Waterbrick Down

Looks like I need to include info on starting equipment and basic consumables. Regarding weapon typings, there are: Kinetic: Do physical damage, i.e. bullets, rockets, swords, maces, etc. Energy: Do radiation/blast damage, i.e. beam swords, phasers, ion cannons, etc. Elemental: Do Fire/Ice/Electricity/Etc. damage, i.e. flame-throwers, tasers, freeze-rays, etc. Each of these corresponding to different range weapons: Melee: Hits adjacent grid squares Short Range: Hits grid squares up to 2 spaces away Long Range: Hits grid squares up to 3 spaces away Artillery: Hits any grid square not adjacent

Figured I'd start uploading these. Rough drafts and definitely need polishing, but they're a start.

I second the consistent theme, the more I look at it, the more I'm working on something closer to the idea of aged sci-fi (think Starwars). While Science-fantasy is a good idea for accessibility, it's difficult to get a consistent look (Nexo knights is the closest). I think the best solution to the consumable issue is to either include a random element to the consumables or simply limit the number available in the setting. As for how the healing works in the system proposed, here's a spell example. Healing Light (Heals HP = # Magic Proficiency Source (Religion/Nature) Successes over the DC)Sustaining Healing DC 1, 1 targetPlentiful Healing DC 3, 2 targetsGenerous Healing DC 5, 3 targetsMasterful DC 7, 4 targets I like the enthusiasm and I think the class abilities could potentially be worked in to a dice pool system impacting things like success criteria, die rerolls, extra dies, etc. I'd echo Kintober with one of the main issues of Heroica 1.0 was the power-creep of equipment and balancing equipment created by different DM's across the quests. There were a lot of times where a single item would be ok but when combined with another piece of equipment would create a very over-powered combo. Plus power creep due to equipment often creates a system where in gold/currency becomes the most important aspect of the system and classes/builds which emphasize it's generation start to skew the economy.

So I’ve been going back and forth and I’d like to put a slightly modified dice pool system out there to try. For those of you not familiar with dice pool systems you roll a number of d6's equal to your given skill, 1-3 is failure, 4-6 success. The number of success is compared against a target number or an opposed roll and the result is determined from there. Difficulty Level Simple: 1 Successes Skilled: 3 Successes Difficult: 5 Successes Impossible: 7 Successes Max Dice Pool = 10 Actions in Combat Attack: (Weapon Proficiency Dice + Weapon Rating) - (Opponents Skill Dice Successes + Armor Rating) = Damage done Defend: Add Skill Attribute Dice to player’s next Defense pool Rally: Add Smart Attribute Dice to Player’s Attack pool Magic: Arcana/Nature/Occult/Religion Proficiency Dice vs. Spell Difficulty Level Any other action: 3 + Proficiency Dice vs Difficulty Level Character Creation 10 Points, 3 starting Proficiencies at level 1, 3 HP Additional Proficiencies cost the number being increased (i.e. to move a proficiency from 1 to 2 it requires 2 points, from 2 to 3 it requires 3 points, etc.) Additional Hit Points cost 2 Points Additional Attributes cost 2 Points Attributes Vitality (HP) Strength (Every 2 = +1 HP, usually a requirement for kinetic weapons, and all armor) Skill (Defensive stat for avoiding damage, rolled for initiative, usually a requirement for energy weapons) Smarts (Every 1 = 1 new allowable Proficiency [over the starting 3], usually a requirement for elemental weapons) Spirit (Every 1 = 2 known spells, often a requirement to cast spells of a certain potency) Equipment (3 Slots) Proficiencies Acrobatics Culture Intimidation Nature Persuasion Short Range Weapons Arcana Deception Long Range Weapons Occult Piloting Stealth Artillery Engineering Medicine Perception Religion Survival Athletics Insight Melee Weapons Performance Sleight of Hand Technology Weapon Ratings (Kinetic Weapons typically have Strength requirements, Energy Weapons typically have Skill requirements, Elemental Weapons typically have Smarts requirements): Standard: +1 Success (Minimum corresponding Attribute = 0) Calibrated: +2 Success (Minimum corresponding Attribute = 3) Engineered: +3 Success (Minimum corresponding Attribute = 5) Precision: +4 Success (Minimum corresponding Attribute = 7) Armor Ratings (Kinetic, Energy, Elemental, All armor typically have strength requirements): Standard: +1 (Minimum Strength Attribute = 1) Padded: +2 (Minimum Strength Attribute = 2) Reinforced: +3 (Minimum Strength Attribute = 4) Composite: +4 (Minimum Strength Attribute = 6) Points for leveling up are awarded after a quest and can be determined by number of combats/quest objectives met, etc. There’s a lot of things that can be added to the system as we go: Weapon type effectiveness against certain armor, Monster types, classes (either by adding extra proficiencies, or changing how actions/skill checks/combat checks work), racial attributes, terrain effects, and of course spells. This should be a good starting point though. Is there a preference for pre-generated characters for a first test or do folks actually want to try creating there own?

A mixture tends to be complicated (think D&D) and trying to keep it simple is the goal. The downside to having everything proficiency based is character mechanics do not vary dependent upon those proficiencies. In Heroica 1.0 the only way you could heal (outside of consumables) was if you were a cleric. In a proficiency only based system, anyone can heal, but only those who advance their medicine proficiency can do it consistently.The same goes for sneak attacks, magic, shielding, etc. Essentially proficiency based systems allow for complete character customization at the cost of unique mechanics. Class systems allow for unique mechanics, but take away some of the customization. This also effects advancement. In proficiency based systems you simply become more reliable at certain skills and the mechanics stay the same, in class based systems you tend to get new different mechanics available to you.

So I guess a good question is whether folks want the ability to free-form create their character based on a proficiency system or whether they want everything tied to a class/race system.

I'd be up for something. I've been looking at a lot of rules light systems lately. Has anyone else played Dungeon World before?

D&D 4th edition used the "Bloody" condition to indicate when enemies were below half health, maybe we could look at something similar in addition. One thing to consider as well, most RPG's have a set bestiary, which means that most players eventually develop a good sense for what the stats of certain monsters are. Because most enemies were unique from quest to quest, perhaps that necessitated the showing of stats since players would never have the advantage of fighting the same monster twice...

But from a RP perspective, how would a character know the giant death robot only has 5HP remaining? Or what about the scenario where the monster can do 60 points of damage and the hero only has 59 hit points left and decides to take a potion? Maybe I just haven't encountered any bad QM's yet in my gaming experience, but I typically find it's easier for players to game the system than DM's.

