D&D 5E Q&A 8/1 - Attack & Skill Checks , Spell DCs and Stat Caps

[malcolm_n]

I mean... if you're playing against Michael Jordan in a game of H.O.R.S.E... some of those shots he's making probably should be virtually impossible for you to succeed at. (Not the greatest analogy, I know...)

Here DEFCON, this one's for you.
http://youtu.be/_oACRt-Qp-s

 

[Warbringer]

Nothing but net ... DC (hardest+1)

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

I guess it depends on how you look at a 10% increase in potential effectiveness versus an automatic +2d6 or +2d8 in damage?

I think it comes down to whether the effects of utility spells also increase when you prepare them at higher level. If the choice is a Hold Person spell that lasts another round each higher level you prepare it at AND an extra point of DC, the choice becomes much easier.

If the only thing utility spells get when you prepare them at higher levels is DC...well, it might be worthwhile to keep them low level and only use them on things you know have a bad saving throw vs them.

 

[Pseudopsyche]

However, I think this logic is backwards. If your damaging spells do half on a successful save, then you will get some effect out of them even if you prepare them in your low level slots. Meanwhile utility spells tend to have no effect at all one a failed save. Doesn't it make more sense to prepare these in your highest slots for the save DC boost in order to make sure they do something?

I interpreted "utility spell" to include the likes of Expeditious Retreat, Invisibility, Haste, etc. All good spells even for high-level wizards. I would classify Hold Person as an "offensive" spell, even if it doesn't do damage. I suspect he intended "offensive" spells to include all spells that require the target to make a saving throw.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I think it comes down to whether the effects of utility spells also increase when you prepare them at higher level. If the choice is a Hold Person spell that lasts another round each higher level you prepare it at AND an extra point of DC, the choice becomes much easier.

If the only thing utility spells get when you prepare them at higher levels is DC...well, it might be worthwhile to keep them low level and only use them on things you know have a bad saving throw vs them.

True enough. I suspect that every utility and damaging spell will be on a case-by-case basis as to which ones are better to cast at regular level versus higher level. In the end though... I do tend to believe Rodney when he says that we will have plenty of spells to cast to fill out our lower level slots (while we choose to use most of the higher level slots for combat effects.)

 

[DEFCON 1]

Here DEFCON, this one's for you.
http://youtu.be/_oACRt-Qp-s

I knew what the video was before even opening the link.

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

I don't mind if the ability score cap sits at 18 or 20, though I do wonder why they don't make it 18 to give the game the right feel.

I would appreciate if the maximum attack modifier was the same as your maximum ability modifier, and then your maximum skill modifier could be twice that - +5, +5 and +10. As it stands, I think they're aiming for there being almost no chance that an average, untrained commoner will beat your 20-ability specialised adventurer very rarely - +17 would mean you lose only on a 1 vs. 19/20 or a 2 vs. 20, which is 3/400. I think there are better ways to do that, such as minimum scores or non-proficiency penalties for particular tasks.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

I don't see that as a bad thing. Let the guy who put everything into being the best thief have his moments to shine, imho.

I'm mostly in agreement. I'm just not a huge fan of DCs that are ONLY possible for specialists. It encourages people to use them. Then you have prewritten adventures that cannot be completed by a particular group of PCs because no one is super specialized in Search to find that secret door.

If all DCs are between 1 and 20 then at least the specialist just nearly auto succeeds at them while everyone else has very little chance to succeed.

I would think it depends on your specialty. If I were to build Malcolm in 5e (I will eventually), I'd have his high-level spells be utility for that very reason. On the other hand, If I want a blaster caster, I'd still put my powerful offensive spells there to get the biggest bang for the buck and not feel like I got nothing if they do save.

You make a good point. I'm beginning to think it might work out just fine. Really, which spells you put into your high level slots are the ones you are going to use the most often, I'd think.

20 is, technically, after racials/class(ials?) bonuses are applied. Your character still has to reach 18 to even work past it. The more you hem it in, the less room you have for other things, especially with bounded accuracy.

Yeah, but if you roll an 18, you can have a 20 at first level. Even if you start with less than that, with stat bumps getting to 20 is easy.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

I interpreted "utility spell" to include the likes of Expeditious Retreat, Invisibility, Haste, etc. All good spells even for high-level wizards. I would classify Hold Person as an "offensive" spell, even if it doesn't do damage. I suspect he intended "offensive" spells to include all spells that require the target to make a saving throw.

Sorry, I used the wrong word. The article refers to "non-damaging offensive spells" and uses entangle as an example. That's what I was referring to when I said "utility".

 

[RangerWickett]

I still think they should go way way back and use this skill system: https://www.wizards.com/dnd/article.aspx?x=dnd/4ll/20110816

It gets rid of the problem with the skill DC system from the past 2 editions, wherein the wide range on a d20 roll fails to match with the actual difference in difficulty. Like, if DC 20 is hard, and DC 10 is easy, even idiots should be able to succeed at easy most of the time, and experts should succeed at hard most of the time, but a 10-point difference in skill modifiers leads to weird number bloat.

The system Mearls proposed back in 2011 just gives you ranks of skills from 0 to 6. If something's difficulty is at or below your rank, you just auto-succeed. If something's 1 rank higher, you'd make an ability check (DC 10) to pull it off.

You don't have to worry about weird stuff like a character sometimes being able to jump a 20-ft. gap and sometimes only clearing 5 ft., or a diplomat farting and pissing someone off with a nat 1, or elite scouts failing to spot something while the half-blind wizard rolls a nat 20 and sees it. You've got a narrower range where there's actual uncertainty of your success. And if you really need to succeed but it's too challenging, you're encouraged to find a narrative solution rather than just throwing dice at the problem.