Base template:

• 10 stat points
• 2 good saves
• 4 skills plus those essential for class
• Stat add every 4 levels
• Talent every 4 levels (offset)
• 2 Maneuvers or Powers per level
• Either:
  • 2 Mana/level and 4 HP/lev
  • 1 Mana/level and 5 HP/lev
  • 0 Mana/level and 6 HP/lev

Variant template (fighter types):

• Talent every 2 levels
  • Every 6 levels, this can be 2 stat adds
• Usually no Mana

Variant template (monster):

• Bonus stats at level 1
• Racial abilities at level 1
• Talent every 2 levels
  • Every ? levels, this can be ? stat adds

Criticisms

There's definitely an opportunity to make this a little bit cleaner. First, the criticisms:

• In terms of utility, Mana and Powers win handily. In terms of numbers, monsters and fighters have the advantage (although they risk breaking Bounded Accuracy--not that it couldn't be updated), but it isn't necessarily clear if winning checks more often results in more fun. Both tend to do about the same damage, as the current damage model gives a limited role (lol) to stats, leaning more heavily on dice.
• Maneuvers may be as powerful as Powers, but still not as useful (the age-old fighter utility problem).
• Talents that give stats are too good, and the mechanic is clunky
• Talents that give powers are weird; which things should be Powers, and which should be Talents?
• There's no training beyond proficiency
• Hit Points are too hard to calculate, and too high at higher levels
• Hit Points don't stack well against Mana

Build Types: solving the Utility crisis

Before we start architecting, let's explore the space a bit. What are the fundamental builds?

• First and foremost, the pure caster. They identify as magic users, and won't sacrifice peak capability (numbers, max spell level, etc) for anything--although they sorely want secondary abilities (be it hybrid fighting, skills, weird races, etc), if only just to differentiate from other pure casters.
• The hybrid: usually a fighter-first approach to combat, although typically not sacrificing more than half their casting ability. In System 6, they actually felt a little too magically powerful due to their high-level spell access (although it wasn't as bad as 3e/5e). Ideally, they have abilities that synergize the two in interesting ways (assuming WotC isn't at the helm).
• The Juggernaut: not necessarily Strength-based (but you never see other builds), this character heavily dives into monstrous classes, favoring a simplistic but effect play style, thanks to large numeric buffs, and the kind of utility that comes from exaggerated base stats (i.e. super strength, super speed, etc). If they want Powers, they are usually at-will and built into their monstrous type, and tend to be--again--simple, but very effective.
• The Concept Character: an antipattern, but not simply because PCs are naughty. This character is trying to be something the rules don't allow. Maybe they want to be a Noble, or a Zeppo, or a courtesan who heals the woes of the world with love. In traditional D&D, this concept doesn't work. It's worth thinking about, a little--but it's also worth noting that tacking on a couple dozen levels of Cleric didn't hurt Keket or Briar Rose's concepts.
• The Swiss Army Knife: suppose you're a tiefling, trained by a witch, who doesn't want to use Infernal powers, and would rather be a private investigator, but is (of course) super-strong, super-charismatic, and has a badass array of cool weapons and armor to top of his supreme fighting skills. Yeah, you're a cheese-whore, you're trying to be too many things at once, and it isn't working. In theory, 5eA's multiclass approach allows this sort of build, while keeping the power level down. It's probably not all that advisable, but then, so are many builds.
• The rarest of the rare: the Pure Fighter. This can include Rogues and other fighter-types, but the idea is the same: no innate Powers, or so few that they don't shift you into Hybrid classification. These builds typically have terrific (probably too complicated) fighting ability, and practically zero utility otherwise. There are a few variants that help solve the problem (e.g. using a magic sword of Telekinesis to fwang around the battlefield), but they are vanishingly rare in the wild, and they aren't really a cure-all.

