PDA

View Full Version : D&D 5e/Next 5e Without Ability Scores-- skills, Skills, Skills



Grod_The_Giant
2016-10-14, 02:11 PM
I... really dislike how 5e uses Ability Scores.

They're weirdly over-prominent, because 5e says "your raw ability is just as important as your training" (Proficiency)
They're painfully structured, because of the widespread use of arrays or point buy, class requirements, and ASIs
They're... oddly disposable, somehow, when you look at it. Plug in your Proficiency Bonus, or Proficiency+1, in place of any ability score, and the game is almost unchanged.

So anyway, this is round three of my attempts to elegantly turn 5e into a purely skill-based game.

The Three Levels of Bonus
On the surface, vanilla 5e characters have two levels of competence-- either they're adding just their Ability Modifier to a roll, or they're adding their Ability Modifier and their Proficiency Bonus. But all Ability Modifiers aren't the same-- you'll usually have one or two you'll focus on, which will begin as +2s and +3s, and others that you care little about, that will spend your entire career circle around the drain of +0. So really there are three, perhaps four categories: Good Ability Modifier plus Proficiency, good Ability Modifier without Proficiency or bad Ability Modifier plus Proficiency (which tend to come out pretty similarly), and bad Ability Modifier without Proficiency.

In this system, I've simply simplified and formalized it a bit. Your character will only ever use one of three bonuses:


Your Major Bonus represents the things you're exceptionally good or well-trained at. It's equal to one-third your character level plus five, rounded down, and is equivalent to the first category, Proficiency plus a good modifier. Use your Major Bonus for any check you'd normally add your Proficiency Bonus to, and for save DCs-- this is known as Proficiency.


Your Minor Bonus represents raw talent and ability, or perhaps things you've trained at but have no aptitude for. It's equal to one-sixth your character level plus three, rounded down (or, if you prefer, half your Major Bonus rounded up), and roughly corresponds to a Profiency bonus or a good ability modifier alone. Use your Minor Bonus in place of any Ability Modifier or Proficiency Bonus mentioned by your racial features, class features, feats or similar effects. You also use it for two skills and one save of your choice-- this is known as Half Proficiency.


Your Trivial Bonus represents the things that, for whatever reason, you're just not very good at, or things that you really can't train at-- but can, perhaps pick up a bit of luck and practice at over the course of your career. It's equal to one-sixth your character level, rounded down, and is similar to a low ability modifier. Add your Trivial Bonus to any d20 roll that did not already include your Major or Minor bonus, and to AC. Note: Trivial Bonuses can be removed if you want to keep 5e's default of of "no progression at all."


Thus, a character would use their Major Bonus to attack with a rapier they are proficient in, add their Minor Bonus to damage, and then-- when using the Defensive Duelist feat to defend themselves from the counterattack-- add their Minor Bonus to AC against that attack. When they are still hit and dropped to zero health, they will roll a d20 as a death save and add their Trivial Bonus. Later, when attempting to impress a bartender with the story, they will add their Trivial Bonus to the skill check they are not proficient in.



Level
Major Bonus
Minor Bonus
Trivial Bonus


1st
+5
+3
+0


2nd
+5
+3
+0


3rd
+6
+3
+0


4th
+6
+3
+0


5th
+6
+3
+0


6th
+7
+4
+1


7th
+7
+4
+1


8th
+7
+4
+1


9ht
+8
+4
+1


10th
+8
+4
+1


11th
+8
+4
+1


12th
+9
+5
+2


13th
+9
+5
+2


14th
+9
+5
+2


15th
+10
+5
+2


16th
+10
+5
+2


17th
+10
+5
+2


18th
+11
+6
+3


19th
+11
+6
+3


20th
+11
+6
+3



Saving Throw Changes
Obviously, without Ability Scores to turn into saving throws, 5e's save system is basically nonexistent. Luckily, resurrecting the classic three save structure is simple.

Fortitude is raw physical power and resilience, and covers all Strength and Constitution saves.
Reflex is raw speed and coordination, and covers all Dexterity saves.
Will is raw mental power and resilience, and covers all Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma saves, as well as Constitution saves to concentrate on a spell.


Alternately, one could keep the six-save split, and simply match each Ability to a skill, like so

Strength -> Brawn
Dexterity -> Acrobatics
Constitution -> Athletics
Intelligence -> Investigate
Wisdom -> Presence*
Charisma -> Insight*

The downside of this is that the aforementioned skills become somewhat more valuable than their compatriots. I think this would work out alright, as the major saves (Dex, Con, and Wis) also match to somewhat skills, but it's also harder to remember and means different characters will have widely differing numbers of good saves, so for now I'm avoiding it.

*Wisdom saves are about self-control and willpower, and Presence is raw strength of character; Charisma saves are about overcoming glamour and charm, and Insight is about recognizing such things.


Skill Changes
The vanilla 5e skill list is actually quite good, and you can certainly use it without alteration. However, there were a few areas it chose to not quite cover. And while I was at it, I figured I might as well edit it a bit more to better consolidate and redistribute competencies, and to replace Tools with something hopefully a little less vague.

We'll start with the loses:

Athletics isn't gone, but it loses its "brute force" options-- shoves and grapples-- to Brawn. In turn, it gets used for a lot of raw Con-type stuff involving endurance. Note: this is the only change that's probably essential
History is folded into a more general "Society" skill, which also acquires raw Int checks' language-type stuff.
Performance is just gone, because seriously, that's what musical instrument tools are for.
Sleight of Hand and Thief's Tools are folded into Thievery; they're related enough, and the latter was significantly more useful than most other tools to start.
Survival is folded into Nature
A new "Presence" skill appears to cover a number of formerly untyped Charisma checks, and take some of the pressure off Persuasion to be the one-and-only social skill.
Tools are gone altogether, replaced by either skills like Thievery (for things like Thief's Tools) or by the broad category of Profession (for things like Artisan's Tools).

