Author Topic: Balancing 3.5  (Read 188250 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Prime32

  • Administrator
  • Organ Grinder
  • *
  • Posts: 7534
  • Modding since 03/12/10
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #820 on: September 05, 2008, 04:29:04 PM »
Giving it at level 1 makes the system simpler as a whole. You can just have an attack action, rather than two types of attack action and a class feature.

If you want something extra for spending a whole round at it, give something like Flurry of Blows without the penalty (though I don't think this is a good idea personally).


How does this affect the power of Spring Attack, though? Would an "Improved Spring Attack" feat that allows movement between each attack be balanced?
« Last Edit: September 05, 2008, 04:33:26 PM by Prime32 »
My work
The tier system in a nutshell:
[spoiler]Tier 6: A cartographer.
Tier 5: An expert cartographer or a decent marksman.
Tier 4: An expert marksman.
Tier 3: An expert marksman, cartographer and chef who can tie strong knots and is trained in hostage negotiation or a marksman so good he can shoot down every bullet fired by a minigun while armed with a rusted single-shot pistol that veers to the left.
Tier 2: Someone with teleportation, mind control, time manipulation, intangibility, the ability to turn into an exact duplicate of anything, or the ability to see into the future with perfect accuracy.
Tier 1: Someone with teleportation, mind control, time manipulation, intangibility, the ability to turn into an exact duplicate of anything and the ability to see into the future with perfect accuracy.[/spoiler]

Ubernoob

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2217
  • Happy Panda
    • Email
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #821 on: September 05, 2008, 04:36:45 PM »
Giving it at level 1 makes the system simpler as a whole. You can just have an attack action, rather than two types of attack action and a class feature.

If you want something extra for spending a whole round at it, give something like Flurry of Blows without the penalty (though I don't think this is a good idea personally).


How does this affect the power of Spring Attack, though? Would an "Improved Spring Attack" feat that allows movement between each attack be balanced?
That's a good idea.  Spring attack was underpowered to start with.  We should fix it to be closer to a dervish dance.
Ubernoob is a happy panda.

RobbyPants

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 7139
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #822 on: September 05, 2008, 04:48:48 PM »
Are people thinking of doing away with pounce and making all full attacks a standard action?  What level would they get this ability?  Level 1, or at some BAB?  At level 1, it certainly makes a TWF rogue more viable right out of the box.
Level 1.  Full attacks are less powerful than spells so they shouldn't cost more actions.
So, would charging be a standard action as well?  Should chargers get multiple attacks per charge, or some other benifit?
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]

JaronK

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4039
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #823 on: September 05, 2008, 04:57:39 PM »
See, I think full attacks on all standard actions is a bad idea.  There's nothing wrong with some melee classes being more mobile than others... the martial adepts being able to move and strike, while the Barbarian pounces and the Ranger/Scout moves and shoots with Greater Manyshot.  Meanwhile, Fighters, Paladins, and other classes can't be as mobile (unless they multiclass or set up as chargers or whatever).  That's a good thing... variety is good.  However, the less mobile classes just need something to make up for it... they need to be quite effective when they can stand and beat on the enemies.

Variety is important. 

JaronK

Prime32

  • Administrator
  • Organ Grinder
  • *
  • Posts: 7534
  • Modding since 03/12/10
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #824 on: September 05, 2008, 05:04:28 PM »
So, would charging be a standard action as well?
No - just clarify a charge as including an attack action rather than an attack.

See, I think full attacks on all standard actions is a bad idea.  There's nothing wrong with some melee classes being more mobile than others... the martial adepts being able to move and strike, while the Barbarian pounces and the Ranger/Scout moves and shoots with Greater Manyshot.  Meanwhile, Fighters, Paladins, and other classes can't be as mobile (unless they multiclass or set up as chargers or whatever).  That's a good thing... variety is good.  However, the less mobile classes just need something to make up for it... they need to be quite effective when they can stand and beat on the enemies.

Variety is important.
Since you are comparing martial adepts and swift hunters to fighters and paladins... of course the latter need something extra.
My work
The tier system in a nutshell:
[spoiler]Tier 6: A cartographer.
Tier 5: An expert cartographer or a decent marksman.
Tier 4: An expert marksman.
Tier 3: An expert marksman, cartographer and chef who can tie strong knots and is trained in hostage negotiation or a marksman so good he can shoot down every bullet fired by a minigun while armed with a rusted single-shot pistol that veers to the left.
Tier 2: Someone with teleportation, mind control, time manipulation, intangibility, the ability to turn into an exact duplicate of anything, or the ability to see into the future with perfect accuracy.
Tier 1: Someone with teleportation, mind control, time manipulation, intangibility, the ability to turn into an exact duplicate of anything and the ability to see into the future with perfect accuracy.[/spoiler]

RobbyPants

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 7139
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #825 on: September 05, 2008, 05:05:56 PM »
JaronK, what kinds of things would you suggest?
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]

AfterCrescent

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Organ Grinder
  • *
  • Posts: 4220
  • Here After
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #826 on: September 05, 2008, 05:14:10 PM »
No - just clarify a charge as including an attack action rather than an attack.
That's a terrible idea without completely reworking charge. You already trade 2AC for a +2 to hit, but now you're getting a free extra move action?
The cake is a lie.
Need to play table top? Get your game on at:
Brilliant Gameologists' PbP Forum. Do it, you know you want to.
The 3.5 Cleric Handbook
The 13th Guard - An alternate history campaign idea.
Clerics just wake up one morning and decide they need to kick ass, and it needs to be kicked NOW. ~veekie

Shadowhowler

  • Barbary Macaque at the Rock of Gibraltar
  • ***
  • Posts: 149
    • Email
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #827 on: September 05, 2008, 05:48:18 PM »

I've never been a fan of basing spell effects off of the caster's size (unless the spell is doing something to the caster himself, like Enlarge Person).  That thought did occur to me.


 
I agree. Having the magic be effected in any way by the size of the caster just makes no sense to me. The idea of magic to me is that the caster can use the power of his mind to amazing results... the power of his limbs matter not at all. So a Pixie's spells are just as powerfull as an Titans.

Midnight_v

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2660
  • Dulce et decorum est pro alea mori.
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #828 on: September 05, 2008, 06:24:00 PM »
Getting rid of the charge is stupid. So we want to kill the charger archtype?
Pass.
Even if you make full attacks stadard actions we should keep the things that already are good.
Though I have to say that, Bier had been leading up to that for a while. . .
I mean like thats our first exchange, and I was like "whatever you're just looking for a way to get rid of chargers, which you hate." predictable.
Uber I think doesn't want to play anything really 3.5 if I look at the over all veiw of he, squirrellord and MAYBE Jaronk (naw actually not jaron), ulitimately, they want a system re-write. Have been wanting it from the begining, and frankly would be happier just playing the tome series or the tome series light.
Robbypants, I have a question...
How many changes can we make and still call it 3.5? At a certain point it goes beyond simple house rules for an better game, we've know entered a realm where basically, we are writing a new game, almost.
We're not even "backwards" compatible like paizo.
If we get rid of charge/pounce what do the great cats do as attack forms.
Most of them have pounce/rend.

I think perhaps maybe we've gone too far down the road, personally.

\\\"Disentegrate.\\\" \\\"Gust of wind.\\\" \\\"Now Can we PLEASE resume saving the world?\\\"

RabidPirateMan

  • Barbary Macaque at the Rock of Gibraltar
  • ***
  • Posts: 158
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #829 on: September 05, 2008, 07:09:38 PM »
Charging isn't the problem.

Full attack on a charge isn't even the biggest problem.

Every class getting a full attack on a charge is.

JaronK (I think) is echoing my plea for diversity within the classes.  The difference between Fighter, Barbarian, Ranger and Paladin kind of smear together when they all get pounce.

As for rewriting the system, I think if we just keep the concepts of 3.5 and tweak the numbers or add in new class features, it'll still be the same.  However, for equality within the 3-4 tier ladder, this takes a lot of numbers.

Ubernoob

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2217
  • Happy Panda
    • Email
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #830 on: September 05, 2008, 07:10:09 PM »
Are people thinking of doing away with pounce and making all full attacks a standard action?  What level would they get this ability?  Level 1, or at some BAB?  At level 1, it certainly makes a TWF rogue more viable right out of the box.
Level 1.  Full attacks are less powerful than spells so they shouldn't cost more actions.
So, would charging be a standard action as well?  Should chargers get multiple attacks per charge, or some other benifit?
I got ninja'd, but charging should still exist as an option with the old restrictions.  Effectively chargers all have pounce by default though.  They have to deal with difficult terrain, but can go longer if they have the straight line.  If there isn't a charge lane then you can just move and full attack.
See, I think full attacks on all standard actions is a bad idea.  There's nothing wrong with some melee classes being more mobile than others... the martial adepts being able to move and strike, while the Barbarian pounces and the Ranger/Scout moves and shoots with Greater Manyshot.  Meanwhile, Fighters, Paladins, and other classes can't be as mobile (unless they multiclass or set up as chargers or whatever).  That's a good thing... variety is good.  However, the less mobile classes just need something to make up for it... they need to be quite effective when they can stand and beat on the enemies.

Variety is important.  

JaronK
Not needing to optimize out the ass with splatbooks is important.

I've never been a fan of basing spell effects off of the caster's size (unless the spell is doing something to the caster himself, like Enlarge Person).  That thought did occur to me.


 
I agree. Having the magic be effected in any way by the size of the caster just makes no sense to me. The idea of magic to me is that the caster can use the power of his mind to amazing results... the power of his limbs matter not at all. So a Pixie's spells are just as powerfull as an Titans.
That's a fair flavor criticism.  I would like to see some love for larger casters though.
Getting rid of the charge is stupid. So we want to kill the charger archtype?
Pass.
Even if you make full attacks stadard actions we should keep the things that already are good.
Though I have to say that, Bier had been leading up to that for a while. . .
I mean like thats our first exchange, and I was like "whatever you're just looking for a way to get rid of chargers, which you hate." predictable.
I agree completely.
Quote from: Midnight
Uber I think doesn't want to play anything really 3.5 if I look at the over all veiw of he, squirrellord and MAYBE Jaronk (naw actually not jaron), ulitimately, they want a system re-write. Have been wanting it from the begining, and frankly would be happier just playing the tome series or the tome series light.
3.5 had a lot of flaws.  The Tome patched a lot of those.  Since we're using the same caster base as the tomes (not getting rid of SoD et all) then we need to use that as the balance point.  We will ALWAYS arrive at a style similar to the Tome if we don't rewrite the entirety of 3E spellcasting.
Quote from: Midnight
Robbypants, I have a question...
How many changes can we make and still call it 3.5? At a certain point it goes beyond simple house rules for an better game, we've know entered a realm where basically, we are writing a new game, almost.
We're not even "backwards" compatible like paizo.
If we get rid of charge/pounce what do the great cats do as attack forms.
Most of them have pounce/rend.

I think perhaps maybe we've gone too far down the road, personally.
I stated earlier that it'd be quicker to make a new edition from scratch.  We chose not to go that route.  We're taking the lazy route and just bringing everything up to casters.  We're also not giving a shit about backwards compatability because that creates the Paizo effect and creates a piss poor game.  So, we're doing just short of rewriting half of the PHB.
Ubernoob is a happy panda.

RabidPirateMan

  • Barbary Macaque at the Rock of Gibraltar
  • ***
  • Posts: 158
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #831 on: September 05, 2008, 07:14:41 PM »
3.5 had a lot of flaws.  The Tome patched a lot of those.  Since we're using the same caster base as the tomes (not getting rid of SoD et all) then we need to use that as the balance point.  We will ALWAYS arrive at a style similar to the Tome if we don't rewrite the entirety of 3E spellcasting.

Really?

I thought we were just concentrating on class features right now...

Huh, so we're not touching spells?

Sunic_Flames

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4782
  • The Crusader of Logic.
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #832 on: September 05, 2008, 07:19:07 PM »
Fighter, Ranger, etc already do blur together. That's why they're dipped in various combos so often.
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]

Midnight_v

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2660
  • Dulce et decorum est pro alea mori.
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #833 on: September 05, 2008, 07:20:55 PM »
Uber... talking to you make it seem like were doing the right thing.

Get a dergree in Polisci. :clap
\\\"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 #834 on: September 05, 2008, 07:25:32 PM »
Uber... talking to you make it seem like were doing the right thing.

Get a dergree in Polisci. :clap
Law school eventually.  Degree in some sort of physics for my undergrad.
Ubernoob is a happy panda.

JaronK

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 4039
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #835 on: September 05, 2008, 08:33:44 PM »
My suggestion (instead of this "everybody is now a charger" idea) is simply to make the more static fighting classes (Fighter, for example) stronger in other ways.  Fighters obviously need a boost, but let's boost that class, as opposed to just giving every melee class a boost that Fighters need (and some melee classes, like Warblades, don't).  I like that some classes are mobile and others aren't, and giving full attacks on standard actions removes that entirely.

So, fixing Fighters is a pretty straightforward thing... make them better in combat (but not as chargers, trippers, or archers... they're good enough there already) and make sure to also give them non combat options as well (not everyone plays pure hack and slash).  How exactly you do that depends on the person.  Me, I think 4 skill points per level, more class skills (Spot, Listen, Knowledge: History, Sense Motive, Handle Animal), a few useful class features (the Warblade's Aptitude ability fits them perfectly, one floating feat every 5 levels would help a lot too), and all good saves (you're a tank, what's with the will save glass jaw?) and you're set.  Other classes need some work too, but we can modify the classes a bit, so that each has its own play style.

But giving everyone free pounce just makes charging too obvious as the "right" way to go.  We don't actually want every melee on the planet to have Shock Trooper, you know?  Charging should be one option among many.  Right now, it's solid... it needs neither nerfing nor boosting.  And if you want to be mobile and still be effective, play a Warblade or Crusader or Scout or Swordsage or Barbarian.  Those options are already there.

JaronK

Ubernoob

  • Man in Gorilla Suit
  • *****
  • Posts: 2217
  • Happy Panda
    • Email
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #836 on: September 05, 2008, 08:35:59 PM »
My suggestion (instead of this "everybody is now a charger" idea) is simply to make the more static fighting classes (Fighter, for example) stronger in other ways.  Fighters obviously need a boost, but let's boost that class, as opposed to just giving every melee class a boost that Fighters need (and some melee classes, like Warblades, don't).  I like that some classes are mobile and others aren't, and giving full attacks on standard actions removes that entirely.

So, fixing Fighters is a pretty straightforward thing... make them better in combat (but not as chargers, trippers, or archers... they're good enough there already) and make sure to also give them non combat options as well (not everyone plays pure hack and slash).  How exactly you do that depends on the person.  Me, I think 4 skill points per level, more class skills (Spot, Listen, Knowledge: History, Sense Motive, Handle Animal), a few useful class features (the Warblade's Aptitude ability fits them perfectly, one floating feat every 5 levels would help a lot too), and all good saves (you're a tank, what's with the will save glass jaw?) and you're set.  Other classes need some work too, but we can modify the classes a bit, so that each has its own play style.

But giving everyone free pounce just makes charging too obvious as the "right" way to go.  We don't actually want every melee on the planet to have Shock Trooper, you know?  Charging should be one option among many.  Right now, it's solid... it needs neither nerfing nor boosting.  And if you want to be mobile and still be effective, play a Warblade or Crusader or Scout or Swordsage or Barbarian.  Those options are already there.

JaronK
Jaronk, do you want to see melee have as effective actions as casters?  Simple question.  A full attack is about as likely to kill someone as a standard action spell.
Ubernoob is a happy panda.

Midnight_v

  • Organ Grinder
  • *****
  • Posts: 2660
  • Dulce et decorum est pro alea mori.
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #837 on: September 05, 2008, 08:36:07 PM »
My suggestion (instead of this "everybody is now a charger" idea) is simply to make the more static fighting classes (Fighter, for example) stronger in other ways.  Fighters obviously need a boost, but let's boost that class, as opposed to just giving every melee class a boost that Fighters need (and some melee classes, like Warblades, don't).  I like that some classes are mobile and others aren't, and giving full attacks on standard actions removes that entirely.

So, fixing Fighters is a pretty straightforward thing... make them better in combat (but not as chargers, trippers, or archers... they're good enough there already) and make sure to also give them non combat options as well (not everyone plays pure hack and slash).  How exactly you do that depends on the person.  Me, I think 4 skill points per level, more class skills (Spot, Listen, Knowledge: History, Sense Motive, Handle Animal), a few useful class features (the Warblade's Aptitude ability fits them perfectly, one floating feat every 5 levels would help a lot too), and all good saves (you're a tank, what's with the will save glass jaw?) and you're set.  Other classes need some work too, but we can modify the classes a bit, so that each has its own play style.

But giving everyone free pounce just makes charging too obvious as the "right" way to go.  We don't actually want every melee on the planet to have Shock Trooper, you know?  Charging should be one option among many.  Right now, it's solid... it needs neither nerfing nor boosting.  And if you want to be mobile and still be effective, play a Warblade or Crusader or Scout or Swordsage or Barbarian.  Those options are already there.

JaronK
Jaronk. Amen.
Fu for you.

However uber has a point, too.
Your action "I move adjacent to the gray render, and... Attack" *rolls 2d6+ magic + focus+ str.
My action: "Grease"! Move to safety.
The're some problems there...
« Last Edit: September 05, 2008, 08:39:12 PM by Midnight_v »
\\\"Disentegrate.\\\" \\\"Gust of wind.\\\" \\\"Now Can we PLEASE resume saving the world?\\\"

fil kearney

  • Barbary Macaque at the Rock of Gibraltar
  • ***
  • Posts: 210
    • KILLFEAR.COM
    • Email
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #838 on: September 05, 2008, 08:54:30 PM »
Just touching the spell revisions quickly regarding fire type spells....

If you are drowning, you die in 3 rounds. 
why not make "on fire" also lethal after 3 rounds?  it can be neutralized by a full round action to put out flames either yourself, or some one aid another to put you out?  otherwise, fire damage + on fire
round 1: 25% temp damage
round 2: 50% temp damage
round 3: you die.

er... I'm AFB, so not certain on the drowning rules... but "holy fuck you are on fire" becomes a big deal.. and SOMEONE had better do something about it or that guy is dead.  3 rounds is not over powered, but being forced a full round action to take care of it is a nasty effect.

too overpowered?

Guyr Adamantine

  • Donkey Kong
  • ****
  • Posts: 586
  • Chaotic Evil and loving it.
    • Email
Re: Balancing 3.5
« Reply #839 on: September 05, 2008, 08:59:35 PM »
Drowning doesn't happen so often, and you get some time to hold your breath before.

Burning people usually are first level commoners.

Burning alive is quite likely to happen often in D&D.