-GM or players may propose rules and rule changes.
-Rules will be voted upon by all the players.  Rules that are accepted by a majority of players will be reviewed by the GM.  The GM may approve or veto the rule.  A GM veto may be overruled by a unanimous vote from the players.
-The GM has responsibility for making rule judgements.  One and only one appeal may be made by any player to any judgment.  After considering the appeal the GM may elect to maintain or change the judgement, and that judgement is final.
-World building is to be shared among the GM and the players.  The important elements of the world are to be laid out by the GM and agreed upon by the players. After reviewing the world elements set out by the GM, the players should make suggestions as to the elements they would like to see incorporated.  The GM has final say as to which elements will or won't be incorporated and how, but must communicate this with the players.  This includes things that would be common knowledge to peoples of the world, and things that would be important for beings to know how to function within the world, but does not preclude the GM from building surprising or mysterious elements into the world.  This is meant to be an iterative process and may continue as long as is necessary until the GM and all players are satisfied.  While most of the important elements of the world should be set out before play starts, world building is expected to continue throughout the duration of play.
-Amendments to this constitution must be made by unanimous vote of players and GM.
-Judgements regarding adherence to this constitution are by majority vote of both GM and players.

In reply to The World (msg # 1):

This sounds reasonable, so far, and we can beat on it -- But I think there's a missing component if we think about the rules and the world without also thinking about the campaign. I would like to see some "amendments" about how the campaign is to play out, since the campaign is actually the reason we are here. The world is just the backdrop and the rules are just how we adjudicate what happens next in the plot.

If I were to take a stab at what I think those amendments would address, it would be:

- The goal of the campaign is known to all parties and agreed upon by all parties
- The success of any particular character to achieve the goal of the campaign is not guaranteed, but the commitment of the player to stay with the campaign is inviolable.
- Each character has goals that are known to all players, which are aligned with the overall goal of the campaign, and which the campaign is amended to build upon by the GM (with or without the player's knowledge, at the GM's option and in the player's best interest).
- The conflicts in the campaign unfold in a way, and increase in difficulty at a pace, that incentivizes the characters to act heroically in spite of the very real risk of failure.

In reply to Matt (msg # 2):

In fact, I think it makes sense to do it in articles:

Article 1: The Players
Article 2: The Characters
Article 3: The Campaign
Article 4: The World
Article 5: The Rules

EDIT: Changed the order to reflect what I think the actual priority is, i.e. the players (inclusive of the GM) determine the characters, the characters determine the campaign, the campaign determines the world, and the world determines the rules.

4 to 5 merits some explanation, I think. Imagine we all wanted to play characters within a film-noir, or Lovecraftian setting. That would give a flavor to the campaign, and that campaign could only exist within a certain kind of world, and the which govern the mechanics of that world (e.g. psionics) might be more or less important to expound upon inside of that world.
This message was last edited by the GM at 20:03, Mon 17 Aug 2020.

I am not going to participate in the constitution discussion.

In reply to Ratt (msg # 4):

Why's that? Boondoggle or disinterest?

Disinterest mostly. Seems like a lot of work for something we will ignore if we decide we don't want to abide by the rule. I am not trying to make a political statement.

Also, kind of feel like whatever whoever is interested comes up with will be fine.

In reply to Ratt (msg # 6):

Well, Seth, I'm pretty interested in this, so I am still game. Setting down expectations for what we're doing in a structured, semi-permanent way rather than just waxing on about it when things go sideways seems like an interesting exercise. Even if it isn't doesn't lead to any change, it will at least be informative.

In reply to Matt (msg # 7):

[Placeholder Post]

In reply to Matt (msg # 8):

[Placeholder Post]

In reply to Matt (msg # 9):

[Placeholder Post]

In reply to Matt (msg # 10):

[Placeholder Post]

In reply to Matt (msg # 11):

[Placeholder Post]

Here is a thought I've been noodling on over the past couple of days.  What say you have a pool of 'hit points' for lack of a better word for each of the six stats.  These are not like hit points though, I guess they would be more like mana or fatigue points or something like that. The idea is that they diminish each time to do something.  So a strength fighter loses some of his strength points every time he swings the sword.  The wizard loses some intelligence points when casting a spell.  The con man loses some of his charisma points every time he tries to get away with a lie.  So they are more like "how many times can I do something before I can't do it any more and need to rest" points.  Kinda like every time you roll the d20 you take an amount of points away corresponding to how hard the thing you were trying to do is.  The higher your stat the more of these points you have.  Obviously there would be a lot more to work out there.  But I'm thinking that gives you a combat like mechanic for anything you try to do.  Roll a d20 to beat an AC or DC or whatever, and then you deplete you ability resources.

As far as vanquishing someone I was thinking what if you go straight to injury.  Whatever determines a 'hit' (probably rolling higher than an AC) rather than rolling damage you roll on an injury table.  Injuries could range from draining some of their ability score points to severing limbs or whatever, with more catastrophic injuries less likely on the table.

I was also thinking of doing away with classes.  Each player comes up with the abilities they gain at each level.  Reusing or reskinning abilities from DnD classes and feats is allowed and probably encouraged.

In reply to The World (msg # 13):

I think that's a massive undertaking for just playable classes, but now think about how you have to do each monster. I think this is where we got stuck with our last major foray down this path. There is a lot of pre-generated content that needs to be audited/edited for any change this fundamental.

That said, I do like it. It can turn social interactions into something like combat.

On doing away with classes, I suggest you ask Joe to build a character whose abilities are unbounded by class limitations to show you how powerful that can get. I think it would also mean more work in terms of encounter planning.

OK, back to the old revising of death saves discussion.  I think I like this, and ask for thoughts and comments.

•Each round of combat costs 1 HP in addition to any HP lost by other means.  This represents getting tired from the exertion of combat.
•Rolling a 1 on an attack roll results in a self-inflicted injury of 1d4 HP.  The roll may still result in a successful attack if the roll plus any modifiers equal or exceed the AC of the target.
•When a creature is reduced to 0 HP, it becomes unconscious until its next turn.
•On its next turn it becomes conscious with an Exhaustion level of 2.
•Over exertion at 0 HP can cause an additional level of Exhaustion at the DM’s discretion.
•At 0 HP a creature cannot engage in combat, attack, cast a spell, dash, disengage, dodge, help, or ready any of these actions, or at the DM’s discretion attempting any of these actions causes an extra level of Exhaustion.
•At 0 HP a creature is vulnerable to a death blow.
•A creature may use its action to inflict a death blow on another creature at 0 HP.
•Any creature receiving a death blow becomes unconscious and will die if not healed by magic or a successful DC10 medical check within 2 rounds or 12 seconds.  Level 1 or lower healing magic, or a successful medical check results in the creature becoming stable, but unconscious for 1d12+1 rounds, after which time the creature revives with 0 HP.
•If a player character receives a death blow or is reduced to 0 HP by a critical hit, the player in the group with the highest medical skill modifier determines the nature of the injury in a accordance with a roll on the following lingering injury table.


•The DM will determine the nature of lingering injuries for non-player characters
•In addition, any creature receiving a death blow receives 3 additional levels of exhaustion.  If this increases the level of exhaustion to 6 the creature is dead.