Balanced Parties, Thoughts and Suggestions

[clementk]

Originally posted by Sandman:
me adds Orff's Carmina Burana and Amadeus's Requiem to the Mix

Good choices as well. I'd love to throw in one of the more unusual selections from 2001 (like the trip to the monolith on the moon), the original Godzilla theme, or the main theme from Crest of the Stars

but that'd probably get Imperial Guard/Marines sent to pick me up.

Casey (no power for 5+ hours today and surges beforehand; yep itsa fun Monday)

Hum Bif Naked, "Leader" or a rousing version of Scots Wha Hae on authentic bagpipes.

No wait, that last one'd be classified under Psychological Warfare.

 

[Falkayn]

Originally posted by Polaris:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by lightsenshi:
I can't recall if I mentioned this already or not. Experience level isn't as skewed as it is for other d20 systems. CR can not be used for determining experience awards because a sixth level NPC can be just as dangerous as a twentieth level one.

The problem is that this isn't entirely true. The lifeblood system in Traveller is about as deadly as the wound/vitality system from both Spycraft and Starwars and neither of these systems makes any bones about the fact that it is better to be high level than low level. Also base attack bonuses matter and that makes the high level NPC much more dangerous because he is much liklier to hit.</font>[/QUOTE]IIRC (and I'm at work, so I've got nothing to look up but my poor old memory) the Star Wars system at least is much less deadly than the T20 system, because each class has a defense bonus and because criticals work differently. That means higher level SW characters have a better AC than similar T20 characters, and less chance of being knocked out by criticals. I've never played Spycraft so I'm not sure how that goes.

T20 is a much deadlier game.

 

[Polaris]

Falkayn,

I don't have access to SWRP books right now, but I can answer your point about Spycraft.

1. Armor blows in Spycraft and so characters above 3rd level or so shouldn't be wearing it. Class defense bonus actually replaces armor for this system and so the AC values for both T20 characters and Spycraft Characters tend to be about the same at any given level.

2. Armor is /great/ in T20. A 10+ level character can easily afford both ballistic cloth and reflec and have an AR against lasers of 12+. Typical ARs against other types of weapons is 6+ for such characters (and this is pretty typical).

Since lasers don't do more than d10 per dice (at least for personal weapons), and other weapons are usually restricted to d12 (and not many at that), it is hard to take too much lifeblood damage if you have lots of armor....which means great gear which means high level.

The advantage also swings the other way. If you don't have the resources for reflec or the other better armors (at least flac jacket), then you will be taking at least a few bloodpoints of damage each time you get hit. Since the higher level character not only hits you on a much lower roll, but also gets to attack more often, higher level characters have a distinct edge.

In short, if you examine the combat system in T20 carefully, high level characers are significantly more deadly than low level characters because they:

1. Have better attack rolls (and more of them)
2. Have much better gear which means they get hit less often and for less lifeblood.
3. Have much better stamina as well.

So please let's stop the fiction that combat is somehow 'equivalent' for characters of grossly different levels in T20 because it isn't so.

-Polaris

 

[Falkayn]

Originally posted by Polaris:
In short, if you examine the combat system in T20 carefully, high level characers are significantly more deadly than low level characters because they:

1. Have better attack rolls (and more of them)
2. Have much better gear which means they get hit less often and for less lifeblood.
3. Have much better stamina as well.

So please let's stop the fiction that combat is somehow 'equivalent' for characters of grossly different levels in T20 because it isn't so.

OK, I can see where you're coming from. For the record my responses are:
1. If they are of the same class yes. But T20 has MUCH greater variance between classes than ANY other d20 system. 5th level Marines are a match for 20th level Merchants.
2. I disagree. Armor is fairly cheap, and anyone expecting to be in combat will wear an appropriate amount of it. High level characters MAY afford better weapons, but this again depends on their class and whether they have the weapon feats required to use those weapons. Law level usually limits ALL levels of character in the armor and weapons they can carry.
3. Agreed, they do - but again it varies by class, and this won't matter much if your opponent gets a critical. In fact, with the damage that even a 1st level character can do with a good weapon, this won't matter at all if you get hit with a full auto burst (and note that he can have the same AC as your uber engineer!).

