An Exercise; Classless D&D.

[Paragon Badger]

I have recently said I dislike the class system as a whole; and thus- I shall indulge you all in an experiment. Using EXP to purchase each skill and ability, individually. Everything from HD to Sneak Attack to Spells per day to Animal Companions.

My objective is to recreate a class in D&D using this method.

This is the amount of Experience needed to level up in D&D relative to one another (Ignoring first to second level since no experience is needed to start.)

Level 2-3: 3x EXP
Level 3-4: 2x EXP
Level 4-5: 1.6x EXP
Level 5-6: 1.5x EXP
Level 6-7: 1.4x EXP
Level 7-8: 1.3x EXP
Level 8-9: 1.28x EXP
Level 9-10: 1.25x EXP
Level 10-11: 1.22x EXP
Level 11-12: 1.2x EXP
Level 12-13: 1.18x EXP
Level 13-14: 1.16x EXP
Level 14-15: 1.15x EXP
Level 15-16: 1.14x EXP
Level 16-17: 1.13x EXP
Level 17-18: 1.12x EXP
Level 18-19: 1.11x EXP
Level 19-20: 1.11x EXP

Using the simplest mechanic as an example; a Full BaB's progression should preportionally increase in size exactly as seen above, since its effects are felt with each new level.

As such, the player should never spend too much on their BaB, since it would get obscenely expensive for his or her 'level'.

The problem therein lies not with preportional increases in cost (since we've more or less established how much more costly they should become) but what the cost should be to begin with.

For simplicity's sake, let's assume all players begin at 'level 2' capabilities, with 1000 EXP to spend on their character. (This is neccesary because the whole system uses EXP as currency, and level 1 characters begin with none.)

If we try to recreate a level 2 class of D&D using this system, we should end up having every one of their skills and abilities sum up to 1000 EXP.

The problem is that the cost of each mechanic must be carefully made in relation to eachother. For example, if we made Saves too cheap- someone could dump all their EXP into ungodly Saves at their 'effective' level.

This would be blatantly overpowered- as to our more balanced objective; where 'overspending' can get extremely expensive, whilst leaving incredibly cheap capabilities neglected.

With this in mind, we must place a percentage value upon each mechanic of the class and level progression. Something along the lines of;

Fighter
2d10 HD (10%) [100 EXP]
Good BaB (10%) [100 EXP]
+2 BaB (20%) [200 EXP]
1 Good Save, 2 Bad (5%) [50 EXP]
+3 Fort Save (5%) [50 EXP]
7 Class Skills (5%) [50 EXP]
10 (+Int Mod x5) Total Skill Ranks (5%) [50 EXP]
Simple, Martial Weapons Proficiency (10%) [100 EXP]
All Armor and Shield Proficiency (10%) [100 EXP]
Feat (10%) [100 EXP]
2 Bonus Feats (10%) [100 EXP]

These values were arbitrarily put on for the sake of an example. Such a system would need rigorous testing to confirm what would be appropriate. To prove my point that the relationship between each capability must be correct; I'll give this pseudo-fighter some more EXP, say... level 10?

With 45,000 EXP to work with, he can get a maximum BaB of +20 (Perhaps more even, but I won't do Epic-Level math) by spending 34,356 EXP. This IS 75% of the level-10-ish fighter's EXP, but aside from that, he'll have all the stats of the 2nd level fighter shown above... Including 2d10 HP. And with only 25% of his EXP left, his other stats would hopefully suffer.

This would allow great customization, such as having a spellcaster with full BaB or even 1d12 HD or other wildly unimaginable things. The inherent costs would (hopefully) give each character a distinct disadvantage however. The aforementioned Full BaB and 1d12 HD spellcaster should be horrible in every other area, since spellcasting should be pretty expensive- enough to compete with Full BaB and 1d12 HD in eating up all your EXP at least.

This is part of the purpose of this exercise. Characters may splurge all their EXP into one or two areas, but to do so will hinder their other class abilities. At least, we'd hope. The above example is far from perfectly balanced.

