|
|
|
veteran
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Aug 2014
|
Larian studios thinks you miss too much in BG3 and so do a lot of players. They have given us easy advantage from backstab and high ground, which seems like a solution that breaks more things than it fixes and railroads combat to revolve around those mechanics. They have played around with lowering AC and raising HP of enemies, which nerfs all attacks that target saves or HP directly instead of AC so that doesn't work.
What if Proficiency Bonus is the better answer here? What if Proficiency Bonus started at +4? Could a blanket +2 to ALL attacks and proficient skill checks and saves improve the game? Let's play with the idea for a bit.
Everyone would get 10% accuracy boost to all attacks without having to resort to High Ground and Backstabs. Let's assume High Ground and Backstab are removed or nerfed at the same time. From the player's perspective the +2 would impact D&D balance less than the current easy advantages do. The biggest impact would be that enemies who benefit from this would hit players more often. Could this in turn be balanced by healing the party a small amount after every encounter, like a short rest level heal? Should the enemies not get this bonus? They already follow different rules. At any rate, giving all attacks an accuracy boost is much better than giving some attacks an accuracy boost for obvious balance reasons.
Sidenote: they still should visualize armor/deflection AC correctly and animate most misses as hits that don't do damage. Heavy Armor doesn't make you better at dodging, BG3.
Everyone would get +10% success rate for proficient skills. I think this would be massive improvement for D&D in general. Choosing your skill set doesn't feel impactful enough as it is. An 8 Int untrained Barbarian with -1 Arcana can easily succeed where a Wizard with +5 can fail. That's just bonkers, it shouldn't happen. That -1 / +5 gap at level 1 isn't wide enough, and it doesn't grow fast enough as you level up. I would make this change in a heartbeat. Being proficient in a skill should mean you're good at it compared to those who aren't.
Everyone would get +10% success rate to proficient Saves. I'm not that experienced with 5e, I can't tell if this would be a good or bad thing.
Last edited by 1varangian; 10/04/21 09:51 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Dec 2020
|
This was actually one of the proposed changes that was being tossed around a couple months back, but it never got any traction because we were admittedly in a 'complain about the massive feedback loop that all of the current mechanics feed into each other' phase.
That said, this is a pretty elegant solution, because the current heavy emphasis on advantage/disadvantage leaves spells that grant advantage/disadvantage and those that target saves in the dust, as you've already said. Raising proficiency bonus would be a far more balanced approach than what we currently have, AND it would give players a slightly better sense of progression from leveling up (as advantage/disadvantage is a static mechanic, while proficiency improves as you gain levels).
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
|
This is something I suggested in the "compilation" thread I made a few monthes ago but I'm not a D&D expert.
Some people suggested something else like reducing the ennemy's AC and a few other answered that it would break the concept of bounded accuracy.
Honnestly I don't really understand why it would be a problem for the normal difficulty.
This would just mean that it's gonna be easy to have a %to hit close to 100%.
+4 from proficiency
+4 modifier
+1 or 2 from highground
+x from bless.
+x from weapons/+1 arrows/...
You'll have a very good %to hit without having to care about advantage or without having a perfect build etc..
And what ?
That's what higher difficulty levels are for : players that know the games, its mechanics and its rules.
This suggestion would allow a very interresting curve of progression in which D&D's concept and complexity are introduced step by step.
As it is now higher level of difficulty are going to be a crap "die more often and retry more often" rather than a mode for players that know the game better.
Last edited by Maximuuus; 10/04/21 10:23 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Nov 2020
|
I feel very apprehensive about this kind of house rule. I think a similar effect can be achieved purely by lowering the DC on a few of the checks in the game because I don't think the issue is that players don't have enough bonuses, but that the DC for certain skill checks feels off. Similar with AC, many of the enemies we face at our level have a fairly high AC because a lot of them are not meant to be encountered at our level.
|
|
|
|
|
|
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
|
I've been having that idea in mind as well. Not necessarily as something I really would want to push for, but from the point of view of game design. Because getting a "bonus" for Backstab does not exactly feel rewarding.
