Rules interaction with possible house rule

[CovertOps]

I come seeking input about a possible house rule I'm going to try and to see if anyone here can think of some downside that hasn't already occurred to me.

Proposal: Give the PC's a flat Level +3 attack bonus to be used with any attack the PC might have. Proficiency bonuses and class features (think the Rogue dagger +1 or the Fighter's +1 with 1 or 2 handed weapons) still add to this so you get a difference between implement users and weapon users to keep the difference between AC and F/R/W. Other uses of a characters main stat remain the same such as damage modifier and other normal uses of that stat.

My initial thoughts: I feel like any time I build a PC in 4e I need to take a race that synergizes with the class/build I am making so I am sure I can hit stuff. By taking away the to-hit nature of a prime stat you open up any race to any class because now (at worst) you lose 1-2 points of damage per swing vs. losing 5-10% to-hit as well. This also reduces MAD problems for classes like the Paladin and Cleric which have 2 prime stats allowing you to dabble in both trees effectively. Last (and best IMO) is that it opens up really decent multi-classing for any race/class combo. The primary penality here is lost damage on a per swing basis for any attacks that don't use a stat you are raising. Also, it makes everyone good with melee basic attacks and eliminates the need for those melee training feats (use ___ in place of STR).

Can anyone think of any glaring abuses for this or some reason this is a bad idea?

 

[keterys]

So, feat, level, enhancement and ability bonuses are presumably subsumed by this? How about power bonuses (Righteous Brand, Lance of Faith, Lead the Attack, etc)? And are only some feats hit, like Nimble Blade or Hellfire Blood okay, Expertise no?

Lessee, at 1st level you'd get +4 to +8 which matches what you have now pretty closely and matches the monster attack/defense spreads well (ignoring 20 Dex rogues with daggers and expertise for a moment, who have +10).

At 30th, you'd have +33 to +37, plus whatever isn't covered above (you'll want to be clear here as not covering weapon enhancement and feat bonuses basically gives you a +10 swing unaccounted for, and autohitting ensues), and likely to be hitting enemies with defenses between 41 and 48 so that seems pretty on track.

In a game I was running, I did something somewhat similar - I replaced stat + level + expertise with 5 + 1/2 level, +1 at 5,11,15,21,25. It made race choice, V classes (paladin and warlock), and multiclassing work much more smoothly. It did mean that people's damages were slightly lower, cause they felt more free to use powers that weren't their primary ability score and/or races that weren't (so, -1 to -3 per attack in some cases)

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I think that is an interesting idea and should work. It is something that has come up before - older editions of D&D did not really have so many ways to vary your attack bonus. You needed very high ability scores to make a difference.

I suppose the biggest changes might be regarding the need for magic items. It is not that critical to keep your implement or weapon at top enhancement level, and it might sometimes be more important to get a good special ability or an entirely different item than to get a high enhancement bonus.

Of course, after some time, the hunt for attack bonus might just turn into a hunt for damage bonuses, and everything turns back to the way it was...

 

[CovertOps]

@keterys: I'll have to check a couple of those, but enhancement, level, and stat are for sure covered by this. Expertise is not allowed in my game, being replaced currently by a different house rule, but I can see this replacing both of them. If it helps (offhand) Careful shot would stack with this (ranger at-will that grants +2)

@Mustrum: I'm headed towards using "Intrinsic" in CB and throwing out enhancement bonuses completely. I'm also not a big fan of 4e magic and don't mind getting rid of "wish lists" in favor of magic that can have that "cool" factor back (not to mention the fact that I can make brand new items with much less work if I only need a few since I'm not worried about +'s) if you're no longer chasing the next +1 to your "primary" gear slots. I'm OK with the hunt for damage bonuses as the theme. I think that really is the area they should have worked on.

 

[eamon]

I'd say you don't want feat bonuses subsumed by this; some of those feats still matter just fine. level+3 would be a fine replacement for ability mod +1/2 level + enhancement + (potentially) expertise though. You don't need an extra expertise rule, your base rule suffices. Adding an extra bonus to compensate for expertise would be overcompensating: you shouldn't do that.

Potential issues: basically, you're dramatically weakening the primary stat. This has numerous knock-on effects. First of all, it makes multiclassing stronger, since you no longer suffer nearly as much from MID and MAD (i.e. you don't need multiple attack stats or multiple implements/weapons). Then, some powers don't involve the primary stat at all except for attacks; these will be attractive picks for builds which sneakily focus on dumping the primary stat. Finally, multi-primary builds like starlocks get a sudden boost; now your really don't need to raise both primary stats nearly as much. Half-elves will love twin strike even more.

Now, do these issues really matter? I doubt multiclassing will ever seriously pose balance problems; the feat cost is just too high and you're mostly gaining flexibility. Barring some very specific combo, it'll represent a power boost, maybe, but nothing to worry about. Similarly, I doubt half-elves by themselves pose any big issues. I would, however, worry about specific combo's. I don't see them yet, but it may be possible to entirely avoid the primary stat for some builds with some trickery, and then to gain unreasonably high benefits from secondardy stats. For instance, dwarven fighters suddenly get a boost; their strength-lack now matters less but their compensating features still do. Tiefling infernal warlocks will enjoy the fruits of their race-specific benefits without the cost of not having a Con modifier. Both of these look strong, but not really problematic - but there are so many combo's it's hard to say.

I think it's doable, but I'd explicitly mention to player's that it's somewhat experimental and that you reserve in particular the right to modify powers that post house-rule would be entirely independent of primary stat. Most should only have a slight power creep and that's OK (you'll just see slightly different builds), but on the other hand some might really be broken.

 

[Stuntman]

This is an interesting proposal. What it does is eliminate primary stats since your attack modifier is the same no matter what class you are. You are basically turning everything into a secondary stat and make everyone have the same chance of hitting. This would benefit the V-classes as they now make the penalties less for choosing powers that use a different ability.

It does impact the ability to min/max as one of the goals of min/maxing is to maximise your chance of hitting. It also seems to impact the effect of magical weapons. If I understand you correctly, a normal sword and a +6 sword have the same chance of hitting, but the +6 sword does more damage.

I can see that certain builds may end up being highly untraditional if the current secondary stat is very powerful. For instance, you may see a lot more dwarven wizards. The staff wizard may max out on Con and the orb wizard will max out of Wis. It would be a little unusual if dwarven orb wizards become way more popular than eladrin wizards. The Wis secondary stat is just so important for an orb wizard that you can almost dump Int because the stunlock effect trumps any additional damage from damaging spells.

 

[keterys]

You already have people who like elves better for orbizards because of the Wis bonus and reroll on the attack, so there's no great change there. And the dwarf would be at -1 damage to every single spell which is notable.

 

[CovertOps]

@Stuntman: I'm using the "Intrinsic" option in character builder. There is no difference between a non-magic weapon and a +6 weapon. That bonus is added into the character directly and not part of his gear. I expect this to allow me to hand create magic items for my party and make them interesting instead of (as one of my players put it) "WooHoo...I got Hand of Vecna!!!! What do you mean it only gives me +2 Athletics???"

 

[CovertOps]

@eamon: What I said was "Expertise is not allowed in my game, being replaced currently by a different house rule, but I can see this (Level +3 attack bonus) replacing both of them (Current house rule and Expertise)".