Yes. I thought I put that in there somewhere. Hm.
Missing a lot of simple stuff apparently. =/
You had it in specific instances, like ranger styles, but not at the beginning of all abilities.
Got it fixed in there, at the end of the "Class Features" blurb.
Anything else I missed? So far you're my top proofreader here. =)
Sorry for being late to the party I had a list I was working on, but you seemed to beat me to it rynjin.
Still not sure about eidelons and summoners, but I don't have a lot of exposure to them.
Ah. I just remembered I hadn't posted it here yet when someone in another thread asked about a classless Pathfinder system.
I'd still like to see your list if there's anything else on there.
One thing is that arcane and divine spell casting shouldn't cost the same. Idk what to tell you about clerics, but Druids and wizards are not equal. Inquisitors, bards, and magi are close, but only because the arcane spell list is cut in half.
I was working on a spread sheet that had each class broken down and totaled up to show relative pt buy totals, and divine casters just don't add up. I'll send you an email when it's all finished.
Spell casting:
Full 9lvls= 90pts (divided by 20 lvls = 4.5 pts/ lvl)
Medium 6lvls = 42 pts (divided by 20 lvls = 2.1 pts / lvl)
Limited 4 lvls = 20 pts (" " = 1 pt/ lvl)
This made my math brake...
That bit would require me to determine which spell lists are better than others and rank then divide them, and I'm honestly not familiar enough with the spell lists to do so, and I doubt you could find a consensus on which are the best.
For now I think it may be worthwhile just to leave it as spells are spells are spells no matter what list they're drawn from (unless they're at a truncated progression).
Druid = 29 pts for build + 90 pts for spells (not counting weapon and armor)
Wizard= 8 pts for build + 90 pts for spells
Question: is the wizard more powerful than a Druid? Survey says, he'll yeah... Pt buy says you could almost build a fighter on top of your wizard with the point difference
That's the most extreme example... Oracles are almost as bad with clerics being the closest in pts to a wizard. Almost all of the medium casters are close to similar, but the spell lists are slashed as well.
I think you will need a spell balancing expert to help with this one, cause its out of my league.
I don't really know much about the relative power and utility of spell lists, but is it generally regarded that Arcane spell lists are better?
If so, you could value them more highly (or less highly, or whatever) to maintain balance.
Basically, you needn't count both Arcane and Divine full casting at the same value.
Another question, Rynjin. I was just thinking about a build, and I have a question - Can I combine two different spell lists and keep them both separate on the same character and advance them both?
An idea I had for a "Inspirational Leader" type included both the Bard and Paladin spell lists. Can I purchase them both?
- 2 Skills Per Level (This excludes INT Primary casters): 10
- 2 Skills Per Level (Int-Based Primary casters only): 11.5
- 4 Skills Per Level: 10.285
- 6 Skills Per Level: 19
- 8 Skills Per Level (Rouge Only): 19
It should be noted that the Barbarian (4 Skills) does NOT have profession as a class skill, and that the Wizard and Bard are the only two classes with all knowledge skills (which individually add up to ten skills, accounted for individually in the average). Further, the Bard is the class with the most class skills, with 26! The Rouge is closest with 19, and the Inquisitor with 18.
So what does this mean? In 3.5, with perception being three skills (search, spot, listen) and stealth two skills (move silently and hide), the rouge got the short end of the stick (I believe they had all these skills, which few other classes did, if any - not even the bard!) While that doesn't close the gap completely, it does shorten it by a skill. And with no knowledge skills taken into account, the rouge does come out on top by a small margin.
It's my opinion that the number of skills that are class skills should be relevant to how many skills points you have - the more skill points you purchase, the more class skills you get. I think a option to have all skills as class skills could possibly be implemented (my gut tells me two points for this option). This ends my thoughts on skills.
I've always been of the mind that balanced characters should have more support. Maybe it's just my own aversion to dropping stats below 10 (though I do it on occasion), but I never feel like I'm rewarded for specializing less than other characters. Just the opposite - most people (even the developers, if I recall) agree that specializing is better for you in the long run than generalizing. One also notices how multi-classing is generally bad, except in very specific builds.
This problem is further compounded by the predicament the MAD classes see them in, in contrast with the SAD. It's bad enough full casters (which are primarily dependent on a single attribute as a matter of course) are already so over-powered compared to non-casters, or even 4th-level casters only exacerbates the issue. But now, MAD classes cannot squeeze every important drop of power they can possess by improving one stat, two, or in the case of the poor monk, they actually need 4 at above average levels!
So, I propose the following (as a first draft):
If a character has more than one attribute that is important to his character, he gains a bonus, and the bonus is increased the more important attributes he has. So the actual rules:
[list]
While it may not be the best system yet, it can hopefully get the juices going. So much for the MADness.
To an extent this makes sense - the healing and supportive stuff is divine, and the offensive stuff is arcane. Except that a good number of support spells are still arcane, and the way combat is set up (and the way healing spells cap and don't get too powerful overall) has made it so healing is impractical outside of emergency situations. The biggest problem in my eye is that the wizard is too generalized. Most everyone agrees healing and raising is outside wizard reign. But that's a part of the game min-maxers will avoid anyway unless absolutely necessary. So it's not really a loss.
