BAB to Skill based?

[librarius_arcana]

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.

Thats not hard to convert, the skill levels are the same

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

Yeah but my wheels are round, radical I know but I think it will run smoother without the silly corners and everything, no need to force anything, just let it roll

 

[irdeggman]

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

Deadlands - classic.

Fate chips, combat that is skill based (based on weapon type), opposed rolls to see if damage is taken, damage thresholds, etc.

 

[librarius_arcana]

Deadlands - classic.

Fate chips, combat that is skill based (based on weapon type), opposed rolls to see if damage is taken, damage thresholds, etc.

That sounds a tad like D6 Star Wars

 

[Someone]

I don´t see the point, really. Virtually anybody, except a limited number of very specialized casters, would take as many ranks in combat skills as they can, turning the skill into a virtual BAB. You´d have the same numbers as now, only with more work.

 

[Squire James]

Try playing baseball.

Seriously. Stronger players can often get more hits because they have an edge in swinging and controling the bat over other players. Now, skill is involved as well, but strength can help make up for a lack of skill.

In game terms, a stronger character can swing a bit faster, which makes it harder to defend. They can also overcome defenses that other weaker characters can't (Some armor, shields, parrys, etc). Skill helps dictate where they strike and how they go about it, but strength does play an important factor.

Besides, adding Str to attack and damage makes the game simpler. There are some complex things in the game to change that rule (weapon finesse, etc.), but the crux of the matter is that stronger people make better pre-gunpowder warriors. It just needs to be emphasized that a "hit" in a D&D game translates to "a hit that does damage" rather than "you touched the enemy with your weapon". That being said, the 3e rules have mucked this basic rule up a bit with added game complexity, and I guess whether or not this is an improvement is a matter of debate.

 

[irdeggman]

That sounds a tad like D6 Star Wars

Except for the damage threshold and the fact that there are different die sizes (d4 through d20s) that can be rolled.

Most dice pool systems (e.g., Westend Star Wars, Deadlands - Classic, Shadowrun, etc.) work on a very similar concept. It is, IMO, that concept that you are attempting to reproduce - knowingly or not.

 

[librarius_arcana]

Except for the damage threshold and the fact that there are different die sizes (d4 through d20s) that can be rolled.

Most dice pool systems (e.g., Westend Star Wars, Deadlands - Classic, Shadowrun, etc.) work on a very similar concept. It is, IMO, that concept that you are attempting to reproduce - knowingly or not.

Well no it's not based on anybodys game at all, and is an idea I had for another game system I just recycled, and there are other games that come closer to my idea on this

 

[librarius_arcana]

I don´t see the point, really. Virtually anybody, except a limited number of very specialized casters, would take as many ranks in combat skills as they can, turning the skill into a virtual BAB. You´d have the same numbers as now, only with more work.

Yep true, and can if they want (but you seem to have forgotten the cost for these skills)

And yes it would/could work like BAB (really kinda hard not to, attacking and all) but in a more realisitic, and narrower way, so it balances out in the bigger picture, this way you get to have the character skills you want, (at least to a degree) the cost would stem the abuse of this sub system

 

[irdeggman]

Yep true, and can if they want (but you seem to have forgotten the cost for these skills)

This point seems to be the crux of the arguement as to why this is balanced.

Now, using the skill cost table you posted earlier:

Does this apply to all skills or only to combat skills?

How do cross class skills work in this system?

Are combat skill class skills for certain classes or are they class skill for everyone?

If they are class skills for some - what is the difference in cost? 1/2 the cost or -1?

In 3.x you cannot store skill points, they must be spent when leveling up. How will this be handled? A character gets a set amount of skill points when he levels up (fighters get 2 + Int bonus) so when leveling up a fighter would be incapable of purchasing higher ranks in combat skills due to not having sufficient skill points.


Using skill based system only reinforces the point most are making that heavily skill based class will be better at this system regardless of how it is used.

By using an increased skill cost per rank system only serves to emphasis the bonus that high skilled classes get.

Also the fact that humans get more skill points will also make them bettter at combat than races like dwarves and half-orcs (races which have historically been better at combat than other races).

To make things clearer to us it would be benficial if you "created" some templates here to show how this lays out, because I think that we are "missing" something.

Suggestions:

1st level:

Human fighter
Human rogue
Dwarf fighter

Then progress them to 5th level (allows for a single ability score increase and chracter level feat).

I also think somewhere it would be useful for you to lay out what you think a "class" is or more specifically what things are "common" enough to make one class different than another. IIRC you had mentioned having issues with the fact that classes are too pigeon-holed (my paraphrasing). I think by defining the "concept" of a "class" you have in mind it will help us to understand "what" is attempting to be done.

 

[librarius_arcana]

You know if you made your post shorter it would be quicker to reply
so I'll cover the basics

This point seems to be the crux of the arguement as to why this is balanced.

Now, using the skill cost table you posted earlier:

Does this apply to all skills or only to combat skills?

How do cross class skills work in this system?

Are combat skill class skills for certain classes or are they class skill for everyone?

If they are class skills for some - what is the difference in cost? 1/2 the cost or -1?

This applys to all skills,

The cost above 0 is the same, but if you don't have a skill as a class skill you first have to pay off the penalty in that skill (example non class skill in spellcraft is -10, any thing you try to do with this skill works at -10 to your roll, if you want to buy points in this skill you have first got to work of the penalty (-10 in this case) at a one to one cost, ie only 10 skill points) then you can start buy this skill above zero,

Combat skill as all skills are open to everyone, (but you would still have a penalty if not related to class)

In 3.x you cannot store skill points, they must be spent when leveling up. How will this be handled? A character gets a set amount of skill points when he levels up (fighters get 2 + Int bonus) so when leveling up a fighter would be incapable of purchasing higher ranks in combat skills due to not having sufficient skill points.

Can in this

Using skill based system only reinforces the point most are making that heavily skill based class will be better at this system regardless of how it is used.

By using an increased skill cost per rank system only serves to emphasis the bonus that high skilled classes get.

Also the fact that humans get more skill points will also make them bettter at combat than races like dwarves and half-orcs (races which have historically been better at combat than other races).

Not so, remember as part of class is also HD, Saves, feats and abilities, so outside of skill the class's are still very different, if you want a Wis whos good with a sword, fine, but he will not be as good at his job compaired to another Wis who spent it on his class related skills, being very high in one skill will lead to weakness's in the rest of his character skills,

and you have the wrong idea about who many skill points each character would have,
it would need to be redone in line with the rest of this system (every class has to reabsorb their BAB in to skill points just to start with)

then balanced against their other class abilities (HD, Saves, feats etc)

thats the number crunching I have not finished (but is doable just because it is balancing numbers)

To make things clearer to us it would be benficial if you "created" some templates here to show how this lays out, because I think that we are "missing" something.

Suggestions:

1st level:

Human fighter
Human rogue
Dwarf fighter

Then progress them to 5th level (allows for a single ability score increase and chracter level feat).

What!?, I wish I had that sort of free time lol

I also think somewhere it would be useful for you to lay out what you think a "class" is or more specifically what things are "common" enough to make one class different than another. IIRC you had mentioned having issues with the fact that classes are too pigeon-holed (my paraphrasing). I think by defining the "concept" of a "class" you have in mind it will help us to understand "what" is attempting to be done.

Okay class work pretty much the same as always, etc,
(aka an occupation/job, but not a forced character stereo type)

you keep forgetting everything else outside of skills, that class's are made from

The game is the same, just BAB is now covered by skills,
and the skill system is more developed (with in built balance) to support this