So what does all this mean? Well, it's important to realize that all of the above builds exist, and they exist because people want to play those characters, even if the balance is off. 4e sank because not everybody wanted to be a wizard--even if that meant finally balancing the game. The Hybrid, the Juggernaut, and the half-hybrid Pure Fighter are welcome niches to fill, even if they all suffer from a utility gap. We can't just ask the characters to play a type they don't want. Let's look at what we've tried, and how it's worked out:

• Everyone's a wizard: nope
• Magic users have fewer spells that compete with Skills: tried in System 6 with some small success (mostly protecting rogues). The existence of Mentalism means that the Charisma skills are still nigh-useless; would they be worthy of the axe?
• PtbA meta-skills: interesting possibility. The philosophy of PtbA is such that an archetype who can "talk their way out of anything" can succeed at bribing prison guards (or whatever) just as often as an Enchanter with loads of mind-altering spells. Of course, that comes with a whole load of baggage, but maybe some combination of the previous point and this could bear fruit.
• Magic Items to the rescue: not sure if it's been tried, but what if magic items were more useful, or plentiful, or what-have-you, in the hands of the less-magical? It seems counter-intuitive, but maybe we could come up with some excuse about how a magic-user is using all of their spiritual energy for Mana, whereas a fighter isn't making much use of theirs? Or it could be more meta--a rule allotting more equipment to non-magic-users (maybe magic interferes with technology or something) could work, but it might not feel fair.

A recent session showed a pattern that might work, if all the stars align. Basically, the PCs needed a whole mess of utility to connive their way in and out of an ultra-secure prison, and they didn't have much in the way of Skill, so they leaned hard on their Pure Caster. It worked, but just barely; she was almost entirely drained, and came within a few points on a d20 from ruin. Skill checks would have been quite a bit less costly, and Powers could still have functioned as a backup. In other words, here's the solution I'm proposing:

• Add "moves" to the game, PtbA style.
  • Convince someone of something: Persuasion
  • Investigate a mystery: Investigate
  • Read a bad situation: Insight
  • etc
• They are all Skill based
• They don't cost anything, but failure provokes a Hard Move (bankable by the DM)
• Analyze the Power list, and anything that trivializes these moves should be trimmed back (try to veer it toward Combat and away from Utility; for example, Mind Control is just as good as Domination in combat, but awful outside)

Bonus topic: Hit Points

Hit Points are a weird, ancient mechanic. I have no problem with their function as a mechanic--I've recently come to terms with the superiority of HP over VP, wounds, Hits, etc--but the way you determine how many you have is clunky, unbalanced, and confusing, especially compared to the elegant simplicity of the rest of the build process.

One of the revelations of 7.8 was that double-dipping in any form of progression is bad; i.e., if you can increase your Mana by increasing Charisma, you shouldn't also be able to increase your Mana through something else. This is distinct from the idea of synergy between abilities--it merely covers cases where there are multiple things to spend your progression on that increase the same number. This is bad because it makes these numbers hard to predict, and it's hard to optimize your build as a PC.

Such could obviously be applied to Hit Points. If you want more Hit Points, you can simply increase your Constitution. Hell, it's probably the only reason anybody would bother. Not to mention that you needn't even make a choice at all--Hit Points go up all by themselves. And they probably should, to a certain extent: after all, you don't want to encourage the Glass Cannon build.

Considering all this, and the fact that the link between class choice and HP/level is pretty weak and meaningless, and the fact that nobody knows how to calculate Hit Points anyway, how about we just do away with the whole thing? HP = (some base number that goes up automatically) + (a modifier based on Con). Any other choices to be made should be powers or maneuvers that improve your defense in other ways.

Binding HP

Maneuvers can bind HP to grant extraordinary abilities, in a similar manner to Powers binding Mana.

Examples: TBD

Stat Perks

We want PCs to be able to invest in stats, but we also don't want to break Bounded Accuracy (at least, not by too much). What do we do?

