The Campaign Builder's Guild

Quote from: Stargate525I think that we should expand it to a five-point system; poor, bad, average, good, and excellent. Right now, for instance, you can't choose the d10 or d6 as a hit die.

Ok, what 5 categories would you suggest for BAB and saves?

@Atlantis: focus die is similar to hit die, but is used for "focus points", the point cost talents require when active. I just didn't want to call it "mana". :P

Anyways, another idea I was having: in addition to the templates (wild, psionic, skilled, etc) we introduce "virtues".

A virtue is equal to one of the six abilities and determines what basic talent trees the character has access to. Each virtue would have one talent tree for martial, magical, and skillfocused characters. This would be similar to the base classes from d20 Modern.

For example, the Constitution virtue could contain the talent trees
- Incarnate (magical; infuse body with magical effects)
- Juggernaut (martial; gain DR)
- Scout (skilled; gain bonuses to movement and endurance)
while the Intelligence virtue would contain the trees
- Commando (martial; loose damage but impose negative effects on target)
- Tactician (skilled; increase bonuses from aid another)
- Wizard (magical; gain spells as invocations)

So, instead of saying "my character is a fighter who grew up in a borderland region and focuses on smart tactics" you can say "my character is a martial type with the wild template and the Intelligence virtue".

Or the other way round. Instead of a virtue being related to an ability score, it could revolve around a concept like "martial" or "skilled". Eg, the Martial virtue could contain the talent trees
- Dreadnought (Str; gain bonus damage with all attacks)
- Dervish (Dex; loose attack bonus, gain bonuses to AC and movement)
- Juggernaut (Con; gain DR)
- Commando (Int; loose damage, inflict status conditions on enemies)
- Destroyer (Wis; ignore hardness and DR)
- Officer (Cha; coordinate allies to gain various bonuses)

Alternatively, we could dump restrictions on talent trees completely, and balance them by having special skill/feat/BAB/save prerequisites. There could arise some balancing issues due to the freeform character creation so far, but it was definitively worth considering.

Just some thoughts, thou. ;)

Quote from: Stargate525I think that we should expand it to a five-point system; poor, bad, average, good, and excellent. Right now, for instance, you can't choose the d10 or d6 as a hit die.

I was just thinking the same thing, but how would we split BAB, skills points, and saves into those 5 different catagories?

Also we could introduce 5 different progression rates that develope how fast a character receives feats and talents (we are still going for feats and talents arent we?)

Quote from: ~Kalin~I was just thinking the same thing, but how would we split BAB, skills points, and saves into those 5 different catagories?

That's exactly the reason why I suggested only three categories. Skill points and class skills would be no problem (2, 4, 6, 8, 10 points per level, or 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 skills known). However, BAB and saves are not really divisible into 5 categories - at least not without fundamentally changing the way combat works.

If you look at full BAB and half BAB, you see the difference between those two is at worst (without magic, buffs, and ability modifiers) "only" 10 points (at level 20). So, an enemy the fighter hits with a "2", the wizard can still hit with a "12". If you now introduce BAB categories below half BAB and/or above full BAB, like 1/4 and 5/4 (the latter was done in Iron Heroes), you drastically increase the gap. 1/4 BAB gives you +5 at level 20, while 5/4 gives you +25 at level 20. Therefore, an enemy the fighter hits with a "2", the wizard can only hit with a natural "20", and it becomes only worse when you add in magic items, abilities, buff spells, etc.

The same goes for saving throws. With progressions worse than 0-6 and better than 2-12 you introduce the problem that one person only fails on a natural 1, while the other must roll a natural 20 to succeed at the exactly same save. The same reasoning was mentioned in the Epic Level Handbook, why Epic Saves and Epic BAB work the way they do instead of following the normal progressions.

Quote from: ~Kalin~Also we could introduce 5 different progression rates that develope how fast a character receives feats and talents (we are still going for feats and talents arent we?)

