Alternatives to the feat-tax solution to to-hit and F/R/W defenses

[eriktheguy]

Why is this a problem? ...
There is no significant abuse here. If a given player powergames, this is going to be a very minor portion of the powergaming ...
If they choose to ignore that [a low defense], I'm ok if a given PC gets hit by the BBEG on a NAD with a 3.

I agree totally, that is my point. The rule suggested in this forum is abusable by power gamers, but not more so than other rules, and definitely not game breaking. Given what you said I probably wouldn't even consider using 'option 2' in my previous post in any of my campaigns.

I told my players the reason I'll be giving them three stat raises at the 4/8 levels. If they choose to not spend those wisely, that's their lookout, and I won't feel guilty hitting them on a 2 or 3 against their weak defense. I did warn them about that.

...She wants her character to be more effective than everyone else's. There's a bit of a problem there - but I won't get into that here and derail the thread.

Exactly, if characters abuse this rule they will also suffer a bit, which makes it less like power gaming, and more like a tradeoff/gamble. Also, one of your players wanting to be the most effective is not a huge problem. The DMG suggests that for power gamers you let them get what they want occasionally, without letting them become too much more powerful than the rest of the party. Allowing your player to abuse this rule a bit will simply allow her to be a bit more powerful than the party some of the time, which is pretty much what the DMG prescribes for her type of player. If the power gamer has fun by occasionally blowing up monsters in ways that seem to bend the rules, it's okay, as long as game balance is maintained overall.

 

[Elric]

From what I read, the solution (+1 to 3 stats at 4/8/14/18/24/28) has the problem that players can use it to powergame rather than to boost their weak defense. I see two simple solutions...

Leave it: Let the players simply choose stats for the sake of attacks and suffer when their weakest defense leaves them vulnerable in some battles.

Stop it: Require the stat increases to be in the three stat categories, you must increase Str or Con, Dex or Int, Wis or Cha

I'm not sure what abusive build you are thinking of that would boost two stats that affect different FRWs under the existing rules, but would primarily boost a third stat that affects one of those same two FRWs under the (+1 to 3 stats at 4/8... levels) rule.

There are certainly abusive builds that would boost 2 of the same FRW given this option (Battlerager Vigor Fighters, for example), but most of those builds would have boosted two stats that add to the same FRW anyway under the current rules. So when you add a third stat boost, these characters will have better FRWs than they would otherwise, like everyone else. Have anything particular in mind?

 

[eriktheguy]

I'm not sure what abusive build you are thinking of that would boost two stats that affect different FRWs under the existing rules, but would primarily boost a third stat that affects one of those same two FRWs under the (+1 to 3 stats at 4/8... levels) rule.

There are certainly abusive builds that would boost 2 of the same FRW given this option (Battlerager Vigor Fighters, for example), but most of those builds would have boosted two stats that add to the same FRW anyway under the current rules. So when you add a third stat boost, these characters will have better FRWs than they would otherwise, like everyone else. Have anything particular in mind?

Actually, the characters that boost two of the same stat even when only two stat boosts are given to them are what I had in mind when I said that I prefer the 'leave it' solution (I was actually thinking of wand wizards and axe fighters). I don't really think any major abuses are possible with this rule, and I think that this fix is the best one suggested in this thread (in conjunction with +1 to attacks and F/R/W at 5/10/15).
EDIT: What I'm trying to say is that I think that the fix suggested in this forum is excellent!

 

[eamon]

Actually, the characters that boost two of the same stat even when only two stat boosts are given to them are what I had in mind when I said that I prefer the 'leave it' solution (I was actually thinking of wand wizards and axe fighters). I don't really think any major abuses are possible with this rule, and I think that this fix is the best one suggested in this thread (in conjunction with +1 to attacks and F/R/W at 5/10/15).
EDIT: What I'm trying to say is that I think that the fix suggested in this forum is excellent!

Sorry for the thread necro - but this thread seems to be what I'm looking for. I too am unhappy with the expertise +epic defense feats and in particular with the poor scaling of the defenses, and am looking for an alternative.

However, I'm not happy with the suggestion that a 3rd stat be bumped - this affects inter-class balance heavily.

Imagine for instance a two-bladed ranger Str/Dex/Wis, who all of the sudden can avoid chain/scale feats, and can take the best of the storm-warden and pitfighter builds.

