# Classless/Point Buy d20?



## The Black Kestrel (Jul 17, 2008)

I seem to remember that at least one publisher if not more puiblished a point buy/classless system for d20. Unfortunately my search-fu tehcnique is weak and I haven't been able to track down the product(s). If anyone remembers the name/publisher of said product(s) please post it here.

Thanks


----------



## Jackelope King (Jul 17, 2008)

Not sure if you mean d20 as "for 3rd Edition D&D", but Green Ronin's _Mutants & Masterminds_ is a classless, point-buy game using the core of the d20 system.


----------



## Crothian (Jul 17, 2008)

Buy the Numbers


----------



## Krensky (Jul 17, 2008)

There was also a Modern version (different author and company) titled Point Buy Numbers.


----------



## The Black Kestrel (Jul 17, 2008)

Yep, "Buy the Numbers" was what I was thinking of. Thanks for the help guys.


----------



## SSquirrel (Jul 17, 2008)

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?t=82858&highlight=Dr+Spunj's+classless

point buy version of core D&D and Arcana Evolved.  Swaps in the AE magic system tho


----------



## Angel Tarragon (Jul 18, 2008)

The now non-existant Red Leaf Games had their classes system for the D20 System as well; D(Liberation) 20 & Magefire. 

These files were made freely available, but can no longer be found on the net.


----------



## Derro (Jul 18, 2008)

Eclipse: The Codex Persona is good. But it is incredibly dense. The pdf will not do, you need hard copy. I made a few characters just with the pdf but to have a group use it would be a royal pain in the arse.

Word to the wise. Classless characters have real potential to break the system. It is very difficult to run out of the box D&D with classless characters. The potential for characters that are stupid powerful and characters that really suck is huge. But if you want classless chances are you're good at customizing a campaign so take that with a grain of salt.


----------



## Scurvy_Platypus (Jul 18, 2008)

You can also download the Red Leaf bits this way:
http://web.archive.org/web/20051217170930/www.netflash.net/llanade/redleafgames/downloads.php

Besides Dr Spunj's system, and the Buy the Numbers (Point Buy Numbers for d20 Modern was a crappy re-hash of Buy the Numbers) there's not a whole lot out there actually. By and large the d20 community doesn't seem to have been interested in this.

There's Eclipse which can be gotten in a "shareware" edition (pay $10 later) here:
http://www.rpgnow.com/product_info.php?products_id=51255&filters=0_0_0&manufacturers_id=617

There of course is also the Anime SRD which is the SRD for BESMd20. BESMd20 gets (or got) plenty of hate though. Mainly because it's got some different sensibilities when it comes to its rules; it expects a lot more discussion between player and GM and isn't up to the standards of "balance" that many d20 folks demand.

You can still download the Anime SRD in rtf form here:
http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/animesrd.html

To make sure it doesn't get lost I've got a copy of it and a couple of other bits uploaded to divShare. You can find the bits here:
http://www.divshare.com/download/4624454-4fd

And the folks of Evil Hat host a pdf version that one of 'em did up back in the day. You can find it here:
http://www.faterpg.com/dl/

By default BESMd20 does use classes, but going classless is as simple as having everyone take the "Adventurer" class, and then they buy up the specific bits that they want for the character. In fact, there was a pretty fun game (I recently finished running a year long campaign) called Everstone that started with this as a core. All the classes in it derived from the Adventurer and then have extra bits added in to make the different classes.

BESMd20 isn't perfect, but it's a pretty workable system actually.

There's a 3.0 thingy that used to have some traction called the Class Construction Engine. It might be of use depending on what you're after. You can find a copy of it here:
http://www.mortality.net/modules.php?op=modload&name=Files&file=index&do=showpic&pid=545

And there's the 3.5 version of it which you can find here (direct links):
http://community3e.com/dn/class/3.5ClassConstruction.zip
http://files.meetup.com/47008/Class Construct v2.pdf


----------



## Scurvy_Platypus (Jul 18, 2008)

Derro said:


> Eclipse: The Codex Persona is good.




Doh. Scooped. Oh well.



Derro said:


> Word to the wise. Classless characters have real potential to break the system. It is very difficult to run out of the box D&D with classless characters. The potential for characters that are stupid powerful and characters that really suck is huge. But if you want classless chances are you're good at customizing a campaign so take that with a grain of salt.




So this right here is the real crux of the problem...

If you're relying strictly on rules to adjudicate how things are going to play out in a classless system, yes you're going to have problems. D&D wasn't actually built in a consistent fashion, and further it's got the expectation of a specific number of characters with a particular make up of abilities.

It's possible to do a classless/point based game, but the GM and the players _have_ to actually work together on this. The players are going to have to accept some of that dreaded "GM fiat" where the GM says, "Look, I don't care if the rules say you can do that... you can't for this game." or "That's cool, but for the game I'm looking to run, I think you might want to change [this]". GMs on the other hand are going to have to be more flexible in their approach to things, and realize that it's potentially going to be much easier to kill the entire party.

Or that the entire party is going to be tougher than expected, owing to a greater range of competency.

The reason why people seem to have such crappy luck with point-buy systems in general (and especially in relation to d20) is that there is an expectation that if there's a bunch of numbers for something, well it means that everything is perfectly balanced against everything else. No matter what, you can have a broken/suck character. Heck cruise around the forums here, and you'll be able to find plenty of posts telling you which classes in the WotC books blow, and which classes will trash stuff.


----------



## Derro (Jul 18, 2008)

Scurvy_Platypus said:


> Dr Spunj's system




Is this any good? I downloaded it and was intrigued but got turned off by all the tables. Have you made any characters or used it in actual play? I ask because it seems very concise but it makes my eyes cross when I try to actually use it.


----------



## Scurvy_Platypus (Jul 18, 2008)

I don't really know. I came across it after I'd already come across these other bits. It's probably serviceable enough, but it's likely going o be judged less harshly since it's a fan creation, instead of an attempt at a full product.

The only ones I've used are Buy the Numbers and BESMd20.

I used Buy The Numbers for Castles & Crusades for a while, and then I put C&C away.

I've run the BESMd20 game for a year so I feel comfortable enough with it. Certainly not an expert, but that's not the sort of thing that really appeals to me in the first place. 

Eclipse... I really have no idea about whatsoever. I've never heard of anyone using it, and I've got so many things pulling at me that I've never bothered sitting down to read it. Plus, BESMd20 did enough of what I wanted/needed that I haven't seen a reason to look elsewhere.

The Class Construction documents... I only have a passing familiarity with them. I actually came to know about them in a roundabout fashion, that being Neverwinter Nights. They seemed ok, although they seemed to be more abouttrying to make things fit within the established framework of D&D (and assume it's balanced), whereas Eclipse/BESMd20 doesn't assume that D&D is actually balanced and simply assign points to things as they go.

The issue of balance is a pretty nasty one.

A large part of it is because different people have some different ideas about what's "balanced" and what's not. This gets further twisted by issues of playstyle, like whether they like big boomy magic, or grim-n-gritty Conan.

The authors of the various stuff of course have their own biases which may or may not line up with the reader's biases.

And then there's the question of "how did they arrive at this cost in the first place?"


----------



## Angellis_ater (Jul 18, 2008)

Dreamscarred Press is about to release a system for using XP to create a classless system in D20 (tentatively called Exp20). It was based upon the concept of "Buy the Numbers" but the author felt that it lacked some mathematically correct progressions. The project is in layout right now.


----------



## Aus_Snow (Jul 18, 2008)

Wow. Now _that_ is an[other] interesting development.

A great time to be looking for a d20-based system, that's for sure.


----------



## Scurvy_Platypus (Jul 18, 2008)

Angellis_ater said:


> Dreamscarred Press is about to release a system for using XP to create a classless system in D20 (tentatively called Exp20). It was based upon the concept of "Buy the Numbers" but the author felt that it lacked some mathematically correct progressions. The project is in layout right now.




Interesting.

Would you care to expand on this a little? Here's why I ask...

As I said, an awful lot of the problems people have with point-buy stuff is a combination of balance, along with their own personal biases in terms of gameplay.

For example, BESMd20 refigures how much is calculated because the author felt that mage types were overpowered in regular D&D. BESMd20 got a bunch of criticism for it, although these days people seem to be perfectly happy to say mages overshadow melee-types.

The nice thing was, in this particular case the author explicitly noted his bias and then went into the calculations for figuring the cost of magic.

If the author of something wants things to look more like Conan than Avatar the Last Airbender, I personally really want to know this upfront. Too often systems present themselves as being "better" mathematically/mechanically and the "better" part really means "This suits my preferences better" rather than "There's a problem here, and this is what I feel will resolve the problem".

If you want an example of this kind of hatchet job? 

Point Buy Numbers. A riff off of Buy the Numbers. Supposedly the author started out with the idea of using Buy the Numbers for d20 Modern and had to keep making modifications/changes as he went along, and finally decided it was so extensive he should put it out as a full product.

He (in my opinion) butchered Buy the Numbers, gave absolutely no indication of what he changed from it, nor did he say _why_ it was changed... it was a really disappointing purchase, and worthless as far as I'm concerned.

Buy the Numbers and Grim Tales are both _good_ examples of how to do this kind of toolkit approach. BESMd20 falls down hard on this job because they didn't actually give explicit breakdowns of the core classes using their system, just a point total.

Buy the Numbers and Grim Tales on the other hand present the "base" way of doing things, and then note several different approaches that are also possible. They mention the potential ramifications of the choices, without using discouraging language ("If your a powergamer, you might prefer to do this instead...")

Some additional thoughts in general about the project.

As a fan of point-based stuff, I've been occasionally annoyed or frustrated by projects like these. Too often it seems a product like this is put out, and then there's no "support" for it. I don't mean an endless stream of new products to buy that are hooked into the system. I mean practical tools, examples, and even just answering questions about the darn thing.

I hope the project provides a bit of guidance in using the system as a class-building tool too. Buy the Numbers assumes that people using it are looking to go the class-less route. But I'd say there's just as much (if not more) interest in being able to build a class as there is in avoiding classes. Some people really like the ease that classes provide, while others are interested in taking a class from another source and "translating it" so that it fits with all the other existing classes.

Having all the base classes laid out using the system, as well as showing the progression of said classes through the 20 levels is something I think would be _very_ nice to have for folks looking at this sort of thing.

Additionally, make up an entirely new class and show how it progresses along too. Instead of simply doing a standard class ("Ok, lets say you want to create a class that combines the Fighter with some mystical elements...") do something a bit more out there. Like a shapeshifter class. That way people can see not only how standard classes look, but they can see the _actual_ flexibility  of the system.

Of course, if you're already in layout it's probably too late to include that. So put it out as a teaser or web-enhancement.

Something else that's handy? A worksheet.

It could be Excel and help do some of the heavy lifting as far as the math is concerned.

It could be a form-fillable pdf. PDFs can do a number of basic calculations, and if you explicitly note that people can use something like Foxit reader to enter and save the values on the sheet, it becomes much handier for the GM.

Hopefully you'll be able to get enough people to mess around with it. If there's a place for them to talk about it and post examples of what they're doing, it'll be nice both for people interested in the product as well as the folks that have already adopted it. Then you'll get to see people trying to branch out and do things like include monster abilities as class features and so forth.

Of course... if you're just a fan and not actually a representative of Dreamscarred Press... ummmm... well, I guess I just listed out a manifesto of sorts in case anyone decides to take their own stab at doing such a thing.


----------



## The Black Kestrel (Jul 18, 2008)

Wow! Thanks Scurvy, that was bit more than I was looking for but very welcome. I own The Complete Enchanter was pretty impressed by it. I'm not a big fan of BESM d20, though I loved GoO's d20 Mecha. I'm not really interested in a running a point buy campaign as looking at breaking the system down and figuring out XP values for skills, saves, feats, BAB etc. I'm thinking about allowing incremental level so I'd prefer not to re-invent the wheel if I don't have to. 