Their supposed "weakness" comes from poor combat skills, bad saves, and little ways to defend themselves. But all these things can be easily compensated for, and a simple "teleport" can defeat even the most elaborate scheme. With contingency they're practically untouchable. So, if one wants to balance out the difference between spell lists, include a "buy-in" in addition to the costs already presented:
- The Paladin or Ranger spell list costs 3 points.
- The Bard or Inquisitor spell list costs 5 points.
- The Summoner spell list costs 6 points.
- The Druid spell list costs 7 points.
- The Cleric spell list costs 8 points.
- The Wizard spell list costs 10 points.
By doing this, you can further charge characters intent on having, quite literally, the most powerful spell list in the game, hands down.
I have one more question. What about prestige classes? My suggestion is to say that if you take a prestige class, you do not gain the additional points/level until you take a level in a base class again. The prestige class works as normal.
On skills: I had thought about it but couldn't find a general rule to follow. I then decided that it's not going to affect much if there's a flat number of Class Skills on your list instead of a nuanced progression of them. If your list is accurate (which it probably is) I can implement that.
On MADness: But when would they get these extra points? Remember, they're gaining points per level up, not all at once, so once they get to the next level of MADness would you just drop a whole bunch of points on their laps? Not saying it's a bad idea overall, I just think you or I needs to think it over a little more before I slap it in the Doc.
On Spells: I had initially set in place a spell list buy-in (6 points flat for all spellcasting classes). The issue came from the Druid, who I could not for the life of me fit his first level abilities into those 25 points. Everybody else fit fine (Oracle and Monk were the other problem children, but I found easy workarounds for them), but Druid required something like 29 points to build with that in place, so I scrapped the idea and went with the 2 points per spell level system alone instead of the buy-in. With that in place, I run into the same issue (and one point worse).
Druid I can't even bundle up properly since he doesn't receive a particular package of abilities at 1st level like Monk does that I can just put together as a flat cost. As-is he takes up the whole 25 points.
On Prestige Classes: I haven't tackled them yet, though I plan to. They require a whole 'nother set of rules to cover the fact that they have separate BaB gains, hit dice, saves, and the like.
Tentatively I put forward that they still have the same prerequisites, but once you meet those prerequisites you may start taking abilities from that Prestige Class, but you retain your same hit dice and saves and such. That somewhat cripples Eldritch Knight builds and the like, but the fact that they can take bigger HD/Proficiencies/Etc. from level 1 mitigates that somewhat.
Sorry for rubbing salt in that Druid shaped wound, Ryn.
Heh.
I'm sure there's SOME way to do it, I just haven't figured it out yet.
I have a long-ass drive tomorrow to figure it out though, so we'll see what I can think up.
Quite frankly, it really sounds that you want to ditch classes altogether.
In that case, why not consider not to try to hammer a square peg into a round hole, and go with a classeless system to start with, such as GURPS, or HERO?
If you're hell bent on staying D20, look up the old Player Handbook 2 rules on using generic classes.
actually unearthed arcana, had the generic class rules for 3.5.
Quite frankly, it really sounds that you want to ditch classes altogether.
In that case, why not consider not to try to hammer a square peg into a round hole, and go with a classeless system to start with, such as GURPS, or HERO?
If you're hell bent on staying D20, look up the old Player Handbook 2 rules on using generic classes.
Mostly because I'm having fun with this. I'd keep it to myself but others seemed interested and collaboration is always nice.
about the druids, shouldn't alignment restrictions and not being able to wear metal armor give them some kind of buyback?
Yes, but not enough.
Cleric = 19
Druid = 29
Oracle= 22
Avg = 24 (rounded up)
Wizard = 8
Sorcerer= 6 (?)
Witch = 12
Avg= 9 (rounded up)
Difference = 15 point difference divided by 20 lvls, which means on average, divine spells are worth 0.75 points/ lvl less than arcane spells.
Or full divine costs 68 pts, arcane costs 90. Ish
You most certainly want to recheck my numbers, but there is a rough formulae for you.
you could also bundle their tertiary abilities as well, allowing one ability to grant the other after so many levels. if you bundled nature bond with wild empathy and allowed woodland stride to grant trackless step the next level, and nature sense to grant resist natures lure in 3 levels. that will only kick back about 3 points though. add another point back for metal armor restrictions, plus lets say 1 point for every 2 alignments a class cannot be under restriction( which for druids is 4, equaling 2 points), that will put the druid at 24 points. heck you could even get rid of the nature sense/lure bundle idea altogether and settle at the 25 maximum.
here is one i started, this is a class born from people who love explosives almost exclusively.
Demolitionist
1st level buyout 25, 19, 16, 10, 10, 8, 5
full bab, 6 points
2 good saves (fort and will), 3 points
d12 hitpoints, 6 points
skills 2+ int, 0 points
weapon proficiency simple, 2 point
heavy armor proficiency, 3 points
bomb class feature, 5 points
2nd level buyout 5, 2, 1
throw anything, 3 points
bravery, 1 point
1 point left over
quick question, I do have to buy every discovery I take right? I kinda feel like it wouldn't be balanced otherwise.
Looks neat.
Yeah, scroll to the bottom, in Special Abilities where the "Feat-like Non-Feats" are. They cost the same as Feats.
so if i didn't have bombs or alchemist spells, it costs 3 points as a secondary ability as normal...correct? just want clarification.
No, access to Discoveries currently relies on having Bombs or Alchemist spells as a prerequisite.
