Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ferghis" data-source="post: 5687996" data-attributes="member: 40483">I understand the math involved in this issue, and at this point my ONLY real complaint about the whole thing is that the online CB does not allow implementing the houserules they acknowledged as reasonable. In case they're wondering what to do to implement such an option, in my campaign, I propose to: - give out a cumulative +1 to all attack rolls except those receiving +3/6/9 at levels 5, 15, and 25. - nerf the bonus that Expertise feats grant to a flat +1 to attack rolls with augmented, encounter and daily powers. - nerf the bonus that Superior Will, Fort, and Reflex (along with Lightning Reflexes, Iron Will and Great Fortitude) grant down to a flat +1.The following houserules don't need to be incorporated into the CB (but it would be nice to just be able to set these up in there, and share them with other players, so the characters are automatically legal in the campaign. - Only one Epic Defenses feat can be taken, and only for the lowest non-AC defense. - All other feats that unconditionally increase non-AC-defense cannot be taken.The very first of these fixes the perceived drop in offensive competitiveness. Despite the correctness of the math, I think the drop is easily spanned by all the buffs that characters benefit from at high level. However, I can understand that knowledgeable players (the worst kind!) would feel cheated without the bonus given the hubbub about the feats. Further, I understand that hitting is more fun than missing. So the problem remains that this bonus occupies a very precious feat slot. So I'd like to give the bonus away for free, and let players take the feats if they're interested in the rider. That's why I need the second change.The defense issue is more complicated. The only fix I see necessary is the relative drop in one (sometimes two) non-AC defenses as characters advance into epic tier. That's why I allow one of the epic defenses feats to patch that issue. But otherwise, I don't want characters raising their defenses. If they do, I have to pitch higher level monsters at them to properly threaten them. When I do that, the odds of overshooting the sweetspot where players feel like they may lose an encounter but manage to come out on top increase dramatically. I'd rather throw more lower level monsters that the PCs can hit and KO more easily, but who can also hit the PCs relatively easily.If you allow PCs to superoptimize their defenses (or worse yet, if only one PC superoptimizes their defenses), the DM has to throw higher level monsters to really threaten them, increasing the risk that a few (un)lucky rolls result in a TPK. But I'm willing to compromise, and I like the Superior NAD riders, which is why I allowed them and flattened the bonus. I might add a paragon-level requirement to them, though.</blockquote>

Verification