Deconstructing class abilities for purchase with XP

[jmucchiello]

From my perspective, the problem with classes is their obvious strength: The forming of a certain image. This image helps enormously at the beginning,...

This is the basis for the argument for and against classes in RPG design. D&D is the foremost class based system and it has survived the longest of all RPGs with that design. Classes provide a noun you can attach to a character that focuses the player on what the character is. He is a Fighter or a Wizard. Classless systems don't have that noun. You have to explain what your character is in sentenses: He's a fighting dude with a couple of spells and nasty gut-stab that he specializes in.

When you are first explaining D&D to a newbie, you can describe how fighters differ from wizards. In a point system, like GURPS or HERO, you need the newbie to know what he wants to play out of the infinite possiblities available to the system. You find yourself asking silly questions like Do you envision your character holding a sword? If you are trying to explain the concept of RPing at the same time, this can be too much take in. To eleviate that problem, GURPS and HERO have "templates/package deals" that you can add to characters to give them a few nouns you can grab ahold of.

Now, for the advanced player, infinite tweaking can be a godsend but that doesn't mean classes are useless. While I can imagine players using Sig's book to make exactly what they want, I can't imagine a DM sittting down and doing the villains the same way. He's gonna just create a group of 10 7th level rogues (with similar stats most likely) and be done with it. I see my own book as more of a DM book sometimes. I imagine the DM creating a set of class variants and offering them for certain areas of his world in place of the some of the standard classes. (Or a player creates the variant and the DM retrofits it into the campaign world.) And at some point the party will meet someone with X levels in the class variant. Point based characters are unique and you won't meet someone with a build similar to the character's build.

Why have sorcerers spend more XP as wizards? The general opinion is, that sorcerers are weaker as wizards,

I know many people who hold the opposit view. XPs are based on combat.* In straight up combat a sorcerer is worth more than wizard of equal level.

* Yes, I know you can generate XPs any way you want. The default game assumes the challenges overcome are combat challenges.

 

[madelf]

My only concern with this system is it would mean the death of classes. Honestly, if you can sneak attack, cast a cone of cold, turn undead, play an instrument and charm folks, and are a genius with the long bow, not only do your opponents not know who you are, YOU DON'T KNOW EITHER!

Consequently, there wouldn't be a "class" reference on a player's character sheet, only a name & the character's abilities and such.

You say all of that like it's a bad thing.

To the minds of many, it's a very good thing. To some it might even make the difference of whether they play D&D/D20 at all.


On a broader basis, all of this concern and debate boggles my mind. There have been games with point based character generation and advancement for many, many years. They all work just fine. Using a point based system for D&D (assuming it's well designed, which this one seems to be) will work equally fine. It will certainly not be to everyone's taste, but that too is okay. This system is an option, a variant that a group can choose to utilize or not as they see fit. If you prefer classes, then use classes.

 

[Pbartender]

For those that are interested...

I use a spell point system similar to that from Unearthed Arcana, except that I raised all spell costs by one spell point (0-level cost 1 spell point)... So that a spell's spell point cost is equal to twice it's spell level (o-level count as 1/2 level):

0 level - 1 spell point
1st level - 2
2nd level - 4
4th level - 8
and so on...

I had adjusted the spell points per day chart accordingly to make up for the increased spell cost.

I did a little Excel reverse engineering with Sigil's XP-buy system, and if anyone is using a spell point system similar to mine (or UA's), a good equation for gaining spell points is...

Experience cost = # of spell points gained * caster level * 10 (5 for divine spell points)

There is, techincally, no limit to how many spell points a caster can gain at each caster level, except for the prudence of the DM and the player. Character can feasibly save lots of XP by buying as many spell points as possible at low caster level.

 

[Particle_Man]

a good equation for gaining spell points is...

Experience cost = # of spell points gained * caster level * 10 (5 for divine spell points)

There is, techincally, no limit to how many spell points a caster can gain at each caster level, except for the prudence of the DM and the player. Character can feasibly save lots of XP by buying as many spell points as possible at low caster level.

Hmmm...this may allow for a Metamind that doesn't get the shaft. (I tend to think in terms of psionics when I hear spell points).

Does Sigil's system allow for asymmetries like this, where it is cheaper to buy things in one order than in another? (In this case, cheaper to first buy lots of spell points, then buy caster levels above first, rather than to buy a lot of caster levels, then buy the spell points).

 

[Verequus]

The quick & easy answer is that the Wizard winds up paying more for Feats, as he gets 5 bonus Feats over the course of his career (Scribe Scroll, and one Metamagic or Item Creation Feat at levesl 5, 10, 15, and 20). So yes, sorcerers spend more on spells, but wizards spend those points that they "saved" on Feats instead.

But the sorcerer pays for his 20iest level 238,301 XP, while the wizard pays only 222,080 XP. That are 16,000 XP more - nearly the next level in the core system. The quick & easy answer doesn't solve this.

