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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="RangerWickett" data-source="post: 1496403" data-attributes="member: 63">If you want to open a new thread to discuss this, I'd be interested.  I can see things going two ways here.  One is the cross-balance approach, i.e., "Of course your halfling makes a crappy fighter!  He's three feet tall!  But that's okay, because he's got a higher AC and saves."  The other is the parallel balance approach, i.e., "It doesn't matter that a halfling is smaller.  His longsword should do d8 because that's balanced.  He shouldn't get a bonus to AC, though.  All things should be equal to their closest counterpart."I prefer the second system, for ease of play.  If all characters can swing a one-handed melee weapon for d8 damage and use a shield at the same time, it's easier for me to deal with, and it puts more onus upon the players to figure out how a pixie can do that much damage in physical combat.On the other hand, that system makes you scratch your head as to why a giant's weapon doesn't do very much damage.  (The answer?  Levels and hit dice should provide a bonus to damage.)  The parallel balance system also gives you fewer anchor points -- things you can move around to adjust balance.  It's give and take.In general, I think a level-based system works better for a parallel balance ruleset, while a cross-balance is ideally point-based, kinda like GURPS.  And I don't like heavy point systems, especially ones where drawbacks get you extra points.  Logically, there ought to be very few surviving adventuring halfling fighters -- most would be wizards or rogues, because that's what they're suited for.Oh, and Dragons ought to have a CR scale like I list below.  Take the needed CR and design backwards to find the right power level, I'd say.  Age Category - CR1 - 1/22 - 13 - 34 - 65 - 86 - 107 - 128 - 149 - 1710 - 2011 - 2212 - 25</blockquote>

Verification