Unearthed Arcana Light, Dark, Underdark - November's Unearthed Arcana

Sacrosanct · Nov 6, 2015

Ugh. Mundane marking. That sounds too 4e-ish. No thank you.

I mentioned the breachgnome upthread, but seriously, IMO they just need to make it fit with what they called it. I.e., the tunnelfighter only gets those abilities when he or she has a non-passable structure (wall, wagon, etc) within 10' of either side of him or her. Then it becomes situational enough that while it's awesome when it works, it only works some of the time, which offsets those other styles that grant bonuses all the time. Then again, I'd still like to see it in actual play as worded, because it just might be situational enough already

gyor · Nov 6, 2015

TF is good, but lets not go overboard.

Anyway, I'm personally more interested in the Shadow Sorceror, its seems like a really cool disurbing subclass, kind of like the 4e Shade with its racial powers, but the 90 darkvision should stack with preexisting darkvision.

I think Shadow Sorceror/Arcane Trickster rogue could be a cool multiclass as well.

I also like that power source seems to differ depending upon origin, Favoured Soul was divine and Shadow is well shadow magic I think instead of arcane.

gyor · Nov 6, 2015

Sacrosanct said:
Ugh. Mundane marking. That sounds too 4e-ish. No thank you.

I mentioned the breachgnome upthread, but seriously, IMO they just need to make it fit with what they called it. I.e., the tunnelfighter only gets those abilities when he or she has a non-passable structure (wall, wagon, etc) within 10' of either side of him or her. Then it becomes situational enough that while it's awesome when it works, it only works some of the time, which offsets those other styles that grant bonuses all the time. Then again, I'd still like to see it in actual play as worded, because it just might be situational enough already

That would make TF suck, its fine, it doesn't need to be fixed.

SkidAce · Nov 6, 2015

JohnLynch said:
After all, how often do you throw around antimagic/dead magic zones on the poor spellcaster?

About 25% of the time.

Radaceus · Nov 6, 2015

gyor said:
That would make TF suck, its fine, it doesn't need to be fixed.

Then don't call it Tunnel Fighter, call it One Man Sheild Wall style and prepare for many a DM facepalm as minmaxers loophole the hell out of it with just the few combos mentioned in this thread, the current verbage needs to either stick to the combat Mechanics, or restrict the feature.

I personally have a hard time justifying Move Action(25-30'), Main Action, Bonus Action, Extra Action, Reaction all in the span of 6 seconds...so this will never fly in my campaigns regardless of 'not needing an action/rule' to label everything. And as such, possibly just me and my group if old timers ate sticks in the myd and prefer our RP be somewhat realistic in timespans. I can see a group protecting a passage, veteran fighters, getting accurate hits in, above the norm, but there would still be a limit to how many

gyor · Nov 6, 2015

Close Quarter Shooter means there is now a fighter style for Paladin's who want to be archers.

That seems an odd choice for a Paladin, but a Oath of the Ancients Paladin can pull it off thanks spells like Ensnaring Strike, which works on both melee and ranged attacks and misty step which boosts mobility, but its going to feel like your Paladin is playing a ranger.

But when your on your magic steed firing your bow you going to feel like a true horse archer.

JohnLynch · Nov 6, 2015

SkidAce said:
About 25% of the time.

1 in 4 fights of being nothing but a liability? I'd definitely want to bring a good book if I was playing a Wizard at your table.

Sacrosanct said:
Ugh. Mundane marking. That sounds too 4e-ish. No thank you.

Yes, unlimited opportunity attacks is much better.

gyor said:
That would make TF suck, its fine, it doesn't need to be fixed.

On it's own it's fine. But in a game where feats are allowed it most certainly does need fixing. I expect feats would be the most often used optional rule in 5th edition and given that it should take feats into account when considering how good it is.

SkidAce · Nov 6, 2015

JohnLynch said:
1 in 4 fights of being nothing but a liability? I'd definitely want to bring a good book if I was playing a Wizard at your table.

The brevity in which I replied was supposed to imply tongue in cheek. Since there are four character types (magical, holy, fighting, and sneaking) I was trying to imply that they all get their turn being "nerfed". My apologies.

No player ever suffers being nothing but a liability in our games. On occasion (less than 25% to be more honest) a situation arises where their main abilities are not applicable to a solution.

Sometimes there's Invisibility Purge or Glitterdust. Sometimes Immunity to Non-magical weapons, or an Unholy curse, or like you asked, a magic dead zone.

So, on topic, we don't always nerf a players specialty, but it doesn't work all the time just because its their specialty either. These new fighting styles would be the same.

JohnLynch · Nov 6, 2015

SkidAce said:
The brevity in which I replied was supposed to imply tongue in cheek.

I got that. My response was equally insincere

SkidAce said:
So, on topic, we don't always nerf a players specialty, but it doesn't work all the time just because its their specialty either. These new fighting styles would be the same.

The solution being proposed to having an overpowered ability, is for the DM to go out of their way to nerf the player playing the character who dared to take an ability that their DM said would be acceptable. When we get overpowered spells, we don't talk about putting wizards in timeout by throwing them into regular anti-magic zones. We simply ban the offending spell (or don't and then complain incessantly about fighter/caster disparity

). Saying "something is fine so long as the DM can punish the player for daring to choose that option" is not (IMO) the hallmark of good game design. Occasionally putting a player in a situation where they don't get to use all their toys can be an interesting situation from a narrative perspective. Constantly throwing players into antimagic zones or throwing ranged enemies at the players constantly is not an interesting choice from a narrative or gameplay level. It's a game of frustration.

bganon · Nov 6, 2015

Radaceus said:
And as such, possibly just me and my group if old timers ate sticks in the myd and prefer our RP be somewhat realistic in timespans.

Oh man, this is a separate debate, but come on. 31-count kata can be done in 15 seconds even with a partner, and most western martial arts recreations I've seen also run at about two strikes per second once an exchange gets going, with exchanges of 3-4 strikes not that uncommon. And that's what you pick up in a year of training, which in D&D is basically 1st or maybe 2nd-level Fighter.

D&D has never, ever been even remotely realistic about time spans of combat.

Unearthed Arcana Light, Dark, Underdark - November's Unearthed Arcana

Sacrosanct

Legend

gyor

Legend

gyor

Legend

SkidAce

Legend

Radaceus

Adventurer

gyor

Legend

JohnLynch

Explorer

SkidAce

Legend

JohnLynch

Explorer

bganon

Explorer

Similar Threads

Related Articles

Latest threads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Recent & Upcoming Releases