Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 tequila_sunrise Mar 13, 2009 15:00:46	These were my two issues: 1. I like my players to be able to use improvised and secondary weapons, but at high levels they need their first-rate weapon’s enhancement bonus to have a decent chance to hit. I also like to be able to drop my players fun loot whenever it’s dramatically appropriate, and not have to worry about treasure parcels or the enhancement bonuses they need for level-appropriate challenges. 2. I don’t like how monster stats scale faster than PC stats. Over the course of 30 levels, monsters gain about 29 bonuses to attacks and defenses while PCs only gain about 25 bonuses. As a result, surviving at paragon and epic levels requires players to power game, have the right kind of leaders and focus a lot of attention on tactics. Some players don’t mind this, but I don’t like to play games where fine tuned tactics, warlords or power gaming are necessary. Here’s how I broke up and cut my baggage loose: 1. Masterwork armor does not exist. Items do not grant enhancement bonuses. Crit dice and other item powers/properties that are normally tied to enhancement bonus are instead tied to listed item levels. 2. Weapon/Implement Expertise, and any future feats that grant a constant bonus to attack rolls or defenses, are not allowed. 3. At the third and seventh level of each tier (3, 7, etc.), PCs get a +1 enhancement bonus to weapon/implement attack rolls, weapon/implement damage rolls and all defenses. They also get a 1d6 critical die at these levels, which does not stack with the critical dice of any weapon or implement they might have. 4. At the first and fifth level of the paragon and epic tiers (11th, 15th, etc.), PCs get an extra +1 level bonus to all attack rolls and all defenses. When a character wears heavy armor, this bonus doubles for the purpose of AC. And I haven’t looked back since: 1. I can now drop loot whenever I want. If I want to run a low-wealth campaign, or if my campaign has a dry spell, I don’t have to rebalance monsters. Characters can now hope to hit with secondary and improvised weapons. It’s about the characters, not their bling. 2. PC stats now increase at a mostly consistent +1 per level, losing at most two relative points at certain levels. Optimizers, player tacticians and warlords can get higher bonuses, but they’re not necessary for high level survival anymore--they just make the PCs more effective now. Because PCs hit more often, there’s less grind and swing-miss repetition. And if I need to tweak monsters to make them easier or harder for my players, I only need to lower or raise their stats by a flat amount, rather than having to scale the tweaks with level.
#2 evilkobra Mar 16, 2009 10:21:08	I agree with the sentiment entirely. I proposed something similar some time ago, and it might be time I revisited it. As was pointed out to me at the time, though, these schemes tend to break down, or at least become a bit unwieldy, where level-dependent items are involved. Take for instance a Bloodclaw weapon. If enhancement bonuses are personal and not item-based, the additional damage from the weapon's power will depend on its wielder only. So in effect it's a level-less item. But something like a Holy Healer's weapon, which has an effect which depends only on its level - not on its enhancement. What to do? Do you follow take the character's level? (e.g. a character of level 7-11 would use the "level 7" properties). Or do you make different versions of the weapon? (e.g. "this is a level 12 Holy Healer's Warhammer"). Either way works, mechanically speaking, but regardless of what you do, you now have a bit of a problem with prices, because the bulk of a magic item's list price comes from its enhancement bonus. So if you go the first route you have super-cheap weapons leaving higher-level parties with immense amounts of disposable income, and making wondrous items inordinately expensive by comparison with weapons. And this also applies to Bloodclaw and other effectively level-less items, too. What price do you give them? You'd essentially have to re-write the entire price list and re-balance the entire economy. Not that I'm saying the idea is wrong. On the contrary, I love it. But re-pricing the entire world is a bit of a daunting task!
#3 tequila_sunrise Mar 16, 2009 14:54:58	As was pointed out to me at the time, though, these schemes tend to break down, or at least become a bit unwieldy, where level-dependent items are involved. Take for instance a Bloodclaw weapon. If enhancement bonuses are personal and not item-based, the additional damage from the weapon's power will depend on its wielder only. So in effect it's a level-less item. Instead of being tied to the item's enhancement bonus, I tie properties and powers to the item's level instead. So for example a 2nd level bloodclaw weapon can only trade 1 damage, while a 7th level bc weapon can trade up to 2 damage. Or if you don't want to mentally replace "per plus" with "per listed level" every time you read an item block, you could keep item enhancement bonuses.
