D&D 5E A Simple Solution to the Saving Throw and other Math Problems

[billd91]

I think AC should scale at the same rate as attack bonus. To me, it's never made sense that characters only ever get better at attacking, but never get better at defending themselves. It seems that they're afraid of players getting really high ACs and becoming nearly invincible, which is a valid concern, but I blame the magic item bonus stacking for that problem.

A character's ability to defend themselves already goes up with level even if AC does not. They gain more hit points, which really is an element of the PC's defense. Their improved skills (and other intangibles) make it easier for them to minimize the damage (relatively speaking) of a hit. Raising AC as well means you're raising defenses in two ways and that strikes me more as bloating the numbers rather than really improving things.

Rather than increasing ACs, I'd rather PCs were able to trade their advancing attack bonus for defense - combat expertise, fighting defensively, etc. They step back their offense to concentrate on defense. I find that a much more satisfying way of handling some of the AC side of fighting.

 

[GX.Sigma]

I think that's an issue over the life of the PC. But I'm not sure it's actually an issue with the encounter in question. That's a shapshot in time.

The issue with this encounter is that the module called for like 8 ghouls, which would have been a near-certain TPK.

Every time there's an "everyone gets a bonus based on level" approach to 5e, it breaks or at least damages the whole idea of seriously reducing bonus inflation. Let's not.

To me, the big issue here is that when you make something a function of level, that means there's two tables you have to constantly reference--your class table, and the general level table. I'd rather have everything on the class table (which is why I like the idea of the upcoming feat/ability-score-improvement system).

 

[Dausuul]

Every time there's an "everyone gets a bonus based on level" approach to 5e, it breaks or at least damages the whole idea of seriously reducing bonus inflation. Let's not.

Well spoken, sir.