Crunch Talk: Base Attack Bonuses and Saving Throws

Epic Meepo · February 26, 2007, 08:20:48 PM

Quote from: Bill VolkMight it be easier if you phrased it in the opposite way?

When a druid uses wild shape or when someone polymorphs himself, would they automatically gain max ranks in their new forms' natural weapons?[/quote]Well, druids are normally proficient in all natural weapons, so I guess they'd get enough skill points to account for natural weapon skills. As for people who polymorph, I don't really know if they gain proficiency in their new form's natural weapons as it is (I don't rememeber reading anything that says they do), so I'm not really sure.

Xeviat · February 27, 2007, 03:30:11 AM

Quote from: Epic MeepoAre good saving throws an intrinsic part of becoming more powerful, or could a character realistically forfeit one or more saving throw bonuses in order to train in another area? I can eaily imagine an experienced character having no combat ability, but I'm not sure if I could imagine an experienced character with very low saving throws (or a very low hit point total, for that matter).

Yes, good saving throws are an intrinsic part of becoming more powerful. In Mutants and Masterminds, a system which you have to purchase your BAB, Skill Points, Saves, Ability Scores, Feats, and Powers via the same points, most players I've seen so far skimp on their saves. They're just something that gets forgotten (aside from the ever necessary Toughness save).

Epic Meepo · February 27, 2007, 03:45:57 PM

Quote from: Side NoteIn fairness to the skimping M&M players, in that game, its much more economical to max out your Dexterity, Constitution, and Wisdom scores than it is to max out your saves. Doing so both maxes out your saves and gives you bonuses on lots of other useful stuff.[/spoiler]
I take it you don't think its a good thing that the M&M system gives players the option of skimping on saving throws as they become more powerful. Is that an accurate assessment of your thoughts on the matter?

snakefing · February 27, 2007, 05:35:10 PM

My own two cents:

Skimping here and there can be a fine thing, to create a little characterization and uniqueness. But you do have to be careful whether a system actually encourages the form of hyper-specialization that ends up in caricaturization instead.

Just as an (off-topic) ferinstance, it always bothers me that you can be a high-level, well-traveled, world-weary adventurer, and have no ranks at all in Sense Motive. I mean, if you've been around the block - seen a little of everything - you'd think you'd have at least a little ability to read people.

In a similar vein, a character whose been around ought to be at least a little tougher (Fortitude save), better at reacting to things (Reflex save), and harder to control (Will save). Not to say everyone would be equally good in all respects, but at least some progression.

If you want the extra characterization of having areas of unusual weakness, you might consider using some kind of tradeoff between flaws and benefits. For example, a character taking a flaw for -2 on Will save could gain a +1 on Reflex save or +1 BAB or something.

Xeviat · February 27, 2007, 06:26:44 PM

Quote from: Epic MeepoIn fairness to the skimping M&M players, in that game, its much more economical to max out your Dexterity, Constitution, and Wisdom scores than it is to max out your saves. Doing so both maxes out your saves and gives you bonuses on lots of other useful stuff.

I take it you don't think its a good thing that the M&M system gives players the option of skimping on saving throws as they become more powerful. Is that an accurate assessment of your thoughts on the matter?

Yeah, I don't particularly care for saves in M&M, because it is easy to forget about them. Maxing out Dex and Wis does boost your saves, but they only really effect Saves and some skills. Con is limited by your toughness save first, and the Fortitude cap is higher than the Toughness cap.

It's a good system as far as point based d20 goes, but the fact that nothing is intrinsically tied to level (aside from caps) makes it easier to abuse.

Captain Obvious · February 27, 2007, 06:34:31 PM

Quote from: Epic MeepoAre good saving throws an intrinsic part of becoming more powerful, or could a character realistically forfeit one or more saving throw bonuses in order to train in another area? I can eaily imagine an experienced character having no combat ability, but I'm not sure if I could imagine an experienced character with very low saving throws (or a very low hit point total, for that matter).

I consider the poor saving throw progression to be a simple measure of improvement due to experience. Everyone gets it, even for stuff they are bad at. The good saves though, are only in areas that their training (class) specialises in. So i would think the poor save progression is natural, while the amount different between good and bad would be their training and as such shpould be able to be improved by their skill points.
I included this in my earlier description of my thoughts for the point system, but didn't give my reasons.

Just a thought, but couldn't spell casting and other class features all get done using skill progresions too? maybe the spellcasting would be something more similart to the truenamer (few abilities, cast as often as you like, using skill checks). I was working on a system like all of this (point based everything with no levels) for my setting Vorsatz, but that has fallen by the wayside of late.

Xeviat · April 04, 2007, 05:54:33 AM

Just as another Mutants and Masterminds reference if I didn't say it before:

1 feat will buy you +1 to hit in melee or in ranged; 2 "feats" will buy you +1 to hit with all attacks.

In Mutants and Masterminds, 1 feat will buy you 4 skill points.

In D&D, 1 feat will buy you +1 to hit with 1 weapon. 1 feat will also buy you 5 skill points, or +3 to a single skill.

Both systems feel that to hit is worth more than skills. This is why I don't think attack rolls should be skills.

PS: L5R, an almost entirely skill based system, has weapon attacks as skills. There is no such thing as class skills (aside from the fact that your "class" gives you 1 free rank in certain skills). We only played for a little, but almost every character maximized one weapon skill unless they were a spellcaster, and even then, they considered it too.

SilvercatMoonpaw · April 04, 2007, 09:00:07 AM

Quote from: XeviatYeah, I don't particularly care for saves in M&M, because it is easy to forget about them. Maxing out Dex and Wis does boost your saves, but they only really effect Saves and some skills. Con is limited by your toughness save first, and the Fortitude cap is higher than the Toughness cap.

Again, this isn't about the system, it's about the players. Whenever I play M&M I'm looking very carefully to my saves, not just the ability scores that go with them. Bad players does not equal bad system.

Quote from: XeviatIt's a good system as far as point based d20 goes, but the fact that nothing is intrinsically tied to level (aside from caps) makes it easier to abuse.

It also makes it easier to ignore the mechanical areas that don't fit a character concept, such as attack accuracy and resistance to injury.

I think the idea of allowing a player to trade BAB for skill points is a great way to do this if you're sticking with D&D. The question is, is going the other direction fair? Is the original idea even mechanically sound? D&D puts a lot of emphasis on combat and being able to hit things, and the system is designed around the assumption that certain characters will be able to hit with a certain accuracy. At the least it's probably best if you don't let 1/1 BAB classes get any more.
There's also the question of the fact that skill points take on one's Int bonus to increase their number. While M&M was brought up as an example of a system where statistics are traded, the poster forgot to mention that M&M doesn't include Int bonus when figuring skill points. Int bonus isn't balanced between classes. I would likely guess that when BAB to skill point trade is figured out the character should not be allowed to add in their Int bonus. That keeps with the earlier statement that classes seem to be figuring their own BAB/skill point trade.
As for saves, I can't comment on a skill-based variant, but I can propose a medium solution: allow a class to pick good and poor saves based on how many they get normally (cleric: 2 good, 1 poor). Then allow the choice of keeping a good save or splitting it into two medium saves (and idea I saw in Arcana Evolved, seems to be abou 1/2 level rounded down). This introduces some variation, while still keeping an ordered progression.

The Campaign Builder's Guild

News:

Crunch Talk: Base Attack Bonuses and Saving Throws

Epic Meepo

Xeviat

Epic Meepo

snakefing

Xeviat

Captain Obvious

Xeviat

SilvercatMoonpaw