#4 evilkobra Mar 16, 2009 16:33:33	Sure, you can do it either way. But neither solves the economy problem... it's a real bummer.
#5 gregt_314 Mar 16, 2009 17:13:40	Sounds like an interesting set of house-rules, and I applaud the work you've put into them. I always have to ask though, when I see such fundamental changes being made to the game, why you've gone to the effort of modding D&D when there are whole systems out there specifically built for this kind of thing? It's like those people who build Halo mods for Half-Life; aside from enjoying the sheer challenge of doing it, it seems like wasted effort.
#6 Dark_Stryke Mar 16, 2009 19:06:00	I've seen and thought about similar things before. One thing I may suggest is that you keep the critical effects tied to weapons, depending on the type of game you're playing. Obviously this is a bad idea for very low wealth games, but for games where the players can reasonably expect to have magical weapons, this gives them both a reason to spend their gold on weapons, and an extra bit of coolness when they hit with that primary weapon, because it's gonna hit hard. At first glance, the math for this works out, and you shouldn't have any mechanical problems using these house rules. All in all rather well thought out, and I would definitely consider using something similar myself for a low magic campaign.
#7 tequila_sunrise Mar 17, 2009 9:44:11	Sure, you can do it either way. But neither solves the economy problem... it's a real bummer. Maybe it's because I don't much care about economics in rpgs, but I don't see a problem. Do magical items cost an exorbitant amount of gold? Of course they do, as they always have. Do players still want them, even if only for minor properties and powers? You bet! I always have to ask though, when I see such fundamental changes being made to the game, why you've gone to the effort of modding D&D when there are whole systems out there specifically built for this kind of thing? First, because it's a lot easier to find D&D players than players for any other system. Secondly, and more importantly, because aside from a few nitpicks like this, 4e D&D is the game I want to play.
#8 evilkobra Mar 17, 2009 11:45:26	Maybe it's because I don't much care about economics in rpgs, but I don't see a problem. Do magical items cost an exorbitant amount of gold? Of course they do, as they always have. Do players still want them, even if only for minor properties and powers? You bet! If it works for you, then that's really great! It certainly isn't a problem if you're planning on handing out all (or most) magic items as treasure, as opposed to letting the PCs buy them. I was just pointing out (as an observation, not a criticism) that for those of us who try to model the economy and cash flows of our campaign world, a rules change of this nature -though absolutely desirable- requires in turn a re-balance of the entire economic system. You see, the thing is that enhancement bonuses are necessary for PCs, whereas other fancy effects are merely desirable. In the basic game, you are expected to pay 45,000gp to upgrade your sword to +4, and yes, you'll likely shell out some extra cash and buy a nicer enchantment. The game (via, inter alia, its parcel system) provides you with the money for that because you will need it. With your (and my) revised system, an 85,000gp "+4" bloodclaw weapon is only slightly superior to its 2,600gp "+2" equivalent. Hit chance is the same, regular and crit damage are the same, as all those things only depend on the wielder now. Only the extra damage from bloodclaw increases. So you're paying the same amount of money for an upgrade which you don't actually require, and whose extra usefulness is extremely reduced. OK, fair enough, it then becomes like a real-world luxury item: you pay an arm and a leg for a marginal increase in performance because you can. So the PCs who don't want to 'waste' their money on 'pointless' items will suddenly have heaps of disposable income to spend on other useful things. Put in perspective, 85,000gp will buy you a small fleet of warships (!). It gets worse when you consider truly level-less items, which include about half of the armors in AV, but also numerous weapons and implements. These items do not scale at all with level, so theoretically you could get them at early heroic and use them all the way through to late epic - without sacrificing anything. I suppose a logical response would be to simply flatten down the price and income curves, because items don't actually get that much better with level anymore. This opens up the possibility for PCs and NPCs to save up for items many levels above them, which could potentially unbalance the campaign. It's of course simply up to the GM, then, to restrict the list of items available in shops as many of us already do - but this does break one of the operating principles of D&D, namely allowing players to choose pretty much any item they want for their character provided it's level appropriate. I'll think about it some more.
#9 archtyrant_terevoth Mar 17, 2009 14:02:06	The problem is that magic items are going to be really variable. In many cases you can buy a level 1 item that has the same property as a level 26 item, because it's just a matter of scaling up the bonus. Wizards who get an orb of inescapeable consquences, or the orb of impenetrable escape can just get them as level 1 and use them the entire campaign,. so they make out great.