Club PA 2.0 has arrived! If you'd like to access some extra PA content and help support the forums, check it out at patreon.com/ClubPA
The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

[D&D 5E] Nothing is true, everything is permitted.

1356799

Posts

  • SleepSleep Registered User regular
    Like your understanding of this is wrong from a basic level. The system makes no ac progression assumptions. The monster accuracy math doesnt jump after 6th level due to an expected AC bump or anything like that. Mainly because there's a whole host of other shit to do with monetary and character building options that isn't raising your AC. So the system doesn't assume anyone raises their AC ever. That way spending your money or character building resources on AC actually acts as an edge rather than just trying to keep up with a meaningless treadmill.

    When i say "there is no AC progression" I mean that the games math isn't designed around ever increasing AC the way 4e was. 4e had AC progression you had to keep up with. 5e doesn't at all.

  • SleepSleep Registered User regular
    Also, oh no the whole party worked together to get the fighter plate armor at level 3 how horrible that they used team work and sharing to give themselves an edge in combat. The horror... the horror.

  • SteelhawkSteelhawk Registered User regular
    A DM ruling that a merchant does not stock magic bolts is legit.

    Ruling that a merchant doesn't stock mundane bolts is bullshit.

    SleepElvenshaeBionicPenguinDevoutlyApatheticMegaMekSmrtnikAegiswebguy20AldoRhesus PositivediscriderDaenrisnever dieEnc14357ZonugalTheDrifterTofystedethHavelock2.0
  • SleepSleep Registered User regular
    Steelhawk wrote: »
    A DM ruling that a merchant does not stock magic bolts is legit.

    Ruling that a merchant doesn't stock mundane bolts is bullshit.

    I mean is it like a small village that only has bows and no crossbows to its name?

    Crossbow bolts are one of the few things that can be hard to come by in small villages that don't use that level of tech.

    I'd question why the crossbow user had literally no other weapons with which to participate, but that's just me i suppose.

    MrVyngaard
  • BionicPenguinBionicPenguin Registered User regular
    Is the point not to have fun? If the player wants to use a crossbow as their primary weapon, why refuse to make bolts available?

    9MpLNPA.jpg
    Steam: MightyPotatoKing/King of the Impossible - Battle.net: PotatoKing#1893
    OptimusZedSteelhawkElvenshaeSmrtnikOatsAegisitalianranmaKadokenMsAnthropyDiannaoChongRhesus PositiveJustTeenever dieEnc14357ZonugaljdarksunTofystedeth
  • ElvenshaeElvenshae Registered User regular
    Is the point not to have fun? If the player wants to use a crossbow as their primary weapon, why refuse to make bolts available?

    Because mah immersions!

    :)

    But seriously, until, like 5E, crossbows pretty much sucked. Might as well let someone use them at-will.

    Also, tracking ammunition in general stinks.

    omgbfz5lzi1s.png
    Steam: Elvenshae // PSN: Elvenshae // WotC: Elvenshae
    The Disappearance of Inigo Sharpe: Tomas à Dunsanin
    MegaMekRendOatsKadokenMsAnthropyDiannaoChongJustTeeMoridin889jdarksunTofystedeth
  • DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic Registered User regular
    Rend wrote: »
    It's very much a classic dnd move to have advancement gated by gold, but I agree it's a weird and not great system in this day and age. Honestly, I feel like gold in dnd these days, at least at my table, is kind of a symbolic reward. I either invent uses for it or it just goes up, but it's still nice to give players something shiny.

    It was a bit more obvious in earlier editions but I've always viewed the gold rewards as basically a really early and soft form of narrative currency. The only use it had was to be used to express what you think your character would use it for. Throw lavish parties, feed the poor, build a keep, buy political influence, start a merchant house, raise an army or even just build a literal pile of gold that is ALL YOURS HANDS OFF.

  • SleepSleep Registered User regular
    Is the point not to have fun? If the player wants to use a crossbow as their primary weapon, why refuse to make bolts available?

    A challenge?