 

[Polaris]

Originally posted by Falkayn:


[My post snipped for space.]

OK, I can see where you're coming from. For the record my responses are:
1. If they are of the same class yes. But T20 has MUCH greater variance between classes than ANY other d20 system. 5th level Marines are a match for 20th level Merchants.

When you include allowed and unique T20 feats into the game, that difference goes down again. I note that the feat "Martial Training" allows a character to (effectively) go up one step in the bab progression up to (but not in excess) of 1/1. Thus, if there will be a lot of combat, and the players know this, your bab differences reduce down to that of any other d20 system. I also note that your argument really only holds water when you compare the non-enhanced merchant and academic vs the marine (or merc).

An academic or merchant with martial training is a match for a 10th level marine at 20th level which is more normal for d20 (and this is fair because the marine can not get the martial training feat). In addition, you neglect service classes such as Navy, Army, and Scout and neglect the core class, "Rogue" all of which have very decent combinations of skill points and bab (and all of which can take martial training as a feat).

So by in large, you will find that my point stands. While there will be class variation, it will be less than you are making out because no player will let himself be that weak if he can prevent it (and he can) and he knows that combat will happen frequently enough to be a danger (and he generally will).

2. I disagree. Armor is fairly cheap, and anyone expecting to be in combat will wear an appropriate amount of it. High level characters MAY afford better weapons, but this again depends on their class and whether they have the weapon feats required to use those weapons. Law level usually limits ALL levels of character in the armor and weapons they can carry.

Neglecting Law levels (which are usually pretty low in an XT zone), I note that only mid level characters can afford heavy combat armor with +4 Cameleon ability. This is +12 AC (8 AR) and it allows up to +6 in Dex (which is almost everyone) and has no armor check penalty. Almost any mid to high level character will be able to wear it too (GM and Law Level permitting of course). This (and Battledress) is where the high value resources of high level characters really come into the fore (that and weapons as has already been noted).

3. Agreed, they do - but again it varies by class, and this won't matter much if your opponent gets a critical. In fact, with the damage that even a 1st level character can do with a good weapon, this won't matter at all if you get hit with a full auto burst (and note that he can have the same AC as your uber engineer!).

Actually he won't (see above). Even more to the point the high level uber-engineer is likely to have a much higher Dex (mine has a Dex of 20!) and because of the feat advantage, the uber-engineer is likely to be able to afford off-engineering feats like.....improved initiative (and so will usually go first). Your first level guy has to hit my engineer. If he is busting, he had better "burst to hit" which will give him +2 (since most autoweapons have a max RoF of 4) and his base attack is +0 (+1 at most but only if he is a marine or a merc).

OTOH, my "uber" Engineer will have a bab of +9 and a Dex of 20 (not hard for 12th level) giving him a grand total of +14 vs the first level guy's total bonus of perhaps +6 including the burst fire bonus (and only if he has a Dex of 18). That is a +8 advantage against he same AC (24 if you include ballistic shields). Now my uber-engineer is a Navy/Rogue type and so doesn't have an auto rifle. OTOH, he *can* do a called shot.....that +8 advantage means he can for the same target number as the first level mook, target the eye and he gets two shots to do it.

If you gave Gani, my uber-engineer an assault rifle as well (to be fair...and a Navy/Rogue guy can use it w/o penalty), then he can burst as well and add an aditional +2 to his roll (and he gets two vs the other guy's one), or can add more damage.

Result: The first level guy is a puddle of blood on the ground in a round or two, while my Uber-Engineer is slighly hurt (if that).

Do you still want to tell me that levels don't matter in T20 combat? I wasn't trying very hard.

-Polaris

 

[sandman]

Originally posted by Casey:
Good choices as well. I'd love to throw in one of the more unusual selections from 2001 (like the trip to the monolith on the moon), the original Godzilla theme, or the main theme from Crest of the Stars

but that'd probably get Imperial Guard/Marines sent to pick me up.

