So I've been spending way to much of my life updating my home brew rule book with feats from PHB2 and the Complete Psionic and my brains are beginning to ooze out my ears hence my rapid descent into the realms of madness and heresy.
It dawns on me that the theme of choice in terms of feats has gotten far beyond the point of usefulness for most player characters. There are just so many options that with the possible of exception of fighters there is no possibility of the players being able to use more then a fraction of the available feats.
This is actually rather unfortunate as I think that the idea of feats is really one of the coolest parts of the current version of D&D. This has lead me to start thinking that what the system needs is less classes and more feats. In fact I'm thinking radically less classes – as in none.
Instead characters are created as races with stats but are otherwise blank slates. The Players then create their own classes purely by choosing feats. Feats for better saving throws, feats for the kind of HPs they get, feats for weapons and feats for magic as well as feats that allow them to do the various cool things that feats normally allow. Of course this would require a lot of feats. Probably players would get something like 2 per level, maybe more early on.
Just about every ability that is now covered by classes and prestige classes could be covered with feats and they could be play balanced with requirements and with feat trees.
This allows players the maximum in flexibility. If you want to be a well armoured, archer with magic abilities then one just needs to choose the feats for it. Or one could decide that they want all their saves to be good (or not want to use feats to help their saves at all).
If nothing else that's the kind of upgrade that might make 4th edition different enough from 3.5 to make it worth the cost of upgrading.
Thoughts?
Sounds like True20.
|
For whatever reason when I first read this my mind instantly jumped to Final Fantasy V, which had a job system set up in it. Essentially each job had its own bonus skills and limitations(mages with no armor for instance) and each time you leveled with a job you gained one of that classes skills, perhaps a new level of spells or the ability to use swords or the like. You could then take any ability you had learned this way and apply it while in another class, though you could only add one at a time, unless you chose to be bare(without job) in which case you could add any two abilities you wished.
Anyway, that was just a random thought that jumped into my head. I think what you are looking for is almost more like ShadowRun's point buy system. This was something they introduced in the 3rd Edition's optional rules book and have made the primary method in the newer edition. Basically each player gets a certain number of points based on the level of power you want in the game, but rather then simply buying attributes with them they can completely build their character. Various races cost different amounts based on their bonuses, being magically active or buying other skills costs points, even your starting cash to equip your character can be changed by spending points. One of the neat things in the system is that there are a number of special qualities that can be picked up during character creation, essentially like WoD's merit and flaw system. For instance your character could be ambidexterous for the cost of few points, or might just be horrible with computers which would earn you a few points back.
All in all I always enjoyed this method of character building because it allows you to really make the character you picture in your mind, one that can be fundamentally different then others.
Well I have not played Shadowrun since its 1st edition (though conceptually it is phenominal - but one can only play so many games unfortunatly). What my suggestion reminded me most of was old Gurps but even here I have only played a couple of games of Gurps and it was long ago.
Your right that in the end it is essentially a point buy system. In fact in my original post I said that the system would be feat and skill based but thinking about it more even skill points should be part of the buying process. Hence one could buy characters with lots of skill points or characters with very few.
That said even if it is essentially a point buy system there are now so many feats (especially if all class abilities are reconcieved of as feats) that it would make for an interesting point buy system since it would have so much material to base the point buy on.
|
|
If you want to see some really neat ideas about being able to customize a character and you don't mind occasionally having your eyes cross, you might want to check out the Hero system. It is created for all genres but they have the 'Fantasy Hero' rules too that fit in a more D&D style world. The system is designed to really design a character in any way you want, not just selecting from a list of abilities but actually custom designing and altering those abilities themselves. For as intimidating as the book looks though the gameplay actually runs pretty smoothly as most of the pages are based around the character creation.
Ugh, its discussions like this that end up making me realize I've played way too many systems.
Well I have not played Shadowrun since its 1st edition (though conceptually it is phenominal - but one can only play so many games unfortunatly). What my suggestion reminded me most of was old Gurps but even here I have only played a couple of games of Gurps and it was long ago.
I'd been thinking along those line too. Instead of having BAB increase as you level up, you have to add skill points to different weapons or weapons groups, so that you might have a fighter who is great with blades, but sucks with bows, or a wizard who is really decent with a dagger, but sucks with everything else.
Regarding shadowrun, I just helped a friend create a couple of characters for fourth edition, and it took about five hours, and that doesn't include any background or personality details. A point by system is flexible, but can be grueling to use. I can make a fairly complex D&D character in under an hour, so it was taking us over twice as long (granted I'm not near as familiar with the new shadowrun rules yet).
You know the only problem that I see with this direction for 4th ed is power gaming. An age old problem in truth, but one which Shadowrun (I have played 3rd ed) is especially troubled with. Part of the reason why is that it is a poitn buy system, I have players who have amazing powers of perception when it comes to finding the most powerful characteristics for the least points. Although I agree that 3.5ed has gone beyonds the useful appex of feats, prestige classes, and spells, that is typical of a game in the twilight of it's current edition (see the recent rifts games for a horrifying example of this, I mean they put out compilation books of classes and then continue to bust out new classes, thus more compilation books, then more classes, ect...). I would also add that I think that 3.5 jumped the Shark recently with some of their more outlandish source books, including the races of dragon and weapons of legacy (both good ideas, for short small books, not large expanded hardbound books).
I worry that Monte Cook is right about 4th ed (a recent piece found on his website about the gaming industry) in that expectations are extremely High and probable quality and originality will most likely be fair to middlin. 3rd Edition was so effective because expectations were so low (the gaming industry was rather morbund at the time) and the quality of the product was so high. I doubt that such a situation will arise again soon.
|
|
The point buy system can take a bit of time when you first start it, though I don't think that the learning curve is any steeper then trying to select feats for the first time in d20, at least when presented with the innumerable amount of sourcebooks available.
Both methods really do have their own advantages. Point buy gives you a great deal of customizability for characters, but feats make characters alot more standard. If you take a 10th level character in D&D you should be able to pretty accurately known what sort of challenge he should be able to surpass, given that each class has certain things they excel against and ones they are weak against. With a point buy system you don't have that sort of reliability. It is much easier for characters to either min-max to the point of being far superior to an average character in a given situation, or it is also much easier to spread onself too thin as having a character who can 'do it all' and has a point in each and every available skill won't be as useful as you might like when things get tougher.
This isn't to rag on shadowrun though as it was my example of a point buy system. I actually think they've done a very good job in the 4th edition rules to set up ways to keep characters within closer line to each other.
|
If you want to see some really neat ideas about being able to customize a character and you don't mind occasionally having your eyes cross, you might want to check out the Hero system. It is created for all genres but they have the 'Fantasy Hero' rules too that fit in a more D&D style world. The system is designed to really design a character in any way you want, not just selecting from a list of abilities but actually custom designing and altering those abilities themselves. For as intimidating as the book looks though the gameplay actually runs pretty smoothly as most of the pages are based around the character creation.
Ugh, its discussions like this that end up making me realize I've played way too many systems.
I love the concept you are talking about. I love the idea of an approach to add more personal preferences to the game. My only concern is that it will make superheros out of player characters, not unlike 3.5. I'm looking for character options and choices without the superhero effect. Anything you can share that would shed more light on said subject of the Herosystem would be greatly appreciated?
Thoth-Amon
|
|
Thoth,
The Hero system was originally designed for superhero games, so alot of the powers in it do have that sort of feel. But I have found that by limiting the number of points that players have to spend, and by limiting the powers they can spend them on(some things are just made for monsters in a non-superhero game), you can make a very effective team of adventurers. My longest running hero game was actually set in a very low magic setting that I designed myself.
I wanted it to be a place where magic still held a great deal of mystery, sort of like the Iron Heroes setting, so I disallowed healing magic and gave a point cap that could be spent on any spell. There are actually specific rules in the system for doing this, and they give examples of where you might want to make these caps based on the over all power of the campaign.
Another thing that might bear mentioning that the hero system has a wonderful thing called 'power pools'. This essentially means that you can combine powers that have either the same source or the same effect to make them more effective. For example if a player had a magical sword he could create it as a powerpool to either spend less points and have only one of its powers active at a given time or spend more points to do something of a combined effect, like deal slashing damage and cause flame damage at the same time.
In the hero system everything is designed with both a power and an effect and can optionally have bonuses or limitations. To put an effect into D&D terms its like looking at the spells Fireball and Lightning Bolt. In the hero system they would both be built from the power Energy Blast, because they are both ranged spells that do physical damage. However, Fireball would have the effect of 'fire' and obviously Lightning Bolt would have the effect of 'electricity'. Then you could add on a bonus that would make the Fireball spell be an area of effect ability, and a limitation that would allow the enemy to try and resist it. The Lightning Bolt could likewise be given the power to continue on after striking a target until it hits the end of its range.
Combining that idea with the above idea of a powerpool can be really neat because you can make a truly specialist mage. For instance instead of having someone who has a magical sword as I used as an example above you could have a 'Fire Mage' who had a powerpool that could contain spells that had the fire effect. It allows for a very customizable character.
I've rambled alot here in answer to your question so I'm going to cut this short here in a moment, but I do want to point out that the same ideas carry over to non-magic as well. While there are a great number of examples throughout the books for different types of equipment players can custom design that as well, using a melee killing attack power to create a sword or adding armor piercing to that to make a rapier. Its really amazing to find a system where you find that if you can imagine it you can build it somehow.
I think that I've managed to make the system sound much more complicated then it really is in my explaination. I think that the system is very fluid when you begin to become used to it, and while the vast amount of choice and the difference in style compared to most other games(Rather then looking for abilities that would suit what you think your character could be like in hero you need a much more complete idea of each of their skills and abilities as each one can be made to be whatever you wish) means that there is a slightly steeper learning curve then some, at least in terms of character design, after a bit of practice I have found that this all doesn't take as much time as it likely sounds like. The book is full of example powers and I have found that I can design a completely new power in under five minutes, far less then that if I'm not doing my norm of making it overly complex.
Anyway, I hope that my rambling on one of my favorite systems answered some of your questions. Hero is a system I would recommend for most gamers, you just have to be ready to read through the book and change some of your perceptions of how character design is done to get there.
We tried a classless system for a while after our gaming group abandoned AD&D for good around 2002. You could buy attributes and skills by spending XP on them directly. There were no levels, but you could increase your survivability by spending XP on your CON score, you could spend XP to buy up your ability to wield weapons or move silently or whatever.
It didn't work. The game sucked.
There was no sense of "reward" to the game--everyone always felt like they were just not getting enough XP to do all the things they wanted to do.
PCs were colorless with no pre-defined sense of identity or class definition. Players dabbled with a variety of powers, attributes and skills and their characters kind of turned into listless jacks of all trades. There were no milestones such as levels, there was no core identity as to what your character was in the game.
I love the fact that you can "round out" your character with a customized selection of feats, but I wouldn't want to do away with all classes--leveling up and getting to roll more HP, improve your saves and BAB, get several skill points, perhaps a new feat choice or an attribute increase--that's a satisfying game mechanic that makes players happy.
I don't think doing away with all classes and just giving out a bunch of feats would work out very well.
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
This idea is something that I think all players/DMs flirt with - having a buffet style system in D&D. I think the basic problem is simple: that's not D&D.
The class system is an important and distinguishing feature of D&D. It gives you an easily identifiable archtype to step into. The bundling of class abilities lowers the learning curve, it makes NPC's easier to DM and the game itself easier to pick up. If someone on these boards posts that their party consists of a Ftr3, Clr2/Wiz1, Rngr 3, and Brd 3 are going into an adventure, that brief description gives you a lot of information about their capabilities. If all characters were built lego syle using feats, the description would be much longer and more complicated.
I'm not saying that I don't like the idea; I do. I just think it's already out there in the market in the form of GURPS, or Heroes, or Shadowrun, or any other game. I wouldn't mind if 4e opened up the feat system a little more (by giving more feats, or more class abilities with choices like the monk and high level rogue recieve), but I don't think a completely modular system would be as popular or as fun.
|
|
I feel like I'm flooding this board, but I'm enjoying this discussion.
Farewell2Kings,
I've never really had that issue, at least using my shadowrun experience which has a similar system to what you talk of(you spend karma, which is basically XP, to develop different aspects of your character.) While I have had one of the characters in one of my games who tried to be able to do just about everything, even if not wonderfully, he played the fifth wheel roll much like a bard often does in D&D, able to pick up slack for any of the others or assist them with just about any task as needed.
Beyond that it seems that most of the characters normally strongly adopt some sort of archtype of another. You might not have a real fighter, but someone takes on the role of the combat specialist, just as someone will be a healer and someone a mage. I think that having the innumerable choices that come from a classless system will lead to characters being a bit more diverse in most cases then it would otherwise, simply because they can be and because sometimes the system favors that mindset as you can often buy a new power much more cheaply then you can add on to a much more well developed one. But I think that is almost much more realistic. Very few people are the very best at whatever it is they do because that requires pretty complete focus on that skill. Most people divide their attention and it makes them much more well rounded.
