simply re-upload the doc with the fixes you make and a note so folks know what to double check.  Either way is fine.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 25, 2011)

ideasmith said:


> I hope that the following monsters stay in:
> 
> Ghost
> Lycanthrope
> Unicorn




Will do, those all look like they'll be easy to keep in.

Also agree on making greater tport a special ability, as that alone will probably automatically another half-dozen monsters for inclusion.  Still fuzzy on exactly how to do that, but that detail can wait til after the monster list is more or less finalized and we see just how many such abilities we need to deal with.


----------



## SuperChris (Jan 25, 2011)

the_orc_within said:


> Thanks for pointing these out!  I'll make sure the fixes get incorporated when I can have a sit down to do so.  Or if you like you can simply re-upload the doc with the fixes you make and a note so folks know what to double check.  Either way is fine.




Done.

Changes Made:

1. Paladin, spells, minimum to cast is now WIS 11.
2. Paladin, spells, DC to save is now 11 + WIS modifier.
3. Ranger, spells, minimum to cast is now WIS 11.
4. Ranger, spells, DC to save is now 11 + WIS modifier.
5. Rogue, Uncanny Dodge, added reference to Improved Uncanny Dodge.


----------



## ideasmith (Jan 25, 2011)

file: TYPES, SUBTYPES, & SPECIAL ABILITIES

status: please proofread

Changes Made:

1.	Vagues out or deleted various spell references
2.	Inlined spells into Alternate Form, Angel Subtype, and Fear
3.	Added Teleport, Greater

Other Notes:

1.          Doubtless more spell will be turned into special abilities.


----------



## ideasmith (Jan 26, 2011)

file: SPECIAL ABILITIES & CONDITIONS

status: please proofread

Changes Made:

1.	Vagues out or deleted various spell references
2.	Inlined spell into Polymorph special ability
3.	Changed reference to bag of holding to reference to the minor artifact bag of hammerspace


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 26, 2011)

Thanks for the updates, folks, they've all been noted.  It now looks like every file (except Legal) has had at least one pass.   Nice work, everyone!  

We're close to rolling out the rough draft online version open for comment and correction.  This will involve converting the rtfs into either a very rough static webpage open to comment, or else a very limited-access wiki.  Either way, changes made to the online rough draft will have to be put into the rtfs manually, afaict-- which is a sticky detail yet to be worked out.  I've got a couple ideas on this, but I'm certainly open to others' technical suggestions as well.

After the rough draft is fully corrected, and the rtfs are verified and blessed as the official "E6 Baseline SRD v.1.0" or whatever, we can  think about a more presentable/useful online reference (likely along the lines of a wiki) that incorporates more hyperlinking, variant rules, lean-up alternatives,  more powerful E6ified monsters, houserules, etc.

On the monster lists: sorry for still not getting this done.  My computer has just died, so I'm now in the process of getting a new one, replacing software, restoring data, etc.  It looks like I'm another couple days out of the loop.  Apologies!


----------



## SuperChris (Jan 26, 2011)

the_orc_within said:


> file: *Spells T-Z*
> 
> status: awaiting proofread
> 
> comment:




This probably ready to go.

Changes:
1. Tongues - removed reference to _Permanency_
2. Web - removed reference to _Permanency_


----------



## Ry (Jan 27, 2011)

Badass.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 27, 2011)

SuperChris said:


> This probably ready to go.
> 
> Changes:
> 1. Tongues - removed reference to _Permanency_
> 2. Web - removed reference to _Permanency_



Good catches.  List is updated to point to this latest version.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 27, 2011)

Ryan Stou'n said:


> Badass.



Heh, well it's your baby.   Feel free to pop in anytime.  We'll send a notify when the first online version goes up for comment & correction.  Hopefully that will be easier for folks to  see and evaluate the changes we've made to the full SRD.


----------



## SuperChris (Jan 27, 2011)

the_orc_within said:


> file: *Basics and Ability Scores*
> 
> status: awaiting proofread
> 
> ...




This one looks good to go.


----------



## SuperChris (Jan 27, 2011)

the_orc_within said:


> file: *Feats* and *Monster Feats*
> 
> status: awaiting proofread




I'm going to hold off un uploading modified versions of these documents, because most of what I have to contribute are suggestions, rather than things that absolutely need to be changed.

*Feats.rtf comments*

*Ability Advancement
Ability Training*

Why not make this a single feat that gives a stackable +1 increase to an ability score and can be taken up to 4 times? That's in line with the ability score increases characters would normaly get at 8th, 12th, 16th, and 20th. This would also allow you to bump your odd numbered ability scores one point to get a better bonus.

*Expanded Caster Stamina
Expanded Spell Knowledge*

These seem incredibly awesome. Maybe too awesome? I don't know. They sure seem to give you a lot of bang for your buck.

*Improved Critical*

Prerequisite BAB +8. How does that work? Can we put Stunning Fist back on the regular list? ;-)

*Knockdown*

Good choice.

*Leadership*

Looks good to me, but I've never played a character with this feat, so...

*Open Minded*

I'd like to see the number of extra skill points modified by INT modifier and racial modifier.
Also, a name change seems in order to give it less of a Psionics feel.

*Plant Control
Plant Defiance*

I guess these are okay. They seem a little weird for, well, anyone short of a druid-like cleric.

*Stand Still*

Never cared for the way this feat worked, but it looks fine.

*Restoration*

Drop WIS prerequisite to 17 (ability score prerequisites are always odd numbers). 
1st and 3rd parapgraphs are contradictory. I assume it is supposed to be a complete curing of temporary ability damage? 
Perhaps change the name to include "Ritual" to make it clear it isn't exactly the same as the spell?

*Stone to Flesh*

Drop INT prerequisite to 17 (see above).
The inline description refers to the as a spell several times. That should be changed.
I'm in favor of dropping 2nd paragraph (the ability to turn mundane stone to flesh). This has been included to act as a restorative ritual, right?
Could also stand a name change so it isn't so obviously a rework of the spell.

*Superior Expertise*

Seems kind of pointless if your maximum BAB is +6. A whole feat for a +1 Defense? Should this be cut or is there a good reason to keep it?

*Wonderous Rings*

Maybe add Craft or Forge to the name so that it sits closer in the list to the other item creation feats? Otherwise, good.

*Blindsight, 5' Radius
Eyes in the Back of Your Head*

I realize that the following comments are completely biased.
Pet Peeve: I've never liked feats with ability prerequisites above starting max. That goes double for abilites like Wisdom where you have no races (that I know of) with a Wisdom bonus. Add in the fact that the ability advances are extremely limited and you need to be overly dedicated to even try for these feats.
Recommend dropping prerequisite WIS to 17 on Eyes in the Back of Your Head. It's good, but not that good, IMO.
Recommend moving Blindsight, 5' Radius to monster feats list. While it is thematically appropriate for Monks and some other insightful warriors, it strikes me as an ability that borders on supernatural.

*Metamagic Feats (General Comments)*

Some of these seem really limited if you can only cast up to 3rd level spells. Not sure I'd blow a feat to be able to Maximize a 0-level spell, for instance.
Maximize Spell, drop the last paragraph. an Empowered, Maximized spell would be 5 levels high that normal.

*Item Creation Feats (General Comments)*

Just a thought: It occurs to me that a caster that reaches 6th level is going to be positioned to sink a dramatic amount of their XP into item creation. I would expect to see characters wandering around with +2 this, that, and the other thing (all the gear they're optimized for) within a few sessions of hitting 6th. It is certainly what I'd do to help improve my party's survival.

*MonsterFeats.rtf Comments*

*Stunning Fist*

It's a damn shame that Stunning Fist needs to be included in with the monster feats. I always felt that +8 BAB prerequisite was a rip, especially since a Monk gets it at Level 1. Still, it is what it is. :-(

*Questions/Observations*

Are there (or should there be) a feat that allows a character to improve their BAB or simulate a higher BAB? That would allow feats like Stunning Fist and Improved Critical to be put back on the list. Just a thought.

Does the project team envision more 6th level prerequisite feats that allow characters access to higher level class abilities?


----------



## SuperChris (Jan 27, 2011)

*PrestigeClasses.rtf*

PrestigeClasses.rtf

Assassin
* Simplified Death Attack Save DC to 11 + INT modifier
* Simplified Spell minimum Intelligence to 11
* Simplified Spell Save DC to 11 + INT modifier
* Spells Per Day. A bit of ackwardness here. Since they start with 0 spells/day, Assassins can't actually cast without having an INT of 12 or higher... Reworded that as well as I could, but you might want to look at it.

Dragon Disciple
* Reworded Bonus Spells feature.
* Reworded Natural Armor.

Horizon Walker
* No changes.

Wow. So many of the Prestige classes miss being usable by just a hair.


----------



## SuperChris (Jan 28, 2011)

the_orc_within said:


> file: Traps
> 
> status: awaiting proofread




Changes

CR5 Fire Trap
* Adjusted Druid level, Damage, Save DC, Search DC
* Need to adjust the cost. Not sure how to figure this.

CR5 Fireball Trap
* Adjusted Wizard level, Damage, Cost.

CR6 Lighting Bolt Trap
* Adjusted Wizard level, Damage, Cost.
* Need to double check cost. I think I figured it correctly.

CR7 Summon Monster VI Trap
* Highlighted trap in document.
* This should probably be cut since it takes an 11th level Wizard to cast.
* Maybe introduce lower level versions?


----------



## SuperChris (Jan 28, 2011)

the_orc_within said:


> file: *Treasure*
> 
> status: awaiting proofread
> 
> ...




Looks good!


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 28, 2011)

Wow, lots of double checks, nice!  