And the full list. For reference, the newcomers are Brawn, Linguistics, Profession, Presence, Thievery, and Society, and have been marked in blue.


Acrobatics can be thought of as the "circus skill"-- it covers acrobatic feats, obviously, as well as things like balancing on a sheet of ice, running across a heaving ship, leaping from rooftop to rooftop, and wiggling free of bonds.
Animal Handling covers most interactions with animals, as well as practical knowledge of how to train and deal with them. Calming a horse, training a dog, riding a griffon and raising a bear cub would all use Animal Handling.
Arcana is academic knowledge of magic. It's not enough to let you cast a spell, but it will let you recognize the spells others cast, know how to survive on other planes, identify magical creatures and items, and so on.
Athletics deals with extended physical exertions-- not those that require fine reflexes or huge muscles, but tasks like running, climbing, holding your breath, and other tasks where endurance is important.
Brawn is raw physical power. If you want to wrestle a monster to the ground, topple a statue, or hold up a collapsing ceiling, you need Brawn. Brawn is used in place of Athletics for Shoves, Grapples, and other combat maneuvers. Use your Brawn bonus +10 in place of Strength when determining how much you can lift and carry; thus, your base carrying capacity would be (Brawn bonus +10)x15 pounds.
Deception is all about fooling people. Outright lies, bluffs, disguises, and other cons all use Deception.
Insight can be thought of as a defensive social skill. It's used to read people, to determine their intentions, feelings, and honesty, and to tell if you are being lied to or misled. The DM might also ask for an Insight check to get a gut feeling or hunch.
Intimidation is the violent social skill. It's used whenever you attempt to influence others through threats, violence, and other such actions.
Investigation is the detective skill. Uncovering hidden objects or traps, understanding clues to a crime, following footsteps, and so on all require Investigation.
Linguistics determines how good you are with languages. It's used to puzzle meaning out of languages you are unfamiliar with, understand ancient glyphs, and so on. In addition to the normal effects, you learn two bonus languages if you are Proficient in Linguistics, and one if you are half Proficient.
Medicine deals with both theoretical knowledge of health and the body, and practicalities such as first aid and hospital treatment. You'd use it to diagnose a disease, treat an infected wound, provide long-term care, and similar such tasks.
Nature covers, well, nature. It lets you recognize plants and animals, know which are safe and which are dangerous. It lets you forage for food, lead a party safely through trackless wilderness, read the weather, and so on.
Profession is a slightly odd case, because there is no one use for it. Instead, every time you gain proficiency in Profession, you pick one trade and gain proficiency in that-- Profession (Sailor), Profession (Smith), and so on. You may use Profession to make checks related to your field of expertise, provided they aren't easily covered by another skill. A blacksmith might roll Profession to forge a sword, a sailor to plot a course, and so on. Profession cannot be used to replace skills entirely-- a circus acrobat would still need Acrobatics, for instance, and a hunter would still need Nature.
Perception is your ability to see them before they see you-- it's your general awareness of your surroundings and the acuteness of your senses.
Persuasion is all about getting people to do what you want. Hints, honeyed words, forceful commands and polite requests all require Persuasion checks.
Presence is raw charisma and social magnetism. It determines how well you can command attention, make friends, carouse, and other situations where words are less important than behavior. It also determines how good you are at resisting social pressure from other people, such as attempts to persuade or intimidate you.
Religion determines how much you know about gods, churches, cults, and so on, as well as demons, angels, and other beings commonly associated with religions.
Society covers more general aspects of civilization. It represents knowledge of peoples-- their histories, their languages, their cultures, their cities. It represents not just academic knowledge of who warred with who a hundred years ago, but making contacts and understanding local politics, even in places you've just arrived. You might use it to recognize heraldic symbols, puzzle out a letter written in an unfamiliar language, or figure out who in the local government to contact about a goblin invasion.
Stealth covers exactly what it sounds like-- hiding and sneaking.
Thievery determines how well you can pick a lock, disarm a trap, palm items, pick pockets, and similar such feats. It's also a good measure of general hand-eye coordination.

And one special rule, to help cover edge cases: You may attempt a skill you are fully Proficient in to simulate another-- for example, rolling Nature to calm a wild beast, or Persuade in place of Deception-- but you do so at Disadvantage. This is not guaranteed; the DM must approve the substitution.

One could also, I suppose, make weapons into Skills-- say, Simple, Finesse, Heavy, and Ranged-- for more symmetry here. You could even do armor as well, with each type of armor granting some amount of DR, and AC being 10+(your armor skill), or an opposed roll. But then you lose the distinction between combat and noncombat bonuses, which make things like Guidance, Expertise, and even class-based bonus skills more powerful than expected.

Update: Forget the "Profession" stuff; that's probably not worth it. Tossed out Linguistics, too, which was probably too specific.


Combat and Equipment

Initiative is now a special Reflex save-- feats like Alert apply the bonus only to Reflex saves
Weapons add your Minor Bonus to damage
Armor can be left alone, with the usual use of your Minor Bonus in place of Dex for light and medium armor. Though note that doing so does make Heavy Armor somewhat less useful; Scale Mail and Chainmail will be functionally identical, as will Half-Plate and Splint Mail.
Shoves and Grapples use Brawn in place of Athletics; they are opposed by Acrobatics as normal.

