One of the major problems encountered at higher levels is the amount of various stacking bonuses. It makes it difficult for the DM to use many types of NPCs effectively without extensive preparation time and can slow down the game substantially when various bonuses are applied or removed mid-game.
It is a bit sad that there was and is not any time allocated specifically to discussing systemic issues, as this is, of course, a systemic issue (as are many other problems in 3.5E). Still, we can at least discuss it here. Some of these systemic issues are not resolvable without fundamentally altering the system, which is not on the cards for the Pathfinder RPG, but the matter of bonus types is different. One of the principal causes of this problem is the sheer number of bonus types, but it also makes the issue resolvable with bonus type consolidation, rather than making some huge systemic alterations.
Here is a simple system of consolidated bonus types that I would like to suggest. The idea was to keep the basic 3.5E system and consolidate some bonuses where I thought they fit together conceptually and where consolidation would not cause too many problems.
Bonus types in 3.5E:
Alchemical
Armor
Circumstance
Competence
Deflection
Dodge
Enhancement
Inherent
Insight
Luck
Morale
Natural Armor
Profane
Racial
Resistance
Sacred
Shield
Size
Unnamed
Counting them all gives us 18 + 1 bonus types in total.
The +1 refers to the ‘Unnamed’ bonus type, which also includes all natural bonuses.
There is also the Roman Lajciak (RL) bonus!
Combined Bonus Types:
Armor = Armor
Circumstance = Circumstance + Luck
Competence* = Competence + Insight + Morale**
Deflection* = Deflection + Shield
Divine* = Sacred + Profane
Dodge = Dodge
Enhancement = Enhancement + Resistance + Alchemical
Inherent = Inherent
Natural Armor = Natural Armor
Unnamed = Unnamed + Racial + Size
As is apparent, the above exercise of combining the various bonus types yields 9 + 1 bonus types, which is half that in 3.5E D&D. At the same time, the conceptual system of 3.5E gets preserved and I would say that backward compatibility is not overly damaged either. It would be possible to go even further in bonus type consolidation, or to use a conceptually different system altogether, but I would say the above is a reasonable compromise between simplicity and backward compatibility.
*There might be better terms than these. The term ‘competence’ could be replaced with ‘insight’, ‘deflection’ could be replaced with ‘shield’ and ‘divine’ could be replaced with ‘moral’ or ‘ethical’ for example.
** ‘Morale’ fits reasonably well with ‘competence’ and ‘insight’ conceptually, but it might be mechanically worthwhile to subsume it under the ‘divine’ bonus instead.
Before coming up with the compromise simplification, I was actually thinking of a wholesale reform of the bonus system.
Magical bonus types
- Spell bonus
- Item bonus
Mundane bonus types
- Inherent bonus
- Equipment bonus
- Circumstance bonus
Under the revised system, there would have been only 5 bonus types, though in some versions, even fewer, for example, in some I tried combining the Spell bonus and Item bonus into one magical bonus. This would, of course, allow so much less scope for magical enhancement, unless the magical bonus was stackable, which would to some extent defeat its purpose. Such minimization of magical enhancement might not be such a bad thing, but it changes a fundamental assumption of the game to too large an extent.
The approach outlined-above seemingly cuts down on the number of bonus types, but one could say that it merely hides some of them into broader categories within which distinctions are still needed. The equipment bonus, for example, would not permit the stacking from armor and shield to get a better armor class, unless stacking was permitted. But if stacking was allowed, it would need to be limited in some way, because unlimited stacking could lead to multiple layers of armor granting a huge AC bonus. The workaround I used was to allow non-magical bonus-stacking from items in different slots. Another approach would be to simply make an exception for shields and armor. But if I were to do that, I realized it would be easier to simply have those as separate bonus types and not hide the different bonus types under equipment slots. So it is not always for the best to cut down on bonus types.
In other versions, I tried distinguishing between the types of magic that gives the bonus, so that different sources would stack:
- Arcane
- Divine
- (Possibly also "Nature", "Psionics", or even "Technical/Alchemical")
This would allow both Arcane casters and Divine casters (and possibly other types of casters - Psionic, Natural and so on) to complement each other in magical enhancement. On the other hand, problems could arise when the Arcane and Divine casters are using the same spells, which appear on both spell lists. If these were allowed to stack, it could break the game. One solution is to keep the system, but simply disallow the stacking of the same spells even from different spell lists. This would essentially yield three (+) bonus types:
- General Magical Bonus (GMB - could be called "Enhancement" bonus)
- Arcane Magical Bonus
- Divine Magical Bonus
- (Possibly Psionic, Natural, etc. bonus types)
Still, this changes the game fundamentally (not to mention that if formalized in this way, adding the spell to another spell list moves it from the Arcane or Divine to the General category) and is thus probably best left avoided. A slightly different idea I considered was to separate only some spell-types, such as transmutation spells, into giving specific bonuses, for example the "Transmogrification bonus". Ultimately, though, the fact that this changes the game to a large extent remains an obstacle.
I even considered abandoning stacking altogether, or allowing any kind of stacking, or allowing all stacking coming from a different source (usually a different spell), but ultimately, these are all very radical and some create more problems than they solve.
In the end, I concluded that the current system should remain in essence, but should be simplified by cutting down on bonus types, but only to a reasonable extent, for example so that there are no hidden bonus types within explicit bonus type categories.
Still, this changes the game fundamentally (not to mention that if formalized in this way, adding the spell to another spell list moves it from the Arcane or Divine to the General category) and is thus probably best left avoided. A slightly different idea I considered was to separate only some spell-types, such as transmutation spells, into giving specific bonuses, for example the "Transmogrification bonus". Ultimately, though, the fact that this changes the game to a large extent remains an obstacle.
