Three days ago, it was reported on Massively that Turbine, publisher of such popular games as Lord of the Rings Online, Dungeons & Dragons Online, the classic Asheron's Call, and the highly anticipated upcoming Infinite Crisis, was undergoing yet another round of layoffs. The story was originally reported on Gamasutra as near as I can tell, and it seems these were mostly targeted in the Lord of the Rings Online division. Many well-known and well-liked developers have been let go in these layoffs. This isn't the first time since Warner Brothers' acquisition of Turbine in April 2010 that Turbine employees have been let go. It has happened a number of times, particularly as Turbine's game servers have seen their populations in slow decline over the last several years. Several expansions to their popular Lord of the Rings Online and Dungeons & Dragons Online properties have attempted to keep the players of these games interested but unfortunately these expansions have often included changes in the games which have significantly alienated players and caused mass defections. The recent release of very unpopular expansions to Turbine's flagship titles such as Helm's Deep (LotRO) and Shadowfell Conspiracy (DDO) have been incredibly unpopular, and as a player of both games, I have to say the drop in players is palpable everywhere as a result.
A lot of people have blamed Free-to-Play, the general state of the United States' economy, and stiff competition in the MMO market with recently released games such Guild Wars 2 or Neverwinter, old staples like World of Warcraft which continue to innovate, and newly anticipated titles like Elder Scrolls Online. While I am certain the economy and competition might play some small role in Turbine's decline, the true culprit in my mind is the poor management of Turbine's properties. As a deeply-invested player in Turbine's games, I can highlight one of the terrible management decisions which have affected the player base in significant ways over the last year. Bear in mind this is only one example, and it is not even the worst, of horrible customer service and management response to a bad situation. Also, I'd like to say that I don't bring this up because it has affected me personally in an overly negative way; I'm not just bringing up a pet peeve or getting up on a soapbox. I am pointing it out because this is one of the things that I think almost all MMO players can relate to in a meaningful way.
Following the release of the much-anticipated Shadowfell Conspiracy expansion pack for Dungeons & Dragons Online (DDO) in August of 2013, a bug appeared in the game which affected the way raid loot (for non-MMO players, this is generally the best loot in a game) was distributed. Without going into detail, it significantly decreased a player's chances of getting an item he or she might want from a raid. Turbine was quick to apologize for the bug and include it in the list of known issues, but it went unfixed for months. Once the bug was finally corrected, Turbine apologized to players by means of granting any character who had run any of the higher level raids in the game since the bug had appeared at least once a "raider's box," which was a barter item that allowed a player to choose from either raid loot crafting ingredients to make existing raid weapons better (a mechanic that already existed in the game but required farming raids) or a choice of any base item from one of the two "endgame" raids in the game. It was a mollifying olive branch which many players initially respected. But the release of these raider's boxes too was bugged, with many allegedly eligible players not receiving their boxes. As a result, Turbine decided to once and for all put the issue behind them by issuing a raider's box to EVERY existing character on EVERY server. This meant every player, even those who had never earned more than a few levels or run a single raid, were instantly granted their choice of one of the most powerful weapons in the game, and while they would be required to level up to a certain "minimum level," as is common in such games, in order to use the weapon, they would never even have to run the associated raid. Some characters who had already received their box as expected, received two boxes. The implications for this were dire, the most important of which was that it effectively killed one of only two endgame raids for DDO. There was no longer any purpose to running the raid for practically every character on the server, as most characters had no need for more than one weapon from this particular raid. The terms "Pay-to-Win" and "Free-to-Play" have become often synonymous with each other in the current era of Free-to-Play games. This was effectively "Free-to-Win." This is not to mention the sense of resentment felt by many players who had run this raid countless times to earn their weapons the old-fashioned way.
As I stated before, this is only one example, purposefully chosen because it was not a huge hot-button for me and because I felt it would be fairly well-understood for the disaster it was by players of any MMO. There have been many other problems, some of them quite egregious. I've been more of a DDO player than a LotRO player, but both games have been hemorrhaging players after the release of two disastrous expansions. And I don't need to look at server population statistics (although I have where available) to know that. It's obvious just by logging into the games. Log in to any other popular MMO and you see hundreds to thousands of players in many instances running around the main public areas, going to and fro and causing the well-known and infamous phenomenon of "public area" lag; it's an annoying but generally healthy sign of a game that is doing well (for the moment at least). The primary public areas in DDO and LotRO are fast becoming ghost towns. Back in the beginning of 2010 for example, you might have seen anywhere from 10-12 instances of the Marketplace (one of DDO's most important "gateway" public areas) during peak hours. Now there are hardly ever more than 2.
As a long-time player of Turbine games, this is actually somewhat emotional for me. I've made friends through their games, many of whom I've spoken to in real life over the phone and many of whom I still keep in touch with through Facebook. I've also played these games with my already close friends and family, including my wife. But it is clear to me that the management team Warner Brothers has put into place at Turbine is completely out of touch with the player base, and the game designer company, in my humble opinion, is spinning out of control. I believe the only hope for the company at this point is acquisition of Turbine by a private firm owned and operated by gamers or gaming enthusiasts who are in touch with gamers. But I don't hold much hope for the prospect. I really want to be wrong on this one, I really want Turbine to somehow right the ship. But for now, I am bidding these games adieu. Logging in no longer brings me joy, just a sense of emotional pain and sadness.
Saturday, February 15, 2014
Thursday, March 21, 2013
Prestige Classes as Feats: Arcane Trickster
The arcane trickster is a prestige class which I always found to be a little mundane. It only grants two abilities that are interesting, ranged legerdemain and impromptu sneak attack. But it does let you progress with sneak attack and continue to improve many skills available almost exclusively to rogues, making for a fairly effective rogue/wizard build. The following prestige feats assume the character wants to continue leveling as a wizard (or sorcerer) to gain caster levels but continue to improve rogue skills at the same time. As I did with the arcane archer, the feats are also available starting at 6th-level and continue as a five feat progression. Because of this I had to relax the prerequisites a bit so that a rogue 3/wizard 3 would be able to take the first feat in the chain. Since a character wanting to utilize these feats is likely to lack the skill points necessary to keep rogue skills modestly high, I threw in some skill bonuses as well. If a character keeps the skill ranks at the minimum levels required, those skills at least (Decipher Script, Disable Device, and Escape Artist) will continue to be just as good as if the character had maximum ranks. Of course there is nothing keeping the character from having even more ranks than the bare minimum if he has the skill points to spare, so that may open the door for an interesting niche which is highly specialized in some skills.
