PDA

View Full Version : RPG System With No Levels, No Classes. (WIP, PEACH)



Plato Play-Doh
2013-02-27, 04:09 PM
So, I was thinking, and thought it would be interesting to come up with a system that wasn't level based, and people just got better at things by doing them. Here's what I've come up with so far:


Character Creation
Characters also have the following attributes: Agility, Charisma, Dexterity, Fortitude, Intellect, and Strength. They each effect certain skills. A total of10*n^2 rank-ups in skills that rely on an attribute are required to rank up that attribute, where n is the number of ranks in that attribute. Each rank counts as 1 rank in all skills that rely on it, except that it doesn’t add to category or attribute rank progression. One skill may have multiple attributes that apply to it. This is in addition to any other uses the attribute has.

Each attribute, in addition to affecting certain skills, has other uses as well. Agility determines movement speed. Base movement speed is 10 meters/5 seconds. Each point in agility adds 1 meter to the base movement speed. Characters may run, doubling their movement speed, at the expense of fatigue (I have yet to fully develop the system for fatigue, but greater detail will be given). Charisma…(?), Dexterity…(?), Fortitude increases endurance. (Again, not sure how it’ll work.) Intellect decreases the number of uses required to rank up a skill. Strength determines carrying capacity. Each character may carry 50kg without being fatigued. Each point of Strength adds 50 kg to this maximum.

Characters have skills. All skills start with 1 rank. This does not count toward category or attribute rank progression. At character creation, characters gain a number of skill points determined by GM, where each point=10 uses of a skill. Each rank in a skill requires a total of 10*(n-intellect, minimum 1)^2 uses of that skill, where n is the number of ranks already in that skill. A use is considered 1 success on a check with a DC equal to 10+your rank in the skill. For every point lower than that the DC is, checks made with it as the DC are worth half the normal uses. For every point the DC is higher than this amount, checks made with it as the DC are worth double the normal uses. Since there are no special abilities gained from levels, these are extremely important, as characters can do pretty much anything with a high enough skill check.

Skills are grouped into categories (martial, magic, craft, knowledge, etc.) Skill categories may be upgraded just like attributes, where having a total of 10*(n-intellect, minimum 1)^2 ranks in skills in that category add 1 rank to the category, where n is the number of ranks in the category. Each rank in a category counts as 1 rank in each skill of that category, except that it doesn’t add to category or attribute rank progression.

At character creation, characters gain a number of item points chosen by GM. Each item point counts as 1gp to be used during character creation. After character creation, each remaining item point is converted to 1d10 gp that is in the character’s inventory.


Combat
Combat is divided into rounds. Each round is 5 seconds. Characters take individual turns during those rounds. During a turn, a character may take an action. An action is defined as a move, an attack, or a partial move and a more difficult attack (divide movement speed by 2, -2 to attack rolls), or another action that could reasonably be taken within a 5 second period of time.

In when attacking, one d20 roll is used for both attack and damage, but with different modifiers. First, the relevant skill is applied, be this Swordsmanship or Archery, or anything else. (I may expand to other settings, but I'll stick with fantasy for now.) For attacks with weapons such as swords and daggers, as well as with bows, dexterity is added here, but with heavier weapons, it is normally strength. Opponents may choose to dodge (with the dodge skill, which will use agility), or parry/block with their relevant weapon skill. This is treated as an opposed roll. If Opponents do not choose to do so, no attack roll must be made. If an attack hits, the same roll applies to damage. For most melee weapons, with the notable exception of the dagger and similar small weapons, strength is added to damage rolls. For the bows and smaller melee weapons, dexterity is used. This is opposed by the opponent's Resistance check, which uses fortitude, and to which armor is added. If this damage roll succeeds by 10 or less, the target is fatigued (remember that fatigue system, I was talking about? Yeah. If the resistance check succeeds, then the character is unaffected by the hit.

Magic
Through study or practice, characters may learn magic seeds. (List pending.) These seeds will each be tied to magic skill (pyromancy, cryomancy, etc.) Once they know a seed, they may use it in spells. To cast a spell, they describe the desired effect, and the seeds that apply to it. If they do not have a seed that is required in the effect, they cannot cast the spell. Then, for each seed, they must make a check with the relevant magic skill, determined by the GM based on the power of the spell they wish to cast. If they fail this check by 9 or less, the desired effect occurs, but they cannot control it. If they fail by 10 or more, the spell completely fails. Additionally, they must make a Concentration check with a DC equal to ½ of the spell’s DC, or be fatigued an amount depending upon how badly they failed. Casting in this way is an action that takes up one turn, and they are considered concentrating (cannot take any actions whatsoever, including to dodge an attack, or anything else) until the beginning of their next turn, when the spell comes into effect. If they so choose, they may extend the casting over a number of rounds, determined when they declare that they wish to do so. If they do this, they are concentrating for the full time, and make relevant magic checks each turn, taking the total of their checks. This total is considered the check result for the spell, which would then come into effect at the beginning of the next turn, until which they are concentrating, as normal. Each turn during this time, they must make the concentration check for the spell as normal.

Prayer
Domains/Portfolios: Deities have domains, areas over which they have power. A deity's collection of domains is known as a portfolio.

To do this, a character must have gone to a temple to their chosen deity, and either given a sizable donation or done some favor for the priests there. In doing this, they gain the ability to speak with their deity. As an action, they may make a diplomacy check with a DC of the GM's choosing based on the rarity of the information to gain one piece of information that has to do with their deity's portfolio, or any piece of information if the deity's portfolio contains knowledge as a domain. Additionally, they may cast spells as with the magic rules abovem, but only with seeds from their deity's portfolio, to which they have access at all times, and they make a diplomacy check in place of any magic checks, and needn't make concentration checks. However, they are beholden to the deity and their church, and must always serve both at all costs or else lose this ability.


My thoughts regarding the mechanics were that skills would be easy to pick up, but grow increasingly difficult to master (thus the exponential growth). Also, the way I have it, it is fairly easy to balance encounters when you just need to find the right number of skill points. Additionally, if done right, it should be pretty much impossible for PCs to be imbalanced compared to each other, and it's very simple for the GM to set the power level for a campaign.

I obviously am in need of some help finishing this, and would like some feedback on what I have. Any suggestions?

bobthe6th
2013-02-27, 05:12 PM
See rogue: clandestine operations for someone trying to do something like this.

...except you have to balance skills. Note how in D&D, craft is weak compared to say jump or USE MAGIC DEVICE! In this system it sounds like attacks would be skill checks? depending on the game, a high fighting skill might be massively important, or negligible.

If their is even a slight imbalence in the skills, suddenly the number of possible builds will shrink as the skill becomes central.

Also, it sounds like you can quickly get high skills by trying and failing the impossible.

"I try to climb the smooth glass wall with my hands tied behind my back!" with 1 point, and a DC in the 100s, that could be worth a number of ranks in the skill.

Plato Play-Doh
2013-02-27, 05:33 PM
I just realized how terrible of an idea it was allowing for failures to count. I don't know why I did that... My bad. Fixed.

That high fighting skill would be important, but the only real way to use it would be fighting. Things get better as you use them, and while you could just practice shooting your bow by hitting a target, that's not actually fun, and it won't take long before you stop rolling over and over again for it. Also, there are many ways for the GM to prevent that from happening. The way this system works, the more useful a skill is in your campaign, the better you'll get at it. Once you're out of the initial character creation, this isn't a point buy system, it's more of a "practice makes perfect" system. No XP, just "have you used the skill enough to get better at it?" That way, you don't get better at picking locks by stabbing people, you get better at picking locks by picking locks.

bobthe6th
2013-02-27, 05:52 PM
but the challenges are usually up to the DM... so skills will only increase as the DM makes them available. So I suspect that all characters will be very simaler.

So if it takes 111110 successes at your skill level to hit +5 to a skill... or to put that another way, to get a +5 to lockpicking you need to pick one hundred and elven thousand one hundred and ten locks. Adding 25% chance of success to picking a lock as when you started.

Frathe
2013-02-27, 05:56 PM
I haven't looked too closely at the system, but with systems like this, there's always the danger of powergamers just repeatedly performing the same action over and over and over and over and over and over and over... just to get better at a skill. With no in-game justification besides practicing to get better; you could argue about if that's realistic. But if "Climb" is a skill, or "Jump" is a skill, what's to stop someone to spend all day jumping or climbing? They can claim it's like athletic training. Of course, that's not fair to people who just play the game normally, and only use a skill when there's a challenge or a barrier to overcome.

barna10
2013-02-27, 06:12 PM
Is there anything your system would do that a system like GURPS couldn't accommodate? There are many systems that aren't level based that work quite well already; why re-invent the wheel?

Studoku
2013-02-27, 06:23 PM
Have you ever played a non-D&D system?

Plato Play-Doh
2013-02-27, 06:23 PM
but the challenges are usually up to the DM... so skills will only increase as the DM makes them available. So I suspect that all characters will be very simaler.

So if it takes 111110 successes at your skill level to hit +5 to a skill... or to put that another way, to get a +5 to lockpicking you need to pick one hundred and elven thousand one hundred and ten locks. Adding 25% chance of success to picking a lock as when you started.

Well, the obstacles are up to the DM, but the way the characters get around them is up to the players. Also, the number of uses required are multiplying by 2 each time, so you actually only need 80 uses in the skill to advance from +4 to +5. It's not some huge number.


I haven't looked too closely at the system, but with systems like this, there's always the danger of powergamers just repeatedly performing the same action over and over and over and over and over and over and over... just to get better at a skill. With no in-game justification besides practicing to get better; you could argue about if that's realistic. But if "Climb" is a skill, or "Jump" is a skill, what's to stop someone to spend all day jumping or climbing? They can claim it's like athletic training. Of course, that's not fair to people who just play the game normally, and only use a skill when there's a challenge or a barrier to overcome.

Well, that power gamer is going to get bored of rolling over and over again really quickly, and if the BBEG is working on furthering their evil plots that whole time, they won't be able to do that anyway, since they won't be able to stop them in time. In a similar manner, they only get a full use each time they succeed if they go with 50/50 odds, and it gets exponentially less effective the easier it is, so I don't think that it's going to be altogether too fun for the power gamer to try to play that aspect up too much, and if it is, then they have a really weird idea of what's fun.


Is there anything your system would do that a system like GURPS couldn't accommodate? There are many systems that aren't level based that work quite well already; why re-invent the wheel?

Well, because this system, in the end, is going to take my ideal game mechanics and put them into one, so it will, of course, appeal greatly to me, though I can't speak for anyone else. To explain why I like what I have currently, the system I have doesn't involve point buy, so it's more realistic and requires characters to actually use skills to advance them. What this means is that if nobody finds a way to vary their approaches to obstacles, then they will end up lacking in some skill or another when they actually need it. This encourages more creative problem solving, rather than just taking the most obvious route, which I like


Have you ever played a non-D&D system?

