D&D 5E What Classes in PHB?

[Blackbrrd]

That's contrary to my experience - 4e combats can get very involved, 3 rounds would be awfully short. Not that it can't happen, given, say, an optimized or striker-heavy party and a less than complex/tough encounter, just that it's not the norm. And, rounds can take a bit longer in 4e because all PC turns potentially take comparable amounts of time to resolve, which generally means casters taking maybe a little less time, but martial ones potentially noticeably more. But, mostly the difference is that 4e combats go more rounds, because everyone has more hps relative to the damage being put out - they're designed to be longer, so tactics can be brought to fruition, and combats kept 'dynamic.' Really, because, just as 5e is over-reacting to complaints about 4e being slow, 4e was over-reacting to complaints about 3e being 'static' and 'boring.'

Often, it seems, the game just doesn't need as much grease as the squeaky wheels among it's fans demand.

I got tired of a bit slow combat in 4e and when my players made their characters for the current campaign, I asked them to put most of the power in offense, not defense. I am running Reavers of Harkenworld and the encounters that are equal in level are mostly over in 3 rounds. I had one encounter that was done in 2 rounds (without spending any dailies).

I have got a paladin/sorcerer hybrid, a brutal rogue, a druid and a bard. At level 1 the Rogue does 1d8+5+2d6+2 on a at-will attack, and can add 1d8 once per ecounter (half-orc racial), and do 1d8 extra with his encounter power. He usually uses his encounter power with the racial for 3d8+5+2d6+2 = 12 - 43 = 27 damage. The Paladin/Sorc does 1d8+8 in a close burst 3. Pretty neat

 

[Tony Vargas]

I got tired of a bit slow combat in 4e and when my players made their characters for the current campaign, I asked them to put most of the power in offense, not defense. I am running Reavers of Harkenworld and the encounters that are equal in level are mostly over in 3 rounds. I had one encounter that was done in 2 rounds (without spending any dailies).

I can see how that could work, yeah.

I have got a paladin/sorcerer hybrid, a brutal rogue, a druid and a bard. At level 1 the Rogue does 1d8+5+2d6+2 on a at-will attack, and can add 1d8 once per ecounter (half-orc racial), and do 1d8 extra with his encounter power. He usually uses his encounter power with the racial for 3d8+5+2d6+2 = 12 - 43 = 27 damage. The Paladin/Sorc does 1d8+8 in a close burst 3. Pretty neat

I'd've expected more full-on strikers, but cool (I'm curious what kind of heavy-offense build the player of the Druid came up with).

I assume you finish 3-round combats fairly quickly, even though you're not, like, crazy 5-rangers-and-a-funereal optimized?

 

[Prism]

I think the issue here is that I shouldn't have to sacrifice +2 AC for style. +1 AC for style I will gladly do, but +2 is absurd.

For longsword you could rule that the versatile property kicks in when one hand is free rather than having to use two. Not sure about rapier

In older editions we used to use a buckler that gave +1 AC or could be ignored if you wanted to use two hands that round. Good for versatile weapons or switching quickly to bows. A normal shield takes an action to stow

 

[Andor]

Yes, modern fencing uses a single weapon. But historically, it was not a rapier. It was a larger heavier blade.

That's ... simplistic. Early dueling did use heavier blades, but as it moved from a street or battlefield skill where fighting in the round was critical to survival to a formalized dueling skill where it was one on one the point emerged as the most lethal element of the sword. The spanish and italian schools of fence centered on the rapier or epee (decended from the estoc, a battlefield weapon) in single bladed styles. (Not exculsively, Florence rather famoulsy favored Rapier and main-gauche.) The English stayed with heavier blades and bucklers and tended to get killed in duels with the europeans. In street fighting you would usually use something in your off hand, dagger, scabbard, cloak, etc. Eventually it evolved into the small sword and then modern sport fencing.

But in a one on one fight a single blade is a perfectly viable choice, I used to often fight single against two weapon fighters in SCA fencing and did pretty well. Although sword and cloak is a lot of fun, few systems support it though.

Historical fighting styles are a big subject, and I'm actually probably a bit dated in my knowledge as there has been a big resurrgence of interest, with accompanying research, with the popularity of the SCA, HACA, ARMA and probably a dozen other acronym laden groups of people who like to hit each other with sticks and steel. Most often the research goes along the lines of "That looks ridiculous, the historical writers must have got the details wrong." Followed by painful lessons where it usually turns out that no, the people who killed people for a living did actually know how to fight.

 

[Blackbrrd]

I'd've expected more full-on strikers, but cool (I'm curious what kind of heavy-offense build the player of the Druid came up with).

I assume you finish 3-round combats fairly quickly, even though you're not, like, crazy 5-rangers-and-a-funereal optimized?

The Druid just has the powers that easily* deal damage, not control. The standard at-will, Magic stones does 3x 1d4+5 damage, or 3d4+15 or 18-27 damage, and usually he has the three targets. AoE Blasters are underrated. What is better control than giving the "dead" condition?

Btw, note that this is only a 4-man party, and I am running the "equal encounter" as if they were 5. I think the party works so well because the Paladin/Sorc is really sticky, and uses some Sorc powers to make mobs take damage if they stay around, or move away.

Combat is very quick (it's mostly held up by me, the DM). Usually, there is at least one mob down in the first round due to the damage from the Rogue +any one party member. In one session with lots of role-playing we went through 6 encounters without any problems.

*Enemy only, or 1-2-3 targets with 5sq, etc.