Radical Idea: Armor
Moderator: Moderators
- Psychic Robot
- Prince
- Posts: 4607
- Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 10:47 pm
-
- Knight-Baron
- Posts: 562
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
It does. +20 vs +10 isn't too bad since its still on the d20 Rng, but the concept is bad.Psychic Robot wrote:I mean, it seems to me that a fighter should have a much larger to-hit number than a wizard at level 20 (+20 vs. +10). But maybe that results in game-breakage.
The way to differentiate the Fighter and Wizard is by their attacks effects, not by their chances to hit. The Wizard could/should have an identical chance to hit, you just alter the effect/damage.
If you want the Wizard's basic damaging attacks to be half as effective as the Fighters, you give them both a +20 to hit, and halve the Wizards damage.
Otherwise the Wizard never hits, or there is a bullshit mechanic like touch Ac, which breaks in all sorts of ways (like Wraithstrike).
There is nothing worse than aggressive stupidity.
- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
- Psychic Robot
- Prince
- Posts: 4607
- Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 10:47 pm
I can see where that works from a mechanics perspective, but I don't really like that from a flavor perspective (I suppose is the term that one would use)--although that seems to be the thinking behind 4e, and that's one of the things I don't like about it.
Count Arioch wrote:I'm not sure how discussions on whether PR is a terrible person or not is on-topic.
Ant wrote:You do not seem to do anything.Chamomile wrote:Ant, what do we do about Psychic Robot?
-
- Knight-Baron
- Posts: 562
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
-
- Serious Badass
- Posts: 29894
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Frankly I don't see why high level "wizards" should be bad in melee. They certainly aren't in modern source materials like Slayers or Murder Princess. They weren't in early 20th century source material like Lord of the Rings or Narnia either. The White Witch or Gandalf strode confidently into battle and killed fools with a stick.
Heck, go back to older source material and people who "have magic" are just higher level across the board. It's like people's conception of a Monk. If your concept is "generally better" your concept is higher level. Monk concepts and wizard concepts are almost universally just "high level" concepts.
And that's why people's concepts for Fighters are always so underwhelming. A high level concept is Goku or Thor. A low level concept is Conan or Khilt the Wolf. If your character can't do something uper awesome, they have no reason to be able to adventure with and against people who can. Full stop.
-Username17
Heck, go back to older source material and people who "have magic" are just higher level across the board. It's like people's conception of a Monk. If your concept is "generally better" your concept is higher level. Monk concepts and wizard concepts are almost universally just "high level" concepts.
And that's why people's concepts for Fighters are always so underwhelming. A high level concept is Goku or Thor. A low level concept is Conan or Khilt the Wolf. If your character can't do something uper awesome, they have no reason to be able to adventure with and against people who can. Full stop.
-Username17
- Psychic Robot
- Prince
- Posts: 4607
- Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 10:47 pm
I think a fighter should be a lot better than that a wizard at hitting a target, not through pure physical power--which is something that 4e strives for, since your attack bonus is largely dependent on Strength (correct me if I am mistaken)--but rather skill, which would be represented by BAB.
Frank: I understand where you're coming from, and I realize that my views on fighters are very much in the minority here. I do not like fighters doing weird, supernatural things without magic, and I don't like them using "magic" without spellcaster levels.
Frank: I understand where you're coming from, and I realize that my views on fighters are very much in the minority here. I do not like fighters doing weird, supernatural things without magic, and I don't like them using "magic" without spellcaster levels.
Last edited by Psychic Robot on Tue Aug 05, 2008 1:49 am, edited 1 time in total.
Count Arioch wrote:I'm not sure how discussions on whether PR is a terrible person or not is on-topic.
Ant wrote:You do not seem to do anything.Chamomile wrote:Ant, what do we do about Psychic Robot?
-
- Prince
- Posts: 3295
- Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 4:22 pm
Yeah, pretty much.FrankTrollman wrote:Frankly I don't see why high level "wizards" should be bad in melee. They certainly aren't in modern source materials like Slayers or Murder Princess. They weren't in early 20th century source material like Lord of the Rings or Narnia either. The White Witch or Gandalf strode confidently into battle and killed fools with a stick.
I think that if you have an attack, you should be good at it. Really, I hate the idea of attack stats altogether, and I think ability scores should be entirely defensive. 4E really shows us why, because you have to pump your attack stat to maximum or you're falling behind.
Really, everyone's attack power should be entirely level based, with only their defenses fluctuating. That way whatever powers you choose are good. And if you want to be the guy who shoots firebolts and spells, then those are your powers. If you want to use sword moves, then those are your powers. If on the other hand, you want a little bit of both, you should be able to do that too.
What differentiates an accurate attack or inaccurate attack should be based on the attack itself, whether it's a separately named 4E power or a 3E style power attack where you can trade accuracy for power.
I'm with P_R on this, although I recognize that high-level fighters need to be able to emulate some superhuman abilities in order to remain competitive. But I don'tr want my fighter doing overtly magical stuff without the Overtly Magical feat or PrC.
I think the cumulatively divergent BAB system can work over a set number of levels. Theoretically, it could be made to work over 20 levels, and you just state that the game ends at 20th level - there is no "epic".
Or perhaps - taking a page from 4e - everyone has a similar "BAB", but fighters get a proficiency bonus with weapons, and a bigger one if they blow feats on them, while spellcasters get a proficiency bonus on magical attacks. A wizard can swing a sword, and a fighter can cast a spell from a scroll (or some minor magical knowledge feat - whatever) but at a reduced attack bonus.
I think the cumulatively divergent BAB system can work over a set number of levels. Theoretically, it could be made to work over 20 levels, and you just state that the game ends at 20th level - there is no "epic".
