1. I really like the system you have come up with. I think you might want a few more levels in your classes though. Maybe five instead of three? It would just feel like you are progressing more commonly and naturally.
2. I love the trial based progression, and I think you could do structured and free flowing. Here’s my idea. First set up specific requirements for each level of each class. (The warrior has to fight a fight with this level of difficulty) then you have places set up in your world with structured challenges (most warriors go to a certain arena to face their trial) but also allow the GM to create the trials naturally using the requirements laid out.
This would allow for a very structured fight, or a naturally occurring one.
3. I do think there needs to be more progression after you become a master in your class. Maybe not physically, but you are always learning things and therefore, always progressing.
4. Weaknesses. Weaknesses should be able to be overcome, through sheer will, magic, or some other way. The things that make us weak push us to overcome those things, and that should be built into the rpg.
A lot of this is my opinion, and hopefully makes sense. I’m already excited for whatever else you are cooking up for us!
I do agree, to a point, about weaknesses....which is why I love the game Villains and Vigilantes so much. Weaknesses might not be overcome, but in every instance, they can be 'adapted' to.
There is no such thing as a person without weakness. It's not a thing.
...it's also a method for growth. Intense growth, usually in a much needed area of life.
An alcoholic is always an alcoholic, meaning ONLY that they have that possibility of falling again if not careful, BUT they can use that determination and new focus as a strength.
I realize this might be what you mean, but I'm very specific in how things SHOULD be viewed, because words matter. Always.
So I'm going to leave this remark with weaknesses should always exist, as a method and/or consequence to create twists should the PC make a bad choice.
I guess that’s probably why I used overcome. Because to me it means that you have gotten to a point where it no longer hurts you, but it still could. Overcoming a weakness doesn’t delete it, it just changes the rest of you so that it is no longer much of a weakness.
Hopefully that makes as much sense as it does in my head…
I’ve always struggled with this kind of RPG trade-off—growing up and playing D&D. The idea that branching out somehow makes you less rather than more. People aren’t one-dimensional, and many of us don’t just pick a single path and stick to it forever. We learn, explore, and integrate knowledge from different places, and often, that makes us even better at what we originally set out to do.
Maybe it’s just a personal bias, and I do see the reasoning behind the trade-offs for secondary classes—balancing power levels, maintaining class identity, and ensuring meaningful choices in progression. Those are valid concerns in most RPGs. But from what I understand, The Hero Within is supposed to be different, no? It’s meant to depict the ordinary person as a hero. We are all heroes of our own lives, thus shouldn’t progression mirror real-life growth? Where mastery isn’t about choosing one rigid path and never looking back?
One thing I really love about the class system you’ve designed is how it makes progression feel earned. The idea that heroes must prove themselves through Trials instead of just leveling up automatically is fantastic—it reinforces the idea that becoming great isn’t just about time passing, but about overcoming challenges, practicing your craft, and proving your abilities. That’s why I’d love to see that same philosophy applied to a multi-classing system.
In real life, people don’t become weaker when they step outside their field to learn something new. They often return to their original discipline even stronger, with new insights that enhance their expertise. A warrior who studies magic doesn’t become a weaker fighter—they become a warrior with an expanded arsenal of knowledge and tactics. Growth isn’t linear, and I feel like the game’s class system could reflect that. Maybe even be the first in its class. (Although I don’t know if any other RPG in existence has executed this kind of system successfully since I’ve only ever played 1)
I’m not saying there shouldn’t be any structure, but instead of outright limiting progression to Stage 2, what if advancing to Stage 3 required proving mastery of both disciplines? Maybe through more unique Trials that force players to integrate what they’ve learned, rather than just locking them out of progression? That way, choosing a secondary class becomes a challenge of synthesis, not a penalty?
I’d love to hear your thoughts on whether a system like this could work within the game’s vision. Because if The Hero Within is truly about being different and mimicking real human growth, then we shouldn’t be boxed in by game mechanics that contradict that core idea, right?
To me, the best stories (and heroes) are the ones who break the mold, not the ones who stay inside it.
And if I have misunderstood the information or am out of my depth because I am in no way qualified to understand the back door mechanics that need to be in place for an entire RPG to function properly, please accept my apologies for my ignorance.
Love to see these posts in my inbox and am excited about the completion of it all!
"...from what I understand, The Hero Within is supposed to be different, no? It’s meant to depict the ordinary person as a hero. We are all heroes of our own lives, thus shouldn’t progression mirror real-life growth? Where mastery isn’t about choosing one rigid path and never looking back?"
