New homebrew idea

>5e d&d campaign based on pokemon/digimon where all players work with/train monsters and use them to fight

>Aberration, beast, celestial, construct, dragon, elemental, fey, fiend, monstrosity, ooze, plant, undead
>PC creatures will level up and gain HP based on which die they use normally, and will gin movesets based on a generic list that most things should be able to do and moves based on their already existing attacks.

I just need ideas on how to put this together. Already thinking of making each player a member of some sort of tribe known for taming creatures.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=-LbgX1OwR4U
drive.google.com/file/d/0B4U5Lxk9ysjTSk1RUHByR01va1E/view?usp=sharing
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pokémon_(video_game_series)
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Dear god don't base it on D&D. Jesus fuck why would you do that?

Also I'm going to keep the damage type rock-paper-scissor thing that pokemon has.

>Acid, Fire, Cold, Poison, Necrotic, Radiant, Lightning, Psychic, Thunder and Force, Bludgeoning, Piercing, Slashing.

Maybe tweak some of the creature types to resist certain damage types if they don't already

Because I already have a group of friends who are already big fans of D&D and are always up for weird campaign ideas like a level zero campaign, or an all paladin/cleric "crusader" campaign.

>5e d&d
nop

Just... Try putting thought into it.

Stop, step back, and ask what kind of things you want a campaign like this to provide. What systemic traits and themes and properties would be helpful for the experience you're trying to create.

Figure that out first, then start considering system. If, at that point, D&D still seems appropriate? Go nuts. But... Fuck, D&D does not do well outside of its comfort zone. Its structure is very, very tied to its genre and roots, and attempting to change that without rewriting most of the system (For example, Mutants and Masterminds) almost always ends badly.

Just ignore the anti-D&D trolls. They always rush to shitpost any time D&D is mentioned.

>Implying I hate D&D

D&D is a damn great system for heroic fantasy. But the OGL clusterfuck showed us that it's raw dogshit for almost anything else, let alone the piles of godawful d20 homebrews/adaptations you can find floating around online.

Please, fuck off with your "D&D can't do all the stuff people have been using D&D for for the last three several decades" bullshit already. It's a versatile system with plenty of variant rules, so just tell us what system you are shilling for so we can laugh at you and then you can fuck off.

I'm putting somethought into it by posting this thread and reading what everyone has to say.

I disagree with you and I think that I can make this system work with minimal changes to the 5e system.

As far as just the combat mechanics go, everything can stay the same.

I can base the leveling up for the monsters on the established pattern for PCs. Roll a die for health, introduce a new skill or two each level.

The whole point is that there isn't one single system that's appropriate for everything. That you're better off broadening your horizons rather than stapling everything to the d20 framework regardless of how utterly inappropriate it is.

I prefer 5e for everything, but this seems like 4e's alley.

The guy knows 5e. That's an easy system to adapt to just about anything.

How about you broaden your own fucking horizons and realize that most people have a much easier time adapting systems than you seem to? If you're admitting to seeing a challenge adapting 5e, you are plainly and simply a moron.

How do you calculate type advantage/disadvantage? Status changes? Objects equipped? Changing your monster? Priority of action? Priority of moves? Also nature/IV/ev spread? Accept it, D&D cannot do all that

But, it can, you shitposting troll of a moron.

The enormous weight of evidence, of shitty homebrew and awful adaptations, both official and fanmade, strongly implies that you are wrong.

Being fair, emulating exact mechanics is also a shitty way to go about trying to make an adaptation.

But even in terms of themes, D&D has very little you actually want.

>Any generic system designed for applying to any possible setting is garbage and sucks at being applied to any setting at all
>DnD, a system designed for one specific setting that's garbage at doing anything else, can easily be adapted to any setting with no problems whatsoever

This is what DnD fags always claim, and this is why you people are hypocritical garbage.

The number one reason I hate DnD fans is their refusal to try anything else and instead shoehorn their incredibly specific ruleset into settings it doesn't belong.

Yeah, sure. Whatever you say
There's no reason on trying to imitate Pokemon without what makes Pokemon a good game

The evidence of your opinion is worthless, and that's really all you have. And, by admitting you don't know how to adapt even a system like 5e, you've proven to be stupid beyond contempt.

