D&D General The Beautiful Mess of 5e

[Horwath]

I've found A5E's expertise die a reasonable compromise, though it didn't go as far substituting that mechanic as it could have. Restricting all the helpful type bonuses down to 1 die, that just upgrades from a d4 up to a d8 barring specific class features provides a little more design space without too much overhead.

If there is anything that I hate about A5E it's the expertise die.

Even changed Guidance/Bless/Divine favor spell to flat +2

 

[Charlaquin]

I think in this particular case, the meaning of the proficiency bonus isn't clear. Still too new to have gotten an increase. Which might point to a world where you just don't get proficiency bonus 'till 5th level or something. Not sure that would work, but it's an interesting idea...

It doesn’t help that most character sheets are laid out in a way that disguises the influence of proficiency bonus on most things. Having skills listed and skill bonuses pre-calculated next to them obfuscates how the mechanic actually works, and makes it look like skills are individual, fixed bonuses, rather than a combination of ability modifier and proficiency bonus. That’s why rather than asking for a skill check, I generally prefer to ask for “an [ability] check, plus [skill] proficiency if you have it.” Yes, it’s two different numbers to add to the roll, but it helps newer players better understand the function they’re being asked to execute, which makes it much easier for them to resolve nonstandard d20 tests when asked to do so, like ability checks with different skills, or ability checks with proficiency bonus for tools instead of skills.

 

[Pedantic]

It doesn’t help that most character sheets are laid out in a way that disguises the influence of proficiency bonus on most things. Having skills listed and skill bonuses pre-calculated next to them obfuscates how the mechanic actually works, and makes it look like skills are individual, fixed bonuses, rather than a combination of ability modifier and proficiency bonus. That’s why rather than asking for a skill check, I generally prefer to ask for “an [ability] check, plus [skill] proficiency if you have it.” Yes, it’s two different numbers to add to the roll, but it helps newer players better understand the function they’re being asked to execute, which makes it much easier for them to resolve nonstandard d20 tests when asked to do so, like ability checks with different skills, or ability checks with proficiency bonus for tools instead of skills.

I felt similarly and it's the game norm in A5E. I designed an updated character sheet when I was playing that game to reflect this, having players sweep for ability bonus at the top, then scan down to a list of skills with proficiency and circumstance bonuses/effects listed, but I was surprised by how much it ultimately slowed down play. Adding even one extra number to addition, and making it a progress each time to recalculate (even of it was generally a minor set of numbers in practice) definitely tripped players up and took more time at the table than I expected.

 

[Staffan]

What @Staffan said, basically. I'd add that Guidance/Bless create a layer of "if you're not using it, you're not really playing optimally, since they stack with advantage!" (especially Guidance -- that spell needs to be at least 1st level, using some resource) that I find particularly annoying. SOMEONE's gotta have 'em!

I think PF2 has a fairly good solve: guidance makes you immune to guidance for one hour (whether you use the bonus or not). So that means you save it for the rolls where it really matters, rather than just getting +1d4 on everything (or +1 in PF2, because of tighter math).

Proficiency bonus is the worst and I hate it. Outside of spells, it's easily the part of the game that confuses novices the most.

I think it's mostly poorly explained, and part of that is because people often don't dig down even a little to understand how the game actually works.

At its core, a check in 5e is d20+stat bonus vs a DC. That's the base mechanic. Then on top of that, you have proficiency: for stuff you're good at, you get a +2 (or more at higher levels) on top of that. And for convenience's sake, you include that +2 (or more) in the stats written on your character sheet. But it's fairly common, I believe, for people to don't quite understand where those numbers are coming from. They just know that they have a +4 or whatever to Perception. Why? I dunno.

Another issue is the standard character sheet where many people miss the heading on that box above the skills: Saving Throws. And since they have the same names as the stats, that also causes confusion. Back in 3e (and 4e) when we had saves (/defenses) as a separate category from stats (Reflex, Fortitude, and Will), that sort of thing was never in question because a Reflex save is clearly not the same thing as a Dexterity check.

Once I get around to running Draw Steel, it'll be interesting to see if skill tests cause as much confusion there as in 5e. The mechanics are very similar: roll 2d10 and add a characteristic (ability score). If you have an appropriate skill, add +2. Then check a table depending on task difficulty to see how well you did. The main differences are:

• The +2 (which doesn't increase at higher levels by the way) is clearly a separate bonus for having an appropriate skill. The Director isn't going to tell you "Roll Arcana to see what you know about this magic society." They'll say "Roll Reason to see what you know about this magic society", and then you'll say "Can I add +2 for my Magic skill?".
• There are many more skills than in 5e: 57 defined ones across five different categories, and specifically allowing for open-ended skill addition (particularly among things like crafts). I'm normally a fan of short, tight skill lists, but I'm fine with it here because the baseline is a straight characteristic test, and having a skill is a bonus on top of that.
• There's no implied connection between characteristics and skills the way you have in 5e. I mean, 5e does allow for using different skills with different stats, but it makes it clear that that's an exception.

