Creative Director
|
It'd be cool if the Gamemastering Guide had some alternative systems like this in it. Or (gasp!) a classless variant of Pathfinder.
We might talk a little bit about alternate XP systems... but we WON'T be doing a classless variant of Pathfinder. That's not really something we at Paizo are interested in, since the class system is the backbone of the tradition of the game we want to play.
|
My group has got a version of classless 3.5 by retroengineering character classes and turning them into a sort of points based system to build characters. We were noticing we were seeing more multi class and this allows flavours of multi class without having to dilute a core character concept. It works for us as our players are now looking at making characters rather than min-maxing.
And if I run Bastards definitely going to go with the I decide when they level up. I'd be looking at breaking up the combat situations a lot more.
|
This reminds me of something I've been dying to try out in some future campaign; namely that PCs would not get any XP anymore. Rather, they would level up after reaching certain "key points" in the story, regardless of how they got there (maybe a level per every 1-5 sessions, depending on the actual events and their character level).
I'm fairly sure that this would lead to less combat and [even] more role-playing / thinking outside the box (we already lean on the latter rather than the former).
This is an interesting idea, and basically the way a friend of mine runs his games. The only problem with it is that it robs players of a concrete measuring stick and reward. Even if you don't gain enough XP to level up after a session, simply GETTING a number that you add to your current XP total is a nice reward. It feels like confirmation that you playing that game session got you something you can see, as well as gives the players a pretty good measuring stick by which they can expect to level up.
Simply saying that PCs level up at "key points" saves the GM the work of figuring out XP, and it certainly makes keeping the PCs at the right level for an AP easy, but it CAN make players feel like they're missing out on something.
You're absolutely right; it's a satisfying feeling and sign of "progress" to receive XP (and then jot in down on your sheet). That is exactly the reason why I haven't tried it yet; I know guys would be disappointed if I ran a combat-heavy scenario and they had actually earned two levels worth of XP, but they would still have to wait for three sessions to level up. You'd practically still have to pay some attention to how much [combat] XP they should have earned (as per RAW), because one of the players likely will. And, naturally, let them level up if they have earned a bit too much XP to claim that "you haven't reached the next 'check point' yet!".
However, if I tried that, I'd probably use Action/Drama Points as well (not the Eberron or 4E version, but rather as something you could spend for XP, gold, and equipment -- maybe even magic items?) that players could earn for good role-playing and completing encounters/goals.
|
|
This reminds me of something I've been dying to try out in some future campaign; namely that PCs would not get any XP anymore. Rather, they would level up after reaching certain "key points" in the story, regardless of how they got there (maybe a level per every 1-5 sessions, depending on the actual events and their character level).For Monte Cook's World of Darkness, I wrote out my house rule where I divided a class level's abilities into four categories (I think it was HD/hp/BAB, skill points, saves, and "all the rest") called "steps." Then, for a typical game session, you could award each character 1 step, for a good session you could award 2 steps, and so on. You can't advance to the next level until you've taken all 4 steps for your current level. And the PCs end up advancing at about the same rate as a standard progression XP track.
That allows the GM to advance the story without worrying about XP math, and still lets the PCs have a tangible awareness of their progression (James' concern).
How about spells and other class features? Did you get them immediately as you had taken the 4 steps and advanced to the next level? Or were they included in "all the rest" category? How about "stat bumps" -- were they automatical? It sounds very interesting, and reminds me a lot of WFRP! :)
We might talk a little bit about alternate XP systems... but we WON'T be doing a classless variant of Pathfinder. That's not really something we at Paizo are interested in, since the class system is the backbone of the tradition of the game we want to play.
Yeah, I know and I'm just poking (hence the "gasp".) I fully understand the class basis for PFRPG and don't think you should mess with it. I appreciate that there are several different ways to skin the roleplaying cat and dislike the notion that they should be merged into some homogeneous bland pudding. So trying to push a class-based system into a classless system is a mistake, in my opinion.
While I do prefer classless systems, I prefer having awesome adventure paths more and am willing to forgo my classless bias to get easy access to the Pathfinder content.
Like I said, someone email me at home and I'll post the rule from the book, it's all Open content, I just don't have it here at the office. :p
IIRC, class abilities and spell progression are part of the "all the rest" step.
Ability score bumps are tied to the HD step.
|
Like I said, someone email me at home and I'll post the rule from the book, it's all Open content, I just don't have it here at the office. :p
IIRC, class abilities and spell progression are part of the "all the rest" step.
Ability score bumps are tied to the HD step.
ohhh!!!! I remember these!!!! we used them when we played our MC's WoD Campaign... worked nicely :D
i will let you answer this... the thing with spells is that in MC's WoD you didn't received spells or spell level progresion (still work fine) but components, sort of spellpoints to arm an spell with different aspects... really great system.
ok... what i rememebr from the top of my head was, the part I remember correctly was 1 step was about skills, other was about all special properties and class abilities (sneak attack, feats, etc), don't remember how BaB, HD, saves were divided... i think it was HD and Bab, and saves and defense...
but i don't remember
Nothing to say really except to note that comments like that contained in the above quote are one of the fantastic things about the Paizo boards. As a keen purchaser of your products, yet one who is ignorant and oblivious to the realities of writing/editting/publishing, I find it fascinating to hear about the behind-the-scenes reasons for various decisions you've taken over the years. Thanks for taking the time to indulge my curiosity.
Well said! I agree with everything you mentioned. My wife is amazed whenever I tell her the level of feedback the consumers get here on Paizo. She will have a question on a topic regarding the AP we are playing and I might mention that, well the designer actually had this or that in mind when this encounter was written and she is floored that I know this because I read it from the designer/publisher/editor/writer; it is extremely impressive that you all care enough about your product and customers to interact in such a way. Thank You!
Ok for the rules on the Step System, check out the 9/16 entry on this page.
(Yeah, I know it says 9/16/09, I forgot to update the date. :P)
Ok for the rules on the Step System, check out the 9/16 entry on this page.
(Yeah, I know it says 9/16/09, I forgot to update the date. :P)
Awesome Sean. Thanks for taking the time to dig that up, update and post it. I like and we're definitely going to use it in the CoT campaign.
I think I'll set the steps based at least partially on story progression, since my players can sometimes get very involved (and have a good time at) silly things like a pit fight, or three-legged dog races, or simple gambling. While they have a blast doing it, I'm not likely to award a step for a night of drunken brawls (unless, of course, it advances either the main plot or a character's personal arc.)
Thanks again.
|
Ok for the rules on the Step System, check out the 9/16 entry on this page.
(Yeah, I know it says 9/16/09, I forgot to update the date. :P)
*yoinked*
This is perfect, I hate keeping track of XP but I like my players to feel like they are progressing each game rather than just gaining a ding every time I feel it's appropriate.
I'm probably going to institute this is the progression rule for all my home games now.
Plus it has the added advantage of speeding up levelling by doing it bit by bit every game. (Level Up always seems to take forever for my players).
This reminds me of something I've been dying to try out in some future campaign; namely that PCs would not get any XP anymore. Rather, they would level up after reaching certain "key points" in the story, regardless of how they got there (maybe a level per every 1-5 sessions, depending on the actual events and their character level).For Monte Cook's World of Darkness, I wrote out my house rule where I divided a class level's abilities into four categories (I think it was HD/hp/BAB, skill points, saves, and "all the rest") called "steps." Then, for a typical game session, you could award each character 1 step, for a good session you could award 2 steps, and so on. You can't advance to the next level until you've taken all 4 steps for your current level. And the PCs end up advancing at about the same rate as a standard progression XP track.
That allows the GM to advance the story without worrying about XP math, and still lets the PCs have a tangible awareness of their progression (James' concern).
SKR,
I like this idea, and I think I'll suggest it for the low-level, low-magic, laid back role playing game I'm in. As it stands, we just come to a general consensus about when to level up based on what has been happening in the game, and I think your system will mesh well with that.
However, I feel like the HP/BAB, Saves, Skills, Abilities split is a bit disjointed. I think I'll suggest collapsing Saves and Skills and making it a three tier system makes the mini-levels more even.
|
|
I like this idea, and I think I'll suggest it for the low-level, low-magic, laid back role playing game I'm in. As it stands, we just come to a general consensus about when to level up based on what has been happening in the game, and I think your system will mesh well with that.
However, I feel like the HP/BAB, Saves, Skills, Abilities split is a bit disjointed. I think I'll suggest collapsing Saves and Skills and making it a three tier system makes the mini-levels more even.
I am not SKR, but I suppose that if that works for you that is ok...
for us... the 4 tier worked fine enough, if they got to great an achievement i gave them 2 tiers
besides, in MC WoD's all "classes" have a decent skill set... countrary to Pathfinder, so certainly a change may be necesary
Some classes may feel a little "shorted" when they take a step that doesn't give them much (like a fighter taking their skills step). But remember that it's better than not getting ANYTHING for that session at all (which is what they'd get 3/4 sessions using XP).
Part of what inspired me to create the steps system was my experience playing WOW. You start a new character, you have some easy pointer quests, you learn how to attack and use your class abilities, and unless you're clueless, you advance to level 2 in about 10 minutes. And to level 3 in about 20 minutes. And level 4 in about 20 minutes. And level 5 in about 20 minutes. Thereafter, the leveling isn't so fast... but the point was that in the first HOUR of play, they hook you with some tangible rewards for your character--more health, new class abilities, better defenses, better attacks.
Compared to a game of D&D, where you make a character, and if things go well you get to level up your character after SIXTEEN hours of play. Four weeks of four hours per week. For new players, that's intolerably slow; most are used to games where after 16 hours, you're probably 1/4 of the way through the game and have made significant advancements.
So any time you can reward your players with SOMETHING rather than NOTHING, I think it appeals to the reptile brain and encourages them to keep playing.
I beg you not to abandon the older style.There's no intention of that. But I think as it pans out in the following volumes what we're doing with that map that the utility for the players will trump the GM knowing exactly how many feet it is from the Brookston Barber to Petuluna's Plum Stand.
Weighing in way late on this one, but that's the opposite of what I'd hope to hear. Coming up with a PC-friendly map is easy. It's the DM-detail map that's hard.
Off the top of my head, it might be nice to know how far it is from Brookston Barber to Petuluna's so that travel times, chases, etc. are consistent.
I already have too many artistic maps, maps without scales, etc. that while pretty to look at at, have almost no value at the gaming table.
For example, the Magnimar & Korvosa maps are fan-frakkin-tastic. That's the kind of map I like to see.
Well, I have to admit that I do miss giving 1 xp for every GP earned...
Unofficially, I still do that for NPCs. Otherwise, they would be level 1 forever. You would never have a level 2 expert blacksmith unless he went out and whacked 13 orcs with his forge hammer.
Not necessarily....
One of my favorite articles!