L
lowkey13
Guest
*Deleted by user*
It's an OK take. And by OK, I mean 0 K.Well, I love the comment, but you know that this "hot take" is approximately 44 years old.
I mean, it's probably room-temperature at this point.
Are there other options I'm forgetting?
This is the perfect example of my point - even a presumable knowledgeable player getting it wrong (no offense dnