Support the GITP forums on Patreon
Help support GITP's forums (and ongoing server maintenance) via Patreon
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 33
  1. - Top - End - #1
    Firbolg in the Playground
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Gender
    Male

    Default Zman's Dnd Overhaul(3.5 Overhaul)

    Zman's DnD Overhaul

    What is it?

    This DnD overhaul is a fairly widespread overhaul to some of the 3.5 mechanics, classes, and abilities. Its meant to be modular, so take what you like, leave what you do not. The ultimate goal is to create a more balanced, more realistic, and ultimately more rewarding DnD experience.

    What this not.

    This does not fix all that is wrong with DnD, and I'm sure that it will create the new potential for abuse, especially where PrCs are concerned. But, with a little common sense and good DMing there should be less problems than a standard game. I define problems as: excessive damage, excessive class imbalance, ability abuse. Effectively anything that "breaks" the game, rendering some characters useless and allowing others to completely steal the show.

    This is not perfect, I am fully aware that this re-envisioning will not be right for everyone nor will it fix all of the problems that 3.5 faces, but it is a step towards how I envision DnD.


    Character Creation

    Abilities: 32 Point Buy using Zman's Pointbuy Alternative

    Spoiler
    Show
    All abilities start at 8, pay listed cost for ability score improvements.
    Ability:Cost
    9:1
    10:2
    11:3
    12:4
    13:5
    14:7
    15:10
    16:14
    17:19
    18:25

    Why?
    Spoiler
    Show
    This redesigned Pointbuy alternative is aimed at making MAD classes more readily viable, ie making moderate scores less costly while severely penalizing any character that attempts to maximize a single ability score. This is aimed at improving MAD/SAD balance.

    A Character can easily play a 14,14,14,14,10,10 character(+8 Modifier) or a 18,12,10,9,8,8(+2 Modifier) character. This is aimed at making Minmaxing more costly. Using a standard 32Pointbuy a character could play a 14,14,14,14,14,10(+10 Modifier) or a 18,14,14,10,10,8(+7 Modifier).

    It is also aimed at bringing the total ability scores and modifiers down to a reasonable range and consistent with the MM. For instance the Elite Array is a 28 Pointbuy while Nonelite array is 15 Point Buy.


    Level Dependent Ability Increases
    At level(4th, 12th, and 20th)
    Either add +1 to one of your highest three ability scores, or +2 to one of your lowest three abilities scores. If there is a tie, the ability scores count as one of the lowest three.

    At level(8th, and 16th)
    Increase all ability scores by +1.

    Retroactive Skill Points for Int Increases from permanent sources.

    Why?
    Spoiler
    Show

    Again, this is aimed at improving MAD/SAD Balance. It puts an opportunity cost to simply improving your highest attribute. It also allows classes to boost relevant ability scores. For example, a 14,14,14,14,10,10 Paladin. Said Paladin can now choose to boost any ability score by +2 at 4th level while the Wizard 18,12,10,9,8,8 could improve his primary ability score by +1 or shore up one of his lower ability scores by +2.


    Other Inherent Bonuses
    Tomes have effectively been removed as 9th level spells have been removed from normal 20 level play. A character can purchase a single tome which grants +1 inherent bonus for the cost of a +5 Tome.

    Why?
    Spoiler
    Show

    Inherent Bonuses such as those granted by casting Wish or purchasing a tome only further upset MAD/SAD Balance further. A Wizard only needs to purchase a single tome while the Other classes must purchase multiple.


    Zman's Wealth By Level

    Level:Wealth
    1:Starting
    2:500gp
    3:1500
    4:3500
    5:5500
    6:10000
    7:16000
    8:23000
    9:31000
    10:40000
    11:55000
    12:72000
    13:90000
    14:109000
    15:130000
    16:160000
    17:192000
    18:226000
    19:252000
    20:290000

    NPC Wealth: 50%

    Why?
    Spoiler
    Show

    Normal Wealth by Level grows extremely after level 13/14. This fixed Wealth By Level table is a comparable through levels 13/14 when the table slows down keeping wealth more reasonable. Also, when combined with other fixes, mainly making acquiring spells more costly it is aimed as a balanced factor.


    Hit Points

    Use Vitality and Wound Points with a few alterations.

    Small Creatures have Wound Points equal to 3/4 Constitution.
    Large Creatures have Wound Points equal to 1 1/2 Constitution.
    No Full Hit Dice for 1st level.
    Creatures are not Fatigued from Wound Point Damage until their total Wound Points is under 3/4 their total.
    Natural Healing, Resting only heals one wound point per night, two with bed rest, and double with treatment.
    Extra Damage Dice(Sneak Attack, Sudden Strike, Elemental Damage, Arcane Strike etc) only deal 1 point per die of wound damage.
    Non Heroic Classes(NPC Classes) do not gain normal Vitality. NPC Spellcasters do not expend Vitality to cast Spells(See Minor Magic Fix).
    NPC Classes suffer minimal CR increase. Ie a Orc Warrior 3 retains its CR.
    Critical threat multipliers, Improved Critical, Keen, etc increase Critical Threat Range by one, not doubling.
    Weapons that normally have an 18-20 Crit Range(Kukri, Rapier, Scimitar, Falcion, etc) instead deal +1 Damage to compensate for their reduced Damage Output.

    Feats:
    Toughness: Gain 3 Wound Points. Loss of these Wound Points does not cause Fatigue, nor a Fortitude Save to avoid being Stunned. Losing more Wound Points than granted by the Toughness feat are handled as normal. These feat can be selected multiple times, it's effects stack.

    Improved Toughness: Gain one Vitality Point per Hit Dice.

    Why?
    Spoiler
    Show

    The Wound Vitality Point system is aimed at adding a degree of realism to the game. Abstract Hit Points make little sense when 14 points of damage is enough to leave our first level fighter dieing on the ground, but is only a tiny fraction of our mid level Fighter's HP equivalent to a paper cut. Here, there is the potential for even Mid to High level characters to be concerned when entering any battle.


    Defense- Armor Class

    Defense Bonus: Bonus to AC(Including Touch AC) which stacks with armor.
    Classed Characters(Including NPC Classes): AC bonus equal to 1/2 a character Base Attack Bonus.

    Monsters: AC bonus equal to 1/2 CR.

    Defense- Armor as DR

    Use Armor as Damage Reduction alternate rule with the following modifications.

    Entire AC bonus(Armor + Enhancement) is halved to determine the DR- bonus. For instance +5 Plate Mail grants a +7 AC bonus to Armor and DR6/-.

    Natural Armor: Creatures with Natural Armor(Including Enhancement Bonuses) gain 1/4 of their Natural Armor Bonus as DR- in the same fashion as DR from armor. For instance, a creature that has +24 natural Armor instead grants a +18 NA bonus to AC and gains DR6/-.

    DR- from armor or Natural Armor stacks with any DR the player or Monster already has.

    Critical Hits bypass DR as per Wound and Vitality Point System.


    Why?
    Spoiler
    Show

    AC does not scale properly in standard DnD. Touch AC becomes trivial for even Mages to hit. High level melee characters laugh at an enemies AC. This is aimed at allowing for a natural scaling to AC and also helps offset any imbalance created by the limited WBL.

    Added Armor as DR rules to compensate for too high ACs at high levels by the defense bonus and the limited ability bonuses at high levels.


    Skills

    No Cross Class Skill Penalty: Cross class skills have the same cost as class skills.
    Cross Class and Class Skill Maximum Ranks are still in effect.

    New skill ranks cost.

    Ranks 1-5: 1 Skill Point
    Ranks 6-10: 2 Skill Points
    Ranks 11+: 3 Skill Points

    Changes to Skills
    Spoiler
    Show

    Appraise: Add ability to haggle when buying or selling items. Requirs either opposed check or taking 10 for simplicity.

    Buying: Price equals (100+ NPC Appriase Check(Take 10) - PC Appraise Check)% of listed cost.
    Selling: Price equals (50 + PC Appraise Check - NPC Appraise(Take 10))% of listed cost.

    Knowledges: DC for finding information on Monsters is DC 10+ 1/2 CR. additional information for every 5 points th checks beats the DC.


    Why?
    Spoiler
    Show

    Skills make little sense in their current implementation. Characters often pick a select few skills and choose to maximize those skills while avoiding all others. Many DCs are trivial. This fix gives an escalating opportunity cost for skill points and is aimed at making skill abuse less widespread, ie Diplomacy, Hide, Move Silently, Intimidate, Knowledges, etc. It also makes Skill Focus feats more viable and less a feat tax. Combat Casting is now a viable feat selection as maintaining a High Concentration skill for a Spellcaster is now more costly, etc.



    Spellcasting

    See Zman's Minor Magic Fix

    Leveling-XP

    Use the Alternate XP progression from Unearthed Arcana.

    Multiclassing

    Standard Multiclassing: No XP Penalty, maximum of four classes.

    Favored Class

    When half or more of a character's level are in their Favored Class they receive a 10% bonus in experience earned. Humans choose one class at Character creation to be their favored class.


    Zman's Balanced(More) 3.5 Classes
    Spoiler
    Show
    The aim is to bring the base classes of 3.5 to Tiers 1.5-4. This will result in an increase in power and versatility for some and a decrease in raw power for others. WIP. Note, the goal is to keep the existing architecture in tact where possible. These fixes will not be perfect, but they will go along way to making the game play better.

    WIP Core Classes
    Barbarian Fix
    Bard Fix
    Cleric Fix
    Druid Fix
    Fighter Fix
    Monk Fix
    Paladin Fix
    Ranger Fix
    Rogue Fix
    Sorcerer Fix
    Wizard Fix

    NonCore
    Beguiler Fix
    Duskblade Fix
    Warlock Fix
    Warmage Fix
    Wu Jen Fix

    Minor Magic Fix

    Prestige Classes

    Most Prestige Classes will remain viable, but certain PrCs that grant full or accelerated Spellcasting must be banned(Ur Priest, Sublime Chord, etc).

    LA-Level Adjustment

    LA: No longer an ECL adjustment.
    Characters now suffer a 15% XP penalty per LA.
    Maximum Template LA is equal to Starting Level, works retroactively on xp and can cause a lower starting level.

    Example: Creating a Half Celestial Paladin.
    Minimum starting level must be level 4(6000xp).
    The Characte suffers a 60% XP Penalty and starts with 2400xp as a 2nd level Paladin. Given enough time and XP she could become a 20th level Paladin.
    Compare this to the normal requirements of starting at ECL 5 as a 1st level Paladin with a maximum level as a 16th level Paladin.
    This LA Revision system factors in its own catchup and effective LA buyoff System.

    *Note: Some Templates are unbalanced and not for PC use, ie Half Minataur, Lolth Touched, Feral, Mineral Warrior, etc. Use DM discression for allowable templates.

    Why?
    Spoiler
    Show

    LA is horribly unbalanced limits a characters progression. This system allows for the use of well balanced templates from lower level and features an organic form of leveling for such characters.


    Monsters as PCs and NPCs
    With DM approval some Monsters make suitable PCs.
    Minimum starting level is CR+1. Character starts with 0XP or XP difference between Minimum Starting level and actual starting level.

    XP Penalty eual to LA x 15%(90% Maximum) for xp gained. If no LA is specified, assume LA(4-6, DM Discretion).

    Monstrous PC gains class levels in Gestalt to Racial HD until their class level surpasses their HD. Follow the Gestalt Rules in Unearthed Arcana. Monstrous PC becomes a single classed character once their class level exceeds their Racial HD.

    CR is equal to CR +1/3 Gestalt Class Levels +1 per Single Class Level beyond RHD.

    Why?
    Spoiler
    Show

    Normal Racial HD + LA led to under powered and undesirable characters. A 3rd level Hill Giant Sorcerer certainly is not an effective ECL 19 PC and would not be effective in a party.

    Under this system, said Hill Giant Sorcerer would be a CR9 enemy. CR7+1 +1(1/3 4 Sorcerer Levels). The Hill Giant would still have 12RHD, but would simply have 4th level spellcasting. Said Hill Giant would have to have gained 15000xp(6000xp after 60% penalty) after starting out as an ECL 8 character. This means that at 52000xp a party could consist of a 9th level Fighter, a 9th level Wizard, and a 4th level Hill Giant Sorcerer(12 Hit Dice).


    Magic Items

    Magic Items requiring 9th level spells are now Minor Artifacts and should be priced and available accordingly.

    +6 Statboosting Items no longer exist.

    Why?
    Spoiler
    Show

    Again, availability of these items greatly exacerbates the MAD/SAD balance of the game. By removing them it makes spells that grant higher enchanment bonuses viable beyond level 10.

    Also, I'm sure there will be more additions to this section.



    Combat

    Dex to Damage for Ranged Weapons.
    No Offhand Strength Penalty for Two Weapon Fighting
    No Strength Penalty for Secondary Natural Weapons

    Why?
    Spoiler
    Show

    Ranged Combat becomes pointless beyond a handful of specialized Builds. This is meant to make it a viable option.

    Offhand Strength Penalties simply Hurt an already Hurting fighting style(beyond some specialized builds).

    Creatures with Natural weapons hurt with the secondary str penalties.


    Feats:

    Feats: Gained at 1st and every odd level thereafter.

    Power Attack: Single Handed/Offhand Weapons gain a 1:1 while Two Handed Weapons gain a 1:1.5 for Penaly:Damage ratio.
    Feats or Abilities that increase Power Attack: Do so by +.5x not x2(ie Leap Attack, etc).
    Craven: +1 Damage per Sneak Attack Die.

    Leadership: Feat does not exist.

    Why?
    Spoiler
    Show

    Power Attack is the basis of most high damage builds. Damage from many of these builds vasty outpaces anything that Monsters can bring forth. By limiting the specialized Melee Builds other forms of dealing Damage, Archery, Non Sneak Attack TWF, Evocation, should become more viable options.

    I'd rather limit the high damage builds than try and bring everything else up.

    Leadership is broken, there are few uses that aren't.

    There are likely to be many more additions to this section.


    Items:

    Zman's Armor
    Medium Armor: Does not incur a movement speed penalty, though medium encumbrance from weight does.
    Worn Armor Weight: Only count half weight for worn armor.

    Choking an dSneezing Powder: Do not Exist
    Nightstick: Only one use per day total.

    Lance: Can only be used One Handed
    Spiked Chain: Maximum of One AoO per turn.

    Why?
    Spoiler
    Show
    Some Items are at the core of broken builds and just don't make sense. This atempts to help balance them.

    There will likely be more additions to this section.


    Zman's E10 Variant
    Zman's E10 Prestige Classes(WIP)
    Last edited by Zman; 2014-05-27 at 12:05 AM.

  2. - Top - End - #2
    Firbolg in the Playground
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Zman's Dnd Overhaul(3.5 Overhaul)

    Change Log:

    2-11-13
    Added Dualclass Clarifications

    2-13-13
    Modified level dependent ability bonus.
    Reduced Skill Point Cost.
    Added additional use for Appraise.
    Made Knowledge DCs appropriate for monster identification.

    2-14-13
    Added Armor as Dr rules.

    2-15-13
    Added Retroactive Skill Points for Int Increases.

    2-17-13
    Feats Gained every Odd level.

    2-21-13
    No Str Penalty for Secondary Natural Weapons
    Temporary removal of Dual and Triclassing pening further work.

    2-22-13
    Improved Critical, Keen, Etc only improve Crit Range by one for Wound/Vitality Points.

    12-5-13
    Wound Points and Natural Healing
    Level Dependent Ability Increases
    E10 Variant
    E6 Varient

    12-8-13
    Favored Class CP Bonus

    12-10-13
    Reworked E10 and E6 Rules

    5-14-14
    Modified the toughness and Improved Toughness feats for use with the Wound/Vitality Point System

    5-15-14
    Removed Favored Class XP Bonus.

    5-16-14
    Added Zman's Armor Changes.

    5-21-14
    No Fatigue for Wound Damage until under 3/4 total.
    Last edited by Zman; 2014-05-21 at 03:12 PM.

  3. - Top - End - #3
    Firbolg in the Playground
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Zman's Dnd Overhaul(3.5 Overhaul)

    Reserved For Later Use

    Zman's Armor

    Armor Cost Armor/Shield Bonus Maximum Dex Bonus Armor Check Penalty Arcane Spell Failure Chance Speed(30 ft.) Speed(20 ft.) Weight
    Light Armor
    Padded 5gp 1 7 0 0% 30 ft. 20 ft. 5lb.
    Leather 10gp 2 6 0 10% 30 ft. 20 ft. 10 lb.
    Studded Leather 25gp 3 5 -1 15% 30 ft. 20 ft. 15 lb.
    Chain Shirt 100gp 4 4 -2 15% 30 ft. 20 ft. 20 lb.
    Medium Armor
    Hide 5gp 4 4 -3 20% 30 ft. 20 ft. 25 lb.
    Scale Mail 50gp 5 3 -3 20% 30 ft. 20 ft. 25 lb.
    Chainmail 150gp 6 2 -4 25% 30 ft. 20 ft. 35 lb.
    Breastplate 200gp 5 3 -3 15% 30 ft. 20 ft. 25 lb.
    Heavy Armor
    Splint Mail 200gp 7 1 -5 30% 20 ft. 15 ft. 45 lb.
    Banded Mail 250 6 2 -4 25% 20 ft. 15 ft. 35 lb.
    Half-Plate 600gp 7 2 -5 25% 20 ft. 20 ft. 45 lb.
    Full-Plate 1500gp 9 1 -6 30% 20 ft. 15 ft. 50 lb.
    Shields
    Buckler 5gp 1 - -1 5% - - 4 lb.
    Dastana 25gp 1 - -2 10% - - 10 lb.
    Shield, Light 9gp 2 - -1 5% - - 6 lb.
    Shield, Heavy 15gp 3 - -2 10% - - 12 lb.
    Shield, Tower 30gp 4 2 -6 50% - - 35 lb.

    *Dastana are forarm mounted armored gauntlets. They grant a Shield bonus and do not require any hands to operate.
    *Weight figures are for armor sized to fit Medium characters. Armor fitted for Small characters weighs half as much, and armor fitted for Large characters weighs twice as much.
    *When running in heavy armor, you move only triple your speed, not quadruple.
    *A tower shield can instead grant you cover.

    Special Materials

    Adamantine

    This ultrahard metal adds to the quality of a weapon or suit of armor. Weapons fashioned from adamantine have a natural ability to bypass harness when sundering weapons or attacking objects, ignoring the first 5 points of hardness. Weapons fashioned from adamantine also reroll damage results of a 1. Ammunition fashioned out of adamantine never break when fired at a target and unless lost can always be recovered Armor made from adamantine grants its wearer an AC bonus of +1 if it is Light or Medium armor and an AC bonus of +2 if it is Heavy Armor. Adamantine is extremely dense, increase the weight of any item fashioned from adamantine by x1.5. Admantine is so costly that weapons and armor made from it are always of masterwork quality; the masterwork cost is included in the prices given. Thus, adamantine weapons and ammunition have a +1 enhancement bonus on attack rolls, and the armor check penalty of adamantine armor is lessened by 1 compared to ordinary armor of its type. Items without metal parts cannot be made from adamantin. An arrow could be made of adamantine, but a a quarterstaff could not.

    Item Type Item Cost Modifier
    Ammunition +100gp(each)
    Light Armor +5000gp
    Medium Armor +10000gp
    Heavy Armor +15000gp
    Weapon +5000gp
    Shields +2000gp

    Only weapons, armor, and shields normally made of metal can be fashioned from adamantine. Weapons, armor and shields normally made of steel that are made of adamantine have one-third more hit points than normal. Adamantine has 40 hit points per inch of thickness and hardness 20.


    Darkwood

    This rare magic wood is stronger than normal wood but very light. Any wooden or mostly wooden item (such as a bow, an arrow, or a spear) made from darkwood is considered a masterwork item and weighs only half as much as a normal wooden item of that type. Items not normally made of wood or only partially of wood (such as a battleaxe or a mace) either cannot be made from darkwood or do not gain any special benefit from being made of darkwood. The armor check penalty of a darkwood shield is lessened by 2 compared to an ordinary shield of its type. Bows fashioned from Darkwood have their range increments increased by 10'. Darkwood items cost double what a normal masterwork item of that type would cost.

    Darkwood has 10 hit points per inch of thickness and hardness 5.

    Dragonhide

    Armorsmiths can work with the hides of dragons to produce armor or shields of masterwork quality. One dragon produces enough hide for a single suit of masterwork hide armor for a creature one size category smaller than the dragon. By selecting only choice scales and bits of hide, an armorsmith can produce one suit of masterwork banded mail for a creature two sizes smaller, one suit of masterwork half-plate for a creature three sizes smaller, or one masterwork breastplate or suit of full plate for a creature four sizes smaller. In each case, enough hide is available to produce a small or large masterwork shield in addition to the armor, provided that the dragon is Large or larger.

    Because dragonhide armor isnít made of metal, druids can wear it without penalty.

    Dragonhide armor costs double what masterwork armor of that type ordinarily costs, but it takes no longer to make than ordinary armor of that type.

    Dragonhide has 10 hit points per inch of thickness and hardness 10.

    Iron, Cold

    This iron, mined deep underground, known for its effectiveness against fey creatures, is forged at a lower temperature to preserve its delicate properties. Weapons made of cold iron cost twice as much to make as their normal counterparts. Also, any magical enhancements cost an additional 2,000 gp.

    Items without metal parts cannot be made from cold iron. An arrow could be made of cold iron, but a quarterstaff could not.

    A double weapon that has only half of it made of cold iron increases its cost by 50%.

    Cold iron has 30 hit points per inch of thickness and hardness 10.

    Mithral

    Mithral is a very rare silvery, glistening metal that is lighter than iron but just as hard. When worked like steel, it becomes a wonderful material from which to create armor and is occasionally used for other items as well. Most mithral armors are one category lighter than normal for purposes of movement and other limitations. Heavy armors are treated as medium, and medium armors are treated as light, but light armors are still treated as light. Spell failure chances for armors and shields made from mithral are decreased by 10%, maximum Dexterity bonus is increased by 1, and armor check penalties are lessened by 2 (to a minimum of 0).

    An item made from mithral weighs half as much as the same item made from other metals. In the case of weapons, this lighter weight does not change a weaponís size category or the ease with which it can be wielded (whether it is light, one-handed, or two-handed). Items not primarily of metal are not meaningfully affected by being partially made of mithral. (A longsword can be a mithral weapon, while a scythe cannot be.)

    Item Type Item Cost Modifier
    Light Armor +1000gp
    Medium Armor +4000gp
    Heavy Armor +9000gp
    Weapon +1000gp
    Shields +1000gp
    Other Items +500gp

    Weapons or armors fashioned from mithral are always masterwork items as well; the masterwork cost is included in the prices given below.

    Mithral has 30 hit points per inch of thickness and hardness 15.

    Silver, Alchemical

    A complex process involving metallurgy and alchemy can bond silver to a weapon made of steel so that it bypasses the damage reduction of creatures such as lycanthropes.

    On a successful attack with a silvered weapon, the wielder takes a -1 penalty on the damage roll (with the usual minimum of 1 point of damage). The alchemical silvering process canít be applied to nonmetal items, and it doesnít work on rare metals such as adamantine, cold iron, and mithral.

    Alchemical silver has 10 hit points per inch of thickness and hardness 8.

    Item Type Item Cost Modifier
    Ammunition +1gp(Each)
    Weapon +100gp
    Last edited by Zman; 2014-05-23 at 03:53 PM.

  4. - Top - End - #4
    Firbolg in the Playground
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Zman's Dnd Overhaul(3.5 Overhaul)

    Fom another thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by PersonMan View Post

    No, you'll be level 3||3. There is no amount of experience listed - just starting level. I know what the intention is, but as-written there's a loophole in high starting level situations - I'd add in a clause about that. This is mostly nitpicking though, I can see you weren't planning on starting 3||3.

    Still, 2||2 gives you: +1.5 BAB, 8 skill points, 2d8 HD [8 + at least 4.5 HP], +1.5 to all saves, two fighter bonus feats, [I don't know how proficiencies are dealt with. Add a clause about it?] Sorcerer 2 casting* and one normal feat.

