D&D General Explain Bounded Accuracy to Me (As if I Was Five)

[Shardstone]

I rather feel that it would be quite evident to most observers that the bounded accuracy is a core design feature of 5e, permeating the whole play experience, whilst the halfling art isn't.

Did you watch that video upthread? 5e is not bounded.

 

[Vaalingrade]

External factors absolutely matter. But I certainly don’t think 5e would have had as much broad appeal without bounded accuracy. The constantly-inflating bonuses of 3e and 4e turned off a significant number of dedicated RPG fans. The game was never going to win over a more casual crowd with that kind of math.

Never underestimate the average person’s aversion to math above a 3rd grade level.

Only the dedicated fans care about 'flat math'.

As evidenced by the fact that 5e still has math everywhere, just on in a way that makes your character feel like they've improved.

Praising BA for being something the average person would care about is like saying getting rid of the six ability scores and switching to 2d10 would make it the most popular game ever because those are the hot button issue keeping people from playing D&D.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Why is giving an option a problem?

The quality of options matters. Like making feats optional instead of assumed, it just puts creating a worse play experience on the table for no positive gain.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

The quality of options matters. Like making feats optional instead of assumed, it just puts creating a worse play experience on the table for no positive gain.

Except it is not worse. It just isn't your personal preference.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Except it is not worse. It just isn't your personal preference.

Everything is personal preference. Okay, so now we can never criticize anything.

 

[Shardstone]

Everything is personal preference. Okay, so now we can never criticize anything.

At last, peace comes to EnWorld. No more arguments! Lisan al-Gaib!!!!!

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Everything is personal preference. Okay, so now we can never criticize anything.

The thing is, even with bounded accuracy, you don't need to put goblins against high level characters. But if I want, I can. That I can do that in no way negatively affects you.

 

[Vaalingrade]

The thing is, even with bounded accuracy, you don't need to put goblins against high level characters. But if I want, I can. That I can do that in no way negatively affects you.

Just like the ruling over rules issue, the issue comes up when you're a player entering a game not being run by someone you know and whose idea of the game aligns with you and enter the CalvinBall arena of pickup games where there's no consistency and plenty of undocumented pitfalls.

The issue doesn't have to affect me directly for me to critique it.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Just like the ruling over rules issue, the issue comes up when you're a player entering a game not being run by someone you know and whose idea of the game aligns with you and enter the CalvinBall arena of pickup games where there's no consistency and plenty of undocumented pitfalls.

The issue in such a scenario is incompatible preferences, not what those preferences exactly are. This is not an issue with the game, exact in the sense that it doesn't have super narrowly defined way to play. (Which is probably a requirement for mass appeal.)

The issue doesn't have to affect me directly for me to critique it.

Everything is personal preference. Okay, so now we can never criticize anything.

But it is just you personal preference, like you admitted. So fighting goblins at high level might not be an issue for someone else. It is not a real problem.

 

[Vaalingrade]

The other difference of course is that this isn't just an option, it's often presented as a selling point.