Working on a low power, low fantasy campaign and a system to match it. Using a mishmash of various x20 system rules to achieve the right feel and decided to place my thoughts here for others to mull over. If anyone sees something they've done before, please let me know how it turned out when you played with it.

I plan to keep core stats (STR, CON, DEX, INT, WIS, CHA), but display them in the true20 method of just having the modifier. The first (possible) change is implementing a system for chargen based off of Perfect20's raise system. I'm on the fence on if I'll have players make their own class, or just use it as a tool to make campaign specific classes. The class generator works by breaking down the class into it's Combat, Save, Feat, Skill Point, Trait, and Trait TEIR progression. Points from a pool are distributed from a pool to each segment, with no more than two points to any one segment. Putting 2 points in Combat would give that class the 'Best' combat progression of a fighter with +1 BAB per level. 2 Points in the Save progression gives 3 good saves instead of 1 good and 2 poor saves, so on and so forth with the notable exception of Trait TEIR. Traits are meant to be the usual class specific abilities, and the various abilities are organized into teirs. Mundane things like 'sneak attack' or 'armour mastery' are open to all, while traits for pseudo-casters (Paladin, Ranger) are second teir and most of the good magic is third tier.
I tried applying this logic to the core classes in the Pathfinder rule book with marginal success. Aside from Rogues 8+INT skill points progression, most classes are built with roughly 6 points. The Ranger was notably higher than the rest, 7 or 8 points depending on how you break down the feats and traits, and Sorcerer appeared to only have 4 points building it.

Class aside, Character gen in general has changed. HP has been outed in favor of a 'wound' system which is still be worked on. BAB is now applied to both attack and defense rolls. The maximum character level is set to 10 with anything beyond that being considered 'epic' and earned piece mill rather than by the level. Feats will more than likely be awarded at an accelerated rate so that a character concept can be fully fleshed out in the shorter level period. The magic system will not be X spells per day or spell points, but rather fallow constraits of time and money for ritual casting and a Fatigue system similar to True20 for spontanious casters. Magic is not the wizbang sort and will most likely not be casted during a fight, serving a more utilitarian roll.

Probably the most influential change is the dice. The d20 is dropped in favor of the 3d6 system outlined in the Unearthed Arcana. Since I have a bell curve to work with, I've plugged the attack roll directly into the damage equation.
Atk = 3d6 + STR/DEX +BAB +random mods
Def = 10 + DEX + BAB +random modifiers
If the Atk > Def than the attack is successful! Here is where it gets not so elegant a kinda crunchy. The difference of the two values is found, then added to 10 plus the Armour and Weapon value ((Atk-Def)+10+Wep-Arm). The result of this is a DC for the defender to roll a Fort save against, failure resulting in a wound. I haven't quiet pegged down wounding. I want to have damage be a variable, possibly based off of how much the defender fails their save by. This would allow for a certain degree of bug smashing as weaker monster could be killed in a single solid hit, but let evenly matched fighters duke it out for a few rounds. I estimate the Fort save will fall between 9 and 16 on most evenly matched exchanges and could be closer to 26 to 30 when a combat savy character goes against a non combat character or lower level combatant. I thinking for ever 5 points a character fails the Fort save by, they take a wound which gives them a -1 to their CON (possible a minus to all actions?) and the character will lose consciousness at -3 CON and must make Will saves or die at -5. Since damage is done to CON the Fort saves will become progressively lower, causing a death spiral. Criticals happen on a natural 18, doubling the bonus given by the weapon used, fumbles happen on a natural 3 with something bad happening, probably what would ever screw over the character most at that point in time. I'm also playing with the notion that characters trying to avoid being hit by projectile attacks use their Reflex save +10 akin to how saves work in 4e. Since fire balls won't be exploding everywhere and elaborate traps in a dungeon will not be standard fair, the Reflex save will  be rarely used. At a glance, typical fighter type builds will suffer from this change, while roguesish or monkish types will be at a serious  advantage at low levels and be unaffected at higher levels. The problem is I've set up different methods for reflex save as i have for fort saves, and that kills me inside.


Everything else should function similar to Pathfinder D&D with some tweaks to Skill DCs to adjust for the difficulty in getting a value greater than 14 on the 3d6.

Hmmmmm I suppose that I could swap the rolls for the damage and smooth out my logic problem of having Saves be passive. The new combat formula would go
((Atk-Def)+3d6+Wep-Arm) vs 10+Fort base +CON.

This would put all the rolling in the attacker's hands in all parts of a conflict.

That leaves Magic mechanics and Will saves. Magic is still very much in it's conceptual stage, but I have some reservations on changing it from the Auto success vs Save of classic D&D. Mainly because I don't know what to add to the roll. DCs are typically set as 10+STAT+Caster Lvl vs d20+Save+WIS. I Suppose I could use the smae logic to make it 3d6+STAT+Caster Lvl vs. 10+Save+WIS. I guess I could set the Trait TIER value as 0, 1/2, or 1 for caster lvl. It does not fit well with the types of magic I have in mind, however. There is nothing in the way of mind control, little in the way of illusions, and targeting magic is so difficult that often buffs are used on friendlies where the save would be forfited anyways. It also detracts from the very systematic notion of magic-as-a-science that i'm working on.

Working on logical changes to combat and skill use for complex tasks. Right now i've taken away the notion of 'flat footed', instead favoring a bonus to the attacker based off the situation. Not being able to move effectively in a combat situation may grant the attack a +1, while sniping at an unaware target may be something like +5. I do like the notion of 'combat advantage' from 4e serving as a catch all for governing when certain combat abilities can function, most notable being sneak attack. Currently the rule is combat advantage is granted to all attackers fighting the same target in melee with a bonus equal to Number of attackers - 1. So you have 3 people surrounding a target, they all get +2 on their attack roll and can use any special traits that require the combat advantage state. This leads to more dangerous combat than traditional D&D, such as a 10th lvl fighter bing in real danger from 5 2nd Lvl goblins. Normally that wouldn't even merit rolling out, now it could be certain death if the player didn't use smart tactics. To compensate for this I plan to have a mundane trait that grants a higher threshold for how many attackers are needed to receive a combat advantage bonus.

Skills are a better more difficult. The current notion for complex or time consuming actions is I have have an attempt DC and a Total DC. The attempt would fall in the typical range of 15 for an easy task to 25 for a difficult task. The Total could be anything above 25. The players would roll against the first DC, and if it passes, subtract that number from the total. When they meat or excced the total, the task is down. Depending on the outcome of a failed roll or time constratints, I may disallow the use of the take 10, take 16 and take 18 mechanics.
An example-
Players want to use one of the fate magics on an enemy NPC, which require a great deal of personal information about the target which is a prominent figure in the city they are in. Getting the required info is easy (DC 15), getting it without raising suspecions is not (DC 23). One roll equals one day of info gathering and the Calculator needs total of 100 for him to target the NPC. If there is no time limit, the players could take 18 and get all the info without any suspicion, or take 16 if a character is good at information gathering. Using the Take 16 and take 18 mechanics the players would spend roughly 50 to 500 days gathering info. In this instance I would rule that Take 10 is possible, though it is almost certain the target will catch wind of the plot, or roll it out which may take longer, but could possibly keep the players plans secret.

- check out my game in sig to see how I have implemented some of the things that you have mentioned

1. i don't see the need for separate saves, Constitution can be used as a save just as well as Fortitude.

2. it sounds like the character's will be actively defending themselves meaning a defender must actively parry an incoming attack based on BAB.  Be careful as higher level fighters could automatically hit high level rogues or spell casters in combat.  Remember the d20 system only gives 20 points of resolution.  A fighter type with a bab + str + feats + magic could easily have a +18 to hit at level 8.  This almost completely wipes out the d20 resolution only at level 8 not to mention higher levels.  The problem with 3d6 is that most often you get 11 or near that value.  This means a fighter with a bab of +8 with a str of 20 +5, magic of +3, and feats of +3 could have a total of +18 bonus.  This means that most likely the score will be around the high 20's.  Since your target uses 10 for defense they are looking to get hit pretty much automatically if they are also not a front line fighter.

of course these are inherent problems of d20 and if you accept them as is then you might not take issue as i do.

3. be careful about adding niche rules for circumstances in combat.  it looks like your okay now, but adding rules for complex combat and simple combat seems redundant, players should be able to remember the rules they need to remember easily.

4. at the end of the day think about what your system does that current DnD doesn't do.  There are a lot of people that post here who in imho don't have a good idea of why they are doing what they are.  Also a lot of this attention seems to be based around tweaking DnD.

hope this helps!  good luck!
Jeff

Hey Jeff
I've peeked through your game system before, but will sit down to more thoroughly scourer it for material applicable to my situation. The more I've dweld on it, the more I agree that 'saves' in general are problematic and can be removed. I'm worried that the lack of a numeric boost to CON when determining wounds may make wounding to easy. I'll have to toy with the numbers to see if that's actually true or not.
The combat system is set so that being focused on fighting means you end up being good at fighting and a level 8 character built for fight will excel in that matter. The kind of magic that gives direct and large boosts to stats or attack rolls simply does not exist in my world, nor do bonuses to weapons that make you hit better. There is some room for improving Atk values from Traits and Feats, but the short of it is, characters not made with combat in mine should avoid fighting when possible, or press every advantage the have.

I'm leaning towards having a 'caught off guard' variable in the combat system for when someone gets the drop on another character before they realize there's a fight going down. If the defender fails what ever check is needed to tell what is happening, they lose their BAB to defense.

i'm trying to push combat out of my mind so I can focus on one aspect of magic. The two tracks of magical ability in the game are Sympathy which, will take much meditation on, and Essence work. Essence work is based of Taosit views of the world being broken down into Human, Earth and Heaven spheres. Each sphere corresponds to a Pow Tier, with the lowest tier being humand and the greatest being heaven. I have a good idea on what the Human tier will cover, it focusing on healing the user and anyone he can lay hands on. It should be noted that this school of magic is regarded in the game world about the same way it's regarded in the real world. Some people will swear by Acupressure, Dowsing, Horoscopes, Feng shui, and the Farmer's Almanac. Some people think it's a bunch of bullshit. Since there are no outward signs that any of these things work aside from results that could have occurred naturally without mystic intervention, the practice has been widely accepted by the common people.
The Human tier has pathways for holistic healing which mechanically adds a fixed bonus to a Heal skill check, resulting in a higher bonus for the wounded to make a recovery check on. There is also room for monk style combat prowess or heightened resistance to poison and illness.
The Earth tier covers dowsing (really a weak form of sympathy) and fengshui. A character can adjust objects and subtle energies in an environment to create a lasting zone of productivity. This mechanically adds a fixed bonus to a single character for a particular Skill of the casters choosing. Likewise this can be used to create a fixed minus to a character and as the caster's skill grows in this field the bonus or minus can be increased or decreased and become more flexible in it's targeting.
The Heaven tier is built on the caster taking complex calculations based off of a person's life in relation to the heavenly bodies. From these calculations a persons fate can be discerned vaguely and altered to a small degree. At the start a Calculator (only those who work in the Heaven sphere get this title) can give fortune to a person in the form of adding an extra d6 to any one roll they make, allowing the character to take the 3 highest numbers as there roll. As a Calculator becomes more experienced they will be able to effect more people in the same amount of time doing calculations and uping the die count bonus granted. Calculators can also bestow misfortune in the form of bonus dice being rolled for a character to pick the lowest numbers. Given the harsh nature of the dice, this power can come as a real life saver for a party in dangerous situations.

