D&D 5E New playtest packet available.

[Feetz]

Mearls just tweeted the exploration rules were removed from the packet but not from the overview.

 

[Szatany]

EDIT: nevermind, I had wrong file open

 

[Rune]

Mathematically, if I was hitting on 10 out of 20 numbers before, but am hitting on 11 out of 20 numbers now, I'm hitting 10% more often. If my target is higher, this percentage increases.

Oh, I get it. You're saying that going from a 10 out of 20 chance of hitting to an 11 out of 20 chance is equivalent to going from a 0 out of 10 chance to a 1 out of 10 chance (an increase of 10%).

Whereas, I'm saying that a 10 out 20 chance is 50% and an 11 out of 20 chance is 55%. An increase of 5%.

Even if the only goal of an attack is doing damage, accuracy is paramount. Not if it means sacrificing too much on the damage side of the equation, mind you, but it's key - and more so if there's a very narrow window of possible bonuses.

That's debatable. And, dependent on role. A controller or leader, and even a defender, might find the rider much more important than the damage dealt.

I'm not suggesting that Next needs to scale with level; I think 4e would have been better with less scaling, honestly. I'm pointing out that, if you remove the level scaling from 4e, it's more or less a bounded accuracy system.

-O

Well, yeah, but it would require a complete overhaul of the system.

 

[Blackbrrd]

Whereas, I'm saying that a 10 out 20 chance is 50% and an 11 out of 20 chance is 55%. An increase of 5%.

That would be 5 percentage points, not 5 percent.

 

[Rune]

The read first file is from the december packet, not from the newest one. It does not mention any changes from january.

My version is from January. And, I'd say mentioning that they added the barbarian is a change (though not from January, 'cause this is the January packet).

 

[Szatany]

The Barbarian seems extremely OP to me...why play a fighter now?

to playtest what should be changed about him.

 

[Obryn]

.

Oh, I get it. You're saying that going from a 10 out of 20 chance of hitting to an 11 out of 20 chance is equivalent to going from a 0 out of 10 chance to a 1 out of 10 chance (an increase of 10%).

Whereas, I'm saying that a 10 out 20 chance is 50% and an 11 out of 20 chance is 55%. An increase of 5%

It's 5 points in the absolute sense, but 10% from the player's perspective. And no, 0/10 doesn't figure in here. +1's increase in relative value as the absolute chance of hitting decreases (and vice-versa).

That's debatable. And, dependent on role. A controller or leader, and even a defender, might find the rider much more important than the damage dealt.

When we're talking game design, I don't think it's debatable at all. Math is math, and the better the designers do, the less there is to worry about on the other side.

Well, yeah, but it would require a complete overhaul of the system.

I'm simply pointing out the math here. It's a working example of a bounded as opposed to an unbounded system, and ignoring the design lessons learned from it would be an error.

-O

 

[Szatany]

My version is from January. And, I'd say mentioning that they added the barbarian is a change (though not from January, 'cause this is the January packet).

I already corrected my post. I looked into wrong file in wrong folder. Hence my mistake

 

[Rune]

Mathematically, if I was hitting on 10 out of 20 numbers before, but am hitting on 11 out of 20 numbers now, I'm hitting 10% more often. If my target is higher, this percentage increases.

From this point of view, of course, each subsequent +1 bonus provides diminishing returns. In other words, to offer two extreme examples, a character who goes from hitting on 1 out 20 numbers to 2 out of 20 numbers has increased efficiency by 100%, but a character who goes from hitting on 19 out of 20 to hitting on any roll has only increased efficiency by 5.2632%.

Now, you argue that those bonuses are very important (precious) and to be hoarded. I don't believe that, in a system of bounded accuracy, they're that important, though, obviously, the scope of that bounding does affect things.

 

[TwoSix]

From this point of view, of course, each subsequent +1 bonus provides diminishing returns. In other words, to offer two extreme examples, a character who goes from hitting on 1 out 20 numbers to 2 out of 20 numbers has increased efficiency by 100%, but a character who goes from hitting on 19 out of 20 to hitting on any roll has only increased efficiency by 5.2632%.

But conversely, a character who goes from hitting on 19 of 20 to 20 of 20 has decreased their chance of failure by an infinite amount.