|
doctor 7 posted:Actually now that I think about it I don't believe Mearls responded to the BM criticism other than a chuckle of agreement. To his credit, I think he's mentioned that Beastmaster and one or two other subclasses are too weak (Champion maybe) and need to be reworked. Four Elements Monk is another disappointing one, because all of it's features depend far too heavily on Ki points.
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2018 21:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 06:34 |
|
|
The Gate posted:To his credit, I think he's mentioned that Beastmaster and one or two other subclasses are too weak (Champion maybe) and need to be reworked. Four Elements Monk is another disappointing one, because all of it's features depend far too heavily on Ki points. He's pretty chill about voicing what he wishes could be improved. He doesn't like Bonus Actions either, basically because pretty much every BA in the game could be switched with "once per turn" as a limiter and it would be fine. I think there are maybe one or two trains where unlimited BAs would be a problem.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2018 21:32
|
|
|
doctor 7 posted:Actually now that I think about it I don't believe Mearls responded to the BM criticism other than a chuckle of agreement. he doesn't give a poo poo, and he knows that he doesn't need to
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2018 21:33
|
|
|
Serf posted:he doesn't give a poo poo, and he knows that he doesn't need to Yeah, sure thing, man.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2018 21:37
|
|
|
after what happened back during the playtest i would absolutely not call mearls good at listening to criticisms
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2018 21:41
|
|
|
Razorwired posted:This is my favorite part of that article: It was a running joke on the show how absolutely useless that bear was and how much their bard kept trying to convince her to leave it behind to die. By the end, Trinket had 1) armor built from bullette hide, 2) special homebrew maneuvers, 3) a magic amulet that could shrink him down so he could be transported easily and fired out like a cannonball into the fray, 4) a magic gift from the Feywild that let him fight with magic claws. He was still basically useless.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2018 21:42
|
|
|
doctor 7 posted:He's pretty chill about voicing what he wishes could be improved. I listened to the same interview. Mearls alluded to wishing they could just push out patches to classes or mechanics that don't work. But he mentioned a couple of things stand in the way. First, it is had to patch paper. If you release an updated book it causes problems and confusion and splits the community. Second, there are people who do like it as it is and don't want to changed, even if it is to improve it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2018 21:42
|
|
|
"i made the game bad and yet people still buy it because of brand recognition. lol" - mike mearls
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2018 21:44
|
|
|
Brother Entropy posted:after what happened back during the playtest i would absolutely not call mearls good at listening to criticisms If it was anything like XGE, which Crawford was open about in terms of playtesting, usually the idea was "did this receive 75% or higher positive feedback? Yes good no bad." Obviously they have internal testing and NDA testing too so that isn't just it. But 5e is leaps and bounds selling far better than any other edition after it selling pretty stagnant for the past few version so I can see why it makes sense to not want to replace core things. However, multiple times when Crawford and Mearls talk about Ranger and Beast master ranger especially they admit it needs work. Regardless of what captain mcmin-max says. It does because "yeah you can be a ranger using only a flying sex snake as your buddy" is not a solution in anybody's mind.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2018 22:01
|
|
|
doctor 7 posted:Yeah, sure thing, man. This is, in fact, the Mike Mearls approach to everything. After confronted with mountains of evidence against any position he's taken, he'll give at most a "maybe I'm wrong" and then proceed to not do anything meaningful about it. It happened during the playtests, it happened with the Zak S situation, and right now in 5e publishing terms, it translates into Revised Ranger never getting published, new Ranger archetypes power creeping as a bandaid rather than the class getting a proper revision (and of course, these new options touted as equally viable alternatives despite being more powerful), and the same poo poo happening in Bladelocks with Hexblade.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2018 22:21
|
|
|
Xae posted:I listened to the same interview. its actually super easy to patch paper, in the event that you gently caress up bigly by not using your insanely long-running playtest as a playtest and grogging everything up to the max you can just put out a small self-contained supplement with fixes and a few new options, either for free or as a $1.99 download at Drivethru RPG, and then updating the digital version of your rulebook we know this because games like Shadow of the Demon Lord have successfully done it multiple times the scourge of awful people complaining about sub-par classes being fixed can be solved by not being an utter coward who works to enable the worst parts of your fan base
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2018 22:35
|
|
|
In all fairness the difference in numbers between those player bases has to be a factor. D&D is pretty damned big, and people can be stubborn about not buying something/using something(or in the case of my cities semi-crappy AL ripoff take forever to vote a book in or just not vote it in at all.)
