This is something I'm adding to simplify the game. I'm divided between calling it an "experience bonus" or calling it a "level bonus." note 1 In 3E terms, it is a single bonus that combines the Base Attack Bonus and the Saving Throw bonuses. In older D&D terms, it's a bonus on your "to-hit" roll and your saving throws.
Here's the values I'm going with:
| Class Level | Fighter | Cleric | Magic User | JOAT note 2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | +1 | - | - | - |
| 2 | +2 | - | - | - |
| 3 | +3 | - | - | - |
| 4 | +4 | +1 | - | - |
| 5 | +5 | +2 | - | - |
| 6 | +6 | +3 | +1 | - |
| 7 | +7 | +4 | +2 | - |
| 8 | +8 | +5 | +3 | - |
| 9 | +9 | +6 | +4 | - |
| 10 | +10 | +7 | +5 | - |
| 11 | +11 | +8 | +6 | - |
| 12 | +12 | +9 | +7 | - |
Multi-class characters get the sum of their bonuses. For example, a character that is a 4th level cleric/2nd level fighter gets a total bonus of +3.
Historical Inspiration & Justification
Let's look at these two excerpts from Ready Ref Sheets published by Judges Guild in 1978:
If you can't see that, let me highlight the relevant bits:
| Fighter level | Hit Armor Class 5 | Save vs Stone | Change from Previous |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 - 3 | 14 | 14 | N/A |
| 4 - 6 | 12 | 12 | 2 |
| 7 - 9 | 9 | 10 | 3 (to-hit) / 2 (save) |
| 10 - 12 | 7 | 8 | 2 |
| 13 - 15 | 5 | 5 | 2 (to-hit) / 3 (save) |
| 16+ | 2 | 5 | 3 (to-hit only) |
As you can see, between level 1 and level 15 both the "to-hit" and the "save" start at 14 and end at 5. They diverge a bit between levels 7 and 12, but the maximum divergence never exceeds 1. When you roll a d20 a difference of 1 only matters 5% of the time, so 95% of the time it doesn't matter. In my mind, that's not worth worrying about if ignoring it will simplify game play.
The level 16+ stuff is a bit further apart. That's because saves only have 5 "level groups" while attack rolls have 6. I'm not worried about that for two reasons:
- In over 40 years of playing, I have never played/ran a game for players of that level.
- When Gygax revised the game from D&D to AD&D, he made the number of "level groups" the same for both saves and attack rolls.
With all that said, I figured what's the point in having separated modifiers for saves and attack rolls? Why not simplify things and go with a single number?
So that's what I'm doing.
Why +12?
That's why I'm making the rolls the same, but how did I arrive at the maximum of +12?
As you can see from the images/table above, the total "spread" for a fighter is 12 in the original rules. In other words, he needs to roll a 14 or better at first level, but at 16th level he only needs to roll a 2 or better. That means a 16th level fighter gets "+12" compared to a first level character. So that's where I topped off my table. Though in my version a fighter achieves it at level 12 instead of level 16. Again this aligns a bit better with AD&D and simplifies things.
Conclusion
I'm hoping that the final product is something that "feels" like playing back in the 70's but with rules that are a lot simpler.
Does what I'm doing make sense?
What name is better? "Level Bonus"? "Experience Bonus"? I don't like "Proficiency Bonus." Is there something even better?
Footnotes
1 Since I've started writing this, I've discovered that this is a bit like something that 5th edition of Dungeons & Dragons calls a "proficiency bonus." [back]
2 JOAT is an acronym for "Jack-of-all-Trades." It is a new character class I made to work with talents. note 3 It will be detailed in a future blog post. [back]
3 Talents are a simplified skill system I've developed for Crowfield. They are detailed in this post. [back]
Appreciate the footnotes! And look forward to the JOAT and talents posts!
ReplyDeleteAs for the primary content here, I agree that the consolidated approach makes things more intuitive (something desirable for the open table format).
A curiosity I have, which may be more due to my overlooking some context or gameplay/lore relevance: why does fighter get so many more bonus points?
I can see that this is the case in the provided excerpt - but for your purposes per the previous blog post, it seems like it doesn't make full sense.
For instance, if the saving throw is against some sort of mental probe or other Intelligence-driven assault, wouldn't the magic user and cleric be the better two to defend against this, and thus their experience in their respective field would add more?
I know that building in a varied approach of class v. attack would make things more complex, but wanted to at least bring up the thought.
And as to the thought about the naming convention...the best other option I can think of is "Class Bonus", which sounds super generic but reflects the system well enough.
DeleteOr a combined "Class Level Bonus", but not sure how wordy that would feel.
I don't think that "Class Bonus" works. As I said, I'm planning on using '3E' style multiclassing. In the example I used above, the character has two classes: he's cleric *and* a fighter. His bonus is +3, which is the combination of both classes. I think it's weird to call it a "class bonus" when it comes from multiple classes.
DeleteAm I making sense?
As always, thanks for your comment!
To answer you "why does the fighter get so much love" question, it's a matter of "fun balance."
DeleteWizards can cast massive spells that can take out a small army. They can transmute matter, polymoph others, and teleport.
Clerics can turn away undead with their faith. They can cure disease, create light, raise the dead, and commune with the gods.
Fighters can swing a sword.
Gotta give players a reason to want to be a fighter.
Both your replies make total sense! And I agree, the "Class Bonus" doesn't make as much sense with the dual-class situation.
DeleteGiven that, I would be inclined to go with "Experience Bonus", as the term works both in the player-centric and character-centric mentality (life experience of the character, and experience points from the player's perspective).