|
One of my players has been waiting excitedly for the "final form" mystic UA to drop. He was talking about possibly retiring his character as soon as psionics were available. He assured me this afternoon that he won't be retiring his character in the near future. His sentiment was basically that he didn't feel like creating an excel spreadsheet with flow chart to manage his character.
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 02:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 06:38 |
|
|
I do appreciate that they put the "Psi Limit" explicitly per level, because "you can't spend more points on a power than your Manifester level" was a 3e rule that always got ignored and always made it sound like Psionics were much more powerful than they otherwise would be.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 02:32
|
|
|
They made it this complex to sell more copies of the online tools they're finally pushing out that will track all this poo poo for you  I just realized how much several of these subclasses just poo poo all over monks. Those poor wuxia bastards...
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 02:40
|
|
|
Anyone getting an unsecured site warning just now going to that link?
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 02:42
|
|
|
Trast posted:Anyone getting an unsecured site warning just now going to that link? Yes. Drop the s from https. WOTC am bad at computer.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 02:44
|
|
|
Trast posted:Anyone getting an unsecured site warning just now going to that link? Works for me. E: I was on http, it seems
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 02:44
|
|
|
Here's the pdf directly.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 02:47
|
|
|
I'm not going to start dropping direct quotes because this isn't grogs.txt, but all the salt about the Mystic being "too overpowered" and "too versatile" and "why do they have to staple on psionics to the core game systems" is kinda hilarious in a game where Wizards exist. Like, how do you think Fighters feel?
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 02:50
|
|
|
Fighters don't have feelings, because feelings have too much narrative power.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 02:55
|
|
|
Um, do you not understand that Fighters get 3 (three!) attacks per turn at level 11? And then a 4th (four!!!) at level 20? That means they can grapple, shove, swing their sword, and whatever else my dm let's them do in place of an attack multiple times per turn, all day long! Meanwhile the wizard can only cast a single spell on his turn.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 02:58
|
|
|
And honestly if the assertion is "Mystics can do anything!", that just makes me want to play a game where everyone has to be Mystics and you're all some kind of Psionic Rapid Response Force. PHirst Encounter Antimagic Recon
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 03:01
|
|
|
Generic Octopus posted:Um, do you not understand that Fighters get 3 (three!) attacks per turn at level 11? And then a 4th (four!!!) at level 20? That means they can grapple, shove, swing their sword, and whatever else my dm let's them do in place of an attack multiple times per turn, all day long! Meanwhile the wizard can only cast a single spell on his turn. Well, as noted earlier, correct wizarding procedure is to use that spell to turn the fighter into a t-rex.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 04:00
|
|
|
Am I missing something, or did they completely forget to add disciplines for the Order of the Soul Knife for the Mystic? Kind of unfortunate, as I have a soft spot for anything resembling Protoss. Of note, the Mystic alone takes up as much page space as the PHB Barbarian, Bard, Cleric, Druid, and half of Fighter combined, and the PHB classes have artwork fluff inflating their page count.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 07:44
|
|
|
Slippery42 posted:Of note, the Mystic alone takes up as much page space as the PHB Barbarian, Bard, Cleric, Druid, and half of Fighter combined, and the PHB classes have artwork fluff inflating their page count. To be fair, that's not the case when you add in the additional content from other books for the classes as well as the UA archetypes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 07:48
|
|
|
Slippery42 posted:Am I missing something, or did they completely forget to add disciplines for the Order of the Soul Knife for the Mystic? Kind of unfortunate, as I have a soft spot for anything resembling Protoss. No. It just doesn't get any bonus Disciplines at 1st level, which is the ONLY reason any of the Disciplines are listed for a certain archetype.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 07:57
|
|
|
Keeping their feedback surveys up for only like a week is hella dumb.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 07:59
|
|
|
