Weird character advancement idea

[Andvari]

I don't know if this is a good idea or not, but it's an idea, and I'd like to know what you think.

Imagine a d20-based RPG where the numbers you add to the d20 roll generally do not improve as you gain levels, and this goes for monsters as well. There's no proficiency bonus or base attack bonus that increases with level. You still gain new abilities, spells, with levels.

The system has something similar to advantage and disadvantage, but you can gain more than 1 die, depending on circumstances.

When you attack a creature lower level than you, you gain an advantage die. When you attack a creature higher level than you, you gain a disadvantage die. Something similar happens with saves and perhaps skill checks.
If the level difference is large enough, an additional advantage or disadvantage die is gained.

Possible positives and negatives of such a system:

• Easier to manage character sheet and progression.
• DCs don't have to "artificially" increase as PCs gain levels.
• Players can tell whether a creature they attack or are attacked by is higher or lower level based on extra dice awarded by the GM.
• Might feel like there's little progression from looking a the character sheet.
• Less granular difference between creatures depending on level difference.
• GM must award adv/disadv more frequently. Might slow down the game a little.

 

[aco175]

Initial thought is that it lacks the, "Wow, I just gained a level and are better at fighting." feel since you just gained +1 from strength going up and +1 from proficiency going up as well. My 10th level fighter is the same combat-wise as my 1st level fighter. I guess if the advantage dice now kicks in and he has 3 dice to 1 to hit, maybe it works out the same. I gather people figure advantage works out to +5 to hit. I'm not sure on double advantage, but can see it being +8ish.

It might be a big swing to feel overpowering to get the +5 (advantage) to hit smaller people, but then -5 (disadvantage) to hit bigger or higher level people.

 

[Hand of Evil]

I remember a game played in, GM had a house rule where and Critical Success would improve your skill.

 

[CubicsRube]

I had a draft of a game where instead of a proficiency bonus you increase the number of d20s you roll (from 0 at disadvantage to 5 at 5d20) and you take the best result.

It still provides progression as it skews the numbers much more towards the higher end and improves consistency, but keps the numbers in the same range.

 

[Tonguez]

I’d be happier with it if there was no HP either but would be cool otherwise if it was just gaining abilities and advantage/disadvantage used narratively.
I do like the proficiency bonus though…

 

[GMMichael]

I don't know if this is a good idea or not, but it's an idea, and I'd like to know what you think.

With pleasure!

Imagine a d20-based RPG where the numbers you add to the d20 roll generally do not improve as you gain levels,

So far so good...

and this goes for monsters as well. There's no proficiency bonus or base attack bonus that increases with level. You still gain more HP and new abilities, spells, deal more damage etc., with levels.

I kinda thought that hit points bloat was one of the issues that needed addressing, but anyway...

The system has something similar to advantage and disadvantage, but you can gain more than 1 die, depending on circumstances.

Sure, but the point of Adv/Dis is to speed up play by keeping things simple. Adding additional dice undermines that.

When you attack a creature lower level than you, you gain an advantage die. When you attack a creature higher level than you, you gain a disadvantage die. Something similar happens with saves and perhaps skill checks.

This ties combat prowess to levels, which doesn't follow consistently for all character types (e.g. wizards).

I

• DCs don't have to "artificially" increase as PCs gain levels.

Given the DM 's difficulty suggestions table, DCs shouldn't be artificially doing anything.

• Players can tell whether a creature they attack or are attacked by is higher or lower level based on extra dice awarded by the GM.

This is too meta for me. Noticing that an opponent has a certain level of combat skill is one thing. Noticing the opponent's character level is something else.

• GM must award adv/disadv more frequently. Might slow down the game a little.

Agreed, but I think your idea has promise

 

[Tony Vargas]

That's not that different from the original idea of Bounded Accuracy. Ultimately they went with a little scaling on the d20 - +2 to +6, doubled with expertise - do you could feel like you were advancing a bit...

Hit points 1HD + CONmod to 20HD+20xCONmod, extra attack 0-3, and spells Unseen Servant to Wish, scale a bit more dramatically.

IDT there's anything major wrong with the idea. I've played other games that have no advancement, or very odd advancement, and just, everything does not have to follow the D&D leveling paradigm.

 

[Andvari]

Whether HP increase or not is not really the point of this method of progression. I suppose it was my fault for mentioning it in my post. I removed HP from the examples of other advancement.

 

[W'rkncacnter]

Initial thought is that it lacks the, "Wow, I just gained a level and are better at fighting." feel since you just gained +1 from strength going up and +1 from proficiency going up as well. My 10th level fighter is the same combat-wise as my 1st level fighter. I guess if the advantage dice now kicks in and he has 3 dice to 1 to hit, maybe it works out the same. I gather people figure advantage works out to +5 to hit. I'm not sure on double advantage, but can see it being +8ish.

advantage/disadvantage is actually about +/- 3.3. i checked in anydice and 3 dice comes out to about +/- 4.99.

 

[Andvari]

advantage/disadvantage is actually about +/- 3.3. i checked in anydice and 3 dice comes out to about +/- 4.99.

I wrote a program that simulates rolling multiple dice and calculating the average. It gives the following results.

10.50 with 1 die
13.82 with 2 dice
15.48 with 3 dice
16.48 with 4 dice
17.15 with 5 dice

Each scenario has 1 million "rolls", so a total of 1 million dice are rolled in the first scenario and 5 million in the last. Running the same scenario can result in minor deviations as it's random, but with 1 million rolls they are always quite close.