Want to prove otherwise? Stop being a little shit, and quit pretending that this is even a challenge to make in 5e.

>DnD, a system designed for one specific setting that's garbage at doing anything else, can easily be adapted to any setting with no problems whatsoever

Cute lie, but even a casual look at the game pops your entire worldview. Tell me about all those settings, variant rules, alternate styles of play, and infinite adaptability and customization, and tell me how those don't make you look like an idiot troll talking out his ass.

But, I've bitten the bait long enough.

I never said I couldn't adapt 5e. I said that I'm smart enough to know not to, because it's an awful basis for adaptation.

As for evidence, go look up the Open Game License. Or hell, pick your favourite thing and search for a d20 version of it. Hint- It's going to suck.

While I agree, it's important to not be overly literal. Instead of trying to copy mechanics directly, instead it's important to consider what those mechanics achieve in the context, what they add to the experience of playing the game. Trying to copy over a mechanic from a video game one to one will very, very rarely actually create the same experience and add the same things you wanted it to, and most systems that take this approach end up overly clunky and generally shitty.

Adaptation necessitates interpretation, of being aware of the differences between mediums and figuring out the most effective way to translates the core experience of one into the other, as smoothly as possible.

Virtually all of that exists within the 'Heroic Fantasy' bubble.

And where it doesn't, amongst official materials? Go look up d20 modern and what an awful clusterfuck that piece of shit was.

>I can homebrew everything I want from scratch, inventing rules as needed, or find someone who homebrewed an unbalanced mess for me already, and that means the game can fit any setting

How you drooling idiots can function in daily life is beyond me.

> New idea
I hate new things

> 5e
Fuck that shit

> Pokemon
Ok...now you're just trolling

>stuff made by amateur designers might not be good!

Wow, that's such a shock, what a surprise. Also, go ahead and look up some non-d20 adaptations. Chances are, they're going to be much worse.

More inportantly, there's already a decent 4e Pokemon Homebrew, and a lot of it can be easily adapted to 5e.

Your issue isn't that you are "too smart", your issue is that you can't see systems as versatile as they are because you are more interested in playing awkward niche games because you don't know how to work with systems. I don't even know what can drive some to not only be so stupid, but to be proud of how stupid he is.

Why bother when a decent Pokemon tabletop already exists?

Although I can't remember which one it is. I know there's two, Pokemon Tabletop Adventures and Pokemon Tabletop... U-something. But one is an autistic pile of shit, while the other is an actually fun system, and I can never remember which is which.

While those other guys talk systems let's talk lore.
What type of land does this adventure take place in?
What is the conflict or motivation for adventure?
Are you creating original creatures?
What kind of tone do you want in this game?
Are all monsters tameable or only specific types?
Is there some way for monsters to be portable or will the players need a farm or enclosure to keep them in?
Are the monsters befriended, captured or enslaved?
How is monster training looked upon in society?
Are there other, non monster training groups?
Can intelligent monsters train other monsters?
Is there a difference between animals and monsters or could I just get a dog and have that be my monster?

D&D is a niche game. It has always been a niche game.

D&D does heroic fantasy. That is what it has always done, although with lesser or greater emphasis on the 'heroic' part.

There are broad, adaptable RPG systems out there, things like Mutants and Masterminds or GURPS. D&D is not one of them.

Your awful and empty lie is ridiculous and is reduced to nothing just by looking in any DMG or any of the setting/theme books. D&D does horror, goofy sci-fi, dark fantasy, and its core mechanic is simple enough to be adapted to just about anything.

D&D has always been kitchen-sink fantasy first, but ultimately it was intended to be an adaptable system that can handle various genres just by employing some variant rules. It's really sad that you are so convinced that just because you struggle to do something millions of people don't have any significant trouble with, it's the system that lacks versatility.

D&D does fantasy horror, goofy sci-fi fantasy, dark fantasy... Seeing a theme here? I've never seen a DMG claim that D&D does anything outside of that. Probably because the designers actually understood their system, whereas you clearly do not.

Oh shit, I didn't realize you thought pokemon were real. My bad.

