D&D 5E Why don't everything scale by proficiency bonus?

[FrogReaver]

That would be reasonable except its a huge module. Show me the tactical AND heroic module for 5e.

The latest edition is not feeling particularly heroic. I have mentioned in other threads that in the previous edition someone skilled can advance to a degree that the impossible is doable and with the right choices reliably.(its supported both by skill powers and by core numbers)

For 5e at this stage probably. But it really isn't that hard of a thing to do IMO. Maybe threading that needle just right would be, but the basic idea is you have one set of additional bonuses for heroic play and one for gritty. That seems reasonable.

 

[jgsugden]

Honestly, i'd like both styles represented. Surely a modular design approach where you could use the heroic style or the gritty style would work well?

Pet peeve: Heroic and gritty are not mutually exclusive or opposites. You can tell a heroic gritty tale. For example, a hero willing to do the right thing, whatever the personal cost, that pays a huge cost for his resolve is a gritty heroic storyline.

 

[FrogReaver]

Pet peeve: Heroic and gritty are not mutually exclusive or opposites. You can tell a heroic gritty tale. For example, a hero willing to do the right thing, whatever the personal cost, that pays a huge cost for his resolve is a gritty heroic storyline.

Yea, not the right word choice on my part but I think most understand the concept I'm getting at.

 

[Fenris-77]

I agree about the heroic and gritty thing. That said, one of the current trends in fantasy is, for lack of less goofy name, grimdark and focuses on grey. Grey characters, grey choices, grey settings, etc - it's all very morally ambiguous. It's also generally set next to, and differentiated from, more traditional 'heroic' high fantasy. So I have some sympathy for those two descriptors as separate, even though it's certain possible to do both at once.

 

[Garthanos]

Some classic Heroes had damn nasty dark ends Cu Cuhlaine was the archetypal oath bound hero killed because of conflicting oaths brought him down it was a death caught up in his identity not a random event of course but still very grim dark and a character who was very much of heroic scale.

Beowulf might be a[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Tahoma, Calibri, Geneva, sans-serif] very dark variety of Warlord (sacrifices minion followers as part of gambits)

[/FONT]

 

[MockingBird]

If I'm repeating I'm sorry. How about a + .5 or a 1 at ever 5th level for all nonproficient skills? That way you get better but still not as great as a proficient skill. I dunno, I never tinker with the mechanics cause I'm satisfied with the stock system. It may throw the math all out of wack.

 

[Fenris-77]

Some classic Heroes had damn nasty dark ends Cu Cuhlaine was the archetypal oath bound hero killed because of conflicting oaths brought him down it was a death caught up in his identity not a random event of course but still very grim dark and a character who was very much of heroic scale.

Beowulf might be a very dark variety of Warlord (sacrifices minion followers as part of gambits)

Heroes from actual myth and folklore are a very different species than heroes from fantasy fiction. OG grimdark and then some.

 

[Garthanos]

Heroes from actual myth and folklore are a very different species than heroes from fantasy fiction. OG grimdark and then some.

The Wheel of Time series compared to The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant... To the Sword of Truth series.

There is a lot of variation in fantasy fiction.

 

[Garthanos]

The latest edition is not feeling particularly heroic. I have mentioned in other threads that in the previous edition someone skilled can advance to a degree that the impossible is doable and with the right choices reliably.(its supported both by skill powers and by core numbers)

Oh and skill challenges (where you could spend a Healing surge as a resource to make the numbers become even more reliable).

 

[Fenris-77]

The Wheel of Time series compared to The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant... To the Sword of Truth series.

There is a lot of variation in fantasy fiction.

You get how groundbreaking Convenant was when it came out right? Grimdark is a very new thing in the context of fantasy as a widely written and read subgenre. And it's still mostly not as dark as actual myth and folklore.

So sure, before the 90's you have Convenant, and Moorcock in spots, and Gene Wolf's Black company, and a handful of others, but for many years they were voices in the wilderness, not reflections of the mainstream. That's why the comparison between high fantasy and grimdark is what it is, it's partially an old vs new comparison. Even the Sword of Truth isn't really Grimdark, it's more Fifty Shades of Tolkein. Anyway, this is all very sidebar and very subjective, as interesting as I find it as a topic of conversation. I'd happily bat it around ad nauseum, but it probably deserves it's own thread, and I'd bet it already has it's own thread somewhere here.