Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lord Zardoz" data-source="post: 5024074" data-attributes="member: 704">I have always found Morale to be a troublesome thing to implement as a straight up d20 roll, and I always figured it would be better left to DM Fiat.Also, I think that the 3rd Edition Intimidate skill basically 'killed Morale and took its stuff'.Also remember the 3rd Edition introduced Feats.&nbsp; I am sure that if there were a Morale rule, there would have been feats to interact with it.&nbsp; And if there was one feat, there would also be magic items, and a particular prime stat and or skill to interact with it in an opposed roll.In 3rd Edition, Opposed rolls were basically broken.&nbsp; Consider Grapple, where you got bonuses for being strong, and being large, and having high Bab.&nbsp; Large creatures are always strong, so you had mid level creatures with a +12 (even more with improved grab).&nbsp; This meant that against a large and strong creature, you either needed to have a massive Bab advantage or you needed to roll higher then 17 and for the monster to roll 3 or less to fail the check.Now, consider a 3rd edition style Morale check where you could have a build optimized for it which would have a PC able to make checks that would cause an Ancient Red Dragon to piss its self and run away unless it could roll 18 or higher and have your PC roll 3 or less to fail.That mechanic would not have made it out of playtest.END COMMUNICATION</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lord Zardoz, post: 5024074, member: 704"] I have always found Morale to be a troublesome thing to implement as a straight up d20 roll, and I always figured it would be better left to DM Fiat. Also, I think that the 3rd Edition Intimidate skill basically 'killed Morale and took its stuff'. Also remember the 3rd Edition introduced Feats. I am sure that if there were a Morale rule, there would have been feats to interact with it. And if there was one feat, there would also be magic items, and a particular prime stat and or skill to interact with it in an opposed roll. In 3rd Edition, Opposed rolls were basically broken. Consider Grapple, where you got bonuses for being strong, and being large, and having high Bab. Large creatures are always strong, so you had mid level creatures with a +12 (even more with improved grab). This meant that against a large and strong creature, you either needed to have a massive Bab advantage or you needed to roll higher then 17 and for the monster to roll 3 or less to fail the check. Now, consider a 3rd edition style Morale check where you could have a build optimized for it which would have a PC able to make checks that would cause an Ancient Red Dragon to piss its self and run away unless it could roll 18 or higher and have your PC roll 3 or less to fail. That mechanic would not have made it out of playtest. END COMMUNICATION [/QUOTE]

Verification