| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
In a discussion I was having on another thread comparing D&D next and pathfinder, the question of "challenging players" came to the forefront quite a few times. That it was important to make the players feel like they are growing into awsomeness and dont start superhuman. So I had an idea.
____
Zero to hero mode:
All characters start with base stats of 10 in all abilities. They add only their racial abilities, and are allowed to diminish scores to add to others (a 0-point buy if you will, so that you can still play things like a dwarven wizard). They player is not allowed to diminish score below 8 or increase them above 12.
At each level, a character can add a permanent +1 increase to one of their abilities. At each level divisible by 4, they would gain an extra +1.
____
The basic idea is to give more flexibility to stat building, and allow players to feel like they're becoming superhuman (rather than being superhuman from the start).
Now, I can see the obvious possibilities for abuse. Namely, any SAD class would be able to increase their main stat up to 37. I would be tempted to put a hard cap at 20-24.
But I can also see the boon this could be for MAD characters, being able to give most of their important stats a good boost.
So, what do you guys think? Am I insane? Would this be helplessly ripe for abuse? Would it be impossible for me to use as a green DM? I await your opinions...
I like it, actually. It would be a way of seeing how each character really developes as they level up.
I dont think this would work without some dramatic changes to the CR system. The characters wouldnt really function properly untill halfway through the game.
Think about it this way, a typical 15 point array is:
15
14
13
12
10
8
Assuming they raised one stat to a 12 to start by reducing another to an 8, it wouldnt catch up to a 15 point buy untill 12th level. Really Sad character might be able to get themselves moving earlier and be able to function (Wizards and Sorcerors in particular) but mad characters litereally wouldnt work at low levels, and even sort of mad characters, like Strength based heavy armor fighters would have difficulty doing their basic functions untill like 8th level.
I'm well aware that I'd have to dramatically adapt the CR. That's my main concern. However, I've heard enough people saying that the CR system is pretty screwy, so I dont mind playing aroudn with it.
I would proabably make them face other PC-class enemies for most of the first 10 levels, with stats adapted in consequence. Monsters would be rare.
I would start them at point buy 3 as that is what commoners/NPC classed characters are built with. Consider them -1 APL for a while and then clear that negative when you feel like they are no longer hindered by lowered stats.
Casters and other SAD classes will still rule this system.
Why not start the group out at low fantasy point buy and speed up their progressions so they wind up with epic fantasy point buy in time for the end of the campaign?
I really wanted them to start out as little more than commoners. I think I'll take the 3 point build of commoners then.
To whale cancer: I dont think there's a single system where SAD classes dont rule. I'm just trying to give MADs a chance (and I would not be tolerant of obvious powergamers)
But I can also see the boon this could be for MAD characters, being able to give most of their important stats a good boost.
Actually it hurts mad more than anyone else because they want a good everything, but SAD just jacks up one stat and maybe con/dex. Elf wizard might have 19/12/10/10/10/8, but Oni Spawn Monk is going to have 14/13/12/12/8/8, for example.(high to low, not actual stats)
My question would be: does this hurt mad chracters more than the preexisting system does?
Why not start the group out at low fantasy point buy and speed up their progressions so they wind up with epic fantasy point buy in time for the end of the campaign?
This wouldnt be a boon for Mad characters, it actually punishes them because they have to wait longer before they can function.
A Wizard starts working as soon as his int is around a 16. With a 3 point buy and a ratial bonus, thats like 2nd level.
A mad character, like say a monk, needs a descent dex, wisdom, and strength to function at all, and really needs con to boost his hp. They are waiting another 5 or 6 levels before they start functioning.
My question would be: does this hurt mad chracters more than the preexisting system does?
Dramatically more. A mad character at least starts the game functional, if not as effective as a sad character. In this system, a wizard could start with a 15 and have a 16 in int by second level.
Mad character cant do that, and would have to do rediculous things like dump 3 stats to 8's just to have 12's in the stats they need.
My question would be: does this hurt mad chracters more than the preexisting system does?
At 20 without racial or point buy 20/20/15/10/10/10(41 point buy, if the 20's were 18's!) vs. 16/16/16/12/10/10/10(32 point buy). Wizard vs monk, the wizard has 20 con/int, the monk has... 12 or 16 con?
Kolokotroni, what do you mean by "starting to function"? Are the MADs literally helpless? Or are they just not doing their best?
Or are they just not doing their best?
Well, either he means they aren't trying hard enough of they would have 18's across the board, or he means that they benefit more from having high stats at the start. A monk for example couldn't have 12 in con/dex/str/wis,(all are stats he needs), but a wizard could have 15 int and 12 con. The wizard sounds much more functional than the monk, the wizard could have even more AC than the monk!
My question would be: does this hurt mad chracters more than the preexisting system does?
I think so.
The only 'fix' I can think of is, instead of gaining attribute bonuses, the players gain points that are distributed according to the point buy system.