Yeah, the Blue Danube from Strauss is great for those "slowly but surely" space moments

Also Sprach Zarathustra, also from Strauss, is great to lead players into Deep Troubles(TM).

As for marches on Bagpipes, I thought it was banned by the Geneva Convention?

If you want something "Classical But Isn't", you can try some Apocalyptica. Think about Metallica on Cellos

But really, There is nothing as good as having good music for setting game mood... Nothing beats Ride of the Valkyries while the players are doing a full frontal assault

 

[sandman]

Originally posted by Polaris:
Since lasers don't do more than d10 per dice (at least for personal weapons), and other weapons are usually restricted to d12 (and not many at that), it is hard to take too much lifeblood damage if you have lots of armor....which means great gear which means high level.

Bah... Nothing Beats a Vehicule Mounted VRF Gauss Cannon to teach those PCs that armor has its limits

Just to think that it isn't a rare thing to see if they're fiddling around Red Zones or not-so-friendly worlds :

 

[sandman]

Originally posted by Polaris:
When you include allowed and unique T20 feats into the game, that difference goes down again. I note that the feat "Martial Training" allows a character to (effectively) go up one step in the bab progression up to (but not in excess) of 1/1.
[SNIP]

But then, Martial training is easily available for those characters that have at least four levels in service classes (Army, Marines, Navy, Scouts).

An academic or merchant with martial training is a match for a 10th level marine at 20th level which is more normal for d20 (and this is fair because the marine can not get the martial training feat).

But the Marines is more likely to have feats which enables him to use weapon that will make mincemeat of the opposing Academic.

In addition, you neglect service classes such as Navy, Army, and Scout and neglect the core class, "Rogue" all of which have very decent combinations of skill points and bab (and all of which can take martial training as a feat).

Please, read the feat description. The only ones that CAN get Martial training are:

</font>

• Those who are have at least 4th Level in the following class:
  Army, Marines, Navy, Scout
  Those who are presently Barbarian, Mercenary or Active Duty Marines
  Those who have at least 12 in STR and DEX.</font>

which means that MANY character can have it (though it cost a character feat) and if the Academic in question is Combat Oriented, you can BET that the Marine would have it too.

Neglecting Law levels (which are usually pretty low in an XT zone), I note that only mid level characters can afford heavy combat armor with +4 Cameleon ability.

Giving access to TL14 armors and equipment too easily will do that. But don't forget that Combat Armor is restricted mostly to Military/*REAL* merc uses. If you want to play the "only character of level X can afford item Z", I might point out that Character Level 50 can probably easily buy Vehicular Mesons to fry anyone he doesn't like so sure, it could unbalance the game

.

Just don't let them buy EVERYTHING

Actually he won't (see above). Even more to the point the high level uber-engineer is likely to have a much higher Dex (mine has a Dex of 20!) and because of the feat advantage, the uber-engineer is likely to be able to afford off-engineering feats like.....improved initiative (and so will usually go first).

To paraphrase StarTrek V:

Why does an Engineer need "Improved Initiative"?

Your first level guy has to hit my engineer. If he is busting, he had better "burst to hit" which will give him +2 (since most autoweapons have a max RoF of 4) and his base attack is +0 (+1 at most but only if he is a marine or a merc).

Are you suggesting that your Engineer will have more combat feat than Combat Oriented characters? Maybe he'll have a few, but I really doubt he'll have *THAT* many.

Now my uber-engineer is a Navy/Rogue type and so doesn't have an auto rifle. OTOH, he *can* do a called shot.....that +8 advantage means he can for the same target number as the first level mook, target the eye and he gets two shots to do it.

OH... So he ISN'T just an Engineer, he's also a Scout/Rogue type...

.. Just stop calling him an Engineer then..

.. Would be like keeping calling Steven Seagal "Only a Cook"...


We're not disputing that a 20th character is "better" in combat than 1st level character, we're only saying that *Together*, in a *TEAM*, they can co-operate without too many problems.

