Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 5396929" data-attributes="member: 4937">In practice I usually find that the two rolls, take the best is worth somewhat more than a +3 bonus.  The actual worth of course depends on the situation, in some cases it is worth less, and in some cases it is worth more, but the important thing to note is that the more likely you are to succeed the more valuable the two rolls are.   Conversely, the more likely you are to succeed the less valuable a static bonus vs. a static DC tends to be (because eventually your bonuses from other sources render it irrelevant).As a side note here, I want to make sure everyone understands that a static +1 bonus versus a scaling DC (like armor class, or a saving throw) always maintains roughly the same worth.  It's only when DC is capped and doesn't scale upward with level that a static bonus begins to be unattractive.To see the math of static bonus vs. two rolls, let's consider two hopefully typical cases.#1) The character is low level and has a +3 bonus on his fumble checks, and the fumble DC is 16.  a) If he takes a feat giving him a +3 bonus, he fails on a 9 or less, roughly 45% of the time.b) If he takes a feat giving him to rolls but no bonus, the chance that he fails both rolls is 12 in 20 times 12 in 20 or roughly 36% of the time.  Hense, the roll is slightly better in this case than a +3 bonus and is in fact worth nearly a +5 bonus.  With other math the value would be slightly less or slightly more, but at this level the two approaches are comparable.#2) The character is high level and has a +15 bonus on his fumble checks, and the fumble DC is 16.a) The feat the player took earlier is now worthless.  A +18 bonus is no better in this case than the +15 bonus, as a roll of 1 is a failure regardless, and so there is a 5% chance of failure.b) This is where two rolls really start to shine.  The chance of failure is now 1 in 20 times 1 in 20 or roughly 1 in 400 times - .25% percent.  At this level, there is no comparison between the two approaches.  The static bonus now utterly useless, and the two rolls save the player from 95% of all failures.Anyway, I hope that illustrates my point.   Even if you don't take my advice in this situation, I hope this adds another tool to your rules smithing tool box and you'll have some better idea of what your future rules accomplish so you can fit your rules to your goals.Lastly, there is always more than one approach.  That a feat becomes useless over time is less of a problem if you allow retraining.  I don't allow retraining but do take care to make sure that feats don't become less useful over time (so that retraining isn't necessary).   And I do think it encouraging that you've added fumbles and made things harder on spellcasters, which suggests you are looking at the rules set holostically.</blockquote>

Verification