The Campaign Builder's Guild

[ooc]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.[/ooc]
[spoiler=CLERIC!][ooc]The Cleric is, I admit, a bit of a rush job - I did not check to make sure my extra feats or channeling masteries did not overlap with existing feats. I'll take care of this latter, I just wanted to get this out ASAP.[/ooc]

Cleric:
Alignment: A cleric's alignment must be within one step of her deity's, along either the law/chaos axis or the good/evil axis, unless her deity allows cleric's of any alignment.

HD: 4+d4

The cleric's class skills are Appraise (Int), Craft (Int), Diplomacy (Cha), Heal (Wis), Knowledge (arcana) (Int), Knowledge (history) (Int), Knowledge (nobility) (Int), Knowledge (planes) (Int), Knowledge (religion) (Int), Linguistics (Int), Profession (Wis), Sense Motive (Wis), and Spellcraft (Int).

Skill Ranks Per Level: 2 + Int modifier.

Attack Bonus: As Rogue.

Class Features:
1: Aura, channel energy 1d6, domains, orisons, spontaneous casting
2: Channel Mastery, Bonus Channeling Feat
3: Channel Energy 2d6, Aura Expansion 1 (Weapons Treated as Magic to overcome DR)
4: Channel Mastery, Bonus Channeling Feat
5: Channel Energy 3d6, Aura Expansion 2 (Weapons Treated as having Cleric's Alignment to overcome DR)
6: Bonus Channeling Feat, 2 Channel Masteries

Changes from Pathfinder:

Channel Energy is usable more often. While still not usable at will, it us usable a number of times per day equal to 3+Wisdom Modifier+2 for each level in Cleric the Cleric has. As in Pathfinder, the Channel Energy does either positive or negative energy depending on the Cleric's alignment.

Spells Per Day:

0	1	2	3	4	5	6
4	2+1	-	-	-	-	-
5	3+1	2+1	-	-	-	-
6	4+1	3+1	2+1	-	-	-
6	4+1	4+1	3+1	2+1	-	-
6	4+1	4+1	4+1	3+1	2+1	-
6	4+1	4+1	4+1	4+1	4+1	3+1

Spell slots above level 4 are used to prepare spells with metamagic feats, prepare additional lower level spells, or used in conjunction with the Extra Channeling channel mastery

Channel Mastery: The cleric gain new options for their Channel Energy class features. A cleric must take the altered Channeling mastery to apply the effects of a channeling feat to a use of Channel Energy altered by a mastery. Unless noted, a use of Channel Energy with a channeling mastery applies expends the normal 1 daily use of the Channel Energy class feature. Applying a Mastery to a Channel is a free action, but using the altered Channel Energy requires the normal action for Channel Energy unless the mastery alters the Channel Energy's action. A cleric must used the altered Channel Energy on the same round the mastery was applied unless otherwise noted.

Reshape Channel: Instead of projecting the Channel Energy as just a 30 ft radius, it can also be channeled as a 60 ft cone or 120 ft line. The normal will save applies to creatures caught in the blast who would be damaged by it.
Special: This mastery cannot be used with any other mastery that changes the range or shape of the channel unless otherwise noted.

Opposition Channel: By an additional daily of her Channel Energy, the cleric can channel the opposite energy (Negative if already channel positive, or visa versa.)

Energetic Channel: The cleric chose one energy type (fire, acid, cold, electric, or sonic) upon selecting this mastery and can channel energy of that type instead of their normal positive or negative channeling. The save against this Channeling is a reflex save instead of a will save. If the Cleric has a a domain associated with one of these energy types, (Acid for Earth, Cold for Water, Electric for Air, and Fire for Fire) the cleric must chose that energy type. All clerics can chose sonic. A sonic channel uses d4s instead of the typical d6, but bypasses the hardness of objects and half the DR from armor.
Special: The range/area of the channel is halved unless the cleric spends one additional daily use of the channel energy class feature. This Mastery can be selected multiple times. Each time it is selected, it applies to an additional energy type. If selected more than once, the second energy type can use an energy outside the cleric's domain.

Focused Channel: At will, the channel energy class feature can be used against any single creature within 30 feet per cleric level. Channeling energy in this manner only deal 1d6+Wisdom Modifier healing or damage, regardless of normal Channel energy damage (unless damage has been modified by the empowered channel class feature). The creature targeted is allowed the normal will save to half the damage, and unlike normal channel energy Focused Channeling spell resistance applies normally (unless used to heal), and using it provokes attacks of opportunity. If the cleric has energetic channeling, no additional cost is incurred, though it still only does 1d6+Wisdom damage. A cleric must be level 3 or higher to select this mastery. This mastery does not expend any any daily uses of the channel energy class feature.
Special:  A cleric must spend one daily use of her Channel Energy class feature if used with Warding Channel, Quickened Channeling, Opposition Channeling, Repelling Channeling or Drawing Channeling. A cleric must spend two daily uses of her Channel Energy class feature if used with Improved Quicken Channeling. This mastery cannot be used with any other mastery that changes the range or shape of the channel unless otherwise noted.

Extra Channeling: A cleric may sacrifice a prepared spell to gain additional uses of her channel mastery, gaining uses equal to half the spell's level, rounded down (2 level 1 spells may be sacrificed for 1 additional use). Orisions cannot be sacrificed this way. The cleric must be level 3 or higher to select this mastery.
Special: A cleric cannot sacrifice his domain spell this way. This Mastery does not use any daily uses of Channel Energy. The additional uses of her Channel Mastery persist throughout the day. Using this Mastery is a full round action that does not provoke attacks of opportunity.

Channeling Rays: For one use of their channel energy ability, the cleric may select a number of creatures to target equal to the cleric's level within a range of 60 feet. One ranged attack roll is made, though the attack roll is only required if the channel energy is being used to deal damage. This channel energy mastery can be used with either Energetic Channeling or Opposition channeling.
Special:
Special: This mastery cannot be used with any other mastery that changes the range or shape of the channel unless otherwise noted.

Extended Channeling: This mastery doubles the range or area of channeled energy. This ability can be combined with any other ability that alters the clerics range or area. It uses 2 daily uses of the channel energy class feature, unless applied to Focused Channel, at which case it only uses 1 daily use.

Altered Channeling: A cleric with this mastery can apply the effects of any channeling feat she possess to a channel altered by a Channeling mastery.. This mastery cannot be combined with any channeling mastery that alters the damage or energy type of the channeled energy used. Alternatively, for two additional daily uses of Channel Energy, a cleric gain gain the benefits of any Channeling Feat besides Extra Channeling Mastery for one round.

Quickened Channeling: This mastery allows channel energy to be used as a move action for 2 daily uses of the channel energy class feature. A cleric can still only channel energy once per round.

Improved Quicken Channeling: This mastery allow a cleric to channel energy as a swift action for 4 daily uses of the channel energy class feature. A cleric still can only channel energy once per round. A cleric must have Quickened Channeling to take this mastery.

Channeling Blow: This mastery allows a cleric to channel energy through a melee attack. The cleric adds his weapon damage to the channeled energy if using a weapon, or an additional 1d6 if using it unarmed. If used with a melee weapon, this mastery still deals weapon damage if used to heal.  This mastery cannot be used with any other mastery that changes the range or shape of the channel, even otherwise noted.
Special: This mastery cannot be combined with Quickened Channeling or Improved Quickened Channeling, and the cleric can only make a single attack regardless of feats or iterative attacks earned from feats, class abilities, or level.

Channeling Shot: As Channeling Blow, but can be used with a ranged weapon instead of a melee weapon.  This mastery cannot be used with any other mastery that changes the range or shape of the channel, even if otherwise noted.

Forceful Channeling: For one additional use of the Channel Energy class feature, a cleric's channeled energy deals force damage instead of it's normal damage type. The dice used decrease to 1d4. A cleric must be 6th level to select this channel mastery.
Special: A cleric must posses Energetic Channeling to take this mastery.

Repelling Channel: For one additional use of the Channel Energy class feature, the cleric's channel energy pushes creatures in its area or that it targets 1d4x5 feet in addition to its normal effect. The cleric can sacrifice any other effect of her Channel Energy class feature to instead push any creatures effected by (1d4+Wisdom modifier)x10 feet.
Special: A Cleric must be level 3 to select this channel mastery.

Drawing Channel: As Repelling Channel, but instead draws the effected creatures the same distance towards the Cleric.
Special: A Cleric must be level 3 to select this channel mastery.

Warding Channel: A cleric sacrifices the damage of their channel energy class feature to grant all creatures within its area or targeted by it Damage Reduction equal to 2/- per dice the channel energy class feature would normally apply.
--------------

New Feat:
Extra Channel Mastery (Channeling)
Prerequisites: Channel energy 2d6, Wisdom 13.
The Cleric gains 1 additional channeling mastery. Normal restrictions on level apply, and a cleric must meet any prerequisites of the channeling mastery.
Special: This feat can be taken multiple times, but only once for each point of Wisdom bonus the Cleric possesses.

Improved Channeling (Channeling)
Prerequisites: Channel energy 2d6, Wisdom 15.
The dice used for Channel Energy increase by one step.

Greater Improved Channeling (Channeling)
Prerequisites: Channel Energy 2d6, Wisdom 17, Improved Channeling.
The dice used for Channel Energy increase an additional step.
[/spoiler]
[spoiler=SORCERER!]Sorcerer[note=Why Not Wizard]In the classic model, the Wizard would come first, than the sorcerer, to round out the 4 man party. However, I wanted to have a spontaneous caster in the initial build as well as a prepared caster, so went with Sorcerer instead.[/note]

HD: 3+d3
Skills: 2+Int/Level
The sorcerer's class skills are Appraise (Int), Bluff (Cha), Craft (Int), Fly (Dex), Intimidate (Cha), Knowledge (arcana) (Int), Profession (Wis), Spellcraft (Int), and Use Magic Device (Cha).

BAB:
+1 per level. The Sorcerer does not gain iterative attacks.

Class Features:
Cantrips, Arcane Bond, Bloodline
Bonus Metamagic Feat
Bloodline Ability
Bonus Metamagic Feat
Bloodline Ability
Bloodline Apotheosis, Bonus Metamagic Feat

Spells Per Day:

1	2	3	4	5	6
4	-	-	-	-	-
5	4	-	-	-	-
6	5	4	-	-	-
6	6	5	4	-	-
6	6	6	5	4	-
6	6	6	6	6	4

Spells Known

0	1	2	3	4	5	6
4	2	-	-	-	-	-
5	3	2	-	-	-	-
6	4	3	2	-	-	-
7	4	4	3	2	-	-
8	4	4	4	3	2	-
9	4	4	4	4	4	3

*Note that there are no actual spells above level 4. Levels 5-6 are for spells known with metamagic feats already applied, or learning lower level spells in a higher slot.

Bloodlines:
Aberrant:
+50% duration to polymorph spells, Summoned creatures gain the unnatural template.
1 - Acidic Spit (su): 1d6+charisma damage, usable at will, 30 foot range.
3 - Tentacles (ex): Sprout two tentacles from shoulders with a 10 ft reach, primary natural attacks that deal 1d4+str damage, can be retracted or extended at will allowing them to be hidden. Tentacles do not chance the sorcerer's threatened area.
5: Weird Anatomy (ex): 50% chance for a critical hit or sneak attack to have no effect, +2 to fortitude saves.
Apotheosis: Spell Resistance 15, Blindsight 60 feet, Tentacle reach becomes 15 feet, gains Improved Grab when using tentacles.

Fiendish:
+50% duration of summoned fiends.
1: Claws: Sprout at will, 2 primary natural attacks that do 1d4+str damage.
3: Resist 5 both Fire and Acid, Gain +2 to saves vs. posion.
5: Perfect Darkvision (Can see even in magical darkness) 60 feet, Can sprout wings to gain a fly speed of 30ft with average manuverability at will.
Apotheosis: Telepathy to 100 feet, Fast Healing 2, when summoning a fiendish creature or evil outsider summons one additional one, claw damage increases by one step.

Aquatic:
+1 to save DC of spells with the Water or Cold descriptor/damage, summoned creatures have aquatic template.
1: Steal Heat: Touch deals 1d6+Cha damage, heals the sorcerer for half the damage dealt, usable at will.
3: Gain swim speed at same speed as land speed, gain aquatic and amphibious subtypes, absorb cold 5 (if hit by cold damage, convert up to 5 of the damage dealt into temporary HP.)
5: Can create 1 gallon of water/level, +2 class bonus to defense.
Apotheosis: Swim speed doubles, Gains DR 5/Piercing, and gains blindsense 60 feet (120 feet blindsight when underwater)

Celestial:
+50% duration of summoned celestials.
1: Holy Touch: Deals 1d4+Cha damage to evil or neutral targets, heals good targets for 1d4+Cha damage. Can be used at will, but when used to heal must wait 5 rounds before healing same creature again.
3: Resist 5 both Electricity and Cold.
5:  Can sprout wings to gain a fly speed of 30ft with average manuverability at will, gains Improved Low Light Vision.
Apotheosis: Permanent Tongues effect (as the spell), adds Charisma modifier as bonus damage to any evil or neutral creatures, no delay to frequency of Holy Touch's healing.

Draconic:
+1 damage per dice with spells of associated energy type (See Draconic Bloodline in the Pathfinder SRD), Summoned creatures can gain the draconic template.
1: Gains a primary natural bite attack and secondary natural tail attack, both of which deal 1d6+Str damage. (Secondary natural attacks in X20 take a -3 penalty)
3: Resist associated Energy 5, gains natural 2/armor.
5: Breath Ray: Ranged Touch Attack (60 ft) that deals 3d6 damage of the associated energy type (no spell resistance). Once used, must wait 1d4+1 rounds before it can be used again.
Apotheosis: Gains Blindsense 30 feet, 2 claws as primary attacks that deal 1d4+strength damage, Can sprout wings at will with fly speed 60ft (Poor Maneuverability).

Earthen:
Summoned creatures can have the earthen template, +1 DC to spells with the Earthen or Acid descriptor/Damage Type.
1: Gains 2 natural slam attacks for 1d4+Str damage.
3: Absorb Acid (see Absorb Cold, above), 10ft burrow speed.
5: Forceful Blow: Slam attacks or spells with the acid or earth descriptor can push the target back 5x(1d6+Str) feet, +10 ft to burrow speed.
Apotheosis: Damage Reduction 3/- , +10 feet to burrow speed, Tremorsense out to 60 feet.

Fire:
Summoned creatures can have the Earthen Template, +1 DC to spells with the Fire descriptor/damage type.
1:  Burning Aura: Creatures that strike the sorcerer with a natural or melee weapon take 1d6+Cha fire damage.
3: Absorb Fire 5 (As absorb cold above), 10 ft climb speed.
5: Aura Surge: Can expand Aura to burn all creatures with in a 20 ft radius for 3d6 damage  (Reflex half) every 5 rounds, climb speed +10 feet.
Apotheosis: Climb +10 feet, Burning Aura becomes Burning Retribution: hits any creature within 30 feet that successfully strikes the Sorcerer with a targeted spell or a ranged, natural, or melee attack.  

Aural:
Summoned creatures gain a fly speed equal to their land speed with perfect maneuverability and +4 to their dexterity.
1: Ranged touch attack usable at will deals 1d6+Cha electric damage, ignores DR from metal armor.
3: Absorb Sonic 5 (As absorb cold above), Fly 10 ft (Perfect)
5: Focused Gale - Burst of hurricane force wind centered on sorcerer with a 60ft radius, can be used every 5 rounds.
Apotheosis: Fly speed becomes 20 (Perfect), +4 class bonus to defense.[/spoiler]
[spoiler=ROGUE!]HD: 4+d4

The rogue's class skills are Acrobatics (Dex), Appraise (Int), Bluff (Cha), Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Diplomacy (Cha), Disable Device (Dex), Disguise (Cha), Escape Artist (Dex), Intimidate (Cha), Knowledge (dungeoneering) (Int), Knowledge (local) (Int), Linguistics (Int), Perception (Wis), Perform (Cha), Profession (Wis), Sense Motive (Wis), Sleight of Hand (Dex), Stealth (Dex), Swim (Str), and Use Magic Device (Cha).

Skill Ranks per Level: 8 + Int modifier.

BAB:
+1
+2
+3
+4/+0
+5/+1
+6/+2

Class Features:
1: Sneak Attack 1d6, Rogue Talent
2: Uncanny Dodge, Rogue Talent
3: Sneak Attack 2d6, Evasion
4: Improved Uncanny Dodge*, Rogue Talent
5: Sneak Attack 3d6, Rogue Talent
6: Perfect Strike, Master Rogue

*Because of the lower levels, Improved Uncanny Dodge can be overcome by someone with effective levels 2 lower as opposed to 4. [note]The Rogue Talents, for now, use the list from the Pathfinder SRD (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/rogue/rogue-talents), though I'll be modifying and adding to it after I get the classes hammered out (at the same point I'll be modifying and adding to spells, feats, and other flexible abilities.)[/note]Master Rogue: Much like Fighters, at level 6 a rogue picks from a list of styles that add to their abilities and focus them on a particular type of combat, though it doesn't reduce their effectiveness in other areas - unlike fighters, this is only gained at level 6, not as they level (a rogue with a particular focus in mind should chose talents that complement them.)

Acrobat: Acrobatic Bluff (Can use Acrobatics in place of Bluff to feint or misdirect in combat), the rogue is always treated as having a running start for jumping, the rogue takes no penalty for using Acrobatics to balance on a narrow surface while moving full speed, and the rogue can, as an immediate action, make a Stealth check when landing from a fall or jump. (Acrobatics must be used as usual to avoid or reduce damage)

Grifter: +2 class bonus to Bluff, Diplomacy, Disguise, and Linguistics. The Rogue can use Detect Thoughts at will as a supernatural ability, but can only read surface thoughts and must make a Sense Motive vs. Bluff check to successfully read thoughts, even if the target fails its will save.

Thug: +6 bonus to hit points, can do nonlethal damage with sneak attack, adds 1d6 to sneak attack when using an improvised weapon or unarmed strike. Unarmed strikes by the rogue deal 1d6 damage (1d4 if small, 1d8 if large) and can be made as off hand attacks if the rogue has two-weapon fighting. This damage increases by one step if the rogue has Improved Unarmed Strike. (The thug must select the appropriate feats to avoid the typical penalties associate with improvised weapons or unarmed strikes.)

Gangster: +2 class bonus to attack and defense while flanking, can sacrifice one sneak attack dice to make an intimidate check as an immediate action after sneak attacking. Gains a +2 class bonus to intimidate.

Scoundrel: Can charge without moving in a straight line, adds Dex modifier instead of Str to light weapons, and when taking the full defense action can make attacks of opportunity against an opponent that misses with a melee attack. The Scoundrel can sacrifice 1d6 sneak attack damage to leave his opponent flat footed after hitting with a sneak attack (but cannot use this ability on the same target on the following round). The ability functions against creatures normally immune to sneak attacks, though they still do not take sneak attack damage.

