Ads

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6
  Print  
Author Topic: X-20/E6 - A new way of d20 (Core Classs Added, Feedback Needed).  (Read 1040 times)
[insert witty statement here]
Handbag Procurer
Jörmungand
*


View Profile
« on: February 06, 2012, 10:39:02 PM »

Out of Character

Initial Post Now Up to Date with current build, Alpha 0.2. You only need to read this post to be caught up on how X-20 works.
So I've been pondering various d20 systems and variants and E6 and all of that, and have begun looking for a system that doesn't have the problems of those two systems - for standard d20, you have characters that become gods by max level, and for E6, you lose out many of your class abilities or that general feeling of awesome. As such, I'm trying out a different way of doing things. Here's some basic concepts I've worked out:

1) Classes have 6 levels, condensed versions of the original base classes.

2) HP will use an increase modeled off of Iron Heroes - instead of gaining d8 hp, a class would gain d4+4, which will keep HP more predictable and normalized.

3) Attack bonus increases each time a new HD is gained. Classes with a martial bent gain more attacks: a primary fighter's attack bonus at level 6 will be +6/+3/+0, a rogue type will be +6/+2, and a wizard type will be +6. Saves will gain a more linear progression (again, gained with HD increase), with abilities like mettle, evasion, uncanny dodge, non-fractional bonuses and such to make sure classes with emphasis on mobility, mental fortitude, and physical toughness retain that.

4) Feats are gained at every even level. Every class gains class features at every level as well. Spells increase up till level 4 - some of the more interesting/iconic ideas in spells that are found past level 4 spell slots are going to be retooled to fit lower levels. In addition, casters will gain spell slots for 5 and 6, usable not for new spells but for adding metamagic feats to lower level spells.

5) Class defense bonus is nixed: Defense is increased by class ability, feats, and the enhancement bonus on armor. Armor, instead of the normal bonus, provides Damage Reduction equal to its base bonus - a good way to increase player survivability without making them have tons more hit points than a low level person.

6) This is the part of the project that's likely going to drive me into utter madness, but I intend on rebalancing and outright restatting monsters, especially the more iconic ones (Dragons being the primary example) to retain their epic threat level while still being within the range of what characters with BAB's around 6 and 6 hit dice could handle.

7) Progression after level 6 will be, instead of just feats (which I feel is a somewhat bogged down system that feels moderately schizophrenic), accomplished through the use "advanced classes," which will work like prestige classes do in d20...if you strip them of BAB increase, Save increases, HD increases - basically everything aside from class features. The goal is to increase player versatility without a direct increase in player damage output or dramatic increases in player survivability.

Thoughts?
« Last Edit: February 15, 2012, 12:46:58 PM by Xathan On The Town » Logged

AnIndex of My Work

Sparkletwist

It's llitul and the brain, llitul and the brain, one is a genius and the other's insane
Proud Receiver of a Golden Dorito

Administrator
Nidhogg
*


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: February 06, 2012, 11:11:19 PM »

Xathan Back Again

Classes have 6 levels, condensed versions of the original base classes.
This is good. I like this. Most of the analysis of 3e that I've seen suggests that around level 5 or 6 is the pinnacle of human achievement, when considering things in any sort of "realistic" fashion. Beyond that you're clearly superhuman-- and the game starts to break.

Xathan Back Again

HP will use an increase modeled off of Iron Heroes - instead of gaining d8 hp, a class would gain d4+4, which will keep HP more predictable and normalized.
I do not like this, however. Rolling for HP is an idea that should've gone away 20 years ago, and it did in most game systems that aren't D&D. The best way to keep HP more predictable and normalized is to completely get rid of the idea of rolling for HP in the first place.

Xathan Back Again

Attack bonus increases each time a new HD is gained. Classes with a martial bent gain more attacks: a primary fighter's attack bonus at level 10 will be +6/+4/+2/+0, a rogue type will be +6/+3/+0, and a wizard type will be +6/+0.
Level 10? You just said it only goes to level 6.

