Ashtagon
2012-04-22, 03:00 PM
Thought experiment...
Characters are build with 4d6 drop one, seven times, drop one, arrange to taste (or whatever randomisation or selection method you choose).
All human characters begin with 4 hp ("hero points" - they are conceptually more of a character shield (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PlotArmor). Instead of negative hp, you have a number of "body points" equal to your Constitution score. Any time you lose bp, you risk falling unconscious and/or suffering a major long-term injury that won't ever really go away without super-science medical aid or magic.
Characters can have any number of traits, feats, or flaws, in any combination, depending on what works best for the character concept. These should probably be assigned points somewhere along in the design stages.
A key point with feats is that they should allow you to do something you couldn't otherwise do (ie. no static bonus feats). On the other hand, a feat shouldn't be required to do something that a reasonably talented person could do. ("Sorry, you can't swing on the chandelier without the Dashing Gallant feat.")
Base attack bonus is dropped. Instead, it is divided up into a dozen of so weapon groups, and treated as a skill.
Armour provides damage reduction and limits your Dexterity bonus. Hard to hit or hard to damage; pick one.
If you want a gritty game, the GM can simply ban or severely restrict the ability to purchase additional hp. For a typical D&D "armed hobos" game, hp should be easy to purchase with your xp points.
Skill points remain largely the same. Without any concept of levels, there's no Intelligence bonus for skill points though. Equally, there's no reason not to open up a whole bunch of skills (and weapon proficiency is now effectively a skill) that previously would never have been considered.
Most class features could quite easily be rewritten as feats, with varying xp point costs to purchase. Some of these could well have prerequisites. The exception is spell-casting, which is notoriously hard to balance, and doesn't lend itself well to this idea as currently written. "Gain one level of wizard casting ability" defeats the primary point of this d20 variant concept.
Is this worth developing?
Characters are build with 4d6 drop one, seven times, drop one, arrange to taste (or whatever randomisation or selection method you choose).
All human characters begin with 4 hp ("hero points" - they are conceptually more of a character shield (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PlotArmor). Instead of negative hp, you have a number of "body points" equal to your Constitution score. Any time you lose bp, you risk falling unconscious and/or suffering a major long-term injury that won't ever really go away without super-science medical aid or magic.
Characters can have any number of traits, feats, or flaws, in any combination, depending on what works best for the character concept. These should probably be assigned points somewhere along in the design stages.
A key point with feats is that they should allow you to do something you couldn't otherwise do (ie. no static bonus feats). On the other hand, a feat shouldn't be required to do something that a reasonably talented person could do. ("Sorry, you can't swing on the chandelier without the Dashing Gallant feat.")
Base attack bonus is dropped. Instead, it is divided up into a dozen of so weapon groups, and treated as a skill.
Armour provides damage reduction and limits your Dexterity bonus. Hard to hit or hard to damage; pick one.
If you want a gritty game, the GM can simply ban or severely restrict the ability to purchase additional hp. For a typical D&D "armed hobos" game, hp should be easy to purchase with your xp points.
Skill points remain largely the same. Without any concept of levels, there's no Intelligence bonus for skill points though. Equally, there's no reason not to open up a whole bunch of skills (and weapon proficiency is now effectively a skill) that previously would never have been considered.
Most class features could quite easily be rewritten as feats, with varying xp point costs to purchase. Some of these could well have prerequisites. The exception is spell-casting, which is notoriously hard to balance, and doesn't lend itself well to this idea as currently written. "Gain one level of wizard casting ability" defeats the primary point of this d20 variant concept.
Is this worth developing?