Streamlined d20 Design Brainstorming [Please PEACH]

[Djinn_in_Tonic]

Basic rule is, as normal, d20 + modifiers. Types of modifiers (bonuses & penalties) are drastically streamlined to 5 or 6 different types (circumstance, inherent, insight, item, and power). Modifiers of the same type never stack.

This works well, as in my mind most abilities should try to do things other than apply static bonuses and penalties, and having fewer of these to work with can increase creativity in other aspects of the game.

Players add +1 per even level to defenses, attack rolls, and skill rolls. In fact, if it's a d20 roll just assume you add this bonus to it (what type of modifier is this?).

4e did this, and it's very solid for gameplay, although it does completely neutralize the threat from a large number of lower-level opponents. That may not necessarily be a bad thing though, so I approve. If it's all d20 rolls, however, make sure you remember that if you use a d20 for anything else in the system, as you'll have to either account for it or make exceptions.

Damage scales at the rate of one dice per odd character level (1d6 for light, 1d8 for medium, 1d10 for heavy; 1 dice at 1st level, 2 at 3rd, 3 at 5th, etc).

While I have always endorsed standardizing weapon damage based on proficiency (which is what I think you're doing here), this will get clunky fast. Rolling and adding ten dice every turn (more with multiple attacks) will bog down gameplay.

Defenses are Avoid and Resist. Armor class doesn't exist. If it's an attack that could potentially miss you it is aimed at your Avoid defense (like a claw swipe or a fireball). If it's an attack that can't miss but might not hurt you if you're tough enough it is aimed at your Resist defense (like a tidal wave or mind control). How are effects like Dragon's Breath handled?

I don't like this. I think this is an over-simplification of the defense rules, and also begs crazy questions: if I'm wearing heavy armor, why can't I Resist that sword swing rather than Avoid it? If I can, how is that fair to people who can't use Avoid against, say, the toxic mists?

In short, I think it's to few defenses. I'd be fine with Reflex, Will, and Fortitude with AC pulled into Reflex and armor granting either extra hit points or damage reduction, but I think at least three defenses are necessary to really differentiate character strengths and weaknesses, as well as to have a wide range of attack options.

Classes no longer have base attack bonus, saving throw progressions, or lists of class skills. They do still gain class features. Skill points per level is up in the air. Characters of any class may train with any skill they want. Exactly what skills exist and what they do is still up in the air.

Good. I approve.

Classes are divided into power source (Arcane, Divine, Martial, etc) and each power source has a list of powers assigned to it (arcane spells, divine prayers, martial feats). Classes of a given power source have access to the powers assigned to their power source (so Fighters and Rogues have different class features but both use martial feats in some way). Each power source operates very differently from one another so that casting spells is a separate subsystem from offering prayers is a different subsystem from executing feats.

...good in theory, but I'd have to see some concepts here before I make a call. I'm assuming there might be some class-specific feats/spells/powers/prayers though, as I'd personally expect that.

Oh, and none of the 4e "every class ever has X at-wills, Y encounter, and Z daily powers," crap. Each subsystem has "powers" but exactly what the nature of those powers are and how they operate can and should vary wildly from one power source to the next.

Again, I'd have to see examples. In concept it sounds great...but you'll have to make it work before I'll say it's good.

Multiclassing works like it does in 3.5, you simply take levels in whatever classes you want (starting with 1st level). Because your attack bonus and damage scales independently of your class levels there is no need for the concept of "caster level" or "initiator level" and multiclassing becomes as simple as possible.

Alright...but how will you work the power discrepancy that will undoubtedly arise from having a few classes's low-level class features vs. a single class's high level features?

Powers increase in level at odd class level (power level 10 at class level 19th)? Or should this also be independent of class level but with increasing prerequisites for higher level powers based on specialization (like X Fire powers)?

Power increase by class level messes with multiclassing. Requiring prerequisites results in an inability to generalize and forcing characters to take abilities they might not actually want. Perhaps a third option could be created here?

Durations are fixed, not dependent on character level, and likely streamlined to a few basic types.

Sounds decent.

Talents granted at 2nd level and every even level thereafter (minor bonus type stuff akin to 4e feats with no prerequisites ever)?

Sure. Why not start with a few at first level, though? Just to add customization.

How are natural ability score increases handled?

Counter-argument: are they even necessary?

1) Items do not need to be magical to be effective. Alchemical items are a Big Deal^TM.

And how are you going to make non-magical items effective? I'm all for it, but, again...examples.

2) Items (even magical ones) are imminently craftable by all characters.

Not sure I like this...it sacrifices realism and character individuality for balance purposes, but I'm not sure how good a trade that actually will end up being...

3) Each monster has a certain percentage chance to "drop" given items that vary from monster to monster.

4) Monsters can effectively be "poached" for other special items (beast's flesh, goblin teeth, phoenix tears) useful for a variety of purposes (See Valkyrie Profile: Silmeria). While a Ranger might be better at this than other characters all classes will be able to do it. Some of these items may also have a percentage chance to be simply "dropped" by a monster, depending on the monster and the item.

Ew. These feel very MMO to me, and I don't like the fact that, by the rules, I should have X% chance of getting Y...a meta-game result of this will be monster-farming, which no Role-playing game should have. I'm also not a fan of cutting up every monster for all the gold it's worth, as that breeds a very different sort of player from a game where that isn't the norm.

These are the two ideas I can say I loathe, plain and simple. I recommend that you remove them.

5) The concept of wealth by level does not exist. Characters are not expected to have a certain amount of magical gear at any level of the game, and no amount of wealth in gold pieces is necessarily translatable to mechanical power. Sensible rules for in-game economics are a top priority.

Good. Magic items and so forth should allow you to tackle monsters above your CR, but the CR system should be designed around a non-magic situation.

That said, this means that magic can't replicate existing powers and/or provide numerical bonuses, otherwise they WILL translate to mechanical power. I think you'll have to settle for less translation to mechanical power.

Rules for economics probably shouldn't be a top priority (most DMs I know handle them pretty well within the respective worlds if the players don't set out to try to break the economy), but it would be nice to see.