D&D General Mike Mearls says control spells are ruining 5th Edition

[AnotherGuy]

In fairness to them, 5e's designers never actually settled on what BA was about, and that was one of the (many) things they claimed it was about.

People claimed on these boards all sorts of nonsense about the 6-8 encounters NOT meaning 6-8 encounters only to have it in black and white that it DID mean 6-8 encounters by 5e deaigners.
I'm not going to buy the same nonsense on what BA is.
If someone would like to define it differently that's on them.

Personally, I think it has a kernel or two of good idea, but it was taken way too far.

How do you believe it was it taken too far?

 

[tetrasodium]

The games DC runs from 5 to 30. Where would you have them stop?

I disagree with your assessment. The game did not need +5 on ability modifiers. There are plenty of incremental benefits that could be provided without the standard +1 +2, but hey it requires creativity.

The point was about the math having room to grow not just attribute bonuses. Weapon attacks added BaB (up to +20) l. Spells tended to add spell level or caster level depending on what was being done. Skills likewise added far more than just a +5 but it's simpler to point out the dc table having "who could do it" examples all the way up to dc43

 

[CreamCloud0]

The games DC runs from 5 to 30. Where would you have them stop?

I disagree with your assessment. The game did not need +5 on ability modifiers. There are plenty of incremental benefits that could be provided without the standard +1 +2, but hey it requires creativity.

personally, far end max of 40 for the really difficult stuff, make expertise and reliable talent more common especially within the martials, d20(20)+ ability mod(5)+ proficiency(6)+ expertise(6)= 37, then you can fill in that last gap with other magic bonuses and stuff like guidance.

 

[AnotherGuy]

Tho point was about the math having room to grow not just attribute bonuses. Weapon attacks added BaB (up to +20) l. Spells tended to add spell level or caster level depending on what was being done. Skills likewise added far more than just a +5 but it's simpler to point out the dc table having "who could do it" examples all the way up to dc43

Okay. Do you have any ideas about how to increase the AC of monsters? Does plate still give +8 and a shield +2?

 

[Minigiant]

The games DC runs from 5 to 30. Where would you have them stop?

I disagree with your assessment. The game did not need +5 on ability modifiers. There are plenty of incremental benefits that could be provided to classes or abilities without the standard +1 +2, but it requires creativity.

Not those DCs

Armor Class: 10-20 (really 13-23)
Spell DC: 12-21
To hit bonus: +4 to +12
Save bonus: -2 to +11

And many of the top level of these bounds required to be both high level to get the highest proficiency modifier of + 6 and have your preferred primary ability score of + 5. But for most of the game you're talking about a -1 to +7 for bonuses.

And again let's not talk about Armor class because that is the most narrow bounds in the game. Most PCS and creatures start at 13 or 14 and if you power game you can get to the very 20s. And you do this at level 3. THREE. unless you are a light armor user or a no armor user you can cap out on your armor at level three level four for most classes and monsters. So most characters never switch armors in their entire PC life outside of the first time they purchase armor with treasure unless the DM gives them strictly better armor which is probably the absolute worst thing any dungeon master should ever do.

I like 5e's edition but it's armor mechanic triggers me so hard sometimes.

Ability check DCs of 5-30 was one of the few bounds they got right.

 

[Minigiant]

Personally, what I think this means is that we need to drill down on how to demonstrate to the players that they have, in fact, "scaled up". Break the treadmill, not by removing the slope, but by making it so players can SEE that they're on a higher point now than they used to be. I don't think 5e's approach is quite right, but it has (again) a kernel of a good idea that can be teased out. Namely: We need monsters that are distinctive to tiers of play. Things that you genuinely "grow out of", and things you genuinely "grow into". Stuff that really, truly is too hard to fight when you're level 3 or 4, unless you've got some miracle--both because that's realistic (there are almost always things too strong for any given combatant!), and because that sets signposts

This is distinctly what 5e was designed to not do. And it was its biggest issue.

5e with design so that you can use goblins all the way to level 10 and still challenge PCs. So they bounded the accuracy and bounded the DCs so that the goblin minions could still hit you and the Goblin hexers can still spells on you successfully even if your level 11.

The problem was that D&D is still a level place game and you still need it progression. So whatever progress blue the static aspects out of the water.

5th edition attempted to cater somewhat to the kind of players who wanted to play low magic low fantasy RPGs. However in doing so it hampered the rest of the system.

D&D is a high Fantasy game and it needs to us except that and allow for certain monsters and certain items and certain things to age out when you get to certain levels. Think of the tiers as actual tiers and actually design with things as tiered. No 100 goblins are not going to slay an ancient dragon.

 

[tetrasodium]

Okay. Do you have any ideas about how to increase the AC of monsters? Does plate still give +8 and a shield +2?

Did you not play earlier editions? Those past editions had an Ac spread that provided a much wider range for growth in the past as well but that too was complicated in build specific ways with asf ACP skill check penalty dex mod cap expected magic item churn and so on in ways that makes it hard to give the simple answer you are fishing for

Ad&d2e likewise was very different but it was very normal for players to upgrade their armor more than once as they progressed through the table and gained magical versions