Well, glad to know you're out of actual arguments at least.

Oh, c'mon. You got torched right there. Go on and continue telling me how a fantasy game wouldn't work for a fantasy setting, you fucking moron.

Because you wilfully confused two meanings of the term Fantasy?

>Type advantage can be done with adding or subtracting a d4/d6/d8/whichever dice feels appropriate. Or I dunno, add or subtract 25/50% of the damage like in pokemon normally

>Statuses can follow the DC save rules and I can roll a d4/d6 to see how many turns it lasts

>I'm not sure why objects equipped can't just do what they'd normally do in the 5e system

>Changing your monster is as simple as the PC calling back a monster and telling another one to attack. There doesn't even need to be a system for this one

>Attack turns can be exactly how they are in 5e

>Nature/IV/Ev spread doesn't have to make an appearance.

Here you go, man. A whole (you), plus an anime girl facepalming. That's all I can give you, because at the point where you are being reduced to attempting to argue semantics like that, I can tell you're the kind of cunt who won't give up no matter how soundly you get fucked up.

Don't spend them all in the same place.

And you claiming unearned victory after, again, confusing two different meanings of the same term is meant to cow me how, exactly?

D&D 5e is a shitty basis for pokemon. No traits or elements of the system are conducive to it being a good basis. The only reason to do so is laziness.

Let's specify terms here: We're now talking about the most commonly referred to D&D game, which is Pathfinder.

In Pathfinder, the game is hard-coded to run on high, heroic fantasy. Wealth by Level is enforced and requires entire extra subsystems to run if you try and avoid it; This is because things like +1 weapons and belts of Strength aren't just cute additions to make your character stronger, but hardcoded parts of your character that are necessary to fight at the levels that the game requires, and this starts VERY early on.

This means as a core mechanic to the game, players need access to magic, huge amounts of magical gear, and a variety of special abilities and combat feats that are cumulative over time, resulting in a high-magic system. In addition, huge HP bloats and a massive impetus to making melee combat vastly superior in most situations means that horror barely exists (As there's very little in the game that can actually kill you without warning, even if that warning is "Impales you with a giant spiky xenomorph dick"), and pretty much every attempt to make technology past the bow and arrow relevant has been an abject failure.

Therefore - D&D is high heroic fantasy, full stop.

5e D&D, mentioned in the OP, does a better job at low heroic fantasy, but fully half the classes and options still assume adventurers capable of holding their own in any situation with plenty of opportunity to overcome. The christmas tree adventurers festooned with magical gear is gone, but now almost every class has the opportunity to acquire magical or pseudo-magical abilities that are hard pressed to fit into non-fantasy genres. Many of these class features and abilities are assumed to be in any given group in order to make encounters fair and balanced.

This is why people say that D&D is meant for heroic fantasy - It runs deep in the system, and requires extensive house ruling and often very liberal use of existing rules to change the genre.

Although it doesn't go into the details of how they run it, these dudes did a DnD pokemon campaign

youtube.com/watch?v=-LbgX1OwR4U

Personally I'd run a pokemon game using unaltered BECMI rules. It'd work perfectly.

The bonus damage works for type advantage, but I'd go for the way 5e handles resistances for type disadvantage, halving it.

It may seem a little lopsided at first, but I think that having multiple attack options mitigates that.

There is already a pokemon table top game, however it is VERY slow, so I can understand why you would try this. I can see the types of creature like beast, aberration, etc. being types and moves just being refluffed spells. Could be fun.

>D&D does not do well outside of its comfort zone.
D&D does not do well would have sufficed. RIP OPs campaign. Sounded like a fun idea though.

You have to placate the D&Dtards by pretending their precious system isn't completely terrible. They tend to be slightly more accepting of the notion that other systems might be a good idea for not-fantasy stuff. From there, they'll learn how much D&D actually sucks and move on to better games. Or they'll double down on their D&Disms, and be beyond hope.

Do you want to do the pokemon games, the manga, or the anime? None of them work in D&D, of course, but it's important to know which so we can help steer you away from a trainwreck.