    Compared to a straight fighter, a huge amount of utility from spells, in or out of combat and a massively widened skill list for the price of some HP, a few skill points, a 1/day Will save reroll and 1.5 points of BAB.

    Compared to a Sorcerer it loses more, but that's to be expected, everything but pure caster loses out a lot compared to pure caster.

    *I would write out which levels you get which bonus spells known at. "Appropriate levels" is unnecessarily vague.


    My original evaluation wasn't entirely accurate, but I stand by my statement that it's a quasi-gestalt, giving a huge amount of utility for the tradeoff of "smaller numbers".

    "Basically gestalt" does not mean "gestalt", it mean "similar enough to be very close, but not quite there".
    Fair enough, I will add a clause about starting at Higher Level. I'd also appreciate a PEACH if you are willing.

    I wouldn't call ~8.5+Con, +2 BaB, 4+Int Skill Points, +2 Fort, +2 Ref vs a Level 3 Fighter to gain a couple of class skills, 1st level Spellcasting, and becoming more MAD. Seems like a fair trade off to me. The Verdatility is grate, but the sacrifices is steep.

    And are you really arguing that since its more versatile than a fighter it's unbalanced!

    Vs Level3 Sorc that is ~1 HP +Con, +2 to Will Saves, 2nd level Spells, 4 Skill Points and becoming MAD nets two Fighter Bonus Feats, Class Skills, and some Proficiencies. Seems like a bad trade to me.
    Now, had I used Armored Mage it's a better trade, but still a balanced trade.

    Those Small numbers were actually a very significant portion of HP, a huge Hit to BAB, and saves for a little bit of Spellcasting.

    Gestalt like is a very broad term, it certainly is not Gestalt, but something Different.

    Yes, you gain the Proficiencies of both as Proficiencies are class features.

  5. - Top - End - #5
    Troll in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2012

    Default Re: Zman's Dnd Overhaul(3.5 Overhaul)

    1: MAD/SAD balance really cant be done when you have Str and Cha. both are construct attributes based on something required to bypass the mental preconceptions of the standard populous.

    2: Tomes and +6 items are integral to the balance of the game. from a WBL perspective, tomes are utterly stupid, simply because they cost 1/6th the wbl of a level 20. From an actual balance standpoint? The people who benefit the most from them are the people who are not able to already say "All i need is Int", because the people who need them, are not able to be a one dimensional supergenious. If you want smaller numbers, the entire system has to be rebuilt for smaller numbers, not removing the numbers from the system.

    3: Multiclassing: You only need to penalize this if you make classes like they are in the SRD. Striking the balance needed is damn hard, but you should provide enough incentive to stay in class as much as you provide to leave the class Wizards Failed by not understanding the game and by making incredibly powerful classes with some worthwile class features, Pazio failed by making classes rely too much on their internal mechanics.

    4: LA as ECL: you do understand that the reason they are broken is because there was no standard for judging power? turning them into crap for players just means that you are hurting roleplaying.

    5: WBL: There is a reason why WBL doesnt work. It is not because they are telling the DM to give players too much money. WBL is broken because the cost of magical equipment is astronomical for mundanes while casters can easily prance about in their universe that has yet to invent pants with everything they need from spells. reducing it to NPC WBL resultantly just hammers mundanes and buffs casters.
    Last edited by toapat; 2013-02-12 at 01:00 AM.
    My Homebrew: found here.
    When you Absolutely, Positively, Gotta Drop some Huge rocks, Accept NO Substitutes

    PM Me if you would like a table from my homebrew reconstructed.

    Drow avatar @ myself

  6. - Top - End - #6
    Orc in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2012

    Default Re: Zman's Dnd Overhaul(3.5 Overhaul)

    I agree about the casters and wealth by level.

    About the overhaul itself, I like everything except your new multiclassing. I think it was fine as it was.

  7. - Top - End - #7
    Firbolg in the Playground
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Zman's Dnd Overhaul(3.5 Overhaul)

    Quote Originally Posted by toapat View Post
    1: MAD/SAD balance really cant be done when you have Str and Cha. both are construct attributes based on something required to bypass the mental preconceptions of the standard populous.

    MAD/SAD balance may not be accomplished, but the current sever imbalance can be lessened. This is what I attempted to do.

    2: Tomes and +6 items are integral to the balance of the game. from a WBL perspective, tomes are utterly stupid, simply because they cost 1/6th the wbl of a level 20. From an actual balance standpoint? The people who benefit the most from them are the people who are not able to already say "All i need is Int", because the people who need them, are not able to be a one dimensional supergenious. If you want smaller numbers, the entire system has to be rebuilt for smaller numbers, not removing the numbers from the system.

    I disagree that they are integral to the balance of the game. The initial balance was based off of poor optimization, evocation damage, and poor spell selection. Tomes do not come into play until 16+ level, +6 items until 10-12+. A simple +2 loss to attributes or the loss of Tomes does not up set game balance when the characters gainng the most out of said items are already way above the power Curve. Here we agree that SAD caster benefit the most. You say NonSAD characters benefit most from these items, I'm saying they don't from the Tomes and being limited to +4 Enhancement Items isn't that large of a loss especially with recouped and redirected WBL, certainly not enough to "upset game balance". Out of these items MAD characters can't simple afford them as early or at all(tomes), with exception of a single +6 nhancement item mid level. I simple removed the effective caster only buff with a small hit to NonCasters.

    3: Multiclassing: You only need to penalize this if you make classes like they are in the SRD. Striking the balance needed is damn hard, but you should provide enough incentive to stay in class as much as you provide to leave the class Wizards Failed by not understanding the game and by making incredibly powerful classes with some worthwile class features, Pazio failed by making classes rely too much on their internal mechanics.

    What did I penalize outside of multidip builds, which certainly weren't accounted for for Game Balance? Wizards also failed by undervaluing some class features and overvaluing others, ie feats. I believe I made this situation better, not worse, can you elaborate.

    4: LA as ECL: you do understand that the reason they are broken is because there was no standard for judging power? turning them into crap for players just means that you are hurting roleplaying.

    What does "Turning them into crap" mean? I believe I made templates more usable and balanced long term without rewriting all of the templates. Yes broken templates exist, but I hadn't intended on fixing them right away, but simply instituting a more organic form of using LA.

    5: WBL: There is a reason why WBL doesnt work. It is not because they are telling the DM to give players too much money. WBL is broken because the cost of magical equipment is astronomical for mundanes while casters can easily prance about in their universe that has yet to invent pants with everything they need from spells. reducing it to NPC WBL resultantly just hammers mundanes and buffs casters.
    Yes, the cost of Magical equipment is astronomical. With an increased cost for spells, and the reduction on prepared casters I don't think this holds as true. An 8th level costs 3200gp for a Wizard. In this version Wizards, the only remaining prepared caster, needs a vast amount of his WBL to populate his Spellbook and will likely be hurting more for WBL than the NonCasters. Where I see improved balance, you see imbalance. Take away Tomes and WBL in vastly differen than before. WBL is comparable to lvl13-14 and Wealth was anything but a balancing factor at the higher levels.

    See blue responses.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zireael View Post
    I agree about the casters and wealth by level.

    About the overhaul itself, I like everything except your new multiclassing. I think it was fine as it was.
    Standard Multiclassing is still in effect with the exception of a limit on number of classes. The Dual and Triclass options are merely an addition to give players more option for uniqu concepts from the start of the game instead of needing to level in an ineffectual state before getting to a point where your class is viable.

    Ie Wizard Cleric. Standard options is pretty much Cleric, then a wizard, then Mystic Thuerge. I've heard it called a trap, because being stuck as a Cleric3/Wizard3/Mystic Thierge1 in a party with a level 7 Wizard and level 7 Cleric is just pathetic. Here being a Cleric5||Wizard5 or possible Cleric6||Wizard6 is much more viable. It also lads to a truer blended class.

    These options are additions and not meant to fully replace standard Multiclassing.


    Thanks for the imput , keep it coming.

  8. - Top - End - #8
    Troll in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2012

    Default Re: Zman's Dnd Overhaul(3.5 Overhaul)

    1: Not really. you just made Pointbuy less desirable.

    2: Tomes: you dont understand my point: +11 to an attribute is integral to 3.5, if you are not a primary caster. Primary casters only need +6 items, tomes are just butter because they are well above the curve because they only need 19 in an attribute. DCs scale faster then saves, their ability to get to hit bonuses is game breaking, they have options that render both irrelevant. The people who benefit the most from Tomes and gear are the ones who dont scale one dimensionally.

    3: No, Multiclassing Penalties exist for one reason. Because there is no Incentive to stay in a class in 3.5. In PF it just makes you stay in one class because PF is also extremely bad in providing incentives to leave the class. Adding them is just admitting you have no idea what you are doing, can easily be pointed as such.

    4: It means that what you did is ruin Templates entirely. XP penalties are horrible. There is a reason why the typical response to pointing out the Multiclassing rules in 3.5 is "There are multiclassing rules?" Its because no one uses them if the DM isnt a ****, because the game isnt fun if you are pepetually 8 levels behind for wanting to play Falls from Grace.

    5: except that the math of the game requires that Mundanes have 2-4 +6 items, 2 +5 tomes, +10 armor, at least one +10 weapon, and a cloak of flight. Ive done the math, the standard assumptions of the game well outstrip what you think in terms of game balance. Assuming you cut off a 0 from all of those item costs, then you might have a reasonable gear investment.
    My Homebrew: found here.
    When you Absolutely, Positively, Gotta Drop some Huge rocks, Accept NO Substitutes

    PM Me if you would like a table from my homebrew reconstructed.

    Drow avatar @ myself

  9. - Top - End - #9
    Firbolg in the Playground
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Zman's Dnd Overhaul(3.5 Overhaul)

    Quote Originally Posted by toapat View Post
    1: Not really. you just made Pointbuy less desirable.

    Less desirable for those attempting to optimize a SAD character yes, that was the point.

    2: Tomes: you dont understand my point: +11 to an attribute is integral to 3.5, if you are not a primary caster. Primary casters only need +6 items, tomes are just butter because they are well above the curve because they only need 19 in an attribute. DCs scale faster then saves, their ability to get to hit bonuses is game breaking, they have options that render both irrelevant. The people who benefit the most from Tomes and gear are the ones who dont scale one dimensionally.

    And you think too much of your self asserted expertise. +11 to an attribute as an integral part of the game? Laughable on some level. A character cannot afford +11 to a single stat until 15th levl, and then it requires over 85% of their wealth and cannot afford +11 to two stats until 18th level, again requiring the vast majority of their wealth. Hell, a single +6 enhancement item is the entire WBL for a 9th level character. You are basing an assumption on a small subset of the game, high level play 16+ where game balance is its absolute worst. You argue that Non Casters benefit the most from these items true, but are the least likely to gain them. Both true, the current environment yields Casters as the only ones gainng said bonuses. I simple removed that problem. Casters still have fast scaling DCs without the additional game breaking bnususes. Non Casters will still find effective uses for their wealth. And as evidenced, high level play is far from balanced with a huge lean towards Pacs.

    Do you realize your last sentence doesn't make sense?


    3: No, Multiclassing Penalties exist for one reason. Because there is no Incentive to stay in a class in 3.5. In PF it just makes you stay in one class because PF is also extremely bad in providing incentives to leave the class. Adding them is just admitting you have no idea what you are doing, can easily be pointed as such.

    Adding the Dualclass and Terclass alternatives is personal preference and not inherently imbalancing. There are many problems with Multiclassing as beyond PrCing into a class which advances your already existing mechanic you inherently sacrific much, usually too much, unless you at a simple Melee class. Dualclassing is an alternative which can prove to be viable and balanced.

    4: It means that what you did is ruin Templates entirely. XP penalties are horrible. There is a reason why the typical response to pointing out the Multiclassing rules in 3.5 is "There are multiclassing rules?" Its because no one uses them if the DM isnt a ****, because the game isnt fun if you are pepetually 8 levels behind for wanting to play Falls from Grace.