I'm at an uncertain point with the distribution of Power traits in regard to Essence working. Either I can make all aspects of Essence separate, so that a player building a Calculator would not know how to do feng shui or energy healing, or make it so a Calculator would have these lesser disciplines to a certain degree, though possibly not to their fullest power

More thoughts have been thunk.

Right now I'm set into breaking up all actions into Active, Passive, and Off Guard. Active means a player is making a serious effort to achieve so ends and does the usual 3d6+x to see how well they do. Passive actions are a flat 10+x and represent the player being alert to a situation, but not actively engaging with it. Off guard is simply 10 + Stat bonus. Here the player isn't paying attention or aware of an action, but could still notice.
This system applies to both combat and skills, So it would be possible for a rouge to stab an seriously injure a much more skilled fighter since the fighter could be caught off guard and not receive the benefit of his higher BAB.
Attacking is always active, defending is always passive in combat.

I also intend for take 10, take 16, and take 18 to be used on a regular bases. It will be assumed that if you can complete a skill check by taking 10, you do so. Taking 10 doubles the time to perform a task, Taking 16 results in the action taking x10 longer and taking 18 is x100 times longer. Some actions and situations will bar taking 16 and 18, but taking 10 will be available anytime when bodily harm is not emanate.
This break down of actions should also open the door to useful 'sense' feats that would keep players from being caught off guard in various situations. 

These rules will hopefully combine to form a faster game play and be more stable than having to roll dice on even mundane actions.

Hi,

I seem to typically weird people out by asking questions which are apparently way out of left field (though in board games the question would be a common as dirt one).

Does your game have an end condition? For when play ends? Even if that's the entire campaign ending due to mechanics determining it?

The end condition would be when people don't want to play anymore. There is nothing mechanically for saying when a game stops, though there will be rules for death when a character stops being part of the game.

I'm turning my attention to class building now. I'm pretty happy with how BAB and Skill progression break down, but realize that not much headway can be made for Feats and various Powers until I define what separates the two.
Currently I have these guide lines for Feats, since I'm going to end up rewritting several from d20 to fit with the new mechanics
1. Feats can be picked by anyone
2. Feats do not add a numerical bonus to BAB (or at least only add a very small one)
3. Feats do not stack, if a Feat can be picked multiple times (Skill focus for an example) it will apply to a different skill/item/situation

Powers aren't as well defined but they can add numbers to BAB and Damage where Feats generally can't. I was thinking that any trait that stacked with its self would be a Power. Sneak attack would be a good example, where you get a straight damage bonus for every level you have in it.

I feel I'm falling into a trap of getting to caught up on Combat and not taking into account all the other things you can do in an RPG. I want to try and make sure there are Powers that would be useful outside of combat.

