Author Topic: Balancing 3.5  (Read 188267 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Midnight_v

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2660
  • Dulce et decorum est pro alea mori.
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #600 on: August 24, 2008, 11:48:11 AM »
Oh noes, necromancers can't exist!  Sure they can.  You just can't play one as a PC.  And thank god.
That's the kind of retarded bullshit that got us 4e: "If it takes more than a minute to balance, let's throw it out!"
+1
As I said previously about this same thing: Can't play necromancers: Fuck that.
Quote
Then you've failed at creating a better game.  Current D&D can indeed let players play that character concept.  Your fix removes a character concept some folks want to play.  Therefor, it is not a fix.  The idea, I believe, is to allow as many people as possible to play a character concept as close to what they wanted as possible.  Either suggest a fix that works, or admit that you can't, but saying "it can't be done because I can't think of how, so you can't either" just doesn't work.

JaronK
*Amen* Preach brother JaronK PREACH!

Quote
One possiblity on SoDs is to put a hit point limit on it.  Something along the lines of the Death domain's ability perhaps, where you roll X damage.  If X is enough to kill the target, it dies, if not, it deals no damage.

Now, if we were to do something like this, a SoD actually becomes worse than direct damage, as the save negates instead of halves the damage, and any damage that doesn't kill the target is also negated.  So, we'd need to increase the "damage" dealt per level to make it balance out.  Perhaps something along the lines of 10 points per caster level with different caps at various spell levels.
My initial response to this was "Then people won't use save or dies, and again we start playing forth edition"
This is similar to my idea about S&B I believe that you have to fix evocation without weakening anything else not quite in a vacuum but you have to give them something to make it valuable and competative...

If you're going to do save or dies like this:
*BITCHIMAKILLYOU!* (reference Eminem song)
Necromancy [Evil]
Level: X
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Target: One living creature
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: Fortitude partial
Spell Resistance: Yes

You deal 10 damage per caster level damage.  If the damage is enough to kill the target, it dies*,  if not, it deals no damage. Damage dealt by this spell cannot exceeded X (where X is whatever we arbitrarily decide).
........................
* this is the most redundant statement ever. Reminds me of MtG's "final fortune" reprint from portal.

In any case yeah you may have found a way to make save or dies worthless or you've made many smaller versions of "Harm" which could be cool. . .
It all depends on what we set X at don't it. If it caps out at spell level like 5th level spell does 50 points flat damage its not really a save or die is it. If it percaster level "uncapped' it may well be the same thing as a save or die is now.

I have to say though I'd be more comfortable with that spell, if it was
10 damage percaster level and if you make your save, bad shit happens to you, just not death.

  If the answer is to make all the other choices bad enough or to remove alternatives till evocation is the best school, then the thing is we can just go see how that works in the new edition forum, really, but there now point to trying to "balance 3.5" then ending up at forth edtion, if thats the case we can all pick up some new books and spare ourselves the bother.
\\\"Disentegrate.\\\" \\\"Gust of wind.\\\" \\\"Now Can we PLEASE resume saving the world?\\\"

Chemus

  • Donkey Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 751
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #601 on: August 24, 2008, 03:03:14 PM »
One possiblity on SoDs is to put a hit point limit on it.  Something along the lines of the Death domain's ability perhaps, where you roll X damage.  If X is enough to kill the target, it dies, if not, it deals no damage.

Now, if we were to do something like this, a SoD actually becomes worse than direct damage, as the save negates instead of halves the damage, and any damage that doesn't kill the target is also negated.  So, we'd need to increase the "damage" dealt per level to make it balance out.  Perhaps something along the lines of 10 points per caster level with different caps at various spell levels.

Another option is to simply remove that part about not dealing damage if the target isn't killed, and just make it into a more potent direct damage spell with a saving throw to negate the damage.  We could take a cue from the the change in Disintigrate from 3.0 to 3.5.  It went from an insta-kill to 2d6 per caster level, max 40d6.

I feel either of these options can preserve the flavor of a SoD spell, while bringing down it's potency to give DD a bit more of a chance.  I'd still want to beef a few DD spells, but I have to put a bit more thought into that aspect.

Attacking Hit Points doesn't seem to me to be the way to go. Attacking Hit Dice, a la circle of death and sleep, has a lot less variance in targets due to high Con which can make many creatures immune, even at the correct CR. HD, not HP should determine efficacy of abilities, IMO. The save alone helps, but max individual HD = your CL might be a good start for some spells.

Quote
Also on the turning bit, I vote that turning paralyzes/stuns/dazes the undead for both sides, with a will save versus...10 + 1/2 CL + Cha. Control via Turning is .... interesting to balance. Making them lose actions is a good thing, IMO. DD is less useful, also IMO.
That's the way it's currently posted on the first page.  I think the only difference is that you need a feat to do either of those, instead of just damage. 

I think that the damage and healing properties should be the feat, and the paralysis (or better, make it dazed or stunned, they shouldn't be helpless, unless...aha!*) should be the base. Thoughts?

*Turned creatures are dazed (unable to take actions, but are not helpless) for the duration, unless their HD <= 1/2 your turning level (Cleric level + any levels that improve it), in which case they're paralyzed. This would affect all creatures within range; any with turn resistance would gain that as a bonus to their save. This would be the same for both Positive and Negative energy clerics. The goody-two-shoes would have the glaring power of their deity halt the undead plague, and the dark nasties would have professional courtesy. Flavor sword cuts both ways.

Anyway, that's my ideas for now.
*waves hand* This is not the sig you're looking for...
The freely downloadable and searchable 3.5 SRD I prefer (Web)
Camlen, Enniwey

Sunic_Flames

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4782
  • The Crusader of Logic.
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #602 on: August 24, 2008, 03:06:03 PM »
Making it HD based means just about everything that isn't a classed humanoid is immune until long after the encounter is trivial. A 21 HD elemental is CR 9 for example.
Smiting Imbeciles since 1985.

If you hear this music, run.

And don't forget:


There is no greater contribution than Hi Welcome.

Huge amounts of people are fuckwits. That doesn't mean that fuckwit is a valid lifestyle.

IP proofing and avoiding being CAPed OR - how to make characters relevant in the long term.

Friends don't let friends be Short Bus Hobos.

[spoiler]
Sunic may be more abrasive than sandpaper coated in chainsaws (not that its a bad thing, he really does know what he's talking about), but just posting in this thread without warning and telling him he's an asshole which, if you knew his past experiences on WotC and Paizo is flat-out uncalled for. Never mind the insults (which are clearly 4Chan-level childish). You say people like Sunic are the bane of the internet? Try looking at your own post and telling me you are better than him.

Here's a fun fact: You aren't. By a few leagues.
[/spoiler]

Ubernoob

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2217
  • Happy Panda
    • Email
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #603 on: August 24, 2008, 03:43:13 PM »
Just to clarify for JaronK:
I believe we should still have hordes of undead.  They just need to be determined by CR and not HD.  The cost has to be something other than GP to create an undead I'm thinking.  I'm thinking that end CR=your ECL-2 for one good pet and the ability to trade that out fractal wise is going to create the best balance.  No matter what all your pets add up to a CR 2 less than yourself.  It would cost a feat or something to make undead (so, effectively leadership with a twist).  Evil paladins that want to be badass can take this feat to have an undead mount and be more badass.  Evil necromancers can have shitloads of minions swarming the heroes while they toss out SoLs.

Thoughts?  Just having create undead cost a feat and function similar to leadership?
Ubernoob is a happy panda.

Squirrelloid

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 407
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #604 on: August 24, 2008, 04:24:53 PM »
JaronK, go argue with Frank and K on /tg/.  Its their test after all.  And maybe you'll actually learn something.

No.  If you can't argue the point effectively here, admit it and be done with it or agree to disagree.  Telling someone "I can't defend my point, so you go over somewhere else and maybe someone there can" isn't terribly useful.

I'm just tired of arguing the matter with you.  And I'm willing to bet F+K have insights that I don't at the moment, especially as I haven't thought overly much about the same game test in like 6 months.

Quote
Quote
I think pets, any pets, are broken.

There you go making blanket statements again.  Ranger Animal Companions?  Familiars?  You already stated those were fine, yet here you go claiming they're not.  Zombies aren't as good as Ranger Animal Companions, as a rule (yes, the Hydra is an exception.  Not easy to find many more), yet you lump them in.

No, Ubernoob already stated those are fine.  His opinions are his own.

Quote
Quote
Oh noes, necromancers can't exist!  Sure they can.  You just can't play one as a PC.  And thank god.

Then you've failed at creating a better game.  Current D&D can indeed let players play that character concept.  Your fix removes a character concept some folks want to play.  Therefor, it is not a fix.  The idea, I believe, is to allow as many people as possible to play a character concept as close to what they wanted as possible.  Either suggest a fix that works, or admit that you can't, but saying "it can't be done because I can't think of how, so you can't either" just doesn't work.

.... no.  A better game and being able to do all the same things are not related.  If you can't balance something because its too powerful for the balance point you're looking for, then you have to axe it.  Including broken material because 'we need to have this capability' leads to bad games. 

I've already granted that pets work fine if your balance point is Races of War and the rest of the Tome series.  Except then we're done, because we have a balanced D+D.  But we've already decided that's not the balance point we're looking for, at which point we need to choose abilities that aren't that powerful to keep.  You're asking for Thor to be available in a game where the balance point is daredevil.  That just doesn't work.
The ignorant shall fall to the squirrels. -Chip 4:2

Chemus

  • Donkey Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 751
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #605 on: August 24, 2008, 05:25:55 PM »
Making it HD based means just about everything that isn't a classed humanoid is immune until long after the encounter is trivial. A 21 HD elemental is CR 9 for example.

You make a very good point, and I'd forgotten about that. While I am not into the 'rocket launcher tag' that has been expressed as a result of playing Frank and K's altered system, I do believe that the monsters and other opponents can, and should, become balanced in a HD=ECL=CR fashion.
*waves hand* This is not the sig you're looking for...
The freely downloadable and searchable 3.5 SRD I prefer (Web)
Camlen, Enniwey

Midnight_v

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2660
  • Dulce et decorum est pro alea mori.
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #606 on: August 24, 2008, 05:27:15 PM »
Quote
.... no.  A better game and being able to do all the same things are not related.  If you can't balance something because its too powerful for the balance point you're looking for, then you have to axe it.
I see... and disagree but thats fine too it happens even with people you typically agree with.

Quote
I'm just tired of arguing the matter with you.
As am I so if we move of from undead the next topic I belive robby suggested was SoD's.

.......
I do have a question about actions as a resource, if its that important where did you feel your idea for the rebalanced fighter sat on the tiers? I mean it eventually got a few extra actions each round if I'm not mistaken ...
\\\"Disentegrate.\\\" \\\"Gust of wind.\\\" \\\"Now Can we PLEASE resume saving the world?\\\"

Ubernoob

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2217
  • Happy Panda
    • Email
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #607 on: August 24, 2008, 05:32:50 PM »
I think we should just get rid of SoDs.  Making them direct damage just means they are useless.  Getting rid of them means more god wizards and buffing.  Things like grease are fine.  Flesh to stone is not.
Ubernoob is a happy panda.

Squirrelloid

  • Bi-Curious George
  • ****
  • Posts: 407
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #608 on: August 24, 2008, 06:06:00 PM »
Quote
.... no.  A better game and being able to do all the same things are not related.  If you can't balance something because its too powerful for the balance point you're looking for, then you have to axe it.
I see... and disagree but thats fine too it happens even with people you typically agree with.

Well, I'm happy playing Tome games if I want to play with everything.

Consider you're playing a superhero game with characters like Iron Fist and Daredevil.  Someone wants to play Thor or Captain Marvel.  Who's being unreasonable here: the game for not allowing them to play the character type they want, or the player for wanting to do something totally out of line with what the rest of the game is balanced for?  My money is on the player.

Now, if you want to play Thor, Captain Marvel, and Iron Man, then you'rein business, because you all want to play the same game.

Does our new game need to include chain-binding for free wishes as well, because the game currently already includes that?

Quote
I do have a question about actions as a resource, if its that important where did you feel your idea for the rebalanced fighter sat on the tiers? I mean it eventually got a few extra actions each round if I'm not mistaken ...

My rebalanced fighter was supposed to be much of the way towards balanced with casters as written.  Ie, good enough to actually be played, not good enough to actually be as powerful.  But at least the caster players won't begrudge the fighter's presence instead of something awesome like another caster.  And the fighter won't feel totally useless.  It was also written for people for whom the Races of War fighter fix was too much.

Since Robbypants has specifically asked for a lower balance point, I'm trying to keep us on target towards a lower balance point.  Because otherwise i'm happy to play Tome series and declare the game is already balanced.  But Robbypants doesn't want that. Its disrespectful to Robby to work towards a balance point in his thread that he doesn't want to play at, especially after he's stated his preference.
The ignorant shall fall to the squirrels. -Chip 4:2

RobbyPants

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 7139
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #609 on: August 24, 2008, 06:16:20 PM »
  If the answer is to make all the other choices bad enough or to remove alternatives till evocation is the best school, then the thing is we can just go see how that works in the new edition forum, really, but there now point to trying to "balance 3.5" then ending up at forth edtion, if thats the case we can all pick up some new books and spare ourselves the bother.
Well, I'd like to upgrade direct damage a bit, but how could you make a DD spell on the same level of a SoD without having it do so much damage as to kill anyting on a failed save?  Or is that the goal?  Unless we nerf SoDs and/or improve DD, then the two will never be balance in regard to eachother.  The only other factor I can see is the number of targets.


I think we should just get rid of SoDs.  Making them direct damage just means they are useless.  Getting rid of them means more god wizards and buffing.  Things like grease are fine.  Flesh to stone is not.
I guess that's another option too.  It's not what I had in mind, but it might be viable.  Another option could be to turn them into double save spells, similar to Phantasmal Killer.  That might end up making them more uselsess than DD spells though...
My balancing 3.5 compendium
Elemental mage test game

Quotes
[spoiler]
Quote from: Cafiend
It is a shame stupidity isn't painful.
Quote from: StormKnight
Totally true.  Historians believe that most past civilizations would have endured for centuries longer if they had successfully determined Batman's alignment.
Quote from: Grand Theft Otto
Why are so many posts on the board the equivalent of " Dear Dr. Crotch, I keep punching myself in the crotch, and my groin hurts... what should I do? How can I make my groin stop hurting?"
Quote from: CryoSilver
I suggest carving "Don't be a dick" into him with a knife.  A dull, rusty knife.  A dull, rusty, bent, flaming knife.
Quote from: Seerow
Fluffy: It's over Steve! I've got the high ground!
Steve: You underestimate my power!
Fluffy: Don't try it, Steve!
Steve: *charges*
Fluffy: *three critical strikes*
Steve: ****
Quote from: claypigeons
I don't even stat out commoners. Commoner = corpse that just isn't a zombie. Yet.
Quote from: CryoSilver
When I think "Old Testament Boots of Peace" I think of a paladin curb-stomping an orc and screaming "Your death brings peace to this land!"
Quote from: Orville_Oaksong
Buy a small country. Or Pelor. Both are good investments.
[/spoiler]

AndyJames

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 3112
  • Meep?
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #610 on: August 24, 2008, 06:20:33 PM »
Making things equal to HD doesn't work. Compare the Big T to the Pit Fiend.

Ubernoob

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2217
  • Happy Panda
    • Email
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #611 on: August 24, 2008, 06:23:45 PM »
I think we should just get rid of SoDs.  Making them direct damage just means they are useless.  Getting rid of them means more god wizards and buffing.  Things like grease are fine.  Flesh to stone is not.
I guess that's another option too.  It's not what I had in mind, but it might be viable.  Another option could be to turn them into double save spells, similar to Phantasmal Killer.  That might end up making them more uselsess than DD spells though...
The problem is the all or nothing effect.  That's why the die in save or die means that they need to be gone.
Ubernoob is a happy panda.

RobbyPants

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 7139
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #612 on: August 24, 2008, 07:17:55 PM »
Chanigng the topic a bit, I finally got around to typing up the Alter Self and Polymorph changes I've been thinking about.  Let me know what you think.


Alter SelfPolymorphenhancement bonus to the ability score equal to the difference between scores.  This enhancement bonus is capped at one point per two caster levels (max +6 at 12th)


Edit:
Forgot to add in racial bonuses to Skills!
« Last Edit: August 24, 2008, 07:22:52 PM by RobbyPants »
My balancing 3.5 compendium
Elemental mage test game

Quotes
[spoiler]
Quote from: Cafiend
It is a shame stupidity isn't painful.
Quote from: StormKnight
Totally true.  Historians believe that most past civilizations would have endured for centuries longer if they had successfully determined Batman's alignment.
Quote from: Grand Theft Otto
Why are so many posts on the board the equivalent of " Dear Dr. Crotch, I keep punching myself in the crotch, and my groin hurts... what should I do? How can I make my groin stop hurting?"
Quote from: CryoSilver
I suggest carving "Don't be a dick" into him with a knife.  A dull, rusty knife.  A dull, rusty, bent, flaming knife.
Quote from: Seerow
Fluffy: It's over Steve! I've got the high ground!
Steve: You underestimate my power!
Fluffy: Don't try it, Steve!
Steve: *charges*
Fluffy: *three critical strikes*
Steve: ****
Quote from: claypigeons
I don't even stat out commoners. Commoner = corpse that just isn't a zombie. Yet.
Quote from: CryoSilver
When I think "Old Testament Boots of Peace" I think of a paladin curb-stomping an orc and screaming "Your death brings peace to this land!"
Quote from: Orville_Oaksong
Buy a small country. Or Pelor. Both are good investments.
[/spoiler]

RobbyPants

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 7139
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #613 on: August 24, 2008, 07:25:15 PM »
Also, as for Shapechange, I'm still not sure what to do.  Perhaps I'll just make it a better version of the Polymorph spell I posted, where you can change your form from round to round, and some of the caps are raised.  It's too hard to allow the caster to gain Supernatural abilities unless I create a pre-approved list similar to what I did with the Extrodanary abilities in Polymorph.
My balancing 3.5 compendium
Elemental mage test game

Quotes
[spoiler]
Quote from: Cafiend
It is a shame stupidity isn't painful.
Quote from: StormKnight
Totally true.  Historians believe that most past civilizations would have endured for centuries longer if they had successfully determined Batman's alignment.
Quote from: Grand Theft Otto
Why are so many posts on the board the equivalent of " Dear Dr. Crotch, I keep punching myself in the crotch, and my groin hurts... what should I do? How can I make my groin stop hurting?"
Quote from: CryoSilver
I suggest carving "Don't be a dick" into him with a knife.  A dull, rusty knife.  A dull, rusty, bent, flaming knife.
Quote from: Seerow
Fluffy: It's over Steve! I've got the high ground!
Steve: You underestimate my power!
Fluffy: Don't try it, Steve!
Steve: *charges*
Fluffy: *three critical strikes*
Steve: ****
Quote from: claypigeons
I don't even stat out commoners. Commoner = corpse that just isn't a zombie. Yet.
Quote from: CryoSilver
When I think "Old Testament Boots of Peace" I think of a paladin curb-stomping an orc and screaming "Your death brings peace to this land!"
Quote from: Orville_Oaksong
Buy a small country. Or Pelor. Both are good investments.
[/spoiler]

Ubernoob

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2217
  • Happy Panda
    • Email
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #614 on: August 24, 2008, 07:35:30 PM »
Also, as for Shapechange, I'm still not sure what to do.  Perhaps I'll just make it a better version of the Polymorph spell I posted, where you can change your form from round to round, and some of the caps are raised.  It's too hard to allow the caster to gain Supernatural abilities unless I create a pre-approved list similar to what I did with the Extrodanary abilities in Polymorph.
Shapechange can go fuck itself.  It's just too good.  Giving even racial bonuses to skills, improved grab, +10 enhancement to stat is too good with the duration.  Instead of shapechange, alter self, and polymorph, we should just be using physical versions of disguise self IMO.  Transforming into something as a disguise is a great fantasy trope.  Transforming into something to better craft, grapple, or whatnot is not a fantasy trope.

IMO, we should not have any positive changes to combat stats from shape changing.  I also believe that shape changeing should last longer.  Also, we need to fix true seeing.  It's too good.  Absolutes need to go.  Make it a CL check or something to see through.
Ubernoob is a happy panda.

RobbyPants

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 7139
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #615 on: August 24, 2008, 09:04:46 PM »
Also, we need to fix true seeing.  It's too good.  Absolutes need to go.  Make it a CL check or something to see through.
What do you mean by absolutes?  That it always works and defeats almost anything?
My balancing 3.5 compendium
Elemental mage test game

Quotes
[spoiler]
Quote from: Cafiend
It is a shame stupidity isn't painful.
Quote from: StormKnight
Totally true.  Historians believe that most past civilizations would have endured for centuries longer if they had successfully determined Batman's alignment.
Quote from: Grand Theft Otto
Why are so many posts on the board the equivalent of " Dear Dr. Crotch, I keep punching myself in the crotch, and my groin hurts... what should I do? How can I make my groin stop hurting?"
Quote from: CryoSilver
I suggest carving "Don't be a dick" into him with a knife.  A dull, rusty knife.  A dull, rusty, bent, flaming knife.
Quote from: Seerow
Fluffy: It's over Steve! I've got the high ground!
Steve: You underestimate my power!
Fluffy: Don't try it, Steve!
Steve: *charges*
Fluffy: *three critical strikes*
Steve: ****
Quote from: claypigeons
I don't even stat out commoners. Commoner = corpse that just isn't a zombie. Yet.
Quote from: CryoSilver
When I think "Old Testament Boots of Peace" I think of a paladin curb-stomping an orc and screaming "Your death brings peace to this land!"
Quote from: Orville_Oaksong
Buy a small country. Or Pelor. Both are good investments.
[/spoiler]

AndyJames

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 3112
  • Meep?
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #616 on: August 24, 2008, 09:06:36 PM »
He meant that it works automatically regardless of how high a level or how skilled the other guy is.

Mister_Sinister

  • King Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 910
  • For some people, four walls are three too many.
    • Email
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #617 on: August 24, 2008, 09:59:38 PM »
The main problem with absolutes in general is that they rapidly paint you into a corner at high levels. This is one of the (many, MANY) reasons why epic fails: you simply have no avenues of attack except hit point damage after a while, as everything has immunities to everything all over it.

Everything I learned about DnD I learned from Frank Trollman at The Gaming Den... but nowadays, my work space is the New DnD Wiki.

Check them both out!


RobbyPants

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 7139
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #618 on: August 24, 2008, 10:11:41 PM »
Back to the Polymorph spell I posted a couple posts back: would it be better to split Polymorph into two spells? 

One could be a combat buff, and function just as I printed, but with a duration of one round per level.  Perhaps it would be a 5th or 6th level spell.

The other would be for utility, and not increase your ability scores at all, but would lower them if the new form's scores were lower.  It would still offer (limited) alternate movements, natural armor, and certain senses (low-light vision, dark vision, and scent).  The duration could be made longer for this, to perhaps 10 minutes per level.  Maybe only animal forms can be assumed.
My balancing 3.5 compendium
Elemental mage test game

Quotes
[spoiler]
Quote from: Cafiend
It is a shame stupidity isn't painful.
Quote from: StormKnight
Totally true.  Historians believe that most past civilizations would have endured for centuries longer if they had successfully determined Batman's alignment.
Quote from: Grand Theft Otto
Why are so many posts on the board the equivalent of " Dear Dr. Crotch, I keep punching myself in the crotch, and my groin hurts... what should I do? How can I make my groin stop hurting?"
Quote from: CryoSilver
I suggest carving "Don't be a dick" into him with a knife.  A dull, rusty knife.  A dull, rusty, bent, flaming knife.
Quote from: Seerow
Fluffy: It's over Steve! I've got the high ground!
Steve: You underestimate my power!
Fluffy: Don't try it, Steve!
Steve: *charges*
Fluffy: *three critical strikes*
Steve: ****
Quote from: claypigeons
I don't even stat out commoners. Commoner = corpse that just isn't a zombie. Yet.
Quote from: CryoSilver
When I think "Old Testament Boots of Peace" I think of a paladin curb-stomping an orc and screaming "Your death brings peace to this land!"
Quote from: Orville_Oaksong
Buy a small country. Or Pelor. Both are good investments.
[/spoiler]

Bier

  • Barbary Macaque at the Rock of Gibraltar
  • ***
  • Posts: 135
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #619 on: August 24, 2008, 10:24:08 PM »
If you're serious about the CR system, you should just ditch monster HD and go with CR, like 4E did.

Really, do you need to know elemental BAB progression?  HD type?  COmponents of AC?

What you really want to know is:  DMG, TH, HP, AC, TOuch AC.

That's pretty much it.  And then you just make the elemental to match the CR, as they are doing with their soldier/brute/controller/striker advance scheme.

And POW, it's intrinscially balanced with CR because you make it for CR, you don't need to try and balance undead .5 BAB with d12 hit dice and no Con bonus and give them huge HD and bork the advance schema.

We're already talking about HD as not balancing CR, and CR as being more relevant.  Monstrous Scorpions are unaffected by holy word at CR, what, 8?  makes no sense.

Put Level = CR = what monster is supposed to be able to do, and you can actually have all the special abilites even themselves out.  Caster level? = CR.  Saves? Appropriate for CR.  AC? APpropriate for type/CR.  Need a 'boss monster?"  UP a couple key stats or the CR, or something as simple as double the HP.

Do you really need to justify it with crazy HD/BAB advance schemes?  that's why there's the whole balance problem with 3.5 monsters now, trying to justify that stuff.

BTW, if the necromancer animator doesn't work, neither does the conjuror, who does basically the same thing.  One thing that might help is cutting down on the action advantage by forcing a move action spent to command your undead minion that hates you so much, or the conjured creature that isn't sure what to do in any one circumstance.

---

I'm also of the opinion that as soon as you starting letting PC's play templates and monsters with +LA, you start wonking the system.

The 'one save for all spells, regardless of level' will have to be reflected by 'base save mechanic for all levels', to counterbalance it (another 4E mechanic), with boosts from stats on both sides, and possibly a class boost to complement.  This gives us a base 50/50 success for strong saves, where stats on both sides are equal, but 'off stats' are going to fail miserably without the stats to back them.  Save mods could swing the issue, if you don't allow Spell DC boosting with enhancement as they do in 4E, another balance mechanic...

Just thinking aloud.

Das Bier!