I was thinking about changing it but at the time of writing my thought process was that 80% of Discoveries change Bombs to begin with so it made a decent prerequisite.
I'll look at and change it again when I have more time. For now I must analyze the Last Guardian's mechanics.
Made the change and wrote in an extra little clarification of something I thought may have been unclear under the Rogue Talents/Ninja Tricks section.
Sorry for the delay. The post monster, my awful ISP, a broken truck, and my boss at work all conspired to prevent me from delivering an answer to you more timely.
On skills: I had thought about it but couldn't find a general rule to follow. I then decided that it's not going to affect much if there's a flat number of Class Skills on your list instead of a nuanced progression of them. If your list is accurate (which it probably is) I can implement that.
It's all a matter of preference. I think higher skill point characters should be rewarded, but that's a matter of choice. Also, again, do you think an option for buying all skills (I think two is a good cost) as class skills would be appropriate?
On MADness: But when would they get these extra points? Remember, they're gaining points per level up, not all at once, so once they get to the next level of MADness would you just drop a whole bunch of points on their laps? Not saying it's a bad idea overall, I just think you or I needs to think it over a little more before I slap it in the Doc.
As soon as possible. So once they purchase an ability that makes them qualify for extra points, they gain those extra points and can use them within the same level up. Not unlike a level 4 INT increase that gives you more skill points - the benefits are in your lap immediately.
On Spells: I had initially set in place a spell list buy-in (6 points flat for all spellcasting classes). The issue came from the Druid, who I could not for the life of me fit his first level abilities into those 25 points. Everybody else fit fine (Oracle and Monk were the other problem children, but I found easy workarounds for them), but Druid required something like 29 points to build with that in place, so I scrapped the idea and went with the 2 points per spell level system alone instead of the buy-in. With that in place, I run into the same issue (and one point worse).
Druid I can't even bundle up properly since he doesn't receive a particular package of abilities at 1st level like Monk does that I can just put together as a flat cost. As-is he takes up the whole 25 points.
It's tough. The main problem stems from that fact that high-level magic really is the end-all be-all. So the options are: make high-level magic only expensive enough that not everyone will go for it and give them few other options; make high-level magic cost everything meaning once they are out of spells or in a fight where their spells are negated, they are useless; or make it cheap enough that everyone will want at least low-level magic. I'm not particularly fond of any of those options. But it's an issue with PF, not the system you've given.
On Prestige Classes: I haven't tackled them yet, though I plan to. They require a whole 'nother set of rules to cover the fact that they have separate BaB gains, hit dice, saves, and the like.
Tentatively I put forward that they still have the same prerequisites, but once you meet those prerequisites you may start taking abilities from that Prestige Class, but you retain your same hit dice and saves and such. That somewhat cripples Eldritch Knight builds and the like, but the fact that they can take bigger HD/Proficiencies/Etc. from level 1 mitigates that somewhat.
Prestige classes tend to have more abilities, too - and a few have multiple scaling abilities. It's a bit rougher, there. But I like the idea of converting those to free-form like you have here, too.
EDIT: A question I had before. I didn't see an answer.
Another question, Rynjin. I was just thinking about a build, and I have a question - Can I combine two different spell lists and keep them both separate on the same character and advance them both?
An idea I had for a "Inspirational Leader" type included both the Bard and Paladin spell lists. Can I purchase them both?
Separated into two posts for ease of reading. One thought for a class - The Fist of Justice
The Fist of Justice (Or The Fist of Tyranny)
The greatest non-super power superhero ever.
Fluff:Sometimes the fist is mightier than the sword. While most adventurers can slay an orc with a weapon in hand or a spell, there are far fewer willing to face such a fearsome foe completely unarmed. Even fewer would dare to do so without armor of any kind. Specially trained in the ways of unarmed combat, they have little use or need for weapons. Preferring to use non-lethal ways of incapacitating their enemies, they have the capacity to kill when it is unavoidable. Nimble, insightful, and deadly, these warriors are capable of striking fear into the hearts of their enemies. Those that have fallen or been trained in the ways of killing since their birth are truly a foe few want to face. Empowered by their faith in either Good or Evil, and trained to make their bodies physically perfect, this is a fierce combatant worthy of respect.
Suggested Alignment: Any Good or any Evil
First-level Traits:
Full BAB: 6 Points
Two Good Saves (Fortitude and Reflex): 3 Points
D10 HD: 4 Points
2+INT Skill Points: 2 Points
Class Skills: Acrobatics, Bluff, Climb, Craft, Escape Artist, Heal, Intimidate, Knowledge (Local), Perception, Perform, Profession, Sense Motive, Stealth, Survival, Swim, Use Magic Device
Proficient with Simple Weapons, No Armor: 1 Point
Class Traits: Physical Training Package (Monk): 5 Points
4 Points to use as liked.
Suggested Later Traits: Rage (Urban Barbarian Archetype), Smite Evil (or Smite Good), Nimble, Evasion (Improved Evasion), any other Monk, Paladin or Anti-paladin class trait.
Important Stats: STR (if damage dealer), DEX (if AC-focused), CON, WIS, CHA (if Smite focused)
I like the idea of an unarmed Paladin running around knocking out people as opposed to killing them (Merciful is the first thing I get on my weapon when I can afford it), and there's simply no effective way to build it. Now The Fist of Justice (or Tyranny) can fill that role. Completely unarmored and unarmed, they can fill a variety of roles, and can be customized to each individual's liking.
