| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd rather make SAD more MAD, given the definitions above. But, outside of theorycrafting, I've found it difficult to function well in a real game without at least two or three decent stats.
What if a martial could use their highest stat bonus for damage, to hit, AC, initiative, reflex, and fort saves?
Well, it'd more or less remove the distinction between those stats. Following that train to its logical conclusion, there would only be two ability scores that really matter--Physical and Mental--with subscores for things like carrying capacity and NPC reaction. Systems have been built similarly with mixed results.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It seems that not using point buys will help equalize things as well. Starting all PCs with the same scores (but arranged in whatever fashion they like) would be, in effect, a mechanic that makes SAD classes more MAD.
This is something that I do. I offer a stat array, 16/16/15/14/13/11 or 20 point buy. Obiously you still add racials. Now, what this does is penalize players who absolutely demand to start with 20 in a single stat compared to those who will take the generous stat array I've given. It helps MAD characters be playable, without raising the over-all power level. In fact, by taking the array it actually lowers the power level as players are starting with scores of 18 instead of 20 in their relevant stats.
|
This is something that I do. I offer a stat array, 16/16/15/14/13/11It seems that not using point buys will help equalize things as well. Starting all PCs with the same scores (but arranged in whatever fashion they like) would be, in effect, a mechanic that makes SAD classes more MAD.
I think I'm in love.
|
There are a lot of threads on caster vs. martial disparity. I'd like to discuss one aspect of class balance: SAD vs. MAD. Full casters are single attribute dependent, they do damage, prevent damage, buff, travel, summon, scry, and do pretty much everything through spells. A wizard or druid in a point buy game can max Int or Wis, adding a few points to Dex and Con, and get by with penalties in Str and Cha. A multiple attribute dependent class like the ranger needs bonuses in Str, Dex, Con, and Wis and benefits from bonuses in Int and Cha. It is tougher to max out one stat and a penalty in any stat hurts more. The ranger needs Str and Dex (if ranged) for dealing damage, Dex for AC and initiative, Con for hit points, Wis for spells, Int for skills, and Cha for wild empathy.
I used wizard, druid, and ranger as examples because they are all strong classes. They have different strengths and weaknesses, and I'm arguing it is more difficult from a build and point buy perspective to make use of a ranger's strengths. I'm not trying to create another caster vs. martial thread, but rather to discuss SAD vs. MAD.
What if there were a mechanic to make MAD class more SAD? What if a martial could use their highest stat bonus for damage, to hit, AC, initiative, reflex, and fort saves? How would that change the game?
These were the problems being discussed over on WotC's forums before plans were being made for D&D 4e. Now you're discussing them again.
I need to remind you that 4e was rejected largely by the people who are here. Just so you know, so you're not going to retread 4e's territory. :)
This is something that I do. I offer a stat array, 16/16/15/14/13/11 or 20 point buy. Obiously you still add racials. Now, what this does is penalize players who absolutely demand to start with 20 in a single stat compared to those who will take the generous stat array I've given. It helps MAD characters be playable, without raising the over-all power level. In fact, by taking the array it actually lowers the power level as players are starting with scores of 18 instead of 20 in their relevant stats.It seems that not using point buys will help equalize things as well. Starting all PCs with the same scores (but arranged in whatever fashion they like) would be, in effect, a mechanic that makes SAD classes more MAD.
36 Point buy against 20 seems quite a lot >_____<
Here is an odd thought to help MAD characters.
Every 4 levels instead of +1 in the tsat of your choice, you get +1 in EVERY stat.
As you pointed out the strongest characters in the game only need 1 stat so this is minor buff to them while the weaker characers need multiple stats and this helps them more.
That's not bad. Maybe +1 in three stats? Allows the characters to still have, you know, character. : D
Didn't work out that way, did it?
Nope, because one 16 is cheaper than two. The sorc doesn't care a whole lot about the fact that his con is 12 and his dex is 14 or vice versa. Whereas the Ranger is going to find it impossible to 14/14/14/14/14 and anything he drops he feels.
...and the one and only Paladin Thread would be of sufficient length, were it to be printed out, to encircle the earth four times.
By my reckoning, the way they set up point-buy (with very high-value stats becoming more expensive) was probably meant to encourage single-attribute-dependent characters to "settle" at 16 or so and spend the rest of their attributes to become better-rounded.
Didn't work out that way, did it?
It worked for some. It didn't work for the more compulsive min/maxers.
I'll concede it needs a little more engineering if it seriously intends to impede anybody from starting with a 20 that they really, really want... while still providing for somebody who really, really wants four pretty good stats without dumping the last two.
If someone wants a 20 bad enough, they can have it. Good luck to that player. : D
One house rule I want to try is you get 1 build point each level instead of an ability boost every 4. Another option is simply make higher stats cost a greater share of your build points.
