D&D 5E Is Tasha's Broken?

[Bill Zebub]

You are adding a +1 to a D20 roll. Obviously if you need a result of 20 to succeed and you were a +0, a +1 will double your chances of success. But you are also only increasing the result of the number you end up with after adding multipliers by 5%.

As far as what was responding to, that may well be part of the issue. You keep repeating things like "it's already been explained" or referencing a previous post without linking to anything or explaining "what has already been explained ". So if I'm confused, I apologize but perhaps something a little more enlightening than "has nothing to do with " might help. You may have a clear understanding, but obviously other people don't.

1) You said “increase effectiveness by 5%” and that is false. If you are getting a 5% return, an investment that returns 6% is 20% better, not 1%.

2) You were responding to a post in which I was agreeing that the +3 vs +2 thing is about comparing your own character options, not comparing your character to other characters. If I were playing a duet game (just me and a DM) I would find the 16 no more nor less desireable.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Or there could be a base Staggering Attack based on STR/DEX and Feinting Attack based on INT that both grant advantages Normal fighters have access to Staggering Attack. However fighters with positive INT can side-up-grade to Feinting Attack..

Personally I hate the Battlemaster design that adds an effect, and sometimes extra damage, to an attack. I’d rather see maneuvers that you use in place of an attack, and have an effect that makes it worth giving up the damage.

 

[Oofta]

1) You said “increase effectiveness by 5%” and that is false. If you are getting a 5% return, an investment that returns 6% is 20% better, not 1%.

2) You were responding to a post in which I was agreeing that the +3 vs +2 thing is about comparing your own character options, not comparing your character to other characters. If I were playing a duet game (just me and a DM) I would find the 16 no more nor less desireable.

You will be successful on whatever you are attempting to do 1 in 20 times more often at whatever you are trying to achieve unless you are at the extremes. I call that being more effective about 1 in 20 times or ... 5% of the time.

 

[Bill Zebub]

You will be successful on whatever you are attempting to do 1 in 20 times more often at whatever you are trying to achieve unless you are at the extremes. I call that being more effective about 1 in 20 times or ... 5% of the time.

What if normally you are only effective 1/20 times. Now you are effective 2/20 times. What % increase in effectiveness is that?

The numbers are lower as your success rate goes up, and only reaches 5% when you are already at 100% success.

And that, of course, ignores the +1 damage you may be getting on all hits.

 

[Minigiant]

Personally I hate the Battlemaster design that adds an effect, and sometimes extra damage, to an attack. I’d rather see maneuvers that you use in place of an attack, and have an effect that makes it worth giving up the damage.

My preference would have been the STR/DEX maneuvers adds Extra Damage + Effect and the CON/INT/WIS/CHA manuevers add two effects or one major condition.

Knockdown Attack adds superiority dice to damage roll and forces a STR save to knocks prone
Trip Attack forces a STR save to knock prone, disarm, and knock weapon INT mod time 5 feet away with no size requirement.

Problem is page space.

 

[Maxperson]

What if normally you are only effective 1/20 times. Now you are effective 2/20 times. What % increase in effectiveness is that?

Doesn't matter. You are still only hitting 1 extra time in 2-5 fights. You can try to candy coat it with terms like 20%, 30% or even 50% more effective, but in the end it's still trivial damage. One more hit every 2-5 fights and a few more points of damage from your normal hits spread over those same number of fights.

 

[Minigiant]

Doesn't matter. You are still only hitting 1 extra time in 2-5 fights. You can try to candy coat it with terms like 20%, 30% or even 50% more effective, but in the end it's still trivial damage. One more hit every 2-5 fights and a few more points of damage from your normal hits spread over those same number of fights.

It's a whole new roll of damage added plus modifiers.

It's basically having something slighlty better than Champion's Improved Critical.

 

[Oofta]

What if normally you are only effective 1/20 times. Now you are effective 2/20 times. What % increase in effectiveness is that?

The numbers are lower as your success rate goes up, and only reaches 5% when you are already at 100% success.

And that, of course, ignores the +1 damage you may be getting on all hits.

I'm done with this, it's a silly argument. You will hit 1 in 20 times more often than without the +1 except at the extremes (needing a nat 20 to hit).

 

[CleverNickName]

My preference would have been the STR/DEX maneuvers adds Extra Damage + Effect and the CON/INT/WIS/CHA manuevers add two effects or one major condition.

Knockdown Attack adds superiority dice to damage roll and forces a STR save to knocks prone
Trip Attack forces a STR save to knock prone, disarm, and knock weapon INT mod time 5 feet away with no size requirement.

Problem is page space.

This is what I hate about the Battlemaster and all of his combat maneuvers. All of these rules creates the false impression that in order to do these stunts at all, you have to be a Battlemaster, or you have to have a certain feat, or you have to jump through a hoop. Maneuvers like pushing someone down, knocking their sword out of their hand, tripping them, etc., should be class-neutral. You should be able to just tell your DM what you are trying to do, and work with them to find a way to make it happen.

During our Storm King's Thunder campaign a couple years ago, our cleric scored a crit against his opponent. The player asked, "Instead of extra damage, could I just deal regular damage but knock him prone instead?" Our DM didn't miss a beat. "Sure, I don't have a problem with that." And that's how we added disarming, tripping, sundering, and other stunts to the game. On a crit, you can do extra damage, or you can do extra Fun^TM.

And a few years before that, I was running a one-shot for some friends. The party was fighting a band of assassins in an alley, and the battle wasn't going well. One of the new players was playing a sorcerer, and was starting to get desperate because she couldn't see her attackers. "I have a whistle," she said, browsing her inventory. "Can I blow it and scream for the guards?" Everyone else at the table was gobsmacked because they never thought of that. "Of course you can," I said. "Make a Persuasion check, and make it at advantage since you're using a whistle. It's the perfect tool for the job." She rolled well, and guards showed up 1d6 rounds later. And now, whenever the party is adventuring in a town, they all carry whistles in case they ever need to "cast the Summon Guards spell" again.

 

[Maxperson]

It's a whole new roll of damage added plus modifiers.

It's basically having something slighlty better than Champion's Improved Critical.

Improved critical isn't that great, either. Just as boring as that +1 bonus for having a 16 strength and still a trivial amount of damage added.

A feat is much more fun and will have far more impact on the campaign.