Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Game design trap - Starting too close to zero.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="delericho" data-source="post: 5846403" data-attributes="member: 22424"><p>In a d20 based system, there's a sweet spot for modifiers around the +10 mark - that's the point where the final result on a check will be equally dependent on 'luck' and 'skill'. (Mathematically speaking, d20+10 vs DC 20 is the same as d20+50 vs DC 60... but the former <em>feels</em> better.) Ideally, you probably want the total modifiers used across the full campaign to be in the range -5 to +25 (at the extremes), with most of the play taking place in the +5 to +15 range.</p><p></p><p>Additionally, there's an issue with specialists and non-specialist characters, and the gap between them. If the game provides lots of options for customising characters (as in both 3e and 4e, and most likely 5e), this gap will inevitably increase with level, probably quite sharply. In 3e, it got to the point that people with a 'good' save could succeed on anything but a 1, against attacks that people with 'poor' saves needed a 20, which was suboptimal, to say the least.</p><p></p><p>That suggests to me that the correct starting point for the specialist (the Fighter with his chosen weapon) is probably about +5 at 1st level, for the non-specialist (the Cleric with a melee attack) is about +0, and the anti-specialist (the weakling Mage with non-proficient weapon) is about -5.</p><p></p><p>Then, give the characters a modest automatic increase with level. In a 20-level system, +1 per 2 levels is probably about right, while in a 30 level system +1 per 3 levels is probably better.</p><p></p><p>And then give characters plenty of options to advance those areas they care about.</p><p></p><p>That would mean that at the outset, the characters who are 'good' at something are already pretty decent, while characters who are 'bad' at something are truly lousy (as bad as the system really supports). Then, after just a few levels, characters advance into the 'sweet spot' for modifiers in the areas they specialise in.</p><p></p><p>And, ideally, as they get to the top end of the level scale, their permanent modifier in their areas of specialisation is about +20, which remains reasonably controlled, while still allowing for a bit of breathing room to add on some situational bonuses/magical buffs/whatever to take them up to the +25 that is the top end of what the system easily supports.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="delericho, post: 5846403, member: 22424"] In a d20 based system, there's a sweet spot for modifiers around the +10 mark - that's the point where the final result on a check will be equally dependent on 'luck' and 'skill'. (Mathematically speaking, d20+10 vs DC 20 is the same as d20+50 vs DC 60... but the former [i]feels[/i] better.) Ideally, you probably want the total modifiers used across the full campaign to be in the range -5 to +25 (at the extremes), with most of the play taking place in the +5 to +15 range. Additionally, there's an issue with specialists and non-specialist characters, and the gap between them. If the game provides lots of options for customising characters (as in both 3e and 4e, and most likely 5e), this gap will inevitably increase with level, probably quite sharply. In 3e, it got to the point that people with a 'good' save could succeed on anything but a 1, against attacks that people with 'poor' saves needed a 20, which was suboptimal, to say the least. That suggests to me that the correct starting point for the specialist (the Fighter with his chosen weapon) is probably about +5 at 1st level, for the non-specialist (the Cleric with a melee attack) is about +0, and the anti-specialist (the weakling Mage with non-proficient weapon) is about -5. Then, give the characters a modest automatic increase with level. In a 20-level system, +1 per 2 levels is probably about right, while in a 30 level system +1 per 3 levels is probably better. And then give characters plenty of options to advance those areas they care about. That would mean that at the outset, the characters who are 'good' at something are already pretty decent, while characters who are 'bad' at something are truly lousy (as bad as the system really supports). Then, after just a few levels, characters advance into the 'sweet spot' for modifiers in the areas they specialise in. And, ideally, as they get to the top end of the level scale, their permanent modifier in their areas of specialisation is about +20, which remains reasonably controlled, while still allowing for a bit of breathing room to add on some situational bonuses/magical buffs/whatever to take them up to the +25 that is the top end of what the system easily supports. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Game design trap - Starting too close to zero.
Top