Master Sniper: Can sneak attack with a ranged weapon at 60 feet or one full range increment, whichever is better. The penalty for range increments is reduced by 1 and the penalty for perception checks does not apply until after 100 feet. The rogue takes no penalty for attack rolls with a ranged weapon while prone.

Assassin: Can make a death attack after observing an opponent for three full rounds - this is a sneak attack (with normal rules for sneak attack) that is automatically a critical hit so long as the attack lands. The Assassin gains poison use if he does not already have it, and adds his int modifier to saving throws against poisons he applied.

Scout: Gains a +10 ft class bonus to land speed, does not take the armor check penalty with light armor (though max dex bonus does still apply), gains Improved Low Light Vision as an extraordinary ability, and gains +2 class bonus to perception checks as well as +2 class bonus to defense when the Scout moved at least 10 feet on his turn.

Infiltrator: The Infiltrator gains Hide in Plain Sight, the ability to use Disguise Self at will as an extraordinary ability (No will save to see through, but casting time is increased to 10 minutes), the ability to 20 on search checks in only one minute, and can treat ceilings as surfaces with a 90 degree angle for the purposes of climb checks so long as it has appropriate handholds or is no more than 5 feet wide (10 feet if large). When making a sneak attack, the Infiltrator can sacrifice one sneak attack dice to silence his target for 1 minute, as it was under the effects of a silence spell.

Master Thief: +2 class bonus to slight of hand and disable device, gains spider climb as a supernatural ability usable at will, and gains Case the Joint, a +4 untyped bonus to all relevant skill checks when attempting to steal from or sneak into/within a location if he spends 3 full hours studying it.

Dungeoneer: Trap Sense +3, gains Darkvision out to 60 feet (or doubles distance of existing Darkvision, including Darkvision gained from a spell, feat, or other source even if not permanent), and can sneak attack (2d6) against creatures normally immune to sneak attacks as a supernatural ability.

[note]The Spell Robber (need a better name that's not spellthief) Master Talent is one that I'm unsure of - it seems like it might be a bit too much, but at the same time is so situational that I feel that balances it. I'd like thoughts on if this should be tweaked or abandoned or moved to another class.[/note]Spell Robber: Can sacrifice sneak attack dice to steal a spell or spell like ability with a level equal to the dice damage sacrificed and use it within 6 rounds of stealing it (the caster either looses the prepared spell if he prepares spells, looses access to a spell slot of the same level if spontaneous caster for 1 minute, or cannot use the spell like ability for 1 minute. Spell like abilities cannot be stolen if all uses are already expended, and spells cannot be stolen if the caster has already used all prepared spells of that level or all spell slots of that level have been expended. This spell or spell like ability can be chosen by the rogue if he succeed on a Spellcraft check with a DC equal to the casters caster level+relevant ability modifier) Gains a +2 class bonus on Use Magic Device and Spellcraft checks. When making a sneak attack, instead of doing any damage or using spell steal, can use a targeted dispel magic on the creature (caster level = rogue level). If successful, the Spell Robber can make a Spellcraft check with a DC equal to the casters caster level+relevant ability modifier to gain the benefit of any beneficial spells dispelled for 2+int rounds. This check is made separately for each spell dispelled. If the rogue makes a full attack action or has multiple attacks, he can only use this ability once per round, but can sacrifice damage from other attacks to gain a +2 bonus on the dispel check for each attack that hits. Otherwise, subsequent attacks function as normal.[/spoiler]
[spoiler=FIGHTER!]Attack bonus will scale as such:
+1, +2, +3/+0, +4/+1, +5/+2, +6/+3/+0. A total of 3 iterative attacks at max level, which seems and feels more balanced than the 4 I had initially planned (especially since I didn't consider cleave, two weapon fighting, and all the things that come with those when I planned that) but still gives those iterative attacks I love so much. These are the same values used in the playtest. Saving throws will progress at the same rate they do for all classes +1, +2, +2, +3, +3, +4 - based off the often unused "medium" progression for saves in d20. Defense will be discussed later.

The class abilities will go as follows:
Skills: The fighter's class skills are Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Handle Animal (Cha), Intimidate (Cha), Knowledge (dungeoneering) (Int), Knowledge (engineering) (Int), Profession (Wis), Ride (Dex), Survival (Wis), and Swim (Str). The Fighter Also Gains 2 bonus skills depending on style as class skills.

Skill Ranks Per Level: 4 + Int modifier.

HD: 5+d5, or 8 (chosen each level) [note]d5= d10/2 rounded down, minimum 1[/note]

Class Abilities:
1: Bonus Feat, Style (rank 1)
2: Bonus Feat
3: Style (rank 2)
4: Bonus Feat
5: Bonus Feat
6: Style Mastery

Styles:
Soldier: a style that excels at teamwork and defending/aiding party members and himself, using shield and weapon in tandem.
Bonus Class Skills: Perception, Craft (Arms and Armor) - A Soldier must be more alert than most warriors, and time in the field has taught them to repair or even make their on equipment in absence of supply trains.
Rank 1: +1 class bonus to self and ally's attack rolls while flanking, +2 class bonus when using the Aid Another action.
Rank 2: Can sacrifice an attack of opportunity to provide ally with his DR, gains bonus DR equal to shield's Defense Bonus
Mastery: Both himself and ally deal additional 1d6 damage while flanking, gains +2 class bonus to Defense when flanking and grants ally same bonus.

Knight: a style that is well trained in fighting but is part of the nobility, skilled at navigating social interactions.
Bonus Skills: Diplomacy, Sense Motive: A Knight is familiar with court intrigue and has a better grasp of social interactions than most warriors.
Rank 1: +2 class bonus to checks when interacting with nobility or wealthy merchants, can treat Social feats as Fighter bonus feats.
Rank 2: Gains a Squire (Warrior(NPC Class) with a level 1/2 the Knight's, Str 12, Dex 10, Con 12, Int 10, Wis 10, Cha 12, Skills and Feats chosen by Knight) that is always "Helpful" to Knight.
Mastery: Class bonus to interacting with nobility or wealthy merchants increases to +4, gains family heirloom magic weapon or armor worth up to 2000gp.

Calvary: a style that excels in mounted combat.
Bonus Class Skills: Perception, Heal: A Calvary fighter must be observant and know how to treat basic injuries, both on his mount and on others.
Rank 1: Gains an Animal Companion as a Druid of his level, but must be a companion he could ride as a mount.
Rank 2: +1 class bonus to attack and defense while mounted - bonus applies to mount as well. No penalty for firing a ranged weapon while mounted.
Mastery: +2 to damage while mounted, +2 class bonus to Ride, +2 class bonus to CMB and CMD while mounted.

Guardsman: a style that is better at social with the "lower classes" than most fighters and especially skilled a nonlethal capture/subdual.
Bonus Class Skills: Knowledge (local) and Sense Motive: A Guardsman is used to being lied to and knows cities well.
Rank 1: No penalty for doing subdual damage with weapon, uncanny dodge as the rogue class ability.
Rank 2: +2 class bonus to CMB to Grapple, Trip, and Disarm, Critical hits automatically confirm when dealing subdual damage.
Mastery: When critically hits while dealing nonlethal damage, target must make a saving throw (DC 10+Guardsman Strength Bonus) or be stunned for a number of rounds equal to the damage dealt.

Swashbuckler: a style that is better at speed, agility, improvisation.
Bonus Skills: Acrobatics and Stealth: A swashbuckler is trained in mobility and sneaking past opponents.
Rank 1: Does not need to travel in a straight line to charge, can sacrifice weapon damage to leave opponent flat footed.
Rank 2: +5ft class bonus to base speed, +10 ft bonus if wearing light or no armor: adds Dex instead of Strength to damage with light weapons or rapier.
Mastery: +2 class to Defense when moved at least 10 ft that round, An opponent struck by a swashbuckler is considered Flanked from the square the swashbuckler struck from even if he has left that spot.

Bruiser: a style that allows for a to focuses on crude and brutal unarmed combat.
Bonus Skills: Heal, Acrobatics: A Bruiser learns to treat their own wounds and is more agile from barroom brawls.
Rank 1: Gains a natural primary slam attack for 1d6 damage (1d4 if Small, 1d8 if Large), takes -3 penalty if using it as off hand attack. A Bruiser is considered proficient with improvised melee and ranged weapons, removing the -4 penalty.
Rank 2: Slam attack damage increases by 1 step, gains +2 class bonus to defense if unarmed. If wearing gauntlets, can do gauntlet damage or slam damage, Bruiser's choice. A Bruiser holding an appropriately sized/shaped object (chair, large lid, etc) gains a +2 shield bonus to AC.
Mastery: Gains a second slam attack as a primary attack at same damage as first, can use enchantment bonus on gauntlets as bonus on attack/damage rolls as well as any special qualities. A Bruiser also increases the damage of improvised melee weapons by one step and their critical damage to x3.

Armsman: A style skilled with a variety of weapons and armors.
Bonus Class Skills: Craft (Arms and Armor), Knowledge (Dungeoneering): A Armsman is well versed in his weapons and armor, and has a good knowledge of the inhabitants of the depths he often faces.
Rank 1: Armor Mastery 1: +1 class bonus to Defense when wearing Armor, -1 to armor check penalty.
Rank 2: Weapon Mastery 1: +1 class bonus to attack rolls with particular category of weapon.
Mastery: True Mastery: Additional +1 class bonus to DR when wearing Armor, +2 class bonus to damage when using weapon from category chosen with Weapon Mastery 1

Magebane: A style trained in combating casters and supernatural creatures.
Bonus Class Skills: Knowledge (Arcane), Use Magic Device - A Magebane is taught to understand magic and use the devices produced by it.
Rank 1: Detect Magic as a Spell Like Ability, usable at will, +2 class bonus to saving throws against all spells and supernatural effects.
Rank 2: Can sacrifice strength bonus to damage to hit target with a targeted dispel magic effect (Caster Level = Strength bonus), Spell Resistance 5+Con Score
Mastery: When making a full attack can sacrifice one attack to have a readied counterspell action (as if using Dispel Magic to counter)  against a spell that targets him or is cast by a caster within melee range (or 20 feet if using ranged weapon) with a caster level equal to the Base Attack Bonus of sacrificed attack.  [/spoiler]
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?

Quote from: Xathan Back AgainClasses 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.

Quote from: Xathan Back AgainHP 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.

Quote from: Xathan Back AgainAttack 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.

Quote from: Xathan Back AgainFeats 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.

Quote from: Xathan Back AgainClasses 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.

Quote from: Xathan Back AgainThis 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. :P

Quote from: Xathan Back AgainProgression 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.

Quote from: sparkletwist

Quote from: Xathan Back AgainClasses 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. :P

Quote

Quote from: Xathan Back AgainHP 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

Quote from: Xathan Back AgainAttack 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. :P

QuoteAnyway, 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

Quote from: Xathan Back AgainFeats 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

Quote from: Xathan Back AgainClasses 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

Quote from: Xathan Back AgainThis 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. :P

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

Quote from: Xathan Back AgainProgression 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. :P

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.

Quote from: sparkletwist

Quote from: Xathan Back AgainClasses 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.)

Quote from: Phoenix

Quote from: sparkletwist

Quote from: Xathan Back AgainClasses 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.

For spells above the E6 level, you could easily implement Incantations - http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/magic/incantations.htm (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.

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.

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).

Quote from: XathanThis 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 (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/dragons/dragon/chromatic-red/red-dragon-very-young) or a Young Dragon (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/dragons/dragon/chromatic-red/young-red-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?

Quote from: Señor Leetz
For spells above the E6 level, you could easily implement Incantations - http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/magic/incantations.htm (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.

Quote from: 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.

QuoteI 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.

QuoteI 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. :P

QuoteGiving 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. :)

QuoteThe 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.

QuoteOn 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.

QuoteOn 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. :)

QuoteEDIT: 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.

Quote from: 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!

Quote from: Steerpike

Quote from: XathanThis 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 (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/dragons/dragon/chromatic-red/red-dragon-very-young) or a Young Dragon (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/dragons/dragon/chromatic-red/young-red-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. :)

Thank you everyone for the continued feedback! I think this project is coming along very nicely, and look forward to how it works out.

Quote from: Xathan Back AgainI 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?

Quote from: Xathan Back AgainI'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. :D

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!

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? :P

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.

Quote from: 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. :D

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.

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 (http://accisworldofbronze.pbworks.com/w/page/39916011/Classes%20and%20class%20rules), I have an ability called 'use protection'.  and Armor types  (http://accisworldofbronze.pbworks.com/w/page/40601197/Armor) 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)."

Quote from: SteerpikeBut 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.

It's equally possible that the weaker fighter will get an unlucky roll on an attack while the stronger fighter gets a lucky roll. 1d8+3 damage later, the difference is even more pronounced.

I understand that there's quite a bit of randomness in the system already, but the randomness is all situational. You can roll well, or roll bad, and the game goes on. The difference between that and rolling for HP is that when you get a bad HP roll your bad roll is permanent. It just makes you worse for no real reason other than some grognard somewhere has done it that way since the 70s.

Quote from: Xathan Back AgainPlus, this factor can be balanced out by increased ability scores, feat selection, etc

Right, but the guy who rolled better can do that too. The other character will still be simply and objectively worse.

Quote from: Xathan Back Againhow 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?

My point in making the comparison wasn't to put them in the same party. It was to point out that one character is permanently and objectively worse than the other despite being built identically. This applies to things like the "Same Game Test."

Quote from: Xathan Back AgainI do think the comparison to rolling 3d6 is inaccurate - your ability scores have far more impact on your character than your hit point total.

The impact may be less severe, but that doesn't mean the comparison is inaccurate. In both cases, you're generating character capabilities through random dice rather than something the player has control of.

Okay, in a way the following goes against the very premise of your system, although it goes hand in hand with the intended goal of making end-game play less extreme.
I think you might have been a bit influenced by E6 when you made the decision to use 6 levels and I believe you might do better with more. More levels make for easier extended play, more levels for you to spread the class abilities and features across, and more rewards and advancements to hand out to the players. 
You could do 10 or even 20 levels and just give out small advancements for each, like an increase in BAB or a save bonus or a class ability.

Just a second perspective. Do with it what you will :)

Quote from: Superfluous Crow
Okay, in a way the following goes against the very premise of your system, although it goes hand in hand with the intended goal of making end-game play less extreme.
I think you might have been a bit influenced by E6 when you made the decision to use 6 levels and I believe you might do better with more. More levels make for easier extended play, more levels for you to spread the class abilities and features across, and more rewards and advancements to hand out to the players. 
You could do 10 or even 20 levels and just give out small advancements for each, like an increase in BAB or a save bonus or a class ability.

Just a second perspective. Do with it what you will :)

Also chipping in that you could have advancement slow down at higher levels, as I do.

I just did the math and in my game it takes 15 quests to reach 5th level, 55 to reach 10th, 120 to reach 15th, and 210 to reach 20th. A quest averages two sessions to finish, and most gamers seem to play weekly. Sets it at almost 8 years IRL to get to level 20. Longer, given the relatively high deathrate pre-5 and raising dead probably not happening until after level 10.

I'd second that it's not your only option, but if you want that end to math scaling, it could be a good way to go.

Quote from: sparkletwistI understand that there's quite a bit of randomness in the system already, but the randomness is all situational. You can roll well, or roll bad, and the game goes on. The difference between that and rolling for HP is that when you get a bad HP roll your bad roll is permanent. It just makes you worse for no real reason other than some grognard somewhere has done it that way since the 70s.

It's true that the hp roll follows your character around, but over several levels of progression it should more or less level out, just as over the course of a given combat attack rolls and damage rolls should level out.  It could be that you get some crappy hp rolls, just as it could be that you roll a series of 1s in a combat.  Getting a certain result on your hp roll is the equivalent of getting a "critical hit" on that level.  Over several levels your luck should level out, just as over a combat your rolls should level out.

I guess what it could come down to is this: do you want your character advancement to be neatly linear, perfectly balanced, steadily progressive, precisely sequenced, and evenly measured, or do you want character advancement to have a level of uncertainty, chaos, suspense, and luck?  Are characters entitled to certain benefits every time they level, or does leveling give an opportunity for a degree of advancement?  My feeling is that most of the elements of character creation and progression are already neatly mechanical (skill points, BAB, ability scores (when using point buy), spells, saving throws, etc), so a small degree of chance in the form of an hp roll or a partial hp roll adds a feeling of the organic and uneven, a rough edge that gives characters a curiously "real" or "lived in" feel.  I can totally see the counter-argument, and it's true that sometimes characters will roll poorly.  By similar counter-arguments one might standardize weapon/spell damage (longswords now do 4 damage, greataxes do 6, daggers do 2, fireballs do 3 damage per caster level, or whatever) or initiative rolls (characters just act in order of initiative) or healing (cure light wounds now heals 4+1 per level).  Pathfinder does this already by using a static Combat Maneuver Defense score instead of a roll, which is what 3.5 used.  Static scores are certainly more even than random rolls, perhaps even "fairer."  Personally I like a certain degree of uncertainty - not total randomness, just a hint of chaos.  If you want to keep all randomness out of character creation/progression, there's nothing wrong with that, but I'm not sure that a small degree of randomness in one of many aspects of character advancement is, like, some kind of gaming sin.

I feel a lot of the arguments, valid though they may be, are part of the same thought process that lead to 4e being what it is - every character who has the same build should be perfectly identical to every other character of the same build. Extend that logic: at that point, why shouldn't every fighter be 100% equal to each other? And if you're going that route, why not make every single class equal to each other? And if you're going to do that, isn't the best way to do so by making every class work the same? And if you're doing that, why not just play 4e? I know this is an exaggeration, but I think my point is still valid.

However, a good point was made about giving characters/players options, and as such I'm settling on a middle ground: each time a character gains a level, they have the option of either taking the X+dX, or taking X+1/2X, rounded down (So a character who would normally gain 4+d4 or 6hp, their choice.) That should satisfy players such as myself and Steerpike who like the randomness in the rolling hit point system - and still give a viable, balanced option for players like Sparkletwist that prefer predictability. If anything, this gets even closer to my design philosophy of "more options", so I'm very happy with it - thanks for the idea you guys! :)

Quote from: LordVreeg
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 (http://accisworldofbronze.pbworks.com/w/page/39916011/Classes%20and%20class%20rules), I have an ability called 'use protection'.  and Armor types  (http://accisworldofbronze.pbworks.com/w/page/40601197/Armor) have a DR and a 'potential protection'

While this seems like it could be interesting, I'm not familiar with the base system involved, so would like to know if there's an easy way to translate it to d20.

Quote from: Superfluous Crow
Okay, in a way the following goes against the very premise of your system, although it goes hand in hand with the intended goal of making end-game play less extreme.
I think you might have been a bit influenced by E6 when you made the decision to use 6 levels and I believe you might do better with more. More levels make for easier extended play, more levels for you to spread the class abilities and features across, and more rewards and advancements to hand out to the players. 
You could do 10 or even 20 levels and just give out small advancements for each, like an increase in BAB or a save bonus or a class ability.

Just a second perspective. Do with it what you will :)

Funny you should mention it - my original idea was for a 10 level progression with Hit Points, Attack Bonuses, and such increasing at irregular increments. The ways I played with it all ended up feeling somewhat schitzophrenic, and giving out hit dice/attack bonuses/etc at every level put players too far out of the reach of mere mortals. However, if you have some ideas on how to do so in a better way, I'd love to hear it. :)

QuoteAlso chipping in that you could have advancement slow down at higher levels, as I do.

I just did the math and in my game it takes 15 quests to reach 5th level, 55 to reach 10th, 120 to reach 15th, and 210 to reach 20th. A quest averages two sessions to finish, and most gamers seem to play weekly. Sets it at almost 8 years IRL to get to level 20. Longer, given the relatively high deathrate pre-5 and raising dead probably not happening until after level 10.

I'd second that it's not your only option, but if you want that end to math scaling, it could be a good way to go.

I will definitely keep that in mind - however, that rate of progression is too slow for my tastes. It means that for weeks or even years players might be playing the same character, unaltered except for some gear. Doing so is just not an option I'm a fan of.

Again, thank you everyone for the continued feedback. :) I don't mean to come across as "I'm doing it my way" - I need everyone's thoughts on how to best do this system, so I'm very open to suggestions. I just might need some convincing on some things. :P

You don't have to play with the regular level progression. Instead of having a Base Attack and regular HP increases, you'd earn a new level and get e.g. +1 to attack, a new attack at a penalty, a fixed (or random) amount of hit points and so on. This would give you much more flexibility in designing your classes as well. You could easily dump an HP increase at one level to give a class another class ability at a comparable level of power. You wouldn't be restricted by those 3 fixed BAB progressions or the number of hit dice types.
Rogues might not get more skill points at each level, but would get skill points more frequently. For a more regular HP progression you might give each character his con modifier as bonus HP at each level, plus whatever hit points he gets from his levels (I think this could be balanced reasonably well although you might get con 18 wizards who are unreasonably buff, but it might make more sense depending on how you personally interpret HP) 
You might even add some modularity: you can choose whether you want the HP, the weapon proficiency or the skill bonus or some fourth hypothetical item.

Quote from: Xathan

Quote from: LordVreeg
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'

While this seems like it could be interesting, I'm not familiar with the base system involved, so would like to know if there's an easy way to translate it to d20

for once, this system is actually d20.  Translation from english to english is hopefully the case here, though perhaps Vreegian D20 is sort of a very regional version with a strange accent.

I like lower HP games, with slightly more damage potential.  This makes the game more dangerous in some circumstances.  What I like to use to mitigate this is giving each armor type a 'potential protection' or 'Potential DR'.  I give each class a progression in an ability called 'use protection' or 'use DR'.  It's a combat ability that simulates combat experience and being able to make the most out of a suit of armor or a shield or helm.  Fighting men get one point every 2 levels, clerics and thieves one point per 3 levels, Magic users one point every 4 levels. 

It was a few different effects.   One effect is that instead of just giving lots of HP to simulate geting better at combat and being able to shrug off attacks, it ties some of this to the use of armor.  this is a simple thing to do, but gets away from the idea of the fighter taking more physical damage than a war horse, etc.
It also means that a rich guy in a suit of platemail can't just waltz into battle with the armor doing the exact same good for him as it would an experienced warrior, since his 'use DR' skill is going to be the base of one.  So while he's as hard to hit as the experienced warrior in plate mail, he can only use 1 of the 4 potential protections of the plate mail, while the level 6 fighter next to him will be able to use all 4, and will last a lot longer in the battle, shrugging off three more points of damage per hit.

don;t know if it is what you want, just letting you know how i did it in my d20.

Quote from: Superfluous Crow
You don't have to play with the regular level progression. Instead of having a Base Attack and regular HP increases, you'd earn a new level and get e.g. +1 to attack, a new attack at a penalty, a fixed (or random) amount of hit points and so on. This would give you much more flexibility in designing your classes as well. You could easily dump an HP increase at one level to give a class another class ability at a comparable level of power. You wouldn't be restricted by those 3 fixed BAB progressions or the number of hit dice types.
Rogues might not get more skill points at each level, but would get skill points more frequently. For a more regular HP progression you might give each character his con modifier as bonus HP at each level, plus whatever hit points he gets from his levels (I think this could be balanced reasonably well although you might get con 18 wizards who are unreasonably buff, but it might make more sense depending on how you personally interpret HP) 
You might even add some modularity: you can choose whether you want the HP, the weapon proficiency or the skill bonus or some fourth hypothetical item.

...oh god, you're tempting me so badly to do it this way, because it has so much potential for future developments of awesome.

I'm going to say that it'll probably be best for me to stick for to the initial concept for the first 6 levels, since that also requires the least work for me...but what you've said sounds awesome to an absurd degree, and I'm going to let it simmer for a little while and perhaps save that for either post-6 progression instead of what I originally had or see if I can do something else with it. I'd appreciate your continued thoughts on this, because I want to keep the mental juices flowing on that one.

Quote from: LordVreeg

Quote from: Xathan

Quote from: LordVreeg
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'

While this seems like it could be interesting, I'm not familiar with the base system involved, so would like to know if there's an easy way to translate it to d20

for once, this system is actually d20.  Translation from english to english is hopefully the case here, though perhaps Vreegian D20 is sort of a very regional version with a strange accent.

Hehehe, I'm familiar with the phenomena - and am guilty of it myself in a few other subjects. Sorry for the confusion - I admit when I started hitting words that didn't make sense to me I thought it was a guildschool system.

QuoteI like lower HP games, with slightly more damage potential.  This makes the game more dangerous in some circumstances.  What I like to use to mitigate this is giving each armor type a 'potential protection' or 'Potential DR'.  I give each class a progression in an ability called 'use protection' or 'use DR'.  It's a combat ability that simulates combat experience and being able to make the most out of a suit of armor or a shield or helm.  Fighting men get one point every 2 levels, clerics and thieves one point per 3 levels, Magic users one point every 4 levels. 

It was a few different effects.   One effect is that instead of just giving lots of HP to simulate geting better at combat and being able to shrug off attacks, it ties some of this to the use of armor.  this is a simple thing to do, but gets away from the idea of the fighter taking more physical damage than a war horse, etc.
It also means that a rich guy in a suit of platemail can't just waltz into battle with the armor doing the exact same good for him as it would an experienced warrior, since his 'use DR' skill is going to be the base of one.  So while he's as hard to hit as the experienced warrior in plate mail, he can only use 1 of the 4 potential protections of the plate mail, while the level 6 fighter next to him will be able to use all 4, and will last a lot longer in the battle, shrugging off three more points of damage per hit.

don;t know if it is what you want, just letting you know how i did it in my d20.

Okay, I'm still translating from a regional dialect I'm unfamiliar with, but now that I know it's a dialect and not a seperate language I think I get it. :P

To make sure I understand: Every armor provides the same bonus to AC (difficulty to hit) to every class, but how much damage it mitigate is class/skill dependent?

Quote from: XathanTo make sure I understand: Every armor provides the same bonus to AC (difficulty to hit) to every class, but how much damage it mitigate is class/skill dependent?

Close.  Every armor provides the same bonus to AC and the same POTENTIAL DR.  The ability to use DR is class/level dependent.  Like Hit points, or spells for a caster.  But it cannot exceed the 'Potential DR' of the armor worn. Fighters gain one more 'Use DR' at levels 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 etc, Clerics and thieves at levels 3, 6, 9, magic users at levels 4, 8, etc.

remember, this means that if our fighter is not wearing any armor, he has no DR, no matter how good his 'Use DR' ability is.  It needs both. 

Quote from: LordVreeg

Quote from: XathanTo make sure I understand: Every armor provides the same bonus to AC (difficulty to hit) to every class, but how much damage it mitigate is class/skill dependent?

Close.  Every armor provides the same bonus to AC and the same POTENTIAL DR.  The ability to use DR is class/level dependent.  Like Hit points, or spells for a caster.  But it cannot exceed the 'Potential DR' of the armor worn. Fighters gain one more 'Use DR' at levels 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 etc, Clerics and thieves at levels 3, 6, 9, magic users at levels 4, 8, etc.

remember, this means that if our fighter is not wearing any armor, he has no DR, no matter how good his 'Use DR' ability is.  It needs both. 

Oh, okay, I get it! It seems like a cool way of doing it - the problem is, my goal here is to completely remove difficulty to hit from armor and make armor totally about damage mitigation, so this system just doesn't fit my design purposes. I do like the idea of "use DR", though - I'm getting some ideas on how to implement it best in the system I'm working out. :)

Quote from: Steerpikedo you want your character advancement to be neatly linear, perfectly balanced, steadily progressive, precisely sequenced, and evenly measured

Actually, yes. I do. :D

I could rant more about this but it looks like Xathan's already decided to just make it an option.
So all I'll say is a small nitpick-- that mean value of 4+d4 is 6.5, not 6.

Quote from: sparkletwist

Quote from: Steerpikedo you want your character advancement to be neatly linear, perfectly balanced, steadily progressive, precisely sequenced, and evenly measured

Actually, yes. I do. :D

I could rant more about this but it looks like Xathan's already decided to just make it an option.
So all I'll say is a small nitpick-- that mean value of 4+d4 is 6.5, not 6.

I'm figuring making it an option gives it a broad range of appeal without being unbalancing.

And yeah, 4+d4 is the hardest since the die involved is even numbered (well, so will 6+d6), but I wanted to offer some reward for players taking the riskier option of rolling fractional hit points seem like they'd be a headache - and if it is 7 for the average of 4+d4, then there's very little reason to risk rolling.

Some interesting ideas going by. Thanks for the link beejaaz. Also an interesting read, though I don't buy everything in it.

Because it's obligatory on this kind of thread, I have to mention...at what point have you changed so many rules you're calling something D&D (or d20 or whatever) for the sake of calling it D&D. Because at that point you may unconsciously be including things your system may not need. Then, perhaps, you are better off making a brand new system with no emotional baggage, tailored to your needs.

QuoteBecause it's obligatory on this kind of thread, I have to mention...at what point have you changed so many rules you're calling something D&D (or d20 or whatever) for the sake of calling it D&D. Because at that point you may unconsciously be including things your system may not need. Then, perhaps, you are better off making a brand new system with no emotional baggage, tailored to your needs.

I'm calling it d20 primarily because that's the "root" system - you roll a d20, add a number, and are good to go. And I don't want to start 100% from scratch - I know myself, if I go that route I'm going to end up not coming anywhere close to finishing this project.

Quote from: Xathan Back Again

QuoteBecause it's obligatory on this kind of thread, I have to mention...at what point have you changed so many rules you're calling something D&D (or d20 or whatever) for the sake of calling it D&D. Because at that point you may unconsciously be including things your system may not need. Then, perhaps, you are better off making a brand new system with no emotional baggage, tailored to your needs.

I'm calling it d20 primarily because that's the "root" system - you roll a d20, add a number, and are good to go. And I don't want to start 100% from scratch - I know myself, if I go that route I'm going to end up not coming anywhere close to finishing this project.

As long as you've examined your reasons for doing it, you're probably in good shape.

Quote from: Xathan Back Again

Quote from: LordVreeg

Quote from: XathanTo make sure I understand: Every armor provides the same bonus to AC (difficulty to hit) to every class, but how much damage it mitigate is class/skill dependent?

Close.  Every armor provides the same bonus to AC and the same POTENTIAL DR.  The ability to use DR is class/level dependent.  Like Hit points, or spells for a caster.  But it cannot exceed the 'Potential DR' of the armor worn. Fighters gain one more 'Use DR' at levels 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 etc, Clerics and thieves at levels 3, 6, 9, magic users at levels 4, 8, etc.

remember, this means that if our fighter is not wearing any armor, he has no DR, no matter how good his 'Use DR' ability is.  It needs both. 

Oh, okay, I get it! It seems like a cool way of doing it - the problem is, my goal here is to completely remove difficulty to hit from armor and make armor totally about damage mitigation, so this system just doesn't fit my design purposes. I do like the idea of "use DR", though - I'm getting some ideas on how to implement it best in the system I'm working out. :)

Tunnells and trolls and a few others did that that I have seen. 
Also, I have used a few systems that do it, and you will find you need to change weapon damage ranges as well.

What do you see as the DR for a Level 10 fighter in full plate armor? 

Quote from: LordVreeg

Quote from: Xathan Back Again

Quote from: LordVreeg

Quote from: XathanTo make sure I understand: Every armor provides the same bonus to AC (difficulty to hit) to every class, but how much damage it mitigate is class/skill dependent?

Close.  Every armor provides the same bonus to AC and the same POTENTIAL DR.  The ability to use DR is class/level dependent.  Like Hit points, or spells for a caster.  But it cannot exceed the 'Potential DR' of the armor worn. Fighters gain one more 'Use DR' at levels 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 etc, Clerics and thieves at levels 3, 6, 9, magic users at levels 4, 8, etc.

remember, this means that if our fighter is not wearing any armor, he has no DR, no matter how good his 'Use DR' ability is.  It needs both. 

Oh, okay, I get it! It seems like a cool way of doing it - the problem is, my goal here is to completely remove difficulty to hit from armor and make armor totally about damage mitigation, so this system just doesn't fit my design purposes. I do like the idea of "use DR", though - I'm getting some ideas on how to implement it best in the system I'm working out. :)

Tunnells and trolls and a few others did that that I have seen. 
Also, I have used a few systems that do it, and you will find you need to change weapon damage ranges as well.

What do you see as the DR for a Level 10 fighter in full plate armor? 

Well, I'm going to be using the Variant Rules outlined here (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/variant-rules) to cover Armor as DR, at least for initial playtesting. As far as how much DR a level X [class] will have on a given basis, the exact numerical values of that are hard to figure in advance - I'll do adjusting after some playtesting.

that system is very similar to what I used when I first started tweaking ac in D&D some 30 years ago.  Literally. 
Ac became avoid and protect. I'll be interested wher you go.

Thanks - I'm doing some class design right now, but haven't come up with anything I'm happy with enough to post...and I haven't gotten past the Fighter. Maybe I will go to the 10 level 6 hit dice method, because making 6 levels feel like a full class is HARD.

Then again, I'm rather proud of the level 6 capstone ability I have for the class, so maybe I'll say screw it and post it later tonight. :P

[spoiler=Sample Characters for Alpha Fighter Test]
[spoiler=Tinklewood Bloodthirster]

Half-Elf Fighter 6
Str 14
Dex 18
Con 14
Int 13
Wis 10
Cha 12

Speed 40ft

Attack +1 Shocking Rapier (18-20/X2) +15 1d6+4+1d6 Lightning
Full Attack +1 Shocking Rapier (18-20/x2) +15/+12/+9 1d6+4+1d6 Lightning

HP: 49

Defense: 21 (23 if move 10 ft)

DR: 5/Adamantine

Saves:
Fort +6
Ref +8
Will +4 (+6 vs Fear)

Skills:
Climb 10 +15
Bluff 10 +16
Perception 10 +12

Feats:
Weapon Finesse
Dodge
Mobility
Spring Attack
Weapon Focus (Rapier)
Weapon Specialization (Rapier)
Improved Feint
Skill Focus (Bluff)

Racial Features
Low Light Vision
Immune to Sleep, +2 vs. Ecnhantment

Class Features
Bravery (+2 to will vs. fear)
Armor Training
Weapon Training (Swords)
Style Mastery: Swashbuckler (+10 movement speed, +2 Defense if move 10 feet, +2 to attack rolls with light weapon)

Equipment:
+1 Shocking Rapier
+2 Chain Shirt
[/spoiler]

[spoiler=Krell Many-Axe]

Half-Orc Fighter 6
STR: 18
DEX: 16
CON: 14
INT: 13
WIS: 10
CHA: 10

Speed 20ft

Attack: +1 Flaming Double Axe (X2) +13 1d6+6+1d6 Fire
Full Attack: +1 Flaming Double Axe (X2) +11/+11/+8/+5 1d6+6+1d6 Fire

HP: 49

Defense: 20

DR: 6/Adamantine (8/Adamantine if Charging)

Saves:
Fort: +6
Ref: +5
Will: +4 (+6 vs Fear)

Skills:
Climb 10 +17
Intimidate 10 +15
Perception 10 +10

Feats: Two Weapon Fighting,
Weapon Focus (Double Axe),
Weapon Specialization (Double Axe)
Two Weapon Defense
Mobility
Power Attack
Combat Reflexes

Racial Qualities:
Orc Ferocity: Once per day, when a half-orc is brought below 0 hit points but not killed, he can fight on for one more round as if disabled. At the end of his next turn, unless brought to above 0 hit points, he immediately falls unconscious and begins dying.
Darkvision 60 Ft

Class Features
Bravery (+2 to will vs. fear)
Armor Training
Weapon Training (Axes)
Style Mastery: Shock Trooper (No Armored Speed Penalty When Charging, +2 to DR if charged, Spring Attack As Bonus Feat)

Equipment:
+1/+1 Flaming Double Axe
+1 Scale Mail
[/spoiler]

[spoiler=Ngali Fuckattacker]


Human Fighter 6
Str 18
Dex 12
Con 16
Int 13
Wis 10
Cha 10

Speed 20ft

Attack +1 Acidic Large Greatsword (X2) +12 3d6+6+1d6 Acid
Full Attack +1 Acidic Large Greatswordr (x2) +12/+9/+6 3d6+6+1d6 Lightning

HP: 55

Defense: 14

DR: 9/Adamatine

Saves:
Fort +7
Ref +5
Will +4 (+6 vs Fear)

Skills:
Climb 10 +17
Intimidate 10 +13
Perception 10 +10
Survival 10 +13

Feats:
Weapon Focus (Greatsword)
Weapon Specalization (Greatsword)
Power Attack
Cleave
Great Cleave
Cleaving Finish
Improved Cleaving Finish
Shield of Swings

Racial Features
Human Bonuses Factored In

Class Features
Bravery (+2 to will vs. fear)
Armor Training
Weapon Training (Swords)
Style Mastery: Oversized Weaponmaster (Treats Weapons as 1 Size Category Smaller, +1 Defense When Wielding Large Weapon w/o shield)

Items
+1 Acidic Large Greatsword X2
+2 Field Plate
[/spoiler]
[/spoiler]

First alpha test complete. I have some serious balance issues to work out...but it was also awesome. Thanks to Nomadic, Sparkletwist, and ElDo for testing!

