Deconstructing class abilities for purchase with XP

[The Sigil]

I just ordered the product, so I don't know how it works yet, but I would think that for creating appropriate encounters, you just need to go back to the total amount of experience the character has, cross check that against the original level advancement table.

For example, you have a character that has a mix of Wizard and Rogue abilities and he has a total of 3400 xps. He should be (if the mechanics for this are right) equivalent in power to any 3rd level character. He and the rest of the characters should be encountering 3 CR critters.

Thanks,
Rich

That's the idea, though I noted that characters' effective levels get a little bit fuzzy - a "Core Rules" character with 5999 XP is not noticeably different from one with 3000 XP... but one with 6001 XP is a LOT different than one with 5999 XP. In an XP-ability-buy system, a character with 5999 XP is a lot different from one with 3000 XP but probably no different from one with 6001 XP.

What this means to me is that, as Umbran suggested, a GM has to use a little more discretion - a character with 5999 XP, even though he'd be "3rd level" in the regular system, is pretty much the equivalent of a 4th-level character in an XP-purchase system.

--The Sigil

 

[Umbran]

For example, you have a character that has a mix of Wizard and Rogue abilities and he has a total of 3400 xps. He should be (if the mechanics for this are right) equivalent in power to any 3rd level character. He and the rest of the characters should be encountering 3 CR critters.

If this were true, then The Sigil would not have needed to point out that the system is particularly vulnerable to min/maxing. The intent is surely to make it as close to the ideal as possible, but a build system that takes all the synergies into account would be too cumbersome to use.

Players good at min-max techniques will create 3rd level characters notably more potent than a "standard" 3rd level character. Folks who instead buy abilities based purely on style rather than effectiveness may create characters of lesser effectiveness. Take these characters back to the standard CR system, and you'll have more problems than usual.

And woe betide you if your group's got min-maxers mixed in with the style-builders

 

[Desdichado]

If this kind of advancement is what you're looking for, I think you might be best served to check out a different kind of game. West End Game's new D6 rules should be exactly what you're looking for, if they use even the smallest vestiges of the D6 system that they did for Star Wars, before Wizards of the Coast picked up the license. Additionally, they're printing all of those rules slightly adjusted for either fantasy, adventure, or sci fi in a new printing (although not, apparently, a new edition) of the original rules.

So, what's so special about d6? GURPS already does that better, and most RPG systems are level-less with a more granular advancement. I can see a real need for a d20 equivalent, so you can use it along with all your other d20 material. I don't think recommending another game, particularly a completely unproven system, is particularly helpful.

Nary a class or template to be found--free form advancement to your heart's content!

But I warn you, it's HELL on GM/DMs. *shudder*

It's not so bad. It's not like its a really unique or innovative concept, to have classes and templates out of the picture. Lots of people have been playing games like that for years and years.

 

[Kalendraf]

I've contemplated something similar to this kind of change before, and while I haven't arrived at the right rules to balance it yet, it seems that given enought forethought and proper testing it should be workable. I was approaching it from a slightly different angle though, looking for a way to eliminate the need for prestige classes, and boil them down into just one generic model. Most of the prestige-class unique features would become feats that have very specific/strict entry requirements instead. This would then serve as a base model for all prestige classes, either allowing the DM to design his own, or even let players think up ones as well...all the while insuring balance.

This would have several advantages. The DM could restrict the list of these abilities for his/her campaign instead of having to provide a list of all the prestige classes that are or are not allowed. It would allow characters a better chance to understand all the requirements they need to obtain that ability. In some cases it might become easier to qualify for certain abilities, which could be good or bad. Balancing everything is the key, and that's where a majority of the work would be for such a system.

 

[LostSoul]

But I warn you, it's HELL on GM/DMs. *shudder*

I found the d6 system much easier to run. I could create NPCs on the fly in my head. You just can't do that in the d20 system, not just because of classes, but Feats as well.

 

[rgard]

If this were true, then The Sigil would not have needed to point out that the system is particularly vulnerable to min/maxing. The intent is surely to make it as close to the ideal as possible, but a build system that takes all the synergies into account would be too cumbersome to use.

Players good at min-max techniques will create 3rd level characters notably more potent than a "standard" 3rd level character. Folks who instead buy abilities based purely on style rather than effectiveness may create characters of lesser effectiveness. Take these characters back to the standard CR system, and you'll have more problems than usual.

And woe betide you if your group's got min-maxers mixed in with the style-builders

Well, it it's that vulnerable, maybe it's not very well thought out? Still haven't received my link for the download yet, so I don't know for certain.

Do you own this or are you speculating like me?

Thanks,
Rich

 

[rgard]

That's the idea, though I noted that characters' effective levels get a little bit fuzzy - a "Core Rules" character with 5999 XP is not noticeably different from one with 3000 XP... but one with 6001 XP is a LOT different than one with 5999 XP. In an XP-ability-buy system, a character with 5999 XP is a lot different from one with 3000 XP but probably no different from one with 6001 XP.

What this means to me is that, as Umbran suggested, a GM has to use a little more discretion - a character with 5999 XP, even though he'd be "3rd level" in the regular system, is pretty much the equivalent of a 4th-level character in an XP-purchase system.

--The Sigil

I see your point and would add one level of granularity for determining the character levels and corresponding appropriate CR of the critters. You could always call 5999 XP: level 3.9. Then a CR4 critter makes more sense for the party to take on than CR3.

Yep, buying as you go instead waiting for the level threshold would necessitate coming up with decimals for the levels...I better go build a spreadsheet for this one!

Thanks,
Rich

 

[Desdichado]

I could create NPCs on the fly in my head. You just can't do that in the d20 system, not just because of classes, but Feats as well.

To be more accurate you can't do that in the d20 system. I, however, do so routinely.

 

[Kichwas]

A point based breakdown of all the class, skill, feat, and other abilities of the d20 system has been out and up for free download since May or so of 2003.

Here:
http://www.guardiansorder.com/games/d20/srd/

It gives -everything- a point costs, and assumes 10 points per level. 100xlvl XP equals one of these points.

It's also available in both soft and hardcover published books, with a revised version of the hardcover coming out in theory this last month, so I would say any day now.

 

[jmucchiello]

While I can't wait to pick up Sigil's book, I only will buy it to see how he did it. If I wanted a point buy character generation system, I'd be playing HERO or GURPS. (Of course my own book takes the point of view that you can plan your progression level by level by taking the parts of various classes that interest you. You create a full 20 level class and then don't need to multiclass. But I don't really want to hijack the thread. )