Brilliant Gameologists Forum

The Thinktank => Homebrew & House Rules => : RobbyPants March 23, 2009, 09:47:34 AM

: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants March 23, 2009, 09:47:34 AM
Well, the Rebalancing project (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=2096.0) I've been heading up is getting close to complete (at least the core parts).  I'm looking to do some play-testing in the near future.  The problem is, I'm not sure the best way to approach it.  Here's what I've thought of so far:

I figured I'd play-test levels 1, 5, 10, 15, and 20, to get a rough spread.  We should probably create characters of each core class, and make parties out of four of them at a time.  I'm not sure the best way to do this.  Really, to play-test each class, I might have to roll up several different PCs to test out different aspects.  For example, I might need to make quite a few clerics!

As for the encounters, I figured I should have a variety of encounters statted up for each level that's being tested.  I think we'd want to have different creature types (undead, constructs, etc) and perhaps NPCs.  I was thinking the party should have to fight four encounters in a day, with some amount of time in between (one hour?).

Should the encounters be random?  I could always stat up six, eight, or ten encounters per level, and roll 1d6, 1d8 or 1d10 to see what they fight.

Anyway, what are your suggestions?  Should we all work on rolling up characters?  This would be a good way to see if things can be broken.  I still think spellcasters are going to come out ahead, but I don't think it will be as bad as before.

_____________________________

Official Rules
(These may get modified as the process is reviewed)

- Characters use a 28 point buy
- Only single classed characters
- Standard wealth by level, no more than half spent on any one item
- Tests will be at levels 1, 6, 11, 16, and 20
- Four person parties will fight four encounters in a day

: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants March 23, 2009, 09:47:51 AM
PCs

Level 1

Halfling Druid 1 by Soda
[spoiler]Halfling Druid 1
Str 10 Dex 16 Con 14 Int 10 Wis 16 Cha 8

Init +3   Spot +7, Listen +7
Languages: Common, Halfling
HP: 10
AC 16   Touch 14      FF 13
Fort +5, Ref +4, Will +6   [+2 vs Fear]
Melee: Shortspear -1, 1d4   [+5 ranged, 20ft]
Ranged: Sling +5, 1d3, 50ft   [+1 attack and damage 30ft, PBS]
      Magic Stone +6, 1d6+1, 50ft   [2d6+2 vs Undead]
BAB: +0   Grapple: -4   [Escape Artist +5]
Abilities: Animal Companion (riding dog)
Qualities: Nature Sense, Wild Empathy
Feats: Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot
Flaws: Noncombatant
Skills: Spot +7, Listen +7, Escape Artist +5, Know Nature +2, Handle Animal +3, Ride +5   [+2 Climb, Jump, Listen, Move Silently]
Spells: 5, 3
   3 Create Water, Resistance, Guidance, Cure Minor Wounds, Detect Magic
   2 Magic Stone, Obscurring Mist, Entangle, Summon Nature's Ally
Gear: Leather armor[/spoiler]

Half-Orc Barbarian 1 by SKRP
[spoiler]Half-Orc Barbarian 1
Str 18 Dex 14 Con 14 Int 10 Wis 10 Cha 8

Init +2
Movement 40 ft. (land speed)
Languages: Common, Orc
HP: 27 [+2 temporary hit points during rage]
AC 16   Touch 12      FF 14
Fort +4 [+6 during rage], Ref +2, Will +0
Melee: Great Axe +5, 1d12+6/x3 [during rage: Great Axe +7, 1d12+9/x3]
Ranged: Shortbow +1, 1d6/x3, 60ft
BAB: +1   Grapple: +5 [+7 during rage]
Special Abilities: Darkvision, fast movement, illiteracy, rage 1/encounter (7 rounds), rage (temporary hit points)
Feats: Toughness, Improved Toughness
Flaws: Shaky
Skills: Intimidate +5, Jump +5 [+9 during rage], Listen +4, Ride +1, Survival +4
Gear: Light mail, Great Axe, Shortbow[/spoiler]

Human Fighter 1 by SKRP
[spoiler]Human Fighter 1
Str 14 Dex 16 Con 16 Int 8 Wis 10 Cha 8

Init +3   Spot +7, Listen +7
Movement 30 ft. (land speed)
Languages: Common
HP: 16
AC 21   Touch 13      FF 18
Fort +5, Ref +3 [+6 to Reflex save for half damage], Will +0
Melee: Battle Axe +3 (+1 while using Two-Weapon Parry), 1d8+2/x3
Ranged: Shortbow +0, 1d6/x3, 60ft
BAB: +1   Grapple: +3
Special Abilities: Weapon Aptitude, Active Defense
Feats: Shield Specialization (heavy), Toughness, Two-Weapon Fighting, Two-Weapon Parry
Flaws: Shaky
Skills: Intimidate 3, Listen 4, Ride 1, Sense Motive 4 and Spot 4.
Gear: Full Mail, Heavy Shield, Battle Axe [/spoiler]

Elf Rogue 1 by SKRP
[spoiler]Elf Rogue 1
Str 10 Dex 18 Con 14 Int 12 Wis 10 Cha 8

Init +4    Listen: +6 Spot: +6
Movement 30 ft. (land speed)
Languages: Common, Elven
HP: 8
AC 15   Touch 13      FF 11
Fort +2, Ref +6, Will +0 (+2 against enchantment)
Melee: Dagger +0, 1d4/(19-20/×2)
Ranged: Longbow +4 (or +2/+2), 1d8/x3 [in 30 ft. range: longbow +5 (or +3/+3), 1d8+1/x3]
BAB: +0   Grapple: +0 [Escape Artist +8]
Special Abilities: Immunity to magic sleep effects, low-light vision, elven weapon proficiencies, sneak attack +1d6, trapfinding
Feats: Point Blank Shot, Rapid Shot
Flaws: Vulnerable
Skills: Balance +8, Escape Artist +8, Hide +8, Listen +6, Search +6, Sense Motive +4, Sleight of Hand +8, Spot +6, Tumble +8
Gear: Light leather, long bow, quiver with 40 arrows[/spoiler]

Gnome Wizard 1 by Soda
[spoiler]Gnome Focused Illusionist 1
Str 6 Dex 12 Con 16 Int 18 Wis 8 Cha 10

Init +5   Spot -1, Listen +3
Languages: Common, Gnome, 4 more
HP: 7
AC 12   Touch 12      FF 11
Fort +3, Ref +1, Will +1
Speed: 20ft
Melee: Club -4, 1d4-2
Ranged: Ranged touch +1
BAB: +0   Grapple: -6   [Escape Artist +3]   
Abilities:
Qualities: Low-light vision
Feats: Improved Initiative*, Spell Focus (illusion), Greater Spell Focus
Flaws: Noncombatant
Skills: Concentration 4, Spellcraft 4, Know Arcana 4, Other Knowledges 8, Listen 2, Escape Artist 2
Spells: Illusion specialty (DC +3), Enchantment, Necromancy, Abjuration banned
   3   Detect Magic, Sonic Snap, Minor Disguise
   1+3   Silent Image x2, Color Spray x2
Gear:
[/spoiler]

Kobold Warlock 1 by SKRP
[spoiler]Kobold Warlock 1
Str 8 Dex 16 Con 14 Int 12 Wis 10 Cha 14

Init +3
Languages: Common, Draconic, one more
HP: 8
AC 17   Touch 14      FF 14
Fort +2, Ref +3, Will +2
Speed: 30 ft.
Melee: Dagger -2, 1d3-1
Ranged: Eldritch Blast +5 1d6+1/x2
BAB: +0   Grapple: -6   [Escape Artist +5]   
Special Qualities: Darkvision 60 ft., light sensitivity, natural armor +1
Feats: Point Blank Shot, Ability Focus (eldritch blast)
Flaws: Noncombatant
Skills: Concentration 6, Escape Artist 5, Spellcraft 3, Use Magic Device 6
Invocations: Shocking Blast (DC 14)
Gear: Light Leather
[/spoiler]

Level 1 human cleric by RobbyPants
[spoiler]Human Cleric 1 (Destruction & War domains.  No deity, longsword as favored weapon for lawful alignment)
Str 14 Dex 10 Con 14 Int 10 Wis 16 Cha 10

Init +0   Spot +3, Listen +3
Languages: Common
HP: 10
AC 15   Touch 10      FF 15
Fort +4, Ref +0, Will +5
Melee: Longsword +3, 1d8+2
Ranged: Sling -2, 1d4+2, 50ft
BAB: +0   Grapple: +2
Abilities: Turn Undead
Feats: Power Attack, Extra Turning, Quicken Spell (flaw), Skill Focus (Jump)(flaw), Martial Weapon Proficiency (Longsword)(domain), Weapon Focus (Longsword)(domain)
Flaws: Murkey Eyed, Shaky
Skills: Concentration +6, Jump +10, Knowledge (Religion) +1, Spellcraft +3
Spells:
   0 x 3
   1 x 2
Turn Undead: x 7 per day
 - Heal 1d6/harm undead 1d6 within 30' (DC 10) for half
 - 1d6 damage to non-magical items & constructs within 30' (DC 10) for half
 - Smite (+0 to hit, +1 damage)
Domain Powers:
 - Phyisical attacks ignore 0 hardness and damage reduction
Gear: Full leather armor, Longsword, Light shield w/holy symbol, Spell component pouch x2[/spoiler]

Level 1 Kobold Sorcerer by RobbyPants
[spoiler]Kobold Sorcerer (Draconic Heritage - Blue)
Str 4 Dex 14 Con 14 Int 10 Wis 8 Cha 18

Init +2   Spot -1, Listen +3
Languages: Common, Draconic
HP: 9
AC 14   Touch 13      FF 12
Fort +2, Ref +2, Will +1
Melee: Dagger -5, 1d3-3
Ranged: Acid Splash +3 touch, 1d6 acid, 25ft; Light crossbow +3, 1d6, 80ft
BAB: +0   Grapple: -7
Abilities: Darkvision 60'
Feats: Extend Spell, Draconic Heritage(Blue)(sor1), Toughness(flaw)
Flaws: Non-combatant
Skills: Concentration +6, Escape Artist +4, Knowledge(Arcana) +2, Listen +3, Spellcraft +4
Spells: 0 x unlimited, 1 x 4
   0 Acid Splash, Daze, Detect Magic, Prestidigitation, Resistance
   1 Enlarge Person, Mage Armor, Magic Missile

Gear:Light Crossbow, Spell component pouch x 3, Dagger[/spoiler]

Half-orc Warlock 1
[spoiler]Half-orc Warlock 1
Str 18 Dex 14 Con 14 Int 10 Wis 10 Cha 8

Init +6
Languages: Common, Orc
HP: 11 (+5 temporary hit points)
AC 13   Touch 11      FF 11
Fort +2, Ref +2, Will +2
Speed: 30 ft.
Melee: Great Axe +4 1d12+6/x3
Ranged: Eldritch Blast +2 1d6/x2
BAB: +0   Grapple: +4   
Special Qualities: Darkvision 60 ft.
Feats: Improved Initiative, Toughness
Flaws: Vulnerable
Skills: Concentration +6, Spellcraft +4
Invocations: Inhuman Toughness
Gear: Light Leather
[/spoiler]

Half-Orc Druid 1
[spoiler]Half-Orc Druid 1
Str 16 Dex 14 Con 14 Int 10 Wis 14 Cha 8

Init +2   Spot +2, Listen +6  Darkvision 60ft
Languages: Common, Orc
HP: 23
AC 16   Touch 12      FF 14
Fort +4, Ref +2, Will +4
Speed: 30ft
Melee: Spear +3, 1d8+4, 20/x3
   (Predator form) Bite +5, 1d6+7
Ranged: Spear +2, 1d8+4, 20ft
BAB: +0   Grapple: +3
Abilities: Shapeshift (predator form), Wild Empathy
Qualities Nature Sense
Feats: Toughness, Improved Toughness
Flaws: Murky-Eyed
Skills: [-2 ACP] Concentration 4, Know Nature 4, Listen 4, Survival 4
Spells:
   0 x 3   Create Water, Cure Minor Wounds, Guidance, Resistance, Know Direction
   1 x 2   Obscuring Mist, Faerie Fire, Entangle
Shapeshift: Swift action, at will.
 - Predator Form: Bite attack 1d6, +4 Str, +4 natural armor, 50' speed.
Gear: Full leather armor, Spear x2, Spell component pouch x2[/spoiler]


Level 6

Shield Fighter L6 by AlterForm
[spoiler]Dwarf Fighter 6
Str 18 Dex 14 Con 16 Int 13 Wis 12 Cha 6

