Chance to hit

[ZickZak]

Hello, in my group we have tried 5e when it came out, but we quit because of the way attack works - never miss - and went back to 4e.
We had an idea lately that if we put the perlevelbonus to ac instead of attack, we might get back to the ca 60% hit chance.
How do you think this would affect the system? What levels, if any, would this get broken at? We will prolly play 6-8 lvls.

Odesláno z mého HUAWEI VNS-L21 pomocí Tapatalk

 

[Ath-kethin]

Your post seems to assume that attacks in 5e never miss, which is puzzling to me to say the least. Attacks miss all the time due to bad rolls, high enemy AC, all kinds if things.

Given that, the rest of your post is difficult to understand.

 

[Blue]

Having played several campaigns at different tables under different DMs, I don't have the experience that you hit all the time.

A few things which might have been different between tables that could explain the difference.

1. We use point buy. 5e doesn't hold up as well with high starting ability scores.
2. Magic items are rare, especially magical weapons.
3. We spend most of our time playing in the 5-11 level range. These or the foes I'm most used to seeing.

If any of these differ from your table, you might want to give them a try to see if it evens things up.

 

[ZickZak]

If I didnt completely forget the way numbers work in 5e, it s (assume lvl 6 archer) +3 proficiency +4 stat = +7 to hit. Usual AC at that level is probably 14, so all a PC needs to roll is 7. Now add +1 for some magic weapon, +2 for Archery Combat Style(?) and then all one needs is 4. Which is 85% hit chance.
No idea how hard is to get advantage

 

[jaelis]

If you feel like everyone hits too often, adding prof bonus to ac isn't a terrible idea. But I might also add it to damage as well to keep fights from going too long. Try it out and see!

 

[ZickZak]

If you feel like everyone hits too often, adding prof bonus to ac isn't a terrible idea. But I might also add it to damage as well to keep fights from going too long. Try it out and see!

Yea the +to dmg is what I thought of as well... I ll have to look at the numbers a lot more, to make sure the AC isnt high and that the dmg is appropriate.

 

[Rhenny]

Most lower level PCs only have +5 or +6 to hit. I'm missing plenty with my 4th level Bladesinger. At higher levels, maybe creatures don't miss as much, but they are usually fighting things that can take a lot of damage.

I find it boring missing too much. When I played Pathfinder and 5e on successive nights, I liked hitting more in 5e. We had one battle vs. 6 goblins in Pathfinder that went on far too long because all the melee PCs were missing and the others didn't want to blow their spells on a small, beginning encounter. It was like, you attack goblin and miss. Goblin attacks you and misses. I'll take rocket tag over that any day.

 

[SuperTD]

If I didnt completely forget the way numbers work in 5e, it s (assume lvl 6 archer) +3 proficiency +4 stat = +7 to hit. Usual AC at that level is probably 14, so all a PC needs to roll is 7. Now add +1 for some magic weapon, +2 for Archery Combat Style(?) and then all one needs is 4. Which is 85% hit chance.
No idea how hard is to get advantage

So a couple of things off with your assumptions. AC 14 for a CR 6 creature is lowballing it. Having just checked the monster manual, of the 16 CR 6 creatures there are 2 AC 13, 4 AC 14, and then the rest are between 15-20. It's fairer to say the average is 16, which immediately knocks 10% of the to hit chance.

Next, you've assumed a 6th level character has a +1 magic weapon, which the base maths does not. I find it's better to give magic items with interesting effects or a bit of bonus damage( like 1D4) rather than messing with the maths. This varies with playstyle though, I know lots of games enjoy getting +x magic items. If this is your game, you need to account for that in monster AC.

Finally, assuming archery fighting style makes it seem like you're looking for every bonus a character could possible be have to prove the maths is bad, seeing as it's the only style that adds a bonus to hit, and is only available to the fighter or ranger. Unless you only have these in your party, it's safe to discount that from the maths as at most 1 character is likely to have it.

Taking these changes into account, it puts the to hit chance for a level 6 character at 60-65%, which is bang on where you want. If you like using lower CR creatures it might be more like 70%, but that's not that bad either.

 

[ZickZak]

So a couple of things off with your assumptions. AC 14 for a CR 6 creature is lowballing it. Having just checked the monster manual, of the 16 CR 6 creatures there are 2 AC 13, 4 AC 14, and then the rest are between 15-20. It's fairer to say the average is 16, which immediately knocks 10% of the to hit chance.

Next, you've assumed a 6th level character has a +1 magic weapon, which the base maths does not. I find it's better to give magic items with interesting effects or a bit of bonus damage( like 1D4) rather than messing with the maths. This varies with playstyle though, I know lots of games enjoy getting +x magic items. If this is your game, you need to account for that in monster AC.

Finally, assuming archery fighting style makes it seem like you're looking for every bonus a character could possible be have to prove the maths is bad, seeing as it's the only style that adds a bonus to hit, and is only available to the fighter or ranger. Unless you only have these in your party, it's safe to discount that from the maths as at most 1 character is likely to have it.

Taking these changes into account, it puts the to hit chance for a level 6 character at 60-65%, which is bang on where you want. If you like using lower CR creatures it might be more like 70%, but that's not that bad either.

I dont remember 5e, I played ranger, so I know about that style. I dont know what other classes have. According to gm guides, its 15. So that s 75% without the weapon for the archer.

Odesláno z mého HUAWEI VNS-L21 pomocí Tapatalk

 

[Charlaquin]

I dont remember 5e, I played ranger, so I know about that style. I dont know what other classes have.

If the only thing you remember about 5e is the build that is specifically tailored to hit more often than everyone else, I’m not surprised your perception of accuracy in 5e is skewed.