D&D General D&D 6e ala Steampunkette: Structural thoughts

Steampunkette

A5e 3rd Party Publisher!
Supporter
So I've talked a few times about what I'd want in a 6e game. Often enough that at 3am this morning I was plagued with thoughts of game design and couldn't sleep. So here's some of the stuff I'm looking at. Putting them in quotes to be easier to isolate and parse.

1) 10th Level Classes

I feel like 13th Age had a good idea, there. Especially since practically everything we hear about leveling up in D&D is that something like 70% of campaigns die out around 12-13th level. There's also fewer spell slots to consider, less resources in general, which can make encounter design faster and easier. It also keeps low-level threats relevant longer. So, tighten up the class design to get rid of the 'extraneous' levels... with a Catch:

You can still progress past 10th. It's just a lot more "Daggerheart". You get your choice of Proficiency bonus increases, extra HP, more Spell Slots or Maneuvers, etc.

As a side-benefit of containing the HP of PCs to 10 levels, NPC HP and Damage explosion can be reigned in quite a lot, too. With player health values closer to the 60-100 range you don't need enemies making 3-4 attacks that deal 25 damage, on average, to make them scary.

2) Make Magic Users More Magical and Less Casty
Okay this one sounds weird. But it makes sense when you dig into it.

Classes that provide Healing do so through core class mechanics rather than Spell Slots. Yes, this means some Healing Surge type mechanics make a return, but also things like Lay on Hands being a core healing structure rather than a one-off class ability. Clerics getting a specific number of extra Hit Dice in a healing pool they can "Cure Wounds" with by touching a target and expending up to 2 dice, plus mods, at level 1, where the "Healing Word" option gives you range but you can only use half as many dice as Cure Wounds allows at your current level. As you level up your Cure Wounds gets bigger and you get "Mass Cure" at some point to divide those hit dice between several targets.

Meanwhile the more "Problematic Spells" become class abilities where you get a choice instead of being able to layer a bunch of BS on top of each other. For example the Simulacrum spell as a 9th level class feature for Wizards competing with Wish. That's right! No more "I make a Simulacrum of myself with Wish prepared, who makes a Simulacrum with Wish prepared!" spam. Also allows for Subclasses to have way more impact. If the only way to get the Gate spell is to be a Conjurer... well.

Similarly, spells like Scrying and Legend Lore go from spell slots to ritual magic or class features. Spell slots are more limited, and more combat-oriented in their use, rather than being used for every aspect of a Wizard's day.

3) Day 1 Psionics
Just gonna go ahead and make a note that the Esper or Psion or Mystic or whatever you wanna call the class will be in the core rulebook. It'll have Powers and Psi Dice. Powers are like Cantrips that you can assign Psi Dice to in order to get more effects, more targets, more damage, etc depending on the power. After you use the power, roll the dice you assigned to it. On 1s and 2s the dice is expended, otherwise you retain it for further use. If you roll the max value, you get back a die you lost.

4) Warlords
Yup. Warlords. Back from 4e. I don't care if you hate me for it. Shout that hand back on and tell the Rogue to walk off the Disintegration from the trap they failed to disarm.

5) Combat Maneuvers
Core class mechanic for martial characters that give you more options for fun and interesting stuff to do in combat that highlights your character's identity. Fighters get to pick any maneuvers they want, but the other classes have more narrow choices. So your Fighter could take maneuvers that let you steal from someone with advantage when you hit them, or fling opponents across the battlefield with a big heavy weapon, but the Barbarian can't take the stealing maneuver and the Rogue can't take the fling someone across the battlefield maneuver.

You can also play with Availability. Monks getting Ki points that they can spend to gain extra uses of their maneuvers as a core identifying trait. Barbarians being able to burn rage mechanics to get more uses of their maneuvers. Paladins trading in spell slots for more maneuvers. Rogues trading sneak attack damage in order to apply maneuvers.

6) Spellcasting Mechanics Variety
Because some of the magic of the classes is being shunted into the class mechanics, there's greater latitude for different levels of spellcasting. Particularly for the classes with now-native healing. A Cleric needs fewer spell slots than a Wizard if they're going to be using their core class function to provide healing to the group than they would in 5e24 where many of their spell slots go to healing magic. So give them a slightly slower spell level progression that caps out at 7th level.

And once you embrace that: You can get into some -weird- stuff that plays into class identity and mechanical variety.

