|
10 months ago ::
Aug 22, 2012 - 7:08PM
#31
|
|
|
This "does it mean more in 4e or Next" conversation is idiotic. +1 = +5% in both. Period. That's it.
The issue here is barely even related to bounded accuracy. With or without bounded accuracy, there is a certain expectation of your attack bonus at each level. In 4e you were supposed to maintain this expectation through a combination of:
1) Half-level bonus
2) Enhancement bonus from +X weapon
3) Attribute increases
4) Expertise
Note that from 1-30, you gain +15 from (1), +6 from (2), +4 from (3) and +3 from (4), leaving a deficit of 1 to get from other sources (not hard) to stay at parity.
The problem was that you could get the +1 from a lot of different sources and it frequently stacked.
You can get +1 from starting with a post-racial 20 in your attack stat.
You can get +1 from taking a stat-boosting ED.
You can get +1 (or even +2 or +3) as an item bonus from some items.
You can get +1 from various class feats.
You can get +1 to implement attacks from a superior implement.
You can get +1 from choosing a weapon with a +3 proficiency bonus instead of +2.
... and so on.
A reasonably optimized character might hit on a 4+; a normal character that just maintained pretty much parity might hit on a 10+ or even a 12+.
Bounded accuracy will have exactly the same problem if you start introducing various ways to get a to-hit bonus, plus the problem that accuracy is no longer "bounded".
What they should actually do is just tie accuracy to level (on a slow progression, say +3 or +4 over 1-20, and identical for every class), and give you NO WAY to get a bonus to-hit other than Advantage. None. Zip. Nada.
Accuracy is a terrible way to differentiate characters, because no one likes missing and it's incredibly difficult to make sure no one can get a much higher accuracy than anyone else. There is plenty of design space left. Use it.
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Aug 22, 2012 - 7:18PM
#32
|
Date Joined:
Mar 22, 2008
|
This "does it mean more in 4e or Next" conversation is idiotic. +1 = +5% in both. Period. That's it.
This is wrong. That +5% is more valuable in 5e due to bounded accuracy.
The issue here is barely even related to bounded accuracy. With or without bounded accuracy, there is a certain expectation of your attack bonus at each level.
This is also wrong. Since bounded accuracy doesn't include +x weapons, the issue with +x weapons impacts bounded accuracy to a great degree.
In 4e you were supposed to maintain this expectation through a combination of
1) Half-level bonus
2) Enhancement bonus from +X weapon
3) Attribute increases
4) Expertise
So what. The issue is 5e, not 4e.
Bounded accuracy will have exactly the same problem if you start introducing various ways to get a to-hit bonus, plus the problem that accuracy is no longer "bounded".
They aren't. They have said that they will not be doing this, but will include +x weapons for those DMs who want to use them. Those +x weapons will be outside bounded accuracy and will be a true bonus to hit. You are also mistaken in your claim that accuracy will no longer be bounded with the inclusion of +x weapons. As far as the game is concerned, the bounded range will be absolute. The game is not responsible for DMs who add in +x weapons.
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Aug 22, 2012 - 7:24PM
#33
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2010
|
This "does it mean more in 4e or Next" conversation is idiotic. +1 = +5% in both. Period. That's it.
This is wrong. That +5% is more valuable in 5e due to bounded accuracy.
Mathematically incorrect. Bounded accuracy, itself, doesn't change the value of +1 to hit. The damage output that is available does, and that's the only thing that does.
It's entirely likely that +1 is going to be less powerful in Next than it is in 4e, to use an example. And 4e doesn't have bounded accuracy in the slightest.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Aug 22, 2012 - 7:26PM
#34
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2010
|
Those +x weapons will be outside bounded accuracy and will be a true bonus to hit.
They are a true bonus to hit, yes, but that does not mean that it's "outside" bounded accuracy.
