log in or register to remove this ad

 

D&D 5E Idea that will most players will hate, but I think addresses a mechanical issue in game

Scribe

Hero
Oh, god, no. Please, can we not expect characters advancement to be placed on stuff? Unless, of course, you just intend the +5 sword to be a sweet bonus not expected by the system math?
Its an interesting question to me.

Disclosure: I love items, and I love party synergy.

I find the idea that we cannot have these things as part of the expected math, sets us back dramatically. If the only expectation is personal power x X (where X is your party total) then the point of balance is off, if items (which I love) and party dynamics (in terms of synergy between classes and abilities) are leaned into.

I understand the issue from the other perspective as well, that would then mandate certain party composition, or a specific threshold of items being utilized, but I feel there must be some kind of middle ground.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

payn

Legend
Its an interesting question to me.

Disclosure: I love items, and I love party synergy.

I find the idea that we cannot have these things as part of the expected math, sets us back dramatically. If the only expectation is personal power x X (where X is your party total) then the point of balance is off, if items (which I love) and party dynamics (in terms of synergy between classes and abilities) are leaned into.

I understand the issue from the other perspective as well, that would then mandate certain party composition, or a specific threshold of items being utilized, but I feel there must be some kind of middle ground.
Whats so interesting about a sword that does more math? Wouldn't magic items be better if they did cool things instead of hit better? Im not advocating taking away magic items, I just want +x items to die.
 

Scribe

Hero
Whats so interesting about a sword that does more math? Wouldn't magic items be better if they did cool things instead of hit better?
Obligatory "Why not both?" :)

+X
Damage Type Bonus
Alignment Restrictions
Summons

The works, lay it on me.

EDIT: Like this, I'll probably never forget this item :D

 

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
Its an interesting question to me.

Disclosure: I love items, and I love party synergy.

I find the idea that we cannot have these things as part of the expected math, sets us back dramatically.
I think you have the absolute on the wrong side. Not that we cannot have it as part of the expected math, but that we don't need it as part of the expected math. The absolute moved from "you must have it or you suck" to "you don't need it, but may have it and be special" in 5e.

If every PC is required to have +X weapon/implement and +X to AC and saves, that's a problem. Any character without it, who lags behind, is penalized. We saw this in 4e where there was a constant gear treadmill and it was called - rightfully so - videogam-esque.

But if the math doesn't require it then people without it don't lag behind, but the characters that do have it have something special and it feels special. And it doesn't even need to be the same type - the character with +2 Plate will feel super defended while everyone else is okay, while the heroine with the +2 greatsword will love it.
 

Scribe

Hero
But if the math doesn't require it then people without it don't lag behind, but the characters that do have it have something special and it feels special.

I get what you are saying, 100%. I just think that...if you balance around no expectation of synergy, and having no items, then introducing those things breaks the balance.

If that balance even exists is of course up for debate.

I get what you are saying though, its just not the way I prefer it.
 

I get what you are saying, 100%. I just think that...if you balance around no expectation of synergy, and having no items, then introducing those things breaks the balance.

If that balance even exists is of course up for debate.

I get what you are saying though, its just not the way I prefer it.
Players simply cannot organize their chars around the expectation of magic items. That has been done to death in other threads, I am sure. Now, building chars around 2 prime stats for damage dealing or magic dealing, as I have said, that leads to a whole cascade of changes. But the need for magic items, no, I don't see that at all.
 

Scribe

Hero
Players simply cannot organize their chars around the expectation of magic items. That has been done to death in other threads, I am sure. Now, building chars around 2 prime stats for damage dealing or magic dealing, as I have said, that leads to a whole cascade of changes. But the need for magic items, no, I don't see that at all.
I know. :)

I just miss all my items. :ROFLMAO:
 

I know. :)

I just miss all my items. :ROFLMAO:
I am playing a Halfling Rogue in one of my games (the stereotypical Stout Scout Rogue). None of the chars in the group have Darkvision, and we are underground, quite a bit. We do have a Driftglobe in the group, but that is actually a fairly problematic item, if it is used as it is actually described. My char is a simple Halfling. He does not know what it is, as he has never heard nor seen one. But the player so wishes for a Moon-Touched Dagger or Short Sword for my char.
 

Lyxen

Great Old One
Whats so interesting about a sword that does more math? Wouldn't magic items be better if they did cool things instead of hit better? Im not advocating taking away magic items, I just want +x items to die.

I think it's great that 5e created in particular the flame tongue and frost brand without plusses, it really makes players have to choose, and I've continued in this vein, the most interesting magic weapons or armors have either plusses or abilities, rarely both.
 

Azuresun

Adventurer
Whats so interesting about a sword that does more math? Wouldn't magic items be better if they did cool things instead of hit better? Im not advocating taking away magic items, I just want +x items to die.

One of the best-received items in my current game has been a Scimitar of Life Stealing. No pluses, but that extra damage and boost comes up rarely enough to feel cool when it does.
 

