[New Game] Gold & Glory

[Oracle_Hunter]

As you can see from my signature, I am an aspiring game designer. I have just posted a Project Overview for a Heroic Fantasy RPG I'm developing called Gold & Glory.

For ease of reading (and quoting!) I've also posted it in spoilers below:

Spoiler

Show

I began work on a new project recently so it seemed an appropriate time to introduce what (I hope) will be a regular feature of this blog: The Project Overview.

The Project Overview is a post designed to cover the most important features of any game I'm producing: The Purpose, The Highlights and The Mechanics.

The Purpose covers the type of game I'm creating and the sort of Players I'm catering towards. Additionally I will include important “axioms” that I'm building the game around, so that its design goals are clear from the outset.

The Highlights detail the most “marketable” features of the game. These are choices I've made that I have either do not see in similar games or have been done badly. Ideally, if someone asked you “why should I play this game” you should be able to answer the question by rattling off the Highlights listed here.

The Mechanics serves to give an in-depth view of the rules that will form the backbone of the game. While by no means complete, this section should give you a solid conception as to how the major components of the game operate and at least hint as to what I expect the final game to look like.

The Purpose
Gold & Glory is a Heroic Fantasy RPG which is aimed at capturing the sort of Players who have been brought up on Dungeons & Dragons, whether it was the Red Box or 4th Edition. While this is ostensibly the goal of Wizards of the Coast's D&D Next (and innumerable other systems – fan-made and official – over the years) I believe Gold & Glory will bring a fresh perspective on the situation. If you've read my posts on D&D That Never Was you have already seen the keystone of Gold & Glory: the Three Pillars of Dungeons & Dragons. I have taken the whole of Dungeons & Dragons and done my best to boil it down into three concepts that could be said to be true of any edition or version of the game:

(1) The Player Characters (“PCs”) are adventurers who rely on each others' diverse talents to overcome obstacles and survive danger (The Pillar of Adventuring Parties)

(2) The PCs explore dungeons (The Pillar of Dungeon Crawling)

(3) The PCs fight monsters (The Pillar of Dragon Slaying)

Starting from these three pillars I have constructed a game which not only holds these concepts at its heart but tries to incorporate the concerns and desires of Players of contemporary versions of Dungeons & Dragons without alienating Players who still play older versions. A difficult task, to be sure, but I have confidence in my approach.

The Highlights
Gold & Glory has several features that should distinguish it from other Heroic Fantasy RPGs:

Characters can ether be built off unified Classes or assembled piecemeal from components
While huge unified Classes were a hallmark of TSR's Dungeons & Dragons, the most popular modern versions of the game (3rd Edition and Pathfinder) have instead encouraged “Build-Your-Own Characters” through Feats and Multi-Classing. While this approach permits Players to make precisely the sort of character they want, the vast array of choices can be daunting to Players who are unfamiliar with the system or simply don't want to be bothered with that level of customization. To satisfy these two sets of desires, Gold & Glory will primary feature Characters made up of components: Race, Profession, Primary Combat Role, Secondary Combat Role, Fighting Style, and Exploration Knack. Taken together you can build anything from a street-fighter who's killer instinct and quick knives keep his friends alive to an aristocratic wizard, skilled with sword and spell who prefers to “lead from behind” in a tussle. Additionally, Players can choose which aspect of their characters to level-up first and how far: if you want to focus on picking locks you no longer have to become an excellent back-stabber as well. Classes are made up of all these components but gain a slight advancement boost to make up for their bundled nature.

Killing monsters is not the driver of character advancement
Many people have showed concern over the “murder-hobo” aesthetic found in novice Dungeons & Dragons Players: they drift from town to town, killing everything and looting their bodies, with little concern for larger matters. To counter this type of behavior (and to encourage PCs to go on plot-driven adventures) recent editions of Dungeons & Dragons have encouraged the awarding of “Quest XP” or even “Roleplaying XP” while some DMs (myself included) have simply stopped tracking XP from monster kills entirely. Gold & Glory goes one further by tracking advancement based on the value of the treasure you find (Gold) and the renown you gain for accomplishing great deeds (Glory); killing all but the most infamous monsters nets you 0 XP. This feature will refocus the game on Heroes performing feats central to most fantasy literature and implicit in Dungeons & Dragons from its beginning.

Advancement is more than just gaining Levels
In the TSR days of Dungeons & Dragons, 10th level Characters focused on making strongholds replete with followers. At the time this was seen as the end of the character's life but when Wizards of the Coast took over Dungeons & Dragons they dropped it to encourage higher level adventuring. However, I have seen among Players a persistent desire for characters to be more than just a bundle of magic items and attributes; indeed, many 3.PF Casters focus on making powerful fortresses or even dimensions of their own at higher levels. In Gold & Glory, the ability of characters to alter the world around them is at the heart of the system: everyone can spend their Gold and their Glory to attract followers, gain titles, and even open taverns or workshops of their own. How each character chooses to spend their Gold and their Glory becomes part of their character as Feat or Prestige Class selection did in 3rd Edition.

The Mechanics
In keeping with the roots of Dungeons & Dragons, Gold & Glory will use an array of dice, from the humble d4 to the mighty d20, to resolve narrative conflicts. However, I am taking the best from D&D Next by utilizing its “Advantage/Disadvantage” mechanic to streamline play. While “permanent” features (e.g. magical items, class features) will provide the traditional +X to Success, combat effects (e.g. spells, darkness) will use the Advantage/Disadvantage system to cut down on the math that needs to be done mid-combat. Sensibly, Advantages and Disadvantages will cancel each other out at a 1:1 basis to permit tactical “stacking” of combat bonuses and penalties.

Skills have been refined along similar lines with the d20 + (Attribute Modifier) becoming only half of the story. In Gold & Glory your Skill Rank (Novice to Master) will be reflected by the degree of Advantage you gain on that Skill Check. Likewise, situational modifiers that can impair your activity (e.g. improvised lockpicks for Open Locks, a rickety bridge for Balance) apply Disadvantages to your rolls. Taken together, the balance of Advantage and Disadvantage reflects how well trained individuals can cope with adversity as compared to rank novices.

