PDA

View Full Version : Tri-class system



nineGardens
2018-10-02, 11:44 PM
The Problem to be solved:

Players want unique personalized characters, but the additional rules required to allow this flexibility bogs people down, and can be daunting and confusing for new players.


In first edition D&D you rolled some stats, and picked a class (in that order) and you were good to go. There was like... 4 classes. This lead to a problem with characters not feeling particularly unique, especially once you allow players the freedom to point buy attributes.

Now we have a dozen or so classes, and once you pick your class, you pick a subspecialty, and a familiar, and then arrange your attributes, and pick your first level spells.
This is what I will refer to as “nested” choices.
Nested choices allow players the versatility they need to build a more unique character... but complicate character building.

In theory, Nested choices make decision making easier- you decide to be a wizard, and THEN you decide to specialize in conjuring, and THEN you look at familiars. By nesting decisions, each individual decision can be simpler. But, Nested decisions tend to add complexity in two different ways: Firstly, you end up making different KINDS of choices in each round. The knowledge you used to make your Class decision doesn’t help you make your fighting style decision, because this is fundamentally a DIFFERENT choice. Secondly, the nesting of decisions acts to obscure earlier decisions – my choice to play as an Alchemist is not based on “Are alchemists cool” but on “Oh, and if I take the poisoner specialty later on...” - I have to look further ahead in the decision tree in order to make my first decisions in a sensible manner.

There’s also the tension between “Specificity” and “Versatility” in classes: A fighter can be a soldier, or a bandit, or a gladiator, and different builds may make sense... but when you tell your friends “Oh, I played as Logan the fighter” there is no strong picture in their head. By contrast a Paladin is well... a Paladin. People have a strong picture, but the class gives less latitude to make it your own.

The need for Versatility in class concept is discussed here: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?55947-On-the-Philosophy-of-Class-Design
A brief mention of the dangers of “Fighters look boring” is mentioned here: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?570490-DnD-5E-Homebrew-Class-The-Exemplar-Would-like-to-hear-your-constructive-feedback



Proposed solution:

All players pick three classes. Classes do not have “sub-specialties”

Each class is super narrow, super specific, and fits on one page.
All abilities available to a class are written on the one page, and no separation is made between feats, class abilities, spells etc.
There is no Strength, Con, Int etc to roll or point buy.
There are no longer the choice between favored weapon and animal companion. You either pick some sort of "Swordbound" class or you pick the "Companion-Gorilla" ("Companion- Armidillo" is an entirely separate class)
The idea is to put all of a players major choices on "One level".

If you want to be a Necromancer, you don’t pick “Witch- Death Mystery”, you pick “Necromancer” as one of your three classes.
You want to combine it with Conjuration and Elementalist to be an epic mage? Go ahead!
Combine it with Con-artist and Swashbuckler instead? Sure- fine, go ahead. You'll be some kind of evil dread pirate.



Okay, so that's the theory- I'd be interested in anyone's discussion on the general triclass concept...

But also this is a design forum, and I've been working on such a Triclass system, and I would really appreciate some feedback on it if anyone is interested.

You can find a link to it Here:
https://v1.overleaf.com/read/qyhqqwvmyymx

For readability, you are probably best off hitting the "PDF" button and downloading (the bookmarks are helpful for navigation, and adjusting zoom is easier offline.)

For those of you who want a condensed description of the game before following the link:

Nine Gardens

Genre: Space opera/RPG
Rules weight: Medium (lighter than D&D, heavier than say... Legacy: life in the ruins. Probably similar to World of Darkness).

Primary mechanical features: Take three classes, smush them together, play. The goal is to give players a chance to really buy into their character from the get go, while also keep the rules as simple as possible.



Humans got really good at Genetic engineering, and managed to cause a speciation event.
After that we terraformed a couple planets, built a few space stations, and used advances in AI to create the Gods.
This did not go well.

Humanity is now scattered amongst the stars. There are Robots, and weird human variant species, and benevolent insane super AIs, and partially completed Terraforming.




So, as far as the game goes, feedback that is wanted:

Does this concept look fun?
Does the setting work for you?
Anyone want to take a shot building themselves a character (I'm curious to see how well it works with people unfamiliar to the system, who are building just based on the rule book, and without my input).