Init +6   Spot +12, Listen +12
Languages: Common, Dwarfish
HP: 55
AC 26   Touch 11      FF 28
Fort +8, Ref +3, Will +3   [+2 vs Poison, +2 vs Spells/Spell-Likes, +]
Melee: Flail +11/(+6), 1d8+5
Ranged: None
BAB: +6/+1   Grapple: +10   Trip: +10 [+14 opposed when on solid ground]
Abilities: Weapon Aptitude, Active Defense, Surprise Lunge
Qualities: Art of War, Battlefield Recon, Stonecunning, Weapon Familiarity(Dwarven Waraxe, Dwarven Urgrosh), Stability
Feats: Exotic Shield Prof (Extreme Shield), Shield Spec (E. Shield), Combat Reflexes, Improved Initiative, Weapon Focus (Flail), Hold the Line, Combat Expertise, Improved Trip, Shield Guard
Flaws: Shaky, Vulnerable
Skills: Craft(Armor) +12, Jump +9, Spot +12, Listen +12, Tumble +7(+12 vs AoOs)
Gear: +1 Full Plate, +1 Flail, +1 Steel Extreme Shield, MW Artisan's Tools, MW Tools (Jump, Listen, Spot, Tumble), 5 Mundane Flails, +2 Gloves of DEX, +2 Belt of STR[/spoiler]

Level 6 human cleric by RobbyPants
[spoiler]Human Cleric 6 (Destruction & War domains.  No deity, longsword as favored weapon for lawful alignment)
Str 14 Dex 10 Con 14 Int 10 Wis 17(19) Cha 10

Init +0   Spot +4, Listen +4
Languages: Common
HP: 42
AC 21   Touch 10      FF 21
Fort +8, Ref +3, Will +10
Melee: +1 Longsword (wielded two-handed) +8, 1d8+4
Ranged: MW Sling +3, 1d4+2, 50ft, Lesser Acid Orb +2 touch, 3d8, 40ft
BAB: +4   Grapple: +6
Abilities: Turn Undead, Quicken spell for 5 turn attempts, Power Attack up to -4/+8 (-4/+16 Leap Attack)
Feats: Power Attack, Extra Turning, Quicken Spell (flaw), Skill Focus (Jump)(flaw), Martial Weapon Proficiency (Longsword)(domain), Weapon Focus (Longsword)(domain), Divine Metamagic (Quicken Spell), Leap Attack (domain), Extra Turning
Flaws: Murkey Eyed, Shaky
Skills: Concentration +11, Jump +14, Knowledge (Religion) +1, Spellcraft +9
Spells:
   0 x 5
   1 x 4
   2 x 4
   3 x 3
Turn Undead: x 11 per day
 - Heal 6d6/harm undead 6d6 within 30' (DC 13) for half
 - 6d6 damage to non-magical items & constructs within 30' (DC 13) for half
 - Smite (+0 to hit, +6 damage)
Domain Powers:
 - Phyisical attacks ignore 3 hardness and damage reduction
Gear: +1 Fullplate, +1 Longsword, MW sling, Periat of Wisdom +2, Cloak of Resitance +1, Ammulet of Natural Armor +1, holy symbol x2, Spell component pouch x2[/spoiler]

Level 6 Kobold Sorcerer by RobbyPants
[spoiler]Kobold Sorcerer (Draconic Heritage - Blue)
Str 4 Dex 14 Con 14 Int 10 Wis 8 Cha 19 (21)

Init +6   Spot -1, Listen +8
Languages: Common, Draconic
HP: 36
AC 21   Touch 13      FF 19
Fort +7, Ref +5, Will +5
Melee: Dagger -2, 1d3-3
Ranged: Acid Splash +6 touch, 1d6 acid, 40ft; Light crossbow +6, 1d6, 80ft
BAB: +3   Grapple: -4
Abilities: Darkvision 60', Rat Familiar (+2 Fort)
Feats: Extend Spell, Draconic Heritage(Blue)(sor1), Toughness(flaw), Improved Initiative, Draconic Power(sor4), Energy Substitution(Electricity)
Flaws: Non-combatant
Skills: Concentration +11, Escape Artist +6, Knowledge(Arcana) +5, Listen +8, Spellcraft +9
Spells: 0 x unlimited, 1 x 7, 2 x 6, 3 x 4
   0 Acid Splash, Daze, Detect Magic, Mending, Prestidigitation, Ray of Frost, Read Magic, Resistance
   1 Charm Person, Enlarge Person, Grease*, Magic Missile, Silent Image, True Casting
   2 Glitterdust*, Mirror Image, Scorching Ray, Shatter
   3 Fireball, Haste
  * Advanced Learning

Gear:+1 Twilight Mithril Light Chain, +1 Mithril Buckler, Cloak of Charisma +2 & Resistance +1, Light Crossbow, Spell component pouch x 3, Dagger[/spoiler]

Human Swashbuckler 6
[spoiler]Human Swashbuckler 6
Str 10 (12) Dex 15 Con 16 (18) Int 16 Wis 8 Cha 8

Init +2
Languages: Common, 3 more
HP: 6d10+24 (59 hp)
AC 21   Touch 15      FF 16
Fort +9, Ref +4, Will +3
Melee: Masterwork Spiked Chain +10/+5 , 2d4+6/x2 (trip: +6)
Ranged: Long Bow +6 1d8/x3, 100 ft.
BAB: +6   Grapple: +6 
Abilities: Weapon Aptitude, Active Defense, Canny Defense, Insightful Strike, Art of War +1, Surprise Lunge
Feats: Combat Reflexes, Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Spiked chain), Improved Trip, Iron Will, Spring Attack, Stand Still, Weapon Expertise, Weapon Finesse, Weapon Focus (spiked chain).
Flaws: Shaky
Skills: Balance 7, Craft (armormaking) 12, Craft (weaponmaking) 12, Intimidate 8, Jump 3, Listen 8, Ride 3, Sense Motive 8, Spot 8, Tumble 11
Gear: Masterwork Mithral Light plate (1,5k gp), Masterwork Spiked Chain (100 gp), Amulet of Health +2 (4k gp), Gauntlets of Ogre Power +2 (4k gp), Hat of disguise (1,8k gp) [/spoiler]


Level 11


Level 16


Level 20
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants March 23, 2009, 09:48:04 AM
Reserved: More PCs?
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants March 23, 2009, 09:48:19 AM
Level 1 encounters


Monstrous Centipede, Small x 4

Goblin Warrior 1 x 3

Dire Rat x 3

Human Commoner Zombie x 2

War Pony + Goblin Warrior 1

Animated Object, Small (Rug – blind and constrict abilities)

Animated Object, Small (Table – hardness 5, speed +20 feet)

Fire Elemental, Small

Wolf

Monstrous Centipede, Large
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants March 23, 2009, 09:48:26 AM
Level 6 encounters


Ogre Zombie x 3

Minotaur x 2

Animated Object, Huge (Steel statue – tall, hardness 10) + Animated Object, Large (Wagon – long, hardness 5, speed + 40 feet)

Green Hag + Ogre

Troll + Ogre

Wraith + Shadow

Babu Demon

Blue Dragon, Young

Pyrohydra, five-headed

Shambling Mound
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants March 23, 2009, 09:48:33 AM
Level 11 encounters


Animated Object, Gargantuan (Adamantine statue – tall, hardness 20) x 4

Erinyes Devil x 3

Fire Elemental, Greater x 2

Monstrous Centipede, Colossal x 2

Spirit Naga x 2

Night Hag + Hill Giant x 2

Rakshasa + Efreeti

Barbed Devil

Green Dragon, Young Adult

Hezrou Demon
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants March 23, 2009, 09:48:40 AM
Reserved: Level 16 encounters
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants March 23, 2009, 09:48:49 AM
Reserved: Level 20 encounters
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants March 23, 2009, 09:48:58 AM
Reserved: results
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: Soda March 23, 2009, 11:52:50 AM
I'm in, but I'm no good at higher levels. I'll draw up some guys when I'm inspired. What are the char creation rules?
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants March 23, 2009, 11:59:59 AM
Good question.

I guess 25 point buy seems most reasonable.  Unless everyone things 32 is better because that's what everyone seems to use in practice. ;)

Other than that, I figure any material from this project would be fair game, and anything from the PHB which hasn't been corrected or updated.  I think this might also highlight some things that we've missed.  It might work best to stick to core classes, although we have touched on some other things like the warlock.

Did I miss anything?

Also, it might be a bit until I post any encounters.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: Soda March 23, 2009, 12:02:26 PM
I like 28 personally. Flaws?
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants March 23, 2009, 12:15:04 PM
Flaws... eh...

I could say yes for now.  It seems like more people (CO regulars at least) use them.  I use them.  We might as well test this under normal play circumstances.  I think we should just stick to UA flaws for now, and not anything from Dragon.

I suppose one of these days, we could balance some flaws too, and possibly create some new ones in the Feat thread.

As for the point buy value, we could always take a vote on it.  I'm fine with 25, 28, or 32, as long as we're consistant.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: Soda March 23, 2009, 02:11:49 PM
Ok, first character, first level. The old halfling druid with the riding dog. A classic. 28 PB.

[spoiler=Halfling Druid 1]Halfling Druid 1
Str 10 Dex 16 Con 14 Int 10 Wis 16 Cha 8

Init +3   Spot +7, Listen +7
Languages: Common, Halfling
HP: 10
AC 16   Touch 14      FF 13
Fort +5, Ref +4, Will +6   [+2 vs Fear]
Melee: Shortspear -1, 1d4   [+5 ranged, 20ft]
Ranged: Sling +5, 1d3, 50ft   [+1 attack and damage 30ft, PBS]
      Magic Stone +6, 1d6+1, 50ft   [2d6+2 vs Undead]
BAB: +0   Grapple: -4   [Escape Artist +5]
Abilities: Animal Companion (riding dog)
Qualities: Nature Sense, Wild Empathy
Feats: Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot
Flaws: Noncombatant
Skills: Spot +7, Listen +7, Escape Artist +5, Know Nature +2, Handle Animal +3, Ride +5   [+2 Climb, Jump, Listen, Move Silently]
Spells: 5, 3
   3 Create Water, Resistance, Guidance, Cure Minor Wounds, Detect Magic
   2 Magic Stone, Obscurring Mist, Entangle, Summon Nature's Ally
Gear: Leather armor[/spoiler]

He would greatly benefit from the halfling druid sub level, but that's not what we're testing so I left it out.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants March 23, 2009, 05:26:52 PM
It all seems legit.  I'll post it in the PCs post.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: Soda March 23, 2009, 07:01:21 PM
Maybe we should do 1, 6, 10, 16, 20 so melee can get their iterative.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants March 23, 2009, 09:58:14 PM
I had thought about that for the same reason too.  It might be a better split.  It will still be a bit until I can post some encounters.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: InnaBinder March 24, 2009, 09:54:04 AM
*Hobgoblin Warlock in progress
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants March 24, 2009, 11:26:33 PM
A couple of other things I never specified:

I think we should probably stick to straight classes at this point.

When we do get to running encounters, how do we handle the starting condtion?  Randomly determine the encounter range?
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: SKRP March 25, 2009, 07:42:40 AM
Evergreen half-orc barbarian with great axe. Able to absorb or deal enormous amounts of damage. Level 1.

[spoiler=Half-Orc Barbarian 1]Half-Orc Barbarian 1
Str 18 Dex 14 Con 14 Int 10 Wis 10 Cha 8

Init +2
Movement 40 ft. (land speed)
Languages: Common, Orc
HP: 27 [+2 temporary hit points during rage]
AC 16   Touch 12      FF 14
Fort +4 [+6 during rage], Ref +2, Will +0
Melee: Great Axe +5, 1d12+6/x3 [during rage: Great Axe +7, 1d12+9/x3]
Ranged: Shortbow +1, 1d6/x3, 60ft
BAB: +1   Grapple: +5 [+7 during rage]
Special Abilities: Darkvision, fast movement, illiteracy, rage 1/encounter (7 rounds), rage (temporary hit points)
Feats: Toughness, Improved Toughness
Flaws: Shaky
Skills: Intimidate +5, Jump +5 [+9 during rage], Listen +4, Ride +1, Survival +4
Gear: Light mail, Great Axe, Shortbow[/spoiler]
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants March 25, 2009, 09:54:39 AM
Also, are we running a 28 point buy?  That's what Soda suggested and it's what he used in his druid, and SKRP used for his barbarian.  We never discused it any further.  I suppose I should put that in the first post.

Also, SKRP, I'll add your barbarian.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants March 25, 2009, 10:08:10 AM
I added some official rules to the first post.  There are still some things that need to be cleared up.

