The Gaming Den

Foxwarrior wrote:I don't agree, however, that a game about Oddly Durable Murder Hoboes in a Modern environment is necessarily not a game with "a modern setting". It can still have hackers, fast cars, and lots of gunfire you know.

You're getting this all backwards. It doesn't matter whether or not there are oddly durable murder hobos, or even what oddly durable murder hobos can or cannot do. But it does matter what people can do before they also have to be oddly durable murder hobos. Batman is a character in a setting which can be described as modern. Batman is an oddly durable murder hobo. Batman hacks at various problems in order to solve them. But not every hacker in the Batman universe should be an oddly durable murder hobo! Indeed, the vast majority of them should piss themself at the prospect of a handful of armed goons out to kidnap them. In a level-based system where being a better hacker means being a higher level and being a higher level means being a bigger badass, that does not work. Everyone who is good at anything is also necessarily an oddly durable murder hobo. It turns bullshit like "sore loser at the world chess championship" into an "evacuate the building and send in SWAT, maybe a tank" level situation.

Modern settings very much need to be able to model competency in different fields independently of one another, something D&D's level-based system just does not do.

Indeed, maybe not every famous painter should be able to take on a mounted knight bare-handed.

Granted, the ridiculousness is a little bit more front-and-center when you have hackers and get knowledge from experts rather than Divinations. But just because it's silly doesn't mean it's unacceptable.

Foxwarrior wrote:Indeed, maybe not every famous painter should be able to take on a mounted knight bare-handed.

Granted, the ridiculousness is a little bit more front-and-center when you have hackers and get knowledge from experts rather than Divinations. But just because it's silly doesn't mean it's unacceptable.

But the fact that it's silly and out of genre means that it's unacceptable. It's actually OK in D&D land if you have to quest to sages who are also powerful warlocks or giant sphinxes or whatever the fuck if you want real top level information. But modern games aren't like that. Top level sages wear sweater vests.


vs.


-Username17

OgreBattle: The mass damage thing sounds like a great idea. Thanks. Yeah, I'm using Tome classes.

The issue with every computer nerd also being amazing at combat can be largely dealt with by replacing skill ranks with skill ratings without a cap.

Ie, Untrained +0, Trained +5, Expert +10.

If it takes 1 skill point to raise a skill to trained and another to raise it to Expert, you have to cut way back on the number of skills allotted. If you eliminate the x4 at 1st level and then just give +1 skill rank each level, that would mostly work.

Ie, an 'Expert' could be trained in 6+Int skills, or Expert in half that number at 1st level.

If your skill list is sufficiently robust, people with particular skills may be useful, even if they are low-level. Your 1st level 'I know the streets contact' can have a better rating in some skills than a 10th level PC.

Prak_Anima wrote:Another ill-conceived idea of minething I wrote you might want to look at rad is Grittiness and Grit Die. It's a reframe of an existing mechanic and a half-assed mook rule.

I'm not sure I understand the system here. But I like the idea of saying HP also includes plot armor, in the same way AC includes both armor and dodging.

Wiseman: The main reason I'm using 3.X is because I'm already reasonably familiar with it. But thanks, if this works out at my table, I'll look into other systems to steal from them. If it doesn't, I'll just look into other systems.

shadzar: Yes, I've considered d20 Modern. It's got some problems though. I will however be gleefully pilfering from it.

deaddmwalking: What about E2 for common professions, E6 for cops, military, spies, martial artists, etc. and E10 for badass normals? No skill caps, more ranks and bonus feats whenever they gain enough experience at max level. You'd still need a cap on say, jump though.

How about you make an NPC Nerd class that gains skill points but doesn't gain BAB, HP, Saves, but this NPC class can be traded out for PC class levels if the nerd becomes a badass through the course of the story?

Ok, how does a 'vehicles' guy work in a d20 system?
How does fighting a battle tank or attack helicopter work in d20 in a way that feels good and isn't "12 gangsters with pistols will destroy a single Abrams in a few rounds of shooting"?

OgreBattle wrote:How about you make an NPC Nerd class that gains skill points but doesn't gain BAB, HP, Saves, but this NPC class can be traded out for PC class levels if the nerd becomes a badass through the course of the story?

Or just cheat on an NPCs skills. There's really no reason a noncombat NPC has to have strict class rules. He can just be a level 1 NPC with a crap ton of skill points to fit the story.

I don't care how noncombat scientists are made because they're not PC characters anyway, so they can just be arbitrarily assigned skills for the sake of plot.

Cyberzombie, the problem with a class and levels system for non-high fantasy genres is that it does not generate most genre appropriate characters. Your solution of "don't use the class and levels system to generate most of the characters" does technically solve that problem. But it does so in a way that very strongly advocates for not starting with a class and levels system in the first place.

If you aren't going to use the system to generate most of the characters, you really aren't using the system and shouldn't pretend that you are.

-Username17

FrankTrollman wrote:Cyberzombie, the problem with a class and levels system for non-high fantasy genres is that it does not generate most genre appropriate characters. Your solution of "don't use the class and levels system to generate most of the characters" does technically solve that problem. But it does so in a way that very strongly advocates for not starting with a class and levels system in the first place.

If you aren't going to use the system to generate most of the characters, you really aren't using the system and shouldn't pretend that you are.

Most of the innocent bystanders aren't people you care about. So you can pretty much just take one innocent bystander statblock, attach whatever skills you want and now you've got a scientist, a chess champion or a lawyer.

Level systems are about combat and the meaningful combatants are the ones you want to spend time on. That's what the levels were designed for, to show you how good of a combatant a given character is. It's fine if a noncombatant has noncombat skills that are way off the charts. Nobody cares.

There's no sense setting up a bunch of red tape to create Stephen Hawking. In fact, it's worse from a design point of view, because it undermines the whole purpose of a level system. Now you end up with 10th level badasses and 10th level nerds, where the nerds are total noncombatants but need to be level 10 so the accounting adds up and they can have a physics score of +20.

Instead, it's a lot more sane to make them 1st level combatants with extraordinary skills. It doesn't matter if you can't make that guy as a PC, because it's not a valid PC concept anyway. So you're best off not sweating the small stuff.

What's important is that your system can stat up Batman and the Joker. Those are the heart of the game. Wasting any more than 10 seconds stating up Stephen Hawking is a total waste of any DM's time.

radthemad4 wrote: deaddmwalking: What about E2 for common professions, E6 for cops, military, spies, martial artists, etc. and E10 for badass normals? No skill caps, more ranks and bonus feats whenever they gain enough experience at max level. You'd still need a cap on say, jump though.

I don't think that would give you as much mileage as you might think. I would say you're best off with a single level cap (if you're using one), but you have to make sure that Einstein can be a level 1 scientist and still be 'the best'. A Level 5 scientist might be only just as good as Einstein at science (or maybe not even as good), but he's likely to survive a fire-fight.

In D&D terms, level corresponds to survivability. Most cops should be Level 1, most scientists should be level 1, most EVERYONE should be level 1... But if most everyone is level 1, you have to make sure that level 1 people can be really good at their profession.

As far as the PCs go, you might use E6 (or E5). You're obviously at that point increasing their survivability beyond what is 'normal', but if you don't want a super-gritty game, that's not really a problem. You may want to ensure you're flavoring damage appropriately to avoid any cognitive dissonance.

What if you made a bunch of combat-centric classes and had those be the combat skill -- i.e., pick one of these, your level in this is the combat skill?

OgreBattle wrote:How about you make an NPC Nerd class that gains skill points but doesn't gain BAB, HP, Saves, but this NPC class can be traded out for PC class levels if the nerd becomes a badass through the course of the story?

I think something like this could work. This wouldn't count towards character level and would allow pretty much any number of skill points. Potential pitfall I can see is PCs wanting to start out as Einstein. However it should be feasible for PCs to start out as competent professionals anyway. Perhaps one free nerd level for Young, two free nerd levels for middle age, and so on. How many 'nerd levels' would Einstein have anyway? Maybe, having nerd levels could increase XP costs for levelling up in PC classes or something. Opinions, deaddmwalking and others?