Am I in the right forum? (Most of the threads here are on class adaptions and smaller scale stuff, and very D&D focused.)
If not, does anyone have somewhere else they'd recommend?


If anyone wants to suggest other names for the game, be my guest. If the current name works for people, that'd be good to know also.
(the username and game name matching is an accident, involving bad chronology, I apologize)

Any other feedback also welcome, those are just the broad brush things I am trying to get right starting off.

Cheers,
Me.

noob
2018-10-03, 09:09 AM
Way more complex than it could be.
Also you did advertise necromancers and there is no such thing in the document.
And the second disappointment is that you said it would allow to make characters without backtracking but then you add class based feats and choices as well as skills.

Ixidor92
2018-10-03, 09:41 AM
The theory behind this class change sounds neat, but also kind of messy in practice. There is also a system that has done something similar to this, I would look at the "Shadows of the Demon Lord" system and see how that handles classes. Here's a short summary:

-This is a 10 level system
-You pick your ancestry (race) at level 0. Your first adventure, you have only your racial abilities and base stats to go off of. At level 4, you gain additional benefits from your ancestry
-Upon reaching level one you pick a "novice" path. This is one of 4, general classes (Mage, priest, rogue, warrior). This choice grants you abilities at 1st, 2nd, 6th, and 8th level.
-Upon reaching level 3, you pick an expert path. There are 12 of these, each one roughly representing an archetype of a base class (4 per base class). This choice grants you abilities and 3rd, 5th, and 9th level.
-Upon reaching level 7, you choose a master path. There are 32 master paths to choose from, each focusing on a very specific type of playstyle (16 of the paths focus on using a single school of magic, the other 16 focus on specific gameplay elements not related to magic). This path gives you abilities at 7th and 10th level.
-Your choice of path at one level in no way restricts your choice of path at later levels

Knaight
2018-10-03, 12:31 PM
This seems potentially pretty functional. You should take a look at Legend - it's a class based system where each class has three talent tracks, and you can multiclass by swapping one out with a track from another class. In your system this is basically equivalent to picking three classes, but you can pick classes more than once.

nineGardens
2018-10-04, 10:45 AM
You should take a look at Legend

I've had a look at that- it looks nice.
Main differences that I noticed reading it (neither good nor bad) were....
* Your stats come from a base class, and are not the result of mixing.
* In legend your ability TRACKS are fairly predetermined, while you also get class agnostic "feats". In Nine gardens, the order of class abilities is up to you... but there are no generic feats.
* Your HP, BAB saves etc level up every level. In Nine gardens these are all static.
* Ones Fantasy, ones Sci-fi.

Has anyone played Legend? I've read it, and seen several people recommend it, but have never played.




The theory behind this class change sounds neat, but also kind of messy in practice.
Are there any particular aspects that sound messy?
Rules wise I've got it down to half a sheet of paper, but of course there are plenty of things that are simple rules wise but messy in practice, so if you have an instinct for any particular source of chaos here, I'ld be glad to see it.



There is also a system that has done something similar to this, I would look at the "Shadows of the Demon Lord" system and see how that handles classes. Here's a short summary:
I like this representation of character DEVELOPMENT, and will look at it some more.
My instinct is that I am aiming for something a little different, in that I am aiming for more well defined characters from the get go.




Way more complex than it could be.
Are there any PARTICULAR elements that you think ought to be taken away?



Also you did advertise necromancers and there is no such thing in the document.
This is a primarily fantasy RPG site. I have a sci-fi RPG. I wanted to give examples and compare to games that I believed my audience would be more familiar with.... which presumably you could guess, so I'm not sure why you are bring this point up.



And the second disappointment is that you said it would allow to make characters without backtracking but then you add class based feats and choices as well as skills.

Fair enough.
I mean, the skills aren't exactly a choice, so I'm going to reject the claim that they contribute to the problem....
but if you claim that a class shouldn't have abilities, or skills, or choices, would you mind telling me what you expect a class to actually consist of?

