CapnZapp
Legend
I am sorry. I can't help you avoid grief and frustration.
Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app
D&D 5E Treantmonk's Guide to Wizards 5e
Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app
Treantmonklvl20
Explorer
You seemed to be under the false impression that if you feel insulted, there has been an ad-hominem logical fallacy committed. I was correcting you, because you made a mistake.
I did not attack your character. That would violate terms of service and would be irrelevant to our discussion.
I did not attack your capabilities, though I'm going to in this post, because it is relevant to our discussion.
I questioned your experience. If someone was unaware that some roads are covered in gravel, I would question their driving experience. If someone was unaware that some books have hard covers, I would question their reading experience. If someone has never heard of single encounter days in official D&D products I will question their D&D experience.
Now if that driver then lectured me that gravel roads don't exist, except perhaps in my town, which is fine, but definitely not on any normal place, and they are offended I questioned their experience, and I commited an ad-hominem logical fallacy by doing so, well, I'm probably not investing much time in getting their driving tips, and the coversation is likely close to over.
Our conversation is close to over.
It is also complete and utter waste of your time and mine. Again. My hopes are not high, but I will explain why you wasted our time...one more time.
6 pages ago. 6 pages ago I asked for an answer to this one simple question, and now you are giving me graphs with the claim how a BS will still be standing when his party members go down.
So now, after all these pages, now I'm going to attack your capabilities.
I have asked the same question of you over and over. I've tried rephrasing it, I've tried specifically asking for you not to change the subject to the BS not being hit in combat, yet you are still doing so. I thought at first you might be unwilling to answer the question, but now I wonder about your capability to comprehend what is being asked, no matter how many times it is rephrased.
It has been making me irritated, and by your tone, your irritation is also apparent, right up to the last post where you answered my question as to why a BS was swinging a sword by pointing out how a BS will still be standing when his party members go down.
That is the reason our conversation is now over.
I will not be blocking you, but I will no longer be responding to your posts.
Also not an ad-hominem by the way.
Treantmonklvl20
Explorer
Yes, I've put it to rest. Thanks for your attempt to warn me.
Treantmonklvl20
Explorer
The "inappropriate content" warning seems to be gone from pt 2 of my guide. Let me know if the original link works again.
It depends? There's too many outside variables to really say one way or another.
Now, while disengaging is a thing, yes, but it takes up your action generally, unless the enemy is a rogue, or have Haste on. And spending an action to disengage means that, for that turn, you're not doing anything. As a tank, that's generally considered as much of a victory as a solid hit. A hoard is almost always better off to rush forwards and not disengage. One critter will take damage, sure. But you can't stop more than one out of the swarm.
It really comes down to tactical consideration. Sometimes, its the right move. Othertimes, its not.
clearstream
(He, Him)
My analysis is over an adventuring day informed by the DMG guidelines (in part because 5th edition's balance and diversity works well with those guidelines). You have asserted that I am saying that single encounter days never happen, even though I have not said that.
I am not wedded to one-abstract-turn damage estimates that ignore attacks back and fail to attribute value to defences. Being attacked back with Advantage against AC 17, and being attacked back with Disadvantage against AC 20, is not identical.
The point is not that BS will still be standing: it is that Cleric cannot sustain the damage that one-abstract-turn suggests.
I've attempted to explain that characters who fall in combat stop dealing damage. That is why it is necessary to create probability functions showing the consequence of a given number of attacks back prior to making a damage estimate, so that it is possible to see where concentration will be interrupted or a character will need to change tactics in order to avoid dying. Clerics cannot deal damage from spells they can't cast, or that they have lost concentration on.
The PDF is one step in the process. For the sake of transparency I shared it. Perhaps that was misunderstood.
Last edited:
jgsugden
Legend
Trying to model every contingency, every option, and every possibility is a fool's errand. There are too many to count.
On a per turn basis, BS are usually pretty good on AC defense and fairly weak on offense. They also tend to be vulnerable to damage that does can require an attack roll. I think we all agree on these points. All of the rest of the discussion extolling the virtues of the bladesinger or condemning the limitations of the class are minutiae.
On a per turn basis, BS are usually pretty good on AC defense and fairly weak on offense. They also tend to be vulnerable to damage that does can require an attack roll. I think we all agree on these points. All of the rest of the discussion extolling the virtues of the bladesinger or condemning the limitations of the class are minutiae.
krunchyfrogg
Explorer
I can’t be the only one who’s disappointed that this amazing guide has degenerated into a discussion about only one of the (currently nine) wizard subclasses.
Bladesingers should have their own conversation. Diviners and Illusionists have already won the discussion as the best wizards.
Bladesingers should have their own conversation. Diviners and Illusionists have already won the discussion as the best wizards.
CapnZapp
Legend
Mhhm.
Hopefully this thread picks up again after the release of XGtE (plus analysis time).
Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app
