[note=Nomadic Made Me Do It]That's right, blame it all on him.[/note]I'm not here to say I hate D&D 4th Edition. It is a fun system, and I've enjoyed what I've played and DMed of it so far. I really love it from the DM's side of the screen, especially the monster and encounter design. But I have three fundamental problems with it: 1, I dislike the power system for martial characters; 2, I feel unable to make new classes for my setting; 3, the 4E License feels far too restrictive.
Thus, I will be attempting to make my own system specifically for my setting. Currently, I am undertaking this with the guideline that it will be a modification of the 3E d20 system, as that is what I'm most comfortable with. This first post will detail my intentions. I would appreciate it if anyone could point me to a system which might have what I'm looking for, and just general input.
Here are my intentions and desires for the system:[list=1]
*The system will be level-based, but possibly not class-based: I require a level-based system because I feel levels are a simple way of determining character balance and what level of threat the players will be able to handle. I may or may not use classes, as it all depends on what kind of feat/talent system I end up utilizing.
*I want 8 (9) ability scores to fit with my elemental cosmology and magic system: I would like to have 4 physical stats and 4 mental stats, with one physical and one mental fitting with each of my setting's primary elements. The physicals are easy (Strength, Constitution, Dexterity, Agility), but the mentals are more difficult (Currently I'm leaning towards Charisma, Will, Intelligence, and Perception, but I'm having a hard time fitting enough into each). The 9th score in parenthesis is Void, which will be utilized to determine "Action Points", Void magic, and other metaphysical things.
*Unified progression for Attack and Defense Scores: I like that D&D4E has a unified progression for these core stats. It allows there to be differences between the scores of different characters without those differences outstretching each other (In 4E, it's common for characters to have a 2 point disparity between attacks and ACs, but in 3E attack scores could vary by 5 or even 10 points, making it difficult to challenge the party evenly).
*Skills should be nice but not required: I believe I will have little to no passive/defensive uses of skills (for instance, there will not be a skill to oppose the stealth skill; the stealth skill will target a Defense). There should be times when a player wishes their character had a certain skill (like times when a fighter would like to be able to sneak or balance well), but I don't want times when a character is out right punished or exploited because they lack a skill (like when a character without "listen" and "spot" is ganked by an assassin with maxed "hide" and "move silently" in 3E).
*An open-ended maneuver system: One of my issues with 4E is that you know you are playing a game. A 1st level fighter with the power Sweeping Blow can only trip someone once, and then they require a 5 minute rest before they are capable of tripping someone again. These limitations are very game-y. I intend to utilize a maneuver system where different effects have different costs, and players will be able to either put these maneuvers together on the fly or make maneuvers in advance (feats will be used to formalize a maneuver and make it into a signature move; for instance how Improved Trip expanded upon the basic Trip maneuver in 3E). This maneuver system will also be utilized for spells, giving casters the ability to put spells together on the fly based on the situation (certain effects will belong to certain elements, or have discounts when used with certain elements).
*The system will model reality where applicable: Carrying capacity, for instance, will model the ranges people are capable of (a 4E character with 18 strength can lift 180 pounds over their head, yet the world record is 580 pounds!). Real world and non-magical fantasy archetypes will be accomidated (I was very happy with the inclusion of the Warlord in 4E D&D). If you can do it in real life, or if you would believe it in a movie or book, I want you to be able to do it in my game. I intend to be simulationist without it being too complex (rules for mundane things like starvation, thirst, and holding one's breath, throwing objects and creatures, and speeds will be made to model reality for low-level characters with human-range ability scores).[/list]
Here are a few things I am interested in:[list=1]
*I like skill based systems, where weapon groups are skills as well as things D&D has traditionally considered skills. There was a time I disliked skill systems because it was too easy for everyone to have a maximized attack bonus with at least one attack (when I was stuck in the 3E mentality that Warriors should hit better than any other character), but now I realize that this is all but a requirement of a combat oriented game. I may seek a way of doing this.
*I would like to implement levels of skill mastery: every certain number of ranks, a character will unlock new abilities with a skill. For instance, if I use weapon skills, having x ranks in a weapon skill might expand your critical range, while having x ranks in tumble would allow you to tumble at faster speeds without penalty. Basically, abilities that feel like any expert of a certain skill would require, or that all experts of a skill will take anyway, will be part of the skill.[/list]
Finalizing the core ability scores and determining which attributes they apply to will be my first task. I would like each to be numerically balanced with each other, since I may go for a point based level-system (like Mutants and Masterminds). At the very least, each ability score needs to do something important that none of the other ability scores do. I want characters to be able to exist with all manner of ability scores, and I don't want certain stats to need to be high for all characters. I do want, though, players to feel some loss for having a low score; no stat should be a no-brainer dump stat for all characters.
Ability Scores
My desired system for ability scores stems from the Elemental system I would like to use for my setting. The core concept is that a being's physical and mental characteristics is either determined by or determines their strength with each element. All living creatures possess five chakras, energy centers within their body that absorb and process the prevailing elemental energies of the world. The elements I will be using are the traditional greek/japanese elements many are familiar with: Air, Earth, Fire, Water, and Void.
