Highest total bonus at level one to a d20 roll

[RangerWickett]

I would prefer if bonuses could never ever get higher than +20. Ever. We roll d20s. Unfailable things can be DC 0. Impossible things can be DC 40. Hard things can be DC 20.

Then let epic-level characters regularly do the impossible. But just cap it at that. It doesn't matter to me if Superman or The Hulk is stronger, or if Reed Richards or Stephen Colbert is smarter.

Then again, I like the idea of not rolling most of the time for skills.

 

[Minigiant]

I think this entire thread is based on a tail wagging the dog premise. Trying to design the game around what a bonus a 1st level PC should have is completely backwards.

First, for skills decide what the average success or failure rate a first level PC should have with trained vs. untrained skills vs. various DCs.

In combat, determine what dice you will use for various damage expressions (since that has huge impact on PC and monster durability and damage output), how often monsters and PCs should be able to do that damage.

Also keep in mind that on average, for a combat to not feel frustrating, players should be hitting approximately 60-70% of the time, on average, against an opponent of equal level. Factor that into what kind of durability a PC should have.

Then once you have that figured out, you will know what a reasonable bonus and DC should be for skills. And you'll know what a reasonable attack bonus and defense should be for a typical 1st level PC. Once you have that baseline, you can adjust as appropriate for different expectations that different classes should have, etc.

Stated in the first post.

A 1st level commoner at +0 has ~50% chance at some average DC.
What do you think the maximum bonus/chance a 1st level player character should be able to reach for that same action?

 

[triqui]

I'd rather have +5 as the best bonus at lvl 1, and then add re-rolls in the task you are focused.

 

[Dragonblade]

Stated in the first post.

A 1st level commoner at +0 has ~50% chance at some average DC.
What do you think the maximum bonus/chance a 1st level player character should be able to reach for that same action?

Assuming we want to keep bonuses symmetrical with 25% gap, or +5 points on a d20 for easy, moderate, difficult, and you go with the original post of DC 10 being say Moderate, then a trained PC with the appropriate stat for that skill at a high level, should make that Moderate DC roll 90 to 100% of the time. So +9 to +10 for a DC of 10. An untrained PC should make it anywhere from 50 to 75% of the time, with 50% being a +0 in the relevant stat, and essentially being no different than the talentless commoner.

From there we can then mathematically reason that if stats work as a they do in 3e/4e, that a player will likely have a bonus of +1 (a stat of 12) to +5 (a stat of 20), then its fair to say that being trained in a skill should be a +5 bonus.

Looks like 4e got the math right on this one, IMO.

 

[Recidivism]

Either the monster is overlevel and the first character is specialized enough to hit it OR the second character should be casting spells and not trying to punch out a frost giant.

The first is a gotcha encounter. The second is correct usage of tactics.

That's a real example from my table, by the way. And no, the character 8 points below the other is the defender, not the spellcaster sitting in the back. There's no reason for these two characters to vary this much in narrative terms, just a consequence of system design that is too complex and rewards system mastery / munchkin behavior too much.

 

[Gryph]

For those who say +5 or lower, what would you consider an average DC for a level 1 challenge?

10 for an average. Probably 8 for an easy. I would not require rolls for any attempt that didn't have a meaningful consequence for failure and where the attempt didn't have a constraint that implied a degree of risk.

I know that's a little vague so maybe an example. Swimming a river with plenty of time to prepare and no time limit on getting across would require no roll.

A river with a tricky current that could pull the pc into some rocks would require an easy roll.

Swimming across a river dragging your friend who can't swim would be an average roll.

Swimming across a river with a tricky current while pulling your friend who can't swim would be a hard roll.

Add some kobolds trying to hit you with slings to the above and its a very hard roll.

 

[Gryph]

I'm still hoping for no (general) attack bonuses from feats and themes.

Must spread XP, etc.

Please add me to your mailing list as I like your ideas.

 

[Minigiant]

That's a real example from my table, by the way. And no, the character 8 points below the other is the defender, not the spellcaster sitting in the back. There's no reason for these two characters to vary this much in narrative terms, just a consequence of system design that is too complex and rewards system mastery / munchkin behavior too much.

Something sounds off. One of my minor gripes with 4E (assuming since you said defender) is that you can't make large gaps between attack values based on the primary stat. Everyone is around Starting mod + level to attck roll. It's pretty hard to have a gap that high between primaries.

 

[kitsune9]

+3 - +5 at 1st level. At 36th level, no more than +20.

 

[KarinsDad]

Interestingly enough, 1E had a max bonus of around +3 for an 18/100 Strength Fighter.

Mostly, it was +0 or +1 with a 55% chance to hit an unarmored foe.

With 4E's high end first level bloat of +10 (weapons) to +20 (skills), it's no wonder that WotC is redesigning the game system. The bonuses have bloated way out of proportion for a D20 dice and what it is reasonable for skilled vs. semi-skilled vs. unskilled PCs to be able to accomplish.

I think an effort to get modifiers into the +1 to +2 range with at most 3 modifiers for most action attempts would go far in getting the game system under control.