Of course, 20th Level Evil Uber-Maniac-Engineer called "Blaufeldt" can be challenging for a group of 1st level characters played by the group

And I'd like to know what you Uber-Engineer could do against an Armed Ship while in an unarmored Far-Trader

 

[Polaris]

Originally posted by Sandman:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Polaris:
Since lasers don't do more than d10 per dice (at least for personal weapons), and other weapons are usually restricted to d12 (and not many at that), it is hard to take too much lifeblood damage if you have lots of armor....which means great gear which means high level.

Bah... Nothing Beats a Vehicule Mounted VRF Gauss Cannon to teach those PCs that armor has its limits

Just to think that it isn't a rare thing to see if they're fiddling around Red Zones or not-so-friendly worlds : </font>[/QUOTE]Sandman,

That doesn't prove a thing. A VRF Guass Gun will hose anyone in anything less than Battledress. Then again, so any spacecraft will hose any vehical too. I consider this BBFH (Blue Bolts From Heaven) and thus outside the issue of game balance.

-Polaris

 

[Polaris]

Sandman,

I am a bit suprised at you. Given your own experience, I should think you more than just about everyone else here should see my point about balanced characters and rules that tend to produce them given your own unfortunate experience. I hate to say this, but you are one of those I was referring to when I made the comment about reality and 2x4s.

Originally posted by Sandman:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Polaris:
When you include allowed and unique T20 feats into the game, that difference goes down again. I note that the feat "Martial Training" allows a character to (effectively) go up one step in the bab progression up to (but not in excess) of 1/1.
[SNIP]

But then, Martial training is easily available for those characters that have at least four levels in service classes (Army, Marines, Navy, Scouts).
</font>[/QUOTE]

Wrong. Read the feat. You have to be at least fourth level and you have to have served at least one term in the Army, Navy, Marines, or Scouts OR have a stength and dexterity of 12 or higher (which is usually a piece of cake).

There is nothing in the feat that says you have to be a fourth level service class. In fact (as confirmed by Hunter and MDJ), a service term does not mean you take levels in the same service class necessarily. If you have a Dex and Str of 12 or better, you may always take this feat if you are at least 4th level regardless of term background.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />An academic or merchant with martial training is a match for a 10th level marine at 20th level which is more normal for d20 (and this is fair because the marine can not get the martial training feat).

But the Marines is more likely to have feats which enables him to use weapon that will make mincemeat of the opposing Academic.
</font>[/QUOTE]

Baring multiclassing this is true. Then again it is true in every other d20 system out there and it still doesn't balance out class level differences in combat. I point out that an academic in a vehical will likely toast a marine in normal armor that is dismounted so the point while apt has limits too.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />
In addition, you neglect service classes such as Navy, Army, and Scout and neglect the core class, "Rogue" all of which have very decent combinations of skill points and bab (and all of which can take martial training as a feat).

Please, read the feat description. The only ones that CAN get Martial training are:

</font>

• Those who are have at least 4th Level in the following class:
  Army, Marines, Navy, Scout
  Those who are presently Barbarian, Mercenary or Active Duty Marines
  Those who have at least 12 in STR and DEX.</font>

which means that MANY character can have it (though it cost a character feat) and if the Academic in question is Combat Oriented, you can BET that the Marine would have it too.
</font>[/QUOTE]

Wrong! READ THE FEAT!

Sorry to shout but when someone tells me to "read the feat" and then gets it wrong, it pisses me off.

1. You only have to be of fourth level with a Dex and Str of 12+ to buy this feat regardless of background. If you have at least one military term you can waive the Dex and Str requirement. There is nothing in the feat that says you have to be fourth level in a service class.

2. You are wrong about Marines and this feat too!

I quote (page 106 of the T-20 Handbook):

May NOT (emphasis mine) be taken by Barbarians, Mercenaries, or (Active Duty) Marines.

Is that clear enough for you? The active duty marine can not take this feat because the best allowed Bab in the game is supposed to be 1/1. That means no 1/1 class can take it.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Neglecting Law levels (which are usually pretty low in an XT zone), I note that only mid level characters can afford heavy combat armor with +4 Cameleon ability.