On feats - Yeah, a lot of these are odd, but the WotC ones are verbatim from their own OGC docs so in the interest of hewing closely to the original, let's keep them as is, even the only marginally useful ones.  Thanks for looking at the "Stone to Flesh" and "Restoration" feats; yours are excellent suggestions.  As for the other E6-specific feats, again they're ripped straight from the source doc, so let's keep them even though they are very limited (by design).  Additional feats (eg to further boost ability, capstones, etc) can come later on when we're tacking appendices onto the baseline SRD.

On PrCs - A few people have suggested dropping PrCs from the baseline SRD entirely, since these RAW ones are so few and imbalanced.  There's so much that can be done with PrCs, it's a shame they are so useless in E6 RAW, so a better treatment would probably fit more naturally in an appendix later on. 

On Traps - We'll have to look at some of those changes a little more closely.  On the ones with caster level changes, I believe the CR should drop (eg, lightning bolt by a 10th level wiz is CR6; but the same trap by a 6th level wiz should have a lower CR).  Normally Id say leave as in RAW (even though they're not creatable by E6ers) or cut them entirely, but for the sake of examples, maybe rejiggering them to new CRs _is_ in order.

Anyway, I'll double-double check when I get time this weekend.   I'll just emphasise that the point with  this baseline E6 SRD  is to keep the rules & wording as close as  possible to WotC's original docs, so it's generally better to just chop  something out entirely rather than modify, which risks introducing new  inconsistencies.  Basically, that's just because we don't want to insert  too many 'surprises' for anyone using this SRD expecting to see RAW.


----------



## SuperChris (Jan 28, 2011)

The rewordings have been extremely minor. Swapping a sentence from here to there, simplifying formulas, etc.

I agree that would probably be good to cut the PrCs since only 3 made the cut anyway.

Looking at it again, most of the feats I have an issue with are sourced from the divine and psionics books, which I've rarely allowed in my campaigns anyway (I'm a core book 1/2/3 kind of DM), so that's probably why I don't care for them.

When it comes time to move beyond the e6 core, I guess I'll put my $0.02 in on specific changes.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 28, 2011)

Oh, that's cool, minor clarifications, sentence structure changes are fine, we just want to keep it obviously "the same" as the official SRD.  Iirc, d20srd.org has made several similar modifications-- and it's probably a more definitive SRD nowadays than the rtfs themselves!  But _please_ keep up with the 2cp wherever you want to pitch it in; that's exactly what keeps people thinking about things.

As for the psi & divine feats, I'm actually of a similar taste myself.  We decided to included them here only because E6 is so feat sensitive, and because these particular feats are offical WotC ogc distributed along with the SRD.  Maybe it would be worth somehow separating them from the core feats in the final release?  Something to think about.

And unless someone really protests, I'll go ahead and axe the PrCs from the baseline SRD, since there's yet more agreement on that.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 30, 2011)

*file: Spells C*

file: *Spells C*

status: DONE

comment: 
again.  corrected entry for "lesser confusion" to include effects table from "confusion".


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 30, 2011)

*file: Types, Subtypes, and Abilities*

file: *Types, Subtypes, and Abilities*

status: awaiting proofread

comment: 
- reworded the _greater teleport_ ability to refer to a generic creature rather than "you" as in the original spell. 
- also added entries for 5 other special abilities (true seeing, dimension door, greater invisibility, charm monster, ethereal jaunt) to accomodate upcoming monster mods, roughly 20 monsters.
- these may still change (either in content or organization) as the discussion continues.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 30, 2011)

All my technical difficulties are sorted out now, so I'm back up and running.  

I've updated the master list (forgot to last couple days, sorry).  Also, assuming no one has big problems with the special abilities I've added to the glossary (because they're shared by multiple low-ish level monsters), monster files will start getting uploaded tomorrow.

There still hasn't been any real discussion how to handle these kinds of special abilities.  Currently, they've been reworded and turned into "special abilites". Another possibilty is to simply keep them spells and add them into a special "Monstrous Spells" section at the end of the special abilities glossary.  Imho, keeping them "spell-like spells" is mechanically simpler, but rejiggering them as special abilities keeps them indisputably separated from PC-accessible magic.


Any preferences/opinions/comments on this?


----------



## Gilladian (Jan 30, 2011)

My personal preference on the monster spells is to keep them spells, but to call them monstrous spells and list them in their own section. 

In this way, we keep inconsistencies at their lowest possible level, give DMs who WANT to allow PCs to "discover" these spells a way to do so, and minimize OUR work load.

Special abilities that you've done, I'm fine with... I think you've done a good job adding them to the glossary and that's super.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 30, 2011)

Well, that's at least a three people who've swung toward "monstrous spells", and I agree. (Such a section also provides a natural place for a GM to drop in any spell he doesn't want the PCs to get their hands on.)

So I'll go ahead and rip out this "special abilities" version shortly, and replace it with a monstrous spells list.  However I'll keep this version around so we can revert back to it later if need be.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 31, 2011)

*file: Monsters Intro - A*

file: *Monsters Intro - A*

status: awaiting proofread
 
comment: 
cut - 
aboleth

modified - 
acherai (ref to insanity changed to lesser confusion)
archons (updated subtype overview to match update in Types file)
avoral (fear, trueseeing are now 'special abilities')


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 31, 2011)

*file: Monsters B-C*

file: *Monsters B-C*

status: awaiting proofread

comment: 

cut - 
basilisk, greater abyssal
barghest

modified - 
blink dog (dimension door now a standalone special ability)


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 31, 2011)

Today I realized that official errata can make a significant difference in sorting out monsters' special abilities.  So I'm going to incorporate official errata as I update these monster files (as well as the "special abilities" files) because that can change a given entry in ways that clarify or simplify things a bit.

I believe the monster files just uploaded above are ok now, but they'll definitely need a second look later on to verify.


----------



## ideasmith (Jan 31, 2011)

A thought on 'monstrous spells', if we end up going that route. They will probably need levels, but will certainly not need any class identified. Therefore, fear would be Level: 4, while greater teleport would be Level: 7.


----------



## ideasmith (Jan 31, 2011)

the_orc_within said:


> Today I realized that official errata can make a significant difference in sorting out monsters' special abilities.  So I'm going to incorporate official errata as I update these monster files (as well as the "special abilities" files) because that can change a given entry in ways that clarify or simplify things a bit.
> 
> I believe the monster files just uploaded above are ok now, but they'll definitely need a second look later on to verify.




Is the official errata Open Game Content? I was under the impression that it is not.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 31, 2011)

ideasmith said:


> A thought on 'monstrous spells', if we end up going that route. They will probably need levels, but will certainly not need any class identified. Therefore, fear would be Level: 4, while greater teleport would be Level: 7.



My thoughts exactly.  I'm wondering if the arcane/divine distinction needs to be preserved, though (eg, "Level: Arcane 4" vs just "Level 4").  My sense is that that's not necessary, but I simply don't know if it matters or not.  Thoughts?  (BTW, I started a thread on this this yesterday.)



ideasmith said:


> Is the official errata Open Game Content? I was under the impression that it is not.



Ugh, I hadn't thought about that.  I know d20srd.org incorporates errata and claims to be entirely OGC, but perhaps it's in error.  I'll dig around to see if I can resolve this.  Thanks for the heads up.


----------



## ideasmith (Jan 31, 2011)

the_orc_within said:


> My thoughts exactly.  I'm wondering if the arcane/divine distinction needs to be preserved, though (eg, "Level: Arcane 4" vs just "Level 4").  My sense is that that's not necessary, but I simply don't know if it matters or not.  Thoughts?




Or maybe 'Level: Arc 4', with 'Level Dvn 4' used for divine. Although I am pretty sure the distinction doesn't apply to spell-like abilities, and we can go with 'Level: Mns 4'.



the_orc_within said:


> (BTW, I started a thread on this this yesterday.)




Which I saw and somehow didn't connect with E6.



the_orc_within said:


> Ugh, I hadn't thought about that.  I know d20srd.org incorporates errata and claims to be entirely OGC, but perhaps it's in error.  I'll dig around to see if I can resolve this.  Thanks for the heads up.




What appears to be the official location of the official errata can be found at:

Official D&D Updates


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jan 31, 2011)

ideasmith said:


> Or maybe 'Level: Arc 4', with 'Level Dvn 4' used for divine. Although I am pretty sure the distinction doesn't apply to spell-like abilities, and we can go with 'Level: Mns 4'.



Yeah, I'm also under the impression it doesn't matter.  It turns out that there are several Sp abilities in the monsters section that don't reference any spell at all, but have no mention of arcane or divine nature.  I think it's safe to assume they're type-less; that seems to be the consensus in the other thread, as well.


> What appears to be the official location of the official errata can be found at:
> Official D&D Updates



That's what I'm working from, as a matter of fact.  What I can't determine is if the corrections to SRD ogc is still ogc.  My gut tells me it's not an issue because they're "corrections"... but I've been looking into this to try to find a definitive answer.

edit: WotC's OGL FAQ asks/answers the question:







> *Q: What is "Open Game Content"?*​ A: Open Game Content is any material that is distributed  using the Open Game License clearly identified by the publisher as Open  Game Content. Furthermore, _any material that is derived from Open Game  Content automatically becomes Open Game Content as well._​



(emphasis mine).  I don't know if that answers the question, but it seems on the right track.​


----------



## ideasmith (Jan 31, 2011)

the_orc_within said:


> What I can't determine is if the corrections to SRD ogc is still ogc.  My gut tells me it's not an issue because they're "corrections"... but I've been looking into this to try to find a definitive answer.
> 
> edit: WotC's OGL FAQ asks/answers the questionemphasis mine).  I don't know if that answers the question, but it seems on the right track.
> [/LEFT]




My own understanding is that the corrections to the Player's Handbook, Dungeon Master's Guide, and Monster Manual are derived from the Player's Handbook, Dungeon Master's Guide and Monster Manual. 

