D&D NEXT: Infinite Posts of the Abyss

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Traditional Games > D&D NEXT: Infinite Posts of the Abyss

Strength of Many: Jan 13, 2012; The butthurt is the life... and it shall be mine.

LazyAngel posted:

Just a thought on the wizard nonsense for my campaign-in-planning.

What does anyone think of forcing Wizards to buy levels of prepared spells with spell slots? Probably at 2:1, so sacrificing a single, say, level 3 slot lets them prepare 6 levels of spells. It means they're still the most versatile caster, but have to balance between having access to versatility at the expense of power.

I would take less toys away from the unsuspecting Wizard player and give more toys to the non-casters instead. All it does is encourage them to not play a Wizard or penalize them for their choice when their intentions could be more fun, group-oriented and less game destroying.

Now, if the player in question IS going to be a dick if they're a Wizard then talk to them and tell them to knock it off or play something else. Or drop them from the game if they are so disruptive.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 11:02

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 14, 2024 01:41

moths: Aug 25, 2004; I would also still appreciate some danger.

Kai Tave posted:

There, problem solved.

I'm still confused by how many people are jumping in with "well it's not good buuut we have to play it, so..."

AlphaDog posted:

edit: This goes way back to the first thread. This how I thought they might actually pull off modules - have cheap pamphlet/PDF mechanics-only supplements for stuff like psionics, and bundle those with the appropriate setting guides.

I've said before that the dev team doesn't understand modular design (and wow they don't!) but I wonder if Mearls actually intended for Quake-style "mods" and assumed mod was short for "modular" instead of "modification." His misunderstanding of how modules change the core game work better in the context of how DooM mods affect DooM. He still managed to touch on a good concept then ruthlessly cock it up, which seems to be a running theme in Next design.

I think that's what's so compelling about 5e: it seems so very close to being OK that we want to fix all the broken parts, like back when you started dating and thought people worked that way.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 11:53

Boing: Jul 12, 2005; trapped in custom title factory, send help

I'm having fun playing 5e because I'm playing the party Wizard and solve all of the problems, while the Fighter and Barbarian are for some reason content with hitting things that are in my way.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 11:59

ProfessorCirno: Feb 17, 2011; The strongest! The smartest!
The rightest!

Babylon Astronaut posted:

I think they are trying to make us forget Greyhawk and Forgotten Realms are two different things, unless they really have officially been mashed together somewhere.

Arivia posted:

There have always been connections, but literally taking one of Greyhawk's signature villains and plopping it in the Realms to the detriment of anything pre-existing and similar in the Realms is a new, and terrifying, thing.

Mearls, as part of his OSR CRED, is a big Greyhawk fan. This is absolutely not the only time you're going to see bleeding between the two. Every new edition changes FR to fit it, and this edition is Mike Mearls' D&D, so expect a whoooole lot of (likely small but numerous) changes.

And you know what? Sorry Arivia. But most FR fans are going to completely eat it up, changes and all. They probably won't even notice the changes!

# ? Sep 12, 2014 12:00

Angrymog: Jan 30, 2012; Really Madcats

ProfessorCirno posted:

And you know what? Sorry Arivia. But most FR fans are going to completely eat it up, changes and all. They probably won't even notice the changes!

I thought that some FR fans went ballistic at the changes to FR for 4E? (RUINED 4EVA!!!!OMGBBQ!!! and all that), or do you mean that they won't notice any changes to the ToEE stuff?

# ? Sep 12, 2014 12:27

neonchameleon: Nov 14, 2012

Angrymog posted:

I thought that some FR fans went ballistic at the changes to FR for 4E? (RUINED 4EVA!!!!OMGBBQ!!! and all that), or do you mean that they won't notice any changes to the ToEE stuff?

The Realms are a setting which contains mountains of third rate schlock in its background. It appeals to the sort of people who like mountains of background and don't care if it is third rate schlock.

4e Realms were a much saner, more sensible, and more manageable setting. Much better for playing in. But people who want a setting that's good for playing in don't pick the late 2e or late 3.5 Realms. They pick something like the Nentir Vale or Eberron. 4e turned the Realms into a setting that the people who liked either PoLand or Eberron would like - and I'll say both are better settings than the Realms. But people who like good settings wouldn't touch the Realms anyway, and people who like the Realms had their toy taken away.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 12:34

Jack the Lad: Jan 20, 2009; Feed the Pubs

Boing posted:

I'm having fun playing 5e because I'm playing the party Wizard and solve all of the problems, while the Fighter and Barbarian are for some reason content with hitting things that are in my way.

To be fair this is a genuine thing. Like, I've had this exact experience too. It boggles my mind, but there really are people content to say "I hit it with my axe" and do nothing else.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 13:08

Daetrin: Mar 21, 2013

Jack the Lad posted:

To be fair this is a genuine thing. Like, I've had this exact experience too. It boggles my mind, but there really are people content to say "I hit it with my axe" and do nothing else.

I once had a player who spent the entire time reading the PH/DMG/MM/etc and only had his character do two things. "I sharpen my axe!" if it was noncombat, or "I hit it with my axe!" if it was combat.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 13:38

Elector_Nerdlingen: Sep 27, 2004

Daetrin posted:

I once had a player who spent the entire time reading the PH/DMG/MM/etc and only had his character do two things. "I sharpen my axe!" if it was noncombat, or "I hit it with my axe!" if it was combat.

I watched a dude play 4e only making loving basic attacks. That's just what he'd done the few times he'd played before (in AD&D, I think). He wasn't very effective, didn't have much fun, and wasn't interested in finding out why. Like, dude isn't a weird grognard trying to make a point, he was just kind of disengaged with the game, probably because he'd rather be playing "drink the booze". I'm pretty sure you can't fix that with rules.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 13:59

Boing: Jul 12, 2005; trapped in custom title factory, send help

If people who want to play wizards have fun playing wizards, and the people who want to play fighters have fun playing fighters, then I guess everything is fine?

(apart from all the problems that aren't related to class balance)

# ? Sep 12, 2014 14:11

Elector_Nerdlingen: Sep 27, 2004

I contend that the game shouldn't cater to people who aren't actually interested in playing it.

I know, I know, geek social fallacy # whatever means everyone is included, but for gently caress's sake are people really that starved for interaction that attending game night to say "I attack" every 10 minutes is the highlight of their week? Is this really a big enough demographic that the D&D rulebooks need to set whole classes aside for it? Can't these people just get together with their friends and drink beer and talk poo poo instead?

I don't want to know the answer, do I?

# ? Sep 12, 2014 14:44

Jack the Lad: Jan 20, 2009; Feed the Pubs

I don't think those players need to be catered to; if they want that play experience they can use any class, however complicated, and just make basic attacks or use the same maneuver over and over.

The mechanics should be there to support people who want to engage with them.

If you don't want to engage with the mechanics, you don't need mechanics to support that; you also don't need to actively not have mechanics.

A good illustration of this is that the Champion is strictly worse than a Battle Master who only uses Feinting Attack.

Here's an effort/math post I made about it on ENWorld:

Me posted:

The Battle Master is strictly better than the Champion, and I'm afraid anyone who thinks otherwise is making a lazy, face-value judgement.

The increased critical abilities are extremely weak:

At level 3, your average damage on a hit goes from 11.8 to 12.2.
At level 15, your average damage on a hit goes from 13.3 to 14.6.

Compare that to maneuvers. The simplest and best maneuver to use if you just want to increase your damage output is Feinting Attack, which gives you advantage on the attack you use it with and adds your superiority die to the damage if it hits.

Against an AC13 opponent (like an orc), at level 3 (when you pick a subclass):

The Battle Master will deal, on average: 7.8 with a normal attack and 15.2 with feinting attack.
The Champion will deal, on average: 8.2 with every attack.

The Battle Master has 4 superiority dice. Each time he uses one to make a feinting attack, he deals 7 more damage than the Champion in that round. After making 4 feinting attacks, he's 28 damage ahead and back down to 7.8 per attack.

However, the Champion only deals 0.4 more per normal attack than the Battle Master, and it will take another 70 attacks for him to match the damage the Champion has done.

That's 24 more 3-round encounters, without even a short rest, even if he gets to attack every round every encounter, for the Champion to catch up.

How many of you run 25 encounters back to back without a short rest? Because if our two Fighters get even a single short rest, the Battle Master regains his superiority dice and leaps another 24 encounters ahead.

Note also the much higher value of front-loaded/burst/nova damage. A Battle Master's feinting attack can be expected to drop an orc in a single hit, for instance, whereas a Champion takes two - and a dead enemy can't hurt you.

Note also the fact that you have 2 other maneuvers available to you. If you use 2 for feinting attacks and put yourself merely 33 attacks/12 encounters ahead, you still have 2 superiority dice with which to disarm or frighten your enemies. These will themselves add 3.15 damage per attack to your efforts, putting you another 6 encounters ahead.

