| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
This thread is to develop house rules based off the discussion from my general forums thread, here: General Discussion
Basically, I'm tired of my characters NEEDING to have stat and ability enhancing magic items. I don't want to NEED belts of strength and +4 swords just to maintain game balance. I don't want characters that glow like Christmas trees whenever you shine a detect magic on them. I don't want to win because I have awesome stuff. I want to win because I AM awesome.
The fantasy movies I see focus on awesome characters. The fantasy books I read focus on awesome characters. A magic item or two will usually wind up playing a part in these stories, but even the smallest items are relics and artifacts. They are few, powerful and usually part of what defines a character.
I have three main options that I would like explored.
*Raise a characters stats directly. The bonuses from the Vow of Poverty feat from Exalted Deeds is the foremost example I have to work with right now. Apply those bonuses directly to the characters at the levels indicated. Any other stat-up suggestions? A key concern that I have expressed in my other thread is, "What do we call those bonuses?" If we call them "enhancement", then they don't stack with most buff spells. One of my goals is to make the party buffer a viable role, via Cat's Grace and stuff. OR, would that upset the delicate balance?
*As a side option to the first point, allow a point-buy style system for stats. Award "Advancement Points" based off of the "wealth beyond first level chart", which is designed for just this type of balancing to begin with. Only instead of items, you get "training". Depending on what "items" you put on the list, you might end up with weird stuff, like flying monks. *sigh* Okay, that should be weird, y'know.
*Raise the CR of monsters. Don't give the PCs ANY special bonuses or magic items. Just realize that monsters are going to be tougher. Of course this solution carries it's own set of problems that would need to be discussed.
*Any other ideas?
I hereby open this thread up for discussion. Have fun!
First problem to probably address is the obvious Damage Reduction. I want to point out the scenario I'm talking about feels like tring to beat a troll without fire or acid.
I've been working on a system off and on to convert spell slots into points and to go classless with point buys closer to GURPS or something. I've had so much other stuff going on though, but that would be something worth looking into.
First problem to probably address is the obvious Damage Reduction. I want to point out the scenario I'm talking about feels like tring to beat a troll without fire or acid.
I've been working on a system off and on to convert spell slots into points and to go classless with point buys closer to GURPS or something. I've had so much other stuff going on though, but that would be something worth looking into.
DR, eh?
Many things that overcome damage reduction are non-magical. Fire, acid, silver, adamantine, cold iron .... no problem there.
Then there's the POINT of damage reduction. 3.0 taught us that "You need to be "x" level to fight this monster" was a bad system. However, DR is still around. Why? Monsters are supposed to be scary. All of a sudden you need an actual PLAN to defeat that 10/magic monster. Maybe a buff or two from the party wizard. You might even have to retreat and counter attack. You know ... things that make gaming interesting. Things that make storytelling interesting. It might also force you to, uh, work together more than you usually do. Have the monk (who can't bypass DR) aide another so that SOMEBODY can hit with attacks that WILL work.
If you're still worried about DR, then you could always have "holy" weapons or the like that aren't actually "enhanced". I MAINLY don't want numeric boosts.
You mentioned in the other thread that you wanted to keep some shiny stuff (more immovable rods and less +1 swords), so why not just give people ~80% of their WBL as invisible items? Basically, you'd just give people their wealth by level to spend on whatever enhancements they see fit, but they don't go away just because you lost your shiny hat and you don't have to roll every goon you beat up.
That's basically option #3 above. (Yeah, I know it's a long opening post). I'm interested in exploring this, as with all options. However, would allowing any items feel right to you, personally? I know that *I* don't much care for the thought of having my Fighter teleporting around just because his soul grew a set of boots! Then gain, that kind of thinking might be unfair to a wizard, for whom nothing really seems out of place? "Bag of holding? What do you think my hat is for?" (Or robes ... or asscrack if it comes down to it).
The whole "flying fighter" idea is why I'm leery about this idea. I want to explore it, but right now I think that straight up stats might be easier. Wonderous items CAN still be handed out.
Have the monk (who can't bypass DR) aide another so that SOMEBODY can hit with attacks that WILL work."I spend my turn giving him +2. Your go."
It's not fun. Make sure you're not doing this to anyone.
In general, I agree. If I were DMing such an encounter, I'd want such a situation to very rarely occur. Even then, the villain would probably be "forced to retreat" or something after a round or two of actually getting hurt! That would give the characters a chance to acquire a more effective means of sharing in the slaughter.
There are other ways around this, too. If only one character can do enough damage to the BBEG to bypass DR, then give the monk plenty of mooks or environment problems to deal with.
Taking away magical items does seem to require more responsible DMing and PCing all around. I doubt this is for the faint of heart.
Make the magical loot belong to the fighter.
Hmm, that could work. Having ONE magically decked out dude doesn't sound too horribly bad.
Does anybody have any opinions as to what the actual enhancements should be? VoP suggests the following by level 20: Strike (weapon bonus) +5, AC +6, Deflect +3, Resist +3, Nat Armor +2. Also your abilities would end up getting +8/+6/+4/+2.
Does this sound right? Balanced? Should these be enhancement bonuses? Or should Bull's Strength actually DO something beyond 4th level ... ?
Have the monk (who can't bypass DR) aide another so that SOMEBODY can hit with attacks that WILL work."I spend my turn giving him +2. Your go."
It's not fun. Make sure you're not doing this to anyone.
In general, I agree. If I were DMing such an encounter, I'd want such a situation to very rarely occur. Even then, the villain would probably be "forced to retreat" or something after a round or two of actually getting hurt! That would give the characters a chance to acquire a more effective means of sharing in the slaughter.
