Cayzle's Wemic Site
 |
|
||||||||
 |
|
||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|||||||||
Liontaurs, gaming, wemics, Dungeons and Dragons, and more.
There is a new edition of Dungeons and Dragons coming out. For a long time, the bits and pieces of news I have heard about 4E have left a sour taste in my mouth. I've been groping toward how I would do a 3.5 revamp right, rather than make the mistakes that WotC seems to be making. Take a look at the links at the bottom of this screed for more.
Of course, I was aware that Paizo was also making a 3.75 revamp. I downloaded the alpha and was a little more than somewhat underwhelmed. Too much of a power boost to the core classes (to keep up with the splat book arms race I figured). Too little change that actually fixes what is wrong.
So I started to write my own set of fixes (see those links below). But the fact is, no one will ever play a revised D&D that i write and post on my little blog. Even if I did make a nice PDF and release it for free, those who would actually use it would be very few.
And I have heard through the grapevine that Paizo is actually being very responsive to suggestions. So I have decided to really give the full court press on the Paizo boards for my ideas on how to improve D&D. Who knows -- if I am loud enough, and if my arguments are strong enough -- maybe I can make a difference.
Here are some of the Paizo message board threads on which I've posted so far. I'll update this screed with more as I write them.
This is an ancillary part of my ongoing series on How I Would Fix D&D 3.5.
First-level characters in 3E D&D are fragile, sure. But the game softens the blow a little, by granting full hit points to first level characters, and by awarding quadruple the normal number of skill points as well. Both of these benefits only accrue at first level.
The problem is that these benefits -- granted only at character level 1, not when you take the first level of a class -- end up creating a balance issue for multiclass characters: The class you take first matters.
For example, if you want to make a skill-focussed cleric/bard, the rules strongly encourage you to take the bard class at first level, since that maximizes your skill ranks.
And compare the fighter1/rogue1 (16 skill ranks, 13.5 hp on average for an Int 10, Con 10 PC) to a rogue1/fighter1 (34 skill ranks, 11.5 hp on average).
If you wanted to make a barbarian/cleric, there is absolutely no reason to take the cleric level first. The barbarian1/cleric1 has 16.5 hp and 18 skill ranks; the cleric1/barbarian1 has 14.5 hp and 12 skill ranks.
The game gives starting characters another bonus: an extra boost to saving throws at first level. But this bonus applies to higher level PCs when they take a second class -- giving multi-class characters a saving throw boost that singletons do not enjoy. A cleric2/monk2/ranger2 has base saves of Will+6, Fort+9, and Reflex+6 at character level 6. A singleton monk does not equal that until level 8 for Will and Reflex, and not until level 14 for Will. And monks have the best saves in the game.
So looking at these three game mechanics that give the Level One Bump -- hit points, skill ranks, and saves at first level -- the system clearly breaks down a little for multiclass characters.
The promise of 3E's multiclassing rules is the promise of level equivalence, that is, no one combination of classes should be more or less powerful than another. Yes, with any span of choices, some choices will be more optimal than others, but the game should act to minimize the imbalance. The Level One Bump undermines that philosophy, because it contributes to some level choices being more powerful than others.
So we have to consider removing the Level One Bump.
And yet, the Level One Bump serves an important purpose. Brand new characters ARE fragile, and they need a bit of a boost. There's nothing wrong with a bump at first level, so long as it applies equally to all characters, and so long as it does not create artifacts like favoring one multiclass option over another, or over a single class option.
Here is my solution: Make the bump a factor of race, not class. Yes, give starting characters extra save bonuses, skill ranks, and hit points ... but make those benefits a consequence of race selection, not class choice.
PROPOSED RULE CHANGES
Characters do not gain max hit points at first level -- instead, they roll normally, as they do for every level. Characters do not gain quadruple skill ranks at first level -- instead, they get the normal ranks plus Int bonus that they do at every level. Also, there is no unusual boost to saves at first level -- instead, saving throws progress normally (see future screed on this topic).
Add the following benefits to the description for each race.
Dwarf: Add five racial bonus hit points. Add +1 to all Fortitude saving throws. Spend 9 + (3 x Int bonus) points on buying class skills, putting no more than three ranks in class skills and 1.5 ranks in cross-class skills. Class skills for dwarves are: Appraise, Craft, Knowledge (dungeoneering), Listen, Profession, Search.
Elf: Add two racial bonus hit points. Add +1 to all Reflex and Will saving throws. Spend 15 + (3 x Int bonus) points on buying skill ranks, putting no more than three ranks in class skills and 1.5 ranks in cross-class skills. Class skills for elves are: Balance, Climb, Concentration, Diplomacy, Knowledge (all), Craft, Hide, Listen, Move Silent, Perform, Profession, Search, Spellcraft, Spot, Survival, Tumble.
Gnome: Add four racial bonus hit points. Add +1 to all Will saving throws. Spend 12 + (3 x Int bonus) points on buying class skills, putting no more than three ranks in class skills and 1.5 ranks in cross-class skills. Class skills for dwarves are: Bluff, Concentration, Craft, Diplomacy, Gather Info, Knowledge (all), Listen, Perform, Profession, Search, Sleight of Hand, Spellcraft, Spot, Tumble.
Half-Elf: Add four racial bonus hit points. Add +1 to all Will or Reflex saving throws (player's choice). Spend 12 + (3 x Int bonus) points on buying class skills, putting no more than three ranks in class skills and 1.5 ranks in cross-class skills. Class skills for half-elves are: All Int-, Chr-, and Wis- based skills.
Halfling: Add three racial bonus hit points. Add +1 to all Will saving throws. Spend 15 + (3 x Int bonus) points on buying class skills, putting no more than three ranks in class skills and 1.5 ranks in cross-class skills. Class skills for halflings are: Appraise, Climb, Craft, Jump, Knowledge (geography), Listen, Profession, Search, Spot, and all Dex-based skills.
Half-Orc: Add six racial bonus hit points. Add +1 to all Fort saving throws. Spend 6 + (3 x Int bonus) points on buying class skills, putting no more than three ranks in class skills and 1.5 ranks in cross-class skills. Class skills for half-orcs are: Climb, Craft, Intimidation, Listen, Profession, Ride, Handle Animal, Rope Use, Spot, Survival, Swim.
Human: Add four racial bonus hit points. Add +1 to all Will or Fort or Reflex saving throws (player's choice). Spend 12 + (3 x Int bonus) points on buying class skills, plus another 3 as a human racial feature, putting no more than three ranks in any one skill. All skills are class skills for humans.
This is part one of an ongoing series on How I Would Fix D&D 3.5.
The promise of Dungeons and Dragons -- in all its editions -- is that two characters at the same character level will be comparable in power. This is the essence of game balance, and it satisfies us because it is fair.
The elegant solution to multiclassing in 3E is that when you advance a character level, you can take any available class level. ("Available" here means that you have to take level 1 in a class before you take level 2. You can't take cleric 5 before you take cleric 4.)
And since the game promises balance among characters of different classes, it also promises balance among characters of different multiclasses.
Now, let's step back for some caveats. In actual play, not all characters at the same character level are balanced so as to be equal in power:
1) Players are free to make suboptimal choices. A fighter using a dagger is not as powerful as a fighter using a greatsword. A sorcerer who selects Floating Disk and Disguise Self is not as powerful one who chooses Sleep and Shocking Grasp.
2) Not all classes are equal. Although this point is debatable -- and has been debated to death and back -- even if you make the most optimal choices, the high-level cleric is generally acknowledged to be more powerful than the high-level fighter, for example.
3) Not all levels are equal within a class. For example, a fighter 5 gains a hit die, skill ranks, and +1 BAB. A fighter 6 gains all that plus a feat and +1 on all saves. Moreover, all classes gain an extra boost to saves at level 1. And at level 1, one's skill ranks are quadrupled, and hit dice are maximized -- so if you want to be a skill monkey, the game pushes you to take a level of rogue or ranger or bard at first level.
4) Many multiclass combinations are clearly unbalanced. A cleric 5 / wizard 5 is not as powerful as a cleric 10 or a wizard 10. The mystic theurge, the arcane trickster, and the eldritch knight are all attempts to fix these problems -- for divinist/arcanists, rogue/arcanists, and warrior/arcanists, respectively. And some multiclass combos, especially using splat books, but also in a few cases for core classes, are more powerful. For example, in stacking save bonuses.
But that does not mean game balance is a lie. Rather, it just means that the game has room for improvement. That's what I aim to offer in this series.
Goals:
This is part one of an ongoing series on How I Would Fix D&D 3.5.
So far I have talked about taking Arcane Archer levels as a specialist -- either as an arcanist or as an archer. But what about the middle ground? Can you have it both ways? Here are three character builds that combine a fair-to-middling amount of casting with above-average shooting.
The Jack-o-Trades. The ultimate jacks of all trades in the core rules are Bards, and they also make superb Arcane Archers as well. Good attacks, excellent skill synergies, excellent saves, and spells that hit an archer's sweet spot make for a versatile character who is no slouch in the combat department, either. Take ten levels in each class for a simple and effective multiclass combo.
Bard casting offers some real gems, including both buffs -- Expeditious Retreat, Cat's Grace, Heroism (a second level spell), Haste, Tiny Hut, and Greater Invisibility -- and area spells that are peachy used with Imbue Arrow -- Grease, Glitterdust, Silence, Calm Emotions, Confusion, Crushing Despair, Slow, and Shout among them. Pick up Scribe Scroll and put all your buff spells on paper -- that lets you use your relatively few spell slots for area spells you can imbue, and whose save DC you want as high as possible.
Use your skills to widen your capabilities. As a bard, maximize your mobility with five or more ranks in Tumble, and max out your Perform skill to optimize your fascination and countersong abilities. If you like talking, ranks in Diplomacy and Bluff come in handy. The obvious synergy is scouting, so you might want to take Listen, Spot, Hide, and Move Silently from both classes. If your party lacks a ranger, you might take Search as a Bard, and Survival as an Arcane Archer; add the Track feat and you're all set. Riding is a great option for a shooter, since you can ride and make a full attack with your missile weapon in the same round -- you might want to use Leadership to attract a viable mount, or just use your bardic Phantom Steed spell.
If you take ten levels of bard and then ten levels of arcane archer, your bard-only skills (like Perform) will be capped at 13 ranks, unless you buy them at double cost cross-class. To avoid that, take 8 levels as a Bard, then switch to Arcane Archer for two, three, or four levels. Take another level of Bard, putting all your ranks into one or two of your favorite Bard-only skills. Take another two to four levels of Arcane Archer, and then your final level of Bard, again pushing ranks into Bard-only skills. In this way, even with no Int bonus, you can expect to max out your Perform and Search ranks at 17, as just one example, rather than 13. (The disadvantage is that you delay attaining the ability to cast 4th level spells, so you have the weigh the beneft of higher ranks ultimately versus not casting Greater Invisibility and Shout as soon as you otherwise could. But keep in mind that you only cast one of those spells a day anyway, and then only if you have an 18 Charisma -- or a 14 Charisma, an Eagle's Splendor spell, and a lenient DM!)
The Sniper. This build gets its required Arcane spellcasting from an unusual source -- the Assassin! Start with five levels of Rogue, then three levels of Assassin, and two levels of Shadowdancer. You could go for four levels of Assassin and just one level of Shadowdancer if you prefer a couple extra spells over darkvision and two skill ranks. At this point you have a +6 BAB -- just enough to qualify for Arcane Archer -- so then take ten levels of Arcane Archer.
