Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)
I doubt this hasn't been thought of before but I was thinking about implementing
it. Unearthed Arcana and the DMG ring a bell with this, but I'm not sure.
Save Classes
In addition to Armor Class, every character has three Save Classes: Fortitude,
Reflex, and Will. These are similar to Armor Class except that they protect the
character from non-physical attacks. [This is going on the theory that while
grenadelike attacks use a physical delivery system, the damage they inflict is
actually energy-based.]
A character's Fortitude Class (FC), Reflex Class (RC), or Will Class (WC)
follows this formula: 10 + class-based save bonus + ability modifier
(Con/Dex/Wis).
Spell Attacks
To cast many spells, every spellcaster must make a 'spell attack' roll. This
'spell attack' roll is made against the target's FC, RC, or WC. Only spells that
are opposed by Fortitude, Reflex, or Will, require spell attack rolls.
A character's spell attack roll follows this formula: d20 + spell level +
relevant ability modifier (Int for wizards, Wis for clerics, etc.)
Natural 1s & Natural 20s
A natural 1 rolled for a spell attack is always a failure for the caster; a
natural 20 counts as an automatic success.
There are no critical hits for spell attacks.
There may be derivative rules necessary to make this all fit into the whole
system but the essence of the thing is there.
Essentially, this "roll reversal" (pun intended) puts the die-rolling into the
hands of the aggressor. If/when there's a 4E, the same principle should, IMO,
apply across the board, assuming saving throws survive to the next edition.
Whoever makes the attack rolls the dice against a target number set by the
defender. (It should seem odd that saving throws would be made by the defending
character, but since we are so used to it working that way, it doesn't.)
Thoughts?
--
Matthias (matthias_mls@yahoo.com)
"Scientists tend to do philosophy about as well as you'd expect philosophers to
do science, the difference being that at least the philosophers usually *know*
when they're out of their depth."
-Jeff Heikkinen
I doubt this hasn't been thought of before but I was thinking about implementing
it. Unearthed Arcana and the DMG ring a bell with this, but I'm not sure.
Save Classes
In addition to Armor Class, every character has three Save Classes: Fortitude,
Reflex, and Will. These are similar to Armor Class except that they protect the
character from non-physical attacks. [This is going on the theory that while
grenadelike attacks use a physical delivery system, the damage they inflict is
actually energy-based.]
A character's Fortitude Class (FC), Reflex Class (RC), or Will Class (WC)
follows this formula: 10 + class-based save bonus + ability modifier
(Con/Dex/Wis).
Spell Attacks
To cast many spells, every spellcaster must make a 'spell attack' roll. This
'spell attack' roll is made against the target's FC, RC, or WC. Only spells that
are opposed by Fortitude, Reflex, or Will, require spell attack rolls.
A character's spell attack roll follows this formula: d20 + spell level +
relevant ability modifier (Int for wizards, Wis for clerics, etc.)
Natural 1s & Natural 20s
A natural 1 rolled for a spell attack is always a failure for the caster; a
natural 20 counts as an automatic success.
There are no critical hits for spell attacks.
There may be derivative rules necessary to make this all fit into the whole
system but the essence of the thing is there.
Essentially, this "roll reversal" (pun intended) puts the die-rolling into the
hands of the aggressor. If/when there's a 4E, the same principle should, IMO,
apply across the board, assuming saving throws survive to the next edition.
Whoever makes the attack rolls the dice against a target number set by the
defender. (It should seem odd that saving throws would be made by the defending
character, but since we are so used to it working that way, it doesn't.)
Thoughts?
--
Matthias (matthias_mls@yahoo.com)
"Scientists tend to do philosophy about as well as you'd expect philosophers to
do science, the difference being that at least the philosophers usually *know*
when they're out of their depth."
-Jeff Heikkinen
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram