PDA

View Full Version : An option heavy system...



Telesto
2016-09-15, 11:04 AM
I was looking through 5e and the forums and it became apparent that almost everything is the same, and most differences between classes are simply fluff based and what options they have.

So, let's drop classes. Or at most make it bare bones: Fighter, Skill-Monkey, Caster, the crosses between them.

Then levels, well... Levels don't really exist in DnD, more like tiers of play with a false structure designed to make it feel as if there is a gradual progression through the tiers. So, why have levels, just go from one tier to another.

Are there any systems out there that would work for this? Maybe just everyone gets a race and then builds up their character as the desire.

Edit- I forgot to describe what I mean by Option Heavy. Essentially I want something where the player picks their race, and then picks options for their character. Like if it has no classes and you want spellcasting, you can take spellcasting. If you want to smite your favored enemy, you can take both options. Etc.

Thrudd
2016-09-15, 11:30 AM
GURPS and D6 Fantasy. Both give you lots of options, no classes. Speed of character progression depends on how many points you give out at the end of sessions or adventures: there are no levels or official tiers, players improve abilities individually or buy new abilities.

Both systems require you, as the GM, to do a lot of work in the beginning. For GURPS you need to decide which books the players can draw from, what fantasy races will exist and what abilities to give them. Both systems give you generic examples and also tell you how to create your own using the system's tool kit. In D6 you also need to decide how magic works and create your own spells. It has generic examples.

Think of both these systems as toolkits to let you create your own world with whatever elements you want.

Knaight
2016-09-15, 11:55 AM
You just described a massive chunk of the entire RPG market. You're describing fairly standard point buy (which is ubiquitous), priority systems (ubiquitous), and a couple of other things - and that's without getting into things that aren't quite what was described but might still fit (e.g. lifepath systems).

Do you have any other preferences? For instance do you want to stick with fantasy, or do you want to try out other genres? If sticking with fantasy, do you want D&Desque dungeon fantasy or something a bit more esoteric? Do you want to use an established setting or a more generic system you can fit to a setting? How much combat focus do you want?

Even answering these questions can be iffy with only D&D knowledge. Fortunately, there are some entirely free games you can look at, test out, and maybe use to get a better sense of your preferences. A quick list:

d6 Open - A fairly broad set of generics that cover a lot of ground.
Nemesis - An action-horror game that introduces you to the ORE system, much of which is commercial.
Anima Prime - A very powers-focused game that might appeal to more powers-focused players.
GURPS Lite - Mostly an introduction into GURPS.
Krendel Core - A very powers focused game. It didn't stand out to me, but I'm not a powwers-focused player. It seems like an easy jump from D&D to it.
Warrior, Rogue, and Mage - A very light D&D like game with no classes. It's not likely to appeal to you directly, but it has some interesting design that can help refine preferences.
Fudge - A lighter, even more generic GURPS like game. It's a personal favorite, but it's also a game where you have to do a decent amount of design work; it's just amazingly open for that sort of thing.
Fate - The Dresden Files incarnation is closest to what you want, but it's not free. Take a look at Fate in general (not FAE) to see if that might be worth looking into further.

There's also a fair few which aren't free but are fairly cheap. Savage Worlds is $10 for the Explorer's Edition. You need just the one $10 book, and you're good. Burning wheel is $25, which is a bit more but also gets you a 600 page rules dense rulesbook with good production values.

thedanster7000
2016-09-15, 12:11 PM
I noticed it's been mentioned, but I stress that a large portion of GURPS (http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/)' design is to give players the ability to achieve a large variety of options. It's a semi to very realistic game that uses point buy for character creation. Due to a huge number of templates, official and otherwise, you won't have to build your character from scratch if you don't wish to (but can), and can tweak anything you want to change even if you do use one. This allows groups to freely use/not use/have the GM create race/class templates as one so wishes.

Another upside of the Point Buy is that you can literally play anything (with the GM's approval, of course). Want to play a goblin? Possible. Want to play a flying cosmic space turtle? Possible. Want to play a flying cosmic space turtle-goblin? Possible. Obviously this has its downsides, but can be resolved by the GM giving out a list of races to choose from or a general agreement that people do not make cosmic space turtles. If you're looking for a D&D-like game I recommend getting GURPS Fantasy (http://www.warehouse23.com/products/SJG31-1001), which has many races/classes that are fairly similar to D&D, plus a lot of background information and tips to running a fantasy game. For a more hack-and-slash game, check out the GURPS Dungeon Fantasy PDFs (http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/books/dungeonfantasy/), or the upcoming stand-alone (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/847271320/dungeon-fantasy-roleplaying-game-powered-by-gurps?ref=user_menu) on Kickstarter, which I feel is specifically designed for D&D converts, but has not yet been released.

