• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

EN World critique requested on my exp system

Kisanji Arael

First Post
Okay guys, background first. I'm pretty much redoing everything (though not, necessarily, in ways that are entirely new) to create a system that suits my needs; I suppose that I've just had it with every system I've played in. But each of these systems has, fundamentally, added things to what I feel is good for an RPG. For reference, I started on D20 (D&D and Spycraft) (though I had read 2nd edition books before that); I have since played WoD (mortal, mage, scion), Serenity, In Nomine, AFMBE and Deadlands.

So, this is my attempt at an experience system; note that this is very raw and fresh in my head, so it isn't perfect yet. I want to know what's wrong with it and what I need to watch out for with such a vague system; but I want to hash out the details before I start remaking all the classes from scratch; that's why you're here.

Characters' levels follow a standard 20 level progression. Experience progression however, follows a simpler trend; it takes a set amount of experience for a character to level every time. The standard number for this is 1000 for a single-class character. Adding another class at a later point adds 500 and adding a prestige class adds 300. I have basically abandoned the “ding” system; I'm making my characters purchase all of their abilities, hit points, skill points separately; level only determines which abilities are available to members of any given class at any point in their career. So the option to purchase abilities from two or more classes assumes, to a certain point, that one will actually purchase abilities from those classes. Those who twink with multi-classing will suffer for it; those who dual-class will have the best low and mid-level abilities from both without suffering too tremendously; as opposed to before, where they would fall behind in terms of class level but not character level, here they are simply members of two classes and, because they are trying to master multiple skill-sets, they advance more slowly in terms of character level, which makes them susceptible to what they get.

Another option is dabbling. Dabbling costs a flat one time fee of 700. Dabbling is sort of like a hobby or, in more familiar terms, a one level dip. This 700 experience is spent immediately to purchase a set number of abilities from the class chosen. In addition, the character can spend skill points to increase certain other abilities associated with that class. For instance, one dabbling in sorcerer might receive two first level spells and three cantrips, and for every five skill points spent, he or she might receive an additional first level spell per day. This instant aptitude represents the fact hat a wizard who has been fighting monsters, albeit untrained, will pick up the fine art of “stabbing till it stops bleeding” far better if he is 15th level than at 1st, if simply because he's had more time to hit things by that point; similarly, fighters who dabble in sorcerer later in their career will be more familiar with the somatic components of sleep simply because they've had it cast on them enough times.
-------

“Oh man,” you must be saying, “given how much exp monsters give at high levels, your players will hit twenty really fast.” But I was tricky and thought of that: what I want to do is create a system where the experience gained is based on the challenge presented. At the end of the day, I feel that a truly life-threating situation is as conducive to how much one learns at any level; the difference is that at higher levels it takes more to be put in such a situation. Similarly, a monster which should be difficult based on its challenge rating, but ends up being easy because of dice rolls, will teach the characters less than it might otherwise have. A storyteller, then, should set up challenges based somewhat on the standard challenge rating but award experience based on what happened. So this is my basic chart of how much experience is gained by various situations; so far, I've only finished combat, since its the most group oriented. Experience gained for exceptional role-playing I'll deal with later.



Code:
Combat
---------------
Combat Difficulty
Civilian slaughter:                         0
No challenge:                          5-10
Minor Workout:                          25
Good fight:                             65
Strenuous:                              90
Disaster avoided:                      125
Life-threatening:*                     250
     * generally reserved for epic moments in story

Combat Events
Opponents escape:                      -20% total
Last man standing:                      50
     * party bonus, personal bonus below
Powerful magic*:                        20
     * implies magic 3 spell levels above the highest level used by the party
Exceptional teamwork:                   25   
Destroy recurring plot villain:         15 x HD

Individual Combat Bonuses
Never missed:                            10 / difficulty level over no challenge
Was basically useless:                 -25%
Last man standing:                      75

Oh, and a side-note: I haven't even worked out how item creation is going to work yet, so while sage words are appreciated, I won't be able to do much with them for now.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Claudius Gaius

First Post
Ah, the original Palladium/Arduin system. It's been a long time... Only problem with it is it tends to work with some character types and not others. How do you do things like "never missed" with a magic-missile specialist?

Not that it can't be done, but each bonus and penalty you put in will shape the characters decisions and tactics. For example, the origianl Robotech game used this kind of system: one of the biggest bonuses available was for "rescuing a comrade". We had one character who took some abilities that turned out to be very useful in rescuing his friends. so he leveled faster, which made him better at rescuing his friends, which made him gain levels faster...

