Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Mearls On D&D's Design Premises/Goals
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Jay Verkuilen" data-source="post: 7760708" data-attributes="member: 6873517"><p>The fact that you need to skirt around it is a sign the high level math is messed up. You don't start really noticing it until about levels 15 or so, but it's around even before that. There are characters with save numbers that are too high as well. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>That was when it was <em>published</em>. If they didn't actually make a "here's how the numbers work" bible until after the <em>Monster Manual </em>was finished.... </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>By construction it's very hard to boost up things like that---and to be clear, preventing this kind of stacking is something the game was designed for explicitly and is, IMO, a good thing. For example, if you have a weak save and have a bonus of, say +1 vs a DC 23 threat, it's exceptionally hard to dig out of a net 12 hole. Bless adds about +2, which gets to you to needing to roll a 20. Inspiration not quite doubles the chance of getting a 20, to 19/400, which is a bit under 10%. Bardic Inspiration (bad WotC for naming a class feature for something else!) is one of the few actual adds and that certainly helps, if you happen to have a very high level bard in your party. Many parties do not. Given that most combats last about five or six rounds, this is a recipe for the player to hand sit for the fight. Finally, <em>Lesser Restoration</em> does nothing to help against something like stunlock. </p><p></p><p>Just because it's strongly noticeable at that point doesn't mean it's not emerging at lower values, though. Furthermore, one of the design goals of the game was to try to help ensure that certain classes weren't necessary. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I'm not sure I follow this. I <em>think</em> you're getting at the fact that ACs shouldn't get too high, which is indeed a feature of the Bounded Accuracy approach. By and large they do not. So what I'm saying is that saves and skills (which we haven't talked about much) start to violate BA in the levels past 10 but certainly by the mid teens. This tempts DMs and WotC back into DC creep. </p><p></p><p>What makes BA work for combat is that success is rarely all-or-nothing and making things in those realms less all-or-nothing would help keep DCs lower. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Nope, it's the math. While people keep focusing on holding the weak save numbers down much of the problem IMO is caused by the fact that <em>strong</em> save bonuses get large too fast. IMO the math would work much better if for saves proficiency gave you advantage on the save rather than adding your proficiency bonus on top of your stat bonus, though that's just a hunch on my part. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I'm not arguing with that. My issue is with bonuses being set with too much range between non-proficient characters, who essentially stay at 0 their entire career and proficient characters with strong stats, who essentially become immune to the vast majority of challenges. You can't even fail on a 1 anymore. </p><p></p><p>This tempts WotC into setting DCs too high to challenge the high level bard, sorcerer, or warlock facing a Charisma attack (let's say). While this is makes it threatening to the bard, it makes it overwhelming to the other PCs. You could, of course, have the same thing happen with some other save, I'm just picking the stunlocked barbarian as a vivid example. </p><p></p><p>That is to say, high level characters develop a glass jaw with respect to the threats they face, which they really didn't have before. The main buff most PCs will have access to and control themselves is Advantage (via Inspiration) but when the probability of success is very low, Advantage has essentially no effect. The buffs available to most PCs actually had an effect. </p><p></p><p>And I want to reiterate: I'm not saying make high level threats <em>weak</em>. What I'd really like to avoid is the "I can't make this save" situation, which I think is really frustrating for the player and starts necessitating particular kinds of parties. I believe this was explicitly a design goal for 5E to avoid. </p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>That's an interesting point, though it wasn't what I was thinking of per se. I think WotC just sets DCs arbitrarily. This is OK in the sense that "it works" as long as you don't get past about 18 because the math works out there. However, the very lack of a basic set of underlying math is why they have these kinds of more common that you'd like corner cases. </p><p></p><p>Admittedly, I am certainly more strongly bothered by math that's not as elegant or clearly thought out as it could be than most people. However, usually when the math isn't worked out right, there's going to be exploits or undesirable side effects to be had.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Jay Verkuilen, post: 7760708, member: 6873517"] The fact that you need to skirt around it is a sign the high level math is messed up. You don't start really noticing it until about levels 15 or so, but it's around even before that. There are characters with save numbers that are too high as well. That was when it was [I]published[/I]. If they didn't actually make a "here's how the numbers work" bible until after the [I]Monster Manual [/I]was finished.... By construction it's very hard to boost up things like that---and to be clear, preventing this kind of stacking is something the game was designed for explicitly and is, IMO, a good thing. For example, if you have a weak save and have a bonus of, say +1 vs a DC 23 threat, it's exceptionally hard to dig out of a net 12 hole. Bless adds about +2, which gets to you to needing to roll a 20. Inspiration not quite doubles the chance of getting a 20, to 19/400, which is a bit under 10%. Bardic Inspiration (bad WotC for naming a class feature for something else!) is one of the few actual adds and that certainly helps, if you happen to have a very high level bard in your party. Many parties do not. Given that most combats last about five or six rounds, this is a recipe for the player to hand sit for the fight. Finally, [I]Lesser Restoration[/I] does nothing to help against something like stunlock. Just because it's strongly noticeable at that point doesn't mean it's not emerging at lower values, though. Furthermore, one of the design goals of the game was to try to help ensure that certain classes weren't necessary. I'm not sure I follow this. I [I]think[/I] you're getting at the fact that ACs shouldn't get too high, which is indeed a feature of the Bounded Accuracy approach. By and large they do not. So what I'm saying is that saves and skills (which we haven't talked about much) start to violate BA in the levels past 10 but certainly by the mid teens. This tempts DMs and WotC back into DC creep. What makes BA work for combat is that success is rarely all-or-nothing and making things in those realms less all-or-nothing would help keep DCs lower. Nope, it's the math. While people keep focusing on holding the weak save numbers down much of the problem IMO is caused by the fact that [I]strong[/I] save bonuses get large too fast. IMO the math would work much better if for saves proficiency gave you advantage on the save rather than adding your proficiency bonus on top of your stat bonus, though that's just a hunch on my part. I'm not arguing with that. My issue is with bonuses being set with too much range between non-proficient characters, who essentially stay at 0 their entire career and proficient characters with strong stats, who essentially become immune to the vast majority of challenges. You can't even fail on a 1 anymore. This tempts WotC into setting DCs too high to challenge the high level bard, sorcerer, or warlock facing a Charisma attack (let's say). While this is makes it threatening to the bard, it makes it overwhelming to the other PCs. You could, of course, have the same thing happen with some other save, I'm just picking the stunlocked barbarian as a vivid example. That is to say, high level characters develop a glass jaw with respect to the threats they face, which they really didn't have before. The main buff most PCs will have access to and control themselves is Advantage (via Inspiration) but when the probability of success is very low, Advantage has essentially no effect. The buffs available to most PCs actually had an effect. And I want to reiterate: I'm not saying make high level threats [I]weak[/I]. What I'd really like to avoid is the "I can't make this save" situation, which I think is really frustrating for the player and starts necessitating particular kinds of parties. I believe this was explicitly a design goal for 5E to avoid. That's an interesting point, though it wasn't what I was thinking of per se. I think WotC just sets DCs arbitrarily. This is OK in the sense that "it works" as long as you don't get past about 18 because the math works out there. However, the very lack of a basic set of underlying math is why they have these kinds of more common that you'd like corner cases. Admittedly, I am certainly more strongly bothered by math that's not as elegant or clearly thought out as it could be than most people. However, usually when the math isn't worked out right, there's going to be exploits or undesirable side effects to be had. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Mearls On D&D's Design Premises/Goals
Top