Enter Perks. If you use a stat add on a capped stat (other modifiers still work numerically; only stat adds provide perks), you don't increase the modifier (you increase the score, but the modifier stays at +5), but you do get a perk that makes that stat feel more powerful. Some examples:

• Strength
  • Oversized weapon: you can use an oversized weapon, which adds your Strength modifier twice.
  • Bender: you can bend or break things most people can't, using Strength checks.
  • Heavy Armor: you can wear extra-heavy versions of regular armor, which grant +Strength to AC (but do not allow any Dex)
  • Iron Grip: you cannot be disarmed, nor anything removed from your hands you do not wish. You will never let something or someone slip from your grasp.
• Dexterity
  • Too Fast, Too Furious: you don't provoke attacks of opportunity for movement.
  • Tuck and Roll: you always take half damage from area effects, even if you don't save. If they allow a save for half, you save for zero damage.
  • Slip Away: you gain the ability to use Disengage or Dash as a legendary action.
• Constituion
  • Thick Skin: gain DR 5
  • Resist: gain Resistance to one chosen damage type
• Intelligence
  • Polyglot: when you encounter a new language, roll an Int check. On 20+, you already knew it, on 10+, you'll figure it out in a few days and can muddle through with a pidgin dialect.
  • Calculator: you can instantly perform mathematical calculations, count objects, work out challenging calculus problems, etc.
  • Leap of Logic: you gain a new move, usable once per encounter, allowing you to gain a nugget of information from the DM that was not apparent from mere Investigation. (Mixed success or failure might give you misinformation)
• Wisdom
  • Hear No Evil: you always know a lie when you hear it
  • See No Evil: you can always tell if someone is in disguise, whether magically or otherwise. Gain advantage to detect invisible or stealthed creatures
  • Tower of Iron Will: even if your mental defenses fail, you can never be compelled to act. At will, as an immediate action, if under the affect of a charm or compulsion, you can void your mind, becoming helpless and paralyzed, useless to your attacker.
• Charisma
  • Irresistible Charm: when taking a move to Influence Someone, you cannot fail. Failure is mixed success, and mixed success is total success.
  • You Wouldn't Hurt Me, Would You?: all attacks that an attacker knows would harm you suffer disadvantage.

Turf War

Overlap between different ability types is a thing to be avoided. Thus:

• Skills, Moves, Maneuvers and Powers are specific actions that you take (or augments to the same).
• Skills and Moves cover all of non-combat, non-magical utility (and perhaps a bit of in-combat utility)
• Maneuvers cover in-combat, non-magical utility
• Powers cover all magical utility, but should skew toward combat
• Moves should be the mundane counterpart to Rituals, and generally much less costly and risky
• Perks are general advantages or disadvantages
• Talents are similar to Perks and Bindings, less powerful than the former, more powerful than the latter

(Note: the classless system may obsolete Bindings, as they clash with Talents)

Talents, Bindings, and Perks

These three are problematic. Talents are supposed to represent specialization within a class identity, although they're often used to magic-up a magic-less class. But shouldn't all magic be Powers (except maybe Perks, which are distinct for how cool it is to have a power that isn't magical?)?

Let's break it down, and maybe invent some more terms:

• Power: a spell. Use an action, spend some Mana, make something go boom.
• Binding: either a constant ability, or a lesser spell usable more than the Mana cost suggests. Reduces Mana pool. Most suitable for hybrids.
• Specialization: an area of focus within a class identity. Might be a small passive buff, might be a modifier to existing abilities, might grant whole new ones. Clashes with Perks, Upgrades, and the Power system itself. Meant to encapsulate 5e talents, but few of those are particularly interesting, and it might be worth jettisoning the whole thing.
• Supernatural Ability: talents, as taken by monster classes or fighter-types that allow magical hybridization (currently zero, but maybe Monks or something). Essential for the Juggernaut build. Potentially clashes with Power and Binding system.
• Extraordinary Ability: talents, as taken by fighter-types, to try to give them more utility. Seems to clash less with Powers due to being non-magical, but comes dangerously close to Perks. Rogue's skill talents might be nice for non-Rogues to access, and definitely infringe on Perk territory.
• Perks: something to do with excess stat points. Clashes with monstrous supernatural abilities, but might be preferable to them (as opposed to having 64 different implementations of Super Strength).

