D&D 5E Color me baffled - attack bonus in Next

[Tortoise]

I'll admit it, I have not been paying too much attention to the playtest documents for a long time.

I'm now skimming the final public playtest packet and getting confused about attack bonus for the classes. Unless I am missing something (very likely) then it appears that a fighter and a mage of equal level and identical ability scores would have the same attack bonus. Please show me what I am missing.

 

[am181d]

I'll admit it, I have not been paying too much attention to the playtest documents for a long time.

I'm now skimming the final public playtest packet and getting confused about attack bonus for the classes. Unless I am missing something (very likely) then it appears that a fighter and a mage of equal level and identical ability scores would have the same attack bonus. Please show me what I am missing.

You are correct, but the fighter will generally have a higher ability score bonus and is proficient in weapons that deal more damage.

 

[Paraxis]

Also, the fighter type classes have plenty of class abilities that make melee and ranged attacks more effective.

So yes, a fighter with a 16 dex and a mage with a 16 dex score both are fighting with daggers they both have the same chance to hit.

 

[Giltonio_Santos]

Yeah... It's now all about proficiency. All classes have the same bonus, but each of them gets to use the bonus for different things (in regard to skills, weapons, saving throws...)

 

[Tortoise]

I suppose it makes some sense for bounded accuracy. I still find it odd that someone trained for fighting and someone not trained for fighting are equal until other skills, feats, etc kick in, other than the difference in hit points which is obvious at the start.

I would have thought Fighters should be ahead of the others on the progression perhaps starting at +2 and ending at +7 while Clerics and Thieves get their+1 at second level and end at +6, with mages getting their +1 at 3rd level and ending at +5.

 

[Li Shenron]

I suppose it makes some sense for bounded accuracy. I still find it odd that someone trained for fighting and someone not trained for fighting are equal until other skills, feats, etc kick in, other than the difference in hit points which is obvious at the start.

They equal only in terms of probability of hit, when using weapons they are proficient in, assuming they have the same Str or Dex score (depending on the weapon used).

I don't think the purpose of this new approach is only in bounded accuracy. I think they also wanted a system which allowed a non-martial character to be able to learn to use a weapon well enough (in 3e, it's quite impossible for a Wizard to wield a weapon decently except at low levels, because of the diverging BAB progressions). They also wanted a system that was as simple as possible, and one progression for all is probably as simple as can be, especially for multiclassing.

Fighter-types are supposed to have enough class and subclass features that makes them better in damage, combat flexibility (e.g. alternative effects), and of course defense. Remains to be seen if this works well in the end, or if spellcasters still manage to be as good as Fighters thanks to self buffs, and still have spells for other things.

 

[jodyjohnson]

As a base the proficiency rule is fine IMO.

But there are a lot of directions you can go with the numbers from there as options.

I like a 1/2 proficiency bonus for some things (0,+1,+2,+3). Or you could go with a no Proficiency bonus to others.

 

[1of3]

I would have thought Fighters should be ahead of the others on the progression perhaps starting at +2 and ending at +7 [...]

It does. For their favorite type of weapon.

 

[Tortoise]

Since the first post I looked briefly at multi-classing and from that standpoint the universal proficiency makes things much easier to work out.

I wonder how things work in the basic game when all the extras that make the difference are inactive?

 

[GX.Sigma]

I wonder how things work in the basic game when all the extras that make the difference are inactive?

It still won't matter, because a mage would be crazy to use a dagger when he can cast ray of frost at-will using Int, and a fighter would be crazy to use a dagger when he can use a longbow or whatever for way more damage.