D&D 4E I like 4E math.

[Mostlyjoe]

Default BAB only modified by the choices of class, weapon, and attack specialties. Target number saves. It solves so many issues I had with d20. It's why Mutants and Masterminds drives me crazy. Why am I spending points on BAB or Saves? Just give me a baseline 10 and let me pick powers.

I think this will work in a big way. I don't have to worry about as much math. Sure the +'s are going to be bigger but there is less "attack focus z, class bonus y, etc, etc."

Call me silly, but it finally 'clicked' in my head.

 

[Wolfspider]

Math? Is that what they're calling it these days?

 

[Voss]

Default BAB only modified by the choices of class, weapon, and attack specialties.

I don't have to worry about as much math. Sure the +'s are going to be bigger but there is less "attack focus z, class bonus y, etc, etc."

I'm not sure any of this is actually true.
I haven't seen any statements to this effect.

Notably, you've left out attribute modifiers, and we know those are in.

 

[Dinkeldog]

Let's knock off the snark. Wolfspider, one more post like that and you'll be invited to leave.

 

[delericho]

The complexity in 3e maths was not due to the classes giving different BAB and save progressions - these were all clearly laid out in the class tables, and the multiclassing rules were trivial (just add the bonuses). There were problems with classes giving different progressions, particularly at high levels, but complexity wasn't one of them.

Rather, the complexity in the maths in 3e was the multitude of feats, powers, spells, magic items, and other special cases that applied modifier on top of modifier. The stacking rules really didn't help with this, because although they were simple in concept (bonuses of the same name don't stack), in practice the huge number of bonus types created big problems. (Quick: I have Protection from Evil and Protection from Law active, a Ring of Protection +1, I am hasted, am wearing Bracers of Armour, have been polymorphed into a Troglodyte, am wearing an Amulet of Natural Armour, Full Plate +3, and a Shield +2, and my Dex is 12. I'm being attacked by a Slaad (Chaotic Neutral). What's my armour class?)

Unfortunately, 4e has moved all the differentiation between characters into special cases, rather than clearly spelling them out up-front. That Rogue class gives some (as yet unknown) bonus to Reflex defense, but it's not presented in the class table - I have to remember it.

There may well be simplifications in the maths in 4e. And there are certainly good reasons to go with fixed progressions across all classes, especially if they actually intend people to play at Epic levels. But the fixed progression is not, in itself, a simplifying factor - we're just trading twelve tables for one, at the expense of twelve different sets of special case modifiers.

 

[Donovan Morningfire]

That Rogue class gives some (as yet unknown) bonus to Reflex defense, but it's not presented in the class table - I have to remember it.

Maybe it's along the lines of the class bonuses that SW Saga Edition provides at 1st level? If you have levels in class X, you gain a +# class bonus to these defenses. If you multi-class, then you get the better of the two class bonuses.

I am so digging how the d20 system runs in Saga Edition without all the micro-managing of skill bonus modifiers that is rampant in D&D3e, and was to a lesser extent in SW RCR. If that's how D&D4e is going to handle it, then so much the better. Less time crunching numbers and more time actually playing the game says I.

 

[delericho]

Maybe it's along the lines of the class bonuses that SW Saga Edition provides at 1st level? If you have levels in class X, you gain a +# class bonus to these defenses. If you multi-class, then you get the better of the two class bonuses.

That would be my guess. Unfortunately, that's actually more complex than the existing system (albeit marginally) - instead of just adding, we have to apply stacking rules. Now, in fact, I am of the opinion that this is actually an improvement, since it prevents weird multiclassing to get a Fort save of +10 at 5th level, and Will and Ref saves of +0 each. But "it's simpler" is not one of the merits of the new rule, in this instance.

I am so digging how the d20 system runs in Saga Edition without all the micro-managing of skill bonus modifiers that is rampant in D&D3e, and was to a lesser extent in SW RCR. If that's how D&D4e is going to handle it, then so much the better. Less time crunching numbers and more time actually playing the game says I.

Agreed. I like the SWSE skill system. My players, however, do not - they prefer the greater customisation of the existing rules.

 

[Steely Dan]

When I talked with David Noonan, he did cryptically mention their "Magic Spreadsheet with all the math…"

 

[Wolfspider]

I'm sorry for being snarky. I'll try to avoid that in the future. I experienced my worst day in over three years yesterday when I wrote that comment. I should have just avoided the boards altogether until I had calmed down a bit.

It's just that with all the talk about weird geometry in 4e's new movement rules, the strength of the math of the new system seems suspect to me.

I will say that I'm curious about this so-called magical spreadsheet I've heard about.

I am also curious if the system will be easy to tinker with, considering that the math is supposed to be so ironclad. Will too many houserules make the system collapse into utter imbalance?

 

[Steely Dan]

I am also curious if the system will be easy to tinker with, considering that the math is supposed to be so ironclad. Will too many houserules make the system collapse into utter imbalance?

Two burning questions for me too.