|
Ryuujin posted:Man they are allergic to making actual D&D 5e style race stat adjustments for these Unearthed Arcana races. Except Human the stuff in the PHB tends toward +2 to one stat and +1 to another, with a few exceptions that get better than that. But it seems like pretty much all of these Unearthed Arcana races get +1 to two stats. Yeah. "You have a climb speed" is nearly on par with at-will flight for exploration, and almost that good for combat. That was a main reason to be a 4e Essentials Thief (Acrobat Trick). A swim speed is great for some campaigns, and since this is a nautical one... The +1 AC almost isn't necessary. But since it's there, it's two styles for the price of one.
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 21:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 02:32 |
|
|
I think this is a definite improvement over all the last Unearthed Arcanas we have had. Anyway the Swashbuckler looks pretty good. It's taunt ability seems to be more about forcing it's opponent to follow it around the battlefield while it stabs and runs away from it. Say it's fighting an Super strong ogre. The Swashbukler uses Panache on it forcing it to move towards the rogue and only to attack it.For the next 10 rounds the ogre is forced to follow the Rouge who can run up to it stab it for sneak attack damage, then use cunning action to dash away and keep out of it's reach and speed with no fear of being attacked in retaliation. They can also use this to lead it into traps and stuff. Honestly it's a pretty powerful ability and subclass for the rogue.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 22:24
|
|
|
As long as they're fighting enemies they share languages with (or that have language at all), and don't have ranged attacks. It does at least RAW bypass everything. Just one insight test.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 22:43
|
|
|
goatface posted:As long as they're fighting enemies they share languages with (or that have language at all), and don't have ranged attacks. True it's not flawless. If it did bypass all that stuff it would be way too powerful. MonsterEnvy fucked around with this message at 23:00 on May 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 22:44
|
|
|
Just out of curiosity, what level is that, and what spells are available by then?
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 22:52
|
|
|
Really Pants posted:Just out of curiosity, what level is that, and what spells are available by then? 9 so one 5th level spell by that point.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 23:00
|
|
|
I like the Rogue archetype. The phrasing "you can use Sneak Attack with any melee attack that [conditions]" implies that it bypasses the usual restrictions regarding permissible weapon types and that you can only use it once per round. It's any melee attack. Specific Beats General, remember? A funny thing also happens with the Sorcerer's tempestuous magic. "Whenever you cast a spell other than a cantrip during your turn, whirling gusts of elemental air surround you. You can use a bonus action to fly 10 feet without provoking opportunity attacks." Now... does the second sentence depend on the first one? In other words, can I always fly as a bonus action, or can I only do that after casting a non-cantrip spell? What do you base this answer on? For that matter, just how long do the gusts of elemental air last? Where does it say that? If I multiclass, does it even have to be a Sorcerer spell? Wind Soul is simply ridiculous. Immunity to two energy type and full at-will flight at 60' speed which can be spread around with like eight other dudes, because gently caress you Tarrasque, killing you wasn't easy enough already. Meanwhile, at the same level the Wild Sorcerer gets... to sometimes roll an extra d6 damage or something. I know this is UA material but Christ at least try.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 23:26
|
|
|
I know we make fun of 5E for its garbage rules language but your arguments for the first two are still really pushing it. The language here is in fact terrible but it's quite obvious what its intention is, whereas something like Polearm Mastery or Crossbow Expert really are up for interpretation.
Dick Burglar fucked around with this message at 23:43 on May 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 23:41
|
|
|
I don't think so. I've seen people reach some pretty bonkers conclusions based on poor rules wording. To conclude that "any attack" means "any attack"? poo poo son that's nothing.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 23:44
|
|
|
The perils of naturalistic language in action.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 23:51
|
|
|
Yeah upon actually pulling up the text again, I'm more in agreement with you on the Rogue thing. I thought the sneak attack language was put in with some relevant ability but nope, it's just hanging out all by itself. Dumb. Tempestuous Magic I'm sticking to my guns though. It just lets you "fly" instead of "move" or "teleport." You move 10 feet by flying, then it's over. That's the bonus action. Seems like it doesn't have any restriction against multiclass spells, so go hog wild with that. Wind Soul is indeed broken but Sorcerers are full casters so what else is new. Also, power creep. Dick Burglar fucked around with this message at 23:53 on May 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 23:51
|
|
|
Sneak attack isn't once per round, it's once per turn. You can apply SA to opportunity attacks RAW.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2015 23:58
|
|
|
Dick Burglar posted:Tempestuous Magic I'm sticking to my guns though. It just lets you "fly" instead of "move" or "teleport." You move 10 feet by flying, then it's over. That's the bonus action. Seems like it doesn't have any restriction against multiclass spells, so go hog wild with that. Oh I didn't mean that you can endlessly fly. What I mean is this: I suspect that they intend the ability to be that you can fly 10 feet as a bonus action on a turn in which you cast a non-cantrip spell. In other words, casting a "real" spell is the prerequisite for taking this bonus action. But that is not what they wrote. Instead, how it now reads is that casting a non-cantrip spell just causes some gusts of air to appear for an indeterminate duration. The ability to fly as a bonus action is completely independent and has no prerequisite action. goatface posted:Sneak attack isn't once per round, it's once per turn. You can apply SA to opportunity attacks RAW. I misspoke (typed) but that's not the issue. If I make one of these Rogues and I dual-wield, can I now make two sneak attacks if I'm in melee and there are none of my allies adjacent to that creature? Normally no, because SA is once per turn, but if I have an ability that says I can now SA on "any attack" which satisfies these conditions... then what? Still only one? Or do I get two? Sage Genesis fucked around with this message at 00:16 on May 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 00:14
|
|
|
Sage Genesis posted:Oh I didn't mean that you can endlessly fly. What I mean is this: I suspect that they intend the ability to be that you can fly 10 feet as a bonus action on a turn in which you cast a non-cantrip spell. In other words, casting a "real" spell is the prerequisite for taking this bonus action. But that is not what they wrote. Instead, how it now reads is that casting a non-cantrip spell just causes some gusts of air to appear for an indeterminate duration. The ability to fly as a bonus action is completely independent and has no prerequisite action. 
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 00:43
|
|
|
Sage Genesis posted:Instead, how it now reads is that casting a non-cantrip spell just causes some gusts of air to appear for an indeterminate duration. The ability to fly as a bonus action is completely independent and has no prerequisite action. I don't think anyone here disagrees that writing boardgame rules in natural language is a terrible idea, but  . This is reaching. Is what you wrote there likely to be what they meant for even one second, rather than the bonus action being as a result of the first clause?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 00:44
|
|
|
Not only does every sentence have to be read independently of prior or later sentences in the same paragraph, but each word should be read independently.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 00:45
|
|
|
Doodmons posted:I don't think anyone here disagrees that writing boardgame rules in natural language is a terrible idea, but I didn't say that was likely what they meant, I'm saying that some people will erroneously reach that conclusion. If you disagree, fine, I guess you've been blessed with nothing but intelligent and discerning players.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 01:05
|
|
|
I've seen people argue that a class that gave 'immunity to magic and nonmagical poison' made you immune to magic, so...
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 01:17
|
|
|
It's the magic poison that gets you!
