Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 5848358" data-attributes="member: 54877">I'm not terribly concerned about the exact method used, as long as the damage expression gets further off of zero. For that matter, moving the average sufficiently away from zero would probably give most of the benefits.&nbsp;That is, for my purposes, the dagger in the 1st level, relatively low Str hands, doing around 1d4+4 or 1d6+3 or 1d8+1 or even 1d10 are all good. Or perhaps 1d4+3 or 1d6+2 or 1d8 would be sufficient. Either way, you then adjust more skilled 1st level attacks and higher level attacks from there (slowly). If I understand Lanefan's stated preference, if forced to adapt to something like this, he'd probably prefer one of those later numbers than the earlier ones. I could easily go with any of them for a particular campaign. The mod of around +4 is merely a convenient way to talk about this. &nbsp;I don't agree that providing at-wills based on other stats fully solves this issue. It sort of does the minimum, in that now everyone has a decent damage expression, they can function. But if that moves certain flavorful options--such as 1st level wizard with dagger--from &quot;might do occasionally when pressed&quot; to &quot;would rather play dead than try, ever&quot;--you've effectively removed that option from the game. There's a fine line between &quot;lousy but possible&quot; and &quot;don't even try&quot;--and I'd like the boundaries of that line to encompass as much territory as it reasonably can. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin&nbsp; &nbsp; :D"&nbsp; data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />&nbsp;The other things you listed are certainly valid approaches to solving the whole shebhang.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Crazy Jerome, post: 5848358, member: 54877"] I'm not terribly concerned about the exact method used, as long as the damage expression gets further off of zero. For that matter, moving the average sufficiently away from zero would probably give most of the benefits. That is, for my purposes, the dagger in the 1st level, relatively low Str hands, doing [B]around[/B] 1d4+4 or 1d6+3 or 1d8+1 or even 1d10 are all good. Or perhaps 1d4+3 or 1d6+2 or 1d8 would be sufficient. Either way, you then adjust more skilled 1st level attacks and higher level attacks from there (slowly). If I understand Lanefan's stated preference, if forced to adapt to something like this, he'd probably prefer one of those later numbers than the earlier ones. I could easily go with any of them for a particular campaign. The mod of around +4 is merely a convenient way to talk about this. I don't agree that providing at-wills based on other stats fully solves this issue. It sort of does the minimum, in that now everyone has a decent damage expression, they can function. But if that moves certain flavorful options--such as 1st level wizard with dagger--from "might do occasionally when pressed" to "would rather play dead than try, ever"--you've effectively removed that option from the game. There's a fine line between "lousy but possible" and "don't even try"--and I'd like the boundaries of that line to encompass as much territory as it reasonably can. :D The other things you listed are certainly valid approaches to solving the whole shebhang. [/QUOTE]

Verification