If you want to do more levels than 6, but keep the power level roughly at 6 HD then it would make more sense to do 12 (or even 18!) levels, so there'd be 2-3 levels for every HD.

I personally didn't consider our characters nearly as overpowered as Xathan seems to think. :grin:

Our damage output was mighty, that is true, but that's also because our party was three melee-optimized fighters. That's pretty much all we were capable of. A more balanced party might not have had such a damage output, but it would've also been more realistic for actual adventuring. Given the dominance of spellcasters in d20 games, any sort of "Fighters sure are doing a lot of damage! GET THE NERF BAT!" mentality is not one I understand at all, because that's pretty much what they're designed to do.

Nerfing casters and then nerfing fighters so they feel as nerfed as the newly nerfed casters is how you end up with 4e.   :ill:

Having only read the first post of this thread, I have a few general questions:

If you are limiting the number of HD to only 6, but not limiting the number of total levels 6, why bother gaining HD at different levels at all?  Why not just start play with X hp and Y HD?  If it's for various HD-dependent effects, why not accrue hp-less HD regularly to represent increased HD-ness?  It jsut strikes me that what you're trying to do is prevent hp from getting rediculously high.  There are other ways to handle it aside from only giving out HD for the first coupel fo levels.  Frex....

Everyone might start play with 3d4+12 hp and 1 HD (whatever that means mechanically).  One of the feats/optional class features/whatever-you-decide-to-call-it that you may acquire at regular intervals through XP acquisition gives you more hp (say another 1d4+4 or w/e you decide).  This lets people who wnat to play tough guys dump XP into more hp while letting those who'd rather be squishy allocate XP elsewhere.  The tough guy will probably get hit a lot, so his hp total will be his class power, while the squishy is a glass cannon in some other way.

Again, you could give a regular BAB increase with feat options that boost it further or grant additional attacks.  This makes it a little more versatile while preserving the d20 system.  Actually, you could do the same thing with yoru saves. Heck, even 3e did this to an extent with feats like Lightning Reflexes and such.

If you don't mind adding one roll to combat rounds, you could tweak AC a little for an interesting effect:  instead of having a true AC, you have a Basic Defense Bonus (BDB) that gets added to a 1d20 roll that opposes your attackers attack roll.  The BAB is comprised of your level bonus to BAB + feats improving your defenses + magic item bonuses improving your defenses + shield bonuses.  Note, however, that armor does not provide a bonus.  Instead, use Iron Heroes system of armor granting DR.  Now, your skill is opposed by an opponent's skill, so it's easily scaleable and justified.

With the above suggestions, note #7 is moot.  Those things you worry about blowing out of proportion with increased level don't scale at all with level, and XP is for buying cool class abilities/feats/whatevers.  Some of those whatevers can be dumped into increasing those nonscaleables, but because that's resources not spent elsewhere, the classes should stay balanced.  Heck, tweak this right, and you won't even need more than a single class progression, really; but that might be taking it too far for your tastes.

Quote from: Superfluous Crow
If you want to do more levels than 6, but keep the power level roughly at 6 HD then it would make more sense to do 12 (or even 18!) levels, so there'd be 2-3 levels for every HD.

I'm definitely considering that - the only problem I have with this, and the only thing holding me back, is monster balance becomes much more complex at this point. Other than that, there's also how progression feels - I'm not sure if it will feel better to gain all 6 HD within first 6 levels or to have 12/18 levels where you're gaining stuff, including the occasional HD spaced out. But that's going to require a full out campaign of playing to really test that out. So...6 HD for now, but 12/18 are on the table as definite options. (I'd just really need to do some heavy work on monster scaling.)

Quote from: sparkletwist
I personally didn't consider our characters nearly as overpowered as Xathan seems to think. :grin:

Our damage output was mighty, that is true, but that's also because our party was three melee-optimized fighters. That's pretty much all we were capable of. A more balanced party might not have had such a damage output, but it would've also been more realistic for actual adventuring. Given the dominance of spellcasters in d20 games, any sort of "Fighters sure are doing a lot of damage! GET THE NERF BAT!" mentality is not one I understand at all, because that's pretty much what they're designed to do.

Nerfing casters and then nerfing fighters so they feel as nerfed as the newly nerfed casters is how you end up with 4e.   :ill:

I guess I should have clarified that - my current stance is not "Nerf Fighters," it's "Buff Monsters to where they pose an appropriate threat." :P You guys did a ton of damage and it was awesome, but that monster was much easier than it should have a did - I ran a sim of similarly built Pathfinder fighters with same ability scores/feats/skills and armor as DR, and they got slaughtered, even with no buffs to the dragon and the dragon using the same tactics. Monsters need a buff so they're on par with the new classes.

Quote from: Humabout
Having only read the first post of this thread, I have a few general questions:

[snip]

I snipped that first part because it was based around the idea of HD not being tied to level, which is something I've decided not to do. :) (should probably update first post) There's some interesting ideas in there, and I'm going to keep them in mind, but it'll probably be when I consider post-6 play when I start looking at those - right now, I'm focusing on levels 1-6, just because that A) requires the least design choices on my part and B) is the most critical to balance. BY NO MEANS am I ignoring what you posted here - I'm just saving much of it for later development.

QuoteIf you don't mind adding one roll to combat rounds, you could tweak AC a little for an interesting effect:  instead of having a true AC, you have a Basic Defense Bonus (BDB) that gets added to a 1d20 roll that opposes your attackers attack roll.  The BAB is comprised of your level bonus to BAB + feats improving your defenses + magic item bonuses improving your defenses + shield bonuses.  Note, however, that armor does not provide a bonus.  Instead, use Iron Heroes system of armor granting DR.  Now, your skill is opposed by an opponent's skill, so it's easily scaleable and justified.

I actually did rolling defense in Mutants and Masterminds, and I liked how it worked out there - and interestingly enough, it typically favors the defender. It does mean fights drag out longer, especially with the massive amounts of attacks that can be made (A full attack two weapon fighter with the right feats can make 5 or 6 attacks in a round, for example), which would mean a ton of defensive rolls as well. :P So it's on the table, and I'm going to try it out in playtesting and see if it's smooth enough to work.

QuoteWith the above suggestions, note #7 is moot.  Those things you worry about blowing out of proportion with increased level don't scale at all with level, and XP is for buying cool class abilities/feats/whatevers.  Some of those whatevers can be dumped into increasing those nonscaleables, but because that's resources not spent elsewhere, the classes should stay balanced.  Heck, tweak this right, and you won't even need more than a single class progression, really; but that might be taking it too far for your tastes.

A single class progression for saves, attack bonus (but not number of attacks) and defensive bonus is becoming very likely as I class balance, even without some of the changes - it keeps people on a more even playing field, solves several balance problems, but still allows plenty of other rooms to feel unique. It's good to hear someone else reaching the same conclusion because I was nervous about that change - makes me more comfortable with it.

Quote from: Xathan Back Again
It's good to hear someone else reaching the same conclusion because I was nervous about that change - makes me more comfortable with it.

Glad I could help!  If I get any other crazy ideas, I'll let you know.  Oooh!  Actually, here's one!  Have you considered spending XP directly on feats and abilities?  Or do you prefer to maintain a leveled structure?  I'm just thinking that making, say frex, Evasion worth 400 XP and Weapon Focus worth 550 XP, it lets you better fine-tune the balancing between class abilities, increased BAB/BDB, incresed saves, and heck! additional HD or hp.

Quote from: Humabout

Quote from: Xathan Back Again
It's good to hear someone else reaching the same conclusion because I was nervous about that change - makes me more comfortable with it.

Glad I could help!  If I get any other crazy ideas, I'll let you know.  Oooh!  Actually, here's one!  Have you considered spending XP directly on feats and abilities?  Or do you prefer to maintain a leveled structure?  I'm just thinking that making, say frex, Evasion worth 400 XP and Weapon Focus worth 550 XP, it lets you better fine-tune the balancing between class abilities, increased BAB/BDB, incresed saves, and heck! additional HD or hp.

Funny you should mention that - that's actually the way E6 does handle post 6 progression, and I made X20 because I'm not a fan of that. It's just my type A personality - I like the flavor and neat linearity classes provide. Of course, that doesn't mean I can't include it as an option, since post-6 classes won't effect your base stats, so you could either go with a class OR buy things separately...

Woops!  That was my Gurps showing.  I'll tuck it back out of sight again :p

I also made mention of it because I knew a guy who was developing a point-based d20 system a few years ago, and last I had heard, it turned out pretty good.

Quote from: Humabout
Woops!  That was my Gurps showing.  I'll tuck it back out of sight again :p

I also made mention of it because I knew a guy who was developing a point-based d20 system a few years ago, and last I had heard, it turned out pretty good.

Hehehe, nothing wrong with that!

And I play a point based d20 system - Mutants and Masterminds - quite frequently. I love it - it's one of my favorite systems - but just not the direction I want to go. Partially because it also involves much more work for me, and I am a lazy bastard. :P

A man after my own heart!  That laziness led me to just adopt a different system someone else already slaved over :D  Now I just kill myself tryign to cobble together settings, since no one has made the sort of weird settings I like.

Quote from: Humabout
A man after my own heart!  That laziness led me to just adopt a different system someone else already slaved over :D  Now I just kill myself tryign to cobble together settings, since no one has made the sort of weird settings I like.

Hehehe, I feel the same way sometimes on my weird settings. And it took me forever to finally commit to making an actual system, and the only reason I'm doing it is because 90% of what I want I can copy/paste legally and freely from the Pathfinder/D20 SRDs :P

I don't see why monster scaling would be an immediate issue just because the level scale is changed from 6 to 12 or 18. You just multiply the CR by 2 or 3 and call it a day. So, it might be off by a point or two, but since the broader range of levels makes for a smoother progression curve I don't think it will be much of a problem.

Also, I'd like to come with a radical statement (which also happens to be a highly personal opinion): RPGs do not have to be mechanically balanced. The important is all the players have something to do and that they are all having fun. Now, D&D is heavily balanced, but that's because it is, at its core, about fighting monsters more than anything else. In a hypothetical alternative RPG a social ability might easily be considered equal to a combat ability. They are both good, but in different situations.

Quote from: Superfluous Crow
In a hypothetical alternative RPG a social ability might easily be considered equal to a combat ability. They are both good, but in different situations.

To some extent, earlier editions of D&D tried to do this. The assumption was, well the fighter can do nothing but fight, so he'll be real good at that. The thief can do lots of stuff, so he won't be as useful in combat.

The problem arose, not just because D&D focuses on combat (it does), but it meant no matter what situation you were in, half your players had little or no opportunity to participate. In earlier editions, a character might not only be unlikely to succeed at something, he might have been completely unable to attempt it.

I think it's better to assume everyone should have roughly balanced abilities in combat and out of combat. By completely separating the two, you leave the choices in the hands of the players. Assuming they have some idea what the campaign focus will be, you give them the chance to play a character that will be the most fun for them at any given point in time.

Quote from: Phoenix

Quote from: Superfluous Crow
In a hypothetical alternative RPG a social ability might easily be considered equal to a combat ability. They are both good, but in different situations.

To some extent, earlier editions of D&D tried to do this. The assumption was, well the fighter can do nothing but fight, so he'll be real good at that. The thief can do lots of stuff, so he won't be as useful in combat.

The problem arose, not just because D&D focuses on combat (it does), but it meant no matter what situation you were in, half your players had little or no opportunity to participate. In earlier editions, a character might not only be unlikely to succeed at something, he might have been completely unable to attempt it.

I think it's better to assume everyone should have roughly balanced abilities in combat and out of combat. By completely separating the two, you leave the choices in the hands of the players. Assuming they have some idea what the campaign focus will be, you give them the chance to play a character that will be the most fun for them at any given point in time.

I am in disagreement, and am in agreement with Crow...as long as the exp rewards match up.  That was a lot of the reasons that in the earlier games, treasure EXP rewards oustripped combat exp rewards.

Balancing roles in combat ability is a mstake unless you want to make the game a combat-centric/encounter-centric one.  That is the fighter's bailwick (please note the name of the class/role), and balancing out the combat removes much of his specialization.

My advice is to look at the kind of game you want this system to play, and make that the fulcrum of the balance.

Quote from: Superfluous CrowRPGs do not have to be mechanically balanced. The important is all the players have something to do and that they are all having fun. Now, D&D is heavily balanced, but that's because it is, at its core, about fighting monsters more than anything else.

Unless you're talking specifically and only about 4th Edition, I think D&D makes better support for your assertion than a counterexample. In 3rd Edition D&D, and Pathfinder to a lesser but still significant extent, spellcasters often have a distinct advantage, some feats are far better than others, and some classes just don't get nearly as nice of things as other classes. However, many players often care more about flavor and fun than purely optimal tactics, and the DM can tailor encounters to turn some of the usual assumptions on their head-- for example, in Xathan's upcoming gladiatorial-arena based game, a character optimized for normal D&D combat would probably suck.

Grognards get angry about balance issues (and I admit I probably rant too much about this too) but in actual play people have fun regardless. :)

@LV,

Actually, I agree about the Fighter in-so-far-as it's a poor name for a class because it does imply all the class does is fight. (And yet spellcasters still make better combatants in D&D.) As opposed to the ranger, who is an excellent combatant and has his own out-of-combat skills--an excellent class. The Fighter is kind of the oddball class with no inherent flavor, something almost every other class in 3e has.

However, I've played in and run many games without XP. XP rewards are not inherently related to what's fun to me or my group. Whether or not a thief could get XP for finding treasure didn't affect the funness of the class. What is inherently un-fun, to us, is to have situations where the fighter can't do anything (maybe for several game sessions in a row) because there's no combat or only brief combats. Then to turn around and have several sessions with heavy combat, where the bard feels like the lame sidekick. (Bard was my favorite 4e class, btw, as they somewhat fixed this issue.)

The fact that it might balance out in the end doesn't matter. I want to have fun every week.

Everyone needs the opportunity to make an equal contribution both in and out of combat. That doesn't mean they need to be doing the same things or in the same ways, but no one should feel like a fifth wheel.

@Phoenix,
I think I know what one of our translation issues is.

Quote from: PhoenixActually, I agree about the Fighter in-so-far-as it's a poor name for a class because it does imply all the class does is fight. (And yet spellcasters still make better combatants in D&D.) As opposed to the ranger, who is an excellent combatant and has his own out-of-combat skills--an excellent class. The Fighter is kind of the oddball class with no inherent flavor, something almost every other class in 3e has.

to me, D&D is not 3E.  In my own little world, 3E/3.5E/Path are later derivations of D&D.  "spellcasters make better combatants in D&D" is a statement that totally nunplusses me, since that is a broad statement including some dozen major derivations (OD&D, original supplements, Holmes Basic, AD&D, Moldvay basic, Moldvay split, and then 2E...all before3e.)
In aD&D, the fighter had a number of campaign-level advantages that have to be looked at in terms of a game where the experience was split pretty evenly.  Because that particular game was heavily balanced around the idea of the campaign.  And the RAW included lots of memorzation, spell component, weapon type vs armor type rules that evened the classes out over time.  Don't get me wrong, magic users definitely became mobile artillery...but they needed the fighters and the others more to keep them alive. 

But you are right that the game one wants to play had best match the system used.  I have seen our very own SIG supposed dungeon crawl turn into a social/town heavy game that uses the adventure to subsidize...becasue that is what the rules are built to do.  The game will become the rules.

Quote from: Superfluous Crow
I don't see why monster scaling would be an immediate issue just because the level scale is changed from 6 to 12 or 18. You just multiply the CR by 2 or 3 and call it a day. So, it might be off by a point or two, but since the broader range of levels makes for a smoother progression curve I don't think it will be much of a problem.

You're right, actually - so I'm not going to worry about monster balance in regards to that change.

However...that still leaves the problem of how progression feels. I don't know if players will like how it feels if they gain their HP every 2-3 levels, or if they gain it all up front, and that's going to require playtesting - and running characters from levels 1-6 will just take less time than 12/18, just because of the number of levels involved (Unless I start playing with XP scaling, but at that point, why does it matter?) :P

Also, there's one other thing that I thought of, trying to figure out why I was so attached to the level 1-6 concept. In Pathfinder (and to a lesser extent, 3.5 and it's other derivatives), players were rewarded for picking an class and sticking with it via cool "capstone" abilities. But there are also plenty of cool Prestige classes available, and waiting until post-20 play to start tapping into prestige classes means you'll almost never get them - but sticking with your class just for that one ability you really want can often mean waiting years in RL time to get there.

I've never played or run a DnD game that's gone on long enough for the players to get that cool ability they really wanted, and of my friends I've only heard of one game where they achieved that - and it "only" took them a decade. (The campaign, by the way, still isn't finished)

Again, want to make it very clear I'm not dismissing your idea - but I'm keeping it as plan B right now if plan A, 1-6, doesn't achieve the playstyle I'm looking for.

QuoteAlso, I'd like to come with a radical statement (which also happens to be a highly personal opinion): RPGs do not have to be mechanically balanced. The important is all the players have something to do and that they are all having fun. Now, D&D is heavily balanced, but that's because it is, at its core, about fighting monsters more than anything else. In a hypothetical alternative RPG a social ability might easily be considered equal to a combat ability. They are both good, but in different situations.

I guess I should clarify that by balanced, I mean every class is capable in general (no one should feel useless during parts of the game) and has particular areas in which they shine, but there should still be challenge involved. Yes, the fighter is about, as the name implies, fighting - but one of the playtesters (IIRC, it was Nomadic) - said "I never really felt threatened" or something to that extent, and ElDo agreed - the only one who really felt threatened at any point was Sparkletwist, and that's because all but one attack the monster made were directed against her, and the one that wasn't was an area attack that included her.

She still finished the fight with about half her HP.

This was against a Dragon, one of the creatures in DnD (and fantasy in general, in my opinion) that should pose the most impressive threats, period. This dragon was also CR 9 (at the start of the fight it was CR 6, but I bumped it up an age category in round 1 (and adjusted damage taken/hp accordingly) to prevent it from dying after it's first action, and bumped it up again in round 2 to allow the playtest to go on a bit longer). This fight should have been a nightmare for them by the end, and should have been threatening from the beginning against the initial creature and remained threatening throughout. If I had added a healer to the mix, the fight would have been even more a joke for the players - I would have had to use a dragon that could outright kill them in a single full attack/breath weapon to make it come close to threatening, and even then they probably would have won, or I would have had to have the dragon fly around and pelt them with breath weapons without landing, which just would have been a jerk DM move to a group of pregens to who I gave no ranged combat.

I agree that PnP RPG's don't need to be balanced like a video game. I feel that RPG's need to be balanced so everyone is challenged but still has a situation that isn't narrow where they can really shine.

