D&D 4E suggestions for 4e ideas easy enough to HR now?

[Primitive Screwhead]

HeapThaumaturgist, I like that idea, making it so that a strong shield still has to rely on the users skill instead of being an auto block. My preference would be to use a BAB check against the attack roll {only one additional dice roll and no need for another skill}

Brislove, I almost lost you there.. If I read that right you are saying that the trade off the character chooses between dealing more damage with 2h weapons vs a little more protection with sword and board is enough of a balancing factor?

 

[Cryptos]

I'm a bit surprised that other than suggesting that one pare down the skill list and fold skills together, no one has touched on skills.

* Get rid of 3.x opposed skill check mechanics and instead use a static value of 10+skill ranks as the target DC.

* Get rid of skill ranks. Give each player X number of skills to train their character in. Their 'skill rank' is 1/2 their character levels + 5 + 5 with a skill focus feat. (Speculation based on SW SAGA, admittedly.)

*Turn some skill checks into multipart roll-and-react extended tasks, according to taste. Think about how you could make some tasks in your adventure an "extended challenge" or a "complex challenge."

 

[HeapThaumaturgist]

I doubt that +5 Trained/ +5 Focus will make it into 4.0. After playing Saga for a while, that particular rule is one of my least favorite.

It becomes quite possible to get dominant with a skill early (lvl1), and generally from what I've seen, any critical skill this is exactly what happens. It doesn't work well with attack skills (Use The Force) because early your bonus far outstrips the expected resistances but you only get worse from there. So you want to whip up with your Force early because mid levels it's 50/50 and higher levels your skills are iffy.

--fje

 

[drothgery]

I doubt that +5 Trained/ +5 Focus will make it into 4.0. After playing Saga for a while, that particular rule is one of my least favorite.

It becomes quite possible to get dominant with a skill early (lvl1), and generally from what I've seen, any critical skill this is exactly what happens. It doesn't work well with attack skills (Use The Force) because early your bonus far outstrips the expected resistances but you only get worse from there. So you want to whip up with your Force early because mid levels it's 50/50 and higher levels your skills are iffy.

I'm going to guess that it does, but skill vs. defense rolls are either drasticly curtailed or eliminated entirely. There are a lot of really good things about allowing someone to be highly skilled at first level if they really want to be, most notably that you can make a wise old sage a 1st level nonheroic and still competent.

Use the Force was the major problem there, and since D&D magic probably doesn't work like the Force (which ended up with a lot of skill vs. defense rolls), that's a non-issue. In the game, it's a bit unbalancing, but very true to the movies; the Force always works on low-level mooks, and never works on high-level types.

 

[brislove]

Brislove, I almost lost you there.. If I read that right you are saying that the trade off the character chooses between dealing more damage with 2h weapons vs a little more protection with sword and board is enough of a balancing factor?

yep. Well that and the fact that they have to spend money on that shield. for an example:

2-handed half-orc fighter 10 28 point buy: According to the DMGs wealth by level (p135) we have 49000 gold.
Full-Plate +3 (~11k), Greatsword +3 (~18k), belt of str +4 (16k) Ring of Prot +1 (2k) some change. =~47000. Starting 20 str bumped twice.

Base Stats Str 22(26) Dex 12, con 16, others can be 8s, doesn't matter for this example.

Attack bonus is (21 total): 10 (bab) + 3(magic weapon) +8 STR=+21

Ac(27) is 10(base) + 5(level) +11 (full-plate) +1 (dex)=27

Damage pre-power attack is 2d6 (7avg) +3(MW) +12 (str) so 22 damage per swing. And hitting himself on a 6+.

Shield fighter 10 Same stats/race.
full-plate+3 (11k) shield +3 (9k) longsword +2 (8k) belt of str +4 (16k) ring of prot +1 (2k)
46k spent. but 1 point from the weapon had to change into a shield. That same change is a lot of items (10k gold worth).

AC(32)=10(base) +5 (level) +11 (Full-plate) +5 (hvy shield)+1 dex=32
Getting hit on a 12+by himself. Still perfectly reasonable, and would be a 7+ without the level based bonus.

Attack(20) is 10 (bab) +2 (MW) +8 (STR)=20
lets say no power attack, as it's not good with a 1-hander.

Damage(14.5) ~4.5 (weapon) + 8 Str +2 MW=14.5 so about 10 damage less per swing.

this discrepancy increases with higher levels as I'll show below. Again not to mention the money that has to be spent on the shield.

heres these 2 guys at 20 (720,000 gold so we'll just assume bunches of good things)
2-hander +5 greatsword +5 ring of prot, +8 belt of str, +5 amulet of natural armor, +4 dex item + 5 mithril full-plate. +5 insight to str.

AC(46) w/o shield is 10(base) +10 (level) + 13 (fullplate) +5 ring +5 Amulet +3 dex=46

Attack bonus(39)= +13 (str) +20 (bab) + 5(MW)= +39

So hitting on a 7 for ~31 before Power attack.

same guy with only a +4 weapon to pay for the shield.

Attack +38 hitting for 4.5 +13+4=~21

Same AC stuff +7 from shield= 53. so getting hit on a 14. With pretty twinked out AC.

if anything I think this rule-change makes it reasonable to use a shield. As without the +10 they would still be hitting you on a 4 making shields completely pointless 90% of the time (since the only time they make a difference is on a 2 or 3 since ones miss anyway.)

With just adding the extra AC you make shields a reasonable choice, instead of a way to make yourself do less damage for no noticeable benefit.

I guess my final review would be that the shield block is an interesting (and cool) option for a feat, but not a needed change for AC balance. it seems to be a trade of getting hit twice as often for hitting for twice as much. this doesn't change that low armored creatures get shredded to dust by power-attack and I think that is a favorable trade for not using a shield.

 

[Xethreau]

Well, something I plan to implement is per-encounter spellcasting. I designed a system for 3.5 today that would make a limited number of cantrips usable at will during battle, level spells usable a number of times per battle, a bonus spell during battle once per day, and any spell known usable at any point outside of battle. I sent the draft to my friends to look at, but once I playtest it with them I might post it here, if there is any interest in it.

 

[shilsen]

Well, something I plan to implement is per-encounter spellcasting. I designed a system for 3.5 today that would make a limited number of cantrips usable at will during battle, level spells usable a number of times per battle, a bonus spell during battle once per day, and any spell known usable at any point outside of battle. I sent the draft to my friends to look at, but once I playtest it with them I might post it here, if there is any interest in it.

I'm definitely interested in looking at it.

 

[brislove]

I posted a decent guideline for seperating spells into per-encounter/perday/at-will. its somewhere in here

Obviously some spells are on a individual basis, such as the orb spells. as they provide de-buffs they have to be per-encounter, unlike -most- single target blasts.

 

[evilbob]

I'm a bit surprised that other than suggesting that one pare down the skill list and fold skills together, no one has touched on skills.

* Get rid of 3.x opposed skill check mechanics and instead use a static value of 10+skill ranks as the target DC.

* Get rid of skill ranks. Give each player X number of skills to train their character in. Their 'skill rank' is 1/2 their character levels + 5 + 5 with a skill focus feat. (Speculation based on SW SAGA, admittedly.)

*Turn some skill checks into multipart roll-and-react extended tasks, according to taste. Think about how you could make some tasks in your adventure an "extended challenge" or a "complex challenge."

I agree that the skill system overhaul is potentially really interesting. Your first and third suggestions seem like "easy" things to integrate; those are practically just DM choice anyway. The second suggestion is the bear, however, and seems more "difficult." One thing that is immediately lost is individual customization. If every fighter has the same skills, that loses some of your individuality. It also loses the ability for players to take odd skill choices here or there, like throwing a few points into a new language. Overall, I'm not sure the simplicity would be worth what you'd lose on that one, and that's coming from someone who is very happy to trash large swaths of stuff for the sake of simplicity.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I'm going to guess that it does, but skill vs. defense rolls are either drasticly curtailed or eliminated entirely. There are a lot of really good things about allowing someone to be highly skilled at first level if they really want to be, most notably that you can make a wise old sage a 1st level nonheroic and still competent.

Use the Force was the major problem there, and since D&D magic probably doesn't work like the Force (which ended up with a lot of skill vs. defense rolls), that's a non-issue. In the game, it's a bit unbalancing, but very true to the movies; the Force always works on low-level mooks, and never works on high-level types.

I agree that these is a serious problem. I think D&D 3rd edition also suffered from the limitations. The Bard using his Perform check result as a saving throw DC was very "powerful" (but luckily the effects using this mechanic were not), and using Intimidate in the most straight forward seeming manner (Intimidate vs. Will Save) wouldn't work well, either.

I assume that attacks against the defenses will be level-based, and depending on the type of attack (martial (or melee/ranged?) and magical (or divine/arcane?)), classes grant a bonus. Depending on the size of these bonuses compared to skill bonuses, a real transparency between skills, attacks and defenses could be achieved. But as you pointed out, one weakness is that such a system doesn't support a "very competent" character at 1st level well, since focusing on an skill that can be used for attack purposes can become overpowered if the defenses don't scale appropriately.