Now, if I had greater judgement or thousands of playtesters with uncountable hours at their disposal spent creating various builds- the actual EXP costs could be perfected so strong class features are appropriately costly and weak class features are appropriately cheap.

But I suppose we'll never know.

'Tis food for thought.

[osyluth]

Wouldn't be easier to just use GURPS?

[Zeta Kai]

Wow, now this is a thought experiment I'd like to see taken further. This is rather similar to an experience point-buy system, such as that found in World of Darkness games. Since I've done some initial work attempting to convert WoD features to D20 rules, I'd love to see more on this concept. So far great job laying the ground work.

[curtis]

I worked on something like this recently.

You have my blessing (and limited help, if needed).

[Silence]

That is a fantastic, although complex and difficult idea.

If you ever get the kinks worked, out please tell me.

[arkanis]

Sounds very cool. I like the idea of a system which allows customization.

However, the d20 system is designed to be a level system. In its very nature it requires a character to spread out their power.

To truly customize this system you'd also need a way to solve the caster level problem. Casters have to pay for spells known, caster level, and spells per day with an increased cost for spontaneous spells. It might be a good idea to use the magic rating and defense bonus variants so that other classes have fair increases: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/magic/magicRating.htm
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/adventuring/defenseBonus.htm

And possible a Wealth rating system for those of you us aren't masters of giving just the right amount of treasure.

[Zeta Kai]

Sounds very cool. I like the idea of a system which allows customization.

However, the d20 system is designed to be a level system. In its very nature it requires a character to spread out their power.

Ah, but it doesn't have to be a class-level-based system, & Paragon Badger is attempting to find another way. What is a class level anyway? It is nothing more than a package of benefits earned by those who have acquired sufficient XP. It all comes in one automatic package. What PB is trying to do is see if it possible to create a balanced progression system based on the idea of much smaller discrete packages. If it works like he has described, you could still spend the same amount of XP to acquire all of the same abilities of a character with a class level one higher than your own. But you could also spend that same XP in a different manner altogether, picking & choosing the traits you wish to focus on.

[Savageman]

Would it not be simpler to just create a new class altogether, if any of the existing classes do not fit your play style?
It seems like the system you are creating is a more complicated method of user-created classes. They will buy each part of what makes up dnd classes - but if they want a thief like character the end result will basically just be a rogue. That is if the system is completely balanced, otherwise you are looking at wizards with bab of fighters or (as you pointed out) ridiculous saving throws at level 2.
If I'm wrong, please tell me, because the OP points did interest me. I just don't see right now how it would be very different with an XP buy system as opposed to straight class progression.

[curtis]

I disagree.

First, creating this system will take a LOT of work, but some people don't WANT to create a new character class, and/or are bad at balancing them

Second, this is a great deal more flexible. 3 HD and 2 BaB at first level? Sure! This system is VERY FLEXIBLE!!!!!!!!!

[Pie Guy]

It seems once we get a table up, It will be very easy to manipulate.

A.k.a. 1caster level = 200 Xp. Or something.

[Various]

I'd been working out such a system myself. Never got very far with it but I was also trying to do away with levels as well. Of course the big problem becomes determining how much XP players get for encounters and how strong the encounters should be. But if you keep levels in this isn't such a big deal.

Back before D&D 3e, they had an updated 2e book, I think it was called Player's Advantage or something, where everything was broken down into purchasable units, even racial abilities. I like the idea of using XP to buy abilities instead.

It would be nice if players could buy abilities as soon as they had the XP available, instead of "you hit level 2 and you can spend these points right now." But some wouldn't want to deal with characters who are not level 5 yet but are more powerful than level 4.

Some thoughts.

[Draz74]

Player's Option.

If you want characters in this system to not become one-trick ponies universally, the abilities need to scale in a more-than-linear fashion. It needs to require more XP to go from +9 BAB to +10 BAB than from +8 to +9.

Sounds nice ... but too complex to ever work. I'll stick to the "Generic Classes" system, where basic things like BAB and Caster Level and HD come in little packets called levels, but class features are selected in a flexible manner that's slightly similar to this.

