The Campaign Builder's Guild

If WP/VP is the way to go, then I see no need for variable HD types.  A WP score would be equal to whatever passes for CON(Willpower maybe), maybe it is just a stand alone figure.  WPs can be bought.  VP would be a function of something like WP*(AGI mod + LUCK(a feat based mod) + WILL mod).

Does that make sense?


Imagine this as (a very rough) character craetion method.
6 stats, split 65 points among them. That is your base score array.
STR AGI ACC WIL PER DEX
You start with proficiency in the simple weapon group.

Character creation points = 15,000.  Also known as XP.
Feats/special abilities/stat points cost 1,000 xp.
First level spells cost 750.
BAB/Save bonuses/skill points/weapon group prof/armor group profs = 700.

So, Cul Le Pettour is our example.
STR 15 +1 bought stat point = 16
AGI 12
ACC 12
WIL 11
PER 07
DEX 08

+1 STR cost= 1000.
Power Attack = 1000.
Light Armor+Medium Armor+Heavy Armor +Light Shield +Heavy Shields = 3500.
4 weapon group profs = 2800.
+2 BAB = 1400.
+1 Fort save/+1 Ref save/+1 Will save=2100.
1 rank in Intimidate = 700.
2 ranks in Ride = 1400.
1 rank in Listen = 700.

Total spent= 14,600.

Ok guys, this amy not fit right here, but I'm saying it anyways.  I had an idea earlier that we do a class system, but each class is only "Table A and Table B" for abilities. Each class could be based on either stealth(rogue-esque), force(fighter/barbarian), or magic(Wiz/Cleric).  New classes would be incredibly easy to make, and the absolute vague nature of these would lend themselves to a broader range of chaacter types with a little more focus I guess...  Of course, magic would be allowed for all of these, and branching out could easily occur.  I guess this would be a lot more like the d20 modern classes than D&D.

I dunno, take it or leave it.  It was just a thought which I thought could benefit the discussion and tie us back into d20 and make the system more attractive and/or familiar to those other than the builders.

CYMRO...
Do we really need three dexterity ripoffs?
No offense.

Well I still should point out that by altering d20 to the extent that you are altering it, it becomes entirely a new game, and thus not very accessible, since most non-hardcore RPGers would prefer not to learn a new system if they can do something similar with d20. The Buy the Numbers suppliment already contains rules for making d20 characters with points instead of classes, but what is this system that is being created on this thread going to offer to make up for the extra learning curve tossed at our would-be players? The advantages should be clear-cut and significant. Asking a player to learn a whole new system to accomplish something that has a merely "different" and not neccessarily better feel to it is a losing proposition.

And yet there are those who play GURPS.
Mind-boggling.

Well not to say that there is no market for an RPG like this, but unless the new RPG carves out a unique niche, it will just be like "GURPS - but different!" and the average player will just say "Why not just stick with GURPS then?

QuoteCYMRO...
Do we really need three dexterity ripoffs?
No offense.

Well, one was someone else's suggestion as to Manual Dex being separated.
And Dex, as RAW, is warped, IMO.
And that was just a VERY rough example of what creating a character would look like.  The particulars are far from being worked out.

QuoteWell I still should point out that by altering d20 to the extent that you are altering it, it becomes entirely a new game, and thus not very accessible, since most non-hardcore RPGers would prefer not to learn a new system if they can do something similar with d20.

The point is to make a system that removes the flaws of d20.  I do not play GURPS, nor have I ever read a GURPS book.  After seeing a rather nasty Steve Jackson interview years ago about gamers, I would never buy a product with his name on it.

QuoteI dunno, take it or leave it. It was just a thought which I thought could benefit the discussion and tie us back into d20 and make the system more attractive and/or familiar to those other than the builders.

You make it attractive by designing a system that has ease of use and is fun.  If it departs from d20, so what?  d20 is a departure from 1E.  1E was quite the departure from OD&D.
I am looking at making something that allows players to create the characters they want with as much ease as possible.

