Fist of all hi!

I read all the material and oh boy you hit the spot I was looking for, for a long while I may say.

I'm trying to develop my own system because you don't see a lot of classeless d20 out there (and I really looked, believe me...) And you work is amazing. Count me in for future play test or you know, thrown ideias around.

But as every work in progress I believe there is room to improvement. Loved you separation of skills and the broader approach to the attributes (ability) you have used. But I was a bit confused about the pips thing, if I may suggest you should look for a PF2e approach with the trained (+2), expert (+4) and so on proficiency system, when I read it was the fist thing Ive remembered.

For balancing stuff you should give a second look at some feats like sharpshooter (Permanently giving advantage at ranged attacks is a bit much). Extra attack could be at a higher lv of pips but with a lesser cost. The spell system is great but the formate could have some rework. And I get the simplified resiliency, but it gets too narrow, I would stick with at least the classic trio fortitude (10+con), reflexes (10+dex) and will (10+Wis).

Would love to Exchange some ideias, really great work.

Thank you for the praises and suggestions! I truly appreciate them. 

During playtest, the pips has been a confusing concept for some folks to wrap their heads around. I've wondered if the name pips was the problem and called them dots, which sort of helped. I have looked at PF2e's proficiency system. A friend recommended it when I was first working on the pips system. While at first I felt like it was a long winded way of saying +2/+4/+6/+8, I'm now realizing that it may also be beneficial to have a more relatable naming system. I'll probably keep the bonuses the same 0/+1/+2/+3/+4 since they're added with the ability modifiers. Was this what you had in mind?

You're totally right about Sharpshooter. A quick thought is to either have it cost FP or change it so that you must aim for an active action first, then the effects last as many rounds as your Awareness. I'm definitely going to have to comb through the feats again, there are probably a few others that shouldn't be permanent (Parry comes to mind).

For the extra/double attack feats, do you think it would be less OP if it was still at a lower level of pips but with a higher cost, then decreasing the cost as the pips increase? Say start at 3 FP at •, 2 FP at ••, and 1 FP at •••.

Would you mind telling me more about what is bothering you about the spell system formatting? Does it feel too cluttered? Too much information at the top? Any suggestions for how to improve this, I'm all ears.

I actually started with Fortitude, Reflexes, and Will before simplifying it to Resilience. I still go back and forth in my head about which is better. I like FRW for PCs but don't really like it for NPCs/monsters as I think it adds more bookkeeping for the GM. But it does add more mechanical depth/variation for opponents. I'm very much on the fence with this, so it wouldn't take much for others to push me to changing it back.

Thanks again for your feedback. If there is anything else you come across please let me know. When I get an online playtest game going, I'll definitely reach out.

You should definitely use the Pip System with values +1 to +4, but I think giving a name to each training level brings a more memorable idea to the player, for example "my character is a Master (+3) in stealth, but this is just a suggestion. 

Regarding the sharpshooter issue, I believe it is the right way to go, accept an FP cost or condition it on another action, even better both if consider the attribute in duration. 

To talk about the extra attack, I think it's important to talk about the levels, since you don't limit a maximum level in the system, there's no need for a level table, just let the game go as far as players feel good about playing, this can open doors for epic PCs or something like that.  Think about epic feats os a bonus for the skills that goes beyond the "common mastery" 

The way I would do the extra attack in the System presented as it is at the moment would be to put an athletics requirement ••, and reduce the cost to 1 FP, being able to perform only one extra attack per turn. As it is a "simple" feat (powerful sure), but you have to think that the PCs won't have a lot os FP to throw around between the rests, so a low cost with a higher requirement is in my mind the way to go (and spells can affect a large area and multiple opponents with a similar cost, attacks are single target)

As for the spells, I must assume that it's mostly my fault that it took me longer than necessary to get the idea, but in my view the idea of FP being in all the conditioning parts of the spells ends up hindering understanding. The way I would do it would be to place a base version of the spell with simple effects with a lower cost (1 or 2 for the basic version) and place a session afterwards with the higher FP cost effects. I believe that D&D 5e gets the training right in this sense. 

Finally As for saves, I believe you've already taken the most important step and avoiding the 6 saves that D&D 5e uses, the biggest problem I see with a unique resistance would be, for example, mental attacks "attacking" a constitution-based defense. To keep it lean and at the same time give it a certain depth, I believe that the 3 saves are the right way.

I've been working on my own project but there is enough similarities that I would like to work with you and your system, if you ever need a little more brain power (great minds think alike eh?). If the ideia sounds cool mail me at bioignun3@hotmail.com

I really thought that it would take ages for a answer, it's great to know you are active in the work! :D

Thanks for the reply as these are all really great points. I'm going to take your advice on the Sharpshooter and Double Attack feats. 

I must note, as of right now, there is a limit to the levels. However, if a campaign wanted to have PCs continue to play at level 12, I wanted to build in a rule allowing them to continue to grow. So they can still accrue XP to develop their skills they just won't continue to gain HP, ability increases, or RS (if that is kept).

I see what you mean about the spells. I'm sure some are much worse than others. This might clear up some of the language as well.  Although in some instances it may be difficult to separate the varied cost with the description text. I'll take a look at the spells and see what I can do.

I am definitely open to more input, I'll send you an email.