SAD characters can still sit on their points to up their main stat, but MAD characters will come into their own faster.
How about this: Keeping point buy conditions. You get +1 (or 2) points by the point-buy standard every level. That would allow MADs to diversify, while limiting sads. Using MrSins example:
19/19/12/10/10/10 (43 pts) vs 16/16/16/16/13/10 (43 pts)
I will admit this advantages the SADS at low levels, but it still allows the mads to get great stats. (I think)
Ok, so this is how I imagine it:
Zero to hero mode:
All characters start with base stats of 10 in all abilities. They add only their racial abilities, and are allowed to diminish scores to add to others (a 3-point buy like a commoner). They player is not allowed to diminish score below 8 or increase them above 12.
At each level, a character can add a permanent +2 (in point buy units) to increase to one of their abilities. The player can "save up" points to use later.
So then what if you just gave MAD classes more points? Say start the SAD classes at 0 points, give the mad classes 3, and then eliminate the every 4 levels bonuses from the sad classes.
So then what if you just gave MAD classes more points? Say start the SAD classes at 0 points, give the mad classes 3, and then eliminate the every 4 levels bonuses from the sad classes.
That could work. Reminds me of the exp tracks from D&D 2e (a level 25 wizard was equivalent to like a level 30 fighter). I'm trying to keep it simple though. I'll keep the idea in mind. It worked in 2e I guess. Though clerics advanced easiest of all for some reason.
Kolokotroni, what do you mean by "starting to function"? Are the MADs literally helpless? Or are they just not doing their best?
I mean helpless. A monk would start the game with like an 11 or 12 AC, +0 or -1 to hit on their flurry of blows...that simply is not functional. Normally even with a 15 point buy they can start with a 16 in both dex and wisdom, and have a positive strength and con.
For me functional means having at least a +2 bonus in the ability scores that determine your success or failure at your job as a character. For a wizard or sorceror, thats JUST Int. For a monk, thats Dex, Wisdom and Strength.
How about this: Keeping point buy conditions. You get +1 (or 2) points by the point-buy standard every level. That would allow MADs to diversify, while limiting sads. Using MrSins example:19/19/12/10/10/10 (43 pts) vs 16/16/16/16/13/10 (43 pts)
I will admit this advantages the SADS at low levels, but it still allows the mads to get great stats. (I think)
It wouldnt fix the problem. My concern is not the meteoric rise of the wizards int. Though thats an issue, the real issue is that Mad characters need more levels to boost get the stats they need up there. And sure they might have a cool stat array at like 15th level. But levels 1-8 sucked. Hard. Does your group start games at level 8? Because otherwise, the only thing i'd be willing to play in a game like this is a summoner, wizard, or sorceror. I'd never play low levels as anything else. There might be a long term payoff, but thats at least months of actualy time i am playing a character that doesnt work.
I wouldn't allow the poor design of the monk class to dissuade you from trying this idea out.
I think I will. I'm currently in vaguely harry potter-ish campaign (school of casters). It's a murderschool, but the base implementation is quite good. I think with this stat distribution, it would be cool to have the characters start as young children and have them grow up. I might even block stat advancement until first level up. Could you imagine winning your first level with nothing but cantrips?
Ok, so this is how I imagine it:
Zero to hero mode:
All characters start with base stats of 10 in all abilities. They add only their racial abilities, and are allowed to diminish scores to add to others (a 3-point buy like a commoner). They player is not allowed to diminish score below 8 or increase them above 12.At each level, a character can add a permanent +2 (in point buy units) to increase to one of their abilities. The player can "save up" points to use later.
Mad characters still dont work at low levels. So unless you never have to play the zero part of this system, it doesnt work.
Just go ahead and try to make a human monk with this. I am I dont know how.
Starting Stats:
Str 12
Dex 14 (12+2 racial)
Con 11
Wis 12
Int 8
Cha 8
Thats an AC of 13 with a con of 11 for a combat character. And he has a +0/+0 for his flurry of blows assuming weapon finese. I wouldnt play that, would you?
Meanwhile the Wizard starts with at least a 14 int, gets it to 6 by 3rd level and is mostly happy. if not thrilled by his lowish con and dex. And heck the summoner, or druid with animal companion are openly mocking the fighter and rogue as they are completely pointless next to their static ability score pets.
Inquisitors/bards/alchemist/etc either arent able to fight, or dont have any real use of their spells and class abilities.
I wouldn't allow the poor design of the monk class to dissuade you from trying this idea out.
Its not just the monk, though he's the word example.
Lets look at a few other examples.
The bard for instance:
Light armor (needs dex)
Charisma based abilities and spell casting (needs charmisma)
Light armor - needs dex
Is a primary or secondary combatant (depending on style) needs strength and con
Inquisitor:
Pretty much the same as the bard.
Certain alchemists, clerics, and oracles are in a similar boat. They arent quite as bad as the monk, but they are still in rough shape starting at a 3pt buy.
Well, you're forgetting that I'm blocking it at 12. In absolute (including racial bonuses). But that doesnt adress the issue you're bringing up either.
I'll admit I'm not fond of most of the "summoning" variety of classes. The summoner in particular is entertaining, but easy to abuse.
Well, I understand your concerns, but the impression I'm getting is that for a combat heavy campaign this would never work (of this I am certain). It would be interesting for a RP heavy campaign, though it would relegate the fighter to uselessness.
All in all, I'm happy of your input Kolokotroni, you've shown the basic flaw of my idea within traditional play. But I've seen engough people say they dont want to start as superhuman that I think this is worth a try. The biggest chalenge would be on me, the GM, to provide appropriate challenges.
I wouldn't allow the poor design of the monk class to dissuade you from trying this idea out.Its not just the monk, though he's the word example.
Lets look at a few other examples.
The bard for instance:
Light armor (needs dex)
Charisma based abilities and spell casting (needs charmisma)
Light armor - needs dex
Is a primary or secondary combatant (depending on style) needs strength and conInquisitor:
Pretty much the same as the bard.Certain alchemists, clerics, and oracles are in a similar boat. They arent quite as bad as the monk, but they are still in rough shape starting at a 3pt buy.
While I think the monk does fail horribly in this system, I don't think other classes suffer as much as you seem to be claiming.
Players will need to adjust their expectations, but that is an assumption of using this sort of system.
A level 1 bard only needs 11 charism to cast his 1st level spells. Proper spell selection means he doesn't need any that have saves. Alternatively, he would only have a DC 1 lower than the wizard. That doesn't seem unreasnoble.
Players in such a game would be significantly weaker. I don't see that as a problem, since all players will also be weaker and the GM will be running adventures with that in mind.
You've pretty much expressed how I thought of it Whale Cancer. Though I'd probably remove monks outright. While they are a cool class, they have no place in medieval european fantasy (I apologise to monk lovers).
You've pretty much expressed how I thought of it Whale Cancer. Though I'd probably remove monks outright. While they are a cool class, they have no place in medieval european fantasy (I apologise to monk lovers).
Good thing Pathfinder isn't european, according to Paizo, huh?
You've pretty much expressed how I thought of it Whale Cancer. Though I'd probably remove monks outright. While they are a cool class, they have no place in medieval european fantasy (I apologise to monk lovers).Good thing Pathfinder isn't european, according to Paizo, huh?
Yeah, just like middle earth isnt an insert for great britain. While there are some elements of it that arent european (it's nice that a great part of the Iconics arent european), the fact that they have to distinguish "eastern weapons and armor" show's that it's medieval european fantasy. Everything in europe and the middle east is part of the core (pretty traditional for medieval european fantasy) but everything else is far away.
@ Lincoln hills: That was the basic idea: to see where the tomatoes would stick. I want to try this out eventually (though it might be a while, seeing as I dont have an RL group to play with) but I think it could be cool.
As for the great down Unda', I agree that it's a setting that needs some work. I've been brainstorming a vaguely mesoamerican/colonialist feeling setting for D&D 4e (The fact that they have "primal" power classes fits really well with the idea of natives) but it's not something that is often considered. Polynesia would also be cool: could you imagine travelling from easter island at it's height, to the sultry island of tahiti, or to face the mighty maori warriors? So many setting ideas, so little time.
I don't see the point of arguing about monks in this thread.
Some people like monks in their PnP, some people don't. I also don't believe OP said his game would be set in Golarion, so that is not an issue.
In any case, I think the whole point buy would work out well, and naturally give the caps I wanted to enforce. The most unablanced distribution you could get would be:
22/12/10/10/10/10
And the most balanced:
16/15/15/15/15/14
Of course, the lower levels would involve a lowering of the CR. But the higher levels could be pretty nice. Heck, with only 3 lower stats, you could have (at level 20):
18/17/17/10/10/10
The progression would be slower (though I would probably use a "fast" xp track), but it could be interesting.
P.S.: I would probably set whatever I do in a world of my personal creation. Monks could fit well (or not). I'm not sure.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hi williamoak!
This might not be helpful at all at this point in the discussion, but I accomplished a similar feel in a campaign I ran once by having my players start out with low fantasy arrays and one NPC class level. They didn't get their first PC class level until the end of the first session, at which point they were still weaker than the typical level 2 character. Because I was throwing encounters at them with CR as though they were normal PCs of their level, the game was pretty hard (I pulled a couple punches to keep things fun). But with each new level, the % of the PCs' levels which were NPC levels decreased, so their power relative the challenges they faced increased even if only slightly. When we finished the campaign they were at level 5 or 6 and they were really feeling like they'd accomplished something, like they had started in one place and gone to another place—zero to hero as you say.
I don't think this approach suits every campaign or even every playgroup but it worked very well for me and I think it produced the kind of dynamic you're looking for.