Community

    Fun at Every Level

    Thursday, November 1, 2012, 7:31 PM

    One of the things that WotC set out to do when they created 4th Edition was to make it so that every class gained something at every level.  This was a noble and great idea; an idea that Pathfinder carried out with on their classes.  I really love this goal.

    Looking at the classes as they are, though, I see that this is not neccessarily the goal for D&D Next.  I'm not saying that the character needs to get a new feature at every level, just something.  This could be the bump up in Weapon Attack Bonus, or a bigger expertise die, whatever.

    By their very nature, the caster classes do gain something every level: a new spell.  But what about the martial classes?  Well, let's take a look.

    NOTE: from here on out, I'm going to give vague descriptions of stuff from the playtest, since I believe me using the very specifics are against the NDA.

    Skipping level 1, because you get something from that no matter what, we see the fighter gets a bigger expertise die and a new maneuver at level 2; NOTHING at level 3; a Weapon Attack Bonus increase, additional expertise die, and a new maneuver at level 4; NOTHING at level 5; a feature at level 6; NOTHING at level 7; bigger expertise dice and a maneuver at level 8; a Weapon Attack Bonus increase at level 9, and additional AND bigger expertise dice and a new maneuver at level 10.

    This makes it so the fighter gains 2 things, then 0, then 3, 0, 1, 0, 2, 1, and 2 things when it levels up.  That's a bit inconsistant, and can really make certain times of leveling up better than others.  

    "Well," you might say, "how well does it line up with the Character Advancement Table for gaining ability score boost, feats, and skill boosts?  I bet the better ones of those line up with the worse ones of the fighter."   

    I would respond with "NOPE!"

    In fact, two of the times that the fighter gains nothing from the class, it lines up with the other table giving NOTHING.  
    A very similar thing happens with the Rogue class as well, I don't really think that I need to get into that.

    BUT! I have a solution to the problem.  First, I edited the Character Advancement Table to give 1 thing at each level, making that table very smooth.  The downside is that by level 10, you end up with 1 fewer skill boost, unless WotC is willing to put one in at 1st level.  Also, if the original table and my table continue with the same pattern all the way to level 20, you end up with 1 fewer feat as well.  I think, in the long run, it won't make much of a difference, though.

    Here's my new Character Advancement Table:
    1 - Background, feat
    2 - Skill Boost
    3 - Feat
    4 - Ability Score Boost
    5 - Skill Boost
    6 - Feat
    7 - Skill Boost
    8 - Ability Score Boost
    9 - Skill Boost
    10 - Feat

    The biggest difference is that Skill boosts were switched to odd levels, rather than even.  The other was that, instead of one feat every three levels, you get one every four levels.  But, like I said, that doesn't reduce the overall amount of feats except by 1 by the time you hit level 20.  I kept ability score boosts the same, since that felt like it was a bigger balance issue to be messing with, plus it lined up in my table anyway.

    Now, for my new Fighter Table:
    1 - Front-Loaded
    2 - Increase Expertise Die (ED) size
    3 - Additional ED
    4 - Weapon Attack Bonus Increase, Maneuver
    5 - Increase ED size
    6 - Feature
    7 - Additional ED
    8 - Maneuver
    9 - Weapon Attack Bonus Increase, Increase ED size
    10 - Maneuver

    Unfortunately, I couldn't do it completely evenly, since the Weapon Attack Bonus Increases kind of got in the way no matter what, but they're also sort of the 'lamest' feature gained anyway, so it's okay to overlap them with something else.

    Those of you who look at the official table and compare it to mine might notice that, when it comes to expertise dice, my table ends up being a bit more powerful in the middle, but it starts and ends at the same power levels, albeit, a little sooner in some cases.   I found it strange that 1) They didn't increase the expertise dice AT ALL for 4 levels.  My only guess is that they thought the feature was too powerful to be included with an expertise die increase.  2) They seem to make up for it by increasing the size AND number of dice when going from level 9 to 10.  So, the precaution becomes moot later on.  My table has a steady progression, swapping between die size and number of dice each time.  

    My new Rogue Table:
    1 - Front-Loaded
    2 - Increase ED size
    3 - Maneuver
    4 - Additional ED
    5 - Weapon Attack Bonus Increase, Maneuver
    6 - Increase ED size
    7 - Maneuver
    8 - Additional ED
    9 - Maneuver 
    10 - Weapon Attack Bonus Increase, Increase ED size

    The Rogue has similar changes to the Fighter, but the even and odd levels are kind of swapped.  This makes it so that the Rogues ED progression is one level behind the Fighter's (for levels 3+), which is a good thing  in my book.  The Rogue should probably be just that one step behind.  That also helps balance out the fact that I ended up giving the Rogue an additional Maneuver (which gives it an equal number with the Fighter) in order to actually make a repeatable pattern.  You can remove the Maneuver given at level 5, but that destroys the pattern.  That might be okay, though, since if you continue the patterns of the Fighter and Rogue, the Rogue will actually have one more maneuver than the Fighter at level 16+, since the Fighter would likely get another feature around then.  

    But it's tough to speculate about what's after level 10, especially since WotC says they're working to make high level play very different from normal.

    For the record, I spent probably about 2 hours doing calculations and rewrites of all this.  You don't even want to see my notes for all of that; they would take a great deal of explaining.

    Anyway, I just wanted to put my 2 cents in.  I don't want dead levels and I want progression to be smooth, not jumpy.   
    3.7 (1 Ratings)
    [ 110 views ] Leave a Comment

    UGH! Just stop, people!

    Sunday, July 22, 2012, 6:52 PM

    The one thing that has frustrated me the most during this time since the announcement of D&D Next is people's lack of homework.
    Every other blogger and commentor has their own perceptions of what is going on in this playtest.  Everyone assumes things that are so obviously wrong.
    I know that this can be a lot of homework, but people would stop getting the wrong idea all the time is they just READ WHAT THE DESIGNERS WROTE!  I know it's a novel idea to be informed before making decisions, but some people don't seem to have read ANYTHING.  
    If you feel that either you haven't been able to find all of what the designers have blogged about or simply think you don't really have read that much, I have a really easy place to go to find everything you need to know: dndnext.com
    It redirects to the wizards page for D&D Next, and on the right column near the bottom, it contains every official post about everything to do with D&D Next.  
    Granted, this isn't actually EVERYTHING that has been posted by them; there are a few developer blogs on the community pages, but just follow some bloggers on twitter, and they're bound to let you know when these guys post something.  They've never let me down.  

    Seriously people, I'm sick of all this predicting of what will happen with the game when the designers have specifically said the opposite. 
    0 (0 Ratings)
    [ 103 views ] Leave a Comment

    Mistakes in the D&D Next Open Playtest

    Friday, May 25, 2012, 8:37 AM

    First off, here is a list of mistakes I've found in the Bestiary:
    • Centipede, Giant: no explanation text for the Scuttle and Vermin Special Traits
    • Gray Ooze: Under the explanation text for Ooze, it says Gelatinous Cube instead of Gray Ooze.
    • Gray Ooze: Under Combat, it says that its acid will eat through wood.  Under Habitat and Society, it says that it doesn't each through wood.  Personally, I choose the second one.
    • Skeleton: has Resistance AND Immunity to necrotic damage.  If the other undead are any indication, I will go with Immunity instead of Resistance.
    • Troll: under Troll Regeneration, it says 'attached' when it should say 'attach'
    • Goblin King: copy and paste error similar to the Gray Ooze error; Cunning Tactics says 'chieftan' instead of 'king'.
    There are a few quirks with the Character Sheets that I've noticed:
    • Cleric of Pelor: Spell Attack bonus should be +6, not +4, unless it was a typo from a copy and paste from the Cleric of Moradin to the Cleric of Pelor about the Cleric of Pelor having the "+2 bonus to the attack rolls of [their] spells".
    • I'm not even going to list these off, but I'll just let you know that several attack, damage, and AC calculations seem to be off.  Just use what's on the sheet; this part of the playtest isn't about balance anyway.
    • This might not be an error, but rather a misunderstanding: The clerics both get to prepare 3 level 1 spells a day, but can only use 2.  I would play it this way, where you choose which 2 you use on the spot, rather than having it predetermined for the day.
    A couple little things in the adventure as well:
    • The Orc Leader from section B in room 12 should have 18 AC if he is wearing chainmail and has a +1 heavy shield
    • His bonus to damage seems a bit high, too, but that might be a hidden feat or feature that the creators added on.
    • Hobgoblins throughout section F keep getting a +4 attack bonus with their longswords, when they should be getting a +3.  I thought maybe the longswords were giving a +3 proficiency bonus rather than a +2, but longswords that are used everywhere else do not provide this, which brings me to my next bit:
    The How To Play rules do not mention a proficiency bonus, even though it clear that it exists from looking at the attack bonuses of all the monster wielding weapons and the characters' attack bonuses.

    I will provide more mistakes as I find them

    BTW, I'm quite excited to run this playtest, despite a few mistakes.

    0 (0 Ratings)
    [ 326 views ] Leave a Comment

Blog Categories

Blog Archive