|
There's for sure no denying they overdeveloped Hexblade.
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 08:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 04:34 |
|
|
Yeah I can see that; though the medium armour is very neh for a dragon sorc imo. Though HB does miss out on the 3 extra cantrips book. Gridlocked fucked around with this message at 09:07 on Feb 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 09:03
|
|
|
Gridlocked posted:Yeah I can see that; though the medium armour is very neh for a dragon sorc imo. Even if you have 16 DEX, half-plate and a shield will be +3 AC over draconic resilience. And Hexblade can still take Pact of the Tome, like any Warlock. Arthil posted:There's for sure no denying they overdeveloped Hexblade. It's what happens when you're trying to fix/balance a narrow part of the system, and in the process ignore how the rest of the rules interact with it. Which seems to be the design mantra for 5e.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 09:16
|
|
|
I think the real crime of the Hexblade is how it's basically mandatory for Pact of the Blade. I kinda see why Crawford or Mearls or whoever keeps posting about how they wish the Pact and Patron weren't separate choices. Because at this point, it's an illusion of choice on how you play a Bladelock. Malpais Legate fucked around with this message at 09:26 on Feb 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 09:20
|
|
|
I always though Hexblade was "You make a pact with your magical talking sword." Apparently I was wrong and its just "You make a pact with your normal patron, but you hit things with a swords too."
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 09:39
|
|
|
Malpais Legate posted:I think the real crime of the Hexblade is how it's basically mandatory for Pact of the Blade.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 09:46
|
|
|
Gridlocked posted:I always though Hexblade was "You make a pact with your magical talking sword." E: wait no it's a pact with a thing that just really likes making swords out if itself. What the gently caress. Splicer fucked around with this message at 09:53 on Feb 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 09:50
|
|
|
Gridlocked posted:I always though Hexblade was "You make a pact with your magical talking sword." Yeah, that's an issue with Hexblade is how poorly defined in its narrative it is. The example they give isn't very illuminating. You're making a pact with some kind of entity from the Shadowfel, but it's through a sword they made. But your pact isn't with the sword, because you don't have the sword. It's just loving dumb. And then there's the whole business where Pact of the Blade is basically useless without it. There really just should have been a revision going into Warlock like they plan(ned?) with Ranger.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 09:52
|
|
|
Malpais Legate posted:And then there's the whole business where Pact of the Blade is basically useless without it. There really just should have been a revision going into Warlock like they plan(ned?) with Ranger.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 10:02
|
|
|
Was that really how the marketed this poo poo? Nothing says "I have no idea what I'm doing" more than "nothing needs to be revised, ever."
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 10:19
|
|
|
Malpais Legate posted:Was that really how the marketed this poo poo? One of the criticisms of 4e was that "there was too much errata". This was a legitimate complaint in some sense, particularly because the books were never reprinted with the errata included, which forced people to use the Character Builder program, or else have some other, non-WOTC-provided way of keeping everything straight in their heads and in their papers. Another criticism of 4e was that because its marketing leaned so hard on "some things about 3e were busted, but here is how 4e is fixing them", some people (read: grognards) felt like the game that they were currently playing (3e) was getting pooh-pooh'ed as a bad game, and that this apparently turned them off. The reactionary response to these criticisms when we get to 5e is two-fold: * nothing is ever called "errata", because that would imply that you would again have the problem of 4e having loose-leaf errata that people need to keep track of. Instead, they're only "clarifications of