    Sometimes it's not all duckies and rainbows.

    Sometimes shit goes wrong and you don't get absolutely everything your character wants.

    Why aren't all the demons 1 hit kills that just level us to 20 immediately and loot piniata all the magic items we want?

    Like stubbornly refusing to participate because you can't do exactly what you want seems alot more like a you problem rather than a them problem.

    If there's no good reason for you to get a bolt resupply then make due till you can get them again. Its the downside of requiring ammo... sometimes you run out of ammo and can't get any more.

    Like if no one in a remote village uses a crossbow then it makes no sense for them to have crossbow ammo available.

    MrVyngaard
  • BionicPenguinBionicPenguin Registered User regular
    A fight or two without bolts could be interesting, but multiple sessions seems a bit much and seems like it’s just shitting on that player. Also, a village not having any crossbows would only be the case because the DM decided that's the case.

    9MpLNPA.jpg
    Steam: MightyPotatoKing/King of the Impossible - Battle.net: PotatoKing#1893
    italianranmaElvenshaeMsAnthropydiscridernever dieEncZonugaljdarksunTofystedeth
  • RendRend Registered User regular
    A fight or two without bolts could be interesting, but multiple sessions seems a bit much and seems like it’s just shitting on that player. Also, a village not having any crossbows would only be the case because the DM decided that's the case.

    This is a Sling village, we don't take kindly to no cross bows here.

    CarnarvonitalianranmaKen OElvenshaeMsAnthropyTerrendosJustTeeMrVyngaardMoridin889Enc14357ZonugalTheDrifterTofystedethTynnan
  • SleepSleep Registered User regular
    Elvenshae wrote: »
    Is the point not to have fun? If the player wants to use a crossbow as their primary weapon, why refuse to make bolts available?

    Because mah immersions!

    :)

    But seriously, until, like 5E, crossbows pretty much sucked. Might as well let someone use them at-will.

    Also, tracking ammunition in general stinks.

    Yeah i generally consider it a negligible piece of tracking for the most part, but on some adventures low running ammunition becomes a part of the adventures challenge. Like say we're on a long and hopefully lonely trek through the desert, you better believe we're tracking all the gear on that adventure including ammo, and if you've blown it all before the end of the trek you aren't going to get a random resupply for no reason.

  • SmrtnikSmrtnik job boli zub Registered User regular
    edited November 2017
    Is the point not to have fun? If the player wants to use a crossbow as their primary weapon, why refuse to make bolts available?

    Because i did something like 80 points of dmg on the opener to his beholder and after that he found ways to prevent me from doing dmg. After i restocked on bolts, an invisible monster trapped me in a magical sphere in round 1 for remainder of the fight. Then the next couple of sessions the enemies were all demons, invulnerable to non magical dmg. Oh and everyone else in the party was either a spellcaster or had obtained a magical weapon by then. Then the campaign was over.

    Really left a sour taste in my mouth. My character even had woodworking skill and tools, just in case, but no trees in the underdark plus DM not saying a peep about the "wood-like" mushrooms that i later found out were in the campaign.

    My character had accumulated over 5k gold, but even a large trading town in the underdark didn't have bolts. He let me ressuply when we briefly visited the surface.

    Smrtnik on
    steam_sig.png
  • SleepSleep Registered User regular
    edited November 2017
    Smrtnik wrote: »
    Is the point not to have fun? If the player wants to use a crossbow as their primary weapon, why refuse to make bolts available?

    Because i did something like 80 points of dmg on the opener to his beholder and after that he found ways to prevent me from doing dmg. After i restocked on bolts, an invisible monster trapped me in a magical sphere in round 1 for remainder of the fight. Then the next couple of sessions the enemies were all demons, invulnerable to non magical dmg. Oh and everyone else in the party was either a spellcaster or had obtained a magical weapon by then. Then the campaign was over.

    Really left a sour taste in my mouth. My character even had woodworking skill and tools, just in case, but no trees in the underdark plus DM not saying a peep about the "wood-like" mushrooms that i later found out were in the campaign.