>They tend to be slightly more accepting of the notion that other systems might be a good idea for not-fantasy stuff.
From the look of this thread that's not going to happen. I don't know if it's just one guy or more, but some of these replies are downright delusional and were seeing
>Or they'll double down on their D&Disms, and be beyond hope.
in action.

OK, a few tips:

Don't let the trainers fight or take actions during battle.
If every player is commanding 2 different characters, combat will go painfully slow.

I wouldn't even let the PCs have a "class". Let them pick a background and some skills. But don't start giving them weapons, armor, spells, etc.

Don't let trainers use than 1 monster in a battle.
In other words: run it like Digimon, not Pokemon. This way, you won't have to worry about switching, capturing, etc.

Don't make type advantages too powerful.
If my monster is doing 2x damage because my attacks are super effective, everyone else is gonna feel kinda useless in that battle. Likewise, if my monster is taking 2x damage from enemy attacks, I'm probably just gonna retreat and let my allies fight for me. It's even more annoying if I'm playing as an ice monster and our quest is leading us to a volcano dungeon where everything will have an advantage against me.

Make sure that the players' monsters all have hands. Don't let someone play as a Voltorb or Magikarp. It's just too annoying to think of useful loot for a creature that can't even hold objects.

Amulets, scarves, capes, hats, ribbons, bracelets, and belts are good gear for monsters. Armor would have to be tailor-made for each monster. Maybe magic armor automatically adjusts itself?

Decide whether or not monsters will be able to use weapons. Can monsters use stuff like metal claws to enhance their attacks?

Also, decide what kinds of items a monster can use during battle. Can they drink a potion or eat a berry? Can they throw a smoke bomb or alchemist's fire? Can they use magic scrolls?

>Make sure that the players' monsters all have hands. Don't let someone play as a Voltorb or Magikarp. It's just too annoying to think of useful loot for a creature that can't even hold objects.

I don't really think that's that much of an issue. Most loot should probably be in the form of consumables (healing items, temporary stat boosts, etc.), and when it comes down to [held] items, it's really not too much of a stretch to do something like put a fannypack around a voltorb.

How does the voltorb get things out of the fanny pack?
How does the voltorb use a healing item?
How does the voltorb throw an item at an enemy?
How does the voltorb give an item to an ally?
etc.
How does the voltorb grapple?
What happens when an enemy machoke grapples the voltorb?

D&D combat becomes very limited and can get pretty boring if all you can do is move and attack in a battle.

All these people talking about their own subjective opinions rather than the OP question.

>What type of land does this adventure take place in
I was thinking a normal medieval fantasy world like a standard D&D setting.
>Conflict or motivation for adventure
Let's say the PCs are members of some cult or religion with the ability to tame creatures. Their religion is based around taming and they need to tame enough for the BBEG Tarrasque
>Original creatures?
No, just D&D creatures reskinned to work
>Tone
Normal campaign with no focus on a particular mood, but with emphasis on thenumerous creatures you come in contact with.
>Are all monsters tameable?
All but giants and humanoids
>Is there some way for monsters to be portable?
Hm. Not sure yet
>Are monsters befriended, captured, or enslaved
I've now decided that all 3 can be used, but the PC has to figure out which would be best for the individual monster
>How is training looked upon in society
Training will be weird and foreign. Trainers with beasts like Mastiffs or maybe even panthers won't attract attention one way or the other, but the town guard would be very reluctant to let someone in with an Aboleth or Rust Monster
>Can intelligent monsters train other monsters
I'll just say that in the universe the PCs all have a latent magic that makes taming normally untameable creatures possible, and that the very idea is something not a lot of creatures think of
>Beasts are a type of monster.

Are you being genuine, or are you just one of the anti-D&D trolls still trying?

In any case, static electricity manipulation in a close field around its body in the case of a voltorb.

Artistic flailing in the case of a magikarp.

>I was thinking a normal medieval fantasy world like a standard D&D setting.

What about Asian medieval fantasy, a la Pokemon Conquest?

I'll have to go through the official bestiary and see if there's enough asian-themed monsters to make changing the setting worth it, but if there is, I might make a different region of vaguely oriental appearance to facilitate the creatures.

