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

[Ridley's Cohort]

Just like there is innate BAB, there should be some skills that are innate. And, I think that BAB itself shouldn't be innate, but purchased instead.

A strong argument, although I have a slightly different opinion regarding BAB.

I find I rather like how BAB works. It feels right to me that my high level wizard can pick up a sword and beat the tar out of an orc for the fun of it. I think it fits well into the rationale of a level based system.

Likewise, the rationale of a level based system suggests to me that heroes improve at least a little bit in every commonly used skill, just like wizards do with a sword.

As an implementation, some skills would be "Good" for a class and give a free rank every two levels, some would be "Poor" and give a free rank every three levels. (These designations could be independent of class/cross-class status. Or not.)

 

[Gez]

Why re-invent the wheel?

Because, actually, a linear wheel just don't make sense. For the wheel to be actually round, it requires more complex formulae than X*(level+Y). (Skills: X=1, Y=3; medium BAB: X=3/4, Y=0; good save: X=2/3, Y=2.)

If BAB and skills were to follow an exponential progression while AC and saves follow a logarithmic progression, we would be closer to something actually round.

^
|
V [color=blue]   --[/color][color=red]-- [/color]
a [color=blue] / [/color]    [color=red] \[/color]
l [color=blue]|  [/color]    [color=red]  |[/color]
u [color=green]|      [/color][color=yellow]  |[/color]
e [color=green] \     [/color][color=yellow] /[/color]
| [color=green]   --[/color][color=yellow]--[/color]
-
 |----Level---->

BAB
Skill
AC
Saves

Spoiler

This is the least useful contribution to this thread, I think.

 

[KarinsDad]

I find I rather like how BAB works. It feels right to me that my high level wizard can pick up a sword and beat the tar out of an orc for the fun of it. I think it fits well into the rationale of a level based system.

I do not have so much of a problem with that concept (i.e. that a Wizard can actually use a weapon a little) as I do with the fact that BAB is rarely used at mid levels and almost never used at high levels by most sorcerers and wizards. So, I have a bit of problem with unused "skills" getting better over time. In real life, skills are use it or lose it. BAB is the exact opposite of real life for most arcane spell casters.

As an implementation, some skills would be "Good" for a class and give a free rank every two levels, some would be "Poor" and give a free rank every three levels. (These designations could be independent of class/cross-class status. Or not.)

In my house rules, I gave Spot, Listen, and Sense Motive a free rank every 3 levels (Spot levels 1, 4, 7, ..., Listen levels 2, 5, 8, ..., Sense Motive levels 3, 6, 9, ...).

The reason I did not do it once per two levels is that I thought it infringed on the Rogue / Ranger skill set a little too much if I did (i.e. effectively a cross class skill full up for free for other classes).

So, at 18th level, all characters have at least a +6 in these 3 areas. Not great, but not shabby either. And my experience has been that many PCs boost that a little higher, not just the Rogues and Rangers. So, at that level with Will adds and such, most PCs have about +10 in these or so. The Rogues have +15 to +20 and still outshine the rest (Rogues get the free skill ranks as well, so it allows them to diversify a little more also).

Effectively, this boosts every character by +1 skill point per level, they just do not get to decide where to spend that point. C'est la vie.

 

[Dingleberry]

One specific factor to keep in mind is iterative attacks: if AC scales comparably to BAB, iteratives become much less likely to connect. As a result, the balance (such as it is) between high-level fighter types and high-level spellcasters would need to be thrown off.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

I do not have so much of a problem with that concept (i.e. that a Wizard can actually use a weapon a little) as I do with the fact that BAB is rarely used at mid levels and almost never used at high levels by most sorcerers and wizards. So, I have a bit of problem with unused "skills" getting better over time. In real life, skills are use it or lose it. BAB is the exact opposite of real life for most arcane spell casters.

The same logic may well apply to HPs. I see the progression of HPs and BAB as a genre convention of D&D -- a stylized metaphysical axiom that has nothing to do with realism.

IME a little more BAB is a convenient thing for wizards for throwing things like a torch or vial of holy water accurately, or using a touch attack spell. But I am not sure I would spend skill points for this convenience.

Your house rules look fun, Karinsdad.

I think that the skill points are one area in which a little tweaking would benefit the system. I find the rules as is make it very painful for many classes to buy even a meager number of ranks in a diversity of skills. I think a few peculiar skills help flesh out the character, and is something that should be actively encouraged. It makes the game more fun for everyone.

 

[Gez]

I do not have so much of a problem with that concept (i.e. that a Wizard can actually use a weapon a little) as I do with the fact that BAB is rarely used at mid levels and almost never used at high levels by most sorcerers and wizards. So, I have a bit of problem with unused "skills" getting better over time. In real life, skills are use it or lose it. BAB is the exact opposite of real life for most arcane spell casters.

Except for touch attack spells (both melee and ranged).

I've a "warmage" kind of class that practically only gets touch attack spells on its spell list, but with a good BAB.

 

[mmadsen]

I see the progression of HPs and BAB as a genre convention of D&D -- a stylized metaphysical axiom that has nothing to do with realism.

Agreed -- but did they choose the best way to implement "bad-ass-ness" within the rules? Could Saves go up as quickly as Skills or BAB? Could AC improve as quickly as Saves?

 

[DanMcS]

Agreed -- but did they choose the best way to implement "bad-ass-ness" within the rules? Could Saves go up as quickly as Skills or BAB? Could AC improve as quickly as Saves?

With limited numbers of spells per day, saves going up as quickly as skills would neuter spellcasters. Spell DCs are 10 + stat modifier + spell level, which by higher levels tends to approach 20-25.

Base saves vary from 6 to 12 by high levels, plus stat mods. Cancel out the stat mods, as they'll tend to be equivalent for evenly matched characters, and you get a save of d20 + [6-12] versus DCs of 15 to 19 for the powerful spells.

What you end up with (roughly) is that characters can usually make their good saves versus appropriate opponents, and often fail their bad ones, but have a chance of success or failure no matter what. Over the party, it balances out, because not everyone has the same good or bad save, so one spell won't usually take out everyone.

If saves went up faster (more like skills or BAB), spellcasters would get whupped.

Likewise for AC versus BAB, if it went up about as fast as BAB, combat would be interminable, since hps are also going up. Since D&D has scaling hps, it doesn't need scaling AC.

The system is pretty carefully balanced as is. It's not the only balance that could be struck, but if you change one of the parts, you pretty much need to redo the whole thing.

I've been working on writing a skill-based system for d20, with spellcasting, attack, defense, saves, etc governed by skills just like other activities are. It's a fat lot of work to get it to come out fair, but it seems doable.

 

[Philomel III]

We should just cut this D&D crap out and pick up our Role Master texts.

 

[KarinsDad]

We should just cut this D&D crap out and pick up our Role Master texts.

Rolemaster is my favorite game. Don't be dissing it now.

I even have house rules in my DND game to make it more like Rolemaster in some respects. Unfortunately, I cannot find enough players willing to play Rolemaster where I live right now.