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

[bsss]

Someone else (was it @AlViking ?) said they always use average damage. To me this also isn't a great solution, as damage swinginess can make a big difference if someone's dice are running hot or cold; never mind it makes things too predictable (I'm at 35 hit points and this guy's been doing 10 on every hit, I'm good for 3 more then I gotta bail out 'cause I can't get lucky on a low-damage fourth hit).

He and I were talking about it. It works great in some games, especially ones where the to-hit roll reigns supreme, because you get the unpredictability there, baked into one simple roll. It's also fine just to simplify the math parts of playing for people who can't do mental arithmetic at scale or don't have lots of dice. I think it's less satisfying in a game with multiple attacks per turn, because you get into the law of averages problem, especially if they are going to be hitting predictably.

Beyond the question of the attack roll, though, the thing to remember about damage rolls is they quickly become a predictable bell curve as you add dice, so the "hot or cold", for big damage dice pools, specifically, becomes increasingly rare at high levels. At that point, your big variable is the d20, in its miss/hit/crit resolution, and resolving the damage by rolling lots of dice becomes a fun (or not) ritual that is mathematically insignificant vs. the average. If those 3 hits you mention or the four attacks per turn hitting are foregone conclusions, then yeah, average damage is samey. If the attacks hitting are uncertain, and one or two extra or fewer rounds are potentially a big deal (and combat rounds should be sought to have meaningful impact), then the damage isn't where the variability lives anyway, so skip the annoying dice roll part (unless you like it (I do)).

I think the problem here is the number of attacks.

 

[abazaba]

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.

I never really thought about it before, but I guess that (at least in 5.5e) once you get 'extra attack' at 5th level as a monk (or barbarian, fighter, paladin, ranger), you could indeed go 'first-attack - move - extra-attack'.

 

[Toe Knee Nose]

I never really thought about it before, but I guess that (at least in 5.5e) once you get 'extra attack' at 5th level as a monk (or barbarian, fighter, paladin, ranger), you could indeed go 'first-attack - move - extra-attack'.

It was true in 5e as well. You didn't even need to get "Extra attack" really. Simply using two weapons would work as well. 5e has always allowed movement at any time.

I mean, in 2024, one of the first abilities a Champion fighter gets is a 1/2 speed movement after a crit. Even casters using spells like Scorching Ray can move between attacks. That's why Magic Missile specifies that all strikes are simultaneous.

 

[abazaba]

It was true in 5e as well. You didn't even need to get "Extra attack" really. Simply using two weapons would work as well. 5e has always allowed movement at any time.

I mean, in 2024, one of the first abilities a Champion fighter gets is a 1/2 speed movement after a crit. Even casters using spells like Scorching Ray can move between attacks. That's why Magic Missile specifies that all strikes are simultaneous.

Thanks. I always thought that the 'simultaneous' part of 'Magic Missile' was there to prevent people from doing things like the following (because you have to specify all the targets up front) :

• Did the first missile kill the enemy ?
• No ? Then I aim the second missile at the same enemy. Did that kill the enemy ?
• Yes ? Then I aim the last missile at another target.

But I guess that that approach could be taken with 'Scorching Ray' now that I re-read the spells description.

 

[Minigiant]

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?

Its because many want all or nothing.

 

[Minigiant]

One thing I think D&D should bring back is 4e monster roles.

Running 4 simple brutes and 1 complex controller is easier and faster than 5 unfocused damage dealers with 3 different attack routines at any level.

 

[AlViking]

But, that's the thing. This is not a complicated character. This an Open Hand monk. That's pretty basic. A straight Battlemaster fighter could easily have just as many things to do in a single round as the monk. A caster, plus pets/summonings, can also easily have just as many actions that need resolving, again, sequentially.

And, let's not forget, the monsters are just as complicated. Again, straight from the Monster Manual - CR 16 Githyanki Dracomancer. Here's the stat block in spoilers to avoid cluttering the post:

Spoiler

View attachment 449635

Now, that's a single monster. It has 3 attacks, each dealing base + fire damage and inflicting the frightened condition. It can also Misty Step as a bonus action. That's about as simple as it gets at that level. Surprisingly, no resistances, which is nice. But, you still have to make 3 attacks, deal damage, dealing with various resistances that the PC's have, plus adding fear conditions, plus a bonus short range teleport. And that's only one critter. Typically, 16th level party is going to face this plus probably two or three more baddies, at a minimum, easily a pair of CR 8 Githyanki knights each with 3 attacks, one of which can be a telekinesis spell, plus a bonus teleport.

And this is a bare bones, no frills encounter for a 16th level party.

So, no, I'm not being "vague" at all. I've been really, really specific. Heck, I've offered solutions to the problem in this thread: I posted my Mob rules which have greatly increased the pace of encounters. I've talked about "Legendary" characters having separate Legendary mechanic like Legendary damage akin to MDC from RIFTS where high level characters don't track damage from non-legendary sources - they either just kill the baddie, or ignore damage under a certain threshold. The Threshold damage rules could be used here to speed things up. Instead of characters having 4+actions in a round, they get one or two, similar to how 4e handled things - lot's of burst and blast AOE effects to simulate having multiple attacks.

In what way am I being vague?

I don't have every version of every class memorized. I'm not going to spend time re-reading and parsing out everything you've said. I could easily have missed something, misunderstood something, honestly I'm not sure.

But, as far as I know you can shove as a monk, you aren't doing damage (unlike someone with some weapons). You're also knocking enemies prone, picking up someone when the only time you can do that is if you use your focus points to use step of the wind - even if an open hand monk gets it along with their flurry there's an issue of timing, you have one action surge to spend per short rest yet this example is typical of every round and so on. You also added in things like your slow fall as something that takes extra time which in my experience only adds a few seconds in play.

I've told you what we do and some suggestions. I let people know they're next so we can roll ahead, if you may gain advantage we roll an advantage D20. We color code dice and use a consistent pattern so we know sequence of attacks which means that if I don't need that 5th attack I don't use it. I even recommend using averages for someone that does a lot of damage either because of multiple attacks or spells with a lot of dice; we round up the damage to make it a better choice in the long run.

Can any of that be applied to your game? Heck if I know. It doesn't even apply to every game I run (I run multiple). It's become obvious that it doesn't matter at this point and arguing about details is meaningless. What I do know is that if suggestions like mine don't work then there is very little the game could do to simplify higher level play that wouldn't change the nature of the game. I don't think that's a viable option. If you had any idea of how it could be done I might provide feedback but I haven't seen many suggestions. If high level play takes too long for you perhaps the only solution is to not play high levels. What else can be said when there are no concrete alternatives other than "FIX IT"?

 

[AlViking]

Your examples are fine. No issue there.

You've offered solutions, sure. My concern is that all those solutions sacrifice granularity for efficiency. Have you got any solutions that speed things up but keep the granularity in place?

Someone else (was it @AlViking ?) said they always use average damage. To me this also isn't a great solution, as damage swinginess can make a big difference if someone's dice are running hot or cold; never mind it makes things too predictable (I'm at 35 hit points and this guy's been doing 10 on every hit, I'm good for 3 more then I gotta bail out 'cause I can't get lucky on a low-damage fourth hit).

When enemies and PCs have triple digit HP I don't find that the damage dealt per hit matters much, whether or not you hit does.

 

[Minigiant]

When enemies and PCs have triple digit HP I don't find that the damage dealt per hit matters much, whether or not you hit does.

Total damage is Accuracy of Attacks times Number of attacks times Average Damage per attack

T = A * N * D

As long as you hit T, you can make A = 100% or N= 1 if you adjust the other variables.

Accuracy of Attacks, Number of attacks, Average Damage per attack are just flavor. And at high level, those arent major part of flavor out of a few like Marriliths.

 

[AlViking]

Total damage is Accuracy of Attacks times Number of attacks times Average Damage per attack

T = A * N * D

As long as you hit T, you can make A = 100% or N= 1 if you adjust the other variables.

Accuracy of Attacks, Number of attacks, Average Damage per attack are just flavor. And at high level, those arent major part of flavor out of a few like Marriliths.

I roll attacks for monsters simply to hear players groan when I crit.

Sadly, all but the monk now have adamantine armor.