First Impressions?

[CasvalRemDeikun]

"Skills" are explained in the DM-Section, pretty clearly I think.

They are there, but they aren't clear. Leaving too much to the DM will lead to inconsistency, which is only a little better than not having rules for it at all.

 

[jasin]

The spell attack bonuses on the wizard elf (+6; should be +5 = 3 Int + 2 magical attacks) and the human cleric (+4; should be +6 = 4 Wis + 2 magical attacks) seem off. Did I miss something?

I'd be the cleric's bonus is a typo, after all he has +6 with radiant lance.

The wizard has +6 in three different places, so maybe there's a +1 bonus to magic for wizards? There does seem to be a +1 bonus to attack for fighters (and +2 to damage).

 

[Snapdragyn]

The wizard has +6 in three different places, so maybe there's a +1 bonus to magic for wizards? There does seem to be a +1 bonus to attack for fighters (and +2 to damage).

If it's +1 to attack for fighters, then why is the rogue seemingly getting a +2 to attack? I cannot work out where the extra +2 is coming from; it seems that it should be at +3 w/ the weapons listed rather than the +5 shown. *confused*

 

[jasin]

If it's +1 to attack for fighters, then why is the rogue seemingly getting a +2 to attack? I cannot work out where the extra +2 is coming from; it seems that it should be at +3 w/ the weapons listed rather than the +5 shown. *confused*

To me it looks like there's a very good case for +2 to attack if you're proficient; carried over from 4E, explicit for magic attacks, seemingly included for everyone, implied by the comment about improvised weapons getting no bonus.

On top of that, fighters and wizards apparently get another +1.

So the rogue's dagger is +3 Dex +2 weapon proficiency.

The cleric's radiant lance is +4 Wis +2 magic proficiency.

The cleric's quarterstaff is -1 Str +1 weapon proficiency.

The fighter's axe is +3 Str +2 weapon proficiency +1 because fighters are the best at hitting people.

The wizard's ray of frost is +3 Int +2 magic proficiency +1 because wizards are the best at magicking people.

Or there could just be mistakes, I don't know.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

If it's +1 to attack for fighters, then why is the rogue seemingly getting a +2 to attack? I cannot work out where the extra +2 is coming from; it seems that it should be at +3 w/ the weapons listed rather than the +5 shown. *confused*

It appears to be a +2 proficiency bonus with weapons. Everyone has a +2 to their attack rolls from nowhere at all, but the fighter has a +3.

Casters just get +2 to spells. I'm guessing to make up for the lack of proficiency bonus.

 

[Libramarian]

Charm Person works best if you beat them up first. That's kinda kinky.

 

[Incenjucar]

This... is frankly rather upsetting to read.

And reading it is incredibly difficult with all that junk text in the way of actual rules.

Blahablablahblahblah1d6blahblahblahblahDCblahblahblahblahInt modblahblahblahblahblah.

 

[Incenjucar]

(sorry for the double-post... forums are choking)

There are some good ideas, that could be better back-ported to previous editions. But overall this is just very, very, very clumsy.

 

[mlund]

Charm Person works best if you beat them up first. That's kinda kinky.

Not really. You break enough of somebody's fingers and they are usually falling over themselves to mollify you and make the hurting stop.

- Marty Lund

 

[Libramarian]

Not really. You break enough of somebody's fingers and they are usually falling over themselves to mollify you and make the hurting stop.

- Marty Lund

That's more like intimidate, not charm. Charm means they actually like you and think of you as a friend.

I suspect this philosophy of spells working better on targets with low HP is going to cause some unexpected consequences when used outside of combat.