Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Dotac 05-01-07, 08:38 PM	Hey all. Next September i'll be running a game of D&D 3.5. I never really cared for the magic system of D&D so i started making my own. One thing lead to another and before i knew it, i had this: http://mail.rochester.edu/~gwelch/index.html Start on the "Settings" link in the lower right. I need ideas on how exactly the world might work, as well as input on the balance/overall quality of the system including magic and some of the base classes i invented. Any input would be fantastic. Thanks in advance.
Dotac 05-02-07, 06:28 PM	Anything?
Araes 05-02-07, 07:57 PM	Not being mean, but your spell system as currently described is broken from a point cost perspective. The problem is that 9th level spells are significantly better than first level spells (moreso than 9 times as good) As such, the current spell point progression and costs allow them to grow in power somewhat faster than intended by the rules. For example, in a normal day, one of your casters could throw down with twenty-two 9th level spells at 20th level with no bonus points from stats. That's just evil. I instead recommend something like the old spell point system from D&D 2nd Ed. which had a squared growth for spell point costs if I remember correctly. As such, all those early level points really don't matter much once you get to high levels. Ex: Level 1 Spell - 1 Point. Level 9 Spell - 81 Points. Sure, at high levels you can cast a ton of low level spells if you want, but really, in combat, the main balance factor is the number of actions you can take. Also, I would recommend doing a quick math analysis on the effect of DR and AC both from pieces of armor. My suspicion is that this is going to slant the armor aquisition extremely towards Heavy armors, even for classes where they would have previously gone with something lighter because of Dex. In addition, I suspect that it wont have much affect at all vs. the magic of the realm, as DR and magical power don't compete in the same realm stat-wise. You would instead need armor to provide SR or +'s to saves.
Dotac 05-02-07, 09:32 PM	Thanks for the input! I agree that a 9th level spell is way better than 9 1st level ones, however, i do not see it being the case that 2nd level spells are nearly twice as good as first level ones. It seems to be some sort of an exponential progression. However, i trimmed a good number of mana points off the top of spells per day, so i was hoping that in the end that would balance out (also i don't anticipate the game getting higher than level 14). A caster that used nothing but high level spells would, is my idea and hope and worked in play test, run low on spells starting at about the 3rd encounter depending on how long they last. As far as the AC goes, i lack the mathematical skills to really analyze the implications of DR vs. AC. (philosophy major) however i do see where you're coming from. I was just hoping to give non spellcasters a little something to smile about. I certainly may re-tool the DR system, or scrap it all together.
Araes 05-03-07, 03:16 PM	Alright, last time I didn't have much time to help you with actual math. But lets look at a quick pair of examples now. You say you're not aiming for high levels, so lets go for 3rd and 10th level to illustrate. At 3rd level, lets say we have two weapons, being used to attack someone with a relatively high dexterity, who can choose between having the same AC with a heavy armor or a lighter armor. At 3rd level, lets say that at most they can afford a +1 weapon. So they'll either be doing an average of 4.5 damage a hit, or 7, depending on whether they took a +1 or a +1d6. To make the math easy, for now lets assume that at whatever level we're talking about characters can hit each other about one quarter of the time (25%). This isn't perfect, as we're ignoring the +to hit, but we'll live. Lets assume our character is some average for HP (d8's) and has a decent Con of 14 (+2). This will give them 20 HP at leveel 3. Now, without the option for DR, but the same AC on both armors, a character facing either of these weapons is going to survive on average for: 1d6 + 1 - 23 HP / (Avg Dmg / Round (1.125) ) = Avg of 20.4 rounds of life. 2d6 - 23 HP / (Avg Dmg / Round (1.75) ) = Avg of 13.1 rounds of life. Now lets give them your DR 4 armor. This would have tradeoffs in loss of some abilities, but many can be avoided with skill / bonus purchases. 1d6 + 1 - 23 HP / (Avg Dmg / Round (0.125) ) = Avg of 184 rounds of life. 2d6 - 23 HP / (Avg Dmg / Round (0.75) ) = Avg of 30.7 rounds of life. A rather drastic increase in survivability. At the low end you basically can't kill them, and at the high end its still a more than doubling of low level survivability. Now lets look at the 10th level case. For this we'll assume the same character, but his Con has risen to 18 with magic items (+4). This gives them 88 HP with average rolls. Lets also assume your opponents can afford better weapons. Now they will have the equivalent of a +3. Lets use a 2d6 + 2 and a 3d6 + 1. For simplicity we'll assume that the first attack they would have at this level is hitting 35% of the time. To be nice, lets say they have a second attack hitting at 10%. Now, without the option for DR: 2d6 + 2 - 88 HP / (Avg Dmg / Round (4.05) ) = Avg of 21.7 rounds of life. 3d6 + 1 - 88 HP / (Avg Dmg / Round (5.175) ) = Avg of 17 rounds of life. Now lets give them your DR 4 armor. 2d6 + 2 - 88 HP / (Avg Dmg / Round (2.25) ) = Avg of 39.1 rounds of life. 3d6 + 1 - 88 HP / (Avg Dmg / Round (3.375) ) = Avg of 26.1 rounds of life. Still a pretty drastic increase in survivability. Nearly a doubling. From this, I feel confident most people will opt for the DR 4 despite other factors and just try to buy off those disadvantages. From this, you can also see why DR is normally a 1 feat = DR 1 ratio in acquisition.
