Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="GMMichael" data-source="post: 8038271" data-attributes="member: 6685730">Spoiler: I'm not proposing any new rules here, because a DM-shift will go a LONG way toward fixing most of these Items.  Furthermore, when this number of rule-changes gather together, it's either time to use a different game or ::shudder:: start designing your own.[SPOILER="Item #1: Not enough difference between proficiency and non-proficiency."]Example. A +6 vs. a +0 in a contested roll will loose 22.75% of the time. +6 represents maximum proficiency and is only at tier 4 (17th+ level!), but will lose nearly 1 in 4 times?Issue. This bugs me because you need 225,000 XP for tier 4, which is a lot of adventuring, trials, success, and failure, but you are not significantly better than someone with no experience whatsoever.Change. You have "disadvantage" on any ability check you make when you do not apply proficiency. Expertise grants "advantage" instead of double the proficiency bonus.[/SPOILER]The character with +6 doesn't lose a fight 22.75% of the time.  17th level vs (whatever tier 1 is) probably wins fights 99% of the time.Re: skills, if you have 225,000 XP, why is the DM calling for a check against someone with no experience whatsoever?  This is a DM problem, not a rules problem.[SPOILER="Item #2: Proficiency (i.e. experience) does not count for enough and is nearly matched by ability scores."]Example. An INT 18 NPC without Arcana proficiency is only 10% less likely to know about Arcana than an INT 10 PC with Arcana at level 17+.Issue. While ability scores should help certainly, they should not come close to matching what thousands of XP of adventuring can teach a PC.Change. Proficiency progression is increased to a max of +8 following this pattern: +2,2,3,3,3,4,4,4,5,5,5,6,6,6,7,7,7,8,8,8 and ability scores cap at 18 with maximum +4. This yields a maximum bonus of +12[/SPOILER]DM problem.  Same as above.[SPOILER="Item #3: A stress on ability scores over proficiency makes sub-optimal builds suffer."]Example. A STR 12 level 20 fighter who uses a longsword will max out at +7 compared to the STR 20 level 1 fighter who is also +7.Issue: A 20th-level fighter's skill should far surpass the max STR bonus of +5, but it doesn't so people are not likely to play sub-optimal builds.Change. See Item #2. In this example, the level 20 fighter would become +9, while the STR 18 (max) level 1 fighter would be +6. Not perfect, but it helps.[/SPOILER]The 20th-level fighter's skill is also represented with hit points.  See Item 8 Solution.[SPOILER="Item #5: Combat takes too long because average success rate is 60+%."]Example. A 5th-level fighter with STR mod +6 will hit an AC 14 on a 8 or higher (65%). With two attacks, he will hit with at least one attack 7 out of 8 times (87.75%) and both attacks 42.25%. It becomes more of a pleasant shock when you miss something!Issue. This leads to boredom because success is more common than failure and is less exciting.Change. All attack rolls are made with "disadvantage" (i.e. you are always Dodging). This makes it so you only hit half as often. (I'll address saves against spell damage later, but basically all saves are made with "advantage.") This change means the number of rounds of combat is about the same, but combat goes faster because you are rolling for damage and tracking it only half as much.[/SPOILER]This one's a little odd to me.  Rolling a "miss" in D&D combat is about the worst part of it, because it usually equates to "you accomplish nothing, and lose your turn."  Sure, "hits" become more exciting, but at the expense of sheer frustration.I'd skip this one and keep Item 6 if you want to make combat more exciting.[SPOILER="Item #8: ACs don't improve even though you've been trying to avoid attacks for levels.."]Example. Again, a tier 4 cleric is just as easy "to hit" as he was at tier 1.Issue. Your ability to avoid damage is reflected in the hit point bloat instead of actually making you harder "to hit".Change. Nothing here yet. Have some thoughts but I don't know if I like them on this topic.[/SPOILER]This is just a narration issue.  All the DM has to do is stop announcing "hits" and "misses."  You can still use rulebook terms if you want: succeed and fail.  Example.  The tier 1 NPC rolls a successful attack against the tier 4 cleric.DM: The foot-soldier orc forgets how epic you are, and his rage takes over.  He swings his axe at you.  What was your AC again?Epic Cleric: It's 14.  You don't know that by now?DM: Anyway, (rolls a success) you take 8 damage as the orc swings at you.  How do you defend?Epic Cleric: I hold up an arm-guard and neatly stop the axe with it.  I get up in his face and grin, preparing my counter-attack.</blockquote>

Verification