Here's (http://www.warehouse23.com/products/gurps-lite-fourth-edition) a free 'lite' version, that some groups even use instead of the full game because of the increased simplicity (but I personally prefer the full thing), and here's (http://www.warehouse23.com/products/gurps-ultra-lite) an even lighter version if you don't feel like trudging through rules to get a feel of the game.

I've had a very good experience with this game (if you hadn't already noticed) and highly recommend at least checking it out.

Anonymouswizard
2016-09-15, 12:20 PM
I was looking through 5e and the forums and it became apparent that almost everything is the same, and most differences between classes are simply fluff based and what options they have.

So, let's drop classes. Or at most make it bare bones: Fighter, Skill-Monkey, Caster, the crosses between them.

If you want me to drop the specifically not medieval fantasy games?
-GURPS
-d6 Fantasy
-Fate (Core or Accelerated)
-FUDGE
-RuneQuest

All don't have classes. Ars Magica has the classes of 'magic-user/mundane/minor role'. Then if you go beyond medieval D&D fantasy games there are significantly more classless games then ones that use classes.


Then levels, well... Levels don't really exist in DnD, more like tiers of play with a false structure designed to make it feel as if there is a gradual progression through the tiers. So, why have levels, just go from one tier to another.

All the systems above are levelless. It's actually pretty common for a system to be levelless or have flexible progression. You do occasionally get 'tiered' play, the first few WH40kRPGs limited certain Talents and skills to higher ranks (to encompass raising Characteristics and branching out), and Legends of the Wulin determines your basic dice pool by Rank.


Are there any systems out there that would work for this? Maybe just everyone gets a race and then builds up their character as the desire.

Lots, my personal favourite is Fate (where, in a fantasy world you can make a High Concept is with '[descriptor] [race] [class]', such as 'talkative orc metamagician' or 'hyperactive elven thief'), but basically any of the ones mentioned in the list above should work. D&D-style class and level has been in the minority for a long time.


Edit- I forgot to describe what I mean by Option Heavy. Essentially I want something where the player picks their race, and then picks options for their character. Like if it has no classes and you want spellcasting, you can take spellcasting. If you want to smite your favored enemy, you can take both options. Etc.

Specifically here? GURPS or d6 Fantasy sounds like what you want. Fate is option heavy, but it's that by giving you a toolkit to put on extra systems (I've seen at least 6 varieties of magic, 2 different vehicles systems, systems for conspiracies as characters and cliffhangers, systems for various types of monster, even a superpowers system), whereas I believe you want a bunch of prewritten options to bolt onto characters.

Telesto
2016-09-15, 12:46 PM
You just described a massive chunk of the entire RPG market. You're describing fairly standard point buy (which is ubiquitous), priority systems (ubiquitous), and a couple of other things - and that's without getting into things that aren't quite what was described but might still fit (e.g. lifepath systems).

Do you have any other preferences? For instance do you want to stick with fantasy, or do you want to try out other genres? If sticking with fantasy, do you want D&Desque dungeon fantasy or something a bit more esoteric? Do you want to use an established setting or a more generic system you can fit to a setting? How much combat focus do you want?

I have experience with Pathfinder, D&D, Dresden Files, World of Darkness, and Dark Heresy.

How about I come up with a series of points and we can see if anyone knows anything that fits.

-System: I don't really care. I enjoy and have enjoyed D20, but I also enjoyed Dresden's system and World of Darkness. So I doubt it will bother me learning a new system.
-Setting: The more I can do with it, the better. Anything from Dinosaur riding nomadic tribes prehistory to general fantasy should be do-able in the system, but it would be nice if it also went as far as steampunk.
-Races: They exist and have some effect on the character
-Classes: It would be nice if there just weren't any the the character could be built any which way.
-Magic: An absolute must.
-Combat: D&D expectations, I should be able to run a heavy combat game, or a decent social game, or anywhere in between.