The Player's Handbook, Dungeon Master's Guide, and Monster Manual are definitely not OGL and WotC's right to use them is definitely not derived from the OGL. The fact that the copyright notice is 'naked', rather than with the OGL notice that would be required if the corrections were OGL, underlines this point.

I am for leaving the corrections out.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 1, 2011)

Heh, suddenly this project has become decidedly less fun.   Maybe [MENTION=19675]Dannyalcatraz[/MENTION] can point me  to something online that would help clear this up?

I understand the manuals as a whole are not released under the OGL, but they do contain open content protected by the OGL.  And it's my understanding that the point of the OGL is to allow derivative materials (including specifically "corrections", etc, in section 1.b of the OGL) to be created from ogc, so long as the resulting material is also ogc.  In this case, the ogc is the SRD, and the derivative material is WotC's errata to non-product identity in the core manuals-- in other words, the SRD.

I guess the thing is that if this were not the case, all those other SRDs out there-- including Pathfinder, which also appears to incorporate the errata-- must be in the wrong.

In any event, I'll hold off on incorporating errata until I've got a  better idea of what's correct here.


----------



## ideasmith (Feb 1, 2011)

the_orc_within said:


> Heh, suddenly this project has become decidedly less fun.   Maybe [MENTION=19675]Dannyalcatraz[/MENTION] can point me  to something online that would help clear this up?




I may have gotten overly intense. My apologies.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 1, 2011)

No, no, no apology necessary!  My comment wasn't aimed at you at all.  The legal issues _are_ a valid concern, and the errata issue _does_ need to be cleared up.  

Sorry if I came off as frustrated; parsing legalese just isn't very high on my "happy fun list".


----------



## macrochelys (Feb 1, 2011)

the_orc_within said:


> Heh, suddenly this project has become decidedly less fun.   Maybe [MENTION=19675]Dannyalcatraz[/MENTION] can point me  to something online that would help clear this up?
> 
> I understand the manuals as a whole are not released under the OGL, but they do contain open content protected by the OGL.  And it's my understanding that the point of the OGL is to allow derivative materials (including specifically "corrections", etc, in section 1.b of the OGL) to be created from ogc, so long as the resulting material is also ogc.  In this case, the ogc is the SRD, and the derivative material is WotC's errata to non-product identity in the core manuals-- in other words, the SRD.
> 
> ...




I've been trying to catch up with all you guys have done, but I feel like chiming in on this right away.

I know this subject is a minefield for armchair lawyers, but having looked at the errata for the PHB 3.5 I would say that the content is almost solely in the form of rules and therefore the changes themselves are not subject to copyright (see U.S. Copyright Office - Games). Certainly, the numbers only changes would be free to be incorporated. The more prose-like changes (i.e. the Polymorph errata) might be questionable, in the strictest interpretation (and it seems Paizo changed these section wholly for Pathfinder).

But, does it matter? d20srd.org, which has certainly been known to WotC, has had the changes incorporated for years. I would say, to fit the bill of a product I would feel safe packaging and selling, I would include the small changes but not the big Polymorph/Alter Self changes, just to cover my ass.

Or I'd base it off the PFSRD, but that's a whole different path 

P.S. I'm also in support of a 'Monster Spells & Abilities' section.


----------



## Ry (Feb 1, 2011)

the_orc_within said:


> Heh, well it's your baby.   Feel free to pop in anytime.  We'll send a notify when the first online version goes up for comment & correction.  Hopefully that will be easier for folks to  see and evaluate the changes we've made to the full SRD.



I'd love to do a read-through towards the end of February if something is available by then.  I've trimmed individual SRD files for what-would-have-been this project a half dozen times.

As I said on e-mail to another interested party, I'm big on keeping exactly to the baseline ruleset (in this case 3.5) and then using well-considered appendices and new feats to make changes from that.  Feats are great rules containers.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 1, 2011)

*file: Monsters D-De*

file: *Monsters D-De*

status: awaiting proofread

comment: 
cut - 
demon, hezrou
demon, succubus
demon, vrock
devil, hamatula
devil, bone
devourer

modified - 
demon, quasit  - inlined commune
devil, erinyes - inline Unholy Blight
devil, imp  - inlined commune
derro - removed refs to confusion and higher-level cure magics


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 1, 2011)

*file: Monsters Dr - Dw*

file: *Monsters Dr - Dw*

status: awaiting proofread

comment: 

modified - 
dryad (inlined [simplified] treestride)


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Feb 1, 2011)

In all honesty, I've never read the OGL: none of my clients are in the industry and despite my long history in the game, I've never felt the urge to publish anything.  If any of my ideas are floating around in the hobby, they were freely given.

That said, my perspective is that, as stated in the link provided above, pure rules are not copyrightable...and ditto corrections to those rules.

As long as you're not using someone's _fluff_, you should be in the clear.  Note that fluff can include unique creature/class/place names or phrases used in particular ways.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 1, 2011)

*file: Types, Subtypes and Abilities*

file: *Types, Subtypes and Abilities*

status: awaiting proofread

comment:

[EDIT: added _dominate person, dominate monster_ and _telekinesis_ to "monstrous spells" list]

In this version, I've removed the spells-as-special abilities (as in the previous version), and kept them as spells in a "monstrous spells" section at the bottom, along with a (very awkwardly worded, imho) paragraph of explanation.  

These "monstrous spells" have only a level with no reference to spellcasting class, and no components (since specials don't use components).  They are otherwise identical to the spells as they appear in the full SRD.  In retrospect, a couple of these (esp true seeing and charm monster) may be more appropriate inlined into monsters descriptions because there are just a couple instances of each, but they're here for now.  Additionally, telekinesis might be appropriate to add, as it's a complex one but will be needed for ghosts (and would also allow the inclusion of vrocks).

Let me know if this "monstrous spells" approach actually looks better or worse than simply rewriting as special abilities.

(Also note , the spell _fear_ is not a separate "monstrous spell".  I left it as ideasmith (iirc?) left it, subsumed into the already existent fear special ability.)


[EDIT: added _dominate person_ and _telekinesis_ to "monstrous spells" list]


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 1, 2011)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> In all honesty, I've never read the OGL:  none of my clients are in the industry and despite my long history in  the game, I've never felt the urge to publish anything.  If any of my  ideas are floating around in the hobby, they were freely given.
> 
> That said, my perspective is that, as stated in the link provided above,  pure rules are not copyrightable...and ditto corrections to those  rules.
> 
> As long as you're not using someone's _fluff_, you should be in the  clear.  Note that fluff can include unique creature/class/place names  or phrases used in particular ways.



Thanks for taking the time to  respond, Danny.

That's basically my impression as well.  Given the WotC material I've been reading (the FAQs, Q'nAs, and the OGL itself) and what I've seen of other published works, I really believe that as long as we stick to just the  SRD-only mechanics and mods to them, we're ok.

however, to assuage others' concerns, I'll still hold off on including  the errata until after this first rough draft goes online.  At that  point, we can add them or not during the final edit.  

I'll continue to look into the issue until then.  I also intend double check the errata to discern what might be considered "fluff" that hasn't already been incorporated into the pre-errata SRD; as well as to more carefully verify what other published rule sets have done.  If anyone has specific concerns, _please_ keep them in mind so we an talk it out in a few weeks when it's go time.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Feb 1, 2011)

Another way to handle errata is to read it.  If you like it, reword it and use it.  If you don't, change it.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 1, 2011)

Good point.  That's probably the safest way to go, especially for the corner cases.


----------



## ideasmith (Feb 2, 2011)

the_orc_within said:


> file: *Types, Subtypes and Abilities*
> 
> status: awaiting proofread
> 
> ...





Part of the file seems to be missing. It seems to cut off partway through 'Ooze Type' description. I didn't see any of the monstrous spells.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 2, 2011)

ideasmith said:


> Part of the file seems to be missing. It seems to cut off partway through 'Ooze Type' description. I didn't see any of the monstrous spells.



I've re-uploaded it.  It looks ok when I download it, so give it a try now.  The filesize is around 250k.


----------



## ideasmith (Feb 2, 2011)

the_orc_within said:


> I've re-uploaded it.  It looks ok when I download it, so give it a try now.  The filesize is around 250k.




Works fine now. Thanks.


----------



## ideasmith (Feb 2, 2011)

the_orc_within said:


> file: *Monsters Dr - Dw*
> 
> status: awaiting proofread
> 
> ...




The general dragon info has references to dragons older than adult, larger than Huge, and/or with a flight speed greater than 200 feet. None of the E6 dragons have any of these. Should these references be removed, or left in to make room for DM creativity?


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 2, 2011)

Well, I was thinking "for DM creativity" when I did it.  But it is admittedly rather awkward with dangling references I left, though, now that I look at it again.

Maybe the ages listed in the individual color dragon entries should provide stats for up to "(young) adult _or older_" to clarify it a bit?  

As for the size-to-damage tables in the general section up top, perhaps they _should_ get trimmed back to the max size in the individual dragon entries (huge, iirc?).  If a DM wants to increase the power of a dragon using straight size increases, he can extrapolate from what's given or just use the size rules in the "improving monsters" section, as he would for any other monster.

So I leave it to your judgment.  And we can always change it later, if/when other eyes have given it a look over, as well.


