mer.c
2016-04-28, 06:17 PM
Hello again, Playgrounders! I'm back for another round of tweak-critiques! This time, I'm looking at Strength, Armor, and Fighting Styles. As always, I'm not dead-set on anything here just passing it by the community for comments, suggestions, and other feedback.
Strength (and Armor Encumbrance)
Problem: The problem with Strength isn't that it's not good. IMO (and as far as I know, in the opinions of my players), Strength works fine for Strength-based characters. You can get best-in-class AC without spending feats, and you can throw down with the best of them. I'm OK with Dexterity giving more to Dex-based builds than Strength gives to Str-based builds, so long as those styles are on reasonably even footing in a general sense.
Rather, the problem I have with Strength is that dumping Strength has almost no effect on so many characters. For most purposes, an 8-strength character is functionally equivalent to a 10, or 12, or 14-Strength character as long as they're in the large demographic whose abilities don't key off Strength.
What I'm working on right now is a few mechanical tweaks to penalize dumping strength, or incentivize boosting it. Here's what I have at the moment:
Intimidate
Characters can choose to apply their Strength modifier OR their Charisma modifier to Intimidate checks.
Armor
Instead of reducing speed by 10 if wearing armor without meeting the Str requirement, a character moves 5 slower per point under the Str requirement. (So 15 slower if wearing Plate armor with Str 12, 5 slower if Str 14.)
Some medium armors now have a Strength requirement. Small races have all armor strength requirements reduced by 3. Dwarves still ignore these requirements.
Scale mail: 10
Breastplate: 11
Half plate: 12
Ring mail: 10
Chain mail: 13
Splint: 15
Plate: 15
Reasoning: I'd like Strength-based builds to have a little extra versatility outside combat, and I think the chance of Intimidate backfiring on you keeps this from being too good.
The real meat of the tweak comes from introducing a balancing point around armor. First, I've never liked the "Str < Requirement = 10' penalty." I houseruled that immediately to be 5' per point of Strength under the requirement (with Dwarves still ignoring the penalty entirely).
That opens the door to a more gradual set of strength requirements than [none] [13] [15]. Anyone can use up to Chain Shirt, even those who dump Strength. To get the really juicy Medium armors without penalty, you need to get a little above average unless you're Small, in which case 9 will do just fine. Chain, Splint, and Plate remain the same, except again for Small races.
Overall, I'd hope that this forces a little more meaningful decision-making regarding Strength for some non-Strength classes. I'd like that Cleric to have to decide between Scale Mail and 10 strength vs. taking it up to 12 for a Half Plate without penalty, much in the same way a GWF Battlemaster needs to consider if they're willing to dump Dexterity and eat the hit to initiative and AC.
Of course, the numbers are totally untuned. I'd be happy to hear what people think about the idea as a whole and also about tuning the numbers themselves.
Fighting Styles and Associated Feats
Problem: Balance between fighting styles isn't great. So my aim here is to level things off and make all the choices compelling, without breaking anything.
Great Weapon Fighting Style
When you deal damage with a heavy melee weapon wielded in both hands, you can reroll any weapon damage die. This includes extra dice from critical hits (including Brutal Critical), but not rider effects such as Divine Smite.
Reasoning: I'm not a fan of the rider-boosting element of this ability, and rule against it. That brings the power down. But allowing it to affect any die, not just 1s and 2s, should help offset it in a more balanced way. It's a pretty small boost for the 2d6 weapons (8.33 to 8.5 baseline damage per hit), but it brings Greataxes up from 7.33 to 8, putting it just .5 behind the 2d6 weapons instead of a full 1. That also means the power boost of GWF is a little closer to that provided by Duelist, without bringing Duelist down. (And of course it scales better with crits.)
If it proves too powerful in conjunction with Great Weapon Mastery or Polearm Mastery, I think those feats should be knocked down a little rather than nerfing the style itself. Just spitballing, there's the popular 1-per-turn restriction on GWM, and PAM could lose its Strength modifier to the 1d4.
Protection Fighting Style
When a creature you can see attacks a target other than you that is within 5 feet of you, you can use your reaction roll an additional d20. You choose which of the d20s is used for the attack roll. You may use this ability after the attack roll is made but before you know its outcome. You must be wielding a shield.
