The Nd20 system (Epic-level play rejigged)

hong · Oct 21, 2002

Because I'm sitting at home with a head cold, which could be playing silly buggers with my judgement.

I'm not particularly impressed by the ELH, but at the same time I wouldn't mind being able to keep playing characters past level 20. Instead of the various hacks that the ELH introduces to make epic-level play feasible, how would the following setup play out in practice?

- keep the existing level advancement per class, including BAB and save progressions. No more wonkiness like "epic levels", and whatnot.

- limit each character to 20 levels per class, or 10 levels per prestige class (thus if you go beyond 20th level, you'll have to have at least 2 classes). A character who is 21st level gets to choose one additional class as a favoured class.

- _multiply the d20 roll by 2_ for epic-level play. Thus attack rolls become (attack bonus + d20x2), skill checks become (skill bonus + d20x2), and saves become (save bonus + d20x2). This keeps d20's linear scaling from becoming unplayable.

As an alternative to doubling the d20 roll, you could halve all bonuses. This would lead to essentially the same results.

When you get to 41st level, multiply the d20 roll by 3. When you get to 61st level, multiply it by 4, and so on. I'm sure it'll break down eventually, but then I'm not setting out to create something that will scale to infinity.

"Off-stage" situations would be resolved using whichever multiple of d20 the DM decided was appropriate. Eg when deciding if a 1st level expert blacksmith succeeds in making masterwork armour, you might use the regular d20 roll on the Craft (armoursmithing) check. If you were deciding whether a 40th level epic archmage succeeds in making a Summon Epic Foozle spell, you might use 2d20 on the Spellcraft check.

You still get problems where characters can obtain insane bonuses on skills, saves, attacks or AC, but that's something that afflicts the ELH rules too.

A problem that I can see is deciding when to start doubling the d20 roll: eg if you have a party where one character has just made 21st level, and the others are still 20th or 19th (or lower). Perhaps you could make the switch as soon as one character has made the jump. Or perhaps you could delay it until all characters have made it.

Derrick Reeves · Oct 21, 2002

With all due respect...

...the system you describe is going to abandon any sense of control.

Players of warrior-types might feel ok about it (Fighter -> Barbarian/Paladin/Ranger, sure), but the other PC classes would be forced into Prestige Classing ad nauseum to retain focus, which defeats the purpose of the Prestige Class, doesn't it? (Alternatively, you'll see vast amounts of cross-training, which will bleed the party dynamic.)

The DM will have difficulties, too. With increased variability on the dice coupled with the potential for a larger range of Attack and Saving Throw bonuses for the PCs, setting challenges is going to be painstaking work.

It is an interesting idea, but I don't think it's workable.

hong · Oct 21, 2002

Re: With all due respect...

Derrick Reeves said:
...the system you describe is going to abandon any sense of control.

Players of warrior-types might feel ok about it (Fighter -> Barbarian/Paladin/Ranger, sure), but the other PC classes would be forced into Prestige Classing ad nauseum to retain focus, which defeats the purpose of the Prestige Class, doesn't it? (Alternatively, you'll see vast amounts of cross-training, which will bleed the party dynamic.)

If you mean a pure spellcaster can't remain quite as "pure", I dunno. Those 20 levels of wizard, sorc or cleric should last them quite some time. Add in 10 levels of a spellcasting PrC, and that takes them to 30th level without having to touch a "mundane" class at all. Add in another PrC to go to 40th, which is as far as I really want to go.

Once you get to epic levels, everyone is slinging around vast amounts of magic anyway. Everyone will (or should) be able to fly, see invisible, teleport and kill at range. The difference is one of nuance. And I see epic characters as multiclassing anyway, because there's only so much oomph you _should_ be able to get out of one class. Flexibility is important too.

The DM will have difficulties, too. With increased variability on the dice coupled with the potential for a larger range of Attack and Saving Throw bonuses for the PCs, setting challenges is going to be painstaking work.

I don't follow. Increased variability on the dice should lead to _reduced_ difficulty in setting challenges. This is because a creature of CR N is vulnerable across a wider range of power levels, and in turn can damage opponents across a wider range of levels than otherwise. You don't have to be quite as careful in getting the CRs exactly right.

It'll still be tricky, because super-high-level characters have oodles of resources at their fingertips, but that's a general problem with high-powered play. This also holds true for the ELH approach.

Derrick Reeves · Oct 21, 2002

Re: Re: With all due respect...

hong said:
If you mean a pure spellcaster can't remain quite as "pure", I dunno. Those 20 levels of wizard, sorc or cleric should last them quite some time. Add in 10 levels of a spellcasting PrC, and that takes them to 30th level without having to touch a "mundane" class at all. Add in another PrC to go to 40th, which is as far as I really want to go.

I suppose a case could be made that every PC is going to fit into a PrC - but two? It seems to be bending the concept (though I'll grant that the concept may have been broken already).

hong said:
Once you get to epic levels, everyone is slinging around vast amounts of magic anyway. Everyone will (or should) be able to fly, see invisible, teleport and kill at range. The difference is one of nuance. And I see epic characters as multiclassing anyway, because there's only so much oomph you _should_ be able to get out of one class. Flexibility is important too.

