|
9 months ago ::
Sep 10, 2012 - 7:10PM
#61
|
|
|
A quick point. People should probably stop thinking in terms of level 1 and 2 only. Sure they are super squishy then, but the wizard eventually, if it's anything like 1e 2e or 3e, will get spells that DRASTICALLY increase their survivability. Stoneskin, Mirror Image,...FLY! Just to name a couple 
You are correct that it is very likely that spells will be added to increase surivability of wizards, but will that also include increased spell slots to use them? What about the actions required to put them in place? Afterall, actions are the currency of combat.
The first level wizard in the playtest is unlikely to have enough shield spells for the adventuring day, and the 10 minute duration is too short to cast it unless you expect combat to be iminent. And on top of that, shield doesn't stack with cover, which can often be enjoyed free of precious resources or actions.
Certainly at high levels with more spell slots available this is easier to manage, but the Cleric and Sorcerer have nearly the same number of spells per day, but their class features provide them with both better armor and more hit points, and its not like their spells suck in comparison.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 10, 2012 - 7:30PM
#62
|
|
|
So far, I think they are doing okay there, too. Some disagree (obviously)... some feel that there's too much risk. Too easily injured. They want double or more hit points. That's fine. If that's what works, great. I just want to give my players a dynamic world full of challenges that seem difficult to overcome, and then let them prove to the universe why they are heroes. If they are too frail, they'll fail (so far, that's not the case with Next). If they are too hardy, then victory is hollow because there was never any risk.
I like where it's at now (if anything, I think Players are a bit on the having-it-too-easy-side), but Next has a LOT of expanding to go through... more rules and tweaks that will all effect challenge and risk... so until I see what's the next phase is, I can't say any particular fixed point for something so influential as HPs is right yet.
I agree with your numbered list for the new editions, all important points in getting the game gonig in the right direction. The point i was trying to make about hit points and wizards is that the only person in the group (at least in my group) that is concerned for the their life is the wizard.
All of the other classes have both more AC and hit points, so as a DM, if I crank up the challenge so that the fighters, clerics and heavily armored sorcerer fear for their lives, the wizard is screwed the first time he gets hit. If the gap between classes is reduced, the monsters can be made more dangerous by increasing the attack numbers and damage as requreid.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 10, 2012 - 7:32PM
#63
|
Date Joined:
Dec 21, 2011
|
Rather than fiddling with starting hit points, the game could do with an arcane shield spell that worked. Make it a Cantrip where you spend a Hit Die to roll d8 = damage reduced. This allows the wizard to stay alive during the encounter, but still pay some price in long-term durability for the day.
I like this idea a lot, but I don't want Wizard to be stealing too much of what the figher can do.
Perhaps the 1st level shield spell should just become a little more protective. Not only should it give you +2 to AC, but it should also give you the opportunity to parry one blow per round using a d6 (like the fighter) for DR.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 10, 2012 - 7:43PM
#64
|
|
|
I like this idea a lot, but I don't want Wizard to be stealing too much of what the fighter can do.
I agree that the fighter finally has something their own that is interesting, useful and iconic, and I'd rather not see other classes encroaching on that. What about making Shield a cantrip that is cast as a reaction, and grants disadvantage to one attack?
It would essentially work as the defender feat, but only for the wizard. It would give them a significant advantage once per round at the cost of one of the at-will powers. Any round where the wizard faces multiple attack would still hurt a lot and focused fire would still be deadly. It would be comparable to having a fighter/cleric's AC for one attack per round.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 10, 2012 - 8:45PM
#65
|
Date Joined:
Aug 11, 2004
|
Here is my proposal to make level 1 just a little easier for the low dice guys.
It can be a variant. Like it, love it, whatever. This is supposed to be the modular version, right?
Kicker:
Even at 1st level, you're pretty bad ass. Something sets you apart from even other adventurers.
Attribute Rolling: 4d6 and a KICKER 1D4. Take the 3 best. You're just a cut above the rest.
HP: 5 Kicker HP. You can choose to roll for your HP and get a Kicker 1d4. Roll your HD and the 1d4 and take the best of the dice. Toughness means you roll a 1d6 kicker HP. A Hill Dwarf is pretty bad ass, even as a Wizard.