And the same with all of us. It looks like a classless/leveless system now. Any objections?

Quote from: Natural 20Ok guys, this amy not fit right here, but I'm saying it anyways.  I had an idea earlier that we do a class system, but each class is only "Table A and Table B" for abilities. Each class could be based on either stealth(rogue-esque), force(fighter/barbarian), or magic(Wiz/Cleric).  New classes would be incredibly easy to make, and the absolute vague nature of these would lend themselves to a broader range of chaacter types with a little more focus I guess...  Of course, magic would be allowed for all of these, and branching out could easily occur.  I guess this would be a lot more like the d20 modern classes than D&D.

Why do we even need to have three types?  That presupposes that those three types underly every concept for a fantasy RPG.  I don't see that.  In real life people can train what they want to train.  I do agree that certain parts of the process require that one have undergone earlier parts to build up the skill.  But other than that everything should depend on player choice.

If you want some arbitrary and useless divide, the only one you need is "combat class" and "outside of comabt" class, because anything else is just one person's opinion about how the world is divided.  Heck, that division I just gave may not even hold up.

Before we get too bogged down in details, we need to decide on some basic things like:

1. What kind of feel are we going for? Gritty and dark, light and fluffy, historical/mythological, high fantasy, hardcore monster bashing, something else entirely? This affects all kinds of things like hit points/wound points, combat systems, critical hits, healing, type and prevalence and power or magic, and so on.

2. What kinds of players are we aiming at? There are optimizers, powergamers, munchkins, wargamers, manga fans, history buffs, tortured artistes, etc. They all want slightly different things from a game.

3. How much crunch are you looking to have? Some players don't want to wade through tech trees, prerequisites, XP costs, or the details of spell casting. They just want to make a character and go on with life. Other players don't feel fulfilled unless everything about their character is spelled out in gory detail.

4. Just how similar to SRD d20 do you want it to be? The more similar it is, the easier it will be to teach your players, and to attract new ones. But then the more you'll be stuck with d20 artifacts like BAB and save progressions, base classes, feat selections, particular class abilities like evasion or rage. The more different, the more freedom you have to make the game the way you want it to be. But also much more work involved in statting out spells, monsters, equipment, GP costs, XP costs, making new spell lists, etc.

So you know where I'm coming from:

I spent some time playtesting and helping to design Ysgarth, and I always felt the biggest two problems we had were reducing the learning curve so new players could pick it up faster, and balancing things out to prevent the optimizers from dominating the game. The two problems fed off each other - those people who knew the game well, knew what combinations had high levels of synergy and could create real combat monsters, while newbies and casual players had a hard time even putting together competent characters.

The high levels of flexibility in the system meant that you could fairly easily capture a wide variety of characters. But only a few types of characters were mechanically competitive with the one-dimensional minimaxed hedgehogs. So all that flexibility just went to waste from a practical standpoint.

Quote from: Golem011And the same with all of us. It looks like a classless/leveless system now. Any objections?

None from me. :D

Preface: I always try to write as honestly as possible, so sometimes I have to say something the way I say it even if it might be irritating.

I'd prefer something that is rules-light, that basically functions as way to resolve disputes impartially when roleplaying alone won't suffice.  However I already have access to such a system, so what I'm aiming for here is d20 but without any restrictions on how I develop my character's abilities.  This is for roleplaying purposes only: I think anyone who designs a character for power without a good roleplaying reason for it is being dull.  What purpose does that character serve once you've proven that it's good at what it does?
Votes, not facts:
1. Feel: Hopefully any feel.  I'd like the system to allow for extensive non-combat play, though.

2. Players: Freeform roleplayers for me.

3. Crunch: As much as is needed to create one's character, but as little as possible elsewhere.

4. Similar to d20 SRD?: That will be decided by removing core d20 elements that we don't like.  So who knows?

Why do we have to aim for something?  What is this project, a serious venture or just something we want to do?