Per Soda's suggestions, I changed the levels from 1, 5, 10, 15, and 20 to 1, 6, 11, 16, and 20.  This was to test out melee iteratives.  Other than that, it seems like a complete wash, differeng from class to class.

How do we want to actually handle encounters?  I have a few general questions:

1) How do we set encounter distance?  Should it be random?  1d10 x 10 feet?  1d20 x 10?

2) How do we handle surprise?  Are both sides assumed to be aware?  If we don't factor in terrain, is it even possible for one side to hide?

3) Are we assuming a wide open battlefield with no cover?  Are we going to vary terrain?  The only random way I could see doing it is looking at the DMG, where they have random distances for things like trees, so you'd know you're 1dX squares away from cover.  Wide open is certainly more simple.

4) How long between fights?  One hour?  Some random amount?  The more randomness we add in, the more odd this testing might get.

5) How do we actually want to run this?  Are people going to run their own private tests, post the round-by-round activities and the results?  Are we going to PbP?  I'm affraid PbP could be very slow.  As long as the specifics are posted in the thread, we can trace through to see if it looks like a result of dice luck, good tactics, bad tactics, or something simply being too weak or too powerful.

So, what are your thoughts?
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: veekie March 25, 2009, 10:38:05 AM
1) How do we set encounter distance?  Should it be random?  1d10 x 10 feet?  1d20 x 10?

2) How do we handle surprise?  Are both sides assumed to be aware?  If we don't factor in terrain, is it even possible for one side to hide?

3) Are we assuming a wide open battlefield with no cover?  Are we going to vary terrain?  The only random way I could see doing it is looking at the DMG, where they have random distances for things like trees, so you'd know you're 1dX squares away from cover.  Wide open is certainly more simple.
I have a suggestion for this one, make up a set of preset scenario maps(with a mix of regular, ambush, close quarters, indoors etc), and define which one happens by % dice roll. PCs get dropped into it at a random spot, based on a predefined party formation.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants March 25, 2009, 10:43:01 AM
It'd be more complicated, but it might be worth it.

So, how would we present these?  Set up an initial JPG with a grid to show terrain and monster locations, as well as monster stats?  Should the four PCs starting positions be fixed?
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: Prime32 March 25, 2009, 10:54:06 AM
You can host this on the Arena if you want (Though something chat-based would probably work better)
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants March 25, 2009, 11:07:09 AM
Chat based would be a lot better than PbP.  My only concern is finding time where several of us could meet at the same time for anywhere from half-an-hour to a couple of hours.  My free time is fairly sparse, and frequently interupted.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: veekie March 25, 2009, 11:40:51 AM
It'd be more complicated, but it might be worth it.

So, how would we present these?  Set up an initial JPG with a grid to show terrain and monster locations, as well as monster stats?  Should the four PCs starting positions be fixed?

Just plonk down some markers denoting spawn points, and roll for them as well. Wouldn't need more than 4 or so for the PCs, assuming they get placed as a group. Add a dozen or so for the monsters, and you're set(just to keep the temptation of lobbing spells blindly at a confirmed spawn point down).
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants March 25, 2009, 12:02:48 PM
I figured the members of the party could list their marching order.  At least, in my experience, that is fairly static for the group unless they specifically say otherwise.  Now, marching order doesn't have to mean a straight line either.  Sometimes they're more in a square or so.  Either way, you seldom get the wizard leading the way up front!
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: Soda March 25, 2009, 12:42:48 PM
We could go as far as letting skill rolls improve your position at the start. Like turning an ambush into an straight fight if someone in the party is scouting and makes some rolls.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants March 25, 2009, 02:36:00 PM
The only reason I'm thinking about avoiding surprise is that it makes the testing much more random, and leaves more room for it to give misleading results.  Obviously some randomness is necessary, but I'm wondering if this should be left out.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: veekie March 25, 2009, 09:58:18 PM
Build it into the map, if the map has the appropriate terrain, and monsters spawn in ambush positions relative to the PCs, skill checks to avoid surprise are par for the course.

This of course, assumes that encounters find players, not the other way round(which is much much more complicated, with any prepared caster).
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants March 25, 2009, 10:44:50 PM
That was my idea (encounters finding players).  As for time between encounters, I'm torn.

Using set intervals like one hour makes it very easy to metagame and buff ahead of time (assuming the duration is too short to last multiple encounters).  Although randomly determining the time between adds to the chaos, and can give wierd results.  If the time were random, the players couldn't know about it, or they would just buff up two rounds before the fight.

Perhaps it's assumed the party can't have any buffs up ahead of time with a duration shorter than an hour.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: veekie March 25, 2009, 10:55:13 PM
Buff time eh, I think anything with hours duration can be raised before a fight, if the player opts to, minutes and 10 minutes, well, you just need a bigger map, and spot the monsters before they spot you back. Nobody said you had to immediately open fire and alert them to know that you know that they are there.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants March 26, 2009, 10:13:08 AM
I've come up with a tenative list of ten 1st level encounters.  I'm curious what you think.  Are there any holes that need to be filled (types not represented)?  Does it seem like a good spread?  I was thinking of assigning a number to each encounter, and rolling 1d10 to determine what the PCs would encounter each time.  When I get a chance, I'll actually stat the encounters up later.

[spoiler=Level 1 encounters]Monstrous Centipede, Small x 4

Goblin Warrior 1 x 3

Dire Rat x 3

Human Commoner Zombie x 2

War Pony + Goblin Warrior 1

Animated Object, Small (Rug – blind and constrict abilities)

Animated Object, Small (Table – hardness 5, speed +20 feet)

Fire Elemental, Small

Wolf

Monstrous Centipede, Large[/spoiler]

It's been a while since I messed around with mixed groups and monster CRs.  I know that when you have fractional CR, you can increase the number by a multiple equal to the denomiator to make an EL 1 encounter (so 3 CR 1/3s, 6 CR 1/6s, etc).  Once you have a whole CR number, every time you double the number encountered you add +2 to the EL (so 2 CR 1's is EL 3, 4 CR 1's is EL 5, 8 CR 1's is EL 7), although this stops working after about four to eight in my experience (the fights get too easy).

What I don't remember is how do you deal with mixed CR opponents?  What is the EL of two orcs (CR 1/2 each) and an ogre (CR 3)?  I don't remember the specific formula, and that would be handy for dealing with higher level encounters.

Thanks. :D
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants March 27, 2009, 12:42:38 PM
I've also worked up some tenative level six and eleven encounters.  I'm trying to get a good mix of different types of monsters to test different types of encounters.  Any thoughts?

[spoiler=Level 6]
Ogre Zombie x 3

Minotaur x 2

Animated Object, Huge (Steel statue – tall, hardness 10) + Animated Object, Large (Wagon – long, hardness 5, speed + 40 feet)

Green Hag + Ogre

Troll + Ogre

Wraith + Shadow

Babu Demon

Blue Dragon, Young

Pyrohydra, five-headed

Shambling Mound[/spoiler]

[spoiler=Level 11]
Animated Object, Gargantuan (Adamantine statue – tall, hardness 20) x 4

Erinyes Devil x 3

Fire Elemental, Greater x 2

Monstrous Centipede, Colossal x 2

Spirit Naga x 2

Night Hag + Hill Giant x 2

Rakshasa + Efreeti

Barbed Devil

Green Dragon, Young Adult

Hezrou Demon[/spoiler]

: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: SKRP March 27, 2009, 02:07:28 PM
My attempt to create a low level s&b fighter. Due to Two-Weapon Parry he becomes a flanking machine. Handy in combination with any rogue. Very resistant on his own.

[spoiler=Human Fighter 1]Human Fighter 1
Str 14 Dex 16 Con 16 Int 8 Wis 10 Cha 8

Init +3   Spot +7, Listen +7
Movement 30 ft. (land speed)
Languages: Common
HP: 16
AC 23   Touch 13      FF 20
Fort +5 [+6 during rage], Ref +3 [+6 to Reflex save for half damage], Will +0
Melee: Battle Axe +3 (+1 while using Two-Weapon Parry), 1d8+2/x3
Ranged: Shortbow +0, 1d6/x3, 60ft
BAB: +1   Grapple: +3
Special Abilities: Weapon Aptitude, Active Defense
Feats: Shield Specialization (heavy), Toughness, Two-Weapon Fighting, Two-Weapon Parry
Flaws: Shaky
Skills: Intimidate 3, Listen 4, Ride 1, Sense Motive 4 and Spot 4.
Gear: Light plate, Heavy Shield, Battle Axe [/spoiler]
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants March 27, 2009, 02:24:24 PM
Sweet!  You beat me to it.  I was all set to create one too.

Also, I never put in costs for the armors.  I should probably do that.  I'll keep them in line with their PHB equivalents.  This puts light plate at 200 gp, so I'm not sure if you'll have enough money for that.

Also, I noticed a typo where you left the barbarian's rage modifier for Fort in the fighter's entry.  No biggie. ;)
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: SKRP March 27, 2009, 03:57:03 PM
Sweet!  You beat me to it.  I was all set to create one too.

I think that you should focus on 6th or 11th level s&b paladin with Argent Bastion specialization. I feel sweet synergy there ;)

Also, I never put in costs for the armors.  I should probably do that.  I'll keep them in line with their PHB equivalents.  This puts light plate at 200 gp, so I'm not sure if you'll have enough money for that.

Average starting gold for fighter is 150 gp. Nah. Could you change his armor to Full mail?

Here comes Elven Rogue, master of ranged sneak attacks (very good when teamed up with s&b fighter).

[spoiler=Elf Rogue 1]Elf Rogue 1
Str 10 Dex 18 Con 14 Int 12 Wis 10 Cha 8

Init +4    Listen: +6 Spot: +6
Movement 30 ft. (land speed)
Languages: Common, Elven
HP: 8
AC 15   Touch 13      FF 11
Fort +2, Ref +6, Will +0 (+2 against enchantment)
Melee: Dagger +0, 1d4/(19-20/×2)
Ranged: Longbow +4 (or +2/+2), 1d8/x3 [in 30 ft. range: longbow +5 (or +3/+3), 1d8+1/x3]
BAB: +0   Grapple: +0 [Escape Artist +8]
Special Abilities: Immunity to magic sleep effects, low-light vision, elven weapon proficiencies, sneak attack +1d6, trapfinding
Feats: Point Blank Shot, Rapid Shot
Flaws: Vulnerable
Skills: Balance +8, Escape Artist +8, Hide +8, Listen +6, Search +6, Sense Motive +4, Sleight of Hand +8, Spot +6, Tumble +8
Gear: Light leather, long bow, quiver with 40 arrows[/spoiler]
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants March 27, 2009, 04:02:07 PM
I'm surprised you didn't give him TWF to team up. ;)

I'll make a note of the armor change and add the rogue.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: Midnight_v March 27, 2009, 04:09:10 PM
1. I'm posting so this come up in my "replied/subscribed threads"
2. I think there should be multiple kinds of tests run.
Since there is no best "playtest" as we learned from paizils and co.
2a. At some point (and not know cause I see you're already making headway in this direction.
A comparision of how the classes that were already considered "Tier 3" would be operating under a similar array of conditions.
2b. Testing will not be quick.  It took us 6-8 months to get together all we have and it'll take around that long to QC it. So let me know what if anything I can do to help you guys out.

M_v.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: AlterFrom March 27, 2009, 04:53:34 PM
Playing with the new Shield Feats.

[spoiler=Shield Fighter L6]Dwarf Fighter 6
Str 18 Dex 14 Con 16 Int 13 Wis 12 Cha 6

Init +6   Spot +12, Listen +12
Languages: Common, Dwarfish
HP: 55
AC 29   Touch 11      FF 28
Fort +8, Ref +3, Will +3   [+2 vs Poison, +2 vs Spells/Spell-Likes, +]
Melee: Flail +11/(+6), 1d8+5
Ranged: None
BAB: +6/+1   Grapple: +10   Trip: +10 [+14 opposed when on solid ground]
Abilities: Weapon Aptitude, Active Defense, Surprise Lunge
Qualities: Art of War, Battlefield Recon, Stonecunning, Weapon Familiarity(Dwarven Waraxe, Dwarven Urgrosh), Stability
Feats: Exotic Shield Prof (Extreme Shield), Shield Spec (E. Shield), Combat Reflexes, Improved Initiative, Weapon Focus (Flail), Hold the Line, Combat Expertise, Improved Trip, Shield Guard
Flaws: Shaky, Vulnerable
Skills: Craft(Armor) +12, Jump +9, Spot +12, Listen +12, Tumble +7(+15 vs AoOs)
Gear: +1 Full Plate, +1 Flail, +1 Steel Extreme Shield, MW Artisan's Tools, MW Tools (Jump, Listen, Spot, Tumble), 5 Mundane Flails, +2 Gloves of DEX, +2 Belt of STR[/spoiler]
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: SKRP March 27, 2009, 04:57:33 PM
Basically, one play-test requires only two participants - PCs' operator and monsters' operator. We just need to create standardized map for some virtual rpg table as OpenRPG (because encounters are mostly written by RobbyPants ) and we can start testing sample "battle encounters".
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: Kuroimaken March 27, 2009, 05:13:24 PM
I'll be making a character myself somewhat shortly. Wait for it.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: AlterFrom March 27, 2009, 05:16:07 PM
Basically, one play-test requires only two participants - PCs' operator and monsters' operator. We just need to create standardized map for some virtual rpg table as OpenRPG (because encounters are mostly written by RobbyPants ) and we can start testing sample "battle encounters".

