Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 kezzek Oct 10, 2008 18:03:37	It seems that some people don't like the idea of having players start out so powerful. They liked the humble beginnings with players running for their lives against meager opponents. What about pre-levels? -1500 xp = Beginner (HP = 1/2 constitution, 1 at will power, no feats, 2 trained skills) -1250 xp = Apprentice (HP = constitution, 2 at will powers, 1 feat, 3 trained skills) -750 xp = Journeyman (HP = constitution + 1/2 1st level, 2 at will powers, 1 per encounter power, 1 feat, 4 trained skills) I would also make the following changes to improve higher levels. Add con bonus to hp every 5 level intervals (5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30). Apply ability and enhancement bonuses to every die of damage (possibly excluding added dice from sneak attacks, hunter's quarry, warlock's curse). I would also add an extra die of damage to every ability after 10th level. A 30th level fighter with a +6 greatsword, 22 str, 18 con would therefore have an at-will strike that did 3d10+36 damage and have 213 hit points. His 29th level no mercy daily power would do 8d10+96 damage. Currently, the same 30th level fighter would have 189 hp and do 2d10+12 damage with his at-will attack and 7d10+12 for the daily power. Currently an ancient red dragon has 1390 HP and bites for 2d12+6d6+12 damage. This averages 47 damage. Under these new rules the dragon would have 1690 hit points (+10 hp/5 levels x 5 for solo). It would also bite for 3d12+36+6d6 damage. Avg 78 damage. What do people think of these rules?
#2 Istaran Oct 10, 2008 18:32:22	It seems that some people don't like the idea of having players start out so powerful. They liked the humble beginnings with players running for their lives against meager opponents. What about pre-levels? -1500 xp = Beginner (HP = 1/2 constitution, 1 at will power, no feats, 2 trained skills) -1250 xp = Apprentice (HP = constitution, 2 at will powers, 1 feat, 3 trained skills) -750 xp = Journeyman (HP = constitution + 1/2 1st level, 2 at will powers, 1 per encounter power, 1 feat, 4 trained skills) You should express the number of trained skills in a way that acknowledges the class variance. Some classes provide fewer than 4 skills for example. Otherwise your suggestion seems to successfully achieve a goal I do not have, so I'll let someone who actually wants -less- power than a level 1 character comment on it more thoroughly. People complain enough about the at-will slug-fest and the lack of character variability at low levels without going through the loveliness of starting with nothing but 1 at-will + basic attack and a mere 2 skills. I won't comment at all on the higher level tweaks. I haven't gotten high enough to form an opinion.
#3 Novacat Oct 10, 2008 18:35:57	It seems that some people don't like the idea of having players start out so powerful. They liked the humble beginnings with players running for their lives against meager opponents. Then they should play 1E. D&D has become a game about heroes. Big damn heroes, not peasants with pitchforks. Trying to reshape this system into 1E will not work.
#4 veritascitor Oct 10, 2008 19:43:06	First off, this thread should go in the house rules forum. As for your rules, all these changes to HP and damage values essentially unbalance the game. Current HP and damage has been carefully designed to be balanced, and your new values would change that balance. What exactly would making these changes add to the game? You say you want to "improve" higher levels. I don't see it as much of an improvement. In fact, it seems like, compared to the dragon, the fighter is actually in a worse situation. Note that the improvement in the dragon's average damage is higher than the improvement in the fighter's HP. That fighter will go down much faster with your new numbers (3 hits from the dragon, instead of 4). In fact, the dragon will go down much faster too, I guess. Either way, what's the point? As for pre-levels, I agree with Novacat. The game is about heroes, not peasants. However, if you really want to start with underpowered characters, what you have there actually seems viable.
