Legends & Lore: What Worked, What Didn't

[Lokiare]

This matches my experience as well. As I primarily DM, my problem was magnified by the fact that only a minority of the party enjoyed the optimization/system-mastery aspect of the game - the rest of us were there to enjoy the plot and move the story along. But as they rose in level, the math made it harder and harder for me to challenge the optimizers in combat without wiping out the rest of the party. I don't DM because I enjoy the math (which I do), but because I enjoy the world-building and the story creation that emerges from the playing of the game. That is what is so appealing about Next - bounded accuracy alone means that system mastery should have less of an impact on those players who don't want to pursue it, while still rewarding those who do.

Wait so a Dwarf Wizard that has an AC of 18 and can use spells to grant people attacking them disadvantage and then proceed to out damage any other class is ok? Its not even 'optimizing' its grabbing a race and 1 feat. Something that can happen randomly 25% of the time. Bounded accuracy means every +1 you gain to something is just that more broken. At least in 3E and 4E a +1 wasn't game changing. I'm sorry, but system mastery is amplified in 5E, not minimized.

 

[Primal]

Oh good, we are returning to actual things mentioned in the OP.

Agree on your final points regarding weapon qualities @Primal. Some games have done this very well and then feats/whatever can unlock more weapon qualities or build on those that are there. But I too think it is important to give weapons something to make them interesting and different from one another.

Casters can blast different effects each round, but more than that, it is just more interesting for the weapon wielders. If your PC is wielding a favoured weapon (and I don't think many players would actually have their PC swap weapons regularly) I don't think many players would forget its major properties.

Anyway, I would love to see weapon qualities like SIFRP.

I've only taken a brief glance at the rules, but I haven't played it (I liked the basic dice pool mechanic, though); how do weapon qualities work in Song of Ice and Fire RPG?

 

[Lokiare]

The short version of how the encounter went was like this...

me: I cast web.
dm: (after rolling) the enemy is stuck
other player: I shoot them with my bow
me: I use magic missile
dm: they're still stuck
other player: I shoot them with my bow
me: I use magic missile
dm: they're still stuck
other player: I shoot them with my bow
me: I use magic missile
dm: they're dead

That was from an old packet though. I have no idea how web may have changed from then to now. I plan to find out during the next season. For next season, I plan to either play a wizard or a druid. I've even considered wizard/druid just out of curiosity to see how the 3E character I am currently playing (multiclass wizard/druid) would translate into 5th Edition.

From the last public packet it works almost the same. The only difference is the save DC is lower, but still very high for creatures with no Dex bonus cast at level 1:

Round     Successful chance to make at least one save (+0 Dex bonus against DC 15)
1            30%
2            51%
3            65.7%
4            75.99%

So 3 rounds is not uncommon, slightly less often than half the time. If we cast it at level 15:

Round     Successful chance to make at least one save (+0 Dex bonus against DC 17)
1            20%
2            36%
3            48.8%
4            59.04%
5            67.232%
6            73.7856%

Since bounded accuracy means creatures ability scores don't go up with level, this means its entirely likely to shut down an encounter with a level 2 spell slot for 4-6 rounds at 15th level. Lets hope all creatures past level 10 or so have ranged attacks.

This is one of the problems with bounded accuracy and the imbalance I keep talking about.

 

[Thyrwyn]

Wait so a Dwarf Wizard that has an AC of 18 and can use spells to grant people attacking them disadvantage and then proceed to out damage any other class is ok? Its not even 'optimizing' its grabbing a race and 1 feat. Something that can happen randomly 25% of the time. Bounded accuracy means every +1 you gain to something is just that more broken. At least in 3E and 4E a +1 wasn't game changing. I'm sorry, but system mastery is amplified in 5E, not minimized.

Dwarf Wizard in Scale Mail with a 14 DEX and his 4th level feat/ability score improvement spent on Shield Master? Congrats - you have an 18 AC. Not hard. Waste of feat choice for a Wizard, though. The argument on whether said character can "out damage any other class"
is still very open.

As for that combination of race, and feat happening "randomly 25% of the time". . . there are more than 4 races and more than 25 feats - so even if you assume one of them is a given, it still can't happen 25% of the time. We'll call this hyperbole and move on.

 

[Lokiare]

Dwarf Wizard in Scale Mail with a 14 DEX and his 4th level feat/ability score improvement spent on Shield Master? Congrats - you have an 18 AC. Not hard. Waste of feat choice for a Wizard, though. The argument on whether said character can "out damage any other class"
is still very open.

As for that combination of race, and feat happening "randomly 25% of the time". . . there are more than 4 races and more than 25 feats - so even if you assume one of them is a given, it still can't happen 25% of the time. We'll call this hyperbole and move on.

