Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
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!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Multiclassing Feats & Powers
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="zookeeper" data-source="post: 4346448" data-attributes="member: 70600"><p>I suppose that may be a possibility, but it appears that Fatigue and Exhaustion are no longer a part of the game. I can find nothing in PHB about these conditions (unless they are not conditions anymore).</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Those conditions aren't that bad, slight problem occasionally overcoming SR. The actual problem like that comes at later levels, Thats why multiclassing in 3rd ed was both good and bad. You could do more at lower levels and eventually had to give up on one and go fully with the other. You also had feats that helped in those situations though (Practiced Spellcaster, Spell Focus, etc).</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Which brings us back to Doh. lol This was the original discussion, why the multiclassed fighter/wizard was so limited in spells.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>The Ranger has significantly changed. The Ranger was a back line archer type that usually hit the wizards and/or rangers of the opponents. And although they had the two weapon Ranger, I, personally, have never played with anyone that chose that option. (And I've played on and off for 30 yrs)</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>But, why can't they be good (or at least above average) defenders and controllers at the same time. Maybe not using the spells and fighting melee in each round or even every other round, but if they moved in or out of combat to use one or the other why can't that be done for the combat.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Using those numbers sure, it works equally. If you use different numbers it don't work (unless multiples of 2 and 3 respectively). As example use 4 and 5 or 1 and 2 or 1 and 3.</p><p> </p><p>Point is: the numbers don't really mean much, its all a matter of opinion.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>OK - but the movement aside for a second, its still robotic in nature. Do this, do that, etc. Now the movement dropping the opponent into a wedding cake sounds like the most exciting thing - lol. But seriously even after a while it too will become robotic depending on your group. Do this - move to rogue, do that move to rogue, etc. Or if no rogue move away for a ranger or wizard to get in a shot.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Good points, but in all actually do you know how many potions of Cure Light Wounds it would take to skew the game the way your talking about? Saving 25 GP because you got an extra potion might get an extra quiver of arrows.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Without reading it, I'll bet it is only once and only against one possible opponent. Am I right? What if you want to disarm the second opponent as well?</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Quality has never been a problem for Sam, he just want to do more to get paid more, keeping the same quality of course. <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/laugh.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing :lol:" data-shortname=":lol:" /></p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>I sort of see your point, but the option to try it is there with or without the feat, the feat does not grant the option of trying, it grants a better chance of success. The powers in 4th ed are limiting, you can only attempt a disarm once in a battle or day and only on one opponent, unlike in 3rd ed where you could attempt it in every round and on every opponent.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>OK mistaken on the size, but the effect is the same. Push x squares and they come right back after you. </p><p> </p><p>And in 3rd ed. The cleric that turned the undead could not attack the turned creature, the others could thereby involving all the characters.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p>In 3rd edition, rogues played two roles. They were the so-called "skill monkeys", and with their sneak attack they were combatants capable of dishing out massive damage. They still fill both of those roles, and have fewer situations where they must choose between combat effectiveness and out of combat effectiveness.</p><p> </p><p>As an example of that, if you like your rogue to be doing the bluffing and diplomacy, you can make a rogue that functions perfectly well in combat using only dex and cha, without feeling that you need to put points into strength for the to-hit and damage bonuses.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Kill the Spell Prep. (oops, did I say that outloud <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite9" alt=":eek:" title="Eek! :eek:" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":eek:" />) We probably will eventually do that, but we are (as far as I know) going to start as written.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Interesting thought.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>OK - I see your point, can't really say any thing about that. Maybe impose that penalty that you can't cast in armor to avoid that situation.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="zookeeper, post: 4346448, member: 70600"] I suppose that may be a possibility, but it appears that Fatigue and Exhaustion are no longer a part of the game. I can find nothing in PHB about these conditions (unless they are not conditions anymore). Those conditions aren't that bad, slight problem occasionally overcoming SR. The actual problem like that comes at later levels, Thats why multiclassing in 3rd ed was both good and bad. You could do more at lower levels and eventually had to give up on one and go fully with the other. You also had feats that helped in those situations though (Practiced Spellcaster, Spell Focus, etc). Which brings us back to Doh. lol This was the original discussion, why the multiclassed fighter/wizard was so limited in spells. The Ranger has significantly changed. The Ranger was a back line archer type that usually hit the wizards and/or rangers of the opponents. And although they had the two weapon Ranger, I, personally, have never played with anyone that chose that option. (And I've played on and off for 30 yrs) But, why can't they be good (or at least above average) defenders and controllers at the same time. Maybe not using the spells and fighting melee in each round or even every other round, but if they moved in or out of combat to use one or the other why can't that be done for the combat. Using those numbers sure, it works equally. If you use different numbers it don't work (unless multiples of 2 and 3 respectively). As example use 4 and 5 or 1 and 2 or 1 and 3. Point is: the numbers don't really mean much, its all a matter of opinion. OK - but the movement aside for a second, its still robotic in nature. Do this, do that, etc. Now the movement dropping the opponent into a wedding cake sounds like the most exciting thing - lol. But seriously even after a while it too will become robotic depending on your group. Do this - move to rogue, do that move to rogue, etc. Or if no rogue move away for a ranger or wizard to get in a shot. Good points, but in all actually do you know how many potions of Cure Light Wounds it would take to skew the game the way your talking about? Saving 25 GP because you got an extra potion might get an extra quiver of arrows. Without reading it, I'll bet it is only once and only against one possible opponent. Am I right? What if you want to disarm the second opponent as well? Quality has never been a problem for Sam, he just want to do more to get paid more, keeping the same quality of course. :lol: I sort of see your point, but the option to try it is there with or without the feat, the feat does not grant the option of trying, it grants a better chance of success. The powers in 4th ed are limiting, you can only attempt a disarm once in a battle or day and only on one opponent, unlike in 3rd ed where you could attempt it in every round and on every opponent. OK mistaken on the size, but the effect is the same. Push x squares and they come right back after you. And in 3rd ed. The cleric that turned the undead could not attack the turned creature, the others could thereby involving all the characters. In 3rd edition, rogues played two roles. They were the so-called "skill monkeys", and with their sneak attack they were combatants capable of dishing out massive damage. They still fill both of those roles, and have fewer situations where they must choose between combat effectiveness and out of combat effectiveness. As an example of that, if you like your rogue to be doing the bluffing and diplomacy, you can make a rogue that functions perfectly well in combat using only dex and cha, without feeling that you need to put points into strength for the to-hit and damage bonuses. Kill the Spell Prep. (oops, did I say that outloud :o) We probably will eventually do that, but we are (as far as I know) going to start as written. Interesting thought. OK - I see your point, can't really say any thing about that. Maybe impose that penalty that you can't cast in armor to avoid that situation. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Multiclassing Feats & Powers
Top