Andreas,

Will Exp20 cover d20 Modern as well?


----------



## SSquirrel (Jul 18, 2008)

Derro said:


> Is this any good? I downloaded it and was intrigued but got turned off by all the tables. Have you made any characters or used it in actual play? I ask because it seems very concise but it makes my eyes cross when I try to actually use it.




I never got to play in any games using it, but Dr Spunj coincidentally lived about a mile from my apartment heh.  He had a group that ran using it for several months and the thread has feedback based on his sessions with it as well as others who have used it.  I spent a lot of time w/the system and made several characters with it.  The balance is very good, even better once you notice they leveled the classes out.  

Instead of having however many different caster progressions D&D has (without even trying there are at least 3:Mage, Sorceror, Paladin) AE only has 2 so you can either buy full casting ala the Magister/Greenbond or half casting like any other caster in AE.  AE goes to spell level 10 and half casters can still cast L7 spells in the end.  Not a bad deal at all.  

Running AE with these point buy rules and Ken Hood's Grim N Gritty Revised & Simplified rules is still a fun thought for me


----------



## Angellis_ater (Jul 20, 2008)

Wow, Scurvy Platypus; a major reply for Dreamscarred Press' "Exp20" system. I've directed the author to join this discussion (since I'm not qualified to answer most of these questions). I know that he will most likely be including an Excel worksheet to work the numbers with the release. However, he is gone for vacation for one week (heading up into the mountains, away from any internet access) but I'm sure he can a

Yes, I'm an "official representative" for Dreamscarred Press since I'm one of two owners (Jeremy Smith, aka Bacris, is the other one) and we'll take these questions and suggestions to heart. 

Black: The author is working on creating a similar system to be used with True20 (which is more modular to start with) and I wouldn't be surprised if he takes a stab at D20 Modern too.


----------



## Angellis_ater (Jul 20, 2008)

Edit: Double Post - love the speedy forums.


----------



## Nonlethal Force (Jul 20, 2008)

Hey!  I had a few extra minutes beforeleaving until Saturday, and I saw the post directing me to come here. I am the author of the ExP20 (tentative name) system in layout for Dreamscarred Press.  However, I am not an official Rep ofthe company - that would be A_a or Bacris.  But - I would love toanswer any and all questions ... when I get back on Saturday.  Sorry!  I can however start with these...



Scurvy_Platypus said:


> As I said, an awful lot of the problems people have with point-buy stuff is a combination of balance, along with their own personal biases in terms of gameplay.




An excellent analysis - and true.  When projects like these come out, the game designer always has to make a choice: assume the misbalance of the original mechanics or change the mechanics in addition to changing character development.  I did not change any mechanics of feats, spells, etc.  All I changed was the character building process.  What that means is that your analysis is correct.  Game balance problems in 3.x will continue to exist in ExP20.  Mages, Psions, etc will still be powerful.  But, I am up front with that and admit it in the work.  With ExP20, I wasn't wanting to also take on the task of redefining mechanics as well.  Save that for another project that may expand ExP20 a little, I suppose.



> If the author of something wants things to look more like Conan than Avatar the Last Airbender, I personally really want to know this upfront. Too often systems present themselves as being "better" mathematically/mechanically and the "better" part really means "This suits my preferences better" rather than "There's a problem here, and this is what I feel will resolve the problem".




I was hoping to assume a base "3.x" feel.  Now, some classes obviously come off smelling better than others.  You can't do a point-buy system completely fairly.  But I can say that in this system the rogue gets help, the Cleric and Druid don't.  The Pally gets a bit of help.  The bard gets much needed help.  Thesorcerer is pretty close to even.  There are a few anomalies.

But, I will say this.  The system was designed around "character options" more than balance.  I had to assume a certain level of balance from 3.x or else I was into redesigning a bunch of mechanical problems.  But this system is designed to give players options.  Those classes with few options tend to come off smelling really good.  Those classes with multiple class abilities at every level tend to come off a bit poorly.  My premise was character options, not the power that were contained within the options.  In that regard, I had to trust that all "6th level abilities" are reasonably balanced with each other.  It is a faulty premise to some extend, but it is one that cannot be purely dealt with without a complete overhaul of 3.x, too.



> Point Buy Numbers. A riff off of Buy the Numbers. Supposedly the author started out with the idea of using Buy the Numbers for d20 Modern and had to keep making modifications/changes as he went along, and finally decided it was so extensive he should put it out as a full product.
> 
> He (in my opinion) butchered Buy the Numbers, gave absolutely no indication of what he changed from it, nor did he say _why_ it was changed... it was a really disappointing purchase, and worthless as far as I'm concerned.




Well, ExP20 has a third of the work dedicated to why I chose the progressions that I did.  The information is all included.  My premises are all there, and DM/GMs are free to agree with them or disagree with them.  But Ican tell you that 1/3 of the entire work is explaining why I did what I did for the system.  And nowhere do I talk down on Buy the Numbers.  I bought that work and loved it - in spite of some mathematical errors in the class builds.  I have great respect for what S.T. Cooley did for my perspective on character design.



> Buy the Numbers and Grim Tales are both _good_ examples of how to do this kind of toolkit approach. BESMd20 falls down hard on this job because they didn't actually give explicit breakdowns of the core classes using their system, just a point total.




For the record, ExP20 will not contain core breakdowns.  Using DSP classes as well as SRD classes, that would have meant doing 23 breakdowns (and many pages of dry mechanical reading).  But there are 8 example builds to show what the system can do.  And they are point-buy-point builds, so DM/GMs can see how the character comes together completely.



> Buy the Numbers and Grim Tales on the other hand present the "base" way of doing things, and then note several different approaches that are also possible. They mention the potential ramifications of the choices, without using discouraging language ("If your a powergamer, you might prefer to do this instead...")




ExP20 has this to an extent as well, including potential ramifications.  I am blatant in the work, however.  Pwergamers will be able to make strong characters.  But powergamers under a powergaming DM will be able to be challenged like never before as well.  Powergaming is not a sin - it's a gaming style.  A style that systems like this _can_ encourage.  And there is nothing wrong with them as a system so long as everyoneat the table wants it!

In the same light, this system encourages non-combat RP builds just as much.  Tables that are more non-combat/non-powergaming can truly find new expression and versatility in this system.  I don't take one style over the other, but I do realize what each style can accomplish under point-buy styles of character design. 



> As a fan of point-based stuff, I've been occasionally annoyed or frustrated by projects like these. Too often it seems a product like this is put out, and then there's no "support" for it. I don't mean an endless stream of new products to buy that are hooked into the system. I mean practical tools, examples, and even just answering questions about the darn thing.




This project will be supported as much as the DSP staff desires.  Honestly, that will also largely be determined by customer requests.  I have known DSP to take their fans very seriously.  If there is a desire for a product - or an expansion or free web enhancement - they get it done.  But, as an independant contractor I cannot speak for ultimate support.  But I have faith in DSP as a company to give their fans what they want.

Also, there is an issue of closed-content material.  For example, while I may be able to breakdown the warlock or Bo9S material - it cannot be published.  So there are copyright limits to how much non-OGl support can exist.  A_a or Bacris, please correct me if I am wrong here or explain it better from a business perspective!



> Additionally, make up an entirely new class and show how it progresses along too. Instead of simply doing a standard class ("Ok, lets say you want to create a class that combines the Fighter with some mystical elements...") do something a bit more out there. Like a shapeshifter class. That way people can see not only how standard classes look, but they can see the _actual_ flexibility  of the system.




As stated before, ExP20 has 8 of these in the content!



> Of course, if you're already in layout it's probably too late to include that. So put it out as a teaser or web-enhancement.




This could easily bedone for all the SRD base classes as well as the DSP base classes.  I have them done in a single Excel file (with 24 different worksheets, mind you!)  It would be up to Bacris and/or A_a to determine the need and form of this, assuming it has fan support/need.



> Something else that's handy? A worksheet.




Done.  I create every character for all of my games on an Excel spreadsheet.  Assuming A_a and Bacris give direction it could be turned into a web-enhancement, product-for-sale, or whatever they determine.  It would take very little time in providing this to a fan base of ExP20 that wants it.  Of course, I am not DSP staff, so I ultimately don't make those decisions.  But as I have said before, A_a and Bacris are very open to listening to what the fanbase wants.  If there is a genuine need and it is worth the time to put a product together, I genuinely believe that they will do it.



> Then you'll get to see people trying to branch out and do things like include monster abilities as class features and so forth.




I've explored that, but monsters and the CR system is so ad hoc that it is tough.  Not impossible, but the rules are so wide that they are only slightly helpful.  But more conversation along this route is certainly possible.



> Of course... if you're just a fan and not actually a representative of Dreamscarred Press... ummmm... well, I guess I just listed out a manifesto of sorts in case anyone decides to take their own stab at doing such a thing.




Thank you for your manifesto.  Next Saturday, when Ireturn from my trip away from technology, I look forward to continuing this discussion.  Thank you for your thougts, I hope my responses were honest and giving you the answers that you sought.

NLF


----------



## Alzrius (Jul 20, 2008)

Wow, I hadn't heard about this at all before casually glancing at this thread, but now I'm quite excited regarding Exp20!



Nonlethal Force said:


> I've explored that, but monsters and the CR system is so ad hoc that it is tough.  Not impossible, but the rules are so wide that they are only slightly helpful.  But more conversation along this route is certainly possible.




The hard part isn't so much the CR system, but that monster abilities need to be refined in terms of what level adjustment they're worth. That's largely a separate concern from CR.


----------



## Angellis_ater (Jul 21, 2008)

First of all, thank you to NLF for coming here and participating in the discussion. There are ongoing discussions on the DSP boards for creating a 3.5 compatible system using a "point build" concept for the entire game, while also making sure to "fix" some of the problems most people seem to agree are inherent in 3.5 - right now its at the idea stage, but feel free to throw ideas in there with the mix!


----------



## Nonlethal Force (Jul 27, 2008)

Alzrius said:


> Wow, I hadn't heard about this at all before casually glancing at this thread, but now I'm quite excited regarding Exp20!




Excellent!  I've used the system for a while now and I like how it builds characters.  Obviously - as I've been sure to mention above - it will play with the relative "power level" because characters are designed exactly how a player wants them.  But so long as everyone understands that, I like how the system comes together fluently.  And since the DM can use the system for classed monsters/villians, it adds a new dimension of making antagonists with surprising twists, too.



Alzrius said:


> The hard part isn't so much the CR system, but that monster abilities need to be refined in terms of what level adjustment they're worth. That's largely a separate concern from CR.




I guess that's what I meant.  Not that the CR system is ad hoc, but that different monster abilities are hard to judge in terms of power and how they combine.  



Angellis_ater said:


> First of all, thank you to NLF for coming here and participating in the discussion. There are ongoing discussions on the DSP boards for creating a 3.5 compatible system using a "point build" concept for the entire game, while also making sure to "fix" some of the problems most people seem to agree are inherent in 3.5 - right now its at the idea stage, but feel free to throw ideas in there with the mix!




Welcome!  And anyone wanting to add to the conversation is certainly welcome!


----------



## QuaziquestGM (Jul 29, 2008)

does anyone know the filename for "Buy the Numbers"?  the name of the zip or pdf?  I'm sure I've downloaded it before but I can't  find it so I need the name to do a search of my drives for it.


----------



## Scurvy_Platypus (Jul 29, 2008)

QuaziquestGM said:


> does anyone know the filename for "Buy the Numbers"?  the name of the zip or pdf?  I'm sure I've downloaded it before but I can't  find it so I need the name to do a search of my drives for it.




Generally they name their files using the Publisher Stock number. So in the case of Buy The Numbers I think it'd be: STC101. I use an entirely different scheme for keeping track of my pdfs, but that does sound right.


----------



## QuaziquestGM (Jul 30, 2008)

still not finding it.  Any other sugestions?


----------



## Alzrius (Jul 30, 2008)

QuaziquestGM said:


> still not finding it.  Any other sugestions?




It's just called "Buy the Numbers" on my computer.


----------



## Aus_Snow (Jul 30, 2008)

QuaziquestGM said:


> still not finding it.  Any other sugestions?



Go to RPGNow.com and use another of your downloads*. You get 5, I think. And even after that, if you email them, they'll probably let you dl again. So there really shouldn't be a problem, I guess. 

* And keep your files in order this time around.


----------



## markkat (Aug 24, 2008)

I had to chime in, as a point buy/classless d20 system is exactly what we at the Ye Olde Gaming Companye just did with Wayfarers. It's not a 3.5 feel, however. Something like a 1.5? But a d20 point buy/classless system it is. -In it's entirety.

The PDF is free, so no pain.

We haven't made much noise yet. But I couldn't pass up this thread. My 2nd post in 3 years! 

Cheers.


----------



## Tetsubo (Aug 24, 2008)

markkat said:


> I had to chime in, as a point buy/classless d20 system is exactly what we at the Ye Olde Gaming Companye just did with Wayfarers. It's not a 3.5 feel, however. Something like a 1.5? But a d20 point buy/classless system it is. -In it's entirety.
> 
> The PDF is free, so no pain.
> 
> ...




Very cool, thank you. When I can budget it I will pick up a dead tree version.


----------



## Kez Darksun (Aug 28, 2008)

Just ran across this thread.  I'll have to keep an eye out for ExP20 from Dreamscarred Press.  I've been interested in point buy for 3.x since I picked up Buy The Numbers.  I'll also be downloading Wayfarers and checking that out when I get the chance.  Oh, I can confirm that the original folder name for Buy The Numbers is stc101.  I'll also add my voice requesting a breakdown of the SRD classes as well as the classes from DSP as some sort of additional material, whether it be a web enhancement or a seperate supplement.


----------



## Angellis_ater (Aug 29, 2008)

Good to hear that interest is high for Exp20 (the name is still tentative) and it is in editing and layout right now, although our release of Third Dawn (an all-psionics campaign setting) is currently consuming most of our resources inhouse.


----------



## Angellis_ater (Sep 2, 2008)

We've decided on a name (Complete Control) and we will be releasing a preview soon! I'll post here for more info.

BTW, NLF has said that he has problems accessing ENWorld, which is why he is somewhat absent from here right now.


----------



## Scurvy_Platypus (Sep 3, 2008)

I'll certainly be interested in seeing the preview.


----------



## Nonlethal Force (Sep 7, 2008)

First off, let me say that I have tried to reply to this thread (and others) multiple times in the last week.  Each time I can log in, but when I post it tells me that I'm not logged in and have no access to post.  What with all the server trouble, I figured to back off until they got a few things fixed.  Sorry if my absence was unfortunate.



Kez Darksun said:


> I'll have to keep an eye out for ExP20 from Dreamscarred Press.  I've been interested in point buy for 3.x since I picked up Buy The Numbers.  <snipped>  I'll also add my voice requesting a breakdown of the SRD classes as well as the classes from DSP as some sort of additional material, whether it be a web enhancement or a seperate supplement.




Glad to hear your interst!  I hope that when you get a hand on this work that it is very pleasing to you.  I know I have been tweaking the progressions for several months (perhaps years is a better way of saying it) now, and I am please with where they landed.

The breakdown of the classes is easily enough done.  It'll be up to the co-owners of DSP as to whether it is a low-cost supplement, a free web-enhancement, or whatever.  But if there is enough interest in it, it certainly can be published.  The work is already done and siting on my hard drive!

Again, thanks for your interest.  And thanks to Scurvy_Platypus for your continued interest as well!


----------



## Aus_Snow (Sep 8, 2008)

Hey NLF, what's this puppy going to contain? Even in general terms, how uh, complete will Complete Control be? To begin with, I mean.


----------



## Nonlethal Force (Sep 8, 2008)

Aus Snow,

Great Question!  If I can do so without seming too cheesy, can I direct you to this thread: DSP/Mentalis Design Conversation about Complete Control

Specifically, that link should bring you to the top of page three of that discussion.  The first post of that page has my breakdown of chapter titles and page counts.  The reason I'm directing you there is so that you can get up on the conversation and perhaps find exactly the details you want in that thread.  I should note that the first 6 or 7 posts of page two of that thread are also very informative.

If you take a look at that thread and don't find what you are looking for then come back here and let me know.  I'd be more than happy to answer specific questions of content.  But if youare looking for a general description of the product that thread really says more than I can say here.  And it says it better, because the thread was developed over time rather than me typing it all now.

Again, sorry if this seems to bypass the question.  Like I said, if you check out the thread (specifically the post I mention) and don't find what you're looking for let me know.

EDIT: I'm not happy with merely referring someone to anyther thread even if I did apologize for doing so.  So ... here's a brief attempt at an answer.  If I can answer it more directly, help me refine it be asking questions based on specific concerns.

Complete Control will allow a character to be build completely from levels 1-20 (inclusive) using any mechanic in the SRD or from Dreamscarred Press.  The work will cover buying HD, BAB, Saves, Skills (no more class skills, though, because there is no more class), Class abilities (broken down into four categories: Constant Abilities, Level-Dependant Variable Abilities, Use-Dependant Abilities, and Progression-Dependant Variable Abilities), SRD-based Magic (IE no Incarnum or Warlock because it isn't OGC), SRD/DSP-based Psionics, DSP Channeling (Tome of Channeling required to use those rules, of course), and probably a few things I left off the list.  In general, if it's on that list Complete COntrol will give you the tools to build a character using those quantities without using the concept of character class.

There, I feel a little better about the post.  If I can be more specific, please let me know how and in which direction.  Again, great question!


----------



## Aus_Snow (Sep 9, 2008)

Thanks for the reply. That does indeed clear up just about everything. If I think of anything else though, I'll pester ya with it.


----------



## The Sigil (Sep 11, 2008)

QuaziquestGM said:


> still not finding it.  Any other sugestions?



Or just PM me with some contact info and I'll see about getting you another copy next time I log in to check my messages.


----------



## Drowbane (Sep 13, 2008)

Buy the Numbers (pdf?) is pointbuy for 3e... but we broke it so badly that the DM opted to run us as Gestalt to simplify (and weaken) things.

Mutants & Masterminds can run any genre and is d20ish.


----------



## Scurvy_Platypus (Sep 14, 2008)

Drowbane said:


> Buy the Numbers (pdf?) is pointbuy for 3e... but we broke it so badly that the DM opted to run us as Gestalt to simplify (and weaken) things.




Heh. Any point system can be abused. The big lie people tell themselves is that "point-based" means "balanced". I've never seen a point-based system yet that can't be abused, and I don't think I've ever seen anyone seriously argue that 2 characters of the same point value in any point-based system will also be equally effective.

The big thing I've noticed in point-based things is that people tend to do their best to make sure they squeeze every possible bit of "value" from each point they get to build their character.



Drowbane said:


> Mutants & Masterminds can run any genre and is d20ish.




1st Ed is closer to "d20" in the standard sense than 2nd Ed. One of the big criticisms that I've seen people had of M&M 1E is that it was "too much like D&D" and one of the many praises 2E seems to get is that it's different from "standard" d20/D&D.

After that... yeah, M&M could be used to run many genres. 2nd Ed is definitely pushing into other genres, and there was Monsters and Mayhem done for running a fantasy game using 1st Ed.

I dunno though. For whatever reasons, when I think "classless" or "point based d20" M&M isn't the first thing that springs to mind. It's possible yes, I just reach for something else. Probably part of it is that all anyone seems to be interested in is 2nd Ed M&M, which as I've said seems to be all about _not_ looking like d20/D&D.


----------



## Nonlethal Force (Sep 14, 2008)

Scurvy_Platypus said:


> Heh. Any point system can be abused. The big lie people tell themselves is that "point-based" means "balanced". I've never seen a point-based system yet that can't be abused, and I don't think I've ever seen anyone seriously argue that 2 characters of the same point value in any point-based system will also be equally effective.




Well put, and I'm glad you posted this.  Because I wanted to say the same thing and each time I tried it sounded snarky so I figured it was better to just not post.  Because this is exactly what I wanted to say!

It should be said ... breaking systems is also just as much a function of the principles of the gaming group than it is the system.  I've seen D&D become broken in every edition.  I can break True20 in a heartbeat.  Part of the premise of choosing a system is looking at the group playing it and finding a system that will be fun for the players.

FWIW, I've played in games where powergaming was the premise - and Point Buy (specificallly Complete Control from DSP) made it a blast!  I was the DM and I could challenge my powergaming-made PCs like I could in no classed game.  Of course, I also made sure it was a game that used few monsters and used mostly NPCs built under the same guidelines as the characters.  At the same time, I've also played in groups where powergaming was frowned on and instead they wanted well-rounded character development.  Complete Control (and in general most Point Buy systems) let you do this, too.

That's actually why I like Point Buy systems.  They are very flexible.  If powergaming is the desired mode for character development, the DM can powergame just as much as the players and challenge them!  It allows powergaming to be a legitimate form of enjoyment for all involved!  But it bends very nicely to a character development model as well.  What is most important is that the premise for the group getting together and everone sticking to that premise.  

A single powergamer can ruin a table full of people who don't enjoy that style regardless of what system is being used.  In the same light, a single non-powergamer can ruin a table full of people who want to powergame.  The style of the group has just as much to say about breaking a system as the actual system.

For the record, I enjoy powergaming as well as well-rounded character development style games.  And I find nothing wrong with both styles.  I just think it is important that a group determine what their purpose is before playing.


----------



## Angellis_ater (Sep 18, 2008)

A 17-page preview of Complete Control can be found here: Complete Control - Example Builds Preview where we offer you a chance to see exactly HOW well Complete Control allows you to create the concepts you have in mind while retaining full control.

My hat is off to Nonlethal Force who has written this piece of excellent support material! If this release takes off well, we're considering making a similar release (although much more modular) for True20, allowing you True Control .


----------



## Nonlethal Force (Sep 19, 2008)

Angellis_ater said:


> If this release takes off well, we're considering making a similar release (although much more modular) for True20, allowing you True Control .




I like the naming conversion.  Just out of curiosity ... how far can that naming convention be taken?

Could you have ... Saga Control?  Or Cthulu Control?  M&M Control? Or perhaps even Savage Control? 

On a more serious side ... 

As I posted over in a thread on the DSP forums, I think the preview does a very good job and tossig out many sample character of almost every kind in the DSP/SRD arena without going into any rules discussion on why the abilities are priced the way they are.  {That discussion and the various tables/exaples are left for the work itself!}.  Obviously all the class abilities aren't represented.  But there is a variety of examples - many of which were intentially drawn up because I've always heard complants about how certain classes just can't be done in 3.x.  For example, a monk who actually scares people in a fight.   Or a true "theurge" that doesn't lose a stitch of caster level power in either progression but instead trades spell variety for spell slots.  Or perhap a blend of Ranger/Paladin that doesn't take a hit on the fact that class abilites in those classes are largely based on class level.  Sure, every character has given up something in order to have control over what they are blended to become.  But that's what complete control over the character building concept should really be.

So, I hope you enjoy the preview.


----------



## Angellis_ater (Sep 19, 2008)

Link updated.


----------



## Scurvy_Platypus (Sep 19, 2008)

Thanks for that.

So a question, since I'm sure it's at the back of many people's mind or will be when they think about whether or not to pick up Complete Control.

What's the basis for deciding the point cost? I'll see if I can explain my thinking...

There's a fair number of people out there that are concerned with whether or not something is balanced. Of course, what a person is looking for when they say "balanced" does tend to vary, although there's a decent enough amount of overlap that such a conversation can at least be had.

Now, when assigning point costs to stuff, there's (usually) a baseline that's established and then costs to other things are assigned based on how such-and-such compares to the baseline.