 

[TwoSix]

I think it's mostly poorly explained, and part of that is because people often don't dig down even a little to understand how the game actually works.

When you apply it has rationales, but it isn't really intuitive unless you're just really familiar with the rule set.

It boils down to each stat has 2 "modifiers" (the raw mod, and mod+stat), and it's extremely situational which one you use. (And of course the modifiers are different from the stat, but we won't go there.)

Are you attacking? Use the second one, except in weird cases. Are you rolling damage? Use the first one, never ever the second one.

Making a saving throw? Sometimes use the first, sometimes use the second, everyone is different and you better check your character sheet.

Making a skill check? Sometimes use the first, sometimes the second, everyone is different and you better check your character sheet. Oh, and a few characters have a special "third modifier" (expertise), so you definitely need to check your sheet for that so you don't forget.

Oh, and you're blessed? Well, definitely add a d4 to your attack roll. Your damage roll? Don't add the d4 there! Oh, you're being grappled? Don't add the d4 to that check! Oh wait, the grapple is part of a spell that has a save? Then yes, definitely add that d4! <sigh>

 

[Pedantic]

When you apply it has rationales, but it isn't really intuitive unless you're just really familiar with the rule set.

It boils down to each stat has 2 "modifiers" (the raw mod, and mod+stat), and it's extremely situational which one you use. (And of course the modifiers are different from the stat, but we won't go there.)

Are you attacking? Use the second one, except in weird cases. Are you rolling damage? Use the first one, never ever the second one.

Making a saving throw? Sometimes use the first, sometimes use the second, everyone is different and you better check your character sheet.

Making a skill check? Sometimes use the first, sometimes the second, everyone is different and you better check your character sheet. Oh, and a few characters have a special "third modifier" (expertise), so you definitely need to check your sheet for that so you don't forget.

Oh, and you're blessed? Well, definitely add a d4 to your attack roll. Your damage roll? Don't add the d4 there! Oh, you're being grappled? Don't add the d4 to that check! Oh wait, the grapple is part of a spell that has a save? Then yes, definitely add that d4! <sigh>

Maybe 3e has grooved itself too hard into my brain, but intuitively it does really feel like that's not a lot to ask. My experience doesn't bear it out though.

 

[TwoSix]

Maybe 3e has grooved itself too hard into my brain, but intuitively it does really feel like that's not a lot to ask. My experience doesn't bear it out though.

It isn't too much for us dedicated nerd types. But for the people I have at my table whose only gaming is our once-a-month 5e game? Or even the weekly gamers I play with who are more vibe/storytelling types than "rules" people? That's where I see the pain points of the constant "if-then" checks the rolls require.

Obviously, crunchy games are going to be crunchy, but I still contrast the 5e system with something like the SotDL/SotWW systems, which are also "medium-crunch" but where every check is either d20+stat or damage dice+stat, and all modifiers are in the form of extra dice.

 

[I'm A Banana]

When you apply it has rationales, but it isn't really intuitive unless you're just really familiar with the rule set.

It boils down to each stat has 2 "modifiers" (the raw mod, and mod+stat), and it's extremely situational which one you use. (And of course the modifiers are different from the stat, but we won't go there.)

Are you attacking? Use the second one, except in weird cases. Are you rolling damage? Use the first one, never ever the second one.

Making a saving throw? Sometimes use the first, sometimes use the second, everyone is different and you better check your character sheet.

Making a skill check? Sometimes use the first, sometimes the second, everyone is different and you better check your character sheet. Oh, and a few characters have a special "third modifier" (expertise), so you definitely need to check your sheet for that so you don't forget.

Oh, and you're blessed? Well, definitely add a d4 to your attack roll. Your damage roll? Don't add the d4 there! Oh, you're being grappled? Don't add the d4 to that check! Oh wait, the grapple is part of a spell that has a save? Then yes, definitely add that d4! <sigh>

Absolutely. Pretty sure my newbie player doesn't really get why any of these exceptions occur, and even my more experienced players hit a wall sometimes. I had a fight with a monster that cast darkness and the cleric - an experienced player! - didn't quite get why guiding bolt had disadvantage when fired at the monster in the darkness while the bard's hideous laughter just couldn't target the monster in the darkness and their shatter had no problems forcing a saving throw. Grappling introduces similar ambiguity (and is distinct from Restrained!).

It'd be really nifty if the modularity of 5e included an easy way to simplify a lot of this for some of the less math-friendly players. I think 2014's Proficiency Die has some legs on making it more distinct, but still...lots of overhead.

 

[Piperken]

...It also used to have the drawback of being difficult to place without the sacrifice of 'friendly fire'.

-Family Feud meme here-

 

[mamba]

actually, it stacks less and less.
only real gain is increase in crit chance.

it jumps your probability to succeed / fail dramatically, not the rolled result, as that is still bounded by 1-20.

Looking at the crit chance is misleading, look at your probability of success