PDA

View Full Version : Easy Way to balance the combat styles [3.5] [P.E.A.C.H.]



Teapot Salty
2014-07-25, 03:19 PM
Hey guys. So, in my limited time playing 4e, I realized they did something right, they balanced the combat styles (and loved/hated twf to no end) very well. So on insperation of that, I am about to arguably, completely fix the balance between them in very simple manner. Despite this, it is an outright nerf, so, please don't compare this to casters, though it should work in a high tier 5-low tier 3 game.


It all revolves around THF, and nerfing it thisly:
Wielding a weapon in two hands no longer adds half your str score again to damage rolls, and power attacking only gives you a 1 1/2-1 trade off, so power attacking at -2 gives you a +3 bonus to damage rolls. Or maybe I should just outright say that it is 1-1, not sure on that.


But in doing this, we make TWF more relevant, as it adds 1 1/2*your str modifier to damage. And sword and board sucks marginally less because two handing doesn't always ludicrously out damage it.
What do you guys think? Thanks, and as always, go nuts.

gr8artist
2014-07-25, 07:30 PM
If you take away the extra damage, what's the difference between 1H and 2H, other than one of the guys can hold a shield or item without trouble?

Teapot Salty
2014-07-27, 06:11 PM
If you take away the extra damage, what's the difference between 1H and 2H, other than one of the guys can hold a shield or item without trouble?

Bigger damage dice.

toapat
2014-07-27, 07:49 PM
You are making a fundamental mistake involving what balance means in relation to games. This is a common misunderstanding involving what balance actually refers to when talking about a game, because it does not mean the idea of Direct Equivalency which is used most commonly, but the term you actually want is either Perfect imbalance or Disparate Equality.

Simply put, the combat styles in DnD should not be equal. However, there are significant issues which must be acknowledged:

1: Animated shields: Sword and board is heavily restricted, as well as the existance of a magical property which allows the benefits of using a shield without the downsides.
1.a: Armor class is poorly balanced, meaning shields are significantly less valuable as levels progress

2: Multi-weapon combat: This combat style is crippled by its limitations. In order to attack at the lowest penalties possible you must be wielding a light weapon in your offhand. This is a problem because this means that you dont get your strength modifier on those attacks for damage. Other problems involve that the combat style requires at least 3 feats to function correctly.

3: Charging: Simply put, there are too many benefits to charging with a lance and virtually no downsides

4: Archery/Crossbow Sniping: As with multi-weapon combat lines, the archery and sniping combat styles are buried under featchains. They also are disallowed the ability to apply attribute to damage without specific feats or expensive weapon construction. Potentially requires multiple attributes to be effective with damage.

5: Gold Efficiency: Of all combat styles, using powerattack and a 2h is the cheapest, followed immediately by throwing weapons. Archery and dual wield can both eat 2/3rds of the character's wealth for minimal returns when compared to other combat styles

Carl
2014-07-27, 08:25 PM
You are making a fundamental mistake involving what balance means in relation to games. This is a common misunderstanding involving what balance actually refers to when talking about a game, because it does not mean the idea of Direct Equivalency which is used most commonly, but the term you actually want is either Perfect imbalance or Disparate Equality.

Simply put, the combat styles in DnD should not be equal.

I think i know what you mean by this but you aren't exactly clear on things.

For everyone else benefit here's an example of what i think is being talked about.

Skyrim has 3 basic forms of melee combat, (i won't bring in archery, stealth, or magic, the balance there is an utter mess).

Dual Wield: The highest damage output option available by miles, even without perks, with them you become a downright monster damage dealer. But you can't block to ward off incoming attacks.

S&B: Lowest damage by a fair margin, but by far the best blocking, (Blocking reduces damage taken), benefits from perks that make blocks affect arrows and eventually spells, plus can gain a counter to the typical answer to blocks, (power attacking). Very defensive and hard to hurt.

2H: 2 Handers can block but benefit from only a few improvements to blocking and stop a much smaller percentage of the damage than a shield block. However it's also got a fair wad more damage.


Whilst the melee system has mechanical flaws IMO and the balance with ranged and magic is awful the end result is that each of the 3 styles brings something equally useful, but also equally different to the fight.

toapat
2014-07-27, 09:12 PM
Whilst the melee system has mechanical flaws IMO and the balance with ranged and magic is awful the end result is that each of the 3 styles brings something equally useful, but also equally different to the fight.

the problem with using Skyrim as an example is that Dual wield, SnB, and 2H very much are under the effects of direct equivalency.

World of Warcraft's Warrior class is a better example, with their three specializations being Arms (2H), Fury (DW), and Protection (Nuking from orbit).

The Arm's Spec is, at least last i knew, the PvP spec. It was about dealing huge amounts of damage with a 2H weapon very quickly to a single opponent.

Fury warriors are walking disaster areas. Where as Arms focuses on ultimate single target damage, Fury warriors engaged entire armies alone with a pair of weapons. They are better in PvE than PvP but still deal alot of damage with alot of hits

Protection is self explanitory. you have a sword, a shield, and make things hit you instead of your allies.

are these directly equivalent? No. Each spec brings its own strengths to the table. This is Perfect Imbalance/Disparate Equality.

Carl
2014-07-27, 10:23 PM
the problem with using Skyrim as an example is that Dual wield, SnB, and 2H very much are under the effects of direct equivalency.

World of Warcraft's Warrior class is a better example, with their three specializations being Arms (2H), Fury (DW), and Protection (Nuking from orbit).

The Arm's Spec is, at least last i knew, the PvP spec. It was about dealing huge amounts of damage with a 2H weapon very quickly to a single opponent.

Fury warriors are walking disaster areas. Where as Arms focuses on ultimate single target damage, Fury warriors engaged entire armies alone with a pair of weapons. They are better in PvE than PvP but still deal alot of damage with alot of hits

Protection is self explanitory. you have a sword, a shield, and make things hit you instead of your allies.

are these directly equivalent? No. Each spec brings its own strengths to the table. This is Perfect Imbalance/Disparate Equality.

Sorry Topat but if Skyrim is direct equivalency then so is the WoW warrior you just described. Being good at one thing at the expense of another is different strengths for each.

toapat
2014-07-27, 10:45 PM
Sorry Topat but if Skyrim is direct equivalency then so is the WoW warrior you just described. Being good at one thing at the expense of another is different strengths for each.

no, they arent. WoW's specs always promote certain playstyles and focus on becoming better at a specific and significantly combat style. Skyrim's combat is so simplistic that picking whether you fight DW/SnB/2H doesnt effect what you can do, its a linear balance of All out damage/balanced/heavy defense. The two exceptions are the Bloodskaal blade in Dragonborn which throws out a Legend of Zelda style energy slash on power attacks, allowing for somewhat ranged combat, and the Spellward daedric artifact that makes Sword and board somewhat effective by allowing you to heavily mitigate a caster's offense against you.

MagnusExultatio
2014-07-28, 05:27 AM
It all revolves around THF, and nerfing it thisly:
Wielding a weapon in two hands no longer adds half your str score again to damage rolls, and power attacking only gives you a 1 1/2-1 trade off, so power attacking at -2 gives you a +3 bonus to damage rolls. Or maybe I should just outright say that it is 1-1, not sure on that.

While you are technically correct in that this would help balance things, you forget one critical thing:

THF/TWF/S&B are balanced in 4e because all three are useful, all three are elevated to being useful in comparison with each either. Hammering the nail that sticks out in this case is counterproductive because it removes the benefit of THF (more damage via Str and PA) and replaces it with nothing. It also doesn't help S&B/TWF at all, making them only 'better' in comparison because of nerfing THF, which is something that's lumped in with the aforementioned nothing. Your homebrew makes the game actively worse if ever implemented, congratulations.


Simply put, the combat styles in DnD should not be equal.

Ha ha, what a terrible opinion.

Carl
2014-07-28, 06:45 AM
no, they arent. WoW's specs always promote certain playstyles and focus on becoming better at a specific and significantly combat style. Skyrim's combat is so simplistic that picking whether you fight DW/SnB/2H doesnt effect what you can do, its a linear balance of All out damage/balanced/heavy defense. The two exceptions are the Bloodskaal blade in Dragonborn which throws out a Legend of Zelda style energy slash on power attacks, allowing for somewhat ranged combat, and the Spellward daedric artifact that makes Sword and board somewhat effective by allowing you to heavily mitigate a caster's offense against you.

And those playstyles boil down to sacrificing one this for another, (i.e. exactly what Skyrim and every other balance system ever built does), all of which in the right situation are equally useful and capable, they don't change what you can do in the slightest unless your in a situation where each type of content makes only one useful. And whilst i'll admit that this is very common, it's a result of awful content design, not an inherent fact of how the specs work. Your confusing and end result with the actual mechanical base being worked off. The Mechanical base makes all specs viable because being able to sacrifice defense for AoE damage or burst damage isn't inherently better or worse than having the defense. It's merely a different way of beating the stuffing out of opponents. It's bad content design that leaves them largely relegated to specialist purposes that makes them each suited for a different type of content.

toapat
2014-07-28, 11:27 AM
Ha ha, what a terrible opinion.

THe problem is that Teapot Salty is suggesting direct equality. This doesnt work. being equal and having equal levels of applicability in different situations are different.


And those playstyles boil down to sacrificing one this for another, (i.e. exactly what Skyrim and every other balance system ever built does), all of which in the right situation are equally useful and capable, they don't change what you can do in the slightest

Skyrim you dont sacrifice anything for picking a combat style other then the option to use another such combat style. There are no special attacks, you cant effectively engage multiple enemies without magic, and your combat doesnt really change between styles beyond exactly how quickly you close to engage.

in WoW, your combat does change to promote strengths of the combat style for your class. Retribution paladins dont use a sword and shield like protection or holy paladins. they also are fairly single target when compare to the other specs. You dont have the level of freedom that skyrim or DnD has but WoW is designed by people who know more about game design then you do as a result of having thrown ideas at the wall long enough to analyze and understand why they dont stick and what has to change.

Having DW, 2H, and SnB be always equivalent regardless of what you are doing is horrible design, and even in Diablo 3 where those styles are probably the closest in balance, they each promote wholly different objectives within character builds. A monk wielding a 2H will focus on high damage, attackspeed independant spells to deal their damage, while a DW monk will focus on their autoattacks for offense. A SnB monk will focus on keeping enemy attention in order to ablate damage away from their allies onto the monk's shield and forcefield.

Weapon styles should not be equal because they are equal, they should have their own advantages over eachother which gives enough options to allow them to allow for similar levels of power but that power should be concentrated in different areas.

The reason why 2H crushes SnB and DW in DnD is because per strike, it has the highest damage, with DW coming out ahead for applying precision damage, where it still loses out to archery, and Sword and board is irrelevant because of Animated Shields and AC scaling so poorly asto not matter