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2018 22:39
|
|
|
doctor 7 posted:He's pretty chill about voicing what he wishes could be improved. Mearles gently wafts as directed by whoever is currently shouting the loudest and closest, unless he's worried that might lead to someone shouting louder later. It's politician answers all the way down, so everyone will remember hearing him say the things they agree with but not definitively saying things that they don't.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2018 23:02
|
|
|
Arthil posted:In all fairness the difference in numbers between those player bases has to be a factor. D&D is pretty damned big, and people can be stubborn about not buying something/using something(or in the case of my cities semi-crappy AL ripoff take forever to vote a book in or just not vote it in at all.) honestly the size of D&D should be an advantage to this approach though- let a large number of people pay a few bucks to participate in the "Ranger Options and Improvements Playtest" to cover the dev costs/make money and then once the mouth-frothing has subsided and feedback has been given/incorporated you can add the patches for the existing class options into your digital book + provide a free supplement with those patches (with maybe an extra class option or two exclusive to the Ranger Options download to make it worth the purchase), and announce that that's what your officially supported play groups should now be using freely available + official updates that have been reviewed by the community shouldn't "split the community" or "cause problems" in any meaningful sense/the way functional updates in a $30 book you reviewed in house would- reasonable groups will adopt it when players want to, groups that are unaware of this stuff will just keep on doing their thing regardless, and while grogs are gonna grog and start internet blood feuds over nothing, the number who are going to go to the mat to defend the importance of beastmasters being utter dogshit forever (as the developers intended) are going to be vanishingly few in number (especially when the developers are telling everyone they want to fix said beastmasters for X reason) and if the oblivious and reactionary don't use the option at their tables who really cares? Individual play experiences in RPGs vary greatly to begin with and you've already broken even/potentially made money LGD fucked around with this message at 23:08 on Mar 8, 2018 |
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2018 23:03
|
|
|
Splicer posted:If you tell Mearles to his face his poo poo is bad, he will not argue. Because he is a coward, and defending his poo poo might make you angry. He will not actually try to fix his poo poo, because he is a coward, and fixing his poo poo might make other people angry. He will never repudiate the Zak S poo poo, because he knows that will make Zak S angry, and Zak S is very good art being angry. Presumably the entire design document for 5e was "Don't make anyone angry". Monte Cooke made people angry, he's gone now. Mearls is way slimier then that. Cook isn't out because he made people angry, Cook was pushed out by Mearls. I'm not saying he isn't a big buffoon who looks like an adult baby - he is, and does - but don't assume a lack of malice.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2018 23:25
|
|
|
If you want a kick rear end bear play a Druid/Barb and hope your DM let's you use Barb class features to rage and get extra armour in bear form. Style points if you have that thing that lets you summon spirit warrior and you summon loving Ghost bears or you let your party cavalier use you as a mount.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2018 23:29
|
|
|
There should be a subclass that is a Necromancer but for ghosts instead of skeletons and zombies. Way of the Four Elements should be incorporating elements into your attacks, not spending a resource to cast lovely spells. Spend a ki point as a bonus action to activate X element for one minute, spend another ki point later to change it. Fist of Four Thunders? Do your regular attacks and then Thunderwave just loving happens if you hit. Give several options to channel through your attacks for every element has some kind of theme so you have to pick and choose what element is best for that fight. drat, I just want a Monk literal Lightning Kicks.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2018 23:53
|
|
|
Nehru the Damaja posted:It was a running joke on the show how absolutely useless that bear was and how much their bard kept trying to convince her to leave it behind to die. I’m assuming that in part this was an issue because CR’s first campaign started as a Pathfinder game that they converted to 5e when they started to stream, but I don’t know poo poo about Pathfinder. Does anyone know whether PF’s Ranger/Beastmaster analogue is more viable?
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2018 23:54
|
|
|
escalator dropdown posted:I’m assuming that in part this was an issue because CR’s first campaign started as a Pathfinder game that they converted to 5e when they started to stream, but I don’t know poo poo about Pathfinder. Does anyone know whether PF’s Ranger/Beastmaster analogue is more viable? Yes, Pathfinder's ranger is better out of the box, and Pathfinder has a bunch of other options if you need to amp it up with even more power. I'm not gonna go specifically digging for it, but the fixes for the CF companion listed sound like things that already exist in Pathfinder and are common equipment for those sorts of characters.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2018 23:58
|
|
|
I did a quick glance/google search, Pathfinder's Beastmaster trait/feat/thing is basically just 3.5E's animal companion rules. Which were okay.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 00:01
|
|
|
I got to go out on a limb and say all pet and summoning classes in D&D adjacent pen and paper are just a bad idea. I understand people really liking that archetype and wanting to fill that niche, but breaking up one characters power into two or more entities that act independently is a huge burden on gameplay, even before trying to balance that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 00:05
|
|
|
Flames of the Phoenix? Toss that in the trash. Spend a ki point to activate Way of the Flame. That gives you access to fire elements, and anyone that takes an OA against you receives d4 damage back, per Monk level. As an action, move 15', then jump and land anywhere within 15', provoking OAs for the first 15' as normal. When you land, you punch the ground and a Fireball spell erupts from that square. You can spend 2 ki points to increase it's casting level by one, up to half your Monk levels. You get advantage on the saving throw. gently caress I'm just some idiot on a dying forum, not a paid professional game designer, and that kind of Monk sounds baller.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 00:12
|
|
|
Anything that involves having to roll a d4 is inherently bad because d4s are the worst dice.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 00:13
|
|
|
Actually how would you guys rule a Cavilier using a Wild Shape druid as a mount?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 00:16
|
|
|
doctor 7 posted:He's pretty chill about voicing what he wishes could be improved. Isn't he literally the lead game designer?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 00:20
|
|
|
Gridlocked posted:Actually how would you guys rule a Cavilier using a Wild Shape druid as a mount?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 00:23
|
|
mango sentinel posted:I got to go out on a limb and say all pet and summoning classes in D&D adjacent pen and paper are just a bad idea. I understand people really liking that archetype and wanting to fill that niche, but breaking up one characters power into two or more entities that act independently is a huge burden on gameplay, even before trying to balance that. Pet/Summoning at least definitely should never be a subclass of something that can also not be pet based. I think the only way it has a chance of working well is if you design a class from the ground up specifically to have the pet be the primary combat presence.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 00:28
|
|
|
mango sentinel posted:I got to go out on a limb and say all pet and summoning classes in D&D adjacent pen and paper are just a bad idea. I understand people really liking that archetype and wanting to fill that niche, but breaking up one characters power into two or more entities that act independently is a huge burden on gameplay, even before trying to balance that. “Act independently” is the issue. Summoner classes should use their action to command the mobs to do some strangely spell-like things (not just attack for pissall damage) then can do some cool fluff thing as a bonus action. At X level let them siphon health from their summons or vice versa. Just don’t bloat the action economy any more in the PC’s favor. Turns take too drat long.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 00:41
|
|
|
mango sentinel posted:Rules as written the mount rules are very loose. I'd say a Land Druid would be a fine mount so long as the rider was one size smaller. I'm now picturing a halfling and Goliath buddy cop team who transform into a tiny winged hussar and his war bear.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 00:41
|
|
|
Elysiume posted:Anything that involves having to roll a d4 is inherently bad because d4s are the worst dice. Tell your DM not to attack you then 
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 00:44
|
|
|
Kaysette posted:“Act independently” is the issue. Summoner classes should use their action to command the mobs to do some strangely spell-like things (not just attack for pissall damage) then can do some cool fluff thing as a bonus action. At X level let them siphon health from their summons or vice versa. Just don’t bloat the action economy any more in the PC’s favor. Turns take too drat long.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 00:53
|
|
|
guess what in 5e it's 8! (I've lowered this to 4 personally but it's still a pain in the rear end.)
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 00:54
|
|
|
PMush Perfect posted:Personally, my favorite 5e house rule is that level 1 HP uses Con score, instead of con mod. Gives everyone about 10-12 more HP to play around with, and is pretty intuitive. I just recently started a 5e campaign and forgot about this until just now. Does anyone else have any suggestions for good house rules?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 01:01
|
|
|
Elysiume posted:I've had fights (in Pathfinder) where the druid was controlling 5+ summons. It's so bad. I played a 3.5 campaign with a conjurer wizard and a druid. I feel your pain.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 01:41
|
|
|
I liked the way the Leader Druids from 4e approached pets. I remember my Summer Druid could hit for 1d12 damage and grant some temp HP or I could tell my companion to attack and he would do 1d12+ his Strength bonus. The encounter power was to have both attack at the same time.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 01:53
|
|
|
I've found summoner classes great for RP but poo poo for combat because action economy of "gently caress man do your turns" is bad. Also if you're going to play a "pet" class in 5e you're better off with one pet to focus on purely for anti frustration... Lol BM. Rip my turtle Howard's riding goblin. Hey are there "good"/socially accepted goblins in Faerun? Like not always brain-dead monsters but accepted into cities and treated normally? Gridlocked fucked around with this message at 02:01 on Mar 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 01:54
|
|
|
Pleads posted:Isn't he literally the lead game designer? Actually, no. He is Senior Manager of R&D, which I understand to be more of a management role than a design role. Jeremy Crawford is The Lead Rules Designer. E: he is referred to as Co-Design Lead for 5E, but I'm not convinced he did much actual design. thefakenews fucked around with this message at 02:18 on Mar 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 02:16
|
|
|
When I googled "pathfinder 2e" the other day it also served up an April Fools joke from two years ago about Mike Mearls joining Paizo to be the edition's lead designer. Sadly took me a minute to realise it was an old article. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 02:52
|
|
|
Never mind did not notice the comma.
MonsterEnvy fucked around with this message at 04:12 on Mar 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 04:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 06:34 |
|
|
there is a comma there
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2018 04:08
|
|