View Profile: Gladius Legis - Morrus' Unofficial Tabletop RPG News
  • Gladius Legis's Avatar
    Tuesday, 16th July, 2019, 12:06 AM
    An idea I've been playing around with recently is keeping DEX to attack and damage for finesse, but the character must also have a certain STR score to be able to wield the weapon in a finesse manner. The STR requirement would vary depending on the weapon. A dagger's STR requirement to finesse would be pretty low, say STR 9. Shortsword finesse could require STR 11, and the rapier STR 13. ...
    87 replies | 2912 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Gladius Legis's Avatar
    Sunday, 14th July, 2019, 03:54 PM
    I'd rank them: 1) 5-10 2) 11-15 *dropoff* 3) 16-20 4) 1-4 5-10 is obvious because it's where the meat of most campaigns take place. 11-15 is second because it's where a lot of campaigns are in their final stages. While 16-20 is pretty rare, hence a distant third on this list, it is more important to consider than 1-4 in my eyes. 1-4 go by very quickly. In fact, many tables skip at...
    16 replies | 586 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Gladius Legis's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 11:52 PM
    Turn-based, with the option for each character to execute macros for the fights where you don't want/need to manage yourself.
    47 replies | 2078 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Gladius Legis's Avatar
    Saturday, 13th July, 2019, 12:15 AM
    It's not magnitudes superior. Not enough to make multiclassing a no-brainer choice. Did you see me defending those abilities? No? Then why do you keep bringing them up? I've long acknowledged they suck. But dismissing everything else is stupid. They're good, but it's still a tradeoff.
    352 replies | 12742 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Gladius Legis's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 11:33 PM
    Favored Enemy and Natural Explorer, I'll give you. The others aren't insignificant, especially the ASI and Defensive Tactics. Or Iron Will. Or Ethereal Step. The skills are nice but hardly groundbreaking. Skirmish is situational at best. The only amazing thing you really gained was Cunning Action. And then the very next level the straight Ranger gets Conjure Animals 2x/day. And is an...
    352 replies | 12742 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Gladius Legis's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 10:45 PM
    Except neither of the builds you showed were appreciably better than a straight Ranger until well past Lv. 15. You couldn't even defend them yourself. You had to go on a red herring/non-sequitur rant about the Paladin. The Lore Bard after 5 levels of Ranger? Doesn't get Magical Secrets until character Lv. 11 and is still on 3rd level spells at that point, 2 levels after the straight Ranger....
    352 replies | 12742 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Gladius Legis's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 10:13 PM
    I think the only context advantage and disadvantage instances should "stack" should be determining whether advantage vs. disadvantage cancels out. More sources of advantage than disadvantage = advantage. Equal number = neither. More disadvantage sources = disadvantage.
    37 replies | 984 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Gladius Legis's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 10:05 PM
    Umm, so you're trying to defend your multiclass builds by ... comparing the Ranger to the Paladin? ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhh .... k
    352 replies | 12742 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Gladius Legis's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 09:35 PM
    Build 1: More or less a wash vs. straight Ranger at Lv. 9, when you're probably on one of the last legs of your campaign. Action Surge and Superiority Dice vs. 2 casts of Conjure Animals and also more 2nd-level spell slots. You're also one feat/ASI down from a straight Ranger. You don't get Cunning Action until Lv. 10 and your Scout archetype (such as that is with 3 levels) until Lv. 11....
    352 replies | 12742 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Gladius Legis's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 09:01 PM
    What 20th-level Wizard is going to have an 8 CON when for most Wizards CON is either 2nd or 3rd in importance?
    71 replies | 2113 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Gladius Legis's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 08:44 PM
    The difference is your weak build doesn't even come online until 15th level, and you expressedly cited a 15th-level build to try to prove your point. I listed spells starting at 1st level through 5th level to answer your claim spellcasting was weak. Big difference. I dare you to spin it anyway else. And Uncanny Dodge is still usually better, and you usually get the same end result as...
    352 replies | 12742 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Gladius Legis's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 08:25 PM
    And you ignore literally all the other spells I listed before those? You are arguing dishonestly. Again, Skirmish competes with Uncanny Dodge for the 1 reaction you'll have every round, and Uncanny Dodge wins out more often. Read and address my argument, please. 1) You didn't have a single level of Ranger in that build. 2) You only had 3 Fighter levels in that build. No Extra Attack...
    352 replies | 12742 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Gladius Legis's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 07:52 PM
    That's a 15th-level build. Most campaigns don't go that far. Not a good example to make your case. Also, the Scout is hands-down the most overrated subclass in 5e, precisely because everyone looks at the Lv. 13 and 17 features (again, past most campaigns) and thinks the whole subclass is good, when it's really not. The main Lv. 3 feature, Skirmisher, competes with Uncanny Dodge for your...
    352 replies | 12742 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Gladius Legis's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 07:39 PM
    OK, then make the spell form a bond with an existing beast instead of summoning a spirit, or whatever. The same spell can even resurrect the beast if it dies.
    352 replies | 12742 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Gladius Legis's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 04:31 PM
    This has been my preferred solution from the beginning. And I don't know how people can insist that it can't be a magical creature when the Beast Master's connection with their pet is explicitly described as "magically bonding," anyway ...
    352 replies | 12742 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Gladius Legis's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 04:17 PM
    Agreed.
    232 replies | 10180 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Gladius Legis's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 04:15 PM
    I really like Extra Attack as it is for the most part. At the very least the initial instance of it at Lv. 5 should stay for all the current "warrior" classes. I'd be OK with Fighters receiving alternate class features at Lv. 11 and 20 for their 3rd and 4th attacks somewhere down the line, though. Maybe an extra weapon die on all weapon attacks at Lv. 11, for instance, in place of the 3rd...
    48 replies | 1794 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Gladius Legis's Avatar
