Quasi classes and Gradual leveling!

[CptClyde]

First off I want to say well done and thank you to Smoot and Dimirag and contributors for the supplements called "Quasi classes" and "Gradual Leveling". Amazing options for truly unique characters that I believe cannot be matched by any other OSR game. I feel this kind of stuff puts BFRPG on the cutting edge of old school play and should be highlighted more.

Has anyone used these two supplements together? How did it go? Was it too complicated for the players to enjoy?

I intend to use both if/when I get a BFRPG group together. I will be using the "limitless area purchase" method of gradual leveling as i think it would be amusing to see someone concentrate all their XP into a single area. Like a fighter with amazing AB but still working with his first level HP an saves. Or a magic user who spent all XP in spell casting and spell research to the detriment of all other areas. A true glass cannon.

I can see the quasi class additional XP requirement would simply be the cost of additional area granted. For instance a fighter(hunter) would need to spend 700xp for HD, Saves, AB, and 500xp for a buff in Hunter abilities. Is this how you'd rule it?

Amazing stuff.

[SmootRK]

Thanks for the high praise. I also feel like the Quasi-Classes are a interesting way to expand options in ways that other games/editions have not tried in a similar fashion. I have not used the incremental/gradual leveling options of Dimirag, so I have little input there.

I would suggest using the version of the Quasi-Classes found in the Showcase (release 4), even if there are a couple spots that need polish (namely the Monk quasi-class needs a little bit, but is largely usable as-is). One of the main refinements in that release is that I removed the percentage XP cost and put in a flat cost instead. The thinking was it (percentage based xp) penalizes classes with higher XP costs inherently (such as MU), or alternatively giving too much to the low cost classes like thief or cleric. The flat XP cost (on each table) seemed like a more fair balance.

[CptClyde]

One of the main refinements in that release is that I removed the percentage XP cost and put in a flat cost instead.

yes I noticed this and like it's ease of use. I'm actrually using r5 I believe. I did not think into the reasoning deeply so is good to hear that it balanced better because I do prefer it.

[Dimirag]

First of all, thank you for your words!

Has anyone used these two supplements together?

I have not.

...i think it would be amusing to see someone concentrate all their XP into a single area.

The same thought came to me when doing the supplement, and thus that option was added.

I can see the quasi class additional XP requirement would simply be the cost of additional area granted. For instance a fighter(hunter) would need to spend 700xp for HD, Saves, AB, and 500xp for a buff in Hunter abilities. Is this how you'd rule it?

By the standard rule, a Hunter(Fighter) will require 2500xp for level 2.

For Gradual Leveling:
I took the XP to level 2 and divided by the number of "areas", I did not count HD size nor weapon training nor backstabbing, they are figured on the base XP and does not really increase in level. Round up the value and you have the final cost for the each area.
Note: The Direct Purchase goes a step further and adds the cost of each "dead level" until you earn a benefit.

I can see some options for combining CQ+GL:

Method A: Add the XP for second level of the class and CQ, increase the number of areas accordingly, divide the XP
--The same Hunter would have 2500XP and 4 new areas (skills + chosen enemy). 2500/7 = 360XP for each area
Method A requires you to know what combo a player will choose.

Method B: Divide the QC XP by its area, then let the character buy areas separately
--The Hunter will buy fighter areas at 700XP and can buy hunter areas at 500/4: 125XP

I would suggest using the version of the Quasi-Classes found in the Showcase (release 4)

And while you are there you can grab the Quasi-Classes 2 for even more options!

[CptClyde]

Interesting. Method-B is what I favour I think, since Method-A ends up REDUCING the cost of fighter areas which seems wrong lol.

Amazing work guys thank you for weighing in here. I wonder how many other RPG systems have contributors who personally answer queries concerning their works.

[Dimirag]

Although with Method A the cost is lower (yes, its a weird sub-product of the system) the character has more areas to improve, the overall cost over time ends up the same. But... yes, the low numbers give a sense of cheaper leveling.