Oh, and as for social conflicts, I tend to leave that more in the hands of the players and some scattered class abilities when it comes to d20 style games - these games, at their core, are combat oriented, and while social situations are important and can easily become the focus of the game, I prefer to let the player's ability to role play and think quickly and talk dictate that more than statistics, with dice rolls being used only when the NPC is on the fence or the player is trying something outlandish OR the result of a failure would be particularly interesting. Modified Diplomacy, Bluff, Sense Motive, Intimidate, and the other Cha and a few Wisdom skills, and feats that modify them, with a few class abilities for Bards, Rogues, and Clerics (the classes I see, in that order, of being the classes that are best at social: because of practice, deceit, and respect, again in that order) to round things out. That's not to say Fighters and Wizards can't be social, they'll just have to make a few cross class skill decisions and feat decisions (or in the case of wizards, spell choices) to keep up with the other three in a social oriented game - but a good RPer can balance out those classes lack of social focus.
------------

For the rest of the posts, there's a lot here and I'm not going to try to respond to all of it (otherwise I'll be at this all day), but cherry pick the things that I feel need a direct response. If I don't respond to it, assume I read it, nodded to myself, and jotted down a few notes in the notepad document I'm keeping of ideas for pre or post 6 advancement, or I feel my response in terms of balance above answered my thoughts on the idea of balance.

Quote from: Phoenix
I think it's better to assume everyone should have roughly balanced abilities in combat and out of combat. By completely separating the two, you leave the choices in the hands of the players. Assuming they have some idea what the campaign focus will be, you give them the chance to play a character that will be the most fun for them at any given point in time.

I think this is a critical thing - communication between DM and players as to type of game. If it's combat oriented, the players will make feat, skill, and class ability selections with that in mind. If social oriented, the same thing. if it's a hybrid, they'll build their characters to function in both situations, and the DM has to take into account that a game focused on both means the players won't be quite as strong in either as a game that's focused on one or the other. For example...

Quote from: sparkletwist
However, many players often care more about flavor and fun than purely optimal tactics, and the DM can tailor encounters to turn some of the usual assumptions on their head-- for example, in Xathan's upcoming gladiatorial-arena based game, a character optimized for normal D&D combat would probably suck.

This was an example of what I'm talking about (not to toot my own horn here - I'm just trying to explain my DMing philosophy and that I'm designing the game with my style in mind). Though I don't think the characters for that game would "suck," they would be no where near as effective as a character optimized for typical DnD combat except in special circumstances. However, I made it clear to the players that social interaction would be minimal and that combat, particularly of the flashy/impressive variety would be the focus of the game.

QuoteGorgnards get angry about balance issues (and I admit I probably rant too much about this too) but in actual play people have fun regardless. :)

Unless I misunderstand Gorgnards (actually, since I've seen you use that term a couple times, what do you mean by it?), I'd like to point out that really anyone who's played with an extreme munchkin in a crunch heavy system can see how much they'd suck the fun out of the game, regardless of focus. (Yes, their is a difference between munchkin and minmaxer, the former trying to break the game and the latter making sure that their character is very good at their chosen role and that the stats best fit the character they're trying to play)

Quote from: LordVreeg
I am in disagreement, and am in agreement with Crow...as long as the exp rewards match up.  That was a lot of the reasons that in the earlier games, treasure EXP rewards oustripped combat exp rewards.

I know nothing of treasure EXP rewards - it's a concept that I've never heard of before. I'd love to hear you elaborate here, and/or direct me to a system that used it.

QuoteBalancing roles in combat ability is a mstake unless you want to make the game a combat-centric/encounter-centric one.  That is the fighter's bailwick (please note the name of the class/role), and balancing out the combat removes much of his specialization.

My advice is to look at the kind of game you want this system to play, and make that the fulcrum of the balance.

I want this game to be used for combat heavy games, social interaction games, and the middle ground - so the fulcrum would be between the two. The big focus of the system is a gritter (in terms of danger) but still familiar to 3.5 players style of play and still giving classes a chance to feel heroic - I want the players to be able to become Aragorn, where orcs were still a threat, and not Anime, where most humanoids or other threats were a joke unless they took templates and classes to make them Anime (or, to poke fun at a different system, Asura) levels themselves - and often surpassing in terms of sillyness both of them. While I don't want to recreate Guildschool, I do want a game where that level of danger is present, but will a more familiar feel to d20 players (again, Asura fits the bill here as well as a model, since the level of lethality in that system is pretty high - other than level for crunch (much higher in GS) and the potential for godlike characters (higher in Asura, or at least easier) I think the two systems have some very similar design philosophies). This applies to social situations as well - in DnD, a level 10-20 character can outsocial pretty much anyone - the term Diplomancer exists for certain DnD classes as well, and situations like this absurd example (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0767.html) are actually possible at high levels with the right buffs/items.

Quote from: Phoenix
@LV,

Actually, I agree about the Fighter in-so-far-as it's a poor name for a class because it does imply all the class does is fight. (And yet spellcasters still make better combatants in D&D.) As opposed to the ranger, who is an excellent combatant and has his own out-of-combat skills--an excellent class. The Fighter is kind of the oddball class with no inherent flavor, something almost every other class in 3e has.

I'm trying to fix that with "Styles" - right now the Fighter has the options at first level of "Soldier", a style that excels at teamwork and defending/aiding party members and himself, "Knight," a style that is well trained in fighting but much better than most fighters at navigating social interactions, "Calvary", a style that excels in mounted combat, "Guardsman", a style that is better at social than most fighters (but not as good as a knight) and skilled a nonlethal capture/subdual, "Swashbuckler", a style that is better at speed, agility, improvisation, and than most fighters but doesn't outshine the roguelike classes except in terms of survivability, "Bruiser", a style that allows for a fighter to focus on the beatdown/unarmed combat without the eastern flavor and trappings of the Monk, and finally the "Warrior", who fills the more classic (if somewhat flavorless) DnD fighter role of just being a good overall weapon/armor user. None of these deserve their own class, making them variants would be overly complicated, but give the fighter much more flavor depending on which style they chose (The Oversized Weapon user that Ngali was is not being nixed, just moving to the Barbarian class as a possible capstone, since it feels more barbarian than fighter). I might cut this list down as I design (merge calvary and knight, for example), but right now I'm happy with that list.

QuoteHowever, I've played in and run many games without XP. XP rewards are not inherently related to what's fun to me or my group. Whether or not a thief could get XP for finding treasure didn't affect the funness of the class. What is inherently un-fun, to us, is to have situations where the fighter can't do anything (maybe for several game sessions in a row) because there's no combat or only brief combats. Then to turn around and have several sessions with heavy combat, where the bard feels like the lame sidekick. (Bard was my favorite 4e class, btw, as they somewhat fixed this issue.)

I'm curious as to how these XPless games handled progression and would like to know more - and agree with you on what is inherently un-fun.

Quote from: LordVreeg
to me, D&D is not 3E.  In my own little world, 3E/3.5E/Path are later derivations of D&D.  "spellcasters make better combatants in D&D" is a statement that totally nunplusses me, since that is a broad statement including some dozen major derivations (OD&D, original supplements, Holmes Basic, AD&D, Moldvay basic, Moldvay split, and then 2E...all before3e.)

I'm trying to learn a bit more about these systems to help with X20. While a friend of mine who played AD&D and 2E lended me her players handbook, I'm having as much trouble deciphering them as I did Guildschool (apparently the problem wasn't the system, it's that it takes me awhile to digest/comprehend a new crunch heavy system that is unfamiliar - Guildschool was just my first attempt at doing so.) I don't need a completely rundown of the various iterations of DnD because that's way too much work for you and would take to long to me, but I'd greatly appreciate thoughts on how those systems did things that I can incorporate/be inspired by for X20 now that I've better stated my design goals (I hope, at least)

QuoteIn aD&D, the fighter had a number of campaign-level advantages that have to be looked at in terms of a game where the experience was split pretty evenly.  Because that particular game was heavily balanced around the idea of the campaign.

I'd love to hear more about these "campaign-level advantages", because that's something I'm unfamiliar with. Not just for fighters (though I would like some specific details there, because it is the hardest class to give advantages to outside of rounds) - what construes a campaign level advantage and how does one implement them?

QuoteAnd the RAW included lots of memorzation, spell component, weapon type vs armor type rules that evened the classes out over time.  Don't get me wrong, magic users definitely became mobile artillery...but they needed the fighters and the others more to keep them alive.

That's one thing I am struggling my hardest to avoid - if a fighter wants to play a Soldier or a Warrior or build one of the other styles into a way to be a defender for the casters, that's great, but I don't want later-play Fighters to be forced into the role of "Defend the squishies so they can do the killing"

QuoteBut you are right that the game one wants to play had best match the system used.  I have seen our very own SIG supposed dungeon crawl turn into a social/town heavy game that uses the adventure to subsidize...becasue that is what the rules are built to do.  The game will become the rules.

And that's the last point I want to keep in mind. X20 games will become gritty (in terms of survivability and danger) high fantasy (that can be re-flavored to different cultures) just by the nature of the rules, and that's fine - I don't want to make the WOTC or typical D20 mistake of trying to make the system fit EVERY POSSIBLE game, because the system is not best for that. The system is going to be for magic and magical worlds where the most skilled/powerful people can still be threatened by a band of orcs - in essence, Pathfinder without the God syndrome. I'd greatly appreciate everyone's thoughts on if I'm accomplishing that - but especially the thoughts of people who have worked with system design.

Next Post: Actual outlines for Fighters and Rogues, a discussion on Defense bonuses, and thoughts on Wizards, Clerics, and Bards.

---------------

Also, one last thought on balance I realized I had forgotten - another part of what I mean by balance is making sure I don't have 2 classes that fill the same core role, (Fighter and the PB2 Knight as examples from d20) but one clearly outshines the other in every possible situation.

This post was originally going to cover Fighters, Rogues, and Defense Bonus, but the Fighter got more involved than I thought - I'd love your feedback on this. One thing I do need help with: Please double check my abilities and see if any of them overlap with existing feats, which I tried to avoid. Also, how interesting do they all seem?

Attack bonus will scale as such:
+1, +2, +3/+0, +4/+1, +5/+2, +6/+3/+0. A total of 3 iterative attacks at max level, which seems and feels more balanced than the 4 I had initially planned (especially since I didn't consider cleave, two weapon fighting, and all the things that come with those when I planned that) but still gives those iterative attacks I love so much. These are the same values used in the playtest. Saving throws will progress at the same rate they do for all classes +1, +2, +2, +3, +3, +4 - based off the often unused "medium" progression for saves in d20. Defense will be discussed later.

The class abilities will go as follows:
Skills: The fighter's class skills are Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Handle Animal (Cha), Intimidate (Cha), Knowledge (dungeoneering) (Int), Knowledge (engineering) (Int), Profession (Wis), Ride (Dex), Survival (Wis), and Swim (Str). The Fighter Also Gains 2 bonus skills depending on style as class skills.

Skill Ranks Per Level: 4 + Int modifier.

HD: 5+d5, or 8 (chosen each level) [note]d5= d10/2 rounded down, minimum 1[/note]

Class Abilities:
1: Bonus Feat, Style (rank 1)
2: Bonus Feat
3: Style (rank 2)
4: Bonus Feat
5: Bonus Feat
6: Style Mastery

Styles:
Soldier: a style that excels at teamwork and defending/aiding party members and himself, using shield and weapon in tandem.
Bonus Class Skills: Perception, Craft (Arms and Armor) - A Soldier must be more alert than most warriors, and time in the field has taught them to repair or even make their on equipment in absence of supply trains.
Rank 1: +1 class bonus to self and ally's attack rolls while flanking, +2 class bonus when using the Aid Another action.
Rank 2: Can sacrifice an attack of opportunity to provide ally with his DR, gains bonus DR equal to shield's Defense Bonus
Mastery: Both himself and ally deal additional 1d6 damage while flanking, gains +2 class bonus to Defense when flanking and grants ally same bonus.

Knight: a style that is well trained in fighting but is part of the nobility, skilled at navigating social interactions.
Bonus Skills: Diplomacy, Sense Motive: A Knight is familiar with court intrigue and has a better grasp of social interactions than most warriors.
Rank 1: +2 class bonus to checks when interacting with nobility or wealthy merchants, can treat Social feats as Fighter bonus feats.
Rank 2: Gains a Squire (Warrior(NPC Class) with a level 1/2 the Knight's, Str 12, Dex 10, Con 12, Int 10, Wis 10, Cha 12, Skills and Feats chosen by Knight) that is always "Helpful" to Knight.
Mastery: Class bonus to interacting with nobility or wealthy merchants increases to +4, gains family heirloom magic weapon or armor worth up to 2000gp.

Calvary: a style that excels in mounted combat.
Bonus Class Skills: Perception, Heal: A Calvary fighter must be observant and know how to treat basic injuries, both on his mount and on others.
Rank 1: Gains an Animal Companion as a Druid of his level, but must be a companion he could ride as a mount.
Rank 2: +1 class bonus to attack and defense while mounted - bonus applies to mount as well. No penalty for firing a ranged weapon while mounted.
Mastery: +2 to damage while mounted, +2 class bonus to Ride, +2 class bonus to CMB and CMD while mounted.

Guardsman: a style that is better at social with the "lower classes" than most fighters and especially skilled a nonlethal capture/subdual.
Bonus Class Skills: Knowledge (local) and Sense Motive: A Guardsman is used to being lied to and knows cities well.
Rank 1: No penalty for doing subdual damage with weapon, uncanny dodge as the rogue class ability.
Rank 2: +2 class bonus to CMB to Grapple, Trip, and Disarm, Critical hits automatically confirm when dealing subdual damage.
Mastery: When critically hits while dealing nonlethal damage, target must make a saving throw (DC 10+Guardsman Strength Bonus) or be stunned for a number of rounds equal to the damage dealt.

Swashbuckler: a style that is better at speed, agility, improvisation.
Bonus Skills: Acrobatics and Stealth: A swashbuckler is trained in mobility and sneaking past opponents.
Rank 1: Does not need to travel in a straight line to charge, can sacrifice weapon damage to leave opponent flat footed.
Rank 2: +5ft class bonus to base speed, +10 ft bonus if wearing light or no armor: adds Dex instead of Strength to damage with light weapons or rapier.
Mastery: +2 class to Defense when moved at least 10 ft that round, An opponent struck by a swashbuckler is considered Flanked from the square the swashbuckler struck from even if he has left that spot.

Bruiser: a style that allows for a to focuses on crude and brutal unarmed combat.
Bonus Skills: Heal, Acrobatics: A Bruiser learns to treat their own wounds and is more agile from barroom brawls.
Rank 1: Gains a natural primary slam attack for 1d6 damage (1d4 if Small, 1d8 if Large), takes -3 penalty if using it as off hand attack. A Bruiser is considered proficient with improvised melee and ranged weapons, removing the -4 penalty.
Rank 2: Slam attack damage increases by 1 step, gains +2 class bonus to defense if unarmed. If wearing gauntlets, can do gauntlet damage or slam damage, Bruiser's choice. A Bruiser holding an appropriately sized/shaped object (chair, large lid, etc) gains a +2 shield bonus to AC.
Mastery: Gains a second slam attack as a primary attack at same damage as first, can use enchantment bonus on gauntlets as bonus on attack/damage rolls as well as any special qualities. A Bruiser also increases the damage of improvised melee weapons by one step and their critical damage to x3.

Armsman: A style skilled with a variety of weapons and armors.
Bonus Class Skills: Craft (Arms and Armor), Knowledge (Dungeoneering): A Armsman is well versed in his weapons and armor, and has a good knowledge of the inhabitants of the depths he often faces.
Rank 1: Armor Mastery 1: +1 class bonus to Defense when wearing Armor, -1 to armor check penalty.
Rank 2: Weapon Mastery 1: +1 class bonus to attack rolls with particular category of weapon.
Mastery: True Mastery: Additional +1 class bonus to DR when wearing Armor, +2 class bonus to damage when using weapon from category chosen with Weapon Mastery 1

Magebane: A style trained in combating casters and supernatural creatures.
Bonus Class Skills: Knowledge (Arcane), Use Magic Device - A Magebane is taught to understand magic and use the devices produced by it.
Rank 1: Detect Magic as a Spell Like Ability, usable at will, +2 class bonus to saving throws against all spells and supernatural effects.
Rank 2: Can sacrifice strength bonus to damage to hit target with a targeted dispel magic effect (Caster Level = Strength bonus), Spell Resistance 5+Con Score
Mastery: When making a full attack can sacrifice one attack to have a readied counterspell action (as if using Dispel Magic to counter)  against a spell that targets him or is cast by a caster within melee range (or 20 feet if using ranged weapon) with a caster level equal to the Base Attack Bonus of sacrificed attack.

Hmm.
lot's to answer.  First of all, I need to mention a contradiction.   I talk about balance in terms of game design for a number of reasons.  But I do not think that perfect balance exists or that it needs to go out of control.  But understanding how you want to balance roles is an important polestar to have.

Who used treasure exp?  Early D&D games, up through AD&D at least, gave experience based on events and achievments, not based on how long the GM wanted it to take for the characters to level up.  It was a very important change in game psychology; in that when you talked to other gamers, progress and achievement was a little more standardized (and My SIG players will note this; in that is still how I do things).  Monsters were worth 'x' amount, and the rest came from treasure and Magic items, symbolizing achievment.

Campaign level balance deals with stuff that balances out long term and that deals with the character's place in the world.  in AD&D, fighters could start building a keep and clearing a freehold at level 9 (250000 exp), and for mages, it was level 11 before they could build said stronghold. (375000exp).  The mage has half again as many exp needed for that.  Your ranger has severe limits in terms of hirelings (a very important part of the old game).  The Ranger establishes a freehold at level 10, at 325000 exp, but does not attract men art arms like the fighter did. 
The strongholds were also very different in terms of what could be earned or the spacing.  The Fighter's stronghold options were about the best, and had the earliest. 

Other examples of this would be Paladin's and Rangers tithing and vows of poverty. 

Quote from: Xathan Back AgainUnless I misunderstand Gorgnards (actually, since I've seen you use that term a couple times, what do you mean by it?)

Grognards.

A grognard is an oldschool gamer-- traditionally wargames, but nowadays the term has expanded to RPGs as well-- who likes to complain about just about everything, particularly things that are new and not like they were back in the "good ol' days."

Quote from: Xathan Back AgainI'd like to point out that really anyone who's played with an extreme munchkin in a crunch heavy system can see how much they'd suck the fun out of the game, regardless of focus.

Sure. I should say "people have fun regardless, if the group is cohesive."  To me, there's only so much that the rules can do if you're playing a game with a jerk, and it's not much. The real solution in that case is to not play with that guy.

Quote from: LordVreeg
Hmm.
lot's to answer.  First of all, I need to mention a contradiction.   I talk about balance in terms of game design for a number of reasons.  But I do not think that perfect balance exists or that it needs to go out of control.  But understanding how you want to balance roles is an important polestar to have.

