BAB to Skill based?

[librarius_arcana]

So in essence you wish to restore the concept of 2nd ed weapon proficiencies, am I reading that correctly?

I beleive that is where you will end up at. Each class getting a certain amount of points to spend on weapon skills, with the high BAB ones gettting more than the low BAB ones.

The other thing to incorporate though is the starting "proficiencies" (a.ka. weapon group feats).

Not sure because I've never read 2nd ed (only basic 1sted, 3.0, 3.5)
so can't say, but like I keep saying only skill based, and it really falls to the player where he wish's to spend his/her skill points, (but class skills start without a penalty, at zero)

 

[irdeggman]

In 2nd ed they had weapon proficiencies and non-weapon proficiencies.

As characters gained levels each class got so many weapon and so many non-weapon proficiencies to use.

Fighters got a lot of weapon proficiencies and not so many non-weapon ones.

Fighters could also use their non-weapon proficiencies for weapon proficiences (IIRC).

Does this make any sense?

The connection between what you are attempting to do and this is that in order to keep things in strict line with 3.5 (to much deviation will absolutely mess up the entire game mechancs) is that you need to have separate pools of points for each. If you don't then classes, like rogues with a lot of skill points will quickly dwarf classses like fighters who have much fewer.

 

[librarius_arcana]

In 2nd ed they had weapon proficiencies and non-weapon proficiencies.

As characters gained levels each class got so many weapon and so many non-weapon proficiencies to use.

Fighters got a lot of weapon proficiencies and not so many non-weapon ones.

Fighters could also use their non-weapon proficiencies for weapon proficiences (IIRC).

Does this make any sense?

The connection between what you are attempting to do and this is that in order to keep things in strict line with 3.5 (to much deviation will absolutely mess up the entire game mechancs) is that you need to have separate pools of points for each. If you don't then classes, like rogues with a lot of skill points will quickly dwarf classses like fighters who have much fewer.

That sounds like it's almost "feat" based (or proto feat)

Down that path lays madness,

I did consider at one time having two pools of skill points, one physical and one mental, to mantain the split in skill types, but after awhile thought against it, I would rather let the players choose themselves instead of forcing them, within this skill sub system it would be costly to be at a high level in any skill, if they feel like they want to commit to such a cost then let them have it (like I said it costs), I think the cost structure will really keep it in check, without putting false limits on the players

 

[irdeggman]

That sounds like it's almost "feat" based (or proto feat)

Down that path lays madness,

I did consider at one time having two pools of skill points, one physical and one mental, to mantain the split in skill types, but after awhile thought against it, I would rather let the players choose themselves instead of forcing them, within this skill sub system it would be costly to be at a high level in any skill, if they feel like they want to commit to such a cost then let them have it (like I said it costs), I think the cost structure will really keep it in check, without putting false limits on the players

Be real careful then.

Rogues get 8 sp per level base and fighters get 2. That is a lot to make up for without making the fighter class a skill monkey one or the rogue a weapon master one. The formula necessary to prevent this from happening seems out of my comprehension.

There are some "generic" classes in Unearthed Arcana which might also give some concept to this, insetad of using standard classes let them be built that way.

 

[librarius_arcana]

Be real careful then.

Rogues get 8 sp per level base and fighters get 2. That is a lot to make up for without making the fighter class a skill monkey one or the rogue a weapon master one. The formula necessary to prevent this from happening seems out of my comprehension.

There are some "generic" classes in Unearthed Arcana which might also give some concept to this, insetad of using standard classes let them be built that way.

I don't even need to be that careful, but a ballpark figure of a skill point value per level would be useful, due to the cost of the skills it allows a certain degree of a buffer (skill level 20 cost 210 points after all, and thats for just the one skill, for almost the same amount of points you could almost get four skills at level 10 (55 each), so you see you really need to be commited to a skill to think it would be worth that much, and thats why this system could support the idea of an on going skill points per session, you would need to save them to have any really chance of going up in a skill level , (1 to 2 points per session)

(I already know about the three class's Unearthed Arcana )

 

[irdeggman]

I don't even need to be that careful, but a ballpark figure of a skill point value per level would be useful, due to the cost of the skills it allows a certain degree of a buffer (skill level 20 cost 210 points after all, and thats for just the one skill, for almost the same amount of points you could almost get four skills at level 10 (55 each), so you see you really need to be commited to a skill to think it would be worth that much, and thats why this system could support the idea of an on going skill points per session, you would need to save them to have any really chance of going up in a skill level , (1 to 2 points per session)

(I already know about the three class's Unearthed Arcana )

Let's see if I can recap this some.