So, without thinking for even a moment, let's just take a stab at fixing it:

• Power: unchanged
• Superpower: a permanent ability, whether constant, at-will, or something in between. Not powered by Mana (necessarily), not purchasable with Power currency. Conceivably includes non-magical superpowers.

You get 2 BP per level.

• Power, Maneuver, Skill, Mana: 1 BP
• Stat Add or Superpower: 2 BP

The Classless System

A unified build platform for all classes and classless characters.

• Each level, you get 5 Build Points. You can cash these in for all sorts of things:
  • 4 BP: +1 to any ability score (if you exceed 5, see "Perks")
  • 3 BP: a Talent
  • 2 BP: one new Maneuver, Power, or Skill. Alternatively, one point of Mana

Random Musings

With classes, you get the ability to customize the delivery of abilities for each class. I can do that, in a way that it feels good to play. However, you get locked into one class, unless the system allows multiclassing (and has done a good job of balancing it). Even if it does, it can feel difficult to find the right build, similar to System 7.

Let's just kill the entire field of sacred cows and start over.

What do players want from the RPG experience? I'd say:

• The ability to build a character with unique strengths and weaknesses at character creation
• A choice of what path to follow, whether to specialize and race toward some big goal first, or generalize and do a bit of everything
• Noticeable, measurable advancement in exchange for work done
• A long runway for improvement, suggesting depth of gameplay
• The ability to choose their own difficulty (e.g. the easy zone has easy mobs and basic loot, the hard zone has hard mobs and good loot, etc). Similarly, the existence of content too difficult at current level that can become available later

And maybe a few nice-to-haves that aren't strictly necessary:

• Multiple currencies for buying upgrades (maybe one main and a few alternatives, or just a whole open field of possibilities)
• Clear separation between innate abilities and equipment upgrades. Both should be possible, and should synergize with each other. Equipment can be lost, so be careful!

Let's look at a couple of successful games, Stardew Valley and D&D 5e:

• Character Build
  • SDV: F. Totally bricks it, with all characters identical at start (except for farm choice).
  • D&D: B. Pretty good differentiation at level 1, better than 3e, but deserves an asterisk for PCs not really being ready to adventure at level 1
• Path choice
  • SDV: S. Nails it. Do you want to focus on farming? Mining? Foraging? Fishing? Relationships? Any chosen blend thereof? You can try to "do it all", but it's not really possible from the get-go, and just gets less possible over time. You can change your path choice in real time with no restriction.
  • D&D: D. Bare-ass minimum. Path is the one choice non-casters ever get, and once chosen, they're locked in forever. Every single Fighter / Champion of level X has exactly the same abilities, period. Worst path customization since 2nd ed. Also, this isn't really "path" anyway, it's just PC abilities. All PCs are forced into the path of "rob tombs, kill people's dead ancestors, and sell them their own heirlooms for cash".
• Noticeable, measurable advancement
  • SDV: B. Gear-based advancement is clear and very noticeable. Professions are pretty meh until 10, and level-ups are virtually unnoticeable. The game is mostly gear, so it weighs in that direction.
  • D&D: B. D&D set the standard for this, and some classes enjoy very noticeable and meaningful upgrades each level. The situation is pretty bad for non-casters, and it's kind of rough for everybody at very high level due to the number-flattening of Bounded Accuracy, but that might be kind of offset by the relatively bombastic low levels. Zero credit for that, though; 5e characters should begin at level 4 or 5, the earlier levels are unplayable.
• Long runway
  • SDV: A. Excellent overall. Could do better with the late game, TBH, but the early and mid are on point. The game plays noticeably differently at 1k gp, 10k, 100k, and 1M. After that, it kind of mushes together. Skilling up to max takes almost exactly until the dawn of endgame (Year 3).
  • D&D: A. For casters, S-class for sure, and maybe SS if epic rules are ever created. For fighters, it's maybe a D on a good day; you go from "I attack with my axe, hitting a +10 and doing 12 damage" to "I attack with my axe, hitting a +15 and doing 12 damage" six times per fight. That's your whole runway. Bullshit. Other classes are somewhere in between, and since most are casters, the overall rating is pretty high.
• Choose your own difficulty
  • SDV: A. S for Farming--you decide exactly what you want to build, and profit in direct proportion to how ambitious you were, and how well you execute. A for Mining and Adventure, with multi-level dungeons that let you dial in your preferred difficulty (S for early/mid in mines, B for Skull Cavern: great fun, but terrible dialing). B for fishing, as the early/mid difficulties are not too hard to dial into (albeit annoyingly, as you sometimes just have to give up on fish that are too hard and hope for easier ones), and the really hard catches all have to be sought out on purpose; it's noteworthy that the rewards don't really scale. D for Foraging, but that's not really a pillar of gameplay unto itself.
  • D&D: D. In theory, PCs can choose their own difficulty, but in practice, DMs control it 100% (failing grade for player choice), and typically choose a difficulty level that scales with the PCs (failing grade for variability of difficulty) and is usually far too easy (failing grade for stakes and challenge). Three failing grades should be an F minus minus minus, but I'll bump to a D because none of this is the system's fault per se...but also the system doesn't help DMs do it the right way or really encourage them at all.
• Multiple currencies:
  • SDV: S. XP, GP, rare materials, common materials...shit, this game nails it. You can usually laser-target the materials you need (although there are a very small numbers of ones that's hard to do, and that's a good thing), or you can just play the game for fun, and probably get what you need eventually.
  • D&D: B. XP, GP, and Treasure is the classic split, and as of 3e, I'd give it an A (short of S for the clunky-as-shit crafting system and the poorly balanced magic items). 5e threw crafting in the garbage for some tired Gen-X bullshit about how "magic items should be rare and special". Yeah, a system that limits item creep would be appreciated, but that shouldn't leak into the fiction, you idiots. Of course PCs can craft their own shit. Or at least buy it. What the fuck are all these gold pieces for if you can't buy equipment? F--- for the treasure system, B for the existing equipment, and A for leveling (I guess).
• Clear separation between innate and items
  • SDV: B. The equipment system gets an A (nearly S, but not quite deep enough; definitely S with Automate/etc). Items feel like something you earned (with serious, painstaking effort), and reward you in ways that are worth the effort, while still feeling like the thing they are (except, I suppose, for a ghost giving you Iridium Ore every day). The skill system gets a C: it's just average. Mining 10 means you mine better than you did at 1, I guess? In some manner? This grade isn't about advancement or runway in and of itself (that's covered elsewhere), but the question is simply this: when you skill up in SDV, does it feel like you are more skilled, specifically, over and above non-skill upgrades such as gear and animal heart level? I guess your crops are gold more often, and you run out of stamina slower. But it could do a lot more to feel like you invested in yourself. Here's a few ideas: run faster, unlock elite crops or artisan products, catch useful fish in the crappy farm pond, find non-foragables lying around (e.g. minerals, crops), get more ore from rocks, get more wood from trees, etc. That wasn't hard.
  • D&D: B. Tricky. Overall, D&D is pretty good at this; a fighter pretty well understands the difference between his sword-swinging ability, and the magic ring that makes him invisible. It could be a lot better for casters, as the purpose of magical equipment is questionable when they're so magical anyway. In SDV, there's universal equipment that anybody could use, and there are skills for using that equipment. D&D is weird, in that there's a group of classes that specializes in the power that makes equipment do what it does, but their skill doesn't make those items more powerful, nor is it required to use them. Weird. I guess I'll just call it a B.

Final reckoning:

• SDV: FSBAASB 0534453 24 B+
• D&D: BDBADBB 3134133 18 C+

So SDV is better at this than 5e, but both have plenty of room for improvement. Seems like an overhaul of skills--including a level 1 character build--would do wonders for SDV's rating. D&D's problems are more evently distributed. But that's a good thing: there's plenty to fix!

