• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D 5E Great Weapon Mastery - once more into the breach! (with math)

I'd like to share something right from the D&D next. Of 2013.

"Opportunity Attacks.
If a hostile creature that you can see moves out of your reach, you can use your reaction to make a melee attack against that creature. This attack is called an opportunity attack. The attack interrupts the creature’s movement, occurring right before the creature leaves your reach. You can avoid provoking an opportunity attack by taking the disengage action (see “Actions in Combat” below).

You also don’t provoke an opportunity attack when someone or something moves you without using your movement, action, or reaction. For example, you don’t provoke an opportunity attack if an explosion hurls you out of a foe’s reach or if gravity causes you to fall past an enemy."

It was illegal back then to share this info, but I do think that this is now past. I still have all the files and that one was the last one before the PHB was printed. At one point, OA were interupting the move of a creature. At some point they decided that only a feat should do that but the wording more or less stayed. Leading many to believe that things like "declared" movement was still in usage. Sometimes assumed knowledge of past editions can be a real enemy...

The first printing of the PHB, although nebulous, could have been interpreted in two ways. With the new printings I now see that I (and many other DM that I know) was in the wrong. You can be assured that things will change.

As for the tactic of dodging...
That changes a lot and not so much in afterthoughts... These tactics were mainly used to pin down a GWM in a corridor, an entry way or simply a door. The tactic will now be restricted to these occasions unless every monsters starts to have the sentinel feats (no I will not do that.) ;)

It is a sad thing though that WoTC didn't judge necessary to clarify such a change from the playtest to the printing of the PHB. And then an other change from the first printing of the PHB to the 3rd or 4th... No mention of that change in the sage advice or in the errata. I hope that there are no more such changes. At least I now understand the irony of some posts ;)

Edit: I was among the playtesters during the D&D next. I kept only the last files on a burned CD rom just to keep a record of that era. I was among those that were sending reports and surveys about our playtesting games. A few things changed from the playtest to the actual birth of 5ed as many have noticed. Some changes just went under my nose without me noticing.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

FrogReaver

As long as i get to be the frog
I'd like to share something right from the D&D next. Of 2013.

"Opportunity Attacks.
If a hostile creature that you can see moves out of your reach, you can use your reaction to make a melee attack against that creature. This attack is called an opportunity attack. The attack interrupts the creature’s movement, occurring right before the creature leaves your reach. You can avoid provoking an opportunity attack by taking the disengage action (see “Actions in Combat” below).

You also don’t provoke an opportunity attack when someone or something moves you without using your movement, action, or reaction. For example, you don’t provoke an opportunity attack if an explosion hurls you out of a foe’s reach or if gravity causes you to fall past an enemy."

It was illegal back then to share this info, but I do think that this is now past. I still have all the files and that one was the last one before the PHB was printed. At one point, OA were interupting the move of a creature. At some point they decided that only a feat should do that but the wording more or less stayed. Leading many to believe that things like "declared" movement was still in usage. Sometimes assumed knowledge of past editions can be a real enemy...

The first printing of the PHB, although nebulous, could have been interpreted in two ways. With the new printings I now see that I (and many other DM that I know) was in the wrong. You can be assured that things will change.

As for the tactic of dodging...
That changes a lot and not so much in afterthoughts... These tactics were mainly used to pin down a GWM in a corridor, an entry way or simply a door. The tactic will now be restricted to these occasions unless every monsters starts to have the sentinel feats (no I will not do that.) ;)

It is a sad thing though that WoTC didn't judge necessary to clarify such a change from the playtest to the printing of the PHB. And then an other change from the first printing of the PHB to the 3rd or 4th... No mention of that change in the sage advice or in the errata. I hope that there are no more such changes. At least I now understand the irony of some posts ;)

Edit: I was among the playtesters during the D&D next. I kept only the last files on a burned CD rom just to keep a record of that era. I was among those that were sending reports and surveys about our playtesting games. A few things changed from the playtest to the actual birth of 5ed as many have noticed. Some changes just went under my nose without me noticing.

Well that explains why Fighters feel about as sticky as butter now. Yall were play testing 5e "wrong" and no one noticed the difference.
 

dropbear8mybaby

Banned
Banned
With the feat, his strength will be 18. Without, it will be 20, so there is an opportunity cost to taking the feat.

You talk about fair comparisons as a justification for starting this thread and then do an unfair comparison. There is no necessity to deny yourself 20 Strength for testing purposes other than to unfairly bias it.
 

Yunru

Banned
Banned
You talk about fair comparisons as a justification for starting this thread and then do an unfair comparison. There is no necessity to deny yourself 20 Strength for testing purposes other than to unfairly bias it.
Yeah, because there's noooo cost to taking GWM over +2 strength. Oh wait...
 

Ancalagon

Dusty Dragon
Yeah, because there's noooo cost to taking GWM over +2 strength. Oh wait...

Exactly.

... are people aware of this concept? Opportunity cost? That's what this ENTIRE THREAD is about!!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunity_cost

assuming the best choice is made, it is the "cost" incurred by not enjoying the benefit that would have been had by taking the second best available choice

So yes [MENTION=6863518]dropbear8mybaby[/MENTION] , this is a *fair* comparison. These are real characters, and they had to make a choice between strength 20 and feats.
 

FrogReaver

As long as i get to be the frog
Yeah, because there's noooo cost to taking GWM over +2 strength. Oh wait...

I know you are aware of this but just want to say it. A level 8 fighter can have both 20str and GWM.

Heck with rolled stats you may can make t happen at level 6. So there is an opportunity cost for sure but it's not 20str vs 18str and GWM unless we are talking extremely early
 

FrogReaver

As long as i get to be the frog
Exactly.

... are people aware of this concept? Opportunity cost? That's what this ENTIRE THREAD is about!!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunity_cost



So yes [MENTION=6863518]dropbear8mybaby[/MENTION] , this is a *fair* comparison. These are real characters, and they had to make a choice between strength 20 and feats.

Yes... obviously you are the only one to ever think about opportunity cost.... -_-
 

Yunru

Banned
Banned
I know you are aware of this but just want to say it. A level 8 fighter can have both 20str and GWM.

Heck with rolled stats you may can make t happen at level 6. So there is an opportunity cost for sure but it's not 20str vs 18str and GWM unless we are talking extremely early
For a Fighter maybe.
For a Barbarian it's the difference between level 8 and level 12. And given how exp is designed to keep you at those mid levels...

Also id we're going for a Reckless Attack Fighter, that's Level 10 instead of Level 8. Not as big of a gap, but a gap still.

And if we want PAM as well, that pushes it further back. Level 12 for the Fighter, level 16(!) for the Barbarian, and Level 14 for the Reckless Fighter.
 
Last edited:

Datalore

First Post
Just remove feats and multiclassing. They are optional and they are pointless. 5e characters are already strong without the need to optimize AND archetypes/races already give you plently of variety.

Problem solved. Moving on.
 


Remove ads

Top