The higher tier feats might not look all that appealing, but when looking at them, try to bear in mind that they grant extra benefits in addition to their listed benefits by virtue of requiring Arcane Trickster as a prerequisite, namely the extra sneak attack and skill bonuses.
ARCANE TRICKSTER [PRESTIGE]
Prerequisites: Decipher Script 7 ranks, Disable Device 7 ranks, Escape Artist 7 ranks, Knowledge (arcana) 4 ranks, ability to cast mage hand and at least one arcane spell of 2nd-level or higher, sneak attack +2d6.
Benefit: You gain the ability of ranged legerdemain once per day. You may use this to perform one of the following class skills at a range of 30 feet: Disable Device, Open Lock, or Sleight of Hand. Working at a distance increases the normal skill check DC by 5, and you cannot take 10 on this check. Any object to be manipulated must weigh 5 pounds or less.
You also gain +1d6 sneak attack and +2 to Decipher Script, Disable Device, Escape Artist, Open Lock, Search, and Sleight of Hand.
Special: For each feat you possess which has Arcane Trickster as a prerequisite, you gain +1d6 sneak attack and +2 to Decipher Script, Disable Device, Escape Artist, Open Lock, Search, and Sleight of Hand.
IMPROMPTU SNEAK ATTACK [PRESTIGE]
Prerequisites: Decipher Script 8 ranks, Disable Device 8 ranks, Escape Artist 8 ranks, Knowledge (arcana) 5 ranks, Arcane Trickster, ability to cast mage hand and at least one arcane spell of 3rd-level or higher, sneak attack +2d6.
Benefit: Once per day you can declare one melee or ranged attack you make to be a sneak attack (the target can be no more than 30 feet distant if the impromptu sneak attack is a ranged attack). The target of an impromptu sneak attack loses any Dexterity bonus to AC, but only against that attack. The power can be used against any target, but creatures that are not subject to critical hits take no extra damage (though they still lose any Dexterity bonus to AC against the attack).
Special: This feat can be taken multiple times.
IMPROVED RANGED LEGERDEMAIN [PRESTIGE]
Prerequisites: Decipher Script 9 ranks, Disable Device 9 ranks, Escape Artist 9 ranks, Knowledge (arcana) 6 ranks, Arcane Trickster, Impromptu Sneak Attack, ability to cast mage hand and at least one arcane spell of 5rd-level or higher, sneak attack +2d6.
Benefit: You gain one additional use of ranged legerdemain per day. You may also now take 10 on this check.
GREATER RANGED LEGERDEMAIN [PRESTIGE]
Prerequisites: Decipher Script 11 ranks, Disable Device 11 ranks, Escape Artist 11 ranks, Knowledge (arcana) 8 ranks, Arcane Trickster, Impromptu Sneak Attack, Improved Ranged Legerdemain, ability to cast mage hand and at least one arcane spell of 8th-level or higher, sneak attack +2d6.
Benefit: You gain one additional use of ranged legerdemain per day. Your ranged legerdemain also no longer increases your increases the DC by 5.
The higher tier feats might not look all that appealing, but when looking at them, try to bear in mind that they grant extra benefits in addition to their listed benefits by virtue of requiring Arcane Trickster as a prerequisite, namely the extra sneak attack and skill bonuses.
ARCANE TRICKSTER [PRESTIGE]
Prerequisites: Decipher Script 7 ranks, Disable Device 7 ranks, Escape Artist 7 ranks, Knowledge (arcana) 4 ranks, ability to cast mage hand and at least one arcane spell of 2nd-level or higher, sneak attack +2d6.
Benefit: You gain the ability of ranged legerdemain once per day. You may use this to perform one of the following class skills at a range of 30 feet: Disable Device, Open Lock, or Sleight of Hand. Working at a distance increases the normal skill check DC by 5, and you cannot take 10 on this check. Any object to be manipulated must weigh 5 pounds or less.
You also gain +1d6 sneak attack and +2 to Decipher Script, Disable Device, Escape Artist, Open Lock, Search, and Sleight of Hand.
Special: For each feat you possess which has Arcane Trickster as a prerequisite, you gain +1d6 sneak attack and +2 to Decipher Script, Disable Device, Escape Artist, Open Lock, Search, and Sleight of Hand.
IMPROMPTU SNEAK ATTACK [PRESTIGE]
Prerequisites: Decipher Script 8 ranks, Disable Device 8 ranks, Escape Artist 8 ranks, Knowledge (arcana) 5 ranks, Arcane Trickster, ability to cast mage hand and at least one arcane spell of 3rd-level or higher, sneak attack +2d6.
Benefit: Once per day you can declare one melee or ranged attack you make to be a sneak attack (the target can be no more than 30 feet distant if the impromptu sneak attack is a ranged attack). The target of an impromptu sneak attack loses any Dexterity bonus to AC, but only against that attack. The power can be used against any target, but creatures that are not subject to critical hits take no extra damage (though they still lose any Dexterity bonus to AC against the attack).
Special: This feat can be taken multiple times.
IMPROVED RANGED LEGERDEMAIN [PRESTIGE]
Prerequisites: Decipher Script 9 ranks, Disable Device 9 ranks, Escape Artist 9 ranks, Knowledge (arcana) 6 ranks, Arcane Trickster, Impromptu Sneak Attack, ability to cast mage hand and at least one arcane spell of 5rd-level or higher, sneak attack +2d6.
Benefit: You gain one additional use of ranged legerdemain per day. You may also now take 10 on this check.
GREATER RANGED LEGERDEMAIN [PRESTIGE]
Prerequisites: Decipher Script 11 ranks, Disable Device 11 ranks, Escape Artist 11 ranks, Knowledge (arcana) 8 ranks, Arcane Trickster, Impromptu Sneak Attack, Improved Ranged Legerdemain, ability to cast mage hand and at least one arcane spell of 8th-level or higher, sneak attack +2d6.
Benefit: You gain one additional use of ranged legerdemain per day. Your ranged legerdemain also no longer increases your increases the DC by 5.
