Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 3783429" data-attributes="member: 54877">If you keep derived abilities (e.g. Str boost from magic affects the ability), or things such as getting +1 from stuff that used to stack, and now only partially stacks, then the complexity of stacking is not reduced, merely rearranged.  The tradeoff being sought is between:1. Make the bonuses manageable (for balance)2. Make the process of counting the bonuses easier.3. Still make a nod to "realism", both in diminishing returns and some effect from stacking.I like the idea of limiting the number of stackable bonus types (around 7 sounds reasonable).  Then add one the idea of only picking the best 3.  You can pick any three.Natural Armor +3 and Plate +8 being the same as Plate +8 is not entirely reasonable, though simple.  Natural Amor +3 and Plate +8 being +11 is not entirely reasonable, either, though also simple.  Plate +8, Nat +3, Arcane +4, Dodge +3 being +15 --and not geting any better unless you find another +4 bonus to upgrade one of the +3, or in one of the (few) remaining types?  That's reasonable and simple, and represents diminishing returns.If you want to make that just a bit more reasonable for the corner cases, then change the total at the end.  Perhaps:  About 7 types of bonuses.  Pick your best three.  Subtract one point of bonus if you have have two types active, and two points of bonus if you have three types active.  That last bit is kind of cumbersome to say, but simple in practice and maybe worth the nod to the corner cases.  So the Natural Armor +3, Plate +8 gives +10.  If the creature has Dex Mod of +2, he ends up with +11.Using something like that, you don't need special rules for Max Dex on armor, either.</blockquote>

Verification