That's true: but some people just aren't flexible.

hong said:
I don't follow. Increased variability on the dice should lead to _reduced_ difficulty in setting challenges. This is because a creature of CR N is vulnerable across a wider range of power levels, and in turn can damage opponents across a wider range of levels than otherwise. You don't have to be quite as careful in getting the CRs exactly right.

It'll still be tricky, because super-high-level characters have oodles of resources at their fingertips, but that's a general problem with high-powered play. This also holds true for the ELH approach.

To be frank, by the time you're hitting this level of play everything is tailored; but I don't see why increasing the variability of play is an advantage. It also means rolling more dice. More dice = bad.

Likewise, the spread of ability is increased - Ftr20/(FtrPrC)10 is +30 BAB; whereas Wiz20/(WizPrC)10 is +15 BAB. Now, I'll freely admit that a 30th level spellcaster shouldn't have to rely on their ability to club things to death. I chose BAB as my example because it didn't require glancing at a book - Saving Throws are a bigger problem.

To be frank, it's not so much that I have a problem with your system (other than my hatred of extra dice), rather that I fail to see its advantages over ELH.

hong · Oct 21, 2002

Re: Re: Re: With all due respect...

Derrick Reeves said:
I suppose a case could be made that every PC is going to fit into a PrC - but two? It seems to be bending the concept (though I'll grant that the concept may have been broken already).

Perhaps allowing PrCs to go up to 20 levels would be a good thing.

That's true: but some people just aren't flexible.

That's their problem, not mine.

To be frank, by the time you're hitting this level of play everything is tailored; but I don't see why increasing the variability of play is an advantage. It also means rolling more dice. More dice = bad.

I'm not rolling more dice. I'm multiplying the result of one d20 roll by two (or three, or four). There are exactly as many possible outcomes as before, just spread over a wider range.

To be frank, it's not so much that I have a problem with your system (other than my hatred of extra dice), rather that I fail to see its advantages over ELH.

I just don't like how class progressions do weird things in the ELH, once you go past 20th character levels.

poilbrun · Oct 21, 2002

Re: Re: Re: With all due respect...

Derrick Reeves said:
To be frank, by the time you're hitting this level of play everything is tailored; but I don't see why increasing the variability of play is an advantage. It also means rolling more dice. More dice = bad.

The first time I played the White Wolf line of RPGs, Iwas a werewolf who, when transformed, fought so good that I had to throw 14 dices at the same time... I actually enjoyed it!

For the subject at hand, I see problem arising. Let's look at it if you make the jump from 1 to 2 D20 at level 21, from 2 to 3 at level 41, etc. A level 40 fighter-type (either ftr 20/brb 20, or with PrC) will have 2d20+40+other bonuses (STR, magic, weapon focus and the like - let's say +15)=57-95. A level 41 fighter-type has 3d20+41+15=59-116. That means that by going up by one level, you give him the potential to hit a creature with an AC higher by 21 points!!

The other problem will be caused by luck/unluck. A level 41 fighter type face a level 60 fighter type. The level 41 has a range of 54-111. The level 60 has a range of 3d20+60+20 (he probably has a better weapon, has improved his strength, has taken a more powerful feat...)=83-140. If the level 41 is lucky, rolling 3 20's and the level 60 has no luck rolling 3 1's, we have a level 41 fighter-type fighting A LOT better than the level 60 fighter-type, even though, in theory, there should be no way that a character with 19 less levels than an other should win the fight.

Of course, on the long run, things will tend toward the average, but I think that such a system could really ruin good roleplaying. If the PC are really unlucky, they will have troubles with the henchmen of the main villain during the whole adventure. Then, come the final fight against the villain, they are again lucky when you're not, and the fight is a piece of cake for them... They'll wonder why that one was the villain and not his follower (who was 15 levels lower), who was able to kill two party members.

These are the flaws I see in this system, but then I'm not disappointed with the epic rules in the ELH... Well, I'm not right now, I'll tell you in about a week or so when I start playing with them!

hong · Oct 21, 2002

Re: Re: Re: Re: With all due respect...

poilbrun said:
For the subject at hand, I see problem arising. Let's look at it if you make the jump from 1 to 2 D20 at level 21, from 2 to 3 at level 41, etc. A level 40 fighter-type (either ftr 20/brb 20, or with PrC) will have 2d20+40+other bonuses (STR, magic, weapon focus and the like - let's say +15)=57-95. A level 41 fighter-type has 3d20+41+15=59-116. That means that by going up by one level, you give him the potential to hit a creature with an AC higher by 21 points!!

Yeah, there's the potential for wackiness at the boundary between d20 x N and d20 x (N+1). Not sure how to deal with that.

Also, note that I'm not particularly concerned about levels 41+. This is really aimed more at the range from 20th to 30th. Extrapolating to infinity is not a design objective.