PCs do get accuracy increases as they level. Bounded accuracy is on the DM side, not the player side. Reread the article again if you don't believe me - it's quite clear. They say this outright.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Aug 22, 2012 - 7:29PM
#35
|
Date Joined:
Mar 22, 2008
|
This "does it mean more in 4e or Next" conversation is idiotic. +1 = +5% in both. Period. That's it.
This is wrong. That +5% is more valuable in 5e due to bounded accuracy.
Mathematically incorrect. Bounded accuracy, itself, doesn't change the value of +1 to hit. The damage output that is available does, and that's the only thing that does.
I didn't say it was greater than 5%. I said the different system makes that same 5% more valuable. You will hit more often with that +1 in a bounded system than you will in any other system of D&D to date.
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Aug 22, 2012 - 10:37PM
#36
|
|
|
This "does it mean more in 4e or Next" conversation is idiotic. +1 = +5% in both. Period. That's it.
This is wrong. That +5% is more valuable in 5e due to bounded accuracy.
No, it isn't. Until you hit on a 2+, to-hit doesn't have diminishing marginal returns.
..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" contenteditable="true" />
They aren't.
They're wrong and/or lying. There will be all kinds of bonuses to hit available, from feats, spells, abilities, what-have-you.
You are also mistaken in your claim that accuracy will no longer be bounded with the inclusion of +x weapons. As far as the game is concerned, the bounded range will be absolute. The game is not responsible for DMs who add in +x weapons.
You realize you contradicted yourself in the span of 3 sentences, right?
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Aug 22, 2012 - 10:38PM
#37
|
|
|
I didn't say it was greater than 5%. I said the different system makes that same 5% more valuable. You will hit more often with that +1 in a bounded system than you will in any other system of D&D to date.
No, you won't. Unless you already hit on a 2+, that +1 will be the difference between a hit and a miss precisely 5% of the time in any system.
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Aug 23, 2012 - 6:43AM
#38
|
Date Joined:
Mar 22, 2008
|
No, it isn't. Until you hit on a 2+, to-hit doesn't have diminishing marginal returns.
..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" contenteditable="true" />
A +1 to hit against a range of armor classes that go from 10 to 65 is less effective overall than a +1 to hit against a range of armor classes that range from 10 to 21. With the first range, the +1 will not help in the vast majority of the cases. With the second, it will help in all cases. If the range is 10 to 25, that +1 will still help against many, many, MANY more monsters than it will against the first range.
They're wrong and/or lying. There will be all kinds of bonuses to hit available, from feats, spells, abilities, what-have-you.
 What are Friday's lottery numbers while you have your psychic abilities out?
You are also mistaken in your claim that accuracy will no longer be bounded with the inclusion of +x weapons. As far as the game is concerned, the bounded range will be absolute. The game is not responsible for DMs who add in +x weapons.
You realize you contradicted yourself in the span of 3 sentences, right?
How is their range of armor classes affected by a DM who puts a +x weapon into the game? Those armor classes don't change. They remain bounded identically with or without the weapon.
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Aug 23, 2012 - 7:41AM
#39
|
|
|
A +1 to hit against a range of armor classes that go from 10 to 65 is less effective overall than a +1 to hit against a range of armor classes that range from 10 to 21.
In 4e you never actually fight monsters within that full range at any given time, obviously. If you do fight a monster that's significantly below-level than nothing matters because you'll just roflstomp them regardless.
How is their range of armor classes affected by a DM who puts a +x weapon into the game? Those armor classes don't change. They remain bounded identically with or without the weapon.
There's also +x armor.
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Aug 23, 2012 - 8:26AM
#40
|
Date Joined:
Mar 22, 2008
|
In 4e you never actually fight monsters within that full range at any given time, obviously. If you do fight a monster that's significantly below-level than nothing matters because you'll just roflstomp them regardless.
That doesn't matter. You DO fight monsters with much higher armor classes than you will find in the bounded system.
There's also +x armor.
Not on monsters.
|
|
|