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 01:19
|
|
|
The sorcerer ability is really badly written, but it's pretty obvious what's meant to happen. That Rogue ability, on the other hand, appears to be written very well, as long as you assume it does exactly what Sage Genesis says it does. If you assume it's really meant to say something other than what it clearly says, then yeah, it's also badly written. Unearthed Arcana: Waterborne Adventures posted:Toujours l’Audace I mean, what does that second part even loving do if normal sneak attack restrictions are also supposed to apply? Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 02:15 on May 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 02:08
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:The Mariner Fighting Style is actually pretty great. So great almost everyone should take it unless they are heavily armored.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 02:43
|
|
|
Original Sneak Attack is:quote:Once per turn, you can deal an extra 1d6 damage to one creature you hit with an attack if you have advantage on the attack roll. The attack must use a finesse or a ranged weapon. If you have Toujours l'Audace, you can Sneak Attack an enemy (of yours) without the "if another enemy of the target is within 5 feet of it, [and] that enemy isn't incapacitated" So if they are standing all by themselves, you can Sneak Attack with a ranged attack (whereas you couldn't before under the original prerequisites) If just you and them are standing adjacent to each other, you can Sneak Attack with a melee attack If they are standing next to their own allies (also your enemies), you can Sneak Attack Sneak Attack still gets disallowed if: 1. You already used it this turn (but not this round) 2. You're not using a finesse or ranged weapon 3. You have Disadvantage on the attack roll 4. The enemy is adjacent to an incapacitated ally (of yours) and you can't meet the prereqs any other way The Crotch posted:Maybe I'm missing something, but should anyone actually be heavily armoured? I mean, Dex Does Everything, so... The best light armor, Studded Leather, is 12 + DEX, and DEX caps out at 5, so that's 17 AC The best medium armor, Half Plate, is 15 + [DEX max 2], so that's 17 AC Plate is 18 AC gradenko_2000 fucked around with this message at 03:18 on May 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 03:15
|
|
|
The Crotch posted:Maybe I'm missing something, but should anyone actually be heavily armoured? I mean, Dex Does Everything, so...
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 03:21
|
|
|
So, an OSR blog I frequent wrote a post about Balance in 5e, specifically at around 5-6 level. (This is the blog famous for writing a series of essays about the importance of player agency.) Here's a paragraph that summarizes the author's thoughts: Hack and Slash posted:Attackers that require strength or constitution saves or melee attacks have practically no effect against the characters. Anything that grants opponents advantage or magical attacks totally tear the group apart. It is very much Rock/Paper/Scissors, and they chose rock, being that 70%+ of the monster manual is made up of scissors.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 03:25
|
|
|
So uh, what the heck happened to the Chat thread? Why'd it get gassed? Also, I look forward to all the ways in which SKR can gently caress up 5e in the future. Next up will be a Dragon article nerfing the Crossbow Expert feat.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 03:51
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Sneak Attack still gets disallowed if: What's your reasoning for this? That is, I can't figure out how you're picking which parts of the general Sneak Attack rule still apply. It seems like "any melee attack" from the specific rule should override the finesse weapon requirement from the general rule, for example. Elector_Nerdlingen fucked around with this message at 04:00 on May 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 03:58
|
|
|
dwarf74 posted:So uh, what the heck happened to the Chat thread? Why'd it get gassed? I thought the point of releasing things as "Unearthed Arcana" is that then they don't have to really work properly, even up to the low standard that regular 5e does. What does "Unearthed Arcana" mean otherwise? (Other than hitting the nostalgia center, of course)
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 05:24
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:What's your reasoning for this? That is, I can't figure out how you're picking which parts of the general Sneak Attack rule still apply. It seems like "any melee attack" from the specific rule should override the finesse weapon requirement from the general rule, for example. The way I read it (and I acknowledge that that's part of what makes 5e so shoddy) is that you can use Sneak Attack whenever you have Advantage, but then there are additional clauses that you can use to work around the Advantage requirement, and that Toujours l'Audace adds another one.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 05:33
|
|
|
The Crotch posted:Maybe I'm missing something, but should anyone actually be heavily armoured? I mean, Dex Does Everything, so... Basically if you for some reason plan on putting a 14 in DEX and never putting it any higher, Medium Armor might be ok. If you plan on pumping DEX forever, Light Armor is just as good. If you REALLY want like, +1 more AC, and plan on dumping DEX and putting at least 15 in STR, and love having disadvantage on stealth forever, go with Heavy Armor. Notably, the only class that really needs STR for it's class features to function (Barbarian) is also the class whose features do not function when wearing heavy armor 