If Clerics cap out at 7th level spells when they hit 9th level (where a Wizard gets their 9th level slots) then you can make Sorcerers cap out at 7th level... and allow them to use Sorcery Points to increase the effectiveness of a 7th level spell (or even a 5th level spell) up to 9th level, increasing the narrative power of the Sorcerer class's core mechanic and identity.

Similarly, you could put more weight into the identity of Wild Shapes and make Druids into 5th level casters with inherent healing magic... and the ability to specifically tap into nature to boost a 5th level spell's effective level up to 7th. (Probably preferring Target Count/Area rather than Damage Dice increases, but still)

Caster TypeClass Level 1Class Level 2Class Level 3Class Level 4Class Level 5Class Level 6Class Level 7Class Level 8Class Level 9Class Level 10
Full Caster 1st Level 2nd Level3rd Level4th Level5th Level6th Level7th Level8th Level9th Level9th Level
3/4 Caster1st Level1st Level2nd Level3rd Level4th Level4th Level5th Level6th Level7th Level7th Level
1/2 Caster1st Level1st Level2nd Level2nd Level3rd Level3rd Level4th Level4th Level5th Level5th Level

7) "Extra Attack" at 3rd with Caveats
Fighters get Extra Attack at 3rd, 6th, and 9th for a total of 4 attacks.

Barbarians at 3rd get Sweeping Attack. If they hit someone with a melee weapon they can make a melee attack on another target within reach. At 5th level it becomes straight up Extra Attack. At 8th level they get Sweeping Attack back, once per round. So a total of 3 attacks but targeting restrictions make it less strictly useful in a fight against a single straight up enemy. But they get their rage damage bonus to make their attacks hit harder.

Monks get Extra Strike at 3rd, where if they make an attack with an unarmed strike or monk weapon they get to follow it up with an unarmed strike (separate from their bonus action Martial Arts they get at level 1). Morphs into extra attack at 5th, allowing any weapon. And at 8th they get to apply a maneuver to an attack they've already made (so they don't waste maneuver uses as much).

For Paladins it's automatic smiting at 3rd level, with Improved Smite. At 5th it's Extra Attack, and then Divine Certainty at 8th allowing them to reroll an attack if they miss. So where Fighters get 4 swings, Monks get 2 plus bonus action attack, and Barbarians get 3 if there's a second target nearby, Paladins only ever get "2", which they add their smite onto, but if they miss they get to try again.

Rangers at 3rd gain Swiftstrike. Bonus Action attack with any weapon they're proficient with. If dual-wielding they get two off-hand attacks on that bonus action. They get Extra Attack at 5th level. At 8th level they can give themselves advantage on an attack if they've already landed an attack this round. So they get 3 attacks, every round, with no target limit or anything, -but- they eat up more action economy to do it.

8) Crit Protection as a Core Mechanic
Armor, Shields, and Weapons can be sacrificed to turn Crits into normal hits. If your armor or shield takes the Crit, halve it's defensive benefit to a minimum of 0. If it reaches 0 it is damaged beyond repair. For weapons they deal half damage after they negate one crit, then no longer function after a second crit. Damaged weapons and armor can be repaired by one step during a long rest with an appropriate skill check. So if your Full Plate (+8AC Bonus) got damaged twice (down to a +2AC Bonus) you'd need two long rests to undent it fully.

Broken items must be replaced, but if parts of the original are incorporated the new item gains any magical or metaphysical properties of the original. (Ship of Theseus rules)

But what's good for the Goose is good for the Gander. NPCs can and will sacrifice their equipment to preserve themselves, sometimes. Well... those who -can-. Most monsters have no armor, shield, or weapon to sacrifice. Could be interesting for them to sacrifice abilities, though... Medusa reducing a critical hit to a normal hit and losing her gaze attack as an example. Or a dragon losing the ability to fly.

Of course, by doing so you make yourself more vulnerable to additional regular hits... so. Y'know. Tough choice.

9) Exploration and Social Mechanics as Core
Yeah, yeah. Wizards do magic about everything to circumvent challenges, Rogues are skill monkeys for traps and doors, and Bards do the talking. Well screw that! Everyone gets to contribute to the social and exploration structures of the game with mechanical benefits built right into the classes.

Fighters getting to size people up in an "I could take him" style assessment. Barbarians getting intimidation bonuses from either glowering in white hot rage or casually displaying their strength. Rangers as incredibly insightful and in-tune characters who recognize vibes below the surface. Etc. Everyone gets to gather information or adjust NPC attitudes/actions through class function.

