Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
Solution to ASI Problem
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="schnee" data-source="post: 7264579" data-attributes="member: 16728"><p>Fair enough, so let me explain more.</p><p></p><p>The system is designed from the very beginning to have ability scores have 20's at higher levels. Those increases combine with the Proficiency Bonus to enable character improvement over time, and that's what replaced the fixed scaling combat and DC bonuses of earlier editions. It's not a bug, it's a feature. </p><p></p><p>The way this is being mucked with won't break the game - Bounded Accuracy is forgiving - but it won't do much that ASI Standard Array wouldn't do already.</p><p></p><p>--</p><p></p><p>Long explanation: Instead of a Fighter getting a lock-step +1 to hit and damage every (x) levels, with a scale that's steeper than other characters, they flattened the math so a +1 or +2 is really significant and gave Fighters more ASI's. So, if you plunk everything into getting a 20 in one stat, it's functionally the same as the old system, and monster math is geared towards that Fighter having a 20 eventually. </p><p></p><p>So, if he wants to make getting a 20 harder, that's his right, but he's now created a different sub-game that players will exploit just as hard. It won't break the game, because of Bounded Accuracy, but in the very end a few characters will have 18's instead of 20's, and probably more Feats, because those are far more worthwhile than getting a 12 to a 14.</p><p></p><p>So, TL<img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite8" alt=":D" title="Big grin :D" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":D" />R: I'm questioning what it will accomplish. </p><p></p><p>If the problem is about 20's, why not just use the Standard Array, or a low point Point Buy, and call it a day? That will push a 20 off until 8th level for the most dedicated min/maxer, and at least 12th for most. Someone who min/maxes that way will have middling to weak scores in their other abilities that will present exploitable weaknesses, and prevent it from being a true problem.</p><p></p><p>--</p><p></p><p>I have my own bias here, and I'll own up to it: I think house rules should be built so they seamlessly mesh within the system, in mechanics and aesthetics, and someone doing an outside analysis couldn't pick them out as being different. This rule seems to be too fiddly and complex, so I don't like it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="schnee, post: 7264579, member: 16728"] Fair enough, so let me explain more. The system is designed from the very beginning to have ability scores have 20's at higher levels. Those increases combine with the Proficiency Bonus to enable character improvement over time, and that's what replaced the fixed scaling combat and DC bonuses of earlier editions. It's not a bug, it's a feature. The way this is being mucked with won't break the game - Bounded Accuracy is forgiving - but it won't do much that ASI Standard Array wouldn't do already. -- Long explanation: Instead of a Fighter getting a lock-step +1 to hit and damage every (x) levels, with a scale that's steeper than other characters, they flattened the math so a +1 or +2 is really significant and gave Fighters more ASI's. So, if you plunk everything into getting a 20 in one stat, it's functionally the same as the old system, and monster math is geared towards that Fighter having a 20 eventually. So, if he wants to make getting a 20 harder, that's his right, but he's now created a different sub-game that players will exploit just as hard. It won't break the game, because of Bounded Accuracy, but in the very end a few characters will have 18's instead of 20's, and probably more Feats, because those are far more worthwhile than getting a 12 to a 14. So, TL:DR: I'm questioning what it will accomplish. If the problem is about 20's, why not just use the Standard Array, or a low point Point Buy, and call it a day? That will push a 20 off until 8th level for the most dedicated min/maxer, and at least 12th for most. Someone who min/maxes that way will have middling to weak scores in their other abilities that will present exploitable weaknesses, and prevent it from being a true problem. -- I have my own bias here, and I'll own up to it: I think house rules should be built so they seamlessly mesh within the system, in mechanics and aesthetics, and someone doing an outside analysis couldn't pick them out as being different. This rule seems to be too fiddly and complex, so I don't like it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Solution to ASI Problem
Top