D&D 5E Silly/Senseless Rules You Have Found

[howandwhy99]

As far as senseless rules, I don't understand the progression pattern in the XP advancement charts. It's all over the board. But then maybe something is happening behind the scenes, with the game design itself, which makes those numbers necessary.

Silly stuff? Honestly, I find the check system, saving throws, and ability modifier amounts silly. Heck, they've all but done away with ability scores for ability modifiers, a painfully bad move that as it makes so much of the game either unbalanceable with the d20 dice used and monotonous to play.

It isn't your father's D&D, but hopefully it's enough to keep the hobby alive.

 

[SilverfireSage]

As far as senseless rules, I don't understand the progression pattern in the XP advancement charts. It's all over the board. But then maybe something is happening behind the scenes, with the game design itself, which makes those numbers necessary.

Silly stuff? Honestly, I find the check system, saving throws, and ability modifier amounts silly. Heck, they've all but done away with ability scores for ability modifiers, a painfully bad move that as it makes so much of the game either unbalanceable with the d20 dice used and monotonous to play.

It isn't your father's D&D, but hopefully it's enough to keep the hobby alive.

I'm really confused about... well pretty much all of this. They've all but done away with ability scores for ability modifiers? What does that mean?

 

[Tormyr]

As far as senseless rules, I don't understand the progression pattern in the XP advancement charts. It's all over the board. But then maybe something is happening behind the scenes, with the game design itself, which makes those numbers necessary.

Silly stuff? Honestly, I find the check system, saving throws, and ability modifier amounts silly. Heck, they've all but done away with ability scores for ability modifiers, a painfully bad move that as it makes so much of the game either unbalanceable with the d20 dice used and monotonous to play.

It isn't your father's D&D, but hopefully it's enough to keep the hobby alive.

They came out and said the reason for the staggered xp thresholds was to accelerate through 1-3 spend more time in 4-10 or so and move more quickly through later levels quickly as well so that more campaigns get of the ground and survive through the later levels.

 

[fuindordm]

I was reading through the NPCs in the back of the Monster Manual, and a lot of them have a nifty "Parry" reaction that adds anywhere from +2 to +5 to their AC against an attack they're aware of.

Why can't PCs have that? Even the battlemaster maneuver of the same name doesn't add AC, it reduces damage. Which is fine, but it seems like it would be a nice feat.

 

[Paraxis]

I was reading through the NPCs in the back of the Monster Manual, and a lot of them have a nifty "Parry" reaction that adds anywhere from +2 to +5 to their AC against an attack they're aware of.

Why can't PCs have that? Even the battlemaster maneuver of the same name doesn't add AC, it reduces damage. Which is fine, but it seems like it would be a nice feat.

If a Valor Bard gives you bardic inspiration, it works just like that add the die to your AC to defend against an attack.

 

[howandwhy99]

They came out and said the reason for the staggered xp thresholds was to accelerate through 1-3 spend more time in 4-10 or so and move more quickly through later levels quickly as well so that more campaigns get of the ground and survive through the later levels.

Thanks. So there's no difficulty balancing then for the design? It ramps people quickly up to speed and then eases survivability down the road.

 

[Tormyr]

Thanks. So there's no difficulty balancing then for the design? It ramps people quickly up to speed and then eases survivability down the road.

I am not sure what you mean by "balancing for the design." Could you elaborate?

 

[AntiStateQuixote]

Thanks for the answers! Makes sense, although it seems odd (if minor) that instruments aren't under Performance.

Proficiency with instrument = good musical artist.

Proficiency in perform = good actor or singer or comedian.

Proficiency in both = front man for a badass metal band!

 

[koga305]

I was reading through the NPCs in the back of the Monster Manual, and a lot of them have a nifty "Parry" reaction that adds anywhere from +2 to +5 to their AC against an attack they're aware of.

Why can't PCs have that? Even the battlemaster maneuver of the same name doesn't add AC, it reduces damage. Which is fine, but it seems like it would be a nice feat.

It is. Defensive Duelist lets you add your proficiency bonus to your AC against one attack as a reaction. Sure, it requires finesse weapons, but that's not too much of a stretch.

 

[KarinsDad]

I don't know if this a silly/senseless rule but the saving throw systems math is goofed. Saving throws are awesome as a concept, I jump out of the way, I resist the mind control etc. However, when proficiency bonus only applies to some stats while applying to caster's spells all the time the numbers do not add up right. In this way, it makes it more difficult to resist or jump based on the caster's level but not on the defender's level.

There are clearly some easy fixes to this problem. For instance, make base saves 8+stat+prof then give a flat +2 to "good saves" is my favorite among them.

I think that you are confusing saves with DCs here.

Even removing the 8, that seems pretty high since the core rule is stat+prof for the best saves. You are increasing the best save by 2 (immediately) and the worse save by 2 (immediately) and 6 (by level 17), at least if I am understanding you.

We use:

stat+prof for the best saves.
stat+half prof for the worse saves.

This tends to result in:

Level 1:
best: +3 to +5
worst: +0 to +2

Level 17:
best: +7 to +11
worst: +3 to +5