Can somone, with more experience with the upper tiers, give the stereotypical stats of a level 30 monster, 1 standard, 1 elite and 1 solo. And then the same with a level 30 player, one with magic items, but no feats, and one with the feats (expertise, improved defenses)?
Thanks in advance! :D
For the monsters, all you have to do is look up either the DMG or the Monster Vault or equivalent Level 30 Brute with 25 CON is 1 HP Minion, 335 HP Standard, 670 HP Elite, 1092 HP Solo. Defenses would likely be around 43, while attack bonuses are often +35 to hit.
For PCs it's a bit trickier, but the basic defense-boosting feats would grant you, at most, +4 to a single defense or +3 to all Non-AC defenses, and typically AC defenses are boosted by around +2 with feats (feat bonus, shield bonus). Keeping a +16 masterwork plate armor, +2 heavy shield, +1 plate specialization, +15 half level, and +6 enhancement bonus in mind, that's 50 AC at level 30. NADs are typically far lower than 50 at level 30 -- sometimes barely reaching 40 at level 30 -- although there are certain builds that go beyond 50 NADs (certain classes even beat 50 AC).
I was also wondering, why level 1? Why not level 2 or 4 or 11? Can a DM that has a regular group implement this ruleset simply by "freezing" his group's character level after the next time they level up?
About this races of numbers, there are two things you can do:
· Take out all leveling bonuses
or
· Ask your DM to make sure the monsters are created with the party in mind and not some "standard ruleset". This means the players can still use the online builder and the DM can use all offical 4e stuff without having to change any numbers.
As I said before, this levelessness is just an excercise, made for those with the itch to use something custom, and not something everybody should use. This is something only experienced DMs should consider using (especially those that have ongoing public events).
Thankfully, as the system does simply "freeze" the game at level 1, any DM could just "freeze" the game at whatever point in the game they're currently in and just continue the game at that level ad infinitum, granting additional feats, powers and features as if the veterans were leveling (without advancing their existing base stats [hp, attributes, defenses]). Newbies can then create characters at the same base level as everyone else in the group, so if let's say most of the players are level 4 (12), and the newbie is at 4 (4), the newbie would be at relatively the same level as everyone else in terms of base stats, except he wouldn't have the additional feats, paragon path benefits, higher-level items, etc.
The most rules-as-written-in-4E method of implementing this system -- and by this I mean just only one houserule: no EXP tracking -- would have the DM granting Divine Boons, Reputation, Grandmaster Training, and the like, all of which would be giving the same benefits as feats, class features, and even paragon path/epic destiny features.
All of this without ever changing the party's level, ever.
Let's say my level 2 Eberron group was supposed to level up from the amount of EXP they have gathered. Instead of granting them a level, I would instead ask them what their level 3 powers would be. Then, I'd run a game where the party -- or the individual members of the party -- would handle certain quests. The reward at the end of this series of quests would be Grandmaster Training/Divine Boon/Reputation/Spiritual Favor/Arcane Spell/etc. rewards that grant the encounter power they would've gotten at level 3.
When the party reaches the EXP quota for level 4, they get another set of quests that allow them access to another set of non-item benefits that grant them the equivalent of a feat.
When the party reaches the EXP quota for level 5, they get yet another set of quests that allow them access to another set of non-item benefits that grant them the equivalent of a level 5 daily attack power for their class.
Etc. etc. etc.
If, at level 2 (5), a newbie enters the group, the party is in reality still at level 2, and can create a level 2 character as written in the PHB. He won't have access to the Grandmaster Training/Divine Boon/Reputation/Spiritual Favor/Arcane Spell/etc. that the rest of the party has though, so he doesn't get more than what a regular PC would get at level 2.
I, as DM, could then push his storyline up, so that he could eventually get hold of non-item benefits that'd help him get to 2 (5)
Then when the party gets the EXP quota for level 7, the DM could easily rule that they lose all the non-item benefits and are immediately boosted to level 7. That is when they prepare a new set of character sheets for printing :D
You are both rational and emotional. You value creation and discovery, and feel strongly about what you create. At best, you're innovative and intuitive. At worst, you're scattered and unpredictable.
If you're crossing the street and see a city bus barreling straight toward you with 'GIVE ME YOUR WALLET!' painted across its windshield, you probably won't be reaching for your wallet.
This is what I believe is the spirit of D&D 4E, and my deal breaker for D&D Next: equal opportunities, with distinct specializations, in areas where conflict happens the most often, without having to worry about heavy micromanagement or system mastery.