Prestige Classes as Feats: Arcane Archer
Today I look at an idea which is not entirely novel, but has interested me nonetheless. To begin with, I have never really liked prestige classes in D&D 3.5 the way they were originally designed. I love the concept, but the implementation was, I feel, a disaster. The first problem is one which I have with multiclassing in general. It's just too good not to multiclass for most characters. Whether that means splashing a couple levels of fighter as a rogue or taking a powerful prestige class as a wizard, the benefits usually far outweigh the costs in terms of prerequisites and other things. The second problem is that prestige classes are, in general, inherently too good to ignore. A character who plays from level 1 to 20 as a single base class is generally going to be at a disadvantage by most metrics to a character who takes even a single prestige class. I have a few other minor gripes with prestige classes, but these two are the main ones. So I got to thinking about prestige classes in a recent EN World discussion which was focused on another topic, but sparked my interest in this idea. Someone posted what was essentially a conversion of the arcane archer prestige class into feats. I got to thinking, what if all prestige classes were that way?
I came up with a relatively simple notion. Convert all prestige classes into feat trees consisting of five feats each. Given that prestige classes generally become available at 6th-level, these feat trees would all have a minimum level requirement of 6th-level. From 6th-level all the way to 18th-level a character receives five feats. So through this conversion, a character who wants to be a consummate expert at the prestige class abilities would need to devote all feats from 6th-level onward to the prestige feat tree. But this would not preclude the character from dabbling in the prestige class by taking only one or two of these feats.
Prestige feats are a new type of feat which function as feat trees that grant a character successive abilities which become increasingly more powerful as one advances. Prestige feats generally have the same entry requirements as the prestige class upon which it is based. They also typically combine elements from one or more prestige class levels into each feat. The benefit granted by a base prestige feat is generally enhanced by each successive prestige feat in that chain. Below is an example of the Arcane Archer prestige feat chain.
ARCANE ARCHER (PRESTIGE)
Prerequisites: Elf or half-elf, Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Weapon Focus (longbow or shortbow), ability to cast 1st-level arcane spells, base attack bonus +5.
Benefit: Every nonmagical arrow you nock and let fly becomes magical, gaining a +1 enhancement bonus. Unlike magic weapons created by normal means, you need not spend experience points or gold pieces to accomplish this task. However, your magic arrows only function for you.
Additionally, you gain the ability to place an area spell upon an arrow. When the arrow is fired, the spell’s area is centered on where the arrow lands, even if the spell could normally be centered only on the caster. This ability allows you to use the bow’s range rather than the spell’s range. It takes a standard action to cast the spell and fire the arrow. The arrow must be fired in the round the spell is cast, or the spell is wasted.
Special: For each feat you possess which has Arcane Archer as a prerequisite, the magic arrows you create gain +1 greater potency.
SEEKER ARROW (PRESTIGE)
Prerequisites: Elf or half-elf, Arcane Archer, Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Weapon Focus (longbow or shortbow).
Benefit: You can launch an arrow once per day at a target known to you within range, and the arrow travels to the target, even around corners. Only an unavoidable obstacle or the limit of the arrow’s range prevents the arrow’s flight. This ability negates cover and concealment modifiers, but otherwise the attack is rolled normally. Using this ability is a standard action (and shooting the arrow is part of the action).
Special: For each feat you possess which has Seeker Arrow as a prerequisite, you gain one additional use of this feat per day.
PHASE ARROW (PRESTIGE)
Prerequisites: Elf or half-elf, Arcane Archer, Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Seeker Arrow, Weapon Focus (longbow or shortbow).
Benefit: You can launch an arrow once per day at a target known to you within range, and the arrow travels to the target in a straight path, passing through any nonmagical barrier or wall in its way. (Any magical barrier stops the arrow.) This ability negates cover, concealment, and even armor modifiers, but otherwise the attack is rolled normally.
Using this ability is a standard action (and shooting the arrow is part of the action).
Special: For each feat you possess which has Phase Arrow as a prerequisite, you gain one additional use of this feat per day.
HAIL OF ARROWS (PRESTIGE)
Prerequisites: Elf or half-elf, Arcane Archer, Phase Arrow, Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Seeker Arrow, Weapon Focus (longbow or shortbow).
Benefit: In lieu of your regular attacks, once per day you can fire an arrow at each and every target within range, to a maximum of two targets for every Arcane Archer feat you possess. Each attack uses your primary attack bonus, and each enemy may only be targeted by a single arrow.
Special: For each feat you possess which has Hail of Arrows as a prerequisite, you gain one additional use of this feat per day.
ARROW OF DEATH (PRESTIGE)
Prerequisites: Elf or half-elf, Arcane Archer, Hail of Arrows, Phase Arrow, Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Seeker Arrow, Weapon Focus (longbow or shortbow).
Benefits: You can create an arrow of death that forces the target, if damaged by the arrow’s attack, to make a Fortitude save (DC 10 + 1/2 character level + your Dex modifier) or be slain immediately. It takes one day to make an arrow of death, and the arrow only functions for you. The arrow of death lasts no longer than one year, and you can only have one such arrow in existence at a time.
Special: For each feat you possess which has Arrow of Death as a prerequisite, you may have one additional arrow of death at a time.
Note that I have left the door open for further expansion of this feat chain. If a character wishes to continue taking Arcane Archer feats into epic levels, you could extrapolate to create greater effects, as well as granting more uses of the previous Arcane Archer feats and a greater enhancement bonus to arrows. These feats end up being a little more powerful than the arcane archer prestige class itself, but the cost is that you are giving up the flexibility of taking other feats and you do not gain some of the other benefits of the arcane archer prestige class, such as skills, saving throws and so on.
I came up with a relatively simple notion. Convert all prestige classes into feat trees consisting of five feats each. Given that prestige classes generally become available at 6th-level, these feat trees would all have a minimum level requirement of 6th-level. From 6th-level all the way to 18th-level a character receives five feats. So through this conversion, a character who wants to be a consummate expert at the prestige class abilities would need to devote all feats from 6th-level onward to the prestige feat tree. But this would not preclude the character from dabbling in the prestige class by taking only one or two of these feats.
Prestige feats are a new type of feat which function as feat trees that grant a character successive abilities which become increasingly more powerful as one advances. Prestige feats generally have the same entry requirements as the prestige class upon which it is based. They also typically combine elements from one or more prestige class levels into each feat. The benefit granted by a base prestige feat is generally enhanced by each successive prestige feat in that chain. Below is an example of the Arcane Archer prestige feat chain.
ARCANE ARCHER (PRESTIGE)
Prerequisites: Elf or half-elf, Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Weapon Focus (longbow or shortbow), ability to cast 1st-level arcane spells, base attack bonus +5.
Benefit: Every nonmagical arrow you nock and let fly becomes magical, gaining a +1 enhancement bonus. Unlike magic weapons created by normal means, you need not spend experience points or gold pieces to accomplish this task. However, your magic arrows only function for you.
Additionally, you gain the ability to place an area spell upon an arrow. When the arrow is fired, the spell’s area is centered on where the arrow lands, even if the spell could normally be centered only on the caster. This ability allows you to use the bow’s range rather than the spell’s range. It takes a standard action to cast the spell and fire the arrow. The arrow must be fired in the round the spell is cast, or the spell is wasted.
Special: For each feat you possess which has Arcane Archer as a prerequisite, the magic arrows you create gain +1 greater potency.
SEEKER ARROW (PRESTIGE)
Prerequisites: Elf or half-elf, Arcane Archer, Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Weapon Focus (longbow or shortbow).
Benefit: You can launch an arrow once per day at a target known to you within range, and the arrow travels to the target, even around corners. Only an unavoidable obstacle or the limit of the arrow’s range prevents the arrow’s flight. This ability negates cover and concealment modifiers, but otherwise the attack is rolled normally. Using this ability is a standard action (and shooting the arrow is part of the action).
Special: For each feat you possess which has Seeker Arrow as a prerequisite, you gain one additional use of this feat per day.
PHASE ARROW (PRESTIGE)
Prerequisites: Elf or half-elf, Arcane Archer, Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Seeker Arrow, Weapon Focus (longbow or shortbow).
Benefit: You can launch an arrow once per day at a target known to you within range, and the arrow travels to the target in a straight path, passing through any nonmagical barrier or wall in its way. (Any magical barrier stops the arrow.) This ability negates cover, concealment, and even armor modifiers, but otherwise the attack is rolled normally.
Using this ability is a standard action (and shooting the arrow is part of the action).
Special: For each feat you possess which has Phase Arrow as a prerequisite, you gain one additional use of this feat per day.
HAIL OF ARROWS (PRESTIGE)
Prerequisites: Elf or half-elf, Arcane Archer, Phase Arrow, Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Seeker Arrow, Weapon Focus (longbow or shortbow).
Benefit: In lieu of your regular attacks, once per day you can fire an arrow at each and every target within range, to a maximum of two targets for every Arcane Archer feat you possess. Each attack uses your primary attack bonus, and each enemy may only be targeted by a single arrow.
Special: For each feat you possess which has Hail of Arrows as a prerequisite, you gain one additional use of this feat per day.
ARROW OF DEATH (PRESTIGE)
Prerequisites: Elf or half-elf, Arcane Archer, Hail of Arrows, Phase Arrow, Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Seeker Arrow, Weapon Focus (longbow or shortbow).
Benefits: You can create an arrow of death that forces the target, if damaged by the arrow’s attack, to make a Fortitude save (DC 10 + 1/2 character level + your Dex modifier) or be slain immediately. It takes one day to make an arrow of death, and the arrow only functions for you. The arrow of death lasts no longer than one year, and you can only have one such arrow in existence at a time.
Special: For each feat you possess which has Arrow of Death as a prerequisite, you may have one additional arrow of death at a time.
Note that I have left the door open for further expansion of this feat chain. If a character wishes to continue taking Arcane Archer feats into epic levels, you could extrapolate to create greater effects, as well as granting more uses of the previous Arcane Archer feats and a greater enhancement bonus to arrows. These feats end up being a little more powerful than the arcane archer prestige class itself, but the cost is that you are giving up the flexibility of taking other feats and you do not gain some of the other benefits of the arcane archer prestige class, such as skills, saving throws and so on.
Friday, December 28, 2012
Feats as Rewards
A while ago I posted an article entitled "Featless" which seemed to get a lot of attention. Some ideas were bandied about, and I thought more on the feat issue. I suppose part of the reason I was thinking about getting rid of feats was to take some of the thought out of character planning so that players can focus more attention on the in-character play rather than the meta-game. For groups who prefer a quick-and-dirty style with simple character creation and a simpler game, I still think cutting feats out of the game wholecloth (forgive the analogy) is a capital idea. But what about those who still want to use feats, but, like me, feel that the regular interval of feats and the necessity of planning for prerequisites either stresses players out too much or at the very least makes them feel shoe-horned into paying feat taxes (which is a bigger problem in 4e, but persisted in 3.5, which is my chief area of interest)?
Let's look at some other ways in which feats, a mechanic which is admittedly cool and fun to play around with, might be utilized in the game without being earned every third level. Because we are working off of the assumption that players will not be able to expect to earn feats at regular intervals, we will first have to do away with the notion of feat prerequisites for things. That is easy enough. If you use prestige classes (as I imagine most 3.5 DMs do), then I highly recommend the Test-Based Prerequisites variant from Unearthed Arcana. I have used this variant rule for many years and both my players and I agree that it is a much better approach to prestige classes than the core rules. Second, we need to make sure that feats are not given out in too great a quantity. At the very most, a player should not be able to earn more feats than he might otherwise earn through the core rules. This is partially for balance and partially to keep complexity of the game at a moderate level. Personally, I recommend no more than one feat per five levels, but as the DM, you can make that judgment as you choose. And if you are going to do this, I highly recommend you take my advice from the Featless article and ignore monster feats as well. Just pretend monsters and NPCs in written adventures or monster manuals do not have the feats listed in order to keep things more on an even keel with the player characters.
With our ground rules established, what are these other ways in which we can introduce feats into our games, keeping them interesting, but not automatic or based on (sometimes arbitrary) prerequisites? One idea which I particularly like is the idea of a feat as a reward. It can be a reward from an NPC for completing a quest, a reward for accomplishing some heroic deed, or just about anything the DM likes. The key is that the feat is a reward, a bonus, a boon, not something that is expected. I suppose some examples might be in order to give you an idea of what I am talking about.
The player characters have been charged by the Wizards of Eindore to retrieve a magical orb from the den of the dragon, Mitzcatla. Without the orb, the Wizards of Eindore are powerless to defend their citadel and so the heroic player characters seek out Mitzcatla, slay him and his monstrous minions, retrieve the orb, and in exchange the Wizards of Eindore offer to teach the player characters one metamagic feat. It could be any metamagic feat or it could be a selection of metamagic feats of the DM's choosing. Of course, training to learn this feat ought to take some amount of time (a couple weeks at the least); I recommend seeing the Dungeon Master's Guide for recommendations on training times and costs. What about the fighters, barbarians, and rogues who gain nothing from this? Well, the Wizards of Eindore would reward those characters in the traditional way, with gold or a specially-crafted magic item. In a future adventure, the player characters might assist the army of the Kingdom of Macea in driving back the goblins from the evil Johaki Empire. This time it would be the turn of the non-casting classes to have the option of learning a combat-oriented feat in exchange for their service while the spell-casters receive a more traditional monetary or magic item reward.
An entirely different way of going about things could be to make specific conditions for players to earn feats by accomplishing some great deed or displaying phenomenal skill. I will present a few examples below.
In order to learn the Maximize feat, a spellcaster must roll the maximum roll on at least five dice worth of damage when casting a spell. Such a task is difficult, and may in fact never happen, but when it does, it will be all the more special. It is also more likely to happen the higher level the caster (it is more likely to get five maximum dice on a 15d6 cone of cold than a 5d6 shocking grasp for example).
A character may learn the Power Attack feat after dealing the killing blow to an opponent with a roll of maximum damage on the damage dice (and it must be a true killing blow which knocks the opponent to -10 hit points or the destruction of a construct, undead, etc.). This is also an unlikely event, but the longer the campaign, the more likely it is to happen. It is also not as unlikely as the Maximize Spell feat, representing the fact that Power Attack ought to be theoretically available earlier.
The Improved Initiative feat may be learned any time after the character has rolled a natural 20 for initiative and also won initiative over all other participants in the combat. This is a fairly simple thing to do. When someone rolls a natural 20 for initiative, he usually ends up going first. And this represents the fact that Improved Initiative has no prerequisites in the core rules and thus is theoretically available to anyone at any time.
These types of "accomplishments" could be secrets of the DM or they could be freely available knowledge to all players, depending on how the DM wishes to run his campaign. And the player would have the choice of taking the feat at that time, or waiting for the opportunity to later take another feat which might interest him instead (remember there still ought to be a limit on the number of feats a character may have). The point is to add a little more excitement and special nature to feats, something that is truly earned through perseverance (and some luck; after all some of the greatest accomplishments in history have happened due to luck). Obviously, this method puts quite a bit more work upon the DM. But if the DM likes this idea and is pressed for time, he could easily do it a little more free-form, deciding on the fly that some awesome stroke of brilliance, luck, or perseverance which fits the nature of the feat has been done which earns the character the feat. A DM in this case need only be wary of not showing too much favoritism to one character over another. I would suggest allowing each character no more than one more feat than the other characters in the party to keep things fair in the eyes of the players.
So there you have some ideas on how to integrate feats into the campaign on a more limited level and make them a bit more exciting and special at the same time.
Let's look at some other ways in which feats, a mechanic which is admittedly cool and fun to play around with, might be utilized in the game without being earned every third level. Because we are working off of the assumption that players will not be able to expect to earn feats at regular intervals, we will first have to do away with the notion of feat prerequisites for things. That is easy enough. If you use prestige classes (as I imagine most 3.5 DMs do), then I highly recommend the Test-Based Prerequisites variant from Unearthed Arcana. I have used this variant rule for many years and both my players and I agree that it is a much better approach to prestige classes than the core rules. Second, we need to make sure that feats are not given out in too great a quantity. At the very most, a player should not be able to earn more feats than he might otherwise earn through the core rules. This is partially for balance and partially to keep complexity of the game at a moderate level. Personally, I recommend no more than one feat per five levels, but as the DM, you can make that judgment as you choose. And if you are going to do this, I highly recommend you take my advice from the Featless article and ignore monster feats as well. Just pretend monsters and NPCs in written adventures or monster manuals do not have the feats listed in order to keep things more on an even keel with the player characters.
With our ground rules established, what are these other ways in which we can introduce feats into our games, keeping them interesting, but not automatic or based on (sometimes arbitrary) prerequisites? One idea which I particularly like is the idea of a feat as a reward. It can be a reward from an NPC for completing a quest, a reward for accomplishing some heroic deed, or just about anything the DM likes. The key is that the feat is a reward, a bonus, a boon, not something that is expected. I suppose some examples might be in order to give you an idea of what I am talking about.
The player characters have been charged by the Wizards of Eindore to retrieve a magical orb from the den of the dragon, Mitzcatla. Without the orb, the Wizards of Eindore are powerless to defend their citadel and so the heroic player characters seek out Mitzcatla, slay him and his monstrous minions, retrieve the orb, and in exchange the Wizards of Eindore offer to teach the player characters one metamagic feat. It could be any metamagic feat or it could be a selection of metamagic feats of the DM's choosing. Of course, training to learn this feat ought to take some amount of time (a couple weeks at the least); I recommend seeing the Dungeon Master's Guide for recommendations on training times and costs. What about the fighters, barbarians, and rogues who gain nothing from this? Well, the Wizards of Eindore would reward those characters in the traditional way, with gold or a specially-crafted magic item. In a future adventure, the player characters might assist the army of the Kingdom of Macea in driving back the goblins from the evil Johaki Empire. This time it would be the turn of the non-casting classes to have the option of learning a combat-oriented feat in exchange for their service while the spell-casters receive a more traditional monetary or magic item reward.
An entirely different way of going about things could be to make specific conditions for players to earn feats by accomplishing some great deed or displaying phenomenal skill. I will present a few examples below.
In order to learn the Maximize feat, a spellcaster must roll the maximum roll on at least five dice worth of damage when casting a spell. Such a task is difficult, and may in fact never happen, but when it does, it will be all the more special. It is also more likely to happen the higher level the caster (it is more likely to get five maximum dice on a 15d6 cone of cold than a 5d6 shocking grasp for example).
A character may learn the Power Attack feat after dealing the killing blow to an opponent with a roll of maximum damage on the damage dice (and it must be a true killing blow which knocks the opponent to -10 hit points or the destruction of a construct, undead, etc.). This is also an unlikely event, but the longer the campaign, the more likely it is to happen. It is also not as unlikely as the Maximize Spell feat, representing the fact that Power Attack ought to be theoretically available earlier.
The Improved Initiative feat may be learned any time after the character has rolled a natural 20 for initiative and also won initiative over all other participants in the combat. This is a fairly simple thing to do. When someone rolls a natural 20 for initiative, he usually ends up going first. And this represents the fact that Improved Initiative has no prerequisites in the core rules and thus is theoretically available to anyone at any time.
These types of "accomplishments" could be secrets of the DM or they could be freely available knowledge to all players, depending on how the DM wishes to run his campaign. And the player would have the choice of taking the feat at that time, or waiting for the opportunity to later take another feat which might interest him instead (remember there still ought to be a limit on the number of feats a character may have). The point is to add a little more excitement and special nature to feats, something that is truly earned through perseverance (and some luck; after all some of the greatest accomplishments in history have happened due to luck). Obviously, this method puts quite a bit more work upon the DM. But if the DM likes this idea and is pressed for time, he could easily do it a little more free-form, deciding on the fly that some awesome stroke of brilliance, luck, or perseverance which fits the nature of the feat has been done which earns the character the feat. A DM in this case need only be wary of not showing too much favoritism to one character over another. I would suggest allowing each character no more than one more feat than the other characters in the party to keep things fair in the eyes of the players.
So there you have some ideas on how to integrate feats into the campaign on a more limited level and make them a bit more exciting and special at the same time.
Tuesday, December 18, 2012
Doing Away with Touch Spells and Rays
After receiving some comments from EN World, I have been thinking about what to do with touch spells. I really don't like touch spells. They require touch AC, which is a mechanic I believe is completely unnecessary. So if you are like me and think touch AC needs to go and want to unify spell mechanics, then the challenge is coming up with a simple system to convert spells that doesn't require a lot of thought and can be done on the fly without really requiring a re-write of the entire system.
Ideally, I want a situation where spells only require saving throws as a mechanic for avoiding damage or effects so casters never need to worry about calculating their to-hit bonus with touch spells and rays. There has to be a sort of balance there though. So I am going to float out a trial balloon of an idea and see what people think. I want to get feedback on this system because I really have no idea how it would work out in-game.
Here is the idea in a nutshell: Touch spells automatically hit so long as there is line of sight and the target is within range. If the spells already have a saving throw mechanic tied to them, then that saving throw mechanic remains and no other change is needed. If the spell has no saving throw mechanic, then the following rule applies: If a spell is a ray and has no saving throw tied to it, then it allows a saving throw for half damage (or a partial effect). If the spell is a melee touch attack, then the target merely needs to be within melee reach. If the melee touch spell already has a saving throw tied in the saving throw remains and nothing else is needed. If the melee touch spell has no saving throw tied in, it allows a saving throw for half damage or partial effect. Here is an example of all 1st-level spells from the Player's Handbook 3.5 and how it would work.
Bard Spells
Cure Light Wounds: no touch attack required; automatically hits and allows a Will save for half damage against undead.
Cleric Spells
Cure Light Wounds: see Bard Spells.
Inflict Light Wounds: no touch attack required; automatically hits and allows a Will save for half damage against living targets.
Protection from Chaos/Evil/Good/Law: no touch attack required (against hostile targets); allows a Will save to negate as usual.
Druid Spells
Cure Light Wounds: see Bard Spells.
Paladin Spells
Cure Light Wounds: see Bard Spells.
Protection from Chaos/Evil: see Cleric Spells.
Sorcerer/Wizard Spells
Protection from Chaos/Evil/Good/Law: see Cleric Spells.
Shocking Grasp: no touch attack required; automatically hits and allows a Reflex save for half damage; targets in metal armor receive a -3 penalty to save.
Chill Touch: no touch attack required; automatically hits and allows a Fortitude save to negate the Strength damage for living targets; undead receive a Will save to negate.
Ray of Enfeeblement: no touch attack required; automatically hits and allows a Fortitude save for half Strength penalty.
So obviously this is just a sampling, but I think it is fairly straightforward. A couple spells are a tad more complicated so I will also address those and how they would be addressed.
Disintegrate: no touch attack required; automatically hits and allows a Fortitude save for 5d6 damage.
Dimensional Anchor: no touch attack required; automatically hits and allows a Will save to negate.
Obviously there is a little bit of room for interpretation in some of these, but I think the majority are fairly simple. But the rule of thumb is that a ray or touch attack with no saving throw required would require a saving throw for half damage if the spell deals damage and partial effect or negate depending on how powerful you feel the spell is. The saving throw depends on school of magic. For evocation and divination, Reflex is required. For conjuration, necromancy, and transmutation, Fortitude is required. For abjuration, illusion and enchantment, Will is required. You might go and make all ray spells Reflex saves, but that could complicate matters as to which rule takes precedence.
Bear in mind this is just a prototype idea. I welcome all constructive criticism.
Ideally, I want a situation where spells only require saving throws as a mechanic for avoiding damage or effects so casters never need to worry about calculating their to-hit bonus with touch spells and rays. There has to be a sort of balance there though. So I am going to float out a trial balloon of an idea and see what people think. I want to get feedback on this system because I really have no idea how it would work out in-game.
Here is the idea in a nutshell: Touch spells automatically hit so long as there is line of sight and the target is within range. If the spells already have a saving throw mechanic tied to them, then that saving throw mechanic remains and no other change is needed. If the spell has no saving throw mechanic, then the following rule applies: If a spell is a ray and has no saving throw tied to it, then it allows a saving throw for half damage (or a partial effect). If the spell is a melee touch attack, then the target merely needs to be within melee reach. If the melee touch spell already has a saving throw tied in the saving throw remains and nothing else is needed. If the melee touch spell has no saving throw tied in, it allows a saving throw for half damage or partial effect. Here is an example of all 1st-level spells from the Player's Handbook 3.5 and how it would work.
Bard Spells
Cure Light Wounds: no touch attack required; automatically hits and allows a Will save for half damage against undead.
Cleric Spells
Cure Light Wounds: see Bard Spells.
Inflict Light Wounds: no touch attack required; automatically hits and allows a Will save for half damage against living targets.
Protection from Chaos/Evil/Good/Law: no touch attack required (against hostile targets); allows a Will save to negate as usual.
Druid Spells
Cure Light Wounds: see Bard Spells.
Paladin Spells
Cure Light Wounds: see Bard Spells.
Protection from Chaos/Evil: see Cleric Spells.
Sorcerer/Wizard Spells
Protection from Chaos/Evil/Good/Law: see Cleric Spells.
Shocking Grasp: no touch attack required; automatically hits and allows a Reflex save for half damage; targets in metal armor receive a -3 penalty to save.
Chill Touch: no touch attack required; automatically hits and allows a Fortitude save to negate the Strength damage for living targets; undead receive a Will save to negate.
Ray of Enfeeblement: no touch attack required; automatically hits and allows a Fortitude save for half Strength penalty.
So obviously this is just a sampling, but I think it is fairly straightforward. A couple spells are a tad more complicated so I will also address those and how they would be addressed.
Disintegrate: no touch attack required; automatically hits and allows a Fortitude save for 5d6 damage.
Dimensional Anchor: no touch attack required; automatically hits and allows a Will save to negate.
Obviously there is a little bit of room for interpretation in some of these, but I think the majority are fairly simple. But the rule of thumb is that a ray or touch attack with no saving throw required would require a saving throw for half damage if the spell deals damage and partial effect or negate depending on how powerful you feel the spell is. The saving throw depends on school of magic. For evocation and divination, Reflex is required. For conjuration, necromancy, and transmutation, Fortitude is required. For abjuration, illusion and enchantment, Will is required. You might go and make all ray spells Reflex saves, but that could complicate matters as to which rule takes precedence.
Bear in mind this is just a prototype idea. I welcome all constructive criticism.
Bonus Spell Slots: Do We Need Them?
I think just about everyone who has played 3rd edition D&D to any extent will admit that spell casters have it good. In fact, all editions up to and including 3rd edition are very favorable to spell casters. Even at 1st-level, a wizard can end a battle before it begins with the casting of a single sleep spell. In AD&D, I often marveled at the sheer power of spell casters and for a time wondered why anyone ever bothered to play anything else. Then 3rd edition came along and just made everything better for spell casters. I indulged for a few years, playing wizards, clerics, sorcerers and druids to the exclusion of other classes. Things had just gotten too good not to be a spell caster in my own humble opinion. Of the reasons for this, not least of which was the introduction of bonus spell slots for all spell casters (not just clerics, as was the case in previous editions) based upon their associated spell casting ability score (and even clerics got a boost with the addition of domain spell slots, but I digress).
In my eternal quest for a simpler version of 3.5, not just a version that would serve to teach new players the game, but one that would just be simpler and easier to play for everyone, I have begun to ask one key question about a number of elements of the game: "Do we really need this for the game to work?" Today I have come to the subject of bonus spell slots and honestly, truly, I cannot answer "Yes" to this question.
Now I imagine that back in AD&D bonus spell slots based on a high Wisdom score were added to the game to encourage more players to choose to play clerics. It seems like there is an eternal struggle that is never-ending to this very day each and every time a new campaign begins. Who will play the healer? Well, clerics are so much more than that, of course (as any experienced cleric player such as myself will tell you), but they often get distilled down to that, appearing to the rest of the party as so many boxes of Band-Aids. I imagine this was discovered early on by Gygax & Co. and so when they published their definitive 1st edition Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Player's Handbook, part of the thinking was that the cleric deserved a few extra spell slots because some of his spell slots would inevitably end up being used as healing spells. Now maybe I am incorrect on this, but I would not be surprised at all if this were exactly the case. So bonus spell slots perhaps make sense for the cleric class. But for everyone?
Well the nice thing about 3rd edition is that the system is so internally consistent. I imagine having separate rules for clerics gaining bonus spell slots probably seemed like yet another sub-system that the designers of 3rd edition wanted to streamline. What this really came down to, in my opinion (and feel free to disagree), was making lower level a little more interesting for spell casters. But while their intentions were good, and certainly made other classes like the wizard a little more fun to play at 1st-level, they actually tackled this from several directions and ended up with what I like to more properly call a mess.
You see, along with bonus spell slots, they also introduced 0-level spells (cantrips or orisons) as a core rule, which had appeared as a variant rule in various official and unofficial versions for years. This gave several more options to low level spell casters, minor though they may be. Furthermore, crafting magic items and the assumption of availability of magic items changed as well. It was now possible to make scrolls as early as 1st-level, allowing a spell caster with only a small cache of XP and GP to add significantly to his arsenal of spells after only a session or two, provided a bit of downtime was provided (I have taken full advantage of Scribe Scroll more times than I care to count, even on sorcerers if you can believe that; it's just that good). Scrolls and potions were also exceptionally cheap. And campaigns in the Forgotten Realms in 3rd edition often began with the assumption that a brand-spanking new 1st-level character could come equipped with either several potions of cure light wounds, or a single potion of cure moderate wounds, not to mention the vast options for other both divine and arcane scrolls, potions, and even wands. A character from The Golden Water, for example, could choose a wand of cure light wounds with 20 charges at character creation!
So we now have 0-level spells, easy crafting of scrolls, cheap scrolls and potions (and 1st-level wands as well), cleric domain spell slots, and bonus spell slots for a high ability modifier. And if you are feeling really generous you give your PCs some extra equipment a la the Forgotten Realms and who is really thinking that hard about resource management? Well, I say enough already. I think a lot of this can be done away with. But let's just focus on bonus spell slots since that is the subject of this article. Given all of the options that are now available just in the core rules of the game, why do we really need bonus spells slots again? We don't. It's that simple.
Spell casters already receive a benefit for having a high ability score in their spell casting attribute, which is improved saving throw DCs. Do they really need more? I believe if you think about it, you will agree with me that they really don't. And by the time you get to level 10, they are exceptionally superfluous. So a fix intended to address a low-level problem just balloons into a nightmare of book-keeping for spell casters as they progress higher and higher. So many spells to choose and so little time! I don't know about you, but I want to play the game, not the meta-game.
In my eternal quest for a simpler version of 3.5, not just a version that would serve to teach new players the game, but one that would just be simpler and easier to play for everyone, I have begun to ask one key question about a number of elements of the game: "Do we really need this for the game to work?" Today I have come to the subject of bonus spell slots and honestly, truly, I cannot answer "Yes" to this question.
Now I imagine that back in AD&D bonus spell slots based on a high Wisdom score were added to the game to encourage more players to choose to play clerics. It seems like there is an eternal struggle that is never-ending to this very day each and every time a new campaign begins. Who will play the healer? Well, clerics are so much more than that, of course (as any experienced cleric player such as myself will tell you), but they often get distilled down to that, appearing to the rest of the party as so many boxes of Band-Aids. I imagine this was discovered early on by Gygax & Co. and so when they published their definitive 1st edition Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Player's Handbook, part of the thinking was that the cleric deserved a few extra spell slots because some of his spell slots would inevitably end up being used as healing spells. Now maybe I am incorrect on this, but I would not be surprised at all if this were exactly the case. So bonus spell slots perhaps make sense for the cleric class. But for everyone?
