Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ilbranteloth" data-source="post: 7209449" data-attributes="member: 6778044">Then don't play a wizard. And why does it matter if somebody has the equivalent of one or two free ASI's? Why does everything have to be hyper-balanced like that? Those types of differences matter only if that makes a big difference in your actual campaign. Your 50% jump in bonus is only a 10% jump in chance to-hit. As a group, those types of things can be very useful for ensuring survival. But it doesn't mean that everybody has to have the same bonus for something else. The fact that it's the same as a character 9 levels higher is much, much less important in 5e.If you're trying to hit an AC 17 it's the difference between needing an 8 or higher instead of a 10 or higher. Very far from game breaking. I'm not sure what you're getting at with the +3/+5 in 3e. A two-point difference in 3e is still a 10% difference, just like 5e. You can't be hitting just as often with a +3 bonus in 3e as a +5. You'd hit 10% less, or actually a variable amount depending on the target AC.In OD&D/AD&D, a 5th level fighter was as good as a 9th level thief or an 11th level wizard when it came to hitting an AC 3. That worked just fine for almost 20 years. In 3e, a 5th level fighter was the equivalent of a 6th level rogue and a 10th level wizard. In both of those (particularly 3e) AC went well beyond that 3 AC. In AD&D it went 13 points farther, and 3e it was essentially infinite. In 5e, though, the maximum published monster AC is less than 10 points higher than 17.It's not really as big a deal as you think, although it's also very, very dependent upon the DM, the campaign, and whether there are lots of players optimizing, tying to fit specific (combat) roles, and other approaches that have come up over the years. Having said that, I do agree that the scaling is different in 5e, and it tends to be on the high side for my tastes. But that's OK, I can live with it and I can work with it.All I can say, is that until you play in one of the campaigns where we roll for characters, you probably really can't determine how much of an impact it may or may not have within that context. I still won't pretend that everybody would like it. I'm sure they wouldn't. Just like I'm positive that not everybody would like me as a DM. But after 35+ years of DMing and having players of pretty much any given play style playing in my campaigns, most of the time they find that it's not what they expected. And it didn't become the favorite approach for all of them. But for a lot of them it has, at least when they are playing in my campaigns.</blockquote>

Verification