Upper Krust, where are you? [Immortal's Handbook]

[Upper_Krust]

Bonjour encore mon ami!

err, the fighter will still be a balanced class.

I don't agree.

Bab isn't the only thing measuring the fighter skill.

Feats are part of what balance the Fighter against the other classes.

An ever increasing number of feat will allow the fighter to attack everyone in a 15ft radius, or to cleave an army of advanced orc.

Fighter will still be better fighter than wizard.

But the difference is reduced. BAB is an intrinsic part of core class balance. If we reduce it across all classes the benefit of the fighter is reduced (and to a lesser exten clerics and rogues).

But IME, it isn't fun at all to give abilities that can't be used to a character and say that it is balanced (think paladin or ranger spell in 2e), to allow for the possibility of having a difference of 35 between the fighter Bab and the wizard Bab, will mean that when the lowest attack of the fighter hit, the highest attack of the wizard won't have any use, at this point, why give a Bab to the wizard? To fight goblins? They'll be toasted with one epic fireball, or killed by the fighter through epic cleaving.

I told you that argument (in effect WotCs excuse) is redundant. Fighter attack bonus and Wizard attack bonus ALREADY differentiate by more than 20 by the time we have reached 30th-level and thats without any min/maxing AND using their adjusted progression rates!

The wizard "high" bab allow to have fun with the group in an anti-magic zone with an assassin who has a high AC, if he want to kill the wizard, he can still hit te assassin sometimes with his dagger.

A Wizard who can also competantly fight is a Fighter/Wizard.

I can think of many circumstances in which the ability of the wizard to sometimes hit a creature (because the wizard doesn't have any spell left) is more fun for the game than having a fighter who always hit and character who sometimes, or the fighter who sometimes hit, and the other who never.

When is an epic wizard (or deity) ever likely to run out of spells (or scrolls, wand/staff/rod charges)? I'll tell you when. Never!

Plus, by putting back the fighter Bab advancement, you'll need to alter his epic feat selection, to balance him with the other classes between level 20 and 40 (the range in which WotC focused to balance things).

I don't think I do.

Consider the paladin, with their ability to take the improved spellcasting feat once they have level 9 spell slot, they'll have good bab, and slighty reduced spellcasting abilities compared to a cleric, while if you let it as is, the paladin has slighty better BaB, and the cleric slighty better spellcasting.

Cleric spellcasting is vastly superior to Paladin spellcasting.

and AC ascend a the rate the DM wish it to ascend on monster ,

If you want to be arbitrary about it.

after all the CR of monster is based on the challenge they represent vs a typical group of 4 adventurers, and if only the fighter can hit the thing with its highest attack, then it might have a higher CR than a monster that everyone can hit.

Would be dealt with under situational modifiers. Thats a very extreme circumstance. Whats more likely is that the Fighter will always hit the Cleric/Rogue may have a chance of hitting and the Wizard should be smart enough to avoid melee.

It shouldn't come as much of a surprise that most deities multiclass.

Or are you speaking of the AC of adventurer based on their spell and items?

Any/and/or.

If so, you can balance their AC the way you like based on the formula you use to have the value of their gear in gold pieces.

Any bonus to AC from items is likely to be countered by bonuses to Attack from items.

 

[Blacksad]

Bonsoir U_K!

To make it short, I should sell my ELH and my De&De, because you'll redo everything the way it should be?

Or are you going to use small portion of them, making their possession important to use the IH, while redoing large chunk of them?

If so, you should seriously consider putting what you'll use from the ELH and the De&De inside the IH, otherwise it will produce a very hard to use book, as it will have opposite rule with those book while assuming the use of some.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Re: Bonsoir U_K!

Bonsoir mon ami!

To make it short, I should sell my ELH and my De&De, because you'll redo everything the way it should be?

If such was the case I obviously wouldn't be waiting six months on both of them entering the SRD, would I!?

Or are you going to use small portion of them, making their possession important to use the IH, while redoing large chunk of them?

Aside from the obvious CR/EL rules; reworking some aspects of divinity including a number of SDAs for better balance (such as Annihilating Strike and Alter Reality); advocating revised applications of harm and heal; and the aforementioned BAB reversion to the core rules there are very few other changes of note.

If so, you should seriously consider putting what you'll use from the ELH and the De&De inside the IH, otherwise it will produce a very hard to use book, as it will have opposite rule with those book while assuming the use of some.

At any point in the IH where I deviate from an official (WotC) rules I will outline exactly my reasoning (as I have always done herein).

 

[-Eä-]

I must say I agree with UK on this issue: the BAB should not change when going epic. The cleric as it is is in many cases a vastly superior fighter than a true fighter due to buffing spells like Divine Power and Tenser's Transformation. The only thing that is keeping hi back is the feat progression. A wizard has also access to these buffing spells, and at the current progression, a wizard will, at higher levels, choosing only fighting feats, be a better fighter than the fighter AND have loads of spells.
The continuation of the current bab-rate is best both for all aspects of this balance: The fighters will be more likely to hit, as they should be, and they would be much more likely to hit in an Antimagic Field, which also should be the case.

I think the EAB presented in the ELH is quite flawed, but the flaw isn't as much present in the first 40 levels the system is tested for. At level 80 this will be much more visible, and as it is gods we are talking of, level 80 is quite plausible.

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Eä and others!

From feedback I have received it seems that many of you were reverting to the Core Rulebook BAB progression even before I had outlined my ideas on the matter.

 

[Blacksad]

Oops

Hi U_K!

I've seen the light, while at level 21-40 the change of Bab doesn't cause problem, in the 80-100 you could potentially end with wizard and fighter of similar CR and Bab, and given the low number of feat...

So I agree with you U_K

 

[Upper_Krust]

Re: Oops

Hi U_K!

Bon soir mon ami!

I've seen the light, while at level 21-40 the change of Bab doesn't cause problem, in the 80-100 you could potentially end with wizard and fighter of similar CR and Bab, and given the low number of feat...

So I agree with you U_K

Rarely is this stuff ever 'black and white', its more shades of grey. I think that this way is better than what the official rules propose, not so much right and wrong (since their rules still work), more a case of me saying; "well this way is slightly better; here is my reasoning, use these changes if you want."

...of course you should have listened to me in the first place mate, what were you thinking...

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi all!

The CR/EL document is finished. Unfortunately I seem to be having some jip converting it into a pdf document. So any advice is welcome.

I was attempting to use pdf995 (which someone recommended), without much success up to now...I am currently inquiring as to what I am doing wrong/or not doing right, so hopefully I'll get that sorted.

Another friend attempted to convert the pagemaker document to a pdf using InDesign, but the formatting went askew for some unknown reason (?).

Hopefully I'll get it sorted sooner rather than later, but if anyone has any advice it would be appreciated.

 

[Buddha the DM]

What was the document originally created in?

 

[Upper_Krust]

Hi Buddha mate!

What was the document originally created in?

Pagemaker 6.5