I think we agree here - including the fact that, unless you make it one class with a strict set of abilities and exact same skills and, well, identical in every way, true balance is just going to cause a headache as you reach for an unobtainable goal.

QuoteWho used treasure exp?  Early D&D games, up through AD&D at least, gave experience based on events and achievments, not based on how long the GM wanted it to take for the characters to level up.  It was a very important change in game psychology; in that when you talked to other gamers, progress and achievement was a little more standardized (and My SIG players will note this; in that is still how I do things).  Monsters were worth 'x' amount, and the rest came from treasure and Magic items, symbolizing achievment.

That's...actually awesome, I can't believe they ditched that. I'm going to try and figure out the best way to bring that back - making the biggest XP rewards come from "achievement" as opposed to "slaughter" will make for a much better leveling system.

QuoteCampaign level balance deals with stuff that balances out long term and that deals with the character's place in the world.  in AD&D, fighters could start building a keep and clearing a freehold at level 9 (250000 exp), and for mages, it was level 11 before they could build said stronghold. (375000exp).  The mage has half again as many exp needed for that.  Your ranger has severe limits in terms of hirelings (a very important part of the old game).  The Ranger establishes a freehold at level 10, at 325000 exp, but does not attract men art arms like the fighter did. 
The strongholds were also very different in terms of what could be earned or the spacing.  The Fighter's stronghold options were about the best, and had the earliest.

Strongholds? Freeholds? Fiefdoms? As CLASS REWARDS?! You, sir, have just blown my mind so hard I need to pick it up. (No sarcasm here - I've never heard of anything like that, and holy crap on a stick is that awesome.) I gotta figure out a way to work that into X20 as a high level option, because that is incredible.

Quote

Other examples of this would be Paladin's and Rangers tithing and vows of poverty. 

What benefits did those give? Did the Paladin receive tithes?

Quote from: sparkletwist

Quote from: Xathan Back AgainUnless I misunderstand Gorgnards (actually, since I've seen you use that term a couple times, what do you mean by it?)

Grognards.

A grognard is an oldschool gamer-- traditionally wargames, but nowadays the term has expanded to RPGs as well-- who likes to complain about just about everything, particularly things that are new and not like they were back in the "good ol' days."

So if I design a system using a ton of stuff from older editions, I guess that makes me a grognard - a title I'll wear with pride. :D

Quote

Quote from: Xathan Back AgainI'd like to point out that really anyone who's played with an extreme munchkin in a crunch heavy system can see how much they'd suck the fun out of the game, regardless of focus.

Sure. I should say "people have fun regardless, if the group is cohesive."  To me, there's only so much that the rules can do if you're playing a game with a jerk, and it's not much. The real solution in that case is to not play with that guy.

Heh, agreed...especially since I used to be "that guy". :P

On older editions:
OD&D: Never played, only passingly familiar
2nd Ed: I enjoyed it, in spite of its rules, which were obtuse
3rd Ed: At first I enjoyed because of the freshness of its rules, though I soured on them as time went on. Regardless, I don't think it's really fair to dismiss something as not D&D just because it differs from our earliest experiences. That seems to imply some kind of Platonic ideal of D&D-ness, which I don't think could be accurate. And since 3rd was enormously popular (and is kind of the basis of this topic), we'd be remiss it not considering it the most strongly.
4th Ed: Some things worked well. Some improvements, some things lost along the way.

Campaign-level advantages:
I do not see these as acceptable class features, but rather acceptable story rewards. They offer proper balance (if at all) only when the same group plays the entire campaign from level 1 to 20. My experience is this rarely happens. Especially for me, nowadays, when I might get to play D&D a couple times a year. I think if you want balance, you need balance at any given time, not across a broad range. "It evens out in the end" was the same complaint I had about X character not being fun during levels Y-Z.

Treasure-rewards:
LV already covered this, but I want to add the thief benefited more from this, as I recall. Each class had specific ways they could earn extra XP. None of which did I find a good idea or to work well in game. And having people advance at different rates makes balancing as a DM even trickier.

Quote from: XathanWhat benefits did those give? Did the Paladin receive tithes?

Lol. The paladin was supposed to give up 10% of his treasure. There was no benefit, it was a required roleplaying aspect. LV meant that the disadvantage of a paladin having to tithe helped balance it with the fighter. You could also argue the high Charisma requirement was balance, though I'd disagree on that one.

Quote from: XathanI'm curious as to how these XPless games handled progression and would like to know more - and agree with you on what is inherently un-fun.

In its simplest form, just level people up at appropriate milestones--i.e. completing a major quest. You can hand out XP in nickels and dimes and pretend like you're doing something else, but really it's all just a metagame construct. I've heard DMs say they threw an encounter in just to give us XP so we'd able to handle the next big fight.

What's the point of throwing in a battle you don't want to include just for that? XP is this nebulous mechanic designed to measure advancement...But levels already do that. I think XP is only a good mechanic in a system like LVs (or TRoS) where what you do determines what you learn. Otherwise, it shifts the focus onto this reward-based thinking. I need to kill monsters to gain XP to gain levels to kill more monsters.

In general, I prefer the focus on roleplaying, moving through the story, being heroes, and so forth. I find when you remove this mechanic, the game plays a little different.

@phoenix, you're missing a whole bunch in there between 0D&D and 2E...which is part of my point.  It is not that I was calling later D&D less than the earlier games, it was your use of the term without including earlier games. I never use the term D&D unless I am referring to all the games that bore the name as a whole, since there are such rule variations.  I should have been more clear.
To me, 3E is a later derivation..but still part of the ruleset, as is 4E.

You are right and wrong at the same time about campaign level rewards.  You are right about the personal, anedotal part...which makes my largeer point...the earlier games were written with the fulcrum of balance (and therefor the preferred game type) of the campaign.  I agree, campaign level balancing means that the game is built for that style of game. And understand, part of this is still evening the game at any given time.  the complaint about the earlier games (and some later ones) was that the mage gets too powerful later...and it is the earlier political power/property/men at arms abilities that actually balance this out...at the same time of the game.  Not saying this is perfect, but it is an example of how the class roles were balanced outside of combat.
I don't use them in my game because I don't use class/role balance....but I like versions of them.  I very carefully make sure that social power accompanies wealth and accomplishment.

I don't consider attrib requirements as balance, since they do not affect game play, merely the % of the population who can qualify.  The fact that the paladin could only keep the armor and weapons and had to tithe and had less ability to attract followers and slightly less weapons specializations were all meant to balance. 

I alos love having players advance at differing rates...healthy competition is a wonderful thing.

First of all, I want to say that I'm reading all the comments here, but responding individually line by line is wearing me down a bit. Pheonix, Vreeg, I'm getting some great ideas that are going on the examine later list and really appreciate your feedback, but right now I want to get the rogue class down and a few other things, so won't be doing individual or detailed responses right now.

And, speaking of which, the Rogue:

HD: 4+d4

The rogue's class skills are Acrobatics (Dex), Appraise (Int), Bluff (Cha), Climb (Str), Craft (Int), Diplomacy (Cha), Disable Device (Dex), Disguise (Cha), Escape Artist (Dex), Intimidate (Cha), Knowledge (dungeoneering) (Int), Knowledge (local) (Int), Linguistics (Int), Perception (Wis), Perform (Cha), Profession (Wis), Sense Motive (Wis), Sleight of Hand (Dex), Stealth (Dex), Swim (Str), and Use Magic Device (Cha).

Skill Ranks per Level: 8 + Int modifier.

BAB:
+1
+2
+3
+4/+0
+5/+1
+6/+2

Class Features:
1: Sneak Attack 1d6, Rogue Talent
2: Uncanny Dodge, Rogue Talent
3: Sneak Attack 2d6, Evasion
4: Improved Uncanny Dodge*, Rogue Talent
5: Sneak Attack 3d6, Rogue Talent
6: Perfect Strike, Master Rogue

*Because of the lower levels, Improved Uncanny Dodge can be overcome by someone with effective levels 2 lower as opposed to 4. [note]The Rogue Talents, for now, use the list from the Pathfinder SRD (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/rogue/rogue-talents), though I'll be modifying and adding to it after I get the classes hammered out (at the same point I'll be modifying and adding to spells, feats, and other flexible abilities.)[/note]Master Rogue: Much like Fighters, at level 6 a rogue picks from a list of styles that add to their abilities and focus them on a particular type of combat, though it doesn't reduce their effectiveness in other areas - unlike fighters, this is only gained at level 6, not as they level (a rogue with a particular focus in mind should chose talents that complement them.)

Acrobat: Acrobatic Bluff (Can use Acrobatics in place of Bluff to feint or misdirect in combat), the rogue is always treated as having a running start for jumping, the rogue takes no penalty for using Acrobatics to balance on a narrow surface while moving full speed, and the rogue can, as an immediate action, make a Stealth check when landing from a fall or jump. (Acrobatics must be used as usual to avoid or reduce damage)

Grifter: +2 class bonus to Bluff, Diplomacy, Disguise, and Linguistics. The Rogue can use Detect Thoughts at will as a supernatural ability, but can only read surface thoughts and must make a Sense Motive vs. Bluff check to successfully read thoughts, even if the target fails its will save.

Thug: +6 bonus to hit points, can do nonlethal damage with sneak attack, adds 1d6 to sneak attack when using an improvised weapon or unarmed strike. Unarmed strikes by the rogue deal 1d6 damage (1d4 if small, 1d8 if large) and can be made as off hand attacks if the rogue has two-weapon fighting. This damage increases by one step if the rogue has Improved Unarmed Strike. (The thug must select the appropriate feats to avoid the typical penalties associate with improvised weapons or unarmed strikes.)

Gangster: +2 class bonus to attack and defense while flanking, can sacrifice one sneak attack dice to make an intimidate check as an immediate action after sneak attacking. Gains a +2 class bonus to intimidate.

Scoundrel: Can charge without moving in a straight line, adds Dex modifier instead of Str to light weapons, and when taking the full defense action can make attacks of opportunity against an opponent that misses with a melee attack. The Scoundrel can sacrifice 1d6 sneak attack damage to leave his opponent flat footed after hitting with a sneak attack (but cannot use this ability on the same target on the following round). The ability functions against creatures normally immune to sneak attacks, though they still do not take sneak attack damage.

Master Sniper: Can sneak attack with a ranged weapon at 60 feet or one full range increment, whichever is better. The penalty for range increments is reduced by 1 and the penalty for perception checks does not apply until after 100 feet. The rogue takes no penalty for attack rolls with a ranged weapon while prone.

Assassin: Can make a death attack after observing an opponent for three full rounds - this is a sneak attack (with normal rules for sneak attack) that is automatically a critical hit so long as the attack lands. The Assassin gains poison use if he does not already have it, and adds his int modifier to saving throws against poisons he applied.

Scout: Gains a +10 ft class bonus to land speed, does not take the armor check penalty with light armor (though max dex bonus does still apply), gains Improved Low Light Vision as an extraordinary ability, and gains +2 class bonus to perception checks as well as +2 class bonus to defense when the Scout moved at least 10 feet on his turn.

Infiltrator: The Infiltrator gains Hide in Plain Sight, the ability to use Disguise Self at will as an extraordinary ability (No will save to see through, but casting time is increased to 10 minutes), the ability to 20 on search checks in only one minute, and can treat ceilings as surfaces with a 90 degree angle for the purposes of climb checks so long as it has appropriate handholds or is no more than 5 feet wide (10 feet if large). When making a sneak attack, the Infiltrator can sacrifice one sneak attack dice to silence his target for 1 minute, as it was under the effects of a silence spell.

Master Thief: +2 class bonus to slight of hand and disable device, gains spider climb as a supernatural ability usable at will, and gains Case the Joint, a +4 untyped bonus to all relevant skill checks when attempting to steal from or sneak into/within a location if he spends 3 full hours studying it.

Dungeoneer: Trap Sense +3, gains Darkvision out to 60 feet (or doubles distance of existing Darkvision, including Darkvision gained from a spell, feat, or other source even if not permanent), and can sneak attack (2d6) against creatures normally immune to sneak attacks as a supernatural ability.

[note]The Spell Robber (need a better name that's not spellthief) Master Talent is one that I'm unsure of - it seems like it might be a bit too much, but at the same time is so situational that I feel that balances it. I'd like thoughts on if this should be tweaked or abandoned or moved to another class.[/note]Spell Robber: Can sacrifice sneak attack dice to steal a spell or spell like ability with a level equal to the dice damage sacrificed and use it within 6 rounds of stealing it (the caster either looses the prepared spell if he prepares spells, looses access to a spell slot of the same level if spontaneous caster for 1 minute, or cannot use the spell like ability for 1 minute. Spell like abilities cannot be stolen if all uses are already expended, and spells cannot be stolen if the caster has already used all prepared spells of that level or all spell slots of that level have been expended. This spell or spell like ability can be chosen by the rogue if he succeed on a Spellcraft check with a DC equal to the casters caster level+relevant ability modifier) Gains a +2 class bonus on Use Magic Device and Spellcraft checks. When making a sneak attack, instead of doing any damage or using spell steal, can use a targeted dispel magic on the creature (caster level = rogue level). If successful, the Spell Robber can make a Spellcraft check with a DC equal to the casters caster level+relevant ability modifier to gain the benefit of any beneficial spells dispelled for 2+int rounds. This check is made separately for each spell dispelled. If the rogue makes a full attack action or has multiple attacks, he can only use this ability once per round, but can sacrifice damage from other attacks to gain a +2 bonus on the dispel check for each attack that hits. Otherwise, subsequent attacks function as normal.

Quote from: Xathan Back AgainI guess that makes me a grognard - a title I'll wear with pride.

I don't know. I think you'll have to be a lot more familiar with AD&D before you can make such a claim. :D

Gaining such familiarity might be fun and inspirational-- you seemed pretty fond of the whole stronghold thing, so there might be a bunch of other stuff in AD&D that you might find interesting, too. Personally, back when I played AD&D, I had some vague recollections of the whole system of establishing strongholds and whatever, but I was young and simple and didn't really use any of those rules. It is a pretty interesting mechanic for a deeper game, though, particularly one that is going to try to create the feeling of actually living in this society instead of just traveling around and killing people and taking their stuff. I admit, I have a feeling a lot of players were like me, which is why they took out a lot of AD&D craziness and 3rd Edition ended up the way it did.

Quote from: LordVreegI alos love having players advance at differing rates...healthy competition is a wonderful thing.

I'm not going to derail Xathan's thread with a long rant on why I think this is a terrible idea.  :dead:

Also, and sorry for making this a separate post but I don't want this to get lost in previous post, I'd really like some specific class feedback as opposed to just overall system feedback - the current build for overall system is something I'm going to stick with until I do some playtesting, and while feedback for post playtesting is greatly appreciated and I still do want it, some class feedback is needed right now. :)

Quote from: sparkletwist

Quote from: Xathan Back AgainI guess that makes me a grognard - a title I'll wear with pride.

I don't know. I think you'll have to be a lot more familiar with AD&D before you can make such a claim. :D

Gaining such familiarity might be fun and inspirational-- you seemed pretty fond of the whole stronghold thing, so there might be a bunch of other stuff in AD&D that you might find interesting, too. Personally, back when I played AD&D, I had some vague recollections of the whole system of establishing strongholds and whatever, but I was young and simple and didn't really use any of those rules. It is a pretty interesting mechanic for a deeper game, though, particularly one that is going to try to create the feeling of actually living in this society instead of just traveling around and killing people and taking their stuff. I admit, I have a feeling a lot of players were like me, which is why they took out a lot of AD&D craziness and 3rd Edition ended up the way it did.

Heh, I guess you're right - but familiarity with AD&D is something I'm going to gain. If nothing else, stuff like strongholds and all that can be included as optional rules as opposed to built in ones, since they were probably removed from core rules for a reason - something I'll have to consider strongly when I look more at how AD&D worked that and if I want such a thing to be built into class, an option for some classes, or something the DM can chose to make an option without it being built in. (Which might be a bit, since I left my borrowed AD&D books at the house of the person I borrowed them from. :P)

Quote

Quote from: LordVreegI alos love having players advance at differing rates...healthy competition is a wonderful thing.

I'm not going to derail Xathan's thread with a long rant on why I think this is a terrible idea.  :dead:

[/quote]

On this one I'm going to have to agree with Sparkle - healthy competition is good, but players feeling left behind or frustrated trying to catch up is bad, and I have trouble seeing how this could result in anything but that - though discussing this further would be a matter I'd be willing to attempt to see if my mind can be changed (unlikely but always possible) but as sparkle mentioned, would appreciate happening in another thread. :)

LV, that's true, I was lumping, AD&D, basic, and AD&D 2nd ed into one category for the sake of brevity, much the same as I didn't breakdown the various iterations of 3.X or 4th/Essentials/etc. I can appreciate why you want to include them, though.

My statement applies on 2nd ed AD&D applies as a blanket to all of them. I think they were (or would have been, never played OD&D or basic) fun, but only because roleplaying is fun. I think the rules themselves were poorly designed by modern standards, and acceptable at the time only as a bridge between war games and because nobody had anything better.

Quote from: Xathan
Heh, I guess you're right - but familiarity with AD&D is something I'm going to gain. If nothing else, stuff like strongholds and all that can be included as optional rules as opposed to built in ones, since they were probably removed from core rules for a reason - something I'll have to consider strongly when I look more at how AD&D worked that and if I want such a thing to be built into class, an option for some classes, or something the DM can chose to make an option without it being built in. (Which might be a bit, since I left my borrowed AD&D books at the house of the person I borrowed them from. )

(Emphasis mine.)

Yeah. A lot of AD&D was striped for various reasons, including accessibility to new players, balance, and simplicity.

And owning strongholds, etc. can be fun, but only in certain styles of play. Which is why they make better optional rules than balancing factors built into the system itself.

@phoenix
The rules were changed for a few reasons, but I agree strongly with your last statement.
I wrote up a template for how I would do 5e, and optional rules that allow you to actually place more emphasis on the rules you want, thus changing the rules to match the focus of the particular game the GM wants to play, were part of it.

Quote from: LordVreeg
@phoenix
The rules were changed for a few reasons, but I agree strongly with your last statement.
I wrote up a template for how I would do 5e, and optional rules that allow you to actually place more emphasis on the rules you want, thus changing the rules to match the focus of the particular game the GM wants to play, were part of it.

And I think that's the kind of thing we need more.

Vreeg and Phoenix, I do agree with the optional rules for those kind of things - and after I post the sorcerer I'm going to get together my ideas for post 6 advancement, and include details for optional rules like strongholds and such. :) thanks for the ideas...and curse you both for giving me more to think of. :P

Sorcerer

HD: 3+d3
Skills: 2+Int/Level
The sorcerer's class skills are Appraise (Int), Bluff (Cha), Craft (Int), Fly (Dex), Intimidate (Cha), Knowledge (arcana) (Int), Profession (Wis), Spellcraft (Int), and Use Magic Device (Cha).

