Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Minigiant" data-source="post: 9288730" data-attributes="member: 63508">But both of those are still sticking to the design goals.Expertise doubles Proficiency. Turning your +3 into a +6 still keeps you in the Bounds of the expected target DC.After Expertise is not Mastery which gives you 3X Prof. It's the mechanics that turn you low rolls into 10. Still withing the boundsAnd the design goal is that magic items are optional. WOTC openly says that magic items break BA and are not factored into math.And that is my point. With Bounded Accuracy, Magic Item Independence, Optional Feats, No New Classes, and No Skill Mastery/Grandmastery, WOTC cut out many of the fiddly bits from the core game that designers use to change up the game and sell more future product.The only core official fiddly bits WOTC left themselves that all players and DMs uses with are damage, HP, races, and subclasses.If the goal was to let a DM use a goblin as a threat to a level 5 PC, they didn't need BA for that. There are magic items, feats, traits, roles, etc that they could have used. However WOTC made all of that optional.And it was unnecessary. A goblin could hit and damage in a meaningful way a level 5 PC in every older edition.If they wanted a goblin to be a threat to a level 12 PC, there was always options. Magic, tactical rules, STR potions, leader effects, etc. A adult dragon isn't siccing his naked kobold thralls on the Realm's 2nd Best Knight unaided.But WOTC wanted to cater to the LOTR Fanboys who wanted to sic unskilled orc and goblins with no tactics nor magic support on PCs for 15 levels.D&amp;D with no base magic assumption? (That's crazy in foreign language)</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Minigiant, post: 9288730, member: 63508"] But both of those are still sticking to the design goals. Expertise doubles Proficiency. Turning your +3 into a +6 still keeps you in the Bounds of the expected target DC. After Expertise is not Mastery which gives you 3X Prof. It's the mechanics that turn you low rolls into 10. Still withing the bounds And the design goal is that magic items are optional. WOTC openly says that magic items break BA and are not factored into math. And that is my point. With Bounded Accuracy, Magic Item Independence, Optional Feats, No New Classes, and No Skill Mastery/Grandmastery, WOTC cut out many of the fiddly bits from the core game that designers use to change up the game and sell more future product. The only core official fiddly bits WOTC left themselves that all players and DMs uses with are damage, HP, races, and subclasses. If the goal was to let a DM use a goblin as a threat to a level 5 PC, they didn't need BA for that. There are magic items, feats, traits, roles, etc that they could have used. However WOTC made all of that optional. And it was [I]unnecessary[/I]. A goblin could hit and damage in a meaningful way a level 5 PC in every older edition. If they wanted a goblin to be a threat to a level 12 PC, there was always options. Magic, tactical rules, STR potions, leader effects, etc. A adult dragon isn't siccing his naked kobold thralls on the Realm's 2nd Best Knight unaided. But WOTC wanted to cater to the [B]LOTR Fanboys who wanted to sic unskilled orc and goblins with no tactics nor magic support on PCs for 15 levels.[/B] D&D with no base magic assumption? (That's crazy in foreign language) [/QUOTE]

Verification