----------



## macrochelys (Feb 2, 2011)

*file: Monsters B-C*

file: *Monsters B-C*

status: proofread & edited

Comment: 

Cut:
Couatl - Its Psionics referenced a few very high level spells, and its Spells section would need a complete rewrite

Modified:
Bralani - Changed the Holy weapons to just +1 weapons, and added a line about the weapons doing +2d6 against evil creatures (there was already a line about the weapons being good aligned) I figure this change simplifies the weapons a lot in this case, and makes them PC compatible.
Chaos beast - Removed references to heal, shapechange, greater restoration


----------



## macrochelys (Feb 2, 2011)

File: *Monsters D-De*

Status: proofread & edited

Comment: 

Modified:
Devil, bearded - Removed reference to Heal spell
Devil, imp  - Changed the Alternate Form text to not reference polymorph


----------



## macrochelys (Feb 2, 2011)

File: *Monsters E-F*

Status: Proofread & edited

Comment: 

Cut:
Formian myrmarch  - Uncommon high level spells. A likely candidate for being reworked and added in at a latter stage.

Modified:
Earth elementals - Remove reference to Move earth

Note:
Formian taskmaster - I didn't inline the spell Dominate Monster as I think it should be put in the TypesSubtypesAbilities file with the other Monster spells.


----------



## macrochelys (Feb 2, 2011)

File: *Monsters G*

Status: Proofread & edited

Comment:

Cut:
Genie, djinni
Genie, efreeti - Need a lot of reworking to fit in their spellcasting and wishes
Giant, elder stone

Modified:
Ghost - Changed Malevolence to include all the necessary info from Magic Jar
Gibbering mouther - Changed Confusion reference to the confused condition
Golem - Cut all references to golem creation, as the CLs and spells were way beyond e6

Note:
Genie (heading) - All genies have Plane Shift, another good spell to include as a monster spell


----------



## macrochelys (Feb 2, 2011)

File: *Monsters H-I*

Status: Proofread & edited

Comment:
Cut:
Hag Covey - This is something I'd like to see come back at a later phase, because it's oozing with flavour, but for now its also oozing with high level spells.
Inevitables - Too many spells once again

Modified:
Hag, sea - Removed reference to dispel evil
Homunculus - Changes construction requirement from Arcane Eye to Clairaudience/Clairvoyance

Note:
I left the templates alone for now. I think we'll have to decide how to handle them later on, as they (along with many monster races) quickly go beyond the power level of e6. I think they'll need a lot of reworking to find their place in the system.


----------



## macrochelys (Feb 2, 2011)

File: *Monsters Intro - A*

Status: Proofread 

Comment: 

No changes.


----------



## Gilladian (Feb 2, 2011)

ideasmith said:


> The general dragon info has references to dragons older than adult, larger than Huge, and/or with a flight speed greater than 200 feet. None of the E6 dragons have any of these. Should these references be removed, or left in to make room for DM creativity?




I started to say leave them in, but that gets really tough; what else could be left in for DM creativity. DMs know where these rules came from. If they want "more", they know where to go. Take out the references is my final suggestion.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 2, 2011)

Hey, macrochelys, nice to see you back.







macrochelys said:


> Cut:
> Chaos beast - Its main ability, Corporeal Instability, can only be countered by spells beyond e6



Yeah, I'd initially ripped out chaos beast for that reason, too.  But _restoration_ actually does fix CI, iirc, and that's an E6 baseline feat.  With the relatively low save DC15, I think chaos beast could probably be left in.  But I'm fine with it, either way.

Also, on templates - I agree, we definitely need to think about templates.  Afaict, at a minimum the (celestial, infernal) HD progressions need to be re-ordered to remain within E6-land.  I'd suggest ripping them out entirely, but they're referred to in other places (eg summons, improved familiar, etc), and they are imho a really nice alternative for advancing power of mundane E6 beasties.

Basically, I feel they ought to stay in the game, but I'm at a loss what to do with them to keep them in.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 2, 2011)

Gilladian said:


> I started to say leave them in, but that gets really tough; what else could be left in for DM creativity. DMs know where these rules came from. If they want "more", they know where to go. Take out the references is my final suggestion.



This is a good point.  Leaving in something for "creativity" in one place makes one wonder why it's not left in in others.

I'm revising my previous suggestion a bit:  
-in the individual color dragon entries, change the max age referred to read either "young adult, adult, and older" or "adult and older" (as is applicable); 
-truncate the size v damage tables and flight tables to the relevant values (Huge, and 200ft, or whatever); 
-chop the age table back to adult, but collapse all the ages beyond adult into the adult category.
- make sure there's a reference to the term "great wyrm" as the term naming the most ancient of all dragons.  Just for the sake of iconicness.

I can implement the changes later today, or someone else can take a whack at resolving it in a different way.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 2, 2011)

A few other things:

Monsters that cast spells as 7th+ level casters - Have we decided for sure how to deal with this? Options that have been floated are:

1. reduce spell slots & spells known to 6th level, but keep effective caster level at 7th
2. change 4th level spells into select SLAs
3. limit 4th level slots to metamagics, give a bonus metamagic feat. (and exclude domain spells)
4. cut the monsters entirely

I'm inclined to go with option 3 (or just cut them).  Any other opinions?


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 2, 2011)

*file: Monsters K-L*

file: *Monsters K-L*

status: awaiting proofread

comments: 
cut -
-leonal
-lich
-kraken

modified -
-lammasu (kept 7th-level caster: gave bonus metamagic feat, and limited 4th-lev spells to metamagic; still open to changing this)
-lillend (inline hallucinatory terrain) 
-lycanthropes (removed refs to higher levels cures for lycanthropy)


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 2, 2011)

*file: Monsters M-N*

file: *Monsters M-N*

status: awaiting proofread

comments: 
cut - 
-naga, guardian
-night hag
-nightmare

modified -
- nymph (kept as Drd7, but limited 4th-lev spell to metamagic; and gave a bonus metamagic feat; and slightly mod'd "typical" spells prepared)
- minotaur (remove ref to maze spell)
- mummy (remove ref to break enchantment)
- naga, dark/spirit/water (kept Sor7, with note that they have extra slots; no mechanical changes)


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 2, 2011)

*file: Monsters Dr-Dw*

file: *Monsters Dr-Dw*

status: awaiting proofread

comment:
modified entry for true dragons - 
-removed info on gargantuan+ size; references to "tail sweep" attack; and fly speeds above 200ft
-where "young adult" was the top age category, changed table refs to read "young adult or older", and added in an "adult" entry under those dragon's Organization entry (so they can have families, too!)
-added a sentence up top saying that even though dragons don't physically grow beyond adult age, they can continue to become more fearsome in various RP respects.

I _think_ I caught all the fiddly bits.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 2, 2011)

*file: Monsters O-R*

file: *Monsters O-R*

status: awaiting proofread

comment:

cut -
- black pudding elder
- purple worm
- rakshasa 
- ravid
- roper

modified -
- ogre mage (inlined cone of cold, separate out polymorph to reference the special ability)
- phasm (change to ref polymorph special ability rather than spell)


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 3, 2011)

*file: Monsters S*

file: *Monsters S*

status: awaiting proofread

comment:

cut -
-salamander, noble
-sphynx, gynosphinx (too many complex high-level SLAs)
-swarm, hellwasp

modified -
- satyr (changed _fear_ reference to special ability rather than spell)
- shield guardian (removed construction info with high-lev spells)
- sphynx, androsphynx (changed _fear_ reference to special ability rather than spell)
- spider eater (inlined _freedom of movement_)
- sprite, grig (inlined _irresistible dance_)
sprite, pixie (inlined _permanent image_, _irresistible dance_;  removed cures for "memory loss" for being too high level)


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 3, 2011)

file: *Monsters T-Z*

status: awaiting proofread

comment:
cut - 
(none)

modified -
- treant (inlined info from _liveoak_ spell)
- triton (inlined info from_ summon nature's ally IV_ spell)
- vampire template (no change; will add _dominate person_ to "monstrous spells")
- vargouille (remove ref to _heal_ spell)
- will o' wisp (remove ref to _maze_ spell)
- xorn (remove ref to _move earth_ spell)


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 3, 2011)

file: *Types, Subtypes and Abilities* 

status: (updated file *here* ) awaiting proofread

comment:
Added _dominate person/monster_ and _telekinesis_ in the "monstrous spells" list.  This meets the needs of a handful of monsters already posted, and allows at least a couple others to be re-added.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 3, 2011)

File: *Monsters D-De*

Status: updated

Comment: 
Re-added vrock (due to addition of tk), and succubus (due to addition of vrock).

(And now the demon section is roughly as balanced as the devils.)


----------



## Turjan (Feb 3, 2011)

I don't know much about E6 and just looked at the first document, Classes I. I noticed this sentence below the cleric table:

"1 In addition to the stated number of spells per day for 1st- through 9th-level spells, a cleric gets a domain spell for each spell level, starting at 1st."

Would that be 6th-level spells?


----------



## ideasmith (Feb 3, 2011)

Turjan said:


> I don't know much about E6 and just looked at the first document, Classes I. I noticed this sentence below the cleric table:
> 
> "1 In addition to the stated number of spells per day for 1st- through 9th-level spells, a cleric gets a domain spell for each spell level, starting at 1st."
> 
> Would that be 6th-level spells?




It would be 3rd-level spells. Thank you.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 4, 2011)

Turjan said:


> I don't know much about E6 and just looked at the first document, Classes I. I noticed this sentence below the cleric table:
> 
> "1 In addition to the stated number of spells per day for 1st- through 9th-level spells, a cleric gets a domain spell for each spell level, starting at 1st."
> 
> Would that be 6th-level spells?