You are correct.
Remember, this is me, throwing out my original ideas here, for everyone to give input. What I'm sharing is what I have done months ago and I've thought a great deal since then.
We are on the same page here. I don't see any reason why someone cannot choose multiple paths...and it may even be possible to be just as god or even better in a secondary or THIRD path...but as in life, there is only so much time, available money, training, and so forth.
These have to be considered, IMO, in the mechanics.
That's exactly what we are doing now.
I want to hear your ideas on this, and how t might be addressed, Kristie.
That’s great to hear—we’re definitely on the same page! And I completely agree that time, resources, and training should factor into progression, just like in real life. No one masters everything overnight, but with enough dedication, people can achieve mastery across multiple disciplines.
So, instead of hard caps, maybe the mechanics could reflect the cost of mastering multiple paths rather than outright limiting progression. Here are my thoughts: and yes, I was coming up with ideas all night last night in the event you were open to more discussion. 😊
Time-Based Growth – Mastery Takes Time (as you agreed)
Instead of preventing Stage 3 in a primary class if a player takes a secondary one, what if advancing both just required more time (XP, training, or in-game effort)? For example, players gain XP normally, but if they pursue a secondary or third class, their required XP for all class advancements increases by +50% per additional class beyond the first. This allows flexibility, but forces players to make meaningful choices about investment—do you specialize quickly, or take your time to develop your skills more slowly?
Resource Constraints – The Price of Knowledge (as you mentioned too)
Multi-classing should come at a resource cost—whether that’s money, mentorship, or rare knowledge that isn’t easily accessible. An example, to unlock Stage 3 in a secondary or third class, players must find a Master Mentor, requiring a high gold fee, rare materials, or an extensive side quest to prove their dedication.
Alternative: for those who detest gurus 😊 Players can choose to self-teach, but this doubles the XP requirement for the next stage. This keeps specialization viable while making multi-classing feel earned rather than automatic.
Trial-Based Mastery – The Grandmaster Test (Names can be changed as I’m thinking in terms of my son’s TKD and MMA high level tests)
Rather than capping Stage 3, what if multi-classed players had to prove they can integrate their skills? For example,a player pursuing both Warrior (Stage 3) and Mage (Stage 3) must complete a Grandmaster Trial that requires:
Solving a combat encounter using both. swordplay and spellcasting strategically. Maybe performing a hybrid technique like infusing a weapon with magic mid-battle.
Defeating an opponent who has fully mastered one path (forcing the player to use both disciplines creatively). This reinforces The Hero Within’s philosophy—growth comes from overcoming challenges, not arbitrary limits.
But I also think there should be
Specialization vs. Hybrid Path bonuses too to incentivize either choice.
For example, “Legacy Skills” Perks (again, name can be worked) for single-class masters like a Warrior at Stage 3 gets an exclusive combat technique unavailable to hybrids.
“Synthesis” Abilities for multi-class masters an example here could be a Mage-Warrior gets a unique hybrid ability like “Spellblade” that scales with both magic and strength. This makes both choices viable—specialists get depth, while hybrids get versatility.
As your book suggests—Choices, not restrictions. 😊
We are again, on the same page here. I was going to mention having to find a teacher, which could be very difficult, depending on what you want.
As foe:
"...Alternative: for those who detest gurus 😊 Players can choose to self-teach, but this doubles the XP requirement for the next stage. This keeps specialization viable while making multi-classing feel earned rather than automatic."
...I'm more of at least twice the EXP, but only achieve HALF the desired effect.
Why? Because the lie of 'practice makes perfect'.
That's NOT a thing.
"Perfect" practice makes perfect.
...if you do the wrong thing over and over again, all you become is proficient in the wrong thing. That has to be addressed in my mind. Yes, you can try to figure things out, but can you truly find the best way?
Maybe.
So I'm open to discussing this, but there have to be some serious challenges if you cannot find a teacher. There ARE examples in my own life, both myself and people I know who have achieved amazing things on our own, and I would challenge 'guru's' in some talents I have....but they came at a very heavy cost.
The OTHER aspect I was thinking of, was allowing players to develop their own skills and magic. As in research and experimentation -- which WOULD give them the ability to gain new skills, unique in their own right.
Example: A PC creates a new kind of weapon, then develops a new way of fighting to align with that weapon? I've personally done it, so it is a thing.