I, myself, have not, though I have looked briefly at other systems' rules. However, I do have/know certain ideas that I like, which leads me to desire a system that includes them, which is why I want to make this.

barna10
2013-02-27, 06:32 PM
I admire your drive to make your own system. I thought of doing the same in the past.

The lesson I learned was that modifying an existing system, instead of starting from scratch, left me more time to actually play instead of spending valuable play-time fixing broken rules or explaining new mechanics to my players.

You could easily modify a system like GURPS to include your learning mechanic. Just award character points for skill use and only allow them to be used to advance the skills that have been used (there's actually an alternate rule for this).

Another advantage of using a pre-existing system is not having to create EVERYTHING. Making a new system means creating all the mechanics, stats on all the monsters, etc.

Plato Play-Doh
2013-02-27, 06:51 PM
I admire your drive to make your own system. I thought of doing the same in the past.

The lesson I learned was that modifying an existing system, instead of starting from scratch, left me more time to actually play instead of spending valuable play-time fixing broken rules or explaining new mechanics to my players.

You could easily modify a system like GURPS to include your learning mechanic. Just award character points for skill use and only allow them to be used to advance the skills that have been used (there's actually an alternate rule for this).

Another advantage of using a pre-existing system is not having to create EVERYTHING. Making a new system means creating all the mechanics, stats on all the monsters, etc.

Well, my IRL players would have to learn a new system for GURPS anyway, and the fixing of rules would probably happen during and after the players' feedback, which I would request after the play session. The sessions would be devoted to playing. Also, even if I adapted an existing system to my modified rules, I would still probably want to make my own system. Why? Because I like being creative. I WANT to make everything on my own, because I find that process enjoyable. I like making new things, and seeing how they work, and then reworking them. I want to tinker, and creating a custom system is the best way to do that while working with RPGs.

Frathe
2013-02-27, 06:58 PM
Well, that power gamer is going to get bored of rolling over and over again really quickly, and if the BBEG is working on furthering their evil plots that whole time, they won't be able to do that anyway, since they won't be able to stop them in time. In a similar manner, they only get a full use each time they succeed if they go with 50/50 odds, and it gets exponentially less effective the easier it is, so I don't think that it's going to be altogether too fun for the power gamer to try to play that aspect up too much, and if it is, then they have a really weird idea of what's fun.Oh, no. Powergamers don't do things because they're fun. They just want to "win" at the system, and make an optimal character build or such. It's not about "fun". You're also thinking of a rather limited kind of plot: not every game has a designated villain (BBEG, if you prefer). Ever heard of a sandbox game? Some people are going to want to play that with any kind of system.

Plato Play-Doh
2013-02-27, 07:11 PM
Oh, no. Powergamers don't do things because they're fun. They just want to "win" at the system, and make an optimal character build or such. It's not about "fun". You're also thinking of a rather limited kind of plot: not every game has a designated villain (BBEG, if you prefer). Ever heard of a sandbox game? Some people are going to want to play that with any kind of system.

Yeah, I actually enjoy sandbox games myself, though if I were GMing, I'd still make the change of seasons or the day/night cycle important in some way so that you can't do that kind of stuff indefinitely, and possibly enforce some form of fatigue on that power gamer (in fact, I'll probably include fatigue in this system in some way). I was honestly just using the BBEG as an example of a timetable than anything else. Additionally, if the power gamers don't get bored, I think that either a)the entire group are power gamers, and in that case, who cares if they power game? or b) the non-power gamers are going to get bored, and make the power gamer either move on or leave. Either way, they shouldn't cause too many problems as long as the proper precautions are taken.

Rizban
2013-02-27, 10:28 PM
Having created a system with many similarities many years ago, I want to offer you a few thoughts.


Do NOT make skill improvements 100% use based. That's already been mentioned but is key to making the game work.

In the system we made, you only gained points at the end of a session. The DM essentially kept a log of how often a particular skill was used and how relevant that skill was to the game session. The DM rated your number of skill uses as None, Rare, Occasional, or Frequent and the importance as None, Minor, Moderate, or Major.

In other words, if you spent the whole time making Jump checks just to make them, they had little impact on the game. If, however, you made a critical Jump check and that was what enabled you to defeat the BBEG, then it has a major impact on the game, even if you only use it once.

In a stripped down explanation of the system, the Frequency of use determined die size (0, d4, d6, or d8) and Importance determined die number (0, 1, 2, or 3). You rolled that many dice and gained the total as skill points at the end of the session. This meant that using skills in a meaningful way guaranteed more skill points would be gained while using them more often just meant you had a chance for more skill points. Using them often in meaningful ways meant you had the highest chance of the most points.

In the Jump example above, the first instance would give the player who used Jump endlessly for no reason 1d8 points in Jump, or a range of 1-8. The second would give the player who used Jump very meaningfully one time 3d4 points in Jump, or a range of 3-12. While this isn't exactly the system we used, it's close enough to serve as an example.


Have different "levels" of skills. In other words, have Primary, Secondary, and Tertiary skills. You don't have to treat them differently, but not all skills are created equal.

For example, you could have primary skills of Swords, Magic, and Archery. These are your "core" skills around which a character is focused. In order to be effective though, that character will need supplemental skills, perhaps things like Tactics and Parrying for the swordsman, Meditation and Focus for the mage, and Precision and Hide for the archer. This keeps you from having to make sure every single skill is balanced with every single other skill. You just need the primary skills to be balanced with one another and the supporting skills to be more or less balanced with one another.