Note: There are other ways you could do armor as well. You could toss out the idea of individual armor types and provide static AC bonuses for the three categories: AC 15 for Light armor, 16 for Medium, and 17 for heavy. Characters can add their Trivial Bonus to get some sense of progression, if so desired-- this is most important for light armor. If you go this route, assume that Mage Armor counts as Light Armor, and Barksin and Unarmored Defense count as Medium.

Another alternative would be to simply declare that if you're wearing armor you're proficient in, your AC is 10+Proficiency, with Barbarians and Monks being the only ones "proficient" in no-armor. If you do go this route, though, you should probably provide some sort of special bonus for at least the more "advanced" categories, so that armor proficiency continues to be an actual defensive class feature. Light Armor can remain untouched as the baseline, perhaps; Unarmored proficiency could, say, gain the ability to negate one opportunity attack/round; Medium Armor could... uhh, something, and Heavy Armor could perhaps reduce incoming physical damage by 2+Trivial Bonus, replacing the old feat. Shields could grant the benefits of Defensive Duelist, if you wanted to keep AC numbers from going too crazy. The specific bonus probably need some work, but I kind of like the underlying idea here...



ASIs and Feats
Without Ability Scores, Ability Score increases are obviously not very useful. Instead, whenever they'd normally get an ASI, characters instead gain one of the following benefits:

Gain Half Proficiency in a new skill
Upgrade an existing Half Proficiency in a skill to full Proficiency
Gain full Proficiency in a new Profession skill
Gain proficiency in a single type of weapon or armor
Gain an additional hit die, though no additional hit points-- the extra die is simply available to spend during a short rest.


If you want to use feats in your game (recommended), characters gain either one or two feats at total levels 1, 4, 10, and 16-- two feats that would normally grant +1 to an ability score, or one feat which does not. (Or one feat which would normally grant +1 to an ability score, and one of the above bonuses for an ASI). In place of this, characters can gain one of the following benefits:

Any two of the bonuses for an ASI
Upgrade their half-proficient save to full proficiency
Upgrade their nonproficient save to half proficiency
Gain an additional hit die and the accompanying additional hit points


Resilient, Skilled, and the weapon/armor proficiency feats are removed as redundant.

Character Creation
As per vanilla 5e, characters get their usual skill, tool, weapon, and armor proficiencies, based on their race, class, and background. If the granted skill has been removed, you may instead gain its replacement. In addition

Characters gain Half Proficiency in two skills of their choice, adding their Minor Bonus to checks
Characters may choose to either gain full proficiency in one Profession skill, or Half Proficiency in two.
Characters gain Proficiency in one save, which must correspond to one of the save proficiencies granted by their class. They pick a second save to of their choice to gain Half Proficiency in. They may add their Trivial bonus to the third save.
Optionally, characters may pick up to two nonproficient skills and take a -2 penalty to them, gaining a new Half Proficiency for each skill selected this way.

Races, obviously, no longer grant Ability Score bonuses. Since this makes normal humans pretty awful, all games should allow Variant Humans instead, limiting them to half-feats if concerned about balance or if you do not normally allow feats.

When calculating your hit points, instead of adding your now-nonexistant Constitution modifier at every level, add each hit die's average value minus 1. Thus a class like the Wizard would give you d6+2 hit points per level, the Rogue d8+3, the Fighter d10+4, and the Barbarian d12+5.

When calculating save DCs, use 8+Major Bonus.

Multiclassing restrictions, obviously, no longer apply, much to the betterment of the game as a whole.

Monsters
The beauty of all of the above is that the system's underlying math is totally unchanged. Characters might be a bit more versatile, with all their abilities operating at full potential, but their peak performance is unaffected-- attacks, damage rolls, ACs, skill checks, and so on will be the same. Because monsters are a bit more nuanced (or, if you prefer, inconsistent) than PCs when it comes to, say, attack bonuses, I recommend keeping combat values-- attack, AC, and so on-- unchanged. Add the new saves, though-- one at full Proficiency, one at Half, and one receiving only the Trivial Bonus. You should probably still use Major, Minor, and Trivial bonuses for skill checks, though, using the monster's CR in place of its level when calculating said bonuses.

CaptainSarathai
2016-11-10, 09:30 AM
I like this. But how do you determine what is a 'Major Bonus' without actually doing the 5e method and statting out before translation?
Maybe I'm just sleepy and dense.

Grod_The_Giant
2016-11-10, 09:46 AM
I like this. But how do you determine what is a 'Major Bonus' without actually doing the 5e method and statting out before translation?
Maybe I'm just sleepy and dense.
Any check you're fully proficient in-- skills, saves, attack rolls, etc-- uses your Major Bonus, which is equal to the formula/table shown above. Or am I misreading your question?

Bruno Carvalho
2016-11-10, 10:24 AM
I don't play D&D anymore (I've played it too much in my RPG years), but I must say that this is BEAUTIFUL. Great Work!

Andrian
2016-11-10, 02:16 PM
While I don't think I'd want to use this in my own games, it does seem fairly balanced. My biggest concern is the armor. I haven't worked out the numbers yet, but my instinct would be, given the way the rest of the system works, to use the original armor stats, then add minor bonus to light armor, trivial bonus to medium armor, and no bonus to heavy armor. This may be what you had in mind, but it wasn't clear.

Grod_The_Giant
2016-11-10, 02:28 PM
While I don't think I'd want to use this in my own games, it does seem fairly balanced. My biggest concern is the armor. I haven't worked out the numbers yet, but my instinct would be, given the way the rest of the system works, to use the original armor stats, then add minor bonus to light armor, trivial bonus to medium armor, and no bonus to heavy armor. This may be what you had in mind, but it wasn't clear.
The idea is to make sure that heavier armors are always better. In RAW the main advantage of heavier armor was not needing Dex, which is a moot point under this system. So there should be some reason not to just wear studded leather all the time, since medium and heavy armor are doled out so carefully.