You're the right girl to be involved in these discussions, Kristie.
You rock.
Oh, BTW -- tell Lucas I was in a used book store last night in the mall and I saw a whole shelf of "Fortnite" manuals and playing guides!
I understand the concept of I need to “earn my level up” and it’s not the worst thing I’ve heard
But it takes it out of the hands of the play and puts it in the hands of the GM more so than it already is
If if let’s say the warrior has to defeat a certain challenge and the Mägo has to find a certain ancient something or other
Chances are it won’t be in the same place
Depending on how the game master runs the game you’ll end up with level gaps and if there are only 3 levels that’s bound to be a substantial gap
If you have a more outspoken or charismatic play vs a younger or less outspoken player
The later is likely to be more over looked or at least always comes second unless the GM is really on top of it and that’s not super likely
The person who levels up first feels cool because their better than everyone else and the person who doesn’t feels like they have to catch up
Not to mention monster balancing
If you have five players two are on stage three and the rest are on stage 2 that’s not the easiest thing to make a monster challenging all the time
All I’m saying is their is a reason in games when people level up it’s as a group not as individuals
#2
What I would do with multi-classing (if each class is only three levels) encourage class dipping I wouldn’t set a cap
The natural restrictions are there by default (it’s the player choosing horizontal growth rather than vertical) so the other players who choose a second level up will have more powerful option but those who get an extra class have more variety
If you stick with three levels
Multi-classing will likely become necessary in some games
Once you get to level three next level you choose a new class that’s just the way it is
Which is unique but with what you have
(Three levels and options to multi class)
That’s how I would do it
(So theoretically if the players played for an eternity they could have 3 levels in each class if you did it this way)
Also wayfarer is an interesting choice
It kind of gives of the vibe of
“Just a guy” class
I don’t know just don’t know what fantasy that ones supposed to fill
I'm trying to read this on my phone, without my glasses, in the dark...
So forgive any spelling acks.
There are more than three levels. I should use a better term...as I see I was confusing. Maybe 3 paths? Stages, perhaps? The actual "levels" were always intended to be granted and achieved as a group...so we are on the same page.
1. I really like the system you have come up with. I think you might want a few more levels in your classes though. Maybe five instead of three? It would just feel like you are progressing more commonly and naturally.
2. I love the trial based progression, and I think you could do structured and free flowing. Here’s my idea. First set up specific requirements for each level of each class. (The warrior has to fight a fight with this level of difficulty) then you have places set up in your world with structured challenges (most warriors go to a certain arena to face their trial) but also allow the GM to create the trials naturally using the requirements laid out.
This would allow for a very structured fight, or a naturally occurring one.
3. I do think there needs to be more progression after you become a master in your class. Maybe not physically, but you are always learning things and therefore, always progressing.
4. Weaknesses. Weaknesses should be able to be overcome, through sheer will, magic, or some other way. The things that make us weak push us to overcome those things, and that should be built into the rpg.
A lot of this is my opinion, and hopefully makes sense. I’m already excited for whatever else you are cooking up for us!
I love these suggestions and perhaps my response piggy backs off your fourth point, Bendragon.
I do agree, to a point, about weaknesses....which is why I love the game Villains and Vigilantes so much. Weaknesses might not be overcome, but in every instance, they can be 'adapted' to.
There is no such thing as a person without weakness. It's not a thing.
...it's also a method for growth. Intense growth, usually in a much needed area of life.
An alcoholic is always an alcoholic, meaning ONLY that they have that possibility of falling again if not careful, BUT they can use that determination and new focus as a strength.
I realize this might be what you mean, but I'm very specific in how things SHOULD be viewed, because words matter. Always.
So I'm going to leave this remark with weaknesses should always exist, as a method and/or consequence to create twists should the PC make a bad choice.
...always consequences.
I guess that’s probably why I used overcome. Because to me it means that you have gotten to a point where it no longer hurts you, but it still could. Overcoming a weakness doesn’t delete it, it just changes the rest of you so that it is no longer much of a weakness.
Hopefully that makes as much sense as it does in my head…
Yup. Thank you. We are one the same page =)
I’ve always struggled with this kind of RPG trade-off—growing up and playing D&D. The idea that branching out somehow makes you less rather than more. People aren’t one-dimensional, and many of us don’t just pick a single path and stick to it forever. We learn, explore, and integrate knowledge from different places, and often, that makes us even better at what we originally set out to do.