    Friday, 12th July, 2019, 04:06 PM
    In a pure combat (well, damage) comparison, that would favor the Fighter even more, as the Paladin would be giving up a certain degree of their damage potential per day to do those other things.
    232 replies | 10180 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Gladius Legis's Avatar
    Wednesday, 10th July, 2019, 10:19 PM
    95 is not on par with 88, dude. You cite math that directly disproves your point and try to spin that it proves you right. That's some mental gymnastics. One. Stinking. Point. At. The. Lowest. 20%. Of. Levels. What do you have against one stinking point at the levels that go by the quickest? I'm not even trying to fix a mathematical balance. I just want my character to use...
    232 replies | 10180 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Gladius Legis's Avatar
    Wednesday, 10th July, 2019, 07:41 PM
    1d6 + Stat and 1d6 + Stat is already better than GWF's 2d6r1&2 + Stat from Lv. 1-4. I fail to see how 1 extra point of damage in the former case makes it that much more egregious. Again, for only Lv. 1-4, 20% of level progression, and the levels that go by quickest. And then at Lv. 5, at STR 18: GWF: 4d6r1&2 + 8 = 24.67 TWF (w/d8 main hand): 2d8 + 1d6 + 12 = 24.5 Lv. 5+, even with a 1d8...
    232 replies | 10180 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Gladius Legis's Avatar
    Wednesday, 10th July, 2019, 06:07 PM
    All that goes out the window once you get Extra Attack. Which accounts for 80% of a fighting class' level progression. Greatsword becomes 4d6 + 2xstat. Which is more than 2d8 + 1d6 + 2xstat. So, bumping the main hand to 1d8 wouldn't throw balance off at all, really. It'd only make dual-wielding slightly stronger (as in, 1 measly point) from Lv. 1-4, which, again, is only 20% of character...
    232 replies | 10180 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Gladius Legis's Avatar
    Monday, 8th July, 2019, 11:52 PM
    By far my biggest pet peeve about 5e dual wielding. And one of my big pet peeves in general in 5e.
    232 replies | 10180 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Gladius Legis's Avatar
    Monday, 8th July, 2019, 02:17 PM
    Improved Divine Smite does NOT add 1d8 to the spell slot you are using for the Smite. It just adds to your regular weapon hits. This was clarified in the most recent errata. Do try to keep up. So at 20th level, it's really 4*9 + 3*13.5 + 3*18 + 5*22.5 = 243 243. Not nearly what you were trying to sell with your inaccurate depiction of what IDS does. The difference between Smite total and...
    232 replies | 10180 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Gladius Legis's Avatar
    Monday, 8th July, 2019, 05:28 AM
    I mean, if all he's doing with Action Surge is being lazy and merely doubling his base DPR, then maybe. That's just never what happens on an Action Surge turn in all my experiences.
    232 replies | 10180 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Gladius Legis's Avatar
    Monday, 8th July, 2019, 04:32 AM
    That is absolutely false.
    232 replies | 10180 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Gladius Legis's Avatar
    Monday, 8th July, 2019, 04:25 AM
    I wasn't comparing one Fighter to another Fighter. You are arguing in bad faith, to the point you're even making any sense at all.
    232 replies | 10180 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Gladius Legis's Avatar
    Sunday, 7th July, 2019, 10:01 PM
    And yet you spent half your posts fawning over the Paladin's Smites, also a nova ability. And now you're saying it's not practical to include them. You're being inconsistent in your argument. Also, comparing Action Surge to Assassinate is ridiculous. The auto-crit part of Assassinate is very situational and tough to set up in a typical party. Action Surge, on the other hand, you bust it out...
    232 replies | 10180 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Gladius Legis's Avatar
    Sunday, 7th July, 2019, 08:15 PM
    You can't control when critical hits happen. You can absolutely control when you Action Surge. A critical hit in the mop-up phase of combat is mostly meaningless. An Action Surge on the first round of a big battle, on the other hand, makes a huge impact right when you want it. Fighters get their damage all the time, without any ally help. Rogues need help from their allies to get their Sneak...
    232 replies | 10180 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Gladius Legis's Avatar
    Sunday, 7th July, 2019, 01:29 PM
    Based on what? It's a Fighter executing his typical attack action. There are literally no other "specific conditions" to consider. Especially when comparing to other classes who would be affected the same (or worse in the case of the Rogue) by those same "specific conditions." This is a simple damage comparison between classes. Based on your assertions that Fighters don't deal as much...
    232 replies | 10180 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Gladius Legis's Avatar
    Sunday, 7th July, 2019, 01:23 PM
    Care to point out specifically what "lot of assumptions" I'm making on something as basic as a Fighter's TYPICAL ATTACK ACTION? No? Then your words are empty platitudes. Again, talking about the damage of a Fighter's typical attack action. There aren't really any "non-quantifiable factors" that effect the Fighter's attack action's damage compared to anyone else. The Fighter makes his...
    232 replies | 10180 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Gladius Legis's Avatar
    Sunday, 7th July, 2019, 05:23 AM
    Well, MY actual gameplay has Fighters consistently outdamaging Rogues. And I'm not even talking about GWM/SS Fighters. Nope. I'm talking good old sword-and-board, without any feats that directly help that fighting style. The math agrees, too. And for the record, I'm sick of having math dismissed as "white room analysis." You just want to remove any objective and quantifiable evidence from the...
    232 replies | 10180 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Gladius Legis's Avatar
    Sunday, 7th July, 2019, 04:16 AM
    Which still doesn't put the Paladin's daily damage output ahead of the Fighter. 1) You clearly haven't done or seen the math of Fighter vs. Rogue DPR comparisons. Fighters tend to come out ahead in those. 2) Sneak Attack is not to be compared to Action Surge and Superiority Dice. If it's to be compared to anything the Fighter has, it's Extra Attack and possibly Fighting Style. 3) It's been...
    232 replies | 10180 view(s)
    2 XP
  • Gladius Legis's Avatar
    Sunday, 7th July, 2019, 02:16 AM
    I think the Paladin is the most overrated class in the game. There. I said it.
    232 replies | 10180 view(s)
    1 XP
  • Gladius Legis's Avatar
    Sunday, 7th July, 2019, 02:15 AM
    You do realize the Paladin is capable of enacting his strongest nova only once per day, right? Any other "nova" the Paladin does after using his highest spell slots won't be as strong. Meanwhile, the Fighter's Action Surge/Precision Attack nova is as strong as it always is whenever he does it.
    232 replies | 10180 view(s)
    0 XP
  • Gladius Legis's Avatar
    Wednesday, 3rd July, 2019, 06:43 PM
    I voted Fighter, Rogue, Cleric, Wizard, Paladin, Bard. If I could, I'd just vote for all 12 classes in the 5e handbook. Excluding just one of those classes makes the game not D&D as far as I'm concerned.
    60 replies | 2056 view(s)
    0 XP
No More Results
About Gladius Legis