Really the more options the players have available the better. Vampire The Masquerade and Requiem were both nice, but... it's vampire specific, and the options for character build are what I would consider moderate to low. The game allowed for the barbarian to cross into the rogue and warlock, or be a lot stronger as a straight barbarian, but... the spells were lacking in breadth and it could have done with some more expansion.

Dresden has a nice system, but it's too race/class heavy, with too little in combat options and real character options.

Magic Myrmidon
2016-09-15, 01:01 PM
Well. Sacage Worlds is a universal system that can handle things from gritty cyberpunk to superheroes to fantasy. There are tons of prewritten settings, and has a wide band of power levels, especially with the rifts supplement that was released recently.

Knaight
2016-09-15, 01:02 PM
I have experience with Pathfinder, D&D, Dresden Files, World of Darkness, and Dark Heresy.

How about I come up with a series of points and we can see if anyone knows anything that fits.

-System: I don't really care. I enjoy and have enjoyed D20, but I also enjoyed Dresden's system and World of Darkness. So I doubt it will bother me learning a new system.
-Setting: The more I can do with it, the better. Anything from Dinosaur riding nomadic tribes prehistory to general fantasy should be do-able in the system, but it would be nice if it also went as far as steampunk.
-Races: They exist and have some effect on the character
-Classes: It would be nice if there just weren't any the the character could be built any which way.
-Magic: An absolute must.
-Combat: D&D expectations, I should be able to run a heavy combat game, or a decent social game, or anywhere in between.

Really the more options the players have available the better. Vampire The Masquerade and Requiem were both nice, but... it's vampire specific, and the options for character build are what I would consider moderate to low. The game allowed for the barbarian to cross into the rogue and warlock, or be a lot stronger as a straight barbarian, but... the spells were lacking in breadth and it could have done with some more expansion.

Dresden has a nice system, but it's too race/class heavy, with too little in combat options and real character options.

This gives us a bit more to work with. It looks like you don't want a specific setting and instead a system that covers a wide variety, having races and magic narrows the field a bit. As far as D&D expectations go almost every system handles the non-combat side better than D&D, fairly few are that combat focused.

Read Nemesis, if you like the core mechanics of the ORE system check out REIGN and the Xth Year of Our Reign web supplements. Ignore the default setting, other than stealing what you want from it. GURPS should also fit your preferences well.

Mark Hall
2016-09-15, 01:15 PM
I was looking through 5e and the forums and it became apparent that almost everything is the same, and most differences between classes are simply fluff based and what options they have.

So, let's drop classes. Or at most make it bare bones: Fighter, Skill-Monkey, Caster, the crosses between them.

Then levels, well... Levels don't really exist in DnD, more like tiers of play with a false structure designed to make it feel as if there is a gradual progression through the tiers. So, why have levels, just go from one tier to another.

Are there any systems out there that would work for this? Maybe just everyone gets a race and then builds up their character as the desire.

Edit- I forgot to describe what I mean by Option Heavy. Essentially I want something where the player picks their race, and then picks options for their character. Like if it has no classes and you want spellcasting, you can take spellcasting. If you want to smite your favored enemy, you can take both options. Etc.

I ran a game very like that in Savage Worlds... I had two kids (about 4-6th grade) who came up with their characters independently, and just wrote the world as we went. You want to play a combat junkie? Pick combat edges. Want to play a mage? Pick an arcane background.

You might also be interested in using Star Wars Saga, specifically versions I developed that are Classless (http://rpgcrank.blogspot.com/2013/07/classless-saga-and-other-alterations.html) and Levelless (http://rpgcrank.blogspot.com/2015/06/h1-levelless-star-wars-saga.html).

Telesto
2016-09-15, 01:40 PM
I don't have anything against the ORE system, but implementation of the system is going to be extremely important. Nemesis has a lot of skills which is okay, but it's missing magic, character features (a Paladin's smite, a rogue's sneak attack, a cleric's divine intervention, etc)...

Well, from what I read. I found a 52 page rulebook online for it.

Actually: what are interesting/good systems. I haven't really disliked any systems, but if I can find the basic information on the systems I may be able to look into things more.

Telesto
2016-09-15, 03:06 PM
Upon considering it, I think I'll work on my, extremely old videogame system I was developing when I was 16. It's somewhat convoluted and will require a lot of work, however the end result should be more in line with what I want than if I worked on someone else's system.

Now the dofficulty will be looking through other general systems for inspiration and simplifying a heavily percentage based, diminishing returns system into something workable for pen and paper and fast gameplay. Pretty sure I can manage it, but it will require some simplification so I can make most things happen in 1 to 2 rolls, using d%.

Anonymouswizard
2016-09-15, 03:18 PM
-System: I don't really care. I enjoy and have enjoyed D20, but I also enjoyed Dresden's system and World of Darkness. So I doubt it will bother me learning a new system.

Okay, so if you enjoyed The Dresden Files look up Fate Core. It's the new edition of the system The Dresden Files used, and the electronic version is pay what you want (with multiple file formats). There's also a lot of Pay What You Want electronic stuff, I've picked up most of it for free (and am buying physical books as I have the money, although some are better value than others). The Fate System Toolkit includes lots of systems to plug in, including less deadly weapon and armour systems (I like Red and Blue dice).

You might also want to look up FUDGE, which is the system Fate is based on. In essence Fate is a more narrativist version of FUDGE with the addition of skill columns and a reworked ladder (including an alternative number system). I personally prefer Fate, but I can see how FUDGE would be better for some games.


-Setting: The more I can do with it, the better. Anything from Dinosaur riding nomadic tribes prehistory to general fantasy should be do-able in the system, but it would be nice if it also went as far as steampunk.

Fate, FUDGE, and GURPS are good here. They can both do almost anything, although GURPS is a bit poor at alternative tech out of the box it can be made to work. For Fate and FUDGE, technology has whatever rules you give it, and all three of them are independent of setting, with you writing the monsters/technology/magic needed that isn't in the books (for GURPS they give you a lot, for Fate and FUDGE not so much).


-Races: They exist and have some effect on the character

In Fate, FUDGE, and GURPS this depends on the group. Most of the time in GURPS members of a race in a setting will all possess a template which gives them a starting point (human template: blank character sheet). In Fate it can vary depending on how your group wants to run it, it could be just an Aspect you can invoke, it could be that you can't do absolutely terrible at certain rolls, or it could be a special skill to do race related things. I'm not certain how it would be handled in FUDGE, ask an expert.


-Classes: It would be nice if there just weren't any the the character could be built any which way.

Again, majority of the market.


-Magic: An absolute must.

Well, GURPS has an inbuilt magic system (I don't really see why, you could just build spells as advantages). Fate has had at least 8 systems for magic at various points, the Fate System Toolkit has five and there's another in the Aether Sea setting, as well as some rules for alchemy in Sails full of Stars.


-Combat: D&D expectations, I should be able to run a heavy combat game, or a decent social game, or anywhere in between.

Err... does not compute... rebooting... HELLO, THIS IS THE WIZARDTRON5000, ABLE TO TALK ABOUT GAMES, DO YOU WANT TO HERE ABOUT HOW D&D SUCKS AT SOCIAL GAMES?


Really the more options the players have available the better. Vampire The Masquerade and Requiem were both nice, but... it's vampire specific, and the options for character build are what I would consider moderate to low. The game allowed for the barbarian to cross into the rogue and warlock, or be a lot stronger as a straight barbarian, but... the spells were lacking in breadth and it could have done with some more expansion.

Yeah, the World of Darkness games are specific, do not try to cross them. Some have more options, some have less.


Dresden has a nice system, but it's too race/class heavy, with too little in combat options and real character options.

Can you explain how? Because Fate can be scaled up to be both more and less complex (and most builds are race/class-less).

Vrock_Summoner
2016-09-15, 03:19 PM
-System: I don't really care. I enjoy and have enjoyed D20, but I also enjoyed Dresden's system and World of Darkness. So I doubt it will bother me learning a new system.
-Setting: The more I can do with it, the better. Anything from Dinosaur riding nomadic tribes prehistory to general fantasy should be do-able in the system, but it would be nice if it also went as far as steampunk.
-Races: They exist and have some effect on the character
-Classes: It would be nice if there just weren't any the the character could be built any which way.
-Magic: An absolute must.
-Combat: D&D expectations, I should be able to run a heavy combat game, or a decent social game, or anywhere in between.
Assuming you're willing to set out a couple of limits, Mutants & Masterminds, despite being ostensibly a superhero game, works really well for standard fantasy fare as well. The only point on your list is absolutely doesn't hit at all is races - it's a completely point-buy game that leaves the origins of your abilities to your imagination, so racial abilities are typically things that would be chosen during character creation. As GM, you could pre-build some races (and required points spent for playing each race) but at default it's more like you choose your abilities and then have the option of saying that some of them are because of your species, rather than having existing species which give you abilities.

It does great for combat, social games, skill-based games, anything along those lines. Solid combat system that's easy to understand enough to do alright at without thinking too hard, but with enough extra layers to be really strategic about it if that's your cup of tea instead.

The setting is almost completely at the discretion of the GM. It was made to be very open-ended, so mechanically speaking, setting distinction mostly comes down to deciding if you'll allow certain elements into your game - for instance, in your standard fantasy fare, most people move at about the same speed without a special effect in play, so you might limit Speed effects to temporary abilities accessible only via spell casting, or racial abilities, while not allowing naturally-speedy humans.

Characters using magic is very much possible, but dealt with a bit more cinematically than in D&D. Even characters described as knowing hundreds of spells, and who would know so many in more simulationist games, will usually have a core repertoire of abilities they use fairly commonly, while saving specialized effects that they would only use once or twice in the campaign for the game's cinematic abilities, basically using Extra Effort (exhaustion) or Hero Points (GM-awarded for being limited by Complications and for good roleplaying) and creating them quickly on the spot to be used for that scene. The main issue some people have with how Mutants & Masterminds deals with magic is that, barring explicit limitation coming from the GM, there isn't anything a "wizard" type of character (in concept only - there are no classes after all) that another character couldn't also pay the points to be able to do. In effect, it's on you to limit certain effects to only being accessible via spell casting; by default, anything a spell caster could do, a non-magical character could do through other means. (I consider this a strength, even for fantasy - certain spells can also exist as racial abilities, after all, and a power-boost can be divine inspiration just as easily as a spell - but some people consider it a flaw that your sorcerer might cast a spell to go invisible while the rogue might be able to use the Invisible effect just as well from being so good at stealth that they literally can't be seen with regular vision.)

The effects are extremely diverse and characters very rarely feel samey in this game - indeed, there are enough ways to achieve particular results in this game that you can even play characters with similar concepts and get a different play experience just by varying how you reach certain end results.

The strengths of this system relative to other rules-heavy user-tailored games is that it's got ease of setup (especially compared to something like GURPS) without losing out on variety for that (the option density, and meaningfulness of options, is huge) and that, while it has its problems, it's one of the most balanced options-heavy systems out there thanks to its Power Level limits.

Its main weakness, especially for fantasy buffs coming from the system background you describe, is that it's a strongly cinematic, rather than simulationist, game - it is, after all, designed foremost for enthusiasts of the "comic hero" type of story structure. There are systems in place allowing characters to substantially push their limits in exchange for exhaustion, players are rewarded with minor narrative control (Hero Points) for being hindered by their character flaws (basically a means of encouraging ongoing roleplaying, as opposed to systems with flaws that only reward you when you take them and then you spend the rest of the game trying to avoid dealing with them), recovery is quick and lethality is relatively low by default, and the general structure is set up for the type of story where the heroes fail and struggle against their weaknesses in the first half to build up hero points before turning things around in the last act. The game isn't married to this structure, of course, but the mechanics do support it most strongly, and that can be surprising or undesirable for GMs who are used to systems where the characters grow tired and less capable throughout the session.

I definitely recommend at least giving it a once-over, if any of what I described sounds interesting. I feel like Power Level 6-8 works amazingly for D&D-esque fantasy games. At PL6, you're very elite compared to most people, in the vein adventurers would be (for reference, most noncombatant civilians are PL1, police and street thugs are 3-4, and SWAT and professional military soldiers are 5). At PL8, you're sort of "human-level superhero." This is where I'd put awesome people like leaders of paladin orders, typical archmagi and high priests ("typical" meaning non-3.5 D&D, which made them basically gods), people who could still hypothetically be killed by soldiers, but are also qualified to put down hordes of enemies and distinctly supernaturally powerful threats like dragons and demons (again, as portrayed in fantasy).

... Granted, the "standard" level of superheroes in Mutants & Masterminds is PL10, but characters at PL10 are substantially more powerful than most things in standard fantasy - for instance, PL10 characters focused on physical strength have lifting capacities measuring in tens to hundreds of tons. So probably stick to PL6-8.

Firest Kathon
2016-09-15, 04:09 PM
System: I don't really care. I enjoy and have enjoyed D20, but I also enjoyed Dresden's system and World of Darkness. So I doubt it will bother me learning a new system.
If you are a) willing to look into a new System and b) able to read German, Das Schwarze Auge (The Dark Eye) may be up your alley. Unfortunately only the basic book has been translated into English.

