D&D 5E Taking a second look at attack bonuses

[keterys]

Mostly, it makes the die roll uninteresting, as it also makes uninteresting the ways of changing the odds.

"I could do this cool thing, to get advantage? Meh."
"Big bad has a gaze - if I don't take disadvantage, I might get in trouble. Hah, whatever."
"Whee, I can spend combat expertise to improve my chances to hit. Cause hitting on a -5 already is a problem."

 

[Blackwarder]

Two things:
1. I don't know why folks seems to think that the highest AC will be 20, and even if it will be than again so what if a fully decked 20 level fighter with max strength hit almost every time? Which lead me to my second point.
2. If fighters can hit almost constantly than instead of fighter abilities that add to the attack bonus the fighter player can use abilities that add extra stuff to the attack like knock back or disarming.

Warder

 

[RHGreen]

All characters should have a Physical Bonus and a Mental Bonus. Not just one, and not a Weapon Attack Bonus and a Magical Attack Bonus - these are too specific.

Remove the Attack part. A Physical Bonus and Mental Bonus can be used for stuff other than just attacking such as within the ability/skill system.

In the context of the OP, separating these out properly will help with the inherent problems you have with a too steep power increase. If a mage is trailing way behind in Physical Bonus, it shouldn't really matter too much as they will always be using their good Mental Bonus anyway.

Of course, I also prefer that they continue to try and flatten the power increase like they are doing, mainly to make challenges stay relevant over a wider spread of levels.

Later Edit: You can think of the Physical Bonus and Mental Bonus as general increase in experience that affects all aspects of that area that is then added to with the more specific (and more quantifiable) sub-abilities.

 

[Iosue]

Two things:
1. I don't know why folks seems to think that the highest AC will be 20, and even if it will be than again so what if a fully decked 20 level fighter with max strength hit almost every time? Which lead me to my second point.
2. If fighters can hit almost constantly than instead of fighter abilities that add to the attack bonus the fighter player can use abilities that add extra stuff to the attack like knock back or disarming.

Warder

If the goal is to bind accuracy the way B/X was bound, then basically AC needs to go from 10 to 25 (same as 9 to -5). In that case, in Blackwarder's system a 20th level fighter with 18th strength would hit AC 25 on an 11 (50%). A +3 weapon knocks that down to 8 (65%). With advantage it's roughly an 80% chance to-hit. I could live with those numbers. It keeps the fighter relevant against the toughest monsters in the game, while not wholly losing the chance of a miss. Now, the key is that magical bonuses would have to scale along the same lines, or perhaps even slower.

 

[Blackwarder]

I think that the highest magical bonus planed to Next is +3, I remember hearing it somewhere...

Warder

 

[Li Shenron]

I think that the highest magical bonus planed to Next is +3, I remember hearing it somewhere...

IIRC that's just the highest appearing in the sample magic items, but I don't think it's "planned".

 

[Blackwarder]

Might be... But beside magic weapons what other bonuses to attack can be derived from magic items? We know that the attack bonuses from feats are history so what's left?

Warder

 

[Iosue]

I think that the highest magical bonus planed to Next is +3, I remember hearing it somewhere...

Warder

Sorry, I was unclear. What I meant by magical bonus was caster's magic bonus. If these outstrip the monsters' saves to a greater degree than a fighter's chance to hit, then no matter how good a chance a fighter has to-hit, he'll have to play second fiddle to the casters.

B/X (and AD&D) solved this by letting monster saves progress at the rate of fighters, so high level monsters had high AC and high non-AC defenses. 3e dropped the ball and let AC rise while saves got progressive weaker relative to the PC caster. 4e resolved this, more or less, but as the Next rules currently stand, high level caster bonuses (or at least Wizard bonuses; I don't recall how it is for Clerics) out-strip high level monster saves by a fair margin.

 

[Blackwarder]

The thing is that with the current system saving throw doesn't scale up as you level up...

Warder

 

[Iosue]

The thing is that with the current system saving throw doesn't scale up as you level up...

Warder

Exactly. Aside from rare cases where monsters have extremely high ability scores, a they have only a slim chance of saving versus a 20th level, 20 Int wizard. I appreciate Next's simplicity and elegance in using ability checks for saves. But there needs to be some kind of level or HD bonus to keep pace with the wizard's magic bonus. Or else caster's magic bonuses need to be scaled back. And its not just to keep from going too LFQW; with the system as it is, battles with high level casting opponents can turn into initiative quickdraws.