|
Post by ayslyn on Aug 25, 2016 1:53:41 GMT -8
Well, I don't know that it's a given. We've been running through Ghosts of Dragonspear Castle, and we're up to eighth level, well into the range that Stu's experience shows a slow down, and we've yet to encounter a combat that's lasted more than thirty or so minutes. Similarly, watching Acquisitions Inc, none of the episodes are longer than an hour-ish. And, while AI is only four guys strong, our group hosts a full six players.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Aug 25, 2016 7:50:15 GMT -8
Well, I don't know that it's a given. We've been running through Ghosts of Dragonspear Castle, and we're up to eighth level, well into the range that Stu's experience shows a slow down, and we've yet to encounter a combat that's lasted more than thirty or so minutes. Similarly, watching Acquisitions Inc, none of the episodes are longer than an hour-ish. And, while AI is only four guys strong, our group hosts a full six players. You see I'd say that 5e has attempted to address the second part of the issue (from my earlier post). By reducing the number of per segment combat options thus reducing the math load / analysis paralysis ( depending on ones perspective or, perhaps and more likely, a combination of both). An interesting experiment would be to retcon 5e back to 2e HP for PC's and HD for 'Monsters' and see if the total combat time is satisfactorily reduced. I don't think such a change would significantly disturb the internal math of the game as it would be a universal reduction in total HP for all parties. Aaron
|
|
|
Post by Probie Tim on Aug 26, 2016 6:03:06 GMT -8
Probie Tim should change his name on the forum back to something with Tim in it. He ain't just the new guy to me, he deserves his actual name. Hah! The listeners demand it. I'm going to print and frame this post.
|
|
|
Post by ayslyn on Aug 26, 2016 8:24:31 GMT -8
Well.... Listener....
<.< >.>
^.^
|
|
|
Post by Probie Tim on Aug 29, 2016 5:51:43 GMT -8
I disagree with your conclusion, Tim. I don't know if it's so much a conclusion as it is an observation. Here's something else to consider: in second edition, HP bonuses from constitution greater than +2 are only available to fighters. And, at that, you have to have a constitution of 15 to get a +1 bonus! So a fighter with a 17 constitution gets a +3 bonus to HP; a cleric with the same score only gets +2. Contrast that against 5E where a +1 bonus is given to a score as low as 12, and any character with a constitution of 17 gets +3 to HP each level. Again, not saying it is the problem, just that it might be part of the problem. Feats and other mechanics are also part of the problem, undoubtedly.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Aug 29, 2016 8:40:45 GMT -8
I disagree with your conclusion, Tim. I don't know if it's so much a conclusion as it is an observation. Here's something else to consider: in second edition, HP bonuses from constitution greater than +2 are only available to fighters. And, at that, you have to have a constitution of 15 to get a +1 bonus! So a fighter with a 17 constitution gets a +3 bonus to HP; a cleric with the same score only gets +2. Contrast that against 5E where a +1 bonus is given to a score as low as 12, and any character with a constitution of 17 gets +3 to HP each level. Again, not saying it is the problem, just that it might be part of the problem. Feats and other mechanics are also part of the problem, undoubtedly. I concur . . . Aaron
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2016 14:16:41 GMT -8
If you really want to feel some HP whiplash, check out the HP for colossal dragons! I want to say an ancient red had somewhere around 135 HP.
But yes, the universal ability modifier - where you gain +3 to whatever a stat does, regardless of what the stat was or what it did - was the harbinger of crazy HP totals. If your Strength bonus adds to your damage, and your Con bonus adds to your HP per level, and both of those numbers are roughly the same, then the average person (or monster) can absorb a number of hits equal to their level (or Hit Dice). When your fighter can take fifteen hits before dropping, and (even worse) you can get healed up to full between every fight, then it's going to take a pretty long combat before you even start to feel threatened.
|
|
|
Post by ilina on Sept 11, 2016 4:00:35 GMT -8
if you used 2e health numbers with 5e damage numbers. combats would definitely be faster, but also deadlier. it becomes a matter of nuking the mooks first. because the mooks are now an extremely significant threat.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2016 23:21:31 GMT -8
The angrygm recently put out a good article on his site about gaming statistics where he went over how to calculate and determine how long it will take said average fighter to defeat an average creature. His findings were enlightening in that you could ditch the listed HP numbers in the book and instead asign HP based on the number of turns you want the fight to last on average. It's really a good read and a nice little brush up on Math.
Using these sorts of analytical tools, you could make your game return to an old school deadliness while still using the new system. Some tweaking and effort required.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Sept 12, 2016 8:17:43 GMT -8
if you used 2e health numbers with 5e damage numbers. combats would definitely be faster, but also deadlier. it becomes a matter of nuking the mooks first. because the mooks are now an extremely significant threat. . . . And that's where your low level one or two shot Mage and ranged offense/2-handed melee Ranger comes in . . . To nuke the mooks and clear a path for the 1 to 1 melee specialists (while the rogue slips round the back). As for the Priest? Well, specialist priests were such a hit or miss with so many options dependent on deity - in combat their granted powers could be devastating or totally useless. Aaron
|
|
maxinstuff
Supporter
Posts: 1,939
Preferred Game Systems: DCC RPG, Shadowrun 5e, Savage Worlds, GURPS 4e, HERO 6e, Mongoose Traveller
Favorite Species of Monkey: Proboscis
|
Post by maxinstuff on Sept 17, 2016 20:38:46 GMT -8
I was just messing with Swords & Wizardry this morning. It too stops the hit dice at lvl 9 (you just get +1 HP instead).
It's also 1500 xp to advance to 2nd level. That's a lot of fucking rats man.
|
|
|
Post by ilina on Sept 20, 2016 0:01:32 GMT -8
I was just messing with Swords & Wizardry this morning. It too stops the hit dice at lvl 9 (you just get +1 HP instead). It's also 1500 xp to advance to 2nd level. That's a lot of fucking rats man. old School D&D balanced the different class and multiclass builds with differing XP requirements proportionate to the classes power. which lead to human thieves with 16+ Dexterity leveling the fastest because humans gained an experience bonus and uncapped advancement. but many people removed the level caps from demihumans which merely lead to a huge amount of elven characters.
|
|
|
Post by ayslyn on Sept 20, 2016 4:04:05 GMT -8
humans gained an experience bonus This would have been a house rule. It was not RAW.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Sept 20, 2016 7:58:18 GMT -8
humans gained an experience bonus This would have been a house rule. It was not RAW. Yep, experience bonus was for having high attributes related to class. Plus you had minimum attributes to qualify for a class - so no parties with 3 Paladins, 2 Rangers and a gaggle of Mages Aaron
|
|
|
Post by ilina on Sept 20, 2016 19:02:27 GMT -8
i remember specialist magi having huge requirements. most difficult splatbook class i remember to Qualify for was the Spellcloak. you needed a 15 dexterity, a 13 wisdom, a 17 intelligence and a 17 charisma. but it was a less MAD assassin/Illusionist that really didn't care about strength and had so many low level arcane defenses that constitution wasn't needed.
|
|