D&D 5E The impact of ASIs

[James Gasik]

I do like to roll dice, but not for everything. I want to feel like I'm the one playing the game, not my dice.

Oh I agree, I prefer to be the guy who only asks for die rolls when it really matters, but I've found you have to give players the occasional die roll to keep them awake, alert, and not looking at their phones.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Maybe it was just my long day at work, but what you are saying here seems to not have much to do with what I am doing there...

You said you wanted proficiency to be increased from "+2 to +6" to "+2 to +10." Assuming you keep the maximum level of 20, that is having a half-level system. Exactly as 4e did.

Further, in 4e, ASIs are just a thing everyone gets at 4, 8, 14, 18, 24, 28: +1 to two different stats. (There is also a +1 to all stats at level 11 and 21.) This is completely unrelated to feats, and feats are, overall, quite strong in 4e--much better than 3e, though the best 4e feats are a small step down in size from the best feats in 5e.

Downtime activities and non-combat activities exist, have mechanical support (player authorship of personal quests, skill challenges), and there are "alternative reward" rules (from later in the edition's life) meant to give appropriate rewards without having them necessarily be treasure per se.

4e gives you both of the things you specifically asked for, with pretty much all the details you've described, without needing any tinkering at all. They're literally part of the game already. Throw in the Dark Sun "inherent bonuses" rules and you'll even legitimately make magic items unnecessary.

People keep saying stuff like this, and there are lots of reasons not to...

1. I don't own any of it.
2. From what I've seen of it, there is a lot of it I would probably not like.
3. I don't really want to take the time to learn a new system which I don't think will enjoy.

1. Fair. 4e books aren't expensive nowadays. $6-$7 dollars each on dmsguild.com. You can get official, watermarked PDFs of the PHB1, DMG, and the (much superior) MM3 or Monster Vault (I don't recommend the MM1/MM2, they have the older monster math which works but is kinda grindy and slow.) That's still ~$20 you don't have to spend if you instead just play 5e, and I can 110% understand not wanting to spend that.
2. There's an awful lot of misinformation out there about 4e, and a LOT of people judged it outright wrong without actually reading. I would know, I was once one of them. Obviously, you have no responsibility to try it. But if you're getting a lot of people telling you this, there might be a reason they're saying it.
3. Alright. Can't really find out what you like if you aren't willing to try, but nothing says you have to try new things. shrug Just seems like a lot of work to keep repeatedly kitbashing a system that has a bunch of things not working for you.

 

[Maxperson]

Oh I agree, I prefer to be the guy who only asks for die rolls when it really matters, but I've found you have to give players the occasional die roll to keep them awake, alert, and not looking at their phones.

Yeah, we have one guy in the group who is really into his phone. What I do to kick him out of that mode is just move to engage him directly about what he wants to do. That way he doesn't have time to be on his phone as much, because after I move back to another player, he pays attention for a while.

Personally, I will never ask for a die roll. I just do stuff with the assumption that I'm going to succeed and roll when the DM asks me to.

 

[James Gasik]

Yeah, we have one guy in the group who is really into his phone. What I do to kick him out of that mode is just move to engage him directly about what he wants to do. That way he doesn't have time to be on his phone as much, because after I move back to another player, he pays attention for a while.

Personally, I will never ask for a die roll. I just do stuff with the assumption that I'm going to succeed and roll when the DM asks me to.

It's a trick that I learned from one of my DM's. Ask for a die roll, even if it's not necessary. Then when they fail, just tell them they "failed forward" and let them wonder what would have happened had they succeeded...

 

[Minigiant]

I also think that even though the written adventures have lots of DCs set for things, you don't have to roll for all of them. The written adventure cannot account for what the PCs will try, and since you only roll when the outcome is in doubt, there should be many instances where those rolls are not called for. DMs often call for too many rolls, especially when they see a DC and just default to it rather than consider the game play before calling for a roll.

I meant spread not quantity. It's too easy many tables and adventures for PC to mostly roll only the ability scores you want and do wht you are good at. Especially with big groups. This encourages people tostack ASI and Feats in the same areas and devalues versatility.

 

[James Gasik]

Unless you use group checks and only one person needs to succeed at a check, I'd think characters should be diversifying. The problem comes in when it's not "does a character spot a trap" but when it's "can all the characters climb the cliff" or, worse, "roll a die if you want to join in a conversation with the NPC Wizard".

