Unearthed Arcana WOTC still can't get the backgrounds right in the new FR book.

[FrogReaver]

Ok then lets go with a single player. That is what I used in my original example that was supposedly a "corner case"

We are evaluating the effect a low stat has on a player, if we are testing this with a party where that is dilluted based on the number of players in a party is not a fair test of that. Heck we could go with an 8 person party and it would have even a smaller overall affect than a 4-person party, but in all these cases the effect on the player and their rolls is the same.

If we are testing the effect on a PC and we are using a party made up of more than one PC then every PC needs to have that effect.

Finally if all backgrounds are nearly equal, and any differences are meaningless, why would 3 out of 4 people in a party have one that is aligned well?

Single player isn’t how d&d is played either. It must be 1 PC in the group context to match with your point.

If it’s really that impactful, why the hesitation to show it in that context?

 

[FrogReaver]

by this logic none of the rules matter and we might as well just throw all the math out

Explain this? Why is pointing out that players are overwhelmingly favored to win 5e combat mean that rules and math don’t matter?

 

[Maxperson]

There is a big difference in losing 46% of the time and losing 91% of the time.

Yeaaaah, that ain't actually happening with your math. Your math completely ignores combat abilities, terrain and other things on both sides. Your white room is nifty, but doesn't mean much in actual game play.

There are only 2 backgrounds that have Strength and Constitution ... you pick one of them!

It doesn't matter. Pick a background that doesn't give a combat feat.

 

[ECMO3]

Not when most combats have you winning 99% of the time. Having a better stat mod might up that to 99.5%.

Most combats don't have PCs doing 1 DPR like the example Maxperson provided. I was using the example provided.

 

[FrogReaver]

Most combats don't have PCs doing 1 DPR like the example Maxperson provided. I was using the example provided.

Why you wasting time on an example that cant actually show what you want to show?

 

[ECMO3]

Yeaaaah, that ain't actually happening with your math. Your math completely ignores combat abilities, terrain and other things on both sides. Your white room is nifty, but doesn't mean much in actual game play.

Yes, with those things the 2 damage 1st level PC you talked about wins most of the time .... as I said.

It doesn't matter. Pick a background that doesn't give a combat feat.

There are none that provide Strength and Constitution, but we can go without feats. Are you happy with that?

 

[ECMO3]

Why you wasting time on an example that cant actually show what you want to show?

That example, as unrealistic as it is, shows a pretty darn big difference.

 

[FrogReaver]

That example, as unreal as it is, shows a pretty darn big difference.

IMO totally unrealistic examples don’t show anything except that in totally non-realistic circumstances it could do something.

 

[W'rkncacnter]

Explain this? Why is pointing out that players are overwhelmingly favored to win 5e combat mean that rules and math don’t matter?

the whole argument is about if +1 to a stat matters. if your response to math trying to demonstrate a position on that is just "well that doesn't matter because you'll win anyways", then i don't know where else that thinking could possibly lead to. you can say it about any part of the game.

 

[Maxperson]

Yes, with those things the 2 damage 1st level PC you talked about wins most of the time .... as I said.

Against a cherry picked CR 1/4 creature.

There are none that provide Strength and Constitution, but we can go without feats. Are you happy with that?

Sure, but I don't see how you can overcome that it still only amounts to one extra hit every multiple combats and that most monsters that aren't cherry picked CR 1/4 are great bags of hit points, so the extra point of damage won't mean much. Unlike you, I'm not impressed with high seeming percentages that really don't amount to much.