    My character had accumulated over 5k gold, but even a large trading town in the underdark didn't have bolts. He let me ressuply when we briefly visited the surface.


    See that's garbage.

    That's not some story reason for why there was no source for bolts, that's someone not properly dealing with pc capability.

    Edit:

    Like that doesn't make sense from multiple angles. Its a large trading town is the full stop, but it being in the underdark makes it make even less sense. A bunch of underdark races are like specifically noted for using crossbows, most especially drow.

    Sleep on
    SteelhawkSmrtnikZomroElvenshaeBionicPenguinRainfallDiannaoChongMrVyngaardMoridin889Fuselagenever die14357ZonugalTheDrifterfurlionTofystedeth
  • SleepSleep Registered User regular
    Like restricting basic equipment of any kind via availability requires the DM to properly explain themselves as to why that is happening narratively. Just handwaving the lack of availability with no narrative justification, or in direct contrivance of a narrative that should make that shit available is bunk.

    MrVyngaardZonugal
  • GoumindongGoumindong Registered User regular
    I think that ranged weapons are super strong in ways that cantrips are not and as such having ammunition be a negligible track is counter productive to the interparty balance. At the same time i don't see a reasonable way to actually fix the problem.

    wbBv3fj.png
  • italianranmaitalianranma Registered User regular
    Guys, I'm going to run Eberron with my next group and I'm coincidentally looking for some new books to read. I guess there are Eberron novels, but I'm not super interested in them; I'd rather go for the material that inspired the source material. There's a 'movies to inspire you' tab, but what sorts of books would the thread recommend? Sherlock Holmes assuredly but what else?

    飛べねぇ豚はただの豚だ。
  • NotoriusBENNotoriusBEN Registered User regular
    I'm going to get a red card for this but...

    Fullmetal Alchemist.

    notoriusben_zpsa205e831.png
    Steam - NotoriusBEN | Uplay - notoriusben | Xbox,Windows Live - ThatBEN
    SleepitalianranmaTheDrifterjdarksun
  • AegisAegis Not Quite TorontoRegistered User regular
    I don't know necessarily about inspired the source material, but Perdido Street Station.

    We'll see how long this blog lasts
    Currently DMing: None :(
    Characters
    [5e] Dural Melairkyn - AC 18 | HP 40 | Melee +5/1d8+3 | Spell +4/DC 12
    ElvenshaeitalianranmaTheDrifter
  • SleepSleep Registered User regular
    Goumindong wrote: »
    I think that ranged weapons are super strong in ways that cantrips are not and as such having ammunition be a negligible track is counter productive to the interparty balance. At the same time i don't see a reasonable way to actually fix the problem.

    Eh the only person who ranged weapons are truly more devastating in the hands of are rogues other than that they run at a reasonable pace to each other, especially since cantrip users can regularly dump out far bigger individual ranged damage hits on a semi regular basis.

    I'd not treat ammunition shortage as a balancing factor, just a type of challenge to throw at the party.

    Elvenshae
  • GoumindongGoumindong Registered User regular
    edited November 2017
    Sleep wrote: »
    Goumindong wrote: »
    I think that ranged weapons are super strong in ways that cantrips are not and as such having ammunition be a negligible track is counter productive to the interparty balance. At the same time i don't see a reasonable way to actually fix the problem.

    Eh the only person who ranged weapons are truly more devastating in the hands of are rogues other than that they run at a reasonable pace to each other, especially since cantrip users can regularly dump out far bigger individual ranged damage hits on a semi regular basis.

    I'd not treat ammunition shortage as a balancing factor, just a type of challenge to throw at the party.

    Nu rangers* and fighters are much stronger than rogues. The main reason is that sharpshooter is much stronger as you make multiple attacks and rangers and fighters get more attacks faster. Plus rangers (and some fighters) get ways to force advantage (or simulate it with attack bonuses) which lets them abuse the advantage of multiple attacks even more.