Compare with Barrelmancy. Ok, it is aesthetically weird in medieval-renaissance fantastic Faerun, and it isn't super immersion-enhancing that nobody cares when you fill the room with barrels. But in order to Barrel-kill Dror Gagzlin with Roah's barrels, you need to have found the stock of barrels, think about the idea (imagine a first-time player who hasn't been on the forums), and then carry the barrels. You have to work for your firework.
Backstab ? You walk around the enemy, you Backstab. Every turn. Zero effort. It's basically default mode. Calling this a bonus at the moment feels meaningless. It's nearly a reward for having launched the game.
So, yeah, from this perspective ... why not just make the "bonus" part of the core rules and be done with it ?
I mean, if Larian is so concerned about the miss rate and they started "tweaking" the 5E rules to make a homebrew ... why not just running with it ? In for a penny, in for a pound as they say.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
|
I feel very apprehensive about this kind of house rule. I think a similar effect can be achieved purely by lowering the DC on a few of the checks in the game because I don't think the issue is that players don't have enough bonuses, but that the DC for certain skill checks feels off. Similar with AC, many of the enemies we face at our level have a fairly high AC because a lot of them are not meant to be encountered at our level. Player's don't have a lot of bonuses in D&D if I'm not wrong (except items, bless and ofc characters build). I'm not sure it's ok to only have specific bonuses in a video game and the concept of advantage (D&D) is not easy to play with. You have to use very specific mechanics which require a good knowledge of the spells, abilities and mechanics. Players have to find ways to improve their %to hit but new players when they'll start a game for the first time won't know why faery fire, bless and even their modifiers are REALLY important. According to me it's a very good solution to add a few easier bonuses but ofc things have to be balanced. But maybe there are things I don't think about.
Last edited by Maximuuus; 10/04/21 11:27 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
|
I feel very apprehensive about this kind of house rule. I think a similar effect can be achieved purely by lowering the DC on a few of the checks in the game because I don't think the issue is that players don't have enough bonuses, but that the DC for certain skill checks feels off. Similar with AC, many of the enemies we face at our level have a fairly high AC because a lot of them are not meant to be encountered at our level. Guys, D&D 5e works very well if done right. CJMPinger has hit the nail on the head. The issue isn't bonuses, it's difficulty levels. When you start the game at level 1, you are supposed to be not very good at things. A few proficiency skills give you a bit of a bonus, but that's it. The point is that when you first start you are barely better than your average grunt or common person, but as the game progresses you start to become a hero. So you are meant to start as barely a hero and end up a champion. The issue, therefore, is we are being thrown into battles against monsters way above our pay grade. Although this is fun, if we can kill them, it makes it so that we have to break the 5e rules in order to survive in the game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Aug 2014
|
I feel very apprehensive about this kind of house rule. I think a similar effect can be achieved purely by lowering the DC on a few of the checks in the game because I don't think the issue is that players don't have enough bonuses, but that the DC for certain skill checks feels off. Similar with AC, many of the enemies we face at our level have a fairly high AC because a lot of them are not meant to be encountered at our level. Guys, D&D 5e works very well if done right. CJMPinger has hit the nail on the head. The issue isn't bonuses, it's difficulty levels. When you start the game at level 1, you are supposed to be not very good at things. A few proficiency skills give you a bit of a bonus, but that's it. The point is that when you first start you are barely better than your average grunt or common person, but as the game progresses you start to become a hero. So you are meant to start as barely a hero and end up a champion. The issue, therefore, is we are being thrown into battles against monsters way above our pay grade. Although this is fun, if we can kill them, it makes it so that we have to break the 5e rules in order to survive in the game. The issue I have with lowering DC's is that it makes it even easier for a non-skilled PC to succeed. The biggest problem is that the skill gap between the highest skilled individual and the worst amateur is negligible. Picking your skills in character creation has almost no meaning. It doesn't make you feel that you are actually good at something. Another +2 would go a long way into making you feel like you are skilled. I think in some areas they took the bounded accuracy and lack of incremental modifiers too far, where things start to feel bland and meaningless.
Last edited by 1varangian; 10/04/21 12:50 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
|
The problem is that character development is greatly simplified in the case of 5e.
For characters on level one, the difference between a character with proficiency and the +3 modifier is only a 25% chance of success more than a character without any bonuses.
Due to the lvl cap, it is unlikely that we will be able to achieve a proficiency bonus greater than +4 before the end of the game.
This is a low bonus, and it's no wonder that a lot of people feel like character building doesn't really matter.
In most games, the difference between an untrained character and one that specializes in some field is much greater.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Aug 2014
|
The problem is that character development is greatly simplified in the case of 5e.
For characters on level one, the difference between a character with proficiency and the +3 modifier is only a 25% chance of success more than a character without any bonuses.
Due to the lvl cap, it is unlikely that we will be able to achieve a proficiency bonus greater than +4 before the end of the game.
This is a low bonus, and it's no wonder that a lot of people feel like character building doesn't really matter.
In most games, the difference between an untrained character and one that specializes in some field is much greater. I like how in 3.x some skills require training to be possible at all. I think the simple Barbarian "deciphering a magic circle" or "remembering something from foreign History he has never studied" fall into that category. This measly +2 from being Proficient in a skill is like the polar opposite of that.
Last edited by 1varangian; 10/04/21 01:10 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
|
But that's what Im trying to point out. At level 1, it is supposes to be a small difference. Even at level 4 it is meant to be small. As you get to higher levels the gap increases. A level 8 Rogue will have considerable advantage over a level 8 fighter at Lock Pick, Stealth, etc. However, at level 4 it is not as big an advantage.
If you increase the prof bonuses at level 1, you will severely skew the bonuses at later levels.
This is EA. We are capped at level 4. Wait until later levels. You will see a far greater difference between classes as you get to higher levels.
Think of it like high school. Level 1 is like being a freshman. Everyone has roughly the same basic elementary knowledge. Some might be better at some things than others, but they are still babies in even those areas, unless they're prodigies.
Level 4 is like maybe Junior. You have, by this point, started to really veer towards one path or another, but you still need a lot of refinement.
Then Level 5 is like you are on your last year of high school. Now you are really choosing your major and charging towards your career. After that, you are like in college until maybe level 8. Now you are a true pro, and you are significantly better at your craft than everyone else.
Others may not necessarily agree on my level choices, but the point is that in the beginning you aren't supposed to have this huge difference between characters in skills and abilities. It is a progressive change that occurs as you level up.
This is why some players hate starting at level 1. They like to create characters at level 5 it least, so they have more differences and aren't such weaklings. The problem with starting at level 5 or whatever is that it takes longer to level up, and people will get frustrated that their characters aren't ever growing.
But remember, D&D is meant to simulate life. Your characters are supposed to grow quickly at first to learn the basic. Then, as they continue on their chosen paths, they start to refine their abilities, which takes a lot longer to so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
OP
veteran
Joined: Aug 2014
|
Think of it like high school. Level 1 is like being a freshman. Everyone has roughly the same basic elementary knowledge. Some might be better at some things than others, but they are still babies in even those areas, unless they're prodigies.
Level 4 is like maybe Junior. You have, by this point, started to really veer towards one path or another, but you still need a lot of refinement.
Then Level 5 is like you are on your last year of high school. Now you are really choosing your major and charging towards your career. After that, you are like in college until maybe level 8. Now you are a true pro, and you are significantly better at your craft than everyone else. But that's not how D&D portrays experience levels, is it? Level 1 characters are already young professionals with training even though inexperienced. A proper comparison would be graduates. In 5e a level 1 bus driver with no medical training can succeed in surgery where a trained surgeon can lose a patient. We even have an actual scene for that on the nautiloid. =)
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
|
Kind of shocked this isn't a thing on top of current homebrews. That's actually a Ranger feature called Natural Explorer, Rangers gain double proficiency on a favored terrain. D&D Beyond RangerTruthfully IMO Ranger is to much homebrewed and the changes cover up what was actually the ranger class. Currently they are able to get more skills than a Rogue via the new class choices. While getting a mix match of other classes thrown into there own and removing core features that made the class what it was years ago (at least in 3.0, Favored Enemy?). This was mentioned in a previous post. Bounded Accuracy
Last edited by fallenj; 10/04/21 01:44 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
|
But that's what Im trying to point out. At level 1, it is supposes to be a small difference. Even at level 4 it is meant to be small. As you get to higher levels the gap increases. A level 8 Rogue will have considerable advantage over a level 8 fighter at Lock Pick, Stealth, etc. However, at level 4 it is not as big an advantage.
If you increase the prof bonuses at level 1, you will severely skew the bonuses at later levels. This is something I don't understand (and I'd like to)
Do you have exemples with numbers and/or situations in D&D rather than a comparison with school ?
The differences between characters that use skills they're proficient with is still the same even if everyone have a +2 bonus to anything, right ?
Just forget that OP call this "proficiency bonus".
I.E the level 8 fighter will still roll with the +2 bonus suggested by 1varangian because he's not proficient while your rogue will with +5. EDIT : writing what's in the spoiler I realize that maybe I missunderstood what OP was asking for.
Last edited by Maximuuus; 10/04/21 02:00 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
|
My previous post from Skill Check Dice Rolls & Dice rolls and dialoguesThere's a thread already about d20 and skill checks Use searchThis is a copy/paste of what I said on the other thread. BG3: Based off BG3 you can't get any better than a 17 for ability score (doesn't matter if you have a +2, +1, or nothing), so ability modifier is going to be +3. There is no skill points in this edition only proficiency which can be gained via background, racial, or class. At level one for proficiency is a +2, generally any race/class can achieve this +5 right from character creation. Leveling up you gain +1 ability score at: 4th, 8th, 12th, 16th, and 19th. Proficiency goes up by one at: 5th, 9th, 13th, and 17th. level 1: Ability Mod:+3 Pro: +2 = +5 level 10: Ability Mod: +4 Pro: +4 = +8 level 20: Ability Mod: +6 Pro: +6 = +12 Social skill challenges don't normally go up, so the higher level you go the better you get at said skill. This also doesn't include spells or potions that can give you the upper hand at skill checks. Now normally in a d&d game you don't cap at 17 so the ability mod for racials actually comes more into effect giving possibly a 18 or 20 ability score. Class features seem to be missing, off the freebe pdf you can get from d&d beyond rogues get a expertise feature at level one. Which doubles skill proficiencies for 2 skills or 1 skill plus thieves tools. Probably more junk I'm missing but I hit my limit on researching. Over all you have a problem with BG3 and how they implemented the 5e rules, 5e rules period, or just d&d all together. I'd recommend go finding another game if you don't like the d20 system in d&d. Edit* Oh I did forget about inspiration points where you can spend a point to give yourself advantage in a skill check. Edit2* Digging through the PDF and looks like 5e does cap your ability scores at 17 at least for point buy (racial mods included) rolls still can be 18s, interesting - option for static rolls, like in Divinity 2 OS, when the skill check is always the same and instead of rolling the dice + applying bonuses, only our bonuses thanks to proficiency selected during the creating (like +2 to persuasion rolls) and ability bonuses count. (levels could also play a part)
- option to reduce the rolls by dividing the difficulty check by 2 and rounding it down (same being applied to the roll), so that your bonuses due to having proficiency and ability bonuses + artifacts are felt as more powerful.
If DC is for example 15, our base chance to succeed is to roll 15,16,17,18,19,20 . (30% Having +3 bonus adds 12,13,14 to the list, increasing the chance by 15% to 45%.
With halved DC, and halved roll, we would need to get 7 or more, to succeed (out of 10). Base chance is 40%, with +3 from persuasion increasing it to 70%.
- same system as right now, to satisfy hardcore dnd fans.
- option for unlimited re-rolling of the DC It's a d&d game, d&d uses d20, if you don't like it go play something else. Now I do know a lot of people asking for skill check modifier to be applied to your roll vs subtracting from DC. I'm pretty sure there was some major problems with this but I don't really remember off hand. I'm pretty sure you said something about save scumming but I can't find it for the life of me. Anyway just encase, devs mentioned more favorable results if you reload multi times. Adjusting proficiencies or any numbers period related to skill checks or attacks will deter from bonuses gained in other areas. Spells, abilities, racials, inspiration points, ect. This is why Height advantage and backstab is a problem in the first place, it takes away from already setup features from 5e. Increasing proficiency would just cause another problem.