I haven't yet decided what the order of opperations yet is, but a character with a strong chakra will show physical and mental strengths associatd with it. Each element will have one physical stat and one mental stat. Currently, this is how I intend to separate them:
Air: (Agility and Perception) Air governs the body and mind's quickness.
Earth: (Constitution and Will) Earth governs the body and mind's resistance.
Fire: (Strength and Charisma) Fire governs the body and mind's raw strength.
Water: (Dexterity and Intelligence) Water governs the body and mind's ability to coordinate and adapt.
Void: (Void) Void makes one whole, for it is what exists between all.
I haven't yet decided what raises which; either physical exercise increases one's fire chakra and thus makes one stronger, or making one's self stronger increases one's fire chakra (since Strength will more certainly be tied to Fire). Magic will be associated with the ability scores, and magic will be divided not only by the elements but also by spheres of influence: Elemental, Physical, Mental, and Void (For instance, Water's spheres currently are Water, Transformation, Illusion, and Healing, while Fire's spheres are Fire, Power, Enchantment, and Light). I would like dedicated casters to focus not only on a mental ability score, but also a physical ability score.
If anyone here is learned in elementalism and the chakras, I would like to discuss the way different cultures associated the elements in these ways. I'm sure my way isn't totally accurate with the way they are looked at, and if there turns out to be a better way to associate the mind, body, and magic of my world to the elements I would love to hear it.
-------------
Aside from that, I am fairly certain I want to stick to a 1-20+ system for ability scores. I would like 20 to measure the normal peak of human achievement, especially since 1-20 allows me to say IQ = Intelligence x 10 (since IQ is a bell curve with 100 as the mean and 200 as the max). Depending on what I determine to be the "normal" range of human "levels" (and thus skill benchmarks), I will use world records of achievements such as lifting and breath holding to determine the guidelines for those in the game.
Racial Balance
Level Progression
Skills
[note]I'm basing this maneuver and magic system off of a Maneuver system presented in "Book of Iron Might", a Malhavoc Press book written by Mike Mearls. I had hoped that, since Mr. Mearls was one of the lead developers of 4E, we'd see something more like this in 4E, but we didn't. The Maneuver system is listed as OGL, so I figure me piecing together my system from ideas from his should be fine. Others will let me know if I need to put up any OGL legal stuff.[/note]Maneuver and Magic System
At its most simple, the maneuver/magic system will include a table of effects with a cost for each effect, along with a drawback table with reductions in maneuver cost. If any cost were to be left over, it would translate into an attack roll penalty. This maneuver system will allow players and DMs to come up with the effects of various attacks on the fly, as well as provide a point-based system for designing signature moves for characters.
A player can make a signature move for their character by spending a feat to build a maneuver at a reduced cost. This maneuver becomes a permanent part of the character, and can be used as frequently as the player wants. The 3E translation of this would be the Improved X feats; anyone can use the Trip maneuver, but if someone takes Improved Trip they are far better at it.
I haven't yet determined the costs for effects or drawbacks in 4E, but I am currently going through the 4E maneuvers to determine how they stack up against each other. Power Attack is a good example of a signature maneuver; with the maneuver system, anyone can accept a penalty to hit to gain bonus damage (in the 3E system, the penalty/bonus is -2 to hit for +1 damage), but those with Power Attack do it at reduced cost (this shows that the 'signature move' feat will likely cut the cost of a maneuver in half before applying drawbacks). Since Power Attack gets better as characters rise in tiers, that will probably translate into an automatic cost reduction for higher level characters; this will allow them to use more potent maneuvers on the fly, and allow them to upgrade their signature moves.
As I am still translating the system to 4E, here is the table from the 3E version (I've modified it from its appearance in 'Book of Iron Might'):
[spoiler=3E Maneuver System][table=Melee Attack Maneuver Effects]
[tr][th]Name[/th][th]Attack Roll Penalty[/th][th]Benefit[/th][/tr]
[tr][td]Ability Score Damage[/td][td]-20[/td][td]-2 penalty to single attribute[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Area Attack[/td][td]-4 per 5-ft. square[/td][td]Attack an area and all targets in it[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Blinding Attack[/td][td]-24[/td][td]Target blinded 1d4 minutes[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Bonus Damage[/td][td]-2 per +1 of bonus[/td][td]Bonus on damage, max +10[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Daze Attack[/td][td]-16[/td][td]Target dazed 1 round[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Deafening Attack[/td][td]-8[/td][td]Target deafened 1d6 minutes[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Deny Dexterity Bonus[/td][td]-16[/td][td]Opponent loses Dex to AC vs. attack[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Disable Natural Attack[/td][td]-16[/td][td]Prevent use of one physical attack[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Disarming Attack[/td][td]-16[/td][td]Target loses weapon[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Disrupt Special Ability[/td][td]-16[/td][td]Prevent use of Su or Ex ability[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Forced Movement[/td][td]-8[/td][td]Opponent moves 5 feet[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Immobilizing Shot[/td][td]-16[/td][td]Target can't move until it makes a Str, Dex, or Escape Artist check[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Inflict Penalty[/td][td]-4 per -1 of penalty[/td][td]Cause penalty to foe's attacks, AC, checks, or saves, max -5[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Knockdown[/td][td]-16[/td][td]Knock opponent prone[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Movement Damage[/td][td]-8[/td][td]Reduce foe's speed by 5 feet[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Sniping Shot[/td][td]-16[/td][td]Negate Cover bonus to AC for attack[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Stagger[/td][td]-8[/td][td]Foe loses next move action[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Stun[/td][td]-24[/td][td]Target stunned 1 round[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Sundering Attack[/td][td]-8[/td][td]Deal damage against object or weapon foe carries[/td][/tr][/table]
[table=Maneuver Drawbacks]
[tr][th]Name[/th][th]Keyword[/th][th]Penalty Reduction[/th][th]Description[/th][/tr]
[tr][td]Attack of Opportunity, Target Only[/td][td]Attack of Opportunity[/td][td]4 or 8[/td][td]Suffer attack of opportunity from target, perhaps ruining maneuver[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Attack of Opportunity, Total[/td][td]Attack of Opportunity[/td][td]8 or 12[/td][td]Provoke attack of opportunity from all foes, perhaps ruining maneuver[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Effects Only[/td][td]Damage[/td][td]4[/td][td]Inflict only maneuver effects, not standard damage; maneuver is made as a touch attack[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Free Strike[/td][td]Attack of Opportunity[/td][td]8[/td][td]Foe automatically hits with free strike[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Full-Round Action[/td][td]Action[/td][td]4[/td][td]Maneuver requires full-round action[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Opposed Check[/td][td]Defense[/td][td]4[/td][td]Target makes opposed attack roll, skill check, or ability check to avoid effect[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Overpowering Effort[/td][td]Effort[/td][td]4[/td][td]Lose Dex bonus to AC until next action[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Overwhelming Effort[/td][td]Effort[/td][td]4[/td][td]Fall prone after completing maneuver[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Reflective Attack[/td][td]Counter[/td][td]4[/td][td]Foe has chance to use your maneuver on you[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Reflective Effects[/td][td]Counter[/td][td]8[/td][td]You suffer maneuver's effects[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Saving Throw[/td][td]Defense[/td][td]4[/td][td]Target allowed save to avoid effects[/td][/tr][/table][/spoiler]
With those maneuver effects and drawbacks, you can reverse engineer the basic maneuvers from 3E (Interestingly, reverse engineering these maneuvers actually shows why some maneuvers were perceived weaker than others). I am using the maneuvers as written in the 3.5 PHB, just interpreting them with this system:
[ic=BULL RUSH]Effect: Forced Movement (-8), Close Quarters (-4), No Attack Roll (-4)
Drawbacks: Attack of Opportunity, Total (+4), Effects Only (+4), Str Check (+4)
Total: 0
As an add-hoc trade-off, the opponent can only be moved backwards, but in return you can move them farther than 5 feet if you exceed their strength check by greater numbers (5 feet for every 5 points you exceed). Close Quarters is an ad-hoc bonus that pays for the attacks of opportunity against you having a 25% chance to hit your target.[/ic]
[ic=DISARM]Effect: Disarming Attack (-16), No Attack Roll (-4)
Drawbacks: Attack of Opportunity Disrupts (+4), Opposed Attack (+4), Effects Only (+4), Reflective (+4)
Total: 0[/ic]
[ic=OVERRUN]Effect: Knock-Down (-16), No Attack Roll (-4), Part of Movement (-4)
Drawbacks: Attack of Opportunity (+4), Opponent can Avoid (+4), Opposed Str (+4), Effects Only (+4), Reflective (+4)
Total: 0[/ic]
[ic=SUNDER]Effect: Sundering Attack (-8), No Attack Roll (-4)
Drawbacks: Attack of Opportunity (+4), Opposed Attack (+4), Effects Only (+4)
Total: 0[/ic]
[ic=TRIP]Effect: Knock-Down (-16)
Drawbacks: Attack of Opportunity (+4), Strength Check (+4), Effects Only (+4), Reflective (+4)
Total: 0[/ic]
When you look at the maneuvers this way, you can begin to see while Bull Rush and Sunder were used less than the other maneuvers. While the maneuvers are all balanced, the effect of Bull Rush and Sunder are smaller than the other effects; this comes into affect when applying feats to improve them. For instance, this is how Improved Trip works:
[ic=IMPROVED TRIP]Effect: Knock-Down (-8; halved from feat)
Drawbacks: Strength Check (+4), Effects Only (+4), Reflective (+4)
Total: +4; This +4 bonus is used to pay for the extra attack you gain if the trip is successful. The additional +4 to your trip check is a function of the non-maneuver part of the feat (all feats are worth 2 maneuver points automatically, and +4 to an ability check sounds like a 2 point ability to me). [/ic]
Feats are worth 2 maneuver points on their own based on Weapon Specialization; +2 damage would cost 4 maneuver points, which is divided by 2 to become 2 maneuver points, which are paid for by the feat. This is why the 'Improved X' feats work by cutting the maneuver cost in half rather than simply adding points to the maneuver; if you added points to the maneuver you would need to add 8 points to accommodate the cost of Improved Trip (Knock-Down is -16, Strength Check is +4, Effects Only is +4, Reflective is +4, Extra Attack is +4, and +4 to the check is +4, totaling +8). If an 'Improved X' feat was worth 8 points, someone could use that to construct a feat which grants +4 damage (+4 damage is -8, paid for by the feat).