    Rogues not only are stronger with finesse weapons (because the ability to dual wield gives them minor action options in the event that their main attack misses in order to simulate advantage) but don't have ammunition problems anyway because they only get one attack/round.

    Edit: All in all their damage isn't even that high. A level 20 Rogue does 1d8+10d6+8 damage= 47.5 (assuming a +3 weapon). A level 20 fighter does 4d8+32 = 50 both on the same attack bonus... Rogues tend to keep pace with fighters in terms of damage, rather than outpace them, regardless of weapon type. The only way for a rogue to really outpace a fighter is by getting a lot of AoO or by getting a fighter to grant them attacks on their turn as a reaction.

    *Old rangers actually weren't too bad either actually

    Goumindong on
    wbBv3fj.png
  • MsAnthropyMsAnthropy Our Lady of Perpetual Mazes The CageRegistered User regular
    Guys, I'm going to run Eberron with my next group and I'm coincidentally looking for some new books to read. I guess there are Eberron novels, but I'm not super interested in them; I'd rather go for the material that inspired the source material. There's a 'movies to inspire you' tab, but what sorts of books would the thread recommend? Sherlock Holmes assuredly but what else?

    The two big pillars of Eberron are pulp and noir. For pulp, you might check out various Doc Savage or The Shadow stories. For noir, classic stuff by Raymon Chandler or neo-noir by James Ellroy would be worth taking a look at.

    "The only real politics I knew was that if a guy liked Hitler, I’d beat the stuffing out of him and that would be it." -- Jack Kirby
    Elvenshaeitalianranma
  • GoumindongGoumindong Registered User regular
    Indiana Jones is also good if you're planning on going to Xendrik.

    wbBv3fj.png
    SleepitalianranmaSteelhawkElvenshaeMoridin889Zonugal
  • SleepSleep Registered User regular
    Goumindong wrote: »
    Sleep wrote: »
    Goumindong wrote: »
    I think that ranged weapons are super strong in ways that cantrips are not and as such having ammunition be a negligible track is counter productive to the interparty balance. At the same time i don't see a reasonable way to actually fix the problem.

    Eh the only person who ranged weapons are truly more devastating in the hands of are rogues other than that they run at a reasonable pace to each other, especially since cantrip users can regularly dump out far bigger individual ranged damage hits on a semi regular basis.

    I'd not treat ammunition shortage as a balancing factor, just a type of challenge to throw at the party.

    Nu rangers* and fighters are much stronger than rogues. The main reason is that sharpshooter is much stronger as you make multiple attacks and rangers and fighters get more attacks faster. Plus rangers (and some fighters) get ways to force advantage (or simulate it with attack bonuses) which lets them abuse the advantage of multiple attacks even more.

    Rogues not only are stronger with finesse weapons (because the ability to dual wield gives them minor action options in the event that their main attack misses in order to simulate advantage) but don't have ammunition problems anyway because they only get one attack/round.

    Edit: All in all their damage isn't even that high. A level 20 Rogue does 1d8+10d6+8 damage= 47.5 (assuming a +3 weapon). A level 20 fighter does 4d8+32 = 50 both on the same attack bonus... Rogues tend to keep pace with fighters in terms of damage, rather than outpace them, regardless of weapon type. The only way for a rogue to really outpace a fighter is by getting a lot of AoO or by getting a fighter to grant them attacks on their turn as a reaction.

    *Old rangers actually weren't too bad either actually

    Nah, those are fair points. I think I'm just very used to seeing the perma hide halflings that just shoot at ranged from behind their own allies, or in available cover, and just snipe all day.

    The rogues turn

    Shoot
    Move
    Hide



  • GoumindongGoumindong Registered User regular
    Well even perma-hide halfings i don't find much of an issue because they provide counterplay. You can prevent them from getting behind allies by moving between their allies and them. You can have enemies spend their turn looking for the rogue. Similarly adhering to the stealth rules well makes it less valuable (you must maintain cover/concealment to hide and so hiding behind an ally forces you to shoot through that allies space for a cover penalty. Enemies can move to find you, the hide can fail etc).