intent". The designers did not "errata" Summon Animals into a model that passes the buck onto the DM to decide how many animals of what species to summon. What actually happened was that that was always how the spell was supposed to work, but the devs are only explaining it to us now, because apparently we couldn't figure it out from the raw PHB description. * nothing is ever "revised", because that would imply that the design was somehow wrong or flawed. Instead, everything is simply an "alternative"*. The new Ranger design isn't a replacement for the Ranger. Rather, it's simply an option that you can consider side-by-side against the original PHB Ranger. ________ * to be the least bit fair, I don't think 3e-era WOTC ever claimed that, for example, the Warblade was supposed to replace the Fighter, or that the Swordsage was supposed to replace the Monk, even though they clearly and obviously were supposed to be better, more workable versions of those classes, but it's sort of a joke when the new class is still called a Ranger but you're still putting the two Rangers on the same pedestal as if it's a close contest. gradenko_2000 fucked around with this message at 10:35 on Feb 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 10:32
|
|
|
Malpais Legate posted:Was that really how the marketed this poo poo? It was right up there with complaining about Warlords "Shouting limbs back on." Because.the hateboner for 4e guys willfully misunderstood the Healing Surge/HP abstraction and tried to treat losing 12 HP as having your hand severed at the wrist.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 11:31
|
|
|
Razorwired posted:It was right up there with complaining about Warlords "Shouting limbs back on." Because.the hateboner for 4e guys willfully misunderstood the Healing Surge/HP abstraction and tried to treat losing 12 HP as having your hand severed at the wrist.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 12:08
|
|
|
Splicer posted:I always liked the implied corollary that a fighter on 1HP was fighting limbless and in pieces. A 100 HP Fighter looks like Goro from MK but like weighing 350 lbs
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 12:12
|
|
|
Razorwired posted:It was right up there with complaining about Warlords "Shouting limbs back on." Because.the hateboner for 4e guys willfully misunderstood the Healing Surge/HP abstraction and tried to treat losing 12 HP as having your hand severed at the wrist. If a Warlord's healing can "shout limbs back on", then that means in D&D-land lost limbs can also be restored with a "cure light wounds" spell, the 5e Fighter's Second Wind ability, and a good night's sleep. It should come as a surprise to absolutely nobody that none of these things can, in fact, restore limbs. 4e is a game with numerous flaws and matters of personal taste. But the extent to which some people contorted to invent new problems was just embarrassing. But anyway, back on topic: The weird thing is that 5e absolutely has errata. http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/sage-advice/errata-november-2017 http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/sage-advice/rules-answers-and-errata-october-2016 That's where the whole thing started with unarmed attacks which are weapons, except they are not weapons anymore, they are now not-weapons which exactly function as weapons. Or something. But they don't use this errata to really fix the Ranger. Oh, sure, they said that beast companions can use Multiattack if they have it. That's genuinely a step in the right direction. But who not go all the way and just fix the drat class already? Why do they insist on using errata to make small fixes but not the important ones? 
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 12:47
|
|
|
Admitting you hosed up is unacceptable in tabletops, apparently.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 14:32
|
|
|
Sage Advice isn't considered official, even though it's written by the creators of the latest edition. It can help sway opinion, but at least as far as Adventurer's League is concerned which uses pure RAW rules they go by the books, then DM, then maybe allow SA to allow as an argument if the DM allows it. Generally citing SA is frowned on because they contradict themselves sometimes and leads to monkeys flinging poo. The DM is the end all, even if he decides the dumbest possible outcome.
