Talk:Fixed Bonus Types (3.5e Variant Rule)

Might it be easier to say what type of bonus and penalty types do exist for this rule? --Havvy 07:05, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Probably. I could get to amending it soon.

No deflection means there's no "catch all" defense which applied to both touch and flat. That makes me... nervous. -- Eiji-kun 07:16, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Read all the attendant rules this is meant to be used with, and your nervousness should be gone.

Name

I feel that the name Fixed Bonus Types implies that the rest of the variant rules don't necessarily fix a problem. Either that, or it is redundant. Wouldn't switching that for Condensed Bonus Types make it more descriptive? --Havvy 06:19, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Ratings

	Havvy likes this article and rated it 3 of 4.
	Normally I use the exact problem he described to great benefit to getting a +12 to all attacks for everybody in the party through spells while giving +9 AC to everybody in the party. This fixes that exploit, leading to actually being tactical being more useful.

K.I.S.S.

Something's been bugging me for a bit and I was encouraged to post this from a conversation. I don't mind the idea of trimming down the various bonus types, it's just... I think you got rid of the wrong ones.

Deflection, they removed it, but then kinda sorta replaced it with enhancement. Why? For ease of conversion, you have something that already does what you need (something that applies to both touch and flatfooted). Keep the most common type (deflection) and remove the others. They also removed circumstance, which is almost always DM granted anyway and now you have no RAW ability to offer situational benefits. And resistance is gone, the de-facto save-booster. Why? And inherent too, the only source being capped at +5 and accessable only through high level tomes or wishes. Really?

You think that in order to do the stated goal you get rid of the ones that are unusual rare types, since common types can't stack anyway. In fact, I'm going to investigate this right now...

• Ability: mods have Untyped (such as from level), Enhancement (common), or Inherent (VERY rare, capped).
• AC: Shield and enhancement to shield (main AC only), Untyped, Armor and enhancement to armor, natural (two/three for flat), Dex, Dodge (two for touch), Deflection (for both), Circumstance (DM granted), Morale (rare and generally not permenant), Size (inherent in race usually)
• Attack: Untyped, Enhancement (common), Circumstance (DM granted), Morale (rare and generally not permenant), Size (inherent in race usually)
• Saves: Untyped, Resistance (common), Circumstance (DM granted), Dodge (Reflex only, unimportant), Morale (rare and generally not permenant)
• Initiative: Untyped, Enhancement, Circumstance (DM granted)
• Skills: Untyped, Competence (common), Circumstance (DM granted)

Look at that, I cut out a lot like luck, sacred, and stuff like that, and it's not very stackable at all. The one with the most, AC, can't usually be combined effectively (as you either have heavy armor and low Dex, or high Dex and light armor) and need a lot behind it. For permenant use you basically have armor, shield, natural, dodge, and deflection, and dodge is kind of rare. More importantly I think this one is a lot closer to its source, which means minimal re-learning.

I don't hate the rules, but they seem to go out of their way to be annoying. Also with this method I think it's easier to use this rule both as part of a three-part rule, and as a stand alone rule. Things would be easier to convert, with rare types being converted to the most likely common type (enhancement usually, when applicable).

There's my 2 gp. -- Eiji-kun 02:47, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

These also look like a nice set of bonuses to go with in total. To be honest, Circumstance shouldn't be in there as a 'type' as much as there should just be an explanation that rule 0 allows giving bonuses and penalties when needed. But then, there are cases where it is always obvious one should have a bonus granted from the environment alone, but that can be untyped. --Havvy 03:33, 20 August 2011 (UTC)