DrSpunj's Class Balance Spreadsheet

DrSpunj said:
Special Abilities: General Feat - 4, Combat Feat - 7

Sorry, what do you mean by a combat feat? If you mean proficiency in all martial weapons, yes it's worth more than a general feat (at least in PHB - I forget how Arcana Unearthed handles it). Other than that, I think combat feats are worth about the same as general feats ... unless you're going to go to a feat pricing system like Sean Reynolds proposed.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Tessarael, can you please provide a link to SKR's feat pricing proposal? I poked around a bit on his site and couldn't find whatever you're referring to.

To answer your question, realize that I enjoy D&D because it offers both combat & non-combat (roleplaying) opportunities. I enjoy both combats and a lot of the roleplaying situations and try to keep a good balance between the two at my table when I DM, but I feel D&D is combat-oriented and that's the way I enjoy playing it. If I wanted solely a roleplaying experience with essentially no combat I'd go play a LARP. :) If I wanted a primarily roleplaying game I'd probably go with another system entirely to take the focus away from the tactical combats, minis & the battlegrid.

Now, having said that, I do not feel that all Feats are equal. Those that have a primary non-combat effect, at least in my games, are just not "worth" as much as a combat feat. As an example, you will never get as much mileage out of Negotiator [+2 on Diplomacy & Sense Motive checks] in my game as you would out of Lightning Reflexes [+2 on Reflex saves] even though both have no prerequisites and are available to any PC at 1st level. Under Core those feats have the same opportunity cost (1 feat slot), even though they don't offer the same benefit.

As I was saying up above to ouini, most skill affecting Feats to me are non-combat. I can see some arguable points (Tumble & Concentration being the biggest, but also Bluff, Intimidate & Sense Motive) but across the board skills are largely used outside of combat (except for the uncommon "make a balance check while fighting on that slippery ice" scenario).

Spells offer both non-combat & combat utility, and because of that all metamagic feats I've classified as Combat Feats. While it's useful to use something like Still & Silent Spell to cast a spell during the king's coronation ceremony, overall metamagic feats find greater usage in my games in combat. Natural spell is a prime example of that: casting a spell to put the archer/guard to sleep so you can slip by while you're a gold finch is pretty cool, but being able to casting Call Lightning while in bear form has a larger impact in most situations.

Magic Item creation feats, OTOH, are entirely non-combat, and therefore General feats.

While there are certainly exceptions to these broad generalities, I'd rather call them out specifically as exceptions to the basic guidelines of "Skills = General, Metamagic = Combat, Magic Item Creation = General, etc." If there are reasons it could be classified as General or Combat, I usually go with Combat and see if the feat/ability needs a little buffing.

Now, looking at class abilities, it's not too difficult to separate things out. A druid's Nature Sense doesn't really have any direct effects in the middle of combat, so it's a General feat. Wild Shape, OTOH, has dramatic effects in combat, so it & any related abilities are Combat feats.

This does mean some existing feats & abilities need to be tweaked. For instance, Dodge IMC is +1 dodge bonus to AC vs all opponents (as a house rule). Using the Weapon Proficiency groups I'm changing Weapon Focus & Specialization (including Greater forms) to select a weapon group instead of a single weapon.

Thinking back to Lightning Reflexes, it offers a +2 at the cost of a Combat Feat, which for me is 7 CBs. Since you get +1/2 per level by paying 2 CBs per level, that's a total of +2 for 8 CBs. 8 vs 7 is close enough for me so I consider that feat okay as is (as are Great Fortitude & Iron Will).

Does anyone have any Feats or Class Abilities that they are having a hard time categorizing? I'd be interested in discussing them since I've tried to look for repercussions from using this system and have probably certainly missed some key points.

Thanks.

DrSpunj
 

Some miscellaneous thoughts:

Are you planning on incorporating Psionics at all in your campaign? If so, I'd like to see entries in your spreadsheet for the classes in the Expanded Psionics Handbook (when you have it in your hands; mine's on order)..

Are you planning on incorporating anything defensewise to raise AC like attacks can be generally raised? What I mean is, in standard D&D, attack ability rises much faster than PC armor class.. there's some ways around that, and I'm wondering if that's something you're considering.. one way (off the top of my head) since you're making Dodge a +1 AC to all combatants, is to have a Greater Dodge, Improved Dodge and so forth, much like there already is for Two-Weapon Defense and like there is for weapon specialization.. something that would be perhaps tied to shields.. I've always wondered why there's been no real shield *defense* feats (as it is now, shields are rarely worth taking).. and one could also add helmets to the equation.. they ought to add some defensive capability, as it is now you can't even buy one unless it's a helm of teleportation or the like..

ttyl,
Videssian
 

Videssian said:
Are you planning on incorporating Psionics at all in your campaign? If so, I'd like to see entries in your spreadsheet for the classes in the Expanded Psionics Handbook (when you have it in your hands; mine's on order)..

