• Welcome to this new upgrade of the site. We are now on a totally different software platform. Many things will be different, and bugs are expected. Certain areas (like downloads and reviews) will take longer to import. As always, please use the Meta Forum for site queries or bug reports. Note that we (the mods and admins) are also learning the new software.
  • The RSS feed for the news page has changed. Use this link. The old one displays the forums, not the news.

5E [Guidance] What, +1d4 to every check ever?

CapnZapp

Adventurer
Being able to get +2.5 on anything anytime has a huge impact on play.

MUCH more than killing some random monster.

It would be much better to make it a 1st level spell, so it couldn't be spammed. Even if the bonus would also be increased.

Guidance is too close to a static bonus. The game doesn't need them - it is easy as it is.

Much more fun in having discrete bonuses that you choose to use only on select few encounters.
 
Last edited:

Hussar

Legend
Being able to get +2.5 on anything anytime has a huge impact on play.

MUCH more than killing some random monster.

It would be much better to make it a 1st level spell, so it couldn't be spammed. Even if the bonus would also be increased.

Guidance is too close to a static bonus. The game doesn't need them - it is easy as it is.

Much more fun in having discrete bonuses that you choose to use only on select few encounters.
But, that's the point I've made already. "Huge impact"? Really? Succeeding 1 in 8 more times than you would without the spell? How is that a "huge impact"?

I'm seeing lots of theorycrafting and very, very little actual evidence.

And, I'd point out that other than this thread, which was necro'd, this has been a virtual non-issue for the past five years. If it has such a massive impact, why aren't there numerous Agony Aunt type posts complaining about it?
 

Stalker0

Adventurer
How often does it make the difference on a skill check? How much impact is it actually having, not, how much do you feel it has.
We already know the math on how much it impacts the roll, all tracking that would do is lead to biases due to a limited roll set. If I had a game where guidance happened to push every single skill roll over the dc, that’s just a lucky night, not proof that the spell is op, and the opposite is also true.

I’d say the better tracking is, how often does a skill check have greater consequence than an attack roll or saving throw? I’m assuming that people think a +2.5 to either of those is pretty good. So if s skill check is often as impactful, than the bonus has to be considered in the same light.
 

CapnZapp

Adventurer
But, that's the point I've made already. "Huge impact"? Really? Succeeding 1 in 8 more times than you would without the spell? How is that a "huge impact"?

I'm seeing lots of theorycrafting and very, very little actual evidence.

And, I'd point out that other than this thread, which was necro'd, this has been a virtual non-issue for the past five years. If it has such a massive impact, why aren't there numerous Agony Aunt type posts complaining about it?
The problem with that is that it enables me to argue there's little difference between a +2 proficiency bonus and a +6 one.

Each +1 bonus matters. When you have players that minmax well, guidance is the straw that breaks the camel's back.

1/8 is not trivial.
 

CapnZapp

Adventurer
I’d say the better tracking is, how often does a skill check have greater consequence than an attack roll or saving throw? I’m assuming that people think a +2.5 to either of those is pretty good. So if s skill check is often as impactful, than the bonus has to be considered in the same light.
No.

The only real cost of Guidance is its cost in the action economy. During combat this cost (=making a Cleric, an otherwise very capable character do nothing else) is actually quite significant and I have zero problems with the cantrip.

Outside of combat, however, this cost approaches zero, which highlights the real issue: your ability to spam the cantrip endlessly.

In short, a cantrip that makes the party easily one level better, is an unwelcome addition to the game. Also, it being free means there's never any good reason for the Cleric to deny its casting. This is not a balance issue, but something I still dislike. (Had there been even a 1-in-20 risk of something bad/inconvenient happening it would help a lot)
 
Last edited:

WaterRabbit

Villager
This is kind of the problem with all at-will cantrips that have a valuable use outside of combat. If it becomes too much of a problem, have something like the cantrip can be used 3+Con Mod before having to start rolling for Exhaustion. (DC 10, just like the chase rules). This will limit spamming but still provide enough uses for a normal group and also give a mechanic for those that want to push it.

Just look at a cantrip like Move Earth. A character can in one hour move 3,000 5' cubes of dirt == 375,000 cubic feet. Seems a little silly. A frontend loader only move about 15-20 cubic feet depending on its size and certainly takes longer than 6 seconds to do so.
 
Last edited:

jasper

Rotten DM
...Move Earth. A character can in one hour move 3,000 5' cubes of dirt == 375,000 cubic feet. Seems a little silly.... WHY DON'T ISEE A 5 ' HOLE MR COOL HAND wATERRABBIT, screamedBoss Godfrey
... Move Earth... WHY DO I SEE 5 ' HOLE MR COOL HAND wATERRABBIT IN MY YARD, screamed Boss Paul
****
...Also, it being free means there's never any good reason for the Cleric to deny its casting......
WHAT! you put sugar in your grits! No Guidance for you!
WHAT! You are a Pepsi drinker. No Guidance for you!
 
Last edited:

Hussar

Legend
The problem with that is that it enables me to argue there's little difference between a +2 proficiency bonus and a +6 one.

Each +1 bonus matters. When you have players that minmax well, guidance is the straw that breaks the camel's back.

1/8 is not trivial.
Well, no. A +6 would change the success rate from 1/8 to 3/8 - a tripling of success rates due to the bonus. Something that bumps almost half of your failures into successes is a major change.

Something that bumps one failure out of eight into a success isn't going to have a whole lot of impact on the game, especially when a single character is unlikely to make more than about 8 skill checks in a given session. A +2 attack does have a larger impact simply because the player makes so many more attack rolls than skill checks.

That's why I talk about tracking the impact. Because we don't really know how often a character is making a skill check in a given session and how often that that skill check succeeds because of a bonus d4. You'd need to track over several sessions, across a number of characters, but, I would hazard a guess that the impact of Guidance is far, far from game breaking.
 

jasper

Rotten DM
teacher! Teacher! Hussar is assigning home work assignments again. And it has to with Sadistics.
 

Stalker0

Adventurer
Well, no. A +6 would change the success rate from 1/8 to 3/8 - a tripling of success rates due to the bonus. Something that bumps almost half of your failures into successes is a major change.

Something that bumps one failure out of eight into a success isn't going to have a whole lot of impact on the game, especially when a single character is unlikely to make more than about 8 skill checks in a given session. A +2 attack does have a larger impact simply because the player makes so many more attack rolls than skill checks.

That's why I talk about tracking the impact. Because we don't really know how often a character is making a skill check in a given session and how often that that skill check succeeds because of a bonus d4. You'd need to track over several sessions, across a number of characters, but, I would hazard a guess that the impact of Guidance is far, far from game breaking.
I think this is where our disagreement stems. In my game I know for a fact that 8 skill checks is low. Most of my games have many more skill checks than attack rolls, unless it’s a combat heavy session
 

jgsugden

Explorer
There is no spell that gets cast more often in my game than Guidance. Not even close. I bet a 3:1 ratio to the next most commonly casted spell is about right, heck maybe 4:1.
Really? My experience would be more like 150% compared to combat cantrips.

And just to note it, my PC cast Prestidigitation about 3000 times last session, in theory, to use it to clean up a bar that was being messed up by a Poltergeist (I bet a lot of PCs know which stock adventure we just started recently). 5 hours, 60 minutes per hour, 10 rounds per minute, 1 casting per round during that time as he walked around and cleaned up everything - over and over. That would be more times than Guidance could reasonably be cast in any campaign....

I'm curious how many opportunities people think there are in a typical game to make a Guidance impactful. It might be an interesting exercise to have people listen to a session of Critical Role and count the opportunities that one of the two clerics in the current campaign *could* have meaningfully cast Guidance. I'll randomly pick episde 39 of Season 2 (Temple of the False Serpent) in case any folks want to listen to it and count the opportunities. If I get the chance to do so, I'll list the spellcaster, the target, the impacted check/situation and the rough time within the podcast episode. My criteria will be that there was a spellcaster available, the roll could be anticipated reasonably, there was no reason not to cast the Guidance (otherwise occupied, trying to be stealthy), and a roll was actually made (I'll include passives should it come up, but that would be hard to anticipate).
 

Hussar

Legend
I think this is where our disagreement stems. In my game I know for a fact that 8 skill checks is low. Most of my games have many more skill checks than attack rolls, unless it’s a combat heavy session
Considering that in a given round of combat, you are likely having somewhere around 5 attack rolls per round (probably more), I find that very hard to believe. Two four round combats in a session (hardly a heavy combat session) would result in 40-60 attack rolls. I seriously doubt you have that many skill checks in a given session.

But, even if you did, how much of an impact is guidance actually having? Standard success rate is 60% in 5e. So, out of 20 skill checks, you would succeed 12 times and fail 8. With guidance, you succeed 13 and fail 7, since guidance only impacts 1 in 8 failures. I find it rather hard to believe that 1 more success would make that much of a difference in your game.

Remember, you can only cast guidance on a single skill check. It's not like bless where a single casting could easily result in 15-20 affected die rolls. Unless you're in a situation where each PC can make a check in sequence and the cleric can cast Guidance on each PC, most likely any given situation might only see a couple of rolls.

Like I said, I'm really having a hard time seeing how gaining 1 success in 20 checks is going to massively impact anyone's game.
 

Advertisement

Top