Jack the Lad fucked around with this message at 15:19 on Sep 12, 2014

# ? Sep 12, 2014 15:11

moths: Aug 25, 2004; I would also still appreciate some danger.

Boing posted:

If people who want to play wizards have fun playing wizards, and the people who want to play fighters have fun playing fighters, then I guess everything is fine?

D&D trains people who don't want to play to play fighters.

Players who actually want to play fighters are encouraged to not play.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 15:15

Babylon Astronaut: Apr 19, 2012

Jack the Lad posted:

A good illustration of this is that the Champion is strictly worse than a Battle Master who only uses Feinting Attack.

I agree with your analysis, but I think it's a bit off. Doing massive damage every once in a while at the cost of doing less damage most of the time isn't that bad. It might not be optimal, but it's a play style. What makes improved critical classes ball bustingly terrible is you have no control at all of when you do big damage, so most of your awesome strikes are a waste making it feel even worse than if you didn't crit. You're constantly saying "gee, I wish I rolled that 20 when I needed it." That's the ennui of a fighter: having no control at all, even of your specialty.

I definitely think you are correct, but my point is bumping critical damage to make the average in line with the Battle Master would not fix the class.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 16:11

Jack the Lad: Jan 20, 2009; Feed the Pubs

It's not massive damage, though. Crits are really weak in 5e; at best it's +8.33 damage.

In fact, 'doing massive damage every once in a while at the cost of doing less damage most of the time' more accurately describes the Battle Master than the Champion - except the Battle Master can control when it happens.

I agree with you that bumping critical damage to make the average in line with the Battle Master would not fix the class.

(It also takes something like a 12-20 crit range to do so.)

# ? Sep 12, 2014 16:31

Serdain: Aug 13, 2007; dicksdicksdicks

Jack the Lad posted:

It's not massive damage, though. Crits are really weak in 5e; at best it's +8.33 damage.

In fact, 'doing massive damage every once in a while at the cost of doing less damage most of the time' more accurately describes the Battle Master than the Champion - except the Battle Master can control when it happens.

I agree with you that bumping critical damage to make the average in line with the Battle Master would not fix the class.

(It also takes something like a 12-20 crit range to do so.)

JTL, what is the DPR comparison like for a frenzying half-orc barbarian with enough fighter levels to get a 19-20 crit range and super-crits, assuming it is going to be getting advantage every turn with Reckless Attack? Could being human w/ extra feat improve this (Great Weapon Master, maybe)?

I think this would make the Barbarian level 12...*edited to add super-crits from barb level 9*

Serdain fucked around with this message at 17:00 on Sep 12, 2014

# ? Sep 12, 2014 16:50

Ferrinus: Jun 19, 2003; i'm finding this quite easy, i guess in part because i'm a fast type but also because i have a coherent mental model of the world

Jack the Lad posted:

I don't think those players need to be catered to; if they want that play experience they can use any class, however complicated, and just make basic attacks or use the same maneuver over and over.

The mechanics should be there to support people who want to engage with them.

If you don't want to engage with the mechanics, you don't need mechanics to support that; you also don't need to actively not have mechanics.

A good illustration of this is that the Champion is strictly worse than a Battle Master who only uses Feinting Attack.

Here's an effort/math post I made about it on ENWorld:

Does this hold up at level 20, when both characters are making 4 attacks and so the Battlemaster is out of dice (though, admittedly, a shitload of damage up) after a single action surge?

# ? Sep 12, 2014 16:57

Jack the Lad: Jan 20, 2009; Feed the Pubs

Serdain posted:

JTL, what is the DPR comparison like for a frenzying half-orc barbarian with enough fighter levels to get a 19-20 crit range, assuming it is going to be getting advantage every turn with Reckless Attack? Could being human w/ extra feat improve this (Great Weapon Master, maybe)?

I think this would make the Barbarian level 12...

I'll do the math in 2-3 hours. Being human is no benefit to your DPR though, because anyone can take Great Weapon Master.

Bear in mind that Frenzy is in no way whatsoever sustainable across multiple encounters:

Jack the Lad posted:

So 5e Barbarians who go the Berserker route have a feature that lets them go Super Saiyan 2 by upgrading their Rage to a Frenzy. This lets them make an extra attack as a bonus action on each of their turns, but when the Frenzy ends they gain a level of Exhaustion, which is a Really Big Deal:

Especially as it takes a Long Rest to recover from the effects of each and every individual level of Exhaustion. Consider that the DM guidelines recommend 6-8 encounters per day, have a look at that chart and think about how often you'll want to use that particular feature.