As another example, here is how Power Attack works with the maneuver system:
[ic=POWER ATTACK (Maneuver)]Effect: +1 Extra damage (-2)
Total: -2 to hit. [/ic]
[ic=POWER ATTACK (Feat)]Effect: +1 Extra Damage (-1; halved from feat)
Total: 0; the base 2 for the feat pays for this damage being doubled when a two-handed weapon is used. [/ic]
-------------------------
With the 3E version of the system analyzed, I can discuss how it applies to 4E. Luckily, 4E's feats are mostly simple. It is the scaling nature of 4E feats which will help determine how maneuvers must scale. Power Attack and Weapon Focus will both serve as examples for how the feat side of the 4E maneuver system will scale.
Power Attack requires a -2 penalty for a +2 bonus to damage, and it comes with a +50% damage bonus if you use a two-handed weapon as part of the feat. This matches up perfectly with the 3E maneuver system, if the +50% maneuver damage bonus is considered a valid ad-hoc 4 maneuver points (which is then divided by 2 to equal 2). But the damage doubles at Paragon Tier, and triples at Epic Tier. At Heroic tier, +2 damage is 4 maneuver points, +4 damage is 8 maneuver points, and +6 damage is 12 maneuver points. This suggests that the 'Signature Maneuver' feat will divide maneuver costs by 2 at heroic level, by 4 at paragon level, and by 6 at epic level, and give an additional 2 points ontop of that.
Weapon Focus grants a +2 bonus to damage, which come with a -4 attack penalty if used as an untrained maneuver. That cost is paid for by the feat. The damage scales to +4 at Paragon (8 maneuver points), and to +6 at Epic (12 maneuver points). If we use the dividers determined through analyzing power attack, the value of the feat remains a consistant 2 points.
I will also be looking at changing the 'Bonus Damage' maneuver to be 'Bonus Weapon Damage Die'. This will help with the construction of maneuvers that look more like Powers.
[spoiler=4E Effects][table=4E Maneuver Effects and Costs][tr][th]Effect[/th][th]Cost[/th][/tr]
[tr][td]Blinded: You grant Combat Advantage; you can't see any target (your targets have Total Concealment); -10 Perception; you can't flank an enemy.[/td][td]?[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Dazed: You grant Combat Advantage; you can take only a single action (and free actions); you can't take immediate or opportunity actions; you can't flank an enemy. [/td][td]?[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Deafened: You can't hear anything; you take a -10 penalty to Perception checks. [/td][td]?[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Dominated: You're Dazed; the dominating creature chooses your action (the only powers it can make you use are at-will powers). [/td][td]?[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Dying: You're Unconscious; you're at 0 or negative hit points; you make a death saving throw every round. [/td][td]?[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Helpless: You grant Combat Advantage; you can be the target of a Coup de Grace. [/td][td]?[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Immobilized: You can't move from your space, although you can Teleport and can be subject to Forced Movement. [/td][td]?[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Marked: You take a -2 penalty to attack rolls for any attack that doesn't target the creature that marked you. [/td][td]?[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Petrified: You have been turned to stone; you can't take actions; you gain resist 20 to all damage; you are unaware of your surroundings; you don't age. [/td][td]?[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Prone: You grant Combat Advantage to enemies making melee attacks against you; you get a +2 bonus to all defenses against ranged attacks from non-adjacent enemies; you're lying on the ground (flying creatures may fall); you take a -2 penalty to attack rolls. [/td][td]?[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Restrained: You grant Combat Advantage; you're immobilized; you can't be subject to Forced Movement; you take a -2 penalty to attack rolls. [/td][td]?[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Slowed: Your speed becomes 2 (does not apply to teleportation or to forced movement). [/td][td]?[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Stunned: You grant Combat Advantage; you can't take actions; you can't flank an enemy. [/td][td]?[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Surprised: You grant Combat Advantage; you can't take actions, other than free actions; you can't flank an enemy. [/td][td]?[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Unconscious: You're Helpless; you take a -5 penalty to all defenses; you can't take actions; you fall prone, if possible; you can't flank an enemy. [/td][td]?[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Weakened: Your attacks deal half damage (ongoing damage you deal is not affected). [/td][td]?[/td][/tr][/table][/spoiler]
Magic Item Philosophy
Magic is a part of the world. A +3 sword is simply a sword whose spirit has grown much more powerful than the spirit of a mundane sword. This spirit could have been empowered by a master smith's ritualistic and masterful crafting process, or perhaps simply by the heroic deeds of it's wielder.
But I would like it if magic items were not required for a character to be competative. I am on the fence between a D&D style game where players try to fill every available slot with magic, or a more literary style game where a magic item is a major and defining part of a character. I would like to see a game where a player could be stripped of all items, pick up a club, and still face challenges appropriate of their level; they should want their stuff back, but they should be able to access the vast majority of their abilities.
I'm surprised that this didn't happen a long time ago, honestly.