    But rangers/fighters don't provide much counterplay. They have as much defense as a normal tankish character but they just do all their damage from afar. Its especially bad if they take sharpshooter/crossbow expert but its still bad when they do not.

    wbBv3fj.png
    Moridin889
  • AbbalahAbbalah Registered User regular
    edited November 2017
    Sleep wrote: »
    Like your understanding of this is wrong from a basic level. The system makes no ac progression assumptions. The monster accuracy math doesnt jump after 6th level due to an expected AC bump or anything like that. Mainly because there's a whole host of other shit to do with monetary and character building options that isn't raising your AC. So the system doesn't assume anyone raises their AC ever. That way spending your money or character building resources on AC actually acts as an edge rather than just trying to keep up with a meaningless treadmill.

    When i say "there is no AC progression" I mean that the games math isn't designed around ever increasing AC the way 4e was. 4e had AC progression you had to keep up with. 5e doesn't at all.

    No, it isn't. Yours seems to be, though. 5e uses bounded accuracy. Bounded does not mean flat. The system expects AC and attack bonuses to increase as you level - that's why CR 1 monsters only have +4-5 to attack rolls but CR 13 ones have anywhere from a +8 to a +14. It's why monster AC at low levels hovers around 12-15 but at high levels commonly hits 16-19 and eventually pushes up to the low 20s. It's why low-level characters have +5 to attacks but a level 16 character will likely have +10-13.

    The system absolutely has expectations about player AC (and attack bonuses), and expects those values to scale. The difference between 4e and 5e is just that where 4e expects those things to increment at an average of close to 1 per level, 5e expects them to go up about 1 per 3-4 levels.

    There's literally a table for this in the DMG that covers average monster stats by CR. There is a bump in monster accuracy from CR 4-6, because monsters get both a +1 to attack bonuses at CR 4 and a +1 increase to their proficiency bonus at CR 5, leading to a spike from +4 to +6 to attacks. You know, the same amount by which chain->plate bumps player AC, at the same time players are likely to be able to afford plate. (Monsters also get a 2-point AC bump at about the same time (from 13 to 15), incidentally, which corresponds to the attack bonus bumps players are getting from their level 5 proficiency bonus increase and their level 4 primary stat boost at those same levels, and a similar increase to spell save DCs that offsets the saving throw boosts players are getting. This helps continue to ensure that parties fighting an even-CR monster always have about a 60% chance to hit with attacks and a 60% to resist spells that target their best save, regardless of the actual level they're at or the actual bonuses in play.)

    If you look at the chart carefully, you'll even note that monster proficiency bonuses at very high (20+) CRs continue to increase to +9, 3 points higher than players scale, leading to attack bonuses and spell save DCs that are 3 points higher than expected. I wonder if we could think of any form of extra player scaling that caps out at +3, that the system could be assuming players have by those high levels and scaling for appropriately! (It's magic items)

    5e doesn't remove the treadmill, it just reduces the incline and then obfuscates it.

    Abbalah on
    ElvenshaeMegaMekJustTee
  • AmarylAmaryl Registered User regular
    Sleep wrote: »
    Like your understanding of this is wrong from a basic level. The system makes no ac progression assumptions. The monster accuracy math doesnt jump after 6th level due to an expected AC bump or anything like that. Mainly because there's a whole host of other shit to do with monetary and character building options that isn't raising your AC. So the system doesn't assume anyone raises their AC ever. That way spending your money or character building resources on AC actually acts as an edge rather than just trying to keep up with a meaningless treadmill.

    When i say "there is no AC progression" I mean that the games math isn't designed around ever increasing AC the way 4e was. 4e had AC progression you had to keep up with. 5e doesn't at all.