Tertiary skills would be completely optional skills that have no bearing on the primary skills. These could be things like Tracking or Fishing.


Avoid complex math. If people have to do algebra to use your system, they aren't going to use it. Keep to basic arithmetic, i.e. addition, subtraction, and multiplication. Use division sparingly, and don't make players modify more than one number at a time. It's always better to give a +2 bonus than a +sqrt(X^2+Y^2) bonus. If they need a calculator to play your game, then they simply won't play it.

Yitzi
2013-02-27, 11:10 PM
1. Your system does have effective "levels" in the total skill ranks achieved, and effective "classes" in the distribution of those ranks. Not that that's a problem, just be aware of it.
2. You'll need something to make sure that they don't just repeat the skill when there's no risk, or repeat easy uses of the skill, to get fast advancement. Perhaps say that it only works if there's something at stake, and change the progression rate depending on how hard it is compared to how many ranks (in everything that affects it) the character already has.
3. You probably should have substantially faster progression in the specific skills than in categories or attributes; most of a character's capability should come from ranks in the skills themselves.
4. Skill costs scaling proportionately to 2^n increases too fast, making it almost always better to spread out skills. I'd say that scaling proportionately to n^2 (e.g. the first takes 10, the next takes 30 more for 40 total, the next takes 50 more for 90 total, etc.) will give you the "increasingly difficult to master" feature without being absurd about it.

barna10
2013-02-27, 11:38 PM
I would suggest making it a simple pass/fail system: Make the check, get a point, fail = get nothing. That would simplify things a ton.

Also, I would only reward points for checks with DCs that equal or exceed the skill level + 15 (assuming you are rolling a D20).

Also, since less points are going to rewarded, how about making the amount of points needed to advance the skill simply equal the current rating? So, if the skill's current rank is 10, it takes 10 points to go to an 11.

This simplicity would eliminate the "algebra" and still stay true to your original idea.

Ninjadeadbeard
2013-02-27, 11:49 PM
I would suggest allowing players to "train" their skills off screen. When they "level" (or Improve, or Rank Up, etc, etc) they may select a set number of their skills their character chooses to train in, granting them a small boost to that skill.

If you really want players to only level skills they use in game, you should count only that they made a Skill Check. They used Jump in a non-trivial manner (ie: the GM allowed it to count as useful), so the GM makes a note of their using that skill. When they "level", the players gain a small pool of skill points determined by the GM and can place those points only into a skill the GM recorded them using. If they Crit'd (or succeeded/failed by some spectacular margin) with a skill check, there would also be a small bonus added to that skill by the GM.

Plato Play-Doh
2013-02-28, 10:36 AM
Having created a system with many similarities many years ago, I want to offer you a few thoughts.


1. Do NOT make skill improvements 100% use based. That's already been mentioned but is key to making the game work.


I think I have it, currently, at a point where repetitively using a skill checks to grind up levels is discouraged by the system (it takes exponentially longer for each check that is easier than 50/50, and at 50/50 chances there's a significant chance of failure.)



2. Have different "levels" of skills. In other words, have Primary, Secondary, and Tertiary skills. You don't have to treat them differently, but not all skills are created equal.


Well, with the use-based system, it doesn't matter if they're made to be separated out, because it's just going to increase as it's used anyway.



3. Avoid complex math. If people have to do algebra to use your system, they aren't going to use it. Keep to basic arithmetic, i.e. addition, subtraction, and multiplication. Use division sparingly, and don't make players modify more than one number at a time. It's always better to give a +2 bonus than a +sqrt(X^2+Y^2) bonus. If they need a calculator to play your game, then they simply won't play it.


It is doubled each time. I don't think that's particularly complex math, though the equation I have could be a little daunting to some. I just couldn't think of a better way to put it other than in the form of an equation.


1. Your system does have effective "levels" in the total skill ranks achieved, and effective "classes" in the distribution of those ranks. Not that that's a problem, just be aware of it.

Yeah, I suppose that's kinda true.


2. You'll need something to make sure that they don't just repeat the skill when there's no risk, or repeat easy uses of the skill, to get fast advancement. Perhaps say that it only works if there's something at stake, and change the progression rate depending on how hard it is compared to how many ranks (in everything that affects it) the character already has.

Well, I did change the progression rate based on difficulty. Exponentially, in fact.


3. You probably should have substantially faster progression in the specific skills than in categories or attributes; most of a character's capability should come from ranks in the skills themselves.

I do. The categories and attributes progress as the skills within them rank up, so while a skill takes 10*2^n uses, an attribute takes 10*2^n skill rank-ups.


4. Skill costs scaling proportionately to 2^n increases too fast, making it almost always better to spread out skills. I'd say that scaling proportionately to n^2 (e.g. the first takes 10, the next takes 30 more for 40 total, the next takes 50 more for 90 total, etc.) will give you the "increasingly difficult to master" feature without being absurd about it.

But skills rank up as you use them, so unless you refrain from using the skill at all, you don't choose not to increase the power of that skill.


I would suggest making it a simple pass/fail system: Make the check, get a point, fail = get nothing. That would simplify things a ton.

Also, I would only reward points for checks with DCs that equal or exceed the skill level + 15 (assuming you are rolling a D20).

Also, since less points are going to rewarded, how about making the amount of points needed to advance the skill simply equal the current rating? So, if the skill's current rank is 10, it takes 10 points to go to an 11.