Anyway, giving every class a full attack bonus (i.e., BAB = level, like a Fighter) makes life nice for casters, but, then again, life is already pretty nice for them. I'm not sure how balanced it is. It'll take some doing to figure out just how many extra attacks should be given out (and when) in order to compensate for this.

Xathan Back Again

Feats are gained at every level. Every class gains class features at every level as well. Spells increase up till level 4 - some of the more interesting/iconic ideas in spells that are found past level 4 spell slots are going to be retooled to fit lower levels.
I think some of the iconic spells are just going to have to go, or be replaced by complex rituals that are driven by arbitrarium, unobtainium, and DM fiat. Otherwise, you'll have to do things like somehow make True Resurrection or Wish a level 4 spell.

Xathan Back Again

Classes get a defense bonus as they level, determined by class and related bonuses. Armor, instead of the normal bonus, provides Damage Reduction - a good way to increase player survivability without making them have tons more hit points than a low level person.
I like this idea, too. I never liked that d20 puts "didn't hit me" and "hit me but my armor protected me" on the same axis. It was a perfectly fine simplification when it was the 1970s and you were playing a game that let you add some color to your Chainmail wargame. It isn't so great any more.

Xathan Back Again

This is the part of the project that's likely going to drive me into utter madness, but I intend on rebalancing and outright restatting monsters, especially the more iconic ones (Dragons being the primary example) to retain their epic threat level while still being within the range of what characters with BAB's around 6 and 6 hit dice could handle.
Yeah, good luck with that one. tongue

Xathan Back Again

Progression after level 6 will be, instead of just feats (which I feel is a somewhat bogged down system that feels moderately schizophrenic), accomplished through the use "advanced classes," which will work like prestige classes do in d20...if you strip them of BAB increase, Save increases, HD increases - basically everything aside from class features. The goal is to increase player versatility without a direct increase in player damage output or dramatic increases in player survivability.
Hmm... I wonder if this will work. I like the idea of not increasing HD any more, to avoid hit points getting out of control, and a case could be made for not increasing BAB or saves too much, but I also wonder if this might remove some of the feeling of advancement that comes from gaining a level. On the other hand, gaining new class features is a nice thing, as long as the "prestige classes" are colorful and interesting enough. To be honest, I'm not sure how I feel about this... so I probably don't have a whole lot of useful comments to add.
Logged


[insert witty statement here]
Handbag Procurer
Jörmungand
*


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: February 06, 2012, 11:37:34 PM »

sparkletwist

Xathan Back Again

Classes have 6 levels, condensed versions of the original base classes.
This is good. I like this. Most of the analysis of 3e that I've seen suggests that around level 5 or 6 is the pinnacle of human achievement, when considering things in any sort of "realistic" fashion. Beyond that you're clearly superhuman-- and the game starts to break.

That one is something I've heard too on a number of occasions, and the analysis behind E6 supports that. Want to keep it within human without losing awesome but without going into superhuman. tongue

Quote

Xathan Back Again

HP will use an increase modeled off of Iron Heroes - instead of gaining d8 hp, a class would gain d4+4, which will keep HP more predictable and normalized.
I do not like this, however. Rolling for HP is an idea that should've gone away 20 years ago, and it did in most game systems that aren't D&D. The best way to keep HP more predictable and normalized is to completely get rid of the idea of rolling for HP in the first place.

I agree that for the most part getting rid of rolling is something that most systems do and that works in normalization, but part of d20's appeal is very much that classic feel. This method is trying to find that happy middle ground of random and predictable. I don't want to completely do away with random hit points - part of the problem with non-random hit points is that it increases one of the common complaints people have with 4e - "Every class feels the same" or, alternatively, "every fighter/rogue/wizard/blank feels the same." - and this helps with that a little, while making the gap smaller. 