    Sure Bounded accuracy means there's no assumption based on character level what their ac is supposed to be. But ever increasing Proficiency bonuses simply mean you're getting easier to hit with each level the enemies gain. So Just because the system doesn't make any AC assumptions, doesn't mean the Math doesn't progress. monsters +hit chance will move from +3 to +11 as you level. Damage output is tremendously increased beyond just the dice-numbers if AC doesn't increase with character progression. This is the important design part, the treadmill exists. Your AC has to go up if you want to be at around 50% hit chance as the game progresses (or whatever number you start at). Otherwise you're just going to get easier and easier to hit, and the Damage and HP scaling will get lobsided.

  • SleepSleep Registered User regular
    edited November 2017
    except theres no mechanism by which ac increases that isn't an option you are free to ignore in favor of other options.

    Ac increases are all optional.

    Magic items are not assumed increases because it's never assumes you get magic items

    Sleep on
    MrVyngaard
  • SleepSleep Registered User regular
    edited November 2017
    Like the only means by which AC increases is by upping dex, taking a feat that allows you to get a third dex point out of medium armor, or buying heavier armor. These are not things any character necessarily must do as they level. There is no expectation that everyone's AC will rise throughout the game.

    Sleep on
  • AbbalahAbbalah Registered User regular
    And yet, the monster math does not line up with any of those claims.

    ElvenshaeMegaMekJustTee
  • SleepSleep Registered User regular
    And yet there is no guarantee of magical items, let alone magical armor

    MrVyngaard
  • DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic Registered User regular
    Hmm...this is the first time I saw this:
    ummv9lbvcbxe.png

    So that looks like a smoothed trend line of a 12 point shift from 0 CR up to 30 CR. Obviously 4 of that can be written off as proficiency changes and maybe another 1 or 2 to attribute bonuses. Another couple from maybe magic weapons. Not really sure where the other 4 is meant to be coming from over a PCs career. Which leaves the assumption that high level adventurers just miss more often? That seems to break some of the basic feedback loop that RPGs exploit though I'm thinking multiple attacks may cover up for it some.

  • SleepSleep Registered User regular
    edited November 2017
    Like even in xanathars guide to everything you are only supposed to give out 20 major magic items, and only 4 legendary ones. Guess what rarity +3 armor is, legendary, guess what+1 armor is, a major magical item.

    Things at higher levels pose greater threats.

    No one wants the balor fight to be easy

    Sleep on
    MrVyngaard
  • AbbalahAbbalah Registered User regular
    edited November 2017
    Sleep wrote: »
    And yet there is no guarantee of magical items, let alone magical armor


    Yes, I understand that they say that, repeatedly.

    I hope that you understand that the chart I am talking about clearly demonstrates that the game expects players to be getting an extra +3 from somewhere by epic levels, in a game where magic item bonuses go up to...+3.

    The game's math expects you to get magic items. It expects you to get magic weapons and armor (which is why, among other things, it has monsters who resist nonmagical damage, and specific guidance on being careful about using them at early levels...because the players aren't expected to have magic weapons at those levels yet.) The claim that the systems math does not expect players to have magic gear is a lie, it just doesn't start incorporating an expected magic item bonus until late.

    Edit: It's almost like 20 major items is enough to give each player 1-2 magic weapon upgrades, 1-2 magic armor upgrades, and an extra major item over the course of the campaign. Which means 3 items at a time, which is...also the number of attunement slots they get! Weird!

    Abbalah on
    Elvenshae
  • SmrtnikSmrtnik job boli zub Registered User regular
    Where is the 20 number coming from and do you adjust it for party numbers other then 4?

    steam_sig.png
  • SleepSleep Registered User regular
    Hey guys the only legendary items im giving you are 4 sets of +3 armor.

    Also flat +1,+2, and +3 armor don't require attunement.

  • AbbalahAbbalah Registered User regular
    Smrtnik wrote: »
    Where is the 20 number coming from and do you adjust it for party numbers other then 4?

    It's from Xanathar's and I don't think it says to adjust it, but you probably should - especially since it pretty clearly/cleanly breaks down into 5 major items, 1 of them legendary, per player.

