Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Rune" data-source="post: 5415896" data-attributes="member: 67">We can work within those parameters.  I think it would be easiest to start with 4e and work backwards. As long as attacks and damage also cap (or slow down, quite a bit), this should not change much in the way of balance, but at that point, what's the point?If, on the other hand, you wish to make higher-level threats more deadly by not scaling the attacks/damage to match, consider that (later) 4e already has ways of doing this.If the point is one of tone, it is certainly possible, but would require a lot of math (unless you took an <a href="http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=200754" target="_blank">E6</a> approach, but made it E10).I think 4e kind of encourages this already (especially with the lack of epic creature-threats out there).  Simply highlight these thematic tones in your adventure-design, and you should pretty easily be able to pull it off. I don't understand.  If you cap them both, the miss chance becomes static.  Perhaps what would work better is if you capped defenses, but allowed bonuses to increase (at a slowed rate (perhaps 1/3-1/5 levels, instead of 1/2). I'm with you on this one.  May I suggest that you work with your players to create abstract descriptions of their powers, especially At-Wills (for instance, Tide of Iron="When I hit an opponent, I get to push him back, and step right on up in his face."), to reference during the more minor battles.  Abstract monster abilities in a similar way and you can probably do most of your combats without a map (as long as you don't have a player that insists on tactical accuracy).I think if you simply required that your PCs describe their skill uses before rolling, you would eliminate this (and other) problems associated with them.  "Describe" does not necessarily mean "role-play," but could.  If you did away with Diplomacy completely, however, it would probably not break the game... The skill design of 4e really can easily be turned into an automatic pass/fail mechanic (much more so than 3.x could), since training is a flat enhancement (which opens up options).  I would still have a record of bonuses to use as a reference, but this kind of thing can easily be winged.  Personally, I would weigh training more heavily than numbers with an automatic pass/fail mechanic.  Just don't forget about opposed checks. Cool.  Keep them in mind when you abstract powers (as described above).As for At-Wills, I recommend that you encourage your players to do similar things that are dependent on their environment and situation.  If they are having trouble getting out of the mindset of spamming powers over and over, reward them +1 to hit with a slightly altered (on the fly) At-Will that takes advantage of environment/situation at hand.  That should provide the incentive to get them started. As for Dailies, consider giving them back at the end of a short rest if they missed during combat.  Do note, however, that this approach will definitely effect the length of time they can go between extended rests (and, also, that most dailies either grant something on a miss, or are reliable. This is the main reason I suggest starting with 4e and working backwards, instead of the other way around.Good luck.  If you implement any of these suggestions, I'd love to hear how they work out.</blockquote>

Verification