D&D 5E D&D Next Q&A: 03/14/2014

[ambroseji]

I always felt that the +5 expertise bonus was too big of a jump at lower levels, so I am happy that it's now a scaling feature.

It also seems simpler to keep track of. It took my players quite a while to grasp the expertise feature. As a DM I had to walk my rogue through it for several sessions. It seems easy enough, but it was another bonus to remember to add and it got lost in the shuffle a few times.

 

[bogmad]

I'm curious about the effect, if any starting with a +2 to attack rolls will affect monster math, if any.
Not as if the numbers were all that balanced in the public playtest anyway.

Will we still be waiting 6 levels to get +3 proficiency?
Will DCs, target ACs, or hit points go up a little bit?

 

[JamesonCourage]

The smaller gap between specialists and non-specialists is a GOOD thing.

No, it's not.

YMMV.

Yes, it does.

 

[Derren]

The smaller gap between specialists and non-specialists is a GOOD thing. It means characters don't have to be such delicate focused workers in some insect colony.

So everyone being a clone of each other with no defining skills or features makes you less a member of an insect hive?

 

[Halivar]

So everyone being a clone of each other with no defining skills or features makes you less a member of an insect hive?

There's more to a class than its numbers, you know.

 

[ExploderWizard]

So everyone being a clone of each other with no defining skills or features makes you less a member of an insect hive?

Those that require huge mechanics only based gaps to recognize any difference between characters aren't even talking about the same game as I am.


The insect colony reference was in regard to over-specialization. Doing one thing, being a one trick pony.

When the rest of the game design takes that over specialization as standard and raises the bar on doing ANYTHING to account for that specialization then you have mechanical inflation. Those that specialize are the new normal, those that don't are now incompetent at anything.

This feeds directly into a sense of entitlement. After putting so much of your character building currency into doing one thing really well then darn it, you better be able to do that one thing ALL...THE..TIME. This leads to the kind of stuff like flying creatures only able to hop or melee characters feel deprotagonized or trippable piles of ooze because oh noes we can't run across anything not subject to our XXYY combo.

This is why I much prefer that specialization give an edge instead of outright trivializing actions that are a challenge to non-specialists. The decision to specialize shouldn't be the ONLY option available in order to function. The added benefit is that when a character needs to do something the situation demands that is outside their specialty, there is a chance to usefully participate.

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

I'm very glad that expertise will be double your proficiency bonus. It's much more conceptually consistent, and it makes the entire feature more readily replicable.

For the first point, it means that proficiency and expertise represent your level of focus more than your level of skill. The difference in focus isn't very significant at first level, but is more notable at higher levels. Plus, it works cleanly with the Bard's Jack of all Trades feature, which is purported to grant half your proficiency bonus to skills.

For the second, it means you can easily swap out the system for skill points. Take the number of skill proficiencies and expertise that a class gets over twenty levels, multiply by 6 (the maximum proficiency bonus), give 8 to 10 points at first level and spread the rest out. Instant skill point system that could be used on a per character basis.

 

[Li Shenron]

For some odd reason, the first thing that came to my mind when I read answer #3, is that now a 5e 1st level PC with proficiency and expertise has +4, which is exactly what a 3e 1st level PC had in a maxed-out class skill, while a 1st level PC with proficiency only has +2, which is exactly what a 1st level PC had in a maxed-out cross-class skill. Nothing more than a coincidence, but it's what immediately came to me

 

[Derren]

Those that require huge mechanics only based gaps to recognize any difference between characters aren't even talking about the same game as I am.


The insect colony reference was in regard to over-specialization. Doing one thing, being a one trick pony.

When the rest of the game design takes that over specialization as standard and raises the bar on doing ANYTHING to account for that specialization then you have mechanical inflation. Those that specialize are the new normal, those that don't are now incompetent at anything.

This feeds directly into a sense of entitlement. After putting so much of your character building currency into doing one thing really well then darn it, you better be able to do that one thing ALL...THE..TIME. This leads to the kind of stuff like flying creatures only able to hop or melee characters feel deprotagonized or trippable piles of ooze because oh noes we can't run across anything not subject to our XXYY combo.

This is why I much prefer that specialization give an edge instead of outright trivializing actions that are a challenge to non-specialists. The decision to specialize shouldn't be the ONLY option available in order to function. The added benefit is that when a character needs to do something the situation demands that is outside their specialty, there is a chance to usefully participate.

Entitlement? Really? You know what entitlement is? The recent "I can do everything because I am a hero" demands which you are indirectly feeding into. If there are people out there who believe that only minmaxed specialized characters should even attempt doing something then it is entirely their problem as this isn't true in any way.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Entitlement? Really? You know what entitlement is? The recent "I can do everything because I am a hero" demands which you are indirectly feeding into. If there are people out there who believe that only minmaxed specialized characters should even attempt doing something then it is entirely their problem as this isn't true in any way.

Isn't true in any way?

Ok then try creating a fighter character in 4E who can contribute meaningfully in ranged combat.

If it isn't melee then its don't bother compared to a "ranged" class. That is the kind of gap I'm talking about.