This simplicity would eliminate the "algebra" and still stay true to your original idea.

I already changed it to only count on successes. :smallbiggrin:

Doing easy things, realistically, should still get you better, just not nearly as fast as if you were doing difficult things.

I think that the system so far has stuck to relative simplicity simply due to its consistency(everything is changing exponentially by 2), and I feel as though realistic learning isn't linear, which I'm trying to show.


I would suggest allowing players to "train" their skills off screen. When they "level" (or Improve, or Rank Up, etc, etc) they may select a set number of their skills their character chooses to train in, granting them a small boost to that skill.

If you really want players to only level skills they use in game, you should count only that they made a Skill Check. They used Jump in a non-trivial manner (ie: the GM allowed it to count as useful), so the GM makes a note of their using that skill. When they "level", the players gain a small pool of skill points determined by the GM and can place those points only into a skill the GM recorded them using. If they Crit'd (or succeeded/failed by some spectacular margin) with a skill check, there would also be a small bonus added to that skill by the GM.

That turns it into a point buy system, which I want to avoid for the sake of originality, as well as realism (the more you use something, the better you get at it. You don't get to choose what you get better at out of everything you used.


Oh, and for anybody who cares, my inspiration for the better by practice type of system comes from Skyrim, though I am just allowing any of the types of things that would be bought with points in Skyrim to be done as skill checks.

Yitzi
2013-02-28, 01:24 PM
Well, I did change the progression rate based on difficulty. Exponentially, in fact.

Yeah, that will help a lot with that.


I do. The categories and attributes progress as the skills within them rank up, so while a skill takes 10*2^n uses, an attribute takes 10*2^n skill rank-ups.

Ah, I misread. So then it's just a next-to-useless feature, because it goes up so slowly.


But skills rank up as you use them, so unless you refrain from using the skill at all, you don't choose not to increase the power of that skill.

At that level of cost increase, choosing not to use it for no purpose other than increasing the skill is pretty much the same as choosing not to increase it past the first few levels.

Using the skill in the course of adventuring really won't add a lot to your skill total; a normal campaign is unlikely to see more than a thousand uses of any given skill.

Plato Play-Doh
2013-02-28, 03:15 PM
Ah, I misread. So then it's just a next-to-useless feature, because it goes up so slowly.


Well, attributes will have other uses that don't involve skill bonuses, and categories will mostly be useful to specialists, who will be ranking up multiple skills in the same category at once.


At that level of cost increase, choosing not to use it for no purpose other than increasing the skill is pretty much the same as choosing not to increase it past the first few levels.

Using the skill in the course of adventuring really won't add a lot to your skill total; a normal campaign is unlikely to see more than a thousand uses of any given skill.

A few thousand uses would be enough to rank a skill up quite a few times. And what about combat skills? Diplomacy skills? They will see more uses than that in a campaign, I reckon.

Yitzi
2013-02-28, 05:11 PM
Well, attributes will have other uses that don't involve skill bonuses, and categories will mostly be useful to specialists, who will be ranking up multiple skills in the same category at once.

Even so, even if there are 10 skills in a category, in order to reach a mere 3 ranks in a category you'd need 2,560 uses of each skill in that category.




A few thousand uses would be enough to rank a skill up quite a few times.

Yeah, 6. That's not a lot. Halfway through the campaign you're up to 5 ranks, and by its end you're at a 30% better chance than at the beginning.


And what about combat skills? Diplomacy skills? They will see more uses than that in a campaign, I reckon.

I doubt it, even for combat skills. If you're planning to imitate the pacing of D&D in terms of length of a campaign, consider the following:
-A 1-20 campaign (most are a lot shorter) consists of roughly 266 level-appropriate encounters (13.3 is enough for a level.)
-A single combat encounter will generally last no more than 5-10 rounds.
-I doubt you're going to use skills more than once per round.
-Thus, the total is around 1000-2000 uses for even a long campaign. More for higher-DC tries, but less because they won't always succeed.

Of course, that's assuming they try to use combat skills only in actual combat. If they're willing to "cheat" and use skills when there's nothing at stake and nothing to be gained other than ranks, they can simply make a try at DC equal to 19+ranks or 20+ranks and (at a rate of one try per round) get an average of 5,120 success-equivalents per minute. They'll fail most of the time (which is why they can't do this in actual combat or challenges), but nothing at stake means that's not really a problem.

Plato Play-Doh
2013-02-28, 05:20 PM
Even so, even if there are 10 skills in a category, in order to reach a mere 3 ranks in a category you'd need 2,560 uses of each skill in that category.





Yeah, 6. That's not a lot. Halfway through the campaign you're up to 5 ranks, and by its end you're at a 30% better chance than at the beginning.



I doubt it, even for combat skills. If you're planning to imitate the pacing of D&D in terms of length of a campaign, consider the following:
-A 1-20 campaign (most are a lot shorter) consists of roughly 266 level-appropriate encounters (13.3 is enough for a level.)
-A single combat encounter will generally last no more than 5-10 rounds.
-I doubt you're going to use skills more than once per round.
-Thus, the total is around 1000-2000 uses for even a long campaign. More for higher-DC tries, but less because they won't always succeed.

Of course, that's assuming they try to use combat skills only in actual combat. If they're willing to "cheat" and use skills when there's nothing at stake and nothing to be gained other than ranks, they can simply make a try at DC equal to 19+ranks or 20+ranks and (at a rate of one try per round) get an average of 5,120 success-equivalents per minute. They'll fail most of the time (which is why they can't do this in actual combat or challenges), but nothing at stake means that's not really a problem.

