Tiers Excerpt (merged)

[HeinorNY]

Here is another quote from the same Paladin Smite article (emphasis added).

I think given all the text written, as opposed to a stat block, demonstrates that damage goes up with level. It is mentioned in two places, and is pretty clear. Does it apply to 'basic attacks'? I don't know.

OK. But keep in mind that the Paladin Smites article is 3 months older than the Rogue article.
Things might have changed.

"Dexterity modifier damage" seems pretty clear and straightforward to me.

 

[Ingolf]

I cannot count how many GMs I've seen try to bring the hammer down on the PCs at every turn to preserve some half-assed "story" that wouldn't have held up in a ThunderCats episode.

What you're bitching about is bad game-mastering, not games with plots.

Some people - most people I'd wager - prefer their games to have some sort of plot framework to hang the encounters and so forth on, even if it's a fairly rudimentary or trite one.

 

[WyzardWhately]

What you're bitching about is bad game-mastering, not games with plots.

Some people - most people I'd wager - prefer their games to have some sort of plot framework to hang the encounters and so forth on, even if it's a fairly rudimentary or trite one.

Depends on what you mean by plot. Do you mean something overarching going on? Yeah, of course, who wouldn't want that? Or do you mean something more like a course of action which the PCs must follow? Because that's what I'm talking about, and that's what a LOT of people mean when they say "plot."

 

[Verys Arkon]

OK. But keep in mind that the Paladin Smites article is 3 months older than the Rogue article.
Things might have changed.

That is very true, and I might indeed be wrong. However, 1/2 level to damage seems to be a fairly major shift in the 'system math'...

 

[KidSnide]

Here is another quote from the same Paladin Smite article .

I think given all the text written, as opposed to a stat block, demonstrates that damage goes up with level. It is mentioned in two places, and is pretty clear. Does it apply to 'basic attacks'? I don't know.

I agree that the quoted text is clear.

I think our uncertainty comes from the fact that the monster stats that we've been seeing clearly *don't* add 1/2 level to damage. Of course, PCs and monsters may just work differently. But, since the Smite article is pretty old, it seems safe to say that we don't yet know for sure.

 

[Gundark]

Wow... We on the boards are so not going to be able to keep up with this info, by the time we are half done debating/arguing over the last thing. The new one will crop up.

I am liking what I am seeing though, also interesting thing with items:

Could this be the beginning of how we determine adjustments if you don't wish to have magic items?

Your first point... yes I think you're right...which is a very good thing. I got tired of reading thread that degenerated into an arguement after page 3.

2nd point....interesting....I think you might be on to something there.

 

[HeinorNY]

Your first point... yes I think you're right...which is a very good thing. I got tired of reading thread that degenerated into an arguement after page 3.

2nd point....interesting....I think you might be on to something there.

This post could be relevant to this subject.

 

[lightblade]

As for feats... we know you get one at level 1 and level 11, so I'm guessing it's one feat at every even-numbered level, plus one at the first level of each tier (1, 11, 21).

And retraining is "in," which in this case seems to mean that each level you can retrain one feat, and at each of the "(replacement)" levels you can retrain a power. It would also seem you can never retrain utility powers.

I bet you're right about the feat frequency . I'm sure the designers want something easy to remember, and your system is solid, IMO.

Your table is really nice. I think you forgot to include the stat bump at 11th level, but otherwise looks good. Edit; you know, I bet the ability bumps follow a similar trend; 4, 8, 11, 14, 18, 21, 24, 28. That matches the 8 ability bumps cited on the forums somewhere.

My guess for retraining is that you can pick either a feat or a power (or something else, like a skill) to retrain each level. For powers, you can probably retrain within the same power level or lower. So, i think you will be able to retrain utility powers.

This is separate from the combat powers, since when you pick a new one you need to give up an old one for the slot if you're full; I wouldn't count that as retraining.

 

[frankthedm]

In a way, this is an age-old problem. Why don't characters not simply attack the merchant selling them their cool magical items? Why don't they even try? How could can his defenses really be?

The old man does not have the items PCs want on him, nor in the store's backroom. He makes the sale, collects the coin, splits the profit with the item's owner and has the item delivered to the PCs with the utmost discretion.

The crap in the backroom is generally superficially magical or cursed. The Golden Hairpin of illusionary Youth, The Jade Mace of Exotic Pleasuring {this is the 'backroom' after all], a -1 sword that glows like a +5 sword and other less helpful items will be found there.

 

[Ingolf]

Depends on what you mean by plot. Do you mean something overarching going on? Yeah, of course, who wouldn't want that? Or do you mean something more like a course of action which the PCs must follow? Because that's what I'm talking about, and that's what a LOT of people mean when they say "plot."

In general I mean something overarching going on, with NPC actors that have their own agendas, secrets and so forth. Plenty of those sorts of "plots" can be subverted by things like scry, etc, and as a DM I get tired of constantly having to account for that sort of thing at all times, but I can deal with it.

But the second type is not automatically a bad thing. No one likes to be railroaded, of course, and if a DM is going to restrict what the PCs can do, it has to be done rarely and with considerable care, or the players will (rightly) object.

For example, my last 3.5 campaign started with all of the PCs in prison together after being captured by slavers. When play started, the rogue had just managed to lift a key off the hobgoblin jailer and the escape was on. Later in that same campaign, I framed one of the PCs for the murder of his Lord in a fairly complicated story involving plenty of behind-the-scenes political maneuvering, a bastard son and (eventually) a trial by combat.

Both of those were situations where the PCs were forced into a specific course of action, but I don't think either of them were "bad" plots or stories, and based on the reaction of my players they didn't think so either. And in the case of the PC framed for murder, something as trivial as "Detect Thoughts" could have made the entire thing a hell of a lot less interesting - I could only run that particular game because I have fairly oddball players and there was no one in the group capable of casting it. Oh, sure, the actual murderer could have been wearing a lead-lined hat all the time or something silly like that I suppose. But the best solution (for me at least) is to just dispense with things like "Detect Thoughts" and the various other plot-twisting effects entirely.