Meanwhile, the Polearm Master feat also allows you to make an extra attack as a bonus action. You have to wield a Glaive or Halberd, which means you deal 1.5 less damage per attack than if you were using a Maul, and the extra attack only deals d4 damage, which is 4.5 less, but let's face it - the whole point of extra attacks is to apply your Strength (5) and Great Weapon Master (10) static damage mods an additional time, and you can Polearm Master All Day.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 16:58

Serdain: Aug 13, 2007; dicksdicksdicks

Jack the Lad posted:

I'll do the math in 2-3 hours. Being human is no benefit to your DPR though, because anyone can take Great Weapon Master.

Bear in mind that Frenzy is in no way whatsoever sustainable across multiple encounters:

I meant Frenzied Barbarian for the improved critical damage, rather than Frenzy (edited post above).

Although, I notice that the Potion of Vitality removes all exhaustion levels.. though it is listed as rare. Perhaps the Barbarian saves his armour-money and just sinks it all into a Bandolier-o-Potions for every time he's about to die of exhaustion?

# ? Sep 12, 2014 17:06

PeterWeller: Apr 21, 2003; I told you that story so I could tell you this one.

OneThousandMonkeys posted:

What, you're not excited that Literally Sauron is here to stay in the always really good and compelling D&D fluff?

No, that's Iuz.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 17:17

Jack the Lad: Jan 20, 2009; Feed the Pubs

Ferrinus posted:

Does this hold up at level 20, when both characters are making 4 attacks and so the Battlemaster is out of dice (though, admittedly, a shitload of damage up) after a single action surge?

Yes, most definitely. In fact, it gets much worse.

The damage the Champion gains from its 15% crit range (10% more than the Battle Master) is very easy to calculate; it's 10% of the extra damage they gain when they crit, or 0.83, for each attack.

Against opponents with 18+ AC the Battle Master does 8.9 more damage than the Champion each time they use Feinting Attack.

If we assume 3-round encounters, both Fighters are making 12 attacks per encounter.

After 6 Feinting Attacks, the Battle Master is 53.4 damage up. In the other 6 attacks of the first encounter the Champion pays off 5 of that damage, leaving the Battle Master up 48.4.

Assuming no short rests, the Battle Master regains one superiority die per encounter after that with Relentless and so another 8.9 damage.

In the 11 attacks each Fighter makes during each encounter after the first when the Battle Master is not making Feinting Attacks, the Champion gains 9.1 damage.

So at level 20 it takes the Champion 242 encounters without a short rest to outdamage the Battle Master.

I'll do the math with Great Weapon Master power attacks later, but I suspect they make it impossible for the Champion to ever catch up.

Jack the Lad fucked around with this message at 17:55 on Sep 12, 2014

# ? Sep 12, 2014 17:41

thespaceinvader: Mar 30, 2011; The slightest touch from a Gol-Shogeg will result in Instant Death!

Out of interest, given how sucky 5e crits are, what are the chances that a crit deals less damage than an average hit would? I know it's possible but the probability maths are beyond me at the end of a long week.

At least part of the problem with the Champion is that crits SUCK in 5e.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 18:28

Babylon Astronaut: Apr 19, 2012

Sure, the math is fucko, but the intent was the champion (of sucking) did huge crits at the expense of being interesting or fun to play. My theory is crits are so weak because they removed the larger die of damage you did when you critted and didn't replace it.

Babylon Astronaut fucked around with this message at 18:39 on Sep 12, 2014

# ? Sep 12, 2014 18:37

mastershakeman: Oct 28, 2008; by vyelkin

Basically 5e fighters should be replaced with 2.5e ones that sever limbs on crits and interrupt casters.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 18:55

moths: Aug 25, 2004; I would also still appreciate some danger.

Melee critical hits should straight up kill things. It's a sharp chunk of hardened metal in an expert's hands, death ought to be the most frequent outcome of steel-to-skull collisions.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 19:06

Slimnoid: Sep 6, 2012; Does that mean I don't get the job?

mastershakeman posted:

Basically 5e fighters should be replaced with 2.5e ones that sever limbs on crits and interrupt casters.