Setting: The more I can do with it, the better. Anything from Dinosaur riding nomadic tribes prehistory to general fantasy should be do-able in the system, but it would be nice if it also went as far as steampunk.
It's your usual kitchen-sink totally-not-the-real-world setting. Many, many setting details available.

Races: They exist and have some effect on the character
Done. Human, Elf, Dwarf are the usual player-races, Orcs and Goblins may be playable but are the setting's bad guys so you may not be able to play the published adventures with them.

Classes: It would be nice if there just weren't any the the character could be built any which way.
No classes at all. Everything is bought with adventure points (XP). At the start of the Game you pick a profession which grants you some free points and makes some things cheaper, but afterwards you are free to learn whatever you want (example: my sneaky rogue is by now also a cleric and an accomplished fighter).

Magic: An absolute must.
The default system is based on published spells (so no free-form magic, although an obscure sub-system exists). Spells are paid in mana (no spell levels) and you can improve your knowledge of individual spells, sometimes producing more powerful results and usually becoming more reliable with the spell.

Combat: D&D expectations, I should be able to run a heavy combat game, or a decent social game, or anywhere in between.
Varied combat system allowing lots of customization of your fighting style. Many optional rules to scale the system complexity.

Knaight
2016-09-15, 05:07 PM
I don't have anything against the ORE system, but implementation of the system is going to be extremely important. Nemesis has a lot of skills which is okay, but it's missing magic, character features (a Paladin's smite, a rogue's sneak attack, a cleric's divine intervention, etc)...

Well, from what I read. I found a 52 page rulebook online for it.

Nemesis technically has magic, but mostly it was to introduce you to ORE. The actual ORE game that fits best is REIGN, which is a 400 page fantasy book and not a 52 page action horror book. The Xth Year of Our Reign web supplements (which are free, and which you should be able to at least mostly parse after reading Nemesis) adds about another 900 pages of supplemental material. Lots of skills, magic, character features, all are present.

Telesto
2016-09-15, 05:16 PM
As an aside:

If I do develop my own system, are there any existing d% systems?

Knaight
2016-09-15, 05:52 PM
As an aside:

If I do develop my own system, are there any existing d% systems?

There's a lot of them. The Palladium line of systems is mostly if not entirely d%, Call of Cthulhu is d%, Rolemaster is d%, Runequest is d%, etc. It's less common among recent systems, but they're still trickling out.

Telesto
2016-09-15, 09:05 PM
Do most of them work on the lower is better concept?

My first thought experiment of a system failed because of a hangup between what amounts to armor class, and a weaker player having the same odds of hitting as a stronger one against something requiring (as an example 30 or lower)

Knaight
2016-09-16, 12:09 AM
Do most of them work on the lower is better concept?

My first thought experiment of a system failed because of a hangup between what amounts to armor class, and a weaker player having the same odds of hitting as a stronger one against something requiring (as an example 30 or lower)

Most are roll under, yes. You try to roll under your own skill, and you roll with a modifier that depends on how easy the task is.

Telesto
2016-09-16, 01:42 AM
Okay. I looked at Dark Heresy's method of handling things.

What I was considering was something along the following lines for determining hits in combat:

Roll d% and apply modifiers.
If it's under your score you hit them.
Compare to their Armor Class. If the modified roll is under their armor class, the hit deals damage.

Regretably the end result is as follows:
A player with a 30 and a player with a 90 for their scores attack a creature with an armor class of 30. Both the weaker and more powerful character have the same chance to hit and deal damage to the enemy. Which in turn was creating some odd conceptual problems.

I'm still debating sticking with it, though. Because those problems are related to general ability to hit the foe. Both are now just as likely to hit, however one or the other may be more likely to wound the enemy.

Part of why I like this notion is something along the following lines:

A player has 100 points invested in using Halberds, a 90 in accuracy (or whatever the necessary score would be named for hitting with a melee weapon) and 50 points in death attack (deals double damage and forces a save or the foe dies). This gives them a 5% chance of death attack working when they attack, a bonus of 20 damage from attacking with a halberd, and a 90% chance of hitting.