Now let's look at what Stardew Valley can teach D&D.

Stardew Valley and Dragons

One thing that jumped out at me while doing this is that not only does Stardew Valley have a skill-based system (with minor, vaguely class-like specializations), but so, it seems, do most modern western RPGs, and non-RPGs with RPG elements. Class systems are more rare, and while they work well for many game types (a la PtbA, at least in theory--single classing kinda sucks), it seems they tend to pop up only in traditional medieval fantasy, probably more for tradition's sake than anything else.

A good skill system should have:

• The right number of skills (a dozen is a lot, more is insane, 5 is lightweight but cozy, 3 is probably too few, etc).
• A lot of depth (leveling to 100 seems like a long slog, 10 is probably the bare minimum, 20 might not be so bad, but why isn't it metric, some might ask)
• The ability to start with a small advantage (character build)
• Minimal overlap between skills, and especially no overlap between mundane and magical skills

All-in-all, Skyrim seems to do a pretty good job at this. There's a good number of mundane skills and a good number of magical skills. SDV isn't too bad, considering the limitations of the game's concept. But assuming we come up with a good skill-based system, let's compare it to some other game systems:

• D&D 5e
  • The skill system is an afterthough, a small addendum to the true core mechanics: swinging swords and casting spells. Kind of a waste, but admittedly, the lack of meaningful skills doesn't impede the core game of Dungeoneering. Whether that game is boring or not is beside the point, although somewhat relevant, in that if the game were ever expanded to have more than one gameplay loop, the skill system would buckle quickly under the load.
• System 7
  • Much more skill-based, but it never really seemed to take off and feel like a "skills first" game. Way too many skills, with little effort balance mundane vs magical skills. The insistence that skills be rollable, and tied to ability scores, held the system back.
• 5e Advanced
  • Not much data yet, but doesn't seem to have changed much from 5e. PCs still intuitively feel like skills should do more than they do, and should represent something beyond a +5. Game mechanics are out of sync with player's mental model.
• Stardew Valley
  • Part of what keeps skills back is that they are secondary to what you're doing, and what challenges face you in doing it. To wit, most of the time, you're using tools to further your Farming or Mining goals, and the tool's limitations and capabilities matter more than your skill. You're never doing anything somebody else with the same tool couldn't do, even if maybe you're doing it slightly better because of that skill.

It seems like there are three different things RPG designers call "skills":

• D&D typically takes every imagineable thing you can do--BESIDES what the classes give you--and dumps them all, pachinko-like, into a bucket of universal skills. This accomplishes some vague ability to specialize, and have different numbers for different things, but it doesn't ever give you new capabilities, nor does it often matter what skills you have. Powers from your class are like 95% of the game.
• Stardew Valley and others use skills as Ability Scores, granting largely passive bonuses to things you were going to do anyway. That's fine for an Ability Score, but skills should unlock abilities, and make you better at the thing the skill is accomplishing.
• Skyrim puts all conceivable powers and abilities into one skill or another, and rewards you for using skills with skill-ups to said skill, which in turn make you better at that skill. They use a fairly simple gating system to grant higher-ranked spells as you level your magical skill; comparable gating happens for mundane skills, but it's less noticeable (though at least as noticeable as SDV). Altogether, a great implementation, worthy of emulation.

So from this, we can conclude that a good skill:

• Directly leads to actions you can take in-game that require and are powered by the skill, and are the primary, relevant powers you need to accomplish your goals
• Is more useful, convenient, and powerful at high ranks than it was at low rank
• Provides access to higher-ranked abilities as a reward for specialization
• Can be invested in directly, at the whim of the Player, in whatever amount they prefer, from 0% of 100% of their effort

And, I might add another one, although I'm begging the question a bit:

• In a system with levels and classes, a Skill should be independent of both

Why this? Well, if it's dependent on level, it can't be invested in directly (although maybe you could use level as a cap...if you're a coward). If it's dependent on class, it's at risk of being mined for class abilities. I mean, if you have a good skill system, what's left for classes to do?