[Malachite]

That might cause a slight problem, in that a 10th level wizard wielding top level spells but nothing else is far more dangerous than a 10th level fighter with any one of his traditional abilities maxed to the detriment of anything else. Still, it's not as if they're balanced right now.


It's an interesting idea though - reminds me of the levelling in DnD Heroes on the Xbox, if any of you have played that. Almost certainly a system implemeted in many other games.

[Various]

Player's Option.

Thank you. I think now I confused the name with something I read in Knights of the Dinner Table. :smallannoyed:



If you want characters in this system to not become one-trick ponies universally, the abilities need to scale in a more-than-linear fashion. It needs to require more XP to go from +9 BAB to +10 BAB than from +8 to +9.

Sounds nice ... but too complex to ever work. I'll stick to the "Generic Classes" system, where basic things like BAB and Caster Level and HD come in little packets called levels, but class features are selected in a flexible manner that's slightly similar to this.

Good points. The problem with skill-based systems is the FOTM (flavor of the month) builds. Anyone familiar with the old version of the MMORPG Star Wars Galaxies can attest to this. But then there were many solutions for those problems, even though the devs ultimately decided to pay absolutely no attention to good advice and just remake the whole game into a steaming pile of suck.

And I don't think it needs to be too complex to work. Things need to be simplified and assumptions put aside. Instead of following the D&D system why not retool parts as are needed? I think many changes can be made to D20 and still have the same mechanical feel.

[Paragon Badger]

That might cause a slight problem, in that a 10th level wizard wielding top level spells but nothing else is far more dangerous than a 10th level fighter with any one of his traditional abilities maxed to the detriment of anything else. Still, it's not as if they're balanced right now.

Probably. But we could say that spellcasting is 75% of the wizard's capabilities (not too far a stretch) so it would be extremely expensive, even in comparison to other class abilities. I imagine with such a costly % of their total EXP, the spellcaster can't achieve a specialization equal to the sample fighter's +20 BaB.

Also, if you do not buy HD- your caster level will be very low. :smalltongue:


Player's Option.

If you want characters in this system to not become one-trick ponies universally, the abilities need to scale in a more-than-linear fashion. It needs to require more XP to go from +9 BAB to +10 BAB than from +8 to +9.

That's how it already was in my example. Since a fighter's good BaB is constantly changing with each level, it costs a preportionate amount of EXP equal to the increase required to level.


Sounds nice ... but too complex to ever work. I'll stick to the "Generic Classes" system, where basic things like BAB and Caster Level and HD come in little packets called levels, but class features are selected in a flexible manner that's slightly similar to this.

Probably. It is an exercise afterall.


Of course the big problem becomes determining how much XP players get for encounters and how strong the encounters should be. But if you keep levels in this isn't such a big deal.

Not neccesarily. You can still use CR and ECL if you wish- but instead of levels, you have to keep track of the player's total accumulated EXP. A CR 2 encounter is perfect for a fresh character in this setting, since new PCs begin with enough EXP to bring them to level 2.


It seems once we get a table up, It will be very easy to manipulate.

A.k.a. 1caster level = 200 Xp. Or something.

Caster levels do not increase as evenly as Good BaB, unfortunately. So their cost increases would have to be calculated at a steeper curve. Thankfully, that could be easily remedied by merely 'skipping' the levels in which you don't receive another caster level.

As I said, the problem lies not within growth- but a balanced cost for a level 2-equivalent character. If we got that down, everything would fall in place.


To truly customize this system you'd also need a way to solve the caster level problem. Casters have to pay for spells known, caster level, and spells per day with an increased cost for spontaneous spells. It might be a good idea to use the magic rating and defense bonus variants so that other classes have fair increases: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/magic/magicRating.htm
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/ad...fenseBonus.htm

Very true. Spellcasting is a dangerous thing if you want to avoid unbalanced characters, so they'd have to be very expensive. I'd wager as far as 75% or more of your EXP would be required to have a caster level equal to the actual Wizard class. But that's throwing a number out there.