But clearly, the beauty of this build is not BAB or second level Assassin spells. It is sniping! With Hide in Plain Sight and some reasonable buffs, you can expect to be firing a sneak attack arrow every round -- each one doing an extra +5d6 of sneak attack damage -- plus poison. For more on how to snipe, check out this screed I wrote on the topic.
The Sniper makes a great scout and spy, with skill synergies in almost all the Arcane Archer skills. With a 14 Int (recommended so that you can cast one second level Assassin spell a day), and four-to-eight base ranks per level, you get lots of skills, so make the most of them.
Assassin spells are nothing to write home about, but use True Strike for your Arcane Archer specials, like your arrow of death, and imbue arrows with obscuring mist to make a fog bank spell at first level, with your DM's okay. Cat's Grace is a sweet once-a-day boost at second level.
The Shot in the Dark. One of the best defenses in Dungeons and Dragons is total concealment. It offers a 50 percent miss chance and, in practice, immunity to most spells, since most spells require line of sight. The usual disadvantage is that either (1) you have to blind your foe, which is not easy, or (2) you use total darkness to afflict both yourself and your enemy -- but then you suffer as much as your target by not being able to see anything. But what if you could negate the disadvantages for yourself?
This build uses a maxed out Listen skill and blindsight by proxy to allow you to shoot foes you can't see. Start as a Ranger, then add five levels of Wizard, another two Ranger, and two of Horizon Walker. Three levels of Ranger and two of HW let you max out your Listen ranks. Your bat familiar gives you Alertness (+2 to Listen) and a +3 unnamed bonus on Listen checks. The HW's Hills Terrain Mastery gives a +4 competence bonus on Listen checks. Take Skill Focus Listen for another +3. Add all that up, and by level 10 you have a healthy 13 ranks +12 in bonuses, total +25, and more if you have a Wisdom Bonus.
That means you can figure out the square your target is in, especially if he just moved there and you can beat his move silent roll -- if he was even trying to move silently. If he was not trying to move silently, odds are the DC to pinpoint his square by sound will be very low, especially with your +25 on Listen checks. If he is quiet becase he is not moving, then you know he is still in the same square. If you can pinpoint his square, you can shoot into it -- although your target still gets a 50 percent miss chance in defense.
Meanwhile, your bat familiar has blindsense within 20 feet, and since you are a fifth level wizard, his Int is 8 and he can "speak with master" -- especially to say things like "There! Ahead 15 feet and to the right!" Add in the Blind Fighting feat and Darkvision from the HW's Underground Terrain Mastery for extra sensitivity.
What the heck! Take a 4th level of ranger, pick up an animal companion that has scent, and keep a wand of Speak with Animals handy so your wolf pal can tell you the location of foes by smell. Or use a Bag of Tricks for the same purpose.
With your listen, darkvision, second-hand blindsense, and second-hand scent, it would be a cruel DM indeed who did not let you know the square in which you can find your enemy, at least within 20 or 30 feet. Maybe your DM thinks, "What's the harm? Even if he knows the square, there's still a 50% total concealment miss chance."
In melee, that miss chance is not too bad, since Blind Fighting lets you reroll your misses. But you are an archer! This is a Shot in the Dark build, not a Swing in the Dark. Blind Fighting is good for moving faster in the dark, and you don't lose your Dex bnus to AC if you are unable to see -- but it does not let you reroll missed shots.
At low levels the True Strike spell lets you ignore the miss chance due to concealment (and the +20 to hit is also quite nice). If you pick the right square, you can shoot an arrow -- with no miss chance -- at your unseen foe. But you can only cast so many True Strikes a day, and you get one shot every other round (since in the off rounds you are casting).
A better option by far is a "Seeking" bow. With one of those, you get to ignore ALL miss percents. Fire five times a round into the right square, and every shot ignores that nasty 50 percent miss chance.
But for this strategy to work, you need to be in the dark! Not some namby pamby Darkness spell dark, and not even a Deeper Darkness spell dark! Those spells do not create the pitch black you need -- they create "shadowy illumination" that only offers a measley 20 percent miss chance. One could argue that in a naturally pitch dark place, say a cave, casting "Darkness" actually improves visibility!
No, you need the kind of true blindness that comes from total concealment. And the best way to get it is with smoke, gas, and clouds. Obscuring Mist is a great example, along with the other fog and cloud spells. Keep in mind that your strategy works if you are in the cloud and your foe is outside. Stay out of line of sight in the cloud and shoot out.
So cast those Obscuring Mist spells. Still, every Obscuring Mist is a Burning Hands or Grease you are not imbuing. What if you could create a fog cloud at will, with no limit or cost in spell casting? The 2,000 gp Horn Of Fog gets that job done.
But in a mist or cloud, you cannot move beyond the edge of the mist. And if you have to cast your spell or sound your horn at the start of each battle, that's a round of arrows you don't get to shoot. How much better to get your hands on a moveable mist -- one that travels with you. Activate it once and it keeps on creating fog forever. Lucky for you, there is just such a mist machine option — the Eversmoking Bottle. Open this affordable 5,400 gp item and strap it to your pack. Forget about it and walk around in a giant cloud. Keep your ears open, and you are all set to take your shots!
So keep out of sight, locate your enemies by sound and smell, and shoot with your Seeking bow. Use your free Scribe Scroll feat to buff up with Flame Arrow, Haste, Cat's Grace, and more. Imbue your Fireballs and Glitterdusts and Burning Hands. Use your True Strike for the Arcane Archer specials, like Arrow of Death and the varied once per day abilities. Keep your ears open, and you'll be ready to shoot your way to the top! Especially if the top is shrouded in clouds!
This is part one of a three-part series on the Arcane Archer.
Wizards just released the gist of multiclassing in 4E.
And my unhappiness with 4E continues to grow.
First off, we get a smarmy lecture on how multiclassing in 3E was a bully that picked on the single classes. It is very clear that the priority in game design for 4E was to create core classes and then graft on multiclassing that "plays nice" with those classes.
Note that "plays nice" means "restricts your choices compared to 3E."
Here's Mike Mearls describing multiclassing under 3e:
3rd Edition gave us a simpler, elegant, and intuitive solution that worked wonderfully… for characters who didn’t cast spells. The system also forced the core classes to delay abilities after 1st level to avoid cherry picking, where “clever” players simply took one level of as many classes as possible (or layered single levels on to a primary class) to reap the benefits of ungodly saving throws and bizarre but ultimately frightening combinations of class abilities that—like chocolate and pickle relish—were never meant to be combined by men and women of good taste.
The use of "clever" in quotes tells you that Mearls does not think it is clever at all; the implication is that multiclassers were abusers. And certain combinations are bizarre and in poor taste -- and of course it is Mearls who gets to decide what is in good and poor taste.
We learn that in 4E you "multiclass" by taking a feat from another class, and then at 11th level you can specialize in the second class. So there is no true multiclass at all until 11th level; until then you can add the flavor of another class to your base class.
And "once you take a multiclass feat, you can’t take a class-specific feat for a different class. You can dabble in a second class but not a third."
So multiclassing is really "dabbling," and you can only take two classes, max.
Excuse me! 3E was about adding more options for players, not fewer. These rules are a step backward. They limit what you can do. You have less flexibility, and you cannot make the same characters you could under 3E. So-called multiclassing in 4E gives you fewer options and takes away part of the game that many people enjoyed.
Let me return to something even Mearls admits: "3rd Edition gave us a simpler, elegant, and intuitive solution that worked wonderfully… for characters who didn’t cast spells." That is exactly right! I agree. But instead of fixing spell casting so that it did work with this simple, elegant, and intuitive system, they decided to trash it all and bolt on an inelegantly kluged fix to their beloved 4E core class system.