Maybe it’s just a personal bias, and I do see the reasoning behind the trade-offs for secondary classes—balancing power levels, maintaining class identity, and ensuring meaningful choices in progression. Those are valid concerns in most RPGs. But from what I understand, The Hero Within is supposed to be different, no? It’s meant to depict the ordinary person as a hero. We are all heroes of our own lives, thus shouldn’t progression mirror real-life growth? Where mastery isn’t about choosing one rigid path and never looking back?
One thing I really love about the class system you’ve designed is how it makes progression feel earned. The idea that heroes must prove themselves through Trials instead of just leveling up automatically is fantastic—it reinforces the idea that becoming great isn’t just about time passing, but about overcoming challenges, practicing your craft, and proving your abilities. That’s why I’d love to see that same philosophy applied to a multi-classing system.
In real life, people don’t become weaker when they step outside their field to learn something new. They often return to their original discipline even stronger, with new insights that enhance their expertise. A warrior who studies magic doesn’t become a weaker fighter—they become a warrior with an expanded arsenal of knowledge and tactics. Growth isn’t linear, and I feel like the game’s class system could reflect that. Maybe even be the first in its class. (Although I don’t know if any other RPG in existence has executed this kind of system successfully since I’ve only ever played 1)
I’m not saying there shouldn’t be any structure, but instead of outright limiting progression to Stage 2, what if advancing to Stage 3 required proving mastery of both disciplines? Maybe through more unique Trials that force players to integrate what they’ve learned, rather than just locking them out of progression? That way, choosing a secondary class becomes a challenge of synthesis, not a penalty?
I’d love to hear your thoughts on whether a system like this could work within the game’s vision. Because if The Hero Within is truly about being different and mimicking real human growth, then we shouldn’t be boxed in by game mechanics that contradict that core idea, right?
To me, the best stories (and heroes) are the ones who break the mold, not the ones who stay inside it.
And if I have misunderstood the information or am out of my depth because I am in no way qualified to understand the back door mechanics that need to be in place for an entire RPG to function properly, please accept my apologies for my ignorance.
Love to see these posts in my inbox and am excited about the completion of it all!
"...from what I understand, The Hero Within is supposed to be different, no? It’s meant to depict the ordinary person as a hero. We are all heroes of our own lives, thus shouldn’t progression mirror real-life growth? Where mastery isn’t about choosing one rigid path and never looking back?"
You are correct.
Remember, this is me, throwing out my original ideas here, for everyone to give input. What I'm sharing is what I have done months ago and I've thought a great deal since then.
We are on the same page here. I don't see any reason why someone cannot choose multiple paths...and it may even be possible to be just as god or even better in a secondary or THIRD path...but as in life, there is only so much time, available money, training, and so forth.
These have to be considered, IMO, in the mechanics.
That's exactly what we are doing now.
I want to hear your ideas on this, and how t might be addressed, Kristie.
That’s great to hear—we’re definitely on the same page! And I completely agree that time, resources, and training should factor into progression, just like in real life. No one masters everything overnight, but with enough dedication, people can achieve mastery across multiple disciplines.
So, instead of hard caps, maybe the mechanics could reflect the cost of mastering multiple paths rather than outright limiting progression. Here are my thoughts: and yes, I was coming up with ideas all night last night in the event you were open to more discussion. 😊
Time-Based Growth – Mastery Takes Time (as you agreed)
Instead of preventing Stage 3 in a primary class if a player takes a secondary one, what if advancing both just required more time (XP, training, or in-game effort)? For example, players gain XP normally, but if they pursue a secondary or third class, their required XP for all class advancements increases by +50% per additional class beyond the first. This allows flexibility, but forces players to make meaningful choices about investment—do you specialize quickly, or take your time to develop your skills more slowly?
Resource Constraints – The Price of Knowledge (as you mentioned too)
Multi-classing should come at a resource cost—whether that’s money, mentorship, or rare knowledge that isn’t easily accessible. An example, to unlock Stage 3 in a secondary or third class, players must find a Master Mentor, requiring a high gold fee, rare materials, or an extensive side quest to prove their dedication.
Alternative: for those who detest gurus 😊 Players can choose to self-teach, but this doubles the XP requirement for the next stage. This keeps specialization viable while making multi-classing feel earned rather than automatic.
