Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="nillin" data-source="post: 4355314" data-attributes="member: 72223">I like your proposals too, and I think they are better than the many die roll versions of the rules as written. But I think one should use the following three points of interest when comparing different solutions: - Strikers roll to do damage with the help of CA, especially rogue sneak attack. 50% of the time is not good enough for a rogue, 75% is on the low side but acceptable. - Tanks ability to hold threat/aggro/hate from the enemies on himself. And untargetable squishies in the back helps with that tremendously. - The amount of die rolls to accomplish this should be kept to a minimum. (- The fourth bonus thingie that concerns realism.<img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/ponder.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":hmm:" title="Hmmm    :hmm:" data-shortname=":hmm:" />) I think your suggestions either fail somewhat when it comes to balance or the number of die rolls. Even though you are on the right track. I feel that 4E skill sets are very similar. Almost all players will have starting stealth of either +0 or +10. With a very slight variation. Likewise monsters will usually have very few skills, so in reality a stealth check versus passive perception is close to a 100%. And having a test to decide whether you have a +2 or not is only relevant if you don't have the skill or the enemy have perception themselves. This means that raising your stealth skill by 1, will increase your chance to get CA by 5% and that in turn will increase your tohit by 0.1. And that gives a 1% increase in damage. Nothing to scorn at, but hardly relevant enough to really make an issue of. The thing that do count is the fact that you have the skill training of +5 and got yourself into the right square. A comparison to the old 3.5E system with complementary skill checks. Maybe that should be implemented with stealth, you try to help yourself, if you succeed you get a +2 bonus on to hit. Feels familiar doesn't it? Realism wise all of the above postings fall short. But we are not here for realism. We want a playable and enjoyable system that our DM can describe to us in such a way that we believe in it.<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /> As a closing thought. Rules should be formulated to give the players decision points. Going offensively and get CA or defensively and get a chance to be untargetable is such a choise. Just rolling a die and see if I got both or neither is not increased interactivety.</blockquote>

Verification