[Hans]

I'm thinking about starting a F2F group, based on the idea of the adventures of Sinbad. It'll be 3.5, as all the players are familiar with it.

In essence of mechanics, I'm allowing the D&D Core, Stormwrack, and Sandstorm. I'm also going to be using the Swashbuckling Adventures PHB in addition to the allowed sources.

I'm thinking about house ruling that no more than 2 classes be taken. 1 Core / 1 PrC, or 2 Core for Multiclass. I'm trying to prevent insta-kills.

What are your thoughts on this?

[Kishi]

It's your call, of course, but I'd at least allow two core and a PrC- otherwise, you're shutting off a whole bunch of prestige classes that require you to multiclass to get to them. It's actually an interesting idea- kinda forces them to focus early on and decide what they want to build towards. And Swashbuckling offers some lovely multiclass options.

(Plus, damn, I'd love to have the Swashbuckling Adventures book allowed for some of my D&D characters....Sorcerer with Unarmored Defense Proficiency and Dashing and Daring- that's a nice AC.)

[Benevolance]

Agreed. There are quite a number of nice prestige classes that require at least 2 core classes to enter. Plus, what about 5-level prestige classes? Can a player take two 5-level classes instead of one 10-level prestige class?

I can understand the desire to prevent insta-kills as a DM, but how many class-combos of those actually exist?

P.S. Sinbad would make an awesome setting for a game. I wish I'd thought of that!

[TLRIV]

I don't know, Sinbad stopped being funny in like 1995.

[Hans]

Added info:

I'm mulling about adding the base armor bonus sytem from Unearthed Arcana. I suspect that the players won't be wearing armor, and defense is always good.

I'm also allowing Complete Warrior and Complete Adventurer.

However, to balance it all out, I'm going to requiring the use of all skills. Yeah, one of the characters can take the helm, but unless they have the Sailor profession skill, will they be able to navigate correctly?

Kishi: Good call on that.

Lance: The 5 level PrC I thought about just limiting it to that PrC.

In Swashbuckling Adventures, I could always throw an immortal at the players to keep things in line.

Thanks for the comments.

This post has been edited by Sunshine Bear: 13 June 2009 - 07:06 PM

[elliott20]

what exactly do you mean you want to prevent insta-kills? If you don't want to see people one shot encounters, you need to look at the character builds vs. the villains instead of just limiting PrCs. (Since PrCs are hardly the source of one-shot ability)

i.e. ubercharger builds can be done using nothing but the fighter or barbarian class, and can with a single charge move deliver enough damage to take down a balor in one hit. (and that's not even the most optimal one) most full casters when they hit high level have the ability to effective end the encounter with the right spell, and that's not even including any incantrix or ur-priest cheese.

in short, if you want to prevent one-shot kills, you need to look at the character build first. Yeah, having a string of 7 PrCs tagging behind a core class seems kind of silly, but most of those are hardly earth shattering. (And if your players are capable of putting together that kind of thing with PrCs, they are probably more than capable of doing similar things with just core too)

[lgm]

You'll want to really examine the base armor bonus from UA. It just doesn't work with multiclassing with certain classes and can easily be abused. If I remember correctly, a monk/fighter can really jack up his bonus according to these rules. If you allow it, tell the players that you want to hold the right to make adjustments to it as the game is played to prevent abuse.

This post has been edited by lgm: 14 June 2009 - 06:10 AM

[Hans]

Good call el and lgm.

LGM, I've tried reasoning it out, and the base armor bonus system would cause a lot of headache, if I hold the right to change it for story. So, I'll scrap it. I say this because I thought about it being applicable to one class only, but in the case of the fighter monk, the AC would be jacked up, quite a bit, either way.

I thought about the upper level characters doing insta kills, and while yes, that is possible in upper levels, my main goal is to prevent min/maxing and the string of 7 PrCs after the base class.

So I've come up with this setup:

Theme:
Sinbad (esque) from Arabian Nights

Materials allowed:

3.5 Core
Swashbuckling Adventures
Complete Warrior
Complete Arcane
Complete Adventurer
Swashbuckling Adventures
Sandstorm
Stormwrack

Denials:
Psionics - Just NO!
In the sake of the story, I'm leaning towards denying the use of monks, as the class tries to distance themselves from the world.
Sidhe - I'm not that confident in my understanding of the Sidhe in the first place
Syrneth - Same reason as the Sidhe
The long string of PrCs - Just silly to me

From Pimptania:
I like Goober's idea of the Plot Points, so I'll allow that.

Any others?

This post has been edited by Sunshine Bear: 14 June 2009 - 03:37 PM

[Kishi]

Yeah, while I love the Sidhe, they'd be quite a bit out of place in a Sinbad setting.

[sirtayls]

When I was DM'ing 3.5 I had this rule as far as classes:

You can have up to two core classes.
You must go to level 5 in a PrC before you gain another PrC.

this prevented many of the min/maxing instant things you are concerned about, and most of the PCs were cool with this idea.

We also house ruled that the UA defense bonus was a 'feat'. Players that wanted to enact those bonuses would choose the feat.

[xenomega]

For the Defense bonus, you can have them take the highest bonus of each class, not stack both together. So like, a 3 Fighter/3 2 Sorc, would have the Defense bonus of a 4th level Fighter. A 3 Fighter/3 barbarian would have the bonus of a 6th level in which ever was better. I think most of them start out higher at lower levels, +2 maybe? Then slow down, so they lose a little bit from taking the equivelent of their level and not just adding them together.

[Hans]

Tayls: I like that house ruling.

Xeno: That's an excellent suggestion. I'll look into that.