Well the nice thing about 3rd edition is that the system is so internally consistent. I imagine having separate rules for clerics gaining bonus spell slots probably seemed like yet another sub-system that the designers of 3rd edition wanted to streamline. What this really came down to, in my opinion (and feel free to disagree), was making lower level a little more interesting for spell casters. But while their intentions were good, and certainly made other classes like the wizard a little more fun to play at 1st-level, they actually tackled this from several directions and ended up with what I like to more properly call a mess.
You see, along with bonus spell slots, they also introduced 0-level spells (cantrips or orisons) as a core rule, which had appeared as a variant rule in various official and unofficial versions for years. This gave several more options to low level spell casters, minor though they may be. Furthermore, crafting magic items and the assumption of availability of magic items changed as well. It was now possible to make scrolls as early as 1st-level, allowing a spell caster with only a small cache of XP and GP to add significantly to his arsenal of spells after only a session or two, provided a bit of downtime was provided (I have taken full advantage of Scribe Scroll more times than I care to count, even on sorcerers if you can believe that; it's just that good). Scrolls and potions were also exceptionally cheap. And campaigns in the Forgotten Realms in 3rd edition often began with the assumption that a brand-spanking new 1st-level character could come equipped with either several potions of cure light wounds, or a single potion of cure moderate wounds, not to mention the vast options for other both divine and arcane scrolls, potions, and even wands. A character from The Golden Water, for example, could choose a wand of cure light wounds with 20 charges at character creation!
So we now have 0-level spells, easy crafting of scrolls, cheap scrolls and potions (and 1st-level wands as well), cleric domain spell slots, and bonus spell slots for a high ability modifier. And if you are feeling really generous you give your PCs some extra equipment a la the Forgotten Realms and who is really thinking that hard about resource management? Well, I say enough already. I think a lot of this can be done away with. But let's just focus on bonus spell slots since that is the subject of this article. Given all of the options that are now available just in the core rules of the game, why do we really need bonus spells slots again? We don't. It's that simple.
Spell casters already receive a benefit for having a high ability score in their spell casting attribute, which is improved saving throw DCs. Do they really need more? I believe if you think about it, you will agree with me that they really don't. And by the time you get to level 10, they are exceptionally superfluous. So a fix intended to address a low-level problem just balloons into a nightmare of book-keeping for spell casters as they progress higher and higher. So many spells to choose and so little time! I don't know about you, but I want to play the game, not the meta-game.
Thursday, December 13, 2012
Touch AC and Why it's Irrelevant
When 3rd edition of D&D came out they introduced a new concept to AC, the Touch Armor Class (as well as the Flat-Footed Armor Class). The idea was that it should be simpler to strike someone if you do not care about getting through full plate or chain mail and just want to connect with that individual bodily. This is all perfectly fair and logical. It just has one problem. It is completely unnecessary. Why? Well there is already a perfectly good mechanic in the game for one's ability to get out of the way of something dangerous. It's called the Reflex save, and if you were to evaluate all the characters you have ever played, I think you would find that if you added 10 to the value of your Reflex save, it would fairly closely match your character's touch AC. So let's get rid of that entry on the Character Sheet for Touch AC and save a little space. (We can get rid of Flat-Footed AC too, which I'll discuss below.)
Now we have to deal with the situations in 3.5 in which Touch AC is required and convert them to Reflex saves. This is actually fairly simple. The situations in which Touch AC are required are very few: 1) initiating a grapple, 2) making a trip attack, 3) touch spells. If I've missed anything, forgive me, but I think it is sufficient to say that if there are any other examples left they are marginal. Grapple and trip attacks are both easy to handle. The attacking character makes an attack roll opposed by the opponent's Reflex save; high roll wins (in case of ties, highest bonus wins the tie, as is the case for all opposed checks in 3.5). With touch spells, this is even easier. The target of the spell makes a Reflex save against the spell with a DC appropriate for the spell level in question. Viola! We've just eliminated an unnecessary part of the character sheet.
I mentioned Flat-Footed AC too. This really isn't necessary either. 4th edition acknowledged (rightly I think) that you don't need to have several values for Armor Class on your character sheet to cover every situation you could possibly think of. Realism is nice for those who like it. But I want a simpler game with a simpler character sheet. So in 4e they introduced the idea of Advantage. Whenever your character has Advantage, you gain a +2 on your roll. I like that idea. It's simple and easy to remember. So whenever your character is Flat-Footed, an attacker gets a +2 to hit you.
So now we only need one entry for Armor Class on our character sheet and don't need to worry about whether or not bonuses from one source or another apply to Touch AC or Flat-Footed AC (something that can be confusing to a new player or an old player). I have other ideas to cut down the size of the character sheet as well. Stay tuned.
Now we have to deal with the situations in 3.5 in which Touch AC is required and convert them to Reflex saves. This is actually fairly simple. The situations in which Touch AC are required are very few: 1) initiating a grapple, 2) making a trip attack, 3) touch spells. If I've missed anything, forgive me, but I think it is sufficient to say that if there are any other examples left they are marginal. Grapple and trip attacks are both easy to handle. The attacking character makes an attack roll opposed by the opponent's Reflex save; high roll wins (in case of ties, highest bonus wins the tie, as is the case for all opposed checks in 3.5). With touch spells, this is even easier. The target of the spell makes a Reflex save against the spell with a DC appropriate for the spell level in question. Viola! We've just eliminated an unnecessary part of the character sheet.
I mentioned Flat-Footed AC too. This really isn't necessary either. 4th edition acknowledged (rightly I think) that you don't need to have several values for Armor Class on your character sheet to cover every situation you could possibly think of. Realism is nice for those who like it. But I want a simpler game with a simpler character sheet. So in 4e they introduced the idea of Advantage. Whenever your character has Advantage, you gain a +2 on your roll. I like that idea. It's simple and easy to remember. So whenever your character is Flat-Footed, an attacker gets a +2 to hit you.
So now we only need one entry for Armor Class on our character sheet and don't need to worry about whether or not bonuses from one source or another apply to Touch AC or Flat-Footed AC (something that can be confusing to a new player or an old player). I have other ideas to cut down the size of the character sheet as well. Stay tuned.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)