So long as they have saves that say "gently caress you" then I'm fine with this.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 19:10

Strength of Many: Jan 13, 2012; The butthurt is the life... and it shall be mine.

Jack the Lad posted:

It's not massive damage, though. Crits are really weak in 5e; at best it's +8.33 damage.

In fact, 'doing massive damage every once in a while at the cost of doing less damage most of the time' more accurately describes the Battle Master than the Champion - except the Battle Master can control when it happens.

I agree with you that bumping critical damage to make the average in line with the Battle Master would not fix the class.

(It also takes something like a 12-20 crit range to do so.)

Or making the crit multiplier more than x2. Even then Champion would still be dogshit.

Jack the Lad posted:

Yes, most definitely. In fact, it gets much worse.

The damage the Champion gains from its 15% crit range (10% more than the Battle Master) is very easy to calculate; it's 10% of the extra damage they gain when they crit, or 0.83, for each attack.

Against opponents with 18+ AC the Battle Master does 8.9 more damage than the Champion each time they use Feinting Attack.

If we assume 3-round encounters, both Fighters are making 12 attacks per encounter.

After 6 Feinting Attacks, the Battle Master is 53.4 damage up. In the other 6 attacks of the first encounter the Champion pays off 5 of that damage, leaving the Battle Master up 48.4.

Assuming no short rests, the Battle Master regains one superiority die per encounter after that with Relentless and so another 8.9 damage.

In the 11 attacks each Fighter makes during each encounter after the first when the Battle Master is not making Feinting Attacks, the Champion gains 9.1 damage.

So at level 20 it takes the Champion 242 encounters without a short rest to outdamage the Battle Master.

I'll do the math with Great Weapon Master power attacks later, but I suspect they make it impossible for the Champion to ever catch up.

Don't forget you can take that one feat to add another Superiority die to the Fighter's tally, bringing you up to 5 at the start of the day. Oh and I realize you are ignoring crits here, but isn't the likelihood of a Feint Attack to crit higher than a Champion Fighter as well?

Strength of Many fucked around with this message at 19:17 on Sep 12, 2014

# ? Sep 12, 2014 19:12

S.J.: May 19, 2008; Just who the hell do you think we are?

moths posted:

Melee critical hits should straight up kill things. It's a sharp chunk of hardened metal in an expert's hands, death ought to be the most frequent outcome of steel-to-skull collisions.

Regular enemies die, elite enemies can save vs death and still take lots of dmg if they do, solos take lots of damage but don't need to save

But then you'd have to split the bad guys up like that so

# ? Sep 12, 2014 19:15

mastershakeman: Oct 28, 2008; by vyelkin

The primary reason to have crit hits is against solos and bosses and whatnot. Minions you'll just kill with hp damage.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 19:18

moths: Aug 25, 2004; I would also still appreciate some danger.

Minions are out because grogs don't understand HP, correct?

# ? Sep 12, 2014 19:29

Jack the Lad: Jan 20, 2009; Feed the Pubs

Strength of Many posted:

Don't forget you can take that one feat to add another Superiority die to the Fighter's tally, bringing you up to 5 at the start of the day. Oh and I realize you are ignoring crits here, but isn't the likelihood of a Feint Attack to crit higher than a Champion Fighter as well?

I'm not ignoring crits, and I do take into account the increased (9.75%) chance to crit that the Battle Master has with Feinting Attack.

Also, level 20 Fighters have 6 superiority dice, so 7 with Martial Adept. It adds another 4 encounters to the tally, so small potatoes.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 19:39

Strength of Many: Jan 13, 2012; The butthurt is the life... and it shall be mine.

moths posted:

Minions are out because grogs don't understand HP, correct?

Yes.

I'm still using them because gently caress HP sack mooks who should be dying in one hit.

Jack the Lad posted:

I'm not ignoring crits, and I do take into account the increased (9.75%) chance to crit that the Battle Master has with Feinting Attack.

Also, level 20 Fighters have 6 superiority dice, so 7 with Martial Adept. It adds another 4 encounters to the tally, so small potatoes.

Okay, good.

I feel like its understated how versatile the Battle Master is by comparison, too.

And it still falls flat before a spellcaster.. Jesus.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 19:47

Jack the Lad: Jan 20, 2009; Feed the Pubs

Serdain posted:

JTL, what is the DPR comparison like for a frenzying half-orc barbarian with enough fighter levels to get a 19-20 crit range and super-crits, assuming it is going to be getting advantage every turn with Reckless Attack? Could being human w/ extra feat improve this (Great Weapon Master, maybe)?