    Speaking of Xanathars' guidance on awarding magic items, here's a relevant bit from the same page:
    The emphasis on characters receiving more items during the second tier (levels 5-10) than in other tiers is by design. The second tier is where much of the play occurs in a typical DnD campaign, and the items gained in that tier prepare the characters for higher-level adventures

    Near as I can tell, the system starts expecting some kind of magic item bonus around level 12.

  • DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic Registered User regular
    Abbalah wrote: »
    I hope that you understand that the chart I am talking about clearly demonstrates that the game expects players to be getting an extra +3 from somewhere by epic levels, in a game where magic item bonuses go up to...+3.

    The actual monster numbers in that chart don't support your assertion. When I said there is 4 left missing I was assuming a +2 from magic. I'm left with the conclusion that higher level PCs are supposed to be missing more attacks than lower level adventurers.

  • AbbalahAbbalah Registered User regular
    edited November 2017
    Abbalah wrote: »
    I hope that you understand that the chart I am talking about clearly demonstrates that the game expects players to be getting an extra +3 from somewhere by epic levels, in a game where magic item bonuses go up to...+3.

    The actual monster numbers in that chart don't support your assertion. When I said there is 4 left missing I was assuming a +2 from magic. I'm left with the conclusion that higher level PCs are supposed to be missing more attacks than lower level adventurers.

    Not your chart, the one in the DMG. (Which incidentally doesn't say monster AC should scale past 19 ever, even though it clearly does when you look at the average AC of actual printed monsters). It scales monster proficiency bonuses to 9 when players stop at 6, which is reflected in their listed average attack bonus/spell save DCs. For players to keep pace with that scaling, they'd need an extra +3 from somewhere.

    Sleep wrote: »
    Hey guys the only legendary items im giving you are 4 sets of +3 armor.

    Also flat +1,+2, and +3 armor don't require attunement.

    I didn't say the items should or needed to be flat +x items - there are plenty of fancy attunement weapons that also grant +x to attacks/damage (nine lives stealer, vorpal sword, hammer of thunderbolts, etc), and neither is vanilla +3 armor the only possible way for players to get the expected bonus (a wizard might well prefer a Robe of the Archmage, and other players could get the same benefit without using their legendary 'slot' by getting +2 armor and (for example) a Ring of Protection.)

    No amount of snark is going to change the math for you.

    Abbalah on
  • SleepSleep Registered User regular
    Abbalah wrote: »
    I hope that you understand that the chart I am talking about clearly demonstrates that the game expects players to be getting an extra +3 from somewhere by epic levels, in a game where magic item bonuses go up to...+3.

    The actual monster numbers in that chart don't support your assertion. When I said there is 4 left missing I was assuming a +2 from magic. I'm left with the conclusion that higher level PCs are supposed to be missing more attacks than lower level adventurers.

    Bing bing bing

    Like i said

    Higher level threats are supposed to be harder to defeat.

    The balor fight should nearly kill someone, at the very least, mainly because if it does kill someone the party likely has a way to deal with that problem by the time they are fighting that guy (1000 gold and a cleric)

    No one wants the balor to be a cake walk fight.

    MrVyngaard
  • DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic Registered User regular
    Abbalah wrote: »
    Abbalah wrote: »
    I hope that you understand that the chart I am talking about clearly demonstrates that the game expects players to be getting an extra +3 from somewhere by epic levels, in a game where magic item bonuses go up to...+3.

    The actual monster numbers in that chart don't support your assertion. When I said there is 4 left missing I was assuming a +2 from magic. I'm left with the conclusion that higher level PCs are supposed to be missing more attacks than lower level adventurers.

    Not your chart, the one in the DMG. (Which incidentally doesn't say monster AC should scale past 19 ever, even though it clearly does when you look at the average AC of actual printed monsters)

    To be clear, that chart was the monsters presented in the MM. I believe those monsters are going to be the ones that are actually used in the vast majority of play and are useful in the discussion to draw a contrast between "Game as it is played" and "Game as it was designed to be played."

    I strongly suspect magic items as part of progression are part of the first. Not sure about the second because even with magic items that to hit gap doesn't disappear.

Sign In or Register to comment.