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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sadrik" data-source="post: 6052266" data-attributes="member: 14506">You know I was thinking about this some more. Think about this in terms of the evolution of the attack roll. We went from fairly tight AC scores 10 to -10 a range of 21 to 3e which blew the doors off and scaled it 10 to anywhere with a variety of BAB and there was a lot of variability touch attacks etc. Then we had the +1/2 level in 4e which people likened to the rat race. If the expectation is that you will have essentially the same chance to hit whether you are 1st or 30th why bother with the +1/2 level so we arrive at fairly flat math in 5e.Now look at HP, is the expectation at high level that a critter is going to take the same number of rounds of attacks as at 1st level. I think that you are making the argument that it should. I honestly can see it going both ways. If the expectation is that HP should scale and damage should scale right along side it... Perhaps we need a 5e "+1/2 level" rule for damage... that affects all characters and creatures.I'll take this concept from another angle. Why should the flesh golem deal 4d6+4 damage per hit? Is it for no other reason than it is a level 6 monster? Or is its damage scaling up due to level? The point being that if this is a concept of 5e, damage scaling by level why not approach it fairly even handed and make a general rule about it. A +1/2 level-like rule...Of course the post modern approach afterward would be lets strip the bonus damage rule out and go with true damage. LOL, Nah, one of the tenants of D&D is scaling HP. How do you handle scaling HP though.</blockquote>

Verification