Giving access to TL14 armors and equipment too easily will do that. But don't forget that Combat Armor is restricted mostly to Military/*REAL* merc uses. If you want to play the "only character of level X can afford item Z", I might point out that Character Level 50 can probably easily buy Vehicular Mesons to fry anyone he doesn't like so sure, it could unbalance the game

.

Just don't let them buy EVERYTHING
</font>[/QUOTE]

Can you say "Black Market"? I knew you could

.

The point is that high levels equates to high money and that is something that can not be neglected either in combat or anything else.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />
Actually he won't (see above). Even more to the point the high level uber-engineer is likely to have a much higher Dex (mine has a Dex of 20!) and because of the feat advantage, the uber-engineer is likely to be able to afford off-engineering feats like.....improved initiative (and so will usually go first).

To paraphrase StarTrek V:

Why does an Engineer need "Improved Initiative"?

</font>[/QUOTE]

You haven't read the Honor Harrington Books have you? Why did a missile tech (Horace Harkness) need to know enough ship design to ferret out smuggled goods and have enough unarmed combat training to be a marine? Perhaps because he isn't only an engineer? That IMHO should be typical of any traveller character.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Your first level guy has to hit my engineer. If he is busting, he had better "burst to hit" which will give him +2 (since most autoweapons have a max RoF of 4) and his base attack is +0 (+1 at most but only if he is a marine or a merc).

Are you suggesting that your Engineer will have more combat feat than Combat Oriented characters? Maybe he'll have a few, but I really doubt he'll have *THAT* many.
</font>[/QUOTE]

A twelfth level engineer (and rogue) vs a first level marine? You bet your bottom credit that the 12th level character will have more feats! (Combat or otherwise!)

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Now my uber-engineer is a Navy/Rogue type and so doesn't have an auto rifle. OTOH, he *can* do a called shot.....that +8 advantage means he can for the same target number as the first level mook, target the eye and he gets two shots to do it.

OH... So he ISN'T just an Engineer, he's also a Scout/Rogue type...

.. Just stop calling him an Engineer then..

.. Would be like keeping calling Steven Seagal "Only a Cook"...
</font>[/QUOTE]

Why not call him an engineer? He is an engineer and one of the best damn engineers in the Spinward Marches! He is also a smuggler and a rogue and feels it is his duty to provide all those little comforts that Imperial or Planetary Customs would otherwise deny his deserving shipmates.....

We're not disputing that a 20th character is "better" in combat than 1st level character, we're only saying that *Together*, in a *TEAM*, they can co-operate without too many problems.

Of course, 20th Level Evil Uber-Maniac-Engineer called "Blaufeldt" can be challenging for a group of 1st level characters played by the group

And I'd like to know what you Uber-Engineer could do against an Armed Ship while in an unarmored Far-Trader

1. The contention was that a first level character was a reasonable challenge in T20 to a 12th level character because T20 combat is deadlier. That is not true and I think I have shown that conclusively. While the first level character might get lucky, that is what such a victory would be: luck.

2. You might be suprised. Read what I posted to Falkayn a few posts ago. A crack engineer can add +10 dice or even more to each energy weapon. In addition, that engineer is pretty much assured of making most damage control DCs in his sleep. A crack engineer gives an unfair advantage for any ship even if the ship is outclassed...and this was proven in actual game play. [If you doubt, read the ship combat rules yourself!] If you have a gunner that is an equally crack shot, this gets really ugly, really fast. Falkayn is quite right when he said that good engineers in T20 are a bit too good, and I am forced to agree.

-Polaris

 

[Bruce]

There IS one balancing tool that you have not mentioned.

Make your players buy their stats with POINTS.

They might end up with one 18, but that's about it.

Makes the PC's concentrate more on their class skills and means the rolls are more defined.

There is nothing more equalizing than a party with 10's and 12's in DEX because they wanted the high stat in INT or EDU for skills.

So, your guy has a higher BAB, but with out a BIG bump because of a 20 Dex, he seems much more resonable.