Secondarily, breaking everything down is a big project. You miught just want to adapt one of the systems which has done it already: BESM is good for anime games (SRD version is free), mutants and masterminds is good for superheroes, and Eclipse: The Codex Persona is good for 3.0-3.5 style fantasy (and the shareware version is free).
 

Quartz

Hero
Kisanji Arael said:
Those who twink with multi-classing will suffer for it;

Sorry, but D20 is designed to encourage multiclassing, at least of non-spellcasting classes. Think Fighter + Rogue, Fighter + Paladin + Knight, Fighter + Monk, and Barbarian + Fighter + Monk. Even the Prestige fix-it Classes don't ding the spellcasters too terribly once you've reached level 10 or so. Leiber's Gray Mouser was a Fighter / Rogue / Wizard.
 

Zelc

First Post
I'm not trying to bash you or anything. I know it's hard to carry the proper tone over the internet, and readers will often see the wrong tone. I just don't think this experience point system is a good idea.

I'd be really hesitant to mess with experience points, especially when it unsynchronizes the rate that different people level up at. This could lead to the higher-level players hogging the spotlight whether they want to or not. If you make a battle that challenges your higher-level characters, the lower-level characters won't be able to contribute. If you make a battle geared towards the lower-level characters, the higher-level characters will breeze through with ease.

It looks like you're trying to make exp rules to punish people for min-maxing, but what really happens is they reward characters who play classes that don't need to multiclass to be powerful. The experience point system does nothing to punish CoDZilla (Clerics and Druids) or straight-classed Wizards, who will greatly overshadow just about every other type of single-classed character. If those other characters try to multiclass, not only are they not as powerful on a level-to-level basis, but they'll also be behind on levels. These exp rules actually make the powerful even more powerful on a comparative basis.

Also, the rules punish people who want to play a character with abilities that don't fit the standard base classes. For instance, one of the most prominent D&D characters, Drizzt Do'Urden, is a multiclassed character. He was originally trained as a fighter in Menzoberranzan, then when he fled the city he developed a Hunter persona that's much more ruthless and lethal (rage, so Barbarian levels), and then when he left the Underdark he trained to be a Ranger. Now, I'm not talking about people playing Drizzt clones or whatnot. What I am saying is that the rules would make it difficult for players to play characters like Drizzt who evolve over time or for RP reasons need a mechanic that can only be obtained by multiclassing.

There was recently a long discussion on what classes mean over at the official boards. You can read it here. One gem that came out of it was someone's interpretation of multiclassing (actually in the precursor thread, but linked to in the other thread). He gave the example of a character who's mechanics were represented by Wizard 5/Geomancer 5/Runecaster 5/Archmage 5. However, the character doesn't think "I'm going to be a Wizard for 5 levels, then I'm going to alternate training with Geomancers and Runecasters, and finally I'll study with Archmages". Instead, he mixed the progression together to create a Scrivener class. The character is studying to be a Scrivener from level 1-20. Now, the mechanics are represented by Wizard 5/Geomancer 5/Runecaster 5/Archmage 5, but is the Scrivener class not as good as a straight Wizard, for instance, just because WotC decided to split the mechanics up into one base class and three prestige classes?

When designing a rules system, make sure you think about what the incentives are. What do your rules encourage the people to do? Here are some potential issues I found with the proposed rules. Make sure combat doesn't have to be combat, otherwise your party face will be unhappy when he diplomatically diffuses a situation only to have the rest of the party yell at him because he caused them to miss out on exp. Also, an exp penalty for having opponents escape will bind your hands when you want them to not kill your BBEG (conflicts with your recurring plot villain; if they're recurring, then they probably escaped an earlier fight). You'll end up punishing them because the story dictates it, and as a player, that's something I'd find quite unfair. The high magic bonus would either punish the entire party because one player decided to use a high level spell, put a lot of peer pressure on the casters to not use their higher level spells (the villain just cast a Dimension Door, so don't use any spells higher than level 1!), or only happen when facing opponents at least 4 or 5 levels higher than the highest caster in your party (usually results in bad things, like a TPK). Never missed is usually a matter of luck, has problems with always-hit stuff like someone said earlier, and may actually result in people attacking less to minimize their chances of missing. The basically useless penalty can make your players unhappy because certain monsters are tough for certain classes to deal with; for instance, facing a Rust Monster would probably automatically incur the penalty for any melee characters in the party. Also, a player might end the fight quickly with, say, a save-or-die, and everyone else in the party would get hit with the penalty. In certain groups, the Last Man Standing bonus might encourage a player to NOT help their party so they might have a better chance of receiving it. Yes, you might be able to punish it, but determining which are legitimate and which aren't is almost impossible and applying such a penalty in error would be really bad.