OgreBattle wrote:Ok, how does a 'vehicles' guy work in a d20 system?
How does fighting a battle tank or attack helicopter work in d20 in a way that feels good and isn't "12 gangsters with pistols will destroy a single Abrams in a few rounds of shooting"?

I'm thinking vehicles are objects (e.g. bike=medium, car=large, firetruck=huge) with facing and the fly maneuver rules (sans vertical movement except at ramps and from higher altitudes to lower altitudes for ground vehicles). Vehicle guys get to use vehicles at a higher maneuverability than the vehicle's base maneuverability (there will be a vehicle specific maximum maneuverability so no trucks can spin around on the spot, though a bicycle can), and get extra abilities like being able to spin vehicles at ramps, drive into a helicopter from a jump even if the terrain isn't specifically aligned for it, multitask (e.g. fire a handgun while driving), etc. Vehicles will have really high DR for piercing and slashing, and less, but still high for bludgeoning. Tanks more so. People in cars are considered prone. There should be modifiers for open roofs, bulletproof glass, etc. This is just what comes to mind at first.

RadiantPhoenix: Could you elaborate?

You could allow characters to choose to advance a level whenever they gain the requisite XP (up to level 6), or they could choose to advance exactly like a 6th level character does. Essentially they could gain 'extra abilities' that for our purposes don't impact CR. To create characters you'd assign an XP total and then either cash in for classes or 'extras' like skill ranks and feats...

It should largely attain your objective, but it isn't as simple as a true level system.

Whoever thinks superheroes are a genre that works with "classes" or zero-to-hero should watch less shonen anime and read more comics.

On that note, however, shonen anime is totally doable as long as your anime characters share a common feature every X levels (like the free feat) that says "allows you to pick a class feature of another class and make it work with your class' key attribute," because shonen anime heroes' thing is gradually stealing his supporting cast's schticks until they've been rendered useless and redundant (with the difference, however, that your table has no supporting cast and is more of a "the magnificent seven supermen").

Dogbert wrote:Whoever thinks superheroes are a genre that works with "classes" or zero-to-hero should watch less shonen anime and read more comics.

I actually think "classes" isn't a bad way to go about things. Imagine for the moment that you had a team with a Psychic, a Cape, two Gadgeteers, and a Martial Artist. It might look something like this:



Or you might have a more ensemble cast with a Controller, three Bricks, two Capes, a Suit, two Gadgeteers, and a Martial Artist. And it might look something like this:

Or you might have a group with two Monsters, two Psychics, and a Controller.

Actually assigning heroes into arbitrary categories is not a bad idea. If Barry Allen or Pietro Maximoff develops a new ability, it will come off the Speedster list, because those characters are Speedsters. They will not get new abilities based on super strength or eye beams because that is not the kind of character that they are. So they might do a thing where they run through the room and take everyone's guns, but they wouldn't get an area of effect ground punching maneuver.

Even arranging things in "power levels" is not an inherently bad idea. We all know that Deathstroke is much more powerful than Green Arrow, just as we know that Superman is much more powerful than Deathstroke. But of course, while arranging things into tiers of power is reasonable, the expectations of a classic leveled system are completely retarded. Characters don't go through power levels 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 in sequence. That is not a thing that fucking happens. Bruce Banner gets hit with some gamma radiation and then he is power level 10 and he did not go through intermediary power levels one at a time.

What actually happens is that characters pretty much stay within a single power level (subject to different authors power creeping by one-upping each other). And they use their powers in various novel ways. In short, it plays out a whole fuck lot more like a Skill Based system than a Level Based system.

When Zatana fights and defeats a new foe, she does not "level up" after defeating her opponent. She comes up with a novel use for her sorcery in the middle of the adventure and is a slightly more versatile but essentially equally powered character at the end.

