+1/level instead of +½ level?

[CovertOps]

The original poster did not propose not adding primary attributes to hit/damage. He proposed not increasing ability scores as characters gain levels.

His point still somewhat remains in that if the stats have a secondary purpose (such as secondary effects on powers - for example Thunderwave does a push of WIS mod, class features such as Healer's Lore which adds WIS mod to all Healing keyword cleric powers) then these abilities get nerfed by getting rid of the stat bumps and just replacing those with +'s to hit and damage.

Another alternative I have been considering is replacing the to hit bonus ONLY with:

Level +3

This would replace the following:
* Stat mod
* Enhancement
* 1/2 level

It does NOT replace the following:
* + Proficiency bonus
* + Class features (dagger +1 for Rogues, +1 Weapon Talent for Fighters, etc.)
* + bonuses from a specific power (such as Ranger Careful Strike +2)

I'm still interested in knowing what the goal or purpose of this change you want to make is. Change for change's sake isn't very useful.

 

[ggroy]

Another alternative I have been considering is replacing the to hit bonus ONLY with:

Level +3

This would replace the following:
* Stat mod
* Enhancement
* 1/2 level

Is enhancement from magic weapons or feats?

 

[ggroy]

Another alternative I have been considering is replacing the to hit bonus ONLY with:

Level +3

This would replace the following:
* Stat mod
* Enhancement
* 1/2 level

Looking at your proposal, I assume this level+3 modifier is meant to replace a player character's primary attack mode in combat (ie. INT for wizards, STR for fighters/rangers/paladins, WIS for clerics/druids, etc ...)? For example, this proposal would seem a bit odd for a wizard with an 8 or 10 strength, doing a STR attack with a staff or weapon they are not proficient at.

The question is whether the equation:

[level/2] + stat mod + enhancement = level + 3

or stat mod + enhancement = level - [level/2] + 3 (*)

(where [level/2] is level/2 rounded down)

makes sense for the levels of interest.

As an example, minmaxers like to have 18 or 20 in their primary stat, which would give a respective +4 or +5 stat mod. Taking 18 for the primary stat, equation (*) becomes:

1 + enhancement = level - [level/2]

Solving this equation for various levels:

level 1, enhancement = 0
level 2, enhancement = 0
level 3, enhancement = +1
level 4, enhancement = +1
level 5, enhancement = +2
level 6, enhancement = +2
level 7, enhancement = +3

At level 8, the mixmaxer would have already added +2 to their primary stat, which changes the equation (*) to

2 + enhancement = level - [level/2]

Continuing on, we get:

level 8, enhancement = +2
level 9, enhancement = +3
level 10, enhancement = +3
level 11, enhancement = +4
level 12, enhancement = +4
level 13, enhancement = +5

At level 14, the minmaxer would have another +2 added to their primary stat, which changes the equation (*) to

3 + enhancement = level - [level/2]

Continuing on, we get:

level 14, enhancement = +4
level 15, enhancement = +5
level 16, enhancement = +5
level 17, enhancement = +6
level 18, enhancement = +6
level 19, enhancement = +7
level 20, enhancement = +7

At level 21, the minmaxer would have another +2 added to their primary stat, which changes the equation (*) to

4 + enhancement = level - [level/2]

Continuing on, we get:

level 21, enhancement = +7
level 22, enhancement = +7
level 23, enhancement = +8
level 24, enhancement = +8
level 25, enhancement = +9
level 26, enhancement = +9
level 27, enhancement = +10

At level 28, the minmaxer would have another +2 added to their primary stat, which changes the equation (*) to

5 + enhancement = level - [level/2]

Continuing on, we get:

level 28, enhancement = +9
level 29, enhancement = +10
level 30, enhancement = +10

One can compare this to the expected enhancement bonuses on page 225 of the 4E PHB:

level 1-5, enhancement = +1
level 6-10, enhancement = +2
level 11-15, enhancement = +3
level 16-20, enhancement = +4
level 21-25, enhancement = +5
level 26-30, enhancement = +6

This level+3 to-hit bonus proposal appears to overshoot somewhat in the paragon and epic tiers, and slightly nerfed at levels 1 and 2.

From my experiences with playing at paragon and epic tiers, I got the impression that combat took longer in general at higher levels even when equipped with appropriate level magic weapons.

 

[ggroy]

Continuing from the last post, let's look at the pattern of:

[level/2] + stat mod + enhancement = to-hit mod

starting with a minmaxed primary stat of 18 at level 1 (ie. stat mod of +4).

The enhancement follows the assumed pattern from page 225 from the 4E PHB:

level 1-5, enhancement = +1
level 6-10, enhancement = +2
level 11-15, enhancement = +3
level 16-20, enhancement = +4
level 21-25, enhancement = +5
level 26-30, enhancement = +6

The stat boosts are assumed to be added to the player's primary stat with enough stat boosts at levels 8, 14, 21, and 28, to affect the primary stat mod.