For example, one baseline _could_ be feats. There's a limited number of them given over the course of a character's development, and while there's a range of "effectiveness" to feats, you can at least figure out some sort of base value using the PHB.

Another baseline might be stats. Again, a character only gets a certain number of stat increases (from leveling), and there's already a "rough" value given for stats in the form of the point-buy cost option.

A whole other potential baseline for the point-buy system could be C.R. Given the work that's gone into figuring out the math behind the CR system and making it more consistent (as seen in Grim Tales), in a number of ways it'd make sense to work from some sort of CR calculation and then modify that into an XP cost.

Any comment on the methodology?


----------



## Alzrius (Sep 19, 2008)

Having looked over the preview, I have mixed feelings about it.

On the one hand, it was helpful to see the results of what _Complete Control_ can do, since that's helpful in showcasing the variety of the builds that the system can handle.

However, those results were largely blunted by showing only what was bought, and not actually constructing the stat blocks for the characters. It's far less impressive, since we don't have the total stat blocks there to showcase the builds; instead, we only have the blueprints for putting them together.

In other words, the preview is a good tool for showing what the book can do, but doesn't effectively convey why someone should buy it.


----------



## Angellis_ater (Sep 19, 2008)

I'll leave it up to NLF to answer for the methodology and answer Alzrius question right here - the honest question is that Third Dawn (our all-psionics campaign setting) is eating up our time and when faced with the choice between a quick preview that might not be as good as it should be or NO preview whatsoever, I decided to go with the preview.

Once we have more time (when TD is released) and if we haven't yet released Complete Control I'll look into getting a more "selling" preview out.


----------



## Nonlethal Force (Sep 19, 2008)

Scurvy_Platypus said:


> What's the basis for deciding the point cost? I'll see if I can explain my thinking...




Absolutely.  I'd love to comment on that.  And I'll give a short answer followed by a long answer.  The short answer is that a complete breakdown of why all the mathematic choices were made as far as determining costs is included in the work itself.  So, while a person has every right to agree or disagree with the decisions that were made in establishing the system, all the math and logic will be fully disclosed.  The reality is that it's too long to go into here, however.

But, I will try to give a more satisfying answer that doesn't go into all the in-depth rationalization.  Basically, what happened was that a non-human generic character was built through each and every level up to the twentieth level for every single class in the SRD, XPH, and DSP material.  That took a fair amount of time in and of itself.

Next, each element of a class whas given a baseline point-value.  For example, each increase to HD, each increase to BAB, each increase to ability scores, each increase to caster/manifester/channeler level, each increase to spell/power levels known, each increase to class abilities, each increase to saves, each increase to skills, etc were all given a baseline point value.

Third, these statistics were then tabulated two ways.  First, these statistics were tabulated in a level-by-level breakdown o each class compared to the XP total that a character would have at the beginning of each level.  Then, these statistics were tabulated adding all the classes together to find out what percentage was spent on BAB across the board, what percentage was spent of saes across the board, etc.

Fourth, obviously, the first attempt was not goingto work out perfectly.  So, each of the progressions thatdetermined the cost of each independant aspect of character development were tweaked one by one.  The tweaks were constantly being watched in terms of changes to level-by-level cost as well as the effects across the board for all classes.  This process took quite some time.

Finally, the rules were then written only once a decent mathematical balance was met (and realize that my definition of balance may or may not coinside with another person's definition of balance).  The rules came directly out of the math instead of the other way around.

Now, regarding the question to CR ... unfortunately CR is such a touchy statistic that while itwould be great to be able to use, it just isn't practical.  I would have loved it to be so simple, but it really isn't.

Instead, I sought to seek balance based on the following principle: _The great balancing factor in 3.x D&D is actions.  A character who has great versatility can still only do one full round action per round._  {Of course, barring magical aids like haste, etc}  Thus, a character can feasibly load up on tons of lower-level class abilities and have a myriad of options available to them.  However, each round they only can pick so may of them.  And without keeping them each up to their current character level through continued improvement costs - they will begin to become less effective.

On the flipside, a player might only want to buy into a small number of class abilities but always mae sure they are as strong as they can be.  In what they can do, they will be more powerful than the first example.  But their range of usefulness will be limited.

Is essence, that is why I believe that true balance is ound among character options at hand.  If you can balance quantity of options with quality of options you achieve balance in my book.  

To use an SRD example, this is why the monk is poorly balanced, a well-built wizard is fun, and many people find sorcerers boring.  The monk simply as too many options to really be useful.  Compare the monk in the SRD with the pugilist in the preview.  The pugilist is built for combat.  It has a few options, but not nearly as many as the monk.  But the options the pugilist has are all useful as the character goes up in level.  Likewise, compare the SRD Sorcerer with one of the caster/power examples in the preview.  Those who find the sorcerer boring do so because the sorcerer has two things: Familiar and limited spells known.  By scaling back in a few areas and adding in a few class abilities, suddenly te sorcerer is still balanced but also has a few more options.

But to actually get into the number crunching and why the prices progress the way that they do, you'll have to wait until the product is released.



Alzrius said:


> In other words, the preview is a good tool for showing what the book can do, but doesn't effectively convey why someone should buy it.




Just out of curiosity, what would?  Each of those builds could easily be turned into a character.  The stat blocks wouldn't be that hard to construct.  They would need to be given armor/weapons, a race, and feats.  I didn't make them stat blocks because variables like weapons/armor/feats are so varied and personal that it seemed pointless to do so.  However, it would not be difficult.  I hope you can understand why I chose to leave them the way I did, though.  

If you would like, though, I would be happy to turn any of those into real breathing characters.  If you so desire, pick one and give me a level to build it to.  I'll take the example as printed and try my best to accomodate your desire for a stat block.  Of course, since the preview is free ... others are welcome to take any of the examples, slap on a race, pick the appropriate number of feats through the level desired, and post it here.  I think it'd be rather neat, actually!

Other than actually going into the rules of why the costs are what they are, what else would help you decide if you wanted to buy the product?  This is an honest question, because in today's day and age marketability is often everything - especially until word of mouth begins to work for a newcomer to game-publishing like myself.


----------



## Alzrius (Sep 20, 2008)

Nonlethal Force said:


> Just out of curiosity, what would?  Each of those builds could easily be turned into a character.  The stat blocks wouldn't be that hard to construct.




Well, I'm not sure how much, but I do think that'd help. The point of the book is to showcase what can be done by being able to freely mix-and-match class abilities (as well as other aspects of a character, like Hit Dice, class skills, etc). The preview, in that regard, should clearly say "Check out what this book will let you do. You can't do this with normal classes!" 

The preview, as it is now, doesn't say that though. It just sort of obliquely mutters it. It indicates what it can do, but it doesn't really *show* it.



> _They would need to be given armor/weapons, a race, and feats.  I didn't make them stat blocks because variables like weapons/armor/feats are so varied and personal that it seemed pointless to do so._




If they're pointless, why not?  I just think a full stat block is a much more impressive display of _Complete Control_'s point-buy abilities. Being shown the build to construct the pugilist is one thing - actually seeing the finished character is quite another (or at least, I think so).

I'm not saying to get rid of what's there now - being shown a step-by-step guide is good too; it just needs to flesh out the end result more.



> _However, it would not be difficult.  I hope you can understand why I chose to leave them the way I did, though._




I understand, I just don't completely agree. 



> _If you would like, though, I would be happy to turn any of those into real breathing characters.  If you so desire, pick one and give me a level to build it to.  I'll take the example as printed and try my best to accomodate your desire for a stat block._




That's cool of you to offer to do so. I'd say, then, Baruk the Dark Wanderer.



> _Of course, since the preview is free ... others are welcome to take any of the examples, slap on a race, pick the appropriate number of feats through the level desired, and post it here.  I think it'd be rather neat, actually!_




I think so too!



> _Other than actually going into the rules of why the costs are what they are, what else would help you decide if you wanted to buy the product?  This is an honest question, because in today's day and age marketability is often everything - especially until word of mouth begins to work for a newcomer to game-publishing like myself._




Hm, I'm not sure. Making the preview more accessible was really my only idea.


----------



## Nonlethal Force (Sep 20, 2008)

Alzrius said:


> Well, I'm not sure how much, but I do think that'd help. The point of the book is to showcase what can be done by being able to freely mix-and-match class abilities (as well as other aspects of a character, like Hit Dice, class skills, etc). The preview, in that regard, should clearly say "Check out what this book will let you do. You can't do this with normal classes!"




To that end, I present Baruk at 14th level.  I should note that I am sure this character could be tweaked to be better.  But this shows what can be done with this system.  I should also note that I only used SRD equipment and the elite array of stats.  Allocating the stats differently and purchasing different equipment would obviously change the character to some extent.  But, how's this for a monk/barbarian/Morphean/Rogue mix:

*Baruk, The Dark Wanderer*
Male | Human | Character Level 14 
XP Total 91,145 | XP Spent 91,145 | Initial XP Amount 1,500 | XP Remaining 0
Medium
*Init:* +5 [+5 Dex]
*Senses:* Spot +20, Listen +3
*Languages:* Common, Goblin, Infernal.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

*Armor Class:* 29, _Touch:_ 23, _Flatfooted_ 24 
   [10 base, +5 Dex, +6 bracers, +3 Ring of Protection, +5 Monk AC class abilities]
*Hit Points:* 14d10 +14
*Immunities:* None.
*Fortitude:* +11 [7 class, +1 Con, +3 Cloak of Resistance]
*Reflex:* +17 [9 class, +5 Dex, +3 Cloak of Resistance]
*Will:* +13 [7 class, +3 Wis, +3 Cloak of Resistance]

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

*Speed:* 70 feet
*Melee:* 
+18/+13 Mindblade [1d6+1d4+7+ Channel Terror; 19-20/x2; piercing or slashing]
+15/+10 Touch of Fear (Touch attack) [1d6+14+Terror, psionic damage] 
*BAB:* +10, *Grapple:* +9
*Powerpoints:* 59 [59 class, +0 INT (No bonus because of no manifester level)]
*Terrors Known:**
Incite Fear, Overwhelming Fear, Horrible Strike, Maddening Fear, Sickening Fear, Mind Drain, Steal Essence, Haunting Steps, Penetrating Fear, Lingering Fear, Soulchilling Fear

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

*Ability Scores*
Strength 8 (-1) [8 base]
Dexterity 20 (+5) [13 base, +1 improvement, +6 Gloves of DEX]
Constitution 12 (+1) [10 base, +2 improvement]
Intelligence 14 (+2) [14 base]
Wisdom 16 (+3) [12 base, +4 Periapt of WIS]
Charisma 16 (+3) [15 base, +1 improvement]

*Class Abilities and Level*
+3 Mindblade, +3 enhancements {Usually Collision and Psychokinetic}
Trapfinding as Rogue class feature
Trap Sense +4 as Barbarian class feature
Evasion as Monk class feature
Uncanny Dodge as Barbarian class feature
Improved Evasion as Monk class feature
Improved Uncanny Dodge as Barbarian class feature
Monk’s WIS bonus to AC and Monk’s Unarmored AC Bonus +3 as Monk class feature
Monk’s Unarmored Speed +40 ft
Touch of Fear* as a 14th level Morphean 
Fearsome Insight/Fearsome Incarnate* as 14th level Morphean
Terrors/Channel Terror* as 14th level Morphean
Abundant Step as 14th level Monk

*Feats* 
Wild Talent [Human Bonus, necessary since Baruk does not have a manifester level as a typical Morphean would]
Stealthy
Persuasive
Weapon Finesse
Fear Mastery*
Intense Intimidation*

*Skills* [17 max ranks, no cross-class skills]
Bluff +22 [17 ranks, +3CHA, +2 Persuasive]
Concentration +9 [8 ranks, +1 CON]
Disable Device +19 [17 ranks, +2 INT]
Gather Information +11 [8 ranks, +3 CHA]
Hide +24 [17 ranks, +5 DEX, +2 Stealthy]
Intimidate +22 [8 ranks, +3 CHA, +2(Synergy:Bluff), +2 Persuasive, +7 Fearsome Insight]
Move Silently +24 [17 ranks, +5 DEX, +2 Stealthy]
Open Lock +22 [17 ranks, +5 DEX, +2 Stealthy]
Search +19 [17 ranks, +2 INT]
Spot +20 [17 ranks, +3 WIS]
Tumble +13 [8 ranks, +5 DEX]

*Possessions*
Clear Ioun Stone
Horn of Goodness/Evil
Bag of Holding Type III
Dust of Disappearance x2
Potion of Enlarge Potion x2
Potion of Blur x2
Oil of Darkness x 2
Periapt of Wisdom +4
Cloak of Resistance +3
Bracers of Armor +6
Gloves of Dexterity +6
Ring of Protection +3
Ring of Feather Falling

*These items are found in Dreamscarred Press’ publication: _The Mind Unveiled: Morphean._  Information on what these class abilities do can be found within that work.