As for your numbers, Minor Bonus for light armor is solid, matching the expectation decently well; Trivial Bonus for medium armor less so-- you would pretty much always be better off in light armor.

Andrian
2016-11-10, 04:19 PM
The idea is to make sure that heavier armors are always better. In RAW the main advantage of heavier armor was not needing Dex, which is a moot point under this system. So there should be some reason not to just wear studded leather all the time, since medium and heavy armor are doled out so carefully.

As for your numbers, Minor Bonus for light armor is solid, matching the expectation decently well; Trivial Bonus for medium armor less so-- you would pretty much always be better off in light armor.

Hmmm... and herein lies the problem I have noticed with medium armor in general in 5e - it sucks. Breastplate is the best you can get when it comes to medium armor by RAW without imposing Disadvantage on Stealth rolls. Since I imagine that anyone in Medium armor wants to at least have a decent Dex score (14 minimum, so as to best take advantage of their armor), imposing disadvantage on the most useful Dex skill is working against your own interests.

Consider, for a moment, the dex-based character in Studded Leather. By level 20, they will have a 20 Dex, making their AC 17. That's straight-up better than anything Medium armor can manage because of the Dex bonus restriction. Half Plate maxes out at 17 AC and imposes disadvantage on stealth checks. If they start at 16 or 17 in Dex and max it out as early as possible, Medium armor is only better than light armor until level 4, at which point the Breastplate is no better than Studded Leather, but is more expensive. If AC is all you care about, half plate remains relevant until level 8, at which point Studded Leather once again wins out.

Granted, not all characters are going for dex builds, but most of those either have access to heavy armor (Fighters, some Cleric domains, and Paladins), don't need armor (Barbarians), or don't have access to medium armor (Monks, Wizards, Sorcerers, and Warlocks).

Really, by RAW, you only want medium armor if your Dex is 17 or lower, you plan to keep it that way for a long time, and one of these conditions apply:

You have a Dex of 16 or 17 and no access to Mage Armor or some form of unarmored defense.
You don't care about stealth and you have no access to heavy armor, but do have access to medium armor.


The number of cases that meet these criteria is very small, I'd say. You're looking at Clerics with domains that don't grant medium armor, and bards. Pretty much everyone else is going to, at best, use medium armor as a stopgap until they gain access to heavy armor or their Dex bonus makes light armor better.

All that said, it does look like the numbers on armors would need tweaking under this system no matter what you do. I'm not a fan of your static numbers plus trivial bonus because I think it's fun to upgrade your equipment within the categories, but I can see why you went for that, considering the difficulty of balancing the RAW armors. With my recommendation, studded leather becomes as good as full plate at high levels, but throughout most of the game stays about where it should. Medium Armor is definitely the problem though. Light armors need a bigger bonus than medium armors to be effective, but the gap between the minor bonus and the trivial bonus is too big to work.

The only way I can see this balancing out properly is by adding the trivial bonus to all armors, but to make it an option to upgrade to half proficiency with light armors with some kind of tradeoff. Perhaps that could be a feature of having proficiency in finesse weapons or ranged weapons (as those are the conditions under which light armor would outperform medium armor by RAW)? By my calculations, that would make studded leather slightly better than either the breastplate or half plate if you choose to specialize in it, with heavy armor still providing superior AC at the expense of losing stealth. The big problem with this, of course, is that it breaks Bounded Accuracy, making players in heavy armor who use shields virtually unhittable before they even get magic armor.

Grod_The_Giant
2016-11-11, 11:29 AM
The main advantage of heavier armors in vanilla 5e is that you need progressively less and less Dex. Heavy armor and you can dump it completely; medium armor and you only need to invest 14 (not terribly difficult with point buy); light armor and you need as much as you can get. But that goal is pretty much entirely negated by my system; every character would have, effectively, the same Dex, which means heavier armor needs a new reason to exist-- and not just a "better at low levels" one either, as the archetype should be useful throughout the game. So it provides more base AC.

My numbers were based on calculations of average AC by... not level exactly, but by scale, and assuming you've picked a method that matches your stat distribution. For a starting character, the average is around 16; that goes up to 17 at mid-levels when you get an ASI or better armor, and 18 when you've maxed out your stats and gotten your hands on full or half-plate. So Medium Armor follows that trajectory; light is slightly inferior and heavy slightly better.

If you wanted, you could introduce "masterwork" versions of each armor type with a minor bonus, or at least make plate (far and away the least accessible) its own thing, giving out the benefit of the ____ Armor Master feat when worn.

Garfunion
2016-11-11, 04:21 PM
I like this system you created. It would be a hard sale to my group. Ability scores are an iconic thing. Even though it doesn't really matter in this 5th edition.

Grod_The_Giant
2016-11-11, 04:37 PM
I like this system you created. It would be a hard sale to my group. Ability scores are an iconic thing. Even though it doesn't really matter in this 5th edition.
Sadly true. Bloody sacred cows...

I wonder, though, if there's a way to build something similar off the "Ability Check Proficiency" variant rule. Say you get full Proficiency in one ability from your class, and half proficiency in two more (one from your background, one of your choice), on top of the Major Bonus for weapons and spells/Minor Bonus for class features business. That might be more palatable to some...

Andrian
2016-11-11, 04:59 PM
So, um... how would this system interact with features like Expertise, or basically anything that doubles your proficiency bonus? Also, what about Jack of All trades?

