Heroes of All Stripes (Beta 4)

In 4th Edition D&D, the Dark Sun campaign specifically banned or limited power sources -- effectively cutting back on the number of classes you could pick from.

Just as a thought-exercise, I looked at what sorts of effects this might have, if implemented in TNP; based on that research, I'll be making some adjustments. What ended up happening was classes that are locked into 2 (or even 3) power sources are unlikely to make the cut, whereas classes that get to freely pick both/all of their power sources will always be an option.

As such, I'm leaning towards changing around classes to fall into one of these two setups:

• one power source is locked in, the other can be chosen from a short list
• both power sources can be chosen freely, but from a list of only three options

Generally, I think it will be thematically best to keep your party composition within 2 class slates, but there is no necessity to limit your party as such; limitations on class slate or power source selection should only be done to reinforce the theme or flavour of a campaign, or party cohesion, and only on the agreement of everyone at the table.

-----

Another thing I've been digging into recently is increasing the customization levels of classes, without adding to or changing their abilities drastically.

Some classes have explicit Roles, while others have implicit roles. For example, the Guardian breaks down into Warden and Shaman subclasses, which each effectively occupy a different role (just as the 4e versions did.) However, their abilities are structured such that they all draw from their "role ability" and they cannot really be extracted from each other. Simply put, these subclasses can't be changed to Archetypes, because one of them must be selected, in order for the class to function in combat.

Because of this, subclasses have been changed to be the "mandatory Role" form of customization; classes with subclasses to choose from can now select one at the start of combat, but should have a default one set, which they are most familiar with.

For some classes, this would not thematically make a lot of sense. For example, the Rogue has Assassin and Sorcerer as its subclasses; on its face, it would not make much sense for a character to swap between such drastically different characters at the start of each combat. In those cases, the subclass tag has been changed to "Path"; your path must be chosen when you create one of these characters. This change will apply to the following classes:

• Cleric: Path of the Crusader, Path of the Invoker
• Sage: Path of the Monk, Path of the Wizard
• Rogue: Path of the Assassin, Path of the Sorcerer

I've also been working over the past little while to make it so that classes with Archetypes to choose from still get basic functionality without having to pick one. Granted, having an Archetype will grant you an additional Iconic Ability and/or additional riders on your powers, but I want characters who don't pick one to still have the standard of 2 trained sets of core skills, as well as at least 1 (or preferably 2) power sources.

The current state of the Paladin is probably the best showcase for this type of design; the class functions fine without an archetype, but picking one gives you some mechanical perks in combat, as well as more options for customization.

-----

EDIT: A new playtest recruit is now live, on the forums. So if you're a goon, sign up!

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!

Laying the Foundations (Beta 4)

One of the ideas I have been kicking around for a while, is to do a "level 0" setup, for beginners to get into the game system. The idea would be that you pick a Class Die, plus one power source and skillset (maybe?) and play a couple of encounters, before settling on a full-blown class to play.

To facilitate this, I want the damage to be roughly balanced, but it would probably have to be less than that of a full class. As a matter of course, kicking this idea around while still working on the damage math, the two ideas have sort of cross-pollinated with each other.

If we look at 5th Edition D&D, light weapons (those suitable for two-weapon fighting) are exclusively d4 or d6 weapons. In The Next Project (where the damage is a bit higher, and all classes are expected to have the ability to hit more than one target in a turn) it probably makes sense that d4 and d6 classes should be able to attack more often. When we look at the current d4 classes, I've had to add some attacks just to keep the damage up; with the d6 classes, I'm noticing it leans heavily towards single-target attacking for some loadouts, so that might be something I'll have to dig into.

The logical starting point for figuring out the damage for "level 0" characters is to start with the math for their full-class counterparts, and hack off one Class die, starting with the d12. So, I'm looking at this as a baseline to tweak from:

• d4: Choose one type of attack (melee or ranged); you deal 2d4 damage when you use this attack as a Standard Action. You can also make this type of attack as a Minor Action, dealing 1d4 damage.
• d6: Choose one type of attack (melee or ranged); You can also make this type of attack as a Standard Action or Minor Action.
• d8: Choose one type of attack (melee or ranged); You have Advantage on the damage rolls of this type of attack.
• d10: You have Expertise on damage rolls.
• d12: You have Disadvantage on ranged damage rolls.

---

In terms of the DM advice areas of the rules, the groundwork is already in place for what sort of shape an "adventuring day" will take.

Classes have between 4 and 12 reserves. In terms of design space, reserves fulfill the same role as Healing Surges in 4th Edition D&D, however, classes in 4e have between 6 and 10 surges (plus your CON modifier.) To help try and bridge the gap, classes on the higher end of that scale in TNP tend to have abilities that can burn reserves for other uses in combat, whereas those with fewer reserves tend to have abilities to mitigate damage. In addition, Reserves provide more healing per use -- typically a full heal.