There are other ways around this, too. If only one character can do enough damage to the BBEG to bypass DR, then give the monk plenty of mooks or environment problems to deal with.
Taking away magical items does seem to require more responsible DMing and PCing all around. I doubt this is for the faint of heart.
"I cannot harm him, I hold him right there for you (= Grapple)/ I disarm him for you, now HURT HIM !!!"
A Monk can contribute to the party in many ways other than punching the enemies.
Just my 2c.
"I cannot harm him, I hold him right there for you (= Grapple)/ I disarm him for you, now HURT HIM !!!"
A Monk can contribute to the party in many ways other than punching the enemies.
Just my 2c.
Ah, yes. Thank you. Exactly my point.
One chart doesn't work too well for every class. You have classes that want a little bit of everything (clerics, monks, druids) and classes with The Stat (wizards). Some classes want spell boosters (Pearls, metamagic rods), some need outright magical effects (e.g. flight) at higher levels, some just want to buy a bunch of +1s to hit and damage and AC. That was part of the problem with VoP. For some classes, it just didn't do much of anything.
You'd need multiple charts. I'm guessing probably 2h melee, MAD melee, MAD spellcaster, and SAD spellcaster, at the very least.
From my experience (as well as Treantmonk's optimization guides) it seems that most classes, even the MADs tend to have a BEST stat. Even optimized monks prefer strength over all else (which I agree with from an optimization standpoint). Plus, a +6 to your secondary stat is nothing to sneeze at. I'm building a melee based Dragon Disciple right now. I NEED strength and Charisma ... and con for that matter. They don't all have to be maxed out, do they?
2h melee? +6 Strength, +6 con
MAD melee? +6 Strength, +4 Dex. MAYBE dex first if you like to annoy your opponents.
MAD spellcaster? If you're a melee type, +8 strength, +6 spell stat. If melee (or whatever) is secondary, then focus on your spell stat first.
SAD spellcaster? +8 spell stat, +6 con, +4 Dex, +2 Int (or other mental)
I don't see any build that would be hurt by this, and it seems that every class would find it quite handy.
Of course, *I'm* not an optimizer, which is why I started this thread to begin with. Could you point out WHY this setup wouldn't work specifically. Even better ... could you come up with an alternate system if you don't like this one?
Without rehashing this whole argument, it's not just a monk problem, combat maneuvers are superduper weak, and monks have it bad enough as it is.
That said, if you go with the point-based WBL thing then people just buy the ability to make one weapon they hold a +1 holy whatever, it's really not a big deal.
Another problem I have with the point-buy idea is it seems like it would require extra work setting up, to avoid abuses. If I were making a character for this system, I'd probably make a SAD character and just buy up my best stat as high as it would go, for instance.
Allowing too much ability to customize can very quickly lead to munchkining. I LOVE being able to custom tweak my characters, but with every new option, you open up potentials for abuse. A fixed chart of things that most people use (especially for enhancement bonuses) seems like it would reduce that risk. Perhaps a smaller buy-chart for special abilities might work better?
Man in Black, I understand your points and your reasoning, and you seem to be making good points. I'm not necessarily trying to shoot you down. I'm mainly trying to play devil's advocate to try to stir up more ideas/opinions. Hopefully we'll get some other people commenting in here. In the meantime, I'll toy with ability-buys and see how it tickles me. I'm also going to bed. g'night!
I think you are on the right track in using VoP as a guide. I say assign each VoP bonus a points value. Figure out how many 'points' each level has and give the players that many points to spend on bonuses. Make sure to keep the maximums cap at whatever the VoP is for that level. So you cant go over with AC or resistance bonuses, but what it would allow is people to spread out stats if they wanted.
Point buy is a trap, optimizers will break it.
I found this thread from the other one you started.
I checked out 'trailblazer' which runs the numbers from 3.5. Their conclusion is that *without* *items* PC's have almost universally a 70% success rate against level appropriate CR encounters of success.
i.e. Monsters hit the pc's 30% of the time. Monsters make their saves 30% of the time, PC's hit the monsters 70% of the time, PC's make their saves 70% of the time.
They make several changes pathfinder does (Increase hit die for certain classes). I also desire this type of 'magic items are rare and important' game. Using wealth by level (as calculated in trailblazer from 3.5) I plan on giving these 'inherent' bonuses to PC's which *EXACTLY* match what items they would effectively have by level.
*Each point of BAB gives a point of untyped bonus to AC (or just raises base AC By one, your preference)
*Stat increases every other level, alternating with feats.
*Each class picks 2 good saves, and the best of STR/CON bonus affect fortitude, the best of INT/DEX bonus affects reflex, and the best of WIS/CHA bonus affects Will.
*Only one buff may be active at a time.
*First iterative attack gives 2 attacks at -2, second iterative attack reduces those penalties to -1, third iterative attack allows 2 attacks at no penalty.
They are right when they say that this type of inherent bonus character will be weaker than a magically equipped character. But hell, even *without* these bonuses (and using non magical items) they will still be successful 70% of the time against appropriate CR encounters. All this whining about everything from the new druid to 'weaker' characters without items seems like it comes from the "I'm entitled, I play a lot of video games" school of Role playing. It sounds like both you and I role play with groups of adults.
These bonuses take care of the 'big six' "necessary" items. (Armor & shield enchantment, Weapon Enchantment, stat boosters, resistance items, deflection items, natural armor items).
The armor steps up in tune with the bonuses you'd get when you could afford them (in an even smoother curve). Your stats continue to raise in tune with your stat items. And you have resistances that are higher *without* raising your good ones to the never fail state.
Also these bonuses are simple to track. If you're really concerned about the to hit bonus (and you want your players hitting 95% of the time instead of 70%) It requires a bit more bookkeeping, but +1 'competence' bonus every 3/5/8 levels to hit depending on your attack progression will make up the difference. If stats are too low (in your opinion) you may also opt for a flat +1 bonus to all stats every X level.
I would *not* give out any armor boosting items without a bit of thought. I also think limiting the buffs is pretty key. (it also limits tracking headaches). I also plan on "eliminating" item creation, by that, I mean I'll run it the way I run Hackmaster. I have a character who wants to make giant killing weapons, I tell him he needs the ashes of a cursed raven, the vitae engine of fire, earth, and air, and the eye from a still living giant, and an unusual metal.
He's still working on that list. ;-p
I might also possibly give everyone in the universe step up feat for free.
Non-related to your thread, but I plan to disallow any classes except for:
*Fighter
*Thief
*Sorcerer
*Oracle
*Summoner
*Cavalier
*Inquisitor
*Alchemist
*Witch
and maybe Bard.
I'm *sick* of one level dips in barbarian and fskin wizards.
...
I checked out 'trailblazer' which runs the numbers from 3.5. Their conclusion is that *without* *items* PC's have almost universally a 70% success rate against level appropriate CR encounters of success....
Can you give us a link please? Thanks.
Great thread by the way. Too much PC "stuff " one of my pet peeves.
Point buy is a trap, optimizers will break it.
I found this thread from the other one you started.
I checked out 'trailblazer' which runs the numbers from 3.5. Their conclusion is that *without* *items* PC's have almost universally a 70% success rate against level appropriate CR encounters of success.
i.e. Monsters hit the pc's 30% of the time. Monsters make their saves 30% of the time, PC's hit the monsters 70% of the time, PC's make their saves 70% of the time.
First of all realize that number crunch of this fashion does not apply evenly to pathfinder. Paizo specifically retooled many monsters to make them more CR appropriate. I obviously have not run the numbers but since On level CR has an average AC of CR+13 for instance, it is unlikely PC's without magic items will be hiting 70% of the time. It will probably be closer to 50% for a full bab single weapon class. Less for a 3/4 bab class like the rogue, or a two weapon fighter/monk.
For instance at level 6 a CR 6 Young White Dragon Has an AC of 20, and Fort +8, Ref +7, Will +5
Assuming a 16 starting stat +2 ractial you are looking at primary stats of 18 or 19.
A fighter with weapon focus, and power attack at level 6 will have an attack bonus of:
BAB 6 + Str 4 + Masterwork Weapon 1 + Weapon Focus 1 + weapon training 1 - power attack 2. Thats a bonus of + 11. Thats a 55% chance of hitting
A wizard casting 3rd level spells will have a DC of 10+3+4 = 17. For the 2 good saves Fort and Ref the dragon will pass these at better then 50% of the time. Will save will pass 40% of the time. And that will rise if the wizard needs to use lower level spells.
The best AC in the party would likely come from a full plate wearing fighter with shield focus and a heavy steel shield. +9 +3 and dex would be +2. That is an AC of 24. The dragons attacks are +11 bite 2 +11 class and 2 +6 wings. Thats a 40% chance to hit on its 3 primary attacks, and less on the two wings.
And this is at leve 6. As you grow higher in level this deficiency will rise dramatically.
At level 10 for instance, the party's primary stat has now likely risen by 2 to a 20. Other stats remain the same.
That white dragon has now grown up to adult size. AC 27, Fort +13, Ref +9, Will +10
The fighter has greater weapon focus. Weapon training 2 and armor training 2.
BAB +10 + Str 5 + Weapon focus +2 + Weapon training 2 - Power attack 3
+16 to hit, so he still has that 55% chance to hit the dragon with his primary attack.
The wizard however even casting 5th level spells with a 20 int, the dc is 20. The dragon passes fort saves on a 7, Ref on an 11, and Will on a 10. And that is the wizards highest level spells. Thats not even close to 30%.
On the other hand, the fighters AC has not increased by much, +1 more if he somehow also had a 16 dex.
thats an AC of 25. But now the dragons bite is +20 and the claws are +19, they will almost always hit the fighter.
And saves vs the DC 21 breath weapon? That fighter, with the 16 dex, has a +6 reflex save. He needs to roll a 15 to pass the save. Even the high dex rogue (20 dex + 7 save) needs to roll an 8.
I guess if you mean by 70% success rate that their is a 30% chance of a tpk for a on level CR monster, then yes you are probably right.
You are a tricky wicket
First of all realize that number crunch of this fashion does not apply evenly to pathfinder. . . .
For instance at level 6 a CR 6 Young White Dragon Has an AC of 20, and Fort +8, Ref +7, Will +5Assuming a 16 starting stat +2 ractial you are looking at primary stats of 18 or 19.
A fighter with weapon focus, and power attack at level 6 will have an attack bonus of:
BAB 6 + Str 4 + Masterwork Weapon 1 + Weapon Focus 1 + weapon training 1 - power attack 2. Thats a bonus of + 11. Thats a 55% chance of hitting
Are dragons still 'reduced' in CR, for the 'startling difficult challenge'? Let's take the *AVERAGE* AC for CR 6.
Oh LOOK, they did the math. Monster creation.
