Some years back, I took stock of the grumblings of the players that I game with and sorted out the legitimate beefs that they had that I could meaningfully address without creating too many additional problems.
Kirth's point about narrative power would have been the major one had I not imported a lot of material from earlier editions (1st/2nd/BECMI) as regarded dominions and human intelligence at the wholesale level. Essentially, martials own these two spheres and own them conclusively to about the same extent that casters own magical intelligence and magical utility (the martials can fake these to about the same degree that casters can fake rulership, generalship, administration, and human intelligence gathering).
Primarily because of the fact that I have three children under three, and I've not had the time to keep up on system mastery on all of the new stuff in APG, Ultimate X, etc, I generally permit core only. This actually solves a fair number of the balance problems with a couple of glaring exceptions that I've houseruled in nearly every game I've run.
The big one is full attacks. You see, in a lot of games, full attacks are really easy to achieve. If the monsters don't go out of their way to avoid full attacks or only accept them when it is to their advantage, your fighters won't notice this little problem. The same is true of fighter 'stickiness'. If your GM is really skittish about accepting AoOs from your fighters, you can actually hold a line pretty well. But what happens when the level of strategy and tactics on both sides of the table gets pretty high? Yes, that's what my fighter players got annoyed with, to the point that they presented me with a group like wizard, wizard, cleric, druid, druid in the next game.
So, house rule #1, at BAB6, all classes can single move followed by a full attack as their complete round's action. They can't full attack followed by a single move, I have no interest in assisting kiting, which is fine as it is. At BAB11, fighters and barbarians can do a charge followed by a full attack, basically pounce. Barbarians are allowed to reverse the order that they get these benefits if they like.
Note that this rule also applies to monsters, making brutes a lot more dangerous.
House rule #2, skilled melee combatants are allowed to nominate several squares adjacent to them that they are sort of present in. This is akin to an American Football offensive line. You can't move through those squares--it is as if the combatant was in them---without bull rushings or otherwise moving them out of the way. You can however attack them in that nominated square. Fighters always get one such square, everyone gets one at BAB 6, BAB11 and BAB16. Normally on the map we designate such squares by laying a die of your color on them.
Tell us more about the "dominions and hum-int" ownership. How is the martial 'ownership' of these spheres enforced? Is a druid, say, incapable of rolling Diplomacy to gather information? If a sorceror buys land, will he be utterly incapable of convincing anybody to come and work for him on it? - Obviously such limitations would be a little high-handed, and I doubt that you impose such absolutes: I'm wondering how you do choose to deal with such situations.
Yeah, I'd like to hear more about that stuff as well, because it's the exactly the kind of thing I'm currently borderline-obsessed with but can't seem to find a smooth way to implement.
I like you rules 1 and 2. I don't think it helps the balance issue people have but it makes combat interesting. As GM I can see this making mob attack quite dangerous at the higher levels. The bad guys move in, full attack and lock the players down. I think that's great idea. Of course the players will use it too, very effectively too against single BBEGs.
I think any argument about game balance is pointless unless you define game balance prior posting arguments. Game balance means different things to different people.
To me game balance is when a class is effective from level 1-20.
Another might look at balance from the point of view at how many different things a character can do. In this case casters out do martial characters.
It might be the power difference. Wish vs a sword in the face.
Lincoln,
I've written about the dominion system in greater detail in other posts. Basically fighters have full level on the dominion chart, rogues have 3/4 level, hybrids are in between, and casters are worse. Everyone is slightly better in their own area of particular expertise (clerics on religious things, barbarians with respect to their own particular tribes, mages on magical matters).
Sorcerors can become barons, dukes, or the like, they're just nowhere near as good at it as a fighter would be (assuming they're both equal level). The biggest factor is in terms of effective taxes collected. A level 15 fighter's domain works FAR FAR better than any kingdom we have any experience with.
