My own take on d20: H20 [Help much appreciated!]

[StormingMarcus]

Goodmorning to all of you!

I'm here asking for help for a project that unfortunately has recently grown stale.
About a year ago, I wanted to try my personal version of the most famous OGL system. I started some topics on an italian forum, and gauged some interest from the users.
As I could have expected, that interest slowly faded away, so I'm asking if you are willing to help me shaping that roleplaying system. It should be a sword&sorcery oriented system, and its principal sources so far are True20 and D&D (3.5 and 4e).

Here (http://zaxarius.altervista.org/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=14467&sid=4eb4dca4bae47d6bcee28e62abdbdafd) is the list of the documents produced so far (in italiani); they are neither complete nor definitive, and the system is far from playest state.

I'll give more information and translate the material if there's some interest in the project.

P.S: H20 means Homebrew20, and yes, it's a very dumb placeholder name.

DOCUMENT LIST
Character Development (http://docs.google.com/View?id=dftbgzkr_50d2jc5vds)
Sparse Notes on the Project (http://docs.google.com/View?id=dftbgzkr_51gc89zkf3)
Conditions (http://docs.google.com/View?id=dftbgzkr_55gjxf7dcj)
Combat (http://docs.google.com/View?id=dftbgzkr_57ckj5h7f6)
Health & Hitpoints (http://docs.google.com/View?id=dftbgzkr_53fn2z9scd)
Feats (http://docs.google.com/View?id=dftbgzkr_59fnv3kfdr)
Rogue (http://docs.google.com/View?id=dftbgzkr_61c2drkddb)
Fighter (http://docs.google.com/View?id=dftbgzkr_67fh9372d7)
Erudite (http://docs.google.com/View?id=dftbgzkr_82gprdprg4)
Skills (http://docs.google.com/View?id=dftbgzkr_72gnfq3dft)
Wealth (http://docs.google.com/View?id=dftbgzkr_703jm8rxs5)
Magic (http://docs.google.com/View?id=dftbgzkr_84xmnj35g2)

[Altair_the_Vexed]

I might be interested in helping... but I speak no Italian.

Do you have any of these in English? Even if they're bad online translations, I'll find it easier than running the Italian through my limited Latin & French knowledge for a translation.

:smallbiggrin:

[StormingMarcus]

I've translated nothing so far, but i can provide you some basic information while i try to create some english document.

- 20 levels.
- 1/2 level bonus on every d20 roll and damage rolls.
- three wide "classes" à la true20: erudito (erudite), combattente (warrior), vagabondo (rogue).
- No class abilities; only feats and talents.
- At-will spellcasting for combat purpose and rituals for long-term effects.
- No attacks of opportunity.
- Multiclass via specific feats that grant you the possibility to take talents reserved to other classes.
- Static defenses: Reflexes, Fortitude and will.
- No AC, armor gives DR.
- Hit points, and a bloodied condition at 1/2hp.
- No critical, if you overcome defense by 5 (and every 5 multiple), you deal +1[A] damage.
- Wealth stat, no hard coinage.
- Monster creation should be level base, using the same classes used for Pcs.

These are just the basic informations, and i think that something's still missing.
Feel free to ask, by the way...

[StormingMarcus]

Here's the first document online:

Character Development (http://docs.google.com/View?id=dftbgzkr_50d2jc5vds).

If you find any mistake or lapsus, feel free to show me them.

In the first post I'll keep the updated doc list.

[Altair_the_Vexed]

I've translated nothing so far, but i can provide you some basic information while i try to create some english document.

- 20 levels.
- 1/2 level bonus on every d20 roll and damage rolls.
- three wide "classes" à la true20: erudito (erudite), combattente (warrior), vagabondo (rogue).
- No class abilities; only feats and talents.
- At-will spellcasting for combat purpose and rituals for long-term effects.
- No attacks of opportunity.
- Multiclass via specific feats that grant you the possibility to take talents reserved to other classes.
- Static defenses: Reflexes, Fortitude and will.
- No AC, armor gives DR.
- Hit points, and a bloodied condition at 1/2hp.
- No critical, if you overcome defense by 5 (and every 5 multiple), you deal +1[A] damage.
- Wealth stat, no hard coinage.
- Monster creation should be level base, using the same classes used for Pcs.

These are just the basic informations, and i think that something's still missing.
Feel free to ask, by the way...
I have two comments to make:


I've found that the Wealth system from d20 Modern is difficult to use, and encourages people to treat towns as "vending machines": rather than looking for merchants and so on, they simply make a Wealth check and declare they are buying X Y and Z.

I played the old Star Wars d20 system (the one before D&D 3.5), and without Attacks of Opportunity, movement and other actions in a melee seemed a bit strange and unnatural. (This was before I had become used to AoO through playing D&D.)

Of course, the way that you have handled these issues may make my comment irrelevant.