    No, not quite. CP penalties are not horrible. Using the Unarthed Arcana XP track as stated the penalties for using LA and Templates are actually smaller. I suggest retreading the relevant Varient. Even using standard xp, being levels behind forces the automatic catchup mechanic to enter play which ultimately minimizes the problem. A 50% xp penalty is ony a two level penalty.
    .


    5: except that the math of the game requires that Mundanes have 2-4 +6 items, 2 +5 tomes, +10 armor, at least one +10 weapon, and a cloak of flight. Ive done the math, the standard assumptions of the game well outstrip what you think in terms of game balance. Assuming you cut off a 0 from all of those item costs, then you might have a reasonable gear investment.

    . Mundanes require this but such a requirement simpply screws niter class balance further. And as stated earlier, high level play is far from balanced. If you noticed the Class Defense Bonus Mundanes, especially with Respecable BAB offset much of the AC requirements.

    You once accused me of housing myself on my on petard. Pot. Kettle. Black

    Please try and provide useful suggestions from now on, or at least phrase things in a more constructive manor. Your ideas and suggestions are likely to be taken in a more receptive fashion.

  10. - Top - End - #10
    Orc in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2012

    Default Re: Zman's Dnd Overhaul(3.5 Overhaul)

    Standard Multiclassing is still in effect with the exception of a limit on number of classes. The Dual and Triclass options are merely an addition to give players more option for uniqu concepts from the start of the game instead of needing to level in an ineffectual state before getting to a point where your class is viable.
    If it's an option, then OK, it's a brilliant option, I might add!

  11. - Top - End - #11
    Troll in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2012

    Default Re: Zman's Dnd Overhaul(3.5 Overhaul)

    In DDO, while alot of the numbers are inflated, enemy AC is largely accurate to what it is in relation to CR. I need, on my paladin, a 45 Attack Modifier (which i do have), to consistently hit raid bosses while tanking them. with 32 pointbuy, i have base attributes of 17-13-14-8-8-15 (before modifiers). I cant get that with your Pointbuy, and that is barely passable when i have 5 +2 tomes, 3 +6 items, and +6 to strength and constitution. with +16 on top of 22 strength, im not hitting consistantly enough the the normal AC values of level 20, let alone if i was hardlimited to +4 strength.

    The classes who most need +6 items and +5 tomes are not the characters who can craft them. They are the characters who need a number of attributes to cover their failings in different areas at different times. DCs are already severely out of proportion to the saves they target, the cost of magic equipment is vastly out of proportion with wealth.


    Multiclassing doesnt need more rules, the only rule needed for it is that the total XP needed is always equal to that required to attain the next level of your ECL.


    LA is broken because standard Guidelines were never outlined for 3.5. Half-Minotaur and Lolth-touched and most of the other broken ones are simple to deal with: Its easier and more effective to simply ban Dragon templates because more of the notable non-epic templates come from it then from WotC.


    Did i say that WBL Worked? No, i said those were the minimum required items for making a functional high level mundane.
    Last edited by toapat; 2013-02-12 at 02:37 PM.
    My Homebrew: found here.
    When you Absolutely, Positively, Gotta Drop some Huge rocks, Accept NO Substitutes

    PM Me if you would like a table from my homebrew reconstructed.

    Drow avatar @ myself

  12. - Top - End - #12
    Firbolg in the Playground
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Zman's Dnd Overhaul(3.5 Overhaul)

    Base 14 Str +4 for levels +4 for Item. Far from Optimized Str.

    Level 20 Paladin, +20 BAB, +5 Str, +5 Weapon, +5 Smite, +3 Divine Favor.

    Takes a 12 to hit AC50. Seems reasonable to me.

    And that's before any other buffs, debuffs, charge, flank, etc. Seems like he can reasonably hit AC50 at 20th level.

    Fixed Fighter has an even easier time.

    Barbarian isn't hurting for options either.

    Other Melee classes can Manage as well.

    Any particular reason you picked +45 as the required amount!

    Brokn templates aside, LA doesn't work well especially at low levels. A lvl1 Drow Fighter is outclassed in a lvl3 party. My way, he's a level 2 Fighter and will usually be a level behind. Seems reasonable.

    WBL doesn't work. I'd rather fix interclass balance though evening out WBL than trying to rprice magic items. As said, my WBL modification are only really apparent in high level games, where balance is already drastically screwed.
    Last edited by Zman; 2013-02-12 at 03:32 PM.

  13. - Top - End - #13
    Troll in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2012

    Default Re: Zman's Dnd Overhaul(3.5 Overhaul)

    Quote Originally Posted by Zman View Post
    Takes a 12 to hit AC50. Seems reasonable to me.
    40% chance to hit is not reasonable when it is only one attack in a round

    WBL doesnt work because the items are not priced reasonably at all, Raping it into the dirt when i easily can spend a million GP on equipment (without getting non-essential gear before that) already for a level 20 mundane wont help that

    if you are rolling a Drow, fighter isnt a class you should be playing (because of crappy race/class synergy), the only mundane classes you should play as a drow are crusader or warblade.
    Last edited by toapat; 2013-02-12 at 05:07 PM.
    My Homebrew: found here.
    When you Absolutely, Positively, Gotta Drop some Huge rocks, Accept NO Substitutes

    PM Me if you would like a table from my homebrew reconstructed.

    Drow avatar @ myself

  14. - Top - End - #14
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Zelkon's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Somewhere over da rainbow
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Zman's Dnd Overhaul(3.5 Overhaul)

    I have to agree with Topat in spirit here. WBL didn't work, but the games assumptions were built around it and there was no reason to change. I don't think making 18 hard to get in point buy was a good idea; instead, consolidate classes into SAD or DAD, and go the 4e route of having a sort of standard requirement of having an 18 along with any secondaries. Otherwise, you've just added to the roadblocks that annoy me about 3.5 that get in the way. It's a nice piece of work, but there's something about it that makes me a little unenthusiastic.
    Akrim.elf made my wonderful ponytar.
    Spoiler
    Show

    "Curse that infernal yellowish-brown text right under comics! When shall you turn normal brown again?" -every OOTS fan ever.
    I support laziness. Call me Z if you can't be bothered to spell my full name.
    Come help build a fantasy setting!

  15. - Top - End - #15
    Firbolg in the Playground
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Zman's Dnd Overhaul(3.5 Overhaul)

    Quote Originally Posted by Zelkon View Post
    I have to agree with Topat in spirit here. WBL didn't work, but the games assumptions were built around it and there was no reason to change. I don't think making 18 hard to get in point buy was a good idea; instead, consolidate classes into SAD or DAD, and go the 4e route of having a sort of standard requirement of having an 18 along with any secondaries. Otherwise, you've just added to the roadblocks that annoy me about 3.5 that get in the way. It's a nice piece of work, but there's something about it that makes me a little unenthusiastic.
    The WBL explosion that happens after mid levels is one thing that I really didn't like, coupled with the further SAD imbalance that the tomes allowed, was a large driving force behind my modifications.

    I don't believe the game was built around assuming an 18 in one's primary stat. In fact, built off of the recommended pointbuy makes that very difficult. I see the intent to create an incentive for more moderate stats. The required 18 philosophy is purely due for our love of optimization.

    The goal is an overhaul of 3.5 that is more inline of my vision of it. Maxing Int into the 30s just isn't in line with that vision. I also find it difficult that the WBL reduction will ruin high level play as most monsters get thoroughly trounced by characters levels before they should be. They may have build the game around certain assumptions, but that doesn't mean those assumptions were correct as evidenced by the long list of broken abilities, classes, etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by toapat View Post
    40% chance to hit is not reasonable when it is only one attack in a round

    WBL doesnt work because the items are not priced reasonably at all, Raping it into the dirt when i easily can spend a million GP on equipment (without getting non-essential gear before that) already for a level 20 mundane wont help that

    if you are rolling a Drow, fighter isnt a class you should be playing (because of crappy race/class synergy), the only mundane classes you should play as a drow are crusader or warblade.
    40% to hit a very high AC before other bonuses. A high AC opponent should be a very difficult fight for a Mundane, just as a creature with very high SR and immunities should be a very difficult fight for a Caster. I think we have to look at average ACs for monsters of that CR, then remember that is a fight for four varied lvl 20 characters to face.

    A Drow should be able to play a fighter, my LA modification makes it more easily doable. A choice of Race shouldn't lock you into a certain class selection, that is bad design. Many of my changes were meant to alleviate that.

  16. - Top - End - #16
    Troll in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2012

    Default Re: Zman's Dnd Overhaul(3.5 Overhaul)

    Quote Originally Posted by Zman View Post
    40% to hit a very high AC before other bonuses. A high AC opponent should be a very difficult fight for a Mundane, just as a creature with very high SR and immunities should be a very difficult fight for a Caster. I think we have to look at average ACs for monsters of that CR, then remember that is a fight for four varied lvl 20 characters to face.

    A Drow should be able to play a fighter, my LA modification makes it more easily doable. A choice of Race shouldn't lock you into a certain class selection, that is bad design. Many of my changes were meant to alleviate that.
    You really dont understand balance then. 50% to hit is the bare minimum you should be assuming for balance (this is what 3.5 assumes you should have at level 20 with full attacks). this means a full +9.5 Attack modifier over what you believe is accurate.

    oh, but we also have to account for the increased AC from Half BAB to AC, which means we need another +24 to to hit in order to maintain that 50% full attack base attack bonus. Your argument that Attributes are not needed in massive sums is invalid


    The game does assume certain classes have certain attributes. thing is you are making a huge mistake in thinking the game assumes that no one has 16s, or 18s. What it does assume is that mundanes get +11 to an attribute, and that by level 16, a cleric/wizard/druid/other fullcaster will have 19 in their primary attribute. Thing is removing the ability to get +11 to stuff simply ruins the game because the people who need it are not the ones who only need one singular and finite score in order to function.


    Asto Drow: Fighters suffer practically nothing from that LA other then a much simpler houserule that fixes it in that your LA is granted as RHD instead of as LA, or you have no LA if you have RHD.
    Last edited by toapat; 2013-02-12 at 10:44 PM.
    My Homebrew: found here.
    When you Absolutely, Positively, Gotta Drop some Huge rocks, Accept NO Substitutes

    PM Me if you would like a table from my homebrew reconstructed.

    Drow avatar @ myself

  17. - Top - End - #17
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    bobthe6th's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Under the midnight sun
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Zman's Dnd Overhaul(3.5 Overhaul)

    Actually, have you looked at monster classes? Like the improved monster classes?

    They offer the alternative to LA of just having to level in a separate class.

    Also, why not rip out WBL and replace it with a Vow of Poverty system... Or one of the improved ones lieing around. Maybe offer a thined out version that gives floating gold you can spend on caster specific extras.
    Avatar by Szilard, thank you sir for the fine work!

    my home brew. you should PEACH them...
    Telekineticist
    Razor
    Shield
    blasterv4
    mindbender

  18. - Top - End - #18
    Orc in the Playground
    Join Date
    Apr 2008

    Default Re: Zman's Dnd Overhaul(3.5 Overhaul)

    I'm confused as to your problems with the skill system. People max out skills, which is a problem because... they can then beat DCs too easily? Except for the things that escalate properly. This should be corrected by having the DCs scale properly, not by making a player specialize further and have less tricks to pull off.

    To give an example, as stands, if I'm playing a wizard, I'll only focus on concentration and spellcraft till I can beat all the DCs I need. I'll focus on knowledges and the like to keep them max'd because they scale by level. (The DC is based on the CR of the creature). Your system is penalizing me for choosing a skill with a DC based on CR. In the meantime, it rewards Concentration because the DC is static (except for damage, but frankly, I've given up trying to keep my concentration check for casting while taking damage high. It just isn't gonna happen.)

  19. - Top - End - #19
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    bobthe6th's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Under the midnight sun
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Zman's Dnd Overhaul(3.5 Overhaul)

    I think the idea is that you tend to hyper focus on maxing x skills, but he wants characters with a mixture of not quite maxed skills.
    Avatar by Szilard, thank you sir for the fine work!

    my home brew. you should PEACH them...
    Telekineticist
    Razor
    Shield
    blasterv4
    mindbender

  20. - Top - End - #20
    Orc in the Playground
    Join Date
    Apr 2008

    Default Re: Zman's Dnd Overhaul(3.5 Overhaul)

    There are multiple reasons for that.

