D&D (2024) Little changes for 5.5

[HammerMan]

PHB, pg 14, in the creating a character section: "Without armor or a shield, your character's AC equals 10 + his or her Dexterity modifier. If your character wears armor, carries a shield, or both, calculate your AC using the rules in chapter 5."

You statement of "dex+armor+magic" isn't correct - it ignores the max dex of some armors, which is why wearing armor it refers you to those specific rules. It would be harmful to have conflicting rules put in.

well my statement was an example of what it could be, since the term is not defined now, so I don't know how an example of what COULD be clarified can possible me WRONG?!?

what I am saying is the bark skin "Ac can't fall below 16" (wait is it 15?) works fine until you start putting situational modifiers on it... if base AC meant something (how tough you are to hit without situational bonuses) the spell would function better with less misunderstandings.

As it is now, if I have 14 AC (+2 dex, +1 ring of prot and +1 from padded or leather armor) and you have 14 AC (all dex) and the druid casts bark skin on me I have a 16 you have a 14. IF we both go behind partial cover I still have a 16 and you have a 16... or do I does that cover give me an 18? what about 3/4 cover +5 you have a 19, do I have a 19, or a 21?

What is the point of Strength at that point beyond one skill and the ability to wear some heavy armors without a movement penalty?

Dex is usually considered the strongest of ability scores. Making it more applicable makes it more powerful - that's introducing more balance issues then you are fixing. In order to change the rules effectively, you must first understand them and their implications.

1) I don't NEED to understand any of it to make suggestions, because as I have pointed out before NO ONE PAYS ME TO WRITE RULES
2) I would decouple Initiative and AC from dex to compensate. For Initiative I would give the better of Wis or Int and for AC I would just make it your best stat with armor restrictions of +2 medium and +0 heavy but I would make light max +5 (sounds useless until you remember things that up stats)

I agree Dex is too good right now adding to some attacks the biggest save and AC plus some of the most used skills

I would also go back to 3e/4e saves Ref Fort Will with choice of 2 stats to save (so Int or dex for Ref. Str or Con for Fort, and Cha or Wis for Will)

doing so also buffs the most useless stat (int)

 

[Vaalingrade]

I'm very confused at how notoriously difficult to balance Superhero RPGs, which do have to deal with a canonical issue of street-levelers mixed with cosmic heroes mixed with creators pets like Batman having balance issues has anything to do with balance in Fantasy where the creators decide the relative power level of the classes.

Unless this is another 'Wizards ruin everything' issue where wizards are expected to be gods (like Batman) and parity with martials would threaten them.

 

[Undrave]

I'm very confused at how notoriously difficult to balance Superhero RPGs, which do have to deal with a canonical issue of street-levelers mixed with cosmic heroes mixed with creators pets like Batman having balance issues has anything to do with balance in Fantasy where the creators decide the relative power level of the classes.

Unless this is another 'Wizards ruin everything' issue where wizards are expected to be gods (like Batman) and parity with martials would threaten them.

It's ALWAYS the Wizards players who complain the most about balance.

 

[Blue]

well my statement was an example of what it could be, since the term is not defined now, so I don't know how an example of what COULD be clarified can possible me WRONG?!?

Term is defined, I literally gave you the page in the PHB and the quote.

1) I don't NEED to understand any of it to make suggestions, because as I have pointed out before NO ONE PAYS ME TO WRITE RULES

You are posting in a public forum about rules changes, it's generally considered courteous to "understand any of it" before posting so you can present an informed opinion. If you would like to proclaim that you don't know what you are talking about because you aren't paid to do it, that's your perogative. It does give others an understanding of what weight to put on your suggested rules changes. Thanks for the heads up, I won't bother to discuss rules changes with you.

 

[Blue]

ask the 1st level party who died to a fireball their wild sorc accidentally cast if everything is absolutely fine.

sorcs are playable but they still could use some love. And that’s not just forum goers saying it, Wotcs own polls have sorcs near the bottom

This is last year's from D&D Beyond. Sorcerer is "bottom" with 7% popularity, shared with four other classes including paladin and bard that are often considered in the top part of the power curve, and beating out the druid, also a class that people do not think is underpowered. It's within 1% of every class except Fighter, Rogue and Warlock.

My google-fu has not been able to bring back anything on results of class surveys, but it easily could be discussed in a video or somewhere else that wouldn't easily find it. Can you give a source that WotC surveys saying sorcerers are near the bottom?

 

[Stalker0]

My google-fu has not been able to bring back anything on results of class surveys, but it easily could be discussed in a video or somewhere else that wouldn't easily find it. Can you give a source that WotC surveys saying sorcerers are near the bottom?

I mean you just did give a survey that says Sorcs are near the bottom, so we are half way there

The trick then is in asking why that is the case. Is it mechanics, flavor, is that people just like playing the "core 4" (in which case poor clerics). Is it that paladins are too "lawful stupid" for most people. Is the fighter and rogue OP and that's why people like to play them etc etc.

 

[jmartkdr2]

I'm very confused at how notoriously difficult to balance Superhero RPGs, which do have to deal with a canonical issue of street-levelers mixed with cosmic heroes mixed with creators pets like Batman having balance issues has anything to do with balance in Fantasy where the creators decide the relative power level of the classes.

Unless this is another 'Wizards ruin everything' issue where wizards are expected to be gods (like Batman) and parity with martials would threaten them.

If you use the rules to represent in-universe power (like DnD usually does), it's basically impossible to balance street-level superheroes and god-level superheroes. If they were DnD characters, Thor would always be better than Hawkeye.

The games (and comics and movies) that pull it off do so by not trying to do that. They balance the narrative impact of the characters: it's not that Hawkeye's arrows do as much damage ad Mjollnir, but they have the same amount of effect on the overall battle. Hawkeye is just as useful as Thor - even if they're not even close in terms of power.

Sometimes this is tailoring the spotlight: if the task is "hit a very small thing far away without touching anything next to it" Hawkeye's your man. The other method is to just not be simulationist in the rules, a la Fate or PbtA which don't have you roll for the attack so much as roll for the section of battle overall.

 

[jmartkdr2]

I mean you just did give a survey that says Sorcs are near the bottom, so we are half way there

The trick then is in asking why that is the case. Is it mechanics, flavor, is that people just like playing the "core 4" (in which case poor clerics). Is it that paladins are too "lawful stupid" for most people. Is the fighter and rogue OP and that's why people like to play them etc etc.

The most popular full caster is the Warlock - not by a lot but it's the winner. Is that due to simplicity, customizability, having the best 'story' for the class, or just doing the best job representing that story? I for one don't know.

 

[HammerMan]

I'm very confused at how notoriously difficult to balance Superhero RPGs, which do have to deal with a canonical issue of street-levelers mixed with cosmic heroes mixed with creators pets like Batman having balance issues has anything to do with balance in Fantasy where the creators decide the relative power level of the classes.

Unless this is another 'Wizards ruin everything' issue where wizards are expected to be gods (like Batman) and parity with martials would threaten them.

it was an example of too much balance... in order to make a game (any game) you need to balance it to a point but have enough clear differences that things don't feel or look the same.

in my example even though the fluff said Superman and Batman were very diffrent, the sheets could look out of game very similar...and get the 'samey' complint.

 

[Horwath]

I think what the Monk is good at is just not what people who want to play a martial artist want to be good at.

Monk is good at speed. The end