D&D 5E Race Class Combos, Design, Roleplaying and the fear of the new

[OB1]

Does it really need to be?

If it is required, yes.

It's not hard to confirm that, just look at the monsters: Do their attacks scale from a +4 at CR 1 to a +8 at CR 20? Do the saves they force scale from DC 12 to DC 16?

Why compare monster attack bonus and save DC to PCs? Monsters have Abilities over 20, which PCs don't. Let's instead compare the defenses that the PCs need to hit between Level 1 and Level 20

CR 1 Brass Dragon - AC 16, Saves - Dex +2, Con +3, Wis +2, Cha +3
CR 20 Brass Dragon - AC 20, Saves - Dex +6, Con +13, Wis +8, Cha +10

The AC has scaled perfectly in line with Prof increase, meaning it's just as easy for a Level 1 PC to hit a Brass Dragon wyrmling as it is for a Level 20 PC to hit an Ancient Brass Dragon without any increase in their Primary Attack Stat.

Saves are all over the place due to ASIs in the Dragon's stats, which have increased a total of 40 points, or 20 total ASI bumps, almost 3x more than even the fighter gets, meaning a 1:1 comparison between monsters and PCs cannot be made. However, just for fun, let's look at the probability of the Ancient Brass Dragon making it's saves against a Wizard with a 14 INT vs 16 INT at 1st level and 14 INT vs 20 INT at 20th level.

1st Level
14 INT DC 12 - Dex 55%, Con 60%, Wis 55%, Cha 60%
16 INT DC 13 - Dex 50%, Con 55%, Wis 50%, Con 55%

20th Level
14 INT DC 16 - Dex - 55%, Con 90%, Wis 65%, Cha 75%
20 INT DC 19 - Dex 40%, Con 75%, Wis 50%, Cha 60%

Any save involving these is a crap shoot for the PCs regardless of level or intelligence and a mere 1 out of 6 castings will end in a different result for the two wizards at 20th level. Is that worth 2 Feats? Or not having to pick between maxing Con (for Concentration and HP) and Dex (for AC and Initiative)? Or wearing Medium armor for the entire campaign? I'd say the choice is a lot closer than people think.

I agree that there is nothing wrong with meandering to 20.

Or even taking a path that never gets there!

 

[Tony Vargas]

If it is required, yes.

Assumed and required are two different things. Your wizard should put his highest stat in INT? Seems obvious that, when doling out his ASIs, he should keep it that way.

Why compare monster attack bonus and save DC to PCs?

Because monsters of the same CR are supposed to be reasonable challenges for them.

Or even taking a path that never gets there!

'Behind the curve' is not a death sentence, it's just behind the curve. Behind by 5% or 15%, in a game like 5e or 4e, where everyone advances on the same baseline (1/2 level, proficiency) means more than it does when you're all on different curves (full vs 1/2 BAB, for instance), and you're skimping on an otherwise superior curve.

 

[OB1]

'Behind the curve' is not a death sentence, it's just behind the curve. Behind by 5% or 15%, in a game like 5e or 4e, where everyone advances on the same baseline (1/2 level, proficiency) means more than it does when you're all on different curves (full vs 1/2 BAB, for instance), and you're skimping on an otherwise superior curve.

Again, just going to have to agree to disagree.

What you see as baseline, I see as ahead of the curve. What you see as behind the curve, I see as baseline.

What you call a superior curve I see as a curve with diminishing returns not worth the opportunity cost of pushing as high as is possible.

Bottom line, I do not believe 20 Prime attack stat is necessary or needed for optimization of a character, it is just one of many options available.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Again, just going to have to agree to disagree.

What you see as baseline, I see as ahead of the curve. What you see as behind the curve, I see as baseline.

That is a nearly trivial disagreement.

What you call a superior curve I see as a curve with diminishing returns not worth the opportunity cost of pushing as high as is possible.

A lot of Fighter SUX threads would agree, I suppose.

Bottom line, I do not believe 20 Prime attack stat is necessary or needed for optimization of a character, it is just one of many options available.

Yeah, the best one, for the most part - there might be a feat or two you should prioritize above your primary, depending on build, 'optimal' is going to mean hitting 20, whether that's riding the curve or leaving it in the dust.

 

[Lylandra]

If it is required, yes.