Anyway, as I said above ... I hope that this helps.  I have no doubt that Baruk could betweaked and min/maxed.  But I'm happy with him at this point.  And, I've tried to give him a few personal touches like the Ioun Stone and the Horn of goodness/evil.  Maybe not min/max kind of equipment, bt fun!  I'm sure I could have done a few things better, but hopefully this willgive you a sense of how seperate aspects of different classes can come together and make a blend that just isn't possible in the core rules.


----------



## Nonlethal Force (Oct 7, 2008)

As an update in case anyone is still following this thread for stuff regarding Complete Control ...

As the end of this thread on the DSP forums indicates, there is a new series of articles going up regarding Complete Control.  Basically, the articles are being written to help players/GMs price out class/PrC class abilities.  Oh course, the articles will be more useful once the ruleset comes out, but I wanted to direct people in that direction as an indicator that support for the product will continue even after publication.

Please feel free to check out the articles and post comments if you would like.

NLF


----------



## Nonlethal Force (Oct 24, 2008)

For anyone still following this thread ... DSP is projecting a release date of Complete Control for next Tuesday!


----------



## Fenris (Oct 24, 2008)

Nonlethal Force said:


> As an update in case anyone is still following this thread for stuff regarding Complete Control ...
> 
> As the end of this thread on the DSP forums indicates, there is a new series of articles going up regarding Complete Control.  Basically, the articles are being written to help players/GMs price out class/PrC class abilities.  Oh course, the articles will be more useful once the ruleset comes out, but I wanted to direct people in that direction as an indicator that support for the product will continue even after publication.
> 
> ...




NLF, will the articles be included in the product, as say an appendix, so I can have one file with all my Complete Control stuff?

Poke A_a about that.


----------



## Nonlethal Force (Oct 24, 2008)

Unfortunately, I'm pretty sre the answer there is going to be a solid no, Fenris.  The reason is because of OGL.  The articles are going to contain the names of any books/classes that people want to break down into Complete Control suggested pricing guidelines.  There are no mechanics being given so that it doesn't violate closed content rules.  But the fact that the articles will eventually stem into books that are not OGL and thus give the names of closed content abilities (minus mechanics, of course!) does mean that they can't be part of a product for sale under the OGL.  So that can't happen.

However, the print function on the articles is really cool.  You get what's on the screen in hardcopy.  That is a nice function indeed. If you want it electronically, that's a bit more difficult since it is intentionally being written in BBCode.  But I'll let Andreas add anything that might be possible, since he is one of the owners of DSP and I am merely a supporting author.


----------



## Angellis_ater (Oct 25, 2008)

Once the articles are finished, we could look into making them available as a PDF download, but it all depends on how copyright defines "publish". We'll see, but it should be doable.


----------



## Nonlethal Force (Oct 25, 2008)

Angellis_ater said:


> Once the articles are finished, we could look into making them available as a PDF download, but it all depends on how copyright defines "publish". We'll see, but it should be doable.




That's a pretty cool idea... if not daunting in scope.  

But a cool idea nonetheless.  It shouldn't even be that hard to do ... just take a bunch of time.  And, of course, I'm sure as with all business decisions it will depend on the profitability of Complete Control.  Which, with any luck, will be a hit among DM/players alike.


----------



## Angellis_ater (Oct 25, 2008)

To be honest it isn't that difficult to match up the articles with the layout and style of Complete Control. You wouldn't happen to have the articles as text-documents, now would you? Because if you did, it would be even easier to transfer them since the tables would be correctly formatted already.

Just saying.

And we DO try to provide our customers with as much additional material and support as we can muster the time for.


----------



## Nonlethal Force (Oct 25, 2008)

I have the documents as .docx files.  The only problem is that I have them saved with the BBCode in them. But that is easy to rip out. One merely needs to do a replace with "
	
	



```
" with " " and its gone.  So I'm not worried about stripping away the BBCode from the text document.  And, of course, if you'd rather have them as a .rtf or other format that could also be done easily.  Short answer = yes.
```


----------



## Angellis_ater (Oct 29, 2008)

Great, in which case people can expect PDFs at a later stage as Web Enhancements for Complete Control. It is btw in the LATE stages of being released, we're essentially doing the final touches. It is at 99%/100% right now and I am estamating a release later tonight.


----------



## Scurvy_Platypus (Oct 31, 2008)

Well, I'm still following the thread at least. Haven't had much reason to comment, but I'm still interested.

And thanks for clarifying the bit regarding the articles. It's nice to be able to see how a system handles things once you move away from the core stuff. Later things (like say the Dragon Shaman) tend to try and change things up and can consequently mess with a system that's been built with mainly the core in mind.


----------



## Greg K (Oct 31, 2008)

Scurvy_Platypus said:


> Heh. Any point system can be abused. The big lie people tell themselves is that "point-based" means "balanced". I've never seen a point-based system yet that can't be abused, and I don't think I've ever seen anyone seriously argue that 2 characters of the same point value in any point-based system will also be equally effective..




I like point based, but I admit that they can abused, because they are tools and tools can be misused. However,  abusing a system is, imo, not a game issue- its a player or group issue (and, if the whole group is on board than it is not an issue) .



> The big thing I've noticed in point-based things is that people tend to do their best to make sure they squeeze every possible bit of "value" from each point they get to build their character..




Some people do and some don't.  Point buy systems , in my experience, work best when a GM and player work together during character generation.  My recent experience with my M&M group.

- one of my M&M players recently presented a character that we had discussed. While looking over the sheet, I questioned his approach for a power and he said it was to save points. The reason he was short on points was that  he was trying to max out the saves ignoring  the campaign benchmarks and where we agreed his character fit.  I simply told him not to game the system and go back and adjust it to what we had discussed. There was no arguments.

- another player was staying in the levels we discussed, but then tried adding new abilties to cover every base.  I reminded him it was a team game and that he was stepping on the other characters.  Partially, he had lost site of his character. However, he admittedly was also testing me- trying to see what I would allow him to get away with (he was new to my group). That I called him on it impressed him.  He happily went back and made appropriate changes.

- the other four players had no problems other than questioning what rating best represented  a particular level of  power that they had in mind for an ability.


----------



## Angellis_ater (Nov 2, 2008)

This book (Complete Control) is now available for purchase here: Dreamscarred Press - The Definitive Source for d20 Psionics › Dreamscarred Press PDF Store › Complete Control


----------



## Nonlethal Force (Nov 3, 2008)

Alright, as the author of Complete Control I just got my first look at layout, art, and captioning.  Of course I knew what the text contained!  But the work is a beautiful piece.  For less than $10, I am certain that most gamers who enjoy the prospect of point-buy character development and classless systems will find it a treasure.  I know, I am of course biased.    But I cannot give high enough praise for the layout, art, and captioning provided by DSP staff.  Feel free to check it out at the link above.

Furthermore, on the DSP forums a FAQ thread has been started while people begin to read up on the system and begin to use it.  As the author, I will be aprticipating in the thread as a sign of support for readers/supporters of the product.


----------



## Nonlethal Force (Nov 3, 2008)

Greg K said:


> I like point based, but I admit that they can abused, because they are tools and tools can be misused. However,  abusing a system is, imo, not a game issue- its a player or group issue (and, if the whole group is on board than it is not an issue) .




As I said in a post above several months ago, I concur.  A system is merely a system.  Any group with any goal can break a system if the goal of the group and the goal of a system aren't compatible.  Systems of game play should always be chosen with the gaming group in mind.



Greg K said:


> Some people do and some don't.  Point buy systems , in my experience, work best when a GM and player work together during character generation.  My recent experience with my M&M group.




I also concur.  Under Complete Control, I very specifically say that "a Powergaming group can be challenged like never before by a Powergaming GM and a Role-playing group can know characters of greater depth under a Role-playing GM."  When players and GM come together, the game grows more deep.


----------



## Runestar (Nov 4, 2008)

Just curious.

Won't a point-buy system just encourage more system mastery, over and above what 3e currently entails? Now, you have free reign in cherry-picking what sort of abilities you want (and what you can dump). At least 3e required you to take the good with the bad (for instance, good prcs can have crappy/expensive prerequisites to balance it out). 

You can already see an example in the form of the fighter, where depending on how much effort you put in tricking him out, you either get a fairly competent build, or an outright useless one. 

That said, it looks like an optimizer's wet dream.


----------



## ValhallaGH (Nov 4, 2008)

As has been mentioned, point buy systems are only as broken as the people playing them want them to be.

My experience has been an initial period of hyper-optimization while staying loosely attached to the character concept, followed by pure boredom when each character turns out to be a one-man party.  This was followed by a new attempt, one where everyone limited themselves to what fit their character (including appropriate growth given their actions); this has remained the standard and has been a great deal of fun for everyone.

No matter what phase we were in, the GM always had the ability to challenge the party because he had access to all the same optimization techniques (including counter-tricks) as the players.


----------



## Nonlethal Force (Nov 4, 2008)

Runestar said:


> Won't a point-buy system just encourage more system mastery, over and above what 3e currently entails? Now, you have free reign in cherry-picking what sort of abilities you want (and what you can dump). At least 3e required you to take the good with the bad (for instance, good prcs can have crappy/expensive prerequisites to balance it out).




A lot of that depends on the game.  As the author of Complete Control, one ofthe things I encourage is that the prerequisites for the PrCs simply shift over to the class abilities within them.  Perhaps not all prereqs shift over to all abilities ... but I do think that class abilities should need some prereqs in many instances.  So, that will help to maintain some balance.  However - your point canot be denied.  In a group of powergamers and under a powergaming DM ... combat will be much more dangerous for everyone involved (including the players!).

On the flipside, a game full of non-optimizers who design characters not for powergaming but for "reality" can also find something truly wonderful in point-buy.  Now they can learn what their character wants instead of what some author says they have to learn as the progress through a class.  In these type of games, Complete Control really works well, too.



Runestar said:


> That said, it looks like an optimizer's wet dream.




I hope you pick it up and enjoy it!  If you do, let me know what you think.  Within the "Designer's Notes" chapter I freely admit that there are people who would probably pick a different progression here and there.  But my hope is that overall the product is useful to a vast array of tables.



ValhallaGH said:


> My experience has been an initial period of hyper-optimization while staying loosely attached to the character concept, followed by pure boredom when each character turns out to be a one-man party.  This was followed by a new attempt, one where everyone limited themselves to what fit their character (including appropriate growth given their actions); this has remained the standard and has been a great deal of fun for everyone.
> 
> No matter what phase we were in, the GM always had the ability to challenge the party because he had access to all the same optimization techniques (including counter-tricks) as the players.




Thank you for bringing this to the conversation going on here.  I don't play with true "optimizers" and "powergamers" all that often, so I didn't experience the progression as you describe it  (we jumped to your end position a bit quicker).  But, your expression seems very plausible - and I can see it being a natural progression within a group.  Should you pick up Complete Control, I hope that the GM would continue to be able to challenge the group in each phase as well.  I have found it to betrue in my groups.  Ultimately, I am glad that your group waws able to move through that progression and end up in a place/understandin that was a lot of fun.