 

[SSquirrel]

You could also check out this thread http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=82858&page=8 for a spreadsheet for turning D&D into a point buy system. Pretty much the same idea, except you spend points at the end of each level rather than anytime you have new XP.

Hagen

 

[SpiralBound]

Why is this an "either/or" situation?

I see a number of people talking about the pros and cons of this points system versus the traditional character building method, describing everything in terms of "but if we use X then we lose the benefit of Y for those players who don't like/understand the different philosophy of the points system". I say, why choose?

I haven't bought this book yet, but from what I've seen posted it sounds like the same D20 features (skills, feats, attributes, saves, bonuses, etc.) are used, just that the way that characters improve is different. Furthermore, Sigil has apparantly gone to great lengths to make sure that if you were to use his system to recreate one of the core 11 classes that the progression of abilities would match the original class/level system as much as possible. With all this taken into consideration, why would all players in a given campaign have to use EITHER the points system OR the class/level system? What would prevent the people who are newbies or just fans of the class/level system from using the original class & level oriented advancement system, while other members of the party who want a type of character that the classes don't support use the points system?

"But some players will steadily gain in abilities while others will only advance when they reach the xp level divisions! " To this objection I say, so? On a session by session basis, is it really going to matter? Will it really be THAT big of a difference? If I play a Rogue, Jimmy plays a Barbarian/Cleric, and Frank plays a variant witch prestige class is this dynamic drastically "broken" if instead I play a Rogue, Jimmy plays a Barbarian/Cleric and Frank plays a "points" character that is built to recreate the legends of a mystical female shaman? Or perhaps it is Jimmy who makes a point character that has the rage ability, a high BAB, and the ability to cast divine spells.

I'm sure that Sigil can answer this better than I, but I don't know of any reason that you couldn't have both systems being used by different players in the same party.

 

[Conaill]

Of course. It's also entirely possible that some chunks of it suit him just fine, and that he would think that it wouldn't make much sense to come up with alternative rules that are almost but not exactly the same. Or - heaven forbid! - he might actually notice a good idea he hadn't thought of already. Or maybe he might want to focus a littel more on a particular aspect that BESM hasn't covered very well.

I don't know about anyone else, but this sounds really critical of the author on a level that is bordering on personal. This is an undercurrent that I've noticed in all your posts on this topic thread thus far. I don't know the author or the product at all, yet your pseudo-sarcastic tone is instinctively making me want to side with him regardless. This creates the necessity in me to overcome the emotional bias you're inducing just so that I can continue to reasonably and objectively consider your points. This style of debate (intentional or not) isn't really conducive to you getting your point across.

I'm sorry if I came across as sarcastic, and I apologize to Sigil if he had the impression I was attacking him directly. I don't think I was being particularly critical of Sigil in the part you quoted. Just pointing out that two minds are often better than one, and there's almost always *something* you can learn from looking how someone else approached the same problem, even if it's only identifying a niche where the other product is lacking.

I haven't yet bought Sigil's work (and I probably won't, because it seems unlikely my current group would be interested in a point-buy system, no matter how much I expound on the virtues of systems like GURPS), but based on his responses in this thread he seems like a great guy, and it sounds like he went about constructing this system exactly how I would have done it (in terms of trying to fit the existing classes).

It's just that his early "willfull ignorance" comment struck a very sensitive nerve in me, because it goes directly against the direction in which I had hoped (perhaps naively) the field would be moving. I definitely understand the economics of being a "small" author and the impossibility of keeping on top of *everything* that has been published. And those I think are excellent reasons for him not having been aware of BESM or other point-based systems out there.

Guess I'm more exasperated with the OGL itself and the publishing model it has engendered than with Sigil personally. It has certainly caused me to become a lot more ambivalent on whether the OGL in its current implementation should be considered a good thing in the long term for the gaming community as a whole.

 

[woodelf]

Besides, isn't is primarily a small set of publishers (authors?) that are really obfuscating their PI/OGC statements?

Deliberately obfuscating? Perhaps no one. Obfuscating, whether intentionally or not? Probably the vast majority. There are very few PI/OGC declarations that i've read that are any more complex than "100% OGC, save the following terms, which are PI:" that are not in some way ambiguous. Most people seem to rely on either CYA statements like "...and anything derived from the D20SRD" or vague, reaching definitions like "all original names". what's "derived"? what's "original"?

As to his problem: if Sigil wants to avoid accidental reuse, he needs to avoid anything that isn't 100% OGC, because even if it's clear w hat parts of a work are OGC and which aren't, he might reuse a bit he read that wasn't OGC, forgetting that it came from that book.

 

[der_kluge]

I've been intending on picking this up since I read about it on rpgnow. Heck, I own everything else of Sigil's, why stop now?

Seriously, the idea really intrigues me. I might even be able to fix the bard with these rules!

I can see how some people wouldn't like these rules. It does beg the question - if I use this, and the Elements of Magic, which I also intend to pick up - am I playing D&D any more?