D&D Paths?

[Yesway Jose]

Between threads about D&D lite, 5E, Mearl's core of D&D and discussions of sacred cows, I was wondering...

What's with the core assumption in D&D that ties combat ability to hit dice/points? Must they be related? How do you model a massive clumsy brute that doesn't hit well, or a grizzled veteran ex-assassin that can be taken down with an arrow, or (in 3E) a 20th level blacksmith who is just as "weak" as a 1st level blacksmith?

I wondered about decoupling hit points from combat skills from magic skills and other skills, and then allowing DMs and players to adjust the various "levers" for their ideal campaign in a modular way:

1) Choose your Race

This defines your Level 0 base = your natural born abilities at the age of maturity for your chosen race. Intelligent humanoids can also advance in Paths...

2) Choose your Paths

Hero Path = advance in hit points, saves, action points
Combat Path = better to hit, higher defense, weapon/armor skills, combat maneuvers, etc.
Rogue Path = skills/tricks for thieves
Arcane Warrior Path = combat wards, damage spells, fast casting times
Arcane Mage Path = rituals and utility spells, slower casting times
Divine Warrior Path = divine spells for crusading clerics
[Skills] Path = one category of apprenticeship, academics, or other life training
etc.

Each Path is like a talent tree. Some Paths are clearly intended for heroic NPCs and PCs, other Paths are intended primarily for NPCs or PC dabbling. You can mix and match Paths according to class builds and game-balancing rules.

Each Path has its own Levels, ie:
- Fighter NPC = 10 levels of Combat
- Fighter PC = 10 levels of Hero + 10 levels of Combat
- Apprentice Blacksmith NPC = 1 level of Blacksmithing
- Maester Blacksmith NPC = 20 levels of Blacksmithing
- Mage NPC = 10 levels of Arcane Mage
- "4E style" Wizard PC = 10 levels of Hero + 1 level of Combat + 9 levels of Arcane Warrior
- "3E style" Wizard PC = 10 levels of Hero + 10 levels of Arcane Warrior and/or Arcane Mage
- "multiclassed" fighter/wizard = 10 levels of Hero + 5 levels of Combat + 5 levels of Arcane Warrior

Hero levels (which can be fluffed as karma or destiny) is what primarily distinguishes PCs from everyone else, basically makes them harder to kill Hollywood-movie style.

You could play a gritty or Cthulhuesque campaign (or 'Hard' difficulty), which sets a low cap on the Hero Path, so battles can be fast and furious and deadly. Or you could play a kids' campaign (or 'Easy' difficulty) which is more generous somehow with Hero levels.

Other customizations could be a low magic campaign without any Arcane Paths, or an ultra magic campaign where every PC and NPC gets 1 free Arcane level.

In advanced/mature games ONLY, you could have interesting concepts like a:
- a mage or rogue who is less effective in real-time combat and has to play a management game of prepping spells or traps in advance
- a fighter PC with only 5 levels of Hero and 15 levels of Combat, but you could flame out pretty quickly in a party where everyone else has higher Hero levels
- a character with mostly Hero levels and not much else, has lots of luck and keeps cheating death, but not an expert at anything
- a war captain with 0 levels of Hero and 20 levels of Combat (through old fashioned hard work and years of training), high defense, deadly attacks, but will only survive one or two or three hits, so not exactly a minion

Again, those examples may be for mature/advanced games only, and maybe not "officially" supported for game balance.

Lite/basic D&D:
-Simplified Path options
-Liberal use of "Page 42" on the fly

Standard/core D&D
-The full core Paths: Hero, Combat, Arcane, Divine, Rogue, etc.

D&D supplement:
-New Paths (Druidic, Monk, Elven, Dwarvish, Shadow, etc.)

Campaign Settings:
-Variations on existing Paths and new exclusive Paths

I admit this is nothing revolutionary in that it's just another way to track and reorganize abilities. Renaming classes to Paths is just semantics to disentangle hits points/saves/etc (=path of heroism) from powers/feats/skills (=paths of experience). For most D&D players who are happy with the current feel or power level of D&D, it doesn't do much. I just see this as a modular way of allowing D&D to be more liquid and flexible, more customizable to be everything for everyone?

 

[the Jester]

I'm running a homebrewed system that largely decouples hit points from combat ability, but since everyone is still 1st level I can't really give you much feedback as to how well it works in play.

One absolutely crucial thing is to flatten the math- if you have to choose between hit points and attack capability, the monsters need to be reasoanbly hittable without much of an attack bonus.

 

[SkullThrone]

This sounds an awful lot like Open Gateways (where 4E means "For Everyone") by Northspot — Kickstarter, those rather than what you call "paths" he calls "Gateways"...Funny, as I play tested the game early on, and he also called these "paths" or "pathways".

 

[GSHamster]

One of the issues I find with these systems is a lot of players find it hard to judge "secondary" skills for their role. Primary skills are fairly obvious, you try to max them out. You have a high level wizard, you max out your "magic" skill.

But secondary skills are a lot more complicated. Even a high level wizard probably needs more more health than a low level wizard. But how much more? It's very hard to judge.

That's one of the main advantages of classes, simple progression in secondary attributes. The wizard spends her effort maxing out her magic, and she picks up the health she need naturally as she levels.

 

[Yesway Jose]

One absolutely crucial thing is to flatten the math- if you have to choose between hit points and attack capability, the monsters need to be reasoanbly hittable without much of an attack bonus.

Well this is all highly theoretical, but each Path could have its own relevant "attack bonus" progression. A wizard wouldn't need Combat levels to hit the monster IF using magic, but in the rare case that he uses a mundane dagger, then he's in trouble, so maybe he uses up some actions points from his Hero levels to compensate.

This sounds an awful lot like Open Gateways (where 4E means "For Everyone") by Northspot — Kickstarter, those rather than what you call "paths" he calls "Gateways"...Funny, as I play tested the game early on, and he also called these "paths" or "pathways".

Interesting!

It's also a funny coincidence that there's an RPG called Pathfinder...

One of the issues I find with these systems is a lot of players find it hard to judge "secondary" skills for their role. Primary skills are fairly obvious, you try to max them out. You have a high level wizard, you max out your "magic" skill.

But secondary skills are a lot more complicated. Even a high level wizard probably needs more more health than a low level wizard. But how much more? It's very hard to judge.

That's one of the main advantages of classes, simple progression in secondary attributes. The wizard spends her effort maxing out her magic, and she picks up the health she need naturally as she levels.

I agree, which is why I assumed classes as builds that recommends how to advance in various levels. If you don't know what you're doing, stick with the recommended build. If the gaming group has decided on a gritty campaign, then everyone goes with that alternative recommendation. It's like those RPG games where you can allow the AI to auto-level your powers, or you can manually micromanage it yourself.