Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DinoInDisguise" data-source="post: 9653767" data-attributes="member: 7045806">There is a difference between "I wouldn't find this complexity burdensome" and "this isn't adding complexity." In this case, you are adding complexity in the math and in the rules. You, and many others, may not find that to be an issue but some may. This is because of the complexity's affect on any given player's experience varies by player.Lets look at the attack bonus chain you lay out. Let's just use proficiency bonus on the first attack, and a cumulative penalty of -1 to that per subsequent attack. This about as simple as one could get. Not likely to be balanced but will do for demonstration purposes. So the options for a player is to memorize the four numbers based on their PB. If their PB is 4, those numbers would be 4, 3, 2, and 1. Or do this math each time. Which would be, 4, 4-1, 4-2, 4-3.  This is in contrast to memorizing one number, 4 in this case, that is printed on their character sheet. We can imagine the process a player's brain will take during the attack.The player will roll, and announce the result. They will say "I rolled an 18!" They then have several things to process. Each will be processed in an instant, but they must all be processed to get the right answer. What attack is it in the turn. What is the adjustment to the PB according to the governing rule. What is the PB+that adjustment. And, finally, what is the total of 18 + PB - adjustment. Where they subtract the adjustment for iterative attacks is irrelevant here, as the number of steps doesnt change.For comparison, we can take the current 5e's method;The player will roll, and announce the result. They will say "I rolled an 18!" They than have several things to process. What is my PB? What is 18 + my PB. Again each of these steps might be processed instantly, but both must be processed to achieve the answer.We can do a simple count of steps and see what process is more "complex." This is very obvious. Even in the case of full memorization, we are still adding complexity. Because in those cases you must recall each memorized item and process the math. Each step still happening instantly, but happening none-the-less.You may not find that complexity burdensome. But that isn't the same as the complexity not being there. Complexity is added, both mathematically and rule-wise, You can only mitigate some of that with rule phrasing. If a prospective player was poor at math and/or poor at memorization, this process might not be dead simple. There might be a difference between the two in both difficulty and time taken to solve. In this case the added complexity could very well negatively impact their experience.You may think the gameplay is worth this cost in complexity. That it's a net benefit. You may even believe that it's not close. And that's fine. But to claim the complexity is not there is definately odd, to say the least.</blockquote>

Verification