Overall, I have simplified combat from the heights of its complexity while doing my best to preserve (and enhance!) the tactical choices available to Players who want them. Each character's Fighting Style (e.g. Sword & Board, Brawling, Sorcery, Faith) and Primary/Secondary Roles (e.g. Defender, Slayer, Controller, Support) determines the bulk of their in-combat options. These three components offer a mixture of damage bonuses and combat options (e.g. inflicting status effects, granting bonuses to allies, moving opponents and/or allies) for all characters so that each character can choose a mix of combat abilities that they're comfortable with. A major feature of combat in Gold & Glory is the Stance mechanic: at the start of each of their Turns characters can choose 1 of the Stances they know to operate until the start of their next turn. Stances reflect the “combat posture” of a character and how that affects their attacks and the space around them. Stances therefore give everyone a meaningful decision to make every Turn, even if it is simply to keep using one of their Stances for an additional Round. Importantly, none of the combat options in Gold & Glory are intended to become obsolete; options at higher levels with be more focused (and therefore more powerful) than lower level ones instead of being strictly superior to the choices you made at level 1.

On that note, Magic is divided up into three mechanical sets: Combat Magic (e.g. Sorcery, Faith), Low Magic and High Magic. Combat Magic is “at-will” magic that can be selected as a Fighting Style and is therefore limited mostly to combat usage (although a Fire Blast could obviously set something on fire). Combat Magic users gain Willpower Points which they can use to temporarily alter their Combat Magic in form (e.g. convert a single-target bolt of lightning into a large blast of deadly electricity) or in effect (e.g. inflicting a status on the target, granting themselves Advantage on the attack). Low Magic closely resembles Vancian Magic of early editions of Dungeons & Dragons by requiring preparation of a selection of spells in advance that take one round to cast and can be interrupted by the Caster taking damage. Importantly, Low Magic is prepared from a pool of “spell-points” rather than a set number of Spells Per Level so that Low Magic Casters can tailor their prepared spells before every adventure. In order to ease bookkeeping, Low Magic spells have a basic duration of five minutes (or one Combat) but can be Sustained for longer if the Caster is willing to take Disadvantage per Spell Sustained on all actions. High Magic covers ritual magic so powerful that simply casting one of these spells is an adventure in itself. Everything from causing earthquakes, controlling the weather, or lifting a castle into the air is covered with High Magic so that high-level Casters who want to use their powers to alter the world have a way to do so without making these powerful effects seem pedestrian by overuse.

Character advancement is still handled by Levels which are earned by Experience Points (“XP”) tallied at the end of each adventure. However, XP is not gained by slaying monsters but rather by accumulating treasure (“Gold”) and performing great deeds (“Glory”) which can, in turn, be spent between adventures in many ways. In addition to traditional adventurer recreations (e.g. making trophies, bragging in taverns, buying gear), Gold and Glory can be spent to earn titles and followers, to build workshops and strongholds, and even to produce useful items to use in the next adventure. Unlike in previous editions spending these points do not reduce your overall XP so that you don't need to make a choice between getting stronger and having useful tools.

I appreciate any and all comments regarding any aspect of this proposal. After all, I am trying to make a game that you (yes you) will buy

[Moreb Benhk]

It looks interesting. I'd find it hard to get a real grip on things without specific examples to look at. The high level advancement seems to imply you're going the more traditional power capped at ~lvl 10 and gaining followers type route vs the go superpower of 3E. Is this the case? Or are you doing an either/or thing(you can has strongholds instead of further advancement) or is it a both/and thing (you get strongholds + further advancement)?

[Oracle_Hunter]

It looks interesting. I'd find it hard to get a real grip on things without specific examples to look at. The high level advancement seems to imply you're going the more traditional power capped at ~lvl 10 and gaining followers type route vs the go superpower of 3E. Is this the case? Or are you doing an either/or thing(you can has strongholds instead of further advancement) or is it a both/and thing (you get strongholds + further advancement)?

The unique style of advancement makes this question a bit complicated to answer, but I'll try anyhow.

Spoiler

Show

As mentioned, every character is made of up the following components:

• Race: Self-explanatory. Grants you "racial abilities" and a bonus to HP
• Profession: What you do for a living. Determines your Professional Skill, the multiplier for your base HP, and provides a variety of "professional skills" such as spellcasting, armor/weapon usage, etc.
• Primary Combat Role: How you mainly contribute to combat. You pick 2 "feats" from your Primary Combat Role which affect how you interact with the battlefield.
• Secondary Combat Role: What you can "pinch hit" for in combat. You pick 1 "feat" from your Secondary combat Role.
• Fighting Style: How exactly you fight. Your style can give you advantages with weapons (e.g. Sword & Board style makes you better at using a shield), new combat maneuvers (e.g. Dual Weapon allows you to attack with both hands at the same time) and similar features. Combat Magic is a Fighting Style.
• Exploration Knack: How you can help with exploring a dungeon. Selections include Dungeoneering (e.g. trap-finding, secret door locating), Dungeon Crashing (i.e. breaking stuff good), Divination (using magic to get information), and Invocations (at-will magic that does "special effects" stuff like levitation or remote manipulation).

Each of those 6 selections has an independent Level System of 1-5. Whenever you gain enough XP to level you can choose to level one of those components. As an example, a character could look like this:

Heinrich the Hammer

• Race: Human 1
• Profession: Soldier 3
• Primary Combat Role: Defender 2
• Secondary Combat Role: Slayer 2
• Fighting Style: Great Weapon 4
• Exploration Knack: Dungeon Crashing 1

In 3.PF, Heinrich would be equivalent to a LV 13 character, theoretically.

The deal with the Class Option in Gold & Glory is that Players who don't want to worry about all those components can select a bundle and level them all up at the same time. To compensate, Classed Characters get to Level 6 components for the price of 5. So, if it takes 200 XP to raise one component from LV 1 to LV 2, it would take a Classed Character 1000 XP (instead of 1,200 XP) to reach LV 2. This means a "LV 5" Classed Character is equivalent to a LV 30 character -- or something similar.

The "stronghold" component of the game runs alongside the "leveling" component so that everyone has a chance to build up their character's assets while also improving their skills.

[Raineh Daze]

Would you have to build strongholds and gain followers and all that? Or would there be something else that you can do if you don't feel like going from an RPG to a 4X game?

I mean, I like Civilisation and all (and SM's Alpha Centauri is awesome) but it's not really the sort of thing I'd want to suddenly move onto.

Also, your level thing there concerns me. Everything caps at 5? Therefore, level 5 effects are logically the strongest (hopefully). Someone who focuses on getting ONE thing to 5, as opposed to levelling equally, is therefore going to get powerful abilities early.

Or they're not that powerful and levelling is kind of dull...

Currently, it's reminding me of White Wolf's stuff, only with less things to get to level 5. Especially if it's the first option, where things start to be orders of magnitude better.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Well, it, ah, could be interesting. Yet Another Fantasy Heartbreaker... I like the idea of having good stronghold rules, and simpler combat is always a good thing. The big draw sounds like the character creation process, though, which sounds great in the first post and iffy in the second. "A class is made of 6 tracks advancing different areas" sounds cool; "characters alternate between taking levels of 6 different classes" less so. Also, wouldn't you quickly start outstripping your comrades if you dumped all your advancements into one area?

[Oracle_Hunter]

@Raineh Daze & @Grod_The_Giant

Spoiler

Show

Would you have to build strongholds and gain followers and all that? Or would there be something else that you can do if you don't feel like going from an RPG to a 4X game?

Of course you don't need to build a stronghold to get followers. But certain followers will be more useful if they have buildings to work with.

For example, if you're a Priest and build a Church your followers (congregants) will have a place to worship and stay while you go off on adventures. Without a Church they're just a bunch of people who have given up their livelihoods to follow you around.

Alternatively you can spend a bunch of Gold and Glory to get a Henchman (i.e. a NPC with adventuring abilities). These guys will be very costly and will, by definition, be weaker than you (why would an equal or superior follow you around?) so while it can be nice having an extra guy around, it won't be like the Leadership Feat in 3.PF. However, if that Henchman is a trained Alchemist and you have a Laboratory he can work on brewing potions while you're off on adventures or doing other things. Handy!

Also, your level thing there concerns me. Everything caps at 5? Therefore, level 5 effects are logically the strongest (hopefully). Someone who focuses on getting ONE thing to 5, as opposed to levelling equally, is therefore going to get powerful abilities early.

Or they're not that powerful and levelling is kind of dull...

The important thing to remember about Gold & Glory is that it is a game of Horizontal Character Growth instead of Vertical Character Growth. Leveling up will make you more powerful, of course, but mainly it will grant you new options (similar to how a 3.PF Wizard gets more spells as he levels). So someone who rushes to, say LV 5 Combat Magic, will have more Willpower Points ("WP") to fuel his magic with and some additional specialist options (e.g. use WP to ignore Resistances; use WP to Dimension Lock target) which, while helpful, aren't the same as getting Meteor Swarm.

Additionally, it takes more XP to get higher levels. Hypothetical Leveling Chart:

• LV 1: Spend 0 XP
• LV 2: Spend 200 XP
• LV 3: Spend 300 XP
• LV 4: Spend 500 XP
• LV 5: Spend 800 XP

So if you rush one Component at the expense of others you will be progressively weaker in all the other components of your character.

The big draw sounds like the character creation process, though, which sounds great in the first post and iffy in the second. "A class is made of 6 tracks advancing different areas" sounds cool; "characters alternate between taking levels of 6 different classes" less so.

No no, Players don't need to alternate advancing levels; they get to choose which ones to invest their XP into.

In the Heinrich the Hammer example in Post #3, Heinrich got to choose which of his Components to advance at a time. Here's how it might have gone:

Spoiler

Show

• Heinrich likes smashing things, so he uses his first level up (200 XP) to improve his Great Weapon Fighting Style to LV 2. He forgoes advancing another Component at his next 200 XP and instead saves up 300 XP to get Great Weapon 3 for a sweet anti-Swarm stance and some other cool maneuvers.
• By the time Heinrich gets his next 200 XP he's gotten sick of his fellow party members complaining about the clothies getting roughed up so he buys his 2nd Level in Defender. Now that his allies have stopped complaining he thinks about Great Weapon 4 but 500 XP is a lot, so he takes Slayer 2 for 200 XP so he can get a nice damage bonus with his weapon of choice.
• By this point, Heinrich has accumulated a bunch of Followers ("drinking buddies") and would like to do something more with them. The DM points out that Soldier 3 includes the ability to enhance Henchmen in battle and so Heinrich spends his next 200 XP on Soldier 2 and the following 300 XP on Soldier 3. Using a little Gold and Glory he upgrades some of his drinking buddies into "spear carriers" who can back him up in battle with ranged attacks. Sweet!
• Heinrich has gained 6 levels by now at a cost of 1400 XP. A Classed Character would be at LV 2 at this point but would have also gotten a level in his Race and Knack (which Heinrich didn't bother with). With 100 more XP, that Classed Character will become LV 3 in everything while 100 XP can't buy Heinrich anything. This is the price for being able to tailor your character like Heinrich did.

The point of the Component Leveling system is to give Players as much (possibly more!) control over the build of their character as any WotC or Paizo D&D Edition.

I hope that makes more sense

[Raineh Daze]

Of course you don't need to build a stronghold to get followers. But certain followers will be more useful if they have buildings to work with.

For example, if you're a Priest and build a Church your followers (congregants) will have a place to worship and stay while you go off on adventures. Without a Church they're just a bunch of people who have given up their livelihoods to follow you around.

Alternatively you can spend a bunch of Gold and Glory to get a Henchman (i.e. a NPC with adventuring abilities). These guys will be very costly and will, by definition, be weaker than you (why would an equal or superior follow you around?) so while it can be nice having an extra guy around, it won't be like the Leadership Feat in 3.PF. However, if that Henchman is a trained Alchemist and you have a Laboratory he can work on brewing potions while you're off on adventures or doing other things. Handy!

I... but... that's not what I asked at all! I was asking if you had to get followers and strongholds, not if you could have the one without the other.

The important thing to remember about Gold & Glory is that it is a game of Horizontal Character Growth instead of Vertical Character Growth. Leveling up will make you more powerful, of course, but mainly it will grant you new options (similar to how a 3.PF Wizard gets more spells as he levels). So someone who rushes to, say LV 5 Combat Magic, will have more Willpower Points ("WP") to fuel his magic with and some additional specialist options (e.g. use WP to ignore Resistances; use WP to Dimension Lock target) which, while helpful, aren't the same as getting Meteor Swarm.

Additionally, it takes more XP to get higher levels. Hypothetical Leveling Chart:

• LV 1: Spend 0 XP
• LV 2: Spend 200 XP
• LV 3: Spend 300 XP
• LV 4: Spend 500 XP
• LV 5: Spend 800 XP

So if you rush one Component at the expense of others you will be progressively weaker in all the other components of your character.[/spoiler]

... I do believe that rushing one thing at the expense of others is blatantly obviously going to lead to lopsided characters.

Horizontal character growth with only... six avenues it can go down, hard caps on the advancement for all of them, and nowhere to go from that sounds... incomplete. There's just not enough, especially because all of the six are being determined at character creation. Add to that the way half the avenues specifically tie into combat when that's only, what, 1/3 of the game? It doesn't seem broad enough for horizontal advancement.

Also, really don't compare levels to 3.X if it's horizontal advancement, that won't work well.

[Ashdate]

I look forward to seeing how this develops! If you get something resembling a playtest, I'll run it for my group!

[Oracle_Hunter]

I... but... that's not what I asked at all! I was asking if you had to get followers and strongholds, not if you could have the one without the other.

Oh!

Spoiler

Show

Well no. There are several "easier" avenues too. I'll sketch out a few here.

• Lifestyle: How comfortably you're set up. This covers things like having a permanent room in an inn, a silk tent and fine food while you travel. Mostly it'll be for RP but I've been thinking of making it have some positive effect on your HP and out-of-dungeon healing.
• Wealth: How much cash you have available. Distinct from Lifestyle in that you can use it to buy gear, bribe guards or what have you. There's a conversion rate from Gold since merchants always take a little something for themselves when they buy golden idols and such from you.
  Renown: How much people know you. This can be everything someone buying "the famous hero" a drink at a Tavern to giving you a bonus to Intimidate rolls.

Additionally you can convert (at a discount, naturally) Gold to Glory (via Boasting -- buying drinks in taverns and paying bards to inflate your role in adventures) and Glory to Gold (via Trophies -- taking worthless items from adventures and tying them to the tale, giving them value to collectors) which give you bonus XP as a by-product. This lets PCs manage their Gold and Glory values if they want.

I'll also have some sort of Training Mechanic where you can spend Gold and/or Glory and practice under a Tutor. This converts Gold/Glory to pure XP at some better discount as the conversions described above.

In short, Gold & Glory gives more options for Players who want them, but also has "easy outs" for the legendary "Simple Player" who just wants to go into the Dungeons and hit Dragons with sticks

Horizontal character growth with only... six avenues it can go down, hard caps on the advancement for all of them, and nowhere to go from that sounds... incomplete. There's just not enough, especially because all of the six are being determined at character creation.

Care to elaborate? How many different components would you like? I'll note that gaining a level usually (maybe always) gives you a list to make choices from -- like the Feat system in 3.PF. So a LV 2 Defender, for example, might choose between 6 different "feats" with half of them Stances and the other half like more traditional Feats. Every level of Defender will have a new list of 6 Feats to choose some number from.

I feel this will give Players at least as many choices on character customization as a Tier II 3.PF Character but I may be missing something.

Also, really don't compare levels to 3.X if it's horizontal advancement, that won't work well.

Yeah, you're right. I shan't do it again

[Grod_The_Giant]

No no, Players don't need to alternate advancing levels; they get to choose which ones to invest their XP into.

That, ah... that is alternating levels. You get to choose, but... in your example below, Heinrich takes two levels of Great Weapon Fighting style, one level of Defender, and two levels of Soldier. It's not necessarily a bad way of doing things-- it worked in 3.5-- but it does sound more like 3e multiclassing than anything else. A "class," then, would be some sort pre-made build-- take one level of soldier, one level of Great Weapon Fighting, two levels of Defender, one level of Solider...

I would suggest moving in a more point-buy direction, to be honest. That's what it sounds like you're talking about-- Heinrick spending XP to buy new abilities. Exalted might be a model, strange as it sounds-- you can spend XP to buy new active abilities (charms), new chassis elements (more dots in skills and abilities), or more worldbuilding-y stuff (followers, resources, and so on).

If you're looking at horizontal advancement, Mutants and Masterminds does a fantastic job of that. Your (power) level directly limits how big your numbers can be, and thus what is and isn't a threat to you, but advances fairly slowly and largely by the GM's whim. Meanwhile, you're using your XP to either buy new abilities or upgrade the ones you have-- and since their maximum power is capped, you're forced to broaden.

Other Thoughts

• Glad to know that there are options to convert between your three forms of reward. Might be tricky to make sure they're balanced in power, though.
• Your experience chart needs work, obviously-- it's way cheaper to pump one ability to level 5 than to level all six to level 2.
• What's the distinction between Combat Roles and Combat Styles, in terms of abilities? Also, is there a difference between your primary and secondary styles?

[Moreb Benhk]

I note you start level 1 in everything, effectively starting at level 5? So there are four steps of growth in any direction?

[erikun]

You mention in the blog that you're trying to attract the sort of players who've played various editions of Dungeons & Dragons, so I'm curious as to which editions of the system you've played. Can you say how the editions were different, and how you'd like G&G to be similar to - or at least attracts players from - each edition?

Your leveling up concept does not strike me as simple at all. Bundled classes require the same level of selection and customization as the non-bundled choices; they just need to be made less frequently (but require more choices when it happens). This isn't the AD&D leveling system, where I can just grab my class's new values and roll HP with a level up, and not worry about anything else.

Heinrich the Hammer

• Race: Human 1
• Profession: Soldier 3
• Primary Combat Role: Defender 2
• Secondary Combat Role: Slayer 2
• Fighting Style: Great Weapon 4
• Exploration Knack: Dungeon Crashing 1

In 3.PF, Heinrich would be equivalent to a LV 13 character, theoretically.

Assuming that a character starts with 1 rank in everything when they begin ("first level"), this would be a 8th level character.


The advantage/disadvantage system sounds like it could work well, especially if you can gather multiple "advantages" and perhaps trade them in for bonus effects. For example, gaining one advantage means you could roll d20 twice and take the better result, or pull out a called shot for extra damage. Two advantages means you could do both. Or if you don't have an advantage, could could take a called shot and suffer a disadvantage.

The concept of gaining Gold and Glory (good choice for system name, by the way) sounds like an interesting concept. Being able to trade in one for the other, or cash both in for XP, sounds like a very interesting way to handle things.

[Jerthanis]

I don't really like the component system you propose. Some people are going to play like Heinrich who play around in the shallows of each component, raising his Combat Role just to avoid falling behind and generally just taking what seems good at the immediate moment without planning or optimization.

But there will also be players in the same group who treat XP spent on anything other than Primary Combat Role or maybe Exploration Knack to be total wastes of experience points, since it's not directly contributing to your role in your group and your survival.

In fact, your primary pillar "Adventurers depend on each other to..." seems to suggest that this attitude is the correct one, since it develops your specialized tools that you contribute to the group the fastest.

It also seems like your third pillar of combat is at the forefront because more than half your components affect combat exclusively, and the examples of most of the other components are going to affect combat as well. I mean, I assume Elf levels is where you'd find their trademark immunity to sleep and resistance to charm effects, which are combat powers. With this focus in mind, it seems like your "Exploration Knack" component seems almost like your dumping ground for the "Dungeon Delving" pillar because those abilities are harder to classify.

OTHER than the component system however, I like the concepts you mention for most of the rest of the system. Components may be workable in an actual finished product, but it's definitely the most worrying thing from what you've presented so far.

[Autolykos]

Wow, if you want to build "D&D, but better", and prevail with it on this already oversaturated market, you're up for quite a challenge (even though there's lots of room for improvement in D&D). There are literally dozens, perhaps even hundreds, out there that tried. Most have some great ideas, but fall short in other areas (or just in marketing, which is the saddest way to die). And if on some off-chance you're successful, you've got that certain Wizard living by the Coast coming your way with The Copyright Hammer. I'm not saying it can't be done, but it won't be easy.

Now for some specific advice:
- The Component System basically tries to break out of the straitjacket named Class System, but it only goes half way and makes everything complicated and confusing. Why not get rid of the whole mess in favor of a more comprehensive Skill System plus some kind of Feat Tree? You could still bundle these up in neat packages labeled e.g. "Fighter I" or "Wizard IV" with a fixed XP cost that can be used as a base by new/lazy players.
- The "XP for killing monsters"-mechanic is IMHO one of the most critical design flaws in D&D (mainly because of the bookkeeping), and getting rid of it is definitely a good thing. I'd go with a pure "XP for objectives/reputation" approach (like Shadowrun's Karma) and use gold to pay teachers. Midgard has an interesting mechanic there, where you have a fixed exchange rate between money and XP and can pay up to 2/3 of your XP costs in gold (by hiring a teacher).
- Fixing the magic system is also important, D&D's is absolutely horrible. But I'd need some testing to know how well yours does.
- I'd love good rules for fortress building, as I've always wanted to run DF on tabletop. Would make for a great sandbox campaign. But please make it optional.

Good "Luck"!

[Morty]

Hm. Interesting. The advancement system does look like it's a bit too complicated for its own good, but maybe it works better in practice. Straddling the line between class-and-level-based advancement and point-buy advancement is always risky.

I'm also not sure how I feel about the "Glory" part. It does look like it forces characters to achieve notoriety, which stifles some character concepts. What if someone wants a character who is powerful, but largely anonymous and lacking infrastructure?

[DeltaEmil]

Killing monsters is not the driver of character advancement
Many people have showed concern over the “murder-hobo” aesthetic found in novice Dungeons & Dragons Players: they drift from town to town, killing everything and looting their bodies, with little concern for larger matters. To counter this type of behavior (and to encourage PCs to go on plot-driven adventures) recent editions of Dungeons & Dragons have encouraged the awarding of “Quest XP” or even “Roleplaying XP” while some DMs (myself included) have simply stopped tracking XP from monster kills entirely. Gold & Glory goes one further by tracking advancement based on the value of the treasure you find (Gold) and the renown you gain for accomplishing great deeds (Glory); killing all but the most infamous monsters nets you 0 XP. This feature will refocus the game on Heroes performing feats central to most fantasy literature and implicit in Dungeons & Dragons from its beginning.

How is this going to stop the murder-hobo stuff, if gold gives xp? Won't it encourage the player characters to kill everyone in towns, taking their money, go to the next town, and then kill everyone to get more money, and therefore more xp?

[Morty]

Yes, I can't say I understand the "XP for gold" idea either. Why not simply give out XP for accomplishments?

[PairO'Dice Lost]

How is this going to stop the murder-hobo stuff, if gold gives xp? Won't it encourage the player characters to kill everyone in towns, taking their money, go to the next town, and then kill everyone to get more money, and therefore more xp?

Yes, I can't say I understand the "XP for gold" idea either. Why not simply give out XP for accomplishments?

Gold giving XP goes back to 1e AD&D, where 1 gp = 1 XP (and potentially more for thieves if you're using the rules for that). It can encourage PCs to kill people in town, I suppose, but most townsfolk wouldn't have all that much money and those that would have a lot of cash would have more protection. And if this does happen (which it never did outside of evil campaigns when I ran 1e), there are consequences to wanton theft and murder that PCs actually have to worry about in this system since they're not effortlessly better than the town guard.

The larger effect is to encourage less murderhobo-y tactics in the field: rather than trying to kill everything they can see, they're incentivized to try to avoid combat, sneak past monsters, take their treasure, and get out alive, because killing a monster gets you very little XP compared to taking its treasure; slaying a great wyrm might give you only double-digit XP while getting its hoard back to town gets you several thousand.

[Morty]

Everything it solves can also be solved by giving out XP for actual accomplishments. It looks like a pointless legacy mechanic to me.

[Ashdate]

Everything it solves can also be solved by giving out XP for actual accomplishments. It looks like a pointless legacy mechanic to me.

I think the problem with simply saying "award quest XP" is that you then need to figure out how the system handles quest XP. D&D has traditionally, been very poor at doing this, largely thanks to a few editions where the best way to gain levels was to be a murder-hobo. The result is that experience rewards for non-combat situations have been largely arbitrary.

The advantage to tying it to gold (aside from modifying behaviour) is that as a DM, you can then set the pace of advancement better than "you need to help five farmers to gain a level". I think treasure has always been a bit of a sore spot in D&D too, so tying it to advancement might kill two birds with one stone, since you can (likely) easily set the pace via the amount of treasure you hand out.

[PairO'Dice Lost]

Everything it solves can also be solved by giving out XP for actual accomplishments. It looks like a pointless legacy mechanic to me.

Granted, quest XP is probably a better approach, I was just pointing out that it doesn't necessarily encourage the murderhobo approach because we already have a case study of a game where it doesn't.

On the other hand, tying XP to gp has one tangible design benefit: you don't need to have any sort of Wealth By Level guidelines, or worry about high-level low-wealth characters, because wealth and XP have no choice but to increase in lockstep; the vast majority of XP is going to come from gp, and parties who get most of their XP from combat are going to be lower-level for longer and thus item dependency and wealth disparities and such won't enter the picture for a while.

[Morty]

I think the problem with simply saying "award quest XP" is that you then need to figure out how the system handles quest XP. D&D has traditionally, been very poor at doing this, largely thanks to a few editions where the best way to gain levels was to be a murder-hobo. The result is that experience rewards for non-combat situations have been largely arbitrary.

There's nothing wrong with that, though. It lets the GM set their own pace.

The advantage to tying it to gold (aside from modifying behaviour) is that as a DM, you can then set the pace of advancement better than "you need to help five farmers to gain a level". I think treasure has always been a bit of a sore spot in D&D too, so tying it to advancement might kill two birds with one stone, since you can (likely) easily set the pace via the amount of treasure you hand out.

Right, except that it creates a situation in which the PCs who get rich easily become powerful more quickly than those who overcome greater challenges, but earn less riches.

Granted, quest XP is probably a better approach, I was just pointing out that it doesn't necessarily encourage the murderhobo approach because we already have a case study of a game where it doesn't.

On the other hand, tying XP to gp has one tangible design benefit: you don't need to have any sort of Wealth By Level guidelines, or worry about high-level low-wealth characters, because wealth and XP have no choice but to increase in lockstep; the vast majority of XP is going to come from gp, and parties who get most of their XP from combat are going to be lower-level for longer and thus item dependency and wealth disparities and such won't enter the picture for a while.

I suppose it is a benefit, although tying wealth and experience so tightly has its own drawbacks. Namely, it essentially forcibly removes the high-level low-wealth characters from play.

[Icewraith]

Previous editions just killed off your high level low wealth characters because their numbers weren't high enough so this seems like an improvement.

The trick is everything's tied to economics, but it also sort of solves the issue of characters getting too much wealth too early. However, if your stuff gets stolen or your stronghold blown up do you lose levels? How did that work in 1e?

[Grod_The_Giant]

I suppose it is a benefit, although tying wealth and experience so tightly has its own drawbacks. Namely, it essentially forcibly removes the high-level low-wealth characters from play.

But it doesn't sound like that's what's happening here. There are three distinct currencies for increasing character power, and it's possible to convert them.

[Ashdate]

Right, except that it creates a situation in which the PCs who get rich easily become powerful more quickly than those who overcome greater challenges, but earn less riches.

I find it curious that you would be in favour of letting the DM "set the pace" (via non-combat experience), yet somehow not see the above as an example of the DM doing exactly that.

[DeltaEmil]

Killing monsters is still the most effective thing to get their money (and therefore xp, which simply means money is now only a xp-token). It has the benefit that now you don't have to worry about the monster trying to stop you from getting away with its money.

I would guess that this will be a system where combat is extremely and brutally lethal, mishaps happen where the combatants can slice off their own arms, magic might lead to demon gribblies appearing out of nowhere and taking the magic user away to their hell and pain dimension, healing takes months or is impossible, every opponent can make you fall ill with tetanus and wound fevers, goblins are actually magical demon monsters from a dark and twisted unseelie realm that can steal the souls of virtuous men and women, dragons are unbeatable terrors from the sky that bring fire and ash to those that do not worship them, undead horrors skulk in forgotten tombs, and a simple house cat can tear off your stomach and make your guts fall out, and other horrible stuff to make player characters rather focus on sneaking, stealing, and scooting away, instead of slashing, skewering and stabbing opponents (and townspeople).

So, Warhammer Fantasy. But less deadly.

[Raineh Daze]

mishaps happen where the combatants can slice off their own arms, magic might lead to demon gribblies appearing out of nowhere and taking the magic user away to their hell and pain dimension, healing takes months or is impossible, every opponent can make you fall ill with tetanus and wound fevers

If the system is set up like that by default, I have to say I'd write it off. PC's being unable to even perform at their chosen profession without somehow killing themselves? That's just... bad.

Well, unless it's Paranoia. But I don't see how you'd get time to kill YOURSELF.

[DefKab]

I'm seeing some very interesting things here. I'll try to be brief, as I could probably talk for hours on some of these points.

Firstly is the XP/Gold/Glory system... I think this has the potential to be brilliant, but for me the issue comes with the separation of the matters... XP, Gold, and Glory can all be used for the same thing, from what I gather, but are doled out separately, and therefore, are treated as separate entities. Might it be an easier solution to give out 'Glory' and that glory can be spent on either improvements to your character's skill, (During this quest, I learned the importance of a good spell!) equipment, (Look at all the treasure the beast had!) or story perks (The king rewarded us with a keep in his country!). With a proper eye for balance, you could establish High Power Low Wealth Characters (by using it mostly to improve the character), Low Power High Wealth Characters, or even pure support and story characters, spending all of their Glory on in-character favors and friends.
Hell, I could even see this change per party, if the DM doubles the equipment and Advancement costs, it'll encourage the players to get story rewards with their glory. Same for tilting the other axis different ways...

Character Advancement: This does worry me, a little. I'll just echo the fears of others, with such low caps, and tiny classes, it may feel different, but mechanically, it's the same... Why not offer all tracks, skills, feats, classes, whatever you call them, at the same time? Those that prefer the sneaky classes will still only pick up sneaky feats, but they wont be restricted to their original choices. You could even make certain feat trees to support focusing on a particular path, while still keeping character creation completely open...
The only issue here, is learning curve, and I suppose that's something that you'll have to figure out yourself.

I'm loving the Henchman and Follower ideas, but I see them as more of an abstract condition, more than an extra PC like Leadership bestows. I imagine my party being in a dungeon, with the followers hanging off-grid, and providing temporary buffs and debuffs from afar, like withering ranged damage, or tossing the eventual cure spell when needed. Combined with Story rewards, your character might not be powerful on his own, but when he has his entourage, he's got a supreme advantage...

Lastly, I'll echo an above statement on Advantages and Disadvantages. Singly, I love the mechanic, it's nice, swingy, and on average a simple +5 bonus. However, stacking them makes it a nice Tactical element, as you aim to keep your party's advantages above the disadvantages the enemies are sending your way. However, what if we could spend Advantages on unique manuevers that other games dont handle so well? For instance, I could trade in my Advantage for a trip attempt, instead of an attack, and that would give Advantage to my Buddy the Rogue, who uses it to fuel his Sneak Attack for a damage boost. It might let you do manuevers easily, without having to worry about sacrificing advancement for it (like 3.5) or make it clumsy (like 3.P).
Just a couple thoughts.

[Oracle_Hunter]

It seems like a lot of people have questions and concerns about the Component System. Let's see if I can clear some things up.

Spoiler

Show

First of all, a Class is something defined in the book; it is a pre-assembled collection of Components that a novice Player can pick right off the shelf. I will even include a "suggested character build" as you see in 3.PF Classes. Here's an example:

Wizard Class

• Race: [Player's Choice]
• Profession: Arcanist (i.e. Vancian Caster)
• Primary Combat Role: Controller
• Secondary Combat Role: Slayer
• Fighting Style: Sorcery (i.e. Arcane Combat Magic)
• Exploration Knack: Invocations (i.e. Arcane Utility Magic)

At LV 1, Wally the Wizard gets to choose his Race, 3 LV 1 Spells from the Arcanist Spell List, 2 Controller Feats, 1 Slayer Feat, his element of Sorcery (e.g. Acid, Ice, Fire, Lighting), and 1 Invocation. He does not need to have a deep understanding of the rules to choose the right mix of Components -- I've done that already. While this is more complicated that a 1st Level 3.PF Fighter I hope that by dividing the "feats" into sub-lists tied to Components it will be easier for a novice to navigate than 1001 Feats.

At LV 2 (1,000 XP), Wally makes the following choices: 1 Racial Ability, 3 LV 2 Spells from the Arcanist List, 2 more Controller Feats, 1 Slayer Feat, 1 Sorcery Feat, and 1 LV 2 Invocation. Wally did not need to decide whether to spend or save up his XP while accumulating those 1,000 XP nor decide whether it was better to get Arcanist 2 first or Invocation 2. While Wally does lose out on the benefits of specialization (as many of you have noted) he remains a rounded character that advances slightly faster than a custom-build character.

Now, it is true that this is not as simple as an AD&D Character but, IMHO, the "character building" portion of the game is just too rooted in the culture at the moment to leave it out. As the 3.x Tier System shows, versatility really does matter in a RPG environment and I could not find a way to create a Class as simple as the AD&D Fighter that would be relevant in a game with a 3.PF Sorcerer. So yes, this is a compromise but I think one which will provide the greatest good for the greatest number.

That said, it does seem like a lot of people have a general concern for having 5 levels per Component being too low. I disagree for a couple of reasons:

• No Empty Levels: In 3.PF there are many levels for many classes where all you get is some BAB, HP and Saves. In G&G every level gives the Player options for customization. With that in mind, I'm confident I can fit ten levels of a 3.PF character into five levels of a G&G character.
• Every Component is a 3.PF Class: As several people have noticed, the Component system looks just like a 3.PF multi-classed character. This is intentional as, in my experience, I found most of my fellow Players took some sort of multi-classing (including Prestige Classes) to get a diversity of options and powers. In fact, Prestige Classes is where people went to get neat abilities that were outside of Feats or Spells -- and most of those Prestige Classes were about 5-10 levels. So don't think of Elf 2 as just being +HP; think of it more like 3.PF Fighter or Thief 2.

That's how I see it, but I would like to hear if I've missed anything.

* * *

As far as I can see, the concerns I see about the Gold/Glory system seem to center around these issues:

• High-Power, Low-Wealth Characters
• Killing for XP
• DM Pacing

I'll address them in the spoilers:

Spoiler

Show

High-Power, Low-Wealth Characters
As others have mentioned, I explicitly have the Gold:Glory conversion system to permit Players to tailor their Character's balance to however they prefer. Additionally, I am making magical items less central to high-level characters by investing so much of a character's abilities into their levels. This means you can actually play an "impoverished" Hero without carting around several kingdoms' worth of magical items.

I can say more on my plan for Magic Items if anyone wants; when I drafted the post, it didn't fit my Big Picture approach.

Killing for XP
While killing may be the fastest route to gain treasure, it is also the riskiest since you risk your life with every fight. Additionally, unlike in many other editions of D&D, you don't gain anything from killing your common Orc: he won't be carrying around much money, and there's no real Glory in doing so. Indeed you will be better able to survive dungeons by avoiding killing and getting the the treasure rooms where the good stuff is.

Importantly, Magical Items do not have Gold Values. Looting a Staff of Power from a Lich is its own reward; you don't get extra XP for having it. So there's that to consider.

Finally, a hypothetical party might decide to simply loot a town for its money but there are a few problems:

• Towns that a party of adventures could destroy don't have much Gold, let alone in great concentrations.
• Burning down towns makes it hard to spend Gold or Glory

So I don't really worry about G&G producing PCs that burn down towns for money any more than previous editions encouraged PCs to locate a Magic Shop and murder the proprietor for his goods.

DM Pacing
Gold and Glory can be used to pace adventures just like XP has always been used. If the DM decides the game is going too slowly he can easily supplement their XP by granting Glory as Quest Rewards (which is rather its point) or ignore these systems entirely as I and others have done in previous editions of D&D. The power of Gold/Glory is that it is more than a plot-tracking mechanic; it gives the Players additional resources with which they can interact with the game world.

And finally, some direct responses to pointed concerns

@Erikun

Spoiler

Show

You mention in the blog that you're trying to attract the sort of players who've played various editions of Dungeons & Dragons, so I'm curious as to which editions of the system you've played. Can you say how the editions were different, and how you'd like G&G to be similar to - or at least attracts players from - each edition?

I have personally played AD&D (1st & 2nd Edition), 3.0, 3.5, PF, and 4e. I won't get into the ins and outs of all the different systems (that's a thesis-length project!) but I had hoped my "Purpose" section had laid out how I planned to attract them: by providing the core D&D experience (as enunciated in my Three Pillars) with mechanics aimed to appeal at the 3.PF crowd. That said, I hope that the "stream-lined" approach will bring TSR Era D&D Players back to the fold (like Scott Kurtz said during the 4e Podcasts) and that my Horizontal Character Growth will appeal to 4e Players.

@Jerthanis

Spoiler

Show

I don't really like the component system you propose. Some people are going to play like Heinrich who play around in the shallows of each component, raising his Combat Role just to avoid falling behind and generally just taking what seems good at the immediate moment without planning or optimization.

But there will also be players in the same group who treat XP spent on anything other than Primary Combat Role or maybe Exploration Knack to be total wastes of experience points, since it's not directly contributing to your role in your group and your survival.

In fact, your primary pillar "Adventurers depend on each other to..." seems to suggest that this attitude is the correct one, since it develops your specialized tools that you contribute to the group the fastest.

I'm not quite sure what the objection is here. Is it that it is possible to optimize in G&G? Or is it that Specialists will leave Generalists in the dust?

If it is the latter, then I have some tricks in store. For one, "survivability" is spread out amongst several Components: Race and Profession determine HP, Profession and Combat Role provide Defenses, and Exploration contains miscellaneous Dungeon Survival abilities. Additionally, most "survivability" choices (but not HP) will need to be made at the expense of versatility: Profession, Combat Role and Exploration all contain new things you can do mixed in with the "survivability" aspects mentioned above and you can only choose so many. So yes, you can make the total tank who cannot die, but hopefully your DM doesn't simply send you on adventures where "not dying" is all you need to do to win

Secondly, this is a game of Horizontal, not Vertical, Character Growth; LV 5 powers are not "win buttons." Here's a sample of some Defender Stances

• LV 1 Defender (Intercept): Once per Turn, when an enemy moves adjacent to you, you may Slide 1 square (5') and make a Basic Attack against that enemy. If you hit, the enemy ends its movement.
• LV 3 Defender (Takedown): Once per Turn, when a flying enemy moves within 2 squares (10') of you, you may Slide 2 (10') and make a Basic Attack against the enemy. If you hit, the enemy falls Prone on the ground and ends his movement.
• LV 5 Defender (Repel Charge): Once per Turn when a charging enemy, size L or larger, moves within 3 squares (15') of you, you may Slide 3 (15') and make a Basic Attack against the enemy. If you hit, the enemy stops his movement and takes 5 Ongoing Damage of an appropriate type (Save Ends).

As you can see from the Samples, higher level options are more powerful, but more limited. While "Intercept" is good against any opponent, "Takedown" works only against flying opponents and "Repel Charge" requires not only a charging opponent, but it needs to be Size L+. Naturally being able to end movement and deal Ongoing Damage is much better than just ending movement but that doesn't mean a LV 5 Defender is only going to use his LV 5 Stance.

Specialization provides advantages, to be sure. You can get the abilities you want faster and, with proper teamwork, execute devastating actions. Since I want to encourage teamwork, this seems like a proper outcome for the system.

Did I address your concern or did I miss something?

It also seems like your third pillar of combat is at the forefront because more than half your components affect combat exclusively, and the examples of most of the other components are going to affect combat as well. I mean, I assume Elf levels is where you'd find their trademark immunity to sleep and resistance to charm effects, which are combat powers. With this focus in mind, it seems like your "Exploration Knack" component seems almost like your dumping ground for the "Dungeon Delving" pillar because those abilities are harder to classify.

A valid concern, to be sure. One thing to remember is that Racial Abilities can be for combat (e.g. immunity to sleep), exploration (e.g. detect secret doors) or both (e.g. low-light vision). Likewise, while Profession will have combat options, it will also interact strongly with the Skill System. It is true that combat is a large focus of character design but I think it is balanced by these aspects I've mentioned above and by the Gold/Glory system of external advancement.

I do not plan on making 4e's mistake of building a brilliant combat system and then neglecting everything else

[Moreb Benhk]

How will spells compare to these other abilities? Because horizontal growth goes right out the window if mages are getting higher level spells.