[elliott20]

I wholeheartedly support the implementation of plot points into most D&D games because it fundamentally has several effects that cannot be ignored

1. it gives all characters more versatility as plot points allows you a resource that can be used in almost any context.
2. it encourages players to play their characters more dramatically and with more cinematic flare over just cold and calculated tactical decision making.

as for minimizing the min/max effect, you need to make sure that you min/maxing should never outstrip or fall behind your PCs too much. And certain kinds of monsters you pretty much HAVE to dumb down a little or else they become far too deadly against a non-optimized party. (i.e. monsters with a lot of physical prowess as well as a ton of innate spell-like abilities)

If you're just limiting the number of PrCs you can use, that's just a small step in preventing min/maxing. In the end, the best you can do would to simply examine each build the characters are shooting for, and modify accordingly. i.e. UA barbarians, IIRC, have access to the ability "pounce", which allows them a full attack after a charge. Add this to the ubercharger build, and you're looking at a one-shot kill build in one round. The clincher for this is the leap attack feat + lion's pounce. (complete adventurer and complete divine, respectively), where one allows you to exchange AC for to hit bonus, the other gives you a full round attack at the end of a charge. add this in with Power Attacking, you can elect to take a huge penalty in your AC to add a ridiculous amount of damage to your hits, making you essentially a charging rocket.

the same thing can be done with paladin's by using their charging smite variant.

[Hans]

I'm leaving the UA out of it. The Base Armor System out of it is covered by the feat "Unarmored Proficiency Defense" in the Swashbuckling Adventures book.

[elliott20]

Just keep in mind that unarmed defense bonus primarily makes it harder for people who rely on their BAB to do things. This will have two primary effects

1. combat take a little longer since people are now harder to hit.
2. people with spells are that much more powerful since a lot of spells skirt around AC and hits the saves directly.

this is all fine and dandy, by the way, as long as you're aware of it.

the feeling I'm getting is that you're aiming for swashbuckling adventurers, who are not meant to consist of a bunch of full casters. If you want to ensure that, you might want to limit access to magic items and classes a little. (i.e. limit class choices to half-casters and the likes)

edit:

caveat to this: if most casters in your game rely on spells that require an attack roll, then unarmed defense bonus will actually be beneficial towards non-caster types and favor melee types since this means they have just gained a more effective defense against casters.

This post has been edited by elliott20: 14 June 2009 - 09:57 PM

[Hans]

I'm expecting a fairly balanced group of PCs.

Casters, as we're all aware, don't have the luxury of being able to wear armor. I'm also trying to account for the lack of wearing amor by non casters.

Half casters are indeed encouraged, but a full caster is warranted. The treasure is good, damn good, but the players go through hell to get it.

Combat will undoubtedly take longer, which gives more time for the cowardly villains to make their escape. And give the heroes the impression of being larger than life.

Magic items are limited.

I can't give too much away, as the game hasn't started yet.

[elliott20]

the armor thing is only an issue when the caster is caught off guard though. But any caster who has time for preparation (or in the case of high level casters) will have methods of ensuring that his lack of armor will not be an issue. Things like mirror image and flight are often far more effective forms of protection than raw AC bonus. (especially in the case of things that just gives you a flat miss chance instead of an AC bonus)

full casters, are of course, not BAD in and of themselves. I'm just saying trying to keep their numbers down in the party. But for villains? feel free to make them every bit as bitchy and as nasty as you want.

[Hans]

Agreed elliot.

[andrul]

A little late here but I'll throw a couple of cents worth of free advice. The class defense bonuses from multiclassing do not stack. You get the highest of the two. The reason LGM mentions that it breaks down with the monk/fighter is you get the higher class defense of the fighter for having heavy armor proficiency, which stacks with the monk Wisdom bonus to AC. I've always tended to play high defense characters so it didn't seem bad to me but LGM nearly had a heart attack when I suggested my Dex 14, Wis 18 Monk 10/Fighter 1 would have a 25 AC without any magic assistance. Of course, a straight Dex 14 fighter with a heavy shield would have a 23 AC and be hitting more often and for typically better damage. You could always just house rule that they don't stack but then monks end up with the crappiest AC by far since the arcane casters get the same class defense bonus and get to cast Shield. Hmm, a Fighter/Sorcerer would get the same AC as the monk by casting Shield and using a 2-handed weapon for maximum damage.

[elliott20]

25 AC by level 11 is not that broken anyway. a melee class character of the same level would punch through that on a roll of 14 or better, just from BAB alone. If you start adding things like feats, STR bonuses, and what not, you're looking at a 50% easy.

Hell, a little bit of squeezing here and there and that monk is gonna have to resume the magical arms race just to keep up with AC, which the monk will almost guaranteed to lose because of how hard it is for a monk to gain AC effectively. (bracers of armor are far more expensive than just good ol' fashion armor)

[andrul]

Agreed. Of course, my core rules monk/sorcerer regularly boosted his AC to the high 30's with mage armor, shield, and protection from evil combined with combat expertise, dodge, and boosted dex/wis scores. He suffered on attacks but compensated with Arcane Strike.

[elliott20]

arguably though, that's a much better option than to go full monk anyway, as with a full monk, unless you're going up against big slow creatures, you won't get that many chances to flurry or full attack. (and if you do, you probably won't be able to do it for long anyway since you're kinda squishy.)

your build now means that you can at least still deliver single blows with lots of effects loaded on them and more reliably deal damage via arcane strike.

high 30s AC is not bad for mid level. It's not AMAZING. But it's a good amount from a crunch standpoint. Most creatures of that level will need to roll fairly decently to get through that. Though, there is still the issue of magical defense. Of course, you're playing a half-sorc, so maybe you can remedy that later on.