Quote

Xathan Back Again

Attack bonus increases each time a new HD is gained. Classes with a martial bent gain more attacks: a primary fighter's attack bonus at level 10 will be +6/+4/+2/+0, a rogue type will be +6/+3/+0, and a wizard type will be +6/+0.
Level 10? You just said it only goes to level 6.

Same reason I keep mentioning "every HD" the original draft of this system had 10 levels, but you only gained HD and related benefits at level 1,2,4,6,8,10. It wasn't until I came up with the "Advanced Class" system that I realized I could do away with that system, but didn't clean up this draft enough to get rid of every artifact I missed. Will go back and edit that. tongue

Quote

Anyway, giving every class a full attack bonus (i.e., BAB = level, like a Fighter) makes life nice for casters, but, then again, life is already pretty nice for them. I'm not sure how balanced it is. It'll take some doing to figure out just how many extra attacks should be given out (and when) in order to compensate for this.

The big balancing factor here is that d20 systems are based around caster's spells using Touch Attacks which bypass a number of different defense types. Class based defense does away with that - but also means that giving casters a lower BaB would be a huge neutering factor. Number of attacks is going to be a balancing act - but largely would be something that comes out through play testing, likely.

Quote

Xathan Back Again

Feats are gained at every level. Every class gains class features at every level as well. Spells increase up till level 4 - some of the more interesting/iconic ideas in spells that are found past level 4 spell slots are going to be retooled to fit lower levels.
I think some of the iconic spells are just going to have to go, or be replaced by complex rituals that are driven by arbitrarium, unobtainium, and DM fiat. Otherwise, you'll have to do things like somehow make True Resurrection or Wish a level 4 spell.

Oh, iconic spells like True Resurrection and Wish are going to have to go. I'm thinking things like Shadow Conjuration, Shadow Walk, Astral Travel - spells that are either cool or interesting OR provide a way to advance the plot, not the major ones.

Incidentally, any spell that returns the dead to life is going to replaced with a single spell that can be used to return the dead, but involves a quest in the underworld - with the revived person's soul taking on an ectoplasmic form to assist.

Quote

Xathan Back Again

Classes get a defense bonus as they level, determined by class and related bonuses. Armor, instead of the normal bonus, provides Damage Reduction - a good way to increase player survivability without making them have tons more hit points than a low level person.
I like this idea, too. I never liked that d20 puts "didn't hit me" and "hit me but my armor protected me" on the same axis. It was a perfectly fine simplification when it was the 1970s and you were playing a game that let you add some color to your Chainmail wargame. It isn't so great any more.

Thanks! I wish I could claim credit for having this idea, but so many people have done variants for this (all of which are OGL) that I'll have to do almost no work here - it's just a matter of picking which one I like best.

Quote

Xathan Back Again

This is the part of the project that's likely going to drive me into utter madness, but I intend on rebalancing and outright restatting monsters, especially the more iconic ones (Dragons being the primary example) to retain their epic threat level while still being within the range of what characters with BAB's around 6 and 6 hit dice could handle.
Yeah, good luck with that one. tongue

I know. X.X I'm thinking of doing a ton of templates to create an easy conversion system, as well as creating something like the Ediolon used by the summoner for various creature types to make homebrewing/remaking monsters much more simple and streamlined than trying to manually convert them all.

Quote

Xathan Back Again

Progression after level 6 will be, instead of just feats (which I feel is a somewhat bogged down system that feels moderately schizophrenic), accomplished through the use "advanced classes," which will work like prestige classes do in d20...if you strip them of BAB increase, Save increases, HD increases - basically everything aside from class features. The goal is to increase player versatility without a direct increase in player damage output or dramatic increases in player survivability.
Hmm... I wonder if this will work. I like the idea of not increasing HD any more, to avoid hit points getting out of control, and a case could be made for not increasing BAB or saves too much, but I also wonder if this might remove some of the feeling of advancement that comes from gaining a level. On the other hand, gaining new class features is a nice thing, as long as the "prestige classes" are colorful and interesting enough. To be honest, I'm not sure how I feel about this... so I probably don't have a whole lot of useful comments to add.