Basic Information

Date of Birth
August 21

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
1,108
Posts Per Day
0.27
Last Post
Finesse rebalance Tuesday, 16th July, 2019 12:06 AM

Currency

Gold Pieces
6
General Information
Last Activity
Today 02:02 PM
Join Date
Tuesday, 10th June, 2008
Product Reviews & Ratings
Reviews Written
0

Saturday, 13th July, 2019


Friday, 12th July, 2019


Monday, 8th July, 2019


Sunday, 7th July, 2019


Thursday, 4th July, 2019


Wednesday, 26th June, 2019


Saturday, 2nd February, 2019

  • 05:53 PM - FrogReaver mentioned Gladius Legis in post [GUIDE] My Word Is My Sword: The Paladin Guide
    Yes, and it's also equal to the stance of anyone, even a bum off of a street. That's not true. He's the lead rules designer and the person that makes official rulings on sage advice. Like it or not, his tweets are infinitely closer to official than a bum of the streets. Regardless, there's a better thread about the Sage Advice specifically to have this discussion on than this paladin guide. I think Gladius Legis would appreciate us moving this argument there.

Monday, 31st December, 2018

  • 11:25 PM - pukunui mentioned Gladius Legis in post Adaptive Explorer: An alternative to Natural Explorer for 1st-level Rangers
    Gladius Legis: This is a cool idea. Thanks for sharing. It's a new year so new campaign for one of my groups, and I've decided to be brave and actually house rule the ranger a little bit. I've replaced the default Favored Enemy feature with the Favored Enemy / Greater Favored Enemy feature from the UA revised ranger. I've also made it so Natural Explorer doesn't require the picking of favored terrains. Its benefits apply to all terrain types. However, because I'm also wanting to implement AiME's Journey rules, I'm going to enforce the idea that a ranger can only be doing one activity at a time (foraging *or* navigating *or* tracking). If the ranger isn't actively navigating, the group can still get lost. If the ranger isn't actively foraging, they don't find extra food. And so on. Your post has made me realize that I inadvertently nixed the disguised Expertise part of Natural Explorer. I might just do what you've done and make it so they get Expertise in one ranger class skill of their choi...

