D&D 5E 02/08/13 New playtest packet to released today. [Udate: PACKAGE OUT!][

[Dausuul]

Question: Does a 9th level ranger (horde path if it matters) get four melee attacks if he chooses to use two-weapon fighting? Thanks.

Going strictly by the rules as written, he gets only two attacks. The Two Attacks feature and the Two-Weapon Fighting rule both say "Use your action..." and there is nothing to indicate that they stack in any way.

I'm pretty sure this is an oversight, because Two-Weapon Fighting is obviously designed around the idea that your two attacks should be equivalent to a single attack with a two-handed weapon, so if they don't stack, dual wielding fighters and rangers are crippled. In the absence of any clear statement of intent from the designers, I'd rule that you get all 4 attacks. But we'll have to wait to get the official word.

 

[Blackwarder]

IIRC, According to mike on twitter it's something that slipped through, his twitter fix is just to add one more attack so two attacks will become three.

Warder

 

[Dausuul]

The Twitter conversation in question:

• Mike Mearls ‏@mikemearls3 Aug
  Two Attacks and Two Weapon Fighting: As written now you use one or the other. Suggestion: TWF gives one extra attack w/o ability mod to dmg.
  Expand
  
  ​
  
  
• John Proudfoot ‏@GX_Sigma3 Aug
  @mikemearls Sounds like a good solution. Kind of lame that, by RAW, Drizzt has no reason to use two swords at once.
  Expand
  
  ​
  
  
• Mike Mearls ‏@mikemearls3 Aug
  @GX_Sigma yeah, ideally TWF is +1 attack regardless of what you're doing
  ​

 

[1of3]

"Regardless of what your doing" is probably meant to be "as long as you make at least one attack", but taking it literally would have interesting consequences.

 

[Warbringer]

[MENTION=58197]Dausuul[/MENTION], thanks.

It would be useful if WoTC actually maintained an FAQ rather than releasing titbits through various channels

 

[TwoSix]

"Regardless of what your doing" is probably meant to be "as long as you make at least one attack", but taking it literally would have interesting consequences.

"I'm glad I had two weapons when I got ambushed by orcs while doing my business here in the woods. I managed to kill five of them while pulling my pants back up!"

 

[variant]

So far, I like a lot of the changes to the classes. My main concern is how they plan to fit the Sorcerer into the Mage class and if they will try to fit the Warlock into it.

I don't think Arcane Traditions, Scribe Scroll, and Brew Potions fit the Sorcerer class at all. I understand why they would want to merge the Sorcerer and the Wizard as a lot of their classes are already redundant. I just want them to keep the flavor of the Sorcerer intact.

I also can't see how they could possibly make the Warlock a part of the class and keep the mechanical flavor of the Warlock intact. I hope that witchcraft is not the Warlock.

On the other classes:
I am wondering what other kind of oaths the Paladin will have as they seemed to have mixed things up again.

Still wanting a Ranger without spells.

 

[1of3]

I don't think Arcane Traditions, Scribe Scroll, and Brew Potions fit the Sorcerer class at all.

I don't think Sorcerers will get the same Arcane Traditions as Wizards do. Wizard Schools appear to sub-subclasses to Wizardry.

Scribe Scroll and Brew Potion are a bit odd, though. And why can't the Druid do the cauldraun?

 

[MoonSong]

So far, I like a lot of the changes to the classes. My main concern is how they plan to fit the Sorcerer into the Mage class and if they will try to fit the Warlock into it.

I don't think Arcane Traditions, Scribe Scroll, and Brew Potions fit the Sorcerer class at all. I understand why they would want to merge the Sorcerer and the Wizard as a lot of their classes are already redundant. I just want them to keep the flavor of the Sorcerer intact.

I also can't see how they could possibly make the Warlock a part of the class and keep the mechanical flavor of the Warlock intact. I hope that witchcraft is not the Warlock.

Exactly, scribe scroll, brew potion and arcane lore by default don't fit the sorcerer, neither ritual casting, but this one is very important for balance. I think that they are doing a disservice by trying to fold sorcerer and wizard into the same class, and the warlock is just worse, spell slots go against everything a warlock is!, not to mention warlocks actually use armor!. I'm affraid the witchcraft and sorcery variants will become needlessly more complicated than if they just were their own class writeout (which might even be necessary).

We really need to see both the sorcerer and the warlock before or at the same time as the multiclass rules, because they appear to have a heavy emphasis on preppared spells (something neither class does)

On the other classes:
I am wondering what other kind of oaths the Paladin will have as they seemed to have mixed things up again.

Still wanting a Ranger without spells.

Yet i'm affraid their focuss on combat hasn't let too much room for non-spellcasting rangers or paladins, still I'm hoping to see avenger return as a paladin subclass somehow.

 

[gyor]

Actually making an Avenger subclass is much easier now. Make Oath of an enimity a CD power that restores itself when the target dies and which grants advantage against the target.

Then replace the mount feature with a choice either retribution where if any none oath target hits you you deal more more damage to your oath target or presuit where you deal more damage if your target runs. Replace divine health with armour of faith and so on. Maybe replace improved mount with improved oath that makes so that disadvantage can not dispel advantage against your oath target.

Just an idea.

As for brew potion and sorcerors I had a cool idea where maybe instead of brewing a potion like a wizard with a bunch of weird exotic ingrediants the sorceror instead simply mediatates and then pours his own blood into a viel which transmutes into a potion. For scribe scroll he writes what he wants the scroll to do in his own language with his own blood and the magic rearranges the words themselves to create a working scroll.