Timeline for What does it mean to break Bounded Accuracy?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
17 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 1, 2022 at 8:29 | vote | accept | Nobody the Hobgoblin | ||
| Jul 29, 2022 at 17:45 | history | became hot network question | |||
| Jul 29, 2022 at 17:42 | answer | added | Draconis | timeline score: 6 | |
| Jul 29, 2022 at 17:12 | comment | added | Nobody the Hobgoblin | @Dave Yes, it seems to but what about Expertise then? WotC seems to have no problem that Expertise by design is pretty much breaking it, if breaking it means automatic success. A mid level Roge can have +12 or better on it with min 10 rolls, so min 22 result, autosuccss on hard checks. To make it interesting for the rogue/bard you have to amp it up so it's nearly impossible to everyone else | |
| Jul 29, 2022 at 16:14 | comment | added | Dave | To me it seems obvious that it would apply to skill checks given that the fundamental mechanics, roll 20 with modifiers against an action specific "success" number, are the same between to hit and skill checks. They're typically the same, even in detail, in that the typical bonuses are ability modifier and proficiency modifier. | |
| Jul 29, 2022 at 11:30 | answer | added | anon | timeline score: 12 | |
| Jul 29, 2022 at 10:44 | comment | added | Nobody the Hobgoblin | @Pepijn This sounds like a great start to an actual answer… | |
| Jul 29, 2022 at 10:41 | comment | added | anon | The question linked by Thomas seems to cover that aspect, its answer explains that in previous editions characters could easily get completely sidelined if they don't happen to have the right skill proficiences because they could never naturally meet the skill DC. Bounded accuracy for skills wasn't necessarily implemented to completely avoid high skill bonuses, but by keeping them mostly on the low end the DM can set DCs that still have a chance of failure for those with higher bonuses WITHOUT having to make them so high that other characters with no bonuses can no longer make the check. | |
| Jul 29, 2022 at 9:00 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackRPG/status/1552942010838941696 | ||
| Jul 29, 2022 at 7:05 | history | edited | Nobody the Hobgoblin | CC BY-SA 4.0 | added 368 characters in body |
| Jul 29, 2022 at 7:03 | comment | added | Nobody the Hobgoblin | As stated, I am most interested what it would mean to break bounded accuracy. For example, you have a question here linked about how it matters for to hit/AC, but the concept is wider, also including skills, as I understand. Does it mean if you get a high enough bonus somehow to auto-success or make someone autofail? | |
| Jul 29, 2022 at 6:23 | comment | added | Thomas Markov | This question, though focused on one particular mechanic, might also be a dupe: Why are armor bonuses considered to break Bounded Accuracy? | |
| Jul 29, 2022 at 6:21 | comment | added | Thomas Markov | This question is very highly scored from the early days of 5e, and is probably a good dupe candidate, though the framing is slightly different: Are peoples' competencies really as flat in D&D 5e as its math suggests?, or possibly, between this one and the one Kirt linked we’ve got a dupe. | |
| Jul 29, 2022 at 5:22 | history | edited | Nobody the Hobgoblin | CC BY-SA 4.0 | edited title |
| Jul 29, 2022 at 5:13 | history | edited | Nobody the Hobgoblin | CC BY-SA 4.0 | added 68 characters in body |
| Jul 29, 2022 at 5:01 | comment | added | Kirt | related, possible dupe: Why is bounded accuracy called bounded accuracy? | |
| Jul 29, 2022 at 4:36 | history | asked | Nobody the Hobgoblin | CC BY-SA 4.0 |