I even considered abandoning stacking altogether, or allowing any kind of stacking, or allowing all stacking coming from a different source (usually a different spell), but ultimately, these are all very radical and some create more problems than they solve.
In the end, I concluded that the current system should remain in essence, but should be simplified by cutting down on bonus types, but only to a reasonable extent, for example so that there are no hidden bonus types within explicit bonus type categories.
Why not merely modify stacking itself, rather than messing with the categories? It is simpler and more backwards compatible.
I would use the "2 + 1 + 1/2" rule:
Only one bonus per category, as normally determined
2 best bonuses stack fully
1 bonus of +1 stacks fully
1/2 bonus rounded down for all others
|
I would use the "2 + 1 + 1/2" rule:
Only one bonus per category, as normally determined
2 best bonuses stack fully
1 bonus of +1 stacks fully
1/2 bonus rounded down for all others
Or just best two or best three. I like simple, and I can't recall the last time I had more than three different bonuses to anything. Then again, I'm more of a role-player than a gamer and don't overly research the system to stack bonuses.
Yeah, well people here talk about ACs of 75 and stuff. When things get out of hand such restraint is necessary.
Still, this changes the game fundamentally (not to mention that if formalized in this way, adding the spell to another spell list moves it from the Arcane or Divine to the General category) and is thus probably best left avoided. A slightly different idea I considered was to separate only some spell-types, such as transmutation spells, into giving specific bonuses, for example the "Transmogrification bonus". Ultimately, though, the fact that this changes the game to a large extent remains an obstacle.
I even considered abandoning stacking altogether, or allowing any kind of stacking, or allowing all stacking coming from a different source (usually a different spell), but ultimately, these are all very radical and some create more problems than they solve.
In the end, I concluded that the current system should remain in essence, but should be simplified by cutting down on bonus types, but only to a reasonable extent, for example so that there are no hidden bonus types within explicit bonus type categories.
Why not merely modify stacking itself, rather than messing with the categories? It is simpler and more backwards compatible.
I would use the "2 + 1 + 1/2" rule:
Only one bonus per category, as normally determined
2 best bonuses stack fully
1 bonus of +1 stacks fully
1/2 bonus rounded down for all others
I agree this would definitely help limit the total attainable bonuses. That said, it makes the stacking rules even more complex and arbitrary than they already are and makes it more difficult to track in-game by adding another layer of rules that need to be followed when adding bonuses. I am not sure that is the way to go.
After some further analysis, I have concluded that it would be best for the Morale bonus/penalty to remain a separate category both conceptually and for gameplay purposes.
Here is the revised list of combined bonus types:
Armor = Armor
Circumstance = Circumstance + Luck
Competence* = Competence + Insight
Deflection* = Deflection + Shield
Divine* = Sacred + Profane
Dodge = Dodge
Enhancement = Enhancement + Resistance + Alchemical
Inherent = Inherent
Morale = Morale
Natural Armor = Natural Armor
Unnamed = Unnamed + Racial + Size
This yields 10 + 1 bonus types, which is approximately half that in 3.5E D&D.
*There might be better terms than these. The term ‘competence’ could be replaced with ‘insight’, ‘deflection’ could be replaced with ‘shield’ and ‘divine’ could be replaced with ‘moral’ or ‘ethical’ for example.
Armor = Armor
Circumstance = Circumstance + Luck
Competence* = Competence + Insight
Deflection* = Deflection + Shield
Divine* = Sacred + Profane
Dodge = Dodge
Enhancement = Enhancement + Resistance + Alchemical
Inherent = Inherent
Morale = Morale
Natural Armor = Natural ArmorUnnamed = Unnamed + Racial + Size
I think this is the best way to go. Though I would like to make sure that the buffs from different classes (arcane casters, divine casters, bard music) get to stack so no one gets shut out.
But then you end up multiplying the common categories:
Divine EnhancementArcane Enhancement
Bardic Enhancement
Morale [non-magical]
Divine Morale
Bardic Morale
Most of the "change the way bonuses work!" posts have been pretty extreme.
This I could actually deal with pretty nicely.
After some further analysis, I have concluded that it would be best for the Morale bonus/penalty to remain a separate category both conceptually and for gameplay purposes.
Here is the revised list of combined bonus types:
Armor = Armor
Circumstance = Circumstance + Luck
Competence* = Competence + Insight
Deflection* = Deflection + Shield
Divine* = Sacred + Profane
Dodge = Dodge
Enhancement = Enhancement + Resistance + Alchemical
Inherent = Inherent
Morale = Morale
Natural Armor = Natural ArmorUnnamed = Unnamed + Racial + Size
This yields 10 + 1 bonus types, which is approximately half that in 3.5E D&D.
*There might be better terms than these. The term ‘competence’ could be replaced with ‘insight’, ‘deflection’ could be replaced with ‘shield’ and ‘divine’ could be replaced with ‘moral’ or ‘ethical’ for example.
Makes sense to me, it would ease up the math and stacking of effects. I was very released when 3.5 cut back on the 3.0 creature types and I would welcome such a change for bonuses in PF.
If you take out the "easy management" AC-only bonus groups (Armor, Natural Armor, Dodge and Shield) you would only realy have 6 bonus types to handle, that would help.
Personnaly I'd link Deflection with luck and circumstance. That would also make it more backward-compatible (a ring of protection would stop stacking with a shield).
Nice to see a positive response on this issue. I think I will try implementing the cut-down bonus list in at least one of my games. One is at level 10, so it is gradually going to be moving into the high-level arena, where these things become an issue.