And also environmental stuff, too. Barbarians kicking down doors with greater ease than anyone, getting climb speeds, or leaping big distances. Monks running over water or up walls. Rangers tracking, sure, but also providing overland bonuses to the group. Fighters who can forced march FOREVER without getting exhausted.

Rogues still get to be the skill monkey. Wizards still get a selection of utility spells to get past obstacles. But the rest of the classes get abilities that reinforce their identity and provide benefits to the entire group.

Also Social Combat as a thing. Straight up rolling initiative for RP scenes and making various checks to gain bonuses you can pass off to one another to increase your chance of success. Every failure reduces the group's collective "Social Capital" until the NPC(s) in the scene are tired of listening and will not change their mind no matter what you say after that point. Ranger rolls Insight to find out what the NPC's motivations are to get a token. Passes that token off to the Bard who gets +1d4 on their Persuasion check thanks to the information the Ranger provides. Things like that.

Some players are going to want the spotlight and do the talking. That's fine. This way everyone else still gets to contribute, even if their character never says a word. It also provides for a total fail state situation that makes good sense. If you run out of social capital you become a nuisance the person wants to be rid of, which could lead to combat if you keep pressing the issue. "GUARDS. Remove them!"

10) Sensible HP Structures
The standard HD for a humanoid in 5e D&D is a d8. Sorcerers and Wizards get d6s. Meaning your average Wizard has a lower max HP than a Goblin with the same Hit Dice. That's some nonsense.

Humanoid HD should be d6s. Meaning the average commoner has 3.5 or 4 hit points. That way Wizards don't represent a group of humanoids that are below the average while being treated as heroic champions. Is it possible to do the sickly/weak/infirm Wizard, mechanically? Sure. Have a Constitution Penalty like anyone else. And with the power overall HP values, a 1hd Goblin is still kind of dangerous to a 5th level character... but even 3-4 points of damage will kill them, so AoE can wipe out a mess of weaklings that might otherwise be a nuisance.

What do you think about a system like this? Interesting package of alternate rules, overengineered nonsense, or nothingburger?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

It's a matter of taste. But most of what you're suggesting is generally in the right direction for me.

#4, #6, #8 and #10 especially.

I often think about these little nuggets of design too. #10 is a good example. It seems so small, but it has huge repercussions on other design decisions.

I know it's a decision that's been had many times here, but I do feel like 4E fixed many of the issues that I had with D&D. It introduced other problems. And with 5E then shoveled all of it out and we have some familiar problems back. Nothing deal breaking but I agree that there's room for improvements.

I'm not a big fan of 7. I always found extra attacks to be more work at the table for something that's relatively uninteresting. The equivalent of a +1 to a sword instead of an interesting effect.

#1 is fine by me. I definitely never went above level 12-13 in a campaign. I'd definitely go towards a level-less design, but I think that's only personal taste and it would probably stray too away too far from D&D's core.
 

I already have a narrative challenge with players reaching high levels in short periods of game time.

"Listen here, fledgling 'heroes'! I am a mighty dragon who has spent decades building my power and influence, and putting my plans into motion. You will never stop me! Leave me, and don't come back without treasure I can loot from your corpses."

...a few moments later... "By Tiamat's five gizzards, how in the hell are you so powerful after 1 month!? This makes no sense!"

These days I'm trying out required training downtime/bastion progress to pass time between adventures, but as long as the players feel that there is an ongoing emergent plot, they naturally avoid any non-forced downtime. Can't let the villains rest!
 

I already have a narrative challenge with players reaching high levels in short periods of game time.

"Listen here, fledgling 'heroes'! I am a mighty dragon who has spent decades building my power and influence, and putting my plans into motion. You will never stop me! Leave me, and don't come back without treasure I can loot from your corpses."

...a few moments later... "By Tiamat's five gizzards, how in the hell are you so powerful after 1 month!? This makes no sense!"

These days I'm trying out required training downtime/bastion progress to pass time between adventures, but as long as the players feel that there is an ongoing emergent plot, they naturally avoid any non-forced downtime. Can't let the villains rest!
Milestone your Levels rather than doing strict XP, and include narrative breaks where your characters have ot wait and do things. Go for One Week Long Rests and One Day Short Rests.

There's options!

Structural Change 11) Timey Wimey.

Short and Long Rests are not 1 hour and 8 hours, respectively. The narrative dictates how long rests are. Short rests can be as little as a minute. Long Rests can be as long as a Week. Depends on Narrative Need. And, yes, you can do Weeklong Downtime activities during a Weeklong Long Rest.
 

