PDA

View Full Version : Need Help With Wording + Balance for a few Class Features



wayfare
2011-01-24, 12:36 AM
Hey, all. Just need a bit of help with the wording and balance of a few class features I'm designing.

Dodge Bonus (Ex): The adventurer is a master of the art of avoidance -- each round he may designate a single opponent he wishes to avoid. The adventurer gains a +1 dodge bonus to defense against that opponent. This bonus stacks with the bonus provided by the dodge feat.
At 5th level, and every 5 levels thereafter the dodge bonus increases by 1.

Evasive Fighting (Ex): As his training progresses, the adventurer learns how to capitalize upon his foes failed strikes to deliver baleful attacks of his own. At 4th level, when the target of Dodge Bonus attacks and misses the adventurer in melee combat, the adventurer adds his Dodge Bonus to all attack and damage rolls made against that opponent on his next turn.

Evasive Mobility (Ex): At 7th level, the adventurer gains the ability to evade opponents attacks through short bursts of movement. Once per round, when an opponent attacks and misses the adventurer in combat, the adventurer may shift 10 feet.
At 12th level the adventurer can use this ability twice each round. At 17th level, the adventurer can use this ability three times each round.

I was hoping to design a few features that synergized well, but in practice they seem a bit cumbersome, both in wording and in use. Any help in streamlining these features would be appreciated.

Many Thanks

-- Wayfare

Ziegander
2011-01-24, 12:56 AM
The Dodge Bonus is pretty weak. Even if the Dodge bonus applied to all foes all the time it would be slightly weak. However, combined with extra benefits when enemies miss it gets a bit better.

I really like the ideas here. What about giving the class all good saves, a dodge bonus that applies all the time against all foes, Evasion and Mettle (at whichever levels feel right to you), and Evasive Strike (as follows):

Evasive Strike (Ex): An Adventurer is able to deal additional damage to foes when their attacks fail. When an Adventurer attacks a foe he deals +1d6 damage if that foe missed him with an attack or if the Adventurer succeeded on his saving throw against that foe's spell or ability in this round or the previous round.

This extra damage increases by 1d6 at every odd level after 1st and is considered precision damage. Thus, creatures immune to critical hits are immune to this extra damage.


*********

Alternatively, you could start the feature off only dealing extra damage to foes that have missed him with an attack and add the saving throw success part as "Improved Evasive Strike" at a later level.

wayfare
2011-01-24, 02:33 AM
The Dodge Bonus is pretty weak. Even if the Dodge bonus applied to all foes all the time it would be slightly weak. However, combined with extra benefits when enemies miss it gets a bit better.

I really like the ideas here. What about giving the class all good saves, a dodge bonus that applies all the time against all foes, Evasion and Mettle (at whichever levels feel right to you), and Evasive Strike (as follows):

Evasive Strike (Ex): An Adventurer is able to deal additional damage to foes when their attacks fail. When an Adventurer attacks a foe he deals +1d6 damage if that foe missed him with an attack or if the Adventurer succeeded on his saving throw against that foe's spell or ability in this round or the previous round.

This extra damage increases by 1d6 at every odd level after 1st and is considered precision damage. Thus, creatures immune to critical hits are immune to this extra damage.


*********

Alternatively, you could start the feature off only dealing extra damage to foes that have missed him with an attack and add the saving throw success part as "Improved Evasive Strike" at a later level.

The class I'm working on is a re-imagining of the rogue that is more geared towards survival than damage output. We are very much on the same page as to what this class gets - mettle is in, evasion and improved evasion are in, as are uncanny dodge and improved uncanny dodge.

As for evasive strike, the version you suggest is great in the context of 3.5 and the similar rogue abilities. i will definitely implement the +1d6 version in my 3.5 games, but this version is for a system I'm working on that does not implement the traditional rogue sneak attack bonus damage. I'm looking for an alternative that grants a significant damage bonus without crossing into 10+ dice being rolled.

Ziegander
2011-01-24, 09:51 AM
So, I assume at 1st level it gets Dodge and Trapfinding? It seems like Evasive Fighting wouldn't be too powerful to give at first level then as well.

Honestly, I didn't think there was anything wrong with the wording of your features, they don't seem cumbersome, though like I said, I'd open things up a bit. Let the Dodge bonus apply anytime he's not denied his dexterity bonus and to all foes. Let Evasive Fighting apply anytime any foe misses him with an attack.

As far as Evasive Mobility... I'm not sure how useful the extra uses per round are, unless you could burn three uses at the same time to move 30ft. If that's not what you originally intended, I think that would help. And like I built into Evasive Strike, I think it would be nice to add the ability to move when you succeed on a saving throw at some level too.

Now, Evasive Fighting grants a +5 bonus to attack and damage rolls, while the Rogue's Sneak Attack grants +10d6 damage (and probably 2 Strength damage), so let's do some math.

Lots of math
Let's say a 20th level Adventurer and a 20th level Rogue have the same stats - Str 16 Dex 32 Con 16 Int 20 Wis 18 Cha 18 and both are optimized for dexterity and use magic device (seems reasonable).

Let's call average AC among enemies at CR 20, 37. Average touch AC (dealing with Wraithstrike via UMD) is around 13. With Greater Magic Weapon in a wand, they both use a +5 weapon.

The Rogue has a +31 bonus to attacks for a full attack of +31/+26/+21. He deals 1d6+19 damage with his short sword, +10d6 when he sneak attacks. At +31 to hit against AC 37 he has to roll a 6 or better, giving him a 75% chance to hit. His average damage, weighted at 75%, is 43.125 with his first attack and 99.727 on a full attack.

The Adventurer has a +31 bonus to attacks, +5 with Evasive Fighting, for a full attack of +36/+31/+26. He deals 1d6+19 damage with his short sword, +5 with Evasive Fighting. At +36 to hit against AC 37 he only misses when he crit fails, giving him a 95% chance to hit. His average damage, weighted at 95%, is 26.125 with his first attack and 62.219 on a full attack.

So, even with a superior attack bonus, the Adventurer is behind in the damage department, by roughly 39% Which is pretty significant on its own, and when introducing Wraithstrike, the Rogue's damage shoots up by a huge margin on all attacks, while the Adventurer sees a much smaller benefit and only on his second two attacks.

Too long, didn't read: The math shows that Evasive Fighting is way behind Sneak Attack as a proper offensive mechanic. A greater Dodge bonus, and therefore better attack and damage bonus, will not help this. I'd say it's time to go back to the drawing board with this one.

wayfare
2011-01-24, 12:18 PM
So, I assume at 1st level it gets Dodge and Trapfinding? It seems like Evasive Fighting wouldn't be too powerful to give at first level then as well.

Honestly, I didn't think there was anything wrong with the wording of your features, they don't seem cumbersome, though like I said, I'd open things up a bit. Let the Dodge bonus apply anytime he's not denied his dexterity bonus and to all foes. Let Evasive Fighting apply anytime any foe misses him with an attack.

As far as Evasive Mobility... I'm not sure how useful the extra uses per round are, unless you could burn three uses at the same time to move 30ft. If that's not what you originally intended, I think that would help. And like I built into Evasive Strike, I think it would be nice to add the ability to move when you succeed on a saving throw at some level too.

Now, Evasive Fighting grants a +5 bonus to attack and damage rolls, while the Rogue's Sneak Attack grants +10d6 damage (and probably 2 Strength damage), so let's do some math.

Lots of math
Let's say a 20th level Adventurer and a 20th level Rogue have the same stats - Str 16 Dex 32 Con 16 Int 20 Wis 18 Cha 18 and both are optimized for dexterity and use magic device (seems reasonable).

Let's call average AC among enemies at CR 20, 37. Average touch AC (dealing with Wraithstrike via UMD) is around 13. With Greater Magic Weapon in a wand, they both use a +5 weapon.

The Rogue has a +31 bonus to attacks for a full attack of +31/+26/+21. He deals 1d6+19 damage with his short sword, +10d6 when he sneak attacks. At +31 to hit against AC 37 he has to roll a 6 or better, giving him a 75% chance to hit. His average damage, weighted at 75%, is 43.125 with his first attack and 99.727 on a full attack.

The Adventurer has a +31 bonus to attacks, +5 with Evasive Fighting, for a full attack of +36/+31/+26. He deals 1d6+19 damage with his short sword, +5 with Evasive Fighting. At +36 to hit against AC 37 he only misses when he crit fails, giving him a 95% chance to hit. His average damage, weighted at 95%, is 26.125 with his first attack and 62.219 on a full attack.

So, even with a superior attack bonus, the Adventurer is behind in the damage department, by roughly 39% Which is pretty significant on its own, and when introducing Wraithstrike, the Rogue's damage shoots up by a huge margin on all attacks, while the Adventurer sees a much smaller benefit and only on his second two attacks.

Too long, didn't read: The math shows that Evasive Fighting is way behind Sneak Attack as a proper offensive mechanic. A greater Dodge bonus, and therefore better attack and damage bonus, will not help this. I'd say it's time to go back to the drawing board with this one.

You're certainly right about evasive fighting. I think its thematically workable with the character in a 3.5 setting, but not really going to match up against the rogue in a pound-for-pound match-up.

My thoughts with evasive mobility was that it was effectively another way to avoid full attacks. If your opponent misses you in combat, you just move 10 feet and negate the rest of their attacks. Less useful against ranged attacks, though.

As per your suggestion, should this feature increase the distance you can travel rather than the number of times you can use it.

Ziegander
2011-01-24, 02:32 PM
You're certainly right about evasive fighting. I think its thematically workable with the character in a 3.5 setting, but not really going to match up against the rogue in a pound-for-pound match-up.

Oh, yeah, the idea of it is great. Very original concept, we just have to tweak it some so it's more effective.


My thoughts with evasive mobility was that it was effectively another way to avoid full attacks. If your opponent misses you in combat, you just move 10 feet and negate the rest of their attacks. Less useful against ranged attacks, though.

Ah, right. Avoiding full attacks is always nice definitely. I was just thinking that it's not too often that a single PC is in danger of being full attacked by more than one creature in a round, so the additional uses per round felt more or less redundant and that getting extra movement on the miss seemed more useful just for battlefield positioning.


As per your suggestion, should this feature increase the distance you can travel rather than the number of times you can use it.

Meh. Probably? It just seems a bit more useful to me.

PairO'Dice Lost
2011-01-24, 05:36 PM
i will definitely implement the +1d6 version in my 3.5 games, but this version is for a system I'm working on that does not implement the traditional rogue sneak attack bonus damage. I'm looking for an alternative that grants a significant damage bonus without crossing into 10+ dice being rolled.

Make it like the AD&D thief's Backstab ability. Instead of adding d6s, it multiplied damage, so instead of +1d6 every odd level, the attack deals x2 damage at 1st level, x3 at 5th, x4 at 9th, etc. or some other rate that you find adequate (keeping in mind that only weapon damage and static modifiers are multiplied, as normal). Also, I'd limit it to light weapons, since as-is it would definitely make Power Attacking greatsword-swinging rogues the best option.

Ziegander
2011-01-24, 09:06 PM
Make it like the AD&D thief's Backstab ability. Instead of adding d6s, it multiplied damage, so instead of +1d6 every odd level, the attack deals x2 damage at 1st level, x3 at 5th, x4 at 9th, etc. or some other rate that you find adequate (keeping in mind that only weapon damage and static modifiers are multiplied, as normal).

Seems like this could get insane...