This gives even a Wizard a pretty good shot of having 12 in Constitution, 5 from the Kicker and 4 from the dice for a total of 10 HP. Fighters, clerics and the like with things like Survivor and Toughness don't benefit tremendously from 5 kicker because they already are the best, but a d4 or d6 class is probably going to double their HP. It also kind of saves people from rolling crappy 1s and 2s and gives people a good chance at 3 or better, even with a 1d4.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 11, 2012 - 7:10AM
#66
|
Date Joined:
May 26, 2012
|
What do you think of a system where you're given flat extra HPs depending on size? You wold get them even when increasing your size:
- small +5 hp
- medium +10 hp (making the wizard survive the first hit, without increasing with levels: he remains quite squishy)
- large +20 hp
- huge +40 hp
- gargantuan +80 hp
- huge +160 hp
It's not a great deal of HPs, but they guarantee both the players and the monsters will have adequate HPs for their size, which is a strong indicator of a monster's power, even if his level (which the players usually don't know) is not so high.
Of course all this starting HP values could be used in different kinds of game
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 11, 2012 - 7:47AM
#67
|
Date Joined:
Aug 11, 2004
|
That is basically what SAGA did as well and I wouldn't want to shaft Halflings and other races out of 5 full hit points, which for a d4 or d6 class is a really big deal.
Small and Medium...5
Large Monsters 5 Elite Monsters 8 Solo 10
And so on, where a solo Huge monster would get another 20, elite 15 and basic 10
It would 1...
Help players survive crucial hits
But 2, let the monsters live longer and keep it so that they wouldn't get dropped or killed by the large amount of ways to do 3d6+ damage.
Basically, both sides need a boost. 5 HP to start also is a massive thing at level 1 (why do you think so many people are taking Survivor and Healer?) but by level 5 or 10? Not too big of a deal. Somebody scoped to be really tough, like a Hill Dwarf Barbarian who would get 2d6 HD (add con modifier twice?!) or even just a fighter would have 100+ HP, good AC, Defender, Parry, stuff like that. So the 5 HP isn't a HUGE deal. But for a first level halfling rogue or bard, or elf Sorcerer? Massive deal. 5 HP kicker will essentially double their starting HP.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 11, 2012 - 1:53PM
#68
|
Date Joined:
Aug 17, 2007
|
You could just set everyone's stats to 12+2d6 (take the highest) and add 20 to starting HP, that way no class will be particularly more hardy than any other. If that seems too much you could add their con score instead.
'That's just, like, your opinion, man.'
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 11, 2012 - 2:30PM
#69
|
Date Joined:
Aug 11, 2004
|
I understand monsters using simple tactics to survive but we've all been in some brutal games where the DM knows the combat rules inside out and upside down and turns every encounter into a battle against not 1 to 3 reasonably combat-savvy and self-preservatory fighters but 5 Special Forces guys led by a Leader style creature who might as well be General Patton. You could just set everyone's stats to 12+2d6 (take the highest) and add 20 to starting HP, that way no class will be particularly more hardy than any other. If that seems too much you could add their con score instead.
Eh, I think 2d6+6 is better instead of drop low. 12+2d6 drop low just leads to way many high scores and doesn't allow the possibility of 10 to 8. adding 1d4/1d6 rolling for HP take best works out to about 20 to 40 extra HP...over the course of 20 levels. Getting 20 HP as a kicker for a level 20 character that you make in an Epic style campaign is a nice luxury. Getting a 20 HP kicker at level one probably triples and quadruples most d4 and d6 HP amounts.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 11, 2012 - 8:04PM
#70
|
|
|
I understand monsters using simple tactics to survive but we've all been in some brutal games where the DM knows the combat rules inside out and upside down and turns every encounter into a battle against not 1 to 3 reasonably combat-savvy and self-preservatory fighters but 5 Special Forces guys led by a Leader style creature who might as well be General Patton.
I've been to parties like that a few times ; )
Regarding the HP discussion, there are lots of ways to add a low-level boost to guys with small dice, but that only solves the problem temporarily. As the entire party levels, the division between d10's and d4's will just continue to widen. For DMs who divvy up monster attacks proportional to a characters ability to survive them (i.e. metagame) it will be fine, but equal oppurtunity DMs will have a huge advantage over defensively pathetic classes like wizards.
Regarding the stat discussion, I think its a really bad idea to increase ability score averages beyond the 4d6 method. The 4d6 methos already leads to higher stats than the standard array, and can easily give character an average of 13-14 points. Any increase to the average will just put the game further out of wack causing standard encounters to become easy, and forcing the DM alter the encounter balance formulae.
|
|
|
