D&D (2024) How to bound the bounded accuracy in magic items for 1D&D?

[Pauln6]

Trying to touch some of your points in the most logical order I'll start with your fighter popularity. in 3.x the base classes were just that & pretty much everyone jumped off to some PrC by 5 or so, trying to compare the popularity of any one base class to the 75654754344654 PrCs & claim it as a meaningful data point is a bit odd. In the context of my being asked if "any edition of d&d avoided these issues" though there were plenty of 1/1 & 2/3 BaB classes & PrCs that got multiple attacks during the span of a normal campaign.

That common occurrence of +6/+1 BaB & better on PCs makes how the iterative attack penalty played out & interacts with system math relevant. The way that played out is very different from your initial asserrtion of "it's not fun for players to keep missing" because it served a very different function of making later attacks that roll well an exciting rather than mundane thing. Now 5e swings the other way with the odds stacked & narrowed so far in favor of success that even getting lucky on on rolls tends to be squarely in the same realm of that twilight zone episode I referenced earlier.

That stacking of the odds & narrowing of chance has direct negative effects limiting the GM's ability to tune the game for the group they have if that group differs too much from bounded accuracy's expected 2-3 player tier1 to low-mid tier2 group of PCs.

I agree that most groups would heal up using spells but doing that left the group a bit vulnerable & wasn't something the group felt comfortable trying to dare the gm when told that taking a rest "here" seems like a bad idea. System differences came into play at that point. I do not however think that the problems with 5e's math are a personal opinion though because it's an objective fact that bounded accuracy was designed primarily for a certain groupsize & level range. From there it's easy to show how other design changes make it more difficult for a GM to adjust the core math to slide back into being bounded for the group of players & PCs. If 5e came with a very narrow band of levels & said that a GM should never have more than X players because of BA then we'd be talking about ways for the GM to stay within it rather than the problems that arise & needless problems that arise in shifting the bounds... but it doesn't say that for obvious reasons & the GM is left attempting to correct it in a system hostile to correction

.

But again, every edition runs into problems based on group size, increasing PC levels, and caster versatility compared to Martial classes to one degree or another. The thread discussion is meant to be about prevention of breaking bounded accuracy with stacking magic items. Simplest solution there is to put a hard cap on AC and don't double additional damage from magic items on a crit.

I think I understand that the problem you are highlighting is that increasing damage dealing makes combat very swingy, especially for low con characters at higher levels. My counterpoint to that is wizards in 1e to 3e had d4 hp and rogues had d6 both with terrible ACs. It's not a new problem, it just appears magnified as the numbers have scaled up.

Similarly, if your solution is to make it harder to hit with multiple attacks, how do you balance that against single attack damage for other classes? Reduce or remove cantrip scaling? Remove or reduce Divine Smite? Reduce sneak attack damage? Would you also look to balance spell damage by reducing save DCs?

It looks like a lot of effort which will probably run into mathematical problems of its own. Options include limiting damage spikes from crits (maybe giving a choice of status effects instead), lowering damage from paladin smites, sorting Eldritch Bolt spamming (maybe +2 damage or half ability score bonus rounded up instead of ability score bonus from the invocation).

Better guidance on subtle ways to tweak monsters to deal with variable group dynamics might also help.

I cannot see them veering left and changing the underlying mathematics on attacks so the discussion is probably moot.

 

[tetrasodium]

But again, every edition runs into problems based on group size, increasing PC levels, and caster versatility compared to Martial classes to one degree or another. The thread discussion is meant to be about prevention of breaking bounded accuracy with stacking magic items. Simplest solution there is to put a hard cap on AC and don't double additional damage from magic items on a crit.

I think I understand that the problem you are highlighting is that increasing damage dealing makes combat very swingy, especially for low con characters at higher levels. My counterpoint to that is wizards in 1e to 3e had d4 hp and rogues had d6 both with terrible ACs. It's not a new problem, it just appears magnified as the numbers have scaled up.

Similarly, if your solution is to make it harder to hit with multiple attacks, how do you balance that against single attack damage for other classes? Reduce or remove cantrip scaling? Remove or reduce Divine Smite? Reduce sneak attack damage? Would you also look to balance spell damage by reducing save DCs?

It looks like a lot of effort which will probably run into mathematical problems of its own. Options include limiting damage spikes from crits (maybe giving a choice of status effects instead), lowering damage from paladin smites, sorting Eldritch Bolt spamming (maybe +2 damage or half ability score bonus rounded up instead of ability score bonus from the invocation).

Better guidance on subtle ways to tweak monsters to deal with variable group dynamics might also help.

I cannot see them veering left and changing the underlying mathematics on attacks so the discussion is probably moot.

.


Instead of repeatedly trying to "understand" it while defending bounded accuracy by claiming they it's not a problem specific to the only edition to use bounded accuracy so far can you maybe show the math supporting your claims when a group exceeds the bounds that BA was designed to fit for a change of gears?

 

[Pauln6]

.


Instead of repeatedly trying to "understand" it while defending bounded accuracy by claiming they it's not a problem specific to the only edition to use bounded accuracy so far can you maybe show the math supporting your claims when a group exceeds the bounds that BA was designed to fit for a change of gears?

Oh hell no. I'm not someone who judges the game in a mathematical sand box.

Maths will tell you the fighter crit does 16 damage and the paladin crit does 72 damage but if the balrog has 7 hp, they can only do 7 damage.

I base my views on whether the players are having fun. This version of the game is extremely popular, so clearly a lot of people are having fun. Ergo, the system is not broken. Fix crazy combo corner cases and it will make even more people happy.

 

[Gadget]

5e was designed around HP & damage scaling higher with level, with the other factors (AC, Attack, Saves, etc.) scaling more slowly. As opposed to previous editions, where all of them tended to scale quite heavily such that any opponent more than a level or two below you was a veritable peon in many cases. That was the idea behind Bounded Accuracy.

Has it succeeded? Somewhat. More could be done to perhaps reduce stacking in some cases, and I've found the +x to AC items more disruptive than +x to attack & damage.