I was trying to love 4E. I decided that we can be friends, but I'm not ready to make a commitment with it.
I feel the same way, I suppose. If you have a group that will go along with you in this, you are fortunate.
Interesting stuff.
How do you plan on implementing skills? 3E's skill points and ranks, or 4E's trained/untrained?
The following are just ideas I've had in the past and ideas I've gotten while reading what you want to do. If you already have a concrete idea about how you are going to implement the elements below then please ignore.
Quote from: 1*The system will be level-based, but possibly not class-based: I require a level-based system because I feel levels are a simple way of determining character balance and what level of threat the players will be able to handle. I may or may not use classes, as it all depends on what kind of feat/talent system I end up utilizing.
*
An open-ended maneuver system:[/quote]
Magic Item PhilosophyBut I would like it if magic items were not required for a character to be competative. I am on the fence between a D&D style game where players try to fill every available slot with magic, or a more literary style game where a magic item is a major and defining part of a character. I would like to see a game where a player could be stripped of all items, pick up a club, and still face challenges appropriate of their level; they should want their stuff back, but they should be able to access the vast majority of their abilities.
[/quote]
This all depends on your monsters, NPC's and Attack/Defense system. You've already stated that you wanted to keep your attack and defense close, so that shouldn't be a problem. If you want magic items to boost the characters, but if they don't have the items they aren't dead meat, then create your monsters/NPC's as such.
If you set the AC for monsters at just above the average character's average attack then magic items will be a boost as it will put them at or above the AC of the monster, but they should still be able to hit them with a normal weapon. Though it'll just be a little harder.
Also if you make magic items grant powers, rather than stat boost you can forgo the +3 bonuses from weapons and items. Instead a sword once wielded (or crafted by) a famous air charka person allows the user to send a burst of air pushing back all enemies (possibly allies too) [Mechanic(in pseudo 4e terms for this example): Once per day Burst 1, make an attack+2 vs fortitude. Hit: Creature is pushed backwards a number of squares equal to (item level/2, agility mod, or etc... whatever you use). Miss: Creatures are pushed backwards one square.] You could also (if you use a Power Point system) allow them to put power points into the weapon to use the ability again. This makes magic weapons/items useful and wanted, but the characters could live without them.
REALLY LIKING WHAT i AM READINGG SO FAR
[blockquote=HorseLord]Also if you make magic items grant powers, rather than stat boost you can forgo the +3 bonuses from weapons and items. Instead a sword once wielded (or crafted by) a famous air charka person allows the user to send a burst of air pushing back all enemies (possibly allies too) [Mechanic(in pseudo 4e terms for this example): Once per day Burst 1, make an attack+2 vs fortitude. Hit: Creature is pushed backwards a number of squares equal to (item level/2, agility mod, or etc... whatever you use). Miss: Creatures are pushed backwards one square.] You could also (if you use a Power Point system) allow them to put power points into the weapon to use the ability again. This makes magic weapons/items useful and wanted, but the characters could live without them. [/blockquote]
Agreed most heartily. I use a lot of low power magic, but little high power, so it changes the PC's idea of what is a cool item. As mentioned above, I prefer charged items that use thr magic system of the world more than a +3 sword. I have some materials that are better to create an item, and there are weapons that hit a little better or damage a little more, but that aid skills ((we use a skill based system, so SaucePans of Masscookery are possible) or have a few charges of spells in the system built into them, that make it better than normal a few swings a day at most.
Quote from: PoseidonOnly problem I see is that depending on how you implement weapons, characters may only pick the most powerful weapons skill and leave the rest. Basically it opens the floodgates to Min/Maxxers, but it also allows those that have a solid character concept the freedom to create that character.
If you make Perception an ability score instead of a skill I can see you pulling this off for the hide and move silently vs a Defense. What about bluff and insight(Sense Motive) though?[/quote]
Sense Motive seems to fall into the same category as a catch-all Perception Defense. You're sensing tone changes, incongruities in their statements, and what-not. I'm not 100% convinced, though. As much as I want 8 ability scores, I do recognize that without some sort of breakthrough, it's going to be very difficult to make it work.
As for the power system you talk about, that's sort of what I'm thinking of for my thing. Every effect has a cost, but as you gain levels you could automatically gain points towards maneuvers. Higher level people are simply better able to do maneuvers with lower penalty. Now, this could be handled by the feats taken to make signature maneuvers, but I'd like to encourage people to not just ride a single maneuver; fans of Mutants and Masterminds will know how they handle Alternate Powers, charging someone just one feat to be able to turn one power into another (like Cyclopse could turn his optic blast from a single target attack to a single target attack with knockback, or an area effect attack); they aren't charged the full price for alternate abilites.
This shows that, while having options does increase one's power, it doesn't do it as much as making someone buy each thing individually.
Putting powers on magic items rather than statistical boosts could be the answer I'm looking for. The more I think of it, the more I lean towards M&M's approach to items (charging character points for them), but that doesn't feel natural. If the players could agree to a magic item and XP philosophy where their expenditure of character points determines if I'll put a magic item in the game for them, it might work best that way. I just don't like the idea, rather than the implimentation.