Skill level vs total cost is being changed from the core rules to a new system that increases the cost as skills go up in ranks.

Armor is going to us a type of DR.

Use the related weapon skill as a defense roll.

Str + Dex combine for melee attacks

Dex and Wis (or Int) combine for ranged attacks

Use "areas" and specialty skills to represent all skills and weapon




If I have this roughly captured.

Other things to watch for/change:

Skill focus. I’m fairly certain you don’t want people grabbing a +3 to hit with a weapon.

Weapon Focus: The benefits of this feat become drastically reduced if a single rank in a skill is its equal.

AC: AC will be drastically reduced in benefit since skills can increase much more quickly.

Max Ranks: If you follow the skill rules then a player can have his level +3 ranks in a class skill. This will outpace the current BAB system very quickly and have an adverse effect on the benefits of armor.

Non-proficiency penalty: The –4 will probably not be sufficient.

Weapon Finesse. This feat may not be as useful anymore or it may be more useful, I’m not sure. But either way its integration will require some consideration.

Spells: Many spells give bonuses to attack rolls. The balance between the effects of magic and skills probably will need some tweaking.

Class benefits: Smite evil, Inspire courage, are just a couple that may need some work also.


One thing that is still not adressed is how to prevent rogues (the core skill monkey class) from becoming better than a fighter (the ultimate combat class) at combat.

If you determine a conversion ratio for BAB that preserves the superiority of a fighter than what what would prevent a fighter from becoming a better skill monkey than a rogue.


I can't see how this system can work and still maintain the basic class structure of D&D.

It can work in a truely generic game where there are no real classes and everything is based on skills and feats. But not with the class system of D&D.

Looking over all the gaming systems I've played in I would say the either Deadlands (original version) or Shadowrun will best capture what you are looking for.

 

[irdeggman]

I don't like class's as they are out the box, it's alot like playing a chess piece, (your class does x,) and is limited in such a unrealistic way, I want players to get realistic rounded characters, the way they imagined them, supported by the system not hindered by it,

I have to ask the question since earlier you had implied that you had only recently gotten into 3.0/3.5 D&D, how long have you played the system of 3.x D&D?

It really is an important question and not meant to be sarcastic at all.

I ask because the entire design concept of 3.x was to eliminate the cookie-cutter molds of previous editions of D&D by allowing a lot more flexability.

While wizards still cast spells the choice of feats they take give them individuality.

While fighters are still at the core combatants, their choice of feats (and the number of bonus feats the class gets) makes them all individual. A character can be primarily an archer or a swordman, a charcter who focuses primarily on weilding a great axe or using 2 short swords. They can't be the best at everything but they can be the best at one thing.

Same is true of the other "classes".

The new player-friendly mutliclassing rules helps provide a means to make a character even more of an individual.

 

[papastebu]

Each weapon or group of weapons can be purchased, just like standard skills.
The maximum advance for these skills is the same as standard skills, with level plus three for class skills, and (level plus one?) for cross-class skills.
Each class has a set number of weapon skill points, as well as the regular skill points for the class, with the fighter variants getting the rogue's standard progression--still intelligence-based--for weapon skill points, the mage variants getting the fighter's standard progression, and the rogue and cleric variant falling somewhere in the middle
Any fighter or fighter variant is going to get all weapon skills as class skills, as well.
Any rogue variant gets the weapons listed as rogue weapons as class skills, and any other simple weapons as cross-class.
Any cleric variant runs the same way as the rogue, highlighting a deity's preferred weapon, possibly allowing specialization.
Druids gain class-skill access to the listed druid weapons, and all other simple weapons are cross-class skills.
Monks run the same as druids.
Mage variants get their respective lists as class skills, and all other simples as cross-class.
If the class has no access to martial weapons, these must be purchased with a feat.
If the class has no access to exotic weapons, these must be purchased with a feat.
Weapon focus still works the same, as does skill focus, but it is up to the DM to allow skill focus to affect weapon skills, when weapon focus is for weapons only. The two would stack.
Fighters can still specialize, but can do so for each specific weapon they like, the feat does the same thing it always has.
At the DM's option, other classes may specialize, but only for one weapon.
Defense becomes an active thing, rather than a passive one, with two skills, parry and dodge, being the possibilities for use.
Parry is based on a character's skill with the weapon used to do so, but uses Dexterity rather than Strength, plus skill ranks. It can be used untrained, but whatever the penalty for using an unfamiliar weapon is applies to the roll. Parry counts as an attack action, and can only be used if the character has more than one attack--determined by the skill-ranks for the weapon used, a la BAB iterative attacks--or if the character has superior initiative.
Dodge as a feat works the same way it always has, but adds to the Dexterity-based dodge skill check, rather than armor class.
Armor worn has a straight soak bonus as well as a deflection bonus, and weight of armor applies a penalty--minus one, minus two, etc,--to dodge and parry checks. Skill ranks can be purchased in a given armor type to offset these penalties, but do not enhance armor class.