On the spell lists...I'm a bit torn on that.
Perhaps I could add an option to the Spellcasting section that allows for merged spell lists for an extra cost, perhaps as a Defining Feature (I was thinking about adding a few "General" features if I could think of good ones) that could let you combine two spell lists, so long as they're a 6th and a 4th level (or two 4th level) spell lists. All in all it would add up to 67 points (both lists plus points), a bit over what a normal mostly Martial character costs.
On your custom class, I like it. I'm a sucker for unarmed fighters. One note, however, 2+Int skill points is free, it's 4+Int that costs 4. SO you actually have 6 leftover points.
@Byrdology: Lemme look at your list a bit more closely. I like it as a guideline, and that bit HAS always nagged at me somewhat. I'll try to figure out a decent conversion rate and/or decide whether the 3/4 BaB and extra armor/weapon proficiencies plus other class features make up for it.
@Toaster: Yes, I had planned to add Alignment Restrictions and other such things as "point buy-back" options. I just need to figure out a non Munchkin-friendly way to do it so the whole "Well I'll just restrict my character to Chaotic Neutral only and go to town with my extra points hehehehe" nonsense. Possibly by restricting certain restrictions (...yeah) to being tied to certain class features or something.
You guys should look at the True20 products from Dreamscarred Press for inspiration on this idea.
so i expanded my demolitionist idea a bit further with restructured abilities, and I would like to know what you think.
link
On the spell lists...I'm a bit torn on that.
Perhaps I could add an option to the Spellcasting section that allows for merged spell lists for an extra cost, perhaps as a Defining Feature (I was thinking about adding a few "General" features if I could think of good ones) that could let you combine two spell lists, so long as they're a 6th and a 4th level (or two 4th level) spell lists. All in all it would add up to 67 points (both lists plus points), a bit over what a normal mostly Martial character costs.
Do you think two sixth-level lists would be too powerful? You could afford it with the points. I think an extra cost would be appropriate. Maybe 5 for a 6th-level and 4th-level, and 3 for two 4th-level lists (to keep in with the pricing system)? A simple line forbidding 9th-level casters from getting an extra list on the side would do. But that would also preclude the Mystic Theruge prestige class.
On your custom class, I like it. I'm a sucker for unarmed fighters. One note, however, 2+Int skill points is free, it's 4+Int that costs 4. SO you actually have 6 leftover points.
Oh, excellent. In that case, it'll be 4 points per level.
Would you like help with something in particular? Prestige classes, munchkin-building to spot bad spots in the system, etc? I would really like to help on this.
It would really depend on the lists. The Summoner list plus any other list may make them just as versatile as a 9th level caster, but for a slightly lower cost. Don't quote me on that though.
Edit: Actually quick math makes it 89 vs 90 without the proposed buy in. May not be an issue actually.
And if you could help me and Byrd with coming up with a fair buy-in for the different spell lists, or rank them by power I'd be grateful. As I said, I'm not a big magic expert in this game.
It's difficult for me to get this done. My computer is not computing. I have lost the file deleted the file by accident, crashed the computer and anything else you can think of and came up with headache and heart ache...
I am using excel, because I like reading things in columns. Each class on one column, all abilities (- spells) in separate columns so I can go across the page and add them up and total pts in the final column. I have different groups: non casters, 1/2 casters, 3/4 casters, full arcane casters, and full divine casters. I take the average of the total points as a rough base line. 3/4 casters work decently on avgs to where the difference between divine and arcane kind of washes. 1/2 casters are ok, but ahead of the non casters.
Druids and wizards are your polar corner cases. Druids cost the most points to build and wizards cost the lowest. I averaged the difference in points for arcane and divine casters and posted the rough estimates above. Since I am unable to post my actual findings because my computer infuriates me at this point, the above is the model and formula that I am using to get my base, bare bones answer for you. The one thing I can say without a doubt, is that your point buy system is pretty close to balanced, and supports the fact that arcane spells cost more than divine by roughly 15 points over 20 lvls.
A legitimate issue came up while discussing my player's "free-form" character. What if someone just decides to take all the primary features?
I mean, now there's a character that can rage, smite evil, has favored enemies, can sneak attack, wild shape, use bardic performances...etc.
It's basically just like level dipping, but the benefits continue to increase over time, unlike with standard level dipping. Clearly, an imbalance. And a big one, at that.
I had a thought about requiring a certain number of secondary and/or tertiary abilities before you can purchase a new primary ability (after your first one). Basically, you have to have an equal number of points dedicated to secondary abilities, tertiary abilities, or bonus feats before you can purchase a new primary ability.
Thoughts?
That's a very very good point. Lemme get back to ya in a few on that.
Edit: Hrm, on the one hand that could be a problem.
On the other, it IS at a slower progression simply by virtue of being taken at a later level (advancements are not retroactive).
On a third hand, being at "X level minus 1" is hardly bad, and doesn't apply to all features anyway.
Solution 1: Three non-Defining features must be bought in between each purchase of a Defining feature, at least one of which must be a Secondary feature.
Solution 2: Every Defining feature after the first is counted as Class Level -3.
Solution 3: ???
Then take smite for full effect, sneak attack to get a 7-8d6 progression and then rage... Cha to hit, + 20 dmg from lvl + Rage+ sneak attack... A bit much.
