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
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
No ascending bonuses: A mathematical framework for 5e
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="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 5787500" data-attributes="member: 2011"><p>You have this today. A low level foe tends to hit for 1/3rd of a low PC's hit points.</p><p></p><p>The difference is that high level foes in 4E tend to hit for 1/6th of a high PC's hit points and DMs have to go out of their way to create monster groups that have good synergy and many attacks per round to overcome this. Course, they rarely can due to the vast plethora of temporary hit points, resistance, surgeless healing, and normal healing at high levels. The PCs have too many ways to reduce this damage even more.</p><p></p><p>The reason your claim here is inaccurate is that damage in this type of model is significantly decreased over what 4E does today. It's ratio-ed out to an appropriate level. It's not just +1 more damage per monster level.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>No it doesn't. It makes low level practically identical to 4E.</p><p></p><p>It makes high level grittier, but that's because high level currently in 4E is a bit of a joke.</p><p></p><p>As an example, a same level foe in 4E does level+8 damage against a PC that has 16+level*4 through 24+level*6 hit points.</p><p></p><p>At level 1, that's 9 points of damage against a PC with 20 to 30 hit points or 2 to 3 (sometimes 4) average hits will usually drop the PC. The odds of hitting though tend to be 35% to 50% or so.</p><p></p><p>At level 20, that's 28 points of damage against a PC with 96 to 144 hit points or 4 to 6 hits will usually drop the PC. Instead of 33% to 50% of a PC's hit points (depending on class), it's now 16% to 25%.</p><p></p><p>That's one of the flaws of 4E. It's sweet spot changes. This type of model avoids that. It's pretty obvious that you don't like this system, but your claims about it are inaccurate.</p><p></p><p></p><p>And of course, this system can be tweaked to whatever WotC thinks is the best model with regard to percentage of damage per hit for a same level foe, chances to hit for a same level foe, etc.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Personally, I think that PCs should hit same level foes about 60% of the time and that it should take 3 to 4 hits to take out the foe (almost regardless of class except for Strikers). I think monsters should hit PCs 40% (vs. melee class) to 60% (vs. non-melee class) of the time and that it should take 3 hits to take out a non-melee class and 4 hits to take out a melee class. In other words, 10 attacks (sometime via multiple attackers) to take out a melee PC and 5 attacks to take out a non-melee PC (by this, I basically mean a Fighter vs. a Wizard, there is room for shades of gray in between).</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="KarinsDad, post: 5787500, member: 2011"] You have this today. A low level foe tends to hit for 1/3rd of a low PC's hit points. The difference is that high level foes in 4E tend to hit for 1/6th of a high PC's hit points and DMs have to go out of their way to create monster groups that have good synergy and many attacks per round to overcome this. Course, they rarely can due to the vast plethora of temporary hit points, resistance, surgeless healing, and normal healing at high levels. The PCs have too many ways to reduce this damage even more. The reason your claim here is inaccurate is that damage in this type of model is significantly decreased over what 4E does today. It's ratio-ed out to an appropriate level. It's not just +1 more damage per monster level. No it doesn't. It makes low level practically identical to 4E. It makes high level grittier, but that's because high level currently in 4E is a bit of a joke. As an example, a same level foe in 4E does level+8 damage against a PC that has 16+level*4 through 24+level*6 hit points. At level 1, that's 9 points of damage against a PC with 20 to 30 hit points or 2 to 3 (sometimes 4) average hits will usually drop the PC. The odds of hitting though tend to be 35% to 50% or so. At level 20, that's 28 points of damage against a PC with 96 to 144 hit points or 4 to 6 hits will usually drop the PC. Instead of 33% to 50% of a PC's hit points (depending on class), it's now 16% to 25%. That's one of the flaws of 4E. It's sweet spot changes. This type of model avoids that. It's pretty obvious that you don't like this system, but your claims about it are inaccurate. And of course, this system can be tweaked to whatever WotC thinks is the best model with regard to percentage of damage per hit for a same level foe, chances to hit for a same level foe, etc. Personally, I think that PCs should hit same level foes about 60% of the time and that it should take 3 to 4 hits to take out the foe (almost regardless of class except for Strikers). I think monsters should hit PCs 40% (vs. melee class) to 60% (vs. non-melee class) of the time and that it should take 3 hits to take out a non-melee class and 4 hits to take out a melee class. In other words, 10 attacks (sometime via multiple attackers) to take out a melee PC and 5 attacks to take out a non-melee PC (by this, I basically mean a Fighter vs. a Wizard, there is room for shades of gray in between). [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
No ascending bonuses: A mathematical framework for 5e
Top