Post/Author/DateTime	Post
jrg2118 03-11-06, 05:22 PM	I'm sure someone might have addressed this at sometime, but being relatively new to 3.5 I thought I would post this: I am planning on incorporating the Fractional Base Bonus system (pg. 73) in Unearthed Arcana when I noticed that as written it is unbalanced. For instance, I am making a serverly multiclassed character (8 classes plus prestige classes) and using this system the BAB became more comparable but the Saves went through the roof compared to single-class characters! At level 10, by the system as is, my character's saves were +14, +12, +14! Even a level 10 monk (best saves) would only be +7 for each. So, in the same spirit of the system, I've revisied it and my character's saves are +6, +6, +4 at 10th level. Much more reasonable. The problem is in the way they laid out the table. If you change it to read Base Saves (Good) and Base Saves (Poor) at level 1: +2.5 and +0.333, respectively. And then for each level beyond 1st add 1/2 for Good and 1/3 for Poor. This stops the problem of getting the initial +2 bonus for the "good" save every time you take the 1st level of a class (after your initial class, that is). The BAB system part worked great and this fixes the error in saves. I think this is what they intended for saves, actually, since it works very well but since I've never seen it revised I thought I would share. Cheers, -Jim
strumbleduck 03-11-06, 08:48 PM	I'm confused. What change are you proposing to the table? As far as I can tell, your proposed change to the table is already present in the table.
jrg2118 03-11-06, 09:24 PM	The way the table is written would imply that if I was a Fighter/Rogue 1/1 my saves would be: (assume Fighter then Rogue) Fort +2.5 +0.33 = 2.83, round down to 2 Ref +0.33 + 2.5 = 2.83, round down to 2 Will +0.33 + 0.33 = 0.67, round down to 0 Same as what you would expect from this class combination, but these saves are better that either would be individually at 2nd level (3/0/0 or 0/3/0). But, if you multiclass several classes the system breaks down. Consider a Fighter/Rogue/Ranger/Cleric/Monk (all at first level): Fort: +2.5 +0.33 +2.5 +2.5 +2.5 = 10.33, round to 10 Ref: 0.33 +2.5 +2.5 +0.33 +2.5 = 8.17, round to 8 Will: 0.33 +0.33 +0.33 +2.5 +2.5 = 6 A Monk 5 only has saves of +4 each while this combo character would have +10, +8, and +6 at 5th level! My point is after the first level, you don't add the "2" for the "good" save, just the 0.5. It works out well: Fort: +2.5 +0.33 +0.5 +0.5 +0.5 = 4.33, round to 4 Ref: 0.33 +0.5 +0.5 +0.33 +0.5 = 2.17, round to 2 Will: 0.33 +0.33 +0.33 +0.5 +0.5 = 2 Now, this combo would only have +4, +2, +2 which is about the same as most 5th level characters. You only have to make this adjustment if the character has more then two classes to keep it balanced really. Also keep in mind if you don't use this kind of system, the combo character mentioned earlier would have: Fort: +2 +0 +2 +2 +2 = 8 Ref: 0 +2 +2 +0 +2 = 6 Will: 0 +0 +0 +2 +2 = 4 And even these are way higher than a 5th level character should have... So, I hope this makes more sense? Cheers, -Jim
Vaelan 03-11-06, 11:05 PM	Don't apply the +2 to one of your save types more than once. Problem solved. For example, a Monk that takes a level of Rogue will not gain an additional +2 to reflex saves. He would instead gain +.5 from the Rogue having a Good Reflex progression.
Talon Stormwarden 03-11-06, 11:16 PM	Don't apply the +2 to one of your save types more than once. Problem solved. For example, a Monk that takes a level of Rogue will not gain an additional +2 to reflex saves. He would instead gain +.5 from the Rogue having a Good Reflex progression. That's exactly what the OP is proposing.
Dragonblade275 03-12-06, 02:21 AM	Don't apply the +2 to one of your save types more than once. Problem solved.How does WOTC handle this normally when they publish adventures? Do they calculate the saves with the +2 for each class of a multiclass character? (I realize they don't use the fractional bases, but I'm curious as to how the standard rule works before the variant is applied.)
