D&D 5E Legends & Lore 7/21/14
Mouseferatu
Hero
Gah! I wasn't clear. I was actually asking about the Arcane Archer feat. 
But thank you, [MENTION=77]Talath[/MENTION]. This is really cool, too.
(I can't XP you again yet, or I would have.)
But thank you, [MENTION=77]Talath[/MENTION]. This is really cool, too.
(I can't XP you again yet, or I would have.)
Talath
Explorer
Gah! I wasn't clear. I was actually asking about the Arcane Archer feat.
But thank you, [MENTION=77]Talath[/MENTION]. This is really cool, too.
(I can't XP you again yet, or I would have.)
I went with a screen shot because the formatting was really messy.
Serendipity
Explorer
Feats as "focused multiclass option" - mmmmm, maybe.
I had all but given up on the new edition until I saw the basic rules. If they can convince me feats are no longer the great unclean thing they will likely be getting this house's money again.
So mark me down as skeptical but intrigued.
I had all but given up on the new edition until I saw the basic rules. If they can convince me feats are no longer the great unclean thing they will likely be getting this house's money again.
So mark me down as skeptical but intrigued.
mach1.9pants
Hero
Not as many feats as I expected!
Agamon
Adventurer
Really? Maybe a few more than I expected. They're more meaty and less available than 3e/4e feats.
The Hitcher
Explorer
Seems very likely.
Li Shenron
Legend
I wonder how those many armor-focused feats work, like:
Heavily Armored
Heavy Armor Master
At least we got a decently-sized list. IMXP the 3.0 core feats list quickly prooved too short for really differentiate characters, but in 5e you don't have to take all the feats you can.
Another thing I wonder is whether taking a feat at 1st level (Human variant) is always appropriate. I wish that when they wrote the variant they had thought about the fact that there are players/groups who dislike the default Human race but still don't use feats, or don't want them at 1st level.
There is no distinction between arcane/divine spells in 5e, so the word "arcane" can freely indicate all spells.
Honestly, I am hating most of the names adjustments done after the playtest. It's hard to believe that playtesters were largely unsatisfied with "Warrior" or "Arcane Archer", and if they really were, they should have put polls on WotC articles. Frankly "Champion" sucks more than "Warrior", it makes me think of an olympic torch-bearer with the We are the champion hymn playing in the background...
Heavily Armored
Heavy Armor Master
At least we got a decently-sized list. IMXP the 3.0 core feats list quickly prooved too short for really differentiate characters, but in 5e you don't have to take all the feats you can.
Another thing I wonder is whether taking a feat at 1st level (Human variant) is always appropriate. I wish that when they wrote the variant they had thought about the fact that there are players/groups who dislike the default Human race but still don't use feats, or don't want them at 1st level.
There is no distinction between arcane/divine spells in 5e, so the word "arcane" can freely indicate all spells.
Honestly, I am hating most of the names adjustments done after the playtest. It's hard to believe that playtesters were largely unsatisfied with "Warrior" or "Arcane Archer", and if they really were, they should have put polls on WotC articles. Frankly "Champion" sucks more than "Warrior", it makes me think of an olympic torch-bearer with the We are the champion hymn playing in the background...
Similar Threads
