D&D 5E good things, bad things and things you would change about 5e

[Hakon Blum]

I draw the opposite conclusion from 2d6. It's MUCH swingier than d20, especially in a system aiming for bounded accuracy so results are near 50/50.

Let's say in a 2d6 system Adam is looking for a 7 or better. That happens 58% of the time, say it's about the same as a 9 or better on d20 which is 60% success. Or 10 or higher (55%) - doesn't matter.

Bob is like Adam but his player didn't optimize quite as hard. He's 1 point worse in modifiers. Bob needs an 8 or higher. That's only a 41% chance of succeeding. That's a 17% swing. On a d20 it would only be a 5% swing. It's more than three times as swingy right where you are aiming for. Even the slightest bit of better or worse building or small numerical modifier (like the Bless spell) will make a huge difference in character chances to succeed.

It gets too sensitive, where the slightest change int he numbers throws the probability of succeeding all over the place much more than a d20. It will have the exact opposite effect as what you are looking for if you. You've got the idea with the bell curve, but the issue is that bounded accuracy puts it on the bell curve right where you have the most variation because dice are granular. A bell curve will have a chance to get a 6.95 or a 7.12, all near a 7, but you can't roll that. The smallest granularity you have, +/- 1, is a really big deal near the middle.

yeah but thats what i am going for, so that players will want to put the odds in their favour with role playing before rolling the dice, and with a near miss system in place failing something like a swim roll by 1 doesn't mean your character drowns.

 

[Lanliss]

thought of another hate:
weapons table in 5e, they dumbed down weapons so much they didn't even realise there is no difference between halberd and glaive
and although it makes it easier that one weapon size fits all, it ruins part of the roleplaying.

i think a chart which has the weapon type, such as piercing blade, slashing blade with flat edge, slashing blade with double edge.
as the type of weapon, and then lists, what tiny, small, medium large, massive does to the weapon

eg for slashing double edged blade, tiny is a pocket knife, small a punching dagger, medium a short sword, large a longsword, massive a great sword.

The chart would then say how it effects attack roles, parrying and damage.
The characters innate size would already effect damage further.

meaning a pixie could grab a nail and use it like a lance, or a giant could grab a tree and use it as a club.
you would just need to know what weapon it is similar too and how big it is in relation to the user.

does this seem appealing?

This sounds awesome, and if you work out the tables for it I would very much love to see them.

 

[Blue]

yeah but thats what i am going for, so that players will want to put the odds in their favour with role playing before rolling the dice, and with a near miss system in place failing something like a swim roll by 1 doesn't mean your character drowns.

The "near miss" for skill failure isn't something you've mentioned before except talking a little about glancing blows. From talking about reaching target DCs it seemed that it was boolean success/fail like D&D. Can you expand on it?

My concern was it is so easy to make a sub-optimal character because even the slightest deviation below expected will have a huge drop in success. That's something I think should be avoided in system design.

 

[Hakon Blum]

Have you looked at Fantasy AGE and its stat divisions? There is a similar line of thinking about dividing stats up a bit more to prevent überstats.

My own simple idea for providing a minor boon to Intelligence is providing bonus languages/item proficiencies based upon Intelligence modifier. (This would also be a nice touch for artificers, at least based upon the most recent UA playtest version.)

wow, thank you, this is very close to my system indeed like 80% there

I still think my stats, skills, leveling, spells and feats are superior.
and i have more classes (currently i have 144 in the works)

but this will help me iron out some creases for sure

you have know idea how helpful this is
especially since my setting has 3 different eras like it has 3 different games with the same rules
mine are past (fantasy), present day (modern), and future (sci-fi)

 

[Belltent]

yeah but thats what i am going for, so that players will want to put the odds in their favour with role playing before rolling the dice, and with a near miss system in place failing something like a swim roll by 1 doesn't mean your character drowns.

If you're looking for your players to optimize you could probably just tell them to. Although, I've played with people who A) don't want to or B) don't seem to know how.

