Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Asmor" data-source="post: 4563937" data-attributes="member: 1154">I think you misunderstood me. I was just positing what would happen if you removed an, in my mind, extraneous bonus from everything. In other words, I was wondering how essential this half-level bonus actually was.That's basically what I was getting at.While this may be true from a purely aesthetic stand point, I don't think it's true from a mathematical one. That is, it might look like it makes magic items more important, but it doesn't.That said, if your Nth level fighter doesn't have weapon, armor and neck-slot items with at least a  +[(N/5)-1] bonus, then he's probably pretty gimped to begin with, with or without the half-level bonus obscuring things.That's a pretty common, and semi-official-but-not-really house rule for low-magic campaigns; ditch the enhancement bonuses and give +1/5 levels to defenses, attack rolls and damage.Yes. And I personally see this as a beneficial thing, as it broadens the acceptable level band and gives the DM more options to throw at PCs.I disagree, for basically the same reason as with magic items above: Changing a monster's attack bonus or defense is going to have virtually the same effect with or without the level-dependent bonus.That's actually, in my mind, one of the best things about this. As I said, I hate the skill system and scaling DCs as they stand now. I think static DCs should be static. Why should the 30th level wizard who can't dance to save his life get a +15 to acrobatics?This doesn't remove skill advancement, skill advancement was never there in the first place. It was all an illusion. If you want to advance in a skill, train in it. If you want to advance farther, focus in it. At that point, you've got a +8 bonus, which is pretty damn good when you're talking about static DCs which will usually be in the 10-20 range.</blockquote>

Verification