Random Ideas

[LotusBlossom]

Though we could have a thread where people can place 5E system ideas that don't yet have a thread or that maybe don't even need their own thread. If an idea blossoms, then we can later move it into it's own thread for further discussion.

[LotusBlossom]

Here's a couple ideas that I noted from another 5E thread (can't remember if from a WOTC forum or EnWorld forum). Coincidentally, it also had 5E in the thread title.

- In stead of having an AC stat, just use Reflex, Fortitude, and Will. Attacks going against AC would be redirected against Reflex.
- Have armor reduce Reflex stat, yet provide damage reduction. So an armored person is easier to hit, but takes less damage. Possibly, it increases Fortitude stat?

The one criticism I've seem from the above is that a rogue attacking a knight with a dagger (if 1d4) might never damage a knight. I however, think this is fine. Unless the rogue criticals (which then might bypass all DR and go against HP/Body points directly), a dagger shouldn't really do anything against full plate. However, I would caveat this by then saying that a high level rogue should be able to critical fairly often against a 1st level knight. A high level rogue would have the experience and ability to stick the dagger in between the plates of mail for criticals. I like this idea, but it would require some kind of critical hit mechanism that depended upon the level difference between two opponents, or something like a critical happening if your to-hit roll is X over what is required (which happens in high level versus low level combats).

[LotusBlossom]

Some more food for thought to get people's creative juices going -- again, this might be similar to other systems or not.

PC have Physical, Mental, and Spiritual stats:

Physical........Mental.........Spiritual
------------..---------.....--------
Strength.......Intelligence..Charisma.........| Fortitude
Dexterity.......Perception...Sanity............| Reflex
Constitution...Wisdom.......Self-Discipline..| Will
==========.========...==========
Phys HP/Body.Mental HP/Mind.Spirit HP/Soul

The top row of stats are your power stats and affect your Fortitude. The middle stats are your Finesse stats and affect Reflex, and the bottom row stats are the resistance stats and affect Will.

Likewise, a PC's physical HP/Body is made from the physical stats (1st column), the PC's Mental HP/Mind is made from the Mental stats, and the PC's Soul/Spirit HP are made up from the Spiritual stats.

Having three sets of Body/Mind/Soul would allow different types of attacks and stuff. Physical/Melee is obviously Body. However, Domination and Mind Flayer type attacks could be attacking Mind Points, and perhaps, a warlock trying to summon a demon to control it would be battling with his Soul Points and trying to wear down the demons Soul points.

If we include in the Fatigue/Combat Points type idea, then one option would be to have a common Fatigue which gets worn down from attacks, using special skills, casting spells, channeling prayers, etc., and after that, the Body/Mind/or Soul stats start to get used up. Or, the second option is to have separate Physical Fatigue, Mental Fatigue, and Spiritual Fatigue. Physical skills/damage eat up Phy Fatigue, Spells and mental damage use up Mental, Praying and soul damage use up Spiritual Fatigue first.

[pdmiller]

Originally Posted by LotusBlossom

- In stead of having an AC stat, just use Reflex, Fortitude, and Will. Attacks going against AC would be redirected against Reflex.
- Have armor reduce Reflex stat, yet provide damage reduction. So an armored person is easier to hit, but takes less damage. Possibly, it increases Fortitude stat?

Big fan of armour as DR, rather than it making someone harder to hit. A shield makes someone harder to hit, armour makes it easier - but harder to hurt the target.

I'm liking the different defence types, I agree AC could go and be replaced by Reflex. One sacred cow down....

[Blue]

Instead of having armor provide a set amount of resistance, it could provide a die. Maybe leather resists d4 damage, etc. So even without crits a dagger could occasionally hurt someone in plate.

Though this adds another roll by another person to each weapon strike.

One note about armor resisting physical damage is that we're not doing the same for magical damage. So we're splitting the amount of damage that we can expect to do (from a design perspective), pre-reducing it for attacks that aren't against physical defenses in order to balance it against weapon damage.

