D&D 5E Bounded Accuracy: does it deliver as promised?

[Chocolategravy]

That is not what bounded accuracy means. Let's not start getting snarky and obnoxious at people without at least learning the meanings of the terms they're using, eh?

You can keep believing that, despite the only number mattering on your d20 being the 1 or the 20, you still have bounded accuracy. I, however, am aware of what that actually means.

 

[Chocolategravy]

You couldn't stack the Shield spell with Defensive Duelist. Both require a reaction to use. You also couldn't use it with a Staff of Defence while wielding a shield, because it requires using a finesse weapon which the staff is not.

Defensive Duelist is only a single attack anyway, blech. But if you're allow staff of defense then you're also talking things like +5 AC from the mask from HotDQ, Ring of Protection's +1 etc. These are all low level items too, it's tough to say what sort of bonuses we're going to be seeing on gear meant for level 16+ characters.

 

[Thank Dog]

A few years ago I was running AD&D and the fighter managed to lose THREE +1 2-handed swords.
The first was broken fighting a caryatid column, understandable.
The second was eaten by a xorn, unlucky.
The third (and I really thought he was going to keep this one) was used to bar the gates between the party and a horde of angry hobgoblins. It certainly bought them enough time to get away!

Heh, you could have a god of misfortune constantly creating scenarios where he loses his weapon because of some slight his uncles, grandfather's, cousin did and this adventurer has the curse of the family line that needs to be remedied by appeasing the god, after which he would then get given a two-handed, sentient sword that could teleport to his hand but would constantly complain about being lost and misused all the time

 

[aramis erak]

1st edition - 12th MU 19hps ... Not so much !!!

That's all about the HP's, man... and your con-as-dump-stat wizard. Depending upon campaign, that might have been a choice, or might have been simply bad luck, but in either case, it's defined the character far more than his AC of 0-13 (depending upon dex and magic items.)

 

[ExploderWizard]

1st edition - 12th MU 19hps ... Not so much !!!

Precisely.

Listen mister, I don't care what arcane powers you command. If you stand there yappin in my face with 19 HP you are going to die!

 

[SilverfireSage]

You can keep believing that, despite the only number mattering on your d20 being the 1 or the 20, you still have bounded accuracy. I, however, am aware of what that actually means.

Why do you keep bothering to respond if you aren't going to actually post anything of merit?

 

[MonsterEnvy]

You can keep believing that, despite the only number mattering on your d20 being the 1 or the 20, you still have bounded accuracy. I, however, am aware of what that actually means.

What the hell does this mean.

Your assumption in your first post was wrong anyway.

 

[Warbringer]

That's all about the HP's, man... and your con-as-dump-stat wizard. Depending upon campaign, that might have been a choice, or might have been simply bad luck, but in either case, it's defined the character far more than his AC of 0-13 (depending upon dex and magic items.)

I think AC was in the 5 range most if the time (1st edition) with shield as needed.

But, the HPs definitely defined him as the weak scholarly old man that he was

 

[Warbringer]

Precisely.

Listen mister, I don't care what arcane powers you command. If you stand there yappin in my face with 19 HP you are going to die!

Looks above head for health bar

 

[Sacrosanct]

What the hell does this mean.

Your assumption in your first post was wrong anyway.

Indeed. He hasn't played the game yet, and it's looking like he hasn't even read it. At this point, he's starting to sound like Donald Trump on climate change.