Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DarkKestral" data-source="post: 3112313" data-attributes="member: 40100">Honestly, I'm in favor of the idea, because it allows me, as THE GM, to design classes that fit well within settings I design. Class systems are great, because once made, a class serves as a kind of basic 'package' for Cool Stuffs the PCs/NPCs can do. That's handy, because that means I can stat monsters/NPCs more quickly.However, a 'by the numbers' approach is good when designing campaigns and PC classes for them. I don't have to guess what percentage of a character's power is taken up by say, the monk unarmed damage progression, good saves, bonus feats, and suchlike. It's not something I would give to the characters, often, but I would like it for GM use, at least. Knowing the basic underpinning of class designs can tell me a lot about where balance is LIKELY to lay. Are players going to try to break the system? sure. But as a GM, especially one interested in maintaining relative balance with or better balance than the current ruleset, I am not likely to make 'broken' PCs intentionally, except as thought experiments, and those 'broken' PCs are generally designed to test rules cases which might come up in play or in response to an argument in which both sides have some degree of support.For example, it appears that a single feat is equal to or less than +1d6 sneak attack, according to UA. If I had a by the numbers guide for the DMG with appropriate guidelines (for every Xd6 of precision damage, usable on average Y percent of the time, use number Z for the 'price' of that special ability sorta thing) I can look at that, see that yeah, I could probably allow fighters some leeway with their feats to gain some sneak attack damage.It also means I can have the flexibility to say: "Hey guys, come up with some classes. You have W point buy for character abilities, and N 'build' points per level. I'd like something along the lines of (insert famous character from literature, TV, radio, or movies). Could you do that? I'll be testing them out for balance later."If you do that with races, you have a very flexible system, but the core of it can still be 'classic' D&D. I need a martial campaign, and so I need a more martial rogue-equivalent with trapfinding? Building one becomes easy.</blockquote>

Verification