 

[Maxperson]

I meant spread not quantity. It's too easy many tables and adventures for PC to mostly roll only the ability scores you want and do wht you are good at. Especially with big groups. This encourages people tostack ASI and Feats in the same areas and devalues versatility.

How? As the DM I call for ability checks, not the players, and when I do call for one I determine what ability scores are used.

 

[DND_Reborn]

You said you wanted proficiency to be increased from "+2 to +6" to "+2 to +10." Assuming you keep the maximum level of 20, that is having a half-level system. Exactly as 4e did.

Ok, I thought that was what you meant, but I would have proficiency go from +2 to +8, maybe +10 or even +11.... One of the things I hate about 5E is the +2 to +6 for everything 17 levels or more of experience represents is just laughable IMO.

Further, in 4e, ASIs are just a thing everyone gets at 4, 8, 14, 18, 24, 28: +1 to two different stats. (There is also a +1 to all stats at level 11 and 21.) This is completely unrelated to feats, and feats are, overall, quite strong in 4e--much better than 3e, though the best 4e feats are a small step down in size from the best feats in 5e.

If you read my other thread, I don't want ASIs linked to levels at all and prefer them to be downtime activities for increasing them.

Feats in general are too powerful IMO. I remember the feat chains from 3E (including d20 SW) and wasn't fond of them. Feats in 5E vary in power, of course, and we recently retooled all of them into half-feats. Now, with ASIs going to downtime activities, I am just removing the ASI from the half-feats, and the toned down feats are at a power level more to my liking.

and you'll even legitimately make magic items unnecessary.

Which would be an antithesis for myself and the game style I like to play.

1. Fair. 4e books aren't expensive nowadays. $6-$7 dollars each on dmsguild.com. You can get official, watermarked PDFs of the PHB1, DMG, and the (much superior) MM3 or Monster Vault (I don't recommend the MM1/MM2, they have the older monster math which works but is kinda grindy and slow.) That's still ~$20 you don't have to spend if you instead just play 5e, and I can 110% understand not wanting to spend that.

Hmm... that is good to know, so thanks for pointing it out, but...

Obviously, you have no responsibility to try it. But if you're getting a lot of people telling you this, there might be a reason they're saying it.

There are probably some element from 4E I would like, just as there are some from 5E I really like, but...

3. Alright. Can't really find out what you like if you aren't willing to try, but nothing says you have to try new things. shrug Just seems like a lot of work to keep repeatedly kitbashing a system that has a bunch of things not working for you.

Yeah, I totally agree, which was part of the reason why I struggle between:

1. Playing 5E as is
2. Modding 5E to what I want
3. Finding a new game which meets all my criteria
4. Finding players to play AD&D or B/X
5. Just walking away from gaming in general.
6 Probably some other options...

From what I have read (limited) and heard, 4E suffers from the same issue 5E has: feature bloat. I remember a PC, I think maybe 7th level, which between races and class had something like 20+ features! It was crazy. So, I experimented with "fewer features" a while back, and it appealed to me (and maybe some others), but the idea of removing "toys" from players once they have them has never been very popular.

The plethora of powers and features and everything similar in 4E is most definitely NOT what I want in a game. It many ways it seems worse than 5E in that respect. And so I do think 4E is really an option for me--the edition (as a whole) is simply unappealing.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Yeah, but mathematically, you're unlikely to really get 10 extra damage per round, is all I'm saying.

Unlikely as the +10 damage comes with -5 to hit. But in the orc example I used you're getting close to 15 extra damage per round

But math on paper is only half the story, I agree. After all, piling on resources to negate the -25% hit chance for a guy with GWM is a better use than piling on those same resources to increase hit by 25% for someone who doesn't have GWM or some similar source of large burst damage, like maybe a Paladin or Rogue.

Definitely. It can even change what your best action is, switching a wizard from an evoker to a debuffer.

 

[Minigiant]

How? As the DM I call for ability checks, not the players, and when I do call for one I determine what ability scores are used.

My point is that adventures and the base system don't spread the ability score checks around.

So most DMs don't. And this encourages players to overspecialize their ASI and feats.