Aside from those two comments, all your concepts appear to be good. I personally like the idea of broad classes with special abilities being taken as feats.

[StormingMarcus]

I've found that the Wealth system from d20 Modern is difficult to use, and encourages people to treat towns as "vending machines": rather than looking for merchants and so on, they simply make a Wealth check and declare they are buying X Y and Z.
I made some little changes to the system, you are required to make checks no more, the higher cost you can afford is simply 10 + wealth. That makes less random results. Regarding "vending machines" problem, I think it's the same as Diplomacy: roll only or roleplay too. Based on the situations, I can accept both approaches, but I prefer the second (the RPing one).


I played the old Star Wars d20 system (the one before D&D 3.5), and without Attacks of Opportunity, movement and other actions in a melee seemed a bit strange and unnatural. I've tried True20 (without AoO) and I didn't miss them. I think they require the board and rely upon player tactics. I don't love tactic combat, I prefer an "action-economy" approach: the tactical choices should regard which action to take (and what to do with them), not where to place my miniature on the board to take the better tactical advantage.
BTW, I realize having explained the concept very badly, I hope you still got the meaning.


Aside from those two comments, all your concepts appear to be good. I personally like the idea of broad classes with special abilities being taken as feats. having strict classes means you are going to create zillions of them to accomodate every strange character concept. With less, broad classes, you only need feats and talents.

[StormingMarcus]

Races (http://docs.google.com/View?id=dftbgzkr_52g6w6z6dm) are up!

[Dragatus]

Looks fairly good, but I have a few comments.

1. I'd reduce the number of ability scores. Specifically I'd get rid of Constitution and Charisma. I'd eliminate CON because everybody needs it and I'd eliminate CHA because it's a dump stat for over 80% of all characters. In my current 3.5 campaign we have 6 players and my rogue is the only character with a CON below 12 and CHA above 10.

You could use Strength as a substitute in all the formulas that curently use Constitution (such as Fortitude defence and CON based skills) except for hitpoints. Those could be purely class based and perhaps improved with feats. And Intelligence could be used as substitute for all Charisma skills. Starting wealth probably shouldn't depend on any ability score.

I suppose this change should also bring around a reduction in character points the players get. Least could be 2, lesser 3, standard 4, superior 5, and supreme 7.

2. The humans get no ability score modifiers, but all the other races get a net +1 increase. I propose a change that humans get +1 to their highest ability. If they have multiple equaly high abilities the player decides which one gets the bonus. Note also that the human extra feat is now less valuable than in 3.5 because everybody gets 11 feats over 20 levels instead of just 7.

3. I am a bit sceptical about +1/2 level damage bonus. I fear it might get out of hand, but then again we haven't seen all your game mechanics so perhaps my fears are unfounded.

[StormingMarcus]

1. I'd reduce the number of ability scores. Specifically I'd get rid of Constitution and Charisma. I'd eliminate CON because everybody needs it and I'd eliminate CHA because it's a dump stat for over 80% of all characters. In my current 3.5 campaign we have 6 players and my rogue is the only character with a CON below 12 and CHA above 10.

You could use Strength as a substitute in all the formulas that curently use Constitution (such as Fortitude defence and CON based skills) except for hitpoints. Those could be purely class based and perhaps improved with feats. And Intelligence could be used as substitute for all Charisma skills. Starting wealth probably shouldn't depend on any ability score. I kept 6 stats for (very remote) compatibility with other OGL systems, and because players are used to them. Your proposed solution is not bad at all, but I prefer not going too extreme.


2. The humans get no ability score modifiers, but all the other races get a net +1 increase. I propose a change that humans get +1 to their highest ability. If they have multiple equaly high abilities the player decides which one gets the bonus. Note also that the human extra feat is now less valuable than in 3.5 because everybody gets 11 feats over 20 levels instead of just 7. Without any racial penalty to stat I had the feeling now humans being the redheaded stepchild, but I took into account extra trained skill and feat and was satisfied. +1 to highest ability might be too much though. What about giving an extra multiclass feat to humans (MC feats let you take talents related to other classes) in addition to their extra feat? Too much?


3. I am a bit sceptical about +1/2 level damage bonus. I fear it might get out of hand, but then again we haven't seen all your game mechanics so perhaps my fears are unfounded. I was not entirely accurate about it; it's 1/2 physical modifier to damage from physical attacks and 1/2 mental modifier to damage from mental attacks: numbers are roughly equal to 1/2 level, so it's basically the same. There are two reasons for it:
- Internal consistency: You add 1/2 level to every roll you make (and to defenses).
- Having eliminated AC (substituted by Reflexes), armors must grant something other than AC bonus, so I opted for DR. Given that, a case could occur when you have 0 possibility to damage your opponent (its DR higher than your max damage), and I put two fixes: rethought criticals and +1/2 level to damage. I hope they are not redundant.

[StormingMarcus]

Here is Health & Hitpoints (http://docs.google.com/View?id=dftbgzkr_53fn2z9scd) document.

About it, I still have some doubts about:
- Non lethal damage.
- Healing ratios.

Simplifying, they are the only two aspects where I deviated from 4e...

Then, different nomenclature and little mechanical changes are welcome: as it stands, it resembles a 4e with serial ripped off (and i do not want to blatantly violate copyrights).

[Dragatus]

I kept 6 stats for (very remote) compatibility with other OGL systems, and because players are used to them. Your proposed solution is not bad at all, but I prefer not going too extreme.

As you wish.


Without any racial penalty to stat I had the feeling now humans being the redheaded stepchild, but I took into account extra trained skill and feat and was satisfied. +1 to highest ability might be too much though. What about giving an extra multiclass feat to humans (MC feats let you take talents related to other classes) in addition to their extra feat? Too much?

I don't see why +1 to highest ability would be too much. All the other races get a net +1 bonus to stats and feats are worth less than in 3.5. So no, I don't think an extra MC feat would be too much either.


I was not entirely accurate about it; it's 1/2 physical modifier to damage from physical attacks and 1/2 mental modifier to damage from mental attacks: numbers are roughly equal to 1/2 level, so it's basically the same. There are two reasons for it:
- Internal consistency: You add 1/2 level to every roll you make (and to defenses).
- Having eliminated AC (substituted by Reflexes), armors must grant something other than AC bonus, so I opted for DR. Given that, a case could occur when you have 0 possibility to damage your opponent (its DR higher than your max damage), and I put two fixes: rethought criticals and +1/2 level to damage. I hope they are not redundant.

The character development document say you get +1 stat increase every 5 levels. I don't see how that leads to +1/2 level damage.

[StormingMarcus]

I don't see why +1 to highest ability would be too much. All the other races get a net +1 bonus to stats and feats are worth less than in 3.5. So no, I don't think an extra MC feat would be too much either. So, I'd consider either a +1 to the highest score or a MC bonus feat. Which one do you prefer?


The character development document say you get +1 stat increase every 5 levels. I don't see how that leads to +1/2 level damage. There are no correlation between +1 stat increases and +1/2 level damage. Why have you inferred that?
Quoting myself,
I was not entirely accurate about it; it's 1/2 physical modifier to damage from physical attacks and 1/2 mental modifier to damage from mental attacks: numbers are roughly equal to 1/2 level, so it's basically the same. There are two reasons for it:
- Internal consistency: You add 1/2 level to every roll you make (and to defenses).
- Having eliminated AC (substituted by Reflexes), armors must grant something other than AC bonus, so I opted for DR. Given that, a case could occur when you have 0 possibility to damage your opponent (its DR higher than your max damage), and I put two fixes: rethought criticals and +1/2 level to damage. I hope they are not redundant. I do not speak about any correlation between stat increases and 1/2 level to damage rolls.

BTW, I'm having some hardware technical difficulties and I will have to "borrow" internet connections from my friends. My replies could be slowlier from now on.

[Dragatus]

So, I'd consider either a +1 to the highest score or a MC bonus feat. Which one do you prefer?

The +1.


There are no correlation between +1 stat increases and +1/2 level damage. Why have you inferred that?

From this:
I was not entirely accurate about it; it's 1/2 physical modifier to damage from physical attacks and 1/2 mental modifier to damage from mental attacks: numbers are roughly equal to 1/2 level, so it's basically the same.

If you get 1/2 physical/mental modifier to damage from physical/mental attacks and the numbers are roughly equal to 1/2 level, that would indicate that the physical modifier increases at a rate of 1/2 level.

It seems however, that there was some sort of miscommunication.

[StormingMarcus]

My fault, miscommunication occured because I am using ambiguous or incorrect nomenclature.

By physical modifier I mean the Base Attack Bonus for physical attacks (those using Str, Dex or Con as their key), and by mental modifier the BAB for mental attacks.
Those are equal to 1/2 level and are further modified by a class bonus (fighters +2 to phys; rogues +1 to both; erudites +2 to ment).

Looking for a name shorter than "Mental/Physical Base Attack Bonus", I used the term Modifier. Suggestions for a more proper term are welcome.

[StormingMarcus]

Conditions (http://docs.google.com/View?id=dftbgzkr_55gjxf7dcj) are up!

There is some overlapping and I am still uncertain on some condition. I want to limit their number, but I am not sure how to achieve it.

Below (in the document) there is the description of a mechanic inspired by Primetime Adventures (a game I have not played but I somehow know its mechanics) and that should grant some more group collaboration and discourage the employment of the 0rule by the Game Master.

[StormingMarcus]

Combat (http://docs.google.com/View?id=dftbgzkr_57ckj5h7f6) is up!

Much less tactical than 4e, I'm still uncertain about the whole document... Something here and something there do not convince me.

Anyway, read and comment!

[StormingMarcus]

Feats (http://docs.google.com/View?id=dftbgzkr_59fnv3kfdr) are up too!

[StormingMarcus]

Rogue (http://docs.google.com/View?id=dftbgzkr_61c2drkddb) is up!

[StormingMarcus]

Sorry, I'm a bit slow on the translations...

By the way, given the somewhat abstract nature of hit point, I think the Bloodied and Bleeding terms are not correct. Do you have a better name to suggest?
I think it could be something like "shaken", or even "fatigued", so merging the two conditions, and obviosuly modifying some rules according to this merging.

[StormingMarcus]

The Fighter (http://docs.google.com/View?id=dftbgzkr_67fh9372d7) is out!

[lesser_minion]

The link to this project from your sig is broken - it should be:

Homebrew 20 (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=125867)

I quite liked True20, so this should be an interesting game.

[StormingMarcus]

Thank you for noticing it.
Despite the project being very incomplete, now I am looking for a way to introduce Aspects from Spirit of the Century, albeit in a simplified way.

[StormingMarcus]

At last I'm back (I hope)!
Now with Wealth (http://docs.google.com/View?id=dftbgzkr_703jm8rxs5).
I translated it a bit in a hurry, so I hope it's intelligible nonetheless.
Suggestions (grammar and gaming ones) always welcome!

[StormingMarcus]

Long time no see...

Sorry for the very long delay, here is the Erudite (http://docs.google.com/View?id=dftbgzkr_82gprdprg4).

[StormingMarcus]

Here is a try at an abstract movement system. It is a bit rough, but I think it could work.

I do not plan on having reach weapons granting melee attacks at distance 1, so the system should look like this.

Distance is measured in zones: characters in the same zone are at a respective distance of 0, while characters in adjacent zones are at distance 1 and so on...

Distance / Effect
0 / Melee attacks
1 / Thrown weapon range
2 / Ranged weapon range
3 / ?
4 / ?
5 / ?
+1 / ?

Tiny character can move only 1 zone per move action; Small to Large characters can move 2 zones and Huge to Gargantuan characters can move 3 zones.

Huge to Gargantuan character bump all the attack effects up one zone (eg, melee at 1, thrown at 2, ranged at 3).

[StormingMarcus]

Here is the Skills (http://docs.google.com/View?id=dftbgzkr_72gnfq3dft) document.

[StormingMarcus]

Here is Magic (http://docs.google.com/View?id=dftbgzkr_84xmnj35g2)! The doc is very incomplete, just the fundamental lines and a bunch of spells.

[StormingMarcus]

Given the abstract movement system, it needs to be a limit on how many creatures can be in a zone.
Let's say 10 medium, 5 large, 2 huge and 1 gargantuan. How could gargantuan creatures be struck in melee (that is when both characters are in the same zone)?

[StormingMarcus]

Because of the abstract nature of movement and positions, it will become difficult to trace concealment and cover (especially the second one).
So, how about something like this?
Cover: As a standard action, the character can get a +1 bonus to defenses until the start of her next turn.
Or
Cover: As a standard action, the character can get a +2 bonus to defenses to ranged attacks until the start of her next turn.

If the zone is difficult terrain, the bonuses could increase by 1 and a successful skill check (at what DC?) could grant another +1 or could make the action needed a move action.

[StormingMarcus]

Cover has been resolved this way.

Take cover: In a covering terrain, the character can take a move action to gain a +2 bonus to Stealth checks and Reflexes and to deny line of sight to and from a single opponent. The effects last until the start of the character's next turn.

Characters trained in Stealth can take cover as a minor action once per encounter.

IMPROVED COVER [TALENT, ROGUE]
Requirements: Trained in Stealth.
Benefit: When taking cover, the character denies line of sight from and to an additional number of opponents equal to her Dexterity.

SUPERIOR COVER [TALENT, ROGUE]
Requirements: Trained in Stealth, Improved cover, mental modifier +2.
Benefit: When taking cover, the character denies line of effect from and to a single opponent whose line of sight is already being denied by cover.

Then, to another topic:
As far as it stands now, there are only two way to heal in combat: Second wind and the Cure spell. More properly, only the first heals you, because the second gives you temporary hp. But that's not important now. A feat lets you use your second wind for an ally, but other than that there is no way, for a non-spellcaster to heal herself or another. So, what about transforming the Cure spell in a feat?

HEARTEN [FEAT]
Requirements: Trained in Persuasion, Inspire courage, mental modifier +2.
Benefit: As a standard action, the character grants 2d6 temporary hps to herself or any ally within 1 zone. These hps are lost first, do not stack with other temporary hps and are lost anyway at the end of the encounter.