Honestly I don't think it matters. Each build is up to DM discretion, so guide your players to the right power lvl. 2 major class features would be the main draw for this build method, as long as the DM doesn't think it's too much then it should be fine.
Solution one is along the lines of what I was thinking. Would you allow bonus feats or feat-like features to count toward the total as well? It still has the problem of letting you pick a primary every other level; primary, then secondary and two tertiary, primary, rinse and repeat.
Solution two: the -3 is in addition to not being retroactive, right? Also, is it cumulative? Minus 3, then minus 6, etc?
I had a question on domains. Does the feature grant you the spellcasting as well?
Solution 3: You may take a primary ability at first level, and then every 5 levels thereafter (6th, 11th, 16th). You may "save" a primary ability for another level if you wish.
what about capstone abilities, also shouldn't well versed be somewhere for the bard? it's probably a tertiary effect.
I would go with cumulative level penalties for primary abilities. Still allows for interesting concepts without breaking the system all to hell.
I dunno if I like that idea TBH. Seems like the penalties of being behind a level or more outweigh the benefits of most primary abilities.
Also, I haven't forgotten about this, if anyone was wondering. I've just been traveling and utterly BURIED under work this past week or so.
Would a cumulative cost-hike for multiple primary abilities work, rather than kneecapping effective level or requiring other abilities to be purchased? Someone could be die-hard and accept the cost, instead of buying a bunch of junk they don't want.
You could even assign "special" hikes for specific abilities that synchronize well together, or perhaps discount ones that were mutually exclusive in usage.
I see nothing on being able to declare specific attributes for spellcasting, or propose a thematic swap of attributes for certain class abilities. This could get really tricky to price and even trickier to playtest, since character attribute point-buy would heavily influence how limiting S.A.D./M.A.D. characters are, but if you managed it, it could be really worthwhile.
Any particular reason the Paladin Auras are all separate instead of being bundled?
Witch Patron is on both the primary and secondary ability lists, which is weird and implies it has no Primary ability. Hexes seem like they should be the defining attribute, as Patron is pretty much a bonus spell list and nothing more- Hexes really give the Witch its playable flavor. Hexes, however, can be bought with feats, like Rage Powers, Discoveries, Revelations, Magus Arcana and Rogue/Ninja Tricks- though they aren't listed as options in that section.
Whoops. Not sure what my thought process was on Hexes being a secondary feature, but I certainly don't agree with it any more. While they CAN be bought with Extra Hex, I think they're a bit more significant than Rogue Talents/Ninja Tricks (which are relatively weak) and Rage Powers/Discoveries/Magus Arcana (which rely on the class abilities set as prerequisites for the most part anyway).
The only reason Revelations are buyable in that manner is because the Oracle was another of the "odd duck" classes that would have been too expensive at first level, but if the ability was downgraded it would have been too expensive at 20th, and Revelations are another "Feat-Like Non-Feat" that are worthy of Defining status.
Paladin Auras are separate because rather than a scaling ability, they all do something new, and the Paladin can already more than afford the Auras at the levels they come in.
Attributes I'm still mulling over. I would like to give complete freedom over picking the casting stat to open up new character concepts (The Sorcerer who casts through having an insightful knowledge into the universe, for example) without relying on things like niche Bloodlines and such to change the casting stat.
Ooooon the other hand, I can see the "The Wis casting Wizard with the Monk Physical Package for the AC Bonus" coming from lightyears away. So that's the big issue with that really. I'm pretty free this week and next week (...and if I'm unlucky completely free for quite a while after that.) so that'll be my focus alongside my new campaign I'm planning, the first one I'm making from scratch.
A cost hike could definitely work, perhaps on the order of "Each additional Defining ability costs an equal number of additional Secondary abilities". Meaning Defining 1 costs 5, Defining 2 costs 8, Defining 3 costs 11, and so on, which can get real expensive real quick. If that's not enough, double cost would definitely cinch it.
Also I just realized I responded to everything in reverse order. Huh.
You could price Secondary and Tertiary abilities by dependency on attributes. Ones that don't involve attributes are normal, while ones that depend on the same attribute as a major casting stat are more expensive than current (cutting down the Wis Wizard/Monk).
This could potentially muddle certain classes that are already consolidating abilities to cut down on existing MAD (mostly the Paladin, I think, but there are probably others). But you could also make the price difference based on changing attributes related to the abilities, or bringing attributes from one category to another (say, pulling from Paladin abilities that might be classified as "Martial" over to Sorcerer, classified as "Caster")(Mostly Divine Grace I'm thinking of).
I'm thinking that TheRedArmy might have a bit of a good idea to jive with this. Spellcasting could have different costs based on how many attributes are required for their spellcasting. A Wizard might be able to split their major casting stat to get points back, like the old Healer and Favored Soul used to do. This might also help when "rating" spell lists, as Save DC/Max Spell is definitely more important to certain casting styles, while Bonus Spells Per Day is more important to others.
I still love and use this Rynjin, just giving an update.
In my game I'm running (just advanced to 8th), most of the party are going Paizo-only characters with the exception of one, who is using your system to fit his desired character best.
- A Conjurer who focuses on battlefield control, summons, and a lot of easy damage from scorching ray, magic missile, and other spells along that arc. Uses an Improved familiar and crafting feats for double the wand usage.
- A Gnome Paladin who rides a camel and has very high skill with a lance. Un-optimized when not mounted.
- A Rouge3/Wizard3/Arcane Trickster who is very effective with his spells and sneak attacks. Rouges aren't under-powered in my group because we aren't optimization whores, so he keeps up well.
- An Wordcasting Oracle (Life?) who uses insanely tricked out diplomacy and healing abilities to keep everyone alive and avoid needless fights. Potent summoner as well. Has a cohort with a PF version of the Incarnate class from 3.5
- A Dwarven Cleric (Earth...something archetype) who focuses on de-buffs and utility spells so as not to steal anyone's thunder. Has a Monk cohort who can get killed easily if he's not careful.
His character, the one using your system, I can't list line by line, but I know most of the major abilities. He has full BAB, Good saves, and I believe 6 skill points. He took a couple of the fighter bonus feats, the nimble feature from the gunslinger, and three levels of bard spellcasting (which will stop after 3). He has a monster AC (28 or 29, I think), Uses a reach weapon for trip attacks, and also has the Bane feature from the Inquisitor. He recently asked me if his damage was too high, so we crunched numbers, and even a run-of-the-mill fighter was out-doing him, so we're good in that department. He definitely intends to start two-handing a weapon and power attacking with it (he was not using PA before, and his strength was only 16, I believe), so his damage should pick up good, but not enough to become anywhere near problematic.
It does require a few things - namely, a player's understanding of the power level of the group, and adjusting his build for it, and a level of trust for the player to not have issues when the DM insists on changes for the betterment of the group. While martial characters definitely become stronger, they were the ones who needed it most, and there are ways to game the system the DM should look out for. If a player can accept limits on what he can do for the good of the game, this will let him play the character that he really want to play, and you could re-create almost any iconic figure you can think of - at least to be "close enough".
Rynjin, you hit a gold mine with this thing. Assuming DM permission, all my character will be built with this in the future. I thank you so, so much!
Thanks for the update!
I didn't realize anyone was actually using it at this time, that makes me feel all fuzzy.
I'm trying to get a game up right now (With Lumiere, Mr. Sin, and a friend of mine) that'll use this, so expect some tweaks, clarifications, and changes forthcoming.
In no particular order, I plan to:
-Find a way to reinstate the "Casting buy-in" in such a way so as to eliminate or at least mitigate the "Full BaB, D10 HD Full Caster" problem inherent to the system, while still allowing it to be modular enough that such a concept is possible, but not as easy to achieve.
Catalyst: Lumiere pointed out to me that it is quite possible to make a character with Cleric casting, full BaB/HD/Skills/Saves, 8th level casting, and still have 10 points left over for something like full Weapon Training and Sneak Attack on top of it due to the cheap point cost of casting at 1st level. Should be easy to remove for anyone who doesn't care about that by simply eliminating the buy-in.
-Add an optional point allocation system that allows for the relative maintaining of current class balance. Essentially, Full Casters get X points (the most), half casters get Y, and full martials get Z (the least, but with a bit of extra leeway since I classify Paladins and Rangers as this).
Catalyst: I want as many people as possible to try it, and there are some who would be interested that don't share my opinions on class balance. This gives them the option to maintain the status quo while still having greater flexibility in class design.
-Bundle some of the Druid's abilities up so there aren't as many of them.
Catalyst: This is the main reason the buy-in had to go, and much like the Monk the Druid's number of miscellaneous class features is too damn high.
Possibly add new class features that work on the same principles as archetype features.
Catalsyt: I have a bunch of ideas for "Wouldn't it be cool if there was an archetype that...", but only have the idea for like one ability. Would likely be on an "Incompatible with ability X" basis. One I was thinking of was a ranged version of Spellstrike/Spell Combat that didn't work with melee.
Along with some other miscellaneous stuff, including one I put in there the other day as a clarification for how multiple spell lists would work (Sin wanted Alchemist casting and Inquisitor casting, but wondered about progressions).
In the event of progressing in two spellcasting groups at once, for example Magus and Alchemist:
You take Magus and Alchemist casting at 1st, for a total of 4 points. You now have 1st level spells for both, at 1st level proportions.
Progress to 4th level, where both get 2nd level casting. If you saved your points, you can progress both, for 4 points each, and it continues progressing as normal until level 7, where 3rd level casting becomes available.
If not, you've effectively cut off your Alchemist casting until you pay for the next level. So let's say you grab the Magus casting at 4th, but can't afford Alchemist until 5th.
In that case, now your Alchemy progresses a level behind. At 6th level, you have an effective Alchemist caster level of 5th, and don't get access to 3rd level extracts until 8th instead of 7th.
As well, I plan to clean up the document since I feel it's getting a bit cluttered, so I hope to make it easier to read and find things.
Casting buy-in, for future reference, will be a one-time cost. No reason to make it apply multiple times for multiple spell lists, since you have to pay the progression twice as well.
I'm not done with this by a long shot (if it's not presumptuous of me to say so, I think I could possibly get it into a publishable state at some point, if it's not against the OGL in some way).
So, thanks for the help and support!
It made me laugh when i realized that i could build the fighter class, but have 4+int skill points and 2 good saves. Still love this thing.
-Find a way to reinstate the "Casting buy-in" in such a way so as to eliminate or at least mitigate the "Full BaB, D10 HD Full Caster" problem inherent to the system, while still allowing it to be modular enough that such a concept is possible, but not as easy to achieve.