If the feats and talents system is still flying, I must vote against this. For a simple reason: min-maxing. If all characters gain bonus feats and talents at the same rate, they have equal chances to gain power. But if you differ characters in this regard, one character now gains power at a potentionally much higher rate than the other - which is imho a bad thing.

Also, 5 categories are too much. How would you spread out the talent distribution without utterly crippling the characters with a weaker progression? I an see the progressions in that case going from "1 talent every level" over "1 talent every 2nd level", "1 talent every 3rd level", "1 talent every 4th level", to finally "1 talent every 5th level".

And this would utterly destroy any sort of balance between the characters, because the character with the best progression would be indefinitively better than the one with the worst progression. Also, no player in his right mind would select the worst progression, as talents are equal with class abilities and character options.

---

However, I had another idea if we go for a completely open system without classes or templates or virtues or some other wonky try to categorize the characters. If all characters had access to all available talent trees, it could quickly become unbalancing. A character with bonuses to movement and perception, as well as having spells as "at will" invocations and a thick damage reduction to boot. So, what if we put up not only requirements regarding BAB, saves, skill ranks, and prerequisite talents, but also regarding ability scores?

It would work similar to the standard magic system. "To cast a spell of level X, you must have a key ability of at least 10+X" -> "To take a talent from level X, you must have a key ability of at least 10+X". We simply key each talent tree to a specific attribute and make it so that to take the first talent in that tree you must have a key ability of 11, to take the second talent in that tree you must have a 12 in the corresponding attribute, a 13 for the third talent in this tree, and so on and so forth.

This would cut down on optimizing, as abilities are a bit harder to min-max than skill ranks, while still allowing all characters a wide field of options open to them.

No one says that there have to be options for all five categories for every section. BAB and saves are arguably more powerful than skill points and hit die, so it costs more to have them better.

Quote from: Stargate525No one says that there have to be options for all five categories for every section. BAB and saves are arguably more powerful than skill points and hit die, so it costs more to have them better.

Well, but what's the point then in having 5 categories, if not all options use all categories? Also, if you give BAB and saves more weight than HD it creates a dichotomoy in the system. You'd have then to differ between fort and will saves, and ref saves. Fort and will are by margin the most important saves, as they prevent your character from instant-death or mindcontrolling, while ref saves usually only negate additional HP damage.

All in all, in my opinion a system where 2 (BAB and saves) out of 6 options use a different number of categories and cost different leads only to a highly inelegant solution. I always ask myself "is it worth it", and to be honest I seriously cannot see the point why having 5 categories for skills, skillpoints, and HD/FD would justify in destroying the simple homogenity of "all options have 3 categories".

But another idea. How about instead of applying the templates in general to the character, we make the templates part of character creation? What I mean is this: in Blue Planet (yes, I know I am referencing this system quite often :P ) the major part of a character's "skillpoints" are preallocated in so called "packages". Each character gets to select one origin package (where they were born and spend their childhood), two background packages (where they grew up and spend their teenager time), as well as three to five professional packages (dependent on power level; what trade the character learned, where he went to university, etc). After that, the player gets some free points to spend as he wishes.

The advantage of such a system is that the character knows what he is meant to know. No more "fighter from the borderlands" with 0 ranks in survival, or "magician from the metropolis" with 0 ranks in Gather information. Also, the character creation process already describes some of the character's background; you know where he was born and grew up, what he did in his youth, and so on.

So, what do you think about adapting this into our system? Currently, DnD assumes that all characters just walk around the countryside and kill stuff for money. The actual background, growing up, and normal life of characters is, as of now, utterly unimportant and close to nonexistant.

So, just some ideas...

"origin templates" like
- metropolis (big cities, think Sharn or Waterdeep)
- wilderness (as it says, in the middle of nowhere)
- borderlands (far away regions, civilized by still far off from civilization)
- countryside (closer to civilization, small villages and hamlets)
would describe where the character was born and spent his childhood.

