D&D 5E Why don't everything scale by proficiency bonus?

[The Crimson Binome]

Instead of trying to 'fix' a system that is not broken (as evidenced by the countless games that use those rules and are incredibly fun), try experimenting with different ways to look at and utilize it to see if you can match the fun that others are having. Youll get a LOT more out of it.

Some people were content with Basic. That's no reason why everyone else should be stuck with that. If you can't criticize, then you can't optimize.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Surely the level 20 wizard is a bit better with a longsword than the level 1 wizard,
Thoughts?

Why would they be? To be a level 20 wizard one would expect them to have spent a lot of time practicing and studying magic, not training with swords.

If you don't use something you don't get any better.

And don't call me... never mind.

 

[Leatherhead]

Really this should only be considered for saving throws, and that's only because it gets much easier for monsters and NPCs to hit a PC in one of their off-saves to take them out of the fight entirely as CRs go up, and that's just not fun.

Skill checks would be mostly brought in line with bounded accuracy by capping expertise and letting the natural stat growth of a characters take care of things.

As for a Wizard learning how to swing a sword better, that's what Tenser's Transformation is for.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

If a wizard really wants to learn to use a sword, the downtime rules in Xanathar's guide can be used. For 300 hours practice they can become proficient.

 

[Garthanos]

Yea, half works fine too. It's not the amount, it's simply the scaling bonus.

I think I would have to play with it a while to decide how much seems apropriate. One per tier seems a bit weak.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Perhaps downtime training could be applied to saving throws?

In HP: The Order of the Phoenix the protagonist is supposed to be being trained to resist the mind-influencing spells of the villain. The effectiveness of said training was doubtful though.

 

[Torquar]

Really this should only be considered for saving throws, and that's only because it gets much easier for monsters and NPCs to hit a PC in one of their off-saves to take them out of the fight entirely as CRs go up, and that's just not fun.

Perhaps downtime training could be applied to saving throws?

In HP: The Order of the Phoenix the protagonist is supposed to be being trained to resist the mind-influencing spells of the villain. The effectiveness of said training was doubtful though.

There are Feats for this. But people don't like taking them because it interferes with "my build...".

 

[Paul Farquhar]

There are Feats for this. But people don't like taking them because it interferes with "my build...".

There is, and I personally wouldn't allow the full proficiency bonus - half at best.

But feats are an optional rule, it might be a good idea to alow something of this sort in a no-feats game.

But personally, I think that if a party if falling foul of saving throw spells too often, they need to prepare better, not change the rules.

 

[Krachek]

DnD is a silly system.
The proficiency bonus and the ability bonus are just there to make believe you’re playing a hero in some strange world.
Their only goal is to give you the impression of power and some kind of progression.
Are they realistic? No.
Can we have a comparaison in real life between a level 20 and a level 1? No
They are only a game mechanic, they work fine and are intuitive if you don’t ask to much question!

 

[Leatherhead]

There are Feats for this. But people don't like taking them because it interferes with "my build...".

There is one feat for that. Resilient. Which you can only take once, for one stat.

And people have asked the devs if they can take it twice or more because it's recommended for everyone except Monks.