Beneath
2016-11-11, 05:17 PM
This is definitely interesting to me

I like ability scores, but I don't like how 5e uses them (or 3e for that matter); I don't like building them fundamentally into the system where you have to define all six ability scores for every monster, and I don't like making attacks into ability contests, or, for that matter, how "casting stats" now are just used for attacks (and for spell preparation, but how 5e handled that is a whole 'nother can of worms); thanks for demonstrating a way to make 5e's math work without using ability scores in it.

Grod_The_Giant
2016-11-11, 05:40 PM
So, um... how would this system interact with features like Expertise, or basically anything that doubles your proficiency bonus? Also, what about Jack of All trades?
Your Minor Bonus replaces Proficiency for class features, meaning you add your Minor Bonus to skills you have Expertise in, you add half your Minor Bonus for Jack of All Trades, and so on.

Caelestion
2017-01-02, 10:23 AM
Why does the table's Trivial bonus jump to +1 at 3rd-level, when the text says that it shouldn't do so until 6th? I presume that the table's at fault, there.

Why would you use an ASI slot to learn a new language when you could just gain proficiency in the Linguistics skill? You could gain a new language if you wanted, I suppose, but you'd have your starting languages, two from Linguistics and a sizeable bonus to figure out new ones on the fly. Buying any more would seem like overdoing it somewhat.

Grod_The_Giant
2017-01-02, 01:15 PM
Why does the table's Trivial bonus jump to +1 at 3rd-level, when the text says that it shouldn't do so until 6th? I presume that the table's at fault, there.

Why would you use an ASI slot to learn a new language when you could just gain proficiency in the Linguistics skill? You could gain a new language if you wanted, I suppose, but you'd have your starting languages, two from Linguistics and a sizeable bonus to figure out new ones on the fly. Buying any more would seem like overdoing it somewhat.
That's a mistake, yeah, sorry. As for the language... it's not a good choice, no, but I was running out of appropriately low-power options to offer. Maybe full Proficiency in a new Profession skill would be better?

Caelestion
2017-01-02, 04:22 PM
That sounds reasonable, yes. It might be an idea to define certain professions, e.g. Sailor would include sea vehicle proficiency and navigator's tool use and Blacksmith could include use of smith's tools, appraising metalwork and recalling relevant professional lore.

Whilst I'm at it, I'd suggest bundling the Wisdom checks for the sudden hunch and spotting disguised undead under the Insight skill, especially as I'm not entirely clear what the line of separation is between Insight and Presence when it comes to resisting Charisma checks. Insight vs. Deception, certainly, but is it Presence vs. Intimidation and Persuasion?

Grod_The_Giant
2017-01-02, 06:38 PM
That sounds reasonable, yes. It might be an idea to define certain professions, e.g. Sailor would include sea vehicle proficiency and navigator's tool use and Blacksmith could include use of smith's tools, appraising metalwork and recalling relevant professional lore.

Whilst I'm at it, I'd suggest bundling the Wisdom checks for the sudden hunch and spotting disguised undead under the Insight skill, especially as I'm not entirely clear what the line of separation is between Insight and Presence when it comes to resisting Charisma checks. Insight vs. Deception, certainly, but is it Presence vs. Intimidation and Persuasion?
I made the change for ASIs, and added a bit to Insight and Presence about how they're used defensively. Presence is the more common defensive one; Insight really only gets used when someone is trying to lie to your, or persuade/intimidate you based on that lie. Intimidation could go either way, I suppose, depending on the nature of the attempt, but I think it's generally more of a "do your worst!" reaction than a "you're bluffing" one.

I don't want to pigeonhole Profession too much, but you're right; it wouldn't hurt to come up with a few examples, if not a short list. Hmmm...

Caelestion
2017-01-02, 07:46 PM
One other thing I noticed - you mention that your allowed encumbrance is determined by your Brawn +10, but since you left out that that is your virtual Strength score and thus needs to be further multiplied by 15, it leaves the impression that you would struggle to even leave home with your adventuring gear! Changing the text slightly would fix that, maybe: "Use 15 x (Brawn +10) to determine your carrying capacity."

Grod_The_Giant
2017-01-02, 08:02 PM
One other thing I noticed - you mention that your allowed encumbrance is determined by your Brawn +10, but since you left out that that is your virtual Strength score and thus needs to be further multiplied by 15, it leaves the impression that you would struggle to even leave home with your adventuring gear! Changing the text slightly would fix that, maybe: "Use 15 x (Brawn +10) to determine your carrying capacity."
Good one, thank you.

Saiga
2017-01-16, 08:45 AM
I absolutely love this idea, I believe it fixes some really important issues 5E had - MAD classes being difficult to use (sometimes with little upside), Charisma based classes being able to hog Face time, certain saves being WAY better than others. I definitely want to introduce this idea to my group and get them to try it out.

However, I have some questions: doesn't tying Initiative bonus to the bonus gained from Reflex saves mean only classes that (previously) gained Dexterity saves will get a bonus to this? (if not playing with trivial bonuses) That seems like it'd be worse than when it was tied to Dex, which I was already not a fan of.

Secondly, how do the class granting save proficiency work in the three-save structure?

Thirdly, can you give examples of how the ASI and Feat options work? If I was a 4th level Fighter, I'd have the option of 1 ASI choice from the ASI and potentially two ASI choices from the Feat? So Feats are generally considered twice as good as ASIs in this system? What is the reasoning for the levels Feats are handed out/removing it from the normal ASI progression?

Caelestion
2017-01-16, 10:08 AM
Under Character Creation: Characters gain Proficiency in one save, which must correspond to one of the save proficiencies granted by their class. They pick a second save to of their choice to gain Half Proficiency in.