Reasoning: As outlined in this thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?482626-Thoughts-on-Protection-Style), Protection style has a number of mechanical issues. This really elegantly solves pretty much all of them, without overpowering the style or complicating it (thank you MaxWilson!). The fact that it uses the same mechanic as we see in other places like Lucky really makes it feel like an organic part of the game rather than a band-aid.
Sharpshooter
ignore half cover and treat three-quarters cover as half cover.
Reasoning: I don't know if Sharpshooter's +10/-5 is a critical balance issue, but I do understand that archery is extraordinarily powerful. Giving it a nudge back seems fine to me, especially since I don't really like mechanics that completely negate inflection points (in this case, entirely ignoring the cover mechanic).
If the feat does turn out to cause balance problems, there's always the 1-per-turn restriction.
Magic Ranged Weapons and Ammunition
Magic ranged weapons give an attack-roll bonus only. Magic ammunition gives a damage bonus only.
Reasoning: Along with being really, really good to begin with, ranged weapons double-dip on enchantments. DM restrictions on loot can get around the balance problems this presents, but I'd rather find a rules way of reconciling them. This change ends up nerfing magical ranged weapons a little bit compared to other weapons because instead of unlimited strikes of extra to-hit and extra damage, you get unlimited strikes of extra to-hit and finite strikes of extra damage. But you still have Sharpshooter to make up the difference in damage, and the DM can always tweak magic arrow recovery rules or make them a little easier to come by.
New Feat: Thrown Weapon Expert
Attacking at long range doesn't impose disadvantage on your thrown weapon attack rolls.
Your thrown weapon attacks ignore half cover and treat three-quarters cover as half cover.
You can draw weapons with the thrown property as a free action. As a bonus action you may draw and throw a light thrown weapon so long as you have at least one free hand.
Reasoning: Because I like thrown weapons, and I want my players to be able to focus on them! Shamelessly ripped from someone-I-don't-remember-who, but thank you! Giving the once-per-turn offhand throw is pretty cool, and seems in line given the lower damage rolls of thrown weapons and the fact that it wouldn't get an ability score bonus.
New Feat: Dual-Wield Master
Prerequisite: Two-Weapon Fighting style, Dual Wielder, Multiattack
Once per turn, when you make a melee attack with a weapon that youre holding in one hand, you can make an attack against the same target with a different melee weapon that youre holding in the other hand.
Reasoning: Dual-wielding as a mechanic seems OK to me, but it doesn't have the same feat support as other styles (especially the GWM/PAM/possibly Sentinel combination). I don't think dual-wielding needs to be changed so much as given a capstone, letting players close the gap by investing a feat. This is an attempt to do that, while also letting players make use of their offhand weapon on turns where they need their bonus action for something else. This also means that the TWF vs. GWF balance doesn't get upset when Opportunity Attacks get factored into the equation.
Also note that this does a lot to help out TWF Beast Masters. In the core rules, they can't make use of their offhand on turns that they split their attack with their beast. (They use their action to command their beast, and they can also make an attack; they don't take the attack action.) With this feat, they'd be able to attack with both weapons alongside their beast, letting the mechanics function together better.
If this looks too strong, the free attack could be changed not to include damage from the ability score modifier, or the free attack could only trigger on a hit. The latter is probably a lot less rule-jiggery (the former overrules part of TWF). It's also a bigger limiter, but since you need Multiattack anyways, you've got pretty decent odds of getting to make the free attack.
Finally, as far as I can tell, the prerequisites should keep abuse to a minimum. Rogues don't get another sneak attack chance unless they multiclass to martial 5 for TWF and multiattack, at which point I'm fine with the extra shot at it. Paladins need a multiclass to get an additional smite chance, and dual-wielding Paladins don't compare well to PAM for just plain nova from what I understand. But if the addition may break things, I'm open as always to suggestions for correcting it.
That's all for now! Thanks for reading, and looking forward to your feedback! :smallsmile:
Changelog
Removed (very low) Strength requirements for light armor
Added rule on magic ranged weapons and ammunition
Previous Critique my Tweaks
Part 1: Avatar Monk and Beast Master Ranger (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?481195-Critique-my-Tweaks-Part-1-%96-Avatar-Monk-and-Beast-Master-Hunter)
Part 2: Moon Druid (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?482486-Critique-my-Tweaks-Part-2-%96-Moon-Druid)
Strength (and Armor Encumbrance)
Problem: The problem with Strength isn't that it's not good. IMO (and as far as I know, in the opinions of my players), Strength works fine for Strength-based characters. You can get best-in-class AC without spending feats, and you can throw down with the best of them. I'm OK with Dexterity giving more to Dex-based builds than Strength gives to Str-based builds, so long as those styles are on reasonably even footing in a general sense.
Rather, the problem I have with Strength is that dumping Strength has almost no effect on so many characters. For most purposes, an 8-strength character is functionally equivalent to a 10, or 12, or 14-Strength character as long as they're in the large demographic whose abilities don't key off Strength.
What I'm working on right now is a few mechanical tweaks to penalize dumping strength, or incentivize boosting it. Here's what I have at the moment:
Intimidate
Characters can choose to apply their Strength modifier OR their Charisma modifier to Intimidate checks.
Armor
Instead of reducing speed by 10 if wearing armor without meeting the Str requirement, a character moves 5 slower per point under the Str requirement. (So 15 slower if wearing Plate armor with Str 12, 5 slower if Str 14.)
Some medium armors now have a Strength requirement. Small races have all armor strength requirements reduced by 3. Dwarves still ignore these requirements.
Scale mail: 10
Breastplate: 11
Half plate: 12
Ring mail: 10
Chain mail: 13
Splint: 15
Plate: 15
Reasoning: I'd like Strength-based builds to have a little extra versatility outside combat, and I think the chance of Intimidate backfiring on you keeps this from being too good.
The real meat of the tweak comes from introducing a balancing point around armor. First, I've never liked the "Str < Requirement = 10' penalty." I houseruled that immediately to be 5' per point of Strength under the requirement (with Dwarves still ignoring the penalty entirely).
That opens the door to a more gradual set of strength requirements than [none] [13] [15]. Anyone can use up to Chain Shirt, even those who dump Strength. To get the really juicy Medium armors without penalty, you need to get a little above average unless you're Small, in which case 9 will do just fine. Chain, Splint, and Plate remain the same, except again for Small races.
Overall, I'd hope that this forces a little more meaningful decision-making regarding Strength for some non-Strength classes. I'd like that Cleric to have to decide between Scale Mail and 10 strength vs. taking it up to 12 for a Half Plate without penalty, much in the same way a GWF Battlemaster needs to consider if they're willing to dump Dexterity and eat the hit to initiative and AC.
Of course, the numbers are totally untuned. I'd be happy to hear what people think about the idea as a whole and also about tuning the numbers themselves.
Fighting Styles and Associated Feats
Problem: Balance between fighting styles isn't great. So my aim here is to level things off and make all the choices compelling, without breaking anything.
Great Weapon Fighting Style
When you deal damage with a heavy melee weapon wielded in both hands, you can reroll any weapon damage die. This includes extra dice from critical hits (including Brutal Critical), but not rider effects such as Divine Smite.
Reasoning: I'm not a fan of the rider-boosting element of this ability, and rule against it. That brings the power down. But allowing it to affect any die, not just 1s and 2s, should help offset it in a more balanced way. It's a pretty small boost for the 2d6 weapons (8.33 to 8.5 baseline damage per hit), but it brings Greataxes up from 7.33 to 8, putting it just .5 behind the 2d6 weapons instead of a full 1. That also means the power boost of GWF is a little closer to that provided by Duelist, without bringing Duelist down. (And of course it scales better with crits.)
If it proves too powerful in conjunction with Great Weapon Mastery or Polearm Mastery, I think those feats should be knocked down a little rather than nerfing the style itself. Just spitballing, there's the popular 1-per-turn restriction on GWM, and PAM could lose its Strength modifier to the 1d4.
Protection Fighting Style
When a creature you can see attacks a target other than you that is within 5 feet of you, you can use your reaction roll an additional d20. You choose which of the d20s is used for the attack roll. You may use this ability after the attack roll is made but before you know its outcome. You must be wielding a shield.
