GravyFingerz
Gravymancer
Sure, but you know, money changers.
D&D 5E Starter Set Character Sheet Revealed!
- Thread starter GX.Sigma
- Start date
Sure, but you know, money changers.
Agamon
Adventurer
Can't escape the banking industry, even in gaming.
Thaumaturge
Wandering. Not lost. (He/they)
Evenglare
Adventurer
It's -ANOTHER- type of money I have to keep track of and probably wont even use so it's just wasted room on the character sheet. I mean, how many people REALLY REALLY use and keep track of copper or silver? If you know a lot of people that's AWESOME! But I know very very very few, if any, honestly. It's just "another" currency that will be trivial to the overall scheme of things. Of course, that's just me. Maybe everyone will run games with electrum as the base currency and that will be GREAT for them! But not so much for me. /shrug.
I am not bothered by Second Wind for a couple of reasons.
1) Resting an hour in an environment where you are taking damage such that you need to rest (ie a dungeon) is not something that occurs regularly. You can't really battle, rest for an hour, battle, rest for an hour, etc.
2) 1d10+level is about a single hit. Effectively a fighter can "shrug" off a single hit once per short rest. If "healing" bothers you so much, you can re-work it as you can re-work "second wind" as a reaction: "Immediately after taking damage a fighter can reduce the amount of damage by 1d10+level once per short rest." Its not healing, its damage reduction. My guess is that is the intent, but as this is "Basic", healing is simpler to grok.
1) Resting an hour in an environment where you are taking damage such that you need to rest (ie a dungeon) is not something that occurs regularly. You can't really battle, rest for an hour, battle, rest for an hour, etc.
2) 1d10+level is about a single hit. Effectively a fighter can "shrug" off a single hit once per short rest. If "healing" bothers you so much, you can re-work it as you can re-work "second wind" as a reaction: "Immediately after taking damage a fighter can reduce the amount of damage by 1d10+level once per short rest." Its not healing, its damage reduction. My guess is that is the intent, but as this is "Basic", healing is simpler to grok.
Last edited:
Athletics calculation
Athletics looks wrong.
Strength Mod: +3
Proficiency Bonus on Strength changes this to: +5 (that's the base of +3 added to the proficiency of +2)
Proficient with Athletics (Str) should add another proficiency bonus to that for a total of +7, but it's only +2.
3+2+2=5 ?!?
Ok, so either somebody screwed up the math, or there's something else going on.
Maybe 1st level are limited to +5 max. But then the level up info should point out the increases.
Maybe you only get the proficiency bonus once. But then, why have both an attribute and skill proficiency? Of course, that does give you a bonus to skills using that attribute if you aren't proficient with it, but then it's the exact same as being proficient with the unproficient skills if you have the attribute proficiency. It would make more sense to just say you are automatically proficient in all skills using (x) attribute. In this case, strength.
So long as you get to chose your skills, nobody in their right mind would waste a choice on a skill that won't get any better by being proficient.
Too bad this character is only proficient in the attributes of Strength and Constitution as there is a total of ONE skill that uses either of those attributes.
Obviously we need a little more info, but I'm betting someone just wrote down the wrong number, in which case, if true, we already need errata.
Athletics looks wrong.
Strength Mod: +3
Proficiency Bonus on Strength changes this to: +5 (that's the base of +3 added to the proficiency of +2)
Proficient with Athletics (Str) should add another proficiency bonus to that for a total of +7, but it's only +2.
3+2+2=5 ?!?
Ok, so either somebody screwed up the math, or there's something else going on.
Maybe 1st level are limited to +5 max. But then the level up info should point out the increases.
Maybe you only get the proficiency bonus once. But then, why have both an attribute and skill proficiency? Of course, that does give you a bonus to skills using that attribute if you aren't proficient with it, but then it's the exact same as being proficient with the unproficient skills if you have the attribute proficiency. It would make more sense to just say you are automatically proficient in all skills using (x) attribute. In this case, strength.
So long as you get to chose your skills, nobody in their right mind would waste a choice on a skill that won't get any better by being proficient.
Too bad this character is only proficient in the attributes of Strength and Constitution as there is a total of ONE skill that uses either of those attributes.
Obviously we need a little more info, but I'm betting someone just wrote down the wrong number, in which case, if true, we already need errata.
GravyFingerz
Gravymancer
I'm sorry, please don't take this the wrong way, but this is so far away from how I feel that I don't understand.
Agamon
Adventurer
That's fine, no one said its use is mandatory.
tsadkiel
Legend
That's a proficiency bonus to strength SAVES, not strength checks in general.
Evenglare
Adventurer
If you like super super detailed minutiae that's awesome! I hope the game caters to you, I was given the impression that the base game would be a ... well a basic game with all that little fiddly stuff to come in the PHB or DMG. I wasn't aware basic games needed five different types of monetary values. I apparently was wrong. I admit defeat.
Similar Threads