Grod_The_Giant
2017-01-16, 11:07 AM
I absolutely love this idea, I believe it fixes some really important issues 5E had - MAD classes being difficult to use (sometimes with little upside), Charisma based classes being able to hog Face time, certain saves being WAY better than others. I definitely want to introduce this idea to my group and get them to try it out.
Thanks!


However, I have some questions: doesn't tying Initiative bonus to the bonus gained from Reflex saves mean only classes that (previously) gained Dexterity saves will get a bonus to this? (if not playing with trivial bonuses) That seems like it'd be worse than when it was tied to Dex, which I was already not a fan of.
Hmm, true. On the other hand, nothing else seems terribly fitting...


Secondly, how do the class granting save proficiency work in the three-save structure?
As Caelestion mentioned, you consolidate the class' granted saves to Fort/Ref/Will, then pick one to have as your full save. Then another of your choice gets half proficiency, and the last gets your trivial bonus only.


Thirdly, can you give examples of how the ASI and Feat options work? If I was a 4th level Fighter, I'd have the option of 1 ASI choice from the ASI and potentially two ASI choices from the Feat? So Feats are generally considered twice as good as ASIs in this system? What is the reasoning for the levels Feats are handed out/removing it from the normal ASI progression?
Correct-- one ASI, and one Feat that can be converted into two ASIs, if you so desired. If you were a Fighter 2/Rogue 2, you'd get only the Feat, which you could convert into two ASIs. I think Feats are generally better than two ASIs, but I didn't want to blow the progression too far out of the water. You're probably better off boosting your saves...

As for splitting ASIs from Feats... you get a lot of ASIs, especially if you're a Fighter or Rogue. Given how few feats are actually published, you'd quickly run out of things you cared about. 5e feats are strong, complete packages; you rarely need more than one or two to make a style work. To say nothing of the power creep...

Saiga
2017-01-17, 08:18 AM
Ah, I totally missed the saving throw part! Thanks for pointing that out. And now that I understand how the new system of Saving Throws works, Reflex modifying Initiative seems way more reasonable - anyone can pick-half proficiency in it at the start, or half/full proficiency through feats. This also prevents Reflex saves from provided too little benefit.

I found a summary of the totals of saving throw types used in the Monster Manual, 253 total saving throws spread as follows:

86 Con Saves, 57 Dex Saves, 52 Wis Saves, 52 Str Saves, 4 Cha Saves and 2 Int Saves. Under the new system, that is:

138 Fortitude Saves (54.55%)
57 Reflex Saves (22.53%)
58 Will Saves (22.92%)

The fact that Reflex save proficiency offers a bonus to initiative means it's still a strong choice. Moving Concentration checks to Will Saves is also a very good choice, or Fortitude Saves would be far too strong and Will Saves would just be weak. This way, Fortitude covers the most saves - it's definitely THE save to pick up if that's what you're worried about - but offers nothing else, and the perks of the other two offer something for players who want more than just improved saves. So, I agree with the logic behind all the changes here.

After consideration, I also agree with splitting out feats from ASIs - you're right, not many builds require more than three feats, and the ability to upgrade Saves with your feat choices means three is a good limit. That way, a player with no need of feats can instead spend all their feats upgrading their saves to full proficiency in all three. It'd probably be too much if every character could get full proficiency in the three saves and still pick up feats afterward - but now that they're not competing with almost mandatory stat increases, three options for feats is plenty. I think I just had a kneejerk reaction, thinking it went from five opportunities to three, but in reality every class wants at least one stat at 20, many two, leaving you with only one to three real feat choices anyway.

Now, as for the optional half-feat mentioned for Variant Humans, do you mean the feats that no longer have a stat increase attached (ie Keen Mind)? How else would you fit these feats in to the progression?

Finally, I have a little gripe about how the armour works currently. I definitely agree that the lack of stats means that Heavy Armour must be made more valuable, so that's good. Using the trivial bonus replaces the need for multiple armour of each category quite easily, but I still think I'd like to have some distinction because it's nice having a meaningful difference between Chain Mail and plate. I was thinking maybe something like 14 for Light Armour, 15 for Medium with no Stealth disadvantage (Splint), 16 for Medium with Stealth disadvantage (Half-Plate), 16 for Heavy with no Stealth Disadvantage (Chainmail), 17 for Heavy with Stealth Disadvantage (Plate). I feel like one extra point of AC might not be worth Stealth disadvantage in most cases, though, so I'm not sure how to balance that.

My bigger issue is the alternate armour methods (Mage Armour, Unarmoured Defence, Barkskin) just becoming armour type equivalents. The cool thing about these spells is how they worked differently: mage armour was expected to be used by classes with lower Dex than Light Armour uses, so it made their base higher to compensate for the lower Ability Modifier. The closest way to get that to work is if there was an even smaller bonus than the Trivial Bonus that could be combined with a higher base (or go the opposite direction, just to keep it unique: lower base AC and Minor Bonus added). I feel if AC levels are being changed, Barkskin's set AC could also change, and it could continue not to receive any modifiers.

Unarmoured Defense I think is a real change to change, as I liked how it let you potentially get even higher AC than Medium or Heavy armour if you invested enough into it. If it's just equal to Medium Armour, it has little point as a mechanic aside from flavour. Since Unarmoured Defence worked by adding another ability modifier to the AC calculation, maybe it could be tied to proficiency in a certain skill or saving throw?

Also, you did not mention Draconic Resilience for Sorcerors. Going by the general rules you gave, the AC for Draconic Resilience would be 13 + Minor Bonus, is this intentional or was it intended to be changed the same way Mage Armour was? You'd get some pretty beefy Sorcerors that way.

I also feel like making Light/Mage Armour start at 15 means that lacking Mage Armour (for whatever reason) is now a -5 penalty to casters instead of a -3. That seem potentially deadly for Casters.