Bruce
The Man Behind the Curtain

 

[Falkayn]

Originally posted by Bruce:
[QB] There IS one balancing tool that you have not mentioned.

Make your players buy their stats with POINTS./QB]

Hmmm ... that is an interesting question, and quite germane to the discussion. Polaris, what stat generating method are you assuming people use. I've taken the one from the DMG and allowed PCs 32 (I think, can't quite remember) points.

 

[clementk]

Originally posted by Bruce:

Make your players buy their stats with POINTS.

So considering say d20 Modern, which gives 25 points for 6 stats, my guess would be 32 or 33 for t20's basic 8. Not tried this yet though.

Casey

 

[Polaris]

Bruce and Falkayn,

Here we are in indisputed agreement. I loath random attribute generation systems because I regard them as unfair (this should come as no suprise to anyone).

To answer the question, my GM has his own "point based" buy system with 32 points per the following rules:

All stats except Soc start at 10 (soc starts at 7) and you may purchase stats up from there on a 1:1 basis up to 18 (except Soc which was limited to 15 unless you took level 1 as a Noble). He also allowed stats to be bought down to 8 but no one took him up on it.

FWIW, I disagreed with this system and said so (a bit of math should convince you why), but I was not about to say no, either.

However, this doesn't solve the problem, completely. Assuming we use the point buy system in the DMG and assuming you increase the points accordingly to allow for two new stats (EDU and SOC), then I persoally would start all characters with 38 to 40 character points which equates to a 32 point buy in DnD (two less stats remember?) 40 divide 8 ways gives an average stat of 13 which is about the same as 32 divided 6 ways (actually it is a bit less).

With such a point based system, with the concept in mind, I would put an 16 into Dex (10 points) leaving me with 30. I would leave Soc alone. I would put two points into Wis (how wise can you be if you smuggle goods in the navy?!) leaving me with 28. I would put 4 into strength and 6 into Con leaving me with 18 to split between EDU, INT, and Cha. I would put 4 into Cha leaving me with 14 points. I would put 10 into Int and 4 into EDU.

Thus at first level before homeword or other modifiers I would start with:

Str: 12, Dex: 16, Con: 14, Int: 16, Wis: 10, Cha: 12, EDU: 12, Soc: 8

Now assuming that I can get a decent roll on a homeworld (TL 14+), then I can get +2 to my starting EDU score starting from that. In addition because of my decent (14) Edu and high (16) Int, I can probably do well taking University initially which can raise my EDU by another 2 to 16.

Then with enough terms, it is not difficult to get stat boots often in Dex, Int, or EDU. Then, of course, you have that +1 stat every 4 levels.

Mind, you this is all a hypothetical exercise based on a 40 point buy, but you all take my point I hope. It is not that hard to have great statistics at the beginning of play.

For the record, in my actual game (with the GM's house ruled point system), I did the following (at level one mind):

Str: 14 (+4 pts)
Con: 14 (+4 pts)
Dex: 18 (+8 pts)
Int: 18 (+8 pts)
Wis: 10 (+0 pts)
Cha: 12 (+2 pts)
EDU: 16 (+6 pts)
Soc: 7 (+0 pts)

Total 32 points

During Prior history, I gained +1 EDU from my high tech homeworld (TL 12), gained +1 Int and +1 EDU as a muster bennies, but lost -1 strength due to a failed term. I also gained +1 Soc because of the Cluster of Heroism (GM rule), and I put +2 into Dex (level 4 and 8) and +1 into Int (level 12).

Final Stats:

Str: 13, Dex: 20, Con: 14, Wis: 10, Int: 20, Cha: 12, EDU: 18, Soc: 8

-Polaris

Edit Afterthought: Technically this isn't even a house rule since T20 doesn't (and can not) specify statistic generation. I also note that all other PCs in the game were designed by the same rules as were the major NPCs (high stats tend to be a bit more common) so I can not say it is unfair.