Average AC is *19*
BAB 6 + STR 4 + Weapon focus 1 + Masterwork Weapon 1 + Weapon training 1, and oh, hey, here's an idea, don't use power attack on something with a decent AC.
*That's* a bonus of 13.
AC 19
19-13 = 6.
1-5 misses (25% miss chance)
6-20 hits (75% hit chance)
I'm not going to go through each of these examples and use the true Average CR's, instead of those weighted examples. This type of number crunch applies *directly* to pathfinder, they already did all the work pointing it out.
Oh heck.
CR 6
Average good save is 9, poor save is 5. Spell focus the poor wizard please.
18-9 = 9 (45%)
18-5 = 13 (65%)
Average High attack is 12, low is 8
AC is Plate (9), Heavy Shield(2), Shield Focus(1) + Dex(2)
24-12= 12 (40%) (60% player success)
24-8= 16 (20%) (80% player success)
I find values from 65-85% acceptable for player success rates. I should point out that as you move up, this number varies some, but always stays in this window.
That was the whole point of the system, also, where they got '1/4 resources for a level appropriate CR'
I leave the *actual* computation of threat versus higher CR's as an exercise to the reader.
After seeing your original thread, I immediately knew I wanted to try this. Here's the system that I'll be trying:
- Ability increase at every level instead of every four levels, but you can't raise the same ability twice in a row. I'm going to make these count as enhancement bonuses, but if you want to encourage buff spells you might want to treat them normally and just disallow ability-boost items.
- Starting at second level, and every fourth level after that (so 2, 6, 10, 14, 18), you get a +1 enhancement bonus to weapons, armor, and shields. The shield bonus only applies if you are carrying a shield, but the armor bonus always applies.
- Every fourth level, you get a +1 deflection bonus to AC, and a +1 resistance bonus to saves.
- Spellcasters get an additional spell slot or spell per day of each level except their highest.
- Every fifth level, you gain a +5 competence bonus on a skill.
The balancing feature of this is that the loot will be reduced by at least half.
Couldn't help myself
At level 10 for instance, the party's primary stat has now likely risen by 2 to a 20. Other stats remain the same.That white dragon has now grown up to adult size. AC 27, Fort +13, Ref +9, Will +10
The fighter has greater weapon focus. Weapon training 2 and armor training 2.
BAB +10 + Str 5 + Weapon focus +2 + Weapon training 2 - Power attack 3
+16 to hit, so he still has that 55% chance to hit the dragon with his primary attack.
Average AC for CR 10
24BAB +10 + STR (5) + Weapon Focus (2) + Weapon training (2)
+19 to hit
24-19 = 5 (80% chance to hit)
Good save 13, poor save 9
DC 21 (5th level spell + 5 stat + 1 focus)
21-13= 8
21-9= 12
Primary save dc is 19 *not* 21.
average attack is +18
Player armor without magic is pretty crappy, yes. I will grant this, with the caveat that *avoidance* becomes less important around this level then *mitigation* (flat miss chance, high hit point totals).
Hence why in my original post I suggest the armor bonus scaling with BAB.
You have the values of the averages, that's what this is based off of, the *average*. This is a thread about a magic item free campaign. They aren't as necessary as everyone seems to think.
You are a tricky wicket
First of all realize that number crunch of this fashion does not apply evenly to pathfinder. . . .
For instance at level 6 a CR 6 Young White Dragon Has an AC of 20, and Fort +8, Ref +7, Will +5Assuming a 16 starting stat +2 ractial you are looking at primary stats of 18 or 19.
A fighter with weapon focus, and power attack at level 6 will have an attack bonus of:
BAB 6 + Str 4 + Masterwork Weapon 1 + Weapon Focus 1 + weapon training 1 - power attack 2. Thats a bonus of + 11. Thats a 55% chance of hitting
Are dragons still 'reduced' in CR, for the 'startling difficult challenge'? Let's take the *AVERAGE* AC for CR 6.
Oh LOOK, they did the math. Monster creation.
Average AC is *19*
BAB 6 + STR 4 + Weapon focus 1 + Masterwork Weapon 1 + Weapon training 1, and oh, hey, here's an idea, don't use power attack on something with a decent AC.
*That's* a bonus of 13.
AC 19
19-13 = 6.
1-5 misses (25% miss chance)
6-20 hits (75% hit chance)I'm not going to go through each of these examples and use the true Average CR's, instead of those weighted examples. This type of number crunch applies *directly* to pathfinder, they already did all the work pointing it out.
Oh heck.
CR 6
Average good save is 9, poor save is 5. Spell focus the poor wizard please.
18-9 = 9 (45%)
18-5 = 13 (65%)Average High attack is 12, low is 8
AC is Plate (9), Heavy Shield(2), Shield Focus(1) + Dex(2)
24-12= 12 (40%) (60% player success)
24-8= 16 (20%) (80% player success)I find values from 65-85% acceptable for player success rates. I should point out that as you move up, this number varies some, but always stays in this window.
That was the whole point of the system, also, where they got '1/4 resources for a level appropriate CR'
I leave the *actual* computation of threat versus higher CR's as an exercise to the reader.
First of all, what I meant was the 3.5 number crunch did not apply to pathfinder as the numbers are different.
As for the fighter not using power attack is basically saying dont do any damage. Every class' damage is dependant on 'to hit' penalties. Whether its rapid shot, two weapon fighting, flury of blows or power attack. Without things like power attack, you may hit, but you arent doing anything. This is not success, its doing nothing. This will not defeat an on CR monster in the expected amount of time, resulting in a much bigger drain then 1/4 the party's daily resources.