[Herremann the Wise]

Originally Posted by Blue

One note about armor resisting physical damage is that we're not doing the same for magical damage...

I wonder?
If you term magical damage as of a particular type (Acid, Cold, Electrical, Fire, Sonic, Force), why wouldn't armor protect you (to an extent, and variably across those types) from such damage too? One of the many things I've been pondering.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

[Herremann the Wise]

Originally Posted by pdmiller

Big fan of armour as DR, rather than it making someone harder to hit. A shield makes someone harder to hit, armour makes it easier - but harder to hurt the target.

I'm liking the different defence types, I agree AC could go and be replaced by Reflex. One sacred cow down....

Hello by the way - good to see you here, I was going to tell you about this little endeavour but you obviously beat me to it...

There is an aspect of this I'm struggling with but I think it worthy of a "Making Armor Work" thread. I'll have to set that one up.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

[LotusBlossom]

Originally Posted by Herremann the Wise

I wonder?
If you term magical damage as of a particular type (Acid, Cold, Electrical, Fire, Sonic, Force), why wouldn't armor protect you (to an extent, and variably across those types) from such damage too? One of the many things I've been pondering.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

I like this as well. If the magical attack (from fire, cold, etc.) is doing physical damage, then DR should apply. Where I don't think it would apply is for something like Drain Life or a similar magical attack.

[Walknot]

OK, here's a random thought. Actually, it comes from some of the posts on "Making Magic Work" but it applies to other areas as well.

First, how it applies to magic: There is the old 3e Sorcerer vs Wizard. The Sorcerer used fewer variety of spells, but more of them. In 3e this effect was provided through the use of two distinct classes.

An alternate method could be this: Allow the magic user to become attuned through repetition. So, if you have been steadily casting "fireball" in encounters every single time, then it should be easier for you to cast "fireball" again. But with this focus comes a cost... other spells are harder for you.

This is not a class feature, but rather a dynamic effect on your character sheet. As you play, so you are. You play like a Sorcerer, then more power to you! More power that is for your fave spell(s), and less power elsewhere. (The trick is how to do the accounting.)

No, how this can apply elsewhere: Consider the fighter and the barbarian. Two separate classes in 3e, one full of feats and the other full of rage. In a sense, the Barbarian is corollary to the Sorcerer. She is stronger in her attacks, but less versatile than the fighter. Can you see how this be transitioned away from a class feature and towards a dynamic effect? That is, Barbarian/Fighter could be an effect of "as you play, so you are" ...

[LotusBlossom]

I was reading a thread over on the WOTC forums and a couple people were talking about PC Stats having to much influence on the game. This got me to thinking if there are other ways of using stats or stat bonuses. Now, I do think that a high STR should grant some bonus to melee attacks, or a low CHR should not help a diplomacy checks (I'm guessing diplomacy is CHR based), so it does make sense for stats to somehow modify or aid in a PC's abilities.

So, the first idea that came to my mind was: maybe stat bonuses should be averaged with skill bonuses or melee bonuses. Here's an example. Joe has CHR bonus of 0 and diplomacy skill bonus of +5 and Fred with a +4 CHR bonus and a diplomacy of +5. So, Joe's overall bonus is +2 rounded down (0+5)/2, and Fred's overall bonus is +4 rounded down (4+5)/2. Joe's just not going to be as good as Fred.

Now, if we used a skill leveling system (a system in which skill ranks are somehow acquired by PC leveling), then over a long time, as Joe and Fred raised their skill levels, the differences between them would level out. Let's say that at 10th level, both raised their diplomacy bonus by +5, making their bonus +10. Then. Joe would have an (0+10)/2 = +5 and Fred would have (4+10)/2 = +7.

Well, on second thought, this only seems to make the stat bonuses 1/2 as effective, and any purchased and initial skill bonuses 1/2 as effective. So, I don't think this idea isn't that great. But I guess the main idea is that there may be other ways in which we can use stats. Can we eliminate stat bonuses and still have stats matter for skills? Is there some other way stats can be effective in a system?

