D&D 5E How would you handle progression and bonuses?

[Najo]

We are all familiar with the various forms bonuses and progression have taken in the various editions of D&D. Personal preference and mileage varies, but the impression I'm given is most of us want characters to show growth, for low level threats to remain relevant as characters progression and for high level characters to be great heroes still connected to the mortal plane, but if waging war with primordials and gods is your cup of tea, then that should be possible to. The main issues seem to be when the ranges for varies characters get to great or the ranges are to short. Then, on top of that, is the Christmas tree effect and the over complicated high level play.

So, how should 5e handle bonuses and their progression/ stacking to satisfy the majority of these issues?

 

[Sadras]

Limits - on Armour Class, Hit Points and "To Hit" Bonuses is in my opinion the best method to achieve all those methods of play.
Armour Class - ensures low level monsters can still hit you

Hit Points - ensures low level monsters damage output still matters, which means they are still a threat for high-level characters.

"To Hit" Bonuses - the cap limit would reflect the type of play, heroic or demi-god status. i.e. Heroic maximum limit of +10, Demi-God Status +20.
And you can have further limitations, if you wanted, where the + can never be higher than your level. For a Demi-God, he rarely misses against heroic opponents.

At high-level play (not necessarily demi-god status), one would not gain above the +10, but would instead gain abilities or feats which would reflect their expertise, similar to E6 or P6 system. Therefore one could have a level 25 Hero with only +10 on the 'To Hit' and should he through the adventure/narrative achieve demi-god status then his + would change and range anywhere from 11-20 depending on the rules.

To support waxia style play - unhinge the limits.

 

[XunValdorl_of_Kilsek]

This is why I think high level play should have it's own book with separate rules, or maybe a continuation of what Sadras said. Kind of a "removal of the limits" set of rules.

 

[grafikchaos]

This is why I think high level play should have it's own book with separate rules, or maybe a continuation of what Sadras said. Kind of a "removal of the limits" set of rules.

Yes! And I believe that the design team is setting it up to where they can achieve something like this. With all of the talk about modules and customization, I think a module with all of that stuff in it, instead of bloating the core rules, would be fantastic.

 

[Jester David]

I'm rather okay with the idea of bounded accuracy. Limiting AC creep works to make low level monsters usable at high levels.
The flatter advancement does make high level play awkward, but epic levels have always really been an option. They're such a change from the ordinary. While 4e was right to try and work epic rules into the math, assuming they're core is problematic. An epic book or rules module would be fine, adding extra levels and maybe a few extra points of attack and saves. If you're going epic and killing gods, the game can assume magic items and work that into the math. Those can have a slightly higher AC as a result