This one, I think, is going to be hard for anyone to really have feelings/thoughts on this until I get some examples posted to show what I mean. tongue
Logged

AnIndex of My Work

Sparkletwist

It's llitul and the brain, llitul and the brain, one is a genius and the other's insane
Proud Receiver of a Golden Dorito

[insert witty statement here]
Handbag Procurer
Jörmungand
*


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: February 07, 2012, 12:16:47 AM »

Oh, as an aside, the "kernel" system - the system I'm working from as my basis - is Pathfinder, not 3.5. Just something I feel important to note.
Logged

AnIndex of My Work

Sparkletwist

It's llitul and the brain, llitul and the brain, one is a genius and the other's insane
Proud Receiver of a Golden Dorito

Incandescence
Jörmungand
*


View Profile WWW
« Reply #4 on: February 07, 2012, 06:38:38 AM »

sparkletwist

Xathan Back Again

Classes have 6 levels, condensed versions of the original base classes.
This is good. I like this. Most of the analysis of 3e that I've seen suggests that around level 5 or 6 is the pinnacle of human achievement, when considering things in any sort of "realistic" fashion. Beyond that you're clearly superhuman-- and the game starts to break.
I'm intrigued about a few points, but this is all I have time to ask about. How could such analyses be conducted. How did anyone go about mapping real-world capabilities to the level system and determine a certain level represents peak human performance? (Not trying to be argumentative on this point, I'm really curious what the thinking was.)
Logged


that's much better
Fenris-Wolf
*


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: February 07, 2012, 07:28:52 AM »

Phoenix

sparkletwist

Xathan Back Again

Classes have 6 levels, condensed versions of the original base classes.
This is good. I like this. Most of the analysis of 3e that I've seen suggests that around level 5 or 6 is the pinnacle of human achievement, when considering things in any sort of "realistic" fashion. Beyond that you're clearly superhuman-- and the game starts to break.
I'm intrigued about a few points, but this is all I have time to ask about. How could such analyses be conducted. How did anyone go about mapping real-world capabilities to the level system and determine a certain level represents peak human performance? (Not trying to be argumentative on this point, I'm really curious what the thinking was.)
http://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/587/roleplaying-games/dd-calibrating-your-expectations-2

Main place I've seen the idea.
Logged

Beejazz's Homebrew System
 Beejazz's Homebrew Discussion

Quote

I don't believe in it anyway.
What?
England.
Just a conspiracy of cartographers, then?

My name has nothing to do with internet gaming.
Fáfnir
*


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: February 07, 2012, 09:05:50 AM »

For spells above the E6 level, you could easily implement Incantations - http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/magic/incantations.htm - which would allow the awesome high level spells, but would balance it as well, as they would be costly and time-consuming.
Logged

Let's go teach these monkeys about evolution.
-Mark Wahlberg

 

that's much better
Fenris-Wolf
*


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: February 07, 2012, 09:53:49 AM »

When you say condensed versions of original base classes, do you mean Fighter Mage Thief (or genericized versions like Warrior Mage Expert) or do you mean the 3x gamut?

I like flat attack bonus/save progression and I'm interested to see how you pull it off, but for casters couldn't you use something like caster-level attacks for magic? That way they can pull off touch attacks without inexplicable weapon training. I don't much like iterative attacks as a rule, but maybe you can pull it off. For me it's just too much rolling, so I just give some martial classes limited area effects and the like.

Giving both a feat and a class feature seems a bit odd. Have you considered class features as feats? Or alternating? Or having that bonus feat structure in classes (so fighters get feats every level, rogues get feats less frequently in exchange for skills, and casters get feats least frequently in exchange for spells)

The scaling defense bonus and DR seems a good way to go, especially with E6 keeping it within reason.

