Return of the NADs: Common Fixes

[Bladesong]

Retracted

 

[eriktheguy]

How about:
Stop increasing ability scores with level
Add a static bonus to attacks and NADs with level.
Add a static bonus to AC in light armor with level.

Should be pretty easy to work out the math.
The root of the issue is that monster Attack/Defense scales with level, player Def is based on ability scores which scale in a dumb way with level. Remove the root of the issue, remove the problem.
Coming up with a solution that fixes the problem without altering core mechanics is pretty much impossible, because the issue IS the core mechanics.

 

[JohnSnow]

Hmm, I think you're conflating two separate issues. I started looking at all the details before realizing it was needlessly wordy. The fix for the separating defense values already exists - in the form of Great Fortitude, Iron Will and Lightning Reflexes. But that's also the fix for the Defense equivalent of the "Masterwork Armor" issue.

Most of the bonuses we're talking about wash out. Since every class gets the same level-based benefit to their attacks & defenses, and every class gets items, it really comes down to the difference in stat-based bonuses to defense.

And honestly, the Fighter should start out 5 points ahead of the warlock (the difference between the bonus from his 18 Str (+4) combined with his Class Bonus to Fort (+2) compared to the Feylock's 12 Con (+1)). If they're both advanced smartly, the fighter picks up just 1 point on the Warlock's Fort Defense by 21st-level. Since there's 6 chances, the fighter has increased his strength 6 times for a total bonus of +3, whereas the Warlock should have split up his discretionary bonuses between Con and Int, and increased his Con 4 times (+2 total). This is where the defense boosting feats come in. If the Warlock takes Great Fortitude, his Fort is actually closer to the fighter's (only 4 points lower) than it was at 1st-level. That probably widens back to 5 points at 28th-level, as the Warlock probably doesn't increase his Con bonus (boosting it once only, or not at all) whereas the fighter DOES increase his strength (boosting it twice). Now the fighter is back to having a Fort Defense 5 points better than the Warlock's.

I suppose the fighter could take Great Fortitude, but he needs Lightning Reflexes and Iron Will a lot more. We can compare attack bonuses if you like...

Any character at level 21 should have a +7 stat bonus. The person he's attacking should have a stat bonus of no less than +3 to his weakest defense, which means he gives up 4 points to the attacker. Compare that to the same characters at Level 1, where the attacker has a +4 stat bonus, and his opponent has at least a +1 to his weakest defense. Over 20 levels, the change is 1 point, and the bad defense can be easily improved by spending a single feat.

As I said above, everything else washes out. Frankly, this is a min/max problem. The character who neglects one of his defenses in order to max out an attack stat is just inviting trouble. Don't have a defense bonus below +1 at 1st level, and don't forget to improve your defense stats as you level up. And spend a feat or two to shore up your weakness. It's not that complicated.

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

How about:
Stop increasing ability scores with level
Add a static bonus to attacks and NADs with level.
Add a static bonus to AC in light armor with level.

This is a simple and elegant solution. Only problem is that 4th and 8th levels are now dead levels. Not a huge problem but...eh.

Make the stat increases at 4th, 8th etc. point-buy.

I think this would end up widening the gap between optimizers and casual players. For the sake of theory though, how would this idea go? Maybe 2 pb points at 4th/8th, 4 points at 14th/18th and 6 points at 24th/28th...

One idea that I had looked at previously was an item-based solution: Heavy Armor for the Non-AC Defenses

If the extra NAD bonus equals the item's enhancement bonus, isn't that too many bonuses? Low NADs only lose 3 points by 30th level, so handing out +6s in exchange for ability bonuses makes these items a must-have for every NAD for every PC. Or am I misunderstanding?

As I said above, everything else washes out. Frankly, this is a min/max problem. The character who neglects one of his defenses in order to max out an attack stat is just inviting trouble. Don't have a defense bonus below +1 at 1st level, and don't forget to improve your defense stats as you level up. And spend a feat or two to shore up your weakness. It's not that complicated.

I thought the point of 4e is that you shouldn't need any particular feats to remain competent? Also, splitting your ability boosts between 3 abilities may or may not be wise but to a lot of casual players boosting only 2 is the most obvious course of action. I am likewise under the assumption that one of 4e's goals is to make obvious choices equally valid with not-so-obvious ones.

These kinds of responses always crack me up. I got the point, I just do not agree that it is an issue.

Then why are you posting in my thread?

Frankly, I find this 'huge stat differences are what differentiate PCs' idea utterly narrow-minded. You know where I've heard this "argument" before? When I invited a 3e player to my 4e one-shot adventure today; he said "I need 3e's skill list to differentiate my samurai from other PCs; everyone has the same bonuses in 4e so everyone is the same." Paraphrased, but no joke!

The idea that huge differences between NADs are meant to be meaningful, or balanced, character traits is as absurd as the idea that you need a bunch of skill ranks to make your PC different from others. To actively think otherwise is to rationalize a minor problem which the designers simply couldn't be bothered to fix.

What the designers intended is for everyone to hit at a roughly consistent 50% rate -- not for rolling the d20 to ever become a wrist exercise.

 

[Kingreaper]

These kinds of responses always crack me up. I got the point, I just do not agree that it is an issue.

The example you gave missed the point. If you got the point, why you chose an example which ignored it is beyond me.

I think this would end up widening the gap between optimizers and casual players. For the sake of theory though, how would this idea go? Maybe 2 pb points at 4th/8th, 4 points at 14th/18th and 6 points at 24th/28th...

First, the pointbuy table must be extended, and maybe modified. Note that all pointbuy would be pre-racial mods (unless you modified racial mods too) and pre-paragon/epic boosts.

8-12 1 point to increase
13-15 2 points
16 3 points
17 4 points
18 5 points
19 6 points
20 7 points
etc.

First bonus would be 8 points (Just more than needed to boost the top 2 possible stat pairs by 1 each [7 looks untidy, even numbers look better IMO])
Second bonus would be 10 points, 3rd 12, 4th 14, and so on.
You would be allowed to save points for later use. Max of +1 to any stat at any one increase.

So, at the final increase (level 28) you would have 18 points to spend. If you had been maxing out one stat, boosting that to 24 (pre racial) would cost you 10 points. This leaves 8 points to spend. You can't have a 21 in your secondary stat (you can't start with 16 and 18) so you're going to have to put some of those points in tertiary stats.

Numbers can be played with, and changing the extrapolation of the point-buy can create different results, (ie. you could flatten the curve, and make it 8/8/10/10/12/12 point buy; [or peak the curve and go for 8/10/14/18/24/30 if you really wanted]) but that's the basic principle.

 

[eriktheguy]

What the designers intended is for everyone to hit at a roughly consistent 50% rate -- not for rolling the d20 to ever become a wrist exercise.

This

I think the range 7-12 is comfortable for same level monsters. The worst athlete in your group of friends doesn't trip every step, and the best can still run out of breath sometimes.

 

[FireLance]

If the extra NAD bonus equals the item's enhancement bonus, isn't that too many bonuses? Low NADs only lose 3 points by 30th level, so handing out +6s in exchange for ability bonuses makes these items a must-have for every NAD for every PC. Or am I misunderstanding?

Well, I would expect a PC's primary and secondary ability score bonuses to equal or exceed the bonus to non-AC defenses from these items, so most PCs would have two non-AC defenses that would not benefit from them. A few PCs who have primary and secondary ability scores that contribute to the same non-AC defense would benefit from two, but only a PC with very balanced ability scores (e.g. no single modifier above +1 for 1st to 5th level item, +2 for a 6th to 10th level item, etc.) would benefit from all three.

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

Well, I would expect a PC's primary and secondary ability score bonuses to equal or exceed the bonus to non-AC defenses from these items, so most PCs would have two non-AC defenses that would not benefit from them. A few PCs who have primary and secondary ability scores that contribute to the same non-AC defense would benefit from two, but only a PC with very balanced ability scores (e.g. no single modifier above +1 for 1st to 5th level item, +2 for a 6th to 10th level item, etc.) would benefit from all three.

Ah I see; I misunderstood.

Thanks everyone, I'm going to go with the +1 to all stats at all 4th/8th levels for my next game. It does remove a fun choice, but there're still feats to pick.

 

[eriktheguy]

Point buy would be messy and difficult. Also it would stop players from increasing their primary stats, and end up making their attack values lower by 1 per tier.

 

[Kingreaper]

Point buy would be messy and difficult.

Only as messy and difficult as it is at character creation.

It's added complexity, but there is a reasoning for it.

I wouldn't want it every level, but every 4-6 levels shouldn't be too hard for people.
Depends on group of course.

Also it would stop players from increasing their primary stats, and end up making their attack values lower by 1 per tier.

How so?
If you're thinking "can't increase past 18", see the extended table, which can be altered to taste.

If you're thinking "it means you'll split the bonuses" a) yes, it gives the option, but you don't have to take it.

b) if the point-buy allowance at each of those levels is increased slightly, you can increase both the main stats, and a third stat [ie. base it on the +1 to 3 stats model, rather than the +1 to 2 model; giving 9, 12, 15, 18 etc. as the values]