D&D 5E 5th Edition has broken Bounded Accuracy

[Celtavian]

Just going to point out that although both ice and glass have some variation in hardness with temperature and composition, glass (~5.5 on Moh's scale) is typically much harder than ice (~1.5 on Moh's scale)

Carry on ....

Good info. Thank you, sir. I guess arrows can break ice. Usually all I need to be convinced of something is a good argument using some basis I can associate in the game world.

 

[bgbarcus]

I have to be careful due to space limitations with the grid. I use a digital battlemat/projector and it's annoying to the players when I have to scroll the map, .

I hit the same type of problem using Roll20. Any sort of mini/token toe of play is going to have trouble scaling to realistic ranges. I've decided to run more encounters narratively. We can have a picture of the encounter area to look at but no token moving or grid counting. The last time I did that I realized how much I miss 'theater of the mind'. If my games were in-person they would be entirely narrative. Huge encounter areas were never a problem in our old games with, pre-VTT, sans battle mats.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Good info. Thank you, sir. I guess arrows can break ice. Usually all I need to be convinced of something is a good argument using some basis I can associate in the game world.

At the same time, though, you very rarely see 6"-12" thick walls of glass, but I'd find it strange to see anything thinner than that if it were made of ice. I'd still agree that the ice can be broken, but I'd expect it to take a hell of a lot longer with a bow than with hacking at it with a slashing weapon or smashing it with a bludgeoning weapon.

 

[CapnZapp]

Where in that analysis did you miss the analysis? I explicitly listed things such as +24 extra points of damage at level 5 being excessive.

That was not an emote.

The answer is fairly simple. How much extra damage should a PC be able to do at a given level due to a reusable non-resource using ability?

If one assumes a ratio of +1 point of damage at level one and +20 points of damage at level 20, then with 1 attack per round at level one and 5 potential attacks per round at level 20, then -5/+4 is reasonable.

But now you are completely disregarding both the direct and indirect costs of that extra damage.

(Being the -5 to attacks and not-taking-an-ASI-or-other-feat, respectively)

Such shallow analysis makes me regard your take as an emotional outburst, nothing more.

If you want to participate, how about giving your complete take on -5/+5? Most forumists seem to agree this is worthless in regular combat. The "+5" part is obviously good, but not good enough to compensate for the "-5" part. Not to speak of the other goodies the feat brings. And, to repeat myself, not to speak of the fact that you just did not take one of the other feats, or +2 to Strength or whatever.

Since most forumists also agree -5/+10 is way too much, I conclude that if the feat lay somewhere in between, it could otherwise be left untouched, and thus we would have a minimal change, which is often the best change.

 

[DaveDash]

If you play the dragon intelligently, Round 2 will turn out just like Round 1: TPK. They need Fly and Haste in order to match the dragon's speed. (One guy with Fly + Haste + Bless is still not enough to beat it but at least it renders the GWM fighter something other than totally ineffectual.)

I've played and fought legendary Dragons before, and I use the trick to keep them mobile (extra 40 feet of movement). I'm glad someone (apart from Celtivan) finally figured it out.

This is why I find it cute that [MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION] thinks javelins are going to make a difference, or even other posters who think Bigbys Hand or whatever spell is going to help.

They're toast. Edit: Well, I am toast. My players want *me* to play Henry Handaxe. Good times.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I've played and fought legendary Dragons before, and I use the trick to keep them mobile (extra 40 feet of movement). I'm glad someone (apart from Celtivan) finally figured it out.

This is why I find it cute that [MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION] thinks javelins are going to make a difference, or even other posters who think Bigbys Hand or whatever spell is going to help.

They're toast. Edit: Well, I am toast. My players want *me* to play Henry Handaxe. Good times.

What's even cuter is that you think Fly is going to save you. One opportunity attack per round isn't going to kill a dragon, kid.

 

[DaveDash]

What's even cuter is that you think Fly is going to save you. One opportunity attack per round isn't going to kill a dragon, kid.

I'm not entirely sure that it will!

Well, with certain party makeups' (Cleric, Bard, Paladin, Abjurer Wizard) yes, but with Fighter, Wizard, Cleric, Rogue probably not.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Agreed on this in theory. In practice, I have to be careful due to space limitations with the grid. I use a digital battlemat/projector and it's annoying to the players when I have to scroll the map, thereby losing the position of their minis, especially when there are enemies participating in combat that are out of sight. Still trying to figure out an elegant way to handle this beyond getting ever bigger tables and projectors with ever bigger throws.

I agree that battlegrids are a primary driver of artificially-limited distances. That's one of my motivations for writing my own tools to manage battles, although none of them is far enough along for me to actually use with my players. Le sigh. In the meantime, I run about half of my battles in Theater of the Mind and the other half on a grid.

In principle you could combine the two approaches: e.g. have a detailed zone about 100' on a side representing a building whereon miniatures are used, and anyone who goes off the gird moves into an abstract "away" space where you just note how far away they are from the building. That way anyone who wants to exploit cover and terrain can head for the building and do grid combat, and those who want to keep their distance can play TotM, and you can always figure out how far guys in the building are from each other and from guys who are "away". I haven't ever done this since I just came up with the idea just now, but if we have another fight like the one last week I will try it. Still trying to find the right way to run gargantuan combats in 5E... in theory it should be easy but little things always trip you up.

(And, this is yet another reason why I, like many of you, run practice combats.)

 

[Celtavian]

At the same time, though, you very rarely see 6"-12" thick walls of glass, but I'd find it strange to see anything thinner than that if it were made of ice. I'd still agree that the ice can be broken, but I'd expect it to take a hell of a lot longer with a bow than with hacking at it with a slashing weapon or smashing it with a bludgeoning weapon.

I'll probably use the damage threshold rules in the DMG for big pieces of ice. I think the ice walls a white dragon creates in the dragon lair are fairly thin.

 

[Hussar]

Why does he have to attack a target? Does the ability require it? Can you think of any reason why a simulationist wouldn't allow a dragon to flap his wings hard and move? It doesn't appear that by RAW it wouldn't let him move. I can't think of a fictional reason why he couldn't do it. Maybe RAI by the designers might say no.

That's my thinking. By RAW you are probably right but by RAI, I think that this is meant to be an attack, not a bonus move. It is in the name after all.