All in all, I'd say that if the exp mechanic isn't broken, don't try to fix it. With a lot of work, you can probably iron out these issues with the current proposed exp rules. If you think that's worth it, go for it, and I wish you luck :).
 
Last edited:

Kisanji Arael

First Post
Wow, this has been a while. I kind of spaced, started writing papers, and forgot that I wrote this.

Tagnik: Bookmarked and added to my notes. I'll look over this after I get done with my kanji homework.

Claudius Gaius: Oh, yes, and I forgot another key point. My players don't get to learn the specific bonuses.

And shame on you! This is house rules! I've been working on this system for two years (scrapped 80% of it about 6 months ago); who are you to tell me "a puppy is a big responsibility, you'll have to house-train it and teach it a new skill system." Seriously! :D This isn't something I'm doing for a specific game; I do this for fun!
---
Quartz: Maybe that's what I'm trying to fix.
---
Zelc: All of the issues that you discuss won't, most likely, come up in my game. A. My players are very polite and low-key; they do not number crunch. If character A hits level 8 while B & C are at 6, player A will probably make a new character at level 6 (who will then die off dramatically somewhere near level 8). The other thing I've done is put the party in situations where the level 6 rogue and barbarian are sent to one half of a mission, while the level 8 characters go the other way! ("There's no time! You two go after the ruby; We'll hold the gates") My players understand that these are subtle signs from me of which way they should go, and my responsibility is to only hedge them into the plot when I know they won't have fun if I don't. Another strategy I've used is drawing up separate dungeon schemes based on certain splits

And as a rule, I don't RP (or, at least, DM) with those who act immaturely or squabble.

Yes, I want to punish multi-classing, because the system that I'm working to create doesn't operate how you assume that it does. Had you read the first half, you'd get it. Players spend exp on HP, skills, abilities (they don't get them de facto upon leveling): the abilities that are available are based on what classes you operate within and your character level. Wizards buy their spells and their spell-slots. Rangers invest points in their animal companions and their weapon abilities. BAB does not rise with level. At this point, it looks like it will be impossible for characters to gain all of the abilities of a given level, but this just opens up more customization.

Also on this note, I bend over backwards for my players when they have a new idea for a class. Not everyone can do this. I can. At first, it was tough, because I kept having to add or take away abilities from players and justify when I did it and when I didn't do it ("He rolled well; you rolled badly; his character isn't overpowered. Remember when I made him switch d20s? It didn't change anything. Probably, your character sheet is just cursed.") Now, I just make 'em balance with each other pretty naturally: it's easy when it's all your own work.

Another note: Ah, yesssss, Drizz't- Point. Counterpoint: Classes are, in my opinion, a coagulation of abilities designed for a purpose, most often combat oriented. The flaw in the character system as it stands now is that it does not understand that certain skills deteriorate in disrepair; my mother cannot write essays as well as she could in college. I go to a school which does not have a wrestling program, and as such, I am no longer an effective wrestler. Effectively, what my additional EXP requirement gives is a maintenance cost of upkeep for keeping one's abilities. If a wizard in my system picked up ranger and never learned another wizard skill (putting all 1500 of his EXP at each level into ranger skills, abilities, hit dice, etc), but continued to use his wizardly gifts, I would expect him to pay upkeep for those skills. In response, it would be easier for him to progress than a straight ranger. Therefore, each task would give less experience. Rather than penalize a percentile, I add to the top.

And Finally: I feel that the system is broken. That is why I feel utter dissatisfaction when I play it. That is why I'm fixing it: unfortunately, as it is a concept and not a "thing," broken is a relative concept.

Anything I missed?
 

Zelc

First Post
Kisanji Arael said:
Zelc: All of the issues that you discuss won't, most likely, come up in my game.
That's fine :). If you have awesome players, then a lot of the issues with a system can be ignored. If your players are cool with this system and are great enough to work out any potential issues with you and the other players without breaking the game, then just about any system can work :).

On the other hand, I would warn other folks that this system does have some potential problems, and to use it with caution. Even if your players won't actively screw each other over, the incentives might be enough to change their actions. For instance, a character might be faced with a decision to heal a character that's about to die or try to take down that ogre who's surely low on HP. The incentives (however small and subtle) might be enough to tip him over to taking more risk with the other character's fate. *shrug*

Another note: Ah, yesssss, Drizz't- Point. Counterpoint: Classes are, in my opinion, a coagulation of abilities designed for a purpose, most often combat oriented. The flaw in the character system as it stands now is that it does not understand that certain skills deteriorate in disrepair; my mother cannot write essays as well as she could in college.
Well, think of it this way. Drizzt isn't a Fighter 5/Barbarian 1/Ranger 3/Fighter +6, he's taking 15 levels in the Drizzt class who's mechanics are best represented by the Fighter 5/Barbarian 1/Ranger 3/Fighter +6. That Scrivener isn't training to be a Wizard for 5 levels, then switching between Geomancer (that's the wrong PrC, but I forgot what the right one is called) and Runecaster training for 10 levels, then going to Archmage training for 5 levels. It's training to be a Scrivener during all 20 levels, although the first 5 might be like a generic Wizardry 101 course before he specializes.

Again, there's nothing wrong with your interpretation, especially since you're willing to work with players to create new classes, but one of the advantages of a pick-and-choose system is customization which your system seems to discourage. If you're happy with it, of course, then go with it.

And Finally: I feel that the system is broken. That is why I feel utter dissatisfaction when I play it. That is why I'm fixing it: unfortunately, as it is a concept and not a "thing," broken is a relative concept.
I might have missed it, but what do you think is wrong with the current EXP and progression system? Just out of curiosity, of course.
 

Claudius Gaius

First Post
Hm... Well, if you aren't going to reveal the rules you're using to the other people in the game, why do you need formal rules at all?

Secondarily, whether or not you reveal the rules, they'll still reward people who's play style suits the rules and penalize those who's play style does not suit the rules: its just that now no one except you will know whats going on. Either the players will eventually deduce the general structure of the rules you're using, obviating the point of not telling them, or they will eventually lose interest in figuring it out - and losing interest in any part of the game is not usually a good sign.
 

Kisanji Arael

First Post
Zelc said:
On the other hand, I would warn other folks that this system does have some potential problems, and to use it with caution. Even if your players won't actively screw each other over, the incentives might be enough to change their actions. For instance, a character might be faced with a decision to heal a character that's about to die or try to take down that ogre who's surely low on HP. The incentives (however small and subtle) might be enough to tip him over to taking more risk with the other character's fate. *shrug*

No, no. They'd let their friend die for the last man standing bonus. :D EXP isn't based on final hit.

But really, that's why characters have alignment. In that situation, I would reward proper role-playing, based on alignment.

Zelc said:
Drizz't stuff.
Now, now, your Scrivener example holds up better than this one. Drizz't learned those skills at very different points in the story, based on his circumstances at the time. But on the note of your scrivener, he accepts those exp penalties in exchange for customization options. The twentieth level scrivener you're describing gets a bunch of stuff not normally available to Wizards. Lets start with a +6 bonus to Will from 3 first level PrC bumps. In addition, the special abilities? He trades customization and specialization for EXP speed. If you look at it the right way, then the standard classes simply represent the least customized variations. Want to blow stuff up for a living? That'll cost you 2 spell schools. Want your bard to have a little more fighting prowess? That'll cost you a class level. The power, in theory, balances out. But in exchange for having the options of two classes available to you, it costs more Exp (both in my system and the SRD), because you aren't just a Wizard, you're a fighter-mage. That is the real power of PrCs, btw. People designing PrCs try to balance them with existing classes; this fails because there is no exp penalty to taking levels from those classes, or even taking levels from multiple PrCs, means that customization with PrCs is more cost effective than customization with Base Classes. In OD&D, it took much longer for a wizard to hit level 20 than anyone else. They were also absurdly powerful when they got there. You are correct about your scrivener, but tell me, why is it fair that he gets so many more options for customization without drawbacks?

Zelc said:
I might have missed it, but what do you think is wrong with the current EXP and progression system? Just out of curiosity, of course.

Sorry, my rants/day operate on a Vancian system. I'll get back to you on that one, but I need 8 hours of sleep and an hour angrily reading over my DMG & campaign notes before I get to use another one.

Plus.... beer pong. I hope you understand.
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top