Breaking Bounded Accuracy: Proposed Fix

dave2008 · Nov 13, 2018

FarBeyondC said:
Does this non-stacking also apply to penalties?

I hadn't thought about it. Gut reaction is no, but i need to think about it more.

dave2008 · Nov 13, 2018

5ekyu said:
If my target has a +2 item and my bardic inspiration does not take that into account then my bardic is really only d6-2 or d8-2 or whatever.

Basically as the party gets more and more items (seems obvious if the gm starts with refusal to cut items) my bardic boosts will run into more and more cases of minimal to no gains.

You misunderstand, the bardic inspiration doesn't change. You don't subtract anything, you take the higher value. You just don't get to add the bardic inspiration + magic item bonus.

5ekyu said:
NOTEto anyone - it's a bad idea to put in place a house rule with major scope and impact if you do not have enough experience to know how all 12 classes will be hit by it.

I disagree with this statement. For a "house" rule, one only needs to worry about the affect on players at the table (or house if you will). If this was some variant rule I wanted to publish, then I would absolutely need to consider all 12 classes. I am definitely curious how it affects all 12 classes, I like a rule to be well rounded and universal. However, I will never likely see the following at my table: monk, bard, or barbarian. In 30 years of playing my group has never selected one of those classes.

dave2008 · Nov 13, 2018

5ekyu said:
NOTEto anyone - it's a bad idea to put in place a house rule with major scope and impact if you do not have enough experience to know how all 12 classes will be hit by it.

To clarify further: my group tries variant rules all the time (some proposed by me some by my players). We give it a go, if it doesn't work for us we change it back or modifying it. Anyone reasonably mature can handle rules changes and tweaks (whether they are major or small) without much fuss if your open and honest about it.

Oofta · Nov 13, 2018

I think this is a solution looking for a problem because I don't see spells like bless being used all that often at higher levels.

I see other holes. Does a belt of giant strength count as giving a bonus to attack? What about spells that grant advantage? Are you going to ban wolf-totem barbarians and reckless attack? What's wrong with just a slight increase in your XP budget or simply giving the monsters their own version of bless?

I also think that if you nerf magical armor it's just one more nail in the coffin for strength based characters. It pushes optimization to barbarians, dual-wielders, dex based characters all around.

Anything else I say on this is going to sound like an attack (not my intent) I just think your putting the conclusion ahead of the problem and the cart before the horse.

I guess my fundamental question is: why is this a problem? Are fights too easy? To the bad guys die too quickly for your taste?

aco175 · Nov 13, 2018

One thing that will solve a lot of problems is to throw more monsters at them, but weaker monsters. You do not need a giant when 20 goblins will be a tougher fight. This is where BA levels things the other way. If the PCs have a 25 AC or deal 50 damage they will still take damage and get to one-shot things. Both sides are happy. Of course, this gets boring for every fight, but puts the PCs into their place like when they gang up on a dragon and kill it in one round.

5ekyu · Nov 13, 2018

dave2008 said:
You misunderstand, the bardic inspiration doesn't change. You don't subtract anything, you take the higher value. You just don't get to add the bardic inspiration + magic item bonus.

I disagree with this statement. For a "house" rule, one only needs to worry about the affect on players at the table (or house if you will). If this was some variant rule I wanted to publish, then I would absolutely need to consider all 12 classes. I am definitely curious how it affects all 12 classes, I like a rule to be well rounded and universal. However, I will never likely see the following at my table: monk, bard, or barbarian. In 30 years of playing my group has never selected one of those classes.

RE the bold - again a sign of where experience matters.

Assume a fighter has +2 to hit due to a sword - net bonus say +7
I give him bardic inspiration under the current rules at d8 then the possible results are +8 to +15
I give him the same dice in your system and the net bonus is +7 to +13.

So the net result difference between the two is:
normal + 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8
Yours +0-0-1-2-3-4-5-6

Which is almost exactly the same result as a d6-2

The key is your system makes 1/4 of the d8 rolls meaningless and the rest not as good as the basic system does (all due to the loss of the +2 that was already present.)

Its obvious to those after a certain bit of experience, i would suppose.

As for making major changes without considering the scope - yup that is common enough an error of lack of experience, so go for it.

Me, after a lot of experience, i prefer narrow scope changes and campaigns where the rule remain consistent from one session to another. So do my players so we are a good fit.

i wish you all the luck in the world.