----------



## Runestar (Nov 5, 2008)

> As has been mentioned, point buy systems are only as broken as the people playing them want them to be.



Broken and system mastery are 2 different things. My query was more of how intuitive the system was to a player who wanted to just spend a minimum amount of time to build a PC to play? Will a hastily built PC still be viable, or will it stink to high heavens? Will I be required to invest a lot of time and effort in understanding what abilities synergize well with others before a viable PC can be constructed? Will I find myself sifting through hundreds of feats/abilities, with the grim knowledge that only a small proportion of them are actually useful, and I have my work cut out for me in terms of determining what those are? What is the disparity in power level?

On an unrelated side note, I know there was a time when I was more interested in tinkering with the 3.5e ruleset than actually playing the game. Days and days spent on end thinking up of new innovative character builds to stat up, how to better optimize/improve the existing MM npc entries, or simply giving statted npc blocks in published adventures a complete overhaul. Some eventually saw play in later campaigns though. Ah...good times...


----------



## Nonlethal Force (Nov 5, 2008)

Runestar said:


> Broken and system mastery are 2 different things. My query was more of how intuitive the system was to a player who wanted to just spend a minimum amount of time to build a PC to play? Will a hastily built PC still be viable, or will it stink to high heavens? Will I be required to invest a lot of time and effort in understanding what abilities synergize well with others before a viable PC can be constructed? Will I find myself sifting through hundreds of feats/abilities, with the grim knowledge that only a small proportion of them are actually useful, and I have my work cut out for me in terms of determining what those are? What is the disparity in power level?




I had a nice answer posted here ... and ENWorld told me I wasn't logged in anymore.  So, I'm going to try this again.  Sorry.  Short answer: No, a hastily built character should be more effective in Complete Control than a hastily build character would be in a regular game.

There are several reasons for this.  First, Complete Control doesn't have penalties for multiclassing.  You can buy the BAB, Saves, Manifester/Caster levels that you want.  This can be done quickly, too!  And let's face it - in fighters and magic/psionics users that is where the power/effectiveness lies.  So in Complete Control - you should be able to build effective fighters and magic/psionics users more quickly than in a regular game.  {Of course, agonizing over spell/powr lists will be the same in CC and in a standard game}

The second reason that I think effective characters can be built quicker is all those hours spent trying to find the right combination of classe to get into the PrC you want.  In CC that time is essentially gone.  There are no class skills ... so if you want a skill to fulfill a prerequisite you can buy it.  Also, you don't need to know all the classes that offer a certain combination of abilities.  If you need an ability for a PrC requirement you want, you buy it.  It's that simple.  It doesn't matter how the various classes combine to meet the prereqs.  You simply buy the ability and meet the prereqs.  {Of course, the prereqs I'm talking about is if the DM transfers some/all of a PrCs prereqs onto the abilities contained within it ... which is recommended in CC for balance reasons.}

For these reasons, you should be able to put together an effective character in less time than a standard game.  The ONLY thing that will take longer is adding up the XP totals spent.  But if you can use a calculator (or better yet a spreadsheet that auto-tabulates) this can be done quickly and error-free.  As an example, I can throw a legitimate character together in 15 to 30 minutes because I use Excel.  Without Excel, it may take a bit longer, depending on how sure I am on my math tabulation.


----------



## Angellis_ater (Nov 5, 2008)

I can tell you guys this much - with a calculator I made a 3rd level character in about 45 minutes. I noticed that what went slowly in the beginning, eases up after a little while and the pretty comprehensive list at the back of the book with class abilities, together with NLF's articles about non-OGL class abilities, made things a lot easier. And then I was making a Wilder/Psion/Thoughtsinger/Halo Knight character build that included a lot of varied stuff.


----------



## Alzrius (Dec 5, 2008)

Before anything else, I want to say that I'm really enjoying _Complete Control_, and think it's the single best d20 book on the market for creating a character without worrying about classes and levels. NLF, congratulations on improving on _Buy the Numbers_!

That said, I recently realized that the book didn't offer me as much freedom as I'd hoped for when I was initially looking it over. Upon reflection, this isn't really the book's fault, because both issues are ones that are separate from the question of levels and classes. They're as follows:

1) I can't design a race the same way I'd design a class.

By breaking down classes into various components that can be purchased with XP over time (particularly in regards to constant abilities, since almost all racial abilities are constant), I'm suddenly cognizant of the fact that the same thing could be done for racial abilities and powers, but hasn't been. It seems like it'd be easy enough, since things like stat modifiers are already covered in CC, and level adjustments are discussed as well. The book talks about converting them into abilities, but doesn't actually do so.

Really, it seems like the only major problems here would be accurately pricing racial abilities in terms of XP costs, and coming up with a "holistic" list of what falls under racial abilities (e.g. are size and type also purchased for XP? And listing all of the racial abilities for creatures in the SRD that have PC racial information). I suppose there'd be some in-game oddities regarding how a character "learned" a new racial trick, but suddenly gaining darkvision or a powerful build doesn't seem that different from learning how to smite evil or wild shape.

2) CC doesn't reduce dependency on magic items.

Balancing XP expenditures works to keep CC characters in line with standard d20 characters, but only in regards to those characters without any items - GP values for PCs and NPCs isn't taken into account. While I've heard multiple accounts for how much gear factors into a character's level of playability (the best being Upper_Krust's postulation that gear is one-third of a PCs' strength in terms of calculating their effective level - e.g. a 12th-level fighter with no gear is basically an 8th-level character), there's no disagreement over the fact that characters without magic items are crippled.

Without a system that translates GP-per-level values into abilities that can be purchased - the way CC breaks down class abilities purchasable via their XP values - characters are going to still be shackled to the "Christmas Tree" paradigm for how their characters function. Admittedly, this'd be very hard to do because of many factors, not the least of which are the varied nature of magic items, and balance issues regarding how items can be stolen, dispelled, sundered, etc., but it'd be a major break in moving away from prescribed d20 tropes that (N)PCs are currently bound to.

Again, I can't really hold either of these against _Complete Control_, since racial abilities are slightly outside of its purview, and magic items are far outside it. That said, NLF, if you ever want to do an expansion for CC, please consider doing so in regards to one or both of these limitations!


----------



## Nonlethal Force (Dec 5, 2008)

Wow!  Thanks for the complement.  I really appreciate the words.

As to your two points, you are absolutely right.  Complete Control does not address racial building nor does it reduce magic dependency.

The reason for the magical dependency has a simple answer and a more complex answer.  The simple answer is that the book was designed to function within the paraments of 3.x.  Now, that's honestly a bit of a cop-out.  But, it is also the truth.  The majority of people looking to play with Complete Control are going to want to continue with their 3.x game and simply redesign how they build characters.

The complex answer is that I wanted to make sure the base product was as solid as possible.  Changing how magic items function is a complex problem; however it would be an excellent supplement, though.  Perhaps I'll chew it around for a little while.  

[EDIT:  As I reread your post, Alzrius, I was hit by a question I'd like to reflect back to you.  I've heard many people talk about how to take a character and replace magic items with extra abilities, etc.  However, what about this solution?  What if the answer isn't found in boosting characters with no magic items but in scaling down the power of monsters?  Personally, I think this is why 3.x has a sweet spot that typically ends at level 12 or 13.  At higher levels, monsters become powerful enough that an encounter could go TPK with a few bad rolls.  But by scaling back, you essentially take the higher levels and pull them back to where the sweet spot exists.  Instead of having an arms race with PCs vs. Monsters you end up with an attempt to hold onto the power level of the sweet spot.  Thoughts?  END EDIT]

As for racial redesigning ... unfortunately that also comes out of a problem in how the game is built.  Just as there are some differences as to how powerful abilities of certain levels are, there is an even greater range of power between what constitues a balanced race.  There are LA +1 classes out there that shouldbe LA +0 and LA +2.  I think that same comparison can be made for just about any LA +x.  The divergence makes it difficult.

However, I'll put out an interesting offer.  If there is a thread out there with any definitive means of valuing racial abilities, I'd be happy to look it over and come up with a system for racial builds as well  {Even if that means one gets started if one doesn't exist}.  It's just not a task that I feel qualified to do without input from a broad spectrum of games as to what each racial ability is worth.

Again, though, thank you very much for your words.  I appreciate the praise and the honest appraisal of where supplements to the work could be useful.


----------



## Angellis_ater (Dec 5, 2008)

Isn't a race design book, with a tie in chapter to Complete Control, really interesting? Imagine being able to play a 1st lvl Mind Flayer in the group? Sure, they'd not have all the standard abilities of the illithid, but he could acquire them via a CC-style xp expenditure. It would be like _Savage Species_ - only really useful!

My immediate suggestion for relying on magic items is to hand out 20% of the gold in experience instead. It translates pretty well (1xp=5gp is used in the DMG) in the game AND a quick overview tells me that it should mean some pretty nice abilities beind added to a character (or someone just raising their abilities higher, permanently).


----------



## Alzrius (Dec 5, 2008)

Nonlethal Force said:


> Wow!  Thanks for the complement.  I really appreciate the words.




Well, it really is a great book.



> _As to your two points, you are absolutely right.  Complete Control does not address racial building nor does it reduce magic dependency._




Yeah, I see those as being the two big restrictions that are still in place, now that classes/levels are freed up.



> _The reason for the magical dependency has a simple answer and a more complex answer.  The simple answer is that the book was designed to function within the paraments of 3.x.  Now, that's honestly a bit of a cop-out.  But, it is also the truth.  The majority of people looking to play with Complete Control are going to want to continue with their 3.x game and simply redesign how they build characters._




Ideally, a point-buy system to replace the necessity of magic items would allow characters to continue to function in a 3.5 game. The idea isn't to remove the things that require magic items in the first place - that'd require overhauling the entire d20 system, to some degree - but to make it so that magic item effects can be point-bought the same way that class abilities are, thus making it less about what character _have_ than about what they can _do_. The need for magic items from a game mechanics remains, in that instance, but it's filled a different way, as magic items are functionally replaced.



> _The complex answer is that I wanted to make sure the base product was as solid as possible.  Changing how magic items function is a complex problem; however it would be an excellent supplement, though.  Perhaps I'll chew it around for a little while._




Again, it's not about changing the function of items. Rather, what's the XP expenditure for getting a +1 enhancement bonus to attack and damage, and overcoming DR X/magic? How much more does it cost to upgrade that to a +2 enhancement bonus? That's the idea, here. I'm glad you'll look it over, though. I think that'd be a major expansion of CC's theme.

EDIT: One of the major strengths of the d20 System is that everything is interconnected; that unlike AD&D 1E and 2E, it's not a group of collective sub-systems that operate independently from each other. However, that's exactly how magic items work, in terms of their necessity for character viability. We measure how many gold pieces-worth of magic items a character should have by level, but this is divorced utterly from the XP tables that measure level in the first place. Hence, an overhaul to one doesn't affect the other, and a character still needs to be at the median for both measurements in order to be balanced and playable. This is, I think, one of the major weaknesses of the d20 System.



> _[EDIT:  As I reread your post, Alzrius, I was hit by a question I'd like to reflect back to you.  I've heard many people talk about how to take a character and replace magic items with extra abilities, etc.  However, what about this solution?  What if the answer isn't found in boosting characters with no magic items but in scaling down the power of monsters?  Personally, I think this is why 3.x has a sweet spot that typically ends at level 12 or 13.  At higher levels, monsters become powerful enough that an encounter could go TPK with a few bad rolls.  But by scaling back, you essentially take the higher levels and pull them back to where the sweet spot exists.  Instead of having an arms race with PCs vs. Monsters you end up with an attempt to hold onto the power level of the sweet spot.  Thoughts?  END EDIT]_




This sounds like a good idea in theory, but I think in practice it'd be almost impossible to make work. While ideally there'd be generalized guidelines for how to power down a monster, in reality you'd almost certainly need to tailor each monster individually to make this work. I can't even imagine how you'd alter the CR of the monster, since CR is already more of an art than a science. And I doubt anyone would be able to agree on how much "powering-down" is needed to bring them back to the proverbial "sweet spot" of the game, since there's no major consensus on where exactly that is. 