I already have a narrative challenge with players reaching high levels in short periods of game time.

"Listen here, fledgling 'heroes'! I am a mighty dragon who has spent decades building my power and influence, and putting my plans into motion. You will never stop me! Leave me, and don't come back without treasure I can loot from your corpses."

...a few moments later... "By Tiamat's five gizzards, how in the hell are you so powerful after 1 month!? This makes no sense!"

These days I'm trying out required training downtime/bastion progress to pass time between adventures, but as long as the players feel that there is an ongoing emergent plot, they naturally avoid any non-forced downtime. Can't let the villains rest!
I solve this by not pushing a plot in my setting. Sandbox all the way!
 

Milestone your Levels rather than doing strict XP, and include narrative breaks where your characters have ot wait and do things. Go for One Week Long Rests and One Day Short Rests.

There's options!

Structural Change 11) Timey Wimey.

Short and Long Rests are not 1 hour and 8 hours, respectively. The narrative dictates how long rests are. Short rests can be as little as a minute. Long Rests can be as long as a Week. Depends on Narrative Need. And, yes, you can do Weeklong Downtime activities during a Weeklong Long Rest.
I'm not really a fan of "narrative need" having any mechanical effect on play, but done of your other ideas I really like. Big fan of your Level Up products!
 

What do you think about a system like this?
OK! Point-by-point...

1) 10th Level Classes
I'm in. Classes border on over-designed.

How might you work archetypes/subclasses in here?

Also, what's stopping you from going even further in reducing class size? Like, if we had 10 levels of play, but one class per tier. So, like, you'd be a Warrior from level 1-4 (maybe with "mundane, but powerful" features) and then you could take the Ranger or Paladin or Barbarian or Knight or whatever class from 5-10....

2) Make Magic Users More Magical and Less Casty
Eh. I think reacting to "problematic spells" is not a great foundation for design in and of itself. That said, I'm on board in principle with moving certain key features out of spell slots and into class features.

For instance, maybe it's OK to make Fireball into an Evoker feature and not a spell that every wizard casts? (that specific spell might be controversial, hahaha, but I like the general idea of exclusive magical features that don't rely on spell slots)

3) Day 1 Psionics
Sure. But, the specific design you're proposing leaves me a little cold.

4) Warlords
On board, but this is a slightly bigger can of worms. Specifically, I'm curious as to how this healing is distinct from casting healing word. Is it just cosmetics (ie, you can do it without spending a spell slot, or you can do it and it doesn't "count" as magic)?

5) Combat Maneuvers
6) Spellcasting Mechanics Variety

These are potentially a red flag for me. I don't want to have to spend more time and more effort on fights than I currently do. In fact, I already spend TOO MUCH time on combat. More decision points and more special effects won't make my D&D sessions any better, and, in fact, will drag them down more.

Some is OK, but even the weapon masteries in current D&D introduce a lot of complexity.

I want to run in the other direction, where D&D is not so much a game about fighting monsters as it is a game about dungeon-fantasy roleplaying in which sometimes you will fight monsters.

7) "Extra Attack" at 3rd with Caveats
Nah, I don't need smaller niches for the rules to disappear within.

8) Crit Protection as a Core Mechanic
Crits are fun. Mechanics that limit them are "time to stop having fun, I guess."

9) Exploration and Social Mechanics as Core
I think this is a bigger discussion, because having a class feature that lets you know if you could take someone in a fight is not a social mechanic in my mind.

10) Sensible HP Structures
Seems reactionary, again. What do we actually want out of our HP system?

Interesting package of alternate rules, overengineered nonsense, or nothingburger?
I think you're circling around some pretty good issues, though you're bogged down a little in reacting to the current design more than creating a vision of what this game could be.
 


OK! Point-by-point...


I'm in. Classes border on over-designed.

How might you work archetypes/subclasses in here?
3-4 Subclass levels over the course of a 10 level class so you get some strong flavor without it overwhelming the core mechanics. Probably with some Social/Exploration ribbons tied to 2-3 of them, as well.
Also, what's stopping you from going even further in reducing class size? Like, if we had 10 levels of play, but one class per tier. So, like, you'd be a Warrior from level 1-4 (maybe with "mundane, but powerful" features) and then you could take the Ranger or Paladin or Barbarian or Knight or whatever class from 5-10....
Ah, very simple: I don't want to make people wait to play their character concept. It's why I made Motif Classes a thing.
Eh. I think reacting to "problematic spells" is not a great foundation for design in and of itself. That said, I'm on board in principle with moving certain key features out of spell slots and into class features.
Kinda, yeah. But it's one of those "I can't chop up this sacred cow, so I'll design around it to keep it from being too abusable."