Yeah, I suppose. I'll bring it down to 10*n^2.

Edit: Also, for attributes, I'm thinking Agility, Charisma, Dexterity, Fortitude, Intellect, and Strength. Intellect will reduce the number of uses required to raise a skill, so that the equation will become 10*(n-int, minimum 0)^2. Fortitude would have large amounts of impact on the fatigue system I'm working on, which is what my combat will be centered around as well. I'm not sure what non-skill utility the other attributes will have, but even as-is, they are dictate some of the most important skills. (Agility for dodge skill, charisma for diplomacy-type skills, dexterity for actually hitting with finesse-type weapons, and how hard you hit with little weapons, like daggers, and projectiles, like bows, strength for determining how hard you hit, and how likely you are to hit with bigger weapons.) What do you think?

inuyasha
2013-02-28, 05:39 PM
I mysef have always wanted to make a system like this but never have, I have one suggestion, although there are no classes/levels maybe you could have origins? like something the character is good at, take some examples from below

Religious background
ability bonus: +2 wisdom (or the equivalent)
skills: good with knowledge poor with martial
interesting abilities: a number of times per day equal to the characters wisdom bonus, a religious backgrounded person can do extra damage to an evil or undead creature equal to half their ranks in knowledge religion (or its equivalent

Tinkering background
ability bonus: +2 intelligence (or the equivalent)
skills: good with crafting, poor with magic
interesting abilities: Tinkerers can create use their creativity and skills to make their own custom weapons (rules either made up by the dm or found soon) the DM may require a check to be made for this to happen

Criminal background
ability bonus: +2 dexterity (or the equivalent)
skills: good with sneaking, poor with crafting
interesting abilities: a number of times per day equal to your dexterity bonus you may deal extra damage equal to half your ranks in sneaking

Magic background
ability bonus: +2 charisma
skills: good with magic poor with martial
interesting abilities: you may cast spells (dont know how you want to handle those)


Sorry if you dont like this but let me know if you do, and im glad i could help :)
and also sorry if these seem a little thrown together i dont have much time right now :smallyuk:

Plato Play-Doh
2013-02-28, 05:49 PM
I mysef have always wanted to make a system like this but never have, I have one suggestion, although there are no classes/levels maybe you could have origins? like something the character is good at, take some examples from below

Religious background
ability bonus: +2 wisdom (or the equivalent)
skills: good with knowledge poor with martial
interesting abilities: a number of times per day equal to the characters wisdom bonus, a religious backgrounded person can do extra damage to an evil or undead creature equal to half their ranks in knowledge religion (or its equivalent

Tinkering background
ability bonus: +2 intelligence (or the equivalent)
skills: good with crafting, poor with magic
interesting abilities: Tinkerers can create use their creativity and skills to make their own custom weapons (rules either made up by the dm or found soon) the DM may require a check to be made for this to happen

Criminal background
ability bonus: +2 dexterity (or the equivalent)
skills: good with sneaking, poor with crafting
interesting abilities: a number of times per day equal to your dexterity bonus you may deal extra damage equal to half your ranks in sneaking

Magic background
ability bonus: +2 charisma
skills: good with magic poor with martial
interesting abilities: you may cast spells (dont know how you want to handle those)


Sorry if you dont like this but let me know if you do, and im glad i could help :)
and also sorry if these seem a little thrown together i dont have much time right now :smallyuk:

This actually looks pretty cool. Not sure if I'll include the ability bonuses or the skills, since that's already a part of character creation, but I think I'll add something like the interesting abilities in. Thanks!

inuyasha
2013-02-28, 05:57 PM
hmm ok :D would you like any more ideas for origins because i have tons?

Yitzi
2013-02-28, 05:59 PM
Yeah, I suppose. I'll bring it down to 10*n^2.

That should work a lot better. You'll also want some rule to limit it to cases where there's actually something at stake, to prevent "grinding" with nothing at stake.

Also, exponential growth with the DC is probably too much as well; perhaps a better approach would be +10% or +20% per point above ranks+10, and -10% per point below it. (Possibly more for above it because you're taking a substantially bigger risk.)


Edit: Also, for attributes, I'm thinking Agility, Charisma, Dexterity, Fortitude, Intellect, and Strength. Intellect will reduce the number of uses required to raise a skill, so that the equation will become 10*(n-int, minimum 0)^2.

I'd say minimum 1; you don't want intellect-based characters to be good at everything without even trying it once.

The list seems fairly good.

Plato Play-Doh
2013-02-28, 06:39 PM
hmm ok :D would you like any more ideas for origins because i have tons?

That would be immensely helpful.


That should work a lot better. You'll also want some rule to limit it to cases where there's actually something at stake, to prevent "grinding" with nothing at stake.

Once my fatigue system is finished it should be capable of discouraging grinding. I'm not entirely certain how it will be implemented, but I'll figure it out. Also, I may end up making some way that the effective "DC" of a task is lowered in respect to how many uses it's worth when you're not in any real danger, but you still have to hit the same roll.


Also, exponential growth with the DC is probably too much as well; perhaps a better approach would be +10% or +20% per point above ranks+10, and -10% per point below it. (Possibly more for above it because you're taking a substantially bigger risk.)

