D&D 5E Red Flags For Classes In Sources Beyond The Player's Handbook

[neogod22]

It's a public forum, if you don't like the possibility that people other than "the person you quoted" may respond to you, perhaps you should take that into consideration.

You're the one speaking out of line and misquoting people. I'm not the one looking foolish. I'm pretty sure no one here needs you to speak for them.

 

[Inchoroi]

Alert: since there is no "surprise round" even if surprised, if a creature wins in initiative, it can still get its reaction. That doesn't mean an alert person can't be subject to an ambush.

Observant: I usually only use passive for things that aren't actually hidden. Things that are hidden, you have to actively look for them.

SS/GWM: I can see these 2 being a problem especially in the hands of a fighter. At lower levels, if they use the -5/+10. They are probably going to miss a lot. IDK, maybe give it a level restriction.

Correction: While there is no surprise round, if you're surprised, you do not get your action or your reaction (PHB, pg. 189), regardless of your place in the initiative order. However, that's not solely my reason for objecting to the feat; I also feel that its not a 5e sort of mechanic in general. I don't think that 5e should have any "I win" abilities.

Just my three cents, really.

 

[BookBarbarian]

Correction: While there is no surprise round, if you're surprised, you do not get your action or your reaction (PHB, pg. 189), regardless of your place in the initiative order. However, that's not solely my reason for objecting to the feat; I also feel that its not a 5e sort of mechanic in general. I don't think that 5e should have any "I win" abilities.

Just my three cents, really.

I'm curious. How do you feel about level 7+ Barbarians that can still act normally when surprised as long as they go into a rage first?

 

[Inchoroi]

I'm curious. How do you feel about level 7+ Barbarians that can still act normally when surprised as long as they go into a rage first?

Its fun, and it expends a use of a daily ability; I love the thematic of a barbarian being surprised, and getting so angry at the fact that he moves faster than the enemy expects him to! Its a very different sort of thing from, "I ignore surprise because of this ability I have; doesn't really cost me much."

There's also something, from a game writer's perspective, that bothers me about it. That can be summed up with the phrase, "If its so good that just about everyone will want it, it's probably too good."

 

[BookBarbarian]

Its fun, and it expends a use of a daily ability; I love the thematic of a barbarian being surprised, and getting so angry at the fact that he moves faster than the enemy expects him to! Its a very different sort of thing from, "I ignore surprise because of this ability I have; doesn't really cost me much."

There's also something, from a game writer's perspective, that bothers me about it. That can be summed up with the phrase, "If its so good that just about everyone will want it, it's probably too good."

Thanks for explaining.

While I think that Alert does have a cost, an ASI, I do agree that they are different.

Also I think it's just fine to not like things. I dislike the lucky Feat, not because of any potential OPness, but because I hate re-rolls for slowing down the game.

 

[neogod22]

Correction: While there is no surprise round, if you're surprised, you do not get your action or your reaction (PHB, pg. 189), regardless of your place in the initiative order. However, that's not solely my reason for objecting to the feat; I also feel that its not a 5e sort of mechanic in general. I don't think that 5e should have any "I win" abilities.

Just my three cents, really.

The surprise ends, when the surpiser takes their turn, at that point the surprisee gets to use reactions as normal. Regardless you can always add circumstances when alert doesn't work I.e. when the characters are sleep.

 

[Inchoroi]

Thanks for explaining.

While I think that Alert does have a cost, an ASI, I do agree that they are different.

Also I think it's just fine to not like things. I dislike the lucky Feat, not because of any potential OPness, but because I hate re-rolls for slowing down the game.

I can understand that, as well! I actually hated the lucky feat for a long time, but ended up changing my mind after reading Pratchett's Guards! Guards!. I treat the Lucky feat like the one-in-a-million freak accident that just seems to happen; as Fred and Nobby said, "It's a one in a million chance...but it just might work!"

 

[neogod22]

Also, the feat. Can't beat boxed texts. Lol

 

[neogod22]

I think in my next campaign, I will not allow feats at all and see how that works out.

 

[BookBarbarian]

I can understand that, as well! I actually hated the lucky feat for a long time, but ended up changing my mind after reading Pratchett's Guards! Guards!. I treat the Lucky feat like the one-in-a-million freak accident that just seems to happen; as Fred and Nobby said, "It's a one in a million chance...but it just might work!"

Oh yeah the luck thing is well supported and should be in the game. I just don't like re-rolls.

I think in my next campaign, I will not allow feats at all and see how that works out.

I imagine it will work fine.

For example, I've always allowed feats but for two years my players never took any.