Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Fanaelialae" data-source="post: 5850764" data-attributes="member: 53980">By varying both PC attack bonus and AC, you're creating too large a range in my opinion. By letting hp and damage do more of the heavy lifting, you can narrow that range while still maintaining differentiation.It isn't as though the worst attacker under this system is a wizard trying to melee a dragon. I's a heavily armored fighter who's effectively best ignored. He rarely hits and he can rarely be hit. Because of his high defenses and minimal threat, enemies will go out of their way to make him the lowest priority, rendering his defense effectively useless. That doesn't strike me as much fun for anyone. Moreover, it seems like a design trap.Either you should have attack and defense deviate by only one point, or keep defense constant (by level) and only vary attack. Then you can give those who favor attacking better damage, and those who favor defense better hp. I'd say that in order to keep things reasonable, the worst attack against the best defense should have a 55% chance of hitting (hit on a natural 10). The best attack against the worst defense should have a 75% chance of hitting (hit on a natural 6). Personally, I'd prefer an even narrower range from 60% to 70%, but that's probably too narrow for many.Not only does this keep the numbers close to the sweet spot, it renders bonuses and penalties meaningful. For example, under your proposed numbers, the worst attack against the best defense, when blinded (-5 penalty), only hits on a natural 20. Similarly, the best attack against the worst defense, with combat advantage (+2 bonus), only misses on a natural 1. IMO, it should be almost impossible to achieve a "cannot miss" or a "cannot hit" situation. Under my proposed numbers, the worst attacker still has a 30% chance to hit when blinded. The best attacker has an 85% chance to hit with combat advantage. Even after modifiers, the roll remains meaningful.Again, tougher creatures should have more hp rather than higher AC, and dangerous creatures should have more damage rather than a higher attack bonus. You can make a creature last the same amount of time (on average) using either method, but if you use hp at least the players get to feel like they're making progress. It might still take them 5 rounds to slog through a defense-oriented creature, but at least those five rounds won't be: miss... miss... miss... oh dear gawds of gaming, why do you hate me so... FINALLY, I hit it and kill it!</blockquote>

Verification