NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 8967055" data-attributes="member: 82106">Of course there will be gaps in skill between the best, the good, and the average/bad. Some people are NOT going to ever choose to defend with an acrobatics check, and probably won't acquire whatever feat/etc. allows that. Doesn't mean it shouldn't be possible! I don't really buy your NAD argument either, it feels very post-hoc to be honest. Effectively the average success rate for all attacks on all defenses is the same, so why should their numbers be off by 2? It made zero sense. As I say, I basically did what you suggest, you get +5 for proficiency, a level bonus, an ability bonus, and a 'permanent bonus', which is just the catch-all for enchantment or any other random thing. Its a MUCH easier and cleaner system, but with all the advantages of 4e's engine. I mean, I have tweaked other stuff, but you could apply this sort of design directly to 4e and all it would force you to do is tweak a few numbers here and there. I doubt anything would require genuine redesign, and there'd be a bunch of feats that would become simpler or even redundant. If there's a 'negative' it might be eliminating a few char op bits where you get some small mileage out of applying bonuses meant to apply to weapon attacks vs AC and instead apply them to attacks against a NAD. I think WotC managed to add "you can't do this" text to most stuff, or just released a ruling against it, to block most cases, but why even need that stuff?</blockquote>

Verification