Sammael
Adventurer
If ability modifier is score - 10, I will most certainly skip 5E, because that places way, WAY, WAAAAAAY too much importance on the ability scores.
D&D 5E Another Critical Hits 5E Report
- Thread starter Alaxk Knight of Galt
- Start date
Lord Mhoram
Hero
What I was saying is assuming this:
Every point of an ability score is a +1 modifier. 15 is +5, 18 is +8
Therefore you take 10 number is just your ability score - don't even have to add ten to modifier, it's already done.
If even a third of your checks are autosuccessed you don't even say "I take 10" "the DC is this" - instead - DM says DC14 climb check - thief says "I climb"
That is where it is mathematically identical.
They said ability score are more important - if more of the bonus is stats and much less on skill that is way you could do that.
It's a big if, of course, and I wouldn't like it either.
Last edited:
Tallifer
Hero
“Mike, you have five minutes left.”
“No problem, I only have one boss battle to run.”
Colour me unimpressed.
But the dungeon master might have meant that he would just handwave the last fight, because of the constraints of the tournament. The players would have accepted that, because they understood the time limit.
I sincerely hope that was the case, because an actual combat of five minutes is nothing. I just took part in a ten minute combat last Sunday: my first level character slew the giant worm guarding the entrance in one normal blow. We all were completely deflated.
“No problem, I only have one boss battle to run.”
Colour me unimpressed.
But the dungeon master might have meant that he would just handwave the last fight, because of the constraints of the tournament. The players would have accepted that, because they understood the time limit.
I sincerely hope that was the case, because an actual combat of five minutes is nothing. I just took part in a ten minute combat last Sunday: my first level character slew the giant worm guarding the entrance in one normal blow. We all were completely deflated.
Lord Mhoram
Hero
I just hope they got the monster to combat length ratio correct...
3e Monsters took to damn long to stat up, and combats went really quickly.
4e Monsters were quick to stat up but fights took too damn long to use a lot of them.
We need monsters that are quick to stat up and quick to fight again.
Interesting - I've been running a 4E game for just about 2 years now, after finishing up a 2 1/2 year long 3.5E game in January of 2010.
I would agree with the first half of both of your sentences (4E quick to stat up, 3E took a long time), but 3.5E combats took way longer in play than 4E combats from what I've seen. 4E combats are still longer than 1E/2E, but I've found them much quicker than 3.5E. In the late stages of our 3.5E game, the combats would often take two entire sessions to finish.
I will qualify that by saying that my 3.5E group was huge - 8 players, plus a few key NPC allies/followers. They had so many options for attack and for defense, that it was impossible to challenge them with a "solo" monster or bad guy - I had to throw masses of bad guys at them.
Lord Mhoram
Hero
Yeah. I'm of two minds. I could learn to enjoy that, but it is a big shift.
With the saying that improvement in attack comes slower, that makes abilities really really important. And if a class gives you a +1 an ability that is actually a big deal too.
The idea hit me when I was trying to make the math work.
But if Next is that way, I called it.
In general use I agree fully but in this (the first chance to show off your new edition/sytem) it's kind of dumb to not follow that formula. It's like when playing a rock concert. You don't end on a sappy ballad or run-of-the-mill song, you nail them with a big hit and adrenalin-pumping anthem for the finale so they last thing they remember (and often most vividly) is a climactic high point.
fuzzlewump
First Post
I agree with the 4e entitlement thing, and I love 4e and play it weekly. 4e seems to put a strong emphasis on having only conflicts the character can solve with no planning, and without having to run away. Read any official module, and as I recall, the DMG doesn't encourage having any planning, or having imbalanced encounters.
Can your game be different? Sure. Your game can be whatever you want it to be. But let's look at wotc modules, the Dnd encounters, and advice given in books before the authors words are brushed aside as being strictly inflammatory with no truth.
Can your game be different? Sure. Your game can be whatever you want it to be. But let's look at wotc modules, the Dnd encounters, and advice given in books before the authors words are brushed aside as being strictly inflammatory with no truth.
Me too. There was a player in my 2ed group that was playing a very high level necromancer (he got up to level 35 of something like that using the High Level Campaign rules). He typically animated a small lizard and sent it in front of him for scouting (he could see through the eyrs of the creature). I saw him using this system for scouting into a goblin lair before teleporting in and obliterating half of the tribe with an enlarged Wail of the Banshee. That was total paranoia and fully fault of the system.
I playtested 5E at DDXP and really enjoyed it. I didn't read my NDA terribly closely, so hopefully I won't get in trouble for sharing this.
We successfully explored one cavern complex, dealing with a variety of kobolds. We were chased out of a second cavern complex by orcs. After regrouping, we approached a third cavern. Sitting outside in a hollowed out rock, with back turned to us, was an ogre. The fight wents something like this...
*We approach as a group.
*The ogre notices us, stands, and limbers up his club arm.
*Somewhat injured paladin charges the ogre and gets flattened (i.e. dead).
*Halfling rogue slips around behind the ogre.
*Wizard casts sleep on the ogre.
*Halfling rogue slits the ogre's throat.
We successfully explored one cavern complex, dealing with a variety of kobolds. We were chased out of a second cavern complex by orcs. After regrouping, we approached a third cavern. Sitting outside in a hollowed out rock, with back turned to us, was an ogre. The fight wents something like this...
*We approach as a group.
*The ogre notices us, stands, and limbers up his club arm.
*Somewhat injured paladin charges the ogre and gets flattened (i.e. dead).
*Halfling rogue slips around behind the ogre.
*Wizard casts sleep on the ogre.
*Halfling rogue slits the ogre's throat.
Argyle King
Legend
5E has gotten a success in the skill challenge of making me interested with these reports.
TwinBahamut
First Post
If a Paladin can't even hold off an Ogre's strike, then that is a pretty poor Paladin. A heavily armored, physically tough class like the Paladin shouldn't be the weak link in a battle against an enemy who uses straightforward physical attacks. That simply is not living up to the class's name.
I don't want to see any more editions where the sleep spell makes entire classes obsolete...
Remathilis
Legend
To be fair, the ogre could crit, the paladin could be down some hp, or some combination of the two.
Not every edition allows PCs max healing between fights and 30+ hp at first level...
TwinBahamut
First Post
In 3E my brother's Paladin held off the attacks of demons ten levels higher than him. This isn't an edition thing. This is a Paladin thing.
Jack99
Adventurer
A 3.5 ogre does 2d8+7 damage. Average damage alone should be enough to kill most 1st level paladins. Let alone one who is already injured.
4e Ogre does 2d10+5 damage. Average damage might kill a wounded 1st level paladin, although it would probably have to roll somewhat over average. Still very possible.
I don't have my older books at hand, but I can't see why what happened at the playtest is not living up to it's name, since it could have happened in the last two editions as well. Unless you feel the paladin didn't live up to his name in those either?
For some, the idea that an Ogre is no longer a pushover for low-level play is a very good thing, and I see nothing wrong with a core mechanic that supports that style of play at its most basic level.
WoTC already has an example of being able to support high powered play on display and in stores right now--4th Edition! The fact that they are concentrating on showing off a design that supports grittier low power mechanics doesn't worry me at all, because this was an extremely early play test. We haven't a clue what additional modules are in the works--a high power curve module for more heroic low-level play might already be waiting for the next WoTC NDA playtest.
What level was the paladin? If a 1st level paladin charges an ogre in most editions, he's going to have a real chance of dying.
Edit: Sorry about being the fourth person with essentially the same reply. Didn't see the others.
kitsune9
Adventurer
Ouch, that must have been terrible.
I remember another story that I get a good laugh about. I remember that I was prepping an encounter with a BBEG for a high level game. Everyone was around 22nd level or so. I had to customize the BBEG so the encounter could be a challenge and it took me four hours to stat the guy and get everything done.
Round 1: players go first, he blew his save and died. Game over.
F o u r h o u r s g o n e.
I laugh about it every time I think about it.
Similar Threads