I'm not 100% I follow everything in this thread, but I do like the general idea behind it. Edit: And apparently I really got into the idea, and below are far more ideas than I had initially planned on. Sorry for the long post.
I wanted to comment on a few things though:
Ability Score increases:
I am playing a brand new level 1 (1) wizard.
You are playing Gandalf the Grey, after he has personally re-summoned Sauron and killed him, just for the fun of it. (Level 1 (30)).
Hell yes I think you should be allowed to hit 20% more often because you have Int 28 and I have Int 20.
Will that make it harder to balance things in combat? Probably - but seriously, it's a difference between a brand new hero and an immortal multiverse shaper who's about to become the greater God of Magic. There should be a difference. And there should still be an extremely pressing reason as to why my wizard and yours are both travelling together, let alone expecting to have approximately the same chance of hitting.
Scaling Feats: Leave them in. See above reasoning: A level 1 (15) fighter should hit more often than a level 1 (1) fighter. The difference from stats will be +2, the difference from scaling feats will be .. +1. The difference from enhancements will be +3. The difference from miscellaneous sources will be +1. Thus the level 1 (15) fighter will hit 35% more often; which is hugely significant, but the lower level fighter CAN still hit, even with everything stacked against him - and, as above, there should be a gosh-darn good reason why Bruce Lee and my brother Jim are adventuring together. The single biggest chunk (and almost half of it) is from an item, and as mentioned, Bruce Lee can easily hand my brother Jim his spare +2 longsword that he no longer wields (not that Bruce Lee would ever use a longsword, but no matter), and the difference drops to only 25%.
Hit Points: Keep base hp as a level 1 character. Any type of scaling source, let it scale. So you get 30 THP (as a level (30) wizard), but you only have 25 hp (as a level 1 wizard) - no problem; you're a demigod, you SHOULD have more survivability than a level 1 character. It's just suddenly actually significantly noticeable. (Note: This means toughness would scale, and suddenly that feat would actually be AMAZING by all standards, instead of a piece of junk that a melee ranger gets to have.)
Monster Attack/Defence: Drop the half level, but no more. Since we didn't take out any other scaling thing, we end up with numbers that are about right, but if you want to tweak it a little to be lower to give that level 1 (1) person a chance, I don't mind.
Everything above this point is my opinion, and basically comes from the fact that I (as DM and player) WANT a noticeable difference between characters who are wildly different levels of experience, even if level and experience are tossed out the window; but I can accept that we could drop all such scaling math and make everyone simply level 1.
Now the only real problem, and the only part of the arms race, and the part that I did not see any true solution to, although it was mentioned in passing: Scaling monster hp, damage and PC damage.
PC's (especially strikers) are designed to increase their damage output, often by huge amounts. We already have optimized PC's who can kill at-level monsters at-will. Most of this damage comes from: Feats, and items. Neither of these are being taken out of the system yet (things like Called Shot, or expanded crit ranges; the scaling feats that grant a feat bonus (like weapon focus) are probably the worst feats for increasing damage, and so even if you kill the scaling, you really haven't impacted the characters actually damage at all, in absolute terms.)
So it would seem that you need to scale monster HP almost as much as normal. Perhaps (if you take out all scaling, including ability scores), you MIGHT half the hp, but even then, that would probably result in PC's completely wiping high level monsters out, without any effort. Large disparity in party 'levels' will also lead to absolutely ridiculous imbalances in the party, far FAR worse than any possible differences in hit rates. At the most extreme, I can see an optimized level 30 character hitting 90% more often than a level 1 character with complete feat scaling as I propose above (which means the high level character hits 10 times for every 1 hit the low level character gets). However, PC damage will be more like: Level 1 striker hits for 15 damage. Level 30 striker hits 3 times for 80 damage each. That's 1600% more damage. And that's NOT the limit of optimization, unlike with hitting. So with PC damage we realize that a high level character can literally be doing the damage (regardless of hit rates, just purely comparing damage assuming they both hit all the time) of 17 low level characters (or more), if that's his shtick, and that will be extremely obvious and not-fun.
On the flip side, monster damage becomes even MORE tricky than PC damage. If I fight a kobold, and then the next day I fight Surtur, I'd like to feel that the Lord of Fire Giants is going to do more damage. But since we're not scaling PC hp (at least not much, even in my proposed variation), Surtur clearly can't do as much damage as he used to, or he'll one shot any PC. So do we have Surtur be the equivalent of a kobold? Or do we have Surtur slaughter anything he so much as breathes on?
