|
I'm making some rules for a simplified Pathfinder game. It's going to steal pages liberally from D&D games of ages past, and by the time I'm done it might not look much like Pathfinder per se. But the idea is to inherit a Pathfinder and D&D feel while being a good game and much simpler than what we have now.
The first change I'm making is to remove ability modifiers. You've got to admit that this will simplify a lot of things. In the absence of modifiers, everything will have fewer hit points, do less damage, and there will be no bonus spells. Many creatures and characters will have fewer skill points. Like I said, simplified Pathfinder.
The new (and also old) mechanic that will be used is the ability check. You roll a d20 and add your whole ability (value 3-18, usually). Standard difficulty is 21, so an 18-strength fellow can hardly fail while a 3-strength fellow is unlikely to ever succeed.
Leadership will be a recognized and prominent part of high-level play, though I imagine it will always be possible to ignore those. But I do want to recognize that high-level play often ends up being fundamentally different from low-level play. Companions (such as eidolons, animal companions, familiars, cohorts) will be equally possible for all classes.
Would you ever like to play a simplified Pathfinder? Is there demand for it outside of my personal circle? Do you have any suggestions or words of caution? Do you want to see more?
Instead of rolling and adding your entire ability score I recommend rolling under the ability score. For example lets say you have a 14 dex and 3 ranks in stealth you add the two together and then try to roll under the target number. So in this case you would need to roll 17 or less to succeed. This makes things incredibly simple and since that's your goal...
I miss AD&D simplicity, by my main problem are micro-movements (5' steps, teleporting 10' when someone fails an attack against you, etc..) and the huge ammount of different rules for similar things, ability bonuses aren't a problem for me.
Things like Mutant & Masterminds are great imo, and iirc there is a fantasy version, altough sometimes they go so minimalistic that all D&D feeling is gone.
Instead of rolling and adding your entire ability score I recommend rolling under the ability score. For example lets say you have a 14 dex and 3 ranks in stealth you add the two together and then try to roll under the target number. So in this case you would need to roll 17 or less to succeed. This makes things incredibly simple and since that's your goal...
Boo, hiss.
One of the simplest innovations of 3e was "rolling higher is always better." If you roll high, you know you did well, if you rolled low, you know you did poorly. I do not miss the 1e and 2e days where the DM would tell you to roll 1d20, and you'd roll a 20, and you didn't know if you should be excited (because it was an attack roll or a save, which needed to be high to succed) or disappointed (because it was a proficiency roll, which needed to be low to succeed).
In other words, in a game based on 1d20, don't ever make rolling a 20 a bad thing. :p
Instead of rolling and adding your entire ability score I recommend rolling under the ability score. For example lets say you have a 14 dex and 3 ranks in stealth you add the two together and then try to roll under the target number. So in this case you would need to roll 17 or less to succeed. This makes things incredibly simple and since that's your goal...Boo, hiss.
One of the simplest innovations of 3e was "rolling higher is always better." If you roll high, you know you did well, if you rolled low, you know you did poorly. I do not miss the 1e and 2e days where the DM would tell you to roll 1d20, and you'd roll a 20, and you didn't know if you should be excited (because it was an attack roll or a save, which needed to be high to succed) or disappointed (because it was a proficiency roll, which needed to be low to succeed).
In other words, in a game based on 1d20, don't ever make rolling a 20 a bad thing. :p
Nor do I but that doesn't mean it doesn't simplify things and that was the op's stated goal. Removing ability modifiers from the game already requires a complete overhaul of the system (which I disagree with but wanted to contribute). Of course if you are looking for simplicity then there are systems better designed for that.
Also on a side note, how the hell is "rolling higher is always better" in any way different from "rolling lower is always better?" I wasn't suggesting that you break the idea of a uniform mechanic. If your confused on when to get excited and when not to then maybe Shoots and Ladders is the game for you.
I thought about doing it that way, Pharolin. But I decided against it on purpose, for several reasons.
No problem. It isn't the best idea I've had. It was simple and...that's it. That was your stated goal but really it doesn't offer much to the game. I wouldn't have made a change like that either. (Though I still think Mr. Reynolds comment about it being a return to the days where everything had its own separate confusing mechanic was a little disingenuous, and well...dumb.)
Anyway let me know what you finally decide on. I'm interested to know how an ability modifier-less game would work or if it works at all.
I have double standards
Note the sarcasm from mr Reynolds regarding my opinion...
Boo, hiss.
Should he be blocked?? Should I be offended?? No, of course not, that's just silly. Nor should he or anyone else.
I do thoroughly disagree with his assertion and find the whole statement to be foolish considering what it was I was actually proposing. But I was not attacking him nor was he attacking me, nor were either of our posts mean or spiteful. Both of us were clearly expressing an opinion. Legitimate opinions. His just happens to be wrong :)
tl;dr: the ape-#@!$ is a lie.
Also on a side note, how the hell is "rolling higher is always better" in any way different from "rolling lower is always better?" I wasn't suggesting that you break the idea of a uniform mechanic. If your confused on when to get excited and when not to then maybe Shoots and Ladders is the game for you.
Because rolling a high number is cooler and more satisfying than rolling a low number.
Because rolling a high number is cooler and more satisfying than rolling a low number.
Lol, yes it is. On that we definitely agree. You are redeemed good sir!
|
|
Okay. I haven't abandoned this project yet, so I thought I'd give an update.
I like rolling higher numbers better than rolling low numbers, and the other thing is that I want combat and ability/skill checks to be the same basic system. You have a target number, some modifiers, and you roll to hit it. I also like having a goalpost that can be moved for higher-level play. So I will not be using a "roll under attribute" mechanic.
There will be four classes in Simplified Pathfinder.
Warrior (or Fighter)
Expert (or Rogue)
Priest (or Cleric)
Mage (or Wizard)
I'm not going to give them special abilities to start out with, though I will include optional rules for them. The optional rules will basically refer to the excellent special abilities in the Pathfinder Core Rulebook. None of them will have class skills. Class skills no longer exist.
All of them will get 4 skill points per level, except for the expert, which will have twice as many. I'm sure you've already guessed that the warrior is a full-BAB, the Mage is half-BAB, and the other two are in between. This is the case. The warrior will also be a d10 hit die, the Mage a d6, and the other two a d8 each.
Characters will also have a bonus that I like to call the "Primary Stat Bonus". The concept is fairly simple: Pick out your highest stat. If you have a tie, pick the one (of those highest) that you like the most. Your character gains +1 to the following:
Strength: Melee to-hit and melee damage
Dexterity: Missile to-hit and AC
Constitution: Hit Points/level
Intelligence: Skill Points/level
Wisdom: Defense vs. Magic
Charisma: # of companions
In most games, it will be reasonable to have a Secondary stat as well as a Primary. In this case, the Primary stat bonus should be a +2, and the Secondary should be a +1. Particularly high-powered campaigns can continue this trend to Tertiary attributes and beyond.
This allows characters to have stats that impact regular gameplay, but the amount of impact they have is not related to how high or low those numbers are. Having a high stat is still great for ability checks and skill checks, but you're not made combat-incompetent just because you rolled low for constitution.
If your confused on when to get excited and when not to then maybe Shoots and Ladders is the game for you.Geez-us. One of the staff expresses an opinion and you go ape-#@!$ over him. Where's the dislike button around here? Or the block button.
Geez-us....
You can always hide the entire topic.
I'm just still here to ask, did you do away with all bonus spells?