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 06:43
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:The way I read it (and I acknowledge that that's part of what makes 5e so shoddy) is that you can use Sneak Attack whenever you have Advantage, but then there are additional clauses that you can use to work around the Advantage requirement, and that Toujours l'Audace adds another one. I didn't interpret the original Sneak Attack rule as working like that, but sure, yeah, I can see what you mean.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 07:23
|
|
|
If it weren't for the massive MAD problem, the swashbuckler would work much better as a Fighter option. You could use multiple attacks combined with removing OA to dance through a group of enemies and get in to hit their back line.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 13:22
|
|
|
goatface posted:If it weren't for the massive MAD problem, the swashbuckler would work much better as a Fighter option. You could use multiple attacks combined with removing OA to dance through a group of enemies and get in to hit their back line.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 14:48
|
|
|
Can fighters get the dex instead of str for to-hit and damage? I'm not near books.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 14:52
|
|
|
goatface posted:Can fighters get the dex instead of str for to-hit and damage? I'm not near books. MadScientistWorking fucked around with this message at 14:57 on May 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 14:54
|
|
|
goatface posted:Can fighters get the dex instead of str for to-hit and damage? I'm not near books. Are you using a finesse weapon? Congratulations, you can use DEX instead of STR for hit and damage. As a note, a rapier is as good as a longsword except a) does piercing damage instead of slashing, b) doesn't get a bonus for being used two-handed and c) is finesse. So yes, it's trivial to do so. The only caveat is that no two-handed finesse weapons exist, so you are going to be using a rapier.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 14:58
|
|
|
Any experience with the new Elemental Evil set? Any pitfalls like with Dragon Horde forcing the party in to specific situations?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 15:02
|
|
|
goatface posted:If it weren't for the massive MAD problem, the swashbuckler would work much better as a Fighter option. You could use multiple attacks combined with removing OA to dance through a group of enemies and get in to hit their back line. Trying to picture this as a Fighter, Toujours and Panache key off CHA, Elegant Maneuver keys off DEX, and you can make your weapon attacks key off DEX if you wanted to. DEX > CON > CHA doesn't seem so MAD?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 15:03
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:The way I read it (and I acknowledge that that's part of what makes 5e so shoddy) is that you can use Sneak Attack whenever you have Advantage, but then there are additional clauses that you can use to work around the Advantage requirement, and that Toujours l'Audace adds another one. Doesn't Toujours l'Audace just mean "You can use sneak attack any time you damned well please?" The only situation that you couldn't would be if there's an ally next to your opponent but they're stunned or otherwise unable to attack, therefore disabling both regular sneak attack rules and Tl'A.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 15:18
|
|
|
Kurieg posted:Doesn't Toujours l'Audace just mean "You can use sneak attack any time you damned well please?" The only situation that you couldn't would be if there's an ally next to your opponent but they're stunned or otherwise unable to attack, therefore disabling both regular sneak attack rules and Tl'A. It depends on whether you read Toujours as its own independent trigger for Sneak Attacks, or as a modification/addition to the normal Sneak Attack ability.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 15:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 02:32 |
|
|
DalaranJ posted:So, an OSR blog I frequent wrote a post about Balance in 5e, specifically at around 5-6 level. (This is the blog famous for writing a series of essays about the importance of player agency.) Incredibly high level of cognitive dissonance here: Hack and Slash posted:I'm not asking for advice. I'm saying that this is literally forcing me into the position of deciding for the characters how much risk they should be taking on, because in many situations "going forward" is their only choice. They have some say in how they manage to do that. 5th edition is good in that it provides and supports diplomacy and trickery and thinking outside the box in a way that 4th edition specifically discouraged, but the expectation of combat in many situations is still there, especially as a result of failure of the other options. Still, I personally prefer to design monsters and factions naturalistically based on good design principles and let the players decide how to navigate the morass.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2015 15:42
|
|