So if they roll under a 5 (after modifiers) they deal death attack. They deal damage if they roll under the foes AC and under their accuracy. Damage is mitigated by some aspect of the target (toughness for example). And the end result is 1 roll for the attacker in combat

thedanster7000
2016-09-16, 01:53 AM
Okay. I looked at Dark Heresy's method of handling things.

What I was considering was something along the following lines for determining hits in combat:

Roll d% and apply modifiers.
If it's under your score you hit them.
Compare to their Armor Class. If the modified roll is under their armor class, the hit deals damage.

Regretably the end result is as follows:
A player with a 30 and a player with a 90 for their scores attack a creature with an armor class of 30. Both the weaker and more powerful character have the same chance to hit and deal damage to the enemy. Which in turn was creating some odd conceptual problems.

I'm still debating sticking with it, though. Because those problems are related to general ability to hit the foe. Both are now just as likely to hit, however one or the other may be more likely to wound the enemy.

Part of why I like this notion is something along the following lines:

A player has 100 points invested in using Halberds, a 90 in accuracy (or whatever the necessary score would be named for hitting with a melee weapon) and 50 points in death attack (deals double damage and forces a save or the foe dies). This gives them a 5% chance of death attack working when they attack, a bonus of 20 damage from attacking with a halberd, and a 90% chance of hitting.

So if they roll under a 5 (after modifiers) they deal death attack. They deal damage if they roll under the foes AC and under their accuracy. Damage is mitigated by some aspect of the target (toughness for example). And the end result is 1 roll for the attacker in combat
If the AC is an issue, just don't have AC. Make the target's attempt to dodge, block, etc. a separate roll.

Friv
2016-09-16, 02:06 AM
Have you considered Exalted 3rd Edition? It exists now, and it sounds like it might suit your style. Loosely based on World of Darkness, with epic demigods, very long and complex fights, robust social systems, tiers of power, and a mostly but not entirely classless creation process. And lots and lots and lots and lots and lots of options.

Anonymouswizard
2016-09-16, 06:27 AM
Okay. I looked at Dark Heresy's method of handling things.

What I was considering was something along the following lines for determining hits in combat:

Roll d% and apply modifiers.
If it's under your score you hit them.
Compare to their Armor Class. If the modified roll is under their armor class, the hit deals damage.

Regretably the end result is as follows:
A player with a 30 and a player with a 90 for their scores attack a creature with an armor class of 30. Both the weaker and more powerful character have the same chance to hit and deal damage to the enemy. Which in turn was creating some odd conceptual problems.

Eh, it's really bad. Generally d% systems have armour reduce damage instead, and make dodging/blocking an opposed roll (better result wins), sometimes you can block every attack, sometimes it's a 'last chance' measure you can do 1/round. It's just simpler and easier to adjudicate.


I'm still debating sticking with it, though. Because those problems are related to general ability to hit the foe. Both are now just as likely to hit, however one or the other may be more likely to wound the enemy.

Part of why I like this notion is something along the following lines:

A player has 100 points invested in using Halberds, a 90 in accuracy (or whatever the necessary score would be named for hitting with a melee weapon) and 50 points in death attack (deals double damage and forces a save or the foe dies). This gives them a 5% chance of death attack working when they attack, a bonus of 20 damage from attacking with a halberd, and a 90% chance of hitting.

So if they roll under a 5 (after modifiers) they deal death attack. They deal damage if they roll under the foes AC and under their accuracy. Damage is mitigated by some aspect of the target (toughness for example). And the end result is 1 roll for the attacker in combat

Why not give up on armour class? Do what Unknown Armies does, make defending an action, and then whoever rolls higher but under their skill wins. Or just have dodge be a skill like attacking with a halberd is, and have the player with the better result wins. Have armour mitigate damage (it increases the wearer's Toughness?), it's how most games do it and it makes armour feel more useful to the player (I will never forget how wearing a metal breastplate once saved my character from a minor wound when we pissed of some dwarf dockworkers).

Telesto
2016-09-16, 09:15 AM
Part of why I was considering that was to streamline and reduce rolls.

I figured it out. Armor Class as a notion before is going to be replaced with a dodge (same concept I just presented). And a concept like DH's toughness will be used for Armor/Toughness.

Telesto
2016-09-17, 12:58 AM
So, after a lot of consideration about how I would want to set this up so attacks occur with only 1 roll, this is ultimately where I am with it.