If you're going with a VTT for playtesting, just make the maps decently-high-rez images. I'm pretty sure all the major (if not all) VTTs can import and scale images and/or their grid size. Also, anyone planning to be using the VTT(s) should become familiar with the scripting language of their VTT of choice. I know MapTool, for one, has a rather powerful but complicated macro language; ORPG has something similar I believe.

Or, if you go with one single VTT for all the playtests, you could set up a campaign file (or whatever the VTT of choice calls it) with encounters and maps premade and ready to dump PC tokens onto.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: Soda March 30, 2009, 01:30:32 PM
[spoiler=Gnome Wizard 1 by Soda]Gnome Focused Illusionist 1
Str 6 Dex 12 Con 16 Int 18 Wis 8 Cha 10

Init +5   Spot -1, Listen +3
Languages: Common, Gnome, 4 more
HP: 7
AC 12   Touch 12      FF 11
Fort +3, Ref +1, Will +1
Speed: 20ft
Melee: Club -4, 1d4-2
Ranged: Ranged touch +1
BAB: +0   Grapple: -6   [Escape Artist +3]   
Abilities:
Qualities: Low-light vision
Feats: Improved Initiative*, Spell Focus (illusion), Greater Spell Focus
Flaws: Noncombatant
Skills: Concentration 4, Spellcraft 4, Know Arcana 4, Other Knowledges 8, Listen 2, Escape Artist 2
Spells: Illusion specialty (DC +3), Enchantment, Necromancy, Abjuration banned
   3   Detect Magic, Sonic Snap, Minor Disguise
   1+3   Silent Image x2, Color Spray x2
Gear:
[/spoiler]
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants April 04, 2009, 10:22:41 AM
No one has commented one way or the other on the level 1, 6, and 11 encounters I suggested.  I posted them on the front page to find easier.  Assuming I did everything right, each one should be EL-appropriate "by the books", but I guess only play-testing will see.

What are your thoughts?  Are there any obvious holes that should be filled?  I have a feeling these will be much easier than their suggested CR for semi-optimized characters using this system.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: SKRP April 04, 2009, 03:03:06 PM
What are your thoughts?  Are there any obvious holes that should be filled?  I have a feeling these will be much easier than their suggested CR for semi-optimized characters using this system.

Yes, they are rather easy, but I hold that majority of players doesn't optimize PCs.

[spoiler=Kobold Warlock 1]Kobold Warlock 1
Str 8 Dex 16 Con 14 Int 10 Wis 10 Cha 14

Init +3
Languages: Common, Draconic
HP: 8
AC 17   Touch 14      FF 14
Fort +2, Ref +3, Will +2
Speed: 30 ft.
Melee: Dagger -2, 1d3-1
Ranged: Eldritch Blast +5 1d6+1/x2
BAB: +0   Grapple: -6   [Escape Artist +5]   
Special Qualities: Darkvision 60 ft., light sensitivity, natural armor +1
Feats: Point Blank Shot, Ability Focus (eldritch blast)
Flaws: Noncombatant
Skills: Concentration 6, Escape Artist 5, Spellcraft 2,
Invocations: Shocking Blast (DC 14)
Gear: Light Leather
[/spoiler]
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants April 04, 2009, 03:43:59 PM
I'm wondering if I should stick to the CR system or not.  Perhaps we can run the first seires of tests with them, and then jump up a CR or two as needed?

Also, just to note for character creation, I finally clarifies how iterative attacks work in the Combat & Rules thread as well as the compendium:

Iterative attacks are all -5 from the BAB, instead of a cumulative -5 penalty.  So, a full BAB attack routine at level 20 would be +20/+15/+15/+15 instead of +20/+15/+10/+5

Just as an update: the PDF is coming along nicely.  Basically, I took the compendium I had here, organized it better, and now I have to reformat things, put in actual tables, and proof read things.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants April 04, 2009, 03:47:13 PM
Also, SKRP, I think you have two more points to spend on the warlock to get it up to 28 points.

: SKRP
Str 8 Dex 16 Con 14 Int 10 Wis 10 Cha 14

Just a reminder: the new racial mod for kobolds are -4 Str, +2 Dex (as I removed the -2 Con penalty).  So, before racial mods, the raw stats for that set would be:

Str 12 (4 pts), Dex 14 (6 pts), Con 14 (6 pts), Int 10 (2 pts), Wis 10 (2 pts), Cha 14 (6 pts), with a total of 26 points.  I'll put it on the front page when you decide where you want those two points to go. ;)
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: SKRP April 04, 2009, 04:11:48 PM
Sorry for that, I'm usually sticked to 26 point buy.

[spoiler=Kobold Warlock 1]Kobold Warlock 1
Str 8 Dex 16 Con 14 Int 12 Wis 10 Cha 14

Init +3
Languages: Common, Draconic, one more
HP: 8
AC 17   Touch 14      FF 14
Fort +2, Ref +3, Will +2
Speed: 30 ft.
Melee: Dagger -2, 1d3-1
Ranged: Eldritch Blast +5 1d6+1/x2
BAB: +0   Grapple: -6   [Escape Artist +5]   
Special Qualities: Darkvision 60 ft., light sensitivity, natural armor +1
Feats: Point Blank Shot, Ability Focus (eldritch blast)
Flaws: Noncombatant
Skills: Concentration 6, Escape Artist 5, Spellcraft 3, Use Magic Device 6
Invocations: Shocking Blast (DC 14)
Gear: Light Leather
[/spoiler]

And another warlock - melee type.

[spoiler=Half-orc Warlock 1]Half-orc Warlock 1
Str 18 Dex 14 Con 14 Int 10 Wis 10 Cha 8

Init +6
Languages: Common, Orc
HP: 11 (+5 temporary hit points)
AC 13   Touch 11      FF 11
Fort +2, Ref +2, Will +2
Speed: 30 ft.
Melee: Great Axe +4 1d12+6/x3
Ranged: Eldritch Blast +2 1d6/x2
BAB: +0   Grapple: +4   
Special Qualities: Darkvision 60 ft.
Feats: Improved Initiative, Toughness
Flaws: Vulnerable
Skills: Concentration +6, Spellcraft +4
Invocations: Inhuman Toughness
Gear: Light Leather
[/spoiler]

Edit: Now he should meet the rules.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants April 04, 2009, 04:44:50 PM
I'll add the kobold warlock.  The only issue I see with the half orc is that Improved Toughness requires a base Fort of +2.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: bkdubs123 April 04, 2009, 05:00:45 PM
I have a feeling these will be much easier than their suggested CR for semi-optimized characters using this system.

Since the PCs are using modified feats and rules, etc, you should use the same things with the monsters. I suggest semi-optimizing the encounters. No need to wrack your brain trying to create mobs specifically designed to destroy parties, but there's also no need for every monster in the game to run around with Iron Will to bump that 0 will save to 2, or to have three iterations of Toughness. Just my 2 cents.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants April 04, 2009, 10:11:15 PM
Alright!  The PDF is up! 

It's about 400KB, so I can't attach it here.  I've uploaded it at filefactory (you need to enter in a capcha code and follow two links to download it, but it's free, and I don't think you need an account.  Just click "download for free with filefactory basic").  Feel free to let me know of any better places to host this!

PDF Download (http://www.filefactory.com/file/af9he43/n/Rebalanced_Compendium_pdf)
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: bkdubs123 April 05, 2009, 12:42:51 PM
Since you mentioned playtesting in the feats thread, and we were talking about Shield Spec, let's bring it here, shall we? At the top of this page is a Level 6 Shield Fighter. He has 29 AC. 29 at level 6!! An Ogre can't possibly hit him, a Shambling Mound hits him on an 18, a Troll hits him on a 20, Babau Demon hits on a 17, and the Dragon hits on a 14. Of course, his touch AC is still quite low, because he hasn't got Shield Ward, but he could have it instead of say... Improved Initiative, and be freaking untouchable!
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: SKRP April 05, 2009, 12:54:33 PM
Since you mentioned playtesting in the feats thread, and we were talking about Shield Spec, let's bring it here, shall we? At the top of this page is a Level 6 Shield Fighter. He has 29 AC. 29 at level 6!! An Ogre can't possibly hit him, a Shambling Mound hits him on an 18, a Troll hits him on a 20, Babau Demon hits on a 17, and the Dragon hits on a 14. Of course, his touch AC is still quite low, because he hasn't got Shield Ward, but he could have it instead of say... Improved Initiative, and be freaking untouchable!

He has poor battlefield control and low damage. High AC is his main edge.


[spoiler=Human Swashbuckler 6]Human Swashbuckler 6
Str 10 (12) Dex 15 Con 16 (18) Int 16 Wis 8 Cha 8

Init +2
Languages: Common, 3 more
HP: 6d10+24 (59 hp)
AC 21   Touch 15      FF 16
Fort +9, Ref +4, Will +3
Melee: Masterwork Spiked Chain +10/+5 , 2d4+6/x2 (trip: +6)
Ranged: Long Bow +6 1d8/x3, 100 ft.
BAB: +6   Grapple: +6 
Abilities: Weapon Aptitude, Active Defense, Canny Defense, Insightful Strike, Art of War +1, Surprise Lunge
Feats: Combat Reflexes, Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Spiked chain), Improved Trip, Iron Will, Spring Attack, Stand Still, Weapon Expertise, Weapon Finesse, Weapon Focus (spiked chain).
Flaws: Shaky
Skills: Balance 7, Craft (armormaking) 12, Craft (weaponmaking) 12, Intimidate 8, Jump 3, Listen 8, Ride 3, Sense Motive 8, Spot 8, Tumble 11
Gear: Masterwork Mithral Light plate (1,5k gp), Masterwork Spiked Chain (100 gp), Amulet of Health +2 (4k gp), Gauntlets of Ogre Power +2 (4k gp), Hat of disguise (1,8k gp) [/spoiler]
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants April 05, 2009, 01:23:11 PM
I'll add these two to the front.  The level 6 version is a direct progression from the level 1 version.  I gave the level 1 a shield because he can't utilize Power Attack yet.  The level 6 version can use DMM(Quicken) twice per day, has Leap Attack (for up to +16 damage on a charge), and can utilize Rhino Rush as a 1st level spell to further increase this.