On human intelligence, I'm talking about the wholesale level, not the retail level. Anyone can use their personal social skills per my usual rules (which I've also described in other posts). But at the wholesale level you're talking about running an intelligence network, a la CIA/KGB or the like. Rogues are just a lot better at this than anyone else. Fighters are their 3/4 equivalents. I also abstract things like wholesale diplomacy (relations between nations, not individuals) and international trade under this. Think Germany at the turn of the 20th century as a classic Fighter empire, the UK as a classic rogue empire.
The other big non-combat sphere is magical intelligence and utility. You don't have to abstract this much because its already mostly in the books---just add the typical standard operating procedures. Casters obviously conclusively own this sphere.
High level adventures when I run them heavily emphasize combined arms both in the noncombat sphere and the combat sphere.
What happens when you're seriously outclassed in dominion/rulership/warfare?
This generally means that your opposing force has a nearly bottomless reinforcement pool available to them on a schedule (think in terms of D-Day and H-Hour, reinforcements coming at D+X and H+Y).
When you have equality or superiority, you can often interdict this, depending on the local circumstances.
What happens when you're seriously outclassed in human intelligence/international relations/etc (the rogue sphere)?
This often REALLY sucks. I honestly need to write a few BBEG postmortems on why their scheme failed to illustrate it better. It means that the PCs are almost certain to get strategic and tactical surprise when they attack you initially, unless your magical intelligence superiority is overwhelming. It means that they can reliably pull off stuff like honey-trapping some of your 2nd and 3rd tier minions and getting information like where is that area you have that actually CAN be teleported into and out of---surely you have such an area, you can't be bothered to WALK in and out of your lair can you?
It means that they can sometimes get whatever nation that your scheme is near to lend a hand, or at least permit their forces to move through without interference. It means that any major fractures you have in your coalition are probably known to the PCs when they attack, and they might even be able to convince some that they have pressing business elsewhere or even that they should change sides. It means that a lot of your special tactics or capabilities are likely known with intimate detail.
What happens when you're seriously outclassed in magical intelligence and utility capability? Usually you can defend adequately about a spell level lower from magical intelligence, although rather imperfectly (you can't cover everything, but you can usually cover your principals). But if you're lower than that you're in serious trouble (dungeons and the like usually help here because in my games they usually interfere with magical divination and transportation). This is where scry-buff-fry comes into play. This is almost directly analogous to satellite and electronic intelligence in the real world. Inquire in the Middle East/Afghanistan about what having a huge inferiority in this area does for you.
No thanks; it's not safe.
Lincoln,
Another big thing I do after level 8-9 or so is I reduce massively the treasure obtained when both of these conditions apply:
1. Foes do not have combined arms AND
2. Foes do not have a means of mitigating the fact that they don't have combined arms (e.g., a dungeon).
This is because foes satisfying 1 and 2 are super tempting targets for anyone looking for loot, and will thus be much more picked over. It's also a nice simulationist explanation for the proliferation of dungeons and the like (many of which were built pre-apocalypse for much the same reasons bomb and fallout shelters were in our own world).
Oh: a word on traps.
I use them...a LOT...but not the way most GMs do. You see, the most important thing to your survival and success as a BBEG is to NOT get hit unbuffed by buffed adventurers. The number one purpose of traps is to provide you warning and time. So alarm type traps and the kind that make lots of noise are rather common in my games. Another sort of trap I use a fair bit of are traps in likely encounter areas and choke points---i.e. traps usually used along with troops, think of a trap as a minion that can't move or think much.
I agree that traps, despite their lack of deadliness compared to Olden Times, are very valuable as alarm systems. Or as dirty surprises within an ambush zone. (I've had good luck with beartrap-style traps just at the edge of guardrooms.) Or, well, anything other than a stand-alone attempt at a deathtrap.
Your clarification on the categories martial characters excel at helps, but I'm still wondering about it - specifically, wondering if I can plug "class modifiers" into the new rules in Ultimate Campaign for organizations and kingdoms.) Can you offer a link to the earlier thread you referred to?