The "6" in "E6" refers to max _character_ level, which means, as ideasmith said, that spells top out at 3rd level.  

Thanks for catching the error!   We'll make sure it gets corrected.  If you spot others, please let us know; I'm sure there are still many at this point.

[edit: it's been corrected.]


----------



## macrochelys (Feb 4, 2011)

File: Monsters B-C
Status: Updated at above link



the_orc_within said:


> Hey, macrochelys, nice to see you back.Yeah, I'd initially ripped out chaos beast for that reason, too.  But _restoration_ actually does fix CI, iirc, and that's an E6 baseline feat.  With the relatively low save DC15, I think chaos beast could probably be left in.  But I'm fine with it, either way.




I had forgotten about the Restoration feat. I added the Chaos beast back in and removed the references to Heal, etc.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 4, 2011)

*file: Abilities and Conditions*

file: *Abilities and Conditions*

status: done

comment:
- pulled out a ref to a high-lev spell
- fixed a couple little format errors
- replaced antimagic example with basic +1 longsword


----------



## macrochelys (Feb 4, 2011)

File: *Monsters K-L*

Status: Proofread

Comments: No changes.


----------



## macrochelys (Feb 4, 2011)

File: *Monsters M-N*

Status: Proofread

Comments: Fixed spelling error


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 4, 2011)

file: *Magic Items I*

status:  done

comment:
In an example, changed "vorpal" to "merciful"


----------



## macrochelys (Feb 4, 2011)

File: *Monsters O-R*

Status: Proofread

Comment: No changes


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 4, 2011)

macrochelys said:


> File: *Monsters O-R*
> 
> {etc}



Excellent!  I'm hopping in and out this evening, but will update the master list as I notice that items get posted.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 4, 2011)

file: MagicItems II

status: done

comment:
[edit: dropped two over-powered items, and updated relevant tables; reverted table footnote]
-removed some superfluous info at bottom (the text of the post that this file was attached to accidentally got attached to the file, looks like.)
-reworded footnote 1 of first table (mainly because of question below)

- - -
Question (esp @ideasmith): There are two items in here (celestial armor and winged shield) that have +3 enhancements.  That's beyond E6, but they also have CL5th.  So should these be cut?  

If so, would you mind redoing the table percentages?  I'm not sure what you did to get the values, but they look good and you'd probably keep them more internally consistent than I would.  

My gut says drop them, but we might also consider changing them to be +2 items (at -5000gp) with a minor name change. However,  that starts to deviate from the full SRD again.  I happen to think these items are nicely suited for E6, so even if they get removed here, they may fit in nicely as (very) minor artifacts.


----------



## ideasmith (Feb 4, 2011)

the_orc_within said:


> file: MagicItems II
> 
> status: awaiting comment
> 
> ...




If I had noticed the +3's, I would have dropped the items.

My current computer situation nixes messing with the documents, but I can give you the percentages:

Major Specific Armors:

01-50 Adamantine breastplate
51-100 Dwarven plate

Medium Specific Shields:

01-22 Darkwood buckler
23-50 Darkwood shield
51-78 Mithral heavy shield
79-94 Caster's shield
95-100 Spined shield

Major Specific Shields:

01-50 Caster's shield
95-100 Spined shield


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 4, 2011)

Thanks for the numbers.  I'll update the tables and re-post the doc shortly.

[edit: Done.]
.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 4, 2011)

file: *MagicItems IV*

status: awaiting proofread

comment:
- changed instance of "4th level spells" to "3rd level spells" in Wands section.
- rejiggered Wands table a bit: 
---Removed wands of _restoration_ and _stoneskin_, as those aren't technically E6 spells.
---Reinserted _neuralize poison_ and _poison_, as those can be made by E6 druids, albeit at a lower price (ie, what a druid would charge).  
---Then changed/corrected the percentages in "Major" & "Medium" columns accordingly (weighted toward lower CLs).


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 4, 2011)

file: *Magic Items III*

status: done

comment:
Looks good, no changes.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 4, 2011)

file: *Magic Items V*

status: done

comment:
-Inlined relevant info into _lesser bracers of archery_ from non-E6 _greater bracers of archery_.
-A few illusions in deck of illusions referred to monsters that have been edited out, so I changed those to similar monsters that remain in the SRD (specifically, HighPriestess:lich-->vampire; Strength:iron golem-->stone golem; Empress:glabrezu-->succubus).


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 5, 2011)

file: *Magic Items VI*

status: in progress (proofreading & consideration)

comment:
Ugh, this is a difficult section to reconcile with E6 while injecting no rules changes!  I'll have some comments soon.


----------



## Lord Xtheth (Feb 6, 2011)

Ok... Ok... I kinda got distracted by real life emergencies, but I'm getting right back on track. 

... Maybe this is why game companies get their own delays? I'm not going to critisize a company again for delaying their projects.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 6, 2011)

file: *Magic Items VI*

status: awaiting comment

comment:
Finally at a point where I can comment on the Artifacts, Cursed and Intelligent Items.

Basically, first I pondered how I'd do it, then went over ideasmith's version, and saw the variants were quite different.  So point-by-point:

Intelligent items:

All I did here was rip out anything referring to spells/effects not explicitly E6ish.  Other than that, it's fairly close to ideasmith's version.  I've never used RAW intelligent magic items, so I don't really have other opinions on the matter.

Cursed Items:

These are peculiar because practically all the ones in the full SRD are beyond E6 in power (ie, they're mostly epic items).  I understand that ideasmith ran into this problem, too, having removed all non-E6 items, then putting most of them back in after seeing there were only two left.

I ended up compromising, more or less just cutting the list off above CL11, witha few exceptions.  Why CL11?  That's the dividing line between RAW detect magic's "moderate" and "strong" auras-- a fact I ended up using later on in differentiating artifacts.  So the cursed items list has a couple items that detect as "normal" level magic; several that detect as "moderate" (=epic level); and a couple that detect as "strong" (=super-duper epic level). 

Artifacts:

Very difficult. The assumption beyond artifacts in normal D&D seems...[casts _dispel_ on unsightly _wall of text_]

Here's the tl;dr version: "I've basically reinterpreted minor artifacts as uncreatable items of power levels equal to or beyond epic E6 PCs (ie, CL6-11); and major artifacts as items beyond even the power levels of epic E6 monsters (ie, CL12+).  This was driven mostly by how auras work by RAW using _detect magic_, and conveniently maps into how we had already decided to cut monsters from the SRD."

End result is that my rework looks very different than ideasmith's, not least because I included more artifacts; because (I think) I've assumed a much less important role for minor artifacts; and just because of personal taste, obviously.  Also, I didn't rename items ported over from the normal magic items list into the artifacts list, and made (almost) no mechanical changes to those items; just made a few editorial mods to emphasize the items' "artifactiness".

Anyway, it's not a critical part of the game, imho, but I'm looking for a little discussion on this before moving on to the next phase of the project!


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 6, 2011)

And looking forward....

I've got a rough and *ugly!* static webpage template for this SRD ready to go.  Dropping it into a wiki at this point looks like it will be a lot of upfront effort, so I'd rather keep it static for now and slowly wiki-ize (or whatever) as the final proofread gets done.  
[edit: This is looking to be easier than first anticipated.  ]
[edit: Spoke too early. rtf to html tables are a pita.]

I'll likely just make up a googlesite (or whatever) page or something, though I'm open to suggestions.  I'm not a web-developer, so I'm not really aware of tools that might be available for making this thing nice in the long run.

Comments & suggestions are most definitely welcome.  In any event, I'll put up a link in this thread when I actually get the site established somewhere.  Then we can more widely advertise the invitation to comment after we decide exactly how that process will work.


----------



## ideasmith (Feb 7, 2011)

the_orc_within said:


> file: *Magic Items VI*
> 
> status: awaiting comment
> 
> ...




Looks good.

1. Since creating an intelligent item requires a "caster level of 15th or higher", all intelligent items are artifacts. I recommend making this explicit in the first sentence as "Artifacts sometimes have intelligence of their own."

2. Since artifacts are determined randomly, the d% columns in various tables should be dropped.

3. Since artifacts are not provided with build information, the base price modifier columns in various tables should be dropped. 

Except for the intelligent non-artifacts issue, and the typo in the name of the Ring of X-Ray Vision, your changes look fine to me. Dropping the non-6e intelligent powers fixed a bad oversight of mine, and the other changes amount to making a somewhat-less-arbitrary set of judgement calls than I did. 

Nice work.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 8, 2011)

Good calls.  I'll update the file when I have a bit of time.

Meantime, I'm slowly getting a site up and running in my spare time.  I've decided on google sites.  Code is fairly restrictive on it (no css, for example), so it's not optimal as a pretty presentation-- but so far it's easy, and has some minimal sharing and revision tracking ability.  

The table formatting is proving to be a capital mess, so I'm mostly ignoring that issue for now.  This first online cut _will_ be ugly; but as a content review, it should suffice.   I hope to have everything converted & ready for a look-see by Thursday.  
Until then, I'll likely be fairly absent.


----------



## Gilladian (Feb 8, 2011)

I agree with you guys; this version is good as far as I'm concerned.

My only experience with building a website from scratch is with pbwiki. I like it a lot, and would suggest it as a possible option when you're ready to go there. I've never worked with a google site, although I do have some (very) basic HTML skills.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 8, 2011)

I took a look your page and pbwiki in general, and it looks like it may well serve our needs.  It might even be appropriate to move it into a wiki sooner rather than later, now that I'm starting to better understand the differences between the various options.  