> _As for racial redesigning ... unfortunately that also comes out of a problem in how the game is built.  Just as there are some differences as to how powerful abilities of certain levels are, there is an even greater range of power between what constitues a balanced race.  There are LA +1 classes out there that shouldbe LA +0 and LA +2.  I think that same comparison can be made for just about any LA +x.  The divergence makes it difficult._




That does make it trickier, but surely that same problem was there for classes when working with CC? I've heard plenty of people say that class X was more powerful than other classes of the same level.

As it stands, CC already seems to lay down the groundwork for about half of making racial abilities into point-buy features. I think a supplement that gave that the full treatment would be a great follow-up product. That said, you would have to work out what exactly was and wasn't bought (do you purchase creature type and size, for example?), and determine the XP costs of various racial powers, which is difficult since there isn't a clear baseline on them now, but I think it'd be a worthwhile enterprise.



> _However, I'll put out an interesting offer.  If there is a thread out there with any definitive means of valuing racial abilities, I'd be happy to look it over and come up with a system for racial builds as well  {Even if that means one gets started if one doesn't exist}.  It's just not a task that I feel qualified to do without input from a broad spectrum of games as to what each racial ability is worth._




Unfortunately, I don't know of any such thread about that. I know there are a few sourcebooks that try to make racial abilities purchasable (such as, I think, the Race Creation Cookbook) but I'm pretty sure they don't use XP as a guideline.



> _Again, though, thank you very much for your words.  I appreciate the praise and the honest appraisal of where supplements to the work could be useful._




I wanted to make a joke about how, thus far, it's just Incomplete Control, but I couldn't figure out a good delivery.


----------



## Scurvy_Platypus (Dec 5, 2008)

I haven't picked this up yet, although it's something I'm quite interested in.



Nonlethal Force said:


> However, I'll put out an interesting offer.  If there is a thread out there with any definitive means of valuing racial abilities, I'd be happy to look it over and come up with a system for racial builds as well  {Even if that means one gets started if one doesn't exist}.  It's just not a task that I feel qualified to do without input from a broad spectrum of games as to what each racial ability is worth.




Well, I don't know if it'll quite work for you, but I'd suggest taking a look at the work that Upper_Krust did for working out CR challenges. Post #42 here:
http://www.enworld.org/forum/d-d-3rd-edition-rules/132991-thoughts-challenge-rating-system-3.html

My gut instinct? There's going to be inconsistencies. It's kind of like going, "Well an orange is kinda like a tennis ball and a tennis ball is kinda like a basketball, but smaller. So that means a basketball is kinda like an orange..."

What I mean by such a...questionable... comparison is that in the process of figuring out some sort of numbers for something, there's going to be a bit of fuzziness. It'll start out being "yeah, ok...I can see the reason for that..." to begin with. But at some point, someone is going to pop up and go, "Hey, wait a minute! You're basically saying that A is worth the same number of points as B, but as you can see from the following example, B is completely out of whack because..."

So what'll happen (I think) is that whatever system is developed will be useable. But people are going to immediately start poking at it to see where it falls apart and it _will_ fall apart in some fashion. Something that's already "official" will be more expensive or conflict, or _something_ along those lines. Because it seems pretty clear that there's a degree of "feel" to how things were designed in 3.x; meaning that it didn't play or feel right for whatever reason, and therefore was modified to better fit with the design goal.

Nice for playability, but it makes attempts to present some sort of coherent or unified system rather... irksome... at times.  

I've got no idea if it'll be of any use to you, but Guardians of Order did try to do something sort of like this with BESMd20. It relies on "Character Points" though and while they do offer up a "conversion" of X CP = Y XP, it's a pretty "coarse" conversion. BESMd20 explicitly (and implicitly) has a degree of "softness" (player and or GM interpretation) in terms of how "valuable" something is; this doesn't set well with a large chunk of the gamer population.

Especially when looking at something like point costs for things.

Still, the Anime SRD might be worth looking at as well. I think UK's CR sheet is going to be better in terms of reflecting actual "value", but even there you're going to have to make some assumptions.



Alzrius said:


> Unfortunately, I don't know of any such thread about that. I know there are a few sourcebooks that try to make racial abilities purchasable (such as, I think, the Race Creation Cookbook) but I'm pretty sure they don't use XP as a guideline.




I happen to have a version of the book and to be honest I was unimpressed by it.

As I recall, they don't use XP. Instead they have a sort of "point system" that's kind of coarse. I remember thinking at the time that it had some resemblances to the BESMd20 approach.

Taking UK's system and chopping up his CRs (and fractional CRs) into some sort of a basic XP cost is probably going to be "easiest". If you go the easy route, you just say that each X bit of CR is worth Y XP and do some straight up basic calculations.

After that, you tweak the cost: either to bring the new XP cost into alignment with other already existing bits of the system (for internal consistency/compatability with the Complete Control system) or based on some other criteria like "it just doesn't feel right".

Doing this though, I can almost guarantee that you'll have some sort of "what's wrong?!?!? It's not adding up right!!!" sort of thing happen at some point. In theory monsters are built to use the same rules as PC, but in the process of messing around with this sort of thing (say as an alternative to LA), you're going to probably bump up against a point cost that varies depending on how you build the character.

Plus, I seem to recall that not all the races are really "worth" the same. Warforge and dwarves for example.

I'm not raining on the idea. On the contrary, I've thought about doing this myself. I'm just pointing out that if you happen to have the impulse for everything to match up and add up neatly for _everything_, you're going to drive yourself batty.


----------



## Nonlethal Force (Dec 5, 2008)

Scurvy_Platypus said:


> I haven't picked this up yet, although it's something I'm quite interested in.




I hope you enjoy it when you do pick it up.  And, come back and let me know what you think!



Scurvy_Platypus said:


> Well, I don't know if it'll quite work for you, but I'd suggest taking a look at the work that Upper_Krust did for working out CR challenges.




I appreciate the link.  I'll check it out and see what it offers.



Scurvy_Platypus said:


> My gut instinct? There's going to be inconsistencies. It's kind of like going, "Well an orange is kinda like a tennis ball and a tennis ball is kinda like a basketball, but smaller. So that means a basketball is kinda like an orange..."




Absolutely.  That is also true with CC.  At some point I had to draw the line and say to myself "It replicates 3.x very well, but not prefectly."  And there are places in CC that peope can work to manipulate or come up with ways to beat the system.  Any game system will have those flaws.





Scurvy_Platypus said:


> I'm not raining on the idea. On the contrary, I've thought about doing this myself. I'm just pointing out that if you happen to have the impulse for everything to match up and add up neatly for _everything_, you're going to drive yourself batty.




Didn't think you were.  I take all ideas meant for constructive criticism as such.  I appreciate the input - and I know that not everything will fit 100%.  Heck, it doesn't even fit 100% in the game for which it was designed!  [Toughness and Improved Toughness both being the same cost as a feat choice, for example!]



Alzrius said:


> Ideally, a point-buy system to replace the necessity of magic items would allow characters to continue to function in a 3.5 game.  <...snipped for length...> thus making it less about what character _have_ than about what they can _do_.




That can be acheived fairly quickly and easily for things like weapons and armor - and you don't need to use XP to do it.  You can base it on overall character level.  It's a little harder with items like potions, wands, tattoos, etc.  But, I have an idea from the above comment you made.  Instead of having items that are powerful because of how much money a character invests, their items are powerful based on how much of their "life force" they devote to each item.  You could even have a mechanics that allows a character to alter their "life force allocation" with a simple 1 hour of meditation per item -or- 8 hours for a complete overhaul.  Hmmm.  This is worth doing, and I don't think it is that hard.

Just to be fair ... what I think I hear you saying is that the "treasure aspect" of the game bothers you.  If characters could know that at any given character level they would have automatically have "X item influence/ability points" that they could allocate into their inventory of items - the game would be better for you.  Is that a fair summary, or am I interpreting your words totally incorrectly?




Alzrius said:


> That does make it trickier, but surely that same problem was there for classes when working with CC? I've heard plenty of people say that class X was more powerful than other classes of the same level.




Yes, it was.  And it is a fuzzy set of lines that define power at each level.  With racial abilities those fuzzy lines are more like thick smudges.  But it could be done.  As you say, CC does lay down those lines fairly well in terms of ability pricing and ability score improvements.


----------



## Alzrius (Dec 6, 2008)

Scurvy_Platypus said:


> I happen to have a version of the book and to be honest I was unimpressed by it.




That matches what I'd heard; I just wanted to note that there was a book that did that.



			
				Nonlethal Force said:
			
		

> That can be acheived fairly quickly and easily for things like weapons and armor - and you don't need to use XP to do it. You can base it on overall character level.




I figured it'd have to be something like that - the XP table doesn't take into account GP values, which are still necessary to function at complete efficiency. You could try to figure out a ratio to turn GP values per level into XP, and merge them with the XP values laid down in CC, but that'd throw off what's listed in CC already.

Basically, I was sort of hoping there was some way to not only create point-buy values for (a functional equivalent to) magic items (and racial abilities), but also to merge it with CC's point-buy system for class abilities. That'd make the entire thing completely open in what sort of character you can make.



> _It's a little harder with items like potions, wands, tattoos, etc. But, I have an idea from the above comment you made. Instead of having items that are powerful because of how much money a character invests, their items are powerful based on how much of their "life force" they devote to each item. You could even have a mechanics that allows a character to alter their "life force allocation" with a simple 1 hour of meditation per item -or- 8 hours for a complete overhaul. Hmmm. This is worth doing, and I don't think it is that hard._




That sounds like it might be the best way to go about it, though there are obviously still some specifics to work out, like how that interacts with actual magic items if they're left in the game. 



> _Just to be fair ... what I think I hear you saying is that the "treasure aspect" of the game bothers you. If characters could know that at any given character level they would have automatically have "X item influence/ability points" that they could allocate into their inventory of items - the game would be better for you. Is that a fair summary, or am I interpreting your words totally incorrectly?_




It's the necessity of gear - specifically magic items - that bothers me. As it stands now, you can make any kind of character with CC, but they're still going to need X amount of magic items, or they're not going to be able to function optimally. If they had some kind of "item influence/ability points" that probably would solve most of the problem I had, simply because magic items wouldn't be so necessary just to function anymore.


----------



## Nonlethal Force (Dec 6, 2008)

Well, to be fair ... even a system of "item influence/ability points" would still mean that items would be necessary to boost the characters to the expected norms for 3.x at any given level.  However, what I could do is essentially make the power for those items come out of the character instead of being in the item.  Thus, you wouldn't have the "Magic-mart" aspect of 3.x.

Here's an example.  Brock, serious fighter from the desolate northern lands, has learned through his experience how to infuse a weapon he uses with frozen power and accuracy.  [Mechanically, let's say it is game equivalent to Brock having a +2 frost weapon]  He loves using his Masterwork Greatsword, and every time he goes into battle his sword is treated like a +2 Frost Greatsword.  However, the last battle he had was with a tribe of powerful ogres and his blade was snapped.  Among the ogre village remains Brock finds a Bastard Sword that he can use until he gets a different weapon.  Brock sits down and meditates with the weapon for an hour, and now every time Brock uses the weapon it is considered a +2 Frost Bastard Sword.

Functionally, the game runs smooth and there is no mechanical difference.  From a GM perspective, there is no more treasure issue.  Players use their character level to determine how much equipment their characters can infuse and treat as "magical gear."  However, when the items are no longer in the hands of the players they are treated as mundane (or even masterwork) items.  Thus, the game always is in "balance" in terms of gear.  And yes, balance is a term that is used fairly loosely there. 

