Thoughts on a theoretical rules-light d20.

[AeroDm]

I am not familar with the Over the Edge system so I can't comment. Are they d20?

As for simplifying, I think cutting out a lot of the 3e rules can make it easier. You don't really need to revamp combat, just only allow the basic options. Ban all classes but fighter, rogue, sorcerer and then allow the sorc to choose any spell. Ignore class skills. Don't use splat books. Don't use AoO.

That right there is a really simple system. Also, a lot of what is desired can be done by the DM. I assume the drive to make this is to give players a quick intro to the game. The DM can call for opposed skill checks instead of DCs by his whim without it being a game mechanic.

Regardless, interesting thread. Keep it going.

 

[ichabod]

I am not familar with the Over the Edge system so I can't comment. Are they d20?

It's made by Atlas Games, but it's not d20. In fact, it's pre-d20. It uses d6's. Basically, each character has a profession. It could be anything, like taxi driver, priest, green beret, and so on. You get a certain number of dice for your profession, which apply to any reasonable skill you would have from that profession. Then you can have extra specific skills, each having a certain number of dice. Experience is in terms of bonus dice, which you can add to individual checks during play, or turn in several between adventures to increase one of your skills. You just have to come up with professions and skills that fit the fantasy genre and your world.

 

[Toj]

We use our own streamline system... but I am not too sure how streamlined, or rules light it is. It is faster in combat.

We have one BAB, which applies to all your attacks. This basically is your fights BAB and your number of attacks is still determining normally. For instance, if you have a BAB of +6, you get 2 attacks.

We use defense, which is 10 plus your BAB, plus your dex, modified by armors etc.

Armor is AC, but it reduces damage instead of making it harder to hit.

So this might be what it looks like:
BAB: +10
#Attacks: 2
Defense: 20
AC: 5

We also use MP for magic... and we are considering making cleric spells all based on DC.

 

[tsadkiel]

My advice would be to take an already simple game and modify it to fit the genre better. The beauty of simple games is that they are easier to modify. My choices would be either the already mentioned Feng Shui, or Over the Edge. The former for more cinematic, the latter for more realistic. Both are excellent simple systems, and I know from experience OtE works well for fantasy.

Nobody's actually playing anything here. No one's really even designing anything here - this is a purely hypothetical thread about what a rules-light d20 would look like.

(And if I ruled the world, 3rd Edition would have used the Feng Shui engine; it's easily my favorite game ever.)

 

[Sir Whiskers]

This is an interesting discussion, but I think one thing needs to be clarified before going forward: are these rules intended to replace the 3E rules in personal campaigns, or are they intended as an introduction to 3E? The two are not identical.

If these are supposed to introduce new players to the system, then major gameplay mechanics cannot be changed. Imagine the confusion players would experience going from a rules-set where classes are different, magic use is different, etc.

Assuming we are discussing introductory rules, here are some thoughts:

*Classes. No alternative classes. It's fine to limit the classes to the core four (Fighter, Cleric, Rogue, Wizard), tho some may prefer to substitute Sorcerer for Wizard (easier for newbies to play, IMO). Aristocrat and Expert might be good additions.
*Spellcasting. No MP systems. If using wizards, Vancian magic (fire and forget). If using sorcerers, limited spell selection. No changing/combining spell lists, but significantly limiting the spells available (by 50% or so) would be helpful.
*Feats. Yep, no doubt these could be trimmed without serious gameplay issues. Changing current class abilities to feats would be a no-no. Item creation feats would probably not be missed, though I'd prefer that at least some metamagic feats stay in, despite the additional rules.
*Skills. I agree with RangerWickett that these are not much trouble, even for beginning players. More info (when to use, which can Take 10/20, example DC's, etc. would be useful).
*Magic items. As with feats, a limited selection of magic items would be fine. Many items have great flavor, but are not really necessary for an introductory rules-set.

All of the above comments concern only a rules-set designed to introduce new players. If this discussion is primarily about simplifying the 3E rules in general, then most/all of the above can be ignored.

 

[Larcen]

Argh. One thing that I been a meanin' t' do fer th' longest time is to drop anchor on any n' all rules (spells, feats, abilities, what have ye) that only be addin' a +1, yea, a +2 even. This would make fer a much less "grainey" system for ye.

I mean, do I really has to be readin' an entire par'graph to know Bless be lending me a lousy +1?? Deep six the spell I say, and all dem others like it too.

Ways I figure on it, if'n I don't get at least-wise a +3 or +4, it ain't worth recordin' n' keepin' track o' it. 'Rithmetic and adding up all o' those nigglin' +1s be damn to the briney deep I say!

 

[Havoc]

Lesse.....a simplified 3e that anyone could learn....refine, refine, refine....

Four classes: Warrior, Mage, Priest, Rogue. Blend together with multiclassing to get the character you want. 4 skill points all, except the rogue who gets 8. No more class skills.

Yes. I think the problem with character creation is that with the number of classes and prestiges classes, the whole advantage of having classes over a point system is lost; I actually find it more complicated to create a determined PC (emulating, for instance, a litterary figure) with D&D than with GURPS.
By diminishing the number of classes, the potential for abusing the system greatly diminishes; by allowing access to all skills, you do not have to "navigate" the class system to acquire them and you can express the talents of your envisionned PC right from the start.
The four base classes would also need to be tweaked; classes should more concentrate on the mechanics and be less linked to the role-playing aspects of the classes; i.e. the cleric and the wizard classes should not make any assumption about how magic works, allowing to create sorcerers and druids.

However, I think that feats (and also talent trees from d20 modern) are nice to keep as is; ideas normally implemented as abilities from prestige classes can thus be emulated. As feats are more limited in scope than the abilities of whole classes or prestige classes, they can be reviewed and accepted or rejected by the GM on a one-by-one basis.

 

[Golem2176]

Try Arcana Unearthed for the Spell Sytem. Not MP, but just the spells. As for MP, check out the Everquest Player's Handbook for D20.

 

[Marimmar@Home]

Points I have found to be problematic with new players are:

1) Spells that have more than one effect or more than 3 lines of text.
2) complex combat modifiers like power attack or rapid shot.
3) Effects that run only for a short time like raging or spell durations that are based on rounds.
4) AoO
5) If I move I can only attack once? But not if I move 5'?
6) Game stoppers like grapple.

~Marimmar

 

[Aaron2]

1) Spells that have more than one effect or more than 3 lines of text.

For me, Entangle is the worse offender in this case. For spells, I'd say to remove all the caster level depended effects. Esp. for near meaningless things like range.

OTOH, I've never had a problem with AoOs.


Aaron