Since it looks like moving the material around really isn't a big a problem as I thought, we could probably try diffierent things over time before settling on something.


----------



## Gilladian (Feb 9, 2011)

yeah, that's one of the real joys of a wiki. You can easily rename pages, redo link structures, cut and paste stuff from one page to another, etc...

It even allows pasting in of excel files and such.


----------



## Ry (Feb 10, 2011)

If you guys want to use it, I've got the keys to esix.pbwiki.com and I'd be happy to add you guys with full rights to fix it up for this project.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 10, 2011)

Ryan Stou'n said:


> If you guys want to use it, I've got the keys to esix.pbwiki.com and I'd be happy to add you guys with full rights to fix it up for this project.



Very cool!  That might be the perfect place to host the baseline when it gets finalized; I'll contact you about that when that time is a bit nearer. 

For the time being, we've just put up a publicly viewable googlesite ready at this *E6 Baseline SRD development* site.  Right now it's basically just a no-nonsense "this is where we stand" thing, but it makes the individual SRD files much easier to view than using the rtfs. 

(tl;dr version at bottom)

It's very much a work in progress.  Of most interest to some people is the little bit of info on the top-level decisions we've made to reduce the full SRD down to E6; a very little bit can be found on the Information page (under "What have you done..?").  I'll be tagging more specific 'design' notes to each file or category of files shortly.

However, the pages containing the SRD itself are full of formatting peculiarities, presumably  from the mish-mash of systems and software used to edit the original  rtfs and convert them to html.   I'd actually like to get the format  issues cleared up as soon as possible, especially to remove weird  non-printing characters and get the tables & fonts uniform, if not  pretty.  I'm prioritizing this because dealing with changes to the rules text is much more difficult to track if we're fixing formatting at the same time.

There's no public editing capability yet; and there may never be on this initial baseline phase, just to keep the project closed ended.  But anyone can feel free to  either talk about it here, or use the contact info on the site.  I believe there's also a comment functionality at the website that would be a suitable place for, well, comments.

With all that said, what I think I'll do is manually fix the formatting on each rtf individually, and re-upload them over the next couple weeks so the pages gradually beome uniform.  As I put them up, I'll steer discussion here toward that particular file(s) along with some specific to do's.  At that time editorial changes can be noted by anyone, and someone with keys to the site can incorporate them into the html and rtf versions.  Of course, anyone can comment on anything at anytime, but focus will be on very specific parts of the SRD at any given time, so concerns might not get addressed immediately.

*TL;DR VERSION -* Go check out the website.  It's rough, but it's usable. 
 Yes, I know it's not pretty, and there's a mess of formatting bugs; I'll fix those first.  
Yes, I know there are rules & design issues, too. 
  As I fix the formats on individual SRD rtfs, discussion (here and there) will be focused on those specific parts of the SRD so we can address the real game issues without the distraction & interference of the messy format.

Cheers!


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 14, 2011)

Our E6 Baseline SRD editing page is more or less ready to go.  The page isn't meant to be an easy-to-use reference (that wil come later); in fact it's temporary.  Right now it's really just a copy of WotC's original RTFs, stripped down to 6th level in the strictest sense.  The page is meant to be an open comment & proofread page for this E6-ified SRD.  

If you'd like to participate, we're starting at the top.  For the next few days, we're focusing on file category Building Characters, specifically the following files

*Basics*
*Races
* *Description*
*Classes I* 

If you see a problem, feel free to leave a comment in this thread, or in the comment box on the Building Characters page.   (And yeah, it's a pretty rudimentary comment system.  Blame google.).  

And of course feel free to check out the rest of the website.  Input is always welcome.


----------



## Lacan (Feb 15, 2011)

Orc and fellow editors,

Had a question, that might not be quick to answer.  We're putting out a gaming product in PDF format first.  It's our rendition of E6+Pathfinder and its going to be OGL.  Can we use the SRD you guys are putting together, modify it (mostly for pathfinder) and re-release this alternative SRD under OGL?  

If not, we're fine writing up another SRD (since we're not trying to piggy back on your guy's great work).  If it looks good, we own a publishing company that does children's book, and we'd like to print a hundred copies or so that will be have OGL v1.0 and Ryan's E6 original document, and will be Pathfinder compatible as well. Under this scenario we would also acknowledge BaseE6 SRD as well and the names of the editors if you would like.  We'd print more, if we can give or sell all those copies, but you probably realize how unlikely that is. 

Let me know what you guys think?  

I talked to Ryan and he's given us his blessing to proceed in term so the original E6 document.


----------



## Lacan (Feb 15, 2011)

Orc and fellow editors,

Had a question, that might not be quick to answer.  We're putting out a gaming product in PDF format first.  It's our rendition of E6+Pathfinder and its going to be OGL.  Can we use the SRD you guys are putting together, modify it (mostly for pathfinder) and re-release this alternative SRD under OGL?  

If not, we're fine writing up another SRD (since we're not trying to piggy back on your guy's great work).  If it looks good, we own a publishing company that does children's book, and we'd like to print a hundred copies or so that will be have OGL v1.0 and Ryan's E6 original document, and will be Pathfinder compatible as well. Under this scenario we would also acknowledge BaseE6 SRD as well and the names of the editors if you would like.  We'd print more, if we can give or sell all those copies, but you probably realize how unlikely that is. 

Let me know what you guys think?  

I talked to Ryan and he's given us his blessing to proceed.


----------



## Ry (Feb 15, 2011)

One thing: I'd prefer if the simplest 3.5-SRD-trimmed-down should be the one called the "E6 SRD"

The Pathfinder+Other Mods can be given your own cool name, like the "Axalon SRD" which lists E6 (or E6 + the E6 SRD) in its Section 15.

Unrelated note: I think cursed items / artifacts / intelligent items don't need to be covered in the E6 SRD.  The game isn't hurt by their exclusion.  Best to cut them out completely for now, and then write a separate article about how to do them in a more E6-friendly way.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 15, 2011)

Lacan said:


> Orc and fellow editors,
> 
> Had a question, that might not be quick to answer.  We're putting out a gaming product in PDF format first.  It's our rendition of E6+Pathfinder and its going to be OGL.  Can we use the SRD you guys are putting together, modify it (mostly for pathfinder) and re-release this alternative SRD under OGL?



Sure, the nature of the OGL is that you can do whatever you like with whatever is released under it, so long as the Section 15 gets propagated accordingly.  So, you're more than welcome to use this stuff.   

The only caution, at least with this particular work, is that it's not finished; there are plenty of bugs and decisions yet to be made or unmade.  It's been 'released' only in the sense that it's publically available, and therefore is supposed to have the OGL tagged to it.  I'm hoping to have it "finalized" in 6 to 8 weeks, at which point an RTF bundle (also ODTs, I think) will be available as an all-in-one thing, analogous to the zip file that WotC makes available in their archives.  

I'll be noting which files are "finalized" as we go along, so if you want to grab them as they're finished, let me know and I'll make sure you can get to them.  You're also more than welcome to help with the proofreading over on the dev site (even just a "this one looks ok" or "mispelled something here" is helpful).  That sort of thing is actually a huge help.

If you like, you can email me offline, E6BaselineSRD _at_ gmail

James


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 15, 2011)

Ryan Stou'n said:


> Unrelated note: I think cursed items /   artifacts / intelligent items don't need to be covered in the E6 SRD.    The game isn't hurt by their exclusion.  Best to cut them out completely   for now, and then write a separate article about how to do them in a   more E6-friendly way.



I kind of agree on this, but not entirely.   The problem we've seen in whittling down the full SRD to 6 levels is  that, while it's straightforward defining how to chop out magic items, chopping out monsters is a much less obvious task.  

 At least the way we've implemented it, there are a ton of "epic"  monsters (ie, CR7+) left to challenge "epic" parties of 6th level.   Given how highly magical some of these monsters are  (especially  outsiders and fey), I really think some mention of "uncreatable"  higher-level  items is appropriate-- especially given how significant iconic things  like flying carpets and flaming swords often are in certain mythic-style  campaigns that E6 is so suited to.  Being confined to the "Artifacts"  section already makes them more or less optional anyway, just as it more  or less is in the full SRD.

 If you haven't looked at it already, you might take a look at the website; and this brief overview of mods:   The goal here has been to create an srd that supports a fairly broad range of campaigns, from pretty low-power gritty ones, to more high-magic mythic ones.  I hope we're more or less on the same page, but if not I'm pretty  certain this project will yield something much closer to a "pure" E6  than the full SRD.  In any event, we won't call it "E6 SRD" unless  you've blessed it; for the timebeing, it's officially "E6 Baseline SRD",  and will stay that way if need be.   

Feel free to email me E6BaselineSRD _at_gmail if  you want to take the discussion offline.

 James


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 16, 2011)

Moving on with proofreading....
Next batch of files we're looking at (comment page here) is still relatively easy stuff:
*Classes I* (continuing),
*Classes II*, 
*NPC Classes*.
A few errors have already been caught & corrected (thanks SuperChris!), and I expect more will follow.

On a related note, I've gone ahead and applied most of the official errata.  I did this for two reasons: First, many of them are "editorial" in nature insofar as they are merely adjustments to numbers, corrections to statblocks, undoing inconsistencies between text/tables and the like-- effectively the sorts of things that this proofreading process aims to correct anyway. Most of the rest of the errata involve changes to all the shape-changing rules.  I incorporated those frankly because they simplify things quite a bit, imho; in fact, the term "polymorph" can now be ripped out of this srd entirely, afaict (though I haven't actually done that yet).