-Username17

deaddmwalking wrote:You could allow characters to choose to advance a level whenever they gain the requisite XP (up to level 6), or they could choose to advance exactly like a 6th level character does. Essentially they could gain 'extra abilities' that for our purposes don't impact CR. To create characters you'd assign an XP total and then either cash in for classes or 'extras' like skill ranks and feats...

It should largely attain your objective, but it isn't as simple as a true level system.

I'd say it's pretty good for a quick hack for a system that wasn't meant for this anyway. Thanks.

Frank: Yeah, levelling up should either happen when getting powers in the first place, getting a power upgrade, e.g. more gamma radiation or at least, a timeskip or something. Some schticks would probably need to be tweaked a bit depending on which level players want to play at in order to have a balanced party. e.g. Superboy in Young Justice is a great low level Superman analogue as he can't fly and doesn't have heat vision, and Mystique from X-men evolution can be considered higher level than her other versions as she could also turn into animals there. While Young Justice and X-men evolution clearly don't consist of balanced teams, the advantage of a class system being there is that dialing up or dialing back powers is really easy to whatever level players like. Also, temporary powerups like Zatanna putting on Fate's helmet, Superboy using those patches, Spider-man getting the Black suit, etc. can be easily simulated via temporary levels.

Having 'power tiers' also helps ensure more even capabilities between characters.

If you make 1st level spells cost '1 building point' and 5th level spells cost '5 building points', there is a big difference in power between two '10 BP characters' where one has ten 1st level spells and one has two 2nd level spells.

Having spells from 1st-3rd level in 'Power Tier 1' and spells from 4th-6th level in 'Power Tier 2' can help balance those differences to some degree.

And the concept works regardless of the specific resource being allocated. Having access to every weapon in the PHB is more flexibility - but not more real power. Having access to a smaller number of weapons but getting a +6d6 sneak attack is a measurable increase in 'real power'.

Cyberzombie wrote:
Or just cheat on an NPCs skills. There's really no reason a noncombat NPC has to have strict class rules. He can just be a level 1 NPC with a crap ton of skill points to fit the story.

I don't care how noncombat scientists are made because they're not PC characters anyway, so they can just be arbitrarily assigned skills for the sake of plot.

FrankTrollman wrote: Cyberzombie, the problem with a class and levels system for non-high fantasy genres is that it does not generate most genre appropriate characters. Your solution of "don't use the class and levels system to generate most of the characters" does technically solve that problem. But it does so in a way that very strongly advocates for not starting with a class and levels system in the first place.

If you aren't going to use the system to generate most of the characters, you really aren't using the system and shouldn't pretend that you are.

-Username17

One solution is to divide up combat and noncombat abilities/skills into two separate types of class and levels. When determining what is an appropriate combat challenge, one looks only at the combat levels of the participants. Ditto for noncombat challenges.

Combat classes and levels would cover the traditional fighting skills and abilities. The noncombat can cover things like diplomacy, business acumen, gadget making, etc.

The scientist and lawyer NPCs have levels only in noncombat type classes and no levels in combat ones. Thugs/muscle would be vice versa.

Player characters should progress equally in both types of classes simultaneously. This, of course, necessitates the need for an "overall" power level which dictates the minimum and maximum levels for combat and noncombat classes that the PCs should have.

This is not necessarily a good solution. For example, there might be synergies between different combat and noncombat classes designers might want to either encourage or discourage, among other potential problems.

Frank, there´s still this little issue:

While one can argue that Batman is a high-Tier hero, there´s Robin, who is a scaled-down Batman: Still a top combatant in the junior leagues, still a great detective for junior-league cases, still drives a souped up vehicle and share the same gadgets (sans combat armor).

On the powers side of the "my motiff is I can do anything" spectrum, we have Mr. Majestic, who is as eyeroll-inducing as silver-age Superman with all kinds of bullshit powers like " super remote programming"... and then there are guys like Doctor Strange, Molecule Man, and The Spectre.

Any superhero game worth its salt must be able to model these guys as-is if only because Batman is one of the most recognizable icons in the genre, and when MC says he´s about to start a superhero game, there´s a chance a player will want to play Batman.

