The Basic Math of D&D 5: Maximum Points

[Minigiant]

These are questions I would like answered based on responses I have received so far.

How many rounds would it take for a 30th level character to kill a 30th level monster?

4 hits and 2 misses= 6 rounds

How many rounds would it take for a 30th level monster to kill a 30th level character?

4 hits and 2 misses= 6 rounds

Rounds, a 1st level character to kill a 1st level monster?

1

rounds, a 1st level monster to kill a 1st level character?

Whoever hits first wins.

How many rounds of combat do players play before they start to get tired of it?

~6. Usually after a player hits/casts 4 times in a fight, everything afterward is boring unless the fight chances in some way.

What should be the highest maximum hit points of a character?
Of a monster?

Umm... don't care. Higher than 200 though.

What should be the highest maximum ability scores, modifiers and level-up bonuses?

Whatever the cloud giant's strength is is the player's limit via race, level up, and magic.

What should be the range of feat bonuses to ability scores?

What should be the maximum magical bonus from magical items?

What should be the maximum damage of a power?

I don't know.
Lima, Peru?

 

[ren1999]

I don't like the 'tier' bonuses on the 11th and 21st level. It just makes the numbers bigger without any need. We'll have a flatter math baseline anyways, so just leave this out.



Did you notice that these characters won't be able to have any penalties? I want character penalties back. . 1E and 2E had them, 3E less and 4E kinda abandoned them completely.

-YRUSirius

These characters will have ability penalties from enemy powers and conditions.

I'm working on that next.

For example, the Weakened condition will involve a penalty of Strength -2.

 

[YRUSirius]

But no natural weaknesses? No weak wizard? No dumb barbarian?

-YRUSirius

 

[ren1999]

I suppose if they players would want to roll 3d6 for their abilities and accept any score that it would be o.k.

But players roll at home where I can't see, or they suicide their characters until they get one with scores that are at least as high as 12 with their favorite score being 18. That has always been the case.

They also re-roll hit dice. That is why I say give them maximum hit dice.

I really like ----, but one mistake is allowing a Wizard to have 5 hit points during a 1st level campaign. The odds of them dying are too high and the player is always really upset. That is why ---- Edition's addition of the constitution score is good.

I'm just saving time.

 

[Argyle King]

I'm thinking 3 rounds. Characters are the heroes. Conan rarely struggles or suffered a lot of damage in movies and comics. But he was sufficiently challenged.
.

The original books are a little different in that respect. I'd say that Conan actually does quite often get hurt or suffers the consequences of combat. He's just more resilient and bodacious than everyone else in his world.

As for combat not taking as long for him, I'd say that's a result of HP being handled quite differently in Howard's stories than the typical D&D game. While some characters were capable of surviving (and fighting with) pretty serious wounds, it was pretty common for an axe to the skull to end a fight in one swing. I can't remember which story it is, but I remember reading one in which Conan is facing an evil wizard, and the fight ends with Conan quite simply just stabbing him while the wizard is in the process of trying to cast a spell - fight over; next chapter.

That does tie into your comments though. I do agree that HP should be handled differently in 5E so as to speed up combat. While I fully understand the viewpoint that D&D HP are abstract and are, in a sense, plot points, I'd like to move things along a little faster than some of the 4E combats I was involved in went.

There needs to be some sort of middle ground between 3rd Edition and 4th Edition that is distinct from Pathfinder.

Note: I am not familiar enough with 1st or 2nd to comment on them, so I used 3rd and 4th as references since I am familiar with them. Personally, I'd prefer combat speed to be increase via making HP represent something a little more tangible, but I understand that "would not be D&D" for a lot of people.




.

 

[Zireael]

I wouldn't make any combat last less than 2 rounds nor more than 7-8.

 

[Zustiur]

How many rounds would it take for a 30th level character to kill a 30th level monster?
Doesn't really bother me, my games never get anywhere near that high anyway.

rounds, a 1st level character to kill a 1st level monster?
1 HIT on average. That may or not take a couple of rounds.
rounds, a 1st level monster to kill a 1st level character?
I think I agree with your 3 rounds, but again, that includes misses.

How many rounds of combat do players play before they start to get tired of it?
My answer is 3 rounds.
My answer is that it varies a huge amount on how long those rounds take in real life. I can be bored by the second round of our 4E game (because the players take so long), whereas I've had combats in my pathfinder game take 10 rounds without any loss of excitement. The difference? 1 round vs 10 rounds... and both situations took roughly the same amount of real world minutes to resolve. [please do not take this as edition bashing, I recognize that the players are a major contributing factor]


What should be the highest maximum hit points of a character?
Of a monster?
I'm torn on this one. I like the plateauing of HP in 1st and 2nd Ed, but I also like the constant progression of 3rd Ed. Simple and 'fair' as it was, 4E's flat numbers per level HP didn't sit right with me, though it was only a minor irritation.
I think I'm happier with the 3E progression; but it comes down to the caveats that I'd like added to those progressions
3E Caveat: lowest HP dice is d6, not d4.
1E-2E Caveat: Other progression points slow down at the same time that HP slow down - you're reaching the upper limits of mortal ability, and so it takes more effort/experience to improve.

The main thing in favour of stopping Hit Dice at level ~10 is that mages won't fall quite so far behind. Hence the d6 idea for 3E.

Regardless of the system chosen, I'm always happy with monsters having a wider range of HP than characters. Anywhere from 1 HP to 50 HD + 50x conmod (or the estimated equivalent thereof).
Basically, the monsters' HP should make sense. A titan/dragon/what-have-you should have a lot of HP compared to a human. And so on.

What should be the highest maximum ability scores, modifiers and level-up bonuses?
3-18 for humans. 2-19 (or perhaps 2-20?) for other races, as natural limits. Magic can take you beyond that. No stat boosts due to leveling up. Include potential adventure driven ways of increasing your stats, within the natural boundaries, whilst preventing everyone from boosting themselves up to 6 18s.

[/b]What should be the range of feat bonuses to ability scores?
+1 weapon proficiency, +1 improved, +1 weapon focus for a total of +3[/b]I think I'd like to see a complete removal of all the flat +1 feats from DND. That is, anything which gives you a +1 to hit virtually all of the time, is too powerful, and should therefore not be in the same category of character features as things like 'gain this miniscule bonus on the rare occasion that you manage to kill something with a critical hit, while within 3 squares of an ally'.
However, having just looked for examples of the kind of feats I was thinking of, I just discovered that the 3.5 PHB isn't as bad as I remembered.
Put me down as undecided on this question. I'm not even sure that I want feats at all to be honest.

What should be the maximum magical bonus from magical items?
+5


What should be the maximum damage of a power?

I haven't the faintest idea...

 

[ren1999]

Good comments. All of you are also going into a lot of detail as to why you chose those number of rounds.

My Dungeons & Dragons Hybrid Game for Firefox and Chrome kira3696.tripod.com/CombatTracker.rar