Grod_The_Giant
2017-01-17, 11:04 AM
The fact that Reflex save proficiency offers a bonus to initiative means it's still a strong choice. Moving Concentration checks to Will Saves is also a very good choice, or Fortitude Saves would be far too strong and Will Saves would just be weak. This way, Fortitude covers the most saves - it's definitely THE save to pick up if that's what you're worried about - but offers nothing else, and the perks of the other two offer something for players who want more than just improved saves. So, I agree with the logic behind all the changes here.
Yeah. A previous Fort/Ref/Will system had characters use their Ref save for AC, which felt like it was making them too good, but... yeah, you're right; having Ref determine Ini and Will determine Concentration makes for a nice set of things.


Now, as for the optional half-feat mentioned for Variant Humans, do you mean the feats that no longer have a stat increase attached (ie Keen Mind)? How else would you fit these feats in to the progression?
Correct... in past versions of these rules, I had feats that granted a +1 count as half a feat, so you could get either GWM or Actor and Athlete. That should probably go back in... those feats are notably weaker...


Finally, I have a little gripe about how the armour works currently.
Yeah, I... never quite felt like I got that right. I dunno, maybe the best bet would be to jettison all the fancy stuff and just let "Minor Bonus in place of Ability Modifiers" handle things, but that somehow doesn't feel like enough; under that system heavy armor is pretty consistently better than light, but medium is worse than either (same AC as light, but probably with the stealth penalty)... unless you invest the feat, at which point it becomes better (same AC as heavy, but without the stealth penalty). And all cap at 18...


My bigger issue is the alternate armour methods (Mage Armour, Unarmoured Defence, Barkskin) just becoming armour type equivalents. The cool thing about these spells is how they worked differently: mage armour was expected to be used by classes with lower Dex than Light Armour uses, so it made their base higher to compensate for the lower Ability Modifier. The closest way to get that to work is if there was an even smaller bonus than the Trivial Bonus that could be combined with a higher base (or go the opposite direction, just to keep it unique: lower base AC and Minor Bonus added). I feel if AC levels are being changed, Barkskin's set AC could also change, and it could continue not to receive any modifiers.
Ehh... I dunno that's true; seems more like light armor isn't supposed to be worth much without some sort of additional defense, like Bladesong or Cunning Action.


Unarmoured Defense I think is a real change to change, as I liked how it let you potentially get even higher AC than Medium or Heavy armour if you invested enough into it. If it's just equal to Medium Armour, it has little point as a mechanic aside from flavour. Since Unarmoured Defence worked by adding another ability modifier to the AC calculation, maybe it could be tied to proficiency in a certain skill or saving throw?
Ehh... I don't like making a skill or save obligatory... and more importantly, following the Major Bonus progression makes it probably too good. I don't want it to be better than plate when it already has an advantage in that you never lose it. I could see maybe 13+Minor Bonus?


Also, you did not mention Draconic Resilience for Sorcerors. Going by the general rules you gave, the AC for Draconic Resilience would be 13 + Minor Bonus, is this intentional or was it intended to be changed the same way Mage Armour was? You'd get some pretty beefy Sorcerors that way.
Whoop, should be changed.


I also feel like making Light/Mage Armour start at 15 means that lacking Mage Armour (for whatever reason) is now a -5 penalty to casters instead of a -3. That seem potentially deadly for Casters.
I mean, they'd still get their Minor Bonus to AC while unarmored... which is a -2 penalty compared to Light, I guess.

Grod_The_Giant
2017-07-03, 08:16 PM
Update: Looking back, I tossed out some of the more pointless changes (I mean, Profession instead of Tools isn't bad, as such, but I think overall it's better to not have a "sort-of-a-skill-but-not-quite-like-the-others in there) and tightened up language here and there.

Caelestion
2017-07-04, 05:54 AM
I liked the idea of the Linguistics skill. :smallfrown:

Grod_The_Giant
2017-07-04, 08:20 AM
I liked the idea of the Linguistics skill. :smallfrown:
You think it would get enough use? Society is kind of crowded now, I admit...

Caelestion
2017-07-04, 09:07 AM
Well, I don't know if Linguistics would be well-used, so to speak, but currently Society lets you learn about pretty much every aspect of civilisation, including history, language and politics, except religion and magic, because Casters Are Awesome (presumably). Yes, your Society skill parallels the vanilla History skill, but I still think there's room to have the language and Decipher Script stuff in a separate skill, especially if it grants you additional languages (which don't seem to be easy to come by in 5E).

Grod_The_Giant
2017-07-10, 10:10 AM
Well, I don't know if Linguistics would be well-used, so to speak, but currently Society lets you learn about pretty much every aspect of civilisation, including history, language and politics, except religion and magic, because Casters Are Awesome (presumably). Yes, your Society skill parallels the vanilla History skill, but I still think there's room to have the language and Decipher Script stuff in a separate skill, especially if it grants you additional languages (which don't seem to be easy to come by in 5E).
Hmm... perhaps. The biggest issue might be that, what with Comprehend Languages being a low-level ritual-- it's an easily obviated skill. More so than Athletics, given how controlled flight is. (Also it'll take me to 19 skills, which just bugs me somehow)

(EDIT: Well, maybe I move Intimidation under Presence...)

Saiga
2017-09-10, 12:35 AM
I missed that this had been updated! Back when I was first saw this, I wanted to suggest it to my own group but they weren't interested. I think at the time, we hadn't had as much experience with 5E, so they were wary of big changes and didn't agree with me on their being a problem with Ability Scores. So I just dropped it, since I didn't think I'd get to use this.