I don't think there's any possible easy fix for monster damage. If you do take out PC hp scaling completely as Chaosfang suggests (but which I am opposed to), then the obvious solution is that ALL monsters are changed to level 1 (or 2 or 3 or 4 or 5) damage expressions.
But I don't like that, for the same reasons that I propose that scaling bonuses remain with this system. Surtur really should be stronger than a kobold.
So my suggestion is that all monsters do damage equal to: (their original damage expression + level 1 damage expression)/2. Basically cut the damage increase in half. Now Surtur still does far more damage than a kobold, but not nearly as much as he used to.
Why? If we keep scaling hp sources in (not including hp scaling from gaining levels - that is one thing that I agree should not be kept in), then we see that level 1 (30) character who is decked out for survivability, can achieve as much as, oh, 80 hp (including temp hp); which is enough to (barely) survive a hit or 2 from our modified level 30 monster. But a level 1 (1) character will be shredded like so much cheese, as he should be (from a roleplaying point of view).
This would also change the dynamics of the system hugely; high level characters would be EXTREMELY afraid of high level monsters. Even mid level monsters would be scary. I think (with a little tweaking and playtesting), this would actually result in a system far closer to dungeon delves from original d&d (and movies). When adventuring, you go after tried and tested humanoid monsters; and they will be low level (even if you're high level) - and if there are lots of them, they WILL pose a threat. Heroic monsters will become bread and butter, at all levels; paragon monsters will become truly terrifying things. And epic monsters are challenges that only the most prepared adventurers will go after, because adventurers are simply not built of the same stuff as monsters. A human, no matter how awesome, or close to becoming a demigod, is NOT physically equivalent to an eight hundred foot tall Elder Evil made of the very mists of the Eternal Flame from the great Beyond. If the human does happen to be on the doorstep of divinity, and has some great allies, and some great planning, then PERHAPS they can fight such an Elder Evil.
The arms race completely disappears; to fight an high level monster requires foresight and planning - it requires roleplaying. If the party does well, they are prepared for a totally one sided fight (and not the parties side). If the party doesn't bother, they die.
Bringing along level 1 (1) characters to a level 1 (30) fight is still utterly ludicrous. But bringing level 1 (1) characters to a level 1 (10) fight isn't; nor is bringing level 1 (21) characters to a level 1 (30) fight; which, under the normal system, WOULD be a ludicrous proposition.
In the end, I am loving this discussion, and the theory that comes from it. If we can come up with a satisfactory answer to monster and PC damage, I will playtest this as soon as I can. But while I'm willing to deal with complicated math-fixes for monster damage, I don't know if there is a good answer to monster damage; and PC damage imbalances between party members of different levels also leaves me completely clueless as to how to propose a solution.
after a lot of playtesting with changing difrent stats I do have to agree players like the feal of doing and taking more damage, like stated by the person above Kobold should not be nearly as deadly as barogs. and if monsters don't scale right you take a ton of the feal away from reaching lvl 20+ as thats when your prepping to be a demi god or personal avitar of some great god or whatever, I mean a demi god should not even blink a eye at a army of kobold.
I think taking a lot of the math scaling out is a good idea, 1/2 lvl needs not be applied to anything but HP and damage scaling should remain and some to hit scaling around 15 -20 difrence with feats and junk betwean lv 1 and lv 30, this does allow a huge difrence in players level and still be usefull but keaps the feal, so maybe new characters start out like 6 LV behind the rest of the party or even as much as 10 LV behind but LV twice as fast so they can catch up which condition that if they miss a game they don't gain extra XP untill they make 2 games in a row again
something like this is for those public games so they don't get all the benifit.
though honestly could start them at lvl but they don't get any gear since the lack of gear alone will make them have a notable difrence and if they fall behind from not showing then that should be find since level has less of a impact
**********************
so in short I personaly say that hp and damage realy needs to scale in some way, even if it's minor, pluss powers take damage scaling into concideration so high level encounter and daily powers are usualy notably stronger and more damaging then lower lvl ones pluss 3D12 damage with keaping lvl 1 hp would always be devistating let alone 5D12 that some powers give
After some consideration, stargazer is absoloutely right. If damage/hp doesn't scale, an elite kobold is doing almost as much damage as lolth. This makes no sense whatsoever xD
Nelphine, I have a wall of text for you, I'll post it later tonight or tomorrow xD
think there is a few difrent veiws on how to go about it but the one agreed upon thing is that 1/2 level should be removed.
and that the desired effect is to have levels grant small power increases mainly to damage and hp whil modifing to hit and skills to a lesser degree
so attack bonus , skills, inititive, and most other variables besides hp and damage would only go up with stats gear and feats.
thus allowing a charcater of much lower lvl to still effectivly travel with the group.
Level would grant new feats, new abilities and hp with ocational stat increases as normal.
Not a bad idea To make it easier on the DM and structure, you basically remove the half-level bonus and keep everything else. Should work seamlessly in playtest, at least theoretically
- - - - - In the freeze-PC-level scenario, I'm thinking that monsters wouldn't scale as much (1 ~ 10 basically, if the PCs are level 1), and you utilize the minion-standard-elite-solo determinants more often... maybe something like level 1 ~ 4 monsters in normal games would be level 1 minion ~ solo in this setup, level 5 ~ 9 monsters in normal games would be level 2 minion ~ solo in this setup, and so on. So a level 35 Lolth normally would be a level 10 solo, having:
468 HP 26 AC , 21 Fort, 24 Ref, 24 Will Initiative +21 Perception +19
Scourge would be +15 vs. AC, 2d4+8 damage, with Effect: the target takes ongoing 10 damage (save ends).
Among other necessary adjustments. That way a Kobold would still be far less threatening than a deity, and yet the deity doesn't go a-stomping the party with just one hit and impossible to be harmed with stuff that doesn't involve miss damage.
It's a bit of a stretch really, but it's not impossible
You are both rational and emotional. You value creation and discovery, and feel strongly about what you create. At best, you're innovative and intuitive. At worst, you're scattered and unpredictable.
If you're crossing the street and see a city bus barreling straight toward you with 'GIVE ME YOUR WALLET!' painted across its windshield, you probably won't be reaching for your wallet.
This is what I believe is the spirit of D&D 4E, and my deal breaker for D&D Next: equal opportunities, with distinct specializations, in areas where conflict happens the most often, without having to worry about heavy micromanagement or system mastery.
still means the pc demigods are no stronger then the pc aprentice which seams realy wrong that a kobold can take a demi god down as easily as they can a aprentice
still means the pc demigods are no stronger then the pc aprentice which seams realy wrong that a kobold can take a demi god down as easily as they can a aprentice
PC Demigod with +5 weaponry, +5 armor, Toughness, Improved Defenses, Weapon Expertise, damage reduction and several other feats, powers, and items, going down as easily as the level 1 apprentice who has just 1-2 feats and mundane equipment (or at best +3 equipment if the PC Demigod was benevolent enough to give the apprentice his discarded or old equipment), especially given how Demigods and other epic destinies have means to shrug off death 1/day?
Let's see that level 1 Kobold with +5 vs. AC take down the level 1 Wizard who has Shield, 24 AC [10 + Unarmored Agility + 20 INT + 5 enhancement bonus + staff of defense + defensive staff], 29 HP [Toughness, and maybe more, if the DM grants the Wizard an item that increases maxHP], and tempHP/damage reduction from stuff like Virtue, as easily as a level 1 Wizard who has 18 AC [10 + Unarmored Agility + 20 INT + staff of defense] and 24 HP.
EDIT: Aside from "it's easy to emulate increasing HP via equippable items", oftentimes in shooter games like Half-Life and Doom, you'd have both Armor and HP-recovering items along the way -- Potions of Cure Light Wounds and the like from Mordenkainen's Magical Emporium could help stretch out the party's day, and other means of granting tempHP and surgeless HP might be in order. And I'm thinking that the very idea of the freeze-level scenario is that, unlike the remove-half-level-bonus scenario, even the most feeble threats will always be threats, minions would have to be dealt with very quickly, and the importance of teamwork and strategy/stealth would be key to survival.
In my personal opinion, with scaling HP and feats, the gap between apprentice and demigod would be large enough to beg the question, "why not just stick to the default setting?"
You are both rational and emotional. You value creation and discovery, and feel strongly about what you create. At best, you're innovative and intuitive. At worst, you're scattered and unpredictable.
If you're crossing the street and see a city bus barreling straight toward you with 'GIVE ME YOUR WALLET!' painted across its windshield, you probably won't be reaching for your wallet.
This is what I believe is the spirit of D&D 4E, and my deal breaker for D&D Next: equal opportunities, with distinct specializations, in areas where conflict happens the most often, without having to worry about heavy micromanagement or system mastery.
Level 30 Brute with 25 CON is 1 HP Minion, 335 HP Standard, 670 HP Elite, 1092 HP Solo. Defenses would likely be around 43, while attack bonuses are often +35 to hit.
To make it easier on the DM and structure, you basically remove the half-level bonus and keep everything else. Should work seamlessly in playtest, at least theoretically 