Or perhaps - taking a page from 4e - everyone has a similar "BAB", but fighters get a proficiency bonus with weapons, and a bigger one if they blow feats on them, while spellcasters get a proficiency bonus on magical attacks. A wizard can swing a sword, and a fighter can cast a spell from a scroll (or some minor magical knowledge feat - whatever) but at a reduced attack bonus.
MartinHarper wrote:Babies are difficult to acquire in comparison to other sources of nutrition.
- Psychic Robot
- Prince
- Posts: 4607
- Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 10:47 pm
That's one thing that I think 4e did right with rituals--make it so that even the "dumb" classes can use them. 'Tis a shame that the system is, overall, made of fail, though.
Count Arioch wrote:I'm not sure how discussions on whether PR is a terrible person or not is on-topic.
Ant wrote:You do not seem to do anything.Chamomile wrote:Ant, what do we do about Psychic Robot?
Should be easy enough to swipe for 3.x, tho'.Psychic Robot wrote:That's one thing that I think 4e did right with rituals--make it so that even the "dumb" classes can use them.
Just designate certain spells as "rituals," maybe have a skill prereq, and slap a "do not use in combat" casting time on 'em.
MartinHarper wrote:Babies are difficult to acquire in comparison to other sources of nutrition.
- Psychic Robot
- Prince
- Posts: 4607
- Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 10:47 pm
Well, I could see the Arcana skill checks being replaced with Spellcraft, the Nature checks being replaced with Survival, but what would replace the Religion checks? I think that the skill should be Wisdom-based, but I think it's retarded to make Knowledge (religion) into a Wisdom skill.
Count Arioch wrote:I'm not sure how discussions on whether PR is a terrible person or not is on-topic.
Ant wrote:You do not seem to do anything.Chamomile wrote:Ant, what do we do about Psychic Robot?
-
- Knight-Baron
- Posts: 562
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
Do you mean either of the following?:Psychic Robot wrote:I think a fighter should be a lot better than that a wizard at hitting a target, not through pure physical power--which is something that 4e strives for, since your attack bonus is largely dependent on Strength (correct me if I am mistaken)--but rather skill, which would be represented by BAB.
-Fighters should be more reliable than Wizards in their damaging attacks.
-Fighters should do more damage than Wizards.
Oh, and martial skill =/= going off the Rng.
There is nothing worse than aggressive stupidity.
- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
- Psychic Robot
- Prince
- Posts: 4607
- Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 10:47 pm
Very easy. Use the same skills, 1 minute casting time (10 rounds, which is essentially time you don't care about outside of combat, but has the possibility of actually being tension-raising trying to interrupt it during a well crafted encounter). Pop some reasonable limit on how many and how often you can do them [that doesn't involve a bank roll], perhaps charisma modifier [how often you can convince the universe to sit the fuck down and shut the fuck up] or Con mod [endurance, bitches], and call it a day.Talisman wrote:Should be easy enough to swipe for 3.x, tho'.Psychic Robot wrote:That's one thing that I think 4e did right with rituals--make it so that even the "dumb" classes can use them.
Just designate certain spells as "rituals," maybe have a skill prereq, and slap a "do not use in combat" casting time on 'em.
- Psychic Robot
- Prince
- Posts: 4607
- Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 10:47 pm
I'd do something like 3 + Con mod times per day, but what would you suggest for replacing Religion as a skill?
Count Arioch wrote:I'm not sure how discussions on whether PR is a terrible person or not is on-topic.
Ant wrote:You do not seem to do anything.Chamomile wrote:Ant, what do we do about Psychic Robot?
Knowledge (religion). Seriously; it may not be nicely symmetrical, but it makes sense.
Edit: And's I'd recommend [Cha mod] + [1/3 level] per day...but that's just me.
Edit: And's I'd recommend [Cha mod] + [1/3 level] per day...but that's just me.
Last edited by Talisman on Tue Aug 05, 2008 3:55 am, edited 1 time in total.
MartinHarper wrote:Babies are difficult to acquire in comparison to other sources of nutrition.
Talisman gave you a serious answer, I'm just going to look at you funny.Psychic Robot wrote:I'd do something like 3 + Con mod times per day, but what would you suggest for replacing Religion as a skill?
Given how high stat mods can get on their own in 3.5, I'd hesitate on adding more times/day. How many times a day do you really need to summon a demon lord from the depths of hell? Or scry/teleport? Because people are really going to be doing that.
- Psychic Robot
- Prince
- Posts: 4607
- Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 10:47 pm
Well, I'm also thinking of low-level things like arcane lock. Perhaps one could use them X number of times per day, but one would have to expend additional uses for more powerful rituals.
Count Arioch wrote:I'm not sure how discussions on whether PR is a terrible person or not is on-topic.
Ant wrote:You do not seem to do anything.Chamomile wrote:Ant, what do we do about Psychic Robot?
Maybe that. Or, and I don't really advocate this, but it may be worth discussing: a 'rituals per day' chart. Yeah, like spells.
Or perhaps, break them into 'ritual levels', 1-9, and you can use 3/day of current level rituals, 5/day of previous level, 7/day of the level before that, and however many you want of lower levels, because they don't really matter any more.
Or perhaps, break them into 'ritual levels', 1-9, and you can use 3/day of current level rituals, 5/day of previous level, 7/day of the level before that, and however many you want of lower levels, because they don't really matter any more.
- Psychic Robot
- Prince
- Posts: 4607
- Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 10:47 pm
- Psychic Robot
- Prince
- Posts: 4607
- Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 10:47 pm
-
- Prince
- Posts: 3295
- Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 4:22 pm