There are 7 base races in the game: Dwarf, Elf, Human, Half-Elf, Halfling, Half-Orc, and Gnome. There is a 14% chance of picking any given race. Then out of feats there are only a few that would benefit a Wizard at low level. So you are correct that its less than 25%, but the effectiveness of the Wizard is not in question.

If you compare when they impose a condition or penalty on a target and when that target doesn't have the condition or penalty then the Wizard gains that as DPR or effectiveness. So if the Wizard casts haste on the Fighter those extra attacks don't benefit the Fighter's DPR, only the Wizards because the Fighter wouldn't otherwise have the extra attacks.

What you end up with is the casters far outstripping non-casters. Heck if you do a straight DPR comparison the Wizard is almost flat even with the Fighter given the 4 encounter per day assumptions in the last public packet.

Increasing your AC potential to 18 is not a 'waste' of a feat. It puts you on equal defense with the class with the most defense for the cost of a single feat.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

What you end up with is the casters far outstripping non-casters. Heck if you do a straight DPR comparison the Wizard is almost flat even with the Fighter given the 4 encounter per day assumptions in the last public packet.

Wait...so far our encounters have been taking around 3-4 rounds of combat a piece. Let's assume this 4 encounter per day at 3 rounds per combat for a total of 12 rounds of combat a day. I'd like to see the math on a Wizard outstripping a Fighter at level 5 given those assumptions.

The fighter must have a 20 strength and be using a Greatsword and take the Great Weapon Fighting Class feature.

In fact, the math is easy enough, I'll just do it. The Fighter has +7 to hit. Most enemies have a 13 AC or so at this level. So they hit 75% of the time. Their average damage is 12. They get to action surge after every short rest, let's assume they take one between each of the 4 encounters. So that means in the 12 rounds of combat they make 32 attacks. 24 of those attacks hit. 10% of them are crits because of the class feature. The crits do 20.5. 22 normal attacks x 12 = 264. 2 Crits x 20.5 = 41. 8 rounds of misses = 40 damage. For a total of 345 damage.

The 5th level Wizard has 9 Spell slots. Let's assume the 3rd level spells are 6d6 save for half. The 2nd level spells are Scorching Rays and the 1st level spells are Magic Missiles.

2 x 6d6(average 21) = 41 damage. Let's assume a monster with +0 to Dex. The DC for a 20 Int Wizard is 15. They save 30% of the time. So 12.3 of that damage in halved. So 6.15 gets taken off. Let's round down to 6 to make this easier. So 35 damage.

3 x 6d6(average 21) damage from Scorching Rays. They have +7 to hit so they hit 75% of the time. 13.5 rays hit for 94.5 damage.

4 x 3d4+3(average 10.5) damage from magic missiles. That's 42 damage.

3 rounds of using cantrips. Let's assume Ray of Frost. 9 damage a piece with only a 75% chance to hit. 20.25 damage.

Thus, during the same 12 rounds a Wizard does 35 + 94.5 + 42 + 20.25 = 191.75

TL;DR:
Assuming 4 encounters at 3 rounds per encounter:
5th level Fighter: 345 Damage per day
5th level Wizard: 191.75 Damage per day

Each encounter after 4 in a day just continues favoring the Fighter more and more.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

The 5th level Wizard has 9 Spell slots. Let's assume the 3rd level spells are 6d6 save for half. The 2nd level spells are Scorching Rays and the 1st level spells are Magic Missiles.

2 x 6d6(average 21) = 41 damage. Let's assume a monster with +0 to Dex. The DC for a 20 Int Wizard is 15. They save 30% of the time. So 12.3 of that damage in halved. So 6.15 gets taken off. Let's round down to 6 to make this easier. So 35 damage.

3 x 6d6(average 21) damage from Scorching Rays. They have +7 to hit so they hit 75% of the time. 13.5 rays hit for 94.5 damage.

4 x 3d4+3(average 10.5) damage from magic missiles. That's 42 damage.

3 rounds of using cantrips. Let's assume Ray of Frost. 9 damage a piece with only a 75% chance to hit. 20.25 damage.

Thus, during the same 12 rounds a Wizard does 35 + 94.5 + 42 + 20.25 = 191.75

TL;DR:
Assuming 4 encounters at 3 rounds per encounter:
5th level Fighter: 345 Damage per day
5th level Wizard: 191.75 Damage per day

Each encounter after 4 in a day just continues favoring the Fighter more and more.

did none of your 6d6 spells hit multi targets?

 

[Nagol]

Wait...so far our encounters have been taking around 3-4 rounds of combat a piece. Let's assume this 4 encounter per day at 3 rounds per combat for a total of 12 rounds of combat a day. I'd like to see the math on a Wizard outstripping a Fighter at level 5 given those assumptions.

The fighter must have a 20 strength and be using a Greatsword and take the Great Weapon Fighting Class feature.

In fact, the math is easy enough, I'll just do it. The Fighter has +7 to hit. Most enemies have a 13 AC or so at this level. So they hit 75% of the time. Their average damage is 12. They get to action surge after every short rest, let's assume they take one between each of the 4 encounters. So that means in the 12 rounds of combat they make 32 attacks. 24 of those attacks hit. 10% of them are crits because of the class feature. The crits do 20.5. 22 normal attacks x 12 = 264. 2 Crits x 20.5 = 41. 8 rounds of misses = 40 damage. For a total of 345 damage.

The 5th level Wizard has 9 Spell slots. Let's assume the 3rd level spells are 6d6 save for half. The 2nd level spells are Scorching Rays and the 1st level spells are Magic Missiles.

2 x 6d6(average 21) = 41 damage. Let's assume a monster with +0 to Dex. The DC for a 20 Int Wizard is 15. They save 30% of the time. So 12.3 of that damage in halved. So 6.15 gets taken off. Let's round down to 6 to make this easier. So 35 damage.

3 x 6d6(average 21) damage from Scorching Rays. They have +7 to hit so they hit 75% of the time. 13.5 rays hit for 94.5 damage.

4 x 3d4+3(average 10.5) damage from magic missiles. That's 42 damage.

3 rounds of using cantrips. Let's assume Ray of Frost. 9 damage a piece with only a 75% chance to hit. 20.25 damage.

Thus, during the same 12 rounds a Wizard does 35 + 94.5 + 42 + 20.25 = 191.75

TL;DR:
Assuming 4 encounters at 3 rounds per encounter:
5th level Fighter: 345 Damage per day
5th level Wizard: 191.75 Damage per day

Each encounter after 4 in a day just continues favoring the Fighter more and more.

One potential oversight I see is the 3rd level spells aren't hitting multiple targets (it is area effect?). If we assume the wizard can catch 3 targets on average then the wizard expectation jumps up 70.

Another issue is any damage past the dropping point is wasted. Effects that cause high damage have an effective cap on effectiveness based on the capacity to absorb damage. That harder to model.

 

[Argyle King]

Wait so a Dwarf Wizard that has an AC of 18 and can use spells to grant people attacking them disadvantage and then proceed to out damage any other class is ok? Its not even 'optimizing' its grabbing a race and 1 feat. Something that can happen randomly 25% of the time. Bounded accuracy means every +1 you gain to something is just that more broken. At least in 3E and 4E a +1 wasn't game changing. I'm sorry, but system mastery is amplified in 5E, not minimized.

I somewhat agree (based upon only the rules as I know them in the public playtest.)

From the last public packet it works almost the same. The only difference is the save DC is lower, but still very high for creatures with no Dex bonus cast at level 1:

Round     Successful chance to make at least one save (+0 Dex bonus against DC 15)
1            30%
2            51%
3            65.7%
4            75.99%

So 3 rounds is not uncommon, slightly less often than half the time. If we cast it at level 15:

Round     Successful chance to make at least one save (+0 Dex bonus against DC 17)
1            20%
2            36%
3            48.8%
4            59.04%
5            67.232%
6            73.7856%

Since bounded accuracy means creatures ability scores don't go up with level, this means its entirely likely to shut down an encounter with a level 2 spell slot for 4-6 rounds at 15th level. Lets hope all creatures past level 10 or so have ranged attacks.

This is one of the problems with bounded accuracy and the imbalance I keep talking about.

Well, that helps me not feel so crazy when I have the experiences I do.

I do not think the concept of "bounded accuracy" (at least how I thought they meant the term in the beginning) is a problem. As said in other threads, I play games which don't have levels at all, so the concept of extremely flat game math is something I feel I understand. Though, I have in very early threads (back when 5E was first getting started) questioned how "bounded accuracy" would mix with D&D style levels. I still think it's possible for flatter math to work, but... basically, I'm trying to say that I feel the implementation of the idea is more of a problem than the idea itself. As said above, this belief is supported only by what I know from the public playtest though, so perhaps the finished product will have a better grasp of how it all fits together. Though, I'd also say that part of my opinion is based on the L&L articles and various other discussions about the intended direction of the game; as well, the collective responses to the polls seem to indicate that the community wants a certain direction. (Getting into whether I feel the poll options were bias or weighted by carefully chosen language to gain a specific result is a different matter.) With (what I feel would be) better implementation of some of the ideas like Bounded Accuracy (and being a modular game, and a few other things) I feel 5th edition would very much become a game I want to invest in. The way things are now is that I'll play the game if presented with it, but feel no motivation to spend money on it.

 

[Cybit]

You guys do realize that a DC 15 is impossible to reach at 3rd level, right?

the DC for spells is 8 + spellcasting mod (which, at 3rd level, is capped out at +3, since the highest buyable stat is 16, with a +1 race bonus, for a score of 17) + a proficiency modifier of 2. So, uh, yeah. That should be a DC of 13 on Web.