    1) Simplicity. You get X skill points at each level, and this is static outside of raising your intelligence (so it might change at level 4, 8, 12, 16 or 20). If those skill points are doing the same thing all the time, then it's one less thing to figure out at level-up, which is already filled with all kinds of weird changes. It's worse than puberty. Things change a bit if you multiclass of course, but he got rid of that problem anyway.

    2) The system encourages it. The current system works extremely well if you max out skills. If you go halfway on two skills, you now suck at two things. Sure, you don't suck as much as someone who's completely ditched them, but any time someone asks for a level-appropriate use of that skill, if you're the only one with ranks, you'll fail.

    Frankly, I always considered putting points into lots of skills kinda like dipping. It's against the initial spirit of the class.

    So, my concern is still as simple as "What's wrong with hyper-focus on a skill?" It doesn't break the system. It makes chargen and levelling up simpler (a big deal in 3.5). It appears to be the intent of the system. This seems to be a case of "Don't fix what isn't broken".

  21. - Top - End - #21
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Deepbluediver's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The US of A

    Default Re: Zman's Dnd Overhaul(3.5 Overhaul)

    Quote Originally Posted by Zman View Post
    Zman's DnD Overhaul
    I've commented in a few of your threads, and I think you and I may have irreconcilable differences of opinion with regards to how 3.X should look, but you've got some interesting ideas here, so I'm going to try and evaluate them as they stand.

    What is it?
    *snip*
    What this is not.
    *snip*
    If you don't want to put in the effort to fix the system entirely, or if I only want to play something that is a little different from 3.5, why don't I just use Pathfinder? What does your system do better than that?


    Abilities: 32 Point Buy using Zman's Pointbuy Alternative
    Ok, this is basically the same thing as giving low-tiers more points in a point-buy system. It's workable, but it still basically acknowledges that some disparity exists and doesn't really fix it. IMO, giving more stats to MAD classes is a band-aid fix that doesn't address the root issue.

    Personally, I just prefer to use ability arrays.

    Level Dependent Ability Increases
    This is an interesting approach, but it's still really just shoring up the low tier classes. A wizard or sorcerer still has exactly 1 important stat and only 3 (total) of any real consequence, so that's what he is going to put his bonuses in.

    Why not try something like this:
    At levels 4, 10, and 16 you can increase any stat by 1.
    At levels 7, 13, and 19 you increase all your stats by 1.

    This is simpler, and still lets classes with a greater diversity of abilities benefit from increases more. It also helps compensate for some of the other stat boosting you removed (which I don't entirely disagree with, more on that later).

    Also, its always bothered me that a high level Fighter or Wizard can have the exact same Intellect or Strength (i.e. off-class abilities) as when they started out adventuring. I think it's a good thing to encourage characters to boost stats other than their primary one, but that's hard to do when you have one or two stats that are obviously far superior to anything else.


    Other Inherent Bonuses
    Tomes have effectively been removed
    Good, I always hated them.

    as 9th level spells have been removed from normal 20 level play.
    Less good. I would prefer to fix rather than ban. There are spells of every level that are tough on balance, and plenty of low level spells that screw up even high-level encounters. I'd rather take a list of some of the worst game-breakers and just tweak them. For example, "Genesis"- just add a line that no material created as part of the demiplane can be removed from it. There, we're solved the infinite wealth issue. "Glitterdust" -keep the anti-hiding and invisibility parts, remove the secondary cause-blindness function. etc etc etc


    Zman's Wealth By Level
    I agree that the WBL is kinda borked, especially if you insist on giving it to PC's purely as coins and let them spend it that way.
    I've always viewed the WBL table as a guideline for the level of item-support a character is supposed to have to face a given CR. It's not written in stone, nor are NPC's required to buy any item a player doesn't want at full market value. I mean, who besides and adventurer really needs a sword of dragon-bane?

    Basically, I don't really have any real objections because this is the rule that I would throw out most quickly, if I had issues with it.


    Hit Points

    Use Vitality and Wound Points with a few alterations.
    I've never liked this system, partly because I'm not certain I understand it. The only thing I AM certain of is that it adds greatly to complexity.

    And realism? I fly around fighting giant insects with tentacles and shooting fireballs from my elbows, I think we checked realism at the door a while back.

    Also, so long as I have vitality points I can still shrug off a fireball to the face, apparently. The entire thing really seems like it's added soley for the sake of fluff, and it's still bad fluff.

    Plus, the system isn't without it's own flaws. Crits go right to wound points (again, assuming I understand this right) and plenty of high-level creatures can deal deadly amounts of wound-damage in a single crit, even to tanky characters. Plus, the 50-HP in one hit SoD rule (whatever it's called, having a brain fart moment) is one of the most frequently house-ruled out, and Wound points replace it with several MORE saves instead.

    Personally, I always had tons of fun (and no real issues) pretending I was this guy:
    Spoiler
    Show

    If you want a rule that makes players care about their HP all the time, there are far simpler ways to go about it. I would prefer something like the following:

    HP<75% = Bloodied [-1 on all rolls]
    HP<50% = Injured [-2 on all rolls]
    HP<25% = Crippled [-4 on all rolls]


    Defense- Armor Class
    I agree that AC needs to scale better, but I'm not sure this is a good valuation. When I was tweaking armor, I did base AC= 5+1/2 HD, for all creatures.
    I understand the fluffy reasons for scaling it to BAB, but that means that anything who can reasonably be expected to hit a melee character at mid level won't even need to roll to smack the wizard. Armor is still important, I don't think there needs to be an ADDITIONAL difference between heavy and lightweight characters.


    Skills

    No Cross Class Skill Penalty: Cross class skills have the same cost as class skills.
    Good.

    Cross Class and Class Skill Maximum Ranks are still in effect.
    Less good. I think that skills are a great way to customize your character, and a character should be able to get good at anything they want to work at. I would prefer to just give a bonus to class skills, since those represent things you (theoretically) do every day as part of your normal routine.

    New skill ranks cost.

    Ranks 1-5: 1 Skill Point
    Ranks 6-10: 2 Skill Points
    Ranks 11-15: 3 Skill Points
    Ranks 16+: 4 Skill Points
    This is interesting. It certainly has the effect of encouraging people to spread out skill points, but I think the numbers you have in place make it too expensive.

    Only a few classes will be able to max out any skills at all, and only at the expense of everything else. Most classes will never have a skill above rank 10. I would suggest altering it to:
    Ranks 1-8: 1 Skill Point
    Ranks 9-16: 2 Skill Points
    Ranks 17-24: 3 Skill Points

    Also, individual skills still need fixing. Diplomacy (and things like it) are broken because with items, feats, and syngery you can get a bonus of 120+ and use it as a free action, which makes the difference between 10 ranks and 15 ranks almost pointless.

    And because it can permenantely turn a hostile dragon into your best friend, and it's supposed to be compared to something like "Jump".

    Spellcasting

    See Zman's Minor Magic Fix
    I'll go check it out, but at first glance it's less of a fix for the system of using magic, and more a list of tweaks to individual spells.

    My biggest complaint about magic is that it's automatically succesful, in the sense that I need to roll to make an attack, or avoid a trap, or jump across a pit, but I can alter the very fabric of reality just by thinking about it. And SR is rare and expensive (compared to something like armor at least). IMO, all spells should require a roll of the dice. just like literally EVERYTHING ELSE IN THE GAME.

    And it can be done very simply, if you feel my total-magic overhaul is too complex.


    Multiclassing
    I've never really like the Dual/Tri-class variant. There are enough published classed to fulfill almost any vision, and if there isn't one then homebrewing something isn't terribly difficult. (Take the War-mage and rework it to be the Thief-mage, etc etc etc)
    What is difficult is dealing with the absolute nightmare that is class balance under this system. Power comes from class features, not HD and BAB, so this is pretty much just gestalt-on-a-stick. Some combinations don't change much at all, some fall apart, and some go completely nuts. Also, I'm still not certain how you would combine Dual-class and Multiclass in one character if some one chooses to go that route (I get a headache just thinking about it).

    Simplicty > Complexity


    Zman's Balanced(More) 3.5 Classes
    The difference between tiers 2 and 4 is still pretty hefty, and overall you are still relying on players to not get in each other's way rather than addressing the issues mechanically. Again, if all I want is a system that shores up the worst of the pitfalls in tiers 5 & 6, why don't I just play Pathfinder?


    LA-Level Adjustment
    I don't have a lot of experience with LA, but this seems like a pretty straightforward way to tackle it. The other option I've seen is to use racial HD, so that a Drow in a third level party starts off with 2 levels of Humanoid to go with his Fighter 1.


    Magic Items
    I dislike most statboosting items as well. I would rather let stats come from the character, and have items grant interesting or unique effects (i.e. a necklace that grants flight, or a ring that shoots fireballs). Of course, some aspects of the game are balanced around having +X, +Y, etc, so this needs to be compensated for elsewhere.


    Combat
    Dex to Damage for Ranged Weapons.
    Ranged combat isn't sucky because it requires 2 different stats (though thats certainly part of it); it's sucky because it requires an entire feat chain just to be decent.

    No Offhand Strength Penalty for Two Weapon Fighting
    Good.

    Feats:

    Power Attack:
    How do I deal with a 3.5 bonus to Damage? How about make it 2:3 instead, since that's the ratio everyone will need to use.

    Leadership: Feat does not exist.
    I think leadership suffered from a lack of direction. And that DnD isn't set up to handle combat for large groups of weak characters well. (there's already a game for that, it's called WarHammer)

    As I said, I would prefer to fix rather than ban, but anything I did to Leadership would look so different from the original it may as well have a different name, so not really gonna complain about it here.


    Items:

    Spiked Chain: Maximum of One AoO per turn.
    If you are going to fix individual items, then I would take the opportunity to make them interesting instead of broken. This sort of thing just seems spiteful. Why is Spiked Chain limited in a way no other weapon is?

    Nightsticks are most broken when they are used in a way that I think the designers did not intend (a lot of the classic Cheese is obtained by combining elements from multiple splatbooks). How about making them an item that anyone can use for turning/rebuking attempts, but can't be sacrificed to fead other abilities.

    And IMO, most of the magical ranges and durations are unbalanced, and any metamatgic just pushed it rapidly into broken territory, even without heavy optimization.


    CONCLUSION
    I think that's everything I can think of atm. There are some individual elements I like, but I would rather just take those and apply them to whatever game I'm playing rather than have to use your entire list, which adds a fair amount of new and more complex rules for relatively little gain.
    Last edited by Deepbluediver; 2013-02-13 at 10:56 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rater202 View Post
    It's not called common because the sense is common, it's called common because it's about common things.
    Homebrew Extended Signature!

  22. - Top - End - #22
    Firbolg in the Playground
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Zman's Dnd Overhaul(3.5 Overhaul)

    Quote Originally Posted by toapat View Post
    You really dont understand balance then. 50% to hit is the bare minimum you should be assuming for balance (this is what 3.5 assumes you should have at level 20 with full attacks). this means a full +9.5 Attack modifier over what you believe is accurate.

    oh, but we also have to account for the increased AC from Half BAB to AC, which means we need another +24 to to hit in order to maintain that 50% full attack base attack bonus. Your argument that Attributes are not needed in massive sums is invalid


    The game does assume certain classes have certain attributes. thing is you are making a huge mistake in thinking the game assumes that no one has 16s, or 18s. What it does assume is that mundanes get +11 to an attribute, and that by level 16, a cleric/wizard/druid/other fullcaster will have 19 in their primary attribute. Thing is removing the ability to get +11 to stuff simply ruins the game because the people who need it are not the ones who only need one singular and finite score in order to function.


    Asto Drow: Fighters suffer practically nothing from that LA other then a much simpler houserule that fixes it in that your LA is granted as RHD instead of as LA, or you have no LA if you have RHD.
    Well, almighty Toapat, lets take a look at a few of your assumptions.

    "I need, on my paladin, a 45 Attack Modifier (which i do have), to consistently hit raid bosses while tanking them."

    A +45 to hit to be effective?

    Looking at the SRD, lets take three CR20 enemies.