Catalyst: Lumiere pointed out to me that it is quite possible to make a character with Cleric casting, full BaB/HD/Skills/Saves, 8th level casting, and still have 10 points left over for something like full Weapon Training and Sneak Attack on top of it due to the cheap point cost of casting at 1st level. Should be easy to remove for anyone who doesn't care about that by simply eliminating the buy-in.
You mean a buy-in at level one, so you can't have all those high features (the BAB, saves, etc), and also have full casting? That's what you plan on re-instating?
-Add an optional point allocation system that allows for the relative maintaining of current class balance. Essentially, Full Casters get X points (the most), half casters get Y, and full martials get Z (the least, but with a bit of extra leeway since I classify Paladins and Rangers as this).
Catalyst: I want as many people as possible to try it, and there are some who would be interested that don't share my opinions on class balance. This gives them the option to maintain the status quo while still having greater flexibility in class design.
True enough on class design. I've seen you scoff at JJ's comments on the matter twice, so your feelings are clear enough. ;-) There are still plenty that disagree, though.
I'm not sure how much putting in a system like that will actually get others interested, though. I don't think it's a particularly productive use of time - but if you like, I'll help you with it.
-Bundle some of the Druid's abilities up so there aren't as many of them.
Catalyst: This is the main reason the buy-in had to go, and much like the Monk the Druid's number of miscellaneous class features is too damn high.
Sure is. Man, there are a ton of them. You could take a large number of the tertiary ones and combine them into a single secondary feature that simply gives you what you would normally get at each level. Would help save on costs and the such, though trading in archetype features could become tricky.
Possibly add new class features that work on the same principles as archetype features.
Catalsyt: I have a bunch of ideas for "Wouldn't it be cool if there was an archetype that...", but only have the idea for like one...
Image here. The girl in blue is the one in question. Her bullets all had cool names based on their power, with the strongest one I saw (never read past book 4, I think) being named "Great Gospel", I believe. Was very cool when she loaded those suckers in, cause it was demon banishment time.
(Thinks)
I'm not sure you really need a system for this. Maybe just a few guidelines for GM's - like if a player wants to add ability X to his class (Say...+2 on saving throws against necromancy effects), and no ability exists in the current classes, simply treat it as a archetype that replaces one ability only, and price it the same as all archetypes - the new ability costs the same as the old one.
Alternatively, you could simply add it in with no replacement, and price it as best you can. For example +2 to saves against Necromancy is pretty similar to the Monk ability that gives +2 to saves against enchantment. That's a tertiary ability, so it costs one point, and simply gets tacked on. Give it a name, and you're good to go.
The paragraph on the potential for abuse needs to be expanded beyond simply 31 feats, or however many it was. There are several moving parts in PF, and abilities that were not meant to combine undoubtedly will be. GMs need to be on the lookout, and players need to understand the concept behind the power level of a given group and how to keep your own custom character within that power level so that you are not too weak (and a drain) or too strong (and overshadowing everyone).
In theory I love the idea, but I think you're being ridiculous in your relative costing of options because frankly the existing classes are NOT balanced. With your by-level costs a fighter should start out more expensive but by 20 might fairly be costed on the whole as 2/3 the cost of a wizard, if not an even more sqewed ratio.
A classless system requires balance, and achieving that is going to require rebuilding the entire feat, ability, and spell systems from the ground up. Simply carving them up and trading pieces around won't solve this fundamental issue.
In theory I love the idea, but I think you're being ridiculous in your relative costing of options because frankly the existing classes are NOT balanced. With your by-level costs a fighter should start out more expensive but by 20 might fairly be costed on the whole as 2/3 the cost of a wizard, if not an even more sqewed ratio.
A classless system requires balance, and achieving that is going to require rebuilding the entire feat, ability, and spell systems from the ground up. Simply carving them up and trading pieces around won't solve this fundamental issue.
In the first place, I think balance can be found by simply altering spells. Maybe not completely, but it's easily the biggest step. Take away the world-breaking spells and RP capabilities of the 9th-level casters and you take a big step in the right direction.
And I don't think balance is really the point. I think getting the character you want to play is. I have so many concepts that I simply cannot get to work because of the way the classes work and Paizo's hatred for multi-classing. But this way I can get that unarmed specialist Paladin I want. I can get a true Mystic Theruge (almost). I can get Bard abilities while also getting Cavalier stuff to become a true party buffer.
And the system is robust enough to balance it for your game. Which is the most important thing.
You mean a buy-in at level one, so you can't have all those high features (the BAB, saves, etc), and also have full casting? That's what you plan on re-instating?
Yeah, the 6 points (as it was previously) to gain casting in the first place, on top of the "Double spell level point cost" bit.
You'd still be able to have the Full BaB Wizard with some extra goodies if you want, but not the Full BaB, D12 HD, All Good Saves, Martial Weapons, 2 misc. class features Wizard.
True enough on class design. I've seen you scoff at JJ's comments on the matter twice, so your feelings are clear enough. ;-) There are still plenty that disagree, though.
I'm not sure how much putting in a system like that will actually get others interested, though. I don't think it's a particularly productive use of time - but if you like, I'll help you with it.
