[5E] The Maths is Wrong!

heptat

Registered User
Validated User
I've read people in various forums claim that the 5E/Next "maths is wrong!". One obvious (even to me) area is monsters.

Ok, beside that, where to people think that the maths is wrong?

From my point of view, I could (and have, briefly) actually play D&D Next as it is and just have fun with it, broken system or not. Longer term, however, system problems would even impinge on the loose sort of game I play. Therefore I'm genuinely interested in what people think are the problems with the system. And I'm asking this now because I'm wondering how much more the system can actually be modified before they have to start locking things down (I'm expecting one more packet of substantial changes after GenCon).

Thanks.
 

ImpactVector

Registered User
Validated User
The other big one is the entire way saves work. When you have six saves, only one or two of which go up as you level (except for Paladin and Monk), and wizards get to use the bonus of their one increasing ability score (on top of their weird spellcasting bonus), it's a recipe for saves that get radically worse as time goes on. Which is a serious concern in an edition where monsters get to have class levels again.
 

Sage Genesis

Two
RPGnet Member
Validated User
Some skill difficulties are prohibitively hard.

To use an example that was recently brought up, take tightrope walking. It's DC 25.

A first level thief-acrobat with pretty good Dexterity (18) will have a check of 1d20 + 2d6 + 4. This means that the specialist acrobat has a 35% chance of success... meaning a 65% chance of failure. Two times out of three, the acrobat can't even walk a tightrope. At higher levels and with feats this improves, but it turned out even at level 20 the super-duper-expert still had a one in eight chance of failure to walk a tightrope. Even though by this level he's challenging demon-gods in combat.
 

MelanisZbri

Member
RPGnet Member
There was (and this was a packet ago so may have been changed) the Experience Points encounter budget and the XP Needed to Level are wonky (as in no one sat down and cross-compared them), the number of expected encounters from one level to the next bounces back and forth (so, for example, it took 10 encounters to get to level 7, but only 6 to get to level 8 and then 11 to get to level 9, no real trend in one smooth direction or another, and no rationale explaining why some levels seem "shorter" than others beyond the initial levels 1-3 tutorial period).
 

heptat

Registered User
Validated User
The other big one is the entire way saves work. When you have six saves, only one or two of which go up as you level (except for Paladin and Monk), and wizards get to use the bonus of their one increasing ability score (on top of their weird spellcasting bonus), it's a recipe for saves that get radically worse as time goes on. Which is a serious concern in an edition where monsters get to have class levels again.
Yes, I see what you mean. That's not good. I quite like what 13th Age do with taking the middle modifier of three abilities for physical and mental defence...of course in 13th Age you're also adding your level.

How new is the latest version of saves in D&D Next?
 

Sage Genesis

Two
RPGnet Member
Validated User
How new is the latest version of saves in D&D Next?
I don't think saves have ever really changed in Next. They started as an ability check and they're still an ability check. Comments in a podcast indicate this may change in the future, though.
 

heptat

Registered User
Validated User
Some skill difficulties are prohibitively hard.

To use an example that was recently brought up, take tightrope walking. It's DC 25.

A first level thief-acrobat with pretty good Dexterity (18) will have a check of 1d20 + 2d6 + 4. This means that the specialist acrobat has a 35% chance of success... meaning a 65% chance of failure. Two times out of three, the acrobat can't even walk a tightrope. At higher levels and with feats this improves, but it turned out even at level 20 the super-duper-expert still had a one in eight chance of failure to walk a tightrope. Even though by this level he's challenging demon-gods in combat.
And I would say if you have a Dex of 18, that's not "pretty good", you're one of the most dextrous people going around. So again, adding the level to this would help...
 

heptat

Registered User
Validated User
There was (and this was a packet ago so may have been changed) the Experience Points encounter budget and the XP Needed to Level are wonky (as in no one sat down and cross-compared them), the number of expected encounters from one level to the next bounces back and forth (so, for example, it took 10 encounters to get to level 7, but only 6 to get to level 8 and then 11 to get to level 9, no real trend in one smooth direction or another, and no rationale explaining why some levels seem "shorter" than others beyond the initial levels 1-3 tutorial period).
Maybe some levels are quicker because they are "dead" levels (that's a problem I've noticed all on my own), lol.
 

Caduceus

Not the rod of Asclepius
Validated User
A few things need to get a level bonus. They are going to do this, so there isn't really a particular math problem.

The game couldn't really have any fundamental math problems. The dice probabilities are so transparent that it just comes down to tweaking specifics.
 

UglyJimStudly

Unforgiven
Validated User
Maybe some levels are quicker because they are "dead" levels (that's a problem I've noticed all on my own), lol.
Different classes have different dead levels, so they don't really match up. I really doubt the wonky advancement math is by design, I think it's just a matter of the team slapping down numbers without really thinking about what they mean.

Another group of numbers that should be cross-checked but don't seem to be: PC to-hit and damage numbers, monster ACs and HP. The latter two increase at a much slower pace than the former two, so there really isn't any such thing as a single tough monster at mid-to-high-level 5e. A 10th-level party will likely have a tougher time dealing with a bunch of orcs than a single balor.
 
Top Bottom