Action point systems tend to be pretty crunchy and requires quite a bit of balancing to ensure no particular strategy becomes abused. Not that it can't work, but it will require a lot more finagling. Figured I'd give a first stab at CMP's proficiency abilities, a few caveats. I'm assuming we'd include the following standard combat options: Attack: Weapons Test vs. Enemies Skill and Armor Defend: Add the character's Skill Attribute dice to their target's next defensive pool (Can target self)Rally: Add the character's Smart Attribute dice to their target's next offensive pool A couple other notes: When dividing, always round down to a minimum of 1 Combat Action DC's (Dice Check) reset at the end of a battle unless otherwise stated Combat Effects and Proficiency Skill Tests are limited by their corresponding Attribute Limits (See CMP's post) Combat effects last till the end of a battle unless otherwise stated Enemies are divided into: Organic, Synthetic, Phantasmal Success Score standard is 1-3 Acrobatics - Dodge (Combat Effect): Characters may add their Acrobatics Proficiency/2 to their Skill attribute against Enemy Ranged Attacks Athletics - Grapple (Combat Action): Characters roll an Athletics Skill Test (DC 1) against an adjacent enemy, upon success the enemy cannot move till the character's next turn. The DC increases by 1 for every consecutive round the character maintains the Grapple. Culture (Combined with History) - Identify (Combat Effect): Characters can add their Culture proficiency when Defending themselves Deception - Feint (Combat Effect): Characters can add their Deception proficiency when Defending themselves Engineering - Weapon Boost (Combat Action): Character may add (Engineering Proficiency/2) to an adjacent ally's Weapon Rating a number of times equal to their Engineering proficiency. Insight - Spot Weakness (Combat Effect): Characters can reroll a number of Weapon Test dice equal to their Insight Proficiency/2 Intimidation - Demoralize (Combat Action): Characters roll an Intimidation Skill Test (DC 1) against an enemy, upon success the enemy next Weapon Test Success Score is decreased by 1. The DC increases by 1 for every consecutive round the character maintains the Intimidation. Medicine - Combat Triage (Combat Action): Characters may add their Medicine Proficiency to an adjacent ally's Health a number of times equal to their Medicine proficiency. Perception - Aim (Combat Action): Characters may spend an action to add their Perception proficiency to their next Weapon Test Performance - Mesmerize (Combat Action): Characters roll a Performance Skill Test (DC = Target's Smart Attribute) against an Organic enemy, upon success the target skips its next turn. Persuasion - Encourage (Combat Effect): Characters can add their Persuasion proficiency when Rallying an ally Piloting - Drone Strike (Combat Effect): Characters can attack any enemy regardless of range a number of times equal to their Piloting proficiency/2 Sleight of Hand - Steal (Combat Action): Characters roll a Sleight of Hand Skill Test (DC = Target's Smart Attribute) against an adjacent enemy, upon success the character obtains one random item from the enemy's inventory. Stealth - Hide (Combat Action): Character roll a Stealth Skill Test (DC 1), upon success the character cannot be targeted till their next turn. The DC increases by 1 for every consecutive round the character remains hidden. Survival - Pursue (Combat Effect): Characters may shift into an adjacent enemy's space immediately after they move, a number of times equal to their Survival Proficiency. Technology (Renamed from Computers) - Hack (Combat Action): Characters roll a Technology Skill Test (DC = Target's Smart Attribute) against a Synthetic enemy, upon success the target skips its next turn. On a completely different topic, should enemy stats be shown to the players during combat?

We're still going to run into the same issue we had with Heroica 1.0 though, either you have to infinitely scale the spells or "mages" will just stock up on health instead of ether. While it does introduce an extra risk/reward I'm not sure it'll be balanced enough unless healing magic/items are limited. I think that might have been the first adventure for 5th edition, it had a lot of problems. I get the worry about limiting low-level spell casters. It goes back to the old adage of "linear fighters, quadratic wizards". Basically the way I see it, we need a way to keep someone who invests solely in spell casting and someone who invests solely in weapon combat balanced. Weapons combat is pretty straight forward as characters are typically as effective in battle number 1 as they are in battle number 2 (ignoring hit points lost over time). You can keep spell casters the same way (as effective in battle number 1 as battle number 2), it simply means their "weapons" are spells, i.e. instead of shooting a bullet they shoot a fire bolt. That means however that they shouldn't get utility spells (as weapon combatants don't get anything equivalent), they shouldn't get bigger explosion spells (again there is no weapon combatant equivalent), they're simply a reskinned weapon user. I don't believe most folks are going to like a reskinned weapon user however as they like the idea of magic being "different" in either scale or utility. That means spell casters have to have a limited resource, unlike weapon users, that can affect how viable they are from battle to battle depending on how they used that resource. Now if they averaged that resource, their overall effectiveness would remain equivalent to a weapon user (or maybe a little less, if we're giving them utility spells), but they will have the option of blowing all of their resources to do extremely well in one combat and extremely poorly in the next. Now that resource could be health, however because health is effected by other things like items/healing magic it'll be very difficult to balance without effecting how those things impact non-spell casting characters. It could be something like SP or Spirit, it could be spell difficulty (i.e basic spells get harder and harder to cast as the quest goes on), or it could simply be spell effectiveness (i.e. basic spells do less and less damage as the quest goes on). Either way, because it's a limited resource, we'll need a defined way that it can be restocked. If that restocking only occurs over the length of a quest, than a 5 combat quest is going to be much more laboring on a spell caster than a 2 combat quest. I don't know if I have a solution, just things I'm trying to keep in mind. Folks still like playing support "classes" so ensuring ways for people to still play that type of character would be idea. However I don't have any qualms about getting rid of the positive status effects or at least the way they were used (i.e. multiplicative). Agreed.