QuoteThis is for roleplaying purposes only: I think anyone who designs a character for power without a good roleplaying reason for it is being dull.  What purpose does that character serve once you've proven that it's good at what it does?

I agree.

QuoteWhy do we have to aim for something?  What is this project, a serious venture or just something we want to do?

My goal is to create a fun and easy gaming system.  I approach every gaming project with a certain amount of seriousness, just not anal-retentiveness.  Fun is the atchword here.

What Cymro and Silvercat said. Of course, min-maxers may gain an edge here, but that's a problem with all systems, and unlike WOTC we can just edit problems out as we find them.

Quote from: snakefingBefore we get too bogged down in details, we need to decide on some basic things like:

1. What kind of feel are we going for? Gritty and dark, light and fluffy, historical/mythological, high fantasy, hardcore monster bashing, something else entirely? This affects all kinds of things like hit points/wound points, combat systems, critical hits, healing, type and prevalence and power or magic, and so on.

2. What kinds of players are we aiming at? There are optimizers, powergamers, munchkins, wargamers, manga fans, history buffs, tortured artistes, etc. They all want slightly different things from a game.

3. How much crunch are you looking to have? Some players don't want to wade through tech trees, prerequisites, XP costs, or the details of spell casting. They just want to make a character and go on with life. Other players don't feel fulfilled unless everything about their character is spelled out in gory detail.

4. Just how similar to SRD d20 do you want it to be? The more similar it is, the easier it will be to teach your players, and to attract new ones. But then the more you'll be stuck with d20 artifacts like BAB and save progressions, base classes, feat selections, particular class abilities like evasion or rage. The more different, the more freedom you have to make the game the way you want it to be. But also much more work involved in statting out spells, monsters, equipment, GP costs, XP costs, making new spell lists, etc.

So you know where I'm coming from:

I spent some time playtesting and helping to design Ysgarth, and I always felt the biggest two problems we had were reducing the learning curve so new players could pick it up faster, and balancing things out to prevent the optimizers from dominating the game. The two problems fed off each other - those people who knew the game well, knew what combinations had high levels of synergy and could create real combat monsters, while newbies and casual players had a hard time even putting together competent characters.

The high levels of flexibility in the system meant that you could fairly easily capture a wide variety of characters. But only a few types of characters were mechanically competitive with the one-dimensional minimaxed hedgehogs. So all that flexibility just went to waste from a practical standpoint.

1) WONDERMENT. The players are living in a world with hidden secrets, treasures, and dangers. Animals, plants, and the dead can talk (but only to those who know how to listen- which should be worked onto the system). Great spirit creatures of the wilderness know ancient and forgotten secrets or can eavesdrop on the conversations of the gods (as per the traditional djinn) and so on and so forth.

CHANGE. The anachronistic take alone makes this necessary. Old religion exists along side new. Old magic and tech exists along side new. Old politics... you get the idea. And one may not always be openly opposed to the other. In many cases, the old simply fades away, or holds on to a tenuous existence of continual self-justifications.

2. Let's make stuff that PEOPLE can play. Simple rules for those who don't want to spend an hour on character sheets. Effective rules for those who want to customize their characters. Killing rules for those who want to kil. Roleplaying rules for those who want to roleplay. All of the above should be available to EVERYONE, because fighters *do* still roleplay. Just because they don't have charisma in the traditional game doesn't mean they don't have families, goals, and backstories.

3. Tech trees are easy. Points rarely are. Ever. But players *do* need a limited pool of resources to draw from.

4. This is shaping up (from the sounds of it) to be pretty far off from d20. As for writing monsters, it sounds possible to have systematic guidelines for GM monster creation.

As for the incompetent/optimized thing... We can prevent over-optimization with a fixed point-percent limit per ability... but I don't know how we could go about fixing the "incompetent character" thing.