Philthy fucked around with this message at 16:11 on Feb 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 16:08
|
|
|
There’s a solution to having to reprint books when errata comes out. It’s called releasing PDFs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 16:11
|
|
|
The thing is you can totally release errata and not have it be the 4e style minor bullshit changes (like the turn undead die) but keep it to the stuff that actually needed changes (everything about the orb of imposition wizard). The problem is that the design philosophy of 5e is to charge you $150 for a vague outline of the game and the DM is supposed to fill in the many, many holes in the system. Using only core 5e, can you explain how to forge a document? Do I need the charlatan background or the forgers kit? I don't know, and you don't either - not because we're stupid, but because the rules for forgery are incoherent and contradictory and require someone to step in and clean them up. Unfortunately Mearls has your $150 and he's not giving it back, not ever.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 17:08
|
|
|
DalaranJ posted:There’s a solution to having to reprint books when errata comes out. It’s called releasing PDFs. Best part is there are errata PDFs, but they're still wholly separate documents that just reference page numbers etc. I know you meant PHB/etc. PDFs but WotC are so bad at tech, that Beyond is likely the closest we're ever going to get because ~PDFs can be pirated~ or whatever their dumb line is at the moment for why we won't get standalone PDF releases
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 17:17
|
|
|
You know last term a guest lecture said that games Kickstarters were the easiest to fund. Which partially is because toys are more fun to buy. But looking at some of the books in this thread there's an appeal to being able to all but Skype the Indie dev you crowdfunded over being sold a half working game for $$$ because tradition and then being told "lol u figure out the rules, nerds." It doesn't explain scam games but sometimes WoTC seems like they haven't figured out that nerds are learning about other options. Hell I wouldn't be surprised if Critical Roll, Godsfall, and the other Actual Plays with worldbooks and fans don't eventually bite WoTC by making their own systems and going directly after their fan's money. It's not like you can't play one of the other 5x they've recycled Greyhawl or the Realms. Tal'Dorei might be basic paint by numbers fantasy land. But at least you can do things if your name isn't Elminster or Drizzt.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 17:38
|
|
|
Razorwired posted:You know last term a guest lecture said that games Kickstarters were the easiest to fund. Which partially is because toys are more fun to buy. But looking at some of the books in this thread there's an appeal to being able to all but Skype the Indie dev you crowdfunded over being sold a half working game for $$$ because tradition and then being told "lol u figure out the rules, nerds." My DM has already inserted not only setting stuff and rules from CR, but even put in a cameo by a character called Scanlan who I believe is the Bard who inspires himself. I imagine a lot of people who are into that show would find that novelty very appealing. There's absolutely a space for these streamers to codify the way they specifically play the game and sell it to people. I think it would be interesting to see a new paradigm wherein you're seeing how the "product" plays and telling the creators to fix it up and put it on paper.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 17:48
|
|
|
At this point I'm wondering if I shouldn't just shell out money for Shadow of the Demon Lord.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 18:10
|
|
|
TheGreatEvilKing posted:At this point I'm wondering if I shouldn't just shell out money for Shadow of the Demon Lord. SOTDL is twice the game 5e could ever hope to be
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 18:13
|
|
|
Against my better judgment I'm going to play in an Adventurer's League game of DnD5. I wanna play a Warlock. ANy fun to play builds out there?
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 18:24
|
|
|
TheGreatEvilKing posted:At this point I'm wondering if I shouldn't just shell out money for Shadow of the Demon Lord. his shadow has fallen over another one
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 18:28
|
|
|
Dragonatrix posted:Best part is there are errata PDFs, but they're still wholly separate documents that just reference page numbers etc. The annoying thing is it doesn't seem like any of the errata is actually applied to DnDBeyond. Hell Fantasy Grounds has some of it but not other online sources. Edit: Actually, some of it is but not all. None of the recent stuff anyway, like Feral Tieflings which choose Winged have the same restriction of no heavy armor like Aarakocra. Arthil fucked around with this message at 18:38 on Feb 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 18:29
|
|
|
MonsieurChoc posted:Against my better judgment I'm going to play in an Adventurer's League game of DnD5. I wanna play a Warlock. ANy fun to play builds out there? Hexblade. I ran a variant human with polearm master but you need to use a quarterstaff for three levels. You can also just use hexblade's curse/hex/eldritch blast to stack a bunch of ranged damage on a target and maybe bring them down before you start getting bored. Unfortunately low level 5e is incredibly boring as you smash bags of hit points into each other for low damage, so it really doesn't matter what you run because combat is going to be a boring slog.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 18:50
|
|
|
TheGreatEvilKing posted:Hexblade.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 18:57
|
|
|
TheGreatEvilKing posted:Using only core 5e, can you explain how to forge a document? Do I need the charlatan background or the forgers kit? I don't know, and you don't either - not because we're stupid, but because the rules for forgery are incoherent and contradictory and require someone to step in and clean them up. Do you really need rules for this if you're not explicitly playing AL? I mean, the current skills cover pretty much everything. Just do a deception check. Done. People are going to argue over it? Punch them in the mouf. The only people wanting everything spelled out for them should be AL. Outside of that the rules were meant to be used or tossed at will.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 19:05
|
|
|
If you're lucky, at low levels hypnotic pattern can practically eliminate fights. Lock everyone, then focus down one target at a time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 19:20
|
|
|
mango sentinel posted:How does polearm hexblade work? You actually do enough damage to justify going into melee instead of just shooting EB, and if you have a fronline then Reach let's you gently caress around with positioning a little bit to avoid incoming attacks. It's also the way to go once you unlock Lifedrinker at 12, but that comes too late to be relevant really.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 20:44
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:Hexblade is also better if you just want to shoot EBs. So for my hypothetical Sorlock with a healery/support bent, would you say it’s better to go Hexblade/Divine Soul rather than, say, Celestial/Draconic (or w/e other Sorceror origin)? Celestial Warlock or Divine Soul Sorceror is necessary to have access to cleric spells, but I don’t have a great feel for the trade offs here. Or maybe it’s a weak concept to begin with?
