|
13 months ago ::
Jun 02, 2012 - 5:20AM
#31
|
Date Joined:
Oct 24, 2007
|
The main reason I miss FORT REF and WILL is, that there are no longer any options
for martial attacks left. Every attack will be targeted against AC.
That's not true. Attempting to shove an opponent would be an opposed Strength check, for instance, not an attack against AC. Poisonous attacks would typically be Constitution saves. Attacks that can trip an opponent could easily be Dexterity saves as could something like attempting to hurl boiling oil on an opponent (ie things that used to be called "touch attacks" in 3e where heavy armor doesn't protect you).
In fact, for the most part, my guess is that things which were previously Fort, Ref and Will saves in 3e will now usually be Con or Str, Dex and Wis/Cha/Int saves in DDNext. That applies to both martial and magical attacks.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
Jun 02, 2012 - 5:40AM
#32
|
|
|
the new saves are much better, it allows for more use if all six stats> NO DUMP STATS!
And why add an additional layer of stats for the same effect....lets face it, Will is just a average wisdom check.
As for spells targetting AC... i like it.... why armour and shields WOULDNT protect you from magic... especially a burst of flames, a ball of force etc. is beyond me
anything thats give more edge to armour and shields is a plus for me
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
Jun 02, 2012 - 11:49AM
#33
|
Date Joined:
May 30, 2010
|
Damn. I have to agree that if there's one thing that should be kept from 4E, it's the passive defenses. I would even go so far as to say reflex defense could easily replace armor class, and armor itself could just reduce damage (like what it would do in real life).
I also thought that would be a great idea... but then I play tested it, and it was not elegant or fun.
I think the only alternation to the current rules that makes sense, at this moment, with the current monsters and playable charchters, is to have the "saving throw", actually be a DC target for the Wizard's attack. (But even then, the dc might be too low)
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
Jun 02, 2012 - 12:47PM
#34
|
|
|
I didn't really care for the ability score saves, myself. I find some of the distinctions between what some of them defend against to be strange. Fort/Ref/Will was clearcut and easy. I also think the system where some things are attacks and others are saves is very clunky and unintuitive.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
Jun 02, 2012 - 12:54PM
#35
|
|
|
I actually like both concepts of "saving throws" and static "defenses". I enjoyed playing earlier editions of DnD as well as 4e.
I might suggest doing it this way:
1. Armor Class = 5 + INT & DEX modifiers + armor/shields worn/carried. < only used for phyical attacks (i.e. melee / ranged weapon attacks). There could be a damage reduction factor based on the armor or shield types used. EX: AC 14 [5 + INT 12 DEX 14 (3 in modifiers) + scale armor (6)]. Let us say that scale armor also has a damage reduction factor of 3. The character sheet would show AC 14/3, meaning phyical attacks must hit AC 14 and all damage from them is reduced by 3.
* ^ this might be a way to add an additional layer of usefulness / options for armor and shields.
2. Saving throws made as normal: ability modifier + 1d20 versus the type of magical, poison, disease, non-physical attacks or non-physical factors OF A physical attack (ie. knockdown).
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
Jun 02, 2012 - 3:37PM
#36
|
|
|
I don't miss FRW defenses so far.
I am impressed by the notions above of certain special situations that target an ability score as the DC of the check or attack made. Bull rush against a DC of the strength of the creature you are pushing is a terrific and obvious one.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
Jun 02, 2012 - 4:01PM
#37
|
|
|
I won't miss F/R/W. At all. It was a pretty decent idea when they did it in 4e. Speaking from experience though (having DMed both 4e and Castles and Crusades for several years now), ability saves both do the same job better, and take up less real estate in character sheets and rulebooks. In practice, 95% of the time Fort defense => Con save, Ref defense => Dex save, and Will defense => Wisdom save. Intelligence might end up getting dump statted a lot, unless they use it in the skill system again.
I do think that they should use Charisma for the clericy/willpower stuff instead of Wisdom, and just rename Wisdom to Perception, but the momentum of forty years tradition isn't really in my favor there.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
Jun 02, 2012 - 4:22PM
#38
|
Date Joined:
Apr 26, 2012
|
I don't miss Fort, Ref, Will simply because they're still a part of the game.
Fort Save = Con Save or Str Save
Ref Save = Dex Save or Int Save
Will Save = Wis Save or Cha Save
The nomenclature has changed, but the basic principle is still the same. I understand how it might not feel the same, though.
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
Jun 02, 2012 - 5:26PM
#39
|
Date Joined:
May 26, 2012
|
It's been suggested that the DC be set to the ability score. It will bother some people, but not others, that the maths for this doesn't work.
A Con 10 monster has a Fort 10 defence, whether you go with ability score or 10 + modifier. But a Con 15 monster has a Fort 15 defence with ability score and only a Fort 12 defence with 10 + modifier. Ability scores scale at exactly twice the rate that modifiers do.
This will completely skew the results you get, particularly at high levels.
The same thing bothers me about the rule for Ability Thresholds on p3 of the DM Guidelines. It might look tempting to say that if you have a Str above the DC for opening a door, you get an automatic success, but, again, the maths doesn't work.
Like I said, I know this doesn't bother a lot of people, but it bothers me, and I believe it should bother any game designer worth his salt.
I think that is a problem with ability score bonuses, rather than the idea of using the ability score as the dc.
Im pretty sure the whole game can be pared down to involving just ability scores...
|
|
|
|
13 months ago ::
Jun 02, 2012 - 8:30PM
#40
|
|
|
Having ability scores replace FRW actually makes a lot of sense for the sake of simplicity. I liked the passive defenses, but I can see the appeal of the "save-or-die" system. It still doesn't make sense for spells to target AC though, but then AC doesn't totally make sense to begin with. Dexterity, intelligence, and wisdom could all conceivably aid you in getting out of the way of something, but why would armor do that? Yeah, I know it's supposed to be an abstraction for the sake of simplicity, but I still like the idea of damage reduction, if properly implemented.
|
|
|