Attacking breakdown:

1. Roll d%.
2. Add any applicable modifiers.
3. Compare your roll to your Accuracy Statistic, or the enemy's Dodge Statistic (whichever is lower). If the modified roll is less than or equal to that number, you hit. Move to the damage step.

Damage Step

1. Add your Damage Statistic modifier, your weapon's damage, and the higher (or lower) value on the two d10s used to roll for your attack roll (treating 0s as 10). Plus any applicable modifiers.
2. The target subtracts their defense score from your damage, and takes that much damage.

Mark Hall
2016-09-17, 09:59 AM
So, after a lot of consideration about how I would want to set this up so attacks occur with only 1 roll, this is ultimately where I am with it.

Attacking breakdown:

1. Roll d%.
2. Add any applicable modifiers.
3. Compare your roll to your Accuracy Statistic, or the enemy's Dodge Statistic (whichever is lower). If the modified roll is less than or equal to that number, you hit. Move to the damage step.


A slightly more straightforward method you might muse, borrowed from Hackmaster.

1. Roll d%
2. Add applicable modifiers, including skill with the weapon, accuracy mods for the weapon, local conditions, etc.
3. Compare to static target number or Opponent's d%+dodge skill. If your total is higher, you win.

Telesto
2016-09-17, 11:32 AM
I am actually avoiding that. I'd rather keep the rolls on one side, and only one. Pretty much just constantly going against static values that don't fluxuate too much during a fight. Mostly to keep the pace faster.

Wmcook
2016-09-21, 09:41 PM
I was looking through 5e and the forums and it became apparent that almost everything is the same, and most differences between classes are simply fluff based and what options they have.

So, let's drop classes. Or at most make it bare bones: Fighter, Skill-Monkey, Caster, the crosses between them.

Then levels, well... Levels don't really exist in DnD, more like tiers of play with a false structure designed to make it feel as if there is a gradual progression through the tiers. So, why have levels, just go from one tier to another.

Are there any systems out there that would work for this? Maybe just everyone gets a race and then builds up their character as the desire.

Edit- I forgot to describe what I mean by Option Heavy. Essentially I want something where the player picks their race, and then picks options for their character. Like if it has no classes and you want spellcasting, you can take spellcasting. If you want to smite your favored enemy, you can take both options. Etc.

I made an attempt at converting 5e to be classless. Based on your later post it's probably not what you were looking for but I thought I would share it with you. My intent was to let players build their character by skills and abilities instead of classes but still be able to use 5e content such as monsters and items.

We've play tested it several times with fellow DM's and made changed as we've gone. It's free so feel free to look it over.

Wmcook
2016-09-21, 09:42 PM
I made an attempt at converting 5e to be classless. Based on your later post it's probably not what you were looking for but I thought I would share it with you. My intent was to let players build their character by skills and abilities instead of classes but still be able to use 5e content such as monsters and items.

We've play tested it several times with fellow DM's and made changed as we've gone. It's free so feel free to look it over.

Forgot the link
http://www.dmsguild.com/product/193957/Chosen-Way-Classless-System?src=newest_in_dmg

Also the abilities are all on cards. Mostly because I don't like having to write down skills and it makes character creation easier.

RazorChain
2016-09-22, 03:39 AM
I am actually avoiding that. I'd rather keep the rolls on one side, and only one. Pretty much just constantly going against static values that don't fluxuate too much during a fight. Mostly to keep the pace faster.

Most of the other system don't have bloated HP pools so characters rely on defense rolls. They might go down in couple of blows, more if they have decent armor. Systems like Gurps and Runequest also have crippling injuries which adds to the incentive not to get hit. It boils down to getting in that blow that ends the fight, not chipping away.

If you want a system that only uses roll on one side against a static difficulty level and then you go straight to damage then you might as well just stick with DnD or modify it and add in more robust skill system.

Not to discourage you but making your own system takes lot a lot of time and you have to figure out how different mechanics work with each other. It is often easier to find something that does things similar to what you want and tweak it.

Telesto
2016-09-22, 09:21 AM
Honestly I've been greatly enjoying it. And I've been setting it up to make it easily modular, and the complexity of the system is entirely how deep the GM wants to go with it. I'm now on my third set of mechanics for secondary statistics, because I am looking for the right level of simplicity and scaling, but it's been fun. When something actually strikes my fancy from 1 to 1000, I'll start running a very very simple set of games. But the mechanics haven't been boring or tedious, my biggest issue is resisting the urge to start modeling the rates as differential equations.