So if you based everything around abilities being 10-11, and all difficulties being based around 1st-level, then the PC's become more powerful as relative to the world around them. I'm tired so I'm probably not articulating this very well but the point I'm trying to get at is that at 1st-level an average PC might start with, say, a 50% chance to hit the average monster. But by 30th-level, they should have somewhere around a 90% chance to hit the average monster.
And by that, I don't mean 90% chance to hit a 1st-level monster, I mean a 90% chance to hit a standard 30th-level monster.
This whole notion of balancing things around 50% hit rate throughout 30 levels seems insane to me. Shouldn't the characters be getting better at what they do?
I'm really starting to like this idea. It'd require a fair bit of thought but I think I just found my next project!
I don't think a 90% (base) hit chance would be much fun. If at level 30 the PCs have a 90% chance to hit (95% with flank, thanks to the fact that you'll always miss on a nat 1) then I can't imagine how you'd make the end of the campaign at all challenging (I'm assuming the 90% success rate applies to skill checks as well). Cutting a swath through your enemies without breaking a sweat can be amusing once in a while, but it sucks when it happens too often (IMO). Besides, you can achieve the same hit chance by sending level 22 creatures against the level 30 party, with much less effort.
PCs will have numerous attack bonuses by level 30 (from powers, feats, paragon paths, epic destinies, etc) which push their attack bonus (theoretically) beyond the base 50% chance. Establishing a base 90% chance to hit essentially guarantees a 95% chance to hit (because finding an extra +1 to hit from
somewhere is not hard) and renders the rest of those bonuses meaningless. Where's the fun in that?
That said, I've been toying with the bonuses myself lately. I might run a sandbox style game sometime in the future (sort of a fantasy version of Fallout) and don't want the game to degenerate into a whiff-fest if low level characters happen upon high level monsters. Basically, I want to be able to seed the sandbox with monsters of varying levels without worrying too much about an automatic TPK or a grindfest occurring; I realize that some consider that part and parcel to a good sandbox, but it's something I'd rather avoid in
my sandbox.
I did want to retain
some differentiation between low and high level characters/creatures beyond just damage to discourage PCs from taking on creatures too far outside their level (my solution was a 10 point spread over 30 levels, such that a level 1 character has a 50% chance to hit a level 1 monster, 40% to hit a level 6, and only 5% (nat 20) to hit a level 30). The (roughly) 50% hit chance is preserved against equal level creatures. Additionally, I recognize that it's nice to see bigger numbers with higher level (yes, I am reducing some of the fun of this by deflating the numbers, but hopefully I've replaced that fun with the joy that comes from smooth combat).
One (admittedly theoretical) advantage I've noticed for this approach is that a normal monster roughly 10 levels higher (than the party) is largely equivalent to a solo of equal level (to the party). The norm is slightly tougher while the solo has greater versatility (and both give almost the same xp). I'm not certain how well it would work in actual play, but I did find it interesting to note.
Here's what I have so far:
-For PCs, remove base magic item bonuses (+1 to +6 for weapon, neck, armor), level-based ability score increases (4/8/11/14/18/21/24/28), and the 1/2 level bonus. Note that ability score increases that are not level-based (such as the bonus from Demigod) still apply.
-PCs receive a 1/3 level bonus (3/6/9/12/15/18/21/24/27/30) to their attack, damage, ability score modifiers (from which initiative and skills are derived), as well as AC and defenses.
-At levels 7/14/21/28, PCs receive a +1 to any non-damage ability score based effects. (For example, the number of squares pushed with a Wizard's Thunderwave). This is to compensate for the fact that the character's ability scores no longer increase by level.
-Ban Expertise and the defense boosting feats (since they ruin the new math), but lower or remove ability score prerequisites on feats in general (ability scores now rarely increase so you should compensate).
-Remove masterwork armors. (Without scaling ability scores, heavy armor doesn't need a boost to match light armors).
-Remove the "accuracy bonuses" inherent to a few powers (the Dragonborn's Dragon Breath for example). If it get's a +2 to start that increases to +4 at 11th and +6 at 21st, those bonuses have to be removed because they were only there originally to balance them magic weapon bonuses. Accurate attacks, like the Ranger's Careful Attack, retain their bonus to hit and are differentiated by the fact that that bonus does not scale.
-For monsters, reduce their attack bonus, AC and defenses by 2/3rds the monster's level (rounded down). (Damage remains the same along with hp, and are the big differences between a low and high level monster).
-Reduce ability score modifiers (as well as skills and initiative) by 1/3 the monster's level (rounded down).
(Technically, it's -5/12ths the creature's level, but I prefer to keep math simple at the game table; -1/3 is close enough. You could instead reduce the ability scores by 1/2 the creature's level and the ability score modifiers (after adjusting for the new ability score) by 1/6 the creature's level, but one step is easier than three).
-DCs increase by 1 for every 3 levels (assuming equal level challenge).
If it's 90% chance to hit and do damage, and 20% chance to do the extra special thing (stun) or 55% chance to do the pretty cool thing (slide), sure... but at that point I think the amount of work required is too much.
