D&D 5E Overcoming Bounded Accuracy

[FireLance]

I know that a lot of people are quite happy with the concept of bounded accuracy. Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on whether or not you want players like me to transit to 5e), I'm not.

So, assuming that I don't have idiosyncratic tastes, and there happen to be a significant number of gamers like me, what modules or simple rules changes could be added or made to remove bounded accuracy?

Perhaps the simplest I can think of is to add your level (or half your level) to everything. So, a level 5 character adds 5 (or 2) to his ability checks, skill checks, attack rolls, AC, saving throws, the save DC of his spells, etc., and so does a level 5 monster. This maintains the parity between monsters and characters of approximately equal level, but it breaks down when it comes to ability checks and skill checks. To use the example of the door, if breaking down a wooden door requires a DC 18 Strength check in a bounded accuracy system, it quickly becomes trivial in an escalating bonus system. On the other hand, a character in a bounded accuracy system would find it almost impossible to break down an adamantium door meant to challenge a high-level character in an escalating bonus system. I suppose you could get around the problem by assigning levels even to doors, so a level 20 adamantium door would have different break DCs under a bounded accuracy system and an escalating bonus system, but the idea of giving levels to doors might seem quite odd to some.

Another possibility might be to have some kind of break point after which D&D goes up to eleven (yes, I'm tempted to make that break point 10th level ). It probably shouldn't be in the base rules to cater to those who want 1st-level thieves to be able to adventure with 10th-level fighters and 20th-level wizards, but perhaps we could have an optional "paragon" module (and an "epic" module for 21st+ level characters) which significantly increases the power of the characters and the challenges that they face.

Any other thoughts?

 

[slobster]

Couldn't you just have the level dependent bonus apply to attacks and defenses but not skills? How often do skills interact with attack and defense scores? I can't think of any cases.

So at 20th level you might have an AC of 39 and +31 to attack, but your perform (pipe organ) skill is still at +5. Since the two subsystems don't directly interact, that shouldn't be a problem.

 

[howandwhy99]

So, bounded accuracy for me is kind of like saying "Here's the scope of play and we want everyone to have a reasonable chance of success or failure within it no matter their advancement within that range."

Now all of this is really about percentage odds, which are easier to understand on single rolls, but get more interesting (and so does the game) when lots and lots of dice are rolled. "Reasonable" odds in D&D has differed, mainly within subsystems, but d20 now has it as 5% for pretty much everything. What I perceive D&Dn as doing is setting the low bar at 50% and the high at 95% and then saying folks at that highest level will have about a 50% odds of winning against even the most difficult challenges.

In terms of what is imagined during play it's also about trying for sense over nonsense. Your average high school wrestler isn't challenged by an ant. But wrestling the moon to pin it against planet earth? That's too much. One is above 95% chance of success, the other is below 5% based on designer experience (YMMV).

That's scope of play and bounded accuracy in action IMO. The game can be changed to suit those who buy it, but it is still built according to certain preconceived notions.

Having a sliding scope that drops playable characters due the odds becoming 0% is relatively easy to reinstate. Simply drop the top cap (or bottom or both) and increase your die roll modifiers beyond the size of the die. We're using d20 and keeping these at about +9-10, but they could be increased across 0 to 18 and still allow for failure and success in every case.

The game will likely feel really pinched at the top level, but that would be part of the design. Removing the caps would remove the pinch, but also remove the possibility of having a cooperative game with different abilities and ability levels for different players.

 

[FireLance]

Couldn't you just have the level dependent bonus apply to attacks and defenses but not skills?

No, because I also want skills to improve with level.

 

[slobster]

No, because I also want skills to improve with level.

Ah. In that case you add half level to all checks and defenses, then tell the GM that DCs in the world generally increase at a much steeper pace. An adamantium door that challenges a high level character will essentially be insurmountable for lower level characters.

But you don't just increase DCs; you also open up the space for high level characters to take on challenges that low level characters can't dare to attempt.