Dotac 05-03-07, 03:39 PM	Ahh sooo. Thanks for making it so clear. Would you then suggest scrapping the DR system entirely? Or just tweaking it in some way? I don't so much mind the survivability, but i really didn't want to make heavy armor a million times better. I guess it's also still a problem that casters will just bypass any DR, just making them better still at dealing damage... i dunno.
Araes 05-03-07, 04:46 PM	Yeah, all valid concerns, and no prob. Engineering / Physics / ect... background. I figured you wouldn't mind the survivability too much, although I find that being nigh unkillable at 3rd level by things within your CR is a little extreme. There may be a way to rework it that would work well. This is generally why for systems like modern / future that use DR armor, they instead drop the AC benefits, so that light people are harder to hit, but heavy people can just take it better. One of the main problems really with this system is that we can "fairly" safely take the assumption that a character with high dex can swap back and forth between light to heavy, and not mechanically change how hard it is to hit them. With an 18 Dex (not unheard of at low levels), you're talking about an unnoticable difference in AC between a Chain Shirt and Full Plate, but with a +4 jump in DR. Once they get the money and materials, then heavy jumps to 7/-. Smart players will then further break this and buy feats, take prestige classes, ect... that add even more to DR. At base, a 3d6 weapon only does 10.5 dmg on average, so you're talking about doing a Lot of damage to overcome or even scratch them. Example, a dwarven defender with this armor, and a few feats could easily reach 15/- on every attack while wearing his armor. A +5 3d6 weapon on average won't hurt him without some strength bonus added in.
Dotac 05-03-07, 08:10 PM	Well like i said, in my level 10 playtests, everything seemed to work out ok. But you're right, at lower levels it will make a much bigger difference. Also i'm still a little concerned about the easy time magic has bypassing DR. What if instead of DR/- i gave armor categories or each armor individually even it's own kind of DR From what i remember from my report on armor back in the 7th grade.... Scale mail and chain mail are good against slashing weapons, but poor against arrows and clubs.... And plate mail is good against slashing, most forms of piercing and bad against warhammers. sooooooo..... Maybe medium armor is DR/piercing or bludgeoning, heavy armor is DR/bludgeoning? or something along that line The damage types in my mind come down to this(based totally on my gaming experience): piercing: arrows, daggers, bite attacks, rapiers. Other things do piercing, these are just the most common. Piercing isn't always to common among PC's (Except for archers) but fairly common on monsters (bite attacks) Slashing: swords, axes, claws. Probably the most common damage type i see in D&D for PC's and enemies Bludgeoning: clubs, bite attacks, slam attacks, monks: This is by far the least common damage type among PC's, but rather common among certain enemies (bite attacks, slam attacks). I guess that natural armor DR being DR/- is ok... It's just that D&D is strange when it comes to natural armor. some monsters have a ton, others not a whole lot, and often times this difference isn't exactly what you might expect. And just thinking about it, it seems that adamantine weapons should pen the DR of any armor not made of adamantine, and possibly that of natural armor too. However, then things start to get complicated, which i was trying to avoid.