BTW: I like bonuses for the main reason that we can have a consistent roll-over system. It makes it a lot easier than roll-under for some things and roll-over for other things. But if there is another way to achieve consistency and have stats be used differently, then that might be interesting.

[Herremann the Wise]

There are two things at play here I'd like to add to the point stat thing.

1) There has been a shift away from the scores and a reliance on the modifiers and I'm not too sure that's a good thing.

2) The game has progressed to the point (in 4E particularly) where not having your primary stat at the maximum possible is inefficiently foolish.

There are a few other things as well but let's look at these first.

1) Sometimes I think the modifier can be misleading. Let's compare for example a jump/athletics check (STR) and a heal check (WIS). Let's compare the jumper with a +5 STR modifier and a healer with +5 WIS modifier. The jumper is going to get much more benefit out of having high strength than a healer with high wisdom. Likewise but in reverse, extensive training will obviously assist a jumper but nowhere near as much as extensive training will assist a healer. However, in 3e the weight most certainly goes with training(ranks) where as with 4e, the overwhelming weight goes with level then training and attribute. I think this just ends up getting figures all wrong.

A possible fix. Let's say there are the following levels of expertise in a particular skill:
- Unfamiliarity
- Familiarity
- Proficiency
- Expertise
- Specialization
- Mastery
Let's also say that for some skills, we are not just interested in the modifier (mod) but multiples of that modifier (2mod, 3mod, maybe even 4mod, and then also 1mod2 for half the modifier if appropriate).

Let's now see how we can mirror the flavour of the skills with the mechanics above and get a total modifier for each of these things.

With Jump/Athletics, the emphasis should definitely be on the attribute, more so than the training. Let's say it's a 3mod skill. Let's then give the following array for training:
- U [NA - assume everybody is at least familiar with jumping]
- F [+3]
- P [+6]
- E [+7]
- S [+8]
- M [+9]
or in shorthand [f3p6e7s8m9].

This gives you the following modifiers:
- STR 17 and Expert: +16, (+9 and +7)
- STR 14 and Specialist: +14 (+6 and +8)
- STR 8 and Familiar: +0 (-3 and +3)
- STR 22 and Proficient: +22 (+18 and +6)

This sits well with previous discussion of modifiers between +0 for a novice and +20 for a paragon. The training factor may need to be tweaked a little but as a rough first run through, I feel like there is plenty of scope here to tailor things nicely.

With Healing, training should be the dominant factor. Therefore, I'd say its a 1mod skill with the following training array:

- U [-6]
- F [+0]
- P [+6]
- E [+10]
- S [+14]
- M [+18]
or in shorthand [u-6f0p6e10s14m18].

This gives you the following modifiers:
- WIS 17 and Expert: +13, (+3 and +10)
- WIS 14 and Specialist: +16 (+2 and +14)
- WIS 8 and Unfamiliar: -7 (-1 and -6)
- WIS 22 and Proficient: +12 (+6 and +6)

I think this also effects a fair balance.

2) I'll edit my thoughts in later - it's getting late.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

[LotusBlossom]

I was just thinking about your idea of giving a negative bonus to Untrained, but in the context of unifying DC values. In 4e, we have Ability checks which are d20 + stat bonus, and Skill checks which are d20 + stat bonus + skill bonus (I'm leaving out the 1/2 level modifier which only complicates things more).

So, one can see that a DC check for skills (assuming trained is what your shooting for as the default) will need to be +5 higher than a similar DC for an ability check. If we move to a -5 for untrained skills and +0 for trained and leave off the 1/2 per level), then a trained skill will be d20+STR bonus, the same as a STR check by itself: d20 + STR bonus. This way we could say DC 20 is a hard task whether or not is for a skill check or an ability check.

I do like the simplicity in 4e of no negative modifiers (well almost none), but having -5 for untrained (or non-proficient for weapons) does allow for a more unified DC level system. If we want to consider attacks, and assume the attacker is proficient with the weapon (+0), then we have d20 + STR + 1/2 level (I like the 1/2 per level for the main class "skill", weapons or spell attacks), the only difference is the 1/2 per level. This is probably okay as these attacks go against the F/R/W defenses and not DCs. Also, the F/R/W scale as 1/2 per level as well, so an 'average' create of the same level can start with a similar DC: ex. DC 10 for average + any type of stat type bonuses, let's say +1 to +5), and we'd have a DC 15 creature + 1/2 it's level, which would be "about" a 50% shot for an attacker with d20 + stat bonus + 1/2 level + any other bonuses. Thus, the DC level system would still be consistent.

Lastly, as noted above, I like the 1/2 level bonus in 4e for some things, but not for everything. I like it for a classes main attack (or a set of skills if one wants the traditional type of thief character). But if something is hard (taking example form another thread I read) like a hard climb for a wall (DC20), then for untrained climbers, this should be very hard. For trained it should be hard. If a PC has put in extra training besides basic, then maybe it's easier.

I do like the idea of skill levels like Untrained -5, Trained +0, Adept/Journeyman/Medium +X, and Master +X. One could use Feats or such to either train in a skill, or increase your level in the skill. I also like the idea of being able to use a Feat or such to purchase the ability to add the 1/2 level to an already trained skill, thereby making you much better at that skill, but maybe for 'straight' skills, the levels should suffice, and for class type skills (weapons, spell attacks, diving attacks), one could purchase the 1/2 level bonus -- although I think a straight thief should have the level bonus in some thieving skills if they want.

[Walknot]

You know, it is true that if your primary stat in 4e is not maxed, you certainly feel it in the game. So, if only that could be fixed. Now last weekend playing 4e I noticed this sort of thing w/ my PC. In a combat vs a solo dragon monster, could only hit on a hit roll such as 18 - 20 which meant basically - a lot of wasted rounds and frustration. Call it ability lag.

Now many games have an aspect that forces a conclusion, thru a buildup / acceleration. For 4e, some have complained of the opposite, as the daily and encounter abilities are all used up. Call this power slump.

Here is one way to do two things at once, fixing the frustration of ability lag and
power slump, in one change.

Transition back to IRL, simulation-wise, a combat encounter is very tiring. How many battle scenes in movies, where it is a drawn out fight, think of where the hero and villain are both bone tired. When the hero wins with a burst of adrenaline or whaever, the villain is sometimes hardly able to defend himself.

Now back to a gamist viewpoint. Suppose that as the battle goes on, all of the AC's dwindle. Yes, that's right, maybe at the start of the battle you hit on 18-20 and 'tis tough. But you are psyched up, and get thru it.

Then the rounds go by and by, and soon enough there goes the AC, now you hit on 17-20, now 16-20, now 15-20 ... what a difference a few points of AC make! And as a low-attack bonus PC, you saved all your best powers, and let fly for the finale.

So, to recap. Max out your attack bonus, and you have the priveledge of striking harder and more often, earlier. But let slip your main ability, no prob; you are filling more of a late-encounter roll. Not bad, eh?

But, somebody would have to figure out the math.

[LotusBlossom]

Interesting idea of reducing the AC as the battle progresses. Maybe, tie a negative AC modifier to a PC's "Combat/Fatigue" points (or just plain HPs). As the PC/Monster is hit (and performs actions that use Combat/Fatigue points if using those), then the AC will get lower. Perhaps a -2 at bloodied, or -1 per 1/4 HP lost, or something. Or something like a -1 to AC each time you are hit by a critical to reflect wounding (this one would be easy enough to keep track of without having to do the math for bloodied, or 1/4 bloodied, etc.) Great idea Walknot.

[siliaris]

Any suggestions for 5e multiclassing. 3e was complex and annoying, however interesting, and 4e lacks options.

I like the idea of gestalt classing (i first saw it in 3e unearthed arcana), and wondered if anyone had ideas about it?