Second, the entire PHB errata had already been incorporated into the SRD as made available by WotC on their site.  This suggests to me that the errata _are_ intended as ogc corrections, where applicable.  I understand some have reservations about this, but I _strongly_ believe that's not an issue.  If it turns out there is a legal problem and the project gets a C&D or something, I'll take that responsibility on myself and undo the errata.

As always, we're always looking for comments, criticisms, suggestions, etc.  Thanks.


----------



## Ry (Feb 16, 2011)

I'm all for applying the errata.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 17, 2011)

We're now checking & double-checking feats.  

To rebuild these section for E6, we've moved feats that RAW 6th-level PCs can't qualify for over to the monster feats; we've also chopped out especially high-level feats (ie, BAB12+ or CL12th+) as those go beyond even the capability of monsters in this srd, even with class levels:

*Feats* (here in the 'Building Characters' category)
*Monster Feats* (here in the 'Monsters' category)

Because epic advancement in E6 depends heavily on feats, you'll note that we've also included all WotC ogc E6-relevant feats that come bundled by default with the SRD, including those from the Divine and Psionics rules.  Only [General] and [Metamagic] feats are included; not [Psionic] or psi-interactive feats, or [Divine] feats.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 19, 2011)

Turns out the Skills I and II sections aren't "no change" as previously thought, due to references to spells of 4th+ level.  So they need a look over as well, if anyone would like to proofread and comment!

*Skills I*
*Skills II*  (Both are here in the 'Building Characters' category)
.


----------



## Yora (Feb 20, 2011)

Hello,

first let me thank you for doing all this. Once it's ready I'll surely be using it a lot. Just learned about its existance right now.

But I'm afraid I start my contribution to this work with pointing out a semi-major error:

From looking over the current test-page, it seems to me that you've fallen into the very common trap regarding the caster level of magic items. *You don't have to create a magic item at the listed CL.*
It's something almost everyone overlooks and I only found by accident some time ago.


> *Caster Level*      The next item in a notational entry gives the caster level of the item,  indicating its relative power. The caster level determines the item’s saving throw  bonus, as well as range or other level-dependent aspects of the powers  of the item (if variable). It also determines the level that must be  contended with should the item come under the effect of a dispel magic  spell or similar situation. This information is given in the form "CL  x," where "CL" is an abbreviation for caster level and "x" is an ordinal  number representing the caster level itself.
> For potions, scrolls, and wands, the creator can set the caster level  of an item at any number high enough to cast the stored spell and not  higher than her own caster level. *For other magic items, the caster  level is determined by the creator. The minimum caster level is that  which is needed to meet the prerequisites given.*



And _a lot_ of items in the SRD are listed with a CL much higher than is actually neccessary. All you need is to have the required feat and be able to cast the required spells. Exceptions are staves, which are explicitly mentioned as having a minimum CL of 8th.
A Flaming Burst weapon requires only the Craft Magic Arms and Armor feat and the _flame blade_, _flame strike_, or _fireball_ spell.
A Belt of Giants Strength only requires the Craft Wonderous Item feat and the _bull's strength_ spell.
There are good reasons not to allow certain very powerful items, but if you use the SRD and apply only the E6 variant and nothing else, these items can be created without any problem. The listed CLs are completely abitrary and would have reduced to 6th for an E6 SRD.
I think this only affects the magical arms and armor lists and the wondrous items list. Scrolls, potions, and wands would remain unaffeced. I'm not completely sure about Rings and Rods, but I think E6 has a variant for the Forge Ring feat, so maybe one for the Create Rod feat would also be appropriate, though there not many rods to create with only 3rd level spells.

I'd even offer to expand the magic item lists, provided there's not a major error in my interpretation of the rules that makes the whole thing irrelevant. ^^


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 20, 2011)

Hi, Yora!  That's an excellent point, and one that we've wondered how to deal with.  Caster levels, in particular, are among the least consistent aspects of RAW when specific examples are measured against the general rule.

At this point, we've basilcally chosen to make this particular SRD a straight, stripped down version of the full SRD _as published_, with few modifications-- mainly for simplicity's sake.  There have been some slight changes to select monsters and magic items for reasons of "epicness"; but other than that, the text of this SRD aims to stay pretty close to the original SRD.

After this SRD is finished, we hope to put up a community website (eg, a wiki) that will allow us more flexibility to deviate from the text.  At that point, I hope to incorporate exactly the sorts of changes that you're proposing, as well as add-on rules for epic advancement, item creation, etc.  This would constitute an "expanded" SRD that extends or improves on the one we're currently working on.

That's the hope, anyway.  At the very minimum, though, even in the absence of a community site, this SRD should be an easier starting point than the full SRD for anyone interested in further refining it into their own E6 rule set.


----------



## Yora (Feb 20, 2011)

The thing is, that this is not a change to the rules. Not including the items would remove options from the game, even though they are completely viable by the rules. Including them as variant rules or optional rules would seem to give a wrong impression, as I see it.

I'm just going through the Feats on the site, and there's quite a number of feats that are not part of the SRD or the E6 document. What is the reasoning for this?
Also, there are some feats I believe are not useable by E6 characters.
Improved Critical requires BAB +8 and Persistent Spell requires 6th level spell slots. What's your prefered method of dealing with such things? Should I put them all into this thread, send you a PM, or use some feedback function of the preview site?


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 20, 2011)

Yeah, it's not a real change to the rules, but it's potentially a huge change to the rules _text_.  Frankly, making mods to that degree is ultimately governed by a very practical issue: rejiggering all those numbers and double checking them is simply a _ lot_ more work than anyone has signed up for.  (It's already a bit bigger than I thought it would be!) So we're  trying to keep this project mostly at the level of deleting material and maintaining internal consistency, rather than fully renovating it at risk of introducing even more inconsistency.   Afaict, this is a first attempt at something like this, so we're approaching it with baby steps. 

That said, I _really_ do hope this project continues on after this  first "v1.0" iteration is completed, so we can start building up  alternatives to the SRD as we're writing now. At that point, enterprising and energetic souls can mod the 773y out of it into something that's more robust.

Regarding feats, the short of it is that we've included all feats that come bundled with the full SRD, which includes a fair number of [general] and [metamagic] ones in the Divine and  Psionics rules.  The rationale is that E6 is very feat-dependent for  epic advancement, so we went with a philsophy of more options to  accomodate default "gestalt" games.   Yes, this is the big, glaring exception to our normal rule of "SRD only".  But we did it essentially for the same  reason that we didn't simply axe artifacts and every monster with a  high-level SLA.

If/when you find non-E6 material that has slipped through the first vetting  process (eg, the feats you've mentioned), you can post the problem  reports here, email the project address at e6BaselineSRD  -at- gmail, or use the comment system on the site itself (the files are  grouped by category, and the comment boxes are on the "category" pages).   Anything goes; it's pretty informal!

And I'm going to go take a look at the ones you've mentioned and get them sorted out shortly.  Thanks!


----------



## Lacan (Feb 20, 2011)

The magic item is an issue that I have been struggling with in my E6 game.  I thank Yora for pointing out a problem that was nagging at me, and I couldn't find the RAW to decide either way.  

I can see why Orc is hestitant to implement this at this point in the project.  But I'll be working on doing the math for magic item creation, and I will post my results, once its finished here, maybe for an inclusion for later versions of the E6 SRD.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 20, 2011)

Lacan, I'm not super-familiar with Pathfinder (which is your focus, iirc?), but if the item creation material you come up with is compatible, I think it would be an _excellent_ expansion for this project in a later version.  Even if it's not fully compatible, it would likely serve as a useful model.

Are you planning on creating an online version of your work?  If so, it might be worthwhile to start thinking about these E6ish projects in terms of a webring or similar community structure.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 20, 2011)

Also, Yora: I've made the fixes you pointed out regarding the Feats (Imp Crit went over to Monster Feats, while Persistent Spell got nixed).

Thanks again for catching those.


----------



## Lacan (Feb 20, 2011)

The final product we are working on will be fully SRD 3.5 compatible, as well as PF conversion notes, so if people aren't using PF they will still be able to use it. 

My plan right now is to provide a RTF for it to you guys, here on enworld, as part of my contribution to the Base E6.


----------



## Yora (Feb 21, 2011)

Regarding Feats: I would recommend splitting the Feat list into a "Core List" and an "Expended List", even in the first draft. I only speak for myself, but if there's one person who mentions it, there are usually a lot more who are thinking it. And I would want to run an E6 game "Core only", that is, without the additional OGL material and only the very most neccessary new E6 feats. When core and non-core feats are all mixed up, it's very difficult to do that, and I would need to use a different SRD to get my "clean" Feat List.
So maybe a Feats I page for the core feats and a Feats II page for the non-core feats. I would hugely appreciate it, and I guess so would many others.

And there's something regarding metamagic feats: There are several feats that require a slot "3 levels higher". That would only be possible by picking 0 level spells and using 3rd level slots. And 0 level spells are always 1 target, 1 damage die. Something I just can't imagine anyone ever wanting to do, and even less anyone spending one of his prescious feats on such a barely useful ability. In my eyes, they are redundant.
If you really want to be as close to the rules as possible, they are still viable feats, but I would always remove them from my game. Just something to ponder, either way is fine with me.