On monsters, it may be more useful to have a method for quick and easy monster generation/tailoring/reskinning rather than statting every little thing out. Also keep in mind that the special abilities can scale monsters up in different ways from stats. Dragons are a great example if they've got flight, long range, and area attacks all at once.

On progression after level 6, consider feat chains and my earlier statement about features as feats.

EDIT: Rituals or incantations would be great for high level spells, especially if you key magic to its own skill or attack bonus.
Logged

Beejazz's Homebrew System
 Beejazz's Homebrew Discussion

Quote

I don't believe in it anyway.
What?
England.
Just a conspiracy of cartographers, then?

Stream-of-Consiousness Prophet.
Hel
*


View Profile WWW
« Reply #8 on: February 07, 2012, 10:02:12 AM »

I'll take a look.  I did a few of these things in my Accis-World of Bronze pulpy d20.  Advanced classes, lowered HP amounts, flattenned magical mana gain after a certain point, and the use of DR (as a potential DR with armor and a skill that allowed using it).
Logged

VerkonenVreeg, The Nice.Celtricia, World of Factions<br />Steel Island Online gaming thread<br />Old, evil, twisted, damaged, and afflicted.  <br />Orbis non sufficit.<br />Thread Murderer Extraordinaire, and supposedly pragmatic...<br />\"That is my interpretation. That the same rules designed to reduce the role of the GM and to empower the player also destroyed the autonomy to create a consistent setting. And more importantly, these rules reduce the Roleplaying component of what is supposed to be a \'Fantasy Roleplaying game\' to something else\"-Vreeg<br />

Spawn of Ungoliant
Hel
*


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: February 07, 2012, 11:26:38 AM »

Xathan

This is the part of the project that's likely going to drive me into utter madness, but I intend on rebalancing and outright restatting monsters, especially the more iconic ones (Dragons being the primary example) to retain their epic threat level while still being within the range of what characters with BAB's around 6 and 6 hit dice could handle.
This might seem like an overly simple solution, but with something like a dragon, I think re-statting might be incredibly easy, since dragons already have a range of age ranges.  Why not just take a Very Young Red Dragon or a Young Dragon and, if you want a giant dragon instead of a little one, change the size to Gargantuan?  Maybe add an extra ability or two?
Logged


[insert witty statement here]
Handbag Procurer
Jörmungand
*


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: February 07, 2012, 01:01:48 PM »

Señor Leetz

For spells above the E6 level, you could easily implement Incantations - http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/magic/incantations.htm - which would allow the awesome high level spells, but would balance it as well, as they would be costly and time-consuming.

A lot of spells could easily work under that framework, so I think I'm going to go that route - there are just a few spells that will work better as traditional castings that I like (Shadow Evocation/Conjuration being the first example off the top of my head), but should be easily reworked to lower levels.

beejazz

When you say condensed versions of original base classes, do you mean Fighter Mage Thief (or genericized versions like Warrior Mage Expert) or do you mean the 3x gamut?

I'm going to do Fighter/Wizard/Rogue/Cleric first, but expand to the entire 3.X gamut including the Piazo Pathfinder Core Classes and some of my own design.

Quote

I like flat attack bonus/save progression and I'm interested to see how you pull it off, but for casters couldn't you use something like caster-level attacks for magic? That way they can pull off touch attacks without inexplicable weapon training.


I thought about that, but the end result (seems like it) would be overly complicated. The reason a wizard won't have inexplicable weapon training will be weapons proficiencies - with only a +6 attack bonus, that -4 for non-proficiency will be a nightmare. A skilled fighter and a trained wizard will be just as good at hitting something with a stick, but with a sword the fighter will be much, much better - unless the wizard has taken Martial Weapon Proficiency (Short Sword), which means the skill isn't inexplicable, because he took the effort to train.

Quote

I don't much like iterative attacks as a rule, but maybe you can pull it off. For me it's just too much rolling, so I just give some martial classes limited area effects and the like.