Why compare monster attack bonus and save DC to PCs? Monsters have Abilities over 20, which PCs don't. Let's instead compare the defenses that the PCs need to hit between Level 1 and Level 20

CR 1 Brass Dragon - AC 16, Saves - Dex +2, Con +3, Wis +2, Cha +3
CR 20 Brass Dragon - AC 20, Saves - Dex +6, Con +13, Wis +8, Cha +10

The AC has scaled perfectly in line with Prof increase, meaning it's just as easy for a Level 1 PC to hit a Brass Dragon wyrmling as it is for a Level 20 PC to hit an Ancient Brass Dragon without any increase in their Primary Attack Stat.

Saves are all over the place due to ASIs in the Dragon's stats, which have increased a total of 40 points, or 20 total ASI bumps, almost 3x more than even the fighter gets, meaning a 1:1 comparison between monsters and PCs cannot be made. However, just for fun, let's look at the probability of the Ancient Brass Dragon making it's saves against a Wizard with a 14 INT vs 16 INT at 1st level and 14 INT vs 20 INT at 20th level.

1st Level
14 INT DC 12 - Dex 55%, Con 60%, Wis 55%, Cha 60%
16 INT DC 13 - Dex 50%, Con 55%, Wis 50%, Con 55%

20th Level
14 INT DC 16 - Dex - 55%, Con 90%, Wis 65%, Cha 75%
20 INT DC 19 - Dex 40%, Con 75%, Wis 50%, Cha 60%

Any save involving these is a crap shoot for the PCs regardless of level or intelligence and a mere 1 out of 6 castings will end in a different result for the two wizards at 20th level. Is that worth 2 Feats? Or not having to pick between maxing Con (for Concentration and HP) and Dex (for AC and Initiative)? Or wearing Medium armor for the entire campaign? I'd say the choice is a lot closer than people think.



Or even taking a path that never gets there!

Your comparison made me think a bit about design and intention of getting your stuff done in combat.

Isn't it a bit weird that a martial character doesn't have to increase his primary attack stat to have the same hit probability on a seemingly well-armored opponent? While a caster at the same time has to increase the primary by 4 AND has a decreased chance of succeeding with the spell in some saves?

This is a development I've seen in 3.5, PF and now 5e: That for a caster, it is way harder to land a spell which allows a save than for a physical character to land most of his attacks... and I'm not even talking spell resistance here.

 

[OB1]

Your comparison made me think a bit about design and intention of getting your stuff done in combat.

Isn't it a bit weird that a martial character doesn't have to increase his primary attack stat to have the same hit probability on a seemingly well-armored opponent? While a caster at the same time has to increase the primary by 4 AND has a decreased chance of succeeding with the spell in some saves?

This is a development I've seen in 3.5, PF and now 5e: That for a caster, it is way harder to land a spell which allows a save than for a physical character to land most of his attacks... and I'm not even talking spell resistance here.

Well, I think that's why 5e casters have the cantrip options that work and scale like weapon attacks. Spell slots are meant to be used for more spectacular, but also more unreliable, effects.

 

[OB1]

Yeah, the best one, for the most part - there might be a feat or two you should prioritize above your primary, depending on build, 'optimal' is going to mean hitting 20, whether that's riding the curve or leaving it in the dust.

Challenge accepted. Give me your most optimal Level 20 Int 20 Wizard (race must give at least +1 to INT), I'll give you my most optimal Level 20 Int 14 Wizard, and we'll let the board decide which is better. Feats or no-feats, your choice.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Challenge accepted. Give me your most optimal Level 20 Int 20 Wizard (race must give at least +1 to INT), I'll give you my most optimal Level 20 Int 14 Wizard, and we'll let the board decide which is better. Feats or no-feats, your choice.

Wasn't a challenge, but quick thought: no feats, array, and why sweat any difference other than which stats you invest in?

 

[cbwjm]

I agree that 14 stat in your primary is pretty much all you need. I'll often go for a 16 as a bit of a boost and then think of what else I can spend my ASIs on. It's one of the reasons I liked those weapon feats, an elf fighter with a longsword could instead gain some differing combat options and a small hit boost instead of just a +1 to a stat. I probably wouldn't even bother with boosting their strength past 16 if that feat was an option.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Everybody always talks about "No Feats" games, but I'd love to play a "no-ASI" game so I could take all those yummy feats without feeling like I was gimping my character.