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 20:45
|
|
|
escalator dropdown posted:So for my hypothetical Sorlock with a healery/support bent, would you say it’s better to go Hexblade/Divine Soul rather than, say, Celestial/Draconic (or w/e other Sorceror origin)? Celestial Warlock or Divine Soul Sorceror is necessary to have access to cleric spells, but I don’t have a great feel for the trade offs here. Or maybe it’s a weak concept to begin with? Sorlock is strong regardless of what archetypes you pick because of the potency of quickened EB, but how much healing do you think you'll actually be doing? The only good healing spells are Healing Word, Mass Healing Word, Healing Spirit, and Aura of Vitality. Of those, the latter two are Druid/Ranger and Paladin exclusives respectively, and the former are not in the Celestial Warlock spell list, so if you want to have healing on a Sorlock you need to go Divine Soul. With that you can do the Twinned Healing Word gimmick in emergencies (skipping Mass Healing Word), but that's all you're really gonna be doing IRT healing - spell slots into HP is just inefficient by nature. So Hexblade dip on Divine Soul. And to clarify, Sorcerer is inherently great support on its own. Twinned Haste? Twinned Polymorph? Twinned Greater Invisibility? Nobody else can do poo poo like that. Divine Soul opens you up to some very good Cleric options in general, but little that specifically synergizes with metamagic.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 21:04
|
|
|
I also have a Sorlock who is level 3 currently who is using the healing subclass. I only really plan to use the heal spells to get people back up if poo poo goes sideways. I don't ever expect to be a party healer. It'll just be a nice thing to toss out in a bag of tricks, which is what I am used to with my pure Warlock. Damage output first and foremost for me.
Philthy fucked around with this message at 21:20 on Feb 20, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 21:14
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:Sorlock is strong regardless of what archetypes you pick because of the potency of quickened EB, but how much healing do you think you'll actually be doing? Thanks for the info, that’s helpful. For some reason I was thinking Celestial also gave access to the cleric list, but it’s just a selection of spells plus the Healing Light feature. I’m generally aware that in-combat healing is a Real Bad Idea in 5e with the exception of getting someone unconscious back on their feet. However, the particular party I’d be considering this character for lacks anyone with any healing at all. So I was toying with backup characters and thought maybe a Divine Soul and/or Celestial Sorlock could do plug that gap without sacrificing much elsewhere or being expected to be a full-on healbot.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 21:45
|
|
|
What are the flavor implications of the nature of combat healing in 5e? Do you think it was an intentional design choice?
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 21:50
|
|
|
It was a blind reaction to healing surges and the "shouting arms back on" canard.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 21:59
|
|
|
I’m actually more interested in an answer to the first question. Since regardless of intention, the rules are what they are.
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 22:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 04:34 |
|
|
DalaranJ posted:I’m actually more interested in an answer to the first question. Since regardless of intention, the rules are what they are. The mechanics of death saves and HP abstraction are so weird that I don't think you'll see a satisfactory flavor/RP interaction with it 'why don't you heal me before I'm unconscious' 'uh, well...'
|
|
#
?
Feb 20, 2018 22:09
|
|
