Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Alex319" data-source="post: 5098012" data-attributes="member: 45678">About the shields and weapons:&nbsp;Do all the &quot;no change&quot; enetries on the +3 proficiency weapons mean that those weapons lose their comparative attack bonuses but don't get anything in return? That would seem to make them strictly weaker than their +2 proficiency counterparts.&nbsp;Also, it seems like you made shields a lot worse. Currently, the cost of wielding a shield is that you need the proficiency feat to use it (unless you are already proficient) and it takes up one of your hands (so you can't use a 2-handed weapon) and the benefit is you get +1-2 static AC bonus. Your system essentially makes it so that in addition to all the normal costs, you only get the AC bonus if you accept a penalty to offense, or even give up your entire standard action. (How often do people actually use total defense in your experience? I've never seen it used in any game I have played.)&nbsp;&nbsp;I'm skeptical of this implication, though. Each additional level of armor proficiency is effectively a feat and possibly some stat points for +1 HP/tier in this system. It would be far more cost-effective just to take Toughness, which is +5 HP/tier for one feat.&nbsp;Also, by the way, another thing you haven't taken into account:&nbsp;In the existing system, weapon attacks tend to target AC most often, while implement attacks tend to target other defenses. Weapons get the proficiency bonus unlike implements, but other defenses tend to be lower than AC, which balances out. However by taking away the proficiency bonuses you are effectively reducing weapon attacks by 2 to 3 points vis-a-vis implement attacks.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Alex319, post: 5098012, member: 45678"] About the shields and weapons: Do all the "no change" enetries on the +3 proficiency weapons mean that those weapons lose their comparative attack bonuses but don't get anything in return? That would seem to make them strictly weaker than their +2 proficiency counterparts. Also, it seems like you made shields a lot worse. Currently, the cost of wielding a shield is that you need the proficiency feat to use it (unless you are already proficient) and it takes up one of your hands (so you can't use a 2-handed weapon) and the benefit is you get +1-2 static AC bonus. Your system essentially makes it so that in addition to all the normal costs, you only get the AC bonus if you accept a penalty to offense, or even give up your entire standard action. (How often do people actually use total defense in your experience? I've never seen it used in any game I have played.) I'm skeptical of this implication, though. Each additional level of armor proficiency is effectively a feat and possibly some stat points for +1 HP/tier in this system. It would be far more cost-effective just to take Toughness, which is +5 HP/tier for one feat. Also, by the way, another thing you haven't taken into account: In the existing system, weapon attacks tend to target AC most often, while implement attacks tend to target other defenses. Weapons get the proficiency bonus unlike implements, but other defenses tend to be lower than AC, which balances out. However by taking away the proficiency bonuses you are effectively reducing weapon attacks by 2 to 3 points vis-a-vis implement attacks. [/QUOTE]

Verification