It may just be a difference in play style but I enjoy my fighters to have a handful of skills that are non-combat orientated just as I think a character should be able to develope a skill that isn't in line with their archtype without its progression being painful. I've always thought that WotC should have included a feat in the PHB that allowed you to make a cross-class skill a class skill for that reason.
Our problem was probably two-fold: a general burnout on RPGs altogether and the fact that we were using a homebrewed game system based on FASA: Star Trek RPG with lots of elements from Spacemaster, Top Secret S.I. and AD&D thrown in.
Had we tried a play-tested and commercially produced game system, we might have had better results, no doubt.
We're sticking to d20 now for everything we play, just to avoid any more fiascos.
Tarlane--there's a feat in Cadv called Jack of all trades that lets the character take a half rank in every skill, I think.
I also enjoy rounding out my characters with non-class related skills and feats. For example, my 3rd level cleric/4th level sorceror/1st level mystic theurge has rapid reload and combat expertise as feats to enhance his melee and ranged capabilities.
I think the game as it stands right now is more than adequate to handle any "role" you envision for your character--without making radical changes such as no classes or whatever.
D20 modern might be a good candidate for a classless system, at least for the core classes, since they are so weak compared to the excellent d20 modern prestige classes.
|
|
I agree, Sebastian. I'm just wanting to add a note here that while I've been spouting the advantages of the point buy system I'm not saying that I think that D&D should change. I've played so many different systems because I enjoy their differences. D&D has its own style that can be very enjoyable. I had initially just meant to post an idea or two at the original poster noting some other systems he might want to try if he was having those ideas in his head, then I got caught up with my rebuttles to other posts. I'm quite happy with D&Ds system for what it is, otherwise I'd be in another thread after all.
If you want simplicity and great flexibility, try Generic Classes from Unearthed Arcana. Note that they allow traditional class skills (familiars, sneak attack, etc.) as feats-- much as you suggest.
They seem slightly depowered from the standard classes-- I'd probably give them additional bonus feats at first level to customise themselves more completely-- but they're very flexible frameworks.
GURPS - point buy EVERYTHING! :P
For whatever reason when I first read this my mind instantly jumped to Final Fantasy V, which had a job system set up in it.
That's exactly what came to mind because i dug out my snes and played the game recently.
I really like the feat-buy idea. Even if it's not "standard D&D" it's an intriguing homebrew variant. I'd agree that you'd have to start with a handful of feats to avoid feeling like you're playing a generic class.
I've thought if this before as well Jeremy, but there is another way to look at it. When I sat down and tried to work it out I realized that classes themselves are already feats. The flexibility in the current editions of D&D for a PC to take a level of this, a level of that, whenever they have the XP means that each class level is essentially a feat that grants you one or more abilities at the cost of points (XP). Sounds like point buy to me, only admittedly less "ground-level" than the system you're talking about.
As far as I can see though there isn't much practical difference between a classless PC who is a good swordsman with a few minor magical abilities and some stealth training, and a Fighter4/Sorceror2/Rogue2. The differences would be minor at best, and really only of interest to power gamers. Just remove the level limitations on multi-classing as we have done in my campaign and you're all set to create an essentially classless character.
I get the feeling that if the game was changed so that every single ability was a feat in itself, pretty soon someone would have the brilliant idea of grouping similar feats into skill packages... maybe we could call them classes? ;)
Regarding shadowrun, I just helped a friend create a couple of characters for fourth edition, and it took about five hours, and that doesn't include any background or personality details. A point by system is flexible, but can be grueling to use. I can make a fairly complex D&D character in under an hour, so it was taking us over twice as long (granted I'm not near as familiar with the new shadowrun rules yet).
Well what I was thinking of would actually probably be faster then most point buys.
Essentially one has a generic featless build that is the basic character class. It gets a d6 HP per level has a bad Base Attack progression, all saves are bad, 4 Skill points per level etc. Its kind of like a really weak fighter class but with lots of feats.
Players then get 5 (or some other playtested number) of feats at 1st level and they use those feats to buy things like weapon proficiencies or Power Attack as well as better attack progressions, access to spells to a greater or lesser degree, better HD per level, more skill points per level etc.
However because one is just getting a limited number of feats on a generic build it would probably not take to long to make a character. spending 5 feats is not the same thing as trying to make a character with 260 build points.
Presumably one would get fewer feats as they progressed in level so one might get 4 at 2nd, 3 at 3rd then 2 every level until 10th and one every level after that.
Obvously balancing the feats would be a very important task, but to some extent it is know anyway - or I hope it is.