The other problem will be caused by luck/unluck. A level 41 fighter type face a level 60 fighter type. The level 41 has a range of 54-111. The level 60 has a range of 3d20+60+20 (he probably has a better weapon, has improved his strength, has taken a more powerful feat...)=83-140. If the level 41 is lucky, rolling 3 20's and the level 60 has no luck rolling 3 1's, we have a level 41 fighter-type fighting A LOT better than the level 60 fighter-type, even though, in theory, there should be no way that a character with 19 less levels than an other should win the fight.

I don't think that a scenario that involves rolling 3 natural 20s is particularly enlightening.

Of course, on the long run, things will tend toward the average, but I think that such a system could really ruin good roleplaying. If the PC are really unlucky, they will have troubles with the henchmen of the main villain during the whole adventure. Then, come the final fight against the villain, they are again lucky when you're not, and the fight is a piece of cake for them... They'll wonder why that one was the villain and not his follower (who was 15 levels lower), who was able to kill two party members.

This is a Good Thing in my book. I don't think the situation where the PCs are guaranteed to blitz through encounters of EL N-1, and then get slaughtered by something of EL N+1, is desirable. It makes the system too fragile, or at least more fragile than I want. But that's the upshot of extrapolating 3E's linear progressions beyond their intended range.

Hence the introduction of a multiplier for the random component of the task resolution mechanic, to increase the influence of randomness in the results. Yes, the upshot is that a 25th level mook can take out your 35th level uber-wizard/paladin. That's what risk is all about.

Note that the exact same situation would hold for normal play: just subtract 20 from all character levels. The odds that the 25th level epic d00d will kill a 35th level uber-epic d00d still remain small, just as a 5th level d00d probably won't kill a 15th level one. If it's good enough for normal play, it should be good enough for epic play.

Plane Sailing · Oct 22, 2002

Hong,

Just wanted to say that this idea sounds very interesting. After an (admittedly cursory) look through the epic level handbook I was very dissatisfied with the concepts and implementation which was used. I could imagine taking a party from 21st-30th level but not beyond, and I'm definitely with you on the "only 20 levels in any one class" sort of thing.

I don't think I'd cap BAB attacks, so if fighters got their BAB to +30, I'd allow them their 6 attacks. After all a whirlwind attack or great cleave can give that many attacks and more at a much lower level! Plus enemies will have many multiples of attack and so there would be many situations where you wouldn't really want to stand and face them toe-to-toe to get your own full attack.

The ST scaling business is a red herring IMO. Currently you would get best saves +12, worst +6 from class at 20th level. The various protection, luck, ability (enhanced) etc, etc bonuses far overshadow any class-based differences, making them neglible. A Ftr 20/FtrPres10 (worst case) would have what, +19 Fort ST and only +9 Will ST. Nevertheless, one would expect that he would have made arrangements to get Iron Will, +5 Cloak, + other bonuses. Of course his will save would still be his weak link (unless he really made an effort for it), but hey - that's the breaks. Spell DC's don't depend upon caster level after all, the only real variable is the casters casting attribute and if that isn't zooming up astronomically none of his target DC's are going to be unachievable. (of course it is possible to pull together strange prestige classes and odd stuff to pump up DC's... but why bother?)

Anyhow, basically I just wanted to encourage you in these thoughts.

Cheers

Al · Oct 22, 2002

The main problem is that whilst the dice rolls are going up big-time, the target numbers are remaining constant.

The primary beneficiaries are going to be the spellcasters. By adding in that extra d20 for their Spellcraft checks, it effectively reduces the DCs for all of their epic spells by 10.

On the other hand, since their spell DCs are remaining (roughly) constant from level 20 to level 21, it does mean that the spells which allow a saving throw have their DC reduced by roughly 10 as well. This thrusts the onus very much on no-save type spells, as the saving throws will be made fairly often on the save spells. Put another way, a save which could only be made on a natural 20 before epic level can now be made most of the time.

Fighters are also beneficiaries. Their attacks get an effective +10, with ACs remaining roughly constant from level 20 to 21. They can be guaranteed to hit even with their lower iterative attacks, and can almost certainly afford a little Power Attacking and/or Expertise.

Rogues and the other skill-based classes get the proverbial shaft. Their skill bonuses which guaranteed them dominance in this area are now hampered severely. Having a skill twenty points higher than someone with d20 guaranteed a victory; with 2d20 it is merely highly probable. On the other hand, set DC skills now become 10 points easier, though I would imagine at epic levels most skill checks would be opposed.

Essentially, the crux of the problem is that all 'fixed' target numbers (skill DCs, AC etc.) become much easier. This cannot be solved easily be simply bumping the numbers up by 10 points. Epic tasks can be attempted by non-Epic characters (e.g.s hitting AC 50, making a DC 50 skill check) so the nearly-epic levels will suffer from this blunt fix. Upping the DCs by 10 simultaneously as introducing a further d20 may work, but dents the suspension of disbelief somewhat.

It is a problem that needs to be looked at. Closely. Good luck!