BAB and Saves vs Skills? (Why these numbers?)

[mmadsen]

D&D has built into it a few now-familiar numeric progressions: BAB equal to level (for Fighters), level x 3/4 (for Clerics), or level/2 (for Wizards); Saves of either level/2 + 2 or level/3; hit points that increase by one Hit Die per level; AC and damage that don't increase at all; and skills that increase (if maxed out) by one rank per level (for class skills) or one rank per two levels (for cross-class skills).

Lvl  BAB          Saves      AC Dmg Skills	
     Ftr Clr Wiz  Good Poor         Class Cross
 +1   +1  +0  +0   +2   +0   +0 +0   +4   +2
 +2   +2  +1  +1   +3   +0   +0 +0   +5   +2
 +3   +3  +2  +1   +3   +1   +0 +0   +6   +3
 +4   +4  +3  +2   +4   +1   +0 +0   +7   +3
 +5   +5  +3  +2   +4   +1   +0 +0   +8   +4
 +6   +6  +4  +3   +5   +2   +0 +0   +9   +4
 +7   +7  +5  +3   +5   +2   +0 +0  +10   +5
 +8   +8  +6  +4   +6   +2   +0 +0  +11   +5
 +9   +9  +6  +4   +6   +3   +0 +0  +12   +6
+10  +10  +7  +5   +7   +3   +0 +0  +13   +6
+11  +11  +8  +5   +7   +3   +0 +0  +14   +7
+12  +12  +9  +6   +8   +4   +0 +0  +15   +7
+13  +13  +9  +6   +8   +4   +0 +0  +16   +8
+14  +14 +10  +7   +9   +4   +0 +0  +17   +8
+15  +15 +11  +7   +9   +5   +0 +0  +18   +9
+16  +16 +12  +8  +10   +5   +0 +0  +19   +9
+17  +17 +12  +8  +10   +5   +0 +0  +20  +10
+18  +18 +13  +9  +11   +6   +0 +0  +21  +10
+19  +19 +14  +9  +11   +6   +0 +0  +22  +11
+20  +20 +15 +10  +12   +6   +0 +0  +23  +11

Obviously there are Feats that can affect these values in play, but the values form the skeleton that the other rules flesh out.

Do these progressions make sense? Are there other progressions that would make just as much -- or more -- sense? (If we were starting from scratch and didn't have to retrofit everything...)

For instance, BAB increases at a decent pace, but AC doesn't increase at all (intrinsically). Hit Points increase at a fantastic rate, but damage doesn't increase at all (again, intrinsically). What would happen if AC and Damage increased along with BAB?

What would happen if we converted BAB to a skill -- or a pair of skills (melee and missile)?

What would happen if we converted Saves to skills? (Could we convert spell DCs to 10 + caster level + bonuses?)

And do skills and Good Saves need the +3 or +2 bonus at first level? It certainly makes multiclassing less elegant.

(I've attached a small Excel graph of the various level-bonus progressions.)

 

[Gez]

I guess most numbers where chosen because they felt right.

Note that other d20 games (SW, WoT, maybe CoC) use a medium save progression as well (from 1 to 9, so it must be something like 2/5+1).

Skills starts at 4 because the first level skill points are multiplied by 4, and vice-versa. Why? Well, I think it was logical the first level would be the one who brought the most points -- for all the "before 1st level" apprenticeship.


I know that in my modified magic system, I'll bring in more numbers, since I introduce Caster Level as a set variable, like BAB. Which progress at full rate (classes that get 9th-level spells), 2/3 (classes that get 6th-level spells, and that actually get 7th-level spells with my modif), 1/2 (classes that gets 4th-level spells, and now reaches 5th-level spells); and 1/4 (non-spellcasting classes; just like no class has a BAB that don't progress, I didn't wanted to have classes with a CL that don't progress).

 

[Cerubus Dark]

Pfft... there you go again trying to bring your fancy logic into a game of fantasy.

 

[Crothian]

THe numbers work. Sure other numbers and other ways will probably work, but why re invent the wheel?

 

[jgbrowning]

THe numbers work. Sure other numbers and other ways will probably work, but why re invent the wheel?

My wheel is better!



joe b.

 

[Fast Learner]

My wheel is even better. Most wheels are just round and can roll.

My wheel is round AND can roll. And it's round. So there.

On topic I would guess this is the kind of thing they did when they came up with 3e. In my game designs so far (boardgames) it's funny how often you need to just set certain numbers and then adjust your other numbers around them. There doesn't need to be too much rhyme or reason behind some of the numbers as long as the other numbers all work with it. For example ability bonuses are +1 per two levels above 10. The designers could have just as easily made them +1 per three levels or +1 per level as long as they adjusted everything else in the game to account for quick ability increases (like slightly higher numbers for armor AC bonuses and cheaper magic armor, as examples).

By that I don't mean to say it's not worth reviewing and considering: just that it's likely that some of the numbers are where they are "just because". And there's not necessarily anything wrong with that if it's not screwing up anything else too badly.

 

[Umbran]

What would happen if AC and Damage increased along with BAB?

If AC and Damage rose along with BAB and HP, as you rose in levels, you'd not see any change in combat. All fights would be like you were first level. If there's no difference in their rate of increase, there's no point in increasing them, really.

AC doesn't rise with BAB, so as you rise in level, you hit more frequently. But, since damage doesn't really rise with HP, those hits do proportionately less. The end result is the image of more epic action. You hit more often, so it looks like something is going on, but you need to hit more times in order to finish the fight.

This is probably a good thing. It lengthens the fight, and allows more time to take advantage of the greater number of tactical and dramatic options available, giving high-powered fights more variability of action than low-powered ones.

 

[Mark]

What would happen if AC and Damage increased along with BAB?

You could more easily oscillate between a magic-rich and a magic-rare game with less trouble, IMO, with combat more stable and associated with level, class, and skills rather than being magic dependent. You'd have to incorporate those same progressions into creatures, of course.

 

[Piratecat]

Under Eric's theory that says "stuff wih numbers goes in rules," off we go!

 

[mmadsen]

Why start at first level?

Skills starts at 4 because the first level skill points are multiplied by 4, and vice-versa. Why? Well, I think it was logical the first level would be the one who brought the most points -- for all the "before 1st level" apprenticeship.

I think this is a holdover from earlier editions where characters were expected to start at first level. If we started characters with three NPC/non-adventurer levels, say, and one PC/adventurer level, we wouldn't need to kludge on extra skill levels at "first level".

Of course, we'd probably want/need classes that didn't boost BAB, Saves, Hit Dice, etc. for most background classes, (a) for "realism", and (b) to reduce bookkeeping during character creation.