The issue is that with the current system there is no such thing as a "fighter" since everything is classless. 4th edition tried something like what your suggesting by giving every class "spells", but most of the community felt like it reduced the system to a League of Legends like MMO. A defend action could easily be doable: Defend: For one round the character doubles their Skill Attribute against incoming attacks. Considering that as an alternative, I think it'd be better to keep them aligned with proficiencies, otherwise you'll have characters that end up spending more EXP on "powers" and the skills themselves will be somewhat useless.

Point taken on the proficiency abilities, I guess I wanted to see it a little more free form as opposed to have defined rules for things like hacking/drones/marking/encouraging, etc. I get the point of the attributes limits, looking back I missed the [Weapon Attribute] limit part. This makes sense now and I'm all for it.

I like the additional proficiencies, I get what you're saying about non-magic characters having stuff to do and I always figured that was the point of Proficiency tests. I'm not quite sold on giving each proficiency an ability, we'd need to make sure they're all balanced. Additionally each would have it's own rule set requiring GM's to constantly go back and reference the abilities. If we're interested in giving people more combat options, my first suggestion was allow players two new actions: Defend: Add the character's Skill Attribute dice to their target's next defensive pool Rally: Add the character's Smart Attribute dice to their target's next offensive pool Beyond that, everything else would be a contested check. Want to move an enemy back a row? Roll a contested Strength or Athletics check. Want to more confidently dodge the opponents next attack? Roll a contested acrobatics or stealth check. I like the addition of the Spirit Attribute. If I'm understanding correctly though, casters don't expend spirit to cast spells though, correct? They basically have limitless spells and are more limited by the number they know. Can you explain the point of the Attribute Limits? Would the intention be to correlate each proficiency to a certain attribute?

I'd agree. I think we've got everything pretty close except for the magic and combat system. The skills and customization seem straight-forward and the theme is wide enough to be generous to GM's. Keeping everything as intuitive as possible, should help keep the actual rules count down as well as making it easy on GM's to run things quickly.

I've played and DM'd 5th edition for the past 4 years, while the D&D spell system is nice, it's pretty weighty in terms of mechanics. Characters would need to worry about spell slots, spell levels, spells known, spells prepared, not to mention the ways spells are balanced between different saving throws. The ether system we had in Heroica 1.0 wasn't all bad as it restricted things to a single stat, it simply wasn't balanced for the entire player experience. Cantrips are OK, but they are typically balanced by being less damage than normal weapon attacks, which there isn't necessarily a great way to handle that in a dice pool system. I do like the idea of restricting positive/negative effects to only one condition at a time, that would definitely help keep things a little more manageable. There's not much new under the sun, everything is going to be a rip off of something, the trick is to pick things that align with the goals of what the community would like to see. From my understanding that is: Sci-Fantasy setting Rules light Easy to run from a GM's perspective Allows players the ability to create unique characters without the restrictions of classes More combat options than Heroica 1.0 Better balanced magic system than Heroica 1.0 Better skill system than Heroica 1.0 If those things can be addressed, I think the next iteration will be setup for success.