Perhaps we could slow down the wizard's progression with this system as well. But trying to create balance where the WoTC did not looks...daunting.


And possible a Wealth rating system for those of you us aren't masters of giving just the right amount of treasure.

As I said before, CR is certaintly applicable to this system. Afterall, if we can perfectly recreate any level class with this system, then that gives us a guideline for their capabilities.


Wouldn't be easier to just use GURPS?

Probably. :smallwink:

Though I'm quite surprised at the amount of support I've seen for this idea. I may actually work on this as more than an exercise. :smalltongue:

A shame though, with the advent of 4.0- I think that this system will fall into obscurity if it ever gets completed. :smalltongue:

[AgentPaper]

Congratulations!

You have found my secret! Now you must never tell! None will know this but the two of us! :smallwink:

Isn't this so fun?

[levi]

I've been playing around with ideas for classless DnD for some time, but I haven't really come up with a solid solution yet. However, I do have some suggestions that may help.

Firstly, check out BESM d20 by the now defunct Guardians of Order. Unlike a lot of third party d20 systems out there, they have a an SRD that you can download. Thier system isn't entirely classless, but it has Character Points and can be easily adapted to be classless. (This is no surprize as it's based off a system that was classless. In fact, the classes in the book where built on a point system.)

While the ideas in BESM d20 are interesting, I'm not sure they're entirely balanced. For starters, they use a linear scale, which is probably borked. It does however, demonstrate that classless d20 can be done and has a lot of good ideas.

Secondly, I'd recommend checking out YabaTheWhat's Feature Points. While the system is designed explicitly for figuring out the ELC of a player race, it does provide a unfied system with values for many things. Yaba has stated that it can be applied to classes and is working on a document to support that, but, AFAIK, it isn't done yet. (And he's stingy about providing partial info.)

I think the FP system is fairly well balanced, but it has it's detractors who range from mild critics to those who hate it. One of the most commonly cited issues is that for some monster races, it's right on with the offical ratings, while for others, it's rather different. This is by design. Yaba feels that the WotC "method" is basically a guess in the dark and so shouldn't be trusted.

An interesting system I want to try out is one called Roles and Tracks. It's not entirely classless, but basically allows for building custom classes. Related abilities are grouped together and with a (somewhat convoluted, but brilliant) system of points, you can choose these packages based on your "roles". The class features are spread out over the levels, so it prevents classes getting ahead of the curve in any one area. Also, as the abilites are grouped together and organized by role, such as "heavy combat", the resulting classes have a theme, rather than just a list of cherry picked abilites.

Finally, there's an idea I had a while back that I've yet to fully develop. The crux of the idea is that many abilites have magic items that produce them. So, if you assume the magic item costs are balanced, then you can use them as a guide to the relative prices of things. Of course, there are a lot of abilites that don't have magic item prices, but it's a start.

I'll try to dig up some links for this stuff so you can check it all out without having to google it all.

[Goober4473]

Classless D&D is very possible if you use some 4e concepts. I'm doing this for a setting/d20 game myself.

Essentially, you need to assume all characters get +1/2 level to attacks, saves, checks, etc. This saves the trouble of figuring out how much a level costs based on high BAB or whatever. Also, this means that since all of these things get the same base bonus, they can all be lumped together. An attack is the same as a skill is the same as a save. So if you want to make a fighter, you train in the Blades skill, the Axes skill, the Maces skill, the Fortitude skill, the Armor skill, etc.

I'm basing skills somewhat on the trained/untrained idea, but there are levels beyond that, similar to skill focus, but more. So you could be Trained, Focused, Mastered, or Grand Mastered in Blades, for example.

Characters get two sorts of points at each level: talent points and skill points. Talent points are spent on special abilities, class features, powers, feats, and the like, all put together as "talents." Skill points are spent to increase the rank of a skill. Untrain to Trained, Trained to Focused, etc. A talent point can be spent to buy a skill point, but not vice versa.