The whole success/failure rate is a complete smoke screen. The PC succeeds on 1 attack, the monster almost certainly has many. So the fighter attacks once for mediocre damage in your example, and gets hit back 2-5 times at a lower to hit bonus. 3 attacks at 40% hit rate is not 60% of player success. That is a nonsense number.
A fighter attacking an AC of 19 with a 1handed longsword (remember he has a shield in your AC calc), Will do 1d8+5 (plus 2 more from weapon spec) damage with a +13 to hit. Thats a little over 9 damage a round. What CR monster is that remotely significant to?
You dont like my dragon example, so lets look at some other CR 6 monsters:
Ankylosaurus CR 6
AC 22
Fort +12, Ref +7, Will +4
Melee tail +14 (3d6+12 plus stun)
He does 12.35 damage to your AC 24 fighter a round. Monster's HP 75 (10d8+30) and the fighters is around 49. Assuming the rest of the party combined contributes at least as much effect as the fighter thats 4 rounds the monster is wailing on your fighter at least. I somehow dont think when they say 1/4 party reasources they meant All of the fighters HP per fight.
Babau CR 6
AC 19
Fort +10, Ref +6, Will +5
2 claws +12 (1d6+5), bite +12 (1d6+5) or longspear +12/+7 (1d8+7), bite +7 (1d6+2)
He this one does about the same as the fighter, 8.925 damage a round with 2 claws and a bite.
Girallon CR 6
AC 18
Fort +9, Ref +8, Will +5
Melee bite +10 (1d6+4), 4 claws +10 (1d4+4 plus rend)
He does 10.5 damage per round to your fighter.
So what am i getting at here? All of these monsters have a better 'success' rate then the fighter in attacking, because they are actually delivering more damage. Some more then others, but things are more even then your single attack examples indicate.
And as you go up in levels, the fighter's to hit will remain roughly the same % as you say 60-85% since AC scales accordingly. But the monsters to hit against the player will go up dramatically, because after Plate a heavy shield and shield focus, the fighter's ac will not go up by much without magic. Monster to hits on the other hand scale with their CR. Monster HP also goes up quite a bit. But without magic items, the fighters damage does not scale practically at all, especially since he needs to forgo power attack to actually have a good chance of hitting.
And yes the wizard could have spell focus. But that is for one school of spells that may or may not apply to the situation. Not to mention lower level spells have a lower DC. In general a wizard for instance will not be able to cast his highest level spell in every fight of the day. At level 6 he has 2-3 3rd level spells, the rest are lower. This changes the success rate significantly, as not only can he not use one of these level spells for the whole encounter, he cant even use one in each encounter of a 4 encounter day.
So in general, I think your 'success' rate is highly skewed. If I hit the 80hp monster for 6 damage, i didnt succeed, I wasted an action. Just hitting is not enough, you have to actually look at wether or not the character is making an impact. Without magic items, martial characters become completely irrelavant, and that wizards few high level spells better win the day or the party is going to be tpk'ed by on CR monsters.
Thank you, Kolokotroni. It REALLY didn't seem right to me that "no magic items" were just as balanced as "full set of magic items". We're looking at a +8 (or so) difference in attack and damage alone! As far as AC goes, it's what ... a 10-15 point difference? +X armor, +X shield, +X deflection, +X natural armor. And yes, I'm considering "shield bonus" for everybody. Monks and duelists use wisdom or int instead when not using a shield. Two-weapon types can take two-weapon defense and/or the defending quality. Pretty much everybody is going to get extra AC from their off-hand (whether they use it to fight or not).
Somebody mentioned that the VoP AC bonuses doesn't stack well with armor. Actually, it's an enhancement bonus TO armor. I think. Anyway, the progressing starts you with a free +4 to account for the fact that you're not even wearing light armor. So, I just reduced all the AC bonuses by 4 to actually accommodate worn armor. This doesn't mean that heavy armor types are better defended. With the exceptions of full plate and breastplate, all armor gives you +8 to your AC, once dex is considered anyway
I really love all the number crunching. Keep it up, please!
Without things like power attack, you may hit, but you arent doing anything.
You are doing damage. It isn't as much damage as the current sense of entitlement seems to make you feel you should do, but in real terms, if you hit you do damage (weapon + strength) At six level you are talking about 4 (extra)points of damage for a 10% reduction in your chance to hit. Sure you would rather do 16 rather than 12 (or whatever), but 12 is not equal to 0
The PC succeeds on 1 attack, the monster almost certainly has many. So the fighter attacks once for mediocre damage in your example, and gets hit back 2-5 times at a lower to hit bonus. 3 attacks at 40% hit rate is not 60% of player success.
Since when do PC's adventure alone? This one CR appropriate encounter is for *four* PC's. So the fighter takes *more* than 25 percent damage, and then the rogue flanks, the mage blasts, and the support class supports. 25% of *total* party resources.
Granted. Pathfinder multi-attack advantage does increase average encounter damage, skewing the numbers away from the players at a faster rate.
You dont like my dragon example, so lets look at some other CR 6 monsters
Apparently you A) haven't read the Beastry completely, or B) didn't click the link to the chart, because we don't need to look at specific examples.
My statements are about average values. Average values are found *here*
Yes, you can find specific CR 6 monsters that push one boundary at the cost of others. This is why I make a statement about averages. Which are shown on the nice table.
