Talk:The Edge (3.5e Variant Rule)

RatingsEdit

	HB Forged favors this article and rated it 4 of 4!
	I agree with everything discussed so far, even the subtle bonus/slowing down. Despite the latter, I've felt like this added some depth to D&D games I've run. Thanks.

	Fluffykittens likes this article and rated it 3 of 4.
	"Anyone making an attack on you that targets AC or Reflex gains the edge," This is 3.5, not 4e. You don't attack people's reflexes! Adds an interesting new tactical element to the game.

Fix'd. --Ghostwheel (talk) 09:20, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

DanielDraco favors this article and rated it 4 of 4!

Looking at the probabilities involved, I really like what I'm seeing here. For the most part the only significant consequence of the edge is that nat 1s and 20s become more or less prevalent, because your average roll only changes up to ±3.32 but 1s and 20s can get as (un)likely as 9.75% or 0.25%. At a glance, it's a simple way to give a non-RNG-breaking bonus/penalty. But because it changes the shape of the distribution, this can become very interesting combined with effects like Power Attack that make your roll bonus a variable tactical decision. With this, I suddenly have a renewed interest in metacombat feats. I'm half-tempted to write a class to bring the two together more fully.

	Foxwarrior is neutral on this article and rated it 2 of 4.
	The idea of having a second die with a bonus or penalty to make its effect more subtle is cool, but it would either slow down the game noticeably or require you to use two colors of d20s.

	Havvy likes this article and rated it 3 of 4.
	A nice system for staying in the RNG while having bonuses and penalties.

Presupposing Other Variants?Edit

You talk about attacking against saves a couple times. Are you presupposing the variant of making attackers roll against a static save defense? If so, I'd suggest rewording to more standard assumptions -- it's easier for DMs to adjust from standard to variant than it is for them to figure out what the hell you mean and then transfer the concept back to standard rules. --DanielDraco (talk) 06:33, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Fix'd. --Ghostwheel (talk) 09:20, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Is it? What does it mean for the opponent to gain the edge on something that forces you to make a Reflex save, when they are not the one actually making a d20 roll? --DanielDraco (talk) 18:18, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Clarified it on the article page. --Ghostwheel (talk) 20:17, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

I like the concept of another variant helping out with "attacking" saving throws. For example, you could use the hypnosis spell or psionics to tell your opponent to "believe what you see", losing him/her some edge (probably 3) on will saves for the duration; "your joints are a bit inflexible", losing him/her some edge on reflex saves; or even use the suggestion spell to trick him/her into losing an edge on such save. Also, a called shot to the legs could cause loss of some edge on reflex saves and/or other DEX checks. All in all, conditions that cause the gain or loss of edge to saving throws is an interesting concept. --HB Forged (talk) 11:09, 20 March 2018 (MDT)

Denied Dexterity to ACEdit

I just want to check if I understand this correctly. When attacking someone who is denied their dexterity bonus to AC, the attacker gains the edge, but the defender keeps their AC bonus for dexterity. Is this correct? Thanks. Fangotango (talk) 15:36, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that's correct. --Ghostwheel (talk) 20:17, 15 February 2013 (UTC)