Trial-Based Mastery – The Grandmaster Test (Names can be changed as I’m thinking in terms of my son’s TKD and MMA high level tests)
Rather than capping Stage 3, what if multi-classed players had to prove they can integrate their skills? For example,a player pursuing both Warrior (Stage 3) and Mage (Stage 3) must complete a Grandmaster Trial that requires:
Solving a combat encounter using both. swordplay and spellcasting strategically. Maybe performing a hybrid technique like infusing a weapon with magic mid-battle.
Defeating an opponent who has fully mastered one path (forcing the player to use both disciplines creatively). This reinforces The Hero Within’s philosophy—growth comes from overcoming challenges, not arbitrary limits.
But I also think there should be
Specialization vs. Hybrid Path bonuses too to incentivize either choice.
For example, “Legacy Skills” Perks (again, name can be worked) for single-class masters like a Warrior at Stage 3 gets an exclusive combat technique unavailable to hybrids.
“Synthesis” Abilities for multi-class masters an example here could be a Mage-Warrior gets a unique hybrid ability like “Spellblade” that scales with both magic and strength. This makes both choices viable—specialists get depth, while hybrids get versatility.
As your book suggests—Choices, not restrictions. 😊
Brilliant, Kristie.
We are again, on the same page here. I was going to mention having to find a teacher, which could be very difficult, depending on what you want.
As foe:
"...Alternative: for those who detest gurus 😊 Players can choose to self-teach, but this doubles the XP requirement for the next stage. This keeps specialization viable while making multi-classing feel earned rather than automatic."
...I'm more of at least twice the EXP, but only achieve HALF the desired effect.
Why? Because the lie of 'practice makes perfect'.
That's NOT a thing.
"Perfect" practice makes perfect.
...if you do the wrong thing over and over again, all you become is proficient in the wrong thing. That has to be addressed in my mind. Yes, you can try to figure things out, but can you truly find the best way?
Maybe.
So I'm open to discussing this, but there have to be some serious challenges if you cannot find a teacher. There ARE examples in my own life, both myself and people I know who have achieved amazing things on our own, and I would challenge 'guru's' in some talents I have....but they came at a very heavy cost.
The OTHER aspect I was thinking of, was allowing players to develop their own skills and magic. As in research and experimentation -- which WOULD give them the ability to gain new skills, unique in their own right.
Example: A PC creates a new kind of weapon, then develops a new way of fighting to align with that weapon? I've personally done it, so it is a thing.
You're the right girl to be involved in these discussions, Kristie.
You rock.
Oh, BTW -- tell Lucas I was in a used book store last night in the mall and I saw a whole shelf of "Fortnite" manuals and playing guides!
Ok so I now have time to read and give feedback
#1
I understand the concept of I need to “earn my level up” and it’s not the worst thing I’ve heard
But it takes it out of the hands of the play and puts it in the hands of the GM more so than it already is
If if let’s say the warrior has to defeat a certain challenge and the Mägo has to find a certain ancient something or other
Chances are it won’t be in the same place
Depending on how the game master runs the game you’ll end up with level gaps and if there are only 3 levels that’s bound to be a substantial gap
If you have a more outspoken or charismatic play vs a younger or less outspoken player
The later is likely to be more over looked or at least always comes second unless the GM is really on top of it and that’s not super likely
The person who levels up first feels cool because their better than everyone else and the person who doesn’t feels like they have to catch up
Not to mention monster balancing
If you have five players two are on stage three and the rest are on stage 2 that’s not the easiest thing to make a monster challenging all the time
All I’m saying is their is a reason in games when people level up it’s as a group not as individuals
#2
What I would do with multi-classing (if each class is only three levels) encourage class dipping I wouldn’t set a cap
The natural restrictions are there by default (it’s the player choosing horizontal growth rather than vertical) so the other players who choose a second level up will have more powerful option but those who get an extra class have more variety
If you stick with three levels
Multi-classing will likely become necessary in some games
Once you get to level three next level you choose a new class that’s just the way it is
Which is unique but with what you have
(Three levels and options to multi class)
That’s how I would do it
(So theoretically if the players played for an eternity they could have 3 levels in each class if you did it this way)
Also wayfarer is an interesting choice
It kind of gives of the vibe of
“Just a guy” class
I don’t know just don’t know what fantasy that ones supposed to fill
I'm trying to read this on my phone, without my glasses, in the dark...
So forgive any spelling acks.
There are more than three levels. I should use a better term...as I see I was confusing. Maybe 3 paths? Stages, perhaps? The actual "levels" were always intended to be granted and achieved as a group...so we are on the same page.