A high level character using bounded accuracy gets over a castle wall by climbing it. A high level character using level-modifiers rolls a strength check to crack the earth and bring down the walls, then strolls through the rubble.

That way you can avoid the common complaint about 4E, where the doors level up along with the characters (supposedly; obviously you didn't have to run it like that, and most people didn't). Instead the challenges facing the PCs move from mundane to challenging to truly epic. At each turn they are challenged, but the paradigm for the quality of obstacle that it takes to actually challenge them gradually changes.

Meanwhile characters using bounded accuracy are still climbing those castle walls.

 

[FireLance]

Ah. In that case you add half level to all checks and defenses, then tell the GM that DCs in the world generally increase at a much steeper pace. An adamantium door that challenges a high level character will essentially be insurmountable for lower level characters.

Right, but for consistency, you might want to tell the DM how much to add to the DC for an escalating bonus system, which means you might have Level 4 wooden doors, Level 10 iron doors and Level 20 adamantium doors.

But you don't just increase DCs; you also open up the space for high level characters to take on challenges that low level characters can't dare to attempt.

A high level character using bounded accuracy gets over a castle wall by climbing it. A high level character using level-modifiers rolls a strength check to crack the earth and bring down the walls, then strolls through the rubble.

Not exactly - an ordinary castle wall (maybe call it Level 5?) doesn't even slow down a high-level character. It would need to be a Level 15 extra-smooth, oiled castle wall or something like that.

That way you can avoid the common complaint about 4E, where the doors level up along with the characters (supposedly; obviously you didn't have to run it like that, and most people didn't). Instead the challenges facing the PCs move from mundane to challenging to truly epic. At each turn they are challenged, but the paradigm for the quality of obstacle that it takes to actually challenge them gradually changes.

Actually, maybe giving levels to doors might not be such a bad idea. That might go some way to address the misperception that wooden doors get harder to break down as the characters go up in level. It then becomes that much more obvious that if you want to present a challenge to level 20 characters, you use a level 20 adamantium door instead of a level 4 wooden door.

 

[slobster]

Not exactly - an ordinary castle wall (maybe call it Level 5?) doesn't even slow down a high-level character. It would need to be a Level 15 extra-smooth, oiled castle wall or something like that.

I meant that, using the bounded system, high level characters' skill mods are still what they were back at level 1. At least, as far as we know. So that high level bounded character is in fact challenged by climbing that wall, whereas your skill-boosted high level character could climb the wall one-handed and asleep, so he breaks the ground instead!

Actually, maybe giving levels to doors might not be such a bad idea. That might go some way to address the misperception that wooden doors get harder to break down as the characters go up in level. It then becomes that much more obvious that if you want to present a challenge to level 20 characters, you use a level 20 adamantium door instead of a level 4 wooden door.

Could be. I'm not against doors matching themselves against certain level expectations (using your level bonus system, anyway), I just wanted to make it clear that it was based on some gameworld logic to forestall the inevitable rage at 4E-style mechanics.

 

[Raith5]

Firelance what is your concern about bounded accuracy? I have some misgivings about bounded accuracy but they are mainly about game style - ie will I feel some sense of progress within this system, will the difference between an ogre and hill giant be only +3 to their hit bonuses, will I be able to to super heroic things at 23rd level etc. But I have a feeling these concerns could be /will be addressed by abilities and powers rather than math.

 

[FireLance]

Firelance what is your concern about bounded accuracy?

It's more of a preference than an actual problem, but I like the idea that high-level characters can regularly succeed at tasks that would be impossible for normal men. Bounded accuracy (as far as I can see from the playtest) puts the capabilities of high-level characters too close to those of normal men for my taste.

 

[ZombieRoboNinja]

To me it sounds like Firelance's issue could be addressed if ONLY trained skills advanced with level. (So instead of plus 1 to one trained skill at even levels, take plus one to all of em, with no cap.) And add back in physical skills like Climb of course.

Scaling damage should make combat scale OK; if you're just missing high-level characters with crazy mundane skill, voila.