It's possible I can make it something you will like. However...I love iterative attacks, so it's possible that my system won't ever be something you'll like. Just a matter of taste - I'm not a huge fan of limited area effects. tongue

Quote

Giving both a feat and a class feature seems a bit odd. Have you considered class features as feats? Or alternating? Or having that bonus feat structure in classes (so fighters get feats every level, rogues get feats less frequently in exchange for skills, and casters get feats least frequently in exchange for spells)

I'm going to keep class features at every level, because otherwise it just feels like bad design - if you're only getting 6 levels in your core class, every level should make you feel like you get something that is part of your core. The feats every level are to increase versatility at lower levels, since that's where it matters most - however, I'm open to having my mind changed on this one. smile

Quote

The scaling defense bonus and DR seems a good way to go, especially with E6 keeping it within reason.

Thanks! This is the one change that seems to be most positive, I just hope I can make it work as well as it sounds.

Quote

On monsters, it may be more useful to have a method for quick and easy monster generation/tailoring/reskinning rather than statting every little thing out. Also keep in mind that the special abilities can scale monsters up in different ways from stats. Dragons are a great example if they've got flight, long range, and area attacks all at once.

Yeah, that's why it's going to be a bit of a nightmare. I'm going to work on a simple method, but unlike pretty much every change I'm presenting here, I have no basis to work from, so gonna have to do it from scratch.

Quote

On progression after level 6, consider feat chains and my earlier statement about features as feats.

That's the exact same thing E6 does, to my understanding, and while an entirely viable system, at the point where I do that my system not only becomes obsolete, but feat chains are the primary problem I have with E6. I like classes, I like the clear progression those offer, and I like that it's more "user friendly" than feats, which can be overly broad and nightmareish for new players to understand and become overwhelming for experienced players that consider every option. If those are the only method of progression...I just don't like it, is what it comes down to, and is the whole reason I'm making this system. smile

Quote

EDIT: Rituals or incantations would be great for high level spells, especially if you key magic to its own skill or attack bonus.

Agreed - especially since virtually everyone has stated as such. 90% of the spells I want to keep would work perfectly as rituals or incantations, and the remaining 10% (which now that I think about it, also include things like "Wall/Dome of Force, Prismatic Spray, Disintegrate" and a few others are easily retooled so their DCs/effects/durations are tooled better to level 6.

LordVreeg

I'll take a look.  I did a few of these things in my Accis-World of Bronze pulpy d20.  Advanced classes, lowered HP amounts, flattenned magical mana gain after a certain point, and the use of DR (as a potential DR with armor and a skill that allowed using it).

I look forward to your feedback!

Steerpike

Xathan

This is the part of the project that's likely going to drive me into utter madness, but I intend on rebalancing and outright restatting monsters, especially the more iconic ones (Dragons being the primary example) to retain their epic threat level while still being within the range of what characters with BAB's around 6 and 6 hit dice could handle.
This might seem like an overly simple solution, but with something like a dragon, I think re-statting might be incredibly easy, since dragons already have a range of age ranges.  Why not just take a Very Young Red Dragon or a Young Dragon and, if you want a giant dragon instead of a little one, change the size to Gargantuan?  Maybe add an extra ability or two?

That's actually a very, very viable option. Things such as the mutation system and the Extraterrestrial/Space creature templates from D20 Modern and Future, the Eidolon progression and Giant/Young/Advanced Creature templates from Pathfinder, and finally various other templates to round it out a bit more might provide a simple and elegant solution to this particular problem. smile

Thank you everyone for the continued feedback! I think this project is coming along very nicely, and look forward to how it works out.
« Last Edit: February 07, 2012, 01:04:25 PM by Xathan Back Again » Logged

AnIndex of My Work

Sparkletwist

It's llitul and the brain, llitul and the brain, one is a genius and the other's insane
Proud Receiver of a Golden Dorito

Administrator
Nidhogg
*


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: February 07, 2012, 02:00:51 PM »

Xathan Back Again

I don't want to completely do away with random hit points - part of the problem with non-random hit points is that it increases one of the common complaints people have with 4e - "Every class feels the same" or, alternatively, "every fighter/rogue/wizard/blank feels the same." - and this helps with that a little, while making the gap smaller. 
There are better ways to make different members of a class feel the same, like presenting them with balanced and equally appealing options that some can take and others decline. This is a whole lot better than introducing "difference" by making some people just plain objectively worse than others through no fault of their own. 3e already has enough problems with character optimization and the like making some characters objectively worse. I don't think we need to get dice in on it, too.

If we both build identical Fighters and then level up, and I roll 15 HP and you roll 18 HP, my Fighter is objectively worse than yours-- identical except down 3 HP. So, yeah, if you want to create character difference by randomly screwing some people over, that's one way to do it, but then you might as well just roll 3d6 for stats; that'll create a whole lot of character difference, right?

Xathan Back Again

I'm going to do Fighter/Wizard/Rogue/Cleric first, but expand to the entire 3.X gamut including the Piazo Pathfinder Core Classes and some of my own design.
Fighting Man, Magic-User, and Thief! Cleric can stay. ;)

Seriously, though, maybe this is just the difficulty I was having with deciding on a character for your PF game, but having lots of classes with various class features that all look interesting in various combinations is just confusing to me. It would be a lot more flexible (and maybe more fun?) if it was based around four core classes with you being able to pick and choose your other features via feats-- like, a Gunslinger is just a Fighter who takes more gun-oriented feats, a Witch is just a Wizard who takes ooky witchy feats, and so on. It seems like this way you can get the exact character you want, although balancing it would probably be a little more difficult.

Or maybe this is just my preference for classless/point-buy systems sneaking in. laugh

Logged


Spawn of Ungoliant
Hel
*


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: February 07, 2012, 02:24:52 PM »

Though I'm not wholly against characters just gaining a set hp amount, it seems that part of the motivation behind it is to eliminate a degree of luck or chance from the game; I think it should be kept in mind that the entire game is already deeply structured by chance, so adding an extra chance in here and there, like hp rolls, is hardly a big deal balance wise.  Take sparkletwist's example of the two fighters with a 3 hp difference.  It's true that on paper one fighter is "objectively worse" than the other.  But put those two fighters in combat, and it's easily possible that the weaker fighter will get a lucky roll on an attack while the stronger fighter gets an unlucky roll.  1d8+3 damage later (or whatever), the difference in hp has been more than equalized.  My point here is that there's no difference between the roll to get hp and the roll to attack; you could see the hp roll as a kind of prologue to the combat itself, a combat round in and of itself, in a certain sense.  In both cases, chance determines the result, not skill or forethought or character optimization; and, moreover, the results of a given attack are, at least in this instance, far more marked than what both players rolled for their hp.

Does that make sense?  Chance already structures the game to an enormous degree, so fighting against it, to a certain extent, is almost to fight against the structure of the game itself.  For those bent on doing that - well, Pathfinder is probably not for you.  Obviously character design still matters a great deal, and we can make the argument that a balance needs to be struck between chance and skill, but I don't think we should seek to do away with chance altogether, and when we do remove an element of chance, we should have very particular reasons for doing so.  To me, one of the most enjoyable parts of combat and whatnot is that feeling of preparing to throw the dice while everyone hopes for a certain result.

I kind of like the middle ground of Iron Heroes hp progression, personally.

