What if we removed the half-level bonus to everything?

[Nail]

The problem with minions is that they are a simplification.

Don't get stuck on the "minion" issue. It's separate from whether or not removing the 1/2 level bonus is a good idea. Any 1st level monster makes the point just as easily in the present thread.

By 30th level, under standard D&D, you're not even fighting level 1 monsters, simply because it's not possible for them to be any kind of threat, and thus there is no excitement in fighting them.

By removing the 1/2 level bonus, the DM's toolbox becomes more limited and monster distinctions become smaller. An orc hits as well as Orcus. The game takes another step in the direction of "vanilla". That's a good thing?

 

[77IM]

There needs to be a reason for the same hazard/obstacle to suddenly require a harder check. There's also this issue. If a group of level 15s save a few villagers then encounter the obstacle, is it a levels 1-3 DC or a 15ish DC?

That's a good question (and something I wish the DMG gave like 1-2 paragraphs more advice on). I tend to do a little of each.

• For obstacles that are somewhat easily defined, I use a static DC. For example, Athletics checks to climb. The stone outer wall of the village has the same climb DC even when the village is under attack by Orcus himself. On the other hand, Orcus's fortress in the Abyss has walls that are very hard to climb, even if a group of level 12s wind up there.
• For more unusual or dynamic obstacles, like a swinging rope bridge or a trap, I use the DC by level (the famous DMG p.42). My rationale is that higher-level foes aren't just harder to hit, they're harder to fight: the combat is more intense, the timing and movement more crucial, etc., to the point where interactions with the environment are more difficult.
• I wholeheartedly approve of Astral-Teflon Slime as a compromise between the two approaches.

On the topic of removing 1/2 level from stats, you could do this for attack and defense, but leave the 1/2 level in place for skills. Attack and defense have a "Step 2" that scales with level -- damage and hit points. In other words, after you attack, you still need to deal damage. This is why 1/2 level on attack and defense is somewhat redundant and can probably be removed. But skills are frequently "make the check and you're done," with no Step 2 involved, so they can benefit from 1/2 level. That way your high-level rogue can still balance on a roof ridge and easily sneak past the guards. Skills aren't used in combat nearly as much, so it shouldn't hinder the goal of monster re-use. The only problem I can forsee is that certain skills go against defenses, notably Intimidate vs. Will, so you'd need to account for that (either give 1/2 level to Will defense vs Intimidate, or make Intimidate opposed by a skill, such as the better of Intimidate or Intuition).

-- 77IM

 

[Benly]

The way the DMG is written seems to encourage confusion about how scaling DCs work.

An average-difficulty Climb check doesn't get significantly easier as you level up. That's why, at any given level, a given DC might be "average": you need an average check to make it.

However, climbing up Fort Crapaud's wooden walls gets massively easier as you level. Fort Crapaud's walls don't become higher in DC (unless someone renovates the fort); rather, the fort's DC becomes an easier-rated check. The scaling is in terms of what kinds of challenges the DM throws at you. This isn't to say that you shouldn't be climbing ratty wooden walls when you're paragon or epic, but rather that they're not challenging enough to merit being considered an encounter; you're up and over the walls of Fort Crapaud and on to the real challenges inside.

 

[Thanee]

The statement you quoted, Thanee, wasn't the only statement there, nor even the last one.

I know, it was only the part that matters to the question "How so?".

Bye
Thanee

 

[Szatany]

If you took level bonuses away, then at 30th level it would be just as difficult to hit a kobold minion and it would be to hit Orcus.

I'm looking at MM right now so let's compare:

If we remove +1/2 level from kobold minion (which is +0), its defenses will be:
AC 15, Fort 11, Ref 13, Will 11

If we do the same to Orcus (half level is +16), its defenses will be:
AC: 32, Fort 35, Ref 30, Will 33

Why are you saying the hit chance will be the same?

 

[Szatany]

Don't get stuck on the "minion" issue. It's separate from whether or not removing the 1/2 level bonus is a good idea. Any 1st level monster makes the point just as easily in the present thread.


By removing the 1/2 level bonus, the DM's toolbox becomes more limited and monster distinctions become smaller. An orc hits as well as Orcus. The game takes another step in the direction of "vanilla". That's a good thing?

Orc minion lvl 4: +7 to hit

Orcus: +21 to hit

You were saying?

To sum things up, IMO it's a great idea to remove the +1/2 level bonus. The game already makes a distinction between low-level and high-level characters (combat-wise), which is:
- ability score increases (from +1 to +4 to all modifiers across levels),
- number of powers (from humble 4 to something like 15),
- everything that comes from paragon paths and epic destinies, which is a lot,
- damage (so not only you have more powers, they also deal more damage each),
- hit points,
- feats,
- bonuses to attacks and defenses from feats and magic item,
- armor,
- gold and rituals it provides.

That is more than enough, we don't need an extra arbitrary and rather pointless modifier on the top of that.

Skills are another thing however and removing +1/2 could hit them. It's easily fixable but needs to be addressed.

 

[Doctor Proctor]

I'm looking at MM right now so let's compare:

If we remove +1/2 level from kobold minion (which is +0), its defenses will be:
AC 15, Fort 11, Ref 13, Will 11

If we do the same to Orcus (half level is +16), its defenses will be:
AC: 32, Fort 35, Ref 30, Will 33

Why are you saying the hit chance will be the same?

Aren't monster defenses based a +1/level scale? In which case, Orcus would have an AC of 16, Fort of 19, Ref of 14 and Will of 17. Still a little better than the Kobold in Fort and Will, but in AC and Ref they're almost identical.

 

[Szatany]

Aren't monster defenses based a +1/level scale? In which case, Orcus would have an AC of 16, Fort of 19, Ref of 14 and Will of 17. Still a little better than the Kobold in Fort and Will, but in AC and Ref they're almost identical.

Does it matter what scale was originally used to create them? If you want to remove +1/2 level from players you have to remove exactly the same number from the monsters.

(IIRC the +1/level for monsters was used to account for bonuses from magic items, ability increases, and feats.)

 

[Nail]

Why are you saying the hit chance will be the same?

You should review the DMG, page 184-185, and then adjust your maths accordingly.

 

[Nail]

Does it matter what scale was originally used to create them? If you want to remove +1/2 level from players you have to remove exactly the same number from the monsters.

It might be helpful if you looked at how monsters are built, before making (erroneous) assertions.