4e Fan Creations and House RulesWorking on variant powers? Statting up a PC race or your version of a monster? Creating or converting an adventure? Put it here!
We now have two threads discussing whether low NADs (or FRW-defenses if you prefer) are a problem. There are many of us who think they are. This thread is about what to do about it. It presumes that all who post here agree on the premise that low NADs are a problem - if you want to debate that point, post in one of the other two threads.
__________________ Carl Cramér
Member of the Netbook of Feats review board.
I'll use my own group of player characters as my example, as that is where the problem currently is for me.
Background
Here are the defense values of my group of level 16 adventurers.
Bard
AC 30, F 21, R 28, W 29
Rogue
AC 30, F 22, R 32, W 28
Fighter
AC 36, F 31, R 27, W 28
Swordmage
AC 34, F 26, R 28, W 28
A typical monster at this level had +20 against at NAD and +22 against AC. The chance to hit against NADs varies from 100% to 45%. The chance to hit AC varies from 65% to 35%.
Formulating the Problem
I am not unhappy with how AC works. I hated the 3E situation where AC outgrew attack bonus to the degree that most critters only hit on a 20. AC is also where most of the damage comes in, and my group is actually taking too little damage to be exiting at the moment. So the question could be; how to get NADs to the range where AC is now.
The spread in AC is six points. The spread in NADs is 12 points. While I can see that a greater spread is desirable, I think this is too wide. The chance to hit against NADs varies from 100% to 45%. This seems a little too high (indicating NADs are too low). About 35% to hit the strongest NAD (a 10% change or +2 to the highest NAD) makes sense.
It seems to me than, for my party at level 16, an increase of about +6 to the weakest NADs to +2 on the strongest ones, resulting in a spread of 8 points with a hit probability from 70% for the weakest to 35% for the strongest. Extrapolating this, I think a +10 bonus to the weakest NAD and +3 to the strongest is reasonable at level 30.
If possible, I want a solution that is easy to express in the character generator.
Proposed Solutions
Change class bonuses to NADs: Right now, most classes get a +2 bonus to the NAD connected to their strongest attribute modifier. This increases the trend to NAD overspecialization. If all characters instead got a +2 to all NADs, that would even out the distribution. This results in a +2 bonus to the weakest NAD.
Increase more attributes: Instead of increasing 2 attributes twice per tier, characters are allowed to increase all (or at least three) of them. This results in a +3 bonus to the weakest NAD over 30 levels, about +2 at my party's level level.
Moderate level bonuses to NADs: Give out a +1 bonus at levels 5, 10, and 15. This results in +3 at level 30, +2 at my party's level. This bonus is easy to play with; it can be doubled to +1/5 levels very easily, for example.
Applying all three of these fixes to my current party would increase the weakest NAD by +6 and the strongest NAD by +2, which is pretty close to the target figures.
My team would end up with (rough estimate):
Bard
AC 30, F 26, R 31, W 31
Rogue
AC 30, F 28, R 34, W 31
Fighter
AC 36, F 33, R 32, W 32
Swordmage
AC 34, F 31, R 31, W 31
Final Thoughts
I'm not saying this is the way to go; this is a rough first draft and if I knew what to do there would be no need for discussion. The part I am most skeptical about is the increase to all attributes at every level. Maybe not including the all-attribute modifier and instead increasing the level modifier is better, but this also increases the strongest NADs. The attribute increases plays havoc with feat prerequisites and makes starting with an 18 in an ability score even better offensively, but by making the lowest NAD competitive and thus increasing the value of a bonus there, this might still be balanced. And perhaps my goals are set too high too; maybe NAD attacks are supposed to be generally stronger?
__________________ Carl Cramér
Member of the Netbook of Feats review board.
One rule I thought of a while ago is to simply allow both stats to apply to each defense.
So a character can apply both str and con to his fort defense for example.
Overall this has the following effects:
1) A class who chooses to focus on a defense can make it really high.
2) Most builds get some boost to their NADs.
3) It increases the power of lower abilities in more stats as opposed to specializing in a few stats. Makes the generalists a bit better.
4) Makes a dump stat less desirable
1. Add +2 to all non-AC defenses
You do get the wierd situation that wizards and other characters in cloth armor have ACs lower than Reflex Defense, though.
2. At 8th, 18th, and 28th level, increase four attributes by +1
Aesthetically, I just find it more pleasing than adding +1 to three ability scores at 4th, 8th, 14th, 18th, 24th and 28th levels as it results in more "balanced" scores and creates a 2-4-6 progression of ability score increases.
If necessary, I might throw in divine boons or slotless magic items that add a +1 to +3 item bonus to non-AC defenses.