"status templates" like
- commoner (everyday farmers and craftsmen)
- free man (freelancer and traders, other people born free)
- nobility (those of noble birth, either acknowledged by their parents or not)
- slave (unfree people, perhaps child to prisoners of war or convicted criminals)
would describe into which social status the character was born.

"youth templates" like
- runaway (grew up on the streets, mostly had to care for himself)
- monastery (grew up in a monestary)
- order (grew up in a knightly order)
- apprenticeship (was apprentice to a mage or cleric)
would describe what the character did in his youth and early adolescence.

"professional templates" like
- craftsman (smith, baker, etc)
- mercenary (sword for hire, used to live and die on the street)
- magician (could be naturally gifted sorcerer, or trained mage)
- artist (sculptors, singers, dancers, etc)
would describe what profession the character adopted in his early life.

The benfits could be something like:
* origin template: gives skill ranks and a bonus feat
* status template: gives skills known
* youth template: gives skills known and skill ranks
* professional template: gives skills known, skill ranks, and a talent

After that, the character could perhaps have skill points equal to 10 plus his Intelligence modifier to distribute among his skills to represent off-topic studies and hobbies.

Quote from: Ra-TielWell, but what's the point then in having 5 categories, if not all options use all categories? Also, if you give BAB and saves more weight than HD it creates a dichotomoy in the system. You'd have then to differ between fort and will saves, and ref saves. Fort and will are by margin the most important saves, as they prevent your character from instant-death or mindcontrolling, while ref saves usually only negate additional HP damage.

All in all, in my opinion a system where 2 (BAB and saves) out of 6 options use a different number of categories and cost different leads only to a highly inelegant solution. I always ask myself "is it worth it", and to be honest I seriously cannot see the point why having 5 categories for skills, skillpoints, and HD/FD would justify in destroying the simple homogenity of "all options have 3 categories".

Yes, it's worth it. Right now, you're cutting off several key features of the d20 system. Right now you've got either a tank that can eat damage for breakfast (d12), or average(d8). There needs to be a middle ground (d10). It's not really even more weight. It's simply that two of the settings don't have (or need) a middle ground. There's not problem with it 'weighting' those skills at all, since you've got a number of pre-selected slots for each category anyway.

Quote from: Ra-TielBut another idea. How about instead of applying the templates in general to the character, we make the templates part of character creation? What I mean is this: in Blue Planet (yes, I know I am referencing this system quite often :P ) the major part of a character's "skillpoints" are preallocated in so called "packages". Each character gets to select one origin package (where they were born and spend their childhood), two background packages (where they grew up and spend their teenager time), as well as three to five professional packages (dependent on power level; what trade the character learned, where he went to university, etc). After that, the player gets some free points to spend as he wishes.

:?: You're stripping away part of the character's ability to be unique why? What's the benefit here, besides the 'characters know what they should'? I don't see how that's a problem we need to fix in the system; if the payer is stupid enough not to take the obvious skills, that's their problem. We shouldn't be restricting the system down to the lowest common denominator.

Quote from: Stargate525Yes, it's worth it. Right now, you're cutting off several key features of the d20 system. Right now you've got either a tank that can eat damage for breakfast (d12), or average(d8). There needs to be a middle ground (d10). It's not really even more weight. It's simply that two of the settings don't have (or need) a middle ground. There's not problem with it 'weighting' those skills at all, since you've got a number of pre-selected slots for each category anyway.

On average, d12 is 1 HP per level above the d10, and d8 is 1 HP per level below the d10. I don't see that much of a problem here. A ranger also "only" has a d8 as hit die, but gets other things (2 good saves, 6+Int skill points, spells, etc) to compensate for that. Consider the relative free and unbound character creation here. If I give up the ability to have eg another good save, or 8 skill points per level, and instead decide I want to play the tank, it'd better be worth it!