I find the whole pagecount argument to be a little ... awkward, I guess? I mean, yeah, the Mystic has a lot of pages devoted to it, but the casters get an entire chapter of the book dedicated to their spells. And ideally, you'd either have every class working off of the same core mechanics, or every class has their own core mechanic to add to the pile: Wizards have Arcane spells, with Sorcerers and Warlocks building off of the concept with customized spell lists and different methods of manipulating/refreshing the bog-standard spell slots Clerics have Divine spells Druids have Nature spells (and however much that overlaps with Divine spells) Bards have their own in-between custom spell list, and they can also cherry-pick between the other three spell lists. Mystics have psionic powers Paladins and Rangers are half-Clerics and half-Druids, respectively ... and so it only makes sense that Barbarians, Rogues, Monks, and Fighters should have their own set of core mechanics and abilities that key off of those mechanics. ====== And to digress a little, they probably packed something like three "class's" worth of material into the Mystic - my reaction is that it just seems long because Mystic is "the all-in-one psionicist" and the difference between a Psion, a Soulknife and a Psychic Warrior is in the archetypes. I guess it would be like if they made a Spellcaster class, and then you'd turn into a Wizard, Cleric, or Druid at level 3 (and then the Bard and Sorcerer and Warlock archetypes would be UAs post-release)
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 08:01
|
|
|
Also, no class has 6 archetype options in the PHB. e: I take it back, Cleric comes with 7.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 08:08
|
|
|
The mystic is unlikely to get the same post-release support, in spells or archetypes or other splat cruft, as the core spell casters, in any case.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 08:10
|
|
|
Is there any neat system online where I can select the spells I'll need to know and it gives me the details in a neatly organized page
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 10:41
|
|
|
Seems like you could rename "psi points" to "stamina points" and ignore the energy beam powers and have something like an actual fighter...? Also, is this the first 5e class that can concentrate on multiple effects at a time? I've long wondered when they'd cross that rubicon.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 10:52
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:The mystic is unlikely to get the same post-release support, in spells or archetypes or other splat cruft, as the core spell casters, in any case. What, like the couple of spells in the SCAG, or what?  Nehru the Damaja posted:Is there any neat system online where I can select the spells I'll need to know and it gives me the details in a neatly organized page The 4e Character Builder does that with its power cards. No idea about 5e, and no idea about online. Ferrinus posted:Seems like you could rename "psi points" to "stamina points" and ignore the energy beam powers and have something like an actual fighter...? That would mean that fighters would get to do cool stuff, we can't have that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 11:12
|
|
|
What happens when you make a psychic energy blade that ignores your opponent's armour? Well, it's a regular weapon attack against AC 10: quote:Phantom Knife Unless it's treated as a Dex save for half damage, of course: quote:Ethereal Weapon (1 psi). As a bonus action, you temporarily transform one weapon you’re holding or your unarmed strike into pure psionic energy. The next attack you make with it before the end of your turn ignores the target’s armor, requiring no attack roll. Instead, the target makes a Dexterity saving throw against this discipline. On a failed save, the target takes the attack’s normal damage and suffers its additional effects. On a successful save, the target takes half damage from the attack but suffers no additional effects that would normally be imposed on a hit. I really wish D&D had a single mechanic for 'hitting people', and it's insane that 4E did exactly that and then they brought saving throws back.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 12:36
|
|
|
Boing posted:it's insane that 4E did exactly that and then they Please don't leak WotC's design process for 5e.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 12:54
|
|
|
koreban posted:Also, no class has 6 archetype options in the PHB. Wizard has 8, as well.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 13:01
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I'm not going to start dropping direct quotes because this isn't grogs.txt, but all the salt about the Mystic being "too overpowered" and "too versatile" and "why do they have to staple on psionics to the core game systems" is kinda hilarious in a game where Wizards exist. So, there actually is a reason for that, and it's archtype protection. Not archtype the 4e mechanic. It's tied to theming. Basically, the idea and internal argument is that the core book is perfect. I'm not kidding - you see it all the time in this hobby, and especially in D&D. It's why there are so many arguments against releasing new books. "It WAS good, then they hosed it all up." Every odd numbered edition (you're probably going "this is not a loving Star Trek style thing" it is absolutely a loving Star Trek style thing) is perfect on release, and can only be ruined later on down the line. So if the book HAS to be perfect, and we need to keep things at least a little organized and non-dissociated, then we have to argue that every class in the first core book is perfect. Like, I can't say this enough - there was actual backlash against the redesigned ranger. There are people - lots of