Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
New Rule of Three is up for 31 Jan. 2014
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="Lokiare" data-source="post: 6254669" data-attributes="member: 83996"><p>1. Group stealth which the current rules makes nearly impossible (4-6 rolls means a really high margin of failure, even if you have high modifiers) is a feature and not a bug, because Ranger spells.</p><p></p><p>Uh....no...That's not an acceptable answer. lets say each individual character has a 20% chance of failure on the dice (meaning they have extremely high modifiers). Lets say we have the average of 5 characters. This means the chance of one member of the party failing is 1 - (.8 * .8 * .8 * .8 * .8) (multiply together the chances of succeeding at a roll to get the chance of not making it) or 67.232%. So if the entire party has an 80% of success individually, they have a 67.232% chance of being detected anyway as a group. I'm sorry, but it appears the team at WotC didn't run the math, or they have a desire to make the group reliant on magic. Just for fun a party that has members that have 20%, 20%, 20%, 40%, 60% chance of failure would give us 1-(.8 * .8 * .8 *.6 *.4) = 87.712% chance of failure. So if you have even one member that has a low chance you might as well not even try.</p><p></p><p>2. There are features of medium armor that make it worthwhile.</p><p></p><p>Sure, especially that near 100% chance of failure of group stealth checks from above. If you have disadvantage on stealth checks that means your party is probably going to fall into that 87% or more chance of failure so no one should take heavy armor, unless you have a Ranger with the right spell, in which case everyone should take heavy armor.</p><p></p><p>3. Yes, the changes in bonus actions are meant to completely nerf the usefulness of rogues two weapon fighting, we just can't tell you straight up.</p><p></p><p>What did you think would happen? Someone pointed out a broken combination and they nerfed the system to accommodate it. So now it has the trickle down effect of nerfing everything it comes into contact with. This is what happens when you don't test everything (that is every combination of features, feats, and spells that can come up in the game) that you design. Were you expecting anything less?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Lokiare, post: 6254669, member: 83996"] 1. Group stealth which the current rules makes nearly impossible (4-6 rolls means a really high margin of failure, even if you have high modifiers) is a feature and not a bug, because Ranger spells. Uh....no...That's not an acceptable answer. lets say each individual character has a 20% chance of failure on the dice (meaning they have extremely high modifiers). Lets say we have the average of 5 characters. This means the chance of one member of the party failing is 1 - (.8 * .8 * .8 * .8 * .8) (multiply together the chances of succeeding at a roll to get the chance of not making it) or 67.232%. So if the entire party has an 80% of success individually, they have a 67.232% chance of being detected anyway as a group. I'm sorry, but it appears the team at WotC didn't run the math, or they have a desire to make the group reliant on magic. Just for fun a party that has members that have 20%, 20%, 20%, 40%, 60% chance of failure would give us 1-(.8 * .8 * .8 *.6 *.4) = 87.712% chance of failure. So if you have even one member that has a low chance you might as well not even try. 2. There are features of medium armor that make it worthwhile. Sure, especially that near 100% chance of failure of group stealth checks from above. If you have disadvantage on stealth checks that means your party is probably going to fall into that 87% or more chance of failure so no one should take heavy armor, unless you have a Ranger with the right spell, in which case everyone should take heavy armor. 3. Yes, the changes in bonus actions are meant to completely nerf the usefulness of rogues two weapon fighting, we just can't tell you straight up. What did you think would happen? Someone pointed out a broken combination and they nerfed the system to accommodate it. So now it has the trickle down effect of nerfing everything it comes into contact with. This is what happens when you don't test everything (that is every combination of features, feats, and spells that can come up in the game) that you design. Were you expecting anything less? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
New Rule of Three is up for 31 Jan. 2014
Top