Intimidation is more forceful (not necessarily evil, but rough think Black Knight), persuasion is more diplomatic (think knight/paladin). Athletics is more feats of strength (breaking down a door, climbing a rope, swimming against a current), acrobatics is more dexterous (balancing along a wall, leaping away from a trap, eluding someone's grasp). The trick is balancing for quest lengths. Heroica 1.0 never really had a fleshed out rest mechanic. If we severely cut back on potion/tonic (or their equivalents) availability or effectiveness then resting (to recharge health or mana) would become more of a necessity and thus something you could balance for. I do like the idea of it being a stat that people can invest in, instead of something that automatically increases. A few more ideas. Have spell casting difficulty increase with each spell cast, i.e. have the spell-casting check increase by 1 each time the spell is cast. This would mean that high level spell casters can cast for longer without having to worry too much about their effectiveness, but it means that there is still a possibility to cast something even if its a very small chance towards the end of their reserves. Cool-down timers dependent on combat rounds. Very basic spells can be cast every round, but the big powerful ones could only be cast every 3-5 rounds. This would of course limit spell casting to only combat unless non-combat spells were very simple.

That might work. My initial list: Short Range Weapons Long Range Weapons Artillery Weapons Melee Weapons Athletics Acrobatics Sleight of Hand Stealth Arcana History Investigation Nature Religion Piloting Insight Medicine Perception Survival Deception Intimidation Performance Persuasion Technology I'll take a look at the Persona system, but does anyone have any other ideas for magic limitations? Flipz has already talked about the Ether failings of the Heroica 1.0 system, where it effected starting mages significantly but was more an annoyance later on. We'd need something to limit its uses at all levels equally, but still allow Spell-casters to feel like they're progressing. Couple other basic spells: Transmute Matter (Converts 1 square feet of inorganic, non-hostile material a number of minutes = # Magic Proficiency Source (Arcana/Religion/Nature) Successes over the DC) Convert object to Wood DC 1 Convert object to Stone DC 3 Convert object to Titanium DC 5 Convert object to Vibranium (or suitable expensive/super strong sci-fi material equivalent) DC 7 Elemental Binding (Restrains an enemy from acting a number of combat rounds = # Magic Proficiency Source (Arcana/Religion/Nature) Successes over the DC) Hampering Hold DC 1, 1 target Thwarting Hold DC 3, 2 targets Irresistible Hold DC 5, 3 targets Debilitating Hold DC 7, 4 targets Quantum Transpositiong (Number of targets effected = # Magic Proficiency Source (Arcana/Religion/Nature) Successes over the DC) Minor Transport DC 1, teleports allies to anywhere within sight or in combat to a different square of the caster's choice Major Transport DC 3, teleports allies to anywhere in the surrounding location, teleports enemies in battle to different squares of the caster's choice Planetary Transport DC 5, teleports allies to anywhere on the planet, teleports enemies in battle away from the field for 1 turn Galactic Transport DC 7, teleports allies to anywhere in the current star system, teleports enemies in battle away from the field for 2 turns

New different proficiency. So everyone starts with 2 proficiencies at rank 1, they can spend their 10 points to increase those proficiencies, or spend 2 points to raise their Smarts attribute which allows them to now advance a 3rd proficiency to rank 1. Looking back, since Smarts only effects spell casting and number of available skills, it may make sense to increase the number of starting profiencies to 3 or 4.

So if we go with a system where in combat is (# of Weapon Skill Successes + Weapon Modifier) - (# of Damage Mitigation Skill Successes + Armor) = Amount damage done, then we'll need to ensure that hit points scale to some extent with weapon skills and the limits. Starting Character: 10 Points, 2 starting Proficiencies, 5 HP Additional Proficiencies cost the number being increased (i.e. to move a proficiency from 1 to 2 it requires 2 points, from 2 to 3 it requires 3 points, etc.) Additional Hit Points cost 2 Points Additional Attributes cost 2 Points Attributes: Strength (Every 2 = +1 HP, usually a requirement for kinetic weapons, and all armor) Skill (Defensive stat for avoiding damage, rolled for initiative, usually a requirement for energy weapons) Smarts (Every 1 = 1 new allowable Proficiency, number of spells known, usually a requirement for elemental weapons) As far as magic goes, I'm thinking have basic spells where each spell has some options built into it that the character can choose to cast. Elemental Evocation (Does Elemental HP damage = # Magic Proficiency Source (Arcana/Religion/Nature)Successes over the DC - Enemies Elemental Armor) Elemental Bolt DC 1, Hits 1 square Elemental Ray DC 3, Hits 2 connected squares Elemental Cone DC 5, Hits 3 adjacent squares Elemental Blast DC 7, Hits 9 adjacent squares Healing Light (Heals HP = # Magic Proficiency Source (Arcana/Religion/Nature) Successes over the DC) Sustaining Healing DC 1, 1 target Plentiful Healing DC 3, 2 targets Generous Healing DC 5, 3 targets Masterful DC 7, 4 targets There wouldn't be a limit to the number of times a spell could be cast, but spell casters would be rolling against a spell difficulty level instead of an opposed check.