I don't know. I mean, you're taking a substantially smaller risk for below it, just like you're taking a substantial risk for below it. If it's necessary, I'll change it, but I'm not quite sure that it is.


I'd say minimum 1; you don't want intellect-based characters to be good at everything without even trying it once.

Right. That was foolish of me. Fixed for implementation.


The list seems fairly good.

I've now included it in the OP. Thanks for the feedback.

inuyasha
2013-02-28, 07:23 PM
new backgrounds below in the spoiler
im not worrying about ability bonuses or skills just interesting abilities
totemistic background
interesting ability: you come from a barbaric tribe and gain one of the abilities below and you also gain the ability to rage (as 1st level barbarian but tweaked for this system)

cheetah totem: +10 speed rating
bear totem: gain toughness as a bonus feat (or +3 HP if you dont use feats)
snake totem: +2 on sneak checks (change to however you want this worded)
wolf totem: you can track people (as the track feat)
eagle totem: you get a +2 on spot checks (again change to whatever you need)



and some more rediculous ones below (good for fantasy/sci fi)
Constructed background (cyborg not golem)
interesting ability: you do not need to sleep and you have a +2 racial bonus to saves vs poison and disease

hellish background
interesting ability: same thing as religious background but only vs. good creatures
mama we all go to hell, mama we all go to hell, mama we're all fulla lies, and right now their building a coffin your size, mama we're all fulla lies AHEM sorry bout that thats what im listening to and it seemed appropriate for the moment


heavenly background
interesting ability: eek same as religious because i cant think of a difference while still retaining balance

monstrous background
interesting ability: you gain 2 claws and a bite dealing 1d4 (claws) and 1d6 (bite)


OK so im done and willing to make more, got any ideas?

also do you think these are good, bad, unbalanced or what :p

Plato Play-Doh
2013-03-01, 08:37 AM
new backgrounds below in the spoiler
im not worrying about ability bonuses or skills just interesting abilities
totemistic background
interesting ability: you come from a barbaric tribe and gain one of the abilities below and you also gain the ability to rage (as 1st level barbarian but tweaked for this system)

cheetah totem: +10 speed rating
bear totem: gain toughness as a bonus feat (or +3 HP if you dont use feats)
snake totem: +2 on sneak checks (change to however you want this worded)
wolf totem: you can track people (as the track feat)
eagle totem: you get a +2 on spot checks (again change to whatever you need)



and some more rediculous ones below (good for fantasy/sci fi)
Constructed background (cyborg not golem)
interesting ability: you do not need to sleep and you have a +2 racial bonus to saves vs poison and disease

hellish background
interesting ability: same thing as religious background but only vs. good creatures
mama we all go to hell, mama we all go to hell, mama we're all fulla lies, and right now their building a coffin your size, mama we're all fulla lies AHEM sorry bout that thats what im listening to and it seemed appropriate for the moment


heavenly background
interesting ability: eek same as religious because i cant think of a difference while still retaining balance

monstrous background
interesting ability: you gain 2 claws and a bite dealing 1d4 (claws) and 1d6 (bite)


OK so im done and willing to make more, got any ideas?

also do you think these are good, bad, unbalanced or what :p

Those look pretty good. I'll probably end up including them as something to be bought w/skill points during character creation. Not all of them are necessarily applicable to the system, but some would work well. Now that I think of it, something like this could work for races and stuff like that, too. They won't be put in quite yet, since I haven't fully figured out a lot of the mechanics that they would rely on, but I'll find a way to include them.

inuyasha
2013-03-01, 04:47 PM
so will this be an RP heavy system or will this be a hack n slash system? (i prefer the second one :D)

Plato Play-Doh
2013-03-01, 05:01 PM
That depends on the campaign. The system itself should work just fine for any play style, hopefully!

Plato Play-Doh
2013-03-02, 10:04 AM
I've fleshed out attributes a bit more, and added in rules for combat, magic, and prayer. I'm still working on the fatigue system and a skill list, and am taking suggestions on them.

DMMike
2013-03-02, 02:13 PM
- If you don't have levels, you don't have an easy way to keep the PCs even with each other. What I'm seeing: the luckier players and the players using skills more in-line with DM challenges are the ones who get the better characters. Remember an important thing about Skyrim: there's no need for balance, because it's one player versus the AI.

- There should be a point (sorry if I missed it) where using a skill doesn't give you progress. The fighter has killed so many goblins, that he might even lose skill (get soft) by wasting time fighting them. The wizard can cast Candlelight in his sleep. Literally. His superhuman intellect is so sharp, that using a blunt procedure like writing the spell on a scroll doesn't make him any better, and possibly fails even to maintain his skill.

- Remove the math, remove the progress counting. Say you need to roll a d20 to find your level of success. The higher the difficulty, the higher roll needed on the die. Don't succeed, don't improve. (Wait, this is a problem because some people learn from mistakes). If the character succeeds, he makes a new check by rolling 3d6. His goal is to get a result equal to the DC-skill points-10.

If I did this right, it means that attempting things that are too easy will get you no improvement, and attempting things that are too hard also won't get you improvement (because you're just being lucky). However, attempting things at which you have a 5% chance of success will earn you a 12.5% chance of gaining a skill point. On any given roll, that's a .6% chance of getting better. Attempting things that are slightly easier for you diminish your chances of gaining that skill point, because it gets harder to roll low on 3d6.

