Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Nifft" data-source="post: 3774703" data-attributes="member: 6562">Just something I thought I remembered from an earlier thread. I could easily be mistaken.I think the point stands even with 4 vs. 4. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> Okay. I agree that we need better group rules for these situations, so let's move on.We've sort-of talked about Tumble and Perception/Stealth, and I made a point about Climb way back when... let's dig into the biggest peeve I have with the current D&D rules.Let's talk Diplomacy. Weeeeeeeeeell... kinda. If we're talking fixed effects across levels, I totally agree with you. But I'm in the midst of designing a spellcasting system based on SW Saga defenses, a Use Magic skill, and various effects, and what I'm finding is that the system works if you scale the effects with level to match the expected difference between skill and defense. (This also means it's often not worth taking Skill Focus until mid-level; and you can avoid effects which target Defenses with skill checks, too, so you can get away with just plain Training and a low Charisma, you just can't be an Enchanter or Evoker type.)At low levels, you should not be allowed to target Defenses with Use Magic often. At high levels, you should be able to wipe out mooks easily, but it should cost you an action which you could otherwise use to target the boss -- in other words, the effect that wipes mooks should be ineffective against your level-contemporaries.But that's mostly, because I'm not done yet. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> The only point I want to make is that just because you may be able to beat a Defense with a skill check, that's not a guarantee doing so benefits you in any material way. You need an effect based off that skill check, and those can be limited separately. That's fine, though, isn't it? It means that the 20th level Wizard isn't surprised by mook assassins, even specialized mooks, but against a Master Assassin he's only got a slim chance.But that's why he's not alone. The 20th level Ranger's Perception ought to be up to the task of spotting the Master Assassin's ambush about 50% of the time. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />- - -IMHO this is a solid improvement over the current 3.5e rules, where a 10th level Rogue can easily hide from a 20th level Wizard -- particularly if the Rogue has a nice magic item or two. Yeah, we're agreed that something must be done about groups. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Cheers, -- N</blockquote>

Verification