Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="innerdude" data-source="post: 5146225" data-attributes="member: 85870">One area of balance that I've always wondered hasn't been approached is what I would call "The Balance of Natural Selection." In BECMI, for exampple, the demi-human classes simply stopped progressing after 8-12 levels. And while the approach can feel arbitrary, I wonder why some form of this hasn't been attempted. For instance, it's clear based on 4e's inherent "1/2 character level" to every combat/skill check, that WoTC recognized that any numerical value above a certain point for a certain type of check naturally becomes "unbalanced." They realized that aside from magic bonuses and other various buffs, any inherent, organic mechanical "bonus" contributor over 15 (maximum of 30 levels / 2) had an unbalancing effect on game outcomes. Thus, in 4e, no matter how hard you try to improve a certain skill or combat check, the maximum you'll ever reach is a simple formula: 1/2 level + attribute bonus + feat bonuses + item/implement/magic bonus + racial bonus + temporary buffs + situation bonuses. Now you can still easily reach skill checks with 35+ bonuses in this way, but it does in some ways put a "hard cap" on how high checks can go, especially in relation to 3.x. Now, if balance is the ultimate goal, one of the ways I've considered balancing the math of d20 is to limit the bonuses OUTSIDE the standard 1/2 character level bonus. For instance -- it would be very easy to houserule that any attribute bonuses must limited to a +5 or less--the rationale being that anything above a +5 bonus in any attribute exceeds the inherent genetic limit of "human" (demi-human/tiefling, whatever) development. Furthermore, I've also considered implementing a house rule where any magic item that gives a natural increase to any check is inherently limited by the attribute the check is dependent upon. Meaning, let's say you have a rogue with a +2 strength mod, and he finds a magical sword +3. Well, because the rogue is limited to a +2 strength mod, he/she cannot maximize the total potential bonus of the magic, because his/her physical capacity is not able to use it. Along those same lines, I've also considered houseruling my Pathfinder games by simply capping the total bonus any one character can receive on any one check, by simply saying, "That's not possible." For example, regardless of buffs, magic items/weapons, skill, or inherent attribute, the total added bonus to any one die roll can never be more than 5 + the character's level + their natural attribute bonus. In other words, if you're a level 10 fighter with an 18 strength, the upper limit of the total bonus to a hand-to-hand attack is +19. Doesn't matter if you're bull strengthed, hasted, and attacking with a weapon-focused +4 longsword, anything beyond that point is simply beyond the physical capacity of the person performing it, and any bonuses beyond that are just wasted. While I realize that this would feel "underpowered" to some players, the goal behind this would be to stop munchkins in their tracks. Sure, go ahead and take every attack feat in the book--but you'll never realize the benefit. Second, I think it would allow for a more robust skill/feat system that actually rewards players for creating more well-rounded characters.</blockquote>

Verification