Szatany
First Post
Why would I want to do that? There is nothing wrong with my math, except perhaps wording. If it makes you more comfortable, I can rename remove +1/2 level modifier of monsters to impose a 1/2 level penalty. End result is the same.
What if we removed the half-level bonus to everything?
- Thread starter Asmor
- Start date
Why would I want to do that? There is nothing wrong with my math, except perhaps wording. If it makes you more comfortable, I can rename remove +1/2 level modifier of monsters to impose a 1/2 level penalty. End result is the same.
Szatany
First Post
I know what I'm talking about. You on the other hand seem to be unaware of what my point is.
DrSpunj
Explorer
I made the part bigger and bolded it, as I think this is key. The PCs are going to continue to enjoy accumulating bonuses from other sources aside from the +1/2 per level part we're talking about here.
Yes, the DMG describes how monster stats are built using +1/level, but unless we were ready to go through and ditch everything listed in bold above we don't want to subtract +1/level to keep the math the same; subtracting +1/2 per level will keep things working otherwise as it does now.
I agree it changes the feel of things a bit but it's not a significant shift, and not inherently A Bad Thing (tm) just initially thinking about it. I'll admit reading through the books the first time I even asked the same question since that bonus appears everywhere, but since I'm so new to 4e in general I don't feel comfortable enough with 4e to know yet whether I really like it as a whole and whether a change like this would necessarily be A Good Thing (tm) or just a And Now For Something A Little Different Thing (tm).
Nail
First Post
Nail
First Post
The half-level bonus (or penalty -> whatever) applies only to PCs. It doesn't apply to monsters. To make it work on monsters you'd have to start with their "+1/level bonus", and subtract out your estimates for how all other effects are fit in.
The OP (if I understand him correctly) didn't want to worry about level at all. Thus he'd have to rebalance monsters (which would mean more than subtracting 1/2 level) so that level had no effect on how well (or poorly) you attacked or defended. That is, he wanted to replicate the default "hit 50% assumption" across all levels.
If, instead, he meant "simply impose a -1/2 level penalty on all PC and monster stats", then I agree that the net difference is the same. But the PCs would find much less difference in attacking creatures above and below their own level. Given that we know monsters advance at +1/level, we can guess that this difference is reduced from +1/level to +1/2 level.
I can't see how that would be a Good Thing(tm). Given the responses in this thread, it's clear YMMV.
Nail
First Post
It occurs to me that in addition to the "less difference" problem, subtracting the +1/2 level also emphasizes magic item choices much more than they are now, at least proportionally.
That is: a 15th level Fighter is only 15th level as long as he has his +4 Longsword of Awesomeness. That's how it'd feel, anyway.
Given where I want gear to be (in the background), I like the subtracting +1/2 level idea even less.
That is: a 15th level Fighter is only 15th level as long as he has his +4 Longsword of Awesomeness. That's how it'd feel, anyway.
Given where I want gear to be (in the background), I like the subtracting +1/2 level idea even less.
Szatany
First Post
Ok, I haven't considered that. But I don't like the idea of changing base chance to +-50% across all levels in all scenarios. This is taking things too far IMO as it makes the game..well bland. On the other hand, removing the +1/2 modifier from PCs and by extention reducing monsters' stats by 1/2 level is a valid idea and worth exploring.
Szatany
First Post
I don't think that's accurate, I think the problem lies in the peoples perception and there alone. Under currect rules, if you are a 30th level and don't have +6 weapon, you will lag 6 points behind the number you are supposed to have. If you reduce (at 30th level) the PC attack bonus and monster's defenses by 15 each, you will still lag 6 points. Mechanically nothing will change, the chance to hit will be identical.
However, under 4e, your +6 bonus is only a fraction of that +30 you have from other sources, while under those proposed rules it is +6 of +15 or something similar, making it look like the bonus matters more (while in reality it doesn't).
You could state that players lose the +1/2 level bonus, but gain +1/5 level bonus on attack and damage rolls with appropriate weapons and implements and to defenses with armor they are proficient with. Then you remove bonuses from magic items. I don't know if I like that idea but at least it almost completly removes magic item dependency.
