An odd idea...

[Tsyr]

Well, first, I'd move ranger to the list of classes that have bab as a class skill... check their BAB progression, they improve as a fighter.

Of course, even given that, I personaly wouldn't use it... I like it how it is. If I wanted to play something like that, I'd play shadowrun or something. Something more based on raw skills is fine, I do like several games that work more that way... I just happen to like the way DnD does it too.

I've always saw these sort of posts as sort of "fixing what isn't broke". I mean, I have no problem with different rules, but when I see posts about "How to get the classes out of DnD", "How to get the levels out of DnD", and so forth.. Well, I wonder why these people are playing DnD and not GURPS or something similar.

Mind you, I realise your idea is a lot less drastic... It's more akin to, I suppose, weapon specialization in 2E, maybe.

Of course you could say the same about me using an alt ranger, but at least then I'm not actualy changing rules, just adding a new class (since the old ranger is still open, just renamed)... or the fact that I use Sov Stone magic system... So maybe I shouldn't talk

One other thing... I think you should work out a way to acknowledge a third rank of combat... Right now you only have "those that are good at combat" and "those that are bad at combat"... But you really should have a way to do classes that are so-so at combat (Like monks and rogues), instead of just lumping them in the "bad at combat" group.

I also sort of wonder how balaned this might be in the long run... I mean, what if you factored in skill focus? What would happen if a wizard dedicated all his skill points into fighting? I guess you could have upper limits (One group can only improve 1 per level, one group only 1 per 2 levels, one group only....) but then, what's the point of the skill system in the first place then? I guess that's my biggest problem. I could see that this could work, with enough effort, but I think in the end you would have jumped through a lot of hoops to, in the end, change very little.

Also, are you planning to take strength out of the picture? It sounded sorta like that at one point. That's a bad idea, IMO... It only makes sense for a guy with an 18 strength to be able to do more damage hitting you with a Big Stick(TM) than a punny guy who can barely swing it.

 

[Reynard]

Interesting idea. I have considered this in the past, and what i came up with as a balancing factor is the following:

a) All classes get the same number of skill points per level, prbably 6. A Feat can add 1 per level.

b) Break down weapons skills into approximately 4 groups - Swords, Axes/Maces/Clubs, Poles/Staves/Spears, Bows/X-Bows, like that.

c) High BAB classes get all the skills as clas skills, and down the line, so that Wizards and Sorcerors have no weapon class skills. In order to fight, they need to buy them cross class.

What this does (in theory - I have not tested it) is maintain the ability of Fighters, etc... to use all weapons (by spending their extra skill points on weapon skills), while at the same time limiting the combat efectiveness of those classes that are in the medium to weak range. However, I am not sure how to deal with the newfound skill points for Wizards and Sorcerors, though many have argued that those classes need more skill points as it is.

Also, maybe Unarmed could be an exclusive skill to monks?

 

[Duncan Haldane]

Several things would more than likely need to happen. First, since BAB is no longer an automatic thing, then more skill points would need to be given to each class. Also, this would need to be made into something of a special skill, like SPEAK LANGUAGE -- meaning that the cost was class dependent, and a maximum of 1 rank is able to be gained at each level.
*snip*

Although, doing it this way, makes one wonder why Saves, for example, would not be handled the same way... eventually, the whole class structure would need to eb scrapped and replaced with a single 'classless' class to build your character from.

I'm confused - first you say that each type of skill would have different costs dependant on class, and then suggest the system would become classless - that seems counter-intuitive to me

 

[Duncan Haldane]

this seems oddly familiar

If you build a system with more skills points, and where players purchase skills in combat, and different classes have different costs for each skill...

We could call it "Rolemaster"!

 

[Piratecat]

This is shifting into House Rules, so I'll slide it over there.

 

[Jack Haggerty]

Several months I thought about a similar system...

Instead of BAB, you'd have skills that looked like:

Unarmed Attack
Melee Attack (swords)
Melee Attack (axes)
Melee Attack (clubs)
Ranged Attack (bows)
Ranged Attack (thrown weapons)

And so on...

Melee Attacks would be Str-based skills, and Ranged would be Dex-based. Which ones were class-skills or cross-class skills would depend on class. Weapon Focus would revert to Skill Focus for the appropriate attack skill.