Knaight
2018-10-04, 02:39 PM
So, moving on from theory to system particulars here, focusing on what can be improved (overall I'm liking it thus far):
Overall: It's mostly well written, and I like the general design philosophy of being a useful toolkit for the GM. From what I've seen so far I'd play this. Also this is a nitpick, but you use the term "a dice" pretty often, and that's pretty jarring. The singular is "a die". There's also some stylistic whiplash in terms of formality of authorial voice. I'm also getting some real AW vibes from document design, which is good - cohesive design is a wonderful thing.
Page 2: The "in some sense all role playing games" probably should be dropped, because of GMless games.
page 4: Again, we have an "unlike most RPGs" which doesn't check out here. You usually don't select a single class, as most RPGs are classless - and this assumption is usually a sign of impending D&D, especially given the d20. So, warning signs. It looks like Feats is the term used for class abilities, which again is kind of an irritating D&Dism. The list of human races also seems pretty incomplete, mostly because there's nothing for non-academics away from the frontier who aren't goring up either really rough or as upper aristocracy (including modern forms of aristocracy).
Page 7: I'm really liking the collaborative setting generation here. It's seriously cool.
Page 8: An explanation of difficulty would be really helpful - you've got nothing on assigning DCs.
Page 12: Critical hits and counter attacks are both cool, but the fumble rules are a bit much. 1/20 is just too high odds for the more severe mishaps.
Page 15: I'm really not liking the need for an external equipment app. It's a valid option, sure, but it's a major negative, at least for me.
Page 21: The central section of the character sheet is a bit ugly - it might be worth reconsidering the iconography. Also using "My Equipment" instead of "Equipment" is a little weird, particularly as you use just "Weapons" and not "My Weapons" lower down. This also applies to the rest of the character sheets.
Page 45: The class hype ("demolish a small army" is pretty incongruent with the mechanics, at least at character creation.
Page 48: There's a small typo: "beats or vehicles" should be "beasts or vehicles".
Page 51: These ranges seem pretty tiny. Also shotguns prompting AoO's seems a bit weird, especially as pistols don't. Bulletsmith feels really gamey, in a bad way. It also uses the term "skill" where it probably should use "feat".
Page 58: I might have just missed something, but I don't think you ever actually define "critical defense range" particularly. From context I'm assuming that ties into the counter attack mechanic, but being more explicit could help. Slayer also seems potentially ridiculous, between the reset time and the lack of on-hit reset. It opens some harassment/sniping strategies of opening fire from far away, falling back, coming back with a big boost, etc. In particular this does ridiculous things combined with Sharpshooter abilities.
Page 60: Eat nails for breakfast is a bit of an odd case, as it matters when you take it - and is (as of page 60) alone in that. I'd change it to "Add your level to hit points". Technically it's lvl-1, but that feels like more complication than necessary.

I'll get more of this later. Structurally all is well.

nineGardens
2018-10-04, 10:04 PM
You, dear Knaight, are a scholar.

So, for now, I'm going to run off an implement all the basic edits you recommend (Dice -> Die etc), although it will be in a seperate document, (as I want the online one to be relatively stable.


As a few quick clarifying queries...

I'm also getting some real AW vibes from document design,
What's AW stand for?


It looks like Feats is the term used for class abilities, which again is kind of an irritating D&Dism
Does the word "Talent" set off less red flags?



Page 7: I'm really liking the collaborative setting generation here. It's seriously cool.
Having played campaigns with it, yes, it is totally cool... unfortunately I can not claim credit for this one. I poached the idea from Legacy:Life amongst the ruins, so full credit goes to Jay Iles.


Page 12: Critical hits and counter attacks are both cool, but the fumble rules are a bit much. 1/20 is just too high odds for the more severe mishaps.
Hmmmm.... I don't like the idea of adding extra rules to make fumbles less likely... so either they're stuck at 1/20, or alternatively they are out of the game.... Hmmmm.... alternatively, would 1/20 odds be acceptable for a MINOR mishap (in which case I'll have to think about how to make something suitably minor....


These ranges seem pretty tiny. Also shotguns prompting AoO's seems a bit weird
Are these comments on realism, or game design, or both.