Probably best to tack down all the rules governing combat, skills, death and injury,  and everything else that would be the basic system prior to listing all the feats and powers and how it would change said system
Combat is the most involved section. It aggravates me at times how important combat is to RPGs, but few other activities are as jeopardizing.
At the start there will be a check for initiative. 3d6+WIS
Then those involved can take an Attack Action, Move Action, and Free action. Attack actions can be an Attack, Defense, or Combat maneuver.
A melee Attack is 3d6+BAB+STR vs the targets DEX+BAB+10.
Defense means the character forfeits their attack but receives +2 to their defensive value
Combat Maneuvers are any offensive action against a target that is not hitting it. It is rolled the same as an Attack but with a -2 modifier.
Damage for a successful attack is ((Atk value - Def value)+Weapon bonus) - (CON+Armour bonus)
Most melee weapons have a Weapon bonus of STR+x
If the damage is 1 or greater the attack deals damage in that many wounds. Different weapons deal different types of wounds but the main difference is Lethal and Non-Leathal.
Lethal Damage that is not greater than CON+Armour deals 1 Non-leathal wound
Non-Lethal Damage that is not greater than CON+Armour does nothing.
A Character will react differently based on the type of damage received. Non-Lethal Damage will Stagger a character at CON+3 wounds and knock them unconscious at CON+5. Lethal Damage will Disable a character at CON+3 and start them Dying at CON+5. Different weapons can inflict additional wounds or injuries based on the type. Currently an injury is taken in addition to the wounds if any single attack deals more than 3 lethal wounds.
Staggered and Disabled impart the same effects, though Staggered will go away with just a few minutes rest. If a character is either, they can only perform a single action during combat and can only move at 1/2 their normal speed if they choose to take a move action.
Wounds impart a -1 to all actions for every wound past the Characters CON. If a character had 3 CON they could take 3 wounds before incurring any minuses. The 4th wound would inpart a -1 and the 6th wound would force a Will check or become staggered.
When a character wants to avoid being staggered/disabled or unconscious/Dying they make a Will check. They roll 3d6+WIS-Wounds vs 10. This roll is pass/fail with a pass meaning they are up and fully active and a fail meaning they are effected by that state.
If a player fails the check to avoid Dying, they become unconscious and must make another check. If they fail three such checks in a row they dye. If they succeed once, they stabilize. Additional attacks, or states such as 'bleeding' may increase the DC of each save or prevent the character from stabilizing unless medically treated.

There is currently some trouble with the damage model as it doesn't account well for massive trauma that doesn't result in death. If the system was used in a modern campaign and a character stepped on a landmine, there would be little structure to explain how they may lose one or both legs but still survive the encounter. I could have it be a function of the wounds and injury system, something like '9 wounds is a lost appendage' and story dictates what gets lost.
hmmmm but then you get into the murky waters of hit allocation, random limb charts, and more simulation stuff.

horomancer wrote:
The end condition would be when people don't want to play anymore. There is nothing mechanically for saying when a game stops, though there will be rules for death when a character stops being part of the game.

Callan, have you played a pen and paper RPG before? I mean, your question makes perfect sense in a board game, there needs to be something to make the game end. To decide who won and who didn't. In that sense there are different conflict/task resolution rolls and rules governing them, but those are ideally just a few simple rolls within the game that directs the flow of the story.
There is nothing mechanically that says when a game ends for any RPG I've ever played (except possibly Paranoia). So it's hard for me to understand your point of view. The game ends when the story has been completed or people just simply want to stop for their own reasons. Even if a character dies, assuming the story doesn't involve them being some sort of chosen one, the player can generate a new character and be worked back into play with little difficulty.

For test running such a system my criteria is 'How well does a character do what the player intended him/her to do?' If a player builds a character to be very good at one thing, I want to reward them with actually being good at that one thing compared to everyone else. The flip side of this is to make a system that will enforce a character's weaknesses. d20 type games are plagued with power builds that result in a character being amazing at something, then having some way to not be weak at everything else. I do not like this, there needs to be a fair trade off in my opinion and that is a very  elusive concept to take down.

Callan, have you played a pen and paper RPG before?

To decide who won and who didn't.

There is nothing mechanically that says when a game ends for any RPG I've ever played (except possibly Paranoia). So it's hard for me to understand your point of view.

The game ends when the story has been completed or people just simply want to stop for their own reasons.

For test running such a system my criteria is 'How well does a character do what the player intended him/her to do?' If a player builds a character to be very good at one thing, I want to reward them with actually being good at that one thing compared to everyone else. The flip side of this is to make a system that will enforce a character's weaknesses. d20 type games are plagued with power builds that result in a character being amazing at something, then having some way to not be weak at everything else. I do not like this, there needs to be a fair trade off in my opinion and that is a very  elusive concept to take down.

I see. You  have an interesting line of thought which I do not believe fits with the topic of this thread.