Vaelan 03-12-06, 04:27 AM	How does WOTC handle this normally when they publish adventures? Do they calculate the saves with the +2 for each class of a multiclass character? Looking at the sample NPCs in Complete Warrior, since I don't keep up with published adventures, they do indeed give the +2 save bonuses for each class of a multiclass character, even more than once for the same save type.
jrg2118 03-12-06, 10:33 AM	The standard method is you just add all the saves together for the classes at the different levels. For example, a Ranger/Monk 4/4 by standard rules would have 8/8/5 for the base saves. This is significantly higher than a Monk 8 (6/6/6) or Ranger 8 (6/6/2) would have. With the alternate system presented in Unearthed Arcana, they would be still be 8/8/5, but with the slight adjustment I suggest they would be (at best assuming you begin with the monk who has better saves) 6/6/5. This makes them better than a Ranger 8 but not quite as good as a Monk 8, although very close. Eitherway, it makes is so multiclassing doesn't give you an advantages of the standard "good" save that occurs with the stanard and the variant system as presented. I hope this helps. Cheers, -Jim
strumbleduck 03-12-06, 07:33 PM	Don't apply the +2 to one of your save types more than once. Problem solved. For example, a Monk that takes a level of Rogue will not gain an additional +2 to reflex saves. He would instead gain +.5 from the Rogue having a Good Reflex progression. That's exactly what the OP is proposing. I think it's slightly different than what the OP is proposing. The OP thinks that +2's shouldn't count at all after 1st level, while Vaelan thinks that +2's shouldn't count if you've had a +2 in that particular saving throw before. I think that either of these systems is better than the system in UA, and that the system in UA is better than the standard system. The root of this whole problem is that all of the core classes are frontloaded. WotC has a good reason for doing this -- it would be no fun if a 1st-level rogue didn't have many more skills than a 1st-level fighter, or if a 1st-level barbarian couldn't rage. The saving throws are the same -- they want fighters to have good Fort saves and rogues to have good Ref saves right off the bat. A good theoretical solution would be to unpack the 1st level of each class into four levels, but to recommend that new players start out with 4th-level PCs. This would let you eliminate the following problems: 1. You could remove the +2's to saving throws at 1st-level, and just use a flat-out 1/2-1/3 system. 2. You could remove a fighter's first-level bonus feat, making Ftr 2 a much less tempting cherry-pick. A beginning fighter would start with four levels of fighter, and hence two bonus feats. 3. You could spread out barbarian and ranger 1st-level abilities over four levels. Someone would have to take several levels of barbarian to get rage, or several levels of ranger to get a combat style. You could also move the ranger's combat style to 4th-level, so that a beginning ranger would have access to his signature combat ability immediately. 4. You could spread out a cleric's first level, so that someone who cherry-picks a level of cleric doesn't get turn undead (for divine feats) and two domains. 5. You could eliminate the special rules for both skill points and hit points at first level. First-level characters would get four hit dice worth of hit points (instead of the current two), which I think would be a good thing. 6. You could eliminate the extra feat at 1st level. Characters would get feats only at levels that were multiples of 3. 7. You could start out as a multiclass character, without needing special "multiclassing at 1st level" rules. 8. You could eliminate the warrior NPC class. If you want a weak fighter, just use one with less than four levels! Of course, this would go way beyond a house rule; It would be a major overhaul of the d20 system. It's not meant as a practical solution -- just food for thought! :)
jrg2118 03-13-06, 09:50 AM	I think that either of these systems is better than the system in UA, and that the system in UA is better than the standard system. Thanks, I'm glad you like the suggestions. The root of this whole problem is that all of the core classes are frontloaded. WotC has a good reason for doing this -- it would be no fun if a 1st-level rogue didn't have many more skills than a 1st-level fighter, or if a 1st-level barbarian couldn't rage. The saving throws are the same -- they want fighters to have good Fort saves and rogues to have good Ref saves right off the bat. Yeah, they are frontloaded but for good reasons. You have basically spent years of your character's life training for the abilities gained by the class, and then just because you "level" you get to pick up all those abilities in a matter of weeks (or often days). This is especially abusive if you don't make training for levels part of your game. Your suggestions have good ideas but would be a major overhaul of the system! I don't think there's too much of a problem with that, much of 3/3.5 needs overhauling. I don't think is was play-tested enough before release really IMHO. I good way to more easily work in your ideas would be to have the first four levels called "base" levels. If a character multiclasses, he can pick up two "base" levels for a standard level. It requires more explaining that what I am doing, but I have to go. :( I'll elaborate more later. Cheers, -Jim