Results 1 to 3 of 3

Threaded View

  1. #1
    Site Moderator Magian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Thief River Falls, MN
    Posts
    497
    Downloads
    219
    Uploads
    19

    A Different Attribute System

    I've been thinking about trying something like this out and wondered if there were other thoughts on it or if it is a completely bad idea or not.

    First I am mostly thinking in terms of 2nd Edition AD&D. Tweaks could easily be done to apply these concepts to other rules.

    Starting out I'd like the characters to only be able to achieve the class minimum that they choose. The rest of the attributes would be just above having a negative penalty with at least one attribute having one negative penalty. Why? Giant strength is a staple in most games and with some of the recent movies juxtaposing giants and dragons next to human sized images there seems to be a great gap. I want the PCs to feel more human at the start of the game. Olympians can achieve 18 /00 strength in the weightlifting event after many years of training, but it becomes their life. So, to simply allow every PC to start with those attributes leaves little room for improvement and no appreciation for having it, rather it becomes a staple. Counter point: they are the heroes of the campaign, therefore they should be so endowed. Response: Under this system they can but they aren't static and can go beyond what they previously could, it is just a matter of starting out weak.

    Attribute improvements:

    Effective class level: +1 per, ECL is used to determine multi/dual class by experience total not actual class levels to avoid spamming low level class leveling for more attribute points.

    Training Action: Can add to skills or attributes, both of which would likely take more and more time to improve skills beyond the first couple levels. I'd also think the training + would have a limit of something like up to +5 at most and would suffer from atrophy faster than aging effects so maintaining it would require training actions. This + would be tracked separately to allow the base attribute to be added to it and not suffer from atrophy the same and for tracking training time. Tracking training atrophy could be optional and justified by the lifestyle of the PC maintains it to simplify things.

    Bloodline Strength Category: Blooded tainted, minor, major, great, and true would all add to the base attribute score as determined by the DM and player. I figure something along the lines of (if not more) tainted +8, minor +12, major +16, great +20, and true +40. These values I had used for a point buying system so they shouldn't translate to base attribute + points, but who knows, perhaps you could make it work that way.

    Regency Points: Instead of increasing a bloodline they could be used to increase attributes. The cost in RP to bring up an attribute could be something like by a factor of 10 for the intended level. Possibly make a success check too.


    Why make this change?

    I view the game as a constant scaling up of the characters. The game seems to default to giving characters a bunch of magical items in order to gain power. Tomes are filled with them. But what if we played in a Vos campaign setting where Belenik rules? Would this not seem to make the Vos live up to their reputation? They investing in their own personal strength and followed by those that value it? Like the Anuireans who invest in their hope for empire. It gives the blooded the fortitude of being an adventurer right away if they so choose. I think it gives more to the adventurer vs. regent and allows for progress w/o spamming magic items and encouraging a low(yet rich and powerful) magic system. After all if you are going to give up a point of Con or some XP to make an item, why would you make a +1 sword, then a +2 sword, and then a +3 sword, and then a +4 sword etc to accommodate adventuring progress?


    Base class requisites:

    Only these requisites would be used when determining the character's starting attributes. Warrior, Wizard, Rogue, Priest.

    A starting PC could only have the minimum of these classes to start as their highest attribute. This would most likely be a 9.

    Then the growing through the level and increasing their attributes would be a main part of character development. For a wizard they'd be concerned with being able to learn more spells and cast level 9 spells as they aren't given that right away.

    Classes like Paladin and specialist wizards would be only accessible after they achieve the dual-class requirements for a second/third class. Therefore these classes become something like the prestige classes.

    Dual-class and multi-class rules would change. Rename them both to multi-class. Use the dual-class rules with the following changes. The PC can use all their abilities w/o xp penalty. They choose which class to gain xp in before the adventure. They can switch what class to level as they declare. They must meet the requisites of dual-class attributes to become that class. HD would = first class of choice. Likely this would encourage warriors. This makes sense in this kind of world.

    This is probably very clunky as I post it in this form. Things like a mage becoming a specialist and their spells cast per day. When it comes to mages becoming specialist a simple statement saying they abandon access to other schools, maintain their level and simply convert to the specialist like when a general ed. major declares a major for a degree or something to the effect that it is the natural path of mages to perform in this way. A paladin from a warrior seems to work in that it is just a new class. What about a priest to a paladin and spells cast or a ranger into a paladin? It is definitely not perfect.

    Is this doable?

    Likely most players would reject this and go with having the standard attribute system. What is the pay off? I envision this as a system for allowing for demi-gods and to become greater beings as they campaign goes on and PCs survive into long life and great heroic deeds. For example the Gorgon seems to have his stats justified under something like this. More so under the point system I used to figure out starting attributes that were higher, but without the +1 attribute per level rule. Rhuobhe was a perfect match actually just using the bloodline strength and point buy system. So bloodform templates could also add some attribute +s. Over all I want a system that can go all the way up like the original D&D to immortals rules. I want it to be seemless though. That is to say that at level x you become a god and new rules apply to you, you are no longer a powerful character but a much more powerful entity beyond the constraints of the class system. In fact I want the gods to be nothing more than powerful demi-gods like the serpent. Walking the face of the world and such having a domain interest like a king to a kingdom as a god to their temples. Thereby, risking offending a god can have some real consequences if you end up meeting them in person. But, yeah that is another story altogether.
    Last edited by Magian; 06-24-2013 at 04:48 AM.
    One law, One court, One allied people, One coin, and one tax, is what I shall bring to Cerilia.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. D20 System
    By Sorontar in forum Main
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-21-2007, 04:03 AM
  2. Skills by Attribute (SRD)
    By Arjan in forum Category
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-12-2007, 07:53 PM
  3. Map System
    By Christopher Kira in forum MPGN Mailinglist archive 1996-1999
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-14-1998, 12:53 AM
  4. War System
    By Hibbs, Philip in forum MPGN Mailinglist archive 1996-1999
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 11-11-1997, 06:51 AM
  5. RE: War System
    By John Campbell in forum MPGN Mailinglist archive 1996-1999
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-30-1997, 04:03 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
BIRTHRIGHT, DUNGEONS & DRAGONS, D&D, the BIRTHRIGHT logo, and the D&D logo are trademarks owned by Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and are used by permission. ©2002-2010 Wizards of the Coast, Inc.