[unnamed] indie RPG in development

[Zireael]

The goals of the project are as follows:
1) remove the Linear Warriors Quadratic Wizards effect
2) remove the clunky tables (too much math)
3) retain the race-class-skill-feat system of the d20 and the use of the d20 dice
4) focus equally on combat and non-combat
5) make it easier for newbies than D&D

Link: http://treskri.wikidot.com/mechanika-dla-treskri.
Warning! Text in Polish, however, Google Translate should do its job - there isn't much text now, mostly bare-bones rules.

I won't translate it into English right now, for two reasons:
a) keeping track of a project in development in two language versions is too hard (making sure both versions are up-to-date)
b) not enough time (studying at uni)

--------------------------------------------------------
I need help mostly with point 4) of the goals. The indie is mostly based on d20, but with stuff adapted from other rulesets - for example, I saw Action Points in Fallout and thought they are easier to understand than D&D's (swift/minor)free/move/standard/full-round actions.

P.S. I take ideas concerning the name of the project itself.

[Double_J]

So, it basically sounds like you want to mainly want to use the d20 OGL, but want to re-work the classes.  As to point 4 -- to me, that just seems to be a matter of refocusing the scenes/encounters ..... maybe some fluff that gives more rewards for non-combat activities (and, in turn, lowers the rewards for combat).

The "quadratic wizards" effect is simply a matter of redesigning the magic system from the ground up (I know that I said "simply", but that's actually a pretty tall order when trying to keep it within the confines of still being operational in the d20 system).

To what clunky tables are you referring?

Honestly, the d20 system is not newb-friendly -- and it's specifically because of the way that the class-skill-feat system interacts internally.  Another major issue is the "ivory tower" design methodology.  Combine that with the sheer number of options, then, as far as I can tell, these issues are pretty much inextricably linked.

To me, based on your design goals, it sounds like you want to design a d20-compatible campaign setting.  Which is totally cool -- just remember that your design goals need to mesh with your work efforts.
[/twocents]


Also, for some reason, when I hit the "translate" button, it says that the document is already in English -- which is clearly not the case.
I also tried to translate it "back" to Polish, and then back to English; but got the same result.

[Zireael]

I want to make d20 based system, yes, but one that is easier for the newbies than D&D is. I combine stuff from all editions of D&D, taking what was done well in 3e and in 4e and changing what was done badly.
Yes, I am aware that it is not possible to change some aspects of the system completely, and that some legacy of the d20 will remain.

I rework not only the classes, but also the spells system and the way skills are gained. Attributes are also slightly changed. I also lumped together all sorts of special qualities and special attacks and feats - under the name of 'advantages'.

Clunky tables? I mean all those tables in D&D - equipment tables, damage tables, class level tables, attributes tables. Too much math.

Someone suggested taking a look at Star Wars talent trees.

Re Google Translate: I pasted the link itself, chose the language as Polish (for some reason, GT suggested Swedish [?!]) and translated into English. It worked. The result is not perfect, but it does the job. But indeed, GT language detection is weird.

[Zireael]

Main features:
- lack of levels
- saving throws as in D&D
- attributes as in D&D, but replaced by the modifiers- HP representing the character's stamina
- action points instead of the minor/move/full-round
- a varied selection of class and race as in D&D
- body parts specified for damage
- 'advantages' bought for XP
- XP given by the DM as he wishes
- some of the more powerful 'advantages' require ranks (a certain number of XP has to be spent earlier)
- no criticals, no random damage dice
- no spell failure
- changed armor check penalties
- advancement paths for given classes
- less skills than in D&D (16 for now)
- every class (fighter and magic-user to use the AD&D terminology) uses the same system
- every class has access to manevuers (a bit of a cross between Tome of Battle and 4e)
- XP price for some potentially unbalancing spells (scry, teleport etc.)

The skill system is 100% done (I only have to add the missing descriptions). The classes are about halfway done - that is, some of the classes are missing. There are several examples of manevuers, advancement paths (equivalent of PrCs) and monsters. Combat rules are 90% done. Equipment lists are halfway done.

I'm wondering whether to leave 'advantages' (feats, special qualities, special attacks lumped together) as they are or should I use something similar to talent trees from SW?

Should I stick to the D&D nine-alignment system (modified a bit) or should I use something else?

[Zireael]

No comments? No ideas? I want some input as to whether I should leave XP and other prizes in the DM's hands or if I should enforce some rules... What about the social part of the ruleset?

