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
*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
*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
Scaling the number of off-hand attacks?
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="jgsugden" data-source="post: 6632923" data-attributes="member: 2629"><p>Monsters follow roughly the same AC progression that PCs do. Something man sized that has no armor and is not particularly dexterous will have a 10 or 11 AC. If they have light armor or are dexterous, 12 or 13. If both lightly armored and dexterous, or in medium armor: 14 or 15. If in heavy armor or built of durable materials: 16 to 22. Deific ACs arise above 22. </p><p></p><p>A -5 penalty to hit turns 1 out of 4 rolls from a hit to a miss, or a smaller percentage if there is advantage. However, even with advantage, it is a big change. DPR is one way to measure the impact, but DPR is a simplistic tool that does not take into account concepts like overkill (wasted damage beyond what it needed to meet a goal (such as taking the monster down)) or deviations in damage per strike. Simply put, those that focus on DPR have taken a step on efficiency analysis, but there is still a long journey ahead of them before they can truly evaluate the true efficiency of an option.</p><p></p><p>As for deadly threats being the majority of combats: That violates the recommended guidelines and it alters many assumptions in the game. Amongst the impacts are a likely change in the rate of encounters per short rest and encounters per long rest. We all know that an easy battle seems pointless at times because it is soooooo easy... but that is only if there is a single goal (killing). </p><p></p><p>A single zombie can be an interesting challenge for a high level party if the goal is not just to kill the zombie, but to kill it in a certain way or before it can do a certain thing. Also, monsters do not need to be the main threat in a combat - they can be a hazard that the PCs must navigate. For example, let's say that the 8th level party comes across a barn full of kobolds at the edge of the village. As soon as they do, the monsters try to fight their way past the PCs to get away. If they get away, they'll kill villagers and livestock. If all the kobolds turned on the PCs, the PCs would likely yawn their way through the slaughter. If they have to figure out how to stop the kobolds from getting away (requiring them to be selective in how they attack), it becomes a different challenge.</p><p></p><p>In other words, you don't have to go deadly all the time to create challenges if death is not the only challenge you go to...</p><p></p><p>If you follow the math of the edition and do not min/max like crazy, 5E is a lot of fun. If you push for the cracks and try to optimize every little detail, you're going to push the game outside the target goals where the game works best. Your choice.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="jgsugden, post: 6632923, member: 2629"] Monsters follow roughly the same AC progression that PCs do. Something man sized that has no armor and is not particularly dexterous will have a 10 or 11 AC. If they have light armor or are dexterous, 12 or 13. If both lightly armored and dexterous, or in medium armor: 14 or 15. If in heavy armor or built of durable materials: 16 to 22. Deific ACs arise above 22. A -5 penalty to hit turns 1 out of 4 rolls from a hit to a miss, or a smaller percentage if there is advantage. However, even with advantage, it is a big change. DPR is one way to measure the impact, but DPR is a simplistic tool that does not take into account concepts like overkill (wasted damage beyond what it needed to meet a goal (such as taking the monster down)) or deviations in damage per strike. Simply put, those that focus on DPR have taken a step on efficiency analysis, but there is still a long journey ahead of them before they can truly evaluate the true efficiency of an option. As for deadly threats being the majority of combats: That violates the recommended guidelines and it alters many assumptions in the game. Amongst the impacts are a likely change in the rate of encounters per short rest and encounters per long rest. We all know that an easy battle seems pointless at times because it is soooooo easy... but that is only if there is a single goal (killing). A single zombie can be an interesting challenge for a high level party if the goal is not just to kill the zombie, but to kill it in a certain way or before it can do a certain thing. Also, monsters do not need to be the main threat in a combat - they can be a hazard that the PCs must navigate. For example, let's say that the 8th level party comes across a barn full of kobolds at the edge of the village. As soon as they do, the monsters try to fight their way past the PCs to get away. If they get away, they'll kill villagers and livestock. If all the kobolds turned on the PCs, the PCs would likely yawn their way through the slaughter. If they have to figure out how to stop the kobolds from getting away (requiring them to be selective in how they attack), it becomes a different challenge. In other words, you don't have to go deadly all the time to create challenges if death is not the only challenge you go to... If you follow the math of the edition and do not min/max like crazy, 5E is a lot of fun. If you push for the cracks and try to optimize every little detail, you're going to push the game outside the target goals where the game works best. Your choice. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Scaling the number of off-hand attacks?
Top