[spoiler=Level 1 human cleric by RobbyPants]Human Cleric 1 (Destruction & War domains.  No deity, longsword as favored weapon for lawful alignment)
Str 14 Dex 10 Con 14 Int 10 Wis 16 Cha 10

Init +0   Spot +3, Listen +3
Languages: Common
HP: 10
AC 15   Touch 10      FF 15
Fort +4, Ref +0, Will +5
Melee: Longsword +3, 1d8+2
Ranged: Sling -2, 1d4+2, 50ft
BAB: +0   Grapple: +2
Abilities: Turn Undead
Feats: Power Attack, Extra Turning, Quicken Spell (flaw), Skill Focus (Jump)(flaw), Martial Weapon Proficiency (Longsword)(domain), Weapon Focus (Longsword)(domain)
Flaws: Murkey Eyed, Shaky
Skills: Concentration +6, Jump +10, Knowledge (Religion) +1, Spellcraft +3
Spells:
   0 x 3
   1 x 2
Turn Undead: x 7 per day
 - Heal 1d6/harm undead 1d6 within 30' (DC 10) for half
 - 1d6 damage to non-magical items & constructs within 30' (DC 10) for half
 - Smite (+0 to hit, +1 damage)
Domain Powers:
 - Phyisical attacks ignore 0 hardness and damage reduction
Gear: Full leather armor, Longsword, Light shield w/holy symbol, Spell component pouch x2[/spoiler]

[spoiler=Level 6 human cleric by RobbyPants]Human Cleric 6 (Destruction & War domains.  No deity, longsword as favored weapon for lawful alignment)
Str 14 Dex 10 Con 14 Int 10 Wis 17(19) Cha 10

Init +0   Spot +4, Listen +4
Languages: Common
HP: 42
AC 21   Touch 10      FF 21
Fort +8, Ref +3, Will +10
Melee: +1 Longsword (wielded two-handed) +8, 1d8+4
Ranged: MW Sling +3, 1d4+2, 50ft, Lesser Acid Orb +2 touch, 3d8, 40ft
BAB: +4   Grapple: +6
Abilities: Turn Undead, Quicken spell for 5 turn attempts, Power Attack up to -4/+8 (-4/+16 Leap Attack)
Feats: Power Attack, Extra Turning, Quicken Spell (flaw), Skill Focus (Jump)(flaw), Martial Weapon Proficiency (Longsword)(domain), Weapon Focus (Longsword)(domain), Divine Metamagic (Quicken Spell), Leap Attack (domain), Extra Turning
Flaws: Murkey Eyed, Shaky
Skills: Concentration +11, Jump +14, Knowledge (Religion) +1, Spellcraft +9
Spells:
   0 x 5
   1 x 4
   2 x 4
   3 x 3
Turn Undead: x 11 per day
 - Heal 6d6/harm undead 6d6 within 30' (DC 13) for half
 - 6d6 damage to non-magical items & constructs within 30' (DC 13) for half
 - Smite (+0 to hit, +6 damage)
Domain Powers:
 - Phyisical attacks ignore 3 hardness and damage reduction
Gear: +1 Fullplate, +1 Longsword, MW sling, Periat of Wisdom +2, Cloak of Resitance +1, Ammulet of Natural Armor +1, holy symbol x2, Spell component pouch x2[/spoiler]
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: AlterFrom April 05, 2009, 01:37:30 PM
Since you mentioned playtesting in the feats thread, and we were talking about Shield Spec, let's bring it here, shall we? At the top of this page is a Level 6 Shield Fighter. He has 29 AC. 29 at level 6!! An Ogre can't possibly hit him, a Shambling Mound hits him on an 18, a Troll hits him on a 20, Babau Demon hits on a 17, and the Dragon hits on a 14. Of course, his touch AC is still quite low, because he hasn't got Shield Ward, but he could have it instead of say... Improved Initiative, and be freaking untouchable!

He has poor battlefield control and low damage. High AC is his main edge.

Yep. His main shtick is to use Shield Guard to intercept charges and/or give extra AC to allies while trying to trip any opponent he can.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: Kuroimaken April 05, 2009, 01:48:48 PM
I'm thinking of building a paladin. I'll make him at level 1 and then his progression at level 6. Not sure of race yet, but I'll work on it. Promise.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: Soda April 05, 2009, 02:03:26 PM
[spoiler=Half-Orc Druid 1]Half-Orc Druid 1
Str 16 Dex 14 Con 14 Int 10 Wis 14 Cha 8

Init +2   Spot +2, Listen +6  Darkvision 60ft
Languages: Common, Orc
HP: 23
AC 16   Touch 12      FF 14
Fort +4, Ref +2, Will +4
Speed: 30ft
Melee: Spear +3, 1d8+4, 20/x3
   (Predator form) Bite +5, 1d6+7
Ranged: Spear +2, 1d8+4, 20ft
BAB: +0   Grapple: +3
Abilities: Shapeshift (predator form), Wild Empathy
Qualities Nature Sense
Feats: Toughness, Improved Toughness
Flaws: Murky-Eyed
Skills: [-2 ACP] Concentration 4, Know Nature 4, Listen 4, Survival 4
Spells:
   0 x 3   Create Water, Cure Minor Wounds, Guidance, Resistance, Know Direction
   1 x 2   Obscuring Mist, Faerie Fire, Entangle
Shapeshift: Swift action, at will.
 - Predator Form: Bite attack 1d6, +4 Str, +4 natural armor, 50' speed.
Gear: Full leather armor, Spear x2, Spell component pouch x2[/spoiler]


I think I'm gonna move on to evoker next. Magic Missiles knock people prone now...
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: SKRP April 05, 2009, 02:10:02 PM
[spoiler=Human Swashbuckler 6]Human Swashbuckler 6
Str 10 (12) Dex 15 Con 16 (18) Int 16 Wis 8 Cha 8

Init +2
Languages: Common, 3 more
HP: 6d10+24 (59 hp)
AC 21   Touch 15      FF 16
Fort +9, Ref +4, Will +3
Melee: Masterwork Spiked Chain +10/+5 , 2d4+6/x2 (trip: +6)
Ranged: Long Bow +6 1d8/x3, 100 ft.
BAB: +6   Grapple: +6 
Abilities: Weapon Aptitude, Active Defense, Canny Defense, Insightful Strike, Art of War +1, Surprise Lunge
Feats: Combat Reflexes, Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Spiked chain), Improved Trip, Iron Will, Spring Attack, Stand Still, Weapon Expertise, Weapon Finesse, Weapon Focus (spiked chain).
Flaws: Shaky
Skills: Balance 7, Craft (armormaking) 12, Craft (weaponmaking) 12, Intimidate 8, Jump 3, Listen 8, Ride 3, Sense Motive 8, Spot 8, Tumble 11
Gear: Masterwork Mithral Light plate (1,5k gp), Masterwork Spiked Chain (100 gp), Amulet of Health +2 (4k gp), Gauntlets of Ogre Power +2 (4k gp), Hat of disguise (1,8k gp) [/spoiler]

[spoiler=Half-orc Warlock 1]Half-orc Warlock 1
Str 18 Dex 14 Con 14 Int 10 Wis 10 Cha 8

Init +6
Languages: Common, Orc
HP: 11 (+5 temporary hit points)
AC 13   Touch 11      FF 11
Fort +2, Ref +2, Will +2
Speed: 30 ft.
Melee: Great Axe +4 1d12+6/x3
Ranged: Eldritch Blast +2 1d6/x2
BAB: +0   Grapple: +4   
Special Qualities: Darkvision 60 ft.
Feats: Improved Initiative, Toughness
Flaws: Vulnerable
Skills: Concentration +6, Spellcraft +4
Invocations: Inhuman Toughness
Gear: Light Leather
[/spoiler]
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: bkdubs123 April 05, 2009, 03:07:54 PM
He has poor battlefield control and low damage. High AC is his main edge.

He's playing a Fighter. Since when has a level 6 Fighter ever had anything but poor battlefield control? He does it as best as he can, and with Improved Trip and Shield Guard it is better than a lot of level 6 meleers can boast, but all the while his AC is through the roof. I'm all for Sword and Board having the highest AC for their level ranges, but to push all but the strongest meleers of their level to the misses-on-18-or-lower corner seems a little much to me.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: SKRP April 05, 2009, 03:52:00 PM
He's playing a Fighter. Since when has a level 6 Fighter ever had anything but poor battlefield control? He does it as best as he can, and with Improved Trip and Shield Guard it is better than a lot of level 6 meleers can boast, but all the while his AC is through the roof. I'm all for Sword and Board having the highest AC for their level ranges, but to push all but the strongest meleers of their level to the misses-on-18-or-lower corner seems a little much to me.

He could go PA, Leap Attack, Heedless Charge, Shocktrooper and be quite nice damage dealer. High AC is just a different niche.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: bkdubs123 April 05, 2009, 05:20:03 PM
No, I understand the idea, but I just had a problem with saying low BC AND low damage. Of course he's got poor BC, which was all I wanted to say.

Anyway, I don't have a problem with optimizing your AC, I want to make that clear, but I think he's made it way too easy for the Sword and Boarders. It's not like taking just Power Attack makes you the best damage dealer for your level; this is like the AC equivalent (if you consider them to be equal niches). I also think the level of damage efficiency that PA, Leap Attack, Shock Trooper grants is too much, but that's not what this is about. If the AC capacity granted by Shield Spec was spread into two separate feats I wouldn't have nearly the problem with it.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants April 05, 2009, 06:36:42 PM
Since you mentioned playtesting in the feats thread, and we were talking about Shield Spec, let's bring it here, shall we? At the top of this page is a Level 6 Shield Fighter. He has 29 AC. 29 at level 6!! An Ogre can't possibly hit him, a Shambling Mound hits him on an 18, a Troll hits him on a 20, Babau Demon hits on a 17, and the Dragon hits on a 14. Of course, his touch AC is still quite low, because he hasn't got Shield Ward, but he could have it instead of say... Improved Initiative, and be freaking untouchable!
Well, if we strip away the new bonus from Shield Specialization, that drops his AC by 3, so he's have a 26.  Even then, the listed monsters are hitting at a 15, 17, 14, and 11.  So, other than the dragon, the best we're looking at is a 35% chance of success.

I think the real issue here is in the CR system, and then, the encounters I picked using that system.

From what I've read about the play-test iconic PCs used, they sucked ass.  I'm gussing they rated at about a tier 4.5 to 5, while we're working to make this a tier 3 game.  I'm only so good at gauging encounter difficulty, and this is harder given new classes, but perhaps the answer is to increase the difficulty of the encounters (I'm just not sure by how much).

Even with four encounters per day, most non-caster abilities are encounter based, not per day, so only HP and expendable items will change from ecnounter to encounter.  Even then, with cantrips and orisons being unlimited now, that makes Cure Minor Wounds capable of unlimited out-of-combat healing right from level one.  So perhaps I need to come up with some new encounters something along the lines of:
Party     CR
Level
__________________
1         1.5 - 2
6         7 - 8
11        12 - 14
16        17 - 19
20        21 - 23

Now that we've been getting more PCs, I have a better idea what the party will look like.


: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants April 05, 2009, 06:43:29 PM
I added the three PCs.

The cost of the mithril light plate should be over 4,000 gp, though, as the original category of medium.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: bkdubs123 April 05, 2009, 08:41:29 PM
Well, if we strip away the new bonus from Shield Specialization, that drops his AC by 3, so he's have a 26.  Even then, the listed monsters are hitting at a 15, 17, 14, and 11.  So, other than the dragon, the best we're looking at is a 35% chance of success.

But I think that's a lot more reasonable than before, don't you?

From what I've read about the play-test iconic PCs used, they sucked ass.  I'm gussing they rated at about a tier 4.5 to 5, while we're working to make this a tier 3 game.  I'm only so good at gauging encounter difficulty, and this is harder given new classes, but perhaps the answer is to increase the difficulty of the encounters (I'm just not sure by how much).

Quite right, the play-test iconics used the Elite Array, and were about as optimized as the monsters were, which is why they seemed balanced. Of course with more powerful classes you'll need more powerful monsters. And with more optimized characters you'll want more optimized monsters.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: Kuroimaken April 05, 2009, 09:09:06 PM
Well, if we strip away the new bonus from Shield Specialization, that drops his AC by 3, so he's have a 26.  Even then, the listed monsters are hitting at a 15, 17, 14, and 11.  So, other than the dragon, the best we're looking at is a 35% chance of success.

But I think that's a lot more reasonable than before, don't you?

From what I've read about the play-test iconic PCs used, they sucked ass.  I'm gussing they rated at about a tier 4.5 to 5, while we're working to make this a tier 3 game.  I'm only so good at gauging encounter difficulty, and this is harder given new classes, but perhaps the answer is to increase the difficulty of the encounters (I'm just not sure by how much).

Quite right, the play-test iconics used the Elite Array, and were about as optimized as the monsters were, which is why they seemed balanced. Of course with more powerful classes you'll need more powerful monsters. And with more optimized characters you'll want more optimized monsters.

Bkdubs, AGAIN, AC is a worthless stat. He might as well have an ungodly charisma with no ranks in social skills for all the good it'll do him.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: bkdubs123 April 05, 2009, 09:39:36 PM
Kuroi, you're simply wrong. At 6th level AC is a perfectly good stat. In fact, if AC is so worthless why not get rid of it entirely? Why not make all armors and shields, and dodging and deflection simply give a certain amount of miss chance/concealment? This is becoming a slippery slope here. Obviously Robby doesn't want to get rid of AC, so talking about how it is a worthless stat is really going to get everybody involved nowhere. I'm talking about it as if it were legitimate, because a lot of times it really is, especially at 6th level, and because Robby is treating it like it is legitimate. If there is a feat that grants +11 to AC, and to hit and AC are supposed to be on an equal footing, than there ought to be a feat that grants +11 to hit, shouldn't there? I'm saying that, within the framework of his rebalancing project, a single feat granting +11 to AC isn't balanced against other options.

