Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="jbear" data-source="post: 6327604" data-attributes="member: 75065">I don't really know how I feel about the issue and how it lines up with my &quot;play style&quot;. I am not even entirely certain how I would define my playstyle as I don't think I have ever sat down to analyse it on such terms. To be clear I am a big 4e fan, and only looking at 5e out of interested curiosity at this stage (why not take a look if WotC are clever enough to gain that interest by giving me free stuff?). It is more than likely that if I were to DM 5e I would quite possibly reduce saves down to 3 (Fort/Ref/Will), taking highest relvant stat as per 4e. I'm just somewhat doubtful that not doing so would result in a non enjoyable or in a some way broken game, just more challenging perhaps.I think that I am okay with having important weaknesses. If the maths you have worked out is decently accurate then it seems like a fairly resonable chance for a weak willed fighter, or a sickly wizard to fail against a powerful enemy despite previous preparation. Using Bless seems like a brilliant idea for a boss fight: +1d4 to not only saves but also all attacks and skill checks. Umm... yes please! Cleric has lost concentration: &quot;Don't worry team, I'll get that right back up!&quot; *Casts Bless again. (It seems that good to be honest).If there are such things as potions of Bear-like fortitude, or at least it can be cast as a spell, then the sickly mage could add another 10% to their chance of success. Very nearly a coin toss as you say. I think I am okay with a coin toss for an epic adventure concluding BBEG type fight at least. Hard Mode. Pretty exciting if you succeed that coin toss, or somehow neutralise that threat so the coin toss never happens but the threat was there and real. Sure, I get that when things go south and your character is taken out 'poof': not so much fun. But maybe then when things work out the victory is all the more sweet?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="jbear, post: 6327604, member: 75065"] I don't really know how I feel about the issue and how it lines up with my "play style". I am not even entirely certain how I would define my playstyle as I don't think I have ever sat down to analyse it on such terms. To be clear I am a big 4e fan, and only looking at 5e out of interested curiosity at this stage (why not take a look if WotC are clever enough to gain that interest by giving me free stuff?). It is more than likely that if I were to DM 5e I would quite possibly reduce saves down to 3 (Fort/Ref/Will), taking highest relvant stat as per 4e. I'm just somewhat doubtful that not doing so would result in a non enjoyable or in a some way broken game, just more challenging perhaps. I think that I am okay with having important weaknesses. If the maths you have worked out is decently accurate then it seems like a fairly resonable chance for a weak willed fighter, or a sickly wizard to fail against a powerful enemy despite previous preparation. Using Bless seems like a brilliant idea for a boss fight: +1d4 to not only saves but also all attacks and skill checks. Umm... yes please! Cleric has lost concentration: "Don't worry team, I'll get that right back up!" *Casts Bless again. (It seems that good to be honest). If there are such things as potions of Bear-like fortitude, or at least it can be cast as a spell, then the sickly mage could add another 10% to their chance of success. Very nearly a coin toss as you say. I think I am okay with a coin toss for an epic adventure concluding BBEG type fight at least. Hard Mode. Pretty exciting if you succeed that coin toss, or somehow neutralise that threat so the coin toss never happens but the threat was there and real. Sure, I get that when things go south and your character is taken out 'poof': not so much fun. But maybe then when things work out the victory is all the more sweet? [/QUOTE]

Verification