Callan wrote:

The game ends when the story has been completed or people just simply want to stop for their own reasons.

Well, some of the newer indie games are written this way, as I understand it, like Capes or 3:16, for example.

I don't think it works, as a story doesn't just become completed - in part it takes a decision from someone. And 'people' just wanting to stop - were not that much of a pack animal that somehow we decide as a collective. Individuals will have their own different thoughts on when to end a game - how do we resolve those differences? You can use mechanics (perhaps some sort of bidding system, as just one example). What happens when you don't have mechanics and the inevitable differences? That's why I say it doesn't really work.

Khimus wrote:
From my read on Horomancer´s project, I think it is in every way a traditional way, whose purpose is to fix some issues he´s seen in d20.

It's not off topic, I'm talking general design in a general design thread. And it's a design direction you don't want to follow in this thread. Fair enough. No one aught to be be so very fixed on a direction that you'd actually call it a social error to bring up another direction. That ceasing to be design talk and instead turning into a clique. No one said at the start this was a 'no end condition' thread (also, I didn't say games should have an end condition - I described reasons in favour of it, like I might not say a car should have seat belts, but instead describe reasons in favour of having seat belts). So roll on with 'no end condition'.

[font=ariel]Not to beat a dead horse but just to make sure you know how this sounds:[/font]

Mark - "I want to fix a d20 pen and paper rpg - so that I like it more"
Phil - "is this going to be a diceless system?"
Mark - "no, i don't see the need"
Phil - [sub]insert a bunch of reasons for supporting a  diceless system the guy ISN'T using as a model[/sub]
James - "you're not helping"
Phil - "yes I am, and he should have posted with "not a diceless game" in the title

Hi

have you checked e6?

http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/206323-e6-game-inside-d-d.html

Low power, gritty d&d. Best of all (for me) you don't have to make it all up yourself.

Cheers, Charles

Interesting. I hadn't come across this E6 when i was doing research, but it is very much in the same vain. Been swamped with real work so I haven't given much thought to the system lately.

I believe i have a decent wound system figured out. So far i like it better than the one mentioned before.

Damage comes in two forms- Lethal (most all weapons) and Stun (special weapons, fists, fall damage and elements)

All weapons have a damage rating and damage divider, typical 2 for blades or 3 for blunt things. For weapons, you roll your hit, and if you do, take the success and add the weapons damage. Then divide by the damage divider and round down. The number you get is the magnitude of the wound you take and refer to the small wound chart (i dislike charts, but this is a small one so I'll make the compromise)
                    1                            2                      3                      4                        5                                              6+
Lethal-        Hurt                    Bleed            Mame (-1)      Crippled (-2)      Save against Death                  Increase death save
Stun-          Bruised              Stunned        Staggered (-1)  Gimped (-2)      Save against Unconscious            Start Lethal Track

The meat of it is you don't die from cumulative wounds. Rather you die from a very bad wound, or bleed out and die from shock after the battle is concluded. How ever since you can take a minus from taking a bad enough wound, you get a spiral of death effect, though it is not so sever as to make combat anti-climatic (hopefully)

Armour is being changed so that rather than reducing damage out right, it changes a set number of Lethal wounds to Stun and/or Stun to ignored.

Hurt and Bruised don't do anything mechanically aside make it obvious you've been roughed up. Bleed deals damage which requires a Heal check to stop, otherwise you run the risk of bleeding out into unconsciousness and death. Stunned does no real damage but gives a -1 to the targets initiative, sometimes allowing the attacker to get multiple attacks in if they where close in the turn order. Mame, Cripple, Stagger, and Gimped all act the same in that they hurt and give a minus to further actions. Staggered and Gimped go away with about 10 minutes rest, while Mamed and Crippled need Heal checks or healing magic of some sort to remove the minus effect. I'm avoiding hit allocation tables at this time though it could be added with minimum effort as add ons to these 4 wound types.