D&D 5E L&L: Mike Lays It All Out

I guess i like a game most, in which your to-hit goes up from about 40% to 80% with the right adjusting of ACs, bounded accuracy does that.

+4 at level 1 to +12 at most at level 20 against an average AC of 17... seems fine for me.

Value of the +1 bonus. Not too much, as you are not expected to "keep up", as there is no arms race. Every +1 is nice, but you don´t have to take it at every opportunity. I guess it is a little more valuable than in 3e, but less than in 4e.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


I guess i like a game most, in which your to-hit goes up from about 40% to 80% with the right adjusting of ACs, bounded accuracy does that.

+4 at level 1 to +12 at most at level 20 against an average AC of 17... seems fine for me.

Value of the +1 bonus. Not too much, as you are not expected to "keep up", as there is no arms race. Every +1 is nice, but you don´t have to take it at every opportunity. I guess it is a little more valuable than in 3e, but less than in 4e.

In 5e the new (old) scale is xp reward for success. I feel that "keeping up" is now a calculation of successful completion of an interaction with a monster; simply put, chance of success for a percentage equal reward is nor party DPS amount per round.

4e excelled at this ...
 



Did older editions (pre-3rd) have "primary stats" in the same way D&D now does?
Every class in original D&D, and most classes in AD&D, had one or more prime requisites (STR for fighters, STR & WIS for paladins, STR, INT & WIS for rangers, DEX for thieves, etc). In B/X, having your prime at 13+/16+ conferred a +5%/10% benefit to earned XP (for demihumans the formula could be a bit trickier). In AD&D, there was only the higher threshhold ie a prime req of 16+ conferred a +10% benefit to earned XP.

From memory, the 1st ed AD&D classes with no prime req were Druid, Assassin, Illlusionist and Monk - but except for the Assassin these all required one or more stats at 15+ as pre-requisites for entry.
 

Remove ads

Top