And I havn't gone through the whole thread, but one problematic subject would be Monsters with Caster Levels. Some creatures have access to spells or spell-like abilities far above 3rd level and some even have access to complete spell lists.
Just that PCs are unable to learn these spells doesn't have to mean these spells are not existing for powerful outsiders. For the CR 16 Planetar alone, we would need the complete Cleric spell list. But for just two or three monsters, I wouldn't want to have all these spells in the E6 SRD. What to do about that? 
Option A: Keep all the spells in, that could be learned by creatures. Really don't like it.
Option B: Remove all creatures that would have access to such spells. Since it's mostly high level outsiders that will show up rarely anyway, that's a slightly better pick, but still not a nice solution.
Option C-1: Crop all these monsters down to Caster Level 6th. This helps with some, but there are still lots of spell-like abilities.
Option C-2: Make a seperate list for spell-like abilities. But that's quite an amount of work.
Option D: Have a "Player Spell List" that only includes spells accessible by PCs. Have also an "Extenden Spell List" that is identical to the complete standard spell list, minus the ranger and paladin spells (as there are no creatures that use those).

These are just some options, I'm sure there are more. But I think going the very straight way is not a viable choice here. Either the spell description tripple in size with spells that will almost never be used, or we have to change something about the monster-section.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 21, 2011)

That's a good suggestion on the non-SRD feats, and one of those organizational  things I've been pondering last week or so.  We'll take a whack at separating the core feats and the others into their own subsections, though I think they'll stay in the same file.

On the practically useless feats like +3 metamagics (and a few others),  we've kept them in for two reasons.  First is that they are strictly  RAW, even if they're of limited utility in strict E6.  Second is that  there are a handful of monsters of CL7th that could use them to slightly better  effect.  That said, it might be more appropriate to shift them over to  Monster Feats, as we've done for most other non-E6 feats.

Regarding monsters, it's an understatement to say the "straight way is  not a viable choice"!  Monsters have proven to be something of a headache.  

I think we've considered most of your concerns in some way or another.  When we were trimming the monsters, we first decided to cap at CR12 (not _completely_ arbitrarily, but nearly so).  Then we removed everything that referenced spells of 4th+ level (SLAs, Su's, even a few Ex's)).  Then we re-added things we felt were appropriate, iconic, mythic, or that we just had a preference for.  In retrospect, it looks like this actually came down to weeding out creatures with many SLAs, or SLAs referring to complex spells.  

For the most part, we just in-lined (and in few cases simplified) the relevant spell info into the monsters' stat-blocks as another (Sp) ability.  In a few cases (where an ability is shared by several monsters) we put the reference spell into a "Monstrous Spells" section in the "Types, Subtypes and Abilities" file, minus its casting class and components info.  This seemed like a good idea at first, as it required almost no adjustments to the text at all; however in practice, it's been unsatisfying, i think because we never defined a clear distinction between which SLAs to in-line and which to add as "Monstrous Spells".  As we finish up this round of proofreading, we'll decide whether to keep this or not.

Creatures with actual caster levels were chopped down to those with caster  levels of 7 or less. (There are 4 of CL7th, iirc: a couple nagas, nymph and lammasu.)  For sorc levels,  7th level has little impact as this just gives the creature more spells  than PCs.  For Clr/Drd levels, we've inserted a sentence in the monster  description that limits their 4th level slot to metamagicked spells (or,  simply lower level spells, of course), and I changed one of their  typical feats to Heighten Spell to illustrate this.

Anyway, that's how we've decided to handle monsters.  The proofreading on them will be truly vicious on account of all the in-lining-- but as you pointed out, there's not a lot of other choice with the bestiary, short of simply cutting practically everything interesting.  In any event, we'll be moving on to proofreading monsters "officially" probably next week, but feel free to take a look at them.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 21, 2011)

I've rearranged the Feats file a bit.  Core feats are at the top, while non-core feats are at the bottom, in a subsection called "Extended feats list", with an _'at DM's discretion!'_ disclaimer.  Might want to take a look to make sure I caught them all.

I think it _does_ feel a bit cleaner that way!


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 22, 2011)

Finishing up the proofread of material under the category Building Characters, files
- *Equipment*
- *Special Materials*

Also moving on to category Spells, specifically the intro material in files
- *Magic Overview*
- *Spell List I*
- *Spell List II*

The proofread of the feats is also still open, since some changes were recently made to files
- *Feats* in category Building Characters
- *Monster Feats* in category Monsters

Thanks!


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 23, 2011)

A fair number of little bugs (mainly references to permanency and other non-E6 level spells) have been caught recently among the spells, so now we're double checking all *SPELLS*, A to Z.

As always, anyone's welcome to take a look and comment.


----------



## Lord Xtheth (Feb 27, 2011)

...
I'm not quite dead yet!

But seriously, I've been caught up in projects that I'm getting paid for, so have set the publishing E6 aside. I apologise.
You guys here seem to have alot more put together than I had anyway, so I may just back out of this one. 

You're all doing a good job! Keep it up for sure.
Sorry again that I've fallen so far behind I won't be able to catch up.


----------



## Ry (Feb 27, 2011)

the_orc_within   

as you proceed could you post links to the stuff that would be best to look at next?


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 27, 2011)

Ryan-

Sure thing.  Lately the focus has been just proofing all spells.  I've stepped back for a couple days for a little breather (and jury duty), but will be back into it tomorrow or Monday.  I'll continue putting up links to the relevant page and the specific file as the focus shifts. 

Fwiw it's worth, my posts up to now have been mainly just to let people know what I happen to be looking at, but everything is up for perusal.  Anyone should feel free to comment on anything (here, in a coment box on the site, or via email e6BaselineSRD -at- gmail).

-James


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Feb 27, 2011)

Getting back to it now, and turning the focus to Monsters.  
The page link is: *Monsters*.  Files of interest at the moment are the introductory and explanatory ones, plus a couple easy ones:

*- Abilities and Conditions
**- Types, Subtypes and Abilities
**- Monsters Intro-A*
as well as
*- Monsters Animals * and  *Monsters Vermin*

Of special note is the Monstrous Spells stuff in "Types, Subtypes and Abilities".  This is an attempt to allow monsters that share abilities that refer to a common higher-level spell without having to in-line the relveant material from the spell into each monster.  This is a nice simplification in that it keeps SLAs in terms of "spells", so the rules don't change, the monster text doesn't change, and errors are reduced.  However, our implementation has been pretty inconsistent.  A few options are: 
*redo it (ie, keep it limited to a handful of SLAs common to several creatures)
*expand it to include all/most spell-references (in lieu of in-lining spell descriptions)
*ditch it (in favor of in-lining).

Also, throughout the site you'll see little green checkmarks on files I've noted as "ready".  Well... that's debatable.   There's frankly been little feedback on any of them, so most of those could probably still do with another proofread by a fresher pair of eyeballs, even just a "yeah, looks ok" is helpful!   You can comment here, in a comment box on the site, or gmail "e6BaselineSRD". Thanks!


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Mar 11, 2011)

*It's not in LIMBO... it's on HIATUS.*

Real life is interfering a few months earlier than expected, so I'm 'officially' putting this project on hiatus so it's 'officially' _not_ in limbo.  

For anyone interested, I've gone ahead bundled all the files as ODTs (sorry, no RTFs) and attached them to this post, with the mysterious version number "0.1".   The zip includes a README.txt with a brief overview of progress and remaining issues.

The same info in the bundle can be viewed online in the *E6 Baseline SRD: INDEX*, as well.  The bundle is also available through that site.

I think most of the content work is close to done, at least on the material that's equally useful to everyone.  The files covering Monsters and Magic Items-- the parts that probably vary most between campaigns-- are definitely still rough.

The biggest issue overall, imho, is the formatting.  Many tables have size issues (especially among the Monsters), typically either being too wide, and/or having extraneous carriage returns that them too tall.  Also, several files have font and line-spacing or paragraph issues, with the result that the appearance of the files is not uniform.

Apologies for not completing this or a reference site as quickly as I'd hoped.  

Thanks to everyone for the interest, and especial thanks to those who have contributed time, editing, comments, and criticisms!


----------



## jmucchiello (Apr 5, 2011)

You can probably should remove this from the H-L spell list as well as the similar text in the G spell list since I don't think E6 contains and spells that are both baseline and lesser or baseline and greater. Whether you would then move the spell to H-L is a different editing question.


> Lesser (Spell Name)
> Any spell whose name begins with lesser is alphabetized in this chapter according to the second word of the spell name.


----------



## NotZenon (May 3, 2011)

wow, was looking at this today, what an amazing amount of work!  Good Job fella's.


----------



## modus666 (Aug 12, 2011)

i see there havent been any updates posted recently, is this project still alive?  this could single handedly revive my dragonmech game so its of great interest to me

edit:  i visited the wiki and saw that the project is on haitus?  PLEASE PLEASE say this is not a permanent state of affairs.  a compiled e6  srd would be of GREAT use to me


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Aug 13, 2011)

[MENTION=9301]modus666[/MENTION] - Yeah, this project is on hiatus, as I've had interference from real life, as well as other game commitments.  The (mostly finished, except for magic items) raw SRD is on the website, but poorly formatted; and I believe there's some development work over on GitP.

Fwiw, I personally am eager to see what the Pathfinder beginner box looks like, since it will cover levels 1-5, and may prove to be 'close enough' to e6.  I also get the impression from rumblings a few months ago here that someone may be working on a published e6 rule set, though that's just a hunch.

Sorry this didn't get done, despite the high hopes.


----------



## Shades of Green (Sep 26, 2011)

Theoretically and legally speaking, is it possible to use the E6 SRD done so far as a basis of either a free/fan or a commercial 3rd-party product? I might be interested in something in that direction.


----------



## ideasmith (Sep 26, 2011)

Shades of Green said:


> Theoretically and legally speaking, is it possible to use the E6 SRD done so far as a basis of either a free/fan or a commercial 3rd-party product? I might be interested in something in that direction.




As long as you stay within the Open Game License rules.


----------