I updated the Maneuver post, detailing the 3E version of the Maneuver system and my thoughts on translating it to 4E. I will be going through the 4E powers (starting with the non-casters because they're slightly simpler, having less effects to deal with) and try to determine a weight to the different effects.
I am really loving that maneuver system (so much so that I might steal it at some point if its ok :P ). You are also right about it explaining the power of 3e feats.
On the topic of balancing magic items with the system properly, I believe that can be achieved through a proper mix of weapon abilities. Make sure that magic weapons and mundane weapons aren't too far apart in terms of to hit bonuses (though there could be a few aiming weapons for those that desire such). Instead give magic weapons certain special abilities. Maybe the Goretusk Axe of Light provides illumination in dark places and the use of a directed flash of light to blind or dazzle opponents. An axe of similar quality is going to hit as hard and as often but its owner will still search for their old Goretusk because its abilities were a boon to them in dark places.
I've been going through the fighter's powers to try to get an eyeball weight on various conditions. There seems to be two levels of conditions, ones that are worth 1W damage and ones that are worth 2W damage (prone is worth more than slowing, for instance).
Other than that, the balancing of powers seems to be more of an eyeballing than really balancing them. For instance, at the level 7 encounter powers, one simple power is one target 2W+Str damage and the target takes a -2 penalty to AC until the end of your next turn, while another power is one target 3W+Str damage but you take a -2 penalty to hit with the attack. My eye for balance says that trading the AC penalty for more damage would be just fine, especially since the AC penalty is so significant and will result in more damage from the party.
One thing I'm trying to attempt is to put a reasonable estimate on the amount of damage that 1W really amounts to. At the momment I'm looking at the Mace as the most basic weapon; +2 proficiency and 1d8 damage. Not everyone has millitary weapons, so I wanted to look at simple weapons. Assume that "millitary weapon proficiency" is like getting +1 damage per 1W.
With 1W being worth nearly 5 points of damage, I can weigh it with my maneuver system.
--------
I would like to have some savy posters to run ideas past, mainly fundamental system ideas, nothing specific. For instance, I want to discuss the merits of 4E's power system vs. something like Mutants and Masterminds where characters can typically use their powers as much as they want.
I've decided that I want to create a system that has a bit more of a nod to realism than 4E, and one that is modular so that all that is required to switch era/genres is to switch out the classes. This way I can kill two birds with one stone and create my d20 Modern Sci-Fi game and my fantasy game at once.
I've been watching a lot of Stargate SG1 and Atlantis lately, and I really want to allow the Daniel Jackson/Rodney McKay character to work; the smart non-combat character. 4E's system of unified attack and defense progressions allows a non-combat character to still contribute in combat, since their combat scores are only going to be a few points lower than others', and the skill challenge system allows for the creation of complex combats where a smart character can do their smart thing while others are fighting (disarm the bomb before the badguys kill the party; translate the tablet to determine how to turn on the ancient weapon ...).
Star Wars Saga edition had the noble, and that's something I'd like to allow in my game. Thus, I believe using Saga/d20 Modern's alternating feat/talent system will be the best way to handle it. New talent trees can be added to cover things. I'd like to keep separate classes and have HP and Skill Points be different for them, maybe with 1st level starting bonuses, but a class-less system might be better.
Well like I said, take a look at Celtricia. The issue you are describing here is actually one of the major RPG problems that it solved. Balancing combatants and non-combatants is hard, but not impossible.
'Solved' is a strong word. 'Addressed and still tinking with' may be more accurate.
Nonetheless, I will say that last night the skills that gained the most experience were:
Basic Outdoors, and the subskill of tracking.
Basic Detect, and the subskill Detect hidden.
Basic Cooking and the Subskill Camp Cooking
Basic Engineer and ther subskill Mason
Basic Scholar with the subskill Historical Knowledge.
And the combat skills were not even used.
And in the Igbarian Crew, the most popluar Guilds to belong to are the Bardic Guilds, not the Knights or fighting schools. SO maybe some of it is working the way we want.
Vreeg, sounds like you have a group that is fulfilled by non-combat stuff. I think I have potentially 4 players who are like that, and another who likes it to an extent (he still wants to advance his character, and wouldn't like to be stuck at one level forever).
I'm currently having considerable difficulty with my ability scores right now. The mental scores are giving me trouble, as my current set up for them isn't working 100%. I'm worried that Will and Perception lack skills outside of their basic defenses, and a few things don't fit (Bluff being a Charisma skill when Bluff is more related to water; Knowledge being an Intelligence skill when Divination is related to air).
Additionally, I'm not sure Strength and Dexterity are going to possess enough material for them to be balanced against the other scores. I want Dexterity to be the score for most attack rolls, and Strength to be the score for most damage rolls, but those shouldn't apply at all for magical attacks, and thus aren't worth quite as much.
Quote from: Kapn XeviatI'm currently having considerable difficulty with my ability scores right now. The mental scores are giving me trouble, as my current set up for them isn't working 100%. I'm worried that Will and Perception lack skills outside of their basic defenses, and a few things don't fit (Bluff being a Charisma skill when Bluff is more related to water; Knowledge being an Intelligence skill when Divination is related to air).