As is mine, and one of the first things I want to do when I get my copy is add a Psionics sheet and see how they work out.

As to whether or not I'll allow them this summer...maybe, but probably not. :)

I like the "slickness" of Monte's AU system, which already includes Psionic spells. Adding Psionics may become too confusing and/or redundant. I want to look at both closely. It doesn't sound fun to me to play a Mind Witch if there are already a bunch of Psionic classes out there.

OTOH, Augmentation sounds like a nifty way to steal spells from the EPH and convert them into AU-like spells with Diminished, Normal and Heightened effects, oftentimes with the Psionic descriptor. And feats from there should be easy enough to rework.

The Psychic Warrior sounds kind of like a Mageblade to me (some magic/psionics but also a decent warrior with some combat feats), and the Mind Witch creates a weapon similar to a Soulknife. There's quite a bit of overlap already.

I guess the best I can say is "not wholeheartedly, but anything you like in there can likely be incorporated pretty easily."

Videssian said:
Are you planning on incorporating anything defensewise to raise AC like attacks can be generally raised?

A Defense Bonus already accomplishes some of this, and incorporating a feat similar to WoT's Armor Compatibility stretches that a bit more. Monte already has Shield Specialization in AU and I have no problem with Improved Dodge upping the dodge bonus to +2 and Greater Dodge going to +3. If you want to spend your feats becoming a turtle, I'm fine letting you do it.

BTW, Videssian, would you be willing to play a character in a game that you generated using the values I listed a couple posts earlier? Do they seem fair to you? If not, why not?

Thanks.

DrSpunj
 

Sean's feat point system is here:
http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/misc/featpointsystem.html
There was some quite extensive discussion of it on his boards, but I'm not going to go looking for that thread. Keep in mind that the pricings Sean put there are provisional - it's not a final version, and there was some debate about the right pricing: e.g. Sean undervalued Maximize Spell and Empower Spell, because he was thinking about the value of the other weaker metagmagic abilities.

So yes, I agree not all feats are equal, but there are some really bad combat feats too.
 

DrSpunj said:
BTW, Videssian, would you be willing to play a character in a game that you generated using the values I listed a couple posts earlier? Do they seem fair to you? If not, why not?

If you mean would I be willing to generate a character using the values/spreadsheet that you've created as a basis for it, and play it in a game that you're running, sure! (otherwise I'm misunderstanding what you mean)

The values seem reasonable to me..

ttyl,
Videssian
 

Videssian said:
The values seem reasonable to me.

That's what I was asking. I was just curious if the way I valued/priced something seemed out of whack, in your opinion.

Cool! :cool:

It still needs some tweaking, and some of the class abilities need to be better defined. For instance, I'm playing a Mage Blade in a PbP game and just leveled to 4th. On the sheet I've broken the Athame into a number of separate feats (for each +1, Summon 1 & 2, Athame Defense, etc.) that might actually work better if some of them were treated like a Familiar's abilities based upon either character level, caster level, of levels of Half magic (the latter would probably be least abusive). I'm thinking that way for two reasons: 1) not all the Athame abilities are worth a true Combat Feat, and 2) Shimmering Shield probably deserves to be a Combat Feat every 4th level as it's really too powerful as a single feat, and currently I haven't worked that into the Mage Blade.

Thanks.

DrSpunj
 

Well, at this point, I think I'll be going with a very conservative (low-cost) point system.

- d6, d8, d10, d12 cost 1, 2, 3, 4
- BAB costs 0, 1, 2
- Adding +1 to a save always costs 1
- 4, 6, 8, 10 SPs cost 0, 1, 2, 3
- Weapon and Armor Profs cost 0, 1, 2, 3
- Feats/Specials cost 3 (general) and 5 (combat)
- Restrictions give -2 and -4

I have a couple working philosophies with regards to feats/specials which makes this work out okay. Some big ones are:
- The ability to *choose* a feat when you level is better (i.e. worth more points) than having to choose them many levels ahead of time (laid out for you as class abilities are). So a Druid's or Ranger's or Barbarian's feats, the type and timing of which are laid out from level one, aren't worth as much as a fighter's feats, which he can capriciously or prudently choose as he goes to match the flavor of the world or campaign situations he's likely to encounter.
- Feats are sometimes based on level, and get better on their own as you advance. Bardic Knowledge, therefore, is one feat, which gets better as you advance.
- Feats which have prerequisites, are more powerful than ones which don't. Feats which have prereqs, but which don't offer more to the character than the prerequisite does (like Barbarian 2x, 3x, 4x Rage, and all progressive class abilities similar to it), should not cost as much as the original feat.


