Originally Posted by Burdock
Originally Posted by Ugmaro
If it gets changed into 3-6 it might soon become 100% hit chance since people don't like missing and suddenly the game is undistinguishable from other RPGs out there - a fate I would very much like to avoid.


I think we should be careful to dismiss new players feedback. Especially using slippery slope analogies. It is perfectly reasonable to seek a balance between complete randomness and complete predictability.

That being said, I think your general point is correct. DnDs intricate combat and moderate randomness makes it really engaging. Reducing it could cause it to become easier to plan "optimal" turns and make the combat less interesting.

Sadly, I think DnD suffers from the inherent disadvantages of a dice system at low levels. The randomness feels "just right" when rolling a 3d4 + 4 attack, but can be a bit overkill when hitting for 1d12. Since as the number of dice increase, the probabilities become more and more normalized. (SEE: https://anydice.com)

This could be subtly tweaked in the RNG at low levels to make a 1d12 distribute more in a bell curve. But I think that might cause more problems then it solves. Either way, this becomes a non-issue after low levels.



Yeah sorry, I tend to make my statements quite simple like that to really get my point across well. You're absolutely correct in everything you've said, the only problem is that low levels provide about 10 hours of gameplay and new players will not play for 10 hours if they don't like the game - as I said, I think it's extremely important that players understand what their choices mean in regards to how their characters will perform, which requires tooltips and more explanation. Mark has also pointed out that it is unacceptable that you cannot review what features your character already has and what they do. THIS needs to be fixxed before considering further additions IMO