(Warning I'm at work so you are getting this while I think of it and I haven't had time to ponder the full effects of doing it this way. As always feel free to ignore)
What if you set up your abilities scores as such:
Air: (Agility) Air governs the body's quickness.
Earth: (Constitution) Earth governs the body's resistance.
Fire: (Strength) Fire governs the body's raw strength.
Water: (Dexterity) Water governs the body's ability to coordinate and adapt.
Air & Earth: (Perception) The mind's ability to quickly interpret its surrounding as well as its resistance to false images.
Earth & Fire: (Will) The mind's strength and resistance to outside forces.
Fire & Water (Charisma) The mind's strength over others and ability to adapt.
Water & Air (Intelligence) The mind's ability to think and adapt and how quickly it can do so.
Void: (Void) Void makes one whole, for it is what exists between all.
Mental stats determined are the balance (or lack of) between two charkas.
Now when you do your skills with Mental abilities you can put Bluff (water) instead of Bluff (Charisma). Doing so would allow either ability to be usable for the skill. In the case of Bluff the character would use which ever was higher either Intelligence or Charisma. How does intelligence work with Bluff? Well being informed or having knowledge can make a lie believable, you don't just need to be Charismatic. Intimidate is similar, you force your will on the person (Will), or you use your threatening personality (Charisma). I admit that is a stretch, but it could work.
Of course to do this you'd have to differentiate between mental skills and physical skills. Having a low mental ability won't be too detrimental and could help lend balance to the system. I don't know, but hopefully you can pull some inspiration from the blubbering thoughts above.
I decided that, for now, I'm going to focus on my maneuver system with only a few changes to the 4E system. First, all characters will follow the following progression:
[spoiler=Level Benefits][table=Level Benefits]
[tr][th]Level[/th][th]Level Bonus[/th][th]Level Benefit[/th][/tr]
[tr][td]1[/td][td]+0[/td][td]Race, Talent, Feat[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]2[/td][td]+1[/td][td]Feat[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]3[/td][td]+1[/td][td]Talent[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]4[/td][td]+2[/td][td]Feat, +2 to 2 scores[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]5[/td][td]+2[/td][td]Talent[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]6[/td][td]+3[/td][td]Feat[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]7[/td][td]+3[/td][td]Talent[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]8[/td][td]+4[/td][td]Feat, +2 to 2 scores[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]9[/td][td]+4[/td][td]Talent[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]10[/td][td]+5[/td][td]Feat[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]11[/td][td]+5[/td][td]Talent, Feat, +2 to all scores[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]12[/td][td]+6[/td][td]Feat[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]13[/td][td]+6[/td][td]Talent[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]14[/td][td]+7[/td][td]Feat, +2 to 2 scores[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]15[/td][td]+7[/td][td]Talent[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]16[/td][td]+8[/td][td]Feat[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]17[/td][td]+8[/td][td]Talent[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]18[/td][td]+9[/td][td]Feat, +2 to 2 scores[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]19[/td][td]+9[/td][td]Talent[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]20[/td][td]+10[/td][td]Feat[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]21[/td][td]+10[/td][td]Talent, Feat, +2 to all scores[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]22[/td][td]+11[/td][td]Feat[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]23[/td][td]+11[/td][td]Talent[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]24[/td][td]+12[/td][td]Feat, +2 to 2 scores[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]25[/td][td]+12[/td][td]Talent[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]26[/td][td]+13[/td][td]Feat[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]27[/td][td]+13[/td][td]Talent[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]28[/td][td]+14[/td][td]Feat, +2 to 2 scores[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]29[/td][td]+14[/td][td]Talent[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]30[/td][td]+15[/td][td]Feat[/td][/tr][/table][/spoiler]
Classes will still exist, and they will still grant everything they do in 4E.
I am entirely removing powers and will be replacing them with my maneuver system. Class tied feats will also be removed and made into talents. Feats will be entirely reevaluated and recast as minor character adjustments. They will be things that expand on a character's options rather than boost their overall power. Feats should be nice but not required. Feats will also tied to skills more closely, with more feats like Long Jumper and Sure Climber (feats which grant extra utility with a skill).
There was a point where I was looking at just merging Feats and Talents into the same thing, but I recently realized that keeping them allows me to control the system better. Feats can be minor and Talents can be bigger benefits. Keeping them separate allows for this differentiation to stay balanced, otherwise you run into the situation where players will have a harder time picking minor feats to round out or develop their character without weakening themselves. Bonuses to AC, Attack, and Defense will be entirely handled by automatic ability score bonuses and assumed item enhancement bonuses, so that no feat becomes a must have (as of right now, the Armor Specialization feats are nearly must have items otherwise your AC will fall even further behind monsters).
I have also doubled up on the ability score bonuses so that character's base abilities progress at the same rate as monsters. I introduced this over on the WotC boards but it wasn't hugely recieved. Here, I'll explain myself. First, this is the bonus progression for AC, Attack, and Defense for players; remember that monsters will gain +29 to all 3 of these stats from 1st to 30th level. The starting bonus does not matter, only how much they change from 1st to 30th level.