 

[ValhallaGH]

First, don't forget about the humble grapple. It is as much a weapon as a greatsword, though a very clunky and unreliable one.

Second, one area you probably haven't even considered yet, but that will cause you headaches down the road.

Monsters.

Monsters are built using the current d20 system. So the 210 points to max out PC's Hide is opposed by the 23 points used to max out the monster's Spot check, for a total of 20 + Dex versus 23 + Wis. And this isn't even considering their combat abilities.
...
I see many days of rewriting monster entries in your future, after the many days of working out your brand new skill system.

Once again, Good Luck! Reinventing wheels is difficult work, I hope your attempt goes smoothly.

P.S. I can't believe I forgot to mention the original Dead Lands system when pointing to systems that already do what you're trying to do. It's a better match than WoD. Silly brain

 

[librarius_arcana]

Let's see if I can recap this some.

Skill level vs total cost is being changed from the core rules to a new system that increases the cost as skills go up in ranks.

Armor is going to us a type of DR.

Yes,

Yes,

Use the related weapon skill as a defense roll.

No, not really instead of it being a flat 10 to hit, going to use active defence (1d20) as used in BESM d20, you roll every time you get attacked, I like the idea because it gives the player some degree of "hands on" defence (almost like a save) instead of just standing there hoping the attackers are not going to hit a passive number AC

you use it for all types of melee/ranged attack, adding your skill would only reflect parrying, (which needless to say can't be use with every monster you're going to bump in to)

Str + Dex combine for melee attacks

Dex and Wis (or Int) combine for ranged attacks

Use "areas" and specialty skills to represent all skills and weapon

yes

yes

& yes

If I have this roughly captured.

Other things to watch for/change:

Skill focus. I’m fairly certain you don’t want people grabbing a +3 to hit with a weapon.

That could be okay, (the Str/Dex average will tend to lower scores alittle any way)

Weapon Focus: The benefits of this feat become drastically reduced if a single rank in a skill is its equal.

Weapon Focus would just add to the area (either Armed combat, Unarmed combat, Marksmanship, etc)

AC: AC will be drastically reduced in benefit since skills can increase much more quickly.

Hence higher defence

Max Ranks: If you follow the skill rules then a player can have his level +3 ranks in a class skill. This will outpace the current BAB system very quickly and have an adverse effect on the benefits of armor.

no, not really, it will tend to be capped by cost, but if a character could do it and wished it I would allow it, due to the character being far weaker across the board (which they would be if they focused to that degree,) instead of forcing some sort of glass ceiling limit on them

Non-proficiency penalty: The –4 will probably not be sufficient.

It's not, diffrent skill penalties vaire, (Spellcraft would be - 10 etc)

Weapon Finesse. This feat may not be as useful anymore or it may be more useful, I’m not sure. But either way its integration will require some consideration.

For only light weapons that don't need Str to use effectively, I would allow it,

Spells: Many spells give bonuses to attack rolls. The balance between the effects of magic and skills probably will need some tweaking.

Class benefits: Smite evil, Inspire courage, are just a couple that may need some work also.

True

One thing that is still not adressed is how to prevent rogues (the core skill monkey class) from becoming better than a fighter (the ultimate combat class) at combat.

If you determine a conversion ratio for BAB that preserves the superiority of a fighter than what what would prevent a fighter from becoming a better skill monkey than a rogue.

Well outside of being limited by feats and abilities not alot, but that was the idea, if a rouge wants a combat monkey he should have picked a fighter with better HD and feats etc,
instead of doing it the hard way though,

I can't see how this system can work and still maintain the basic class structure of D&D.

The class's would be less limiting and allow players to have a character closer to what they imagined rather than a stereo type every one has, (but remember everything costs, are you sure you want to spend those points there?)

It can work in a truely generic game where there are no real classes and everything is based on skills and feats. But not with the class system of D&D.

ye have little faith

Looking over all the gaming systems I've played in I would say the either Deadlands (original version) or Shadowrun will best capture what you are looking for.

Not seen Deadlands in any form, which version do you mean?