HERE. (again)
And as you go up in levels, the fighter's to hit will remain roughly the same % as you say 60-85% since AC scales accordingly. But the monsters to hit against the player will go up dramatically, because after Plate a heavy shield and shield focus, the fighter's ac will not go up by much without magic. Monster to hits on the other hand scale with their CR. Monster HP also goes up quite a bit. But without magic items, the fighters damage does not scale practically at all, especially since he needs to forgo power attack to actually have a good chance of hitting.
as noted in the last e-mail, this is in fact true, because more than one of the big six (three in fact) are items that affect player defense. *HOWEVER*, regardless of magic items, as you move into a mid-level game (7+) damage mitigation (Hit points, flat miss chances, disabling opponents from spells, etc.) Become more important. Didn't we already agree on this?
And yes the wizard could have spell focus. But that is for one school of spells that may or may not apply to the situation. Not to mention lower level spells have a lower DC. In general a wizard for instance will not be able to cast his highest level spell in every fight of the day. At level 6 he has 2-3 3rd level spells, the rest are lower. This changes the success rate significantly, as not only can he not use one of these level spells for the whole encounter, he cant even use one in each encounter of a 4 encounter day.
Since the wizard gets to *pick* his spells and his targets he will almost always have the opportunity to target the low save. Again, the assumption of the 3.x system is not that characters will *each* use 25% of their resources, but that the *party* will.
So in general, I think your 'success' rate is highly skewed. If I hit the 80hp monster for 6 damage, i didnt succeed, I wasted an action. Just hitting is not enough, you have to actually look at wether or not the character is making an impact. Without magic items, martial characters become completely irrelavant, and that wizards few high level spells better win the day or the party is going to be tpk'ed by on CR monsters.
Average HP on a CR 6 is 70.
Average damage per round is higher than 6 for *every* sixth level class.
Well, if you're seriously suggesting that six damage is a realistic value for a first level fighter, then you either are very poor at math, or have not played the game we are all playing. I'm pretty sure of that because with SAD, wielding a weapon with a higher average damage of 2, he will do more than 6 damage.
In *your* example you are talking about 4 damage per hit. (The loss of power attack) Substantial, but without magic items, power attack is an actual interesting choice, versus an always on mechanic. More choices that matter is better gameplay. (What's a game besides a collection of interesting choices)
Basically, it's *this* type of entitlement, selfishness and poor thinking that has led to the 'I need my magic items'. You do not need to play in a game where you can only fail 1 in 20 times. Power Attack should not be something you just get to do, it's an actual combat *option*.
It's ok to play a game where you have a chance to fail, your hyperbole shows the truth of several posts as well as lots of comments in the actual trailblazer document about this attitude of "you *need* magic items".
If your comment is, a party without magical items will have higher bonuses and an easier time of encounters then one without, then that's sort of a trueistic statement.
Otherwise, what is your point?
My point is that, even if you don't give them extra BAB bonuses intrinsic, they will still hit ok. If you don't give them intrinsic armor to make up for the +6/12/18/24 from items at wealth breakpoints they will take lots more hits. There are some edge cases with saves that are issues, but not that much has to be changed to run a low magic item, heroic character game.
P.S. These aren't *my* numbers. They are the objective numbers and averages in the game itself.
Thank you, Kolokotroni. It REALLY didn't seem right to me that "no magic items" were just as balanced as "full set of magic items".
What does this even mean? Where did anyone even say *just* as balanced.
I can only address claims I actually make, not insane statements that have nothing to do with what I've said ever.
Without magic items, characters of average optimization will against average values of level appropriate CR's succeed between 65%-85% of the time.
Yes, with magic items, you can push that way up to 95% (and take on higher level CR encounters), but with this method, at least CR appropriate encounters are challenging.
I guess it's a choice against (say for example) running level 6 PC's versus CR 4's mostly with the occasional big bad CR 6 encounter, versus running magic heavy PC's versus CR 6's mostly with the occasional big bad CR 8 encounter.
since the thread is about low magic campaigns, and the elimination of magic items, I figure I'd talk about the first, instead of whining about how it isn't like the second.
Have the monk (who can't bypass DR) aide another so that SOMEBODY can hit with attacks that WILL work."I spend my turn giving him +2. Your go."
It's not fun. Make sure you're not doing this to anyone.
In my youth, i played rugby. I was actually fairly good. I played three positions well. Hooker, Prop and Winger.
One of those positions, the Prop, is entire based around the real world equivilant of providing that +2 to the Hooker. While it didn't have the personal glory of winger or Hooker, it was anything but Dull.
The same can be true in roleplaying games.
What you see as, "I spend my turn giving him +2. Your go.", i see as
'Right, Valra Isran dances forwards, ducking under the ogres arm. She twists lithely, flicking her weighted scarf around its arm, entangling it's arm for a moment. So move to set up flanking for my brother, continue my bardic performance and perform an aid another."
Then my partner goes with. "Manra Isran slips in, dodging the ogres blows and thrusts his Steletto up into the monsters arm pit with all his weight, inspired by his sisters nimble steps.. So thats move, sneak attack with a total bonus of +5 to my normal attack."
I have to say, I don't consider that boring.
Now, it just so happens that I have a level 10 fighter statted up. It wouldn't be hard to strip his magic gear.