EDIT: I'm playing devil's advocate to a certain extent here.  If you want to make hp progression fixed, I don't think it would ruin the game or anything like that!
« Last Edit: February 07, 2012, 02:57:58 PM by Steerpike » Logged


[insert witty statement here]
Handbag Procurer
Jörmungand
*


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: February 07, 2012, 02:56:32 PM »

On the HP issue, I'm with Steerpike - I like the slight randomness in a system that's laden with it. The half system is a middle ground that maintains some similarties - on any given level, the difference between two characters of the same class is smaller than it would be in standard d20. Plus, this factor can be balanced out by increased ability scores, feat selection, etc - and plus, let's be honest, how often are two people of the exact same class built the exact same way with the only difference being hit points EVER seen in the same party? tongue

I do think the comparison to rolling 3d6 is inaccurate - your ability scores have far more impact on your character than your hit point total.

sparkletwist

Fighting Man, Magic-User, and Thief! Cleric can stay. ;)

Seriously, though, maybe this is just the difficulty I was having with deciding on a character for your PF game, but having lots of classes with various class features that all look interesting in various combinations is just confusing to me. It would be a lot more flexible (and maybe more fun?) if it was based around four core classes with you being able to pick and choose your other features via feats-- like, a Gunslinger is just a Fighter who takes more gun-oriented feats, a Witch is just a Wizard who takes ooky witchy feats, and so on. It seems like this way you can get the exact character you want, although balancing it would probably be a little more difficult.

Or maybe this is just my preference for classless/point-buy systems sneaking in. laugh



Balance is the only reason I'm considering a more traditional class structure - however, Pathfinder showed some amazing things that can be done with variant/alternate class features, so it's something I'm more than open to when I get down to class design.
Logged

AnIndex of My Work

Sparkletwist

It's llitul and the brain, llitul and the brain, one is a genius and the other's insane
Proud Receiver of a Golden Dorito

Stream-of-Consiousness Prophet.
Hel
*


View Profile WWW
« Reply #14 on: February 07, 2012, 03:42:23 PM »

We could do a whole thread on the effects of chance in the game...I have opposing damage and protection rolls...but both with dividing dice...so probablities 'R' us.

Any how, in My accis game, I have an ability called 'use protection'.  and Armor types have a DR and a 'potential protection'


"Protection: All character classes get the Protection Skill when starting out.  That is, they get 1 protection point plus their attribute bonus.  There is a difference between a character’s actual protection (i.e., how many points of damage they can absorb after having been hit before they lose Hit Points) and potential protection.  The protection column above contains the maximum potential protection a character can have based upon the armor they are wearing. 

Potential Protection Example 1: A 1st level Fighter, wearing Chain Mail (+DC = 13/Protection = 4) and carrying a Large Shield (+DC = +1/Protection = +1) has an unadjusted DC of 14 to be hit and an unadjusted Potential Protection of 5.  In this example, the Fighter has a Health Score of 11, which results in no adjustment to the Protection Skill, which is +1 at 1st level.  Therefore, while this character has a potential for up to 5 points of protection, at this point, the character only has 1 point of actual protection.   

Potential Protection Example 2: A 5th level Fighter, still equipped with Chain Mail (+DC = 13/Potential Protection = 4) and a Large Shield (+DC = +1/Potential Protection = +1) still has a combined, unadjusted DC of 14 and a combined, unadjusted Potential Protection of 5, as in the first example.  This Fighter, however, has a Health Score of 15, which imparts a +1 bonus on the Protection Skill.  This Fighter is also 5th level, which, according to the Protection Skill progression, imparts a +1 bonus for every 2 levels.  Thus, this Fighter’s Actual Protection is 4 out of a Potential Protection of 5 (+1 for 1st level, +1 for the attribute bonus [15 Health score], +1 for 2nd level, +1 for 4th level)."
Logged

VerkonenVreeg, The Nice.Celtricia, World of Factions<br />Steel Island Online gaming thread<br />Old, evil, twisted, damaged, and afflicted.  <br />Orbis non sufficit.<br />Thread Murderer Extraordinaire, and supposedly pragmatic...<br />\"That is my interpretation. That the same rules designed to reduce the role of the GM and to empower the player also destroyed the autonomy to create a consistent setting. And more importantly, these rules reduce the Roleplaying component of what is supposed to be a \'Fantasy Roleplaying game\' to something else\"-Vreeg<br />

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6
  Print  
 
Jump to: