Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 koosemose Apr 09, 2009 22:11:28	Greetings all, For a game I shall be running in the near future for my group, I have decided that I want a more freeform class system. I feel that for the purposes of my game the classes as laid out in Modern d20 don't quite fit, and not trusting my creative ability to come up with enough class variety, I have instead came up with a system for freeform class creation. However, there are a few spots that feel a bit rough and I would like some assistance in smoothing them out. Here's the basic layout, First off with no preset classes, I had to rework how talents worked, so basically what I did was just allow my players to choose from any Talent from any core class, and for advanced classes I ripped them apart into Advanced Talent Trees that require various prerequisites to enter into. From these talents a player chooses a new talent every odd level. I realize there is potential for abuse here, but my players have proven mature enough to not abuse this, and if they do get carried a way are willing to work with me to get their characters a little more balanced. The only problem I am having with regard to talents is that characters only end up with 10 at level 20 and I'm not sure that enough since that also includes what would normally be class abilities from Advanced classes which generally seem to come at a quicker rate. The only solution I've come up with that doesn't feel to clunky is to give a bonus talent every 5th level (5, 10, 15, 20). Next the feats, this part I'm happy with. Characters start with 5 feats (since they get no starting feats from occupations (due to the campaign everyone would have the same occupation, so it seemed simpler to remove them), every one is human, and no starting feats from classes. As they progress they get a new feat every level except for every third level, it's a bit awkward there but it ends up with approximately the same number of feats a character would have from progressing 1-20 normally, and giving a feat every other level and every third level just seemed to weird without the seperation between character level feats and class level feats. Now the part that has a few issues. "Class" Creation. Basically a character has 5 traits; combat (base attack bonus), defense, skills, hit die, and saves. each trait is ranked high, medium, or low, and you assign 2 high, 2 medium, and 1 low. High combat is +1 BAB every Level, Medium is +3 BAB every four levels, and Low is +1 every two level. This feels mostly balanced, so far test characters have had medium and high saves, (no concepts have been fitting for low combat, but there may be one), and honestly since this is to be a game of mercenaries I expect lots and lots of combat, so few low combat priorities seems about right. High Defense goes off the fast hero chart, Medium goes off the Tough hero, and Low goes off the Strong Hero. This one I think is well balanced, I've had Defenses at all priorities High Skills is 8 per level, Medium is 4 per level, and Low is 2 per level; I recently changed High from 6 per to 8 per, as skills based characters just didn't seem to have enough skills to go around based on what they were giving up, this may change back down I'm still not sure. Hit die is d10 for high, d8 for medium, and d6 for low. Seems well balanced, had all priorities. Finally the one that seems the most off is saves, High gives you 3 good saves, medium gives you 2 good saves and low gives you 1 good save (Good being what the Reflex save of the martial artist is, starting off at 2 and going up about 1 every 2 levels, bad being the basic classes low saves, starting at 0 and going 1 every three). Higher priority in saves just doesn't seem to be worth it, or more accurately, low priority doesn't seem so bad. So far all test characters created by myself and players have had Low priority saves, it just doesn't feel like enough of a sacrifice to have low, and saves just don't mesh with many character concepts to make it even worth while to make a "saves" based character with all good saves. The only solution I can come up with is inserting a "medium" save (with a medium save starting at 1 and going up every two levels) in there somewhere, maybe high is 1 good 1 medium 1 bad, medium 1 good rest bad (and/or 2 medium), low 1 medium rest bad. Is this to harsh or what? So what does everyone think? And does anyone have suggestions to aid balance? I should note, I'm only interested in internal balance, as this will not crossover with standard modern d20 classes, I just need internal balance and for this to be as stream lined as possible. I also, of course, welcome any other suggestions and tips anyone may care to offer. Thanks for taking the time to read all this, I tried to split it up to avoid Wall of Text... hopefully I succeeded.
#2 TheRealOrion Apr 09, 2009 22:29:26	I think it looks pretty balanced, at first glance, although it's not totally free-form. You can't, for example, take all "bad" Save progressions in trade for something else, but that's not necessarily a good idea. I only say to point it out. What I would say is that, given that you have players who aren't just going to abuse it (which is always a good place to start!), just play-test it and see what happens. As soon as you introduce more choice, there's more potential to make classes that suck or classes that seem too powerful. That's to be expected. But as long as they're more or less in range with each other, I think you're good. And if they work for your table and your game, what else do you need, really? Mission accomplished. You produced fun.
#3 koosemose Apr 09, 2009 22:44:26	Yah, I wanted to avoid completely freeform, my players may be mature, but they're certainly not saints, and complete free form just begs for abuse. The main reason I want to get it as balanced as possible from the start is because even though there will be play testing, the main issue (the saves) won't really show up until an extended campaign, and I'd hate to "nerf" players saves mid game either forcing them to deal with sucky saves all around or completely change a balanced character, as that can completely trash a concept. I think if all else fails I will institute the version with the medium saves first, as I'm sure a mid-game powerup will always be welcome.
#4 TheRealOrion Apr 09, 2009 23:26:07	That's exactly what I would have said, yeah. Bring it in underpowered and ease it up as you go. You find the right balance and you look like the hero.
#5 koosemose Apr 10, 2009 0:25:53	1st 1 2nd 2 3rd 2 4th 2 5th 3 6th 3 7th 4 8th 4 9th 4 10th 5 11th 5 12th 6 13th 6 14th 6 15th 7 16th 7 17th 8 18th 8 19th 8 20th 9 Ok after a bit of work extending the pattern of the saving throws of the base classes this is what I have as a medium progression for saving throws all the way to 20, It looks clean to me, and seems to result in a midpoint between the two others pretty much the whole way through. Only thing that bothers me is that theres not a simple formula to express the progression that I've discovered yet, but thats just my inner math geek... ahh scratch that... found the formula I'm happy now...
#6 DwarfFighter Apr 12, 2009 20:03:45	One question, though. Are you having the players define their characters at the outset and having them stick with it throughout the game, or are you allowing for any sort of multi-classing? -DF
#7 TheRealOrion Apr 12, 2009 20:26:34	Oh that is a good question! If you don't allow multi-classing, then you're potentially making them less flexible. But if you do allow it, then they can readjust their numbers every level and seriously spug the math. Tough call.
#8 koosemose Apr 17, 2009 1:15:34	My current intentions are that the players will set their class at the outset, and it will stay there. I actually don't believe this will limit flexibility significantly -- In my experience (My group), players generally stick to similar classes, as far as the stats from my "traits" go -- i.e. a player will always stick with high defense, high reflex classes, if that's what they started with, and seem to be less happy if they have to multi-class to a class with a different set of base stats for whatever reason. Most of the flexibility comes with the talents the various classes provide, and in my system that is even more open... The only issue I think I will have is if a player wants to create a character that has a non standard base attack progression (for example, that's the one that has the most difference between priorities) like what one would achieve by alternating between fast and smart hero... that and the simple fact that due to the nature of the game (mercenaries) I expect combat to be a bit more important than usual, so the low combat priority seems a bit to low... but I can't come up with another option that would have enough of a difference between the three ranks... I suppose that'll be something that needs hammered out in play... better to have it to low and increase it later than the other way around... of course if it's too low no one will take it and I won't get a good idea of how it plays out... Though my GM PC will likely have low combat priority, as he's a support character. So I can see if it's any fun for me, but that'll make it tricky to tweak as I'll be biased... hmm