** spoiler omitted **Incidentally, if you want to see a Fred with actual gear, check it out.
I've seen your other thread, it's quite relevant
So the simulacrum fight ends with a Fred on the floor. Very dead. Hopefully your low-magic game has easy access to Raise Dead because Team Fred is expected to do this four times a day
Isn't level 10 when raise dead becomes available? I wonder why that is? Can anyone maybe think of a reason?
also: low magic *item* game. And it's not my game. It's the original posters. Who I'm trying to help. Instead of, you know, talking about how sad I am anyone is considering taking away their toys. Or that someone somewhere might not be having fun the right way. Did you read the original post?
it is *totally* awesome that no one chooses to pay attention to something I am saying over and over, but it doesn't change my core point.
again, around CR7 or CR8, the numbers for player armor *do* break out of the (65%-85% success range) Because 3 of the big six 'necessary' magical items are armor related. (Armor/Shield Enchantment, Natural Armor, Deflection) Since the methods of the party at this point have to do more with damage mitigation then avoiding getting hit either you mitigate the damage by using up the hit point total of a fighter, require a mage or cleric to cast buffs or heals (Or contribute using spells), or use a flanking rogue to spike damage or etc.
On the plus side, using average values, you would see that the party has effectively spent approximately 25% of it's total resources (in this case fighter hit points) overcoming a level appropriate CR, and frankly, that's exactly my point.
Again I point out, that this isn't *my* claim I'm purposing, it's the core claim of the 3e ruleset, and I'm just (as you are) using data to show that it's correct.
Also, Power Attack cannot be made into an interesting decision. Either it is more damage or it is less damage. Period. Sliding numbers around simply make it a good idea or a bad idea more or less of the time; this does not make it more interesting.
In certain situations it is not. (where you have a very small, or very high chance of hitting.)
At 10th level, with something you hit 70% of the time, you can hit it for x damage or you can take a -15% chance to hit it for x + 6 damage. That's a decision that has some weight to it - perhaps not mathematically, but at the table when the dice are hot. . .
With magic items you will do more damage, and power attack will (in general) *not* lower your chance to hit, because your chance to hit will be so high that you can lose 3 points to your attack and *still* have a 90/95% chance of hitting.
Just as an aside, I am *so* *confused* by the responses in this thread about using house rules to eliminate magic items. Isn't that what we're talking about, here's a guy who wants to run a heroic game, instead of one that's about magic mart?
The Game was designed to be playable without magic items. I didn't say, an easy risk-free hackfest, I said playable. And per everyone's comments, the math, the examples, it *is*.
Your data doesn't make for much of a playable game. You start from flawed premises and arrive at a result that doesn't match the predictions of the CR system. Moreover, you are making an extraordinary claim that the game is meant to be balanced around nearly halved the DPR of melee classes when playing with full WBL, and the math that you use to back this up is woefully insufficient.
Look, we're in 100% agreement on the whole issue. The difference is, what I consider 'acceptable' or 'playable', you do not.
I did not *ever* say that it was 'balanced' in an abstract sense, just that average PC's have about a 3 in 4 success rate of dice rolls against average monsters without items in general. A point, which in fact you have proven.
You are 100% correct that it doesn't match the base assumption of wealth by level who's elimination is the entire point of this thread. So can we talk about that?
Original poster, I plan on giving +1 untyped AC bonus to characters per +1 BAB to offset the armor penalty, and +1 stat every other level alternating with feats. I believe these adjustments will *more* than enough allow the players to cope with encounters of their level, because it addresses *four* of the big six.
I plan on addressing resistance items, by letting each character pick two good saves and having those increase based off character level, not class level, and allowing them to apply the better bonus of the two relevant attributes (Thank you best 4e contribution).
It is not necessary to give weapon enchantment bonuses as those scale with level.
One of my players says +1 untyped AC per BAB may be too high. if that's the case, I will make it a fraction of BAB instead of Full BAB.
It's possible that 1 stat point every other level may not be enough. In that case I will every x levels provide flat +1's to all stats.
Look, we're in 100% agreement on the whole issue. The difference is, what I consider 'acceptable' or 'playable', you do not.
I did not *ever* say that it was 'balanced' in an abstract sense, just that average PC's have about a 3 in 4 success rate of dice rolls against average monsters without items in general. A point, which in fact you have proven.
You are 100% correct that it doesn't match the base assumption of wealth by level who's elimination is the entire point of this thread. So can we talk about that?
Original poster, I plan on giving +1 untyped AC bonus to characters per +1 BAB to offset the armor penalty, and +1 stat every other level alternating with feats. I believe these adjustments will *more* than enough allow the players to cope with encounters of their level, because it addresses *four* of the big six.
I do believe the point of this thread is to assist the OP with compensating for the removal of the majority of player wealth (at least in magic items, i dont know if the OP intends to still give out oodles of gold). Saying players are 'acceptable' without any magic items doesnt add to that conversation. Now your plan for what to give to your players certainly does.
So Obviously the +1 AC compensates for AC loss due to magic items, in fact it probably takes it a good bit further. I think it depends on the character. But do you think doubling the stat boosts makes up for the loss of resistance items, stat items and magic weapons? (those are my assumptions of the other 3 of your 'four' please correct me if I am wrong). So at level 10 you would be able to add a total of 3 +1's that you would not normally get. A fighter could likely raise his strength by 2 that covers the primary stat item. Now you have 1 more which could cocievably raise a single save by 1 if your con wisdom or dex is odd. I think it is huge overstatement to say it addresses 4 of the big 6.
Okay, let's set aside emotional considerations ("OMG, it's so much damage!"/"OMG, I gotta hit this round!")
Clearly we're in agreement that this sense of entitlement is getting in the way of the discussion and should be disregarded. Why would we *not* set emotional considerations aside, unless we were dealing with children who don't know how to control their emotions.
. . .
[Power attack math]
I haven't checked this math (I trust it). I was just wondering if you do this math ahead of time, or in your head at the table.
Clearly there always is a best option, but I'm fairly comfortable with the statement that the *vast* majority of players don't do this math to determine the efficacy of their power attack. Hence, an interesting choice for them, because they have imperfect knowledge.
You are of course correct that there is a mathematically correct answer. (You may note earlier where I say that the decision has weight to it, 'perhaps not mathematically'. I said that because, you know, if you actually did all the math, then you would get your clear yes or no answer.)
I am beginning to suspect that you either have not done or do not comprehend the math involved, nexusphere.
. . .
I am capable of performing math. (see some earlier in the thread). You want to send me a math problem or something?
This is a discussion of creating a balanced system to replace wealth by level.
Oh. So I guess the original poster shouldn't have suggested the reduction in CR, since you've decided that's not what this thread is about.
Basically, I'm tired of my characters NEEDING to have stat and ability enhancing magic items.
The whole point in pointing out that characters are acceptable without items, addresses the original posters main concern. Characters do not in fact *need* to have stat and ability boosting items.
Knowing this the original poster should feel comfortable reducing the CR. Or giving out certain select items, without feeling like he has to fill every stat enhance slot. Or giving flat bonuses upon advancement. He should feel free to make the changes as he wishes, because of the inherent resiliency of the system.
We simply differ as to what is considered 'playable'. After all, those four fighters did *win* that little combat you cooked up, with, as you pointed out, a slightly greater than average loss in resources. ;-p (due, in large part to the homogeneous nature of the party composition.)
Or, you know, he should feel confident in doing absolutely nothing, as long as he's willing to accept the consequences as noted in the 'wealth by level' section.
I find it particularly interesting that when PC's start dropping around CR 8 or 10, there are suddenly spells available to help them deal with the consequences of that. it's almost like someone put that in there *intentionally*.
Either join the discussion by proposing WBL alternatives that are balanced (and thus not "nothing") or go away.
How is being boss of the internet working out for you? Havin' a lot of success with that? ;-p
So Obviously the +1 AC compensates for AC loss due to magic items, in fact it probably takes it a good bit further. I think it depends on the character.
I believe it's possible to push this into an edge case with the new armor values. In my campaign, I'm just probably going to limit heavy metal armors, for both flavor/fluff reasons and to avoid these edge cases.
But do you think doubling the stat boosts makes up for the loss of resistance items, stat items and magic weapons? (those are my assumptions of the other 3 of your 'four' please correct me if I am wrong). So at level 10 you would be able to add a total of 3 +1's that you would not normally get.
I count 5. One at 2nd, 4th, 6th, 8th, 9th. Oh. I see what you're saying. I was just assuming that these new additions stacked on normal advancement stuffs. Hm.
Perhaps make it every even level (and 2 points at levels 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20) but make the points inherent bonuses? (to cap them at +5 per stat? Although I would probably make that +6)
A fighter could likely raise his strength by 2 that covers the primary stat item. Now you have 1 more which could cocievably raise a single save by 1 if your con wisdom or dex is odd. I think it is huge overstatement to say it addresses 4 of the big 6.
Agreed. So under this new model, you have 7 new points by level 10. Also: I mentioned if it wasn't enough, perhaps a flat +1 to all bonus every 5 or 10 levels.
Mr. Fishy doesn't like stat magic either but Mr. Fishy runs a more low key, story driven game. Mr. Fishy doesn't use a lot of demons or devils. Most of Mr. Fishy's villians are people. You could house rule a stat bump to all stats at every 6th level (+3 at 18th) for a nonmagic heroic bump. Mongoose had that in the Conan RPG. Stat increase at 4 levels and every stat at 6 levels.
It comes down to how you play, high end magical monsters, demons godling, dragons need more magic. More "human" or roleplaying encounters need less magic typically. Roleplay means more diplomacy or investigating and less combat, more skills. Mr. Fishy must warn you Mr. Fishy has lost games to roleplayer's talking to every damn thing.
You've been suggesting that CR is just fine, despite cutting the damage-per-round of melee by half.
Implying implying implying
It's *your* example that shows a CR 10 average taking on 4 average fighters removing 30% of their resources. Isn't that what they (they being the authors of 3rd edition) claim a CR appropriate encounter should do?
If you're suggesting "Don't make any changes at all," then you're wrong.
Well, then, since in the entire text of my post I don't suggest that the original poster do that, (simply point it out as an option with the relevant consequences) then I guess I'm not wrong.
Characters need to have stat and ability boosting items (or some replacement for them) in order to not die.
This is a false dichotomy. They could in fact fight weaker opponents. Then they would also not die and also not have magic items.
Sure. If the PCs have a 30% chance to fail every encounter, how many encounters does it take before you kill the party?
This isn't a math problem. It's something I like to call a strawman.
First, they *won* the encounter, using the expected (or slightly more) amount of resources.
Second, based on your math, 4 level 10 fighters have about a 0% chance of a TPK against an average CR10. So, you'd have to post the CR of this encounter they would 'fail' against (since you've declined to define fail, I'll define it as a total party kill)
What is the point you're trying to prove here exactly?
*Raise the CR of monsters. Don't give the PCs ANY special bonuses or magic items. Just realize that monsters are going to be tougher...
Personally, I'd simply go with that.
Balance of power per level aside, magic items are still a fundamental part of the typical D&D "feel" however; I'd make sure that magic items are still somewhat present in the game unless you voluntarily wish to divorce from that component of the game; which is fine by itself but may leave some players who are expecting this on their hunger, so to speak (meh, bad translation from a french expression).
Otherwise, I'm not not a fan of stat boosting items either, although I understand the part they play in the game...
'findel