Basically, I was trying to figure out how to make different styles of guns play differently, so that choosing between them was a CHOICE gameplay wise. If you or anyone else has recommendations on how to do this better, I'm all ears.


And... the rest of it is stuff I can act on on my own.

Thanks heaps - have you got anything around here that could use a examine/review/critique/whatevs?

Knaight
2018-10-05, 03:35 PM
As a few quick clarifying queries...

What's AW stand for?
Apocalypse World - there's enough structural similarities that I'd suspect a pretty direct and close line of influence. Which is fine; it's a well organized system in a lot of ways (at least by RPG standards) worth using as inspiration.


Does the word "Talent" set off less red flags?
It's a fair bit better. There's enough other things going on with the system that it sheds the D&D-clone look pretty quickly, so this could easily be a pet peeve and nothing more.


Having played campaigns with it, yes, it is totally cool... unfortunately I can not claim credit for this one. I poached the idea from Legacy:Life amongst the ruins, so full credit goes to Jay Iles.
Well, I stand by my comment. It's still a good inclusion, borrowed or not.


Hmmmm.... I don't like the idea of adding extra rules to make fumbles less likely... so either they're stuck at 1/20, or alternatively they are out of the game.... Hmmmm.... alternatively, would 1/20 odds be acceptable for a MINOR mishap (in which case I'll have to think about how to make something suitably minor....
I do think most of them work fairly well - there's just a few points where they're potentially a bit severe.


Are these comments on realism, or game design, or both.

Basically, I was trying to figure out how to make different styles of guns play differently, so that choosing between them was a CHOICE gameplay wise. If you or anyone else has recommendations on how to do this better, I'm all ears.
More a matter of gameplay feel than anything - shotguns should generally feel like close combat weapons, and they kind of don't given the penalties assigned.


Thanks heaps - have you got anything around here that could use a examine/review/critique/whatevs?
Nothing finished, but I'm in the process of working on Legacy (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ah1pbXshNN8331ohsQEd1ui_OQ1OcXCCP0uhfNoZszw/edit). A name that appears to be increasingly used elsewhere, but hey.

nineGardens
2018-10-05, 10:00 PM
Apocalypse World - there's enough structural similarities that I'd suspect a pretty direct and close line of influence. Which is fine; it's a well organized system in a lot of ways (at least by RPG standards) worth using as inspiration.

Ahh yes- one of my main soundboards is a big fan of Apocalypse world, and "Legacy: life in the ruins" (which inspired a lot of this) runs on the AW rules engine, so yeah, there's a pretty direct line, even if I've never played AW myself.



It's a fair bit better. There's enough other things going on with the system that it sheds the D&D-clone look pretty quickly, so this could easily be a pet peeve and nothing more.

You aren't the first one to raise concerns that its a D&D clone. If changing a single word helps me dodge around that, then I am all for it.


More a matter of gameplay feel than anything - shotguns should generally feel like close combat weapons, and they kind of don't given the penalties assigned.
Right, yes, I am aware.
I was playing around with trying to set them up so that they are like... an arms length weapon. Terrible at long range, risky at melee range, and absolutely devestating if your enemy is standing about 2 meters away - hence the goal was high damage... but somewhat tricksy to use.
By the sounds of it, this may be too many hoops to ask a player to jump through.




Nothing finished, but I'm in the process of working on Legacy. A name that appears to be increasingly used elsewhere, but hey.
Uggghhh... naming things is bloody impossible. This thing spent the last decade being called "Star Traveller", only for people to point out that "Traveller" and "Starfinder" were already things that existed.

Legacy looks cool- I like the master/apprentice thing.... I'd be happy to provide an reader for it some time... but also don't want to go around offering critique while you are still in the writing phase, unless there are particular aspects you are looking for feedback on.

I guess the first questions that come time mind are.... If players are switching roles, and the "campaign" is in some sense spread over generations, is there any opportunity for the role of GM to hop players? (Apprentice->Master-> GM -> Apprentice???)...

Also, to what extent do you expect the "role" of the pair to change? If we start with a knight and a squire, will it always be knight and squire, or could we get a few episodes in and be playing with a assassin an a thief?