Monday, 10th December, 2018

  • 02:59 AM - Ashrym mentioned Gladius Legis in post Allowing some Concentration Stacking - With big costs
    Concentration as a caster limitation is one of the best changes from 3e, IMO. Changing it as suggested does nothing but change the optimization and buffs casting. Gladius Legis had an interestind suggestion but I think that takes one of the benefits of Bestow Curse away. I would go with concentration spells cast using 3 slots higher than required removes concentration and is an additional requirement beyond other scaling. Personally, I would be more inclined to add a feat... Centered Caster: The spell caster can make a DC 10 concentration check to cast and maintain one additional concentration spell without breaking concentration on an existing spell. The caster must an additional concentration check at the end of each of his or her turns to maintain the second spell. The caster makes any other concentration checks at disadvantage on the second spell. That gives an added bonus to sorcerers because of save proficiencies. A feat for a controlled concentration buff seems far more reasonable as a trade-off.

Saturday, 7th April, 2018


Wednesday, 21st March, 2018

  • 03:41 AM - Harzel mentioned Gladius Legis in post Survivor Subclasses (Gish Edition)- IT IS OVER!
    Gladius Legis vote got lost Arcane Trickster 21 Beast Master 17 Eldritch Knight 24 Gloom Stalker 22 Horizon Walker 18 Hunter 19 Oath of the Ancients 2 Oath of Conquest 18 Oath of the Crown 16 Oath of Devotion 21 Oath of Redemption 20 Oath of Vengeance 16 Oathbreaker 4 Monster Slayer 18

Friday, 5th January, 2018

  • 10:41 PM - Blue mentioned Gladius Legis in post Trying to make a good vengeance paladin, I need some help.
    The estimable Gladius Legis said much of what I was going to. Vengance works fantastically with Great Weapon Mastery, so go two handed weapon and enjoy lots of damage. Dump Dex - an 8 won't hurt your AC, and you want to go after foes so they have a chance to move closer so you can close and engage on round one. Focus on STR & CON (for both Concentration and survivability). Early on don't miss spells like Shield of Faith and Protection from Evil and Good to help keep you up because you will make yourself a target. On the other hand, if you go variant human and pick up GWM at 1st, Bless to land it more is the way to go. (This is in addition to GL's suggestion about Haste at later levels.) Depending on what level you expect the game to end at makes a big difference for multiclassing. If it's less than the teens, I wouldn't do it. And you don't need to do it, it's just a different focus. If you do multiclass I can't complain about GL's suggestion of Fighter 1st to get CON saves, but it delays so many good p...

Monday, 11th December, 2017

  • 09:19 PM - Bishop_ mentioned Gladius Legis in post [GUIDE] My Word Is My Sword: The Paladin Guide
    First of all, thank you for your guides, Gladius Legis. I really appreciate them. So, I'm planning a Sorcadin (Paladin (Conquest) 7/Sorcerer (Divine Soul) 13). Mostly, he'll be a tank and support for the party. Do you (and others, of course) think that Martial Adept for Menacing Attack is worth a feat/ASI for this build? And if it's possible, could you provide example builds for the new material that came out in XGtE, please?

Sunday, 10th September, 2017


Monday, 26th June, 2017

  • 10:46 PM - Gadget mentioned Gladius Legis in post What's the worst spell?
    I would second @Gladius Legis on the list provided with the slight disagreement that Blade Ward--though niche-- has its uses. In short there are two ways to measure a spell's effectiveness: how well it matches the fiction and lives up to the expectations in the description, and how well the mechanical implementation works along with the system mastery required to effectively use it. For example, few players, even newbies, would expect Illusory Script to be an dungeon pawning, knock-down-orcus type of spell. Mechanically, the spell largely delivers what it says on the tin, and is a somewhat niche utility spell that may come up in certain types of campaigns, but not one an erstwhile dungeon delver is likely to take to keep them and their companions alive while adventuring. As such, I don't really have a problem with it (save for maybe having the duration be longer for ancient treasure maps or some such story driven thing). Spells like Mordenkainen's Sword, on the other hand, deliver quite a bit different exp...

Monday, 5th June, 2017

  • 06:28 PM - Hawk Diesel mentioned Gladius Legis in post June Unearthed Arcana: Druid Shepherd, Fighter Cavalier, and Paladin of Conquest
    I forgot to comment on the paladin! I agree with Gladius Legis about the Conquering Strike vs Conquering Presence. I don't think it makes a huge difference to be able to activate it on a successful strike. Scornful rebuke is cool, but I think it should probably require using your reaction, and should be minimum 1 rather than 0. But then again, given an ability of such a high level, maybe if it requires your reaction it should be a bit higher damage.

Friday, 24th February, 2017

  • 08:02 AM - Xeviat mentioned Gladius Legis in post The 'New' Ranger
    To play devil's advocate about the game assuming the ability to get through damage resistance, I'd point you to page 277 of the DMG. There, in the CR calculator, there's a part where it tells you to effecitvely multiply a creature's HP for resistances ("especially bludgeoning, piercing, and slashing damage from nonmagical weapons", it says). This multiplier goes down as levels increase: 1-4 - x2 5-10 - x1.5 11-16 - x1.25 17+ - x1 It's almost as if they expect groups to have more and more ways of bypassing resistances as levels increase (just like they think Flight isn't a defensive advantage past level 10, when players have better ranged attacks and better access to their own flight). I'm with Gladius Legis mostly; since the pet cannot wield weapons, and there are no baseline "magic fang amulets" that I'm aware of, I'd give them the ability to ignore DR/magic. But, like TheCosmicKid, I'd add a "magic fang" spell, because like the "magic weapon" spell, +X to hit would be a worthwhile buff on a pet if you aren't using your concentration for something else. Maybe. But, a "magic fang amulet" that allowed the wearer to bypass magic resistance would be a simple compromise too. I give out "endless quivers" to make the game simpler too.

Thursday, 10th March, 2016


No results to display...
Page 1 of 29 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Saturday, 13th July, 2019

  • 02:23 AM - 5ekyu quoted Gladius Legis in post Saving Throws and non-proficiency
    What 20th-level Wizard is going to have an 8 CON when for most Wizards CON is either 2nd or 3rd in importance?Isnt the baseline exsmple for the vulnerability used here sn 8 wisdom fighter? Wasnt the "the same" mocking compared to thst? If we are gonna compare the heinous vulnerability of a 20 fighter with 8 wis in a festless game with no buffs vs saves to the hp protection of w izard, why isn't the same determination of how gimped the wizard would be ok ?
  • 12:46 AM - Flamestrike quoted Gladius Legis in post What is the Ranger to you?
    I Conjure Animals is most definitely worth at least as much if not more than an ASI. You're a 9th level Ranger. 4 x black bears, 2 Dire wolves, or 1 Sabre tooth tiger is probably the best option at a glance (there may be others). From memory, our Druid used it (at 5th level) to summon a giant constrictor (actually Huge from memory). At this level, they'd be lucky to last a single encounter (of which you're getting 6 or so per adventuring day as a median average going by the DMG). I guess the Wolves can knock stuff prone (not that this helps you as ranged guy that much), and they provide a HP sink (other than a PC losing HP). It's a good spell. The fact it uses your concentration is a bummer (and drops if your concentration drops, or if you short rest seeing as it only lasts an hour). lol, Monster Slayer is the weakest XGtE archetype by far, dude. No, it's not. Banishment and Hold monster are fantastic spells. At 15th level you get an at will +1d6 to saving throw effects (all of them) from yo...

Friday, 12th July, 2019

  • 11:57 PM - Flamestrike quoted Gladius Legis in post What is the Ranger to you?
    Favored Enemy and Natural Explorer, I'll give you. The others aren't insignificant, especially the ASI and Defensive Tactics. Or Iron Will. Or Ethereal Step. Defensive tactics is OK but it's easily at least matched by [+1 AC from Fighting style, the odd parry or riposte from Battlemaster, and 3 x short rest bonus action heals from Second wind). The ASI is at least matched by Action surge. If the latter was available as a feat, I take it every time. The 1 extra 2nd level spell per long rest, is easily matched or beaten by a few Superiority dice per short rest. Favored enemy and Natural explorer improvements you wouldnt miss if you didnt get them, and you'll probably never even use them. Id rather a single skill proficiency (even one chosen at random) over those abilities. The skills are nice but hardly groundbreaking. Skirmish is situational at best. The only amazing thing you really gained was Cunning Action. Expertise in Perception (and Stealth) is amazing. +2d6 sneak attack every single rou...
  • 11:13 PM - Flamestrike quoted Gladius Legis in post What is the Ranger to you?
    Except neither of the builds you showed were appreciably better than a straight Ranger until well past Lv. 15. Yes they clearly were. I'll start with something like Ranger 5 + Scout Rogue 3. Its better than a Ranger at being a Ranger. You lose an ASI and a single spell of 2nd level per long rest (and 2 extra spells known). 3 HP, some useless exploration pillar abilities and the moderately useful Defensive tactics. In exchange, you gain 3 extra skills known, Expertise in 4 of your skills (including Nature and Survival, and probably Stealth and Perception), cunning action, +2d6 sneak attack damage every single round, and Skirmish. Or take 3 levels of BM and gain 4 sup dice per short rest, action surge, a second fighting style for a fixed +1 to AC, get your 3 HP back, and get some short rest healing with Second Wind. Both of those options are far better than an extra 2nd level spell per day, and defensive tactics. The Lore Bard after 5 levels of Ranger? Doesn't get Magical Secrets until charac...
  • 10:36 PM - Flamestrike quoted Gladius Legis in post What is the Ranger to you?
    Umm, so you're trying to defend your multiclass builds by ... comparing the Ranger to the Paladin? ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhh .... k Dude, the whole point of the exercise is to show that Rangers suck mechanically after 5th level. In order to do that it's pretty important to compare them (mechanically) to other classes and 'builds'. You can build a more 'rangery' ranger (i.e. better than the Ranger at sneaking around, doing nature and surival and scouting stuff, mobile fighting and damage) by leaving Ranger and taking levels in Scout Rogue (which I am all but persuaded of the Devs thew in to mainly give Rangers a stealth buff) and Fighter. By 5th level, youve gotten everything useful out of Ranger you're going to get, and you're better off leaving. Heck; even taking 10 levels of Lore Bard after 5 levels of Ranger makes you a better Ranger - you get expertise AND plenty of extra skills, can fluff cutting words as you using your Favored enemy knowledge of the enemies against them, and gain access to the be...
  • 10:02 PM - Flamestrike quoted Gladius Legis in post What is the Ranger to you?
    I'm really not seeing how either of your builds are any better at "Rangering" than the Ranger. And those builds are certainly taking far too long to mature into anything worthwhile. What do you mean they take too long to mature? From levels 1-5 they're identical to a single classed ranger! It's only after 5th level that you take levels in other classes because Ranger 6-20 sucks. Ranger 6-20 is full of sub-par class features (such as covering itself in mud at 10th level, a woeful capstone, getting better at stuff you never do in most campaigns with favored enemy and terrain feature improvements, getting a gimped version of a feature your Rogue has had since 2nd level... at 14th level and so forth). I guess it's a half caster, but it's list is sub-par compared to Paladin (the other half caster), it's locked into a small selection of spells known (unlike the Paladin who can mix and match and has twice as many spells known, if not more), cant change those spells other than by advancing a level (one ...
  • 09:19 PM - Flamestrike quoted Gladius Legis in post What is the Ranger to you?
    The difference is your weak build doesn't even come online until 15th level, and you expressedly cited a 15th-level build to try to prove your point. Dude, I've told you three times now. The 'Weak Build' is I presented is (take your choice) at 15th level: 1) Ranger 5, Battlemaster Fighter 3, Scout Ranger 7 (the remaining levels in Scout) 2) Ranger 5, Scout 3, BM 3, Druid 4 (the remaining levels in Druid) Each class is better at Rangering than the Ranger. And Uncanny Dodge is still usually better, and you usually get the same end result as Skirmisher using Cunning Action: Disengage. My point stands. You cant Cunning action [disengage] unless it's your turn an it uses your bonus action. Skirmish uses your reaction. Scenario: 6 Mooks and 1 Boss, 30' away. You lose initiative. Mook 1 moves up to you and attacks; his turn then ends. You now shrug, and use your reaction to move away 20-30'. Now the other mooks (and the boss) cant attack you this round. They can Dash to you (wasting their actions...
  • 08:36 PM - Flamestrike quoted Gladius Legis in post What is the Ranger to you?
    And you ignore literally all the other spells I listed before those? You are arguing dishonestly. I didnt ignore them mate. I called you out on your own dishonesty for handwaving abilities at mid to high level away, while sneaking a few of them in yourself to prove a point. Again, Skirmish competes with Uncanny Dodge for the 1 reaction you'll have every round, and Uncanny Dodge wins out more often. I did adress your point. It's mainly taken as a ribbon ability. Scout is taken for the fluff (it fluffs with Ranger well) more than anything else. But mechanically it's still a great ability. Your turn ends. A monsters turn begins; he attacks you, his turn ends, and then you move away half your move before anyone else can act (Presuming the classic Wood Elf, Mobile, bonus speed from Scout and Longstrider route), that's 20-30' of movement with no AoO's. It's often more than enough to get you out of range of several creatures melee attacks for the rest of the round. For a class that is built on Kiting...
  • 08:05 PM - Flamestrike quoted Gladius Legis in post What is the Ranger to you?
    That's a 15th-level build. Most campaigns don't go that far. Not a good example to make your case. Yet here you are below using spells of 4th and 5th level (conjure volley, swift quiver etc - neither of which are online till 17th level, and conjure woodland beings at 13th level) to outline your point. Also, the Scout is hands-down the most overrated subclass in 5e, precisely because everyone looks at the Lv. 13 and 17 features (again, past most campaigns) and thinks the whole subclass is good, when it's really not. Scout was selected to gain Expertise to Survival and Nature. The Skirmish ability (movement as soon as a creature finishes its turn next to you) and bonus land speed is just gravy to a Ranged PC. Hunter's Mark, Goodberry, Absorb Elements, Healing Spirit, Pass Without Trace, Spike Growth, Conjure Animals, Guardian of Nature, Freedom of Movement, Conjure Woodland Beings, Conjure Volley, Swift Quiver ... all good to great spells. I'll take the Paladin list any day of the week thanks...
  • 06:51 PM - SkidAce quoted Gladius Legis in post What is the Ranger to you?
    This has been my preferred solution from the beginning. And I don't know how people can insist that it can't be a magical creature when the Beast Master's connection with their pet is explicitly described as "magically bonding," anyway ... Find Steed summons a spirit. I want the ranger to recruit a woodland ally and grow into a team. They can "mystically bond" sure, but its not a summoned creature or spirit. Its your partner you grew up with. That's a different story (and what I think people want) instead of "Summon WhateverBeast"
  • 05:39 PM - doctorbadwolf quoted Gladius Legis in post What is the Ranger to you?
    Does the revised beast master ranger do too much damage at lower levels? It feels like it does, but I haven't gotten to see it in action yet. Compared to, say, a Hunter with horde breaker, they're both getting two attacks bit horde breaker has limitations on when they can use it. Or does it self balance because people baby their pets? it does a little more damage, but they both have restrictions on use. PCs have more ways to get to enemies than a wolf does, for one thing. But it evens out after a while so Im not worried about a small advantage in levels 1-3. But people are still fairly careful, and tend to not send the pet solo against multiple enemies and the like. This has been my preferred solution from the beginning. And I don't know how people can insist that it can't be a magical creature when the Beast Master's connection with their pet is explicitly described as "magically bonding," anyway ... Yeah I dont see any problem with modeling it after Find Steed tbh. What I'd really lik...
  • 04:14 PM - Xeviat quoted Gladius Legis in post Consensus about two-weapon fighting?
    In a pure combat (well, damage) comparison, that would favor the Fighter even more, as the Paladin would be giving up a certain degree of their damage potential per day to do those other things. It does. I'm suggesting that maybe it's okay if the fighter eeks out a little ahead since it's all they can do.

