Buffs and Maths (mini-rant)

[FireLance]

For instance, the notes under Bull's Strength say:

+2 to Attack and Damage*
+2 to Climb, Swim, and Jump checks
Carrying Capacity Increase

(etc.)

* Unless you're wielding a two-handed weapon, in which case it's +2 to Attack and +3 to damage if your current Strength score is 14 or higher.

Or unless you've got gauntlets of ogre power, in which case it's +1 to attack and +1 to damage, or +2 to damage if you're wielding a two-handed weapon and your current bonus to attack rolls from Strength is even, and your current Strength score is 14 or higher.

Or unless you've got Weapon Finesse and you're wielding a finessable weapon, in which case you get the damage bonus, but your bonus to attack rolls is capped by the amount your current bonus to attack rolls from Strength excceeds your bonus to attack rolls from Dexterity (minimum 0).

 

[Garboshnik]

There was a good thread about this a while back: http://www.enworld.org/archive/index.php/t-176055.html

I was pretty happy with the wardings/boosts idea that was presented there.

 

[Nail]

I wouldn't mind seeing a reduction in the "types" of bonuses. Rather, I'd like to see most types of buffs stack, but have a limit to the number a given character can have at a single time.

That's what I do.

All bonus types bestowed by spells are changed to enhancement. Enhancement bonuses stack with themselves. The maximum bonus is +10. Period.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Word.

I wouldn't mind seeing a reduction in the "types" of bonuses. Rather, I'd like to see most types of buffs stack, but have a limit to the number a given character can have at a single time.

We do 1 +1/4 levels, that are always on until dispelled, or replaced. Some effects are toned down, but its worked well so far. I hate tracking durations.

 

[I'm A Banana]

* Unless you're wielding a two-handed weapon, in which case it's +2 to Attack and +3 to damage if your current Strength score is 14 or higher.

Or unless you've got gauntlets of ogre power, in which case it's +1 to attack and +1 to damage, or +2 to damage if you're wielding a two-handed weapon and your current bonus to attack rolls from Strength is even, and your current Strength score is 14 or higher.

Or unless you've got Weapon Finesse and you're wielding a finessable weapon, in which case you get the damage bonus, but your bonus to attack rolls is capped by the amount your current bonus to attack rolls from Strength excceeds your bonus to attack rolls from Dexterity (minimum 0).

.....exactly what I mean by simplification.

Odly enough, I've never heard anyone complain about it. Perhaps because the moment someone says "...but I have Weapon Finesse" I say "If you want to do the math, go ahead, but I'm telling you you get +2 to attack and damage. Got a problem with that?"

 

[Lanefan]

One simplification might be to eliminate straight stat buffs e.g. Bull's Strength, Cat's Grace, etc., as changing a stat can affect a lot of things (Cat's Grace, for example, affects AC and Reflex save, and several skills as well). It's easier to track when each buff can only affect one thing (Barkskin affecting only AC is a good example).

Eliminating items that boost stats would help in the same vein; could replace with items that improve specific things (e.g. to-hit, AC, Fort save) if desired.

Lanefan

 

[jeffh]

* Unless you're wielding a two-handed weapon, in which case it's +2 to Attack and +3 to damage if your current Strength score is 14 or higher.

10, actually, if you mean the pre-Bull's Strength score.

 

[interwyrm]

I'm pretty much as far from with you as can be. Sorry, interwyrm.

I like buffs, debuffs, the whole bit. If magic were nothing more than chucking fireballs I would be bored so very quick.

I don't have a problem with debuffs as they are not cast pre-combat. Also, I hate using damage-dealing spells when I play a mage. I enjoy effects like web, entangle, dominate person, and wall spells.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

I guess perhaps I'm a bit snobbish - the math is simple addition. This should not be considered "complicated". Perhaps there's too much of it for your taste, but it isn't complicated by any stretch of the imagination.

Such a math elitist....

 

[FireLance]

10, actually, if you mean the pre-Bull's Strength score.

I was thinking post, but you're right. It's probably easier to go off the unmodified Strength score.