D&D 5E What is "broken" in 5e?

[Tony Vargas]

Except they don't, largely because of bounded accuracy. An ogre, for example, has Strength 19. The chances of any random human having Strength 19, given 3d6 distribution rather than 4d6 drop lowest, is 1 in 216.

It's 0 in 216. 1 in 216 be an /18/. OK, same bonus, but still, not a 19. Not quite as strong as your average ogre - ogres not really being known for work'n out and stuff...

There are conflicting accounts as to whether his grandfather was or was not Zeus. As with any superhero origin story, it underwent several revisions, and there is no single definitive source on that.

You can't play the relatives of gods anymore (no Demigod option I'm aware of) so that's conveniently moot in 5e.

If PC rules don't apply to NPCs, then we don't have any real rules for governing NPCs, which is a massive shortcoming of the game.

Or another few degrees of freedom in which the DM is Empowered.

It would make the game unplayable in exactly the same manner which 4E was unplayable

Also 'unplayable' in that same sense: 0D&D and AD&D. Really, only 3e used virtually the exact same rules for PC & NPCs - and even it had NPC classes.

So not 'unplayable' at all, then.

 

[l0lzero]

In defense of the 3e NPC classes, expert was boss AF (wait, I get to choose my weapon proficiencies AND skill list? yes please... human expert adventurers were a thing at our tables lol), and witch had a really cool spell list (iirc heal was a 4th level spell on their list? books are at the shop atm, so I can't just grab it and look it up, regardless, witch was awesome). Just saying...

Note: I think what saelorn is trying to say is that if you're generating every NPC of a 2160 npc town, rather than "is it one of X NPC creatures? If no, commoner, if yes, X NPC creature" then you'd be likely to generate their stats as well, and the easiest way to do this is using the PC generation method. Otherwise, AFAIK, when you create an NPC the stats are arbitrary by the rules. I do not recall a "use the standard array because it's an NPC" or "use this method to generate ability scores" rule in the DMG or MM, doesn't mean it doesn't exist, but I'm pretty sure by "RAW" it's arbitrary.

 

[Willie the Duck]

It's 0 in 216. 1 in 216 be an /18/. OK, same bonus, but still, not a 19. Not quite as strong as your average ogre - ogres not really being known for work'n out and stuff...

You are forgetting the human racial bonus of +1 to each stat.

 

[guachi]

I'll echo what's been said that I am disappointed by how little Intelligence contributes to characters that are not absolutely dependent on it. An extra skill proficiency per ability modifier bonus seems a bit excessive; maybe tool or language? That couldn't end up too unbalancing, would it?

I'm a linguist in my day job. There is strong evidence that "intelligence" (however you wish to measure it. The military uses the ASVAB) has a very strong correlation with the ability to not only learn a (second) language but learn a language quickly as an adult.

In other words, I'd have no objection with letting a PC of high Intelligence (leave it to the reader to decide what constitutes "high") learn an additional language or two.

 

[Xeviat]

I'm a linguist in my day job. There is strong evidence that "intelligence" (however you wish to measure it. The military uses the ASVAB) has a very strong correlation with the ability to not only learn a (second) language but learn a language quickly as an adult.

In other words, I'd have no objection with letting a PC of high Intelligence (leave it to the reader to decide what constitutes "high") learn an additional language or two.

Now I feel dumb, because I've tried to learn Spanish and Japanese and I can't get anything but the basics of grammar to stick. Maybe all the game systems I know ate up my languages learned.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Blue]

What is so hard about understanding that WotC no longer supports their chosen way of playing the game, and to respect that by not reframing their anguish into glossed-over sales-pitch language?

A thread specifically about what we feel is broken in 5e seems like an appropriate place to talk about problems with the resource management just as much as it is to talk about underpowered sub-classes or overpowered feats.

I feel that it is broken because it limits the DM in the types of adventures they can run, and it doesn't fit well with a limited sessions time that wants to engage equal wall clock time on all the different pillars of D&D yet still have time pass in-world.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Update, for anyone who may have been following along:

There are three methods for generating NPC stats, presented on page 92 of the DMG. The first method is to not worry about the specific numbers, but give each NPC one high stat and one low stat. The second method is to give them an NPC stat block. The third method is to roll up their stats, exactly like a PC.

The second method gives a range of sets, from all 10s (on the commoner), up to something like the elite array with several ability boosts (on the archmage). Reconciling these three methods, it follows logically that NPCs are created by 4d6 drop lowest, and poor rolls correspond to commoners, while good rolls correspond to nobility and strong assassins and whatnot. It's also clear from this that the NPC stat blocks are averages for each type of character, with (for example) a typical commoner having stats like 14, 10, 10, 9, 9, 8.

Importantly, this means that rules for NPCs are not something which is broken in 5E, since it does give sufficient information to determine how NPCs operate (and it's not grossly different from how PCs work).

 

[Tony Vargas]

You are forgetting the human racial bonus of +1 to each stat.

Lol! I was caught in a 1e time warp, there. Thanks for snapping me back to the present.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

Note: I think what saelorn is trying to say is that if you're generating every NPC of a 2160 npc town, rather than "is it one of X NPC creatures? If no, commoner, if yes, X NPC creature" then you'd be likely to generate their stats as well, and the easiest way to do this is using the PC generation method. Otherwise, AFAIK, when you create an NPC the stats are arbitrary by the rules. I do not recall a "use the standard array because it's an NPC" or "use this method to generate ability scores" rule in the DMG or MM, doesn't mean it doesn't exist, but I'm pretty sure by "RAW" it's arbitrary.

You've covered why I pointed out to Saelorn that the claim of 10 people in a town of 2160 humans would be as strong as an ogre is a result of DM choice - choosing to roll every NPC as if it were a PC, regardless of what purpose the character is meant to serve in game-play or story, rather than choosing to use either of the much less time consuming and effort wasting (because it really doesn't matter what the bartender's strength score is, even if "he's strong" is a part of the character's description) methods presented in the book prior to it stating that if you want to you can roll up an NPC as if it were a player character - and is not an inherent condition that is always true even though the DM doesn't want it to be.

And an important quote on the topic from the DMG, page 89, "You don't need to roll ability scores for the NPC..."

 

[Celtavian]

Applying probabilities based on dice-generated stats for the genetics of a fantasy world is taking things too far. Stat generation is not the basis for genetic probabilities in a game world. A DM would not have that many ogre strong humans wandering around because he wanted to use a the common stat generation method for every single human in the world. It's up to the DM to create a setting that fits what he wants, including the genetic curve for the standard humanoid populations.