Quote from: Turanil;754596Okay I understand, thanks. I also bought Dead in Thay PDF, in which I could look at the latest play-test rules.

In reading the rules and the monsters, I thought that the whole seemed well done. Nonetheless, it's not retro-compatible with any other edition of the game. Yet, concerning my monster book on the work, it seems it could still be usable in 5e, if I only give the monsters the reduced AC value. Well, that would make for three different stats on the AC line. One for FH&W (and other retro-OSR that make use of ascending AC), another for 1e/2e (i.e. the same AC but descending), and lastly one for 5e (basing my best guess on the monsters presented in Dead in Thay).

I still have other questions. Saves of monsters, and BAB of monsters: how are they determined? Is it enough for saving throws to just list their stats (Str, Dex, etc.)? Concerning BAB it looks like I should also propose a reduced BAB?

FWIW, last year I ran A1-4 using 5e's rules.  One guy really wanted to play but was only familiar with AD&D, and didn't want to figure out or spend the time on creating a PC in 5e.  So he ran his AD&D1e cleric with the rest of the group of 5e characters.  The only thing we changed was converting his AC to ascending, and replaced saving throws with ability checks.  Still used AD&D's spells per level and spell descriptions, still used xp and hit point progression, etc.  That was it.  He was a little underpowered compared to his 5e companions, but it still worked.

Personally, I don't see how you could get more backwards compatible than that outside of just rewriting AD&D all over again, which obviously can't happen.  I imagine monsters would be the exact same--just convert AC to ascending and replace saving throws with ability checks.  Lower level monsters would probably be more of cannon fodder in 5e than they are in AD&D, but higher level monsters would be tougher I think, due to he higher AC values.  An AC -3 (23) in 5e is nearly unhittable.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;754636FWIW, last year I ran A1-4 using 5e's rules.  One guy really wanted to play but was only familiar with AD&D, and didn't want to figure out or spend the time on creating a PC in 5e.  So he ran his AD&D1e cleric with the rest of the group of 5e characters.  The only thing we changed was converting his AC to ascending, and replaced saving throws with ability checks.  Still used AD&D's spells per level and spell descriptions, still used xp and hit point progression, etc.  That was it.  He was a little underpowered compared to his 5e companions, but it still worked.

This is a great thing to hear!! It means my own game won't become obsolete when 5e is released. If I understand well, character made in my own game could be ran in 5e. Great!

Quote from: Turanil;754787This is a great thing to hear!! It means my own game won't become obsolete when 5e is released. If I understand well, character made in my own game could be ran in 5e. Great!

Tabletop games aren't software. If you enjoy playing them, then they never become obsolete.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;7544055e uses bounded accuracy, so the total bonuses you get from things is toned down from every other edition (except ability modifiers strangely).

In 5e, the highest attack bonus a fighter gets at level 20 is +6.  And magic items are mostly only +1, with +2 weapons being very rare.  The purpose is exactly like you said, so larger groups of lower level monster are still a threat to higher level PCs.

As a comparison between 10th level fighters:

AD&D: Needs a 12 on the attack matrix for AC 0 (effective +8 to hit).  Probably has a +3 weapon by this point.  Another +3 from ability (either naturally has a high STR, or has a gauntlets of ogre power by now).  So that's a total of roughly +14 to hit.

5e: +3 proficiency bonus.  +4 bonus from ability (probably has 18 STR by now).  +1 bonus from a weapon, maybe a +2 tops.  Total +9 to hit tops.

So in order to hit a creature with AC -3 (or 23), the AD&D fighter would need to roll a 9 or higher.

In order for the 5e fighter to hit an AC 17, he would need to roll an 8.

So in terms of what's actually needed to roll to hit, it isn't much different

This bounded accuracy thing is pure gold, in my opinion.

I think it is a huge improvement.

Quote from: Turanil;754787This is a great thing to hear!! It means my own game won't become obsolete when 5e is released. If I understand well, character made in my own game could be ran in 5e. Great!

Heh, I'll be honest and say what I'm most likely to use FH&W for is as a source of interesting character classes, so that'd probably what I'll end up doing.

Quote from: Bill;754825This bounded accuracy thing is pure gold, in my opinion.

I think it is a huge improvement.

