Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="HeavenShallBurn" data-source="post: 4236828" data-attributes="member: 39593">I was speaking of rebuilding the base system of BAB/Saves/DCs rather than purely a single status tweak.  They're meant to work together as a unified base mechanic that brings variation range down rather than as individual patches.If you use it in combination with the MAB system for DCs the DCs and Saves match, as intended.  It was meant to be a unified solution.Yes that's one of the most common epic level house rules I've encountered.  My "Base+X" formula was designed to get rid of the divide between epic and non-epic as much as unify progression.Yes, UK formula's do work well.  I just have a personal preference for armor as DR systems and find it easier to move most of what's now AC over to DR then bump damage a certain amount as compensation.Largely the HD gaps are caused by a cascade from the different BAB/Saves/etc of the various monster types diverging so much, and the rules about Y HD per CR.  If you're regularizing you might as well regularize the entire system which brings CR back into a much closer relationship to HD.   SLAs would have the same DC as that of a caster of equivalent level though, which would actually bring things back into line.  You would be divorcing caster levels from DCs to an extent.  Caster Levels would still determine how many spells and of what levels were available but DCs would be independently scaled to an appropriate amount for them relative to the total character level.  For creatures with SLAs caster level would no longer enter the picture for DCs at least.  CL equivalence would be purely a matter of effect calculation and duration.  I'm still trying to figure out how to rework effect scaling for a tie into MAB without giving up some of the granularity of CL, haven't managed it yet though.</blockquote>

Verification