Dodge: Gain +1 dodge bonus to AC.
Shield Specialization: Gain +1 additional Shield bonus to AC, +1/two Fighter levels.

Hrmm... tough call here...
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: Soda April 05, 2009, 09:51:24 PM
New weapon focus gives +2 and +4 damage for fighters. So that's +4. I think that's the minimum right there.

Some interaction with combat expertise would be flavorful for shields, but not very good.

I think making it into two feats is a good idea.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: Kuroimaken April 05, 2009, 10:09:15 PM
Kuroi, you're simply wrong. At 6th level AC is a perfectly good stat. In fact, if AC is so worthless why not get rid of it entirely? Why not make all armors and shields, and dodging and deflection simply give a certain amount of miss chance/concealment? This is becoming a slippery slope here. Obviously Robby doesn't want to get rid of AC, so talking about how it is a worthless stat is really going to get everybody involved nowhere. I'm talking about it as if it were legitimate, because a lot of times it really is, especially at 6th level, and because Robby is treating it like it is legitimate. If there is a feat that grants +11 to AC, and to hit and AC are supposed to be on an equal footing, than there ought to be a feat that grants +11 to hit, shouldn't there? I'm saying that, within the framework of his rebalancing project, a single feat granting +11 to AC isn't balanced against other options.

Dodge: Gain +1 dodge bonus to AC.
Shield Specialization: Gain +1 additional Shield bonus to AC, +1/two Fighter levels.

Hrmm... tough call here...

Where are you getting +11 at SIXTH level? Methinks there is some serious miscalculation there. And, AGAIN, the Fighter is SUPPOSED to be a tank, so what's wrong with him having a high AC?
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: bkdubs123 April 05, 2009, 10:27:13 PM
Where are you getting +11 at SIXTH level? Methinks there is some serious miscalculation there. And, AGAIN, the Fighter is SUPPOSED to be a tank, so what's wrong with him having a high AC?

:rollseyes

Is AC relevant or not? When did I say anything about +11 at 6th level?

My points, restated for clarity.

Another point: +11 Shield bonus is worth 120,000 GP. Just to put that out there.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: AlterFrom April 05, 2009, 10:45:52 PM
Just popping in here...

I wouldn't have dared put that fighter at L11, let alone 16/20. At level 6, you just aren't dealing with a constant barrage of spells and AC is something of a viable defence. HOWEVER, I didn't see his high AC being his major "tankiness" at all. If he shoots his shield bonus to an ally (say, one of the squishies) he has simultaneous made himself easier to hit and his ally harder to hit, a very pseudo-sticky thing to do. I gave him tripping as a backup sort of thing so he wasn't entirely one-dimensional to play.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: Kuroimaken April 05, 2009, 10:46:22 PM
Where are you getting +11 at SIXTH level? Methinks there is some serious miscalculation there. And, AGAIN, the Fighter is SUPPOSED to be a tank, so what's wrong with him having a high AC?

:rollseyes

Is AC relevant or not? When did I say anything about +11 at 6th level?

My points, restated for clarity.
    * AC is perfectly relevant at 6th level.
    * +11 to AC from a single feat is not balanced against other feats that improve AC.
    * If becoming a highly powerful damage dealer takes three to four feats, increasing your AC by an epic level should take more than a single feat.

Another point: +11 Shield bonus is worth 120,000 GP. Just to put that out there.

But at 6th level, you don't HAVE +11 to your AC. At the point where AC is RELEVANT, you don't have the full benefits of the feat. See where the problem lies? The feat is actually a worthwhile investment throughout the lower levels and a bit halfway through, but not further. Also, +11 to AC costing 120k GP is one of the things that's wrong with the system. Consider this:

-The Fighter's role is supposed to be a tank.
-High AC contributes to it (but is not the be-all end-all way to do it, and in fact, at mid-to-high levels saves are much more important).
-AC being more and more costly at higher levels to NONSPELLCASTERS ONLY is detrimental to the Fighter's role.
-A feat that scales with Fighter levels helps more easily produce the effect of Fighter=Tank.

So what IS, exactly, the problem with the feat?
Here's another point to consider. Do you find that +11 to AC costing 120k, to the FIGHTER and his melee lookalikes ALONE, is a good thing? I don't think there is a problem there.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: bkdubs123 April 05, 2009, 11:39:16 PM
So what IS, exactly, the problem with the feat?

Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I think +3 to AC from a single feat is unbalanced as well.

Here's another point to consider. Do you find that +11 to AC costing 120k, to the FIGHTER and his melee lookalikes ALONE, is a good thing? I don't think there is a problem there.

No, I don't think that's a good thing, but this is Robby's rebalancing, not mine. I have a problem with wealth by level entirely. I have a problem with the fact that AC isn't a relevant defense after a certain level. I have a problem with magic ruling all of the roosts after a certain level, with every character needing to spend money in order to buy magical abilities in order to come remotely close to functioning. But Robby isn't utterly revamping the magic system, it's still more powerful than other options after so many levels, he isn't reworking wealth by level or magic items as far as I know, so +11 to AC is still going to cost a lot of money, and spells are still going to be better ways, not only of getting a high AC, but of producing any of the more relevant defenses.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: Kuroimaken April 05, 2009, 11:51:36 PM
So what IS, exactly, the problem with the feat?

Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I think +3 to AC from a single feat is unbalanced as well.

Here's another point to consider. Do you find that +11 to AC costing 120k, to the FIGHTER and his melee lookalikes ALONE, is a good thing? I don't think there is a problem there.

No, I don't think that's a good thing, but this is Robby's rebalancing, not mine. I have a problem with wealth by level entirely. I have a problem with the fact that AC isn't a relevant defense after a certain level. I have a problem with magic ruling all of the roosts after a certain level, with every character needing to spend money in order to buy magical abilities in order to come remotely close to functioning. But Robby isn't utterly revamping the magic system, it's still more powerful than other options after so many levels, he isn't reworking wealth by level or magic items as far as I know, so +11 to AC is still going to cost a lot of money, and spells are still going to be better ways, not only of getting a high AC, but of producing any of the more relevant defenses.

Okay, let me rephrase the question then. What do you believe is wrong with a feat that boosts a defense that becomes useless at the higher levels, granting a bonus that essentially saves him 120k at said higher levels? What IS the problem with granting the Fighter what is essentially a low-level money-saver at the expense of damage?
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: Midnight_v April 05, 2009, 11:52:25 PM
Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I think +3 to AC from a single feat is unbalanced as well.

Yeah probabbly feats should be valued higher. +3 ac from a feat is totally reasonable. Generally you only get 7-8 feats so they should be worthwhile. Generally not if you're a Fighter or psiwar. Even they could get a bit more strength without unbalancing the game.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: bkdubs123 April 06, 2009, 01:09:38 AM
Okay, let me rephrase the question then. What do you believe is wrong with a feat that boosts a defense that becomes useless at the higher levels, granting a bonus that essentially saves him 120k at said higher levels? What IS the problem with granting the Fighter what is essentially a low-level money-saver at the expense of damage?

You're not looking at the bigger picture. You're treating acting as though nothing else exists except Sword and Board sucking as an option, and this feat to "fix it."

6th level Fighter with Power Attack, Leap Attack and Shock Trooper, wields a +1 Greatsword, wears Full Plate, and has 20 str. On a charge, if he power attacks for 6 (which he does), he deals 2d6+7+24 damage, avg 39. He has 20 AC (14 after a charge) and 11 Touch. He has a +12 to hit, hitting the S&B guy 30% of the time, avg resulting damage of 13.

6th level Fighter with Shield Spec, Shield Ward, and Shield Guard, wields a Longsword, wears Full Plate, and has 20 str. Every hit he deals 1d8+5 damage, avg 9.5. He has 27 AC and 18 Touch. He has a +12 to hit, hitting the Charger 65% of the time, or 95% of the time after the Charger charges, avg resulting damage of 6~9.

Now, these two builds seem relatively balanced against each other, however, the first build needs Shock Trooper to deal that much damage. It needs all three feats to do its thing. The second build doesn't need Shield Guard. That feat actually gives him new, unique capability that helps his allies. I come again to the point I made earlier, where if somehow the benefits of Shield Specialization were split into two feats (probably using a different mechanic than just adding the Shield bonus straight up), I would have far less objection to the result.

Something like these?

Shield Specialization
Prerequisites: Shield Proficiency
Benefit: You gain an additional +1 Shield bonus to AC while wielding any shield.
Special: For every five Fighter levels you possess the bonus granted from this feat increases by 1.

Grand Bulwark
Prerequisites: Shield Specialization, Base Attack +6
Benefit: This feat grants you two special combat options, as follows;
Impenetrable Glare - As a swift action you can double your Shield bonus to AC against a single foe for 1 turn.
Defender's Aegis - As long as you wield a shield, as a swift action, you can deny line of effect to a single adjacent ally for 1 turn.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: Kuroimaken April 06, 2009, 04:06:55 AM
Okay, let me rephrase the question then. What do you believe is wrong with a feat that boosts a defense that becomes useless at the higher levels, granting a bonus that essentially saves him 120k at said higher levels? What IS the problem with granting the Fighter what is essentially a low-level money-saver at the expense of damage?

You're not looking at the bigger picture. You're treating acting as though nothing else exists except Sword and Board sucking as an option, and this feat to "fix it."

6th level Fighter with Power Attack, Leap Attack and Shock Trooper, wields a +1 Greatsword, wears Full Plate, and has 20 str. On a charge, if he power attacks for 6 (which he does), he deals 2d6+7+24 damage, avg 39. He has 20 AC (14 after a charge) and 11 Touch. He has a +12 to hit, hitting the S&B guy 30% of the time, avg resulting damage of 13.

6th level Fighter with Shield Spec, Shield Ward, and Shield Guard, wields a Longsword, wears Full Plate, and has 20 str. Every hit he deals 1d8+5 damage, avg 9.5. He has 27 AC and 18 Touch. He has a +12 to hit, hitting the Charger 65% of the time, or 95% of the time after the Charger charges, avg resulting damage of 6~9.

Now, these two builds seem relatively balanced against each other, however, the first build needs Shock Trooper to deal that much damage. It needs all three feats to do its thing. The second build doesn't need Shield Guard. That feat actually gives him new, unique capability that helps his allies. I come again to the point I made earlier, where if somehow the benefits of Shield Specialization were split into two feats (probably using a different mechanic than just adding the Shield bonus straight up), I would have far less objection to the result.

Something like these?

Shield Specialization
Prerequisites: Shield Proficiency
Benefit: You gain an additional +1 Shield bonus to AC while wielding any shield.
Special: For every five Fighter levels you possess the bonus granted from this feat increases by 1.

Grand Bulwark
Prerequisites: Shield Specialization, Base Attack +6
Benefit: This feat grants you two special combat options, as follows;
Impenetrable Glare - As a swift action you can double your Shield bonus to AC against a single foe for 1 turn.
Defender's Aegis - As long as you wield a shield, as a swift action, you can deny line of effect to a single adjacent ally for 1 turn.

Oh, NOW I see it. You think the feat is unbalanced when it comes to charger versus S&B. In terms of lasting power, though, doesn't the charger have an upper hand as far as how much benefit his feats give him?

Consider this: the charger boy can pretty much use his schtick forever and not be gimped by it. Regardless of what level people are, they'll always have an AC to hit. Sure, the smartest of them will be hiding behind GMI and Invisibility and whatnot but hey, they still have an AC and hitpoints, and as far as magical concealment goes they can always go Mageslayer or something. This is something the S&B fighter can do nothing about - his AC essentially becomes useless after a certain level and there are no feats or magical items to remedy this. So, while his thing is pretty rad and cost-effective at low levels, he sucks so hard later that he could milk a rock. Meanwhile, while charger boy spent more feats, he's actually getting a better mileage out of them. Sorry, but I don't think making Shield Specialization a turkey feat and then adding Greater Bulwark is better. Remember, part of the reason we're using scaling feats here is to avoid turkeys that would never be taken DEAD by themselves.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: bkdubs123 April 06, 2009, 04:18:53 AM
Oh, NOW I see it. You think the feat is unbalanced when it comes to charger versus S&B. In terms of lasting power, though, doesn't the charger have an upper hand as far as how much benefit his feats give him?

Okay, and now this argument I find to be much more legitimate. The charger can use his schtick forever and not be gimped, this is true. I guess for Robby's rebalanced game it's probably okay, even though the sheer number makes me think it is broken. I mean... since it the AC doesn't matter after a while why not simply make it, "You gain an additional +3 Shield bonus to AC from any shield you wield" and be done with it. I would prefer a game though where AC continued to be just as viable a defense as saving throws, and in such a game I'd need to see something like Shield Spec+Grand Bulwark.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: Kuroimaken April 06, 2009, 04:38:26 AM
Oh, NOW I see it. You think the feat is unbalanced when it comes to charger versus S&B. In terms of lasting power, though, doesn't the charger have an upper hand as far as how much benefit his feats give him?

Okay, and now this argument I find to be much more legitimate. The charger can use his schtick forever and not be gimped, this is true. I guess for Robby's rebalanced game it's probably okay, even though the sheer number makes me think it is broken. I mean... since it the AC doesn't matter after a while why not simply make it, "You gain an additional +3 Shield bonus to AC from any shield you wield" and be done with it. I would prefer a game though where AC continued to be just as viable a defense as saving throws, and in such a game I'd need to see something like Shield Spec+Grand Bulwark.

Because the mileage of how long that bonus will actually be useful for can vary. In some campaigns the spell-slinging doesn't close the game and you actually have some use for your AC for quite some time (typically low-magic campaigns). Also, if it's not broken, why fix it?
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants April 06, 2009, 09:15:38 AM
Bkdubs123, I see where you're coming from comparing the strength of the feats.  The reason I added high bonus to the feat was because of what you lose by using a shield.  You lose the ability to make meaningful Power Attacks, and unless you're using a spinning sword or kusari gama, you lose reach.

Perhaps the rate at which the feat scales can be tweaked, and I think some testing will give us a better idea.  I think Kuroimaken is right in that by the time you're getting a serious bonus from this feat, AC begins to matter less and less.

Also, AlterFrom, I forgot to ask you earlier.  Where's the extreme shield from?  It looks like you're getting +3 AC from it, but other than that, I've never heard of it.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: Midnight_v April 06, 2009, 10:39:29 AM
 :( God.

I really gotta make time to come back to this, before its too late. *sigh*
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: AlterFrom April 06, 2009, 11:26:11 AM
Extreme Shield is from Races of Stone.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: Soda April 06, 2009, 01:09:46 PM
I agree with bk overall. +11 AC and Ref vs damage is too much for one feat. It's far beyond the accepted powerlevel of feats in 3.5. And then one more feat and you have +11 to touch AC too.

BK's feats are better, but I'll point out that a fighter that spends (one of) his swift actions on Impenetrable Glare every round, would have +8 to AC from his shield vs one guy. Extreme shield would be +10.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants April 06, 2009, 01:12:20 PM
Extreme Shield is from Races of Stone.
Thanks.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants April 06, 2009, 02:37:15 PM
So it's pretty obvious that PCs built with these rules are going to be stronger than what the CR rating for mosnters suggests.  I'm thinking I might try designing some encounters with raised CR to raise the encounter level, increasing more at higher levels.  Something like this:

Party     EL
Level
__________________
1         1.5 - 2
6         7 - 8
11        12 - 14
16        17 - 19
20        21 - 23

: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: bkdubs123 April 06, 2009, 02:43:40 PM
I think that is a fine idea for a test, just to see how it goes, but I think you should also, heavily "optimize" the standard CR encounter Monsters. Min/Mix their ability scores, tool up their feats, make them more dangerous, and then see if that helps anything.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants April 06, 2009, 03:50:05 PM
I'll add this kobold sorcerer.

[spoiler=Level 1 Kobold Sorcerer by RobbyPants]Kobold Sorcerer (Draconic Heritage - Blue)
Str 4 Dex 14 Con 14 Int 10 Wis 8 Cha 18

Init +2   Spot -1, Listen +3
Languages: Common, Draconic
HP: 9
AC 14   Touch 13      FF 12
Fort +2, Ref +2, Will +1
Melee: Dagger -5, 1d3-3
Ranged: Acid Splash +3 touch, 1d6 acid, 25ft; Light crossbow +3, 1d6, 80ft
BAB: +0   Grapple: -7
Abilities: Darkvision 60'
Feats: Extend Spell, Draconic Heritage(Blue)(sor1), Toughness(flaw)
Flaws: Non-combatant
Skills: Concentration +6, Escape Artist +4, Knowledge(Arcana) +2, Listen +3, Spellcraft +4
Spells: 0 x unlimited, 1 x 4
   0 Acid Splash, Daze, Detect Magic, Prestidigitation, Resistance
   1 Enlarge Person, Mage Armor, Magic Missile

Gear:Light Crossbow, Spell component pouch x 3, Dagger[/spoiler]

[spoiler=Level 6 Kobold Sorcerer by RobbyPants]Kobold Sorcerer (Draconic Heritage - Blue)
Str 4 Dex 14 Con 14 Int 10 Wis 8 Cha 19 (21)

Init +6   Spot -1, Listen +8
Languages: Common, Draconic
HP: 36
AC 21   Touch 13      FF 19
Fort +7, Ref +5, Will +5
Melee: Dagger -2, 1d3-3
Ranged: Acid Splash +6 touch, 1d6 acid, 40ft; Light crossbow +6, 1d6, 80ft
BAB: +3   Grapple: -4
Abilities: Darkvision 60', Rat Familiar (+2 Fort)
Feats: Extend Spell, Draconic Heritage(Blue)(sor1), Toughness(flaw), Improved Initiative, Draconic Power(sor4), Energy Substitution(Electricity)
Flaws: Non-combatant
Skills: Concentration +11, Escape Artist +6, Knowledge(Arcana) +5, Listen +8, Spellcraft +9
Spells: 0 x unlimited, 1 x 7, 2 x 6, 3 x 4
   0 Acid Splash, Daze, Detect Magic, Mending, Prestidigitation, Ray of Frost, Read Magic, Resistance
   1 Charm Person, Enlarge Person, Grease*, Magic Missile, Silent Image, True Casting
   2 Glitterdust*, Mirror Image, Scorching Ray, Shatter
   3 Fireball, Haste
  * Advanced Learning

Gear:+1 Twilight Mithril Light Chain, +1 Mithril Buckler, Cloak of Charisma +2 & Resistance +1, Light Crossbow, Spell component pouch x 3, Dagger[/spoiler]
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: Midnight_v April 07, 2009, 11:07:23 AM
Are you still using the T3 rubric?
Will you run existing comparable classes in the same tests?
i don't think the changes are that far out of line with, The TOB and the such...
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants April 07, 2009, 12:09:17 PM
A control group, per se?  That makes sense.

Are you thinking of running a party of "modified" PCs and a party of "unmodified" tier 3 PCs through the same fights for comparision?  I think that would yield more info than mixing modified and unmodified classes in the same party.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: Midnight_v April 07, 2009, 12:19:44 PM
A control group, per se?  That makes sense.

Are you thinking of running a party of "modified" PCs and a party of "unmodified" tier 3 PCs through the same fights for comparision?  I think that would yield more info than mixing modified and unmodified classes in the same party.

EXACTLY.
Scientific Method FTW!
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants April 13, 2009, 09:34:07 AM
I'm curious about what you think of some revised encounters.  I haven't changed much regarding feats, but I've increased the EL for the level 1 and 6 encounters.  What do you think?

Level 1 (EL 1 1/2 - 2):
[spoiler]6 Tiny Monstrous Spiders

5 Dire Rats

3 Level 1 Kobold Warriors (Longsword, Full leather armor, Tower shield) and
3 Level 1 Kobold Warriors (Light crossbow, short sword, Light leather armor)

3 Level 1 Orc Warriors (Longsword, Longbow, Full leather armor, heavy wooden shield)

3 Human Commoner Zombies

3 Medium Monstrous Centepedes

Medium Animated Object (Table - Speed 50', hardness 5)

Bugbear (* Iron Will, replace Alertness)[/spoiler]


Level 6 (EL 7 - 8 ):
[spoiler]3 Minotaurs

Huge Animated Object (Stone Statue - Tall, Speed 30', hardness 8 ) and
Huge Animated Object (Rug - Long, Speed 20', Blind, Constrict)

2 Basalisks

2 Dire Lions

2 Wraiths

Dire Bear

Young Red Dragon

Huge Fire Elemental

Hill Giant[/spoiler]

______

Also, does anyone want to roll up some tier 3 "control" PCs?  Midnight_V makes a good point that we should have some other PCs for comparison.  While I own ToB, my ToB-fu isn't that great, so I probably shouldn't be rolling any up.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants April 13, 2009, 09:48:50 AM
Also, for reference, here's a list of tier 3 classes from JaronK's thread that haven't been modified here:

Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, Crusader, Bard, Swordsage, Binder (without access to the summon monster vestige), Duskblade, Factotum, and Warblade.

The Psychic Warrior is also on that list, but we've opted to add additional power points.  I don't think this is enough to warrent a serious change, so if there are no objections, I think the PW could also be used as a control character, if anyone is interested.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: Midnight_v April 14, 2009, 12:40:45 PM
The Psychic Warrior is also on that list, but we've opted to add additional power points.  I don't think this is enough to warrent a serious change, so if there are no objections, I think the PW could also be used as a control character, if anyone is interested.

Hmm... I'll do it. It was my grand argument anyway, that it actually was tier 3 (low) A few more pp and its solid in the middle. . . or not but anything for a gauge.

Though I gotta now what is the analog role I should be making it as.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants April 14, 2009, 12:50:31 PM
Though I gotta now what is the analog role I should be making it as.
Role?  As in tank, skill monkey, etc?

I'm not sure how much those matter.  I mean, you'd want a group to have it's bases covered, and roles are one way to do that, but it's not the only way.

For now, people have just been submitting various PCs, most only at level 1.  I figured we'd select four at a time to run through various encounters.  So, whatever your PW does, you could probably select three other PCs around it.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants April 17, 2009, 10:10:24 AM
Any thoughts on the power level of the tenative encounters I suggested here (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=3949.msg134131#msg134131)?  I was aiming to get the EL higher than the level of the party, but not by too much.  Although, depending on what gets changed with Shield Specialization (if anything), it might make some differene...
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: Soda April 23, 2009, 04:44:18 PM
[spoiler=Halfling Druid 6 by Soda]Halfling Druid 6
Str 10 Dex 16 Con 14 Int 10 Wis 19 Cha 8

Init +3   Spot +13, Listen +13
Languages: Common, Halfling
HP: 42
AC 20   Touch 14      FF 17
Fort +10, Ref +8, Will +12   [+2 vs Fear]
Melee: Shortspear +5, 1d4   [+9 ranged, 20ft]
Ranged: Sling +9, 1d3, 50ft   [+1 attack and damage 30ft, PBS]
      Magic Stone +10, 1d6+1, 50ft   [2d6+2 vs Undead]
      Produce Flame +9 touch, 1d6+3, 120ft max
BAB: +4   Grapple: +0   [Escape Artist +4]
Abilities:
Qualities: Animal Companion (black bear), Nature Sense, Wild Empathy, Woodland Stride, Trackless Step, Resist Nature's Lure
Feats: Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Natural Bond, Ashbound
Flaws: Noncombatant
Skills: [-1 ACP] Spot +13, Listen +13, Escape Artist +4, Know Nature +5, Handle Animal +4, Ride +6, Hide +8, Move Silently +8, Climb +1, Jump +1
Spells: 8/5/3/2
   5 Create Water, Cure Minor Wounds, Detect Magic, Purify Food and Drink, Mending, Know Direction, Detect Poison, Light
   4 Magic Stone, Produce Flame, Entangle, Faerie Fire, Magic Fang, Summon Nature's Ally I
   4 Bite of the Wererat, Mass Snake's Swiftness, Nature's Favor, Summon Nature's Ally II
   3 Sleet Storm, Ice Lance, Summon Nature's Ally III
Gear: +2 Full leather armor (4350), Cloak of Resistance +2 (4000), Healing Belt (750), Periapt of Wisdom +2 (4000)

Companion: Black Bear, Medium Animal
HP: 52 (7 HD)
Initiative +2
Speed: 40ft
AC: 20, touch 12, flat-footed 18   (+2 Dex, +6 natural, +2 armor)
BAB/Grapple: +5; +10
Attack: Claw +11 (1d6+5)
Full Attack: 2 Claws +11 (1d6+5) and Bite +5 (1d6+2)
Qualities: Low-light vision, scent, Link, Share Spells, Evasion, Devotion
Saves: Fort +7 Ref +7 Will +3
Abilities: Str 21 Dex 15 Con 15 Int 2 Wis 12 Cha 6
Skills: Climb +6, Listen +5, Spot +5, Swim +10
Feats: Toughness, Weapon Focus (claw), Improved Natural Attack
Gear: Light leather barding[/spoiler]

[spoiler=Elf Ranger 6 by Soda]Elf Ranger 6
Str 14 Dex 18 Con 13 Int 10 Wis 12 Cha 8

Init +4   Spot +12, Listen +12
Languages: Common, Elven
HP: 37
AC 18   Touch 13      FF 14
Fort +8, Ref +11, Will +5   [+2 vs enchantments]
Melee: Shortsword +6/+1, 1d6+2
Ranged: Longbow +12/+7, 1d8+3 plus 1d6 cold   [+1, +1 PBS]
         +10/+10/+5, 1d8+3 plus 1d6 cold with Rapid Shot
         +8, 2d8+6 plus 2d6 cold with Manyshot
      
BAB: +6/+1   Grapple: +8
Abilities: Wild Empathy
Qualities: Favored Enemy (monstrous humanoids +4, magical beasts +2), Animal Companion
Feats: Track, Rapid Shot, Manyshot, Endurance, Point Blank Shot, Precise ShotF, Weapon FocusF, Swift and Silent(pftg), Woodland Archer(rotw)
Flaws: Noncombatant, Vulnerable
Skills: [-1 ACP] Hide +12, Listen +12, Move Silently +12, Search +11, Spot +12, Survival +10
Spells: Hunter's Mercy x2
Gear: +1 Full leather (1350), +1 Darkwood Composite Longbow (2600), 20 Cold Iron Arrows, 10 Silver Arrows, adamantine arrow, Cloak of Resistance +2 (4000), Lesser Crystal of Energy Assault (3000), Healing Belt (750), Antitoxin, 2 Human Bane arrows (200), Aberration bane arrow, dragon bane arrow

Animal Companion: Riding Dog
HP: 57 (6 HD)
Initiative +3
Speed: 40ft
AC: 23, touch 13, flat-footed 20   (+3 Dex, +8 natural armor, +2 armor)
BAB/Grapple: +4; +7
Attack: Bite +8, 1d6+3
Qualities: Low-light vision, Scent, Link, Share Spells, Evasion, Devotion
Saves: Fort +7 Ref +8 Will +2
Abilities: Str 17 Dex 17 Con 15 Int 2 Wis 12 Cha 6
Skills: Hide +5, Jump +7, Listen +3 Move Silently +5, Spot +2, Survival +3 (+4 Survival while tracking by scent)
Feats: Track, Weapon Focus (bite), Toughness, Improved Toughness
Gear: Light leather barding[/spoiler]

Both of these need to buy gear. I'm so bad at shopping.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants April 24, 2009, 09:54:28 AM
I guess I'll wait to post those on the front until they have new gear.

...or did you want us to suggest some items?
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: Soda April 24, 2009, 10:25:41 AM
Well, I have no idea what to get.  :p


[spoiler=Human Paladin 6]Human Paladin 6
Str 14 Dex 10 Con 14 Int 10 Wis 12 Cha 18

Init +0   Spot +1, Listen +1
Languages: Common
HP: 50
AC 25   Touch 15      FF 25
Fort +11, Ref +6, Will +7      [+1 vs spells, +5 Ref vs half damage]
Immune to Fear, Disease
Melee: Longsword +9/+3, 1d8+2
Ranged: Light crossbow +4, 1d8
BAB: +6/+1   Grapple: +8
Abilities: Detect Evil, Smite 2/encounter, Lay on Hands, Turn Undead 7/day, Pancean Touch
Qualities: Aura of Good, Divine Grace, Aura of Courage, Divine Health, Argent Bastion
Feats: Goad, Shield Specialization, Nymph's Kiss, Law Devotion, Shield Ward*, Awesome Smite
Flaws: Shaky
Skills: [ACP -6] Diplomacy +17, Intimidate +15, Knowledge (religion) +5, Sense Motive +10, Use Magic Device +10
Spells: CL 3
   3
Gear: +1 Full plate (2500), +2 heavy steel shield (4000), cloak of charisma +2 (4000), Mwk Longsword[/spoiler]
I'm not really happy with how this turned out but meh. I gave him umd for the hell of it, any ideas what to do with it? Can you take ability focus goad?
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants April 24, 2009, 12:54:29 PM
Well, let's see...

Druid
Yeah, you don't really need to worry about Wilding Clasps anymore, and you're using the animal companion variant anyway.  A wand of Entangle might be nice.  You don't need to worry about the save too much, because it halves their speed even if their save is successful.  A wand of Splinterbolt (SpC) might be a nice backup "weapon".  Other than that, a Periapt of Wisdom +2, and perhaps a Dex and/or Con booster?  You can also blow money to pimp the black bear a bit.


Ranger
Why did you get a darkwood bow for the ranger?  Is there some advantage other than a weight reduction?  Upgrading the bow to use +2 points of Str will increase your damage.  You could possibly get him some arrows of different materials (adamantine, silver, and cold iron).  If you're looking for a cheap way to increase the damage on the bow, consider a lesser Energy Assault crystal (3,000 gp for +1d6 energy damage).  You can only put one on at a time, but it's cheaper than upgrading from a +1 bow to a +2 bow.  Gloves of Dex +2 couldn't hurt.  A cloak of Resistance +2 could be nice (or +1 if running low on money).  Boots of Striding and Springing are a bit pricy for that level but doable, and the added mobility might help for an archer.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants April 28, 2009, 09:46:27 AM
I wanted to discuss the actual "process" of playtesting.

Are we going to each do this on our own (with paper and dice) or try to collaborate somehow online?  I think it would work best with at least two people (DM and PCs) so as to avoid any bias (pulling punches and the like).  How would we best do that?  PbP seems very slow, but it can work across time zomes.  IRC or similar chat could speed things up, but then you have to get several people free at the same time.  Do you have any other ideas?

If we do it online, it'd be nice to have some sort of a board, just to keep positions clear.  I'm not sure the best way to handle that.

After we run though the four fights for a day, what comes next?  Analysis of what happened?  We could try to figure out why PC X failed.  Was it bad rolls, bad tactics, bad PC design, bad class design or some combination?

In addition to fighting groups of EL-appropriate encounters, should we create single NPCs and/or groups of weaker NPCs?  Even "boss fights" at a higher EL?  People always say D&D isn't PVP arena when discussing wizards and fighter and the like, but NPCs with class levels are standard encounters in most games.

So, what are your thoughts on the matter?
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: Soda April 28, 2009, 12:14:57 PM
Uff, mountain of work.

And I want to do some parallel testing of my other two projects too. -_-


PbP or IRC are fine with me. Alone testing is up to anyone with the initiative. I say let's get a battle map up and four of us will stick PCs on it.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants April 28, 2009, 12:50:33 PM
How are we going to handle battlemaps online?

The quickest way I can think of is to create an image with a grid and cut-and-paste icons as things move and die.  It's clunky, but it's simple and should work.  Does anyone know of any free software to handle that?
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: Soda April 28, 2009, 02:00:14 PM
I have no idea why I'm only making characters with animal companions.

Half-Orc Ranger 6 by Soda
[spoiler]Half-Orc Ranger 6
Str 20 Dex 14 Con 16 Int 8 Wis 10 Cha 8

Init +2   Spot -4, Listen -4
Languages: Common, Orc
HP: 49
AC 18   Touch 12      FF 16
Fort +8, Ref +7, Will +2
Melee: Standard- Handaxe +13, 1d6+5+1d6 fire or
               +11/+11, 1d6+5+1d6 fire/1d6+2
         Full attack- +11/+11/+6/+6, 1d6+5+1d6 fire/+1d6+2
Ranged: Handaxe +13, 1d6+5 or
         +11/+11, 1d6+5/+1d6+2
BAB: +6/+1   Grapple: +11
Abilities: Wild Empathy
Qualities: Favored Enemy (elves +4, humans +2), Animal Companion, bonus feat instead of spells
Feats: Track, Two-Weapon Fighting, Endurance, Weapon Focus, Quick Draw, Brutal Throw, Spring Attack, Combat Reflexes, Vexing Flanker
Flaws: Murky-Eyed, Inattentive
Skills: [-1 ACP] Climb +8, Hide +6, Intimidate +5, Knowledge (nature) +4, Move Silently +10, Search +8, Survival +11
Gear: +2 full leather (4350), Gauntlets of Strength +2 (4000), 3 Mwk Handaxes (900), Healing Belt (750), Lesser Crystal of Energy Assault (3000)

Animal Companion: Wolf
HP: 39 (6 HD)
Initiative +3
Speed: 50ft
AC: 21, touch 13, flat-footed 18   (+3 Dex, +6 natural armor, +2 armor)
BAB/Grapple: +4; +6
Attack: Bite +7, 1d6+2
Special Attacks: Trip +2
Qualities: Low-light vision, Scent, Link, Share Spells, Evasion, Devotion
Saves: Fort +7 Ref +8 Will +3
Abilities: Str 15 Dex 17 Con 15 Int 2 Wis 12 Cha 6
Skills: Hide +6, Listen +2 Move Silently +6, Spot +2, Survival +2 (+6 tracking by scent)
Feats: Track, Weapon Focus (bite), Combat Reflexes, Vexing Flanker
Gear: Light leather barding[/spoiler]
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: AlterFrom April 28, 2009, 06:09:00 PM
How are we going to handle battlemaps online?

The quickest way I can think of is to create an image with a grid and cut-and-paste icons as things move and die.  It's clunky, but it's simple and should work.  Does anyone know of any free software to handle that?

GIMP if you just want to edit an image (warning: learning curve involved).
Any and all VTTs should be able to handle that if coupled with a screencapture ability (which is similarly present on any and all OS's I can think of).
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants April 29, 2009, 09:36:16 AM
Yeah, I already have Gimp 2.0 installed, but I suppose everyone else would need that too.  I only have a very cursory knowledge of how it works, and I've never really taken the time to learn layers.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: veekie April 30, 2009, 10:29:23 AM
If it's anything like Photoshop, layers would greatly expedite moving tokens about and adding them. You just need to make a set of standard tokens to paste onto and slide around a basic grid template. Players wouldn't need it if the grid is marked with coordinates, just the DM.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: Soda April 30, 2009, 11:08:10 PM
I was thinking, What if we run a warblade or crusader through a gauntlet of encounters. And then we run a fighter or barb through. They should hopefully perform similarly. And to derandomize a little, what if the characters and the encounters each have a list of random numbers.

Each encounter would have a list of rolls for the PC and one for the opponents. Instead of rolling a d20, you draw the next number from the list.
So, no one can have lucky rolls because every character to run the test rolled the same numbers. But the character behave normally, because the numbers are, of course, secret.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: Kuroimaken April 30, 2009, 11:20:33 PM
I was thinking, What if we run a warblade or crusader through a gauntlet of encounters. And then we run a fighter or barb through. They should hopefully perform similarly. And to derandomize a little, what if the characters and the encounters each have a list of random numbers.

Each encounter would have a list of rolls for the PC and one for the opponents. Instead of rolling a d20, you draw the next number from the list.
So, no one can have lucky rolls because every character to run the test rolled the same numbers. But the character behave normally, because the numbers are, of course, secret.

Of course, you'd have to run the encounters simultaneously.
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants May 01, 2009, 09:36:20 AM
Midnight_V was suggesting the same thing and I agree with it.  Basically, a control group, as we've already decided they're at the target power level.  I'd prefer someone else to roll them up, because I'm fairly new to running ToB PCs.

Why do they have to be run simultaneously?  Once you get into the second or third round, I would expect the fights could be going in an entirely different direction.  I think they should go up against the exact same fight (same monsters, same starting positions, etc).
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: Kuroimaken May 01, 2009, 01:59:53 PM
Midnight_V was suggesting the same thing and I agree with it.  Basically, a control group, as we've already decided they're at the target power level.  I'd prefer someone else to roll them up, because I'm fairly new to running ToB PCs.

Why do they have to be run simultaneously?  Once you get into the second or third round, I would expect the fights could be going in an entirely different direction.  I think they should go up against the exact same fight (same monsters, same starting positions, etc).


Because otherwise the "rolls" are known, and therefore this fact can be used to the advantage of the latter player regardless of how the combat went so far.

Also: what happens if they run out of "rolls"? Start over?
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: RobbyPants May 01, 2009, 02:55:48 PM
Rolls known?  I'm suggesting two entirely separate fights.  Basically, I'm saying you take the monsters and their starting positions and use that for both fights, but otherwise run them as two different fights.

Did you want to use the same rolls to keep the randomness down?  I suppose that could help narrow down what's really affecting the fight...
: Re: D&D Play-testing [Rebalancing 3.5]
: Soda May 01, 2009, 03:56:02 PM
It might be too much work for little benefit. Probably better off to use the time to run more fights.