    Pit Fiend: AC40
    Very Old Green Dragon: AC36
    Balor: AC35

    Toapat's Paladin has a 95%/95%/80%/55% chance of hitting a Pit Fiend, or 3.25 Hits on Average on a Full Attack sans other modiefiers.
    Has a 95%/95%/95%/75% chance of hitting a Very Old Green Dragon or 3.6 Hits on Average.
    Has a 95%/95%/95%/80% chance of hitting a Balor or 3.65 Hits on Average.

    Considering a character with a +1000 To hit only averages 3.8 Hits per turn, I would call Toapat's Paladin overkill.

    A Full BAB characters Sans Tomes and +6 Items can easily achieve a +20BAB, +6Str(22Str Assuming, 14 Starting Stat, +4 Enhancement, +4 for levels) +5 Weapon or +31 without any added bonuses.

    That is a +31/26/21/16

    Vs Pit Fiend 60%/35%/10%/5% or 1.1 Hits on Average.
    Vs Very Old Green Dragon 80%/55%/30%/5% or 1.7 Hits
    Vs Balor 85%/60%/30%/10% or 1.9 Hits.

    Thats not bad at all and pretty balanced as it doesn't factor in Debuffs, other buffs, situational modifiers, etc.

    Out of everything you've said, there is a useful point you've made. I didn't fully take into account what my defense modifications would do when combined with the reduced ability to increases ability scores. This does lead to potential imbalance at High level play. Now, if we can work on helping you achieve effective communications skills you will turn into a helpful member of the homebrew community and save a lot of trouble and arguing.

    With my defense modifications in place Toapat's Paladin has...

    Vs AC50 Pit Fiend 80%/55%/30%/5% or 1.7 Hits.
    Vs AC 46 Dragon 95%/70%/45%/20% or 2.3 Hits.
    Vs AC 45 Balor 95%/75%/50%/25% or 2.45 Hits.

    This seems to validate my Defense bonus with Toapat's level of play but will prove to be too high if other bonuses are restricted.

    Non Optimized or Buffed Melee is a +31/26/21/16

    Vs AC50 Pit Fiend 10%/5%/5%/5% or .25 Hits on Average.
    Vs AC 46 Very Old Green Dragon 30%/5%/5%/5% or .45 Hits
    Vs Balor 35%/10%/5%/5% or .55 Hits.

    This is indeed a problem. Simultaneously buffing AC based upon CR and lowering higher level characters ability to boost stats into the stratosphere has created an issue with High level play(lvl15+) ACs.

    Thank you Toapat for pointing this problem out, even if it was in your own way.

    I need to strive for a solution that allows for ~75%/50%/25%/5% sans buffs for situational effects.

    Quote Originally Posted by bobthe6th View Post
    Actually, have you looked at monster classes? Like the improved monster classes?

    They offer the alternative to LA of just having to level in a separate class.

    Also, why not rip out WBL and replace it with a Vow of Poverty system... Or one of the improved ones lieing around. Maybe offer a thined out version that gives floating gold you can spend on caster specific extras.
    I've looked at the VOP systems as replacing WBL, and truthfully it just doesn't sit quite right to me.

    I have looked at the monster classes, my Monster alternative was primarily aimed at allowing for more interesting monsters. This system was designed to allow other kinds of monsters that aren't limited by huge RHD problems. A Hill Giant Druid1 is CR8, whereas a Hill Giant RHD12||Druid12 is CR12, IMO much more competitive. It also allows players to play monsters and remain competitive. The monster classes only allow you to accumulate the Monster's stat block over time, IMO it doesn't fix the problems.

    Quote Originally Posted by chaos_redefined View Post
    I'm confused as to your problems with the skill system. People max out skills, which is a problem because... they can then beat DCs too easily? Except for the things that escalate properly. This should be corrected by having the DCs scale properly, not by making a player specialize further and have less tricks to pull off.

    To give an example, as stands, if I'm playing a wizard, I'll only focus on concentration and spellcraft till I can beat all the DCs I need. I'll focus on knowledges and the like to keep them max'd because they scale by level. (The DC is based on the CR of the creature). Your system is penalizing me for choosing a skill with a DC based on CR. In the meantime, it rewards Concentration because the DC is static (except for damage, but frankly, I've given up trying to keep my concentration check for casting while taking damage high. It just isn't gonna happen.)
    Most skills don't scale properly and many don't scale at all. I do not like ultra specialization, the goal is to incentivize a varied skill selection. Currently skills boil down to I auto succeed, or may as not roll. I'm trying to balance the field slightly while making things such as skill focuses useful.

    You do make a good point about some skill DCs which scale by CR, primarily the knowledges. I will need to address those skills as I didn't think about high level checks. Thanks.

    But, for those skills with a fixed CR, namely those in the DC15-25 range this system works well.


    Quote Originally Posted by bobthe6th View Post
    I think the idea is that you tend to hyper focus on maxing x skills, but he wants characters with a mixture of not quite maxed skills.
    This is exactly what i am aiming for.

    Quote Originally Posted by chaos_redefined View Post
    There are multiple reasons for that.

    1) Simplicity. You get X skill points at each level, and this is static outside of raising your intelligence (so it might change at level 4, 8, 12, 16 or 20). If those skill points are doing the same thing all the time, then it's one less thing to figure out at level-up, which is already filled with all kinds of weird changes. It's worse than puberty. Things change a bit if you multiclass of course, but he got rid of that problem anyway.

    2) The system encourages it. The current system works extremely well if you max out skills. If you go halfway on two skills, you now suck at two things. Sure, you don't suck as much as someone who's completely ditched them, but any time someone asks for a level-appropriate use of that skill, if you're the only one with ranks, you'll fail.

    Frankly, I always considered putting points into lots of skills kinda like dipping. It's against the initial spirit of the class.

    So, my concern is still as simple as "What's wrong with hyper-focus on a skill?" It doesn't break the system. It makes chargen and levelling up simpler (a big deal in 3.5). It appears to be the intent of the system. This seems to be a case of "Don't fix what isn't broken".
    I reject 1.

    I agree with 2. The system does encourage specializing in skills, and my goal is to fix it. "Level Appropriate Use of a Skill", there are only a handful of skills which follow this rule. My goal is to bring the skills back into balance and closer to the fixed DCs. I am glad you pointed this out, I have more to fix about skills.


    Quote Originally Posted by Deepbluediver View Post
    I've commented in a few of your threads, and I think you and I may have irreconcilable differences of opinion with regards to how 3.X should look, but you've got some interesting ideas here, so I'm going to try and evaluate them as they stand.

    Appreciated.

    If you don't want to put in the effort to fix the system entirely, or if I only want to play something that is a little different from 3.5, why don't I just use Pathfinder? What does your system do better than that?

    Mainly much of what I disagree with wasn't fixed in Pathfinder. Though, I think Pathfinder did do some things right. My system will be more inline with what my vision of DnD is.

    Ok, this is basically the same thing as giving low-tiers more points in a point-buy system. It's workable, but it still basically acknowledges that some disparity exists and doesn't really fix it. IMO, giving more stats to MAD classes is a band-aid fix that doesn't address the root issue.

    Personally, I just prefer to use ability arrays.

    Arrays are an option I considered. And yes, it is similar to giving lower tiers more points, but Casters that are willing to take a moderate casting stat can benefit greatly from it as well. Fixing the disparity takes more than just ability generation, just a part of the whole.


    This is an interesting approach, but it's still really just shoring up the low tier classes. A wizard or sorcerer still has exactly 1 important stat and only 3 (total) of any real consequence, so that's what he is going to put his bonuses in.

    Why not try something like this:
    At levels 4, 10, and 16 you can increase any stat by 1.
    At levels 7, 13, and 19 you increase all your stats by 1.

    This is simpler, and still lets classes with a greater diversity of abilities benefit from increases more. It also helps compensate for some of the other stat boosting you removed (which I don't entirely disagree with, more on that later).

    This isn't bad, I may add the +1 to all stats at certain levels. Thanks for the suggestion.

    Also, its always bothered me that a high level Fighter or Wizard can have the exact same Intellect or Strength (i.e. off-class abilities) as when they started out adventuring. I think it's a good thing to encourage characters to boost stats other than their primary one, but that's hard to do when you have one or two stats that are obviously far superior to anything else.




    Good, I always hated them.

    Me too.

    Less good. I would prefer to fix rather than ban. There are spells of every level that are tough on balance, and plenty of low level spells that screw up even high-level encounters. I'd rather take a list of some of the worst game-breakers and just tweak them. For example, "Genesis"- just add a line that no material created as part of the demiplane can be removed from it. There, we're solved the infinite wealth issue. "Glitterdust" -keep the anti-hiding and invisibility parts, remove the secondary cause-blindness function. etc etc etc

    It was party of my class based fixes. Many 9th level spells are gamebreaking. I'm reserving 9th level spells for my eventual Epic Rules.


    I agree that the WBL is kinda borked, especially if you insist on giving it to PC's purely as coins and let them spend it that way.
    I've always viewed the WBL table as a guideline for the level of item-support a character is supposed to have to face a given CR. It's not written in stone, nor are NPC's required to buy any item a player doesn't want at full market value. I mean, who besides and adventurer really needs a sword of dragon-bane?

    Basically, I don't really have any real objections because this is the rule that I would throw out most quickly, if I had issues with it.

    And that is all it is, a guideline. I tried to keep low to mid level wealth similar as I didn't see it as problematic.


    I've never liked this system, partly because I'm not certain I understand it. The only thing I AM certain of is that it adds greatly to complexity.

    And realism? I fly around fighting giant insects with tentacles and shooting fireballs from my elbows, I think we checked realism at the door a while back.

    Also, so long as I have vitality points I can still shrug off a fireball to the face, apparently. The entire thing really seems like it's added soley for the sake of fluff, and it's still bad fluff.

    Plus, the system isn't without it's own flaws. Crits go right to wound points (again, assuming I understand this right) and plenty of high-level creatures can deal deadly amounts of wound-damage in a single crit, even to tanky characters. Plus, the 50-HP in one hit SoD rule (whatever it's called, having a brain fart moment) is one of the most frequently house-ruled out, and Wound points replace it with several MORE saves instead.

    It is a more lethal, gritty system that makes even mid and high level characters moderately afraid of combat with monsters that would normally be laughable. Also, high level characters with good Fort saves really aren't at risk of dieing, but are at risk of being disabled on a lucky hit. I have trying to explain away HP loss, wound/vitality points have always made more sense to me. To each their own I guess.

    Personally, I always had tons of fun (and no real issues) pretending I was this guy:
    Spoiler
    Show


    Can't see it.

    If you want a rule that makes players care about their HP all the time, there are far simpler ways to go about it. I would prefer something like the following:

    HP<75% = Bloodied [-1 on all rolls]
    HP<50% = Injured [-2 on all rolls]
    HP<25% = Crippled [-4 on all rolls]


    That isn't a bad way to do it, as before, always just preferred wound/vitality points.

    I agree that AC needs to scale better, but I'm not sure this is a good valuation. When I was tweaking armor, I did base AC= 5+1/2 HD, for all creatures.
    I understand the fluffy reasons for scaling it to BAB, but that means that anything who can reasonably be expected to hit a melee character at mid level won't even need to roll to smack the wizard. Armor is still important, I don't think there needs to be an ADDITIONAL difference between heavy and lightweight characters.

    As pointed out before, I have a couple of problems here, especially at high levels. I tied it to bab as it made the most sense to me.
    As Stands, its purely a bonus to characters. The Wizard was better off now than he was before.




    Good.



    Less good. I think that skills are a great way to customize your character, and a character should be able to get good at anything they want to work at. I would prefer to just give a bonus to class skills, since those represent things you (theoretically) do every day as part of your normal routine.

    I may take the pathfinder approach, it is good and originally I did.

    This is interesting. It certainly has the effect of encouraging people to spread out skill points, but I think the numbers you have in place make it too expensive.

    Only a few classes will be able to max out any skills at all, and only at the expense of everything else. Most classes will never have a skill above rank 10. I would suggest altering it to:
    Ranks 1-8: 1 Skill Point
    Ranks 9-16: 2 Skill Points
    Ranks 17-24: 3 Skill Points

    I had 1-5: 1 Point, 6-10: 2 Points, 11+: 3 Points before I changed it. I may go back to it. It should still do what I am after.