+1 to F/R/W defenses at levels 5, 15, 25
+1 to one defense for which you have a class bonus at levels 11 and 21
No Paragon or Robust Defenses feats, no Epic Fort/Ref/Will feats
Great Fortitude, Iron Will, Lightning Reflexes, and the epic feats with special kickers are still available
My level 15 PCs, with house rules and level-appropriate gear:
Human guardian fighter: AC 32 (45%), Fort 33 (30%), Ref 28 (55%), Will 27 (60%)
Hobgoblin fey warlock: AC 26 (75%), Fort 25 (70%), Ref 29 (50%), Will 29 (50%)
Dragonborn TWF ranger: AC 28 (65%), Fort 29 (50%), Ref 27 (60%), Will 23 (80%)
Tiefling orb wizard: AC 29 (60%), Fort 21 (90%), Ref 28 (55%), Will 30 (45%)
A typical level 15 monster has a +20 vs. AC and +18 vs. NAD. Next to each defense, I've put the % chance that this hypothetical standard monster has to hit each defense. My experience at mid-paragon levels? The fighter is hard to hit in general (30-60% to hit, depending on defense), especially against the AC and Fortitude attacks that prevail in melee combat. He does not have a glaring defensive weakness -- he has a decent Wisdom because he is a pit fighter (Will), uses a shield (Reflex), and obviously has a good Strength (Fort), plus he gets the human bonuses.
The rest of the characters have glaring weaknesses. For the warlock, it is AC and Fort (though he is usually concealed, so his defenses are effectively better); for the ranger, it is his AC (especially for a melee character -- he is trying to rectify this) and Will; and for the wizard, it is an atrocious Fort defense.
Overall, I think my house rules have helped somewhat, but I still hammer the party sometimes, especially with artillery monsters. But I guess that is to be expected, and encourages them to get after those soft second rank monsters (which the warlock excels at).
Last edited by Mentat55; 3rd November 2009 at 07:54 PM..
After some discussion, I think I will throw out the stat changes. This only partially reduces the differences between high and low NADs.
Current proposal
Change class bonuses to NADs: Right now, most classes get a +2 bonus to the NAD connected to their strongest attribute modifier. This increases the trend to NAD overspecialization. If all characters instead got a +2 to all NADs, that would even out the distribution. This results in a +2 bonus to the weakest NAD.
Level bonuses to NADs: Give out a +1 bonus at levels 5, 10, and 15.
Applying all three of these fixes to my current party would increase the weak NADs by +3 and the strongest NAD by +2, which is still close to the target figures.
My team would end up with (rough estimate):
Bard
AC 30, F 24, R 31, W 31
Rogue
AC 30, F 25, R 34, W 30
Fighter
AC 36, F 33, R 31, W 30
Swordmage
AC 34, F 29, R 31, W 29
The rogue and bard still have very weak Fort, but at least the monsters need to roll a 4 and a 5 to hit them, so it is not entirely pointless to increase the effects. As was pointed out in an earlier threads, when status effects are involved, even improving a bad NAD is worthwhile and long as you are in the possible die range.
__________________ Carl Cramér
Member of the Netbook of Feats review board.
I think changing the class bonuses is an overcomplicated idea - as a general fix. Not all builds of a class have the same "poor" defense; and it requires actual decision making for each character thus. In practice, for one group, this 'll be fine; but its a weakness of the approach that I don't like.
For that matter, specialization per se isn't bad; it's the excessive specialization we see. I prefer the "raise all stats at 4/8/14/18/24/28" approach - simple and not-too-fiddly. It also ameliorates excesses in skill overspecialization, and reduces the impact of some poorly chosen stat prerequisites in PHB1 (where the prerequisites suddenly make some builds much less viable than others for no particularly clear reason - and thus penalize those that don't preplan characters fully). It also ameliorates AC problems in basic builds like the Con/Cha warlock or the Con/Wis shaman, and turns hide armor expertise from an OMG must-have into a just very nice feat for Con-heavy light armor builds.
If this overpowers PC's, an easy fix would be to simply increase monster damage - or just use an extra elite now and then. Then again, it's par for the course to give strong parties stronger encounters, so most DM's shouldn't have a problem raising overall difficulty so long as the intra-party balance remains OK.
__________________
4e balanced random loot system
- Think item wishlists are devilspawn?
- Dislike the impact of a few bad item picks by the DM on the party?
- Or find it ludicrous that PC's constantly just "happen" to find magic items tailored to their needs?
Try: A simpler treasure system for (mostly) random loot.
3.5 death&dying variant
- Tired of players that won't cure their mortally wounded allies 'cause "he's only at -2"?
- Tired of a dying mechanic which uses anachronistic d10's?
- Tired of a dying mechanic which never kicks into action for high level characters, which tend to go from alive and kicking to instant death before anyone can intervene?
- Tired of horribly complex house rules?
Try: Death & Dying - a better (and simple!) system
Last edited by eamon; 5th November 2009 at 11:16 PM..
That would catch up the lowest NAD, but jet the highest one ahead by 4 points. If you get rid of the improved defenses feats (all of them, from both PH and PH2), I guess it wouldn't necessarily be too dire.
That would catch up the lowest NAD, but jet the highest one ahead by 4 points. If you get rid of the improved defenses feats (all of them, from both PH and PH2), I guess it wouldn't necessarily be too dire.
Actually my problem isn't taht the lowest NAD is hit all the time, its that the highest one does. A fighter shouldn't have a problem getting hit with will attacks all the time, but when he can't even take a fort attack more than 50% of the time something is off.
