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
Not liking Bounded Accuracy
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="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6770595" data-attributes="member: 996"><p>Bounded Accuracy is largely cosmetic compared to the 4e treadmill. In both cases, PCs of all classes advance in competence at about the same rate, and you can easily tailor challenges to the party. The d20 system the die gets overwhelmed by sufficiently large bonuses, so even though you don't 'seem to be getting better' under Bounded Accuracy, you're not really doing any worse than on the Treadmill vs 'appropriate' challenges (and inappropriate ones are just virtual auto-fail/success). One is 'numbers porn' and the other is 'numerically repressed,' you could say. </p><p></p><p>OTOH, compared to 3.5 BAB, 2e THAC0 or 1e attack matrices, 5e BA does mean that really don't 'seem to be getting better' relative to other PCs. In those editions, a fighter got better at attacking, rogues at skills, wizards at casting, and so forth faster than other classes (who might not improve at all), so you had not just nominal progress matched by ever-increasing challenges, but relatively greater progress in your area of specialization. 5e BA does leave out characters who lack proficiency so when it comes to skills and saves, a PC can 'seem to get better' relative to his peers, in those areas.</p><p></p><p>An advantage of BA is that the system needs fewer challenges designed & statted out, since the same monsters, traps, or whatever can be re-used over a wider range of levels. Another advantage (npi) is (Dis)Advantage, which works better the closer your natural roll to succeed is to 10 or 11, again, it's largely cosmetic, because you'll need the same range of natural rolls to succeed vs 'appropriate' challenges on the treadmill. And, like the treadmill, BA avoids the problem of needing to over-challenge the rest of the party just to modestly challenge the party specialists.</p><p></p><p>Those both suggest fairly simple variants:</p><p></p><p>You can already use downtime to learn new languages or proficiencies, why not skills, as well? </p><p></p><p>Feats are supposed to be 'big' - you could have a feat grant a selection of skills & Expertise in one of them, or whatever upgrade seems appropriate for the cost.</p><p></p><p>That'd undercut part of the point of bounded accuracy, which is that you don't need to overclock a DC just to minimally challenge the party specialist.</p><p></p><p>Rulings-not-Rules goes beyond Rule 0. You don't need to re-write rules in detail, just make rulings that work at the time. For instance, a character who's proficient & high stat in a skill you could allow to succeed without needing a check more often, while requiring a do-able check for others. In theory, the specialist could fail that same DC, but you don't call for the roll.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 6770595, member: 996"] Bounded Accuracy is largely cosmetic compared to the 4e treadmill. In both cases, PCs of all classes advance in competence at about the same rate, and you can easily tailor challenges to the party. The d20 system the die gets overwhelmed by sufficiently large bonuses, so even though you don't 'seem to be getting better' under Bounded Accuracy, you're not really doing any worse than on the Treadmill vs 'appropriate' challenges (and inappropriate ones are just virtual auto-fail/success). One is 'numbers porn' and the other is 'numerically repressed,' you could say. OTOH, compared to 3.5 BAB, 2e THAC0 or 1e attack matrices, 5e BA does mean that really don't 'seem to be getting better' relative to other PCs. In those editions, a fighter got better at attacking, rogues at skills, wizards at casting, and so forth faster than other classes (who might not improve at all), so you had not just nominal progress matched by ever-increasing challenges, but relatively greater progress in your area of specialization. 5e BA does leave out characters who lack proficiency so when it comes to skills and saves, a PC can 'seem to get better' relative to his peers, in those areas. An advantage of BA is that the system needs fewer challenges designed & statted out, since the same monsters, traps, or whatever can be re-used over a wider range of levels. Another advantage (npi) is (Dis)Advantage, which works better the closer your natural roll to succeed is to 10 or 11, again, it's largely cosmetic, because you'll need the same range of natural rolls to succeed vs 'appropriate' challenges on the treadmill. And, like the treadmill, BA avoids the problem of needing to over-challenge the rest of the party just to modestly challenge the party specialists. Those both suggest fairly simple variants: You can already use downtime to learn new languages or proficiencies, why not skills, as well? Feats are supposed to be 'big' - you could have a feat grant a selection of skills & Expertise in one of them, or whatever upgrade seems appropriate for the cost. That'd undercut part of the point of bounded accuracy, which is that you don't need to overclock a DC just to minimally challenge the party specialist. Rulings-not-Rules goes beyond Rule 0. You don't need to re-write rules in detail, just make rulings that work at the time. For instance, a character who's proficient & high stat in a skill you could allow to succeed without needing a check more often, while requiring a do-able check for others. In theory, the specialist could fail that same DC, but you don't call for the roll. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Not liking Bounded Accuracy
Top