Search results

You are indeed wrong. If, for whatever reason, characters end up being powerful to the point where it's making the game less enjoyable if it's not taken into account, it makes the game more difficult to run. If you find yourself making the game more difficult to run, you should stop doing...

And in neither of them did adding a +1 modifier to an individual check really matter much if you still had to roll ~10 to succeed. If I make a character from levels 1-4 in 5e, his stat modifier cannot make a difference as to whether he automatically succeeds at an easy task. I can't just say "I...

Regardless of who causes the problem, having a big power differential makes it harder to involve everyone in the game. Insisting on being a lone wolf, being that guy who just has to pull all the levers or the guy who moons the king, or even just that guy who tries to have intimate tete-a-tetes...

This isn't quite true - ability scores ARE the biggest way you can influence your rolls, but they're actually less important than in 3e, because of what has happened to DCs and modifiers. In 3e, having a +4 modifier (through whatever) meant that you automatically succeeded at easy tasks. In 5e...

I think the actual problem is that there's no point in investing in anything other than your main attack stat. Fundamentally, stat modifiers are so low compared with other contributing factors that over small numbers of rolls, they effectively get lost in the noise. A +3 charisma bonus to your...

Saying "group X should apply for something that has previously been advertised as open to everyone" is not remotely close to saying "nobody except group X should apply for something". Even if they had explicitly said that minority groups would be preferentially hired, that's called encouraging...

I think the biggest problem with optimzing for combat is that it tends to ramp up damage. In response, the DM ramps up monsters, and most monsters ramp up their own damage in a way that outpaces their defenses. That means that the line for a DM is quite fine: it's easy to end up with encounters...

I included damage bonuses, although for simplicity's sake, I overvalued stat mods to damage heavily by assuming everyone is rolling 1d8 and is moving from a raw 1d8 to 1d8+1. What I left out was the skill benefits of an ASI. I think the numbers probably end up about right - but like I said, this...

That's because encounters are handled as a party. Like I said: if EVERYONE takes the +2 ASI, then you end up dealing with ONE extra encounter per day. Each person is only dealing with a fraction of an encounter. In a 5 person party, each +2 ASI is only handling 20% of an encounter per day. That...

1. The DC for a 'nearly impossible' task is 30. In theory, your party rogue might have enough in whatever skill you deem necessary to pacify a dragon to hit that number. However you've indicated that Graz'zt cannot be dealt with. This escalates the DC to impossible, meaning there is no roll: any...

Right... and the actual benefit is much harder to work out: your outgoing damage from those two things has gone up by 5% + (final hit chance)*12.5%. If we make your final hit chance 70%, then you're killing things 13.75% faster. In an ideal world that means they do 13.75% less damage, so your...

Personally I think people overvalue attribute increases. Think about it - a +1 to every single roll you make only shifts your chance of success by 5%, so it really only makes a difference in about 1/20 rolls. I'd argue that most feats are going to make their presence felt more often than that...

My main issue with constitution is that it's boring yet necessary. It feels like a tax. I've never made a character and gone "Woo! Tons of hit points! That will make the game more fun!", yet at the same time you just know that if you dump it, you're going to have a bad time.

A very important thing to note is that the feat for ritual casting is based off of character level. Every other method of ritual casting limited by class level. That means that getting the feat is typically superior to dipping for ritual casting.

Solve the problem by just copy-pasting the spell from 3.5. In that one, each simulacrum was half the level of the original. So your simulacra could do normal day-to-day stuff, but they weren't really competitive as adventurers, and certainly couldn't chain simulacra. On the plus side, you can...

How often does someone with a 19 strength and great weapon fighting fall back to a bow? Does he really lower his AC by a point to avoid disadvantage on stealth checks? I'll give you the initiative, dex saves and skills... That's more a problem of an item handing out better than maximum stats...

What benefit are they double dipping on? They get to shore up their strength checks, carry capacity and strength save, and get a wider choice of backup weapons. Game broken? What? The wizard with an 8 intelligence still has to live with an 8 intelligence for the time he doesn't have the...

So what? If a fighter has a high dex, getting a high strength is of limited value. Congratulations, now you can use those weapons you specialized in multiple levels ago... Meanwhile Bob has picked up a helm of telepathy, or a javelin of lightning, or any number of other items that aren't nearly...

Well, no. I addressed the fluff portion which was 3/4 of your post. And despite my making an incorrect assumption, your explanation still doesn't work. I'm not sure I buy the bounded accuracy thing either... the only place it really makes a difference is in balancing the different affordable...

Sorry, I mistakenly had a lower number (ie - early 20s) for when people "peak". A lot of what I'm seeing says 30 is a better number... but the explanation for how that was derived seem a bit flaky to say the least. I mean the whole thing also fails since most of the published adventures run...