D&D 5E Crafting Items - Expert Craftsman vs Adventurers

[Myzzrym]

I see a lot of good points here!

One thing that strike out to me that I didn't really consider is the repeated rolls. Considering how adventuring goes, whenever something happens it's "roll once and we'll see the result" - but that's mostly because it's an immediate action type of thing. For crafting or other long term endeavour, it makes sense to make multiple rolls which would overall ensure that the difference remains consistent (unlike single rolls where strokes of bad / good luck often happen).

Another thing is to consider that even small differences in results have an important impact. As stated before since I only recently (a few months at most) switched to 5e after years of 3.5e, I tend to narrate the difference in increments of 5 - like rolling a 30 vs a 25. But with bounded accuracy, it makes sense to say that 18 vs 16 would have the same difference in result as the example before.

On a completely different topic: Speaking of Tools, is there any official information as to what Stat Modifier to use for each tool? (or do you not use any stat mod. at all?) Like for instance with Cooking Ustensils, I have arguments where you could either use Int (following recipes, careful dosage, western-style of cooking mentality) or Wis (getting the right feeling, using ingredients that marries well together, eastern-style of cooking mentality). Hell I even wonder if you could pass it as Cha sometimes (for some people cooking is an art, a way of expressing themselves).

 

[MarkB]

I'd use Wisdom for cooking, simply because wisdom governs perception, and that includes smell and taste.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I play this way, and it's awesome. The 20-30 goblins aren't acting alone: they're minions for a formorian warlock. They attack in a group and function more like a terrain hazard, at least until a fireball or a couple of shatters takes them all out.

It's similar to 4E's minions, except that you don't need special rules for it, thanks to... bounded accuracy.

If they aren't acting alone, you miss the point. Of course weaker foes are great as support and fodder to a BBEG, that's been true long before bounded accuracy came along. The "special rule" in 4E I am not familiar with since I never played it, but it seems like bounded accuracy IS the special rule... they just made everything else worse IMO by making it universal.

Speaking of "who even plays this way?," I think we should be comparing a level 1 character to a level 8 character when those two PCs won't be in the same party. I think the more important comparison is between PCs. Bob the level 8 archer may have a total +9 to attack with a longbow -- but Penelope the level 8 war cleric with a mediocre Dex only has a +5, and Sam the level 8 mountain dwarf wizard could pick up the longbow and have a -1 to attack.

That's where you see the difference in hit chance. And increasing the proficiency bonus exacerbates that difference. It's unlikely that Sam will pick up a longbow since she's 50% less likely to hit than Bob, but it could happen. But if you increase that discrepancy, it becomes even less likely.

So you've never had higher level characters with lower level retainers and henchmen? Having a low-level character in the same party as a mid-level one is not that uncommon, at least it never has been in my games. But hey, tastes differ. The scenario of an archery contest at some festival games is very possible and has happened several times through all my years of playing DnD.

Your comparison misses the point yet again. Of course someone who has dedicated their skills to something will be better than someone who simply knows how to do it and yet another person who isn't even proficient in it. Proficiency is the core of measuring skill. Everything else is secondary. Take away Bob's higher Dex and Penelope is nearly as good. The only edge Bob has is the Fighting Style, which Penelope could pick up with a single level of Fighter. Give Sam proficiency by making her an Elf, and now she is nearly on par with Bob also. Since you didn't spec out everything, I can't tell you just how close they'd be, but it wouldn't be far off.

As to my original point, when it is possible that two characters so vastly separated by XP amounts and levels as Bob and Tim have nearly the same chance of hitting a target, there is something wrong with the system. If I take away Bob's higher Dex, the difference is only +1 for proficiency bonus despite a spread of 7 levels (encompassing dozens of fights and hundreds of kills) when the levels cap at 20. Again, ridiculous....

 

[jasper]

Since there is no NPC classes in 5E, why are you trying to use PC rules? Or simiply
NPCS CHEAT AND BREAK THE RULES!

 

[SkidAce]

... They attack in a group and function more like a terrain hazard, at least until a fireball or a couple of shatters takes them all out.

It's similar to 4E's minions, except that you don't need special rules for it, thanks to... bounded accuracy.

Exactly.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

On a completely different topic: Speaking of Tools, is there any official information as to what Stat Modifier to use for each tool? (or do you not use any stat mod. at all?) Like for instance with Cooking Ustensils, I have arguments where you could either use Int (following recipes, careful dosage, western-style of cooking mentality) or Wis (getting the right feeling, using ingredients that marries well together, eastern-style of cooking mentality). Hell I even wonder if you could pass it as Cha sometimes (for some people cooking is an art, a way of expressing themselves).

Any or all of the above. In the same way that Thieves Tools are sometimes paired with abilities other than Int, what you are trying to achieve with the tool will determine what ability check you roll.

 

[Tony Vargas]

If they aren't acting alone, you miss the point. Of course weaker foes are great as support and fodder to a BBEG, that's been true long before bounded accuracy came along. The "special rule" in 4E I am not familiar with since I never played it, but it seems like bounded accuracy IS the special rule... they just made everything else worse IMO by making it universal.

The 'special rule' in 4e was "a missed attack never damages a minion" (minions were 1-hp monsters, so a hit prettymuch always killed them).

But /part/ of the idea of BA was to keep contemptable /lower-level/ foes relevant longer, and the main idea of minions was to have contemptable /lesser/ foes workable at any level.

The difference the 4e minion rule made was that area attacks would decimate minions, but some caught in the area might be missed and survive to continue to pose a threat, or at least annoyance, while AEs in 5e tend to be save:1/2, meaning much-lower-level foes caught in them tend to die automatically.

As to my original point, when it is possible that two characters so vastly separated by XP amounts and levels as Bob and Tim have nearly the same chance of hitting a target, there is something wrong with the system. If I take away Bob's higher Dex, the difference is only +1 for proficiency bonus despite a spread of 7 levels (encompassing dozens of fights and hundreds of kills) when the levels cap at 20. Again, ridiculous....

It helps to consider it in the context of the whole system. Take the archery contest: yes, a talented low-level amateur might well win an archery contest against a high-level adventurer, but an archery /duel/ would be won by the high-level adventurer every time. Because hps.

 

[Beleriphon]

In the Ye Olde Archeree Conteste from Robin Hood the idea was that the archers shot at progressively more distant targets. So by the end only Robin could split an arrow thus achieving a more perfect bulleye than his competitor. In the same scenario for the contest between Bob and Tim, at a certain point Bob is better, he's not rolling his to-hit with disadvantage if he has Sharp Shooter.

That said, years of experience can only take you so far for anything related to combat. Despite what a kung-fu movie would have us believe at a certain point those years of experience make you slower and weaker. Always bet on the bigger combatant when skill is equal.

There's a good reason a flyweight boxer doesn't fight a heavyweight boxer.

 

[S'mon]

There are no "levels" for non-PC-class NPCs in 5e, so the OP makes no sense.

There is Proficiency bonus, and skill bonus, but you don't need any particular skill bonus to be a good armourer - there aren't any rules beyond "tool proficiency". There are no rules for determining if an NPC is a journeyman or a master craftsman. It's more like 1e than 3e.

 

[S'mon]

Who plays that way? I'd be so annoyed with the DM if he threw 20-30 goblins at the party, which we would end up defeating anyway, and then we get so little XP it wasn't worth the hours the battle took.

I've run some perfectly decent fights like that in 5e; they don't even take particularly long. Especially good with solo high level PC vs horde of mooks using tactics, bows etc.

You seem a bit stuck in a 3e mindset. In 3e I didn't run the '30 goblins' fights; I'd narrate them "three days later, after a few battles with goblins, you reach..." - but 5e keeps them threatening. The XP is ok, too.