Or worse, a barbarian - these guys can't afford a decent Dex mod usually, and get a compensating class feature (though they'll still be low on AC, generally) - now, all of the sudden, they'll be ahead of the curve by 3 points of Reflex and AC, and can still have the rest of their cake too.

Any class that wants 3 ability scores and was balanced in the old system, will now gain quite an advantage in the form of +6 to an ability score over the course of the game. Previously expensive feat prereqs will be cheaper. Hybrid and/or multiclass characters may grow overstrong.

Basically, this change will affect a lot of the game. What if a strength-paladin get's a "fixer" feat for his divine challenge in the upcoming divine power - this fix might let him get both the benefits of a good cha score and of "the fix". It's hard to say exactly how much the game will be impacted; but are you willing to risk it?

 

[KarinsDad]

Sorry for the thread necro - but this thread seems to be what I'm looking for. I too am unhappy with the expertise +epic defense feats and in particular with the poor scaling of the defenses, and am looking for an alternative.

However, I'm not happy with the suggestion that a 3rd stat be bumped - this affects inter-class balance heavily.

Imagine for instance a two-bladed ranger Str/Dex/Wis, who all of the sudden can avoid chain/scale feats, and can take the best of the storm-warden and pitfighter builds.

I don't understand. Sure, he could be a great Stormwarden/Pit Fighter.

He would gain +3 damage for Pit Fighter over a normal Stormwarden / Pit Fighter.

What's your point? The guy is probably already averaging 30 or so points of damage per successful hit (without including Hunter's Quarry). What's 3 more? It's the equivalent of the Weapon Focus feat.

Plus, he has to give up Epic Destiny to accomplish this. No insta-heal when going to zero hit points. No super cool attack powers or power regain powers. Just some extra damage and some Paragon level Encounter attack powers.

At high levels, monsters have so many more relative hit points than PCs do that this would actually be a good thing. The striker is still a striker, even at high level.

Or worse, a barbarian - these guys can't afford a decent Dex mod usually, and get a compensating class feature (though they'll still be low on AC, generally) - now, all of the sudden, they'll be ahead of the curve by 3 points of Reflex and AC, and can still have the rest of their cake too.

This would need a house rule. The REASON barbarians have the class feature is because of the math bug. So, drop the class feature OR only allow Barbarians to get a boost to 2 ability scores instead of 3. Simple.

Just because WotC started throwing in a series of fixes into PHB II does not mean that the DM cannot make it easy on himself and fix the game system itself instead.

Basically, this change will affect a lot of the game. What if a strength-paladin get's a "fixer" feat for his divine challenge in the upcoming divine power - this fix might let him get both the benefits of a good cha score and of "the fix". It's hard to say exactly how much the game will be impacted; but are you willing to risk it?

Sure. It's not a risk at all. Or at least a lot less of a risk than the plethora of more potent feats and powers that WotC is adding to the splat books.

It's fixing the math.

 

[Elric]

I don't understand. Sure, he could be a great Stormwarden/Pit Fighter.

He would gain +3 damage for Pit Fighter over a normal Stormwarden / Pit Fighter.

What's your point? The guy is probably already averaging 30 or so points of damage per successful hit (without including Hunter's Quarry). What's 3 more? It's the equivalent of the Weapon Focus feat.

Plus, he has to give up Epic Destiny to accomplish this. No insta-heal when going to zero hit points. No super cool attack powers or power regain powers. Just some extra damage and some Paragon level Encounter attack powers.

I'm not sure what you're referring to. How can a character give up his epic destiny to take a second Paragon Path? What he means is that a Str/Wis/Dex boosting ranger can take advantage of all of the powers and feats requiring a high Wisdom (e.g., Armor Splinter) that a Pit Fighter would take and all of the abilities requiring a high Dexterity (e.g., not spending feats for Heavy Armor, high Stealth, using a bow effectively, Flail or Heavy Blade Mastery).

This would need a house rule. The REASON barbarians have the class feature is because of the math bug. So, drop the class feature OR only allow Barbarians to get a boost to 2 ability scores instead of 3. Simple.

Dropping Barbarian Agility would leave the (light-armor) Barbarian who didn't boost Dex before but does now worse off for AC/Reflex over most of his career, since the Barbarian Agility benefits occur faster. Boosting 2 ability scores instead of 3 seems unfair to the Barbarian as well, since he won't get the benefit of qualifying for feats. My tentative proposal would be to make Barbarian Agility not scale; it's just a flat +1 to AC and Reflex while in light armor. This keeps Barbarians somewhat ahead of the curve they used to be on, rather than somewhat behind, and shouldn't be hard to implement.