This. There are so many better and more flexible systems out there than DnD. DnD just won't work well enough, methinks. For an idea of how batshit a system has to be to properly handle the specifics of Pokemon, look at either of the two big Pokemon ttrpgs. Anything you want to use should be able to handle at least half of what one of those systems do.

My mistake for wording the OP incorrectly, but it's a D&D campaign in the D&D setting with the official D&D monsters but with the homebrew'd ability to capture and train these monsters similiar in fashion to pokemon or digimon

Oh, then please, go on. Show some of these things in action to the full depth required to handle all the variables of a Pokemon game.

You should learn to just ignore them. They just automatically start shitposting any time they see the words D&D.

In that case, just use... Does 5e have the equivalent to the Leadership feat yet, or Cohort rules? That'd be the best place to start.

My god, you are so amazingly defensive.

Are you really incapable of believing anyone legitimately dislikes or criticises your favourite system, so you have to rationalise it all as the actions of trolls?

No but I'll definitely start looking into incorprating it into the campaign and changing it where I need to.

Honestly, I dgaf. I'm just trying to help someone who wants to try something new do it in the easiest way possible. Not everything's an attack on your game.

...

The systems you want are:
>Monsters and other childish things
Build-a-beast system based around easy to learn, flexible rules. Allows for *basically* everything you could do in Pokemon, including Evolution, temporary forms, special moves, unique abilities, and equipment that alters their fighting style. The base system is kinda grim though... Like, losing a monster fight might cause your parents to get divorced kinda grim.
>Cute & Fuzzy Cockfighting Seizure Monsters
An expansion for Big Eyes Small Mouth, focusses on replicating the feel of Pokemon anime.

Veeky Forums doesn't really like D&D and it does get alot of undeserved hate, but the concept of homebrewing a pokemon style game on 5e just sounds like such a bad idea that it raises the question of whether OP has everything right in the head.

Ok... as someone who actually likes 5e, I'm just gonna say this is a Really, Really bad idea.

5e is built for each player to control 1 detailed character while Pokemon is a game designed around controlling multiple semi-granular characters.

Summoning and controlling creatures is one big shitshow in 5e. The ranger sucked until they finally fixed it in Unearthed Arcana, and even that wasn't great, while druid rectally violates action economy and strategy with their summoning spells. It's why Conjuration Wizard isn't remotely close to a summoner.

That all being said, here's the Kanto pokedex statted for 5e...
drive.google.com/file/d/0B4U5Lxk9ysjTSk1RUHByR01va1E/view?usp=sharing

It's still not going to work though. I would strongly encourage the use of a different system, or changing the focus to be a Mystery Dungeon style game.

>Veeky Forums doesn't really like D&D

It's literally a handful of autists trying to make themselves out to be more than they are, and don't think it's not obvious.

Wow you fucks like 5e?

2nd edition is the best edition, 3rd edition is playable, 3.5 is when everything started going to shit


I am disappoint Veeky Forums

3e was worse than 3.5. The only thing it lacked was the severity of option bloat.

Just let them collect several Revised Ranger UA beastmaster animal companions, and let them swap between them with an action.

This idea isn't awful, you just need a homebrew non-magical class with that feature and some support abilities.

>I'm so insecure I have to make up conspiracy theories to defend myself

>Guys, I'm thinking about doing a Formula One based Badminton game where all the players hit a shuttlecock around with rackets. I just need ideas on how to put it together.

>Because I have a group of friends who are already big fans of Formula One and are always up for weird variations on that.

>My mistake for wording the OP incorrectly, but it's a Formula One race on a Formula One track with official Formula One cars but with rackets, a shuttlecock, and a net.

Are you honestly suggesting that there are a few hate filled autists so hellbent on shitposting about a single system on an anonymous imageboard, that they accomplish the task of posting hate about said system around the clock, in addition of having the coordination to always appear in the same threads at the same time to appear more numerous? And they do all this entirely for free?

I have a confession to make: I'm the D&D hater. In every thread, at every hour, any day of the week, whenever someone is shitting on D&D? That's me. I did it.

Alright... that's it. Time to have some fun.

2E was a pile of Shit that was far too open to interpretation. 3E was hailed as a fix because it was an API to code a D&D game, not a few base ideas and commands you had to hack together to actually make something.