BAB: 
+1 per level. The Sorcerer does not gain iterative attacks.

Class Features:
Cantrips, Arcane Bond, Bloodline
Bonus Metamagic Feat
Bloodline Ability
Bonus Metamagic Feat
Bloodline Ability
Bloodline Apotheosis, Bonus Metamagic Feat

Spells Per Day:

1	2	3	4	5	6
4	-	-	-	-	-
5	4	-	-	-	-
6	5	4	-	-	-
6	6	5	4	-	-
6	6	6	5	4	-
6	6	6	6	6	4

Spells Known

0	1	2	3	4	5	6
4	2	-	-	-	-	-
5	3	2	-	-	-	-
6	4	3	2	-	-	-
7	4	4	3	2	-	-
8	4	4	4	3	2	-
9	4	4	4	4	4	3

*Note that there are no actual spells above level 4. Levels 5-6 are for spells known with metamagic feats already applied, or learning lower level spells in a higher slot.

Bloodlines:
Aberrant:
 +50% duration to polymorph spells, Summoned creatures gain the unnatural template.
1 - Acidic Spit (su): 1d6+charisma damage, usable at will, 30 foot range.
3 - Tentacles (ex): Sprout two tentacles from shoulders with a 10 ft reach, primary natural attacks that deal 1d4+str damage, can be retracted or extended at will allowing them to be hidden. Tentacles do not chance the sorcerer's threatened area. 
5: Weird Anatomy (ex): 50% chance for a critical hit or sneak attack to have no effect, +2 to fortitude saves.
Apotheosis: Spell Resistance 15, Blindsight 60 feet, Tentacle reach becomes 15 feet, gains Improved Grab when using tentacles. 

Fiendish:
+50% duration of summoned fiends.
1: Claws: Sprout at will, 2 primary natural attacks that do 1d4+str damage. 
3: Resist 5 both Fire and Acid, Gain +2 to saves vs. posion.
5: Perfect Darkvision (Can see even in magical darkness) 60 feet, Can sprout wings to gain a fly speed of 30ft with average manuverability at will.
Apotheosis: Telepathy to 100 feet, Fast Healing 2, when summoning a fiendish creature or evil outsider summons one additional one, claw damage increases by one step.

Aquatic:
+1 to save DC of spells with the Water or Cold descriptor/damage, summoned creatures have aquatic template.
1: Steal Heat: Touch deals 1d6+Cha damage, heals the sorcerer for half the damage dealt, usable at will.
3: Gain swim speed at same speed as land speed, gain aquatic and amphibious subtypes, absorb cold 5 (if hit by cold damage, convert up to 5 of the damage dealt into temporary HP.)
5: Can create 1 gallon of water/level, +2 class bonus to defense.
Apotheosis: Swim speed doubles, Gains DR 5/Piercing, and gains blindsense 60 feet (120 feet blindsight when underwater)

Celestial:
+50% duration of summoned celestials.
1: Holy Touch: Deals 1d4+Cha damage to evil or neutral targets, heals good targets for 1d4+Cha damage. Can be used at will, but when used to heal must wait 5 rounds before healing same creature again.
3: Resist 5 both Electricity and Cold.
5:  Can sprout wings to gain a fly speed of 30ft with average manuverability at will, gains Improved Low Light Vision.
Apotheosis: Permanent Tongues effect (as the spell), adds Charisma modifier as bonus damage to any evil or neutral creatures, no delay to frequency of Holy Touch's healing. 

Draconic:
+1 damage per dice with spells of associated energy type (See Draconic Bloodline in the Pathfinder SRD), Summoned creatures can gain the draconic template.
1: Gains a primary natural bite attack and secondary natural tail attack, both of which deal 1d6+Str damage. (Secondary natural attacks in X20 take a -3 penalty)
3: Resist associated Energy 5, gains natural 2/armor.
5: Breath Ray: Ranged Touch Attack (60 ft) that deals 3d6 damage of the associated energy type (no spell resistance). Once used, must wait 1d4+1 rounds before it can be used again.
Apotheosis: Gains Blindsense 30 feet, 2 claws as primary attacks that deal 1d4+strength damage, Can sprout wings at will with fly speed 60ft (Poor Maneuverability).

Earthen:
Summoned creatures can have the earthen template, +1 DC to spells with the Earthen or Acid descriptor/Damage Type.
1: Gains 2 natural slam attacks for 1d4+Str damage.
3: Absorb Acid (see Absorb Cold, above), 10ft burrow speed.
5: Forceful Blow: Slam attacks or spells with the acid or earth descriptor can push the target back 5x(1d6+Str) feet, +10 ft to burrow speed.
Apotheosis: Damage Reduction 3/- , +10 feet to burrow speed, Tremorsense out to 60 feet. 

Fire: 
Summoned creatures can have the Earthen Template, +1 DC to spells with the Fire descriptor/damage type.
1:  Burning Aura: Creatures that strike the sorcerer with a natural or melee weapon take 1d6+Cha fire damage.
3: Absorb Fire 5 (As absorb cold above), 10 ft climb speed.
5: Aura Surge: Can expand Aura to burn all creatures with in a 20 ft radius for 3d6 damage  (Reflex half) every 5 rounds, climb speed +10 feet.
Apotheosis: Climb +10 feet, Burning Aura becomes Burning Retribution: hits any creature within 30 feet that successfully strikes the Sorcerer with a targeted spell or a ranged, natural, or melee attack.  

Aerial: 
Summoned creatures gain a fly speed equal to their land speed with perfect maneuverability and +4 to their dexterity. 
1: Ranged touch attack usable at will deals 1d6+Cha electric damage, ignores DR from metal armor.
3: Absorb Sonic 5 (As absorb cold above), Fly 10 ft (Perfect)
5: Focused Gale - Burst of hurricane force wind centered on sorcerer with a 60ft radius, can be used every 5 rounds.
Apotheosis: Fly speed becomes 20 (Perfect), +4 class bonus to defense.

[ooc]The Cleric is, I admit, a bit of a rush job - I did not check to make sure my extra feats or channeling masteries did not overlap with existing feats. I'll take care of this latter, I just wanted to get this out ASAP.[/ooc]

Cleric:
Alignment: A cleric's alignment must be within one step of her deity's, along either the law/chaos axis or the good/evil axis, unless her deity allows cleric's of any alignment.

HD: 4+d4

The cleric's class skills are Appraise (Int), Craft (Int), Diplomacy (Cha), Heal (Wis), Knowledge (arcana) (Int), Knowledge (history) (Int), Knowledge (nobility) (Int), Knowledge (planes) (Int), Knowledge (religion) (Int), Linguistics (Int), Profession (Wis), Sense Motive (Wis), and Spellcraft (Int).

Skill Ranks Per Level: 2 + Int modifier.

Attack Bonus: As Rogue.

Class Features:
1: Aura, channel energy 1d6, domains, orisons, spontaneous casting
2: Channel Mastery, Bonus Channeling Feat
3: Channel Energy 2d6, Aura Expansion 1 (Weapons Treated as Magic to overcome DR)
4: Channel Mastery, Bonus Channeling Feat
5: Channel Energy 3d6, Aura Expansion 2 (Weapons Treated as having Cleric's Alignment to overcome DR)
6: Bonus Channeling Feat, 2 Channel Masteries

Changes from Pathfinder:

Channel Energy is usable more often. While still not usable at will, it us usable a number of times per day equal to 3+Wisdom Modifier+2 for each level in Cleric the Cleric has. As in Pathfinder, the Channel Energy does either positive or negative energy depending on the Cleric's alignment.

Spells Per Day:

0	1	2	3	4	5	6
4	2+1	-	-	-	-	-
5	3+1	2+1	-	-	-	-
6	4+1	3+1	2+1	-	-	-
6	4+1	4+1	3+1	2+1	-	-
6	4+1	4+1	4+1	3+1	2+1	-
6	4+1	4+1	4+1	4+1	4+1	3+1

Spell slots above level 4 are used to prepare spells with metamagic feats, prepare additional lower level spells, or used in conjunction with the Extra Channeling channel mastery

Channel Mastery: The cleric gain new options for their Channel Energy class features. A cleric must take the altered Channeling mastery to apply the effects of a channeling feat to a use of Channel Energy altered by a mastery. Unless noted, a use of Channel Energy with a channeling mastery applies expends the normal 1 daily use of the Channel Energy class feature. Applying a Mastery to a Channel is a free action, but using the altered Channel Energy requires the normal action for Channel Energy unless the mastery alters the Channel Energy's action. A cleric must used the altered Channel Energy on the same round the mastery was applied unless otherwise noted.

Reshape Channel: Instead of projecting the Channel Energy as just a 30 ft radius, it can also be channeled as a 60 ft cone or 120 ft line. The normal will save applies to creatures caught in the blast who would be damaged by it.
Special: This mastery cannot be used with any other mastery that changes the range or shape of the channel unless otherwise noted.

Opposition Channel: By an additional daily of her Channel Energy, the cleric can channel the opposite energy (Negative if already channel positive, or visa versa.)

Energetic Channel: The cleric chose one energy type (fire, acid, cold, electric, or sonic) upon selecting this mastery and can channel energy of that type instead of their normal positive or negative channeling. The save against this Channeling is a reflex save instead of a will save. If the Cleric has a a domain associated with one of these energy types, (Acid for Earth, Cold for Water, Electric for Air, and Fire for Fire) the cleric must chose that energy type. All clerics can chose sonic. A sonic channel uses d4s instead of the typical d6, but bypasses the hardness of objects and half the DR from armor.
Special: The range/area of the channel is halved unless the cleric spends one additional daily use of the channel energy class feature. This Mastery can be selected multiple times. Each time it is selected, it applies to an additional energy type. If selected more than once, the second energy type can use an energy outside the cleric's domain.

Focused Channel: At will, the channel energy class feature can be used against any single creature within 30 feet per cleric level. Channeling energy in this manner only deal 1d6+Wisdom Modifier healing or damage, regardless of normal Channel energy damage (unless damage has been modified by the empowered channel class feature). The creature targeted is allowed the normal will save to half the damage, and unlike normal channel energy Focused Channeling spell resistance applies normally (unless used to heal), and using it provokes attacks of opportunity. If the cleric has energetic channeling, no additional cost is incurred, though it still only does 1d6+Wisdom damage. A cleric must be level 3 or higher to select this mastery. This mastery does not expend any any daily uses of the channel energy class feature.
Special:  A cleric must spend one daily use of her Channel Energy class feature if used with Warding Channel, Quickened Channeling, Opposition Channeling, Repelling Channeling or Drawing Channeling. A cleric must spend two daily uses of her Channel Energy class feature if used with Improved Quicken Channeling. This mastery cannot be used with any other mastery that changes the range or shape of the channel unless otherwise noted.

Extra Channeling: A cleric may sacrifice a prepared spell to gain additional uses of her channel mastery, gaining uses equal to half the spell's level, rounded down (2 level 1 spells may be sacrificed for 1 additional use). Orisions cannot be sacrificed this way. The cleric must be level 3 or higher to select this mastery.
Special: A cleric cannot sacrifice his domain spell this way. This Mastery does not use any daily uses of Channel Energy. The additional uses of her Channel Mastery persist throughout the day. Using this Mastery is a full round action that does not provoke attacks of opportunity.

Channeling Rays: For one use of their channel energy ability, the cleric may select a number of creatures to target equal to the cleric's level within a range of 60 feet. One ranged attack roll is made, though the attack roll is only required if the channel energy is being used to deal damage. This channel energy mastery can be used with either Energetic Channeling or Opposition channeling.
Special:
Special: This mastery cannot be used with any other mastery that changes the range or shape of the channel unless otherwise noted.

Extended Channeling: This mastery doubles the range or area of channeled energy. This ability can be combined with any other ability that alters the clerics range or area. It uses 2 daily uses of the channel energy class feature, unless applied to Focused Channel, at which case it only uses 1 daily use.

Altered Channeling: A cleric with this mastery can apply the effects of any channeling feat she possess to a channel altered by a Channeling mastery.. This mastery cannot be combined with any channeling mastery that alters the damage or energy type of the channeled energy used. Alternatively, for two additional daily uses of Channel Energy, a cleric gain gain the benefits of any Channeling Feat besides Extra Channeling Mastery for one round.

Quickened Channeling: This mastery allows channel energy to be used as a move action for 2 daily uses of the channel energy class feature. A cleric can still only channel energy once per round.

Improved Quicken Channeling: This mastery allow a cleric to channel energy as a swift action for 4 daily uses of the channel energy class feature. A cleric still can only channel energy once per round. A cleric must have Quickened Channeling to take this mastery.

Channeling Blow: This mastery allows a cleric to channel energy through a melee attack. The cleric adds his weapon damage to the channeled energy if using a weapon, or an additional 1d6 if using it unarmed. If used with a melee weapon, this mastery still deals weapon damage if used to heal.  This mastery cannot be used with any other mastery that changes the range or shape of the channel, even otherwise noted.
Special: This mastery cannot be combined with Quickened Channeling or Improved Quickened Channeling, and the cleric can only make a single attack regardless of feats or iterative attacks earned from feats, class abilities, or level.

Channeling Shot: As Channeling Blow, but can be used with a ranged weapon instead of a melee weapon.  This mastery cannot be used with any other mastery that changes the range or shape of the channel, even if otherwise noted.

Forceful Channeling: For one additional use of the Channel Energy class feature, a cleric's channeled energy deals force damage instead of it's normal damage type. The dice used decrease to 1d4. A cleric must be 6th level to select this channel mastery.
Special: A cleric must posses Energetic Channeling to take this mastery.

Repelling Channel: For one additional use of the Channel Energy class feature, the cleric's channel energy pushes creatures in its area or that it targets 1d4x5 feet in addition to its normal effect. The cleric can sacrifice any other effect of her Channel Energy class feature to instead push any creatures effected by (1d4+Wisdom modifier)x10 feet.
Special: A Cleric must be level 3 to select this channel mastery.

Drawing Channel: As Repelling Channel, but instead draws the effected creatures the same distance towards the Cleric.
Special: A Cleric must be level 3 to select this channel mastery.

Warding Channel: A cleric sacrifices the damage of their channel energy class feature to grant all creatures within its area or targeted by it Damage Reduction equal to 2/- per dice the channel energy class feature would normally apply.
--------------

New Feat:
Extra Channel Mastery (Channeling)
Prerequisites: Channel energy 2d6, Wisdom 13.
The Cleric gains 1 additional channeling mastery. Normal restrictions on level apply, and a cleric must meet any prerequisites of the channeling mastery.
Special: This feat can be taken multiple times, but only once for each point of Wisdom bonus the Cleric possesses.

Improved Channeling (Channeling)
Prerequisites: Channel energy 2d6, Wisdom 15.
The dice used for Channel Energy increase by one step.

Greater Improved Channeling (Channeling)
Prerequisites: Channel Energy 2d6, Wisdom 17, Improved Channeling.
The dice used for Channel Energy increase an additional step.

I like the way every class has talents. All in all, the classes remind me of the D20 Modern classes a bit, structure-wise.
A small complaint: the layout is pretty messy. Can't figure out what entries are talents and what are class abilities. Also, the rogue's Master Strike seems to be missing? Or maybe I wasn't looking hard enough.
An idea you could toy with: 2 level prestige classes replacing levels 5 and 6. The 5th level would be a sort of initiation cost and the 6th would yield a nifty alternative capstone ability.
Of course, when they are only six levels long, making new base classes is probably way easier.
Are you in any way designing this for multiclassing? Capstones are neat, but sometimes it's just great to be able to build your own thing from the building blocks available. Would be cool if there was some synergy.
I must admit I am warming quite a bit to this enhanced E6 concept! It looks lovely and you did a good job so far.
If you were to sum it up, what are the other major differences from vanilla D20 aside from the shortened level spectrum?

Quote from: Superfluous Crow
I like the way every class has talents. All in all, the classes remind me of the D20 Modern classes a bit, structure-wise.
A small complaint: the layout is pretty messy. Can't figure out what entries are talents and what are class abilities. Also, the rogue's Master Strike seems to be missing? Or maybe I wasn't looking hard enough.

...I totally forgot Master Strike, partially because I spent a bit while designing trying to figure out how to properly do it without it being overly nasty but still worthwhile. And yeah, the layout needs fixing and updating - I'm aweful at organization, I freely admit.

QuoteAn idea you could toy with: 2 level prestige classes replacing levels 5 and 6. The 5th level would be a sort of initiation cost and the 6th would yield a nifty alternative capstone ability.
Of course, when they are only six levels long, making new base classes is probably way easier.

I like the idea of 2 level PRCs - perhaps that's how I'll handle variant classes, one ability at level 1 and 2 for the last two levels. And making a base class that feels flexibile and cool for 6 levels is harder than I thought it would be - I like it, but the design requires much more effort and "outside the box thinking" than I had expected. :P

QuoteAre you in any way designing this for multiclassing? Capstones are neat, but sometimes it's just great to be able to build your own thing from the building blocks available. Would be cool if there was some synergy.

After level 6, you'll be able to purchase "levels" in classes other than your core class, and can multiclass freely from levels 1-6. The post-6 levels do not confer an increase in BAB, Saves, HD, Non-Bonus Feats, Ability score bumps, or Skills, but do give you the class features as if you had taken a level in that class, including iterative attacks. This is one of the things you can do to advance post 6 - you'll be able to spend XP this way (the most expensive thing but also potentially the most rewarding), as well as spending XP for a lower cost on new feats, skill points, spells/spell slots, rituals, ability increases, and other advancement opportunities, many of which will be designed to aid in multiclassing - things like armored casting, for example. I hope to get this outlined in the next couple days in greater detail.

QuoteI must admit I am warming quite a bit to this enhanced E6 concept! It looks lovely and you did a good job so far.

Thanks! It's a blast to write and work on, and I'm really glad that people are liking it as much as I am enjoying writing it.

QuoteIf you were to sum it up, what are the other major differences from vanilla D20 aside from the shortened level spectrum?

Flexibility. All classes are designed to have greater flexibility than their d20 counterparts at levels 1-6, and after that level you have complete control over what you gain as you advance and even the rate at which you gain new things. Also, unlike d20 where you might have to wait till level 10 or higher to play the exact class you want to play, X20 is being designed around the principal that you should be able to be the class you want to be from level 1 - or at the very latest, level 6.

Meant whether there were any significant rules changes aside from classes.
For variant classes there is always the Archetype model introduced in pathfinder.
I'm not sure I like your ideas for past-6 progression though. Unlimited advancement, particularly access to extra class abilities, is gonna skew the power level and work against the whole idea of having only 6 levels.
I think you mentioned being against buying feats as the post-6 progression, but would perhaps be interesting if you allowed buying feats from level 1. But you don't get any automatically. So players have to decide whether to go for another level or an extra feat. Maybe even skill points could be bought.
This edges dangerously close to a point buy system, but I think you can do it and still keep the classic level aesthetic.