Reasoning: As outlined in this thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?482626-Thoughts-on-Protection-Style), Protection style has a number of mechanical issues. This really elegantly solves pretty much all of them, without overpowering the style or complicating it (thank you MaxWilson!). The fact that it uses the same mechanic as we see in other places like Lucky really makes it feel like an organic part of the game rather than a band-aid.
Sharpshooter
ignore half cover and treat three-quarters cover as half cover.
Reasoning: I don't know if Sharpshooter's +10/-5 is a critical balance issue, but I do understand that archery is extraordinarily powerful. Giving it a nudge back seems fine to me, especially since I don't really like mechanics that completely negate inflection points (in this case, entirely ignoring the cover mechanic).
If the feat does turn out to cause balance problems, there's always the 1-per-turn restriction.
Magic Ranged Weapons and Ammunition
Magic ranged weapons give an attack-roll bonus only. Magic ammunition gives a damage bonus only.
Reasoning: Along with being really, really good to begin with, ranged weapons double-dip on enchantments. DM restrictions on loot can get around the balance problems this presents, but I'd rather find a rules way of reconciling them. This change ends up nerfing magical ranged weapons a little bit compared to other weapons because instead of unlimited strikes of extra to-hit and extra damage, you get unlimited strikes of extra to-hit and finite strikes of extra damage. But you still have Sharpshooter to make up the difference in damage, and the DM can always tweak magic arrow recovery rules or make them a little easier to come by.
New Feat: Thrown Weapon Expert
Attacking at long range doesn't impose disadvantage on your thrown weapon attack rolls.
Your thrown weapon attacks ignore half cover and treat three-quarters cover as half cover.
You can draw weapons with the thrown property as a free action. As a bonus action you may draw and throw a light thrown weapon so long as you have at least one free hand.
Reasoning: Because I like thrown weapons, and I want my players to be able to focus on them! Shamelessly ripped from someone-I-don't-remember-who, but thank you! Giving the once-per-turn offhand throw is pretty cool, and seems in line given the lower damage rolls of thrown weapons and the fact that it wouldn't get an ability score bonus.
New Feat: Dual-Wield Master
Prerequisite: Two-Weapon Fighting style, Dual Wielder, Multiattack
Once per turn, when you make a melee attack with a weapon that youre holding in one hand, you can make an attack against the same target with a different melee weapon that youre holding in the other hand.
Reasoning: Dual-wielding as a mechanic seems OK to me, but it doesn't have the same feat support as other styles (especially the GWM/PAM/possibly Sentinel combination). I don't think dual-wielding needs to be changed so much as given a capstone, letting players close the gap by investing a feat. This is an attempt to do that, while also letting players make use of their offhand weapon on turns where they need their bonus action for something else. This also means that the TWF vs. GWF balance doesn't get upset when Opportunity Attacks get factored into the equation.
Also note that this does a lot to help out TWF Beast Masters. In the core rules, they can't make use of their offhand on turns that they split their attack with their beast. (They use their action to command their beast, and they can also make an attack; they don't take the attack action.) With this feat, they'd be able to attack with both weapons alongside their beast, letting the mechanics function together better.
If this looks too strong, the free attack could be changed not to include damage from the ability score modifier, or the free attack could only trigger on a hit. The latter is probably a lot less rule-jiggery (the former overrules part of TWF). It's also a bigger limiter, but since you need Multiattack anyways, you've got pretty decent odds of getting to make the free attack.
Finally, as far as I can tell, the prerequisites should keep abuse to a minimum. Rogues don't get another sneak attack chance unless they multiclass to martial 5 for TWF and multiattack, at which point I'm fine with the extra shot at it. Paladins need a multiclass to get an additional smite chance, and dual-wielding Paladins don't compare well to PAM for just plain nova from what I understand. But if the addition may break things, I'm open as always to suggestions for correcting it.
That's all for now! Thanks for reading, and looking forward to your feedback! :smallsmile:
Changelog
Removed (very low) Strength requirements for light armor
Added rule on magic ranged weapons and ammunition
Previous Critique my Tweaks
Part 1: Avatar Monk and Beast Master Ranger (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?481195-Critique-my-Tweaks-Part-1-%96-Avatar-Monk-and-Beast-Master-Hunter)
Part 2: Moon Druid (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?482486-Critique-my-Tweaks-Part-2-%96-Moon-Druid)