I also thought about a Dodge skill, and a Parry skill to use as opposed skill checks against the Attack rolls.

And I also thought about turning the Saving throws into skills.

The idea was that now you could become very good at a single weapon to the exclusion of all others, or become competent in many weapons.

Skill points, epecially for fighter-types, would necessarily have to be increased.

I never really got past the "thinking about it" stage, though.

 

[UnDfind]

Man

That's asking for trouble. Important things should NEVER be skill based without high DCs. The D20 system allows the skill bonuses to get too high to rely on skills for attacking foes (unless AC was also increased by a skill).

If you need proof check it out for 7th level fighter:

Skill Focus: Hit Baddies In Da' Head=+3

Str 18=+4

4 SP at first level, and one each additional level=10

Weapon Focus: Head Hitta=1(medium)

Weapon Focus Li'l Head Hitta=1(Small)

= A plus 17 to hit at 7th level...split that's 18/13/8/3

Now add in ambidexterity and 2 weapon fighting, what what do you get?

+16/+16/+11/+6/+1

That's at 7th level! Even if you worked out a different system for multiple attacks you'd still be able to hit nearly anything as long as you didn't roll a 1. You'd have to work some wierd chart thingy about how much BAB increases per skill bonus, and it would end up as the same thing.

But of course if you're looking for power, go for it, but I'd reccomend making some sort of Dodge skill for AC mods, but all you'd really be doing is working with bigger numbers in the same system.

It's not a bad idea, just one that would require an entirely different system to work. If you come up with a way to work it, tell me and I'll use it. I've always liked skill-based weapon stuff better than class-based.

 

[Jack Haggerty]

UnDfind, Perhaps you missed the bit of my post where I mentioned a Dodge skill and a Parry skill?

This would essentially make combat an opposed roll... Melee Attack (swords) vs. Parry, or Ranged Attack (bows) vs. Dodge, for example.

And Skill Focus (Melee Attack (weapon)) would replace Weapon Focus for the same, not stack with it.

So, at first level, you could have a human fighter with Skill Focus (Melee Attack (swords)) and Skill Focus (Dodge) and one other "fighter" feat. Let's say he has a Str of 16 and a Dex of 14, and he's maxed those two skills out. That would give him Melee Attack (swords) +9 and Dodge +8.

For a wizard, these might be cross-class skills, and so a 1st level wizard with a strength of 12 and a dex of 14 might have Melee Attack (swords) +3 and Dodge +4.

So, if the fighter attacks the wizard, its 1d20+9 vs. 1d20+4, and if the wizard attacks the fighter it would be 1d20+3 vs. 1d20+8. That seems pretty reasonable. On average the wizard would hit the fighter 30% of the time, and the fighter would hit the wizard 75% of the time.

The other tricky part is that you'd have to find another mechanic for Armor (using DR, for instance).

 

[WaterRabbit]

Three suggestions

1) With this system, fighting classes have a -3 non-proficiency bonus and non-fighting clases have a -4 non-proficiency bonus. When you buy Weapon Skill it off-sets this. That way, at 1st level, a fighter that has spent 4 skill points on a Weapon Skill will have a BAB +1 and a non-fighter that has spent 4 skill points will have a BAB +1.

2) Like the classless d20 system, your BAB in a weapon cannot go past +5 unless you take the Skill Focus (Weapon Skill) feat. Your BAB cannot go past +10 unless you take the Weapon Specialization (Weapon Skill) feat. Your BAB cannot go past +15 unless you take the Grand Specialization (Weapon Skill) feat (or whatever you want to call it).

3) For spellcasters, they would have a Skill (Ray, Ball, Touch) for spells and could by skill with it as well, with the restrictions from 2 above.

 

[UnDfind]

You're right!

I did miss that part! ::Bows head in shame::

I STAB MY EYES!

As for armor, the DR thing sounds good, bacause it wouldn't make sense to give a skill called "dodge" or something a bonus because of armor.

All in all, it would require a whole lot of messing with stuff, with all the tweaking of rules and classes. But if you ever do it, post a copy.

Okee...I'm done!