I do note that the other two players put 4 points into Soc while I did not (the system assumes an average of +4 to your stats per stat). [My character concept was a lower class runaway that joined the navy....among other things so I did not see him as having a high Soc whatsoever. I RP that out too, in spades.] That actually puts up another good point...other than the Noble class, what is to stop the other classes from simply treating Soc as a "dump stat"? It doesn't seem to be all that good stat (except of course for Nobles).

 

[Polaris]

Originally posted by Casey:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Bruce:

Make your players buy their stats with POINTS.

So considering say d20 Modern, which gives 25 points for 6 stats, my guess would be 32 or 33 for t20's basic 8. Not tried this yet though.

Casey </font>[/QUOTE]Casey,

I see two problems with this:

1. No one outside of WOTC (and most even within WOTC) feels that 25 points for 6 stats is actually a reasonable number of points. That is especially true when Living Greyhawk (by no means a muchkin's paradise) uses 28 and most other d20 systems (such as Spycraft) use 32 for tournament play.

In fact in my prior post, that is why I picked 40 points for a point buy. The standard d20 point buy (non WOTC) is 32 for 6 stats, which equates to about 40 for 8.

2. Some statistics in T20 are less useful than they were in other d20 products because of the two new stats (EDU and Soc). EDU infringes on INT, but that is not a huge deal since both synergize well together anyway. OTOH, Soc does infringe on Cha in a bad way (especially for nobles). Since Cha affects skills and Soc doesn't, the powergamer will usually dump Soc (and you get the added benefit of a lower cost of living). Soc needs to be strengthed as a stat in T20 IMHO.

-Polaris

 

[Falkayn]

Polaris, checking my old emails, it was 32 points I restricted the guy's to - the stats you started with above are just way too good!

 

[Polaris]

Falkayn,

I can not disagree. I did say that I disagreed with my GM's system and said so at the time. However, the it's one saving grace (and this is true about any point buy) is that it is fundamentally fair because everyone had the same number of points (all the PCs and important NPCs).

However, I do think that 40 points on a standard buy is fair for T20 because 32 is the standard for d20 (outside of WOTC including Spycraft for example) and that is for 6 stats. [Remember that with 8 stats, 40 points only gives an average stat of 13.]

I also have to add that in my comparison of the first level character vs the 12th, I assumed maximum Dex (and thus maximum attack) for both so I was fair there too.

-Polaris

 

[Falkayn]

Originally posted by Polaris:
I also have to add that in my comparison of the first level character vs the 12th, I assumed maximum Dex (and thus maximum attack) for both so I was fair there too.

Fair? Sure. But it does contribute to the one character can do all things problem. It explains why a rogue/engineer has 20 DEX, and still have 22 EDU. This would exacerbate problems people are having with DCs being too low - they are not meant for PCs with multiple stats in the high teens/early 20s.

 

[Polaris]

Falkayn,

My engineer only has an 18 EDU FWIW. Now, having said that, I could have easily gotten that to a 22 had I taken University to it's logical conclusion (as Sandman's little problem child did). I did not because it did not fit my character.

As for the TN problem, I will agree that high stats exacerbate the problem, but d20 is rather unique in that it is fairly stat insensitive. By the time you hit 5+ levels, your attribute bonuses mean less and less to your overall skill total, and your ranks become correspondingly more important.

Result: Going by the Prior History method as currently written, characters of any type should maximize their Int and EDU because that will give them the maximum XP per prior history term. With any reasonable point buy, you will have more than enough for decent Dex and Con. Strength is really a non-issue and isn't really needed for the Martial Training Feat either (if you take at least one service term which most characters will).

So, while you have a point, I trust you see mine as well....and I am glad we agree that I was being fair.

-Polaris

Edit Afterthought: If you think my stats are bad, then you should see some of the abominations that come out of random stat generation. With a 4d6 drop the lowest (or a varient) over 8 stats, you can easily (if the player is rolling hot) see stats that put even my uber-engineer's to shame. Since random stat rolling is the default, this should sound a warning bell.

 

[sandman]

Aye, Polaris...

I mis-misread the feat..

that is I misread some parts and messed-up my logic in trying to explain something, but that's not new to me

I missed the part about the "term" (actually, seems like my brain skipped that part...)