Part of the reason I'm considering it is that I don't think it'll take a whole lot of time. I won't need to do it for every class, just the most expensive in each category (Caster, Hybrid, Martial, which is likely gonna end up as Druid/Oracle, Inquisitor, Ranger).
(Thinks)I'm not sure you really need a system for this. Maybe just a few guidelines for GM's - like if a player wants to add ability X to his class (Say...+2 on saving throws against necromancy effects), and no ability exists in the current classes, simply treat it as a archetype that replaces one ability only, and price it the same as all archetypes - the new ability costs the same as the old one.
Alternatively, you could simply add it in with no replacement, and price it as best you can. For example +2 to saves against Necromancy is pretty similar to the Monk ability that gives +2 to saves against enchantment. That's a tertiary ability, so it costs one point, and simply gets tacked on. Give it a name, and you're good to go.
Probably, yeah.
The paragraph on the potential for abuse needs to be expanded beyond simply 31 feats, or however many it was. There are several moving parts in PF, and abilities that were not meant to combine undoubtedly will be. GMs need to be on the lookout, and players need to understand the concept behind the power level of a given group and how to keep your own custom character within that power level so that you are not too weak (and a drain) or too strong (and overshadowing everyone).
Truth. I've tried to make it as self-sustaining as possible, and will continue to make it as much so as I can, but I don't see any final outcome where it won't require some GM oversight and guidance to maintain balance.
One of the other major ones is being able to choose your own casting stat.
One the one hand, Muscle Wizard is a cool concept.
On the other, Wis Wizard with Monk Physical Package (which includes the AC Bonus) is suddenly not so squishy, even without buffs.
And no, perfect balance isn't the point. I'd like it to be as balanced as possible, of course, but with the system as inherently unbalanced as it is, and how small a part of the game this changes in the grand scheme, it's not going to balance everything. Might make a few strides in a couple of directions if used, but overall casting is still king and beating stuff with a stick is still second fiddle to that.
But now you can cast and beat things in different ways! And that's fun.
I think my only regret about making this (because I've had a lot of fun with it so far) is I'll probably never find a Gm that uses it.
Yeah, the 6 points (as it was previously) to gain casting in the first place, on top of the "Double spell level point cost" bit.
You'd still be able to have the Full BaB Wizard with some extra goodies if you want, but not the Full BaB, D12 HD, All Good Saves, Martial Weapons, 2 misc. class features Wizard.
Yeah, I remember now. The buy-in could change based on casting level - 2 for limited, 4 for partial, 6 for full. I'm even thinking 10 for full would be more appropriate. In the wizard's case - 12 for casting, 0 for BAB/Saves/HP/Skills, 1 for proficiency, 5 for School, 2 for bonus feat, 3 for Bond. That leaves only 2 points. I guess the other ones need more (Cleric and Druid need that two just for saves, and they need armor still). 6 feels like too much of a boon for wizards. I'm envisioning them buying weird things that synergize well that only players who optimize better than me can find. Maybe change based on which list in particular?
Part of the reason I'm considering it is that I don't think it'll take a whole lot of time. I won't need to do it for every class, just the most expensive in each category (Caster, Hybrid, Martial, which is likely gonna end up as Druid/Oracle, Inquisitor, Ranger).
(Thinks)
Mm. I suppose that's true.
Truth. I've tried to make it as self-sustaining as possible, and will continue to make it as much so as I can, but I don't see any final outcome where it won't require some GM oversight and guidance to maintain balance.
One of the other major ones is being able to choose your own casting stat.
One the one hand, Muscle Wizard is a cool concept.
On the other, Wis Wizard with Monk Physical Package (which includes the AC Bonus) is suddenly not so squishy, even without buffs.
I hadn't even considered Muscle Wizard. I just assumed it was the three mental stats without thinking about it. My Bard casts with Charisma, like normal, by the way.
And no, perfect balance isn't the point. I'd like it to be as balanced as possible, of course, but with the system as inherently unbalanced as it is, and how small a part of the game this changes in the grand scheme, it's not going to balance everything. Might make a few strides in a couple of directions if used, but overall casting is still king and beating stuff with a stick is still second fiddle to that.
But now you can cast and beat things in different ways! And that's fun.
I think my only regret about making this (because I've had a lot of fun with it so far) is I'll probably never find a Gm that uses it.
No GM? Lumiere or MrSin don't run? My sympathies. I sometimes feel like a few of the characters I really want to play from level one to level 20, I'll just never get the chance to. It makes me sad. :-(
- A monk built properly with either your system or a MoMS2/Fighter(Brawler) who can pseudo-flurry (with TWF) and uses maneuvers like a boss. Been watching movies like Hero, Ip Man, and so on. Starting to like wuxia, actually. I get it now.
- A Paladin of Shelyn because that is the coolest f***ing thing ever - possibly human, but Aasimar if I can make the feats work. Complete redeemer - everyone get a second chance, mercy is the first step toward a better world, violence is the absolute final resort. Even taking a trait to deal non-lethal damage effectively, preferring to take them alive rather than kill. She would rather let an evil person go and stop them again to show the uselessness of their ways than kill. Very Superman-type.
- A Varisian Tattooed Sorceress who uses Words of Power, the other coolest f***ing concept ever. I don't know if there's a system for this but if there is a way to incorporate Runelord rune magic into it, that's what I want. Just playing a Sorc isn't enough - I need to flavor of Golarion poured into this character to really get her to work.