In other words, the whole reason it was so great was because it was little more than a few lines of text held together by DM Fiat. It's the system of overbearing and controlling DMs that can't handle being wrong.

If you are hell bent on DnD, I really think 4th edition will suit better. 4e is great for tactical turn based combat, and the tools for building creatures is very modular.

Here are my main concerns:
1. will the characters be able to fight or will they just get jobbered if they try. If they can fight reasonably well enough to be a threat to the monsters, then you now have every player running double the characters in combat. This is going to slow stuff WAY down.

2. Can players have more than one monster? If so, what is going to stop them from collecting dozens of cheap throwaway ones? This is a problem with 5e, a cr 1 monster "can" hit a cr 20. And they can damage them. If you can have more than one monster, why not just collect dozens of something and throw them like the disposable chaff they are? Lets say pokemon rules, and you can carry a max for an arbitrary reason, what stops them from throwing everything they have at once? More units, more time wasted. Ok, arbitrary reason and they cant do that either. Fine. You still have multiple monsters, and the fight isn't really over until they are all gone. That is going to drag the fight to an endless slog. Over all, just not really a great table top environment.

Yes, and?

No, it's just that they are most active when other people are out actually playing games.

It's always a bad idea to try and discuss D&D at night on the weekends. That's when the people bitter about no one wanting to play with them are most upset.

Man, you've put a lot of thought into that conspiracy theory. Do you have a corkboard?

>wah, he hit me where it hurts most!

The truth hurts, don't it.

Veeky Forums is the most active on weekends anyway, so saying that D&D haters are the most active during the weekend doesn't really mean anything.

It's more that your paranoid delusions are hilarious, so I keep poking you to see what other crazy shit you come up with.

When most people who actually play games are away, you trolls get super antsy and upset whenever you think about people having fun.
That's why there's plenty of hours where people can discuss D&D without getting molested, but not during the traditional hours when people actually play games.

You've already convinced yourself. Why do you need to convince that other guy too?

Poor baby. Go on. Cry more for me.
Tell me about how it's D&D's fault no one wants to play with you, and not you being a dumb cunt.

...and this makes sense with time zones, how exactly?

Are you being serious?
I don't actually know how stupid you are, and whether you know anything about Veeky Forums.

Ever notice how posting slows down considerably when America goes to sleep on this English-language board?

That seems kinda irrelevant.

Very stupid, it seems.

Serious question here, why do keep posting? From the viewpoint of a neutral observer, this thread is like a monument to D&Delusion. You accuse everyone who disagrees with of being a troll, make ludicrous claims of persecution and conspiracies, and have been so utterly BTFO'd that you resort to arguments like these here that strongly stink of projection. Why go on? You're only making D&D players as a whole look like bad at this point. It's only thanks to people like these to show not all D&D players are as irrational as you.

>D&Delusion

I fucking love it.

>from a neutral position

Cute. You really are shameless.
And, as far as BTFO, you sound like the guy who tried to say a fantasy game wouldn't work for a fantasy game.

You are killing Veeky Forums by trying to make everything into a system war all the time, and worse by being so shameless with your trolling.

Are you really going to keep confusing Fantasy (genre) with Fantasy (as opposed to reality) and acting as if it's a point?

You mean this? Because if this is your definition of a BTFO, then I think we hit a new level of delusion.

You're fucking nutters, bro.

Do you know what genre Pokemon falls into, you moron? Here's a clue, it's not historical nonfiction.

Pulp sci-fi?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pokémon_(video_game_series)

Genres

Adventure
Augmented reality
Fighting
Puzzle
Role-playing
Strategy

I think were done here.

Both suck, PTA is an autistic pile of shit and PTU is a pile of messy rules that render it unplayable for more than a few sessions.

Besides the guy doesn't want to play Pokemon using D&D, he wants to play D&D with a dash of Pokemon flavor, still a terrible idea.

I'd say it straddles sci-fi and fantasy in a way not too dissimilar to Spelljammer, which takes most of its cues from "pulp scifi."

...A setting where a somewhat contemporary human world with sci-fi technology and strange creatures is somehow comparable to full on science fantasy space opera? How fucking twisted is your brain?