How so? I'd imagine we're still going to recommend people use thumbnails for the enemies. The aid simply uses those thumbnails. If people don't want to use thumbnails they can simply use the below format from any spreadsheet program: Enemy A Enemy B Enemy C Enemy D Enemy E Enemy F Enemy G Enemy H Hero A Hero B Hero C Hero D Hero E Hero F No problem, people can still use the spreadsheet format if they don't want to use pictures.

Yeah, that's the downside of just go with success vs failure. I wanted to avoid calculating a bunch of numbers and potentially having super high rolls, but if that can be curtailed using limits, I think that'll work. Diagonals would be valid targets. I'm thinking movements would cost an action and PC's can move through fellow party members. Regarding leveling up, CMP mentioned limits, but I also thinking either increasing the cost of points for leveling up attributes, or increasing the number of combats for a level up are both valid ways to slow the progression, plus with a dice pool system, the average roll is usually 50% of your dice pool. So in order to get a roll of say 10 consistently you'd need at least 20 dice and even then you'd have a chance of still not making the roll. Exactly, that way DM's/the game has 5 different ways that rolls can be affected: Increase/decrease the number of successes required Increase/decrease the pool limit Increase/decrease the die roll that counts as a success (typical is 4-6) Add static modifiers that give or take away successes Allow a certain number of dice to be rerolled

So on the combat front, I've been doing some tinkering. What if we reduced HP to simply a vitality score measured by the number of hits a character could take? Then the combat would simply be based on whether someone hit as opposed to how hard they hit. Character progression would be measured more on how often you hit instead of how much damage you did. Going with the dice pool system I suggested earlier, the character on offense would roll a number of dice equal to their weapon proficiency level, the character on defense would roll a number of dice equal to their defensive capabilities (evasion/skill/dodging/etc) and the number of successes would be compared. If the character on offense had a greater number of successes the character on defense would take one vitality of damage. Weapons, instead of boosting the amount of raw damage done, would simply guarantee a number of successes (i.e. standard weapon = 1 guaranteed success, improved weapon = 2 guaranteed successes, etc.) to be added to the offensive character's total roll. Armor and shields, instead of boosting how much raw damage they could absorb, would negate successes based upon the weapon type (i.e. if the weapon used was a kinetic weapon and the defensive character was wearing standard kinetic armor (1 success), their armor would count as a single success). Example Hero A Vitality: 5 Strength: 2 Skill: 1 Smarts: 1 Proficiencies: Melee Weapons (2), Short Range Weapons (1) Items: Standard Vibro Axe (Kinetic melee weapon, +1 Success, Strength Requirement 2) Enemy A Vitality: 2 Strength: 1 Skill: 2 Smarts: 1 Proficiencies: Melee Weapons (1), Short Range Weapons (2) Items: Standard Blaster (Energy Short Range Weapon, +1 Success, Skill Requirement 2), Standard Titanium Breastplate (Kinetic Armor, +1 Success, Strength Requirement 1) Round 1: Hero A vs. Enemy A: [Melee Weapons (2) + Standard Vibro Axe)]- (Skill (2) + Standard Titanium Breastplate] = [2+1 success] - [1+1 success] = 1 Success, Enemy A takes 1 Vitality Damage As for how to incorporate row, I like Flipz's idea of a standard template Melee weapons could only hit an adjacent square (or the closest enemy square), short range weapons could hit something two spaces away, long range weapons could hit something three spaces away, and artillery could hit anywhere.

I'm not 100% row should be gotten rid of. The advantage of ranged classes has always been that they're able to stay out of melee combat and usually wear less armor, but without an actual tactical grid, there's not really a good way to mechanically represent that advantage. As for SP, perhaps it wouldn't hurt to cap it and by extension WP, i.e. maybe the best armor only gives +5 SP. I'd recommend giving people suggestions, i.e if they want to play a cleric the standard loadout would be: proficiency in Medicine/Religion/Diplomacy middling health/armor/weapon proficiencies, but I'd stay away from starting classes (even mini ones). When I was referring to skills vs combat, we've got two different systems: dice pool vs. a d6 system, I think consolidate down to one and stick with it. I think a d6 is fine, if we're trying to stick to something consistent make it a dice pool check. I.e. who ever rolls the highest number of successes with their skill dice and maybe some sort of relative proficiency, have that be the order of battle. As for aware enemies, the DM picks who the enemies would target. To be fair, the first round the DM would post who each enemy is targeting, the second round the party would post their targets first. I can agree with the level = points correlation. I don't follow the super power example, but I realize I might be taking for granted that each level increase should not = a new point to spend, or conversely, each battle should not necessarily equal a level up. I agree with Chromeknight. Row always had more to do with providing benefit to ranged characters in that they wouldn't take as much damage from normal attacks. In the absence of a tactical grid it was the only way to show how they kept their distance from melee fighters. The issue became that enemies couldn't respond to that advantage in a logically consistent way. Eventually we started including row ignoring enemies, but because enemies in Heroica 1.0 were passive, they could easily be avoided by having the ranged fighters never target the enemies that ignored row. If we can come up with a row system where in enemies can eventually close the gap and attack ranged fighters up close, I think we can stick with the row system, but until then fighting from the back row will always be preferable.

Lots to discuss here, so I'll break it down into smaller sections. The armor weaknesses section is a little confusing. Some armor isn't necessarily "weak" to certain damage types, it just takes unreduced damage for certain types. Combining this with the way shields work in battle, I believe is going to get a little too complicated overall for the system. Regarding weapon ranges, logically it doesn't make sense to limit ranges arbitrarily, aside from melee attacks it seems very unintuitive. Everyone would need a chart to keep track of who they can and cannot target. I'm not sure I like how attributes are merely just disguised level caps with a small bonus effect. It's almost always more advantageous to advance proficiencies rather than Smart as you'll get more effect for your points and unless combat is going to be very brutal where whoever goes first almost always wins, increasing Skill isn't really useful. Also, I'm not really too keen about having "classes". If we're moving away from them, I really think we should split entirely from them. I like the options, not 100% I agree on implementation, especially when it comes to mixing systems for combat vs skills. The Arcana/Tech/Wisdom proficiencies may need to have updated descriptions as they don't quite make sense to me. I'll be honest and say I wasn't a fan of the old Heroica 1.0 combat system. The d6 percentages make things too swingy and it takes all agency away from enemies. Having iniative be tied to a d20 also seems out of place as it's the only spot in the rules one is used. I like the idea of players having more options in combat, however the dodge action needs a little more definition. I like the idea of shield systems restoring after a battle and the tri-shield system is one that I think is worth developing more. I still don't know how I feel about casting/healing be the exact same as Heroica 1.0 as it definitely had its issues, I'm just not quite sure how to handle it yet. Regarding leveling up and items, I'm still trying to determine myself whether or not having a logarithmic leveling curve is best. Sure it allows newer players to catch up quickly, but it has the downside of making higher level players burnout as the time they are investing really isn't translating into actual mechanical progression. As for items, this is a mixed bag, some of them were fine, but because they became the central part where by players distinguished their character, it certainly introduced a level of power creep into the game that I think would be best avoided.