them! - that swear up and down that every single option in the 5e player's handbook is equally viable to every other option, and if it's not, you just aren't doing it right. This means, of course, that all 5e fighter options are not only all perfect and equally viable, but, as per their description, fighters must be The Best at fighting. And like. They aren't! At all. Fighters are awful and fall behind plenty of other classes constantly in a ton og ways, many of which are, in fact, about fighting. But facts don't matter - fighters are listed in the PHB as the best of the best at fighting, so they have to be just that. I've talked about it before, but one of the big things in tabletop gaming is that nerds are loving idiots who are convinced of their own genius. That hubris is a part of the insane brand loyalty - after all, if you're a perfect intelligent rational being, then whatever you like must be Objectively Good. So when something like, say, the ranger remake - or Tome of Battle, or 4e, or - anything that runs against their claims, they loving lose it. Remember, they cannot be wrong - you're the one who's wrong. And they're idiots convinced of their own genius, so using actual things like math isn't going to work, it's only going to enrage them further. There has been a LOT of math made up that literally proves that the Champion archtype is worse then the Battlemaster, period, forever, the end. It doesn't matter. Remember what I said about attributes and arrays and the like - the real reason people hate them isn't because they create cookie cutter characters (they don't), they hate them because they reveal what a sham the attribute system is. People hate being fooled. But people hate knowing they were fooled more then they hate being fooled. The fighter has to be perfect. So the mystic has to be overpowered, because it's better at fighting. The cleric isn't overpowered, because the cleric is also perfect. So is the wizard. And the bard. And the Paladin/Sorcerer. And the warlock multiclass. And etc, etc, etc. But it's more then that. The fighter has his specific archtype - he's the Fighting Man. Despite the fact that I just described most D&D classes...actually there's no end to that statement. It's all just dissociation bullshit. Point is, they were told by the perfect book that the fighter is the best fighting man. And then the Mystic comes along, and he's got the same archtype as the perfect fighter, but he's BETTER at it. Tome of Battle comes along, and those classes have the same archtype as the perfect fighter, but they're better at it. The range revamp comes along, and it's the same class ENTIRELY as the perfect ranger, but it's better at it. Etc, etc. It also loops into justification. The cleric and wizard and whatever are allowed to be the best because the PHB is perfect. So they can't be wrong. I mean, don't get the wrong idea - there's a lot going on beyond just that, including a healthy dollop of "magic is allowed to be unrealistic, fighter's aren't." And if you ever had this conversation in the 3e era, you've no doubt heard plenty of justifications, many of which directly contradict each other! "The fighter IS better at fighting just with these obscure conditions" right after "it's ok for things to be unbalanced" right after "actually it's all super well balanced" right after "it's ok for a buffed cleric to be better at fighting because" right after "so long as you ROLEPLAY properly the cleric will never be better at fighting" etc, etc, etc. It all boils down to "but the fighter HAS to be perfect!" I'm getting off topic. So there you go. The mystic very explicitly steps on the fighter's shoes, which like...good, the fighter blows. But if the fighter blows, that means 5e is flawed. And lots of people can't handle knowing the thing they like is flawed, because that suggests they aren't some perfectly rational arbiter of truth. So no, the fighter is actually perfect, which means the mystic has to be overpowered. The moon druid isn't overpowered even though it can be the same thing because "druid" is put in a different thematic circle then "fighter" even if their mechanics are perfectly comparable. Because it's never been about the mechanics.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 13:39
|
|
|
The Mystic would be a great skin to make a more interesting version of the fighter class. Add a bonus attack at level 6 in place of the archetype features, make the hit dice D10, add Martial weapons and armour proficiencies, and limit the disciplines to the more fightery ones, and you've got a great martial class that has interesting things to do, and that scales all the way to the late game.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 13:55
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:There has been a LOT of math made up that literally proves that the Champion archtype is worse then the Battlemaster, period, forever, the end. It doesn't matter. Hey, isn't the Champion better when you've got a good source of extra damage die like Sneak Attack or Divine Smite that you can apply on-hit when a critical is rolled?
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 14:51
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:Hey, isn't the Champion better when you've got a good source of extra damage die like Sneak Attack or Divine Smite that you can apply on-hit when a critical is rolled?