I need to remind you that 4e was rejected largely by the people who are here. Just so you know, so you're not going to retread 4e's territory. :)
4E is gone, therefore anything 4E did was bad! Except you know, that's not really how it works.
Anyways, I like the idea that every class is roughly just as MAD. From a development POV, I always thought it was extremely difficult to balance things if everyone's put on different scaling, and MAD only makes that worse, and is exacerbated by the lack of equal progression between stats. Not a big fan of SAD either, because I feel like it makes one attribute more important than all the others. Ideally, if everyone's on a closer scale of MAD/SAD, I think its easier to balance their DCs and the like. At worst you run the risk of homogenization, but there are always ways around that(ones you should probably take).
Edit: One of my favorite ways to give stats more flexibility is probably allowing someone to pick one of two to go into a skill or save or some other modifier. Makes it suck slightly less to be MAD, gives you a chance to say "well I intimidate with strength not charisma!", though its best to create the system with this in mind.
There are a lot of threads on caster vs. martial disparity. I'd like to discuss one aspect of class balance: SAD vs. MAD. Full casters are single attribute dependent, they do damage, prevent damage, buff, travel, summon, scry, and do pretty much everything through spells. A wizard or druid in a point buy game can max Int or Wis, adding a few points to Dex and Con, and get by with penalties in Str and Cha. A multiple attribute dependent class like the ranger needs bonuses in Str, Dex, Con, and Wis and benefits from bonuses in Int and Cha. It is tougher to max out one stat and a penalty in any stat hurts more. The ranger needs Str and Dex (if ranged) for dealing damage, Dex for AC and initiative, Con for hit points, Wis for spells, Int for skills, and Cha for wild empathy.
I used wizard, druid, and ranger as examples because they are all strong classes. They have different strengths and weaknesses, and I'm arguing it is more difficult from a build and point buy perspective to make use of a ranger's strengths. I'm not trying to create another caster vs. martial thread, but rather to discuss SAD vs. MAD.
What if there were a mechanic to make MAD class more SAD? What if a martial could use their highest stat bonus for damage, to hit, AC, initiative, reflex, and fort saves? How would that change the game?
Besides Fort saves, Devish dance will do most all of that.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The issue with stats and ability dependency is that the stats are not equal.
Example.
CHA is less valuable than INT.
Cha dumps are offset by skill points.
To reign in SAD advantages would require the elimination of SAD in the basic design.
I haven't tried this but here is an option I've tossed around in my head.
Full progression spellcasters have a massive advantage in that one stat basically is all they need. That stat gives the spell access by level, adjusts the spell's DC, and provides bonus spells per day.
Break that up.
Spell level access could be determined by INT (so an int of 13 would allow access to lvl3 spells)
Bonus spells per day could be determined by WIS
Spell DC bonus comes from CHA.
Single stat dependency could just go away for casters. As an added benefit the current crop of Idiot Savant builds with a godlike Intelligence but the common sense of a house fly and the personality of a toaster oven would wander off.
Mental stats are far more valuable than physical stats after a certain point, clvl 6, so adjusting the values in point buy is of middling effect since it will actually penalize the MAD builds more than the SAD builds.
A score of 20 in STR only adds a +5 bonus to hit and DMG to a level 10 character. It also ups carrying capacity but at this point theres an extradimensional space which makes this useless.
A score of 20 in WIS provides a +5 will save bonus, a handful of bonus spells, acess to all spells available to the level and a +5 spell DC. To the caster at 10th level.
If point buy is retained, your game gets skewed the higher level it goes.
Static stat arrays offset this somewhat bit they don't address the real power advantage of mental stats at higher levels.
Old school rolling methods, just narrow character choice early on. They also create a power disparity, but this method spreads it around. If you roll like crap but pull a 17, it's a wizard; if you roll amazingly well, you skip the SAD builds and play that hard to build Monk or Paladin. If you roll like a zombie you get youself killed quick and start over. Easy to do if you pull 7s in me taps and CON, you just "roleplayed your stats"
Another downside that is never addressed is that the classes that are most SAD are also the classes that get access to Stat boosts and the ability to make those boosts semi permanent.
Let's forget that a starting stat of 20 was unheard of before 3.X.
It was Also unheard of that an item could boost a stat, with a permanent bonus, by +6 WITHOUT ALSO BEING AN ARTIFACT. The type of item that drives an entire campaign.