In my system, characters begin with 5 talent points and 5 skill points, then get 2 talent points at every even level, and 3 at every odd level, plus 1 skill point every level. A 1-point talent is like a feat in level of power (based on 3.5 D&D), a 2-point talent is like a moderate class feature, and a 3-point talent is like a powerful class feature.

Characters get 18 hit points to start, and +3 per level. More hit points (another 3) will cost a talent point, but would be max 1/level, so a character could end up with about barbarian level hit points if they buy it every level, and it would still leave them with points to buy lots of fightery skills and talents.

Talents will mostly be independant. Not a lot of trees, in order to allow more customization. The magic system isn't like D&D for this, so caster progression is irrellevant. A single talent could be the ability to cast one specific spell, or to choose from a few spells, learn a new spell and also get points towards casting anything you know, etc. There will also be spellcasting skills, which means skills are useful to all character types, not just skill-monkeys.

All talents will scale in power. Meaning if a talent is useful at level 1, it's useful at level 20. Damage goes up with level, for example, but a +2 bonus to attack doesn't, because +2 to hit is always +10% chance to hit, not matter your level.

Perhaps some of that will help you.

One other suggestions, based on what I know about BESM d20 and Mutants and Masterminds:

Do not allow buying ability scores with anything like talent points. Special abilities and ability score boosts do not balance well at all. Trust me, it's a really bad idea. The same goes for BAB and saves and whatnot, but if you base those on skills (and use the base +1/2 level), then it won't be an issue.

[Xyk]

Try Mutants and Mastermind. Edit it a little bit to make it fantasy. It is absolutely classless, the archetypes presented are merely guidelines. It is my favorite form of d20 and great for classlessness.

[Hadrian_Emrys]

I, for one, am a fan of am open ended system based on creating your own "class", but base it upon 2 and 3.

2 ability types: physical and mental
3 ability scores per: str dex con and int wis cha

2 classes of traits: physical and mental
3 aspects governed: BAB hit-die saves and skills abilities magic

Pick one as a primary trait, one as a secondary, and give players points in accordance. The primary trait gets 12 points, and the secondary gets 6-9 (I have no got this part worked out quite yet). There should be some free floating points (possibly just 2) that can be applied to either trait. So...

Primary Trait: 12 points
Secondary Trait: 6 points.
Floating Points: 2

Physical Traits:
BAB: 2 points per level of progression (2 for 1/2, 4 for 2/3, 6 for 1/1)
Hit-die: 1 point per type (1 for d2, 2 for d4, 3 for d6, etc)
Saves: 2 for each good save

Mental Traits:
Skills: 1 point for every two skill points (I think all skills should be class skills)
Abilities: Each point put into this catagory is matched on a 1/1 basis each level as a pool from which you pay for the cost of abilities. Abilities should have a requirements just as feats do.
Magic: Still hazy on how this would work, but I'll figure it out in time.

On making a Barbarian:
Primary: Physical
BAB: 6 points (1/1 BAB)
Hit-die: 6 points (d12)
Saves: 2 points (from floating points, Fort)

Secondary: Mental
Skills: 2 points (4 skill points per level)
Abilites: 4 points (4 points each level to pay for abilities, can be saved)
Magic: 0 points (not a caster, still working on the system)


All in all, I think it's a neat first step towards making a tweakable system.


P.S. For Sir Giacomo: Monk:
Primary: Physical
BAB: 4 points (2/3 BAB)
Hit-die: 4 points (d8) (2 from floating points)
Saves: 6 points (all good)

Secondary: Mental
Skills: 2 points (4 skill points per level)
Abilites: 4 points (4 points each level to pay for abilities, can be saved)
Magic: 0 points (not a caster, still working on the system)


Crafted "Monk":
Primary: Physical
BAB: 6 points (1/1 BAB)
Hit-die: 4 points (d8) (2 from floating points)
Saves: 4 points (Fort, Wil)

Secondary: Mental
Skills: 2 points (4 skill points per level)
Abilites: 4 points (4 points each level to pay for abilities, can be saved)
Magic: 0 points (not a caster, still working on the system)