Last edited:
This is an interesting prospect.
First, I just want to clarify what I thought the OP meant. First, remove the 1/2 level bonus from the PC's stat calculations. Then, subtract 1/2 of the challenges level from the DC of any target number in a challenge (be it a skill challenge DC, monster defense, or whatever), and the attack rolls that the challenge makes against party defenses, regardless of whether 1/2 of the level was used to calculate it (in most cases, it is not).
This will produce NO CHANGE in hit or success chances against challenges of your party's level. You just subtracted the same number from both sides of the equation.
I see this having three (or four) major effects.
One. It will tend to shift existing (that is, written without this rule in mind) challenges toward a single difficulty. That is, previously easy fights will become harder (since the party lost more from the D20 than the monster/skill challenge lost from the DC), and previously hard fights will become easier (the opposite).
Two. It will make writing new creatures and challenges more difficult. Currently, if you write a new monster, you have some padding in the design process. If the powers you have chosen are a little too good or too bad, the fact that the creatures attacks and defenses vary so aggressively by virtue of the simple level math smooths it out. Taking that away, even only by half, makes the balancing act that much harder.
Three. There will be weird fringe effects. What about truly fixed DCs, like wall climbing and gap jumping? High level characters no longer improve at these. Unless every wall now has to have a level as well as a DC, in which case, the higher level you make the challenge of the wall, the EASIER it is to climb (since it starts at a fixed DC, and you subtract half the level). DCs set by tier (such as monster lore, trapfinding, lockpicking, and so on) will have a "sawtooth" style plot of success chance based on the level of the device/monster, where, for the same character, it will be EASIER to pick/find/learn about higher level challenges than lower level ones, for the same character.
My point is, while an interesting idea, it would be really really weird. Unless, of course, I misunderstood the original idea, and the proposal is to remove 1/2 level from the players side, and whatever level based math went into the monster side (mostly full level).
In that case, the game would quickly become completely silly, with PCs being completely and utterly unable to miss by mid Paragon tier, and monsters hard pressed to ever hit.
--
gnfnrf
First, I just want to clarify what I thought the OP meant. First, remove the 1/2 level bonus from the PC's stat calculations. Then, subtract 1/2 of the challenges level from the DC of any target number in a challenge (be it a skill challenge DC, monster defense, or whatever), and the attack rolls that the challenge makes against party defenses, regardless of whether 1/2 of the level was used to calculate it (in most cases, it is not).
This will produce NO CHANGE in hit or success chances against challenges of your party's level. You just subtracted the same number from both sides of the equation.
I see this having three (or four) major effects.
One. It will tend to shift existing (that is, written without this rule in mind) challenges toward a single difficulty. That is, previously easy fights will become harder (since the party lost more from the D20 than the monster/skill challenge lost from the DC), and previously hard fights will become easier (the opposite).
Two. It will make writing new creatures and challenges more difficult. Currently, if you write a new monster, you have some padding in the design process. If the powers you have chosen are a little too good or too bad, the fact that the creatures attacks and defenses vary so aggressively by virtue of the simple level math smooths it out. Taking that away, even only by half, makes the balancing act that much harder.
Three. There will be weird fringe effects. What about truly fixed DCs, like wall climbing and gap jumping? High level characters no longer improve at these. Unless every wall now has to have a level as well as a DC, in which case, the higher level you make the challenge of the wall, the EASIER it is to climb (since it starts at a fixed DC, and you subtract half the level). DCs set by tier (such as monster lore, trapfinding, lockpicking, and so on) will have a "sawtooth" style plot of success chance based on the level of the device/monster, where, for the same character, it will be EASIER to pick/find/learn about higher level challenges than lower level ones, for the same character.
My point is, while an interesting idea, it would be really really weird. Unless, of course, I misunderstood the original idea, and the proposal is to remove 1/2 level from the players side, and whatever level based math went into the monster side (mostly full level).
In that case, the game would quickly become completely silly, with PCs being completely and utterly unable to miss by mid Paragon tier, and monsters hard pressed to ever hit.
--
gnfnrf
