Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="doctorbadwolf" data-source="post: 9262366" data-attributes="member: 6704184">Wait what? Why would that be the case? Dude I’m sorry your experience with 5e is so full of people literally running the game wrong. I mean that genuinely, no snark. Thats a whole conversation, yeah. In my own game master level experts have a very low chance of failure, while noobs are going to almost always get either total fail or mitigated fail. But, both can spend a game’s main limited resource to push a failure of any kind to a partial success, and either get some of what they wanted or get the whole bag but with consequences. Star Wars Saga Edition has much lower chance to hit with attacks than 4e or 5e D&amp;D, and it drives me up the wall. We played recently after a years without doing so and it was so frustrating to play a game with 1 attack per turn and a dynamic where each attack does a lot of damage but has a lower chance to hit that my wife basically just said no. Yikes. That is genuinely bad DMing that ignores the way the game is built to be played. That really sucks, and I hope that clearer guidance in new core books helps with that long term. Yeah 70%+ success is good for someone with either no training or no natural aptitude. The only issue I have with that is that D&amp;D lacks ways to bump your rolls on even just a basic and limited basis, like Star Wars force points or something. You have 5+1/2 your level Hero Points. When you fail a check or want to try for a higher tier of success, you can spend a Hero Die to add 1d6 to the roll. If the check still fails, the Hero Point is not spent. You regain Hero Points equal to your proficiency bonus with a long rest, and regain all spent Hero Points when you gain a new level.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="doctorbadwolf, post: 9262366, member: 6704184"] Wait what? Why would that be the case? Dude I’m sorry your experience with 5e is so full of people literally running the game wrong. I mean that genuinely, no snark. Thats a whole conversation, yeah. In my own game master level experts have a very low chance of failure, while noobs are going to almost always get either total fail or mitigated fail. But, both can spend a game’s main limited resource to push a failure of any kind to a partial success, and either get some of what they wanted or get the whole bag but with consequences. Star Wars Saga Edition has much lower chance to hit with attacks than 4e or 5e D&D, and it drives me up the wall. We played recently after a years without doing so and it was so frustrating to play a game with 1 attack per turn and a dynamic where each attack does a lot of damage but has a lower chance to hit that my wife basically just said no. Yikes. That is genuinely bad DMing that ignores the way the game is built to be played. That really sucks, and I hope that clearer guidance in new core books helps with that long term. Yeah 70%+ success is good for someone with either no training or no natural aptitude. The only issue I have with that is that D&D lacks ways to bump your rolls on even just a basic and limited basis, like Star Wars force points or something. You have 5+1/2 your level Hero Points. When you fail a check or want to try for a higher tier of success, you can spend a Hero Die to add 1d6 to the roll. If the check still fails, the Hero Point is not spent. You regain Hero Points equal to your proficiency bonus with a long rest, and regain all spent Hero Points when you gain a new level. [/QUOTE]

Verification