D&D 5E Q&A 8/1 - Attack & Skill Checks , Spell DCs and Stat Caps

[Morrus]

In this week's D&D Next Q&A, @wotc_Rodney talks about check bonuses, spell DCs and stat caps.

 

[Plaguescarred]

I think superior expertise +12 may be too steep for check DCs and make the gap between untrained and expert to big. I still prefer if we'd simply ditch Spellcasting Bonus.

Im good with that and putting pressure on spellcasters’ higher-level spell slots.

I'd prefer if ability score capped at 18 for it has meaning for me and my group, even if it means adjusting other part of the game accordingly.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I think superior expertise +12 may be too steep for check DCs and make the gap between untrained and expert to big. I still prefer if we'd simply ditch Spellcasting Bonus.

Eh... I'm not so sure to tell you the truth. If DC 10 is Easy, DC 15 is Moderate, and DC 20 is Hard... a Hard task for someone with complete superior expertise (+12) is still going to fail about 2 out of every 5 times (7 or less on a d20). And considering +12 I think is meant to be the absolute character maximum (IE a 20th level character fully trained in everything to get there)... having them fail a little less than half of all Hard checks is not that big of a deal.

 

[jodyjohnson]

Eh... I'm not so sure to tell you the truth. If DC 10 is Easy, DC 15 is Moderate, and DC 20 is Hard... a Hard task for someone with complete superior expertise (+12) is still going to fail about 2 out of every 5 times (7 or less on a d20). And considering +12 I think is meant to be the absolute character maximum (IE a 20th level character fully trained in everything to get there)... having them fail a little less than half of all Hard checks is not that big of a deal.

Add in an assumed +5 bonus from the specific stat. So 10% failure rate which personally seems acceptable.

The issue might be what other bonuses pile on (say Guidance for +1d4 or an item of Skill for +1 to +4).

 

[Gadget]

Good answers this week. I liked his explanation of spell level DC set by the slot, makes perfect sense to me. It also works to reduce the quadratic caster problem, as your lower level slots will not automatically scale (They already squashed the scaling of damage and other effects, this will squash the de facto scaling of DC they get as well, or the outright scaling I've heard some suggest by basing DC on caster level).

 

[Plaguescarred]

@DEFCON 1They said the Task DC will be revised, so not sure about the final result with +17 total possible. We'll have to wait and see.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

1. I'm mostly in agreement with this logic. +12 still does seem pretty high and seems likely that they are doing this mostly so they can set DCs at 25 and know that anyone without the "extra training" can almost never succeed at DC 25 tasks without a natural 20.

2. I'm not entirely sure I agree with the logic here. They claim that since spells that do damage often do half damage on a save that people are more likely to put them in high level slots as opposed to utility spells like Entangle. However, I think this logic is backwards. If your damaging spells do half on a successful save, then you will get some effect out of them even if you prepare them in your low level slots. Meanwhile utility spells tend to have no effect at all one a failed save. Doesn't it make more sense to prepare these in your highest slots for the save DC boost in order to make sure they do something?

3. I think I'd prefer stats to be capped at 18 as well, both for traditional reasons and to have less difference between the lowest and highest bonus in the party.

 

[DEFCON 1]

2. I'm not entirely sure I agree with the logic here. They claim that since spells that do damage often do half damage on a save that people are more likely to put them in high level slots as opposed to utility spells like Entangle. However, I think this logic is backwards. If your damaging spells do half on a successful save, then you will get some effect out of them even if you prepare them in your low level slots. Meanwhile utility spells tend to have no effect at all one a failed save. Doesn't it make more sense to prepare these in your highest slots for the save DC boost in order to make sure they do something?

Actually, I think I can understand where Rodney is coming from. If the difference in saving throw DC between a 6th level slot and a 4th level slot is just like 2 points... that's a 10% difference. But you might only have one 6th level slot compared to three 4th level slots. Do you want to risk casting a utility with a 6th level slot just for the extra 10% chance of success... rather than using one of your three 4ths? If the person saves... does "blowing" that lone 6th level slot feel much worse? And would it have been better used for a damage spell since even a successful save still causes damage?

I guess it depends on how you look at a 10% increase in potential effectiveness versus an automatic +2d6 or +2d8 in damage?

 

[DEFCON 1]

@DEFCON 1They said the Task DC will be revised, so not sure about the final result with +17 total possible. We'll have to wait and see.

True enough. Although even that +17 is still the end-all-be-all of character advancement (level 20, fully trained, max ability score etc.) If someone else at level 20 still manages to be a +0 for that particular skill... at that point do they kind of deserve to get shellacked at most Hard or Very Hard uses of it?

I mean... if you're playing against Michael Jordan in a game of H.O.R.S.E... some of those shots he's making probably should be virtually impossible for you to succeed at. (Not the greatest analogy, I know...)

 

[malcolm_n]

1. I'm mostly in agreement with this logic. +12 still does seem pretty high and seems likely that they are doing this mostly so they can set DCs at 25 and know that anyone without the "extra training" can almost never succeed at DC 25 tasks without a natural 20.

I don't see that as a bad thing. Let the guy who put everything into being the best thief have his moments to shine, imho.

2. I'm not entirely sure I agree with the logic here. They claim that since spells that do damage often do half damage on a save that people are more likely to put them in high level slots as opposed to utility spells like Entangle. However, I think this logic is backwards. If your damaging spells do half on a successful save, then you will get some effect out of them even if you prepare them in your low level slots. Meanwhile utility spells tend to have no effect at all one a failed save. Doesn't it make more sense to prepare these in your highest slots for the save DC boost in order to make sure they do something?

I would think it depends on your specialty. If I were to build Malcolm in 5e (I will eventually), I'd have his high-level spells be utility for that very reason. On the other hand, If I want a blaster caster, I'd still put my powerful offensive spells there to get the biggest bang for the buck and not feel like I got nothing if they do save.

3. I think I'd prefer stats to be capped at 18 as well, both for traditional reasons and to have less difference between the lowest and highest bonus in the party.

[/quote]20 is, technically, after racials/class(ials?) bonuses are applied. Your character still has to reach 18 to even work past it. The more you hem it in, the less room you have for other things, especially with bounded accuracy.