Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Ability Score Increases (I've changed my mind.)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8390742" data-attributes="member: 6801228"><p>Why couldn't you plan for it before? The only reason you spent a spell slot was because you suspected there were dragons in the area. You could plan for Dragons to be in the area without confirmation, just based on the information that led you to use Primeval Awareness. </p><p></p><p>And how do you go about finding it? It could be six miles behind you, running away. It could be three miles in front of you, sleeping. It could be lurking 4 miles below you in inaccessible caverns. It could be a mile overhead observing you. It could be polymorphed into the horse you are riding. You have no possible way to use this information. And while it is "only 3rd level" Third level is chock full of actually useful abilities for most other classes. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Which is why people did Math. Math to check their assumptions. Math which you don't engage in because you have a gut feeling the designers did something else. </p><p></p><p>Look, I know I haven't had time to dig into the math, and try and show it to you, but it has been all over various forums, and people don't come to these numbers by just making an assumption and twisting the data to show it. If they did, it would be swiftly debunked.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>No, it isn't. It was based partially on the designers saying years ago that they wanted to have a more than 50% success rate, and 65% is comfortably between being too easy and too hard. Additionally, 16 is the number from dozens of different ways to calculate it. Your 14 is based solely on a gut feeling and the mistaken idea that pushing the scale downward was desirable to them, because you think 5e is easier than 3.5, so the numbers must be lowered.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I have no idea what you are trying to say with the bolded. Again I am left assuming you just don't understand how a small sample size can warp data. </p><p></p><p>And for the second, ONCE MORE, the Standard array was altered from the true average. We know this. We've known this. Because the designers didn't want the Standard array to offer a 16, because they didn't want the +2 races to start with an 18 without rolling. They did the exact same thing when setting up the point buy. Which is why you can't buy a 16, only a 15. </p><p></p><p>Additionally, when talking about numbers less than a standard deviation apart, they are close enough to be considered equal, without needing to be identical. Heck, the true mathematical average could be 73.62487 but since you can't roll a decimal place it had to be rounded. Not being identical doesn't change anything, because I never claimed they were identical.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The game was designed at the collective level, with hundreds of thousands expected to play it. It is impossible to accurately predict what any five people will do when given 3 options, only one of which is static and the other random and the third controlled values. They couldn't possibly design the game with your assumptions. They had to take an aggregate value and work with the averages as an assumption.</p><p></p><p>And your statement is farcical on the face of it, because rolling allows for massively powerful and massively weak characters. I've seen people roll where their modifiers were (+2, +1, +1, +0, -2, -1) and I've also seen them roll where they were (+4, +4, +3, +2, +2, +0). The entire point of rolling is the potential to get a far more powerful character than average, while risking getting a character weaker than average. But for that to be the case, an average must exist. And it does. The average doesn't suddenly disappear because no one rolled in when they rolled only four times. That's like saying that the chance of heads on a coin flip is 75% because you flipped four times and 3 of them were heads.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Because that doesn't matter. Your "100's of years and many campaigns" is a red herring assuming that the average must show up at a specific table of 5 reliably to be a real factor. That isn't how probabilities work. The average of the dice doesn't care whether or not it shows up at your table, it exists despite your table. And since the designers can't predict what you will roll every single time, their best bet is to go with the average. Which we can see they clearly did.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>They aren't entitled to Hp. They aren't entitled to AC. They aren't entitled that a positive modifier doesn't lower their roll because the DM decided that you have to roll under. The DM can decide that all monsters critically hit on a nat 1 and a nat 20, while players critically miss on a nat 20 and a nat 1. </p><p></p><p>Make sure your DM teaches you the game, because they are entitled to change literally any aspect of it regardless of the group or individual. </p><p></p><p>I think you can see why I'd prefer to play with people who are slightly more judicious in which rules they change, because "I have the right to literally change anything I want, because I am the Master of this game." isn't a healthy attitude in my opinion.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Chaosmancer, post: 8390742, member: 6801228"] Why couldn't you plan for it before? The only reason you spent a spell slot was because you suspected there were dragons in the area. You could plan for Dragons to be in the area without confirmation, just based on the information that led you to use Primeval Awareness. And how do you go about finding it? It could be six miles behind you, running away. It could be three miles in front of you, sleeping. It could be lurking 4 miles below you in inaccessible caverns. It could be a mile overhead observing you. It could be polymorphed into the horse you are riding. You have no possible way to use this information. And while it is "only 3rd level" Third level is chock full of actually useful abilities for most other classes. Which is why people did Math. Math to check their assumptions. Math which you don't engage in because you have a gut feeling the designers did something else. Look, I know I haven't had time to dig into the math, and try and show it to you, but it has been all over various forums, and people don't come to these numbers by just making an assumption and twisting the data to show it. If they did, it would be swiftly debunked. No, it isn't. It was based partially on the designers saying years ago that they wanted to have a more than 50% success rate, and 65% is comfortably between being too easy and too hard. Additionally, 16 is the number from dozens of different ways to calculate it. Your 14 is based solely on a gut feeling and the mistaken idea that pushing the scale downward was desirable to them, because you think 5e is easier than 3.5, so the numbers must be lowered. I have no idea what you are trying to say with the bolded. Again I am left assuming you just don't understand how a small sample size can warp data. And for the second, ONCE MORE, the Standard array was altered from the true average. We know this. We've known this. Because the designers didn't want the Standard array to offer a 16, because they didn't want the +2 races to start with an 18 without rolling. They did the exact same thing when setting up the point buy. Which is why you can't buy a 16, only a 15. Additionally, when talking about numbers less than a standard deviation apart, they are close enough to be considered equal, without needing to be identical. Heck, the true mathematical average could be 73.62487 but since you can't roll a decimal place it had to be rounded. Not being identical doesn't change anything, because I never claimed they were identical. The game was designed at the collective level, with hundreds of thousands expected to play it. It is impossible to accurately predict what any five people will do when given 3 options, only one of which is static and the other random and the third controlled values. They couldn't possibly design the game with your assumptions. They had to take an aggregate value and work with the averages as an assumption. And your statement is farcical on the face of it, because rolling allows for massively powerful and massively weak characters. I've seen people roll where their modifiers were (+2, +1, +1, +0, -2, -1) and I've also seen them roll where they were (+4, +4, +3, +2, +2, +0). The entire point of rolling is the potential to get a far more powerful character than average, while risking getting a character weaker than average. But for that to be the case, an average must exist. And it does. The average doesn't suddenly disappear because no one rolled in when they rolled only four times. That's like saying that the chance of heads on a coin flip is 75% because you flipped four times and 3 of them were heads. Because that doesn't matter. Your "100's of years and many campaigns" is a red herring assuming that the average must show up at a specific table of 5 reliably to be a real factor. That isn't how probabilities work. The average of the dice doesn't care whether or not it shows up at your table, it exists despite your table. And since the designers can't predict what you will roll every single time, their best bet is to go with the average. Which we can see they clearly did. They aren't entitled to Hp. They aren't entitled to AC. They aren't entitled that a positive modifier doesn't lower their roll because the DM decided that you have to roll under. The DM can decide that all monsters critically hit on a nat 1 and a nat 20, while players critically miss on a nat 20 and a nat 1. Make sure your DM teaches you the game, because they are entitled to change literally any aspect of it regardless of the group or individual. I think you can see why I'd prefer to play with people who are slightly more judicious in which rules they change, because "I have the right to literally change anything I want, because I am the Master of this game." isn't a healthy attitude in my opinion. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Ability Score Increases (I've changed my mind.)
Top