Thursday, 11th July, 2019

  • 03:00 AM - Remathilis quoted Gladius Legis in post Consensus about two-weapon fighting?
    I'm not even trying to fix a mathematical balance. I just want my character to use rapier/dagger or longsword/shortsword, TWO REAL-WORLD FIGHTING STYLES, without having to take a feat (i.e. OPTIONAL RULE) for it. Which for whatever reason is making you rage hard. This. To me, one point of damage is barely a consideration since 5e is designed for neither PVP nor PerfectBalance, and the worst that comes off it is that a monster dies one round sooner, if even. In all honesty, I think the bigger problem is greatswords doing 2d6 compared to the other heavy weapons doing 1d12. I think 2d6 skews the math and makes it superior to all other nonreach weapons.
  • 12:45 AM - FrogReaver quoted Gladius Legis in post Consensus about two-weapon fighting?
    This is wrong. Greatsword + Hunter's Mark, 3 rounds, STR 18, Extra Attack: 3*(6d6+8) = 87 1d8 main weapon + 1d6 off weapon, 3 rounds, Hunter's Mark tag round 1, dual-wielding 2 and 3, STR 18, Extra Attack: (2d8+2d6+8) + 2*(2d8+4d6+8) = 86 Even after three rounds, the greatsword is a point ahead of the dual-wielder with a d8 main. The dual-wielder pulls ahead in Round 4, which is the last round of many combats, likely mopping up. Additionally he's assuming that you never killed that enemy and needed to move the hex/hunter's mark to the next enemy. If that happens then you never catch up.

