D&D 5E I Told Ya So 2014!! (or not)

[Zardnaar]

Back in 2014 justr after 5E came out on the WotC boards I claimed several things. THey were.

1. Bless was OP.
2. Sharpshooter/Great Weapon Master was OP
3. Bards were OP.

This was circa September/October 2014. Some of the other posters were very good at spotting other things such as the Sorcerer/Warlock and how RAW eldritch blast+polearm master+ warcaster worked together. Now here we are 2 years later and the -5/+10 feats seem to be widely regarded as being OP but I am also seeing a few references to Bards being OP as well but I'm not sure that is so clear cut.

So Was Zardy somewhat right in 2014 or was he barking up the wrong tree. Or shall we go with the or not part of the thread title.

Note I regard myself as a reasonable powergamer. I roll 4d6 drop the lowest and whatever I try and do I try and excel at but I rarely go for things regarded as being uber power, hence playing a Monk ATM despite my thematic dislike of the class. If I did something like roll 3 18s I would play an Elemental Monk or Beastmaster.

 

[FrogReaver]

Zard, saying a single feature is strong is not the same kind of overpowered ness you spoke of. Your overpoweredness came from a party with higher than point buy stats, higher than normal magic weapons, and casters that always attempted to buff and keep their concentration checks high. Oh and couple this with fewer combat encounters in a given day and you get the op you spoke of.

No the -5 +10 feats are strong but not op unless the party optimizes to use them. Party optimization is a much different animal than character optimization.

Back in 2014 justr after 5E came out on the WotC boards I claimed several things. THey were.

1. Bless was OP.
2. Sharpshooter/Great Weapon Master was OP
3. Bards were OP.

This was circa September/October 2014. Some of the other posters were very good at spotting other things such as the Sorcerer/Warlock and how RAW eldritch blast+polearm master+ warcaster worked together. Now here we are 2 years later and the -5/+10 feats seem to be widely regarded as being OP but I am also seeing a few references to Bards being OP as well but I'm not sure that is so clear cut.

So Was Zardy somewhat right in 2014 or was he barking up the wrong tree. Or shall we go with the or not part of the thread title.

Note I regard myself as a reasonable powergamer. I roll 4d6 drop the lowest and whatever I try and do I try and excel at but I rarely go for things regarded as being uber power, hence playing a Monk ATM despite my thematic dislike of the class. If I did something like roll 3 18s I would play an Elemental Monk or Beastmaster.

 

[Zardnaar]

Zard, saying a single feature is strong is not the same kind of overpowered ness you spoke of. Your overpoweredness came from a party with higher than point buy stats, higher than normal magic weapons, and casters that always attempted to buff and keep their concentration checks high. Oh and couple this with fewer combat encounters in a given day and you get the op you spoke of.

No the -5 +10 feats are strong but not op unless the party optimizes to use them. Party optimization is a much different animal than character optimization.

Back then we were using the default array BTW. We sitched to 4d6 drop the lowest a few months ago. Might switch back for the next one depending on how may people play. And we also had a decent amount of encounters up to and including 10+ of har and deadly. Back then we had 6 encounters of which 4 of them were deadly, 1 medium 1 hard.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

So Was Zardy somewhat right in 2014 or was he barking up the wrong tree.

Definitely barking up the wrong tree, as has been constantly pointed out (and ignored) every time you bring this stuff up.

And we should be clear that there is a significant difference between the same half-dozen or so folks claiming a particular thing anywhere and everywhere, and that particular thing being widely regarded as is being claimed.

1. Bless isn't OP. Teamwork is meant to be beneficial - it's working as intended.
2. Sharpshooter/Great Weapon Master aren't OP, they are circumstantially beneficial - some DMs just don't want to use any circumstances except the ones in which these are beneficial, but that is on them, not on the feats they chose to allow.
3. Bards aren't OP - people are just surprised that they aren't competing for least popular class anymore, and again, teamwork is meant to be beneficial so of course a class with plenty of teamwork abilities is obviously beneficial.

 

[Zardnaar]

Definitely barking up the wrong tree, as has been constantly pointed out (and ignored) every time you bring this stuff up.

And we should be clear that there is a significant difference between the same half-dozen or so folks claiming a particular thing anywhere and everywhere, and that particular thing being widely regarded as is being claimed.

1. Bless isn't OP. Teamwork is meant to be beneficial - it's working as intended.
2. Sharpshooter/Great Weapon Master aren't OP, they are circumstantially beneficial - some DMs just don't want to use any circumstances except the ones in which these are beneficial, but that is on them, not on the feats they chose to allow.
3. Bards aren't OP - people are just surprised that they aren't competing for least popular class anymore, and again, teamwork is meant to be beneficial so of course a class with plenty of teamwork abilities is obviously beneficial.

Its more than half a dozen popel though. The -5/+10 fetas are coming up in mulitple forums by multiple posters and they are in various char op type guides here on ENworld. Bards were never really bad it was mostly a myth they rocked in AD&D, sucked a bit in 3.0 and were decent in 3.5. People sucking at playing them though was definitely a thing. They may not have been CoZillabroken in 3.5 but granting +8 to +16 to hit and damage in 3.5 made them very powerful IMHO.

 

[happyhermit]

Are they good? Yes.

OP? I don't think so really, depends on the situation and your definition.

I certainly don't see players feeling like if they don't play a bard they are somehow "underpowered" in comparison. Same with bless and SS/GWM although I have heard that online a bit. Though personally it doesn't mean much to me when I hear people complain about something being OP online, too many times I have heard people go on and on about how bad something is, only to see absolutely no problem in real games.

How "powerful" Bless is obviously depends on # of attacks, chance to miss, # of saves, etc. So it depends on who is being attacked, who is in the party, etc. etc.

Bards are awesome, but they aren't better at much than any other class. They are very versatile though, and can be very useful in certain parties/situations.

Feats are an optional rule, and of course have a significant cost. Sharpshooter is very situational, it doesn't do much in; winding passageways, typical buildings, etc. it doesn't do anything in those situations unless the target is "easy" to hit.

Overall, no IMO, these things aren't "OP" in general. Sure, it may be possible to use them in particular builds in ways that makes them particularly powerful, but I don't see it happening in any extreme way. So, at least in the games I have seen they are not OP.

 

[FrogReaver]

-5 +10 is strong. It's not super op without ways to boost attack rolls.

Its more than half a dozen popel though. The -5/+10 fetas are coming up in mulitple forums by multiple posters and they are in various char op type guides here on ENworld. Bards were never really bad it was mostly a myth they rocked in AD&D, sucked a bit in 3.0 and were decent in 3.5. People sucking at playing them though was definitely a thing. They may not have been CoZillabroken in 3.5 but granting +8 to +16 to hit and damage in 3.5 made them very powerful IMHO.

 

[FrogReaver]

Zard claims things are broken op. Each and everyone of those things are individually broken op.

Others claim those are very good and strong options but not broken op on their own.

Zard ignores what they say and suggests that they are agreeing with him. Yep I'm seeing a trend here.

 

[Zardnaar]

-5 +10 is strong. It's not super op without ways to boost attack rolls.

Well 5E has plenty of ways to do that or grant advantage. Natural spell is fine, might have problems when you use it with a Druid.

 

[FrogReaver]

Well 5E has plenty of ways to do that or grant advantage. Natural spell is fine, might have problems when you use it with a Druid.

Most ways to grant advantage end up granting disadvantage to a number of allies. Kind of interferes with the focus fire tactic.