D&D 5E Looking for inspiration for D&D data projects

[Fenris-77]

Hmm, ok, I'll give it a go.

Step One

Roll a d20 to CAST- if 6+ then success; if 1> but <6 then accrue condition FATIGUE = cumulative -1 to further checks; if =/<1 then save vs CON DC 9 (assume no mods)

------if CON save = <9 then add condition EXHAUSTION = add disadvantage for subsequent checks

------if CON save = >/= 9 then no further modifiers apply


Step n+1 = roll CAST and apply set of FATIGUE and EXHAUSTION, the compare to DC 6 as above


after CAST if total FATIGUE =/> 4 then add condition EXHAUSTION and remove set of condition FATIGUE

after CAST if total EXHAUSTION =/> 2 then CAST is impossible until EXHAUSTION = <2

I'm not sure to what extent this is what you were looking for. But I tired, maybe too hard.

 

[Esker]

Not to preempt @Elfcrusher, but is this something like what you're looking for? I figure two people independently doing a calculation is a good way to verify that it's done correctly (and that the same algorithm is used).

 

[Esker]

I think though that you probably intended for fatigue to be added on a nat 1 if you pass the exhaustion check? It's not what you wrote and so not what I implemented, but if so the number of casts will be a bit lower.

Also unsure if gaining exhaustion via a failed CON save resets fatigue, or if fatigue is only reset when it gets to 4.

 

[Fenris-77]

Huh. That's a little higher than I expected it to be. What kind of difference does it make to adjust the DC for CAST to 8 or the DC mod for fatigue to -1/-2/-2, if it's not too much trouble. The breakpoint above indexes way to much power level for low level casters. This is an excellent example of how statistics can escape the designer - my gut feel for the numbers I gave was that the 50-50 point was going to be a lot lower than 20 CAST.

Ideally, I'd want the drop-off after 6 to steeper I think. That seems like a job for the mods rather than the DC. There are other numbers at play in the actual system, but those involve casting higher level spells with higher DCs, so I'm not going to worry about that just yet. If I can get a feel for how moving the DC needle, and the mods dial, effects the curve I can probably get it where I want to.

 

[Fenris-77]

I think though that you probably intended for fatigue to be added on a nat 1 if you pass the exhaustion check? It's not what you wrote and so not what I implemented, but if so the number of casts will be a bit lower.

Also unsure if gaining exhaustion via a failed CON save resets fatigue, or if fatigue is only reset when it gets to 4.

Yeah, gaining EXHAUSTION 1 via any source resets fatigue and adds disadvantage. Thinking about the natural one, yes, I do think that a passed save should still add FATIGUE.

I wanted the system to feel a little swingy, as I think magic should be at least slightly beyond the perfect control of the caster. The carrot is being able to, potentially, cast spells up to 3rd level as a 1st level caster. With attendant risks, of course.

 

[Esker]

Ok, having nat 1s add fatigue, and having exhaustion always reset fatigue, here's what it looks like. It's shifted down a little, but the mean is still about 18.

Here's what it looks like changing the check DC to 8 (but leaving the effect of fatigue at -1 per):

Here's making fatigue escalate, -1 after the first level, then -3 (cumulative), then -5, but putting the check DC back at 6. Though this has the odd effect of making it slightly better in the short term to fail your CON save if you have three points of fatigue and no exhaustion, since -5 is worse than disadvantage, and failing resets fatigue.

And here it is if you have both DC 8 and escalating fatigue:

 

[Fenris-77]

Sweet, that gives me a nice overview of what the knobs and dials do. The last one, with DC 8 and escalating fatigue is closest to what I think this should look like. What that actually means is DC 10 but with the proficiency modifier (at first level), which I think helps represent skill scaling with level.

I had been under the impression that advantage/disadvantage was roughly equal to +5/-5, that's why I went with -1/-2/-2. Apparently I was misinformed. Maybe a straight -2 across the board might be better. If you wouldn't mind doing just one more, could I see what It looks like at DC 9 and straight -2's for fatigue? This has been immensely helpful, too, thanks for the stats assist.

Out of curiosity, what tool are you using to generate the numbers?

 

[Esker]

I'm using R, with the ggplot2 package for the plotting

 

[Esker]

Advantage/disadvantage is equal to +5/-5 when you need a nat 11 or better to succeed. For other DCs it's less than that.

 

[Fenris-77]

I'm using R, with the ggplot2 package for the plotting

Gabba gabba, google mixstash orange spotty horse. Gotcha. I probably shouldn't have asked.