Last edited by fallenj; 10/04/21 02:04 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Feb 2021
|
Think of it like high school. Level 1 is like being a freshman. Everyone has roughly the same basic elementary knowledge. Some might be better at some things than others, but they are still babies in even those areas, unless they're prodigies.
Level 4 is like maybe Junior. You have, by this point, started to really veer towards one path or another, but you still need a lot of refinement.
Then Level 5 is like you are on your last year of high school. Now you are really choosing your major and charging towards your career. After that, you are like in college until maybe level 8. Now you are a true pro, and you are significantly better at your craft than everyone else. But that's not how D&D portrays experience levels, is it? Level 1 characters are already young professionals with training even though inexperienced. A proper comparison would be graduates. In 5e a level 1 bus driver with no medical training can succeed in surgery where a trained surgeon can lose a patient. We even have an actual scene for that on the nautiloid. =) Ah, but that's not a skill proficiency issue. That's a difficulty issue. See. Brain surgery should be more like DC 20 or 25. It should be near impossible for an untrained character to pull off. Only a level 8 or 10 character with single or double proficiency should have a chance of success in such a task. The reason we have characters with no proficiency being able to do things that only a professional can do is because the DC is not high enough to illustrate that only a professional can do it. So, taking the nautiloid scene, if a bus driver can still succeed in performing the brain surgery task of removing the brain, what Larian as the DM is saying is that this particular brain surgery is something anyone COULD do, whether an expert or not. If you are a young medical student who has some proficiency in surgery, you might have a better chance of success than Mr. Bus Driver, but you still lack the training and experience to gain a significant advantage over Mr. Bus Driver. That is the misunderstanding many have with D&D. Just because I create a cleric with Medical proficiency, it doesn't mean Im a young professional at it. It means I have some very basic knowledge of it and interest in it. That gives me and advantage in that area over someone who has no real interest or training in it it all. As I gain levels, NOW Im becoming a young professional. And the idea is that just because Mr. Bus Driver doesn't have any proficiency, it doesn't mean he has NO knowledge in that area. It just means it is not his strong subject. When you succeed in a dice roll where you are not proficient, it is like the character saying, "Wait! I actually know this. I learned it from this or that past experience." So maybe Mr. Bus Driver succeeds in removing the brain because somewhere in his past he sat in a surgeon's office and was bored and studied the guy's brain surgery poster diagram showing how to do it.
Last edited by GM4Him; 10/04/21 02:32 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
|
My previous post from Skill Check Dice Rolls & Dice rolls and dialoguesThere's a thread already about d20 and skill checks Use searchThis is a copy/paste of what I said on the other thread. BG3: Based off BG3 you can't get any better than a 17 for ability score (doesn't matter if you have a +2, +1, or nothing), so ability modifier is going to be +3. There is no skill points in this edition only proficiency which can be gained via background, racial, or class. At level one for proficiency is a +2, generally any race/class can achieve this +5 right from character creation. Leveling up you gain +1 ability score at: 4th, 8th, 12th, 16th, and 19th. Proficiency goes up by one at: 5th, 9th, 13th, and 17th. level 1: Ability Mod:+3 Pro: +2 = +5 level 10: Ability Mod: +4 Pro: +4 = +8 level 20: Ability Mod: +6 Pro: +6 = +12 Social skill challenges don't normally go up, so the higher level you go the better you get at said skill. This also doesn't include spells or potions that can give you the upper hand at skill checks. Now normally in a d&d game you don't cap at 17 so the ability mod for racials actually comes more into effect giving possibly a 18 or 20 ability score. Class features seem to be missing, off the freebe pdf you can get from d&d beyond rogues get a expertise feature at level one. Which doubles skill proficiencies for 2 skills or 1 skill plus thieves tools. Probably more junk I'm missing but I hit my limit on researching. Over all you have a problem with BG3 and how they implemented the 5e rules, 5e rules period, or just d&d all together. I'd recommend go finding another game if you don't like the d20 system in d&d. Edit* Oh I did forget about inspiration points where you can spend a point to give yourself advantage in a skill check. Edit2* Digging through the PDF and looks like 5e does cap your ability scores at 17 at least for point buy (racial mods included) rolls still can be 18s, interesting - option for static rolls, like in Divinity 2 OS, when the skill check is always the same and instead of rolling the dice + applying bonuses, only our bonuses thanks to proficiency selected during the creating (like +2 to persuasion rolls) and ability bonuses count. (levels could also play a part)
- option to reduce the rolls by dividing the difficulty check by 2 and rounding it down (same being applied to the roll), so that your bonuses due to having proficiency and ability bonuses + artifacts are felt as more powerful.
If DC is for example 15, our base chance to succeed is to roll 15,16,17,18,19,20 . (30% Having +3 bonus adds 12,13,14 to the list, increasing the chance by 15% to 45%.
With halved DC, and halved roll, we would need to get 7 or more, to succeed (out of 10). Base chance is 40%, with +3 from persuasion increasing it to 70%.
- same system as right now, to satisfy hardcore dnd fans.
- option for unlimited re-rolling of the DC It's a d&d game, d&d uses d20, if you don't like it go play something else. Now I do know a lot of people asking for skill check modifier to be applied to your roll vs subtracting from DC. I'm pretty sure there was some major problems with this but I don't really remember off hand. I'm pretty sure you said something about save scumming but I can't find it for the life of me. Anyway just encase, devs mentioned more favorable results if you reload multi times. Adjusting proficiencies or any numbers period related to skill checks or attacks will deter from bonuses gained in other areas. Spells, abilities, racials, inspiration points, ect. This is why Height advantage and backstab is a problem in the first place, it takes away from already setup features from 5e. Increasing proficiency would just cause another problem. The problem is that currently character progress is poor for an RPG, and unfortunately that won't change much at the higher levels.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
|
This would be a relatively elegant solution for difficulty options that accounts for skill checks, attack rolls, and spell save DCs (something that high ground/backstab doesn't). Story: Proficiency +6 Easy: Proficiency +4 Normal: +2 Hard: no bonus Very Hard: -2 Adjusting proficiencies or any numbers period related to skill checks or attacks will deter from bonuses gained in other areas. Spells, abilities, racials, inspiration points, ect.
This is why Height advantage and backstab is a problem in the first place, it takes away from already setup features from 5e. Increasing proficiency would just cause another problem. I'd argue that the larger problem of height advantage and backstab is that it grants Advantage, which means that all other sources of granting Advantage (spells, class abilities, shoving prone) are invalidated. And because Advantage is so powerful, these options outshine ~all other non-tactical options in combat. A higher proficiency bonus, however, stacks with all other bonuses and doesn't limit tactical options. With small +2 increments dependent on difficulty, on most difficulties it will still be useful to Bless/get Advantage. Normal difficulty 70% to hit -> Advantage becomes 91% (+21%) Easy difficulty 80% to hit -> Advantage becomes 96% (+16% = still pretty powerful) I would likely still make use of Bless/Faerie Fire/etc if I was playing on normal or easy. This option breaks down a bit when you consider that skills you don't have proficiency in aren't affected: my character not proficient in persuasion will have the exact same bonus in Story and Very Hard. But this is a much smaller issue than either highground/backstab Advantage or adjusting enemy AC & HP to change difficulty.
|
|
|
|
|
|
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Jan 2021
|
I've brought it up before. An adjusted proficiency table would do the game a lot of good. (Only adjusting levels 1-4). Table Level 1-4 +3 Level 5-8 +3 Level 9-12 +4 Level 13-16 +5 And as it's been brought up in the past, adjustments to proficiency are a good base for scaling difficulties. This would be a relatively elegant solution for difficulty options that accounts for skill checks, attack rolls, and spell save DCs (something that high ground/backstab doesn't).
Story: Proficiency +6
Easy: Proficiency +4
Normal: +2
Hard: no bonus
Very Hard: -2
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
|
If the goal is to reduce misses, I don't really understand why it would be better to add a +2 to proficiency rather than a +2 on everything for everyone (normal difficulty).
The balance between classes would remains the original one and we'll miss less often...
Last edited by Maximuuus; 10/04/21 07:30 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