All that being taken into account, we get a framework that should roughly line up with that of 4th Edition -- specifically, to aim for around 4-6 encounters per day. Encounters per day and reserves per day might both have to be adjusted after some playtesting, but I think it's a good enough place to start from.

The important thing to keep in mind is that an adventuring day is not a literal time-based day, nor should it end when your gaming session ends. If an adventuring day spans more than one session, it should be considered a "two-part episode" in much the way TV series often do (even when a series usually conforms to "one-shots.") As such, I am considering alternate names for "adventuring day," such as "chapter."

---

For monster math, the baselines for PC damage have been established, so it is a simple matter of reverse-engineering from there. If we expect PCs to deal 15 DPR (or 3 hit dice of damage) on average, then in order to facilitate 3-round combat, an encounter should include 45 HP (or 9 HD) worth of enemies per PC participant. We can round these numbers off for simplicity -- 50 HP or 10 HD -- if we want something easy to remember.

Likewise, if the PCs have between 24 and 32 HP, and our objective is to reduce their HP by about half each encounter, then it makes sense to have standard monsters do 4-6 DPR over a 3-round combat. Assuming the PCs only successfully defend 50% of the time, this works out to about 10 damage for each standard monster's turn.

I think when class abilities come to bear, playtesting will show that the PCs are a bit heartier both in terms of damage and defense. As such, I'm betting that enemies will have to be adjusted "up" based on playtest feedback, but that should be easy enough to do.

Object of the Game (Beta 4)

After a bit of playtesting, I've been thinking about what the measuring stick for success should be, on a campaign- or adventuring day-level. Pretty much the only resource management in the game currently comes in the form of Reserves, which are a "daily" resource.

On its face, the point of this style of game is generally to get as far down into the dungeon (or advance the story arc as far as possible) before needing to return to safety and take a rest. But since we're not using a framework where levels, magic items, or wealth are used as the driving force of progression, the only measuring stick we have is how much content is completed before going back to "town."

Should the rewards simply be a matter of keeping score? There are a couple possible shapes this could take: rewarding players "points" either based on the number of encounters they have completed before going back to base, or by how many of their Reserves they have left after a predetermined amount of progression has been completed.

Either option requires some amount of balancing, and ultimately the solution may be to introduce additional subsystems to the game, to provide additional means of progression.

Change Log [2017/02/25] (Beta 4)

A couple more updates:

• [Core Rules] Power Attack can now only be used on Basic Attacks that are made as a Standard Action (Bard's Sword & Sorcery may end up changing to Iconic Attacks due to this, but for right now I'm leaving it as Basic Attacks)
• [Core Rules] Added explanation of Subclass/Archetype/Role into the text.
• Wizard can now make ranged basic attacks as a minor action
• Monk can now make melee basic attacks as a minor action, which deals additional damage; Monks gain advantage on melee basic attack rolls
• Bard's Sword & Sorcery now grants advantage to one of the attacks, instead of advantage to one and disadvantage to the other
• Fighter wording altered to grant Fighting Styles without needing an Archetype
• Some Archetypes renamed to "Subclasses"; wording on Roles altered; Domains, Disciplines (i.e. Sage schools), and Totems are now treated as "Archetypes"
• Adventuring Skills renamed to "Core Skills"
• All class backgrounds adjusted to accommodate Power Sources
• Re-worded the Domain riders on Cleric's Bless ability; War Domain's rider changed to only work on Basic Attacks
• Paladin wording altered to grant Trained Skills and Power Sources without needing an Archetype
• Bard background benefits tweaked; added INT skills as a Scholar option
• Fighter's Two-Weapon Whirlwind clarified w/r/t making Brawl checks; also changed this ability to use a double roll instead of a Trade-off, using one roll for the number of attacks and the other roll for the damage (similar to the Monk's Flurry of Fists; the distinction between Trade-offs and similarly-functioning double rolls will be ironed out in later updates)
• Increased Fighter's number of Reserves

Background Skills (Beta 4)

I've gone over the current classes, and revised all the "Background" sections to incorporate the use of Power Sources, for determining your Knowledge skills. (Follow the links to the classes, in the Core Rules document on the sidebar.) I wanted to touch on my ideas about those skills a bit here today.

Generally, I've found knowledge skills to be a bit situational, and so I don't want them to be "bought" with the same character-generation currency as "core skills" i.e. those which can be more actively used in encounters (particularly combat skills.) As I had mentioned in a previous post, most classes will have 2 sets of core skills; likewise, most classes will have 2 power sources, each granting them a set of 3 knowledge skills.

Here's the current list of knowledge skills I've decided to put into the game, along with which power sources grant you training in that skill:

• First Aid (Martial): allows you to treat basic injuries and identify common wounds
• Medical (Divine, Shadow): more complex medical knowledge, such as identifying remains, as well as diagnosing and treating poisons or diseases.
• Local (Martial): basic knowledge of settlements and their customs; deals with common people
• Streetwise (Shadow): pertains to the underworld within civilized locales; deals with lower-class people
• Royalty & Nobility (Divine): connections to people within high society, political structures, etc.
• History (Martial, Arcane): information about significant events of the past
• Arcana (Arcane): identifying and understanding sources of magical power
• Religion (Divine, Arcane): knowledge of deities, religions, cults, etc.
• Geography (Primal): knowledge of terrain features and landmarks
• Nature (Primal): surviving in the wilderness, knowledge of animals and plants
• Dungeoneering (Primal, Shadow): surviving in underground locations, such as ruins or caves; knowing about creatures or societies that live in such places

Now, at first glance, it might seem that these skills aren't very well-distributed. However, it is important to remember that each character will have 2 power sources, granting them a total of 5 or 6 knowledge skills.

I didn't feel it was wise to have knowledge skills tied to Basic Abilities (as Core Skills are) nor to have "knowledge" as a skillset (though that was the case in previous iterations.) In fact, a lot of times when I am tinkering with house rules for existing D&D rulesets, I often decouple knowledge skills from ability scores, in some fashion or another.

Conversely, I wanted to keep Performance skills linked to Basic Abilities. On the other hand, I didn't necessarily want to have each class that gets training with a Basic Ability to necessarily be good at the Performance skills that are tied to it. As such, the wording in the core rules has been clarified a bit to allow for this distinction. Essentially, your class' Background will specify whether you have "access" to the Performance skillset; if so, any training or Expertise you have with Basic Abilities is also applied to Performance skills that fall under those abilities (i.e. STR, AGIL, DEX, and CHA.) Some classes/archetypes may also be granted training in the entire Performance skillset (such as the Performer archetype, for the Bard class.)

Power Sources, Knowledge Skills, and Performance Skills are the pieces that compose your character's Background. Mechanically, they are less important than "core skills" or combat abilities, but they can be a good starting point for those who like to approach character creation from a more narrative angle. Similarly, characters can potentially grow from having just a background and a class die, into a fully-fledged character (if a DM and their players choose to start out at a lower power level.)

Scattershot (Beta 4)

I'm a little behind on my blogging, but I don't really have enough material on any one topic to make a solid post, so I'll just touch on a handful of things instead. Hopefully they can each be expanded upon down the road.


Subclasses/Archetypes
In the interest of allowing classes to be broken down into smaller bites, and thus less front-loaded, I've been making some tweaks here and there regarding Archetypes. Wherever possible, I'm making it so that choosing an Archetype is optional; where this does not work as well, I've changed the archetypes to instead be called Subclasses, which are mandatory.

This leads to the classes being somewhat asymmetrical, but also kind of gives a clearer indication as to which ones are straightforward, and which ones have more customization.


Combat Math (roughly)
The basis for the damage/HP calculations roughly originated from one of my earlier playtests. I hadn't crunched the numbers that closely, but expected classes to do around 10 damage per round (DPR). In practice, they were doing closer to 15 DPR, so that's been the benchmark for average damage, that I've been aiming at.

With the intent of keeping damage roughly equal, the smartest thing was to work from the biggest class die (d12) and see how best to fit the other dice into it. The best starting point was to assume that d12 classes would be doing 2d12 of damage on their turn (a maximum of 24) which obviously is hard for d10 classes to fit under. This is alright, since d10 and d6 classes are expected to have a slightly higher damage output; essentially we want each class to have a maximum damage output (aside from critical hits) in the 24-30 range. This gives us a couple of possible expressions for each class die:

• 6d4, 7d4, 1d4+1d20, 2d4+1d20
• 4d6, 5d6, 1d6+1d20
• 3d8, 1d8+1d20
• 3d10, 1d10+1d20
• 2d12

So using things like Advantage, Expertise, and "double roll and stack," we can bump the average damage of individual dice without increasing the maximum range. (This is something that D&D typically doesn't dabble with, instead using +1s to increase minimum, average, and maximum damage.)

For example, the Acrobat gets to double roll and stack the damage of their specialty basic attacks (and basic attacks also get Expertise.) So by being able to make basic attacks as both a standard action and a minor action, they're effectively doing 4d4 damage (before adding in things like Power Attack.) However, their average will be much higher than a Wizard doing four individual 1d4 attacks with their Magic Missile iconic attack, because the Acrobat is more likely to do maximum damage with each die.

I'm in the process of slowly crunching out the actual DPR of each class' attack sequences, to make sure they actually hit that 15 DPR benchmark; as such, some classes have already been given a few damage perks or additional attacks.

Housekeeping

I'm still going to try and keep up with posting 3x per month. I've been keeping a change log of any edits to the classes and core rules, so I'm hoping I can use that as the 3rd post of each month.

The remaining posts due for this month will hopefully be able to be done on time.