I think this would make the Barbarian level 12...*edited to add super-crits from barb level 9*

Okay, Half-Orc Barbarian 9/Fighter 3. 16/17 starting Strength and 2 feats which we'll spend on Great Weapon Master and Polearm Master. We'll fight with a Glaive.

While raging and using reckless attack, we can attack twice with advantage at +2 for 1d10+16 and once with advantage at +2 for 1d4+16.

Our 10% chance to crit becomes 19% with advantage, and our crits are +3[W] instead of +1[W].

We do this damage:

Which still isn't as good as the Crossbow Expert + Sharpshooter Fighter (redoing my math on that, will repost shortly).

Jack the Lad fucked around with this message at 20:13 on Sep 12, 2014

# ? Sep 12, 2014 20:10

thespaceinvader: Mar 30, 2011; The slightest touch from a Gol-Shogeg will result in Instant Death!

moths posted:

Minions are out because grogs don't understand HP, correct?

Yes as rules entities, no in that there are a LOT of low CR monsters with single digit hp that die in one hit regardless. And bounded accuracy (theoretically) means they are still at least going to hit for small damage at high levels, so, minions basically. But half-assed and backwards thinking. So, Next minions.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 20:31

Infinite Karma: Oct 23, 2004; Good as dead

Why won't the argument about the Fighter just die? It's a lovely class with a kind of boring niche, but some nice abilities if you multiclass dip a few levels. Multiclassing is much improved in 5E, where martials don't sacrifice attack bonus, and casters don't sacrifice spell save DCs for doing it.

Barbarians, Rogues, Rangers, and Paladins don't get full spell access, either, but seem to have plenty of utility and prospects in combat (Rangers look the worst of the bunch). Rogues especially could be damage powerhouses. Sneak attack outpaces the single-target damage anyone else is going to get, at least with the material we've seen.

It's also arguable (I would argue it anyway), that Reliable Talent works on attack rolls. With +4 proficiency at level 11, and 20 Dex, you're hitting an 19 AC automatically. You're probably automatically passing any save you're proficient in. You're getting 23 as a minimum roll on Hide rolls (assuming you have Expertise in it), which you can make as a bonus action on your turn. A halfling can even hide behind other creatures when there isn't convenient terrain. Throwing out all below-average rolls is a huge, huge advantage in a system with a d20 + usually single-digit modifiers.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 20:47

moths: Aug 25, 2004; I would also still appreciate some danger.

I wonder if you could actually do bounded accuracy by having a band of levels at which you fight normally, treating everything below that as minions while everything above that treats you as the minion.

So at level 1, kobolds are a regular challenge, but by 5 kobolds are one-hit minions. But a huge-rear end dragon treats you as if you only have 1Hp because it's a goddamn dragon.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 20:56

MonsterEnvy: Feb 4, 2012; Shocked I tell you

PeterWeller posted:

No, that's Iuz.

Iuz seemed like a god that actually got poo poo done by ruling his kingdom in person, rather then Sauron.

moths posted:

I wonder if you could actually do bounded accuracy by having a band of levels at which you fight normally, treating everything below that as minions while everything above that treats you as the minion.

So at level 1, kobolds are a regular challenge, but by 5 kobolds are one-hit minions. But a huge-rear end dragon treats you as if you only have 1Hp because it's a goddamn dragon.

Kobolds are pretty much 1 hit minions at level one. Only surviving hits if they get lucky.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 20:57

moths: Aug 25, 2004; I would also still appreciate some danger.

Infinite Karma posted:

Why won't the argument about the Fighter just die? It's a lovely class with a kind of boring niche

Because in better games fighters are neither of these things.

# ? Sep 12, 2014 20:58

mango sentinel: Jan 5, 2001; by sebmojo

Hey, this got glazed over several pages ago, so here's the condensed version:

Warlock Pact of the Blade is bad c/d

# ? Sep 12, 2014 21:02

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 14, 2024 01:41

Jack the Lad: Jan 20, 2009; Feed the Pubs

mango sentinel posted:

Hey, this got glazed over several pages ago, so here's the condensed version:

Warlock Pact of the Blade is bad c/d

Yes, it's bad.

Also, here's the Hand Crossbow Fighter. I haven't yet found a build that beats it for at-will DPR:

# ? Sep 12, 2014 21:20

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Traditional Games > D&D NEXT: Infinite Posts of the Abyss

«‹›1608 »