Well, recently they've started finding their own problems with ability scores, and they sounded more interested when I mentioned your rework again. So I'm back, and I see you've changed armour to work the way it did - I think this is a good idea and I agree with it, my only problem is that a +6 bonus makes Leather/Mage Armour better than it would by Dex (unless you had a manual of quickness, I guess).

Do you think this is a big problem? Would it be fine to just bump up the AC of each Medium/Heavy armour type up by 1 to match, or ban studded leather (or both?). If most PCs end up being 1 AC higher than they would normally, does this effect much?

Conversely, does capping out minor bonus at +5 make things work better? I realize skills are slightly worse off, but everything else that uses minor bonus would have previously used an ability score, and therefore capped out at +5 without magic items.

AC aside, I also wanted to clarify HP - we don't roll for HP, so using the average HP provided by the book + the substitute for Con in this system, everybody would just gain their Hit Die's full value upon level up (Wizards gain 6 HP, Barbarians gain 12). That's fair enough. However, that means the difference between each 'level' of hit die is 2 hp, when the average difference is 1 hp. This is relevant for subclass abilities like the Draconic Sorceror giving +1 hp per level, which in the normal system is equivalent to being 1 hit die higher. Not sure how to keep these two in line without just retconning the sorceror ability to be +2 hp, or introducing a flat bonus to hp for every class (3? 4?)

Also, did you intend for first level HP to work as it is, such that a level 1 Wizard has 6+2 hit points? When I first read it I thought they'd also have (1d6 or 4) + 2 hit points like at every other level.

Last question (for now anyway), I've been considering the feats/ASI replacements. I plan on including both full and half-feats in my game (under "Major Feat" and "Minor Feat" to match the bonuses) but I'm wondering about how to grant them. Now that UA has introduced more feats that will be coming in Xanathar's, I think there may be a large enough pool not to worry about having too few choices - and I think it might make the system clearer to combine feats and ASIs again. I also am not sure how I feel about feats being part of character level instead of class progression, I am worried about ASIs being seen as much less important and Fighters/Rogues/single class builds suffering as a result.

Hypothetically, if you were to only have one type of option (in place of ASIs) how would you balance it? It'd be something like:

*One Major Feat
*Two Minor Feats
*Upgrade a Save proficiency to next category
*Upgrade two (or more?) skill proficiencies to the next category

etc. I do like that the current ASIs are weaker now that players effectively get improving ability scores for free (so the PCs aren't equivalent to a character with maxed primary stats AND spending every ASI on a feat) but I think that having one type of replacement for the combined ASI/feat choice would make things more palatable to people accepting the system.

edit: Although, this might mean that players never feel like upgrading skills - between saving throw upgrades and actual feats, it's may be likely that even a Fighter would make out their ASIs without ever picking up skill proficiencies. Which might be fine (nobody picks the Skilled feat anyway) but if you want players gaining more skill proficiencies over the course of the game, I can understand wanting to keep them separate. However if I were to do that, I'd probably have feats in place of ASIs and skill proficiencies gained separately via whatever the new progression is.

Grod_The_Giant
2017-09-10, 10:18 AM
So I'm back, and I see you've changed armour to work the way it did - I think this is a good idea and I agree with it, my only problem is that a +6 bonus makes Leather/Mage Armour better than it would by Dex (unless you had a manual of quickness, I guess).

Do you think this is a big problem? Would it be fine to just bump up the AC of each Medium/Heavy armour type up by 1 to match, or ban studded leather (or both?). If most PCs end up being 1 AC higher than they would normally, does this effect much?

Conversely, does capping out minor bonus at +5 make things work better? I realize skills are slightly worse off, but everything else that uses minor bonus would have previously used an ability score, and therefore capped out at +5 without magic items.

Since the difference only kicks in at 18th level, I don't think it's a problem you're likely to see? If you're going that high, capping at +5 should fix everything, though.


AC aside, I also wanted to clarify HP - we don't roll for HP, so using the average HP provided by the book + the substitute for Con in this system, everybody would just gain their Hit Die's full value upon level up (Wizards gain 6 HP, Barbarians gain 12). That's fair enough. However, that means the difference between each 'level' of hit die is 2 hp, when the average difference is 1 hp. This is relevant for subclass abilities like the Draconic Sorceror giving +1 hp per level, which in the normal system is equivalent to being 1 hit die higher. Not sure how to keep these two in line without just retconning the sorceror ability to be +2 hp, or introducing a flat bonus to hp for every class (3? 4?)
Hmm, I never noticed that-- either of those points, really. The first is neat. As for the second... I don't think the +1 hp/level bonuses losing ground are worth worrying too much about, though. You're not actually losing hit points relative to where the game expects you to be; if you're concerned, things like Tough exist.


Also, did you intend for first level HP to work as it is, such that a level 1 Wizard has 6+2 hit points? When I first read it I thought they'd also have (1d6 or 4) + 2 hit points like at every other level.
First level hit points should work normally.


I also am not sure how I feel about feats being part of character level instead of class progression, I am worried about ASIs being seen as much less important and Fighters/Rogues/single class builds suffering as a result.

Hypothetically, if you were to only have one type of option (in place of ASIs) how would you balance it? It'd be something like:
Ehh... even with more feat options around, I don't like the idea of loading a character up with feats. It kind of de-values them, makes them less character defining and prominent. Not to mention that you'll probably wind up with more powerful characters with more ability bloat.

If you feel like the ASIs are too weak, though, it might be worth upgrading them so they feel more worthwhile? A full new skill proficiency or a full new HD with accompanying hit points? Or weapons, or maybe even armor; with the revised number progressions, heavier armor offers less of a power jump.