As I said on page 1 of this thread, boosting 3 ability scores is a larger change in balance between classes than +1 to hit and FRWs at levels 5/15/25. Some of this would be beneficial; for example, boosting 3 ability scores fixes the terrible scaling for AC of a Bear Shaman or Con/Cha Warlock who doesn't use Heavy Armor.

If you only used +1 to hit and FRWs at levels 5/15/25, you'd fix most of the scaling issues besides a character having a weak FRW. It would probably work out fine.

 

[KarinsDad]

I'm not sure what you're referring to. How can a character give up his epic destiny to take a second Paragon Path?

I misread a sentence in the PHB and thought that was possible. Nevermind.

Dropping Barbarian Agility would leave the (light-armor) Barbarian who didn't boost Dex before but does now worse off for AC/Reflex over most of his career, since the Barbarian Agility benefits occur faster.

Bah. 12 levels out of 30. Who cares? He has +2 better AC than the Rogue right off the bat (Hide +1 vs. Leather). Plus, the Barbarian would gain a bonus to some skills.

As is, the Barbarian is better than a Rogue. Who cares -1 AC for 12 levels compared to the jacked up AC that WotC gave the Barbarian?

 

[Elric]

Bah. 12 levels out of 30. Who cares?

It's 17 levels if you start with an even Dex score. 1-7, 11-13, 21-27.

 

[KarinsDad]

It's 17 levels if you start with an even Dex score. 1-7, 11-13, 21-27.

You know, I have to not post when I am tired.

I suspect that some players would have their Barbarian take heavy armor right away because comparing a book 18 Dex Rogue's to a 14 Dex Barbarian's AC (without feats or shields or epic) with magic at levels 3, 6, 11, 16, 21, 26 yields:

1 16 16
2 17 17
3 18 18
4 19 19
5 19 19
6 21 21
7 21 21
8 23 22
9 23 22
10 24 23
11 25 25
12 26 26
13 26 26
14 28 27
15 28 27
16 31 30
17 31 30
18 32 31
19 32 31
20 33 32
21 35 35
22 36 36
23 36 36
24 37 37
25 37 37
26 40 40
27 40 40
28 42 41
29 42 41
30 43 42

 

[eamon]

I like the simplicity of the "just add +1 to three scores" approach, but when I suggest a house-rule, I'd like to be sure that it's truly better that the WotC alternative.



Making the barbarian's bonus a non-scaling +1 is a decent fix - for this problem. But I can't oversee all the various combo's and interactions. How much better will a starlock now be, now that he can have 2 secondary stats? A tempest that can gain scimitar dance, pit fighter and marked scourge? A bard that's even better at multiclassing?

You don't need to be an abusive player to pick an obvious combo; and there are many, many combo's that become possible with the advent of a third +1. Some of them may well overshadow the rest, and that would be bad for balance, but take a lot of work to detect up front. You'd further need to evaluate all the new material in this new light. Right now, even dragon magazine stuff works fine out of the box - with this change, you never know.

Alternatively, you could just increase the lowest defense - being the defense where the ability mod plus the new defense bonus is lowest.

That would make the new rule - +1 to to-hit, FRW, and an extra +1 to the lowest of FRW (before feats and other modifiers) at levels 5, 15, and 25.

Thus, to-hit and FRW would all scale by +28, and AC by +27. This would have little impact on class balance, meaning that eventually "fixes" to the shaman or whatnot would just work out of the box, and classes such as the barbarian don't require special treatment. Once per tier, you'd need to compute the "basic" FRW scores to find the lowest one - not particularly onerous; and you could just let the player choose too (it's probably in their best interest to balance the defenses). No changes to masterwork armor are necessary.

The only problem is that I'm not sure how easy this would be to implement in the current character builder.

Finally, a +1 to hit and to FRW at 5,15, and 25 even without extra attention for the weakest score is probably fine - that missing +3 isn't going to be terribly problematic. In short, isn't a +1 to three scores at stat-boosting levels a disproportionate measure for a fairly small problem? The big problem (overall bad scaling) is easy to fix, and the fact that one defense lags slightly is less problematic than opening up a whole swath of new & untested, potentially unbalancing build options.