Wednesday, 10th July, 2019

  • 08:13 PM - Flamestrike quoted Gladius Legis in post Consensus about two-weapon fighting?
    [QUOTE=Gladius Legis;7632570]1d6 + Stat and 1d6 + Stat is already better than GWF's 2d6r1&2 + Stat from Lv. 1-4. I fail to see how 1 extra point of damage in the former case makes it that much more egregious. Again, for only Lv. 1-4, 20% of level progression, and the levels that go by quickest. Exactly. 2WF is already good at low (1-4) levels. Your proposed 'fix' doesnt fix this; it just makes it even better at those low levels. And then at Lv. 5, at STR 18: GWF: 4d6r1&2 + 8 = 24.67 TWF (w/d8 main hand): 2d8 + 1d6 + 12 = 24.5 Your 2WF gets 3 attacks per round to your GWF's 2. Meaning he deals more reliable (if slightly less) damage. So there is a trade off elsewhere. Greatsword + Hunter's Mark, 3 rounds, STR 18, Extra Attack: 3*(6d6+8) = 87 1d8 main weapon + 1d6 off weapon, 3 rounds, Hunter's Mark tag round 1, dual-wielding 2 and 3, STR 18, Extra Attack: (2d8+2d6+8) + 2*(2d8+4d6+8) = 86 Hunters mark (2 attacks per round) 3 rounds = 12d6 + (Str x 6) + 6d6 damage = 87 average damage - more with GWS ...
  • 06:40 PM - Flamestrike quoted Gladius Legis in post Consensus about two-weapon fighting?
    All that goes out the window once you get Extra Attack. Which accounts for 80% of a fighting class' level progression. Greatsword becomes 4d6 + 2xstat. Which is more than 2d8 + 1d6 + 2xstat. Agreed, but by that time all classes with extra attack as a class feature (or thirsting blade) have [+ damage] riders on attacks (Smite, Rage, Sup dice, Hunters mark, Hex, Eldritch smite, Divine Favor) or like having multiple attacks to land sneak attack in the case of rogues (who dont get extra attack), which picks up the slack. So, bumping the main hand to 1d8 wouldn't throw balance off at all, really. It'd only make dual-wielding slightly stronger (as in, 1 measly point) from Lv. 1-4, which, again, is only 20% of character progression as well as the levels that go by quickest. It doesnt throw balance off, but it makes TWF mechanically superior to Great Weapon fighting (and that's before you factor in Hunters mark and similar riders) at least until level 5. It gets worse when fighting style investments a...

Monday, 8th July, 2019

  • 03:40 PM - dnd4vr quoted Gladius Legis in post Consensus about two-weapon fighting?
    Improved Divine Smite does NOT add 1d8 to the spell slot you are using for the Smite. It just adds to your regular weapon hits. This was clarified in the most recent errata. Do try to keep up. Improved Divine Smite By 11th level, you are so suffused with righteous might that all your melee weapon strikes carry divine power with them. Whenever you hit a creature with a melee weapon, the creature takes an extra 1d8 radiant damage. (DELETED: If you also use your Divine Smite with an attack, you add this damage to the extra damage of your Divine Smite.) Removing the italicized sentence in no way implies you don't combine DS with IDS (if that is your thought). If the two were meant to be non-complementary, the errata would have stated so, but then that nearly defeats the purpose of IDS in most games IMO since many tables have so few combats between rests and at 11th-level or higher Paladins routinely add DS to their attacks. That doesn't mean they don't get to also add IDS since it applies to every hit...
  • 01:21 PM - dnd4vr quoted Gladius Legis in post Consensus about two-weapon fighting?
    That is absolutely false. Wrong, it is pretty simple math: (at 20th-level, assuming Improved Divine Smite still caps smites at 5d8, some tables play it increases it to 6d8, but whatever...) 4 smites for 3d8 = 4 x 13.5 avg = 54 3 smites for 4d8 = 3 x 18 avg = 54 8 (3 + 3 + 2) smites for 5d8 = 8 x 22.5 avg = 180 54 + 54 + 180 = 288 hp of damage on average. Oh, and MOST importantly, this is added AFTER the hit so it is guaranteed damage and NOT affected by the 60% hit probability like Sneak Attack. Even with 6 action surges at 20th-level, with an average damage of 27.6 hp each (from the table earlier), the total boost the Fighter gets is 165.6. 288 - 165.6 = 122.4. Looks to be more than 100 to me. :) Now, perhaps you meant "That is absolutely false." to my stating at most 3 action surges? If so, my apologies, you are absolutely correct I was mistaken since the greatest number of action surges a character can get is in fact 6 (which was used in my above calculation). I think he's right about div...
  • 05:17 AM - FrogReaver quoted Gladius Legis in post Consensus about two-weapon fighting?
    That is absolutely false. I think he's right about divine smite and action surge. It's just he's conceniently excluding superiority dice as well...
  • 02:48 AM - 5ekyu quoted Gladius Legis in post Consensus about two-weapon fighting?
    Care to point out specifically what "lot of assumptions" I'm making on something as basic as a Fighter's TYPICAL ATTACK ACTION? No? Then your words are empty platitudes. Again, talking about the damage of a Fighter's typical attack action. There aren't really any "non-quantifiable factors" that effect the Fighter's attack action's damage compared to anyone else. The Fighter makes his attacks. Simple miss/hit probability and damage averages. Something that gives the Fighter disadvantage on attacks is going to do the same to the Paladin or the Rogue. Your "non-quantifiable factors" really aren't relevant. If all you compare is one fighter's attack action vs another fighter's attack action, you have eliminated like 99.99999% of the factors in play in a combat and so any conclusions judgements have practically no value in terms of an assessment over which class does more damage? You make this too easy when your last paragraph is a perfect proof of my point about assumptions and "non-quantifiable fac...


Page 1 of 29 1234567891011 ... LastLast

Gladius Legis's Downloads

  Filename Total Downloads Rating Files Uploaded Last Updated

Most Recent Favorite Generators/Tables

View All Favorites