Scars Unseen

Adventurer
So here's a screwy idea to break up caster supremacy a bit. Instead of class based caster stats, why not make it spell based instead. You could still have a SAD caster, but they'd be more limited in optimal spell selection, or you could have a MAD caster who has a broader arrangement of spell potential, but a less bonus when using some of them. If you really wanted to go all out, you could also have spells with ability score requirements the way some people talk about have prereqs for heavy armor and such.
 

So here's a screwy idea to break up caster supremacy a bit. Instead of class based caster stats, why not make it spell based instead. You could still have a SAD caster, but they'd be more limited in optimal spell selection, or you could have a MAD caster who has a broader arrangement of spell potential, but a less bonus when using some of them. If you really wanted to go all out, you could also have spells with ability score requirements the way some people talk about have prereqs for heavy armor and such.
I like this idea as well. Some combination of minimum level AND minimum ability to cast a spell. I can only begin to visualize the arguments about what spells qualify at what levels, but as you said, if armour and particular weapons require particular stat abilities, why not spells?
 

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
So here's a screwy idea to break up caster supremacy a bit. Instead of class based caster stats, why not make it spell based instead. You could still have a SAD caster, but they'd be more limited in optimal spell selection, or you could have a MAD caster who has a broader arrangement of spell potential, but a less bonus when using some of them. If you really wanted to go all out, you could also have spells with ability score requirements the way some people talk about have prereqs for heavy armor and such.
That's a fun idea. However, only directly offensive spells (damage/debuff) are based on attributes at all. All utility, buffing, support, healing, and the like gain no modifiers based on ability scores. How would we want to incorporate those?
 

Cadence

Legend
Supporter
Whats so interesting about a sword that does more math? Wouldn't magic items be better if they did cool things instead of hit better?
I'm so picturing an intelligent sword shouting out the statistically optimal attacks and maneuvers in every situation... that would be some useful extra math!
 

ECMO3

Hero
Over the years I have seen I have no idea how many arguments about Dex being the god stat. I don't disagree.
There are also umpteen arguments about stats/abilities/what not tied to Str or Dex.

I propose something, that will infuriate most players, for all kinds of reasons.

Some weapon attacks require both a modicum of Strength AND Dexterity. In the real world, a top swordsman (not talking fencers), or archer, needs both.
So what happens if I said to my players:

"OK, when you use your Long Bow, you use your Dex and Prof to Hit, but you add (or subtract) your Str modifier for damage."
This concept can be applied to a myriad of the published weapons, though not all.
Anybody who has wielded a sledgehammer in the real world, or tried splitting wood, understands it not all about Strength.

Now, the cons to such an idea are not limited to the following:
1. More complexity for the players and DM, and we know that new age players hate complexity.
2. Dex, or Str, is no longer a dump stat, which will irritate most martial class players.
3. Martial class chars are taking the hit, while this has no impact on casters.

But...this is far more realistic, and the arguments about creating optimized chars loses some of its value.
Does this also mean that the base damage value of martial weapons has to be altered, to compensate for the inherent nerf to martial chars? Yes.
There are multiple cascade effects.
I think casters are already more powerful than martials and this further nerfs martials.

If you want to eliminate dump stats the rules already support the best solution - make players roll stats.

If you want to eiminate even characters who would move their rolls then make them roll strength first, what you get is what you have in strength, roll dex next, roll con next .....

Then you would have no dump stats.

This would be a FAR, FAR better solution IMO.
 


Scars Unseen

Adventurer
That's a fun idea. However, only directly offensive spells (damage/debuff) are based on attributes at all. All utility, buffing, support, healing, and the like gain no modifiers based on ability scores. How would we want to incorporate those?
You could either go the prereq route or recalculate the math of any applicable spells to incorporate bonuses.
 

Scars Unseen

Adventurer
I'm so picturing an intelligent sword shouting out the statistically optimal attacks and maneuvers in every situation... that would be some useful extra math!

Now I want an intelligent sword that acts as the 4E warlord class. "Hey jerkwad! Who told you you could lay down and die? I'll have no layabouts on my watch! Up and at 'em, up an at 'em!"
 

Bayushi_seikuro

Adventurer
I've never seen a wizard invest in Dex, but no, they neither need not deserve a boost.

CHA to AC it is then. No explanation, it just is.
This reminded me of 1e 7th Sea, where your 'charisma stat' Panache actually also affected how many actions/attacks/parries you got in a round of combat. Random fact :)
 

Now I want an intelligent sword that acts as the 4E warlord class. "Hey jerkwad! Who told you you could lay down and die? I'll have no layabouts on my watch! Up and at 'em, up an at 'em!"
I have in the past given a dagger to the group. It was actually an artifact, though they did not have the knowledge to unlock all its powers. BUT, it was sentient, it was opinionated, AND the player did have to roll a Wisdom vs the weapon's CHA whenever the group went into combat, as the weapon always wanted to be used, and would charge forward.
 

Level Up!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top