Blerg.
Let me talk a little more about the advantages of 3E multiclassing, which Mike Mearls mentions ...
Simple -- 3E multiclassing is easy. When you advance a level, you pick a class add a level from that class. That's it. The mechanic is very easy to grasp.
Intuitive -- The old system is readily grasped by new players. It requires very little explanation. it is conceptually easy to figure out.
Elegant -- In this context, we are not talking about white tablecloths and crystal vases. This is the mathematical sense of the word. Per the Wikipedia, "the proof of a mathematical theorem is considered to have mathematical elegance if it is surprisingly simple yet effective and constructive." The 3E multiclass system is elegant because it reflects an underlying design philosophy and applies that philosophy in a way that suggests larger answers to game mechanic issues.
Let me talk a little more about that. The underlying core philosophy of 3E is that the unit quantum unit, the chunk that cannot be broken down further, is the character level. Moreover, you can therefore combine character levels freely and the game will remain balanced.
The promise of this philosophy is that a multiclassed character can take as many levels of different classes as he or she wants because every level is equal. It should not matter that a character is a wizard5/cleric5, or a fighter2/rogue3/paladin2/monk3, or a bard 10, for that matter -- because all levels are equal, and any combination is equally valid.
Now, we know of course that it does not work that way in reality. As Mearls points out, the first level of a class is often the best level. Some levels are notoriously underpowered, like Fighter 5. And combining spellcaster classes is an especially bad idea, albeit somewhat patched in 3.5 with prestige classes like the Mystic Theurge, the Arcane Trickster, and the Eldritch Knight.
If I were to revamp 3E into a new edition, I would change the classes so that the promise of the philosophy was fulfilled -- that is, so that all levels of all classes are equal, and can be combined freely.
To me, the value of multiclassing is not to boost power. The idea is to be able to create interesting character concepts. If you are limited to core classes only, how do you make the priest of a god of thieves who is himself a thief? How do you make a battle mage? Or a singing knight?
The problem with the early editions of the game is that they were all about limits. Only humans can be paladins. Halfling clerics cannot advance beyond 7th level. Certain magic items can only be used by some classes. There are no druid/monks.
But 3E changed that. In 3E, you can be anything. I just love that flexibility.
Yes, I am the first to admit that my liontaur rogue/sorcerer/fighter/avenger/grim is a power-gamer's creation, although I would argue until the new moon that she is also a very fully developed and interesting character, not a hodgepodge or a portmanteau.
But I will also point to my liontaur bard/druid/seer as an example of multiclassing that is designed to maximize roleplay over power. In a few circumstances, Zeoll is a game changer, but usually he is just an underpowered summoner/buffer without any healing. The point is that I was able to use multiclassing to make a unique character not as a munchkin, but as an RP option.
One of the best things about 3E is the underlying philosophy that players should be able to make their own choices. What skills do you want? What feats? What classes? What PrCs? None of those were under player control in 1E after first level.
The problem is that if you want to offer a wide ranges of choices, it is practically impossible to make all choices equal. For example, a newbie makes a human fighter, a nomad of the steppes who is a tough guy. He takes Toughness, Great Fortitude, and Running. Put him up against the veteran gamer who also makes a human fighter, a bowman. He takes Weapon Focus (longbow), Point Blank Shot, and Precision. These are not equal choices.
So in any choice-focussed system, some choices will be more powerful than others. The trick is to make sure that standard options -- like core classes -- are comparable to the best other options. I think 3E does a decent job of this. Stack a high level pure wizard or cleric up against any core rules multiclass option, and the core caster will be reasonably close in power.
I'm not talking about splat books, which are often way out of whack.
The trick in revising D&D is not to throw the baby of player choice out with the bathwater of possible exploits. The trick is to keep the good while getting rid of the bad.
