|
3 months ago ::
Feb 13, 2013 - 6:15PM
#11
|
Date Joined:
Mar 29, 2012
|
I have introduced this concept before with mixed results. And in actual gameplay it is more convoluted that it seems. But re thinking the subject...
What if the threshold was the targets DEX, CON, or STR? Instead of just targeting the AC you compare the d20 to targets raw Ability score and trade MMD for effects? Beat the targets DEX and they lose movement or AC bonus, for example.
Some argue 'why knock prone when damage is more effective?' the answer lies in your party members and what they can do to that prone target...
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 13, 2013 - 6:19PM
#12
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2009
|
Some argue 'why knock prone when damage is more effective?' the answer lies in your party members and what they can do to that prone target...
Move 5 spaces faster relative to the target isnt that the current impact?>
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 13, 2013 - 8:11PM
#13
|
Date Joined:
May 23, 2012
|
I'm all for degrees of success and roll threshold results -- in the advanced game.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 13, 2013 - 9:31PM
#14
|
Date Joined:
Jan 29, 2005
|
So I got to thinking about how basic attacks (martial and magical) are just that: basic and very unflavorful. But adding extra stuff like status effects and such can throw balance into a tizzy.
Source for this claim? Because 4e has demonstrated that basic attacks with "extra stuff like status effects" can be balanced just fine.
I suppose I'm using my own experience as a primary source, followed by the reasoning that status effects are nigh-impossible to quantify in terms of damage. If I have a basic attack that does 1dX damage, and another that does 1dY and also knocks prone, slides, slows, inflicts disadvantage, or grants advantage, how should the damage be modified to achieve a semblance of balance? 4e did a solid job in creating nifty at-will powers with a fair amount of uniqueness. Were they balanced? Not really. Certainly not between classes. When you have at-will powers like Arc Lightning (2 targets, 1d6+statics, range 20, egads!) vs other at-wills that had same damage, but single target and less range. Not seeing the balance in that.
Magic Dual Color Test
Show
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 13, 2013 - 10:18PM
#15
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2010
|
So I got to thinking about how basic attacks (martial and magical) are just that: basic and very unflavorful. But adding extra stuff like status effects and such can throw balance into a tizzy.
Source for this claim? Because 4e has demonstrated that basic attacks with "extra stuff like status effects" can be balanced just fine.
I suppose I'm using my own experience as a primary source, followed by the reasoning that status effects are nigh-impossible to quantify in terms of damage.
Only at first glance. 4e had a rather consistent method for how much damage they deducted based on effects.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 14, 2013 - 6:29AM
#16
|
Date Joined:
Jan 29, 2005
|
So I got to thinking about how basic attacks (martial and magical) are just that: basic and very unflavorful. But adding extra stuff like status effects and such can throw balance into a tizzy.
Source for this claim? Because 4e has demonstrated that basic attacks with "extra stuff like status effects" can be balanced just fine.
I suppose I'm using my own experience as a primary source, followed by the reasoning that status effects are nigh-impossible to quantify in terms of damage.
Only at first glance. 4e had a rather consistent method for how much damage they deducted based on effects.
Oh, 4e was consistant, that wasn't my gripe. Consistancy didn't make powers even remotely balanced. I like 4e, and it is still my favorite edition overall (I would welcome a 4.5 rework, merging the powers by power source for starters, and probably more power slots overall). The formula, IMO, was too simplistic for 4e, since lowering the die or dropping the primary ability mod didn't really scale with all the other static bonuses. 1d6+15 vs 1d4+15 does not really justify the second one gaining a slide 1, etc.
Magic Dual Color Test
Show
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 14, 2013 - 6:41AM
#17
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2010
|
Well, that's a different issue, in my opinion. The interaction of static mods, and the damage they did to the system, is one of 4e's core weaknesses. The presence of it, however, does not mean that lessons can't be learned from other aspects.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 14, 2013 - 12:18PM
#18
|
Date Joined:
Jan 29, 2005
|
Well, that's a different issue, in my opinion. The interaction of static mods, and the damage they did to the system, is one of 4e's core weaknesses. The presence of it, however, does not mean that lessons can't be learned from other aspects.
I think we essentially agree. Coming up with balanced mechanics between damage and status effects won't be easy, but perhaps it can be significantly improved this iteration. I really hope they will consolidate the spell list with the spell families like Cure/Inflict Wounds, et al. It would save a ton of room in the books for much more meaningful content.
Magic Dual Color Test
Show
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 16, 2013 - 3:16AM
#19
|
Date Joined:
May 23, 2012
|
See my Mage Hand, more than just a cantrip thread where I take some of the ideas you are talking about here and apply them to force (telekinetic) spells/prayers.
|
|
|
