Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Swarmkeeper" data-source="post: 8498279" data-attributes="member: 6921763">Just plucking these out for the moment.&nbsp; I'm going to take some (hopefully small) liberties with the math for ease of use.&nbsp; I believe you mentioned somewhere that a 35% hit rate would be more your speed rather than the 5e &quot;60-65%&quot; success rate you indicate.&nbsp; With that assumption in mind, let's make it 33% vs 66%.Combined with 5e increase in HP (I'm saying it is a 2x increase for simple math here - just as the &quot;to-hit&quot; rate is 2x higher) we find ourselves with the following question:Would players rather have a 5e-style fight against a 100HP monster that can be hit 2/3 of the time OR a modded &quot;old school&quot;-style fight against a 50HP monster that can be hit 1/3 of the time?It strikes me that players having their PCs hit 2/3 of the time is likely more fulfilling than missing 2/3 of the time.&nbsp; If we add the &quot;more damage&quot; assertion to the mix, we have the 5e-style fight resolving more quickly.Oversimplified?&nbsp; Most definitely.&nbsp; But, given these parameters, it strikes me as potentially adjusting HP and &quot;to-hit&quot; knobs down for no real benefit and, perhaps, added frustration at the table with 2x the misses.&nbsp; Is that really what &quot;old school&quot; was like?&nbsp; I honestly don't remember that - but, then again, it's been decades since I played in a 1e campaign, then I skipped 2-4, and started playing 5e exclusively 6 years ago.That said, I'd personally focus on incorporating other ideas from your list to give our 5e game a more &quot;old school&quot; feel, if that's what I was after for our table.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Swarmkeeper, post: 8498279, member: 6921763"] Just plucking these out for the moment. I'm going to take some (hopefully small) liberties with the math for ease of use. I believe you mentioned somewhere that a 35% hit rate would be more your speed rather than the 5e "60-65%" success rate you indicate. With that assumption in mind, let's make it 33% vs 66%. Combined with 5e increase in HP (I'm saying it is a 2x increase for simple math here - just as the "to-hit" rate is 2x higher) we find ourselves with the following question: Would players rather have a 5e-style fight against a 100HP monster that can be hit 2/3 of the time OR a modded "old school"-style fight against a 50HP monster that can be hit 1/3 of the time? It strikes me that players having their PCs hit 2/3 of the time is likely more fulfilling than missing 2/3 of the time. If we add the "more damage" assertion to the mix, we have the 5e-style fight resolving more quickly. Oversimplified? Most definitely. But, given these parameters, it strikes me as potentially adjusting HP and "to-hit" knobs down for no real benefit and, perhaps, added frustration at the table with 2x the misses. Is that really what "old school" was like? I honestly don't remember that - but, then again, it's been decades since I played in a 1e campaign, then I skipped 2-4, and started playing 5e exclusively 6 years ago. That said, I'd personally focus on incorporating other ideas from your list to give our 5e game a more "old school" feel, if that's what I was after for our table. [/QUOTE]

Verification