Also, why would you need more degrees of diversion regarding hit points? Either you're used to dealing with hits, or you suck at it, or you're average.

Quote from: Stargate525:?: You're stripping away part of the character's ability to be unique why? What's the benefit here, besides the 'characters know what they should'? I don't see how that's a problem we need to fix in the system; if the payer is stupid enough not to take the obvious skills, that's their problem. We shouldn't be restricting the system down to the lowest common denominator.

Even if I am cutting a bit into each character's uniqueness (I don't think I'm stripping too much, as the correct templates would give the "important" skills the player would select anyways) but give him some sense. I've seen sorcerers have the same 4 skills (bluff, concentration, knowledge arcane, and spellcraft) maxed and nothing else, no matter if they came from the wilderness, a small hamlet, a huge city, or another plane. Does that seem resonable to you?

Currently the system just does not encourage putting ranks in your "not-so-important" skills. Because either you'll suck anyways (compare: "fighter spot cross-class vs rogue hide class"), or the DCs are so high you'll have to pump in much more than 1 or 2 ranks (*cough*UMD*cough*). With a "templated" character creation, the character would have some "basics" at ~2-4 ranks that he would have picked up in his past (wilderness -> survival, knowledge nature; city -> diplomacy, gather information; hamlet -> profession, survival; etc) without him needing to sacrifice his precious skill points he gains from levels.

It's in fact quite the contrary than a nerf. Each character would get a boost, because the skills from the templates would not count against his skillpoints he gains at first level. My idea was making it so that in total a character gains 20 skillpoints from templates (which are predistributed) and then gains another 10+Int mod to distribute as the player wishes. In my eyes, this would make characters even more unique, as now the player has the chance to put ranks into "craft basketweaving" he learned as a little child from his mother without gimping himself mechanically.

The only reason to split BAB, skills etc... into five catagories is so that a player can choose from all HD used eg: d4, d6, d8, d10, d12, Correct?

If so we could use what Ra-tiel stated earlier. That HD is dependent on the race you choose a character creation, and you could then pick from the list a +2(poor), +4(averge), +6(good) (with constitution still added normally), allowing us to keep only three catagories. what do you guys think?

Quote from: ~Kalin~The only reason to split BAB, skills etc... into five catagories is so that a player can choose from all HD used eg: d4, d6, d8, d10, d12, Correct?

As far as I can see, yes. But as said, I really cannot see a reason why we would be "forced" to include all 5 types of hit dice. Just take a look at the first edition of the B5 d20 rpg. They did completely away with HD. At first level, each class gains a number of HP equal to 1d6+X, where X ranges from 1 to 6. Yes, that's right: variable HP at first level! :P After that, each level added only a minor amount to HP (eg a soldier got 3 more HP per level). Of course, Con was not added to HP, but increased your chance of stabilizing once in the negatives. ;)

Quote from: ~Kalin~If so we could use what Ra-tiel stated earlier. That HD is dependent on the race you choose a character creation, and you could then pick from the list a +2(poor), +4(averge), +6(good) (with constitution still added normally), allowing us to keep only three catagories. what do you guys think?

A good idea. However, if we used that we'd have to consider that characters are going to have substantionally more HP than in normal DnD. A human fighter would (if using my hip shot numbers from above and your suggestions) have 8 + 19*1d8 + 20*6 + 20*Con mod HP.

I'd help more with this, guys, but I have a bunch of work to finish up before school starts.

Quote from: Ra-TielA good idea. However, if we used that we'd have to consider that characters are going to have substantionally more HP than in normal DnD. A human fighter would (if using my hip shot numbers from above and your suggestions) have 8 + 19*1d8 + 20*6 + 20*Con mod HP.

Well we could decrease the bonuses to a +1(poor), +2(average), +3(good), that would decrease the increase in hp (i hope that last bit mad sense).