Additionally, one of the issues you brought up was the swingy-ness of the d20. You also mentioned familiarity with the EotE system. In my mind, there's no better solution for that first sentence than that second one. Edge or it's big brother WHFRP are less clean on paper but way smoother at the table for my money.

 

[Hakon Blum]

The "near miss" for skill failure isn't something you've mentioned before except talking a little about glancing blows. From talking about reaching target DCs it seemed that it was boolean success/fail like D&D. Can you expand on it?

My concern was it is so easy to make a sub-optimal character because even the slightest deviation below expected will have a huge drop in success. That's something I think should be avoided in system design.

the near miss at present is a miss of just 1 point off, which in this 2d6 system is a lot.
but i also have glancing blow which is the result is a tie, resulting in half damage in combat.
the near miss is in place so that if you get close, you only half fail at something.
i find in dnd the chance to hit goes up so fast that ac can't keep up unless your a +3 shield wielding tank.
by making draws result in half damage and near misses cause 1-2 points of damage (which usually mean 0 if it hits armour)
combat lasts a little longer then 2 rounds

i want combat to feel like your actually trying to open your opponents defences and strike the fatal blow rather then swing, kill, swing, kill, swing, kill

the idea is that the bound mechanics will assume you are average at everything, through your training choices and skills and feats you should find you get to an almost auto pass on everything average.
the idea is the dm is to throw your group in the deep end, send on mission impossible where the advantages you have min maxed to get are a necessity in order to succeed.

in combat a veteran archer will be like legolas, practically never missing the average foes, but the harder foes that come along are suppose to be there to throw a spanner in the works, to force team work in the groups to overcome.

something i feel dnd doesn't do very well, you have your front lines, you damage dealers and your support, but in most scenarios if the enemy gets into melee with the damagers like wizards they are forced to get out of there and not do damage.
instead of tanks wrecking havoc in melee, wizards casting spells and support providing buffs, combat usually ends up being
tanks do all the work, wizards run away till they get a clean shot and supporters chase the wizards and tanks trying to top them up with healing
(note this does depend on the dm and level but i have noticed a pattern)

while I'm sure similar things will occur in my game at times the very monsters them selves will be a wild card.

an example of this is my entry for troll.
in my bestiary instead of weakness to acid and fire it says:
2 weaknesses, roll on chart to determine which
it might have a double weakness to electrical
or might roll a double 6 and have none
or a weakness to water and sonic

but only the dm will know, your group can throw fire at it like you would in a normal game, but it may actually be immune to fire.

this factor makes the game even more fun in my opinion as it removes something that a lot of dm's feel is meta gaming


so in summary the game will work on you having a 10 in every stat, the balance should automatically occur from advisories being better then average like you and from the dm throwing you on harder missions.

This sounds awesome, and if you work out the tables for it I would very much love to see them.

i will try to find the 5e conversion chart i made a year ago, it is what i am basing my current one on, it may take a while though as i have notes and files everywhere.

 

[Hakon Blum]

If you're looking for your players to optimize you could probably just tell them to. Although, I've played with people who A) don't want to or B) don't seem to know how.

Additionally, one of the issues you brought up was the swingy-ness of the d20. You also mentioned familiarity with the EotE system. In my mind, there's no better solution for that first sentence than that second one. Edge or it's big brother WHFRP are less clean on paper but way smoother at the table for my money.

i play EOTE on mondays and D&D 5e wednesdays, hence the reason i realised both systems had flaws and tried to merge the 2 in to one flawless game

i do like the RP advantage/threat system and am still working on a way to work the system in.

at present i am leaning towards allowing a move action to be traded for a skill check, the skill check you choose has an effect on the way you attack

at present every attack rolls:
2d6 to hit
2d6 for where your blow strikes

then damage is 1d3, 1d6, 2d3, 3d3, 2d6, 4d3 etc

the means at present you need 3 colours of d6
the hit
the location
the damage

a skill check is
the check
the bonus effect

so at present its like edge but with an extra roll for damage
if i include the bonus effect on attack rolls as well its just too many dice to roll, it would slow the game
its simple right now
did you hit? where did you hit? whats the damage?

by going the route of bonus effects (similar to advantage/disadvantage) only effecting skill checks and allowing skill checks to be done as a manoeuvre during combat, it means you can still have this crazy moments where you swing from the chandelier (if you cut the right rope)

at present for skills a 2 is a crit fail (think despair) a 12 is a crit (think triumph)

on the bonus effect a 2 gives 3 threat, 3 is 2, and 4 is 1 threat, 5,6,7,8,9 have no effect, 10 is 1 advantage, 11 is 2, 12 is 3 advantage. That results in 1/6 bad, 2/3 nothing, 1/6 good for the odds.

so all skills rolls are 4d6 rolls, (2d6 x 2 colours)

 

[Sacrosanct]

thought of another hate:
weapons table in 5e, they dumbed down weapons so much they didn't even realise there is no difference between halberd and glaive
and although it makes it easier that one weapon size fits all, it ruins part of the roleplaying.

i think a chart which has the weapon type, such as piercing blade, slashing blade with flat edge, slashing blade with double edge.
as the type of weapon, and then lists, what tiny, small, medium large, massive does to the weapon

eg for slashing double edged blade, tiny is a pocket knife, small a punching dagger, medium a short sword, large a longsword, massive a great sword.

The chart would then say how it effects attack roles, parrying and damage.
The characters innate size would already effect damage further.

meaning a pixie could grab a nail and use it like a lance, or a giant could grab a tree and use it as a club.
you would just need to know what weapon it is similar too and how big it is in relation to the user.

does this seem appealing?

I'm sure it has great appeal to some players. You'd think, with me being an AD&D guy all these years, that I'd be all for weapon charts. But actually, I go the opposite way. IMO, it slows things down too much and discourages certain archetypal builds, like the lethal dagger wielding fighter. I would rather they make it even more simpler, and every weapon uses the same damage dice, like a d6 like they had in OD&D and B/X. Then, based on skill and proficiency, that damage dice can improve. Maybe tied to the prof rating. Just tossing out ideas. For example, "Weapons you are proficient in, you add your prof bonus to damage". And maybe a feat that "add 1 to either strength or dexterity, increase your weapon damage dice to a d8." And maybe a champion fighter ability sort of like expertise, "Choose two weapon types. You double your prof bonus to damage with those weapons."

When you have really detailed weapon charts, you end up with cookie cutter builds. Everyone and their grandma's dog has a long sword in AD&D. And cookie cutter PCs is a bad thing, IMO. It's a game about heroes. If someone wants to play a famous character from literature or a movie who uses a less optimal weapon, it's good for the game if they are able to do so without suffering mechanically. Ergo, all weapons use basic same dice.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Let's say in a 2d6 system Adam is looking for a 7 or better. That happens 58% of the time, say it's about the same as a 9 or better on d20 which is 60% success. Or 10 or higher (55%) - doesn't matter.

Bob is like Adam but his player didn't optimize quite as hard. He's 1 point worse in modifiers. Bob needs an 8 or higher. That's only a 41% chance of succeeding. That's a 17% swing.

Not how I'm used to hearing 'swingy' used around here.

Rather, swinginess seems to be used unscientifically, like variance in statistics/probability. A d20 is swingier than 2d6 because you're more likely to get a result that further from the average.

 

[Blue]

Not how I'm used to hearing 'swingy' used around here.

Rather, swinginess seems to be used unscientifically, like variance in statistics/probability. A d20 is swingier than 2d6 because you're more likely to get a result that further from the average.

I apologize if my use of terminology was incorrect, but that doesn't change point.

The number rolled on the d20 is an intermediate step. The actual result is (in D&D) the boolean pass/fail - did you make your DC/AC or not.

So with the assumption that your targets are near the center, if you make the smallest possible adjustment supported (+/-1), a d20 provides a 5% change (say 10+ to 11+), while 2d6 provides up to 17% (7+ to 8+).

Now, as tasks get either very likely or very unlikely the 2d6 has a smaller change than d20. But in the sweet spot a small change in modifiers will have a huge effect on did you make your DC.