|
I just want the warlord back. WarlordBeloved Martial Healer and Friend 2008-2014 Taken Too Soon
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 06:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 06:06 |
|
|
megane posted:I just want the warlord back. Yeah I agree, the loss of the 4E Warlord class was a tragic blow, IMO.  I had a good warlord character in 4E, so I'd love to be able to play another one in 5E at some point.Kinda reminds me of Dallas from Payday, where he 'heals' downed teammates by pointing at them and yelling "GET THE gently caress UP!" That's my kind of martial warlord healing! haha  Regarding 3.5 features though, I wish they carried across the 'composite bow' features to 5E. I know they probably didn't so that it would be a little simpler, but I liked effectively being able to be a buff ranger with a super high poundage longbow, who can annihilate at range just as swiftly as at melee range. Makes sense from a realism perspective too, since someone new to archery would want a lower poundage bow, while someone who's an experienced archer who's developed the relevant muscles in their back+shoulders and arms would be able to use a higher poundage bow. (Technically I guess it should probably also boost its max range, but for a game like D&D that's unnecessary, aside from if you decide to shoot in a tourney or something)
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 06:59
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:I enjoyed 3.5 at the time, but I much, much prefer building for 5th. Having just run a1-4, first edition is barely a system. It's still p fun though, I just used 'roll under stat' for skill rolls.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 08:58
|
|
|
Facebook Aunt posted:Backgrounds are lame because there are none for farmers. Or hunters. Or any kind of basic salt of the earth peasant except "folk hero". Funnily enough I did think the same thing and did try my hand at making meager backgrounds. This is in the flavour of kobolds (of cooooourse!), but it basically takes you 75% of the way for other races, just change a few words around if needed. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 12:49
|
|
Oh you were orphaned when your village was burned down? So what were your family before your village burned down? Urchins? Sages? Pirates???
|
megane posted:I just want the warlord back. A5E has the Marshal, which is a 5e Warlord Gort fucked around with this message at 13:23 on Jul 19, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 13:21
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:I enjoyed 3.5 at the time, but I much, much prefer building for 5th. TO be honest, out of all the editions I've played, 3.x is probably my singular least favorite overall. I can appreciate it as a stepping stone to the editions that followed, but it just feels so needlessly clunky and restrictive in its mechanics. I'd say 1st ed AD&D is only bad because the majority of its rules material was written by Gary "I have a thesaurus Q.V." Gygax. Mechanically, pretty much every edition of the game from the initial release of the 2e PHB and earlier are so mechanically similar as to be almost interchangeable. It's bare-bones, but I like it more than where 3.x ended up.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 15:48
|
|
|
I've only ever played 2e (with 1e supplements thrown in) and 5e. Honestly 5e seems like 2e modernized in a lot of ways, the transition felt pretty seamless. If 3.5 and pathfinder were similar then I kinda hate 3.5 by pathfinder proxy. Far too finicky and particular and the multiplicity of trap options seem to shoehorn you into a very narrow set of "viable" builds. There are certainly things 5e could do to improve. Better implementation of feats, replacing spell "levels" with "ranks", abolishing the warlock class, you know, straightforward stuff
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 16:05
|
|
|
KingKalamari posted:TO be honest, out of all the editions I've played, 3.x is probably my singular least favorite overall. I can appreciate it as a stepping stone to the editions that followed, but it just feels so needlessly clunky and restrictive in its mechanics. I'd say 1st ed AD&D is only bad because the majority of its rules material was written by Gary "I have a thesaurus Q.V." Gygax. Mechanically, pretty much every edition of the game from the initial release of the 2e PHB and earlier are so mechanically similar as to be almost interchangeable. It's bare-bones, but I like it more than where 3.x ended up. I think the people who have an issue with 1e are looking at it from the lens of something like Pathfinder or 3.5 edition where every rule is important. Most of the material in 1e is basically optional. You are not going to break anyone's finely crafted character build if you ignore weapon speed or don't use the potion mixture table.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 16:28
|
|
|
