|
Finally, grappling a rider was a *difficult* thing to do - as shown by medievel experience.
See we have different opinions here, grapling a mounted person while the horse is moving is nearly impossible (but it would be in mechanics as well if the player used ride by attack he would not end in the space that he attacked in and therefor wouldn't be able to be grappled) but pulling a person out of the saddle when the horse is standing still isn't that hard, I agree that a ride check could be used to negate it since you can turn the horse to keep it in the way, but it's not as you say *difficult*.
Maybe instead of using grapple we have a new CMB called pull from sadle. Or just a line to CMB that says it can be used for other things than those listed that way a DM can decide on his own what does or doesn't call for a CMB
|
|
2. Multiclass Saves:
Soooooo, my Fighter 2, Ranger 2, Swashbuckler 1, Beast Master 1, Halfling Outrider 2... walks into a bar.... Yup, 8th level char...
Lets see reflex save...+16. Check
Fort save... +17.... check
Will save... +0Yes, this 8th level character is *just* as bad at making will saves - after fighting beholders, and mind flayers, and evil clerics... as on the day he started.
I think that a point system is unnecesary, I don't see the will save as an issue because that is a choice of build, on the high end I agree though, because I don't think that saves should be something people multiclass for, but then I think a simple rule that at any level other than 1st you only get a +1 instead of a +2 then the saves would be +6 much more reasonable.
Lets see reflex save...+16. Check
Fort save... +17.... check
Will save... +0
The elegance and beauty of 3E multiclassing comes from the design philosophy and goal that All Levels Are Equal. That is, since you can create a character by taking any number of classes, and any number of levels, and since a design goal of D&D is that all characters of the same character level should be approximately balanced in power, then it should not matter if you are a fighter5 or a ranger1/barbarian1/rogue1/mage1/cleric1.
But of course, it DOES matter, per the RAW, because the rules do not fulfill the goal. In actual play, a very multiclassed character's saving throws are out of whack, as cp's example shows. And Pathfinder does not fix what is broken about the way the rules do not conform to the All Levels Are Equal philosophy.
In the RAW and in Pathfinder, saves at first level have a special First Level Bump. So if you take enough level 1s in diverse classes, you get the First Level Bump too many times.
The First Level Bump is intended to improve the survivability of first level characters. We also see the Bump in max hit points and quadruple skill points for first level PCs. But the rules have managed to keep the Bump to just first level for max hp and quad skills by fiat (an inelegant solution, but that's another post).
For Pathfinder, I think a better solution is to Move the Bump and Use Fractions.
MOVE THE BUMP. I'm talking here about the +2 on saves given at first level. A class with one good save gets a total +2 on saves (Fort+Will+Refx) at first level, but on average gains only +1 per level at each following level. A class with two good saves gets a +4 at level 1 but has on average +1.25 at each following level. A class with three good saves gets a +6 at first level but on average gains only +1.5 per level.
If we need a bump at first level, then we must find a way to grant it without allowing it to be taken repeatedly by multiclassers. One way would be by fiat, that is, by a rule that something applies only at first level. For example: "At first level only, your base save bonus is doubled."
But that still leaves us with the problem that we want to ensure All Levels Are Equal. If we just double the saves at level 1, then classes with more god saves still benefit disproportionately.
Instead, my suggestion is that we Move the Bump. Race is something that is picked only once, and at first level. If we want a bump, then add it to race. For example, maybe every race has an extra +2 on certain saves. Maybe elves get +1 on Will and Reflex. Dwarves get +2 on Fort. Humans can chose to put their +2 or +1/+1 wherever they want. One human PC might go with +2 Reflex; another +1 each on Will and Fort.
Thus, first level characters still get the bump. AND multiclass characters do not get the benefit of too many +2s by taking lots of first levels.
USE FRACTIONS. We need to not be shy about using halves and quarters! The math is not hard! And the alternative is the absurd example that cp gives above.
I propose that classes with good saves advance the good save by +0.5 every level. Classes with poor saves advance the poor save by +0.25 every level. Fractions of 0.25 round down; fractions of 0.5 and 0.75 round up.
So Moving the Bump and Using Fractions, the first 10 levels of ranger would look like this:
Level........Will........Reflex........Fort
...1........+0.25......+0.50......+0.50
...2........+0.50......+1.00......+1.00
...3........+0.75......+1.50......+1.50
...4........+1.00......+2.00......+2.00
...5........+1.25......+2.50......+2.50
...6........+1.50......+3.00......+3.00
...7........+1.75......+3.50......+3.50
...8........+2.00......+4.00......+4.00
...9........+2.25......+4.50......+4.50
.10........+2.50......+5.00......+5.00
After rounding, like this:
Level........Will......Reflex......Fort
...1...........+0.........+1.........+1
...2...........+1.........+1.........+1
...3...........+1.........+2.........+2
...4...........+1.........+2.........+2
...5...........+1.........+3.........+3
...6...........+2.........+3.........+3
...7...........+2.........+4.........+4
...8...........+2.........+4.........+4
...9...........+2.........+5.........+5
.10...........+3.........+5.........+5
When you multiclass conventionally, the granularity, the bumpiness, of the current non-fractional system creates artifacts like the Will +0 that cp has for a relatively high level PC. But the beauty of this solution is that lacking that granularity, you also lose the artifacts created by adding in too many +0s and not enough +1s. That's because, with my suggestion, we come closer to the design goal that All Levels Are Equal.
Good stuff.You know, I posted earlier about fractional saves and BAB scores, but everybody said that "fractions are icky" in the same tone that eight-year-old boys say "girls are icky". Glad to see I'm not the only one who thinks it's a good idea.
Incidentally, I would extend the idea to BAB as well, except by fours instead of by threes.
I agree 100%! We need to adopt and embrace easy fractions (quarters and halves) because using +1s and +0s leads to granularity and the problem that some levels are more useful than others.
Take level 5. At level 5, because of the pattern of save and BAB advancement, no PC gets any save bonus at all, and PCs with average and poor BAB advancement gain nothing there either! But level 6! Woohoo! Every class gets +1 on all three saves and +1 BAB! That makes level 6 more useful than level 5! All other things being equal, a multiclassing player sees NO reason to take five levels in a class unless she intends to go on to take level 6.
Of course, all things are not equal. Getting level 3 spells at level 5, to cite just one example, makes level 5 a good level. But not for bards and sorcerers. For them, level 5 sucks! But that betrays the promise and design goal of D&D that All Levels Are Equal.
For BAB, I would advance BAB by +1 per level for classes with good attacks, by +0.75 per level for classes with average attacks, and by +0.5 per level for classes with weak attacks.
If you want to read more along this line, visit my blog