FrankTrollman wrote:

Dogbert wrote:Whoever thinks superheroes are a genre that works with "classes" or zero-to-hero should watch less shonen anime and read more comics.

I actually think "classes" isn't a bad way to go about things. Imagine for the moment that you had a team with a Psychic, a Cape, two Gadgeteers, and a Martial Artist. It might look something like this:



Or you might have a more ensemble cast with a Controller, three Bricks, two Capes, a Suit, two Gadgeteers, and a Martial Artist. And it might look something like this:

Or you might have a group with two Monsters, two Psychics, and a Controller.

Actually assigning heroes into arbitrary categories is not a bad idea. If Barry Allen or Pietro Maximoff develops a new ability, it will come off the Speedster list, because those characters are Speedsters. They will not get new abilities based on super strength or eye beams because that is not the kind of character that they are. So they might do a thing where they run through the room and take everyone's guns, but they wouldn't get an area of effect ground punching maneuver.

Even arranging things in "power levels" is not an inherently bad idea. We all know that Deathstroke is much more powerful than Green Arrow, just as we know that Superman is much more powerful than Deathstroke. But of course, while arranging things into tiers of power is reasonable, the expectations of a classic leveled system are completely retarded. Characters don't go through power levels 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 in sequence. That is not a thing that fucking happens. Bruce Banner gets hit with some gamma radiation and then he is power level 10 and he did not go through intermediary power levels one at a time.

What actually happens is that characters pretty much stay within a single power level (subject to different authors power creeping by one-upping each other). And they use their powers in various novel ways. In short, it plays out a whole fuck lot more like a Skill Based system than a Level Based system.

When Zatana fights and defeats a new foe, she does not "level up" after defeating her opponent. She comes up with a novel use for her sorcery in the middle of the adventure and is a slightly more versatile but essentially equally powered character at the end.

-Username17

That sounds almost exactly like Mutants and Masterminds.

Yes, except Mutants & Masterminds isn't a class/level system, it's point buy with caps. (By which I mean that PL sets an upper bound for power, but no lower bound like "real" levels do.)

You could use M&M to make this game, by building "class progressions" for the various archetypes. It'd be a bit of work, but it'd be pretty easy. Whether it would be worth the effort I'm not sure, but it is an opportunity to balance the different archetypes. You could avoid a lot of M&M's balance issues by building some archetypes on more points per level and not putting certain options in the power lists. This comes at the cost of being limited to playing archetypal characters, of course, but another advantage is that if the GM needed some really weird stuff for a spesific adventure, like a sentient disease or a guy that transforms emotions into summoned monsters, the system could do it -beccause it'd be M&M under the hood.

FrankTrollman wrote:Even arranging things in "power levels" is not an inherently bad idea. We all know that Deathstroke is much more powerful than Green Arrow, just as we know that Superman is much more powerful than Deathstroke. But of course, while arranging things into tiers of power is reasonable, the expectations of a classic leveled system are completely retarded. Characters don't go through power levels 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 in sequence. That is not a thing that fucking happens. Bruce Banner gets hit with some gamma radiation and then he is power level 10 and he did not go through intermediary power levels one at a time.

That's true, but it's true across every genre. The number of stories of any genre that would map well onto a D&D level system is vanishingly small. Probably because many small improvements from wimp to god is hard to portray in an noticeable manner compared to a few discrete jumps in power.

hogarth wrote:That's true, but it's true across every genre. The number of stories of any genre that would map well onto a D&D level system is vanishingly small. Probably because many small improvements from wimp to god is hard to portray in an noticeable manner compared to a few discrete jumps in power.

?

You start off with a plucky young teenager, who joins up with some more experienced adventurers, and goes on an adventure. They start out fighting goblins, and then they fight orcs, and then they fight ogres, and then they fight trolls, and then they fight giants, and then they fight dragons, and then they fight a god. With each new foe get a few new powers that don't seem too big on their own, and get more skilled in ways that are hard to quantify.

And then they go back and stomp some giants and dragons so you know it's not just that the setting has flat power levels.