[Callan S.]

What's play meant to be about? What do you want play to revolve around? For example - if you want play to be about courtly intrigues....well, removing levels just aint gunna do much one way or another. So I look at the list of changes or similarities and have no idea what your shooting for and whether any of it is, by my estimate (FWIW), will work toward your goal.

[Zireael]

What's play meant to be about? What do you want play to revolve around? For example - if you want play to be about courtly intrigues....well, removing levels just aint gunna do much one way or another. So I look at the list of changes or similarities and have no idea what your shooting for and whether any of it is, by my estimate (FWIW), will work toward your goal.

Play is meant to be like in Warhammer or D&D, but balanced. Not leaning towards combat, 75/25 as in 4e, but 50/50 or even more in favor of roleplaying and social skills.

[Justin Halliday]

Seems to me that some of your goals are in opposition.

You want to simplify D&D, but you're keeping lots of the complicated parts of D&D (feats, skills, etc), and then adding more components that are arguably more complicated than D&D:

- Advantages (with ranks) that are purchasable
- Body location damage
- XP prices for some spells

The way to make a simpler game is the reduce the number of up-front choices that players make and to streamline each of the systems in the game.

[Zireael]

Advantages = feats and skills and special qualities and special attacks. It's easier to keep track of, say 5 advantages, than of 4+ skills and 4+ feats plus special qualities of a D&D character of a comparable level.
Body location damage is an attempt to make it a little more realistic than D&D is. This system is not merely "D&D simplified", it's meant to be my own system also.
XP prices for spells were present in several iterations of D&D - IIRC, 2e and 3e.

[Callan S.]

Play is meant to be like in Warhammer or D&D, but balanced. Not leaning towards combat, 75/25 as in 4e, but 50/50 or even more in favor of roleplaying and social skills.

I guess I'm just trying to figure out questions that might help to consider. So:

How are you making it 50/50? Do the rules tell the GM to do that?

What duty does roleplaying perform? Can you change the ending of a session or even a campaign on roleplaying alone? Does this rely on a GM judging the roleplay? What if this GM judgement means, for some GM's only one in a million times can roleplay change the outcome? Is that a bad GM, or could the rules actually ensure the GM does not have so much influence?

Maybe the questions are useful to consider, maybe not. I'm not putting them out as if they have to be considered.

[Justin Halliday]

Advantages = feats and skills and special qualities and special attacks. It's easier to keep track of, say 5 advantages, than of 4+ skills and 4+ feats plus special qualities of a D&D character of a comparable level.

Maybe I'm confused, but in Goals you listed:

3) retain the race-class-skill-feat system of the d20 and the use of the d20 dice

And then in Main Features you listed:

'advantages' bought for XP

Are these the same unified system or separate systems?  It's not really clear.

[Zireael]

3) retain the race-class-skill-feat system of the d20 and the use of the d20 dice

Rewritten: 3) retain the race-class system of the d20 and the use of d20 dice; use advantages as a way of simplifying the skill-feat system

[Justin Halliday]

Rewritten: 3) retain the race-class system of the d20 and the use of d20 dice; use advantages as a way of simplifying the skill-feat system

Better.

Do you have some examples of how the advantages would work with various skills, feats, and in combat?

[Zireael]

The advantages work mostly as the feats did. They give a numerical bonus to the test. For example, Skilled gives a +5 bonus on a certain skill check. Weapon Focus gives +2 to hit. Special attacks work as combat-related feats that allow you to do more stuff did, like Spring Attack. Special qualities are either adapted to work just by giving new abilities, or are converted to numerical bonuses. Spell resistance was removed completely.

Combat works mostly like in D&D, though I'm wondering whether I should tweak armors and AC a bit. There is no random damage, however. You roll your attack against enemy's Endurance - if you win by a lot, he's severely wounded; if you win barely, he's just wounded.

[Zireael]

There are some monsters over at the wiki which show how the system works.

Armors give DR now.

I tweaked the prices - mundane equipment (poles, ropes, food rations) are for a number of cp, normal equipment (armor, weapons, mounts) for a number of sp, and magic items are for gp. The numbers are mostly the same as in D&D 3.5 or PF. This is to reflect the fact that magic items are extremely rare and hard to obtain. I'm also wondering whether I should give some items a XP price.

To be done:
- manevuers
- a description of ability scores in RL terms
- short description for each class
- magic items