Fifty Days of Design (Beta 4)

Another quick post to announce my latest plans:

10 classes in 50 days!

 As of right now, these classes are what I would call "done":

• Acrobat (d4)
• Sage (d4)
• Fighter (d6)
• Paladin (d10)
• Barbarian (d12)

So, over the next 50 days, I'm looking to finish up the final 10 classes, each with 2 archetypes:

• Druid (d4)
• Rogue (d6)
• Scout (d6)
• Cleric (d8)
• Bard (d8)
• Ranger (d8)
• Mystic (d10)
• Guardian (d10)
• Warlord (d12)
• Spellbinder (d12)

Since I am trying to post every 10 days, that works out to 2 classes for each blog post!

Some of the classes are in a more complete state than others (specifically, those from previous iterations mostly just need some tweaking) so it's not as huge a feat in some cases.

...

As a minor note, Knowledge skills have finally been moved away from the structure of other skills, in what I consider to be a satisfactory manner in terms of the language used for them. Knowledge skills will fall into 4 categories: Battlefield, Social, Exploration, and Lore.

Also, if you haven't had a look at the core rules yet, check them out here!

The Road Ahead (Beta 4)

A quick-ish post to take stock of where The Next Project is at:

About half the classes need some major form of writing; either new classes that need to be written from the ground up, archetypes that need to be added, or classes/archetypes that need to be converted from one slot to another. The other half could still use some touch-ups, but a couple of them are what I would consider "done."

The core rules are probably done; it'll just be a matter of whether playtesting turns up any bugs that need to be fixed. Movement and status effects might cause hangups.

The monster math/encounter design stuff is more or less there, in my head. So I need to put pen to paper with that, and get an updated draft ready. I also want to at least have some sample monsters rolled out, if not an entire full-length monster manual.

I also want to do up a DM guidance doc, explaining how to utilize the system from both a technical as well as an aesthetic perspective. Specifically, I want the game to support both DM-driven as well as player-driven campaigns/narratives, so there should be advice for that bundled with the system.

Compare and Contrast (Beta 4)

One of the things I wanted to do with The Next Project was to get rid of static modifiers, and instead use more dice rolling. I kind of want to limit the straight-up addition of other dice rolls to d20 rolls, but so far there is still some of that in the game.

Using Advantage, Disadvantage, Expertise and "roll and compare" mechanics allows for improving hit chance and crit range, but doing so with dice has a fun, tactile side to it; simply having +1 to hit or "18-20 crit" on your sheet doesn't give you the same kind feel.

I also like Advantage/Disadvantage better (particularly as I have defined it in this game) rather than just bigger and more numbers being added to your roll. The nice thing with the "compare and contrast" mechanics, is that they can be layered over top of Advantage/Disadvantage, without skewing the numbers the way simply adding to the roll would. It also helps to mitigate the downside of Disadvantage, and further minimize the randomness of Advantage.

For example, if you're using "roll and compare" with a d8:

• With Disadvantage, you stand a fairly good chance of matching your d8 roll, assuming you don't roll doubles with the d20s to begin with. So while statistically the Disadvantage will give you a much higher chance of rolling unsuccessfully, that d8 can potentially turn that around
• With Advantage, you gain another safety net against bad rolls, without the swinginess that greatly expanding crit range (by adding dice) would bring into the game.

Trade-offs also work to keep things interesting; even something as simple as Power Attack is more interesting when the penalties and bonuses are subject to a roll of the die, rather than being known, flat numbers. There are limited ranges though, and the math isn't too tough to figure out, for those who want to crunch the numbers and optimize their actions.

Basically, I think it all plays off of that added rush from the "gambling" aspects of it. More dice-rolling means less of the same outcomes over and over, and more randomness -- but it has to be tempered by the design elements, to keep the math within acceptable ranges. This is what makes the process of design long and challenging, but also fun.

Back to Basics (Beta 4)

One of the things I have to continually remind myself of, is that The Next Project is meant to be a distillation of the general D&D playstyle. To this end, it's important to occasionally dial back some of the more grandiose ideas that crop up. I am giving some consideration to doing an "Advanced" version (that would functionally be an expansion of the game) but I think the base game needs to focus on being simple and accessible; the typical newbie probably doesn't need to dive in at the deep end of "great RPGs of the modern era" and thus, I don't think this game needs to fully emulate everything that would entail. To this end, the skill system is going to be kept very freeform, within a simple mechanical framework.

The other thing with coming at it from this angle, is that while it's important to introduce new players to some of the D&D classes that don't quite conform to existing fiction, not every D&D class in the history of the game needs to be represented. In terms of class design, I'm moving away from "filling in the grid." I found with a lot of slots, I was staring at a class name, with no idea of how to represent it mechanically and still make it unique. The other thing is, using Archetypes as a design conceit of the game, you can take class concepts that are relatively minor or don't quite translate to this system, and still have them represented while making them play effectively.

So right now, I am planning on doing 3 slates of classes, with each class having 1-3 archetypes. As currently constituted, each slate will be composed of 1-2 "power sources." Some classes within a slate will lean towards one power source or the other, while some will have an archetype for one power source, and a second archetype for the other power source.

The idea with this is that, if the system is to be monetized at some point, each slate would be its own supplement, that you could build a party out of (similarly to how the Essentials books were laid out, in 4e.) I also have plans for a demo/starter 'party' that would borrow classes from across the slates/supplements, with one archetype for each class; barring major changes, that 'basic' slate would look like this:

• d4: Archer
• d6: Rogue
• d8: Cleric
• d10: Mystic
• d12: Barbarian

With the question of slates figured out, it's just a matter of finishing off the last few classes that need to be written/expanded upon. Then, my attention will turn to developing the DM side of the game.