A repost
In games I run, fighters fairly quickly start gaining massive bonuses to leadership, administration, and warfare, while rogues gain massive bonuses to what would be called 'human intelligence' and trade. Both gain moderately large bonuses in the other's spheres, as they're '2nd best' in those areas (most other classes are 3rd, 4th, or 5th rate). Neither system is based on feats, skills, or attributes, but rather class abilities.
Would you be willing to share these mechanics? I've long been arguing for something similar, and given the typical reaction to my "heretical" proposals, I certainly never expected to find someone else who had actually thought to put something similar down on paper.
Kirth,
I've used quite a few different sets of mechanics for this, depending on the particular setting I was going for, but here's a nice fairly simple one.
There are two spheres of abstracted, large scale social capability. Note that this is not the same as the retail level that skills like diplomacy, bluff, intimidation cover, or the midrange that bards specialize in. This is the Costco-sized capability that presently pretty much nobody rolls for but rather abstracts.
The first sphere is leadership (not the feat, which almost everyone I know bans), administration, and warfare. This is the primary sphere that makes you a good ruler and commander. Looking at the source material for our genre, fighters are the best at this. Who bleeds with me will be my brother, and all that. Rogues are second place. Aristocrats are honorary fighters. Clerics are second place ONLY when dealing with religious matters or fanatical followers, third rate otherwise. Wizards are third rate only when dealing with magical matters, and 4th rate otherwise. Barbarians are 2nd rate unless dealing with tribes of their own, where they are 1st rate. Rangers are 2nd rate. Paladins are 2nd rate except with fanatical followers as in a crusade, where they reach 1st rate. Other classes can be slotted in as desired.
Now, 1st rate means you get your full level on this chart, 2nd rate means 3/4, 3rd rate means 1/2 and 4th rate means 1/4.
Level-1 Basic rulership. If you don't have at least this, take -25% to pretty much all actions and tax income. If you do have this, no modifier. An awful lot of places in the real world are ruled at this level of proficiency. You can command up to a platoon or so competently directly (i.e., without good sergeants). You can be a captain or so in a typical army. Most armies will recognize that you 'have potential'.
Level-3 Level 3 is sufficient to hold any rank in any military. Above average rulership +10% to rulership actions and to effective taxes collected.
Level-4 This is the level termed 'hero' in previous editions. Good generals will have this level in the real world. In terms of rulership, you gain a +25% modifier on all ruler actions and effective taxes collected (you don't actually collect more taxes, you simply get less inefficient use out of them than would a typical ruler). A few places in the real world have this level of rulership, but it's much better than the mean. This level is also the level where you start to meaningfully inspire your soldiers. Their morale is raised substantially if you're directly involved. Depending on what morale system you're using this ought to be about the equivalent of a grade in troop quality (e.g. green to regular or regular to seasoned or seasoned to elite or elite to fanatical). Guys like Rommel, Patton, and Lee fit into this category.
Level-6 This is getting to the edge of what we have real-world experience of. Think the great Captains of history and the world leaders who justifiably have 'The Great' attached to their name. +50% to rulership actions and effective taxes collected. The loyalty they inspire is very strong. Troops under their direct supervision generally gain the effect of two troop quality classes and pretty much never have to check morale (this doesn't mean they never retreat, but they do it in a controlled manner and when such is actually militarily prudent, not in a rout). In addition, leaders like this seem to create 'mighty men' out of thin air over time. Soldiers directly commanded by them actually gain XP (if in your game NPC soldiers normally do not), or 2x the normal XP if such advancement is normal in your game.
Level-10 +100% to rulership actions and effective taxes collected.
Troops fight as if 3 grades higher and as if one level higher with one bonus feat (has to be one of yours).
Level-15 +150% to rulership and effective taxes collected.
All troops fight as if elite and fanatical and 2 levels higher with 2 bonus feats (you must have these feats).
Level-20 +200% to rulership and effective taxes collected. Troops fight as if 3 levels higher, 3 bonus feats (you must have these feats).
Note, to get the temporary inspiration bonus levels, troops must be half your level or less before the adjustment.
Recent threads in General Discussion
|