    Also, individual skills still need fixing. Diplomacy (and things like it) are broken because with items, feats, and syngery you can get a bonus of 120+ and use it as a free action, which makes the difference between 10 ranks and 15 ranks almost pointless.

    And because it can permenantely turn a hostile dragon into your best friend, and it's supposed to be compared to something like "Jump".

    I agree, some skills need to be fixed. Diplomancers are a problem. You also make a good point, I need to address Items to some skills and fix said skills.

    I'll go check it out, but at first glance it's less of a fix for the system of using magic, and more a list of tweaks to individual spells.

    My biggest complaint about magic is that it's automatically succesful, in the sense that I need to roll to make an attack, or avoid a trap, or jump across a pit, but I can alter the very fabric of reality just by thinking about it. And SR is rare and expensive (compared to something like armor at least). IMO, all spells should require a roll of the dice. just like literally EVERYTHING ELSE IN THE GAME.

    And it can be done very simply, if you feel my total-magic overhaul is too complex.

    I added in the basic Nonlethal/Vitality damage for casting, and individual spell fixes. I wasn't after anything more complex.


    I've never really like the Dual/Tri-class variant. There are enough published classed to fulfill almost any vision, and if there isn't one then homebrewing something isn't terribly difficult. (Take the War-mage and rework it to be the Thief-mage, etc etc etc)
    What is difficult is dealing with the absolute nightmare that is class balance under this system. Power comes from class features, not HD and BAB, so this is pretty much just gestalt-on-a-stick. Some combinations don't change much at all, some fall apart, and some go completely nuts. Also, I'm still not certain how you would combine Dual-class and Multiclass in one character if some one chooses to go that route (I get a headache just thinking about it).

    Simplicty > Complexity

    True it is a bit more complex, but in my experience the loss of HD, and therefore class features does work well as a balancing factor. Potential for abuse is there, but there always is. Again, more personal preference as I've always enjoyed Dualclassing.

    Simplicity is good, but DnD in general is far from simplistic.




    The difference between tiers 2 and 4 is still pretty hefty, and overall you are still relying on players to not get in each other's way rather than addressing the issues mechanically. Again, if all I want is a system that shores up the worst of the pitfalls in tiers 5 & 6, why don't I just play Pathfinder?

    Tiers 2 and 4 are still playable together. As before, not the biggest fan of Pathfinder though I like what they did with some of their classes. I also started my classes fix with a simple fighter fix, its grown to this.


    I don't have a lot of experience with LA, but this seems like a pretty straightforward way to tackle it. The other option I've seen is to use racial HD, so that a Drow in a third level party starts off with 2 levels of Humanoid to go with his Fighter 1.

    RHD is a good option as well.


    I dislike most statboosting items as well. I would rather let stats come from the character, and have items grant interesting or unique effects (i.e. a necklace that grants flight, or a ring that shoots fireballs). Of course, some aspects of the game are balanced around having +X, +Y, etc, so this needs to be compensated for elsewhere.




    Ranged combat isn't sucky because it requires 2 different stats (though thats certainly part of it); it's sucky because it requires an entire feat chain just to be decent.

    Dex to Damage merely helps, especially around level 3 when everyone no longer even bothers picking up a bow anymore.

    Good.


    How do I deal with a 3.5 bonus to Damage? How about make it 2:3 instead, since that's the ratio everyone will need to use.

    2:3 is the same thing. I can word it better.

    I think leadership suffered from a lack of direction. And that DnD isn't set up to handle combat for large groups of weak characters well. (there's already a game for that, it's called WarHammer)

    As I said, I would prefer to fix rather than ban, but anything I did to Leadership would look so different from the original it may as well have a different name, so not really gonna complain about it here.


    Yes, a leadership fix is a large project in and of itself. I found it simpler to just get rid of it.

    If you are going to fix individual items, then I would take the opportunity to make them interesting instead of broken. This sort of thing just seems spiteful. Why is Spiked Chain limited in a way no other weapon is?


    Nightsticks are most broken when they are used in a way that I think the designers did not intend (a lot of the classic Cheese is obtained by combining elements from multiple splatbooks). How about making them an item that anyone can use for turning/rebuking attempts, but can't be sacrificed to fead other abilities.

    And IMO, most of the magical ranges and durations are unbalanced, and any metamatgic just pushed it rapidly into broken territory, even without heavy optimization.

    To be honest, haven't put much time into the items, those were just the two that came to mind. I need alot more work on this section. Any suggestions for broken items or fixes?

    CONCLUSION
    I think that's everything I can think of atm. There are some individual elements I like, but I would rather just take those and apply them to whatever game I'm playing rather than have to use your entire list, which adds a fair amount of new and more complex rules for relatively little gain.
    Thank you for your time. As I said before, people are free to take what they like, leave what they don't.

  23. - Top - End - #23
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Deepbluediver's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The US of A

    Default Re: Zman's Dnd Overhaul(3.5 Overhaul)

    This isn't bad, I may add the +1 to all stats at certain levels. Thanks for the suggestion.
    What I've come to realize is, for the vast majority of players, if you want them to boost any secondary stat, you kind of have to force it on them. I like to roleplay quite a bit, and even I don't waste points boosting my monk's Charisma score.

    Designing a build around roleplay instead of rollplay is a fool's errand unless the entire rest of the party is doing the same, and the DM is adjusting things accordingly.

    It is a more lethal, gritty system that makes even mid and high level characters moderately afraid of combat with monsters that would normally be laughable.
    Not everyone would consider that a good thing; I think it depends largely on what style of game you and your players are running, but I've had lots of moments where it feels damn good to go back to the enemie who nearly TPK'd you 10 levels ago and just stomp all over them for gits and shiggles. Kind of like turning on cheat codes in video games, I guess.

    Can't see it.
    Hrrmmm....
    Try this finely crafted link instead then.


    As Stands, its purely a bonus to characters. The Wizard was better off now than he was before.
    And the Fighter is a LOT better (in terms of defense), so anything that is boosted high enough to hit the fighter can slap around the wizard just by looking at him cross-eyed. Addmitedly, most lightly armored characters are in the higher tiers and can avoid this kind of thing, but it also sort of FORCES them to avoid. In other words, you can't count the wizard (or sorcerer, or bard, etc) actually surviving even a single hit. It's not wrong, but it's something to keep in mind for how it changes the game.


    True it is a bit more complex, but in my experience the loss of HD, and therefore class features does work well as a balancing factor.
    Then I think there should be a greater penalty, at least to the class-abilities. If a max-level character is "half wizard" and "half rogue", then he should have the abilities of a 10th level wizard and a 10th level rogue. Not an 18th level rogue AND an 18th level wizard. Even if you are slightly squishier than a normal rogue, 18 levels of spells MORE than makes up for it.

    It does work better for the lower tier classes, I admit that. If your really want to keep this, what about an XP penalty for higher tiers? For example, you still split the XP you recieve as normal, but for each tier 3 class in your build you recieve 5% less, for each tier 2 class 10%, and for each tier 1 class 15%.

    So your theoretical rogue/wizard would would only get 80% as much XP as normal, and would have to split it. And a Wizard/Cleric/Druid tri-class would be getting a 45% XP penalty. (the numbers where pulled out of thin air, they could be adjusted)
    Last edited by Deepbluediver; 2013-02-13 at 02:17 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rater202 View Post
    It's not called common because the sense is common, it's called common because it's about common things.
    Homebrew Extended Signature!

  24. - Top - End - #24
    Firbolg in the Playground
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Zman's Dnd Overhaul(3.5 Overhaul)

    Quote Originally Posted by Deepbluediver View Post
    What I've some to realize is, for the vast majority of players, if you want them to boost any secondary stat, you kind of have to force it on them. I like to roleplay quite a bit, and even I don't waste points boosting my monk's Charisma score.


    Again, I like he point you are making. Could do three(4th, 12th, 20h) +1 to all stats, and +to stat of choic at (8th, 16th).

    Not everyone would consider that a good thing; I think it depends largely on what style of game you and your players are running, but I've had lots of moments where it feels damn good to go back to the enemie who nearly TPK'd you 10 levels ago and just stomp all over them for gits and shiggles. Kind of like turning on cheat codes in video games, I guess.

    I hate chat codes with a passion and enjoy a bit of risk. I like knowing that fighting a Greataxe Wirlding Orc has some form of inherent risk.

    Hrrmmm....
    Try this finely crafted link instead then.


    Nope, no dice.

    And the Fighter is a LOT better (in terms of defense), so anything that is boosted high enough to hit the fighter can slap around the wizard just by looking at him cross-eyed. Addmitedly, most lightly armored characters are in the higher tiers and can avoid this kind of thing, but it also sort of FORCES them to avoid. In other words, you can't count the wizard (or sorcerer, or bard, etc) actually surviving even a single hit. It's not wrong, but it's something to keep in mind for how it changes the game.

    The gaol wasn't to boost monsters more, so those classes are only at less risk than before. Yes he fighter gets a bigger advantage, buts it's pretty small for most levels.

    Then I think there should be a greater penalty, at least to the class-abilities. If a max-level character is "half wizard" and "half rogue", then he should have the abilities of a 10th level wizard and a 10th level rogue. Not an 18th level rogue AND an 18th level wizard. Even if you are slightly squishier than a normal rogue, 18 levels of spells MORE than makes up for it.

    The Rogue||Wizard does suffer. He is more MAD, constantly 1-2 levels behind, diluted abilities, lost HD, Skill Saves, it would end up with a 9d6 Sneak Attack and 7th level spells. But at no point would they be as powerful as a Wizard, and would have to rely on spells to be as competent as the Rogue. Compared to the Arcane Trickster sit a similar level of power, just more organic. I've actually had to argue that Averaged Abiliies Dualclass wasn't underpowered in other threads. Try making three 10h level(xp Equivelant) characters and compare abilities and capabilities. I see it a more balanced than the classes themselves. A Wizard||Rogue is more balanced than a Wizard or a Rogue.

    It does work better for the lower tier classes, I admit that. If your really want to keep this, what about an XP penalty for higher tiers? For example, you still split the XP you recieve as normal, but for each tier 3 class in your build you recieve 5% less, for each tier 2 class 10%, and for each tier 1 class 15%.



    So your theoretical rogue/wizard would would only get 80% as much XP as normal, and would have to split it. And a Wizard/Cleric/Druid tri-class would be getting a 45% XP penalty. (the numbers where pulled out of thin air, they could be adjusted)

    Simplicity, this is going a bit too far.

    Blue Responses.

  25. - Top - End - #25
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Deepbluediver's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The US of A

    Default Re: Zman's Dnd Overhaul(3.5 Overhaul)

    Accidentally hit "post" too soon. Here are the other things I meant to reply too as well.


    Tiers 2 and 4 are still playable together.
    Debatable. The difference between tiers 1 and 2 is that some tier 2 builds CAN be gamebreaking, while every tier 1 build has that option. I could make a sorcerer that had the majority of the wizards encounter-ending spells, and I wouldn't even need to prepare certain ones each day.

    The tier list is good, but it shouldn't be taken as gospel. IMO, tiers 3-5 play well together, but tiers 1 and 2 are in a group by themselves. Yes, players can CHOOSE to voluntarily decrease their power, and in a party of all tiers 2 and 3 the DM shouldn't have much trouble creating encounters, but that's not the problem here. The issue with balance is the ceiling (maximum) of a class, not it's range.

    Dex to Damage merely helps, especially around level 3 when everyone no longer even bothers picking up a bow anymore.
    My problem with it is that it doesn't change who uses bows: dexterity based builds (rogue and ranger, pretty much, maybe the occasional cleric).

    For my ranged fix I said that Strength added to ranged damage the same as it does for other melee weapons (Dex is still needed for attack rolls). This doesn't change the need for feats (which I also boosted) but it does make it easier for non-ranged builds (Fighters, etc) to pick up a bow and deal decent damage with it.

    Any suggestions for broken items or fixes?
    Fixing stuff depends on what you want out of a game. IMO, just having boosts to damage or crit range is not enough to justify exotic weapons (or make them interesting). My ideal version of an exotic weapon would be like a regular martial weapon, but with some other unique feature.

    For example, a "Scythe" is an exotic weapon (ignore for the moment all the ways a farming tool is actually a terrible weapon); what does spending a whole feat get you? Slightly increased crit-damage. I'd rather leave the scythe's crit multiplier at x3, and have it grant Cleave/Greater Cleave as part of it's "exotic" package. No other weapon would do this, and it's the sort of unique feature I'm talking about. But I don't know if you want that kind of thing in your games. If I can come up with anything specific for a spiked chain, I will.

    And also, I hate the tripping rules with weapons so much I wrote my own. Gotta keep that in mind.
    Last edited by Deepbluediver; 2013-02-13 at 02:50 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rater202 View Post
    It's not called common because the sense is common, it's called common because it's about common things.
    Homebrew Extended Signature!

  26. - Top - End - #26
    Orc in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2012

    Default Re: Zman's Dnd Overhaul(3.5 Overhaul)

    +1 to all stats at certain levels is a good idea.

    I also love Dex to damage, ranged combat just got better.

    What did you do with combat manevuers such as bull rush and tripping?

  27. - Top - End - #27
    Firbolg in the Playground
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Zman's Dnd Overhaul(3.5 Overhaul)

    Quote Originally Posted by Zireael View Post
    +1 to all stats at certain levels is a good idea.

    I also love Dex to damage, ranged combat just got better.

    What did you do with combat manevuers such as bull rush and tripping?
    If I tackle the maneuvers, it'll end up something like Pathfinder and be a simplified version. But, that is a while off.

    Quote Originally Posted by Deepbluediver View Post
    Accidentally hit "post" too soon. Here are the other things I meant to reply too as well.




    Debatable. The difference between tiers 1 and 2 is that some tier 2 builds CAN be gamebreaking, while every tier 1 build has that option. I could make a sorcerer that had the majority of the wizards encounter-ending spells, and I wouldn't even need to prepare certain ones each day.

    The tier list is good, but it shouldn't be taken as gospel. IMO, tiers 3-5 play well together, but tiers 1 and 2 are in a group by themselves. Yes, players can CHOOSE to voluntarily decrease their power, and in a party of all tiers 2 and 3 the DM shouldn't have much trouble creating encounters, but that's not the problem here. The issue with balance is the ceiling (maximum) of a class, not it's range.

    The goal is to make game ending magic more difficult, bring the casters down a notch, and bring everyone else up. Its not perfect, but it is better. And that is a start. The 4e approach of everyone equal isn't the way I want to go either.

    My problem with it is that it doesn't change who uses bows: dexterity based builds (rogue and ranger, pretty much, maybe the occasional cleric).

    Now there is two ways to add damage to bows, Dex automatically and str with Mighty Composite Bows.

    Not changing who will use bows is akin to saying str to damage doesn't change who uses melee weapons.

    The goal was to make ranged combat more appealing and competetive short of a set of specific magical enchantments and a long feat chain. Now a beguiler can grab a bow and at least stand a chance of dealing some damage, if he has to.


    For my ranged fix I said that Strength added to ranged damage the same as it does for other melee weapons (Dex is still needed for attack rolls). This doesn't change the need for feats (which I also boosted) but it does make it easier for non-ranged builds (Fighters, etc) to pick up a bow and deal decent damage with it.

    Oh, as written Fighter can be a phenonemal archer. Especially with some of my fixes to the class. Now a Primary Dex, secondary Str Fighter with a bow can be a very competent build.

    Fixing stuff depends on what you want out of a game. IMO, just having boosts to damage or crit range is not enough to justify exotic weapons (or make them interesting). My ideal version of an exotic weapon would be like a regular martial weapon, but with some other unique feature.

    For example, a "Scythe" is an exotic weapon (ignore for the moment all the ways a farming tool is actually a terrible weapon); what does the whole feat get you? A slightly increased crit-damage. I'd rather leave the scythe's crit multiplier at x3, and have it grant Cleave/Greater Cleave as part of it's "exotic" package. No other weapon would do this, and it's the sort of unique feature I'm talking about. But I don't know if you want that kind of thing in your games. If I can come up with anything specific for a spiked chain I will.

    And also, I hate the tripping rules with weapons so much I wrote my own. Gotta keep that in mind.

    Very true, I just need to find a way to limit the Spiked Chain of Ridiculousness and AoO of Doom build. Builds like that detract from the game IMO.

  28. - Top - End - #28
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Deepbluediver's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The US of A

    Default Re: Zman's Dnd Overhaul(3.5 Overhaul)

    Nope, no dice.
    rackem frackem grerble grumble....
    Ok, try THIS.

    And if that doesn't work:
    Spoiler
    Show
    Just go to Google and image search for "HP I still have one left"


    A Wizard||Rogue is more balanced than a Wizard or a Rogue.
    Yeah, but that's because you picked one high-tier class and one low-tier class. How does the Monk/Paladin stack up against the Wizard/Druid?

    I just need to find a way to limit the Spiked Chain of Ridiculousness and AoO of Doom build. Builds like that detract from the game IMO.
    See, here's where we differ, I think. I don't mind some one having a good melee build, because there are always methods to get around something like that (that don't feel as personal as an anti-magic field) Something might be encounter-ending, but it's not gamebreaking. If the group has good mastery of the Reach and AoO rules, next encounter they are up against Kobolds with crossbows or a longspear-wielding minotaur.

    The simplest AoO build, as I understand it, doesn't really fit a good definition of "build". It's basically any high-dex class with a reach weapon and Combat Reflexes; just about anyone can do that at level 1. So I would say that I don't mind some one making good use of the rules, but perhaps the benefits should be spread out so they require more of an investment.
    For example (and this is really off the top of my head just as an example) maybe something like: Combat Reflexes grants 1 extra attack of opportunity, and each feat in the Weapon Focus line also grants 1 additional AoO if you have Combat Reflexes. So to make an AoO build some one would need to spend 5 feats. (please don't use this exact rule, it creates more problems, its merely intended to illustrate the kind of thing I mean)

    In addition, needing to get in melee range and therefor suffering AoO is less cumbersome if ranged combat is more widely available, so one adjustment can solve several problems.

    Also (last thing, I swear) some aspects of D&D are fine on their own, but break down when combined or used in ways the designers never intended. For example, dropping your weapon now means your character is in trouble...except that you took Quick Draw and have an entire Handy Haversack of spiked chains, so you get all the benefit of tripping attempts and none of the intended drawbacks. And thats not even the cheesiest stuff you can get into from cherry-picking in splatbooks.

    [In the interest of full disclosure, Bags of Holding and the like are a pet peeve of mine; I ban or restrict them whenever possible.]
    Last edited by Deepbluediver; 2013-02-13 at 03:17 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Rater202 View Post
    It's not called common because the sense is common, it's called common because it's about common things.
    Homebrew Extended Signature!

  29. - Top - End - #29
    Troll in the Playground
    Join Date
    Jan 2012

    Default Re: Zman's Dnd Overhaul(3.5 Overhaul)

    Quote Originally Posted by Zman View Post
    Well, almighty Toapat, lets take a look at a few of your assumptions.

    "I need, on my paladin, a 45 Attack Modifier (which i do have), to consistently hit raid bosses while tanking them."

    A +45 to hit to be effective?

    Looking at the SRD, lets take three CR20 enemies.

    Pit Fiend: AC40
    Very Old Green Dragon: AC36
    Balor: AC35

    Toapat's Paladin has a 95%/95%/80%/55% chance of hitting a Pit Fiend, or 3.25 Hits on Average on a Full Attack sans other modiefiers.
    Has a 95%/95%/95%/75% chance of hitting a Very Old Green Dragon or 3.6 Hits on Average.
    Has a 95%/95%/95%/80% chance of hitting a Balor or 3.65 Hits on Average.

    Considering a character with a +1000 To hit only averages 3.8 Hits per turn, I would call Toapat's Paladin overkill.

    A Full BAB characters Sans Tomes and +6 Items can easily achieve a +20BAB, +6Str(22Str Assuming, 14 Starting Stat, +4 Enhancement, +4 for levels) +5 Weapon or +31 without any added bonuses.

    That is a +31/26/21/16

    Vs Pit Fiend 60%/35%/10%/5% or 1.1 Hits on Average.
    Vs Very Old Green Dragon 80%/55%/30%/5% or 1.7 Hits
    Vs Balor 85%/60%/30%/10% or 1.9 Hits.

    Thats not bad at all and pretty balanced as it doesn't factor in Debuffs, other buffs, situational modifiers, etc.

    Out of everything you've said, there is a useful point you've made. I didn't fully take into account what my defense modifications would do when combined with the reduced ability to increases ability scores. This does lead to potential imbalance at High level play. Now, if we can work on helping you achieve effective communications skills you will turn into a helpful member of the homebrew community and save a lot of trouble and arguing.

    With my defense modifications in place Toapat's Paladin has...

    Vs AC50 Pit Fiend 80%/55%/30%/5% or 1.7 Hits.
    Vs AC 46 Dragon 95%/70%/45%/20% or 2.3 Hits.
    Vs AC 45 Balor 95%/75%/50%/25% or 2.45 Hits.

    This seems to validate my Defense bonus with Toapat's level of play but will prove to be too high if other bonuses are restricted.

    Non Optimized or Buffed Melee is a +31/26/21/16

    Vs AC50 Pit Fiend 10%/5%/5%/5% or .25 Hits on Average.
    Vs AC 46 Very Old Green Dragon 30%/5%/5%/5% or .45 Hits
    Vs Balor 35%/10%/5%/5% or .55 Hits.

    This is indeed a problem. Simultaneously buffing AC based upon CR and lowering higher level characters ability to boost stats into the stratosphere has created an issue with High level play(lvl15+) ACs.

    Thank you Toapat for pointing this problem out, even if it was in your own way.

    I need to strive for a solution that allows for ~75%/50%/25%/5% sans buffs for situational effects.
    You fail horribly at balance. 50% of hits (2/4 attacks in a full attack action) is what 3.5 assumed were going to hit. This means you need 87.5%/62.5%/37.5%/12.5% (medium has to be 75%/50%/25%) chance to hit on each iterative and to remain to as badly balanced as 3rd edition.

    the solution is simple: let them have the +11 to an attribute, because what makes spells broken is that they scale largely independantly of attributes, for instance, the warlock is a good example of a class that has NAD, instead of SAD or MAD

    Note: A Raid boss is CR 24-30, not CR20
    Last edited by toapat; 2013-02-13 at 03:35 PM.
    My Homebrew: found here.
    When you Absolutely, Positively, Gotta Drop some Huge rocks, Accept NO Substitutes

    PM Me if you would like a table from my homebrew reconstructed.

    Drow avatar @ myself

  30. - Top - End - #30
    Firbolg in the Playground
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Zman's Dnd Overhaul(3.5 Overhaul)

    Quote Originally Posted by toapat View Post
    You fail horribly at balance. 50% of hits (2/4 attacks in a full attack action) is what 3.5 assumed were going to hit. This means you need 87.5%/62.5%/37.5%/12.5% (medium has to be 75%/50%/25%) chance to hit on each iterative and to remain to as badly balanced as 3rd edition.

    the solution is simple: let them have the +11 to an attribute, because what makes spells broken is that they scale largely independantly of attributes, for instance, the warlock is a good example of a class that has NAD, instead of SAD or MAD

    Note: A Raid boss is CR 24-30, not CR20
    You still just dont understand effective communication, guess you aren't nearly as smart as you believe you are.

    Regardless of the assumptions you believe they made, the end result failed and requires correction. They also assumed a mixed party, one with debuffs and buffs as well as the use of tactics. And with just a little bit added in cracking the "50% of hits" is very easy. You can't cherry pick assumptions. Throw in Bless and a flank and we've surpassed expectations. Throw in a bit of optimization and debuffs and we blow 50% out of the water at 75/50/25/5 starting. As before, the only problem area is 15+ level, which I've admitted.
    A "Raid Boss" isn't really appropriate for normal 20 level play and should be out of the capabilities of a normal party.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •