Class Showcase: Acrobat, Bard, Sage (2023)

For today's post, we're going to look at 3 classes that have sort of been tangled and disentangled from each other, at various points in the development.

• The Acrobat (d4, d8)
• The Bard (d8)
• The Sage (d4)

When I had first set about making a d4 Monk class (at the start of doing the 2nd full slate of classes, if memory serves) there was essentially a "mundane monk" subclass (the Martial Artist) and a "magical monk" subclass (the Ki Master). Later on, when I got around to doing a 3rd slate of classes, one of the ideas I started off with was to add an archer, as a "2d4" class. Eventually, the archer and the "mundane monk" got stapled together to form the Acrobat. Although not mechanically inspired by the Avenger or the Executioner from 4th Edition, the idea is that with different power sources (such as Divine or Shadow, respectively) the Acrobat can be used to approximate the flavour of such classes.

Likewise, the Sage started off as the d4 Mage class. In early iterations, the "INT Mage" was the wizard subclass, with the "CHA Mage" being the bard subclass. Later, that would change to Wizard and Swordmage being the Mage subclasses (with Bard and Sorcerer being subclasses for the "Trickster" -- kind of a de facto "CHA Mage" class.) With the big remix that came out of the 3rd slate, the "magical monk" got stapled onto the wizard subclass, to create the Sage class. As such, the Wizard is kind of the "mental Sage" whereas the Monk is the "physical Sage" in terms of their skills.

By recombining the subclasses this way, both the Acrobat and the Sage end up with a melee subclass and a ranged subclass. The Bard would eventually get spun off into its own class, as would the Swordmage (expanding to include the Hexblade subclass, under the banner of the "Spellbinder" class.)

As a side note, the general realignment that came with the expansion to a 3rd slate of classes was meant to organize the slates more around power sources.

If you look at the 4th Edition books...

• Martial characters were in PHB1, and Heroes of the Fallen Lands
• Divine characters (specifically Cleric and Paladin) were in PHB1, Heroes of Shadow, Heroes of the Fallen Lands, and Heroes of the Forgotten Kingdoms
• Arcane characters were in PHB1 (Wizard, Warlock), and PHB2 (Bard, Sorcerer), with variants and subclasses for those spread across all of the Essentials books
• Primal characters were in PHB2, PHB3 (Seeker), Heroes of the Forgotten Kingdoms (Sentinel Druid, Hunter and Scout Rangers), and Heroes of the Feywild (Berserker Barbarian, Protector Druid)

The original slate in TNP was meant as more of a classic/"greatest hits" compilation (Mage, Rogue, Ranger, Paladin, Barbarian[-ish]) but when the roster expanded to 3 slates, it became more of an exercise in answering the question, "How would the 4e classes have been grouped, if we started with all of them and worked backwards [rather than start with the 8 classes from PHB1, and expand outwards]?"

With the Ranger class moving from "Martial" in PHB1 to "Martial and Primal" in Heroes of the Forgotten Kingdoms, and Rogue being a good candidate for the underdeveloped Shadow power source, this left the Martial roster for TNP a little thin; the obvious way to fill it out was to combine Martial and Divine into one slate, consisting of the Acrobat, Fighter, Cleric, Paladin, and Warlord classes.

An "arcane and shadow" slate drawing from the Wizard, the "magical monk", the Rogue, the Sorcerer, the Bard, the Swordmage, the Hexblade, the Warlock, and the Necromancer would have more than enough material to flesh it out. Likewise, a combined "primal, or primal & martial" slate including all forms of Ranger, Druid, and Barbarian, as well as 4e-specific classes like Warden, Shaman, and Skald seemed to cover enough ground as well.

To sum up, the idea was that each TNP "book" (i.e. slate) would revolve around one or two power sources, and have all of the classes (and other materials) related to those power sources included. It's meant as sort of a refinement of the 4e ethos, where each "PHB" seems to have a primary power source (but also secondary and tertiary ones) as well as each power source having one or more "players' option" splat-books... to say nothing of the Essentials or post-Essentials books.

...

Anyway, that's all for this month.

Check back on October 10th for the next post!

Balancing Act (2018)

One of the distinctive features of The Next Project is the lack of a magic subsystem, and I wanted to touch on that a bit, today.

When we look at editions of D&D that use the "3.x" style of spellcasting, what becomes immediately apparent is that the classes are split into "haves" and "have nots." Ultimately, spellcasting classes are interacting with an extra layer of design -- they gain additional resource management, but also have much greater breadth of abilities.

So what do spells typically end up doing, in practicality? In short, you use them for both combat and non-combat, and generally what you're doing with them is spending limited resources to exceed baseline expectations. You can make an area attack to deal more damage than a single weapon swing, to more targets, or you can use it to overcome an obstacle -- whether that be in social encounters or in exploration. You can cast Knock to open a locked door, or cast Charm Person to get past the guard, or sway the regent, or whathaveyou. Generally when you're targeting a creature, there is a save involved, but a lot of times spells "just work" -- you're spending a limited resource, so the game doesn't make you roll.

Now, that being said, you still (as a spellcaster) have the option to not use these resources; you can swing your weapon all day, and you can try and use skill checks to get past non-combat encounters. This was sort of a problem I ran into with the Backgrounds in 5th Edition; they're a great starting point for giving characters declarative power, but everyone gets them. Spellcasters are still operating in a completely different design space than non-casters, while at the same time overlapping everything that the non-casters can do.

What I wanted to do with this game, is to even that all out: classes have their unique features for combat, and non-combat is handled using skills. That's it. We don't need magic as another layer of design that just duplicates things that are already covered; instead, it's used as a method of applying theme or flavour, to how a particular class handles combat or uses skills. We also don't want to be trying to balance off combat and non-combat utility against one another -- a classic "apples and oranges" analogy -- which is why the combat and non-combat aspects of characters are siloed off from one another, and why resource management is kept very minimal, in the game's overall designs.

This also avoids the pitfalls of having the spellcasting classes be the most versatile, powerful, and influential -- a feat which I think was one of 4th Editions greatest successes. As I've said before, the focus on teamwork meant that classes had to be designed to contribute meaningfully, and on about an even par with one another. What this allows the player to do, is to pick the class that most closely approximates the character that they have in mind, learn the ins and outs of that class, and just play -- secure in the knowledge that they haven't made a false choice, will under-perform, and feel like dead weight, bringing the rest of the party down. Balancing classes is important for enabling players to enjoy the game, by helping them to fully realize their character concepts.

Now, the problem with flattening the power curve, is that it is possible for classes to either look (on paper) or feel (in actual play) very similar to one another. This is where I think the design of TNP has the potential to execute better than some of its predecessors, because of class dice. In order for parity to be maintained, a party of 5 characters -- all operating off of different dice -- necessitates each class having unique and different mechanics. Admittedly, this requires a lot of number-crunching by the designer (me) in order to ensure each class can contribute equally. But overall, I think it's a meaningful goal to have, and one that helps guide much of the design process.


---


This sort of touches on one of the snags that have hit the class designs a bit. Trying to emulate D&D-style fantasy classes can mean dealing with some classes that have too much design space, and others that have too little. In most cases with this project, I've had an easier time of reigning in bloated classes, than in expanding classes that are a bit too narrow in focus. The one that always comes to mind in this regard is the Acrobat, and I'm hoping I can find a satisfactory solution for this class, as well as others.

In the near future, I'm hoping I can crank out a minor revision of the current playtest rules, but I also want to finish up a few more classes -- and make some of the needed changes to the new class format and leveling systems.


---


Next post should be on September 9th, so check back then!

Getting Back on Track (Beta 4)

I'm about a month behind schedule on updating the blog, but now that the days are getting shorter again, I think it's time to get back to working on TNP. I might not continue with posting three times per month, but I'd like to keep it to at least twice.

So here are the thoughts that I have been kicking around, as of late:
I never completely finished crunching out the math for all of the classes that are currently in the game, because myself and (probably) a few of my followers were super hyped just to see the system in action, so I went ahead with some playtests. And largely, what that testing seemed to indicate was that the d4 classes in particular were underperforming, in terms of damage. (As a side note, the Sage was pretty thoroughly crunched out, and subsequently beefed up -- but was not playtested.)

Part of the problem (it seemed) was having so many classes meant that some got the "really good" mechanics, and others were missing out. There was some consideration given to paring down the class slates (from 3 to 2) and what shape that would take, but I wasn't really satisfied with those options. Instead, I am going to try and focus on fixing the underlying math, and coming up with more mechanics, so that each class is unique and interesting.

Ultimately, the problem with the d4 paradigm is trying to hit all the damage benchmarks (specifically, an average DPR of 15, with a cap of 24.) And, compounding that challenge, is trying to do so without needing to make excessive numbers of dice rolls. The results of trying to address this can be seen in the "4.1 version" of the Druid; this introduces the "Druidic Focus" mechanic, which is essentially a banked 2d4 roll, that is reused for a wide majority of the class' abilities.

With this in place, I went on to look at the Acrobat. Currently, they have an AoE ability, which does a number of attacks equal to the result on a d4 roll, each dealing 1d4 damage. When I crunched this out, it's easy to see that the damage is too low -- but, a connection was made. Essentially, the formula needs to be closer to this:

[1d4 attacks * 2d4 damage] or [2d4 attacks * 1d4 damage]

This gives us a maximum of 4 * 8 = 32 damage. While we want the cap to be 24, I'm already making allowances for d10 classes to cap out at 30 (for obvious mathematical reasons) with d6 classes given similar leeway (since they too are intended to be damage-stacking classes.) As usual, things like Expertise and "double roll" mechanics can be used to tinker with the averages for this d4 formula. It also avoids the problem of having massive crits, from using d20s to supplement damage rolls.

With that in mind, I had a thought for another mechanic that could be unique to d4 classes:
auto-damage.
The current math essentially filters all damage through a 60% (for basic attacks) hit-rate, requiring a bunch of d4s in order to hit the benchmarks. If that mechanical restriction is removed, it makes it easier to achieve those same results, with fewer dice. For example, we can roughly hit the average DPR and the cap by simply using 6d4 or 1d4+1d20 for damage, where filtering through hit-rate math would require closer to 11d4 of damage.

For an iconic ability such as Magic Missile, auto-damage is a historical fit; that ability may be changed to use this new mechanic, instead of its current setup. The current Magic Missile mechanics would then be freed up, to be hung onto other classes.

Change Log [2017/03/26] (Beta 4)

Here are some more changes that have been put in this month. 

Also, check out the Homebrewery version of the Acrobat writeup, if you haven't seen that already.

• [Core Rules] Clarified the "Hidden" rules; attacking reveals your position
• [Core Rules] Updated "starter characters" with some streamlined formatting, and pre-picked core skills, so they can be more easily used as pre-generated characters
• [Core Rules] Changed rules so creatures with 1 HD do auto-damage
• [Core Rules] Added in a fair bit of text and additional guidelines regarding customization options
• [Core Rules] Clarified escaping a grapple, to work as a Shift
• Acrobat can now make any skill checks to gain High Ground as a Move Action.
• Acrobat's subclasses changed back to being archetypes; made some minor adjustments to make non-archetype Acrobats functional
• Archer's Aimed Shot changed to make it easier to deal damage with.
• Barbarian can now make a Class Die roll with Disadvantage in place of their training die on some skill checks
• Barbarian's Frenzy changed so that the trade-off is only rolled once, rather than on each of your turns
• Bard gains an additional trained Core skill list (mostly to accommodate non-archetype Bards) 
• Bard's Sword & Sorcery changed so that only one of the attacks counts as a basic attack (so you can't Power Attack with both attacks)
• Fighter, Druid, and Guardian abilities with the [Concentration] tag all changed to [Form]; added explanation for this new keyword into the Core Rules (this may be discussed a bit in future posts)
• Scout's Skirmish ability changed: extra class die roll now only works when you attack from unengaged; Withdraw changed to Move Action from Minor Action (it was too easy to Withdraw and become Hidden, in playtesting; Skirmish die roll being free was piling on a bit)
• Spellbinder's Beguiling Blade changed to not require sigil or hex for the reserve-burning attack
• Spellbinder's subclasses changed back to being archetypes; core skills list changed to better accommodate non-archetype Spellbinders; Hexblade now gains a 3rd skill training

Next post should be up April 5th, so check back then!

Change Log [2017/01/25] (Beta 4)

Here's a list of some of the changes that have been made to the various classes, since the start of the holiday break:

• Archer can now Counter-attack against ranged; same Hunter ability re-worded
• Acrobat using d20 to Power Attack removed; specialty basic attacks are now Reliable; Martial Artist's prone ability now works on unsuccessful attacks; Archer's reroll ability now works on any ranged attack (not just ranged basic)
• Wizard's Magic Missile basic attack is now Reliable; Veritable Vision now grants Expertise to damage rolls
• Assassin now gets training in either AGIL or Infiltration, instead of defaulting to AGIL
• Rogue Tactics given archetype-specific effects; clarified how Disengaging works via Cloak & Dagger
• "Warrior" class renamed to "Adventurer"
• Adventurer's Defender ability changed to "1d10[exp] or 1d20[exp] for defense rolls"
• swapped some aspects of the Fighter and Adventurer TWF abilities
• Soldier archetype's power attack ability limited to attacks made as a standard action; Weapon Training's miss roll is now likewise limited; Weapon Training can no longer turn misses into crits
• Fighter's Protection style changed to "allies in your maelstrom" instead of "Nearby ally"
• changed some Guardian totem perks to require spirit manifestation; Blood Totem now does extra damage when you are bloodied
• Cleric regains some HP when spending reserves in combat
• Ranger mark damage changed to "advantage; stack if you already had advantage"
• Bard can now Power Attack using a basic roll
• Bard's "Leader" role renamed to "Support"
• Necromancer's Animate Dead changed to allow for multi-HD minions
• Warlock's minor action attack removed; Eldritch Blast iconic attack now targets a number of enemies based on the roll, rather than making a number of attacks based on the roll
• Mystic's trained skills corrected to fit current format (oops)
• Paladin's Holy Aura reworded, now grants defense bonus only on unsuccessful rolls
• Paladin now gets training in either STR or Influence skills, instead of both (still gets additional skill training from their Archetypes)
• Swordmage now gets training in both STR and Influence skills, instead of one or the other
• Hexblade's Beguiling Blade changed to "roll class die in place of d20 roll" rather than "double roll and stack in place of an unsuccessful attack roll"
• Changed the rules on stacking class dice onto d20 rolls, in the core rules; clarified mechanics of using a basic roll for a Trade-off