Stat boosting items are hilariously underpriced. They further wreck chaos on balance when they come into play.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not sure if making everyone MAD is really a great solution.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
On the note of wizards doing everything with spells: I've played in a lot of games with wizards, and for a good chunk of their career they just don't always have the time or slots to prepare a stat boost spell if/when they need one, or to leave a slot empty and prepare on the fly. Wizards don't get a free pass around any problem that can be solved via a spell; they do still have to prepare and cast the spell. Bonded items do mitigate that somewhat if there's only the one odd useful spell in a day, but most wizard players I've met are afraid of bonded items.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Alternatively you could have physical stats affect actual class features at high levels.
If fighters applied their STR bonus as a crit modifier.
Instead of 1d8/19-20 x2 +5
make it 1d8/19-20 x5 +5
Or adding the Dex mod as a minimum for each die of Backstabbing damage.
I could see this actually causing TPKs though if the same mechanic went for monsters.
This would skew the value of HP too. Making the d6 and d8 classes much less survivable. But it's commonly repeated on these forums that HP is a weak resource and HP damage is a suboptimal tactic in combat. Having Martials hit for 100 damage, like 3.5's Warblade, would alter that perception.
You could break spell casting into two ability scores: one to determine bonus spells, and one to determine spell DCs.
You could break spell casting into two ability scores: one to determine bonus spells, and one to determine spell DCs.
In which case you want the minimum for bonus spells, and to crank DCs to be useful.
Not a fan of limiting spellcasters by limiting how many spells they cast. You want to cast spells to have fun probably, and an I-win button you can only use once per day is still an I-Win button. Its a ridiculously false balance that doesn't really work towards fun imo.
Having Martials hit for 100 damage, like 3.5's Warblade, would alter that perception.
You can hit for 100 damage in pathfinder too, not that difficult either. Its just a little more obvious if its in a single hit.
You could always bolster HP if you were worried about people dying too fast, by doing something like giving people max hp automatically or increasing HD for classes. That's on the other end of increasing damage. There's something to be said for stat squish though, adds some simplicity.
Critical multipliers can be a horrible mess for balance because they can be unpredictable and tend to be overkill. 20/x5 is very likely to be so. 15-20x2 is much more predictable, and less likely to overkill. Range over multiplier for the purposes of balanace, imo.
Long story short, ability scores are hardwired into how characters function within the system. Feats, class abilities, etc. can mitigate that too an extent. But if your goal is to see everyone have an equal amount of SADNESS/MADNESS, your best bet is to hardwire directly into the classes what their current "best" stats do.
Don't want Wizards going all out for that 18 Int + racial mod at level 1? Then change their spell progression to reflect what a 20 Int wizard would have, increasing with the 4/8/12/16/20 bonuses and Int-stat items periodically mixxed in. Have Int just affect skill points, Int-based skills, languages, etc. Want rangers to be less MAD? Maybe let their favored terrain bonus count as a dodge bonus to AC within their favored terrain. Or give them an innate boost to their Wild Empathy (maybe 15+1/2 ranger level instead of 10+cha+1/2 level), it's not like that's a game-breaking ability as is by any means.
What if there were a mechanic to make MAD class more SAD? What if a martial could use their highest stat bonus for damage, to hit, AC, initiative, reflex, and fort saves? How would that change the game?
It's already pretty easy to make a Dex-based melee type. Weapon Finesse. Agile Weapon enchantment. Put your highest score into Dex. Your highest score is now your bonus for damage, to hit, AC, touch AC, initiative, CMD, reflex, and 25% of the skill list. You're a melee too, so you have a d10 or d8 hit die. Don't dump Con and you're fine.
The ranger needs Str and Dex (if ranged) for dealing damage, Dex for AC and initiative, Con for hit points, Wis for spells, Int for skills, and Cha for wild empathy.
Wizards need Int for spellcasting, Con for hitpoints, Dex for AC/initiative, and Wis for will saves. I play about half the time as an Int-based caster (real builds, not the Schroedinger's Wizard BS). Everyone worries about the fighter getting Dominated and killing the party, but what's really scary is when the wizard and the fighter BOTH get Dominated. Hold Person? Your 9 Wisdom, level 7 God-Wizard is going to fail that Will save at least 65% of the time.
I'd almost argue that Rangers are less MAD than Wizards since they have a d10 hit die to fall back on, a full BAB progression, 3 free combat feats that ignore pre-reqs, an animal companion (hitpoint meatshield that also deals damage), favored enemy, and what would be an underwhelming spell list if it wasn't designed to mesh PERFECTLY into the ranger's niche. Obviously rangers get more mileage out of Dex than Str, but that's true for every character who wears light or no armor. Obviously Str helps archery based rangers with damage, but that's also true of any archery build.
I'm arguing it is more difficult from a build and point buy perspective to make use of a ranger's strengths.
