Fantasy Craft first printing Errata question

[theCimmerian]

I don't have the second printing (yet).  Reading the errata to the first printing, it looks like Drakes, Ogres, and Rootwalkers do not have Large size any more. 

Is that correct?

Thanks. 

[ludomastro]

No, that is not correct.  They all retained their Large size.

[Crafty_Pat]

What in the errata makes you think they don't?

[theCimmerian]

Thanks for the prompt replies.

I had mis-read the format of the race statistics under each race.  I thought size was one of the bullet points, not part of a separate section labelled "type".   So when the errata for those three species had no bullet points for large size, I thought the size change to large was removed.   Now that you've explained it, my error is obvious. 

[Crafty_Pat]

Thanks for the prompt replies.

I had mis-read the format of the race statistics under each race.  I thought size was one of the bullet points, not part of a separate section labelled "type".   So when the errata for those three species had no bullet points for large size, I thought the size change to large was removed.   Now that you've explained it, my error is obvious. 

Ah, I see! That's actually valuable feedback. Part of what we do here is try to figure out not just the best rule to present but the best way to present it. Knowing that you overlooked this particular piece of info in this particular spot is mui helpful.

Thanks!

[theCimmerian]

Ha!  Here I was feeling like a total moron for just mis-reading the stat block format.  Your comment makes me feel a little better.

I love FantasyCraft, I genuinely believe this is the Dungeons and Dragons I've been looking for ever since I first became frustrated with some aspects of AD&D over 20 years ago.   I hope the line is successful and profitable for you.

[Desertpuma]

The next big book for Mastercraft should be Spellbound which is going to blow the roof off. ...

Welcome to the Forums. I think you'll find us a tremendously amazing collection of forums here.

[theCimmerian]

What about Spellbound is going to be so... spellbinding?

Hey, the Spellbound designers have already thought about these, but I have two thoughts with respect to Spellbound:

1.  To make polymorph spells and their equivalents more interesting and more unique, the caster picks 1 form per polymorph spell they know.   If shapechanging to an animal is a level 5 spell and a Mage wants to be able to shift to a fish, a squirrel, a bear, and an eagle, then he has to use 4 of his known spells to do it. 

2.  Suggestion for a new campaign quality:  knowledge of spells is hard (a cooler name is required) - the number of spells a PC knows is half the sum of his Wisdom attribute and Sorcery skill.   On one hand, this is more boring for PC spellcasters because they have fewer options.  On the other hand, it has two advantages - it makes each spellcaster more unique because there will be less overlap in their spell selections, and it prevents the spellcaster from excelling in more than a few specialties, instead of being a jack of all trades.

[Crafty_Pat]

I love FantasyCraft, I genuinely believe this is the Dungeons and Dragons I've been looking for ever since I first became frustrated with some aspects of AD&D over 20 years ago.   I hope the line is successful and profitable for you.

That's very kind. Thanks!

[Crafty_Pat]

1.  To make polymorph spells and their equivalents more interesting and more unique, the caster picks 1 form per polymorph spell they know.   If shapechanging to an animal is a level 5 spell and a Mage wants to be able to shift to a fish, a squirrel, a bear, and an eagle, then he has to use 4 of his known spells to do it. 

Sorry? Not following you. Are you suggesting different spell point costs for different forms?

2.  Suggestion for a new campaign quality:  knowledge of spells is hard (a cooler name is required) - the number of spells a PC knows is half the sum of his Wisdom attribute and Sorcery skill.   On one hand, this is more boring for PC spellcasters because they have fewer options.  On the other hand, it has two advantages - it makes each spellcaster more unique because there will be less overlap in their spell selections, and it prevents the spellcaster from excelling in more than a few specialties, instead of being a jack of all trades.

You can definitely expect alternative spell acquisition. We've got you covered there!

[Sletchman]

1.  To make polymorph spells and their equivalents more interesting and more unique, the caster picks 1 form per polymorph spell they know.   If shapechanging to an animal is a level 5 spell and a Mage wants to be able to shift to a fish, a squirrel, a bear, and an eagle, then he has to use 4 of his known spells to do it. 

Sorry? Not following you. Are you suggesting different spell point costs for different forms?

As I understand it, he's suggesting that the caster have to buy "Polymorph (Fish)" and "Polymorph (Bear)", all at the same level, instead of just "Polymorph".

Personally, I do think different forms should have different spell point costs.  One of the things I liked most in later 3.5 books was the variant (and more balanced) shapechange spells - Dragonshape is much more powerful (and versatile) then Trollshape, so it should cost more spell points.

Of course shapechanging is one of the hardest things to balance in any game system, so you guys totally have your work cut out for you with the Trickster (and perhaps the Conjuror, depending on where the division of labor occurs).

[theCimmerian]

Sletchman understood my intent and explained it more descriptively than I did.   I thought each individual alternative form would use one known spell. 

I was not expecting different spell point cost for different forms, although that could be a factor too.   I could imagine, for example, Polymorph (Bear) level 3 that carries a bear's shape and Bite 1, Claw 1, speed 30',  and Polymorph (Bear) level 7 that has Bite 4, Claw 3, +2 to Str, thick hide 4, and a number of bonuses related to enhanced hearing and sense of smell. 

[Crafty_Pat]

Sletchman understood my intent and explained it more descriptively than I did.   I thought each individual alternative form would use one known spell. 

I was not expecting different spell point cost for different forms, although that could be a factor too.   I could imagine, for example, Polymorph (Bear) level 3 that carries a bear's shape and Bite 1, Claw 1, speed 30',  and Polymorph (Bear) level 7 that has Bite 4, Claw 3, +2 to Str, thick hide 4, and a number of bonuses related to enhanced hearing and sense of smell. 

I see, so you just want them to be scalable, possibly with spell point costs to match.

Maybe. The book's already pretty heavy on shapeshifting, and what you're suggesting could easily take up 50+ pages on its own if we're not very careful (and the more careful we are, the more we have to condense, which inevitably leads to application questions, dramatically mitigating the point).

I'll flag it and see if there's anything we can do, but at this time I can't make any guarantees.

[Sletchman]

@theCimmerian: In some ways, the game's already got that - Wildside I-III grant improving natural attacks as the spell becomes higher level.  They're also generic, so you can flavour them to a particular character motif (ex: a wolf shaman who always uses bite, and becomes a bit wolfey).

@Pat: I am seriously looking forward to seeing what you guys do with The Trickster - all of my favourite aspects of magic (Illusion, Secrets and Shapeshifting) in one class (that's focused on those 3 things beyond just his spell list)?  Hells yeah!  I'd about sell my sister to see that class early.

[Crafty_Pat]

@Pat: I am seriously looking forward to seeing what you guys do with The Trickster - all of my favourite aspects of magic (Illusion, Secrets and Shapeshifting) in one class (that's focused on those 3 things beyond just his spell list)?  Hells yeah!  I'd about sell my sister to see that class early.

Based on what Alex and I have done so far, I think it's safe to say you'll be pleased.