(stat mod = +4)
level 1, to-hit mod = +5
level 2-3, to-hit mod = +6
level 4-5, to-hit mod = +7
level 6-7, to-hit mod = +9

(stat mod = +5)
level 8-9, to-hit mod = +11
level 10, to-hit mod = +12
level 11, to-hit mod = +13
level 12-13, to-hit mod = +14

(stat mod = +6)
level 14-15, to-hit mod = +16
level 16-17, to-hit mod = +18
level 18-19, to-hit mod = +19
level 20, to-hit mod = +20

(stat mod = +7)
level 21, to-hit mod = +22
level 22-23, to-hit mod = +23
level 24-25, to-hit mod = +24
level 26-27, to-hit mod = +26

(stat mod = +8)
level 28-29, to-hit mod = +28
level 30-31, to-hit mod = +29

As an approximation, a possible replacement for [level/2] + stat mod + enhancement = to-hit mod

to-hit mod = level + 3, at heroic tiers of levels 1 to 10
to-hit mod = level + 2, at paragon tiers of levels 11 to 20
to-hit mod = level, at epic tiers of levels 21 to 30.

Not quite a single formula.

Looking at the patterns, I wonder whether it would be easier to just use a to-hit mod = +level, and changing the assumptions of the monsters and skills accordingly to acommodate this. The enhancement bonus of magic weapons for the to-hit and damage, could be stripped out with only the magical properties remaining which may be triggered by critical successes (or something else).

EDIT: More generally, these approximate to-hit mod equations for a primary stat mod differing from +4 are:

to-hit mod = level + 3 + (primary_stat_mod - 4), at heroic tiers of levels 1 to 10

to-hit mod = level + 2 + (primary_stat_mod - 4) , at paragon tiers of levels 11 to 20

to-hit mod = level + (primary_stat_mod - 4), at epic tiers of levels 21 to 30.

 

[WalterKovacs]

The concept of the increasing stats over time being lost would have an impact. Immediately, odd stats would be nearly worthless (and the stat prerequisites would be altered as a result). Stats increasing over time do not simply have an impact on attacks and defenses. There are skills (which would either significantly change, or use the 1/2 level trick, but not improve as much over time). There are also a number of rider effects that improve over time as your stats increase. If nothing else, an epic tier character has an extra healing surge to work with simply from the free 11/21 bumps.

On a strategic level, there are decisions on how to handle character progression that would be removed as well. Starting with a 17 instead of an 18 in your main stat to use those last 4 points to meet prerequisites or having higher secondary or tertiary stats for your NADs, for example. Taking expertise now or later. Making sure you have the prereqs for feats at the right level, etc. Over time, you can slightly tweak your character as you level by perhaps changing your mind and pumping a different stat than you did when your character started. There was the trade off of how to fill the three necessary slots of weapon, armor and neck slot ... which was the most important for you to get that extra plus one ASAP, and which would you wait for the right rider effect, etc. With masterwork armor, you had the option of going for more AC, or for the bonus to a NAD, or even DR. While you did get bonuses over time ... the ones tied to feats allowed you to pick the time you got them. The ones tied to weapons were a matter of when you found them, or when you bought them ... not whn you leveled up.

While it may make the math simpler and more pure (and could work very well for a low magic campaign) it does basically lock you into many of your choices at level 1. Your characters stats will remain the same for your entire career. Which means you have to meet every prerequisite that is stat based at level one, which is harsher than the current system (even if it's currently based to have a plan from level 1 forward ... you can at least start pumping a stat at every opportunity if you want to get a stat up over time to meet a prereq, or "set it and forget it" like a wizard starting with CHA 12 for spell focus and letting the auto bumps do the work). With paragon paths and epic destinies allowing for further stat bumps or boosts to attack progression (and specialized feats like the Gnome Illusions and Charms, or Tiefling Fire, etc) there are ways to get more attack boosts over time, at an opportunity cost, for those that want to get as much as possible (or to compensate for a lower starting stat, or putting both points into non-attack stats a couple times to shore up NADs or prerequisites, etc). The system would be a lot simpler, but a lot of complex options would be stripped down as well. Not to mention any feeling of the game not changing as you level up would be made more apparent by this system, as a party of 3rd level characters against a level 5 monster, and the same group at level 23 against a level 25 monster would, outside of variation of defenses based on role, have the same hit percentages for and against as they would before. If in both cases it was say, a soldier ... they would be practically the same. So the difference would come down to nastier condition effects available at higher levels mostly.

While expertise and various defense bonus feats was a clunky "fix" to keep the PCs on par with monsters over their career, and the systems round about way to add up to effectively +1/level does leave traps for players that don't know what they are doing ... the alternative seems a bit bland as it removes a number of important decisions that players need to make over time (part of the idea was to give fans signifcant choices whenever they level). The choice of 2 stats meant that, while your attack stat is pretty much automatic, you still have to pick a second. You can't choose to improve all your NADs each time, you have to have a weak spot, or spread yourself thin. In some cases, you even have to choose between improving a second NAD, or going with STR/CON as a barbarian, or WIS/CHA as a prescient bard, etc. While some choice seems like only the illussion of choice, eliminating those choices completely and effectively making a characters attack and defense progression be on autopilot eliminates a lot of players control over their character over time. They get to pick the powers and the feats ... but from level one, most players will have a pretty good idea what their character will look like at level 30. And, since the only options the player is left to make are retrainable ones ... except for class, race, background, paragon path and epic destiny ... he doesn't really have many decisions outside of 1/11/21 where he needs to make the decision carefully as it will stick.

 

[ValhallaGH]

There seems to be two problematic "points", the first is that the +10 applies to damage, but the +15 from levels do not. Is there a solution to this?

The two-part solution that I favor is the following:
1) Return stat increases to the character progression, as they were before you touched the rules.
2) Remove ability score bonus from all attack calculations. Any attack that would have added an ability score bonus instead adds +2 (or +3 if you want to be generous to your players).

This leaves the damage and rider effect progressions alone while keeping the evenly-scaling attack bonuses you've generated via the basic house rule.

It also is similar / identical to what CovertOps mentioned up thread. I just missed that post when I first wrote this.


Good luck.

 

[Alisair Longreach]

Instead of adding +1 per level I use a progression of +8 per 10 levels as this leaves room for stat increases and keeps pace with Monster levels.

You have to ban the Expertise feats and remove the masterwork bonus from light armor.

 

[CovertOps]

Is enhancement from magic weapons or feats?

Enhancement from magic weapons. I forgot to add that this also replaces/outlaws any of the Expertise type feats. If you account for that then this progression is right on the money.

Edit:
It also assumes that you have a starting primary stat of 18 (+4) at level 1 and makes some impossible multi-classes viable (while noting that with a lower attack stat you'll do slightly less damage, but that's not nearly as bad as having -3 to hit). For example: Multi Fighter/Wizard with 16 STR, 16 INT, 13 WIS....your fighter and wizard attacks may only get +3 damage from stat mod, but you'll still get +4 to hit as if you had an 18.

 

[CovertOps]

Looking at your proposal, I assume this level+3 modifier is meant to replace a player character's primary attack mode in combat (ie. INT for wizards, STR for fighters/rangers/paladins, WIS for clerics/druids, etc ...)? For example, this proposal would seem a bit odd for a wizard with an 8 or 10 strength, doing a STR attack with a staff or weapon they are not proficient at.

Actually this is exactly as intended. A first level Wizard with an 8 STR would get a to-hit bonus of:
* +4 (level + 3)
* +2 or 3 (for a proficient weapon)

So assuming a Wizard using a Staff it would look like this:

Melee Basic Attack
Attack: +6 vs. AC
Damage: 1[W] - 1 (1d8 - 1)

Now if you think that is somehow overpowered because it actually allows the Wizard to do something useful if stuck in melee for some reason then you're welcome to have that opinion, but this is really aimed at multi-class characters being functional no matter what 2 classes they pick even if the prime stats don't align for those classes. It reduces MAD problems at the cost of damage which is the whole way that scaling is done in 4e anyway so IMO that is the perfect way to make multi-classes weaker is less damage for more versatility.

 

[DracoSuave]

Actually this is exactly as intended. A first level Wizard with an 8 STR would get a to-hit bonus of:
* +4 (level + 3)
* +2 or 3 (for a proficient weapon)

So assuming a Wizard using a Staff it would look like this:

Melee Basic Attack
Attack: +6 vs. AC
Damage: 1[W] - 1 (1d8 - 1)

Now if you think that is somehow overpowered because it actually allows the Wizard to do something useful if stuck in melee for some reason then you're welcome to have that opinion, but this is really aimed at multi-class characters being functional no matter what 2 classes they pick even if the prime stats don't align for those classes. It reduces MAD problems at the cost of damage which is the whole way that scaling is done in 4e anyway so IMO that is the perfect way to make multi-classes weaker is less damage for more versatility.

I'm going to call bullocks on two classes not aligning.

What is happening is that two classes don't align -perfectly- and that there is a cost for doing so.

For example, a Wizard and a Figher do not dovetail... but you have -exactly- the attribute support you need for this. You put points into Strength and Intellegence. You may be lacking in some secondary benefits for certain powers, but you're not doing it for perfect efficacy in one class, you're multiclassing for the purpose of hybridizing and expanding your breadth.

What the system DOES cost you, however, is depth in a single class. You're making multiclassing better simply for the purpose of making it better, and willing to sacrifice single-classing's depth in order to do so... and that is a bad mistake with this system.

What you end up with, then, are single-class characters that cannot enhance their secondary attributes so that multi-class characters that cannot enhance their secondary attributes can... do what, exactly? Cause the problem still exists... the new way, these multi-class characters STILL can't enhance their secondary attributes.

There ARE ways around it. For example, Bards can take Combat Virtuoso and that solves the issue a LOT better than nerfing single-classes just because 'attribute dependancy is bad, mkay?'