D&D 5E Tweaking Reliable Talent and comparing it with Indomitable

[Quartz]

Keep in mind, reliable talent doesn't raise the ceiling on skills, it just raises the floor.

And it raises the floor by 45%, 9 points on the d20. It's twice as good as Advantage in that way. More, it raises the floor from - assuming a Proficiency Bonus of +4 and a stat bonus of +4 and no Expertise - 9 to 18 and 18 is often a success.

Heck, in a campaign where the DM uses passive skills, and uses the passive skill score as a floor - the ability becomes much less useful.

That's effectively giving everyone Reliable Talent.

 

[Ashrym]

Passive skill checks should be used when there's no real risk but not enough time or inability for repeat checks and the "take 20" option.

It's not meant to give reliable talent to everyone and is the exception to the general resolution. When it's more likely to happen (like perception because no one knows to perceive 20 times usually) it gets mentioned more.

I wouldn't compare reliable talent to indomitable either. As mentioned, it's meant to be like 3rd extra attack, and a big marker ability moving into a higher tier of play.

 

[Mycroft]

I think Fighters should get some better saving throw action, like they had in AD&D; maybe at 5th level (as they get nothing compared to the other extra attack classes at that level) they can add 1/2 their proficiency bonus to any save that doesn't already use their proficiency bonus, or something.

 

[Parmandur]

Passive skill checks should be used when there's no real risk but not enough time or inability for repeat checks and the "take 20" option.

It's not meant to give reliable talent to everyone and is the exception to the general resolution. When it's more likely to happen (like perception because no one knows to perceive 20 times usually) it gets mentioned more.

I wouldn't compare reliable talent to indomitable either. As mentioned, it's meant to be like 3rd extra attack, and a big marker ability moving into a higher tier of play.

I believe that one hardcover a month was the official strategy in the beginning at least. One major difference between the two rates of production is that the designers are now more familiar with 5E than they ever got with 4E.

 

[Quartz]

I wouldn't compare reliable talent to indomitable either. As mentioned, it's meant to be like 3rd extra attack, and a big marker ability moving into a higher tier of play.

The third attack involves rolling a die; Reliable Talent often obviates rolling that die. Not really a fair comparison IMO.

 

[Mort]

I wouldn't compare reliable talent to indomitable either. As mentioned, it's meant to be like 3rd extra attack, and a big marker ability moving into a higher tier of play.

The third attack involves rolling a die; Reliable Talent often obviates rolling that die. Not really a fair comparison IMO.

The important part is the second part of the sentence "...and a big marker ability moving into a higher tier of play..."

In execution reliable talent is also nothing like gaining 6th level spells (spellcasters), the ability to stay up regardless of wounds (barbarian), extra radiant damage on every attack (paladin, this one might be a bit underwhelming? Then again it adds up) etc. but the point is, these abilities have a clear change in tier feel.

 

[Krachek]

Do we need that all classes equals in all aspect of the game.
that all classes progress at the same pace, restore abilities at the same rate?
i call this the 4ed syndrome.

 

[Mistwell]

Is there any ability of the rogue people don't want to nerf?

 

[Mycroft]

Do we need that all classes equals in all aspect of the game.
that all classes progress at the same pace, restore abilities at the same rate?
i call this the 4ed syndrome.

Yeah, and I have grown a bit tied of the one proficiency bonus to rule them all. In the playtest there was bit more granularity. It kind of irks me that a 20th level wizard is as skilled/accurate with trained weapons as a 20th level fighter.

 

[Krachek]

Yeah, and I have grown a bit tied of the one proficiency bonus to rule them all. In the playtest there was bit more granularity. It kind of irks me that a 20th level wizard is as skilled/accurate with trained weapons as a 20th level fighter.

But the 20th fighter attack four time.
bound accuracy don’t irk me.
the will to normalize short rest and long rest classes irk me more.