Point buy also makes it hard for a Wizard to have a Con score of above 12 if they want their spell DCs to keep pace with monster/encounter CRs. Point buy makes it hard for a Wizard to have a Dex score of above 12 for the same. Getting both Con and Dex above 12 is very difficult in a point buy system.
Point buy is terrible IMO. If I wanted point buy, I could play any of a dozen other game systems that give you a set attribute pool to spend on character creation. Point buy is designed to make you think about where you put your point dollars and how much you value high stats vs. dump stats. I like rolling 4d6, drop the lowest, and assign as desired or a mix & match of assign and random.
I'm not trying to create another caster vs. martial thread, but rather to discuss SAD vs. MAD.
It seems like you were hung up on MAD vs. SAD primarily in regard to martial vs. caster. It's not an accusation, I just think a more dynamic MAD vs. SAD demonstration would be better had in comparing martials to martials or casters to casters.
Cleric is probably the SADDEST class in the game, since they get medium armor proficiency & shields, d8 hit die 3/4 BAB, good fort/will, and their Wis is both their primary casting stat and the Will save attribute. Clerics are less reliant upon Dex and Con due to shields, armor, and the d8 hit die. Compared to sorcerer/witch/wizard who get no armor or shield proficiency, so they either have to ditch their defensive attributes in a point buy system for the good Cha/Int, or sacrifice their most important stat for Con/Dex/Wis.
On the same token, Fighter just needs strength OR Con, depending on your philosophy. Fighters can wear all armor and use all shields, so the classical heavy armor fullplate sword & board fighter has little need of Dex. Fighters already have good built-in bonuses for to-hit and damage, so you could argue that a higher Con gives you more survivability (or that a higher Str means you kill enemies faster, meaning you don't need as many hitpoints, etc). Compared to a monk, who needs, at minimum both Dex and Wisdom, fighters have it easy.
SADNESS/MADNESS is just the nature of the beast. Personally I don't mind it, having played AD&D/3.x/etc for 16+ years now. Other game systems do things differently, but most of the ones I've seen do character creation similar to point-buy. If you don't want an attribute economy forced on you, ask your DM if you can roll for stats to generate more organic characters.
ask your DM if you can roll for stats to generate more organic characters.I'm not quite sure how it's more organic. Simpler, sure, since you just roll a few dice. Frustrating, possibly, if you're looking to play a monk but only roll over twelve once. But organic? I don't really see it.
A lot of older players push forward rolling instead of point buy, even if you suffer horribly or have an insanely awesome character. Its organic in that you have your rolls to work with and you can't change and min-max if I had to guess, so you work with your rolls to see what you make. The downside of course is that the guy with nothing over 12 and the guy with straight 18's are for some reason expected to play side by side and planned around, which isn't really the best design unless your scores don't matter. Then again the same person said SAD/MAD are the nature of the best and to be honest that may not be the type of thinking that says "Wow, this could be better!" or "Wow, this works great" and instead is "This is how it is" and ends without putting more thought.
That's been brought up before, though nobody responded.
Its hard to respond to. I think some things I'm okay with scaling with attributes and others can be out of control. The downside is that it creates less variance with our characters it feels like, but the upside is you can more contain all the madness that comes with variance.
People would argue that it's not D&D*,but I'm not sure that eliminating stats wouldn't be the easiest way to restore balance.
Each class gets 2 stat modifiers. End of story.
Heck they could pick the modifiers with no ill effect.
The modifiers could scale with level.
Not long ago someone on this Board, may have been Kyrt, said that he makes an obvious "Disconnect" between his stats and how he roleplays. He doesn't dump CHA, then play a douche, he doesn't dump WIS and then touch obviously hot things. Stats are mechanical and have nothing to do with Roleplaying. This goes against basically 30 years of gaming for me, but it does make a certain elegant sense in the era of Point Buy.
*An old time Roleplayer, in his 60s by now, once told me that Min/Maxing basically is D&D. With time I've come to accept that basic truth.
I'm not quite sure how it's more organic. Simpler, sure, since you just roll a few dice. Frustrating, possibly, if you're looking to play a monk but only roll over twelve once. But organic? I don't really see it.It's more organic in the way that in real life you get a random assortment of ability and some people are just better at things then others. So, like real life, you may be unsuited for the jobs you like and thus are either forced to take one you dislike or suck at the one you like. This more accurately represents the drudgery and desperation that we organic beings experience.
Plus if you throw together 3d6 in order with stat requirements on certain classes and old school meat grinder campaigns you get something more organic in that it is kind of like natural selection.
In modern D&D, character death is viewed as a failure on the part of the DM. Very different than the old days where surviving to "Name Level" was actually a big deal.
I think Organic is an apt term in that rolling stats is the beginning of character creation instead of having a concept as the beginning and generating stats is like buying equipment.