Currencies: A different kind of rules light

[Ry]

This occurred to me quite a while ago, but I think it's something worth sharing. Obviously this will only be considered worthwhile to those interested in moving to something a bit more rules-light, but not at the cost of character description & customization. Also be advised that this is a game theory piece; it's an arrow towards what a rules-lighter d20 system would be, not the whole system itself.

OK, disclaimers done. Onto the idea:

A currency is a specific type of rules information that provides some kind of benefit (or combination of benefits and penalties) to a character. In D&D, currencies include Attributes, Racial Benefits, Level-dependent Abilities, Save progressions, Base Attack Bonus progressions, Hit Dice size, Feats, Spell Slots, Spells Known, Magic Items, Skill Points, Class Skills, and a few I'm sure I missed.

The point is, when two items in the same currency have the same cost and are perceived to have the same value, then the items are considered balanced (relative to each other). When they have different values, then they are considered unbalanced. For example, two feats with no prerequisites have the same cost, and if they are comparable to each other in power level, then we call them balanced feats. If one of them had a prerequisite that took 5 levels to attain, then they would be considered unbalanced.

When a benefit in one currency (say a feat) interacts with elements in another currency (say a spell), it becomes more difficult to tell what is balanced and what is not. Rules become a headache, however, when the same item (say a level in a prestige class) gives values in multiple currencies at once.

The classic example of this is when the DM doesn't know when to say "no", and allows feats, prestige classes, and spells from many, many sources into his game. The rules workload starts to get out of hand (and balance breaks down) because the combinations involved - even when the individual feats, prestige classes, and spells smoothly interacted with each other, and were balanced in their own context.

So, we clearly know how to make the rules burden heavier. But what if we are trying to make it lighter?

My approach (or at least the very, very first part):

Reduce the number of currencies and the interactions between them. When I look at the available options, the first thing I look for is a good "base currency" - something that other rules might be reducible to. For me, the answer is Feats. Then I look for other things that could be reduced to Feats.

Now I look for things that I don't think can be reduced to the base currency - things that are elemental in defining characters, but which Feats don't cover - and here, I'll float Attributes and Level as candidates.

So what else in the system can boil down to Feats, Attributes, and Level? Quite a lot, actually, but I'll leave it till next time and see if there's any interest in seeing me continue.

 

[greywulf]

Good question!

I don't think that it's really possible to come up with a general answer as to where the equivalencies are in your currency model simply because every GM, player, campaign and even adventure will place a different emphasis on different parts of the whole D&D mechanic.

As as GM, I might value a certain PrC or feat tree higher than a player, because there's more NPC mileage out of it. Similarly, a player who is magic focused will value metamagic feats above Great Cleave.

That's good, and supports your hypothesis because a "monetary" value can only be put on things that people value. So your currency model holds, and the laws of supply (the rule books) and demand ("We Want More Feats!") is in action. Some people want different things, at different times.

Creating a rules-light system involves taking out the stuff that is:

a) unecessary for 99% of all situations
b) only exists are a meta-game concept

In creating Microlite20 I took the barest possible bones approach slicing out whole chunks - nay, Chapters - of the rules with the goal of producing the lightest possible system that could still be identifiably d20 in origin. I removed feats, pared down the races, classes, magic and skill system and greatly simplified combat and level advancement. I don't expect it will suit everyone, and I'm sure other folks would create something very different from the same goals, but it worked for our group.

What's left - as you suggest - is Race, Class and Level. There's three stats and four skills; each skill can interact with the stat bonuses to produce very different skill "effects". That gives enough uniqueness to each character without bloating the system.

In your currency model, I "devalued" the whole system by taking out the high-cost, high-maintenence elements, leaving only the lowest common denominator. What I'm trying to say is that sometimes people just want something that's small, light and "cheap"

 

[Ry]

I'm not trying to find the equivalences - that's probably impossible - I just want to show:

1) That the concept of currencies helps explain rules light vs. rules heavy
2) That more currencies = harder system to adjudicate
3) Suggest that fewer currencies = easier system to adjudicate
4) Sketch a way to spin few currencies into a full-blooded system that's still easy to run.

I decided to go Attributes, Level, and Feats, because I'm pretty confident I can get everything else with those 3 building blocks. I think my end result won't be as rules-light as a system based on Races, Classes, and Level, but it will be substantially more rules-light than D&D and still give lots of room for character customization and tweaking.