Bounded Accuracy L&L

[TerraDave]

As far as L&L goes, it was kinda awesome.

 

[Ratskinner]

I'm not convinced this will do anything to improve my enjoyment of the game. The last thing I want to be doing is rolling 20d6 damage at level 10 because the monster has 987 hp. Or fighting 84 goblins who die without me needing to roll. And I certainly don't want to be DMing that game. I want less dice not more. If you can't fit the dice in one hand, it's too many dice!

That said, I look forward to seeing how it shapes up.

I dunno, some wizard players seem to like the bucket-o'-dice throw...

Nonetheless, I agree in general (the occasional spell notwithstanding). I hope that HP inflation doesn't become the newest issue in mistaken compensation for Bounded Accuracy.

 

[Minigiant]

I am still afraid.

Skills are stripped from class and made into Backgrounds
Styles are stripped from class and made into Themes
Accuracy is now stripped from class and bound to abilities.

Class Features Have To Have Major Impacts Now.

There has to be very big reasons to pick one class over another or there will be major overshadowing. There has to be a good reason to be a soldier dwarf slayer FIGHTER with 16 Strength and Wisdom over a soldier dwarf slayer CLERIC with 16 Strength and Wisdom or a a soldier dwarf slayer ROGUE with 16 Strength and Wisdom.

 

[am181d]

Two thoughts:

I do NOT understand what happened with skill rolls in 4e that freaked everyone out so much, but I gather it had something to do with scaling DC rolls based on levels. So the DC for climbing a rope keeps going up and up and up. Which is idiotic.

In this week's column they joke "You also don't have to throw an Adamantine door in front of a party just to challenge them at higher levels." And I say, What? Isn't the point of going up to higher levels to face bigger, crazier threats. You SHOULD be bashing down Adamantine doors. When you need to make a climb roll, you shouldn't be climbing up a Tarasque's back, not a rope. For all the talk about 1st level characters being superheroes, I find the idea that a 20th level character will be challenged by an ordinary door kind of stupid.

Second: While I like the idea of a town taking on a dragon, I'm less thrilled with the dynamic of sword master vs. apprentice: The apprentice is going to his the sword master twice and the sword master is going to hit the apprentice twice, and then the apprentice is going to fall over. (As opposed to the apprentice being unable to hit the sword master, or only getting in one lucky blow before being taken down.)

 

[Astrosicebear]

Second: While I like the idea of a town taking on a dragon, I'm less thrilled with the dynamic of sword master vs. apprentice: The apprentice is going to his the sword master twice and the sword master is going to hit the apprentice twice, and then the apprentice is going to fall over. (As opposed to the apprentice being unable to hit the sword master, or only getting in one lucky blow before being taken down.)

First, I think everyone is over reacting at the word "Dragon". There was no mention of size, and I am sure everyone's mind immediately pictured Smaug or some other colossal beast of legend. I am sure the scenario presented wasn't meant to be that extreme. And truthfully, I bet a town guard of 100 could take down a medium-large dragon with proper tactics and brute force.

Secondly, to your idea of apprentice vs master. I think that's a bit too vague right now on class mechanics to define. I am sure there will be builds that have Int based AC modifiers, or combat expertise, etc. In those situations the apprentice could not hit the master(except on a 20, as it should be). And yes when the master strikes back, it hurts a hell of a lot more and everything is right in the world.

 

[Fenes]

In this week's column they joke "You also don't have to throw an Adamantine door in front of a party just to challenge them at higher levels." And I say, What? Isn't the point of going up to higher levels to face bigger, crazier threats. You SHOULD be bashing down Adamantine doors. When you need to make a climb roll, you shouldn't be climbing up a Tarasque's back, not a rope. For all the talk about 1st level characters being superheroes, I find the idea that a 20th level character will be challenged by an ordinary door kind of stupid.

It is stupid. A level 20 party is meant to kill dragons, yet can't wreck a wooden door faster than you can say "I hit it with my axe"? How many hitpoints does a wooden door have, huh?

 

[Grazzt]

In this week's column they joke "You also don't have to throw an Adamantine door in front of a party just to challenge them at higher levels." And I say, What? Isn't the point of going up to higher levels to face bigger, crazier threats. You SHOULD be bashing down Adamantine doors.

When you need to make a climb roll, you shouldn't be climbing up a Tarasque's back, not a rope. For all the talk about 1st level characters being superheroes, I find the idea that a 20th level character will be challenged by an ordinary door kind of stupid.

The DM can easily hand wave the rope and door thing. If you're high level, the DM can simply say "you climb the rope" or "you smash down the door"....no rolls needed (unless climbing the rope or smashing down the door is somehow tied to the main plot...then i might have the players roll or keep trying).

 

[B.T.]

Will be honest, while I'm okay with the design philosophy, I'm getting tired of these corporate buzzwords. In 4e, we had "exception-based design," "design tech," "effects-based design," "narrative control," and "economy of actions." Now we have "modularity," "flatter math," and "bounded accuracy."

Yuck.

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

How many of you DMs are going to have the patience to manage, let's say, 25 goblins fighting a party of 10th-level adventurers?

Seeing that I really enjoyed running a horde of 100 ghouls against a high-level AD&D party, me.

First level characters still won't be fighting trolls, and once regular trolls get mundane, there will be ubertrolls (or whatever they called) that are tougher than regular trolls.

Having played for 10 levels and going from killing a handful of goblins to killing 86 goblins on a regular basis isn't exactly something that sounds thrilling. Why do you think we have 3-5 or more MM's per edition?

Sure. But you can choose to move on to bigger threats, while the DM running a campaign centering on a human nation's conflict with goblin tribes isn't forced to use increasingly leveled goblins just to challenge the party. There is no downside to you, you don't have to keep using goblins.

But even if damage reduction is a way of introducing a type of "depth" into combat that doesn't require escalating the DCs, what is the analogue of damage reduction for out of combat activities, given that (as far as we have seen to date) there is no analogue of hit points and damage there, but just the same old "make a check and have the GM adjudicate the result of success/failure".

The depth would have to come from other sources. For example, breaking down the Gates of Hell wouldn't just be "Break Portcullis - DC 21." You might need to gather sources of power or components that are too difficult to acquire for low-level characters.

In order for an Iron-banded wooden door to be tough to break down for a 20th level party it would need hitpoints on a level equal to a 20th level monster. But that would mean it's near-impossible to break down or damage at low levels (whioch breaks verisimilitude for anyone who ever used an axe)

Or wooden doors are somehow impossible to be damaged by weapons such as Axes (which destroys verisimilitude, period.)

Or wood is the ultimate armor material, able to withstand level 20 damage better than anything else (which again destroys verisimilitude).

Or You can cut an iron golem down with your sword, but cannot cut down a door since it has to be "broken down" according to the rules, which means a strength test, no weapons allowed. Which would be silly.

Or the increase in damage isn't a large as you assume. It could take a 1st-level PC 10 good axe swings to break down the iron-bound wooden door while the 20th-level character does it in three. Depends on how fast damage scales.

There are a lot of other things, most of them I guess we still don't know, that can be used to "insulate" BBEGs from low level heroes.

For example, judging solely what was written in the article, they could give epic monsters high damage resistance, so that only high level heroes have a chance to actually damage them.

Or, in the case of the Tarrasque, requiring a wish to permanently kill it. Not many low-level armies with wish spells.

And monster abilities can come into play. If the Tarrasque can Rampage (move through enemy squares, attacking each that you pass through), it can probably attack a couple or a few hig-level party members in a single attack. Against a low-level army in formation? Devastation as one would expect when fighting Godzilla.

 

[Grazzt]

It is stupid. A level 20 party is meant to kill dragons, yet can't wreck a wooden door faster than you can say "I hit it with my axe"? How many hitpoints does a wooden door have, huh?

Wooden Door: AC 5, hp 10.