#5 Altivec Oct 10, 2008 19:52:04	It seems that some people don't like the idea of having players start out so powerful. They liked the humble beginnings with players running for their lives against meager opponents. Are they so powerful? Sure, they may seem that way on paper, but the opponents are also more powerful. A level 1 fighter going 1-on-1 with a level 1 kobold skirmisher will likely win, but it is not guaranteed, and will take several rounds. How much more humble can you get than a kobold?
#6 Seeker95 Oct 10, 2008 20:03:14	It seems that some people don't like the idea of having players start out so powerful. They liked the humble beginnings with players running for their lives against meager opponents. Who are these people? Do they only have fun if they can play Madden 2008 with college redshirts? What do people think of these rules? I think people who don't want to play Dungeons & Dragons need to search for a game they enjoy playing, rather than trying really hard to turn Dungeons & Dragons into that game. But if they want to write new rules, they should play with those rules and see how they like them and then report back to the Boards the results of their own playtesting.
#7 Novacat Oct 10, 2008 23:35:54	Who are these people? Do they only have fun if they can play Madden 2008 with college redshirts? I think people who don't want to play Dungeons & Dragons need to search for a game they enjoy playing, rather than trying really hard to turn Dungeons & Dragons into that game. But if they want to write new rules, they should play with those rules and see how they like them and then report back to the Boards the results of their own playtesting. This is typical Seeker95 wisdom.
#8 totoro Oct 11, 2008 2:17:10	I won't comment at all on the higher level tweaks. I haven't gotten high enough to form an opinion. :P
#9 arderkrag Oct 11, 2008 10:00:02	It seems that some people don't like the idea of having players start out so powerful. They liked the humble beginnings with players running for their lives against meager opponents. Yes, and there are previous editions and other rpgs for them to play.
#10 Novacat Oct 11, 2008 20:28:45	It seems that some people don't like the idea of having players start out so powerful. They liked the humble beginnings with players running for their lives against meager opponents. What about pre-levels? -1500 xp = Beginner (HP = 1/2 constitution, 1 at will power, no feats, 2 trained skills) By comparison, let us look at how a party of 5 would fare against a single, level 1, non-minion kobold. In all likelyhood, the kobold will go down in a round or two, but EACH of the PCs has a good shot at being taken down in one hit. Not only is this not very fun, but any encounter with a single kobold isn't fun. How do you, as a DM, design adventures with such pitiful encounters? -1250 xp = Apprentice (HP = constitution, 2 at will powers, 1 feat, 3 trained skills) Now the party has a good chance at killing that single kobold without anyone going down, assuming they're blowing heals every fight against the weakest monster in the entire franchise. A group of kobolds, though... ooo. Watch out. -750 xp = Journeyman (HP = constitution + 1/2 1st level, 2 at will powers, 1 per encounter power, 1 feat, 4 trained skills) At this point, you're practically a level 1 character without a daily power, probably missing some trained skills, and you're a little more delicate than normal. Normally easy encounters for a level one party are probably bumped to hard, and combat is a little more boring. I would also make the following changes to improve higher levels. Add con bonus to hp every 5 level intervals (5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30). Too complicated for too little gain, and seems to pointlessly disturb the balance of the game. Apply ability and enhancement bonuses to every die of damage (possibly excluding added dice from sneak attacks, hunter's quarry, warlock's curse). I would also add an extra die of damage to every ability after 10th level. That will make everyone's damage significantly more insane, and will hurt the PCs much more than the monsters. It will also enhance the wizard and the ranger more than any other classes, due to their tendency to get multiple attacks and more reliance on dice over ability scores. Again, seems like you want to play surgeon with a chainsaw on a perfectly healthy patient.
#11 Rustmonster Oct 11, 2008 20:38:54	It seems that some people don't like the idea of having players start out so powerful. They liked the humble beginnings with players running for their lives against meager opponents. You are calling fighting kobold and orc grunts "so powerful"? Also, D&D has never been about "humble beginings". Characters have always been good combatants from level one. It's just that they used to have one or two options max, and died at the drop of a hat. This gave the illusion to some of being "humble".