|
multiclassing is a problem because class design is a problem because 5e has bone-deep issues as a system. The fact that the first level of warlock is massively more interesting than basically anything else is an indictment of how boring most other levels are, and the fact that it's much more powerful speaks to how empty 5e's design is. it's always better to do more damage consistently (multiple attack rolls!) than less damage inconsistently, so it's always better to pick up eldritch blast than pretty much any other cantrip (hey here's a good question: why is eldritch blast, which is clearly supposed to be a defining warlock feature, tied inherently to the cross-class friendly spell system? What the gently caress kind of choice was that?). It's always better to minimize ability score multidependencies (DTAS) so consolidating to CHA for all save targets and damage is always the right move. It's always better to have a wider array of options than fifteen gradations of strength for one option, so except for certain spell level breakpoints you'd almost always rather expand your spell list laterally than get e.g. more spell smites. There's five million charisma casters, also, for no reason, making the problem worse. If there were more interesting things to do than damage or save-or-suck, multiclassing wouldn't be a problem the way it is. If the game wasn't shackled to ability scores, multiclassing wouldn't be a problem the way it is. If it wasn't so incredibly easy to make a subpar character (with the range of effectiveness that entails), multiclassing wouldn't be a problem the way it is. but they like all those old canards, so multiclassing will continue to be a problem. e: now I'm thinking about non-spell ways to have a warlock that maintains its striker caster energy, like not by having The Good Cantrip And Its Upgrades but by bonus action shooting eldritch lasers every round. WARLOCK UNSHACKLING USHABTI OMNIGUN double e: like barbarian gets +2 rage damage and a couple subclass features after level 5. there's no reason not to run basically any other class on top of that chassis once you hit that point unless you really, really want to, like, cast augury once a day as a spell-like ability. of course multiclassing is rampant when most classes in this game are only designed through level 6 or level 11 (while the spell system runs all the way to 17). Valentin fucked around with this message at 05:37 on Jan 4, 2024 |
#
?
Jan 4, 2024 04:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 06:18 |
|
|
Democratic Pirate posted:It’s wild how quickly AI art can generate passable character mock-ups. I’d pay a real artist for anything serious, but the right prompt can get essentially real time sketches of something silly a character did during a session. Seriously. I’m using the bing chat “draw me a picture of…” feature to make some pretty cool art for my campaign blog. It saves me a ton of time trawling Google images and deviantArt and as long as I’m careful about asking it to create crowds of people (horrifying…) it’s pretty good. My only guff is that it tends to crank out female characters as super-gaunt duck-lipped heroin-chic models unless I’m really really specific.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2024 05:42
|
|
|
aw frig aw dang it posted:In your rogue example, I'd just say that's a called shot and have them roll with disadvantage. You could also have the monster roll a save - maybe if they do then it only halves their move speed instead of pinning them entirely. Another way would be to increase the AC needed to score a hit on a called shot, because a specific spot is harder to score a hit on.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2024 13:53
|
|
|
for example Babe Ruth's famous called shot was AC -9 (the equivalent of AC 29 in modern systems)
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2024 16:02
|
|
|
Empty Sandwich posted:for example Babe Ruth's famous called shot was AC -9 (the equivalent of AC 29 in modern systems) Yeah, but that was back when his DM didn't understand system mastery yet and he could abuse it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2024 16:25
|
|
|
Valentin posted:WARLOCK UNSHACKLING USHABTI OMNIGUN The eldritch blast was never cast as a spell. The eldritch blast was always in the process of being cast as a spell. The eldritch blast doesn't count as an attack. The eldritch blast always hits automatically, regardless of if it was ever actually cast or not, ignoring all cover, and its damage cannot be reduced in any way. No rule supersedes this.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2024 17:24
|
|
|
pseudosavior posted:The eldritch blast was never cast as a spell. Real Emiya Shirou, "I don't create swords, I create a world that contains an infinite number of swords, ready and waiting." energy here. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2024 18:00
|
|
|
just learned about catnap and i don't think i've ever been more irritated at something in a game before. the world's dumbest little bandaid that shows they understand short rests are a problem in their design but absolutely won't do anything to fix it lmao
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2024 19:20
|
|
|
Valentin posted:just learned about catnap and i don't think i've ever been more irritated at something in a game before. the world's dumbest little bandaid that shows they understand short rests are a problem in their design but absolutely won't do anything to fix it lmao When it appeared in the campaign I’m in I immediately said, “Well, that’s the most powerful ability I’ve ever heard of. But our wizard is a Tabaxi, so I decided that it’s too funny a coincidence to complain. Also, I’m the warlock, so I suppose it’s in my best interest.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2024 19:36
|
|
|
Yeah, fixing short rests was the first thing that I blatantly stole from Baldur's Gate 3. Short rests in my games now take as much time as is required according to the narrative, like using a tent in a final fantasy game. Sometimes that's around an hour, sometimes that's a few minutes to simply catch your breath, patch your wounds, eat a granola bar, and then head back into the breach.
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2024 20:02
|
|
|
Valentin posted:multiclassing is a problem because class design is a problem because 5e has bone-deep issues as a system. The fact that the first level of warlock is massively more interesting than basically anything else is an indictment of how boring most other levels are, and the fact that it's much more powerful speaks to how empty 5e's design is. Yeah was going to write essentially this although admittedly my DM experience it more with 3.5e than 5e, but it's easy to say "well just let your players do what's in the rules!" when in reality the entire reason DMs feel compelled to house rule is that the rules often just flat out suck. In 3.5 multi-classing was a massive pain I mostly didn't want to deal with while I was also doing a lot of the core work myself (and this was nearly 20 years ago when there were a lot fewer digital tools to help) so simply assuming that only a controlling DM would ban multi-classing is the kind of thing that makes my eyebrow raise
|
|
#
?
Jan 4, 2024 20:13
|
|
|
Valentin posted:multiclassing is a problem because class design is a problem because 5e has bone-deep issues as a system. The fact that the first level of warlock is massively more interesting than basically anything else is an indictment of how boring most other levels are, and the fact that it's much more powerful speaks to how empty 5e's design is. The problem here isn't Eldritch Blast. It is technically the best ranged damage cantrip - but the difference between it and Firebolt is so small that it really isn't worth multiclassing just to get it. Eldritch Blast only becomes comfortably the best cantrip with the Agonizing Blast Invocation which requires either two levels or one level and a feat; a substantial investment and worth an entire spell level. This only actually becomes worthwhile for sorcerers IMO starting at level 9 because the number of spells you get after that point stops going up and there's a huge EB power spike at level 11, and 90% of games are over by level 10. Bards gain more damage but can't funnel warlock slots into metamagic and don't gain armour proficiency, and paladins hit like trucks anyway. Eldritch Blast Multiclassing in the actual level range at which people play works more or less as intended as a "this works and gives you something but at a substantial cost" (and the Coffeelock doesn't come good until the teens and requires a very permissive DM). The warlock multiclassing problem actually belongs to the Hexblade subclass and a single level dip into that subclass. The Pact of the Blade is awful for a range of reasons, but one major one is that warlocks have charisma as their primary stat and only light armour - so they have to give up the spellcasting to hit people with weapons (plus they are squishy). The Hexblade subclass was designed as a patch for how bad the Pact of the Blade was rather than just errataing or adding a new better pact. When used as intended the Hexblade works and a hexblade melee warlock is decently tough and powerful without being overwhelming. But it does this by giving weapon wielding with charisma, medium armour and shield proficiency, a curse of their own, and two spells of which one is Shield. This is amazing as a single level dip on some of the other charisma casters.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 03:23
|
|
|
The main narrative issue with multiclassing is that it exposes the main narrative issue with levelling in 5e and other similar games. Namely that it's very hard to reconcile "you have trained for years to do 1d6+3 slashing damage and die after 3 hits" and "this group of people who met in a tavern last month and could barely handle a giant rat just executed God". But that's a fault of the overall design of the game, not a fault of multiclassing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 09:01
|
|
|
Lamuella posted:The main narrative issue with multiclassing is that it exposes the main narrative issue with levelling in 5e and other similar games. Namely that it's very hard to reconcile "you have trained for years to do 1d6+3 slashing damage and die after 3 hits" and "this group of people who met in a tavern last month and could barely handle a giant rat just executed God". But that's a fault of the overall design of the game, not a fault of multiclassing. Is that a fault? I don’t know any ttrpg that puts time restrictions on leveling up if that’s what you’re saying. I ran a wfrp campaign that took 30 sessions to complete that spanned the course of 8 in game days, during which the players earned a campaigns worth of xp, and you just kinda ignore that aspect, because the alternative is the players don’t level up at all for almost a year’s worth of play.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 14:13
|
|
|
Lamuella posted:"this group of people who met in a tavern last month and could barely handle a giant rat just executed God" nothing much to add to this conversation but simply lol at this phrasing
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 14:42
|
|
|
neonchameleon posted:The problem here isn't Eldritch Blast. It is technically the best ranged damage cantrip - but the difference between it and Firebolt is so small that it really isn't worth multiclassing just to get it. I only have a minor quibble here which is that plenty of charisma classes literally do this except they go one more level so they can get agonizing blast as well because the fact that EB is an increasing series of separate attacks with their own bonus to hit and damage is bigger than you give it credit for, especially if it grants say, paladin a charisma scaling ranged attack alongside the silly poo poo you do with smite and warlock slots.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 14:48
|
|
|
Lamuella posted:The main narrative issue with multiclassing is that it exposes the main narrative issue with levelling in 5e and other similar games. Namely that it's very hard to reconcile "you have trained for years to do 1d6+3 slashing damage and die after 3 hits" and "this group of people who met in a tavern last month and could barely handle a giant rat just executed God". But that's a fault of the overall design of the game, not a fault of multiclassing. Why does it have to start with , "you have trained for years to do 1d6+3 slashing damage and die after 3 hits?" I don't recall reading any rules that specify how long training takes. It could just be, "You decided last week that you would finally read that 'basic sword instructions' manual that has been on the shelf, and now you can do 1d6+3 slashing, but you will die after 3 hits..." Imasalmon fucked around with this message at 15:23 on Jan 5, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 15:18
|
|
|
Imasalmon posted:Why does it have to start with , "you have trained for years to do 1d6+3 slashing damage and die after 3 hits?" I don't recall reading any rules that specify how long training takes. It could just be, "You decided last week that you would finally read that 'basic sword instructions' manual that has been on the shelf, and now you can do 1d6+3 slashing, but you will die after 3 hits..." The flavour text of a lot of classes is based around your class being a longtime vocation. For example: "Paladins train for years to learn the skills of combat, mastering a variety of weapons and armor. Even so, their martial skills are secondary to the magical power they wield: power to heal the sick and injured, to smite the wicked and the undead, and to protect the innocent and those who join them in the fight for justice." "Wild and enigmatic, varied in form and function, the power of magic draws students who seek to master its mysteries. Some aspire to become like the gods, shaping reality itself. Though the casting of a typical spell requires merely the utterance of a few strange words, fleeting gestures, and sometimes a pinch or clump of exotic materials, these surface components barely hint at the expertise attained after years of apprenticeship and countless hours of study." (The previous one was wizard)
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 16:20
|
|
|
Adventurers are not normal people; they are protagonists. In the same way that me learning video production gave me a leg up in learning photography, me being pretty good at being a bard makes it easier for me to become roguish.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 16:26
|
|
|
Verisimilidude posted:Is that a fault? I don’t know any ttrpg that puts time restrictions on leveling up if that’s what you’re saying. I ran a wfrp campaign that took 30 sessions to complete that spanned the course of 8 in game days, during which the players earned a campaigns worth of xp, and you just kinda ignore that aspect, because the alternative is the players don’t level up at all for almost a year’s worth of play. It's more a fault of scale; the time issue is just part of the scale issue. The fact that D&D wants the spectrum of possible adventures to be so wide means that a party of four is supposedly more challenged by three swarms of insects at min level (50% past the "Deadly" encounter threshold) than by Yeehognu, god of the gnolls, at max level (only 20% past the "Deadly" encounter threshold). Most people don't do 1–20 campaigns, though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 16:46
|
|
|
neonchameleon posted:(snip) you have successfully identified the issue that hexblade is very good, yeah. but that's not what I'm talking about. the problem is that paladin levels 7-11 (maybe 8-11 if you have a decent subclass feature) are just a wasteland. man yeah I'd love to cast aura of vitality and spirit shroud. that owns so hard. I'd love to get a minor math tweak worth ~2.5 damage per round. gently caress that poo poo owns. I'd way rather have that than the ability to shoot people from 120 feet away forever, a piece of added versatility I can't acquire from basically anywhere else in the game with way, way bigger implications for how I can play on a round to round basis e: and the only reason I'm not extending to 12 is because it has an ASI, the only cudgel they could find to encourage singleclassing Valentin fucked around with this message at 17:16 on Jan 5, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 17:14
|
|
|
Valentin posted:you have successfully identified the issue that hexblade is very good, yeah. but that's not what I'm talking about. level 8 has an ASI too. Also, I really love Crusader Mantle in my group with 4 martial characters. YggdrasilTM fucked around with this message at 17:28 on Jan 5, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 17:24
|
|
|
Just have one class and let spell selection differentiate characters. Add a “Swing weapon” cantrip as support for melee characters.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 17:26
|
|
|
I do kinda feel like there should be way more feats to give you what you'd want a dip to do, and way more official ways of gaining feats. I feel like the choice of an ASI or a Feat is a tad unfair. Because the ASI is so good that unless you had Heroically Epic Legendary Pointbuy or rolled all 18s (and in the campaign I dm I do like 5d6k3h as it is! WITH FREE REROLLS OF 1s! People only really average out to slightly above average rolls!!) the only reason to NOT do an ASI is for something like Lucky. Which is a little too powerful, or something that gives you more choices during combat, which often feel weak even if it gives a half asi. Like multiclassing should be so you gain access to mechanics that require going at least like 5 levels into that class for the full effect; and the level 1-2 dips should just be feats.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 17:40
|
|
|
ASIs are easily the worst part of character progression, yeah. 4e's feat tax problem, built into the game from day 1, in a way designed to make you take dead levels in the hopes of one day acquiring a +1 to your core combat stat, after they already theoretically fixed the feat tax problem with bounded accuracy and scaling proficiency bonus.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 18:19
|
|
|
Democratic Pirate posted:It’s wild how quickly AI art can generate passable character mock-ups. I’d pay a real artist for anything serious, but the right prompt can get essentially real time sketches of something silly a character did during a session. The rules thread for this subforum is stickied. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 19:20
|
|
|
Valentin posted:I'd way rather have that than the ability to shoot people from 120 feet away forever, a piece of added versatility I can't acquire from basically anywhere else in the game with way, way bigger implications for how I can play on a round to round basis My friend came up with a nice idea which was that all the dope stuff you can add onto eldritch blast should instead be added onto your 'signature cantrip,' which you get for free based on your patron (so sacred flame for celestial, firebolt for infernal, chill touch for undead etc). It just adds a bit of variety and thematic flavour and softens that choice of 'oh, should I take a d8 cantrip, or the d10 cantrip that has has the longest range, damage bonus and can split its targets and push/pull people as necessary.'
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 19:25
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:I do kinda feel like there should be way more feats to give you what you'd want a dip to do, and way more official ways of gaining feats. I feel like the choice of an ASI or a Feat is a tad unfair. Because the ASI is so good that unless you had Heroically Epic Legendary Pointbuy or rolled all 18s (and in the campaign I dm I do like 5d6k3h as it is! WITH FREE REROLLS OF 1s! People only really average out to slightly above average rolls!!) the only reason to NOT do an ASI is for something like Lucky. Which is a little too powerful, or something that gives you more choices during combat, which often feel weak even if it gives a half asi. Valentin posted:ASIs are easily the worst part of character progression, yeah. 4e's feat tax problem, built into the game from day 1, in a way designed to make you take dead levels in the hopes of one day acquiring a +1 to your core combat stat, after they already theoretically fixed the feat tax problem with bounded accuracy and scaling proficiency bonus. Cosigned to both of these. The feat taxes still exist because you're still making a choice between a number boost and a cool ability, they just don't call the number boost a feat anymore. It feels like they were well aware of 3.5 and 4e's feat bloat and took the worst option to get around it by trying to force players into a compelling choice, but it's not between two fun options, it's between the boring but better option and the more interesting but worse option. This goes against game design 101 -- the most effective way to do something *has* to also be the most fun or interesting, or else players will bore themselves to death just to get the tiniest sliver of a numerical advantage and blame the devs for making a bad game. It's such an easy fix too: separate feats and ASIs again, and just have the goddamn self-control to not flood the zone with feats again. ninjahedgehog fucked around with this message at 19:41 on Jan 5, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 19:39
|
|
|
The thing I hate most about 1D&D feats is that they all come with a one point ASI. It doesn't fix the problem of odd points, it just exacerbates it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 19:42
|
|
|
I think feat flooding would be fine if it was more of a JRPG sort of thing where they gave small but meaningful boosts, and came regularly. The problem is that you have a few really good feats that are basically have the value of a whole class (Lucky); and then Feats that don't even do what they say (Mage Slayer) and ones that are very situational (Dungeon Delver).
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 20:10
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:The thing I hate most about 1D&D feats is that they all come with a one point ASI. It doesn't fix the problem of odd points, it just exacerbates it. Agree to disagree. There are plenty of feats I wouldn't take if they didn't have that +1 stat increase. It's also a good way of rounding out custom lineage characters
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 20:23
|
|
|
I think a lot of people have to also consider that many players, perhaps even most players, don't view building their character as a series of strategic steps to increase numerical efficiency, but rather building their character is a series of moment-to-moment choices that make thematic sense, or are done purely for fun. I've interacted with far more players who build their characters sub-optimally because the options better match their characters, and the relatively low level of difficulty in encounter design allows these characters to survive and thrive. Striking a balance between these two concepts is hard, and 5e does a fairly good job at it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 20:23
|
|
|
Verisimilidude posted:I think a lot of people have to also consider that many players, perhaps even most players, don't view building their character as a series of strategic steps to increase numerical efficiency, but rather building their character is a series of moment-to-moment choices that make thematic sense, or are done purely for fun. yes, all this is true. It's another reason multiclassing is a problem, because the moment to moment thematic sense and fun choices are way stronger and more interesting at level 1 of a new class than they are at a dead level. A level 9 paladin has literally no character building choices to make at level up. also, nothing you're saying requires a system that is poorly balanced or designed. Valentin fucked around with this message at 21:25 on Jan 5, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 21:06
|
|
|
Verisimilidude posted:I think a lot of people have to also consider that many players, perhaps even most players, don't view building their character as a series of strategic steps to increase numerical efficiency This is a false dichotomy. People write this off way too easily to be like "well some people like role-playing and not roll-playing" and the issue is that some people are just like, able to do math and are now forced by the game to choose between oh this is a cool thing that is thematically appropriate for my character and not being bad at the job your character is supposed to be good at. It kinda fuckin sucks that you are measurably, verifiably punished for doing it. Like this isn't about I'm a pro gamer that has to be OPTIMAL at everything I just don't want the feels bad every single time I play this game that whenever I fail a roll by one it's because I decided to pick something cool for my character. Imagine a game where it's "okay you can choose to have a cool cape but you have to do 5 less damage for life. The cape doesn't do anything and just looks neat and the damage really isn't a HUGE deal it's not gonna win or lose the game for you but everyone who isn't wearing the cape is measurably better than you you dumb cape wearing idiot" and that's d&d. It's not even that people won't make that choice I've played a dwarf wizard because I could wear heavier armor and I thought that was neat even if the stat bonuses didn't line up but why is that a choice I need to make Glagha fucked around with this message at 22:34 on Jan 5, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2024 22:32
|
|
|
Lamuella posted:The main narrative issue with multiclassing is that it exposes the main narrative issue with levelling in 5e and other similar games. Namely that it's very hard to reconcile "you have trained for years to do 1d6+3 slashing damage and die after 3 hits" and "this group of people who met in a tavern last month and could barely handle a giant rat just executed God". But that's a fault of the overall design of the game, not a fault of multiclassing. No D&D player in the history of the medium has ever genuinely complained about this outside of a "hey, isn't it kinda funny that..." idle musing sort of way, the same way they might discuss the implausibility of how someone managed to get a manticore in a dungeon room with entrances too small to admit a Large creature or whatever. It's a level of suspension of disbelief a little kid is capable of, who cares.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2024 06:14
|
|
|
no, it's ridiculous. like when galahad defeats his father lancelot at only 15 despite being raised by nuns, then gets immediately knighted, gets the seat at the round table only for the guy who's gonna find the holy grail, then gets given a magic sword. how'd that guy get good at swordfighting. it's childish and I'm tired of it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2024 06:48
|
|
|
Valentin posted:no, it's ridiculous. like when galahad defeats his father lancelot at only 15 despite being raised by nuns, then gets immediately knighted, gets the seat at the round table only for the guy who's gonna find the holy grail, then gets given a magic sword. how'd that guy get good at swordfighting. it's childish and I'm tired of it. Lamarckian evolution. He was born good at sword fighting because his dad was good at sword fighting. It was in his blood.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2024 06:52
|
|
|
Asterite34 posted:No D&D player in the history of the medium has ever genuinely complained about this outside of a "hey, isn't it kinda funny that..." idle musing sort of way, the same way they might discuss the implausibility of how someone managed to get a manticore in a dungeon room with entrances too small to admit a Large creature or whatever. It's a level of suspension of disbelief a little kid is capable of, who cares. It's true. Absolutely nobody ever. Business Gorillas posted:Since everyone was curious what I do at my table, a level one character involves years of specialization and mastery in a path over your regular commoner
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2024 08:26
|
|
|
Optimization is a much bigger deal if you aren’t rewarded for failure. No one seriously argues about optimizing in Fate, and most PbTA games have such a variety of things to be good at there are only a few really broken combos I can think of offhand. (In the original Apocalypse World, if you’re gonna fight, it’s always best to take the move that lets you fight as a gang.) https://knightattheopera.blogspot.com/2022/12/not-all-balance-is-same.html I loved this article about how balance is really multiple different topics.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2024 08:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 06:18 |
|
|
It's best to abstract it all. I was just thinking about leveling while playing BG3, how you pick up Karlach after she's spent literal years battling demons in the hells, is so altered by the experience that she barely has any unscarred skin, and is regarded as a bad rear end and dangerous warrior. But like you get her in your party, have her help kill five goblins, and suddenly she's like "wait, I think I can access the spirit of the great bear now." Same with Wyll being so famous that people know his stupid nickname. I figure you just have to roll with it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2024 18:07
|
|