Also, I'd limit it to light weapons, since as-is it would definitely make Power Attacking greatsword-swinging rogues the best option.

Ah, yes, this sounds much better. One-handed light weapons? That probably wouldn't matter.

The idea I had today at work amounted to giving them a free Smite on every attack made via Evasive Reflexes. They get a bonus to attacks equal to their Dodge bonus to AC and deal extra damage equal to their Adventurer level. If the multiplier thing seems too crazy.

wayfare
2011-01-24, 10:13 PM
Seems like this could get insane...



Ah, yes, this sounds much better. One-handed light weapons? That probably wouldn't matter.

The idea I had today at work amounted to giving them a free Smite on every attack made via Evasive Reflexes. They get a bonus to attacks equal to their Dodge bonus to AC and deal extra damage equal to their Adventurer level. If the multiplier thing seems too crazy.

Wow, can you read my mind?

I was literally just getting ready o post it. Powerful, but not tremendously overpowering, i think it might be what takes the day.

thanks a lot for the help, guys!

ericgrau
2011-01-25, 12:34 AM
People tend to underestimate AB and AC by a large margin. And stacking. Scaling enhancement/deflection/etc. bonuses are hunky dory. Scaling bonuses that stack with everything don't make sense, b/c your d20 doesn't scale and get bigger as you level and you just got rid of X numbers on it.

You can expect a huge increase in hits and misses with this thing, unless it's medium BAB or light armor to compensate. Then it should merely make up the difference, which is a bit more balanced. The above calculations are forgetting real magic weapon bonuses and other magic items, which add a ton of damage and make actually hitting more important and more damage less important. Especially the +1d6 enchantments. I mean 100 damage is par at level 15. At level 20 you should do 200.

Or better yet listen to the people that say X% miss chance and damage are better, give the class X% miss chance and damage, it'll actually be a nerf, they'll be happy, I'll be happy and we can ignore the fact that we disagree on why it's correct :smalltongue:.

Djinn_in_Tonic
2011-01-25, 10:53 AM
Make it like the AD&D thief's Backstab ability. Instead of adding d6s, it multiplied damage, so instead of +1d6 every odd level, the attack deals x2 damage at 1st level, x3 at 5th, x4 at 9th, etc. or some other rate that you find adequate (keeping in mind that only weapon damage and static modifiers are multiplied, as normal). Also, I'd limit it to light weapons, since as-is it would definitely make Power Attacking greatsword-swinging rogues the best option.

Honestly, I'd recommend avoiding this. It really swings the balance in favor of high +damage weapons, high Strength modifiers, and the like. The nice thing about the normal Sneak Attack is that the 10d6 damage is good if you're attacking with a 1d4-1 damage dagger, or a 2d6+5 damage Greatsword. Basically, it's an equalizer, and straight-up multipliers are not equalizers, and thus encourage min-maxing.

Maybe just a straight numerical damage bonus might serve best?

PairO'Dice Lost
2011-01-25, 09:06 PM
Honestly, I'd recommend avoiding this. It really swings the balance in favor of high +damage weapons, high Strength modifiers, and the like. The nice thing about the normal Sneak Attack is that the 10d6 damage is good if you're attacking with a 1d4-1 damage dagger, or a 2d6+5 damage Greatsword. Basically, it's an equalizer, and straight-up multipliers are not equalizers, and thus encourage min-maxing.

Hence why I suggested making it only usable with light weapons, also the way the AD&D thief worked (well, not those terms exactly, but the same idea). As this rogue variant is focused on "survival more than damage output" and is a very mobile, evasive combatant, it seemed like an ability that makes them good with light weapons only without allowing Power Attack, 1.5*Str, and such would make sense. Without seeing the rest of the class chassis, though, I admit it's hard to judge what sort of ability would work best--if it's a very tempting dip for a fighter type, the multiplier would be not be as good a fit, whereas if it's unlikely any full-BAB class or frontliner would dip it, the multiplier might work as well or better.