And ... I can make it work with existing magic weapons no problem.  So DMs could choose the variant to which I speak, or normal D&D, or both systems simultaneously if they want.  And, I think that it can be such a simple change.  I'm assuming if I wrote this up (Brainstorming here ... Complete Gear?  Completely Equipped?) and convinced the good folks at DSP to produce it as a Complete Control Expansion that you would buy it?  [Especially if it can be done as simply as I think and it therefore would likely cost less than Complete Control]

DISCLAIMER: I am not an official representative of DSP and cannot vouch for neither production nor pricing.  My statements above should not in any way be taken as a promise or anything other than simple brainstorming.  In that respect, I am interested in sensing interest so that when suggesting a work to the good folks at DSP I can relay a sense of interest inspiring the work.


----------



## Angellis_ater (Dec 6, 2008)

If NLF would be interested in such a venture, Dreamscarred Press would be very much interested in continuing our co-operation and expand the Complete series with a Complete Gear release (and in the future, a Complete Race(?) release too, should NLF want to). Our pricing of the product would depend on size (ie pages), art used and time it needed in editing/layout with us.


----------



## Tagnik (Dec 6, 2008)

I just used M&M's mechanic and made it for DnD.  Basically you spend points to buy up you hit dice, BAB, buy class features and spellcasting ability, etc.

Took some work, but it was fun.


----------



## Nonlethal Force (Jan 23, 2009)

Alzrius said:


> It's the necessity of gear - specifically magic items - that bothers me. As it stands now, you can make any kind of character with CC, but they're still going to need X amount of magic items, or they're not going to be able to function optimally.




Well, I've done some thought and some work in this area, and I have a solution.  I've sent it to Angellis_ater for final preview and then with a little luck it'll be sent to layout.  It doesn't remove the dependency on items ... because as you say in an earlier post that would require an overall of the whole system.  But what I have managed to do is completely remove a player's dependency on gold pieces/treasure.  _Complete Gear_ (the temporary name of the product) takes gold and treasure and turns it back into fun stuff rather than a step along in the route to greater purchasing.



Alzrius said:


> If they had some kind of "item influence/ability points" that probably would solve most of the problem I had, simply because magic items wouldn't be so necessary just to function anymore.




This sentence is what inspired me.  _Complete Gear_ doesn't use infusion concept (IE a character permanently gives a part of himself to make a greater weapon).  Rather, the character influences the item to make the object magical for as long as the character desires.  So, the character can make whatever weapons/items he wants/needs without worrying about the "gold" involved.  Of course, there are limits...

But the cool aspect about this is that certain things become easier.  DMs using this system can now equip their NPCs however they want without worrying about an item the NPC has coming back to bite them.  Disjunction is now fun ... because it's no longer a game-ending tactic.  Disjunction is now a hiccup that can be overcome.  Found items can be used, items can have meaning beyond how much they cost.

Anyway, I wanted to make sure that you didn't think that this was forgotten, Alzrius.  Hopefully it is in the pipeline ... to bereleased at some point in the future.


----------



## Angellis_ater (Jan 24, 2009)

It is very much in the pipeline. I would expect *Complete Gear* to release in February.


----------



## Alzrius (Jan 25, 2009)

Nonlethal Force said:


> Anyway, I wanted to make sure that you didn't think that this was forgotten, Alzrius.  Hopefully it is in the pipeline ... to bereleased at some point in the future.




Woot! That's great to hear! I look forward to seeing it!


----------



## Croesus (Jan 25, 2009)

Nonlethal Force said:


> Done.  I create every character for all of my games on an Excel spreadsheet.  Assuming A_a and Bacris give direction it could be turned into a web-enhancement, product-for-sale, or whatever they determine.  It would take very little time in providing this to a fan base of ExP20 that wants it.  Of course, I am not DSP staff, so I ultimately don't make those decisions.  But as I have said before, A_a and Bacris are very open to listening to what the fanbase wants.  If there is a genuine need and it is worth the time to put a product together, I genuinely believe that they will do it.




So, any news on this? I really want to use the rules, but I know my gaming group - without a character builder, they'll never give it a shot.


----------



## Angellis_ater (Jan 26, 2009)

If NLF provides us with an Excel spreadsheet for Complete Control, we will post it, as a free web enhancement, on our website ASAP.


----------



## Fenris (Jan 26, 2009)

Angellis_ater said:


> If NLF provides us with an Excel spreadsheet for Complete Control, we will post it, as a free web enhancement, on our website ASAP.




Hot dawg! Get cracking NLF!


----------



## Nonlethal Force (Jan 28, 2009)

Croesus said:


> So, any news on this? I really want to use the rules, but I know my gaming group - without a character builder, they'll never give it a shot.




Okay ... there was one significant problem that I had to overcome.  How to make a spreadsheet that is easy to use but yet capable of taking into account a skill system that may change as a character's skill rating fluctuates throughout their career.  That stumped me back when the original post was made.  I had a solution that worked for me, but I like math, I like spreadsheets, and it was complex.  So it wasn't something that would be useable fr the general public.  BUT!  I have now solved that dilemma ... I had to do some out of the box thinking.  With that problem solved, I don't think there is anything that will necessarily stop the production of this web enhancement.  I don't make any promises, but version 1.0 could be made available very quickly.  I will post here should I submit something to DSP.


----------



## Nonlethal Force (Jan 28, 2009)

Croesus said:


> So, any news on this? I really want to use the rules, but I know my gaming group - without a character builder, they'll never give it a shot.




God news!  I have a beta version up in the game that I DM on the DSP forums.  You should be able to find it here: Forays into Destruction.  I think it is the ninth or so post on the page.  However, you may have to have an account and be logged in to view it.  I'm not entirely sure about that.

Note, however, it is PURELY a character calculator - not an electronic character sheet.  I am working on that, but those kind of things are often best left for people to design themselves.  I love it, because I kno how to buy "Weapon Focus" and then have the sheet auto-calculate the extra bonus to attack for me.  But not everyone knows how to do that.  So as of right now, it is a character calculator.  You type in what you want, and it tells you exactly the price you have spent.  It'll even calculate bonus spell slots, bonus power points if you like, too.  Anyway, just so you know that this is being responded to as well, Croesus.


----------



## Nonlethal Force (Apr 21, 2009)

I'm not sure if anyone is still monitoring this thread, but since it was mentioned earlier I wanted to give an update.  The Dreamscarred Press forums are stating that Complete Gear should be out sometime next week.  I will post an update here when it actually releases.  But anyone wanting immediate notifications are welcome to check out the forums themselves.


----------



## Alzrius (Apr 24, 2009)

Nonlethal Force said:


> I'm not sure if anyone is still monitoring this thread, but since it was mentioned earlier I wanted to give an update.  The Dreamscarred Press forums are stating that Complete Gear should be out sometime next week.




Sweet!


----------



## Aus_Snow (Apr 28, 2009)

spam reported. again.


----------



## Piratecat (Apr 28, 2009)

Alahad_Group said:


> There was also a Modern version (different author and company) titled Point Buy Numbers.



[off topic] Welcome. I've deleted the advertising links in your sig. We'd love to have you stay and discuss games, but free advertising from new members (and advertising non-RPG subjects) isn't something we'd like to see. Email me with any questions. [/off topic]


----------



## Nonlethal Force (Apr 29, 2009)

Rats.  Three new posts and only spam to talk about.  Here I was excited about new conversation!  (I had already seen Alzrius' excitement!  )

Back on topic, Jeremy on the DSP forums is predicting Complete Gear by the end of the week.  (Fingers crossed!)


----------



## Nonlethal Force (May 15, 2009)

Complete Gear is up!  You can find it here.  I haven't seen the final product (art and layout) but since I wrote the words I know what it contains!  Considering you can buy it for a whole whopping $2.95 (less if you are a premiere customer at the DSP forums) of course I recommend that you check it out!

It delivers what it promises:

1. Characters define their items instead of the other way around.
2. GM playis easier because treasure can become a non-issue (IE no planning required).
3. Game balance is perfectly maintained according to 3.5 standards (and I mean perfectly)
4. It works with any system and any books that have a common currency standard.

Feel free to enjoy.  If you buy it, please also feel free to write a recommendation or comment about the contents!  {On whatever board you purchased it from, of course!}


----------



## Angellis_ater (May 17, 2009)

We're proud to have NLF onboard as the great writer he is and I wanted to pop in to share a little news on the Complete series. In a little time, we're intending to release both Complete Control and Complete Gear as a single, print-on-demand book to fulfill your desire for having this excellent material in the DeadTree Version!


----------



## Alzrius (May 17, 2009)

I've already got my copy of _Complete Gear_, and I'm quite enjoying it!

The transition from GP to influence points quite intuitive once you grasp the basic idea, and NLF did a great job making sure all the bases were covered - with the exception of epic-level progressions. The variant ideas, in particular, showcase great ways to tweak the system to make it work exactly how you want.

That said, I think GM's who use this book should remember to treat it like a toolkit in regards to their approach. While it does introduce some flavor for how this works in-game, the majority of that approach is meant to be done by the person running the world. Precisely how a person is able to make their gear magical, simply by willing it to be so, is a process that I'm sure most GM's will want to tailor for themselves.


----------



## Angellis_ater (May 17, 2009)

Absolutely - both Complete Control and Complete Gear are perfect toolkit additions to a 3.5 or Pathfinder game. One of the things that I have considered is that with this kind of experience/influence point system, a GM can design and tweak his campaign and rules to match. For example, I want spells to be rare but extremely dangerous in my own Third Dawn campaign - so I triple their price, but allow the rare spellcaster a limitless progression of caster level. Psionics on the other hand is common, so everyone has a 25% discount when buying psionics, but they are capped at median level+1 for their manifester level and power level.

With Complete Gear, I'm going to tweak away part of the Influence Points to be "Meditative Effects" allowing people to increase their stats with inherent Enhancement Bonuses that are effects of mantras and meditations, while I am disallowing all "one use items" - but allow people to keep Influence Points in reserve for "healing potions" - take a move action and perform a short mantra, note down the IP spent, roll dice to heal.

Awesome if you ask me!


----------



## Nonlethal Force (May 17, 2009)

Alzrius said:


> I've already got my copy of _Complete Gear_, and I'm quite enjoying it!




Great.  I'm sorry you had to wait longer than anticipated to get it; but it is really nice to hear that the wait seems to be worth it!



Alzrius said:


> That said, I think GM's who use this book should remember to treat it like a toolkit in regards to their approach. While it does introduce some flavor for how this works in-game, the majority of that approach is meant to be done by the person running the world. Precisely how a person is able to make their gear magical, simply by willing it to be so, is a process that I'm sure most GM's will want to tailor for themselves.




Absolutely.  This is particularly why I wanted to leave the aspect of flavor largely out of the work.  Some games are going to be divine centered.  Others are going to be magic centered.  Some are going to be mind/ki focused.  And many are going to have blends of the above.  The more I stuck to mechanics and let flavor be the DM's job, the more I felt DMs could integrate the work into their campaigns with greater ease.



Angellis_ater said:


> With Complete Gear, I'm going to tweak away part of the Influence Points to be "Meditative Effects" allowing people to increase their stats with inherent Enhancement Bonuses that are effects of mantras and meditations, while I am disallowing all "one use items" - but allow people to keep Influence Points in reserve for "healing potions" - take a move action and perform a short mantra, note down the IP spent, roll dice to heal.
> 
> Awesome if you ask me!




That a neat perspective, and should you guys get a CC/CG compendium I think it would be a neat addition or variant rule added into the material if you and Jeremy should agree.


----------



## Angellis_ater (May 21, 2009)

There will be a compendium, but now it all kinda depends on if you're gonna write us a "Complete Races" or not  - if that is the case, we might wait until that one is finished before we compile and put this INTO PRINT!


----------