What level is your fighter? Does he have great fortitude or an item that improves Fortitude? Is he human?
Cause +4 would turn that 50% into 70% which is really about the upper bounds of where your missed chance should be... and an item and great fortitude would net you another +4 which would bring that to 90% missed. Human 95%. Etc.
What level is your fighter? Does he have great fortitude or an item that improves Fortitude? Is he human?
Cause +4 would turn that 50% into 70% which is really about the upper bounds of where your missed chance should be... and an item and great fortitude would net you another +4 which would bring that to 90% missed. Human 95%. Etc.
True, but as in your last post house rules may need to be balanced with other houserules. If you allow for a net bonus to NADs, it may be prudent to remove NAD boosting feats.
Just to back up some of my words I decided to run a quick test. I pulled up one of my characters from the char builder, an 11th level dragonborn paladin. He's a strength/charisma build, with no special feats or items to boost fort, but otherwise has a big strength and solid defenses. His Fort Defense is 25.
I ran an average of Fort Attacks for 11th level monsters and the attack was +14. That's exactly 50% attack rate on my guys Fort Defense, so the 50% hit rate on high NADs seem right on the money, at least at 11th.
Getting back to the discussion, I'm personally fine with raising weaker NADs as well, just stressing the point that I currently don't think higher NADs are so high they can't benefit for some of these houserules as well.
Also, I'm not a fan of more stat raises to account for defenses. My problem with that is your taking a hammer to the problem instead of a scalpel. Stats affect a lot more than defenses...skills, ability rolls, feats prereqs, etc.
If the problem people have is with defenses, then focus on defenses. Straight up bonuses to those defenses directly addresses that problem, without affecting the rest of the system at all. Its a more elegant way of addressing the issue imo.
True, but as in your last post house rules may need to be balanced with other houserules. If you allow for a net bonus to NADs, it may be prudent to remove NAD boosting feats.
Yeah, that's pretty much just my point. That it feels like the up to +6 to NADs you can get via feat, plus the up to +3 from items, are mostly shoddy bandaids, so as long as you take them out, you're probably fine.
Just don't give out +7 over 30 levels _and_ +6 via feats _and_ potentially +3 from items/masterwork... cause that'll just go over the top.
Yeah, that's pretty much just my point. That it feels like the up to +6 to NADs you can get via feat, plus the up to +3 from items, are mostly shoddy bandaids, so as long as you take them out, you're probably fine.
Just don't give out +7 over 30 levels _and_ +6 via feats _and_ potentially +3 from items/masterwork... cause that'll just go over the top.
I'm not convinced this is a problem. It makes someone almost HAD immune. But there is still AC, and this guy really paid a lot for it.
__________________ Carl Cramér
Member of the Netbook of Feats review board.
My house rule is as follows:
+1 to F/R/W defenses at levels 5, 15, 25
+1 to one defense for which you have a class bonus at levels 11 and 21
No Paragon or Robust Defenses feats, no Epic Fort/Ref/Will feats
Great Fortitude, Iron Will, Lightning Reflexes, and the epic feats with special kickers are still available.
I think your math is solid, based upon the experiences of the characters in your campaign. For my own campaign I think the "+1 to F/R/W defenses at levels 5, 15, 25" is sufficient.
But looking through the Paragon Tier monsters, alot of the NAD attacks are just encounter powers. That means that your party is going to be subjected to an NAD attack one time per monster during a fight, and the remaining attacks will be against AC.
Obviously, some paragon monsters have NAD attacks on the recharge(5 6), and a few have them as at wills, but that's not common. While I agree that makes them threatening to a group, adding too many modifiers in seems like it would make it too easy to ignore those types of attacks.
I think if you feel the need to house rule the NADs a great deal, it might be due to the monsters you're throwing at the PCs. As DMs we can choose what to hit the PCs with, and you have the choice whether or not to drop a critter that attacks a weak NAD at will.
Personally, I thinkg it's easier to mod a monster and change an "at will" NAD attack to a "recharge X" or "encounter" than adding too many house rules to the characters.
__________________ Life is the game that must be played. ~Edwin Arlington Robinson
After level 11, item (other than the neck) can also help some here. Some boots gives a bonus to Ref, some helm to Will and some Belt to For. Those bonus goes from +1 to +3. Simply adding this bonus to more of these (or all, like all heroic boots gives +1 ref, all paragon boots +2, etc.) can solve the problem.
Just to be sure, I made a level 30 controller (seeker just for fun). With +3 from boots and belt and +2 from helm to NAD, and Robust Defense somewhere near the end, his defenses are AC 42, Fort 37, Ref 47, Will 46.
There is a big glaring weak spot in 37 Fort, which could easily become a 41 with 1 more feat, which would make even the Tarasque requires an 8 to hit. That weak spot comes from the 12 Con by opposition to the 26 Dex and 30 Will.
I think for my next game I will be putting more NAD bonus on boots/head/belt, and possibly gives a +1 to a third stat. Now the only character with a real weak spot will be the one that boost the same def-stat twice, like the Str/Con barb.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
