|
Solemn Sloth posted:get back to 4e with this poo poo matey hah jokes on you 4e didn't have much in the way of that either
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 10:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 21:25 |
|
|
The Crotch posted:So apparently the new UA lets wizards get access to a high-level cleric class feature before clerics do? That's kind of odd, but I'm sure there's a goo- If only there was some sort of Background system, then we could add an Acolyte or something. I'm just spitballing here, but the description could be something like: "You have spent your life in the service of a temple to a specific god or pantheon of gods. You act as an intermediary between the realm of the holy and the mortal world, performing sacred rites and offering sacrifices in order to conduct worshipers into the presence of the divine. You are not necessarily a cleric - performing sacred rites is not the same thing as channeling divine power." I dunno, it's just a crazy idea. More seriously, I invite everybody to look up what happens if a Theurge picks the Arcana domain and reaches 14th level (when he picks up Arcana's level 17 ability). No peeking, try to figure it out for yourself if you can. Some things have to be seen to be believed. Absolutely nothing happens. Arcana lets you pick a couple of Wizard spells as domain spells and, thanks to the way the Theurge treat domain spells. you can now forego learning a new Wizard spell when you level up and instead take a Wizard spell. Because you're a Wizard who minors in Cleric-who-minors-in-wizard.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 10:35
|
|
|
The new wizard isn't just really strong, it's ridiculously the best option in the game. It is better then every other wizard choice and beats pretty much any cleric choice. Two levels in it also just became an absolutely stupifying dip for almost literally every single spellcaster in the game. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 10:36
|
|
|
Fun fact about Divine Arcana: As a bonus action, you get a +2 bonus to your next spell's attack roll or saving throw DC, as appropriate. It doesn't say your next spell must be cast before the end of the next round. It doesn't say your next spell must be cast within the same encounter. It doesn't say your next spell must be cast within the same day. Just "your next" spell. Oh, and 5e doesn't have any rules that prevent stacking as far as I know, because they trusted their Concentration mechanic and "bounded accuracy"  to fix all that.So, you can take a week or so to prepare (this become easier at higher levels with multiple channels per day) and then wander out, escorted by your party, and hit someone with an unbeatably high Tasha's Hideous Laughter or other such devastating spell. They get to repeat the impossible save every round, which they never succeed at, so in essence you've reinvented save or die as early as level 2.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 10:52
|
|
|
Sage Genesis posted:Fun fact about Divine Arcana: Yeah, no. The rules state bonuses from the same effect don't stack.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 11:02
|
|
|
Solemn Sloth posted:Yeah, no. The rules state bonuses from the same effect don't stack. I was looking for that but couldn't find it. Got a page number?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 11:06
|
|
|
Solemn Sloth posted:Yeah, no. The rules state bonuses from the same effect don't stack. Sage Genesis posted:I was looking for that but couldn't find it. Got a page number? As far as I recall from a time this came up before, the 5e PHB actually doesn't say this. The 3.5 PHB and SRD do explicitly say this so everyone assumes the same holds true now. 5e mentions you can't add the same proficiency for something multiple times but doesn't address the general case of any modifier. Ask
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 12:01
|
|
|
Kaysette posted:As far as I recall from a time this came up before, the 5e PHB actually doesn't say this. The 3.5 PHB and SRD do explicitly say this so everyone assumes the same holds true now. 5e mentions you can't add the same proficiency for something multiple times but doesn't address the general case of any modifier. That's what I thought. There's a rule that says that the same spell doesn't stack multiple times (p. 205), but anything that isn't a spell is not subject to that rule. I browsed a bit through the errata and Sage Advice and they confirm this: bonuses stack unless they are from the same spell.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 12:17
|
|
|
Huh, forgot it was only spell. Oh well, lucky DMs are a thing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 12:56
|
|
|
Solemn Sloth posted:Huh, forgot it was only spell. Oh well, lucky DMs are a thing. The sword of Damocles need only fall once. Rigged Death Trap fucked around with this message at 14:08 on Aug 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 14:05
|
|
|
Anyone want to compare the Divine Arcana Wizard to the Arcana Domain Cleric?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 14:35
|
|
|
The Crotch posted:So apparently the new UA lets wizards get access to a high-level cleric class feature before clerics do? That's kind of odd, but I'm sure there's a goo- So, how many times has a UA article come out for a casting class and it covered their full 20 level progression, vs how many times have they done the same for a fighter/rogue/barb/ranger/paladin(sort-of)?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 14:45
|
|
|
Admiral Joeslop posted:In case you didn't realize, you won't get an ASI or feat until whatever level the Fighter gets one. They're based on class level, not character level. I wanted to do more control since I have some some high damage allies. Shoving people is good as is supplementing my Dex rolls where I can. I've also been thinking of Heavy Armor Master. The Str point does dick all, but as someone in the middle of the low damage mooks most of the time the damage reduction is appealing but I don't know how long that will be useful. Don't see any other especially appealing options aside from dumping into Con or Str
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 15:55
|
|
|
Keep in mind, Mearls has had to basically issue errata for this wizard already to add that the cleric spells the new wizard gets become wizard spells, because otherwise they a) used Wisdom as their spell modifier, and more importantly, b) the wizard spellcasting description specifically says they use their spell slots to cast wizard spells, and thus the new wizard could never actually cast their new spells.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 16:06
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:Keep in mind, Mearls has had to basically issue errata for this wizard already to add that the cleric spells the new wizard gets become wizard spells, because otherwise they a) used Wisdom as their spell modifier, and more importantly, b) the wizard spellcasting description specifically says they use their spell slots to cast wizard spells, and thus the new wizard could never actually cast their new spells. Oh good, so at level 18 they do get to cast infinite Cure Wounds spells thanks to Spell Mastery. I was wondering if that was legit.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 16:28
|
|
|
WTF even is this 'god of magic' niche that Mike is yearning for? Like, okay, Wizards learn spells through intense study and something that exists between math and science. Clerics are granted powers from their deity - which, I think everybody would agree, is magic. Presumably if you have a god of magic they already favor wizards in the same way that a god of water probably favors seafarers and a god of the hunt digs hunters. The idea of a wizard/cleric becoming some kind of super-wizard is dumb as hell. Where are my options for being a super-sailor or a super-hunter? Cause all I see is Ranger is that isn't super-anything. I think the whole idea of a 'god of magic' is stupid in DnD.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 19:10
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:WTF even is this 'god of magic' niche that Mike is yearning for? Agreed. There's gods of mischief and thieves, just look at the Trickery domain. They would favor the Rogue class, yes? So where's my Rogue who gets Cleric features before the Clerics do? Where's the Fighter who is blessed by Athena or Ares, to the point where he gets War domain features several levels before War Clerics get them? Oh wait that's right, they don't exist and will never exist as official material either. Only Wizards get this kind of bullshit. Wizards are God's chosen people. Like, literally.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 19:16
|
|
|
I liked some of the previous UA articles, but this one is bad enough to make me shy away from the concept entirely. If something this obviously awful passes muster, I can't trust seemingly more balanced articles to actually work out in the long run. If it makes the jump from UA to final product the way the rogue's swashbuckler archetype did, then I'm done with 5e.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 19:27
|
|
|
404notfound posted:I liked some of the previous UA articles, but this one is bad enough to make me shy away from the concept entirely. If something this obviously awful passes muster, I can't trust seemingly more balanced articles to actually work out in the long run. Between Mearls's Wizardlust and the four man staff, I'm not remotely surprised that they are so bereft of ideas or dissenting voices that something like this meets their standards for being published on the site. I haven't read over the swashbuckler, but hearing people talk about it suggests it's real good. Is it broken?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 19:39
|
|
|
I mean, it's not called Fighters of the Coast, now is it?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 19:41
|
|
|
mango sentinel posted:Between Mearls's Wizardlust and the four man staff, I'm not remotely surprised that they are so bereft of ideas or dissenting voices that something like this meets their standards for being published on the site. It has two class features that combine to allow you to utilize sneak attack at basically all times except when you're attacking from range. Everything else is at least decent or good.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 19:51
|
|
|
The swashbuckler essentially gets free sneak attack and disengage all the time, though my point wasn't really that it's disgustingly overpowered. Just that there's a precedent for Unearthed Arcana content becoming actual released content, and this one really shouldn't.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 20:10
|
|
|
The problem is that Wizard is the most fun class to play and design, because you have so many toys and active choices to make. It's also the most "fantastical", so the wizardlust isnt without merit, but it just highlights a problem with the design of the game. I wonder if wizard should be like Psyker in Dark Heresy 2nd or how I believe being Force Sensitive in the Star Wars RPG works... it's something anyone can take to add magic to their class, with some costs. That way you could get ranger, bard, cleric, sorc etc casting without making wizards the only be-all-end-all class. When was the last time Rangers were legit in D&D? 4e doesn't count cause I'm never gonna play it 
Dre2Dee2 fucked around with this message at 21:09 on Aug 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
Dre2Dee2 posted:The problem is that Wizard is the most fun class to play and design, because you have so many toys and active choices to make. It's also the most "fantastical", so the wizardlust isnt without merit, but it just highlights a problem with the design of the game. I wonder if wizard should be like Psyker in Dark Heresy 2nd or how I believe being Force Sensitive in the Star Wars RPG works... it's something anyone can take to add magic to their class, with some costs. That way you could get ranger, bard, cleric, sorc etc casting without making wizards the only be-all-end-all class.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 22:26
|
|
|
Dre2Dee2 posted:When was the last time Rangers were legit in D&D? 4e doesn't count cause I'm never gonna play it 3.5's wildshape ranger is alright, isn't it? (For all that people here like to talk about 4e, I wish they'd run more campaigns of it. Very hard to find a game of it on Roll20, and drat near impossible to find a game with a tolerable GM.) 404notfound posted:That's the thing that's been bothering him for 30 years??? gently caress this. gently caress Mearls
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 22:30
|
|
|
"Huh, bards are proving to be more useful than wizards in regular play, gotta fix that!" Who is the new UA aimed at anyway? Who wants to play a religious wizard that's better than a cleric? Where was the demand for this?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 23:46
|
|
|
The Crotch posted:So apparently the new UA lets wizards get access to a high-level cleric class feature before clerics do? It wouldn't be the first time one class got another class's "key feature" before the other class.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 23:50
|
|
|
Dre2Dee2 posted:The problem is that Wizard is the most fun class to play and design, because you have so many toys and active choices to make. It's also the most "fantastical", so the wizardlust isnt without merit, but it just highlights a problem with the design of the game. I wonder if wizard should be like Psyker in Dark Heresy 2nd or how I believe being Force Sensitive in the Star Wars RPG works... it's something anyone can take to add magic to their class, with some costs. That way you could get ranger, bard, cleric, sorc etc casting without making wizards the only be-all-end-all class. 2es ranger is quite good , especially if the DM realizes that tracking is pretty much the most important nwp in the game. Rangers can track way better than almost everything else. However, it's tough to play with the ability score requirements.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 23:51
|
|
|
KingKalamari posted:Who is the new UA aimed at anyway? Who wants to play a religious wizard that's better than a cleric? Where was the demand for this? He wanted it, so it is.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 23:58
|
|
|
Red Metal posted:It wouldn't be the first time one class got another class's "key feature" before the other class.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 00:01
|
|
|
Imagine working at a games publisher (arguably the biggest), and your job is to write throwaway house rules as web content while creating little or no actual physical publications. This is what has become of D&D. I think at this same point in the dev cycle, 4E had... 6 or 7 real actual splatbooks alone? I would have to go back and check.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 00:03
|
|
|
The Crotch posted:I can at least pretend the bard eating the ranger's dessert was an accident. I actually meant Warlocks getting a fourth attack with Eldritch Blast at level 17, when Fighters have to wait until level 20.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 00:31
|
|
|
OneThousandMonkeys posted:Imagine working at a games publisher (arguably the biggest), and your job is to write throwaway house rules as web content while creating little or no actual physical publications. We're 2 months away from "Essentials" in 5e's life cycle.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 00:44
|
|
|
Kurieg posted:We're 2 months away from "Essentials" in 5e's life cycle. I stopped caring about 4E before Essentials came out because I had no one to play with. I remember always making characters because the crunch was fantastic and there were a ton of options from all the splat books before I gave up 
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 00:49
|
|
|
Dre2Dee2 posted:The problem is that Wizard is the most fun class to play and design, because you have so many toys and active choices to make. It's also the most "fantastical", so the wizardlust isnt without merit, but it just highlights a problem with the design of the game. I wonder if wizard should be like Psyker in Dark Heresy 2nd or how I believe being Force Sensitive in the Star Wars RPG works... it's something anyone can take to add magic to their class, with some costs. That way you could get ranger, bard, cleric, sorc etc casting without making wizards the only be-all-end-all class. You're absolutely right but here's my problem with that: For some reason you can have a Wizard special doodad for every loving thing. Pyromancer, time wizard, necromancer, whatever, there's some mechanized way to represent that and if not than some nerd somewhere is going to publish it. Then you have people blowing their tops over powerful martials, saying, "you'd need to be magical do to those things!" (w/r/t things like shouting limbs back on or leaping over mountains). Okay, so where are my level 10 class options that let me choose between "Hero of the Gods" and "Found an Artifact Sword" class paths? Why is there no baked-in options for taking my martial class into the magic dimension? The answer is always, "multiclass" but the wizard doesn't have to - no no, he needs new spells and class options to represent additional bullshit. What I'm saying is that martials should get another class layer after level 6 or so that lets them pick semi-magical advancement paths to justify a host of new class features. Mendrian fucked around with this message at 02:18 on Aug 4, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 02:16
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:What I'm saying is that martials should get another class layer after level 6 or so that lets them pick semi-magical advancement paths to justify a host of new class features. Yeah, but what if someone wants to level their mundane only fighter after level 6 and doesn't want to spontaneously be magical? 
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 02:19
|
|
|
NachtSieger posted:Yeah, but what if someone wants to level their mundane only fighter after level 6 and doesn't want to spontaneously be magical? Then we all just agree like adults that even though it says 'Class Path of Found Legendary Sword' that it's not actually the sword doing it. Or even if it says 'Son of Zeus' in the handbook you're just a crazy awesome fighter.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 02:22
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:Then we all just agree like adults that even though it says 'Class Path of Found Legendary Sword' that it's not actually the sword doing it. Or even if it says 'Son of Zeus' in the handbook you're just a crazy awesome fighter. Man I can't muster up the energy to pretend to be a shitposter any longer, so I'mma say that that's entirely fair, and I do really wish fighters, or fighter-likes in rpgs got more nice things in general. It's come to the point where if I look at an rpg I always zoom in on comparing the non-"magical" types to the "magical" types, then do an internal comparison between fightery types and non-fightery types, and I'm always invariably disappointed that wizardry is the better answer and the fighters have garbage skills to where I might as well just not bother with out of combat stats  Also related, me refusing to read any and all D&D homebrew in which fightery types have a poor Will save or equivalent because of prior bad experiences with the entire concept of the system 
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 02:29
|
|
|
Mendrian posted:What I'm saying is that martials should get another class layer after level 6 or so that lets them pick semi-magical advancement paths to justify a host of new class features. This is what I meant when I said "fantastical." Say a Fighter is so powerful fate itself decrees he be in certain spots for battles and when he travels places it just somehow happens that he makes it there in a day's time. Rogues so good at pickpocketing they gain the ability to Steal Hearts and Steal Tongues with their Sleight of Hand. A Ranger's Hide in Plain Sight shouldn't require a bunch of extra bullshit and they should be so completely one with their chosen terrain that it seems to bend to the Ranger's will to the point it becomes her ally. There's all kinds of flavorful stuff they could do, they just won't.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 02:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 21:25 |
|
|
NachtSieger posted:Also related, me refusing to read any and all D&D homebrew in which fightery types have a poor Will save or equivalent because of prior bad experiences with the entire concept of the system But don't you see? they have a lot of hit points. That means they must suffer in some other way because
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 02:42
|
|