D&D 5E 5th Edition has broken Bounded Accuracy

[DaveDash]

It's trivial to avoid being overshadowed. Just split the party and scout ahead alone. (;

Sent from my LS670 using Tapatalk 2

I see what you did there.

 

[bgbarcus]

We're not talking about an Eagle or even a Condor - we're talking about a building sized lizard. If you look at the Smaug scenes in Hobbit 5 Armies, I think I'd clock the dragon at somewhere around 30 MPH as a best guess... If I imagine it a bit slower, it would have been good as well - perhaps more majestic?

Regardless, if you want to compare the game to nature, you'll fail. Eagles in 5E fly at 60' per move - or about 15 MPH, not 60 MPH. If you use the 'real world' speeds, then some of the combat mechanics are impacted heavily. When you can attack in the middle of a move and then return to full cover, massive speeds can become very problematic for game balance. The game needs to be well designed to have fun first, and replicate the real world second.

Dragon speeds are too slow. Eagle speeds are slow too, but eagles are not intended to be epic encounters so I won't worry about them.

I am leaving toward ruling that dragons can fly at the MM speed in their first round of flight then accelerate to triple that number with the second round. The 80' can be explained as launching and flapping like mad to get aloft. Then the really scary 240' (because dragons should be really scary and they are infused with magic) sustained speed starts on the second round if flight.

Maybe I'll rethink that after I've slept on the idea and reduce it to 160'. Either way, dragons should be exceptionally fast flyers because they should be exceptional at everything.

 

[Psikerlord#]

We play much more like you. When I play my War Cleric, I get in there and dodge. Its so efficient, and I dont care that I'm not taking swings or rolling much in combat.

The group I DM for revolve around the Paladin. They're happy to buff him using up their valuable concentration slot when its most effective to do so. The Bard player has cast fly on the Paladin THEN hid inside a portable hole to not risk losing concentration.

That's teamwork.

No, that's boring. Or at least in my book it is. But different strokes for different folks. Not all players want the same kind of game, and that's to be expected.

As long as we're all having fun, at our own tables - cool beans.

 

[Quartz]

You mean if the DM allows this? We're not playing with magic item creation right now.

Perhaps you should reconsider that. If permanently flying is too much, consider allowing the creation of potions (or other one-shot items) of flying.

 

[Psikerlord#]

I don't treat my friends that way. Fortunately, my friends don't treat me that way either. I'm happy I don't have to deal with that attitude. This has always been a team game to our group. You don't win alone. People that try selfish play usually die a lot.

I know a bow isn't good enough against a dragon if the wielder of the bow isn't built for it.

A bow is perfectly fine. Not optimal - but so what? Yeah, super melee guy is less effective against fliers. That's balance. Melee guy can hardly depend on a fly anyway - the wizard might be out of slots, or concentration broken, or wizard is dead, or wizard player didnt turn up this session - etc, etc.

There's nothing selfish about the wizard wanting to choose his own spells. What is misguided "entitled" behaviour is the melee guy expecting the wizard to fly him everytime a flier appears. DnD isnt some MMO dungeon raid game with strictly allocated roles. Melee guy is great at melee. When a flier combat comes along, he might get a fly buff, but if not, his bow works well enough - let others shine for a bit, melee guy, sheesh.

Indeed what is selfish is melee guy wanting to shine brightest not only melee but also flier combats too.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

I think that the Concentration "only one such spell" mechanic went too far overboard in the "get rid of 3E multi-buff".

I think that getting rid of the multi-buffs is a great thing. But there was no logical requirement that the mechanics are so restrictive as they are. It could be possible to cast other spells, or cast some sub-set of other spells.

I think an analogy can be made with the Attunement rules, because they both deal in hard limits on gaining benefits from magic. Would the Attunement rules be more fun if they instead said: "In addition to the need to attune some specific items, a character may only gain the benefit of up to three items at any time, including such things as potions and wands."

 

[bgbarcus]

I think that getting rid of the multi-buffs is a great thing. But there was no logical requirement that the mechanics are so restrictive as they are. It could be possible to cast other spells, or cast some sub-set of other spells.

I think an analogy can be made with the Attunement rules, because they both deal in hard limits on gaining benefits from magic. Would the Attunement rules be more fun if they instead said: "In addition to the need to attune some specific items, a character may only gain the benefit of up to three items at any time, including such things as potions and wands."

My game has nine characters in the party. Of those, all but one is a caster. The single concentration rule works very well for a large party. If I were running a small group, 3-5 characters, I would be tempted to give a magic item or two that allowed a second concentration. But it would be very limited use until testing showed its impact.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I think that getting rid of the multi-buffs is a great thing. But there was no logical requirement that the mechanics are so restrictive as they are. It could be possible to cast other spells, or cast some sub-set of other spells.

It already is. Sanctuary, Blindness/Deafness, Mirror Image, Blink, Fire Shield, Armor of Agathys, Sleep, and of course Planar Binding/Ally do not cost concentration. I may be overlooking a few others.

Sent from my LS670 using Tapatalk 2

 

[the Jester]

I think that getting rid of the multi-buffs is a great thing. But there was no logical requirement that the mechanics are so restrictive as they are. It could be possible to cast other spells, or cast some sub-set of other spells.

You can cast any spell not requiring concentration while you concentrate on a spell.

 

[DaveDash]

A bow is perfectly fine. Not optimal - but so what? Yeah, super melee guy is less effective against fliers. That's balance. Melee guy can hardly depend on a fly anyway - the wizard might be out of slots, or concentration broken, or wizard is dead, or wizard player didnt turn up this session - etc, etc.

There's nothing selfish about the wizard wanting to choose his own spells. What is misguided "entitled" behaviour is the melee guy expecting the wizard to fly him everytime a flier appears. DnD isnt some MMO dungeon raid game with strictly allocated roles. Melee guy is great at melee. When a flier combat comes along, he might get a fly buff, but if not, his bow works well enough - let others shine for a bit, melee guy, sheesh.

Indeed what is selfish is melee guy wanting to shine brightest not only melee but also flier combats too.

Having fought high level flying and mobile creatures with a melee character in the group I can tell you with absolute confidence that a bow will NOT do the job on a str based character. Not even close. Not even in the same league.