Example: Yeager, the dragon-rider, is chasing another dragon through a canyon. He needs to make a Flight check to get through the next gap (or take a lot of damage on impact). The DC is 24, and his Flight skill points/ranks are 8. He succeeds, needing a 16 or higher on the d20 (excluding other bonuses). Since he was eager to earn skill, he rolled his 3d6 at the same time. His goal on that roll was DC(24)-Skill(8)-10=6. To roll a 6 on 3d6, no more, no less, he has 4.6% odds. If he had more Skill, his odds of gaining a skill point would diminish, since it's harder to roll a 5, and 4, and 3, on 3d6 than a 6.

Plato Play-Doh
2013-03-02, 05:11 PM
Wouldn't that make it even more a matter of chance? One PC could rank up a skill by using it once, while another could take 100 tries to finally rank it up. Also, though after a point it would just be luck, doing something that is particularly difficult would make you better at it faster, realistically speaking. I'm still not sure if I want automatic successes on natural 20s, and if I don't, then that will be the point where they can't rank up, because they simply can't fulfill the task. Also, assuming the GM gives each party member an equal chance to participate, which they should be doing anyway, balance shouldn't be any more of an issue than it would be if I had levels.

silphael
2013-03-02, 07:50 PM
The thing is, you don't have to make a system based on try-and-rank up progression while wanting to build a system without levels or classes.

As explained earlier, it may be better to begin with changes on a known system, and then to build one.

Something interresting when building a system for games with a lot of interraction is to make a difference between potential (often statistics, raw potential) and training (giving you stability).

For exemple, for a superpowered system I builded last year, your raw stats (two physicals, two mentals, two spirituals (social)) decide the number of dice (D6) you roll (then improving violently your maximal results), while your skill gives you a stable bonus (+2/level, with synergies giving you some more bonuses, because, you know, you're a super hero ^^).

Furthermore, super stats gave you bonus bonus (^^), because it gave you stability while using that stat ( after all, superman is always able to launch autos ^^), while superskills give you bonus dices (D12 if I remember well : your mastery of that domain gives you increased potential).

For progression, the best system is often the "spending XP" one : to go from n to n+1 in one skill you need "some calculation including n", with approbation of the GM, that is, either you need to use it a little, either you have to explain that you trained it somehow.

You could sneal a look at oWoD system, it pretty much the basis I used.

Plato Play-Doh
2013-03-04, 12:54 PM
The thing is, you don't have to make a system based on try-and-rank up progression while wanting to build a system without levels or classes.

I know, but that specifically is what I wanted. I simply put "RPG System With No Levels, No Classes." as my title because I couldn't think of anything better. The title will change once I can think of a good name for the system. Honestly, point buy is, for what I was thinking of, only slightly better than classes/levels.


As explained earlier, it may be better to begin with changes on a known system, and then to build one.

Well, what I have right now would be fairly easy to incorporate into another system. However, if I'm going to make my own system anyway, why not skip the middle man?


Something interresting when building a system for games with a lot of interraction is to make a difference between potential (often statistics, raw potential) and training (giving you stability).

For exemple, for a superpowered system I builded last year, your raw stats (two physicals, two mentals, two spirituals (social)) decide the number of dice (D6) you roll (then improving violently your maximal results), while your skill gives you a stable bonus (+2/level, with synergies giving you some more bonuses, because, you know, you're a super hero ^^).

Furthermore, super stats gave you bonus bonus (^^), because it gave you stability while using that stat ( after all, superman is always able to launch autos ^^), while superskills give you bonus dices (D12 if I remember well : your mastery of that domain gives you increased potential).

I'd consider that. I just went with d20+modifier because that's what I'm used to.


For progression, the best system is often the "spending XP" one : to go from n to n+1 in one skill you need "some calculation including n", with approbation of the GM, that is, either you need to use it a little, either you have to explain that you trained it somehow.

You could sneal a look at oWoD system, it pretty much the basis I used.

As I said before, I'd rather do a rank-up by use system.


Anybody have suggestions/feedback on my combat/magic/prayer systems? I haven't implemented initiative yet, though that is coming, but what does everyone think of what I have so far?

Tesla
2013-03-06, 06:44 PM
The first thing I have to say is that the overall idea feels similar to a D6 system change that I encountered once. Where you could only attempt to do what was reasonable for your character in any given situation, and if you failed you got points towards an increased skill. That worked fairly well at keeping everyone balanced, but I admit that the game did not go on very long. So I cannot be certain how it would last into significantly higher power levels.

Combat seems to be normal as far as I can tell, but I think that this is the first system that penalizes you for moving and attacking. I really do not think that I have any suggestion to improve it that would be in line with what you want though.

If the magic systems allows buffs then you are going to encounter problems by allowing rituals that stack in power that quickly. A static bonus based on time spent concentrating would almost certainly be better, as otherwise you end up with the possibility of someone warping reality by spending a few minutes concentrating. This coming from someone who saw that exact thing occur in another system that attempted something similar.

Prayer looks to be solid in my opinion, and I really like the idea of talking a deity into helping you in the middle of combat to trigger magical effects.

Best of luck with making your own system.

Plato Play-Doh
2013-03-07, 03:27 PM
The penalization for taking actions was an extension of the fatigue system that I am making to prevent munchkins from repeatedly making checks to add to their skills. If making skill checks take energy, I can't really justify not having attacks and the like require energy.

With the magic system, they still have to make a concentration check equal to 1/2 the DC each round, so that puts a limit on the power of the spells that they can cast over time.

Thanks for the response!

inuyasha
2013-03-07, 09:06 PM
and always let me know if u have ideas for origins :)