D&D 4E Using 4e's Inherit Bonus system in pathfinder

[Kazalt]

Has anyone used 4e's Inherit Bonus system for pathfinder? If so, how well does it work? Does it need fine tuning for 3.5's rules?

For those that don't know the system, it basically gives you bonuses to attack, damage, AC, and saving throws at certain levels. By level 20, you're at +4 for the above mentioned stats. It's there so that you don't have to rely on magical items as much, which sounds good on paper, but I don't know how well it works out overall.

Thanks in advance!

 

[udalrich]

Has anyone used 4e's Inherit Bonus system for pathfinder? If so, how well does it work? Does it need fine tuning for 3.5's rules?

For those that don't know the system, it basically gives you bonuses to attack, damage, AC, and saving throws at certain levels. By level 20, you're at +4 for the above mentioned stats. It's there so that you don't have to rely on magical items as much, which sounds good on paper, but I don't know how well it works out overall.

Thanks in advance!

Would this replace enhancement bonuses on weapons or tomes that grant inherent bonuses? Would it just add an extra bonus?

I haven't used it in any addition, but it does look like it gives fighters an advantage over magic users. Saves benefit everyone, but magic users often are casting spells that don't require an attack roll and either don't do damage or do damage on a scale where even +4 is negligible. They also might be relying more on miss changes and illusions to avoid being hit than on AC.

In contrast, a fighter might be making 5-8 attacks each round, so +4 to damage could be an extra 20-32 damage per round, which would be noticeable.


It would probably work as a replacement for magic armor, weapons and cloaks of resistance. You would have to figure out what to do about DR/magic.

It also reminds me of common criticism of 4E, which is that it is balanced by removing all the differences between the classes. In a way, you are forcing everyone to buy a +1 weapon at this point, and to buy a +2 armor at that point. Since you are making choices for the players, they will probably not be the choices that the players want to make, especially since it seems to be a one-size-fits-all choice.

Do you want to remove/limit magic items, or do you want the characters to be defined by their basic stats and not have a lot of additional modifiers?

Depending what your goal is, you might be able to achieve it by changing descriptions and possibly using Complete Gear.

CG recasts the idea of wealth as an inner power. When you attune yourself to an item, it works better for you. In the hands of a simple peasant, that longsword is just a simple longsword. In the hands of Palatine the Pure, it becomes a Holy Avenger.

You could even take the idea further and (for most items) not even require a physical item. (This does not work well for armor and weapons, obviously.) Palatine sits and concentrates on techniques for resisting magic. When he is done, he gains a +1 resistance bonus on saves. (His player also checks of the cloak slot on the character sheet.)

Magical items are still there, but now they are just a bookkeeping mechanism on the character sheet. Humphry the Wizard can go into battle naked if he so desires, and be as effective as the standard wizard with a staff, 2 wands, three scrolls, a robe, a cloak, a headband, boots and a belt.

 

[SkredlitheOgre]

I haven't used it and can't really see a reason to. The PCs are already more powerful than 3/3.5E, so why give them more combat bonuses? If I were going to use something like that, I would give the bonus to skills and so forth in order to foster more roleplaying.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

I haven't used it and can't really see a reason to. The PCs are already more powerful than 3/3.5E, so why give them more combat bonuses? If I were going to use something like that, I would give the bonus to skills and so forth in order to foster more roleplaying.

You aren't giving them more bonuses.

It's just, instead of a Fighter getting a +4 longsword at the appropriate level, he just gets +4 to hit and damage instead (which can apply to any weapon). The end result is the same.

Then, you can hand out magical items that do more interesting schticks without worrying that the players will ignore them for the tried-and-true base-enhancement weapons - or skip handing out magic items entirely!

Frankly, in the end, there's little difference between making sure everyone has appropriately-bonused weapons and just handing out the bonuses, other than your inability to (hopefully temporarily!) deny someone that bonus through taking their toys away.

I say, go for it, see how it works out, and report back to us!

And welcome to ENWorld!

It would probably work as a replacement for magic armor, weapons and cloaks of resistance. You would have to figure out what to do about DR/magic.

That's the basic idea. It frees the DM from making things like basic weapons +X and armor +X and enough cloaks of resistance +X to go around are found in treasure troves by eliminating them from the game entirely and just buffing the players appropriately, and instead focuses on more interesting magical items.

So, no one needs to wear a Cloak of Protection +3, because they've got the +3 save bonus already; instead, they can wear Wings of the Bat or a Cape of the Mountebank, etc.

 

[steenan]

I really like the inherent bonus system.

1. It makes characters much less dependent on equipment. This opens a possibility of opponents stealing PC's stuff, sundering items in combat etc. without the risk of making characters unviable at their level and without having to give them the same or similar stuff a little later.

2. It makes magic item shops unnecessary. As there is no need to get all the "required" items at appropriate levels, PC may use only what they find during their adventures. "Magic shops" only sell low-level potions and scrolls.

3. There is much less correlation between wealth and combat power. I can throw out all the"wealth by level" guidelines. Characters may get from being broke to having more gold than king's treasury and back in few sessions and are able to reasonably adventure for the whole time.

4. I use the same system for NPCs and it frees me from having to give them a lot of magic items to be dangerous opponents. I'm free to decide how much gold and magic items the party will get by defeating someone, instead of being forced to put a lot of wealth on every enemy NPC.

 

[Stormonu]

I'd say if you use it, just remember to trim the gold the PC's get so they don't get these "free bonuses" and use their purchasing power elsewhere.

 

[Mojo_Rat]

it sounds like the sort of thing to use if you wanted to do a low magic game. as a normal rule it's...... really boring. I'm sorry but finding magic swords excites me. well not a whole lot but as a general thing it's part of the game.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

it sounds like the sort of thing to use if you wanted to do a low magic game. as a normal rule it's...... really boring. I'm sorry but finding magic swords excites me. well not a whole lot but as a general thing it's part of the game.

Is it more exciting to find:

A +1 sword, and then a +2 sword, and then a +3 sword; or

A sword that let's you teleport 6 squares once per hour, a sword that lets you automatically confirm a critical hit once per fight, and a sword that can throw a small ball of fire once per day

?

You can combine them, certainly, but then you've got a +1 sword that lets you automatically confirm a critical hit once per fight, that you then have to give up when you find the +3 sword that lets you teleport - or you spend a lot of time missing in combat, because the system assumes you'll have a better attack bonus than you actually do.

Inherent bonuses don't remove magic items from the game. They remove the boring-but-necessary magic items from the game.

 

[SkredlitheOgre]

Inherent bonuses don't remove magic items from the game. They remove the boring-but-necessary magic items from the game.

And I think this depends ENTIRELY on what you consider "boring-but-necessary."

My party is low-level (4 3rds, 1 2nd, and 2 1st) and they are just getting ready to find their SECOND magic item (a +2 sword, and that's not counting a bundle of +2 arrows they found along with some masterwork bows), which at that point in their character careers is a big deal.

The way I read things, and I don't play 4E so i don't have a copy of the DMG2, these inherent bonuses aren't magical in any way, which is fine if you want to play a low-to-no magic game. Personally, I find it easier and way less complicated for all involved to hand out magic items which either do or do not beat damage reduction rather than redoing monsters/enemies to take out DR without having to have the players keep track of yet another statistic.

I really like the inherent bonus system.

1. It makes characters much less dependent on equipment. This opens a possibility of opponents stealing PC's stuff, sundering items in combat etc. without the risk of making characters unviable at their level and without having to give them the same or similar stuff a little later.

And why would you take the players "toys" away? The only reason I would do that is to make it a plot hook for another adventure and I would never do that to the ENTIRE party. For example, one of my players currently has a Fang of Turaglas (Dragon Magazine #312, page 72). He isn't "supposed" to have it, so the nearest cult of Turaglas will start sending some people after it. If he loses the sword, then he has the option to go get it back or not after he's learned what the sword DOES. (It sends life energy to an entrapped demon lord). And even if you take away one really nifty weapon, do your players only carry ONE weapon? Hell, each person in my party has at LEAST two weapons.

2. It makes magic item shops unnecessary. As there is no need to get all the "required" items at appropriate levels, PC may use only what they find during their adventures. "Magic shops" only sell low-level potions and scrolls.

Magic shops make for great roleplaying encounters. You can set ANY NPC in there and they don't seem out of place, giving you the opportunity to use any plot hook you want. You can also plant items there, too. Has one of your characters been looking for a particular item? Well, here's a chance for them to pick it up...or find a cursed one that looks JUST like it, thus giving you another plot hook.

it sounds like the sort of thing to use if you wanted to do a low magic game. as a normal rule it's...... really boring. I'm sorry but finding magic swords excites me. well not a whole lot but as a general thing it's part of the game.

This right here. As a player, I would MUCH rather find the magical doodad instead of getting a +1 modifier. I know my players feel the same way. Now, getting higher bonuses because of magic or something like that, they're cool with that. But handing out a +1 because they got to a certain level? No thanks.

I can see using the Inherent Bonus if you're playing a game that either 1) is low-to-no magic or 2) focuses more on combat, since the bonuses given are all combat oriented. Mine is neither of those, so I can't see myself ever using the IB in the current game I'm running.

 

[BriarMonkey]

I can see both sides of the coin, and that side in the middle - and honestly, I think it boils down to the type of game you want to run.

For my part, I really want to decouple the christmas tree effect - for which, inherent bonuses would play a role. I also want to allow characters to roam around town without feeling like they must be wearing their +X Plate Armor of Awesomesauce and slinging their +X Great Sword of Doom, lest the kobold ninja strike from the alley and then the character feels they are unable to do anything with just a dirk. If the characters want to travel the roads in traveling garb, vice heavy armor, they should be able to do that - without being heavily penalized for not being "geared up".

So yeah, a little tweaking of the numbers.

The next campaign I run I am going to use something similar to this concept. We already have bonuses to attributes granted at differing levels, so extending this to saves, skills, etc. doesn't seem like any real stretch. I am going to grant points at certain levels that the players can use to bump up bits of their characters. While the mechanism is pretty much the same as what the OP mentions, I'm using a differing progression (and no, it's not all worked out yet).

As for its impact on magic items, etc., I am making a few little other tweaks too. I'm using more magic items that have both benefits and drawbacks (IE: a headband may grant +2 INT, but it also may cause -2 STR); I'm using the DR variant for Armor out of the Unearthed Arcana; and as a whole I tend to be a tad on the stingy side for coin.

As for the point at hand, if the system is used without regard to magic +X items, expect the characters to be better than normal; but adjust magic a little too - and all should be dandy.