D&D 5E What is balance to you, and why do you care (or don't)?

[Lanefan]

it does. when 6e comes around I really hope we get attack rolls based on your best stat...

For everyone, or just Fighters?

If it's for everyone, how does allowing a Wizard to use its Int modifier when attacking do anything except make the Wizard even better? This seems a backward step.

I could even argue a fighter with wisdom based attacks would work.

I'd have a hard time justifying Con-based attacks - how good you are at taking punishment has nothing to do with how good you are at giving it out.

 

[Helldritch]

How did you balance it? I've found that if a creature can survive a party nova and dish back, PCs are going to die. If it can't, then I need multiple encounters for that "day."

With 6 players, I needed a bit more. 1st monsters are rarely alone. I often put low level threats.
2) I do not allow the get in, get out that most DM do. Once you are in a lair, if you flee, you can be sure that search parties will be coming to you. So players have learned to play accordingly. This forces them to use such combat options as the dodge action to mitigate hits a bit more.
3) I have modified some monsters. Not much, but some. The veteran for example. This foe uses a long sword, two hand or one hand but does not carry a shield? Add a shield and now the veteran lost 1hp of damage on average but gained 2 pts of AC. That 10% alone makes players cringe when they see one. Or give the veteran a two handed sword and raise the potential damage.
4) I have modified solo monsters and I put fights with minions before any solo fights.
My mod for solo
Single encounter big bad guys
Add 1 feat/ASI per 4 CR (save the first four)
Add 1 legendary action per PC above 4.
Multiply HP by 1 +0.25 per PC above 4.
Add 1.5 AC (round up) per PC above 4.

Here is a modified lich my players defeated at 17th level in a previous campaing.

AC: 17 (natural armor + dex) Now 23 (+1.5 AC x 2 for players number, Staff of power and +1 ring. It could go up to 25 for one attack because of the shield guardian and I am not counting shield. Since shield was an at will power, it became and AC 28 and 30 for one attack)
HP: 135 (18d8 + 54) Now 238 for a 1.5 multiplyer for number of players and tough feat (+36hp).
Spd: 30' (unchanged)
Stats: Unchanged (decided to use feats instead...)
Added: Warcaster, Elemental Adept Fire (that one was a surprise for my players), Tough.
Mage feature added: Shield and Mirror image at will (I counted that one as a feat)
Spell list was changed to reflect the added mage feature and feats.
Cantrip: Removed prestigiditation and added Fire Bolt. Rose number of cantrip to four and added Green Flame blade
Level 1: Removed shield and added disguise self (Lich used it to appear human as she did in her life.)
Level 2: Removed Mirror image and added Misty step instead.

Legendary action Rose to 5 (again 6 players)

Lich was also using Staff Of Power And a Shield Guardian.

Note that damage potential is unchanged. Only defensive options.
Add in the Mythical ability that came with Theros and your BBEG or Solo will be much more memorable.

I used a sword wraith captain to which I gave this treatment and the Theros mythic ability and the fight lasted 13 rounds with 8th level characters. They won but it was truly an epic fight.

5) Creature usually use their treasure if they can.

 

[Lanefan]

5) Creature usually use their treasure if they can.

This.

Ah the many times when a foe has read a scroll or downed a potion and all I've heard from the players is "Hey, he's using OUR stuff!"

Music to my ears...

 

[James Gasik]

"He's drinking our treasure!"

 

[GMforPowergamers]

For everyone, or just Fighters?

for the combat classes. So an ability (even if it is a choice) that lets a fighter hit with wisdom, and another that lets the paladen hit with cha, and yet another that lets the Ranger hit with con.

If it's for everyone, how does allowing a Wizard to use its Int modifier when attacking do anything except make the Wizard even better? This seems a backward step.

wizards already use Int to hit with spells. I don't mind a subset of spells (although I would rather break the wizard up TBH) that allow for an Int attack with a weapon I am 100% against them being cantrips.
This could though allow a multi class fighter/mage (or paliden/mage, or barbarian/mage) to do so but that is becuse of multi

I'd have a hard time justifying Con-based attacks - how good you are at taking punishment has nothing to do with how good you are at giving it out.

out of the 6 stats con is the hardest for me as well TBH, but not impossible with a bit of imagination... if they made it only the other 5 I would not raise much annoyance at it.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

This.

Ah the many times when a foe has read a scroll or downed a potion and all I've heard from the players is "Hey, he's using OUR stuff!"

Music to my ears...

oh man it's going back a ways, but when I had a monster use a wand of fireball 3 times (was resistant to fire like 20ish so once targeting himself) and they got the treasure with 1 charge left it was brutal... I swear the wizard almost cried

 

[James Gasik]

for the combat classes. So an ability (even if it is a choice) that lets a fighter hit with wisdom, and another that lets the paladen hit with cha, and yet another that lets the Ranger hit with con.

wizards already use Int to hit with spells. I don't mind a subset of spells (although I would rather break the wizard up TBH) that allow for an Int attack with a weapon I am 100% against them being cantrips.
This could though allow a multi class fighter/mage (or paliden/mage, or barbarian/mage) to do so but that is becuse of multi

out of the 6 stats con is the hardest for me as well TBH, but not impossible with a bit of imagination... if they made it only the other 5 I would not raise much annoyance at it.

I think it was the Battlemind in 4e that used Con to hit with it's attacks- the way I assumed this worked is that they were literally smashing into the enemy like the Juggernaut, or they were fighting defensively trying to outlast their opponent, until said opponent slipped up and made a mistake, Corwin of Amber style.

 

[Helldritch]

for the combat classes. So an ability (even if it is a choice) that lets a fighter hit with wisdom, and another that lets the paladen hit with cha, and yet another that lets the Ranger hit with con.

wizards already use Int to hit with spells. I don't mind a subset of spells (although I would rather break the wizard up TBH) that allow for an Int attack with a weapon I am 100% against them being cantrips.
This could though allow a multi class fighter/mage (or paliden/mage, or barbarian/mage) to do so but that is becuse of multi

out of the 6 stats con is the hardest for me as well TBH, but not impossible with a bit of imagination... if they made it only the other 5 I would not raise much annoyance at it.

Or simply put penalties for casting in combat. Advantage on the targets save, disavantage for the caster to hit.
Reinforce penalties for low stats as I am doing.
Strength penalties are always applied on weapons. Whether they are ranged, melee, dex based or str based does not matter. So a 20 dex rogue with 8 strength will be at "only" +4 to hit and damage. It may not be perfect, but it does make for some better versimilitude. Likewise, Dex penalty on armor is applied even on heavy armor. If you are clumsy without armor, imagine with heavy... This prevent the "dump" stat syndrome and makes rising stat somewhat a bit more important. Making intelligence adding more skills and languages at character's creation would also help it. Allowing certain skills with either wisdom or intelligence also help. With this, clerics can now be good with Religion without seeing the wizard or rogue next to them being better than they are at their own religion.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Or simply put penalties for casting in combat. Advantage on the targets save, disavantage for the caster to hit.

where i can see a place for a campaign for such things (combat magic not working well) i would not like that to b the default

eReinforce penalties for low stats as I am doing.
Strength penalties are always applied on weapons. Whether they are ranged, melee, dex based or str based does not matter. So a 20 dex rogue with 8 strength will be at "only" +4 to hit and damage. It may not be perfect, but it does make for some better versimilitude.

sort of... it sounds to me like the dump str just became 10 instead of 8...

Likewise, Dex penalty on armor is applied even on heavy armor.

that seems backwards and defeating the purpose of all of this. Dex penalties already hit you hard why make them worse?

If you are clumsy without armor, imagine with heavy... This prevent the "dump" stat syndrome and makes rising stat somewhat a bit more important.

except it only makes it that you put a 10 in dex or a 10 in str instead of 8 how is that not just raising the dump from 8 to 10?

Making intelligence adding more skills and languages at character's creation would also help it.

I keep toyng with things like this too, the + to skills didn't work out well.

Allowing certain skills with either wisdom or intelligence also help.

yes I like mix and match skills tools and stats

With this, clerics can now be good with Religion without seeing the wizard or rogue next to them being better than they are at their own religion.

ugh that is sad... I played in a game with a Rouge (arcane trick)/wiz (illusion) gnome and an aasimar cleric... the rogue/wiz took religion and was 10x better then the cleric

 

[EzekielRaiden]

For everyone, or just Fighters?

I mean, for me I'd want it to be everyone. But I'm a 4e fan, sooo...

If it's for everyone, how does allowing a Wizard to use its Int modifier when attacking do anything except make the Wizard even better? This seems a backward step.

It's not like they aren't doing that already. That's literally what cantrips (with spell attack rolls) do. There has been a melee spell attack option literally from day 1 in the PHB (shocking grasp) and perfectly solid ranged options (fire bolt, ray of frost, chill touch). There are also the actual make-a-melee-attack options (green-flame blade and booming blade).

It isn't the Wizard that gets a bunch out of this. It basically just simplifies a thing they were already doing (because a couple of offensive cantrip options is a pittance cost).

I'd have a hard time justifying Con-based attacks - how good you are at taking punishment has nothing to do with how good you are at giving it out.

One of the biggest factors in any battle is endurance. Being able to pummel your enemy non-stop, without giving them a break, without letting up, is an excellent strategy for overcoming enemy resistance. On a larger scale, this is literally the best tool humans have for violence; we are endurance hunters, not swift attackers (before the invention of weapons, at least).

Attacking with Con is, in a certain sense, the antithesis of attacking with Dex. Dex is, in theory, supposed to be making an attack in the precise weak point of their armor or whatever, right? Attacking with Con is "it doesn't matter if I miss 99 times so long as I hit the 100th time." Obviously something of an exaggeration, but this is something that shows up in (for example) fencing duels both in action films and IRL. People tend to wither before a "full-court press" strategy.