What are your thoughts on making a 'page 42' for 3.x?

[Endarire]

The famous page 42 of D&D 4E is sometimes maligned, but it does have its points.  It's clearly stating the DCs and damage ranges by level on the DC and damage curves.

Does 3.x or Pathfinder have such an explicitly stated DC/accuracy/damage curve?  I've seen fan-made curves for saves (and if you have a link, share!)  If not, what's the best way to assemble one?

[linklord231]

Not so much for accuracy, but the Rules Compendium clarified that save DCs are 10 + 1/2HD + (usually highest) stat mod for pretty much everything.  That scales pretty linearly, and at the same rate as a class's Good save progression.  For non save DCs (opening locks or whatever), you use the stats for whatever should reasonably be there in the world you've created.  All doors don't suddenly transmute into Adamantine with a Superior grade lock on them just because you hit level 12 or whatever. 

Pg 36 of the DMG has tables for the expected damage per spell level of arcane and divine spells.

[Unbeliever]

^ pretty much this. 

Also, one of the great things about 3E is the heterogeneity.  4E, in its quest for "balance uber alles!" bled out a lot of the differences, mechanically-speaking, between characters.  In 3E there's nothing wrong with having characters with wildly different damage scores or DCs, provided they are making some sort of tradeoff -- e.g., I'll do crappy damage but load up on debuffs which leaves them vulnerable for you. 

This has its own problems, of course, but it's a strength of the system.

[zook1shoe]

Occasionally there are abilities that break that DC formula in 3.x, like Doomspeak

[RobbyPants]

Oddly enough, I've been going through and changing all of the DCs to follow that formula for my houserules, just to keep things simple.

[veekie]

Pathfinder has an expected typical stat range for monsters in the bestiary, though they don't always stick to the table.

[awaken_D_M_golem]

Yeah but even that p.42 stuff got switched around.
Post MM3 and into Essentials, they changed a bit.

Still the idea is sound, if the game "should" be linear.

[Complete4th]

Does 3.x or Pathfinder have such an explicitly stated DC/accuracy/damage curve?  I've seen fan-made curves for saves (and if you have a link, share!)  If not, what's the best way to assemble one?

Decide which and how many booster items you expect your PCs to have over the course of twenty levels, add up the bonuses, decide how often PCs should succeed at any given check, and the charts pretty much write themselves. The first step and the third step are of course tricky because the designers never deigned to provide any real guidelines, and because success ratios are probably meant to increase or decrease with level depending on the type of check. For pretty much all of them. I could tell you what bonuses and ratios I think PCs should have, but everyone seems to have a different opinion on the topic so I'll just wish you luck.

All doors don't suddenly transmute into Adamantine with a Superior grade lock on them just because you hit level 12 or whatever.

Not how it works, FYI. Like, at all.

[Unbeliever]

...

All doors don't suddenly transmute into Adamantine with a Superior grade lock on them just because you hit level 12 or whatever.

Not how it works, FYI. Like, at all.

I don't think he was even implying that it did. Quite the opposite.  Touchy much?

[Demelain]

Does 3.x or Pathfinder have such an explicitly stated DC/accuracy/damage curve?  I've seen fan-made curves for saves (and if you have a link, share!)  If not, what's the best way to assemble one?

Decide which and how many booster items you expect your PCs to have over the course of twenty levels, add up the bonuses, decide how often PCs should succeed at any given check, and the charts pretty much write themselves. The first step and the third step are of course tricky because the designers never deigned to provide any real guidelines, and because success ratios are probably meant to increase or decrease with level depending on the type of check. For pretty much all of them. I could tell you what bonuses and ratios I think PCs should have, but everyone seems to have a different opinion on the topic so I'll just wish you luck.

Sounds similar to a friend of mine.
He isn't very interested in stating up enemies, calculating skill check DCs and modifiers, etc. Instead, he decides whether something is easy, medium, or hard. For skill checks, that means our d20 roll has to come up 5+, 10+, or 15+, respectively. Doesn't really matter what our modifiers are, he just bases it on the d20 itself. Does the same thing with enemies (easy foes hit if they roll 15+, and get hit if we roll 5+; medium is 10+/10+; hard 5+/15+). Same thing for saves.
He doesn't do hit points, either. The enemies die when he thinks they've had enough.

It's really annoying, and I've stopped making characters for his games. I show up with what is essentially a blank character sheet and some flavor notes.

[Complete4th]

...

All doors don't suddenly transmute into Adamantine with a Superior grade lock on them just because you hit level 12 or whatever.

Not how it works, FYI. Like, at all.

I don't think he was even implying that it did. Quite the opposite.  Touchy much?

Yeah, I am. Rereading linklord's post, I can see how it might be innocent. Or it might be yet another "I skimmed the 4e DMG or read the interweb, and it says that stuff magically gets harder as players level in 4e lol."

Does 3.x or Pathfinder have such an explicitly stated DC/accuracy/damage curve?  I've seen fan-made curves for saves (and if you have a link, share!)  If not, what's the best way to assemble one?

Decide which and how many booster items you expect your PCs to have over the course of twenty levels, add up the bonuses, decide how often PCs should succeed at any given check, and the charts pretty much write themselves. The first step and the third step are of course tricky because the designers never deigned to provide any real guidelines, and because success ratios are probably meant to increase or decrease with level depending on the type of check. For pretty much all of them. I could tell you what bonuses and ratios I think PCs should have, but everyone seems to have a different opinion on the topic so I'll just wish you luck.

Sounds similar to a friend of mine...

Yeah I just started a campaign where the DM has a similar attitude, and I'm not a huge fan. I'm playing a wizard, but I might as well be playing a monk or samurai 'cause I'm fairly certain that damage and DCs don't actually matter. But I guess that's one way to create a kind of game balance, eh?

There's a difference between having a solid set of guidelines that take all the standard stats and bonuses into account, and "Fuck the bonuses, DCs, and damage; I'll just look at the die!" Y'know?

[Captnq]

How about a page XX?

(Bonus cake for the first person to get it!)

[Unbeliever]

White Wolf? 

And, Comlete4th, I was mostly ribbing you -- I can understand a certain level of defensiveness given the level of bashing 4E takes.  Some of it, I would claim, is warranted, but that's where my sympathies lie.  Regardless of that fact, though, the constant drumbeat of it, I'm sure, gets old. 

[Captnq]

White Wolf? 

Unbeliever gets cake.