Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9288170" data-attributes="member: 6790260">Furthermore, &quot;accuracy&quot; isn't just your bonus to attack in proportion to the AC you're trying to hit.It's also your bonus to skill usage in proportion to the skill DCs you're trying to hit, and any other parts of the system which express growth. And those parts have been compressed or flattened as well--but in ways that, frankly, kind of end up being the worst of both worlds.A super-expert character is rolling with Advantage, Expertise, and a magical bonus or two (since magic is allowed to break the &quot;no fiddly bonuses&quot; rule whenever and wherever it feels like.) That's going to end up as something like (2d20k1)+12+5+1d4, or something to that effect, which is relatively likely to land in the 34+ range (as in, more than 50% of results are between 34 and 41), meaning stuff that's supposed to be damn near &quot;going beyond the impossible&quot;. Yet Peter Paladin is rolling Stealth at the exact same 1d20 (with disadvantage)-1 that he was rolling back at level 1. An across-the-board nat-1 (a less than 1 in 1600 event) is identical to the Paladin rollng a crit.So we still have the problem that a super-focused expert can achieve some stupidly high results...as in, comparable to what ultra-expert 4e characters could achieve, which the whole point was to get away from that, while at the same time these rules have created a situation where the Paladin not only sucks at stealth but gets progressively worse at it due to the party naturally focusing on tougher enemies over time.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 9288170, member: 6790260"] Furthermore, "accuracy" isn't just your bonus to attack in proportion to the AC you're trying to hit. It's also your bonus to [I]skill usage[/I] in proportion to the skill DCs you're trying to hit, and any other parts of the system which express growth. And those parts have been compressed or flattened as well--but in ways that, frankly, kind of end up being the worst of both worlds. A super-expert character is rolling with Advantage, Expertise, and a magical bonus or two (since [I]magic[/I] is allowed to break the "no fiddly bonuses" rule whenever and wherever it feels like.) That's going to end up as something like (2d20k1)+12+5+1d4, or something to that effect, which is relatively likely to land in the [I][B]34+[/B][/I] range (as in, more than 50% of results are between 34 and 41), meaning stuff that's supposed to be damn near "going beyond the impossible". Yet Peter Paladin is rolling Stealth at the exact same 1d20 (with disadvantage)-1 that he was rolling back at level 1. An across-the-board nat-1 (a less than 1 in 1600 event) is identical to the Paladin rollng a crit. So we still have the problem that a super-focused expert can achieve some stupidly high results...as in, comparable to what ultra-expert 4e characters could achieve, [I]which the whole point was to get away from that[/I], while at the same time these rules have created a situation where the Paladin not only sucks at stealth but gets progressively worse at it due to the party naturally focusing on tougher enemies over time. [/QUOTE]

Verification