Me too.  I can't tell you how awesome it is to feel like you have the entire stable of monsters at your disposal for adventures that might normally seem to be higher level than what you want to use.  It makes the dungeon feel way more organic.  In my current dungeon, the levels where the PCs will probably be around level 7 or 8, it just made sense from an organic/worldbuilding/continuity sense to have a cavern home to a clan of kobolds.  You really couldn't do that in previous editions without it being a cakewalk for the PCs unless you threw a ton of them in there and loaded the place up with traps or something, and still have it as a combat challenge*.

Now, with 5e?  A simple squad of a half dozen kobolds and a dozen giant rats will cause an experienced party to hesitate pretty seriously.


*story time.  Once, a long time ago, one of my buddies PCs was a barbarian with a girdle of giant strength.  We were in tunnels leading to a dragon's lair and were beset upon by a horde of kobolds.  They could only fit through the tunnel two at a time.  My buddy just said, "I flick them as they come in."  Didn't even do a regular attack.  they were so weak compared to us that each flick killed one automatically, and he just kept doing it until the rest ended up fleeing.  Sort of boring

Quote from: Sacrosanct;754830Me too.  I can't tell you how awesome it is to feel like you have the entire stable of monsters at your disposal for adventures that might normally seem to be higher level than what you want to use.  It makes the dungeon feel way more organic.  In my current dungeon, the levels where the PCs will probably be around level 7 or 8, it just made sense from an organic/worldbuilding/continuity sense to have a cavern home to a clan of kobolds.  You really couldn't do that in previous editions without it being a cakewalk for the PCs unless you threw a ton of them in there and loaded the place up with traps or something, and still have it as a combat challenge*.

Now, with 5e?  A simple squad of a half dozen kobolds and a dozen giant rats will cause an experienced party to hesitate pretty seriously.


*story time.  Once, a long time ago, one of my buddies PCs was a barbarian with a girdle of giant strength.  We were in tunnels leading to a dragon's lair and were beset upon by a horde of kobolds.  They could only fit through the tunnel two at a time.  My buddy just said, "I flick them as they come in."  Didn't even do a regular attack.  they were so weak compared to us that each flick killed one automatically, and he just kept doing it until the rest ended up fleeing.  Sort of boring

I will probably prefer the 5E 'power curve'

'Mighty Hero' is fine for me; I don't really play dnd to be a 'Greater God'

Can someone tell me what "bounded accuracy" means?

By the way, by which method is determined a character's attack roll bonus? In Dead in Thay there is several 6th level character stat-locks. At 6th level, they all have a +2 proficiency bonus. The fighter and barbarian get a +7 because of their 20 Strength score. But then, other characters, with much lower strength scores (including two who get a -1 penalty to hit), with classes (druids, mages, etc.) that traditionally had a slower attack roll progression, also get +4, +5 or +8. SO WHAT?

Quote from: Sacrosanct;754830Me too.  I can't tell you how awesome it is to feel like you have the entire stable of monsters at your disposal for adventures that might normally seem to be higher level than what you want to use.  It makes the dungeon feel way more organic.  In my current dungeon, the levels where the PCs will probably be around level 7 or 8, it just made sense from an organic/worldbuilding/continuity sense to have a cavern home to a clan of kobolds.  You really couldn't do that in previous editions without it being a cakewalk for the PCs unless you threw a ton of them in there and loaded the place up with traps or something, and still have it as a combat challenge*.

Now, with 5e?  A simple squad of a half dozen kobolds and a dozen giant rats will cause an experienced party to hesitate pretty seriously.

I don't see that as a good thing. If I'm 7th or 8th level I'm going to be awfully disappointed at finding a level full of kobolds.

There's a gazillion monsters for D&D. Why make it so you keep fighting the low level ones that people are tired of, over and over and over?

The combat system is based around a d20. It should use as much of that as possible, while it looks like the opposite is true in 5e...

Quote from: Turanil;755021Can someone tell me what "bounded accuracy" means?

By the way, by which method is determined a character's attack roll bonus? In Dead in Thay there is several 6th level character stat-locks. At 6th level, they all have a +2 proficiency bonus. The fighter and barbarian get a +7 because of their 20 Strength score. But then, other characters, with much lower strength scores (including two who get a -1 penalty to hit), with classes (druids, mages, etc.) that traditionally had a slower attack roll progression, also get +4, +5 or +8. SO WHAT?

There is no 'slower attack progression' in 5th edition, you either get the proficiency bonus with your weapon or not. A lot of the Dead in Thay pre-gens use finesses weapons and so add there Dex to attack rather than strength.

Quote from: JeremyR;755026I don't see that as a good thing. If I'm 7th or 8th level I'm going to be awfully disappointed at finding a level full of kobolds.

There's a gazillion monsters for D&D. Why make it so you keep fighting the low level ones that people are tired of, over and over and over?

The combat system is based around a d20. It should use as much of that as possible, while it looks like the opposite is true in 5e...

The part you are missing is that you don't HAVE to keep using the same old monsters. If you want to leave kobolds and rats behind and just use tougher monsters then nothing is stopping you.

For those that like the idea, they can still use weaker monsters in greater numbers if they fit the campaign better.

This gives you more options to play with instead of less.

Quote from: JeremyR;755026I don't see that as a good thing. If I'm 7th or 8th level I'm going to be awfully disappointed at finding a level full of kobolds.

There's a gazillion monsters for D&D. Why make it so you keep fighting the low level ones that people are tired of, over and over and over?

The combat system is based around a d20. It should use as much of that as possible, while it looks like the opposite is true in 5e...

Look at it the other way. At second or third level you can be fighting demons and shit.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;755032The part you are missing is that you don't HAVE to keep using the same old monsters. If you want to leave kobolds and rats behind and just use tougher monsters then nothing is stopping you.

For those that like the idea, they can still use weaker monsters in greater numbers if they fit the campaign better.

This gives you more options to play with instead of less.

This is exactly right.  No one says you have to have kobolds.  However, if they happen to fit the dungeon ecology for that area, you can have them without worrying about it being just another boring cakewalk for higher parties.

That image in the 1e DMG with the green dragon fighting the kobolds?  Now it's actually a thing worth playing out.  And I like to have that option.

Quote from: Turanil;755021Can someone tell me what "bounded accuracy" means?

By the way, by which method is determined a character's attack roll bonus? In Dead in Thay there is several 6th level character stat-locks. At 6th level, they all have a +2 proficiency bonus. The fighter and barbarian get a +7 because of their 20 Strength score. But then, other characters, with much lower strength scores (including two who get a -1 penalty to hit), with classes (druids, mages, etc.) that traditionally had a slower attack roll progression, also get +4, +5 or +8. SO WHAT?

In 5e, your bonus to hit is pretty much determined by two main things (3 if you count magic weapon bonuses): proficiency and ability modifier.  For weapons you are proficient in, you get to add your proficiency bonus as determined by your level.  Then you add the ability modifier that's applicable (strength for most melee weapons, dex for ranged and finesse weapons).

Quote from: LibraryLass;755046Look at it the other way. At second or third level you can be fighting demons and shit.

hehe, well, not exactly.  It's not so much true in reverse unless there is a horde of party members.  High level monsters like demons often have fear, area of effect and summoning spells that will still make mincemeat of even larger numbers of low level opponents.  The only scenarios where I've seen a larger group of low level PCs take out a dejmon is theorycrafting arena battle when only a straight DPR comparison was made.  And since the game never actually plays that way, it is sort of moot.

I don't understand what people are talking about when they debate the power balance between monsters and PC's on adventures. The world doesn't owe your characters a series of fights with opponents just-tough-enough-to-hang-around-a-couple-of-rounds-but-not-tough-enough-to-kill-you. The troll who lives under the bridge is a troll whether you are 1st level or 10th.

Quote from: Larsdangly;755069I don't understand what people are talking about when they debate the power balance between monsters and PC's on adventures. The world doesn't owe your characters a series of fights with opponents just-tough-enough-to-hang-around-a-couple-of-rounds-but-not-tough-enough-to-kill-you. The troll who lives under the bridge is a troll whether you are 1st level or 10th.

While I agree with the sentiment, there is I think still a huge advantage to avoiding having fights being utterly one sided if they are not in the right CR to level band.

The problem as I see it is every edition of D&D has made level more and more dominant in terms of power creep. 5th seems to be winding that back so the game feels more like it was in TSR days.