That last question is actually pretty important, because there's a whole realm of abilities we expect to see, that might not be covered very well by Skills. We'll get to that in a bit.

The Skill System

Mundane skills:

• Agility
• Investigate
• Melee
• Persuasion
• Ranged
• Stealth

or...

• Melee (str)
• Defense (str)
• Agility (dex)
• Dodge (dex)
• Defense (con)
• Endurance ()
• Knowledge (int)
• Spellcraft (int)
• Concentration (wis)
• Perception (wis)
• Charm (cha)
• Willpower (cha)

Magical skills:

• Elementalism
• Evocation
• Invocation
• Mentalism
• Thaumaturgy

Look at all these skills! What can we do with them?

We can...

• Investigation
  • Investigate a mystery
• Perception
  • Read a bad situation
• Persuasion
  • Manipulate Someone

Other Assets

Honestly, not sure what to call this category, because it's so broad, but it needs to exist, if only to reassure the player that every conceivable ability that doesn't belong in a Skill has a home somewhere. Brainstorming:

• Monstrous abilities (vampire, tiefling, dragon, etc)
• Bloodline powers (elemental, divine, etc)
• Superpowers (super strength, super speed, what-have-you)
• Unique Equipment (e.g. power suit, moonblade, etc)
• Resources (do you know who I am?)

Classless, version Kangaroo

What does everyone get each level (assuming we're talking about good classes)?

• 2 spells (or bindings, or upgrades, or arcana, or maneuvers)
• 2 Mana or 0.2 of an extra attack and some extra HP
• 0.25 of a stat add
• 0.25 of a talent / path

What about a two-dimensional approach:

• Levels
  • Classes are Fighter, Mage, and Enhanced
  • Fighter gets 2 maneuvers (or talents), extra HP, and weapon damage upgrades
  • Mage gets 2 spells (or bindings/upgrades) and 2 Mana
  • Enhanced gets +1 ability score and a Talent
• (something)
  • Stat adds, path advancement

Classless, version Llama

(also see <../systems/5e/5eA2>)

Each level, you get either:

• One Power (new skill at rank 1 or upgrade existing skill 1 rank), and 2 Mana
• One Superpower (bundle of supernatural abilities), and a bundle of stat adds that go with it

Every 4th level, you get a stat add. Cuz 5e.

Powers

Power list (subset):

• Fire
• Life
• Frost
• Drain
• Infernal (invocation)
• Faery (invocation)

Roughly equal to a 5eA Discipline/Sphere

Fire

Rank 1

Choose one:

• Immolate
• Wildfire
• Burning Hands

Choose X:

• Fireball
• Flame Jet
• Wall of Fire
• Conflagrate

Rituals:

• Start a fire
• Control fire

How powers should work

Each power has:

• Description of things you can definitely do easily (cantrips and rituals)
• Description of things you can conceivably do, but with some risk of failure and/or cost (Mana and/or Use Magic)

One way it might work:

• Spell effects are still arranged in 5 ranks, as per system 6
• At rank X, everything of rank <X is "easy", X is "doable", and >X is "big magic or impossible"
  • Thus, at rank 1, rank 0 cantrips are "easy", 1 is "doable with risk", and 2 might be possible with risk, cost, and other sacrifices
• Anything specifically listed, you can do, as long as you spend the Mana and pass any required skill checks (i.e. Use Magic)
• Anything within the bounds of the abilities you can do is also doable with Use Magic / Big Magic

Thus, you don't need to spend skill ranks to learn individual spells, but rather by advancing your skill rank, you can make all spells of a given rank "easy"

Mana costs don't change in this model (though they might not be needed at all with Use Magic).

Superpowers

Roughly equal to 7.8 power sources.

• Super Strength
• Super Speed
• Spider Climb
• etc

(should be a bit more like divine salient abilities, avoid ranks if possible, but passives should exist for simpler builds)