Also has anyone done any more work on the talent tree?

Double Post

Quote from: Sir VorpalI'd help more with this, guys, but I have a bunch of work to finish up before school starts.

No problem. Any help and suggestions are appreciated. :)

Quote from: ~Kalin~Well we could decrease the bonuses to a +1(poor), +2(average), +3(good), that would decrease the increase in hp (i hope that last bit mad sense).

Now that would be an idea. If we use the standard HP system, that is. ;)

If we used a VP/WP system, we could give an category-dependent one-time bonus to VP/WP, eg 5/10/15, or even 10/20/30 (although that could be again too much).

Or we could use a system that was a mix of SAGA and d20 Modern. A character would have a "wound threshold" equal to his Con score. Whenever he suffers more damage from a single blow than this number, he'd have to make a Fort save (DC 15, but could be modifier by the attacker's talents) or suffer a certain status condition (sickened, nauseated, stunned, etc). Now we could give a character bonuses to these Fort saves, representing his "sturdiness", eg +2/+4/+6 or something.

Or we could get rid of HP altogether, and implement a system with different wound degrees that impose negative conditions on the character. The bonuses would be similar to my above suggestion, as the characters would gain bonuses on the "resistance" check against a wound.

I'd like to hear some more ideas and comments before we decide for a fixed system. I only mentioned HD because they were the supposed "standard", but that doesn't mean we couldn't butcher this sacred cow. ;)

Quote from: ~Kalin~Also has anyone done any more work on the talent tree?

Well, which one? This is also a point where we should first decide in which way we want to develope our system (classless and/or levelless? using some sort of generic classes? using standard DnD classes?), because each of these decisions has an impact on how we would have to design the talent trees (most importantly regarding the talents' prerequisites).

Quote from: Ra-Tiel

Quote from: ~Kalin~Well we could decrease the bonuses to a +1(poor), +2(average), +3(good), that would decrease the increase in hp (i hope that last bit mad sense).

Now that would be an idea. If we use the standard HP system, that is. ;)

If we used a VP/WP system, we could give an category-dependent one-time bonus to VP/WP, eg 5/10/15, or even 10/20/30 (although that could be again too much).

Or we could use a system that was a mix of SAGA and d20 Modern. A character would have a "wound threshold" equal to his Con score. Whenever he suffers more damage from a single blow than this number, he'd have to make a Fort save (DC 15, but could be modifier by the attacker's talents) or suffer a certain status condition (sickened, nauseated, stunned, etc). Now we could give a character bonuses to these Fort saves, representing his "sturdiness", eg +2/+4/+6 or something.

Or we could get rid of HP altogether, and implement a system with different wound degrees that impose negative conditions on the character. The bonuses would be similar to my above suggestion, as the characters would gain bonuses on the "resistance" check against a wound.

I'd like to hear some more ideas and comments before we decide for a fixed system. I only mentioned HD because they were the supposed "standard", but that doesn't mean we couldn't butcher this sacred cow. ;)

Quote from: ~Kalin~Also has anyone done any more work on the talent tree?

Well, which one? This is also a point where we should first decide in which way we want to develope our system (classless and/or levelless? using some sort of generic classes? using standard DnD classes?), because each of these decisions has an impact on how we would have to design the talent trees (most importantly regarding the talents' prerequisites).

Quite true, and on that note i vote for a WP/VP, classless system (something very similar to Ra-Tiel's, that allows you to pick from three columns, except that race determines HD, and one of the columns gives you a bonus to WP/VP) and that will use a combination of bonus feats and talents and virtues (that are based around a specific concept) to emulate what the D&D classes already do and hopefully more with hopefully much more customization.

EDIT: I would also vote for the use of "class templates", eg: Vile, Holy, wild, civilized, skillful, marital, arcane, psionic, that dictate how a character progresses and what talents and feats they can learn, as well as unique abilities that may progress as the character gains levels.