I feel like the difference in philosophy between the earliest editions and post-3rd edition is more about how the rules are presented. 1e's mechanics are very much DM-facing as opposed to the more player-facing approach that the game moved towards from 3e onwards. While I can definitely understand and appreciate the appeal of making your mechanics player-facing, I do feel like the game has lost something in the transition. I might just be speaking out of personal frustration because I play with a few people who have a very hard time wrapping their heads around the idea that they don't need to have something mechanically codified on their sheet for it to play a part in the game...Of course these are the same people who now belligerently refuse to play anything but Eclipse Phase, so there's that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 16:35
|
|
|
Yusin posted:Radiant Citadel unlocked for me, will give some impressions later. Time for some impressions. So I overall like the book, the Citadel and the various settings it connects to are interesting, and the adventures cover a wide variety of tones from humorous to horror. To go into more detail on one, my favorite of the settings is probably Akharin Sangar the Iranian written and themed setting. The backstory of the setting is that in the past it's people were threatened by a demon Zolmate Shab, however with the aid of the deity the Sunweaver a hero banished the demon, and helped found the city-state of Akharin Sangar in a land free of the demon. She ruled for 300 years in an era of prosperity. It continued to prosper during following dynasties, but eventually corruption, and excess took root. When that happened darkness fell on the city and the Zolmate Shab returned with an abyssal host. The people prayed to the Sunweaver again, and the angel Atash came down to aid them. Atash and his hosts defeated Zolmate Shab and it's armies. However Atash believed his mission was not finished, he prophesied the return of Zolmate Shab, even stronger than before, if the people of Akharin Sangar fell from grace again, and took leadership of the city to ensure this did not happen. It's now been 50 years since Atash has become ruler however he has become increasingly withdrawn and cold, due to being tired of seeing what he views as people repeating their mistakes. His decrees have become more restricting and have basically closed Akharin Sengar off to the rest of the world. Many of the people are also starting to doubt his prophecy's legitimacy after 50 years of peace, and are dissatisfied by his rule. The most notable are the Silent Roar, a rebel group made up of artisans, philosophers, and merchants who want to oust Atash and institute rule by the people, and the Ashen Heirs a violent anarchist group that want change at any cost, and view the city as a crumbling husk that needs to be burned to start anew.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 16:57
|
|
|
I miss prestige classes. It was a more fun way to customize your character and feel unique
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 16:58
|
|
|
RC Cola posted:I miss prestige classes. It was a more fun way to customize your character and feel unique I dislike the concept as they worked in 3.5e. You basically had to map out your character progression, skills, feats, multiclasses, etc before hand in order to qualify for the correct prestige classes. It's a very odd thing thematically, to know what your character will look like at 20th level when you are only 1st level. It pigion holes your character. If they added prestege classes to 5e I would want them to have a level requirement only.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 17:11
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:I dislike the concept as they worked in 3.5e. You basically had to map out your character progression, skills, feats, multiclasses, etc before hand in order to qualify for the correct prestige classes. It's a very odd thing thematically, to know what your character will look like at 20th level when you are only 1st level. It pigion holes your character. That's not how I did it, but lol if you think that people don't map out their sick warlock/sorc/paladin from level 1-20. People who map out their poo poo are gonna map out their poo poo
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 17:13
|
|
|
KingKalamari posted:TO be honest, out of all the editions I've played, 3.x is probably my singular least favorite overall. I can appreciate it as a stepping stone to the editions that followed, but it just feels so needlessly clunky and restrictive in its mechanics. I'd say 1st ed AD&D is only bad because the majority of its rules material was written by Gary "I have a thesaurus Q.V." Gygax. Mechanically, pretty much every edition of the game from the initial release of the 2e PHB and earlier are so mechanically similar as to be almost interchangeable. It's bare-bones, but I like it more than where 3.x ended up. agreed. i love a lot of OSR games though and i grew up on becmi so im partial to that. 5e is honestly my favourite edition and ttrpg game i ever played but i appreciate a lot of what 4e did as well. occasionally i take stuff from 3.x and pathfinder but mostly these systems were pure poo poo and almost made me quit the hobby
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 17:41
|
|
|
Arivia posted:For once, 5e thread, I come to you with an actual 5e question. A friend is running a 5e FR game, and I'm playing in it. The allowed books are the PHB+SCAG, with flexible racial bonuses but no access to other supplements. I was thinking of going swashbuckler rogue, although some sort of cleric or paladin is still open as well. Any build advice or recommendations? The first thing I'd recommend figuring out what you'd like to be doing with your bonus action during battle: The base rogue in melee generally doesn't want to stand at the front line, and therefore wants to move in, attack, and then move out. Non-swashbucklers will usually use their bonus action to Disengage using their Cunning Action, after swooping in to take a swing, and then moving away from the front lines to relative safety. Fancy Footwork gives the swashbuckler a couple of alternative uses of your bonus action by giving you the equivalent of a Disengage on each melee target you swing at. 1) You can dual-wield, and use your bonus action to attack again, letting you a) have another chance at landing your sneak attack in case your attack action misses, or b) attack another enemy to trigger Fancy Footwork to avoid an opportunity attack on a second opponent. In this case, your movement to advance, attack, and retreat will be limited ... 25' - 35' depending on your race. 2) You could instead use your bonus action to Dash using Cunning Action and be extremely mobile. This option really shines with a high movement speed race, like the Wood Elf previously suggested. That character would be moving 70' per turn with Dash which is an amazing amount of mobility, letting you get to the front lines (or even behind them), strike, then retreat to a very safe distance. Another build concern is around skills and the ability score assignment. If you're wanting to build a complementary party, you should figure out if you're going to be the party face (handling social interactions and making Persuasion, Deception, and/or Intimidation checks) and should therefore favor a high CHA score and Proficiency (or even Expertise) in one or more social skill. Additionally, you'll want to know if your character will be the party scout in normal exploration scenarios, which will make you want to prioritize Stealth, Perception, Investigation, and maybe even Survival (for tracking). Finally, Athletics and Acrobatics are very thematic for a swashbuckler, even though a class feature around them doesn't come online until very late (Elegant Maneuver at level 13). You will want DEX as your highest stat, followed by CON and CHA in some order, but since STR, INT, and WIS all fuel skills important to you, there is no obvious dump stat. I personally would dump INT but try to counteract that by being proficient in Investigation unless someone else in the party can handle that for you. I would also speak with your DM and confirm that they are on board with rules allowing a rogue to sneak attack on someone else's turn by using a reaction, then start looking at some ways to get that to come online via other party member abilities and features, multiclassing options (Battle Master maneuvers for example), or feats (Sentinal, Mage Slayer, or Martial Adept with Riposte for example). Finally, swashbuckler multi-classes very well, especially with fighter. A single level dip gives you a Fighting Style (Two Weapon Fighting for dual wielders, Defense or Dueling otherwise), shield proficiency (use one if not Dual Wielding), medium and heavy armor proficiencies, martial weapon proficiencies (grab a Heavy Crossbow when you are forced to fight at range), and Second Breath. You can make a solid build adding fighter levels all the way up to 5th for Extra Attack, which synergizes with Fancy Footwork very well.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 18:09
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:abolishing the warlock class, you know, straightforward stuff This is hosed because Warlock is the best class in 5e
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 18:29
|
|
|
Glagha posted:This is hosed because Warlock is the best class in 5e how did you typo paladin so badly
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 18:30
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:I think the people who have an issue with 1e are looking at it from the lens of something like Pathfinder or 3.5 edition where every rule is important. Most of the material in 1e is basically optional. You are not going to break anyone's finely crafted character build if you ignore weapon speed or don't use the potion mixture table. I wonder about that. You don't hear the same criticisms leveled at Basic and AD&D2E, which are also full of optional rules. Now that may be because people who began with WotC editions just consider all of the TSR stuff 1E, but I think it may instead be that BECMI and AD&D2E are much more clearly written and organized versions of the TSR D&D rules.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 18:35
|
|
|
I've definitely got to agree with you there: Gygax's awful writing and organization really did a lot more to make AD&D seem more convoluted than it actually was in the public consciousness.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 19:00
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:I think the people who have an issue with 1e are looking at it from the lens of something like Pathfinder or 3.5 edition where every rule is important. Most of the material in 1e is basically optional. You are not going to break anyone's finely crafted character build if you ignore weapon speed or don't use the potion mixture table. In retrospect, 1e as a system is functional, but as a rules-set it is not good. After rereading the 1e PHB recently, it’s clear that 1e intends you to find a group and learn to play from them, not from reading the rules, because the rules omit basic information that any modern RPG would consider critical. What can I do in combat? How do I know if I hit? The DM will explain it all. 1e is heavily slanted towards “here’s a bunch of systems, some well-developed and some not, mix and match as you please but the DM makes all the decisions.” I even recall some 1e groups running combat round as segments, so in one game a 3 segment casting time spell would get cast three segments after you started in the same combat round (which had 10 segments) even if you started casting late in the round, while in another if you started too late it would finish the next round, and in a third each “combat round” lasted one segment so you’d be casting as your action for three combat rounds before you cast that spell. 1e was a very RAI with multiple options, pick your preference, with very few RAW frameworks to wrap around it. You couldn’t really teach yourself to play. And the rules are bad at delineating which elements are crucial vs optional. I played in only one campaign that bothered to use the 1e weapon modifiers vs armor type table, for example. Most dispensed with weapon speed, but doing that with any of the options that slowed spellcasting gave martial classes an edge, though arguably one they needed. Again, it’s the philosophy of a rules system vs a rules reference: one gives you a structure, the other gives you ideas.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 19:28
|
|
|
Narsham posted:In retrospect, 1e as a system is functional, but as a rules-set it is not good. After rereading the 1e PHB recently, it’s clear that 1e intends you to find a group and learn to play from them, not from reading the rules, because the rules omit basic information that any modern RPG would consider critical. What can I do in combat? How do I know if I hit? The DM will explain it all. 1e is heavily slanted towards “here’s a bunch of systems, some well-developed and some not, mix and match as you please but the DM makes all the decisions.” I even recall some 1e groups running combat round as segments, so in one game a 3 segment casting time spell would get cast three segments after you started in the same combat round (which had 10 segments) even if you started casting late in the round, while in another if you started too late it would finish the next round, and in a third each “combat round” lasted one segment so you’d be casting as your action for three combat rounds before you cast that spell. To be fair: The lack of information on some of those core systems in the PHB is another reflection of the divide between what was considered player-facing vs. what was considered DM-facing. Stuff like actions in combat and rolls to hit are things that were included in the Dungeon Master's guide and were generally considered pieces of knowledge the players weren't supposed to have access to under normal circumstances.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 19:36
|
|
|
Narsham posted:In retrospect, 1e as a system is functional, but as a rules-set it is not good. After rereading the 1e PHB recently, it’s clear that 1e intends you to find a group and learn to play from them, not from reading the rules, because the rules omit basic information that any modern RPG would consider critical. What can I do in combat? How do I know if I hit? The DM will explain it all. 1e is heavily slanted towards “here’s a bunch of systems, some well-developed and some not, mix and match as you please but the DM makes all the decisions.” I even recall some 1e groups running combat round as segments, so in one game a 3 segment casting time spell would get cast three segments after you started in the same combat round (which had 10 segments) even if you started casting late in the round, while in another if you started too late it would finish the next round, and in a third each “combat round” lasted one segment so you’d be casting as your action for three combat rounds before you cast that spell. A lot of that is because when 1e was published, the game was still growing and evolving rapidly. Gygax was getting suggestions from everywhere about stuff he could include and DMs were largely running their own homebrew systems based loosely on the 0e stuff. He was loath to tell anyone they were doing it wrong, so he tried to include some form of almost everything So it wasn't a thoroughly play-tested mature game at that point. A lot of stuff was left in the hands of the DM because DMs were the innovators, defining the game as it was being played. I'm a bit forgiving of its disorganization because TSR was trying desperately to ride the tiger they'd caught.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 19:43
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:If they added prestege classes to 5e I would want them to have a level requirement only. I'd like to see presige classes implemented when you hit character levels 6, 11 or 15 maybe? Something to make sure they are for higher level campaigns where you start to expect things to get a bit silly. I'm thinking of classes where you get a signature abolity at level 14, and then spend the next 6 levels either filling out a trick build with action surge or kind of going 'more of the same please.' I think they could be good if done right, I just definitely don't want a return to 'ah poo poo, i need to pump my wisdom score so my monk doesn't just straight up die, but also I don't want to lock myself out of kickpuncher at level 8' kind of building. Part of me misses the mechanical complexity of building 3.5 characters well as a kind of mathematical exercise, but man does it feel stressful to play a character knowing you HAVE to upgrade it in a certain way - it's a difference between building a character and actually playing that character before the cool stuff starts.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 19:46
|
|
|
Yeah pretty sure subclasses are supposed to fill the prestige class niche. I do wish there was more opportunity for customizing a character in different ways, and I would like to see more feats that enable that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 20:24
|
|
|
Base Emitter posted:Yeah pretty sure subclasses are supposed to fill the prestige class niche. I think the lack of customization opportunities is probably my biggest complaint with 5e. It would be cool to have additional class-related choices at later levels.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 20:35
|
|
|
I think the best way to fix the lack of customization choices would be something akin to Shadow the Demon Lord's system where you get to select additional subclasses as you level up. Add an additional sub-subclass choice players can take somewhere around 6-8th level on top of the subclass they've already selected.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 20:40
|
|
|
KingKalamari posted:To be fair: The lack of information on some of those core systems in the PHB is another reflection of the divide between what was considered player-facing vs. what was considered DM-facing. Stuff like actions in combat and rolls to hit are things that were included in the Dungeon Master's guide and were generally considered pieces of knowledge the players weren't supposed to have access to under normal circumstances. The philosophy makes me think of the PtBA games a little, where Players are forbidden from naming the Move they're using -- they're just supposed to say what they're doing, and then the GM says 'Oh, okay, that sounds like a Act Under Fire, so roll cool'. or whatever
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 22:37
|
|
|
Glagha posted:This is hosed because Warlock is the best class in 5e That's the problem! Look, there were no warlocks in 2e, and 2e was the best edition because it had Dark Sun and when I played it my neck and back didn't hurt and I still had dreams. More substantively, the problem with warlocks is they're just too good a pick too easily; virtually any build you have you can improve it by slapping a level or three of warlock in, because all their goodies are front loaded and they get extremely powerful spells and spell slots on a short rest recharge. The existence of the warlock trivializes too much of character building. Bobby Deluxe posted:Part of me misses the mechanical complexity of building 3.5 characters well as a kind of mathematical exercise, but man does it feel stressful to play a character knowing you HAVE to upgrade it in a certain way - it's a difference between building a character and actually playing that character before the cool stuff starts. Yeah, it's really hard to make a system that allows for complex character designs but also prevents trap options and allows players to just build what they want and make it work. Pillars of Eternity did it but mostly because there was a computer available to calculate everything on the fly, so the game could get EXTREMELY complicated under the hood and the player didn't ahve to worry about the details. One thing that's really important in more complex systems is easy re-building and re-spec'gin your character. Lancer does this really well, you can just do it at every level up as you want, pretty much. The problem with complex systems like pathfinder is that you have to assume the GM is going to let you rebuild if you end up trapping yourself into poo poo, and not all GM's will.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 22:53
|
|
|
Arrrthritis posted:I think the lack of customization opportunities is probably my biggest complaint with 5e. It would be cool to have additional class-related choices at later levels. Just one of the many reasons the warlock with its infusions is the best class. And the sorcerer, where picking your spells is customising your character, is better than the wizard, where picking your spells is customising your equipment.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 22:57
|
|
|
IMO warlocks should be a cut above the rest. They should also have real strings attached. Selling your soul as the easy road to power shouldn't be a trivial thing. I think a DM who doesn't put pressure on their players through their patron is doing a disservice.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 22:58
|
|
|
Mr. Lobe posted:IMO warlocks should be a cut above the rest. They should also have real strings attached. Selling your soul as the easy road to power shouldn't be a trivial thing. I think a DM who doesn't put pressure on their players through their patron is doing a disservice. Every class should have similar hooks!
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 22:59
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:More substantively, the problem with warlocks is they're just too good a pick too easily; virtually any build you have you can improve it by slapping a level or three of warlock in, because all their goodies are front loaded and they get extremely powerful spells and spell slots on a short rest recharge. The existence of the warlock trivializes too much of character building. With the sole exception of the way the Hexblade gets Hex Warrior (melee attacks based on Cha, medium armour, and shields) at level 1 rather than giving it as Pact of the Blade at level 3 I couldn't disagree more. There are, when push comes to shove, up to three classes that commonly dip warlock without going for hexblade to get charisma as their attack stat as a level 1 ability. The first is the paladin for a whole lot more smiting power; up to two free smites per short rest. This however is only necessarily worth it after level 11 in paladin. The second is the sorcerer for quickened Eldritch Blasts or even full coffeelock - again not worth it until level 9 as a sorcerer. And the third is the Bard getting an at will attack that's actually worth having. (This could be trivially fixed by making EB a class feature based on your warlock level - and I'm in favour of each warlock subclass having its own attack "cantrip"). If you're suggesting that level 11+ fighters and barbarians (or even L6+ barbarians) should bail on their base class that's not a problem with the warlock. Meanwhile smart wizards who dip at all dip either artificer or cleric because it maintains their spellcasting progression and gives them armour and a shield plus healing. And giving up caster levels is bad. And no dipping three levels of warlock won't give you extremely powerful spells on a short rest - it will give you second level spells on a short rest.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 23:11
|
|
|
Doctors & Daleks, the 5e Doctor Who RPG, is out now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 23:12
|
|
|
RC Cola posted:That's not how I did it, but lol if you think that people don't map out their sick warlock/sorc/paladin from level 1-20. People who map out their poo poo are gonna map out their poo poo But people no longer feel forced to map out their poo poo because it's needed to squeeze into prestige classes. In the normal way of 5e subclasses give you 80% of the benefit of prestige classes for about 25% of the effort. I've long been an advocate of the pure martials (and possibly half-martials) getting a second subclass at level 11 that says how they can actually hang with the reality warpers.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 23:12
|
|
|
Ginger Beer Belly posted:The first thing I'd recommend figuring out what you'd like to be doing with your bonus action during battle: Hey, thanks for all the good advice! I went wood elf and dumped Charisma and then looked at the subclass again and how it depends upon Charisma a bunch. Thankfully my DM is okay with me rearranging my ability scores. My DM is pretty new/not confident so I'd rather not bug them about the sneak attack on reactions. Not sure which way I'll go in terms of two handing or extreme mobility but you've given me a bunch to think about!
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 23:25
|
|
|
Fishbus posted:Funnily enough I did think the same thing and did try my hand at making meager backgrounds. This is in the flavour of kobolds (of cooooourse!), but it basically takes you 75% of the way for other races, just change a few words around if needed. Those are cool.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 23:28
|
|
|
It is pretty funny that by default, swashbucklers aren't able to, you know, do the buckling part of being a swashbuckler. No shields for them by default.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 23:31
|
|
|
neonchameleon posted:With the sole exception of the way the Hexblade gets Hex Warrior (melee attacks based on Cha, medium armour, and shields) at level 1 That's like 90% of the multiclass builds posted and recommended around the internet, though. Martials and rogues are the ones who multiclass, and they typically multi into Warlock, for the reasons you state. Wizards rarely multiclass and when they do it usually means they're net weaker (no Wish!) so it's not a huge issue. A lot of this could be fixed with some relatively minor tweaks (making warlocks int casters; adjusting EB as you suggest; adjusting hexblade; etc), sure. To get back to the topic of 5e generally: one thing the Baldur's Gate 3 character creation screen is really reminding me of is how BLAND initial character creation is in 5e. I suppose it's good, keeps new players from getting overwhelmed, but the basic player's handbook subclasses and the lack of feats (which I always forget are an optional rule) really combine to just make initial character creation so limited.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 23:36
|
|
|
neonchameleon posted:In the normal way of 5e subclasses give you 80% of the benefit of prestige classes for about 25% of the effort. I've long been an advocate of the pure martials (and possibly half-martials) getting a second subclass at level 11 that says how they can actually hang with the reality warpers. The problem with pure martials is that in a world where magic exists, you would expect them to be able to use it in some way. You can kind of do this via magic items, so you could allow martials of level 10+ an extra attunement slot? Sort of like they're not using up their flow of magic spellcasting so they have more 'passive' magic capacity or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 23:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 06:06 |
|
|
Arivia posted:Hey, thanks for all the good advice! I went wood elf and dumped Charisma and then looked at the subclass again and how it depends upon Charisma a bunch. Thankfully my DM is okay with me rearranging my ability scores. My DM is pretty new/not confident so I'd rather not bug them about the sneak attack on reactions. Not sure which way I'll go in terms of two handing or extreme mobility but you've given me a bunch to think about! By default sneak attacks can happen on your reaction. The rule for it is once per turn, and reactions happen on a different turn than yours. If it was not allowed they would have said once per round instead.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2022 23:38
|
|