gothmaugCC
First Post
ALrighty, There's been many posts on how in 4th edition saves are going out the window and new "ala Saga Edition" static defense scores will be implemented. Also we see from Dave noonan's playtest article (and other sources) that wizard type characters will be making a magic based attack roll.
On the surface this seems pretty simple. The Wizard makes his attack roll, and its checked against everyones appropriate defense score.
Advantages:
1) Its fast. One die rolled instead of one per player.
2) You can "crit" with your spell. Face it, people like to make things go boom
3) It makes the DM's life much easier when a player tosses a spell at NPC's
Though the system sounds nice, I see 2 MAJOR faults in it.
Disadvantages:
1) The "thrill" is gone from the defender's hands. IE. No longer is there the exultation of rolling a 20 or the dread of possibly rolling a 1.
2) STACKING EFFECTS: This is the big one. In any system its easier to modify a single source than multiple ones. Now that Wizards get an attack roll, it seems to me that it would be much easier for that single mage to find ways to stack up a really high magic attack roll, compared to how the defenders can increase thier STATIC defense score.
Think about it, With the right mixture of classes, feats, skills, magic effects, magic items (like +X wands), and other sources, it MAY be possible to raise your, lets say, Fireball attack roll to a degree much higher than the average defenders reflex defense at your level. Its MUCH easier for one person (the wizard NPC perhaps) to stack a single ability than for a whole bunch of people to beef up thier defense scores (like the party for instance).
This worries me a bit. We could see a proliferation of Cannon-Type characters who push thier Magic attack roll high enough so that they suceed, lets say, 80% of the time against the average defense scores at the characters level. I pray that the developers have taken this into account when calculating thier current system thats replacing saving throws.
Bullsh*t rampant speculation example:
Bob the 5th level wizard casts fireball at the gnolls. His magic attack score is his level + his Int modifier(3) + spell focus(1) + fire staff(2) + headband of Intellect (+2) for a total of +12. So Bob rolls 1D20 +12 (+5+3+1+2+1) and rolls an average roll of 10, for a total of 22. SO for a dead nuts average roll, those gnolls better have a reflex defense between 21-23 for a 50/50 success rate of avoiding that fireball.
So in conclusion, I dislike static defense scores. At least with the current system, when hit with a fireball, I feel like MY fate is in MY hands when I roll my reflex save. I don't think im gonna enjoy a system where all the attacker has to do is beat some static number written on my character sheet. Where's the heroics? Wheres the cheering as that natural 20 appears? Wheres the sympathetic patsa on the back when that 1 shows up? I don't know I'll have to see the final system before I make my decision, but I pray the developers think of these things.
On the surface this seems pretty simple. The Wizard makes his attack roll, and its checked against everyones appropriate defense score.
Advantages:
1) Its fast. One die rolled instead of one per player.
2) You can "crit" with your spell. Face it, people like to make things go boom
3) It makes the DM's life much easier when a player tosses a spell at NPC's
Though the system sounds nice, I see 2 MAJOR faults in it.
Disadvantages:
1) The "thrill" is gone from the defender's hands. IE. No longer is there the exultation of rolling a 20 or the dread of possibly rolling a 1.
2) STACKING EFFECTS: This is the big one. In any system its easier to modify a single source than multiple ones. Now that Wizards get an attack roll, it seems to me that it would be much easier for that single mage to find ways to stack up a really high magic attack roll, compared to how the defenders can increase thier STATIC defense score.
Think about it, With the right mixture of classes, feats, skills, magic effects, magic items (like +X wands), and other sources, it MAY be possible to raise your, lets say, Fireball attack roll to a degree much higher than the average defenders reflex defense at your level. Its MUCH easier for one person (the wizard NPC perhaps) to stack a single ability than for a whole bunch of people to beef up thier defense scores (like the party for instance).
This worries me a bit. We could see a proliferation of Cannon-Type characters who push thier Magic attack roll high enough so that they suceed, lets say, 80% of the time against the average defense scores at the characters level. I pray that the developers have taken this into account when calculating thier current system thats replacing saving throws.
Bullsh*t rampant speculation example:
Bob the 5th level wizard casts fireball at the gnolls. His magic attack score is his level + his Int modifier(3) + spell focus(1) + fire staff(2) + headband of Intellect (+2) for a total of +12. So Bob rolls 1D20 +12 (+5+3+1+2+1) and rolls an average roll of 10, for a total of 22. SO for a dead nuts average roll, those gnolls better have a reflex defense between 21-23 for a 50/50 success rate of avoiding that fireball.
So in conclusion, I dislike static defense scores. At least with the current system, when hit with a fireball, I feel like MY fate is in MY hands when I roll my reflex save. I don't think im gonna enjoy a system where all the attacker has to do is beat some static number written on my character sheet. Where's the heroics? Wheres the cheering as that natural 20 appears? Wheres the sympathetic patsa on the back when that 1 shows up? I don't know I'll have to see the final system before I make my decision, but I pray the developers think of these things.