AC (Heavy)
Level: +15
Masterwork: +6
Ability: -
Enhancement: +6
Total: +27; Result: -2 behind monster progression.
AC (Light)
Level: +15
Masterwork: +2
Ability: +4 (if maxed, a stat can gain +8 points by 28th level; +10 points if Demigod is used)
Enhancement: +6
Total: +27 (+28 w/Demigod); Result: -2 (-1 w/Demigod) behind monster progression.
Attack
Level: +15
Masterwork: -
Ability: +4 (if maxed, a stat can gain +8 points by 28th level; +10 points if Demigod is used)
Enhancement: +6
Total: +25 (+26 w/Demigod); Result: -4 (-3 w/Demigod) behind monster progression.
Defense
Level: +15
Masterwork: -
Ability: +4 (+5 w/Demigod; +1 for secondary defenses, defenses that a class's primary or secondary ability score don't apply to)
Enhancement: +6
Total: +25 (+26 w/Demigod, +22 for secondary defense); Result: -4 (-3 w/Demigod, -7 for secondary defense) behind monster progression.
My system removes the need for masterwork bonuses for Light Armor, and brings Light Armor, Attack, and Primary Defenses up to +29 (by increasing the total ability modifier bonus from +4 to +8), which evens it out with monsters. It also smooths the progression a bit. Heavy Armor remains an issue, because Ability Score Bonuses don't apply to it (currently I'm planning to just spread the masterwork bonuses across more enhancement levels).
The only things that I'd like to put in my own homebrewed system is the other 3 ability scores and extra focus on skills (weapon skills, skill benefits at certain master levels ...). But 4E is almost exactly what I want anyway, so I feel this compromise will make it easier for me to make what I want.
Additionally, these changes will still allow my system to be modular; all you have to do is switch the classes out and you can change the genre. I might make a few adjustments to the skill list to facilitate this (such as re-combining the knowledge skills and reintroducing the craft skill; these skills exist in all genres and times, but their exact specializations are different).
The plus side to this is that 4E monsters will still be compatable.
Adding to my post flurry, I'm going to be taking a firm look at my system work. Now that I have decided to use Mutants and Masterminds as a system base, there are many things I will be looking at differently.
One thing that Mutants and Masterminds still makes difficult is my desire to split up the ability scores. It makes it worse actually, since Dexterity is made quite weaker.
The only problem is that I will not be able to use 4E monsters wholesale. But a chart system could be made to make monsters easily enough.
about some of the stats that you have trouble with.
Will: Will is mental fortitude and stamina, and can be considered the mental constitution and strenght.
Therefor, it could act as a stat that gives bonus when ever the character does an action in a way where they spend more effort and time then normally.
For example, a guy with no skill in cooking might fail under normal circumstances, but if he have high will, then to hell if he have to spend the intere day and cross reference 3 different cooking book, tonight he will have a properly spiced beef for when his date comes over.
basicly a stat representing sheer willpower to keep interest and not just give up in frustration when putting in effort.
it could also give a limited bonus in combat where the character is out-classed. for example, gaining a bonus on to-hit or on damage, if down to less then 25% hit point, to represent the "no way I'm going down with a whimper ya bastard!" attitude.
basicly, high will = succeding something due to putting in effort made easier or more efficient.
Perception: perception could also give bonus to iniative, if iniative not only represents reacting fast, but also represents the ability to quikly sieze up the situation before applying an approbiated action.
it could also give a bonus in to-hit, to represent the ability to spot openings in the enemies defense, weak spots (that can be hit for massive damage) and read the opponents combat style.
possible keep the bonus on to-hit from perception a constant, but instead let high perception reduce the number of rounds needed to observe the opponent, before the bonus is applied.
Quote from: Kapn XeviatAdding to my post flurry, I'm going to be taking a firm look at my system work. Now that I have decided to use Mutants and Masterminds as a system base, there are many things I will be looking at differently.
One thing that Mutants and Masterminds still makes difficult is my desire to split up the ability scores. It makes it worse actually, since Dexterity is made quite weaker.
The only problem is that I will not be able to use 4E monsters wholesale. But a chart system could be made to make monsters easily enough.
I'll be watching to see what way you want to take this. I'm curious to see how much you will take from here and how much you will synthesize.
What power growth curve are you looking at? Something close to traditional fantasy, or something grittier? And how are you thinking about doing spells?
Since I am using the Mutants and Masterminds System, I have a bit less options when dealing with ability scores. To-hit is not determined by ability scores, in order to keep their value lower, but I might end up bringing it back since my desire for 8 scores tears things down too much; it would be fine in the end, because M&M allows you to buy stats (like to hit and saves) back up.
Power Growth Curve will probably be a lot smaller. The jump between Power Levels in Mutants and Masterminds is huge.
Spells will be largely individualized by the caster, though I will probably present a number of premade spells to make things easier for newcomers to the system. You will determine what element (Air, Earth, Fire, Water, Aether) and what sphere (Elemental, Physical, Mental, Aether) it belongs to. Mutants and Masterminds use power arrays, and a single array can only be one element, but you can have multiple spheres. I may or may not have some restriction on the spheres (like required ability scores for Physical and Mental spheres); I'm not sure.