5ekyu · Nov 13, 2018

Oofta said:
I think this is a solution looking for a problem because I don't see spells like bless being used all that often at higher levels.

I see other holes. Does a belt of giant strength count as giving a bonus to attack? What about spells that grant advantage? Are you going to ban wolf-totem barbarians and reckless attack? What's wrong with just a slight increase in your XP budget or simply giving the monsters their own version of bless?

I also think that if you nerf magical armor it's just one more nail in the coffin for strength based characters. It pushes optimization to barbarians, dual-wielders, dex based characters all around.

Anything else I say on this is going to sound like an attack (not my intent) I just think your putting the conclusion ahead of the problem and the cart before the horse.

I guess my fundamental question is: why is this a problem? Are fights too easy? To the bad guys die too quickly for your taste?

i agree... there are so many ways to duck around this "solution" and so many consequences that are likely unintended. Bards add dice but barbarians add advantage so one is whammied but the other not. Bless gives d4 but guiding bolt gives advantage... etc etc etc etc etc etc

Its my own experience showing but i always have to look at the scope of a change and that includes all the classes and all the spells and so forth that will be impacted to see if in addressing a "problem" i am not causing a lot of unintended or unwanted shifts at the same time.

heck, might be wrong but if i recall correctly there are a lot more ways to get advantage than there are to get bonuses to roll in common play so... not sure if this sack full of unintended shifts and slaps even gets at the bounded accuracy lobby's demands if it ignores advantage.

dave2008 · Nov 13, 2018

Oofta said:
I think this is a solution looking for a problem because I don't see spells like bless being used all that often at higher levels.

Quite possible. As I noted I already have a solution that works for me. I am just looking for another option.

Oofta said:
I see other holes. Does a belt of giant strength count as giving a bonus to attack? What about spells that grant advantage? Are you going to ban wolf-totem barbarians and reckless attack? What's wrong with just a slight increase in your XP budget or simply giving the monsters their own version of bless?

Thank you, that is the type of feedback I am looking for. As originally intended it has no effect on belts of ... and it I already stated that it doesn't change magic that grants advantage. I would have to review barbarians in more detail, we don't have in our group (and haven't had one in 30 yrs of playing). Nothing wrong with buffing monsters, I do it all the time. I am just looking for another option.

Oofta said:
I also think that if you nerf magical armor it's just one more nail in the coffin for strength based characters. It pushes optimization to barbarians, dual-wielders, dex based characters all around.

Well, I already only allow strength to add damage to attacks, so I am not worried about that

Oofta said:
Anything else I say on this is going to sound like an attack (not my intent) I just think your putting the conclusion ahead of the problem and the cart before the horse.

I guess my fundamental question is: why is this a problem? Are fights too easy? To the bad guys die too quickly for your taste?

No, no, I appreciate all comments - thank you. I have no issues with my combats or encounters. I can challenge my group with RAW monsters and I already adjust encounters if needed. I am just looking for another tool in my tool box.

dave2008 · Nov 13, 2018

aco175 said:
One thing that will solve a lot of problems is to throw more monsters at them, but weaker monsters. You do not need a giant when 20 goblins will be a tougher fight. This is where BA levels things the other way. If the PCs have a 25 AC or deal 50 damage they will still take damage and get to one-shot things. Both sides are happy. Of course, this gets boring for every fight, but puts the PCs into their place like when they gang up on a dragon and kill it in one round.

To be clear - I have no issue with challenging my groups. That is not what this proposal is about. It is about the concept of BA (which I like) and how to prevent it from being bent to far out of shape.

Hawk Diesel · Nov 13, 2018

I have never really had an issue with bounded accuracy. But I do things a bit differently than the average DM. I have an Excel spreadsheet that compiles a bunch of the numerical mechanics for each player. This includes Hit Points, AC, Attack Bonus, Spell DC, Saving Throws, and Skill Bonuses, just to name a few. I then have the sheet automatically calculate appropriate enemy AC, Attack Bonus, Save / Skill DCs, ect. It's set to churn out easy AC / DC (will succeed 75% of the time), Medium (succeed 50% of the time), and Hard (succeed less than 25% of the time).

Using this not only helps me create encounters that are appropriate challenges, but it lets me throw together encounters very quickly on the fly. The only time this might break is when one player has a an attack bonus or AC that is very high or low compared to the party average, but such players are building their characters in that way. It throws off the numbers a bit, but thus far it has been a pretty successful system.