D&D 5E Mike Mearls's Tweets

[Gorgoroth]

..

I really wish the expertise dice would match the weapon dice of the weapon you are using.

I think a fighter will soon figure out there is no point in wielding that greatsword after a few levels, otherwise. Especially with Parry costing you HD, you could save a lot of Parries with that extra 1 AC from having a shield, which are directly transferred to your weapon damage via Deadly Strike.

I think someone did some zombie attrition analysis of that a while back, with a dwarf using a battle axe + shield vs greataxe, and the shield was more effective in the long run. Sort of like how Iron Dome is essentially an offensive weapon, strategically, since it allows you to attack without retaliation. Or like the Nato missile defense shield they wanted to plunk in Poland, but Russia didn't like it since it altered the balance of power. I'd only wear a shield if it were advantageous to do so.

A dwarf with a greataxe is doing 2d6, a battle axe 1d10 but gets hit 5% less often, meaning if you are using Parry consistently in cases of getting hit to reduce incoming damage, then you get one free expertise die back on your Deadly Strike for next turn. so 1d10 becomes 1d10 + 5% * 1d6 = 5.67 or something like that.

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

On the matter of whether a +1 to hit or +1 to damage is better..

It seems intuitive that you should want the +1 to hit. On average though, if you do less than 20 average damage, +1 to hit increases you average damage by less than 1. So you really want to increase your damage until it's over 20 on average, and then go for to hit bonuses. (Obviously combats are much shorter though, so reliability is favoured, not to mention you can do things other than damage when you hit)

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

Get expertise die at 1st level but don't add ability mod to damage OR add your mod but no expertise dice until 5th. Which do you choose?

When you start asking questions like that, you've designed yourself into a corner.

 

[Sammael]

I am out of the loop. Do we still not have a proper skill system in Next, or have they come to their senses?

 

[Li Shenron]

I am puzzled about the discussion on ability bonus to damage...

One very small complaint that I have (and this shows how a wimp I've become after years of changing diapers instead of gaming...) is that it feels uncomfortable to have a TOTAL bonus to attack rolls different from TOTAL bonus to damage, because you apply the Str or Dex bonus to both but the class-based bonus only to the attack rolls. Would be a bit easier if I had only one bonus to calc and apply to both or to one only.

 

[delericho]

It seems intuitive that you should want the +1 to hit. On average though, if you do less than 20 average damage, +1 to hit increases you average damage by less than 1. So you really want to increase your damage until it's over 20 on average, and then go for to hit bonuses.

That's not quite right. Remember that the +1 increase in damage must also be multiplied by the chance to hit (which is never greater than 95%, since a nat-1 always misses). Consequently, it will also always be less than 1.

So, the point at which these are even depends on both your 'base' chance to hit and your 'base' damage. With a 50% chance to hit and 10 average damage they are equal; with a 70% chance to hit and 14 average damage they are also equal. (In fact, they are equal when average damage is (20 * chance to hit).)

I should note that I haven't factored things like critical hits into this calculation. Obviously, the manner that they change the calculation depends on the exact mechanic used.

 

[WhatGravitas]

I wouldn't be opposed to getting rid of damage modifiers for weapons if different weapons were rated for use by minimum strength or dexterity.

Not sure, whether I'd like it - but it's at least an interesting idea. Especially neat would be the interaction with things like racial weapons - instead of blowing up the damage dice for a race (which pretty much makes every other weapon completely suboptimal), races could relax the Str/Dex requirement.

Instead of making a weapon a blatantly superior choice for the race, it instead allows for more different builds/ability spreads around that weapon.

 

[Aramax]

their going to end up making everyone unhappy about something

 

[bbjore]

I really wish the expertise dice would match the weapon dice of the weapon you are using.

I really like the idea in theory, but it does somewhat force individuals to take the biggest weapon they could find. It's good for balance for a greatsword to do more damage over a longsword if someone is using a shield with their longsword, but it's bad if every assassin out there is running around using a greatsword.

I do agree, that playing with number and size of die could go a long way towards changing the way a specific weapon plays. For instance, perhaps two-handed weapons have fewer and bigger die, which does give them more potential damage, but a smaller weapon has more but smaller die, making them more of a finesse and maneuver weapon.

In any case, I really like the idea of ED as a way to normalize damage scaling for all classes, as well as a currency that can be spent to stunt. I think they're a really elegant solution in that regard.

Now if only they can manage to do that, and still make it so two-handed weapons are more powerful because you loose the defensive bonus of a shield or what-not. Maybe two-handed weapons get a step up in die size and using a weapon one-handed without a shield grants you an additional die?

 

[delericho]

I really like the idea in theory, but it does somewhat force individuals to take the biggest weapon they could find. It's good for balance for a greatsword to do more damage over a longsword if someone is using a shield with their longsword, but it's bad if every assassin out there is running around using a greatsword.

You can deal with that by giving the Assassin a Death Attack power that requires him to be using an appropriately light weapon (and be hidden, of course), but which gives him 3d4 for each 'die' he assigns from his pool, or otherwise makes up the difference. That way, there'a trade-off to be made - use a heavy weapon and get a consistently high benefit, or use a light weapon and get a lesser benefit most of the time but a huge bonus when the conditions are set up right.