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 15:25
|
|
|
Nehru the Damaja posted:Is there any neat system online where I can select the spells I'll need to know and it gives me the details in a neatly organized page https://www.dnd-spells.com/spells
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 15:30
|
|
|
I'm reading through Out of the Abyss in preparation for running later, and I can't get my head around the travel mechanics. The book actively recommends tracking how much time it takes to get between landmarks in the Underdark, with daily navigation checks to avoid getting lost, foraging checks to avoid starvation, and some pretty cool random encounters. Daily random encounters. One hike in Chapter 9 goes for 200 miles at an average rate of 6 miles per day. That's 33 random encounter rolls, meaning that an entire 4-hour session might be taken up by beating up cave bats while trying to get somewhere more interesting. Worse, it looks like these random encounters are a major source of early experience since a lot of the early game takes place in towns where armed conflict is presumably frowned upon. Whyyyyyyyyyyyy
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 16:39
|
|
|
blastron posted:I'm reading through Out of the Abyss in preparation for running later, and I can't get my head around the travel mechanics. The book actively recommends tracking how much time it takes to get between landmarks in the Underdark, with daily navigation checks to avoid getting lost, foraging checks to avoid starvation, and some pretty cool random encounters. Being somewhat strict about the difficulties of travel and the random encounters makes sense in Chapters 1-7 when the party is really up poo poo creek. I enjoyed the survival aspects of that portion but after Chapter 8 you have the backing of a king and potentially a small army at your disposal so those aspects fade away. The book doesn't explicitly state this AFAIK but it's a big pivot from getting hosed up to being the fucker-uppers in the Underdark. Additionally, like you mention, some of the random stuff is really cool and some options are stupid bats and poo poo. Just pick the cool ones and roll with those when you feel like it. Don't worry too much about XP and do milestones where every chapter is basically a new level.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 16:46
|
|
|
It's been a while since I've given a PotA update: oh sweet christ it's soo goddamn boring. We repeatedly stagger into some place we shouldn't be, whip the rear end of whoever is there, and then leave, having learned nothing of the overarching plot. I've heard that there's a way into the temple of elemental evil in each of these loser forts but we've yet to find it. People on the road keep trying to kill us and we have no clue who they are or why they want to. This adventure is poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 17:09
|
|
|
Why do you keep playing it?
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 17:11
|
|
|
ur right
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 17:15
|
|
|
I did a couple more storm king's thunder sessions and my players left the town very quickly, scaring off the zhentarim with the drawbridge up and immediately leaving for the cave without resting. I gave them one level-up but not two since they didn't have meaningful encounters after the first one. They managed to clear the cave despite being level 2 instead of 3 so that's cool(I would have been more worried if there wasn't a moon druid), but now I need something in the town for them to do before they hitchhike somewhere else. The orc/elf encounter seems a little boring, felgolos or whoever as suggested by that blog seems a little shoehorned in to me.
Jeffrey of YOSPOS fucked around with this message at 17:21 on Mar 14, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 17:18
|
|
|
Nehru the Damaja posted:Is there any neat system online where I can select the spells I'll need to know and it gives me the details in a neatly organized page I've been using the 5th Edition Spellbook app.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 17:20
|
|
|
Kaysette posted:Being somewhat strict about the difficulties of travel and the random encounters makes sense in Chapters 1-7 when the party is really up poo poo creek. I enjoyed the survival aspects of that portion but after Chapter 8 you have the backing of a king and potentially a small army at your disposal so those aspects fade away. The book doesn't explicitly state this AFAIK but it's a big pivot from getting hosed up to being the fucker-uppers in the Underdark. The hike in Chapter 9 explicitly calls out that you should roll for random encounters as you and your expeditionary force make your way to Mantol-Derith, from the same set of tables you were using when you were trying to escape. Weirdly enough, once you hit chapter 10, there's suddenly new encounter rules out of a different set of tables. Maybe they specifically want you to use the original tables in Chapter 9 so that the players get to feel that pivot in power now that they have actual equipment and support? Even still, these travel times blow. Average travel time between locations even in chapters 2-7 are about 20 days, which means 20 rolls on an encounter table between points A and B.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 17:39
|
|
|
Druid advice? I was thinking of redoing my lv. 4 Land druid into a Moon druid. I'm aware of when Moon druids typically wax and wane in overall effectiveness, but are they still versatile and fun to use even when they stop being the party's uber-tank? I mostly want to make the switch for flavor and because it suits my character better.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 18:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 06:38 |
|
|
Deified Data posted:Druid advice? I was thinking of redoing my lv. 4 Land druid into a Moon druid. I'm aware of when Moon druids typically wax and wane in overall effectiveness, but are they still versatile and fun to use even when they stop being the party's uber-tank? I mostly want to make the switch for flavor and because it suits my character better. Seduce people in animal form.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 18:28
|
|