That's what a lot of these elements are. There's sacred cows in the game that you "Must Have" for it to be D&D.
For instance, maybe it's OK to make Fireball into an Evoker feature and not a spell that every wizard casts? (that specific spell might be controversial, hahaha, but I like the general idea of exclusive magical features that don't rely on spell slots)
Fireball, for example. Sacred Cow. I'm not sure I could even make that one into a feature of the Evoker Subclass because of the outcry that would likely result.
Sure. But, the specific design you're proposing leaves me a little cold.
Fair. Not everyone's gonna like the same stuff. Have you seen my Esper? You can get the class, powers, and martial tradition for free on DriveThruRPG.Com if you'd like to see how it goes.
On board, but this is a slightly bigger can of worms. Specifically, I'm curious as to how this healing is distinct from casting healing word. Is it just cosmetics (ie, you can do it without spending a spell slot, or you can do it and it doesn't "count" as magic)?
Healing Word/Cure Wounds doesn't use a spell slot. So neither would Rally. Definitely doesn't count as magic, though, no.

The difference would lie, most likely, in how it's applied. For my part, I think it'd make sense to have Rally rely on your target's Hit Dice availability rather than a pool of dice the Marshal can dole out. Probably have it start out as multitarget, in fact, while a Cleric has to work up to multitarget, but gets a pool of their own healing to throw out there.

Could be a way to build in mechanically reinforced narrative differences into the classes, after all.
These are potentially a red flag for me. I don't want to have to spend more time and more effort on fights than I currently do. In fact, I already spend TOO MUCH time on combat. More decision points and more special effects won't make my D&D sessions any better, and, in fact, will drag them down more.
Spellcasting Mechanics variety pretty much refers to spell availability. Full versus 3/4 versus 1/2 caster. Though the Sorcerer and Druid are both, at least in theory, able to play around with their spells a bit more for power/variation.

Would absolutely add in more mechanical finagling for martial characters, however. As it's an attempt to give them some level of combat variety beyond "I move to the nearest enemy and stand in his face while hitting him until he is dead."
Some is OK, but even the weapon masteries in current D&D introduce a lot of complexity.
You and I probably have different tolerances for "A lot" of complexity, if weapon masteries introduce a lot. I feel like they're far too barebones and simplistic. Some of them actually have an impact (Vex, Nick) but others are largely irrelevant (Slow).
I want to run in the other direction, where D&D is not so much a game about fighting monsters as it is a game about dungeon-fantasy roleplaying in which sometimes you will fight monsters.
Very fair.
Nah, I don't need smaller niches for the rules to disappear within.
Fair.
Crits are fun. Mechanics that limit them are "time to stop having fun, I guess."
Crits can be fun... or frustrating as hell. Really depends on whose on which end of it and how often. And a player choosing to sacrifice their ancestor's sword/shield/armor/whatever to save themself from certain death can be a pretty fun and dramatic moment, too.
I think this is a bigger discussion, because having a class feature that lets you know if you could take someone in a fight is not a social mechanic in my mind.
Sizing them up -like- that. Like "Is their proficiency bonus bigger than mine?" could help you figure out whether you've got a decent chance of convincing them of stuff. "Are they tougher than me?" tells you whether or not to try Intimidating them. Things like that.
Seems reactionary, again. What do we actually want out of our HP system?
Personally? I want the players to feel strong without making them feel out of line with the world.

I also really want to be able to Magic Missile 5 goblins and be relatively sure 3 of them are gonna die of the damage 'cause they've only got 3-4 hp each when I'm in the 5th to 6th level range and we're dealing with swarms of enemies that are built to have varying levels of durability to make Single Target and AoE abilities equally important on the field of battle.
I think you're circling around some pretty good issues, though you're bogged down a little in reacting to the current design more than creating a vision of what this game could be.
Again, it's really just about maintaining the Sacred Cows while trying to combine the best things I've seen from various editions of D&D (and some other systems) together in as harmonious a way as possible.
 

Rather than cutting things down to 10 levels, I would prefer to embrace more of 4E.

Have 30 levels split into chunks that have less of a power curve between them. Bring back something similar to Paragon Paths. Levels 1-10 are your base class for the heroic tier. If you want to play beyond that, you pick up a Paragon Path.
 

Remove ads

Top