Quote from: Superfluous Crow
Meant whether there were any significant rules changes aside from classes.

Oh! As of right now, no: I'm planning on playtesting with the majority of rules as is, and tweaking later as needed (if needed) - but for now, anything that's not stated to have changed is assumed to work as it does in Pathfinder. (With one exception - Armor, instead of making you harder to hit, provides Damage Reduction. Your Defense is how hard you are to hit, and is influenced by your dexterity, feats, and class features.)

QuoteFor variant classes there is always the Archetype model introduced in pathfinder.

I'm drawing a lot of inspiration from that, actually. :) The big thing I'm looking at is how much of that I can stick into archetypes such as styles and masteries that existing classes have, and how many of those work as variants on existing classes, and how many need to be a separate class in X20.

QuoteI'm not sure I like your ideas for past-6 progression though. Unlimited advancement, particularly access to extra class abilities, is gonna skew the power level and work against the whole idea of having only 6 levels.

I'll admit I"m a bit worried about it and the power being skewed, but I also want to still allow for progression post 6 - otherwise the game gets to 6 and then stagnates, which kind of kills the fun (read an interesting article once about frustration vs. boredom being the big balance that, if struck properly, makes a game super addicting and fun, and if you don't advance at all past 6 I feel it would become extremely boring, but if post 6 advancement is overly powerful it'll be too frustrating.) The idea is for post 6 advancement to cause characters to grow outwards, not upwards - gain a wider variety of powers without too much of a direct increase in power.

Still, the more I think and talk about it, the more I think I need levels 1-6 better balanced before I start worrying about after 6...but I can't help thinking about it, and the progression idea (which comes down to a semi-point buy) is the best I've come up with yet.

QuoteI think you mentioned being against buying feats as the post-6 progression, but would perhaps be interesting if you allowed buying feats from level 1. But you don't get any automatically. So players have to decide whether to go for another level or an extra feat. Maybe even skill points could be bought.

I normally don't say this kind of thing, but that idea just doesn't appeal to me at all. Part of it is because it punishes classes (such as, right now, the rogue) that don't gain bonus feats, part of it is because that means players would advance in three critical areas - HP, skills, and Attack bonuses  - at different rates. I don't want a situation where a player chooses one or the other and then feels like he feel behind. (That big thread about uneven advancement got me thinking about it, and I'm very solidly in favor of making advancement even.)

QuoteThis edges dangerously close to a point buy system, but I think you can do it and still keep the classic level aesthetic.

This is what I'm hoping to do Post 6. Now, your idea for buying feats instead of levels would work great for post 6 advancement - I'm actually thinking of going that route, where after six the game gradually becomes a point buy - feats cost X, skills cost Y, class abilities cost Z in terms of experience - which is much like E6 works now. I'm not entirely sold on it - like I said, post 6 I'm really not having any great ideas for, point buy is best I can come up with. :\

If part of your motivation for doing this is that a level 6 character is of comparable power to a well-trained real-world human individual, I wanted to note that allowing more class abilities per character post-6 is definitely going to make the game feel more like classic high-level D&D gaming with crazy all-powerful gishs.
It would also remove the main benefit of a class-based system: character role distinction. As the game progressed, all the characters would become more and more alike.
In fact, I find that with E6 especially, multiclassing is more intriguing because you have so few levels to play around with. In Steer's Fimbulwinter (where we are capping the level at 6) I'm in a deep dilemma as to how to split the 6 levels of my multiclass character. The choice becomes much more significant than in traditional D20. You should capitalize on this, not dilute it.

But compare it to D&D. Setting aside the epic rules, characters were supposed to stop advancing beyond level 20. Since you have effectively just lowered the level cap from 20 to 6, you are essentially designing a game that stops at level 6. Of course it will taper out after that, but so do all class-based games. And as you said earlier, this allows players to actually reach the capstone in their own lifetime. They'll play around with that for a while and then they will whip up new characters for a new game. E6 games are simply not designed for the same year-long campaigns you can run in D&D. You are just ensuring that the game remains intense for the duration of the campaign.

EDIT: when it comes to post-6 progression, raising the general power level is probably a bad idea since it goes against one of your design tenets. But if you don't want to do away with it completely, consider progression-as-specialization. Post-6 characters would sacrifice versatility in their field for added ability within a single subfield. Sorcerers might sacrifice known spell slots or even entire schools, fighters might disavow entire groups of weaponry and armor and combat styles. In a way you have already done this with the capstone though. Maybe make the capstone ability an upgradable effect?
Still, there has to be a limit somewhere. Unlimited progression is neither fun nor sustainable and all good things must come to an end. Of course, if the XP cost increased exponentially you might be able to put up an artificial limit while keeping the illusion of possible progression.

Just wanted to chip in, but another thing you could consider is slowing the numerical side of the power curve and upping the number of levels to fit more unique abilities into the 1-6 progression. HP would be hard to slow this way, but you can do it sneakily by just upping damage potential to match. Likewise you could reset the DCs instead of the skill progression if you want to keep the skill progression math the same.

I've been thinking a lot about perk progression in my game, and one thing you can do is have feat types and feats with some number of that feat type as a prerequisite. It can keep the class based feel by using chains without chains that way. Maybe 5 of a type without the prereq and 3ish that require a minimum of 3, with a "cap" that requires a minimum of 5? So after the cap level you can just keep pouring stuff into (lets say) an illusion based feat chain and the character will stay an illusionist instead of becoming a "gish."

Quote from: Superfluous Crow
If part of your motivation for doing this is that a level 6 character is of comparable power to a well-trained real-world human individual, I wanted to note that allowing more class abilities per character post-6 is definitely going to make the game feel more like classic high-level D&D gaming with crazy all-powerful gishs.

I guess my motivation has slightly shifted - a level 6 character should be of comparable power to a well-trained action movie human. Take, for example, the non-hobbits in LOTR as of Fellowship. They would all be level 6, perhaps with a bit of post six advancement, but lacking in magic items for the most part. A relatively small groups of Orcs (I believe it was maybe 20-25) was able to pose a credible threat to them, even killing one of the party members and requiring some of the party to flee for safety, a cave troll damn with some goblin backing near killed some of them, larger groups of goblins/orcs/humans required the party to outright flee to avoid death, and a powerful demon required incredibly clever use of terrain after fleeing for awhile to defeat and STILL required the party sorcerer to sacrifice himself to defeat. (I'm partially discounting the hobbits as part of the party - they were level 2 or 3 NPCs that the level 6's had an escort quest to complete with them - a quest, I might mention, that they failed). They were still able to do a variety of awesome things, but if they had instead been level 12 DnD characters (a level most people agree would be needed for what they could do)

That being said, none of them were true gishes - Aragon was a single class ranger (though maybe had a level of fighter or two), Borimir was a single class fighter, Legollas was likely a multiclass fighter/rogue or ranger/rogue, Gandalf was a single class sorcerer, Gimli was a single class Fighter or perhaps had a level of Barbarian (I know I don't have rangers or barbarians statted yet, but I'll get to them.), so your point about the crazy DnD gishes is not lost on me at all - I need to find a way to handle post 6 advancement that doesn't allow for those gishes. I still like the idea of expanding versatility without outright power (in terms of ability to take damage or deal it to much more), but the more I think about it, the harder it becomes to believe that would actually work.

[ooc]Wanted to get that response out before I want to class - will respond to rest of your post and Bejazz's post when I get back.[/ooc]

[ooc]Rest of response now![/ooc]

Quote from: Superfluous Crow
It would also remove the main benefit of a class-based system: character role distinction. As the game progressed, all the characters would become more and more alike.
In fact, I find that with E6 especially, multiclassing is more intriguing because you have so few levels to play around with. In Steer's Fimbulwinter (where we are capping the level at 6) I'm in a deep dilemma as to how to split the 6 levels of my multiclass character. The choice becomes much more significant than in traditional D20. You should capitalize on this, not dilute it.

Knowing I only had 6 levels to work with in Fimbulvinter, I was careful to choose a class that I would (or hoped I would) enjoy playing for 6 solid levels without multiclassing, and was kind of assuming that every other character would be making the same decision. When I saw your character was a multiclass I was surprised and intrigued. But, since my assumption has been that with only 6 levels of play, players would choose to stick with their class for all 6 levels, I've been building X20 (to a degree) around this very premise.

In the current build, single classing is very strongly rewarded - a multiclass character misses out of the most powerful ability of either of their classes, the capstone. Knowing that you faced a dilemma that I hadn't even considered, I'd like to hear your thought process on your choices and considerations as well as ways to best capitalize on that - right now, the system inherently is punitive to multiclass characters (to a degree, though they do gain some flexibility to make up for it), and I'm at a loss for ideas at how to make that choice as viable as single classing. (There also is the issue of how to handle iterative attacks for multiclass characters, but that's a whole 'nother issue I'll probably hold off on until I have a bigger pool of classes to analyze.)*

*some of the ideas I got from your later responses and thoughts on post-6 progression actually would, to a degree, solve this issue - see below for details.

QuoteBut compare it to D&D. Setting aside the epic rules, characters were supposed to stop advancing beyond level 20. Since you have effectively just lowered the level cap from 20 to 6, you are essentially designing a game that stops at level 6. Of course it will taper out after that, but so do all class-based games. And as you said earlier, this allows players to actually reach the capstone in their own lifetime. They'll play around with that for a while and then they will whip up new characters for a new game. E6 games are simply not designed for the same year-long campaigns you can run in D&D. You are just ensuring that the game remains intense for the duration of the campaign.

That is something that I honestly hadn't even thought about until you mentioned it - that the basic assumption is that play would stop at level 6 - and one that has me worried to a degree about my system, even though it accomplishes that goal very neatly. [note=Linguistic Tangent]I want to have my cake and eat it too makes no sense - I deliberately reversed the phrase because this way is actually a paradox[/note]But what I want might be trying to eat my cake and have it too - I want DMs to have the option, in X20, of running a years long campaign with the same characters and intricate plots and development (in terms of story) that you can only get in that type of game, but also to run shorter games that stop at 6. The intention was less "you stop at 6" but more "You don't become a god," and I don't want to loose that feel - however, if it comes down to "detailed post 6 progression will dilute or weaken the system," I'll drop that from the system and instead focus entirely on making 1-6 as intense and interesting as possible. However, this is still in its infancy and I'm sure there's tons of possibilities I haven't explored yet, and I'm not willing to give up yet, not until I've exhausted as many avenues as possible. (One "worst case" scenario is making 3 versions of each class, a 6 level version, a 12 level version, and an 18 level version like was earlier suggested (I believe by you) with HD and associated benefits being spread out over those levels to maintain the power level I want but allow for a longer duration of game, and giving the DM the flexibility to choose at the campaign's beginning which style they want - however, that would require a ton of work from me, so I'm saving that for "If nothing else works well.)

That being said, I'm going to keep my primary focus, regardless of ideas I have for post 6 progression, on levels 1-6: I didn't realize it until you pointed it out, but X20's strength's lie mainly in those 6 levels, and I want to make sure that is as refined and exciting as possible before I put too much detailed effort into the later advancement. I'm still loving discussing it and by no means want less feedback in those areas, I just probably won't get around to hammering down details until after I have 1-6 to a much more refined point.

QuoteEDIT: when it comes to post-6 progression, raising the general power level is probably a bad idea since it goes against one of your design tenets. But if you don't want to do away with it completely, consider progression-as-specialization. Post-6 characters would sacrifice versatility in their field for added ability within a single subfield. Sorcerers might sacrifice known spell slots or even entire schools, fighters might disavow entire groups of weaponry and armor and combat styles. In a way you have already done this with the capstone though. Maybe make the capstone ability an upgradable effect?

First, you're absolutely right that a raw power increase goes directly against my design goals, and that's why advancement is so tricky - I don't want to increase raw power but still allow advancement.

Progression in the form of specialization is a fascinating idea and one I hadn't even begun to consider, especially the idea of sacrificing existing abilities as you specialize. This one is going to have to be carefully considered - players usually get disappointed if they loose abilities they already had, and I think this would make the system even further punish multiclass characters, but that doesn't mean it can't be done and isn't worth consideration. Even without sacrificing abilities, the idea of a character advancing in a more narrow instead of a broader path is a great one, and does help reduce the "everyone becomes the same" factor. Upgradable capstones would be a great way to handle this, though I would have to make new Capstones that multiclass characters could take as their first "upgrade" and then later advance - or just make them pick a capstone from one of their classes.

Another idea I'm considering for post 6 that I'd like your thoughts on is what Vreeg mentioned earlier and was discussed by Sparkle, yourself, and a few other people would be "Campaign Rewards" - increased leadership potential, advancement within an organization/the nobility/the clergy etc, new magical rituals, strongholds/bases of operations, allies, or just increased reputation - things that progress the character but do not directly increase power, and things that come with a heavy investment in terms of money or XP or both, but are still rewarding for continuing a game after level 6 is reached and keeps the story moving and developing even though you are at the peak of your power. With this form of advancement might come a slow, limited ability to swap out feats, spells, and perhaps some other character decisions so a player who made some choices they're unhappy with from levels 1-6 isn't stuck with them, but that's something that would have to be handled carefully to avoid characters feeling schizophrenic.

The final idea, and the one I admit sounds best on paper, is inspired by your "upgradable capstones" idea. Instead of being able to advance in a new class, a character could take abilities from their existing class(s) and continue adding them - not things like bonus feats or additional spell levels, but things like Channeling Masteries, Rogue Talents, Bloodline Traits, Fighting Styles, and perhaps additional spells known/cablecast up to their highest level of casting. To prevent a character from taking one level in 6 classes and then stacking these on post-6, you'd have to have at least 2 levels in any class you wish to advance this way. The reason I like this idea is that it rewards both single class characters and multiclass characters, and I like to think that I did a good job of making those abilities (well, Piazo did the work on the rogue talents, but still) situational, which was my intention - most of them would not stack with each other (especially since they all provide a class bonus, a new type of bonus that doesn't stack with itself) and be usable in different situations from existing abilities, so power would not increase but flexibility still would. A single class fighter (Knight) could begin training in a more agile style of combat (Swashbuckler) or find himself more often than expected in situations where he needs to defend an ally (Guardsman) where he could benefit from better teamwork (Soldier) or perhaps sees the value of rough and tumble fighting (Bruiser). Since these abilities are typically gained every other level or every 3 levels, progression would be slower than existing classes, but still occur - especially if the XP cost increases exponentially or even geometrically.

QuoteStill, there has to be a limit somewhere. Unlimited progression is neither fun nor sustainable and all good things must come to an end. Of course, if the XP cost increased exponentially you might be able to put up an artificial limit while keeping the illusion of possible progression.

I agree with you there 100% - but it's impossible to know that limit until I figure how or if I want to work post 6 progression. Just wanted you to know that I agree with you there has to be a hard cap and that all good things must come to an end, I just hope to allow that end to last longer than level 6 if the DMs and players want it to.

Quote from: beejazz
Just wanted to chip in, but another thing you could consider is slowing the numerical side of the power curve and upping the number of levels to fit more unique abilities into the 1-6 progression. HP would be hard to slow this way, but you can do it sneakily by just upping damage potential to match. Likewise you could reset the DCs instead of the skill progression if you want to keep the skill progression math the same.

My problem here is that, while scaling damage with level better and adding more levels would keep danger to the PCs intact, it leaves the problem that the abilities of the PCs would greatly outstrip normal people to a degree I'm not comfortable with, and the threats they would regularly face would become insurmountable by a conventional force, which is something I want to avoid and don't see happening under this model.

QuoteI've been thinking a lot about perk progression in my game, and one thing you can do is have feat types and feats with some number of that feat type as a prerequisite. It can keep the class based feel by using chains without chains that way. Maybe 5 of a type without the prereq and 3ish that require a minimum of 3, with a "cap" that requires a minimum of 5? So after the cap level you can just keep pouring stuff into (lets say) an illusion based feat chain and the character will stay an illusionist instead of becoming a "gish."

This is something that I also haven't considered, and I like quite a bit on paper - it's going on the "consider for post 6" pile, which is rapidly expanding beyond what I had imagined was possible for options. My only problem is the increase in power that feats typically imply, but something like this would be a great way to handle the "advance narrow, not broader" idea that SC came up with above. In fact, merging these two ideas would be the best way to accomplish this, in my opinion.



Thanks for all the feedback - keep 'em coming! Also, I'm going to spend some time at some point reformatting the classes so they're more legible, promise.

On the math and scaling, 6th level is peak human condition because (for example) you can jump like an olympic athlete. All you would need to do in order to raise the level cap you can work with (while keeping the "level cap is peak human condition" thing) is make sure DCs are similar in the early game and reach 6th level capabilities around the level cap you want. Doing this on the DC side means you don't even have to change the way skills work.

The only thing to watch out for is whether you want low level NPCs to be a threat for high level foes. If the numeric gap isn't capped around 10 or less low level foes and high level players will still be in different leagues. If the numeric gap is capped around 10 or less, there might not be much statistical difference between characters at low levels. I get around this with a combination of major systemic changes including active defense (so if the party gets ganged up on it's a big deal), slow scaling damage/MDT, and wounds. I don't think you want to go this far (or for our games to look that alike) so slow scaling bonuses might be a good idea. If you want a bunch of conscripts to challenge people at the peak of human condition.

Quick question, sorry if it was already asked: how are you utilizing saving throws? You have attack bonus scaling differently from saving throws, so I hope they aren't associated with each other.

Ever since I heard of the concept, there is a rule I have always implemented in my d20 games to keep mobs of low-level enemies dangerous for longer. Obviously, with your changes to the system you may no longer feel it necessary or worthwhile but I thought I'd mention it anyway cause it seems to suit the more "gritty"/high-threat-level concept of a lower level variant.
I think I first heard of it being a part of Mongoose's d20 Conan RPG several years ago, but it also crops up in other places (some not even d20, such as Savage Worlds) in a few variations. The rule is simply that any character making melee attacks gains a +1 bonus to hit for every other character who previously made melee attacks against the same target that round. This way even the most expert of warriors with the very biggest of shields can still only effectively defend against one opponent, or at best a handful. As soon as s/he is surrounded on all sides by a press of enemies, it's likely that at least a couple of their blows will land home, no matter how good s/he is.
I suppose another (more complex) way of doing this would be to have AC/Defence/Parry/whatever stat stops people killing you be more of a resource than a fixed target number. So when your character is attacked the GM will ask "how many AC points are you defending against this orc with?" and you may put all of them against the first attack, or you may only put a few against the orc, knowing that the ogre might be about to swing for you with a much more powerful attack, and wanting to save most of your AC for that.