D&D General Does D&D Really Need 20 Levels?

[Lanefan]

Since you don't actually have any experience with VTT's, perhaps it might be more useful to take me at my work when I say pre-rolling IS NOT THE PROBLEM.

On the VTT I'm used to - roll20 - prerolling would be a headache, as your rolls would disappear up the chat* and off the screen as other rolls-comments-etc. were made and would also cause other people's rolls etc. to similarly disappear. You'd have to label each roll such that when you and-or the DM scrolled up the chat to find them you'd know what each roll was for, and typing in the label would make the process take longer than just rolling the dice when asked to.

* - at least once a session the animated dice on the screen show a different result than what the chat says. DM ruled that the chat shall always be taken as correct.

 

[Lanefan]

I let them know only after they've hit.

If there's valid grounds to be suspicious I'll give them a roll to notice whether that swing did all the damage they think it did and if not, why not. If it's obvious, though, I'll just tell them.

 

[Toe Knee Nose]

The number of different things you do, the number of creatures you attack are maxing out complexity in ways I've never seen. It's far more complexity than you had indicated.

If you roll ahead you have to have a way to indicate sequence of attacks. Since we play in person and use dice, it's not an issue. If I'm running a complex character I can write down my attacks - something like
1) 16/24:15 meaning without advantage hits AC 16 or 20 with advantage and does 15 damage.
2) 12: 14 advantage die was lower so AC12 for 14
And on down the line. Sometimes I'll write an if such as if still standing smite for X.

It doesn't matter if I have multiple targets. Even with all your movements and extras it will still go fairly fast certainly faster than rolling at every step.

I don't know if you can do any of that with the tool you're using. But I do know that there's probably no way to streamline any of that without taking away most of your options. It would be a different game.

Edit - if you know the target AC ahead of time, you can usually save even more time.
Edit 2 - you can't do both flurry of blows and step of the wind on the same turn since they're bonus actions. Unless I'm missing something (rules have changed since I played a monk, but I don't see that changing). You also aren't action surging more than once per short rest. If a target dies before I use all my rolls, those rolls are ignored.

This is a bog standard high level turn. 3 enemies. If you are never seeing complexity like this, then, sure, I can see why your turns play so much faster. Step of the Wind, btw, is automatic (no action needed) when a high level monk uses a ki point for flurry.

And, sure, if you are stripping away actions (that like wasted rolls if an opponent dies) and not allowing PC's to move between attacks, I can see why you claim that high level combat is so much simpler.

To me, my example was a bog standard turn. That wasn't even all that complex.

YES IT'S A DIFFERENT GAME THAT I WANT. Now you're getting it. I WANT NEW RULES TO STREAMLINE HIGH LEVEL PLAY.

 

[Lanefan]

And, sure, if you are stripping away actions (that like wasted rolls if an opponent dies) and not allowing PC's to move between attacks, I can see why you claim that high level combat is so much simpler.

Is moving between attacks a Monk-specific thing?

I know characters can go move-attack-move but I didn't know they could go attack-move-attack.

 

[Dessert Nomad]

How many CR 11+ monsters have no resistances? I don't know the answer to that, but, I'm pretty willing to bet, "Not many" is pretty close. IOW, virtually everything you use in an encounter in double digit levels will have resistances. And typically multiple resistances.

Without looking it up, what resistances and vulnerabilities does a black Slaad have? Nalfeshnee? Gelugon? You know these off hand? Because as a player, if I'm not calling out my different damage types, I won't know which ones are relevant or not. So, they all need to be called out.

None of these questions are at all relevant, and the last line is simply untrue. Since you don't seem to be able to infer the way it works:

Player says "I'm doing X, Y, Z damage, do I need to separate it?"

DM looks at their reference (typically a printed stat block or saved copy in an online doc). Note that they need to have this at hand to know the monster HP, abilities, damage, and so on.

DM then says what damage needs to be tracked separately, if any. This is how the player knows which damage types are relevant.

Player then totals damage that doesn't need to be separated and each type that does, and says those. The player doesn't need to call out every damage type separately every time unless the creature has a really unusual mix of damage modifiers (something like vulnerable to fire, immune to thunder, normal from radiant, resistant to B/P/S).

For example, if fighting a devil with the damage types I listed before, the DM would say 'they're immune to fire, do others together'. If fighting a solar 'they're immune to the radiant, do others together'.

You're making all of this stuff out to be more complicated than it needs to be and...

You keep suggesting solutions to problems that I keep telling you I don't have.

complaining that the stuff you're choosing to ask questions about is irrelevant when someone answers you. I think it's absurd to say 'how can you possibly do this?' in one part of the post and 'oh the thing I was asking about really isn't a problem, why would you answer what I asked' in another. I answered the last one just in case anyone else is wondering how it works.

 

[Toe Knee Nose]

Is moving between attacks a Monk-specific thing?

I know characters can go move-attack-move but I didn't know they could go attack-move-attack.

standard 5e.

 

[Dessert Nomad]

The problem with the tug of war is that anyone who suggests any change is automatically "the enemy that must always be opposed no matter what" and a complete lack of listening to the actual problems being brought up.

I'm sorry, but an optional ruleset that streamlines high level play by reducing the number of actions characters take on a turn is a bridge too far? Really?

Yes. Getting more abilities and options is what makes high level play different from low level play. Taking a low level game but multiplying the players damage and HP, and also multiplying enemy damage and HP would not provide the play experience that I would want from high level play. As far as I'm concerned, it would be removing high level play from the game.

 

[Thomas Shey]

If it's a creature your character hasn't seen before, the GM's answer to this should always be "You'll find out" - preferably with an evil grin.

When I ask that, I've already rolled the hit, so there's no point in being coy any longer.

 

[Thomas Shey]

If there's valid grounds to be suspicious I'll give them a roll to notice whether that swing did all the damage they think it did and if not, why not. If it's obvious, though, I'll just tell them.

Eh, if there's no sign of burn marks after someone has hit with the flaming weapon, I don't see any point in being coy. It might be a different story about determining how much fire resistance, or f its full blown immunity, but that only probably matters to the spellcasters, and those are the guys with the Lore skills to figure it out.

 

[Toe Knee Nose]

Yes. Getting more abilities and options is what makes high level play different from low level play. Taking a low level game but multiplying the players damage and HP, and also multiplying enemy damage and HP would not provide the play experience that I would want from high level play. As far as I'm concerned, it would be removing high level play from the game.

For you. And that's great.

For me, the trade off is too great. Play is just too slow, again, for me, at high level play.

Which is why I've repeatedly suggested OPTIONAL rules for streamlining play. Optional damage rules to cut down on math. Optional monster rules to combine large numbers and cut down on the number of actions the NPC's take every turn.

Not really understanding the push back against OPTIONAL rules.