First Impressions?

[Psikus]

Or the fact that Studded Leather gives you 13 + dex for 25 gp, but Ringmail gives you 13 + half dex for 35 gp? So basically you're spending 10 extra gold for armor that only half as much dex bonus.

It's a bit situational, but the Ringmail beats Studded leather for characters with Dex lower than 10 (since Dex penalties are also halved).

 

[Stormonu]

My first impression after an initial read-through is that heavy armour seems gimped.

In fact, ACs seem too low in comparison to some of the slightly tough monsters in the bestiary.

I'm already contemplating a house rule - Light Armor grants an opponent Damage Advantage (roll 2 damage dice, take the best); Heavy Armor grants an opponent Damage Disadvantage (roll 2 damage dice, take the worst).

It'll be easy to apply to PCs, might not be so easy with monsters.

 

[ArmoredSaint]

I'm already contemplating a house rule - Light Armor grants an opponent Damage Advantage (roll 2 damage dice, take the best); Heavy Armor grants an opponent Damage Disadvantage (roll 2 damage dice, take the worst).

It'll be easy to apply to PCs, might not be so easy with monsters.

That is delightful! I love it.

It's probably too much to hope for that something that awesome would make it into the final rules, though...

 

[SageofMusic]

Aesthetic choices are fine if there's no mechanical disparity between them. But if a starting character only has X amount of gold to spend on equipment... there's absolutely no reason why they'd buy a mace rather than a club. Even if the mace was more "cleric-y" for example... that cleric would put that extra 5.5 gold to good use in getting a few more belt pouches and vials. That cleric of Pelor will certainly want those vials when making up their antitoxins and healing potions.

I only hope they just cut and pasted the 3.5 armor, weapon, and equipment charts without having done any real work on them, just to that DMs would have something to reference when the PCs returned to town. Because they are kind of lame as they stand (in addition to not actually matching up to what the character sheets list in many places.)

If you think about it, what is the difference between a club and a mace in real life? In all honesty, both do the same amount of damage to a body, and both are similarly easy to use. The only real difference is in the material. Therefore, as a house rule, decide that clubs have a chance to break when used on heavy armor (or a bulky carapace) while maces don't.

 

[Melkor]

I don't like that a long rest gives you back all of your lost hit points.

Yeah, out of everything in the playtest rules, this is the one thing I can point to now and say I really do not like.

 

[Mercutio01]

I just don't understand how the fighter's attack value with the greataxe is being calculated. Why is it twice his strength modifier?

 

[quindia]

The regaining all of your HP thing may have changed since this doc was typed up because Mearle's post earlier this week specifically stated that didn't happen...

Overall, I am very happy after reading through the material!

 

[Vikingkingq]

Quick question regarding Advantage and statuses and various sneaking things:

If a status gives a creature disadvantage, does that disadvantage in turn give advantage to the person fighting the creature? I'm thinking of something like a creature being Blinded/Frightened/Intoxicated - is that creature open to Sneak Attack? It doesn't seem that way as written, but it makes sense. If I throw sand in your eyes and you can't see me, or if you're hammered so that you see three rogues, or you're running away in a blind panic, it should be easy to put a dagger or arrow in your back.

Also, it seems logical that if being Deafened makes sneaking an auto-success, the same should probably happen with Blinded, no?

And as someone who loves playing rogues, I really wish stealth incorporated a simple line of sight mechanic, since cover is a sometimes thing.

 

[Dragoslav]

Quick question regarding Advantage and statuses and various sneaking things:

If a status gives a creature disadvantage, does that disadvantage in turn give advantage to the person fighting the creature? I'm thinking of something like a creature being Blinded/Frightened/Intoxicated - is that creature open to Sneak Attack? It doesn't seem that way as written, but it makes sense. If I throw sand in your eyes and you can't see me, or if you're hammered so that you see three rogues, or you're running away in a blind panic, it should be easy to put a dagger or arrow in your back.

Also, it seems logical that if being Deafened makes sneaking an auto-success, the same should probably happen with Blinded, no?

1) It doesn't specify that the target grants advantage, so no. However, a stunned or paralyzed target does specifically grant advantage to any attacker.

2) Maybe, but it's probably easier for a not usually sneaky person (like a warrior in plate mail) to stay out of sight of a deafened person than to not make noise while sneaking up on a blind person.

 

[YRUSirius]

An attacker IS kinda like invisible to a blind defender so one could argue that the attacker has attack advantage because he's invisible to his target. Thoughts?

-YRUSirius