Also, just as the base hit die (d6) and base skill points (4 per level) cost absolutely nothing, I'm tinkering with regular saving throw progression (one save gets to +18 at 20th, the other two get to +6) costing nothing. This works out to giving two +1's at odd levels, and one +1 at even levels, for free.
 

ouini said:
- d6, d8, d10, d12 cost 1, 2, 3, 4

Also, just as the base hit die (d6) and base skill points (4 per level) cost absolutely nothing....

These two statements don't mesh. Your d6 costs 1 pt as you list it.

And you don't list how much you've priced magic at. What are you doing there? Going to a feat based magic system?

ouini said:
I have a couple working philosophies with regards to feats/specials which makes this work out okay. Some big ones are:
<snip>

These are all really good points, but I'm not sure how they relate to the simplified costs you list. Does a Barbarian's 3rd Rage/day feat cost less than a Fighter's Bonus Feat? If so, how?

You speak about the Druid/Ranger/Barb abilities almost like they are feat paths. Are you using something along those lines? What happens if/when you want to deviate from the path? One of best things, IMO, about 3E was the ability to multiclass, and it can be difficult to keep that level of built-in flexibility with something like feat paths.

ouini said:
- Feats are sometimes based on level, and get better on their own as you advance. Bardic Knowledge, therefore, is one feat, which gets better as you advance.

I like this idea, but I wasn't sure how to keep PCs from becoming overpowered. If you link Bardic Lore to character level, what stops anyone from purchasing that feat and enjoying the benefits? What keeps someone from using their 18th level General feat that all PCs get to buy the Bardic Lore feat and suddenly get a +18 on a Lore check?

When you find the time, please email me a copy of what you've done with the sheet. I'd be interested to see how things work out under your system. I'm very interested in what people think are reasonable "single feat" abilities, like the Bardic Lore up above. I agree that making someone pay for 10 General feats, each of which increases the Lore bonus by +2, is a bit much, but lumping everything into a single feat looks like way too much, especially when you compare it to something like Dodge. :confused:

Thanks.

DrSpunj
 

DrSpunj,

Good catch. I meant d6, d8, d10, d12 cost 0, 1, 2, 3.

So powerful or combat feats cost 5, and general or expansion feats cost 3. Since I think pre-mapped abilities, and low-power prereq'd feats should cost less, feats which fall into one or especially both categories (like the Barbarian's pre-mapped 2nd and 3rd Rage per day ability/feats), cost less than a Fighter's Bonus Feat. I price them as general or expansion feats (3).

I noticed many of the costs I was using originally (weeks ago) were divisible by 2, which is why my costs are about half the original listed costs. Magic I'll likely price at 4 and 7 for half and full, but I'm still tinkering, not being as familiar with that system (thanks for the details you gave).

I do think the Druid/Ranger/Barb abilities, in the core classes, are pretty concrete feat paths. Now, I too liked that in 3E you can multiclass. But the thing about multiclassing I didn't like was the fact that the 1st level of many classes was where much of the power lay. (Want a truckload of abilities and amazing saving throws by 3rd level? Take three different classes). The thing I like about a la carte character levelling is that you get flexibility, without reckless freebies.

But if someone wanted to commit to being a Barbarian or Druid (or whatever well thought-out theme they came up with) for several levels, and committed to buying themed/expansion feats a few levels ahead of time, I'd likely drop the cost of those future, pre-mapped feats.

This rule sort of applies to Bardic Lore, as well. Actually, there are lots of abilities based on class level, though usually they're based on prestige class levels. Since a la carte purchasing doesn't have "classes" per se, just make sure players can't buy feats that don't fit their concept. Not all feats are general feats, after all. If I remember right, some can only be taken at first level. Some improve with / are limited by other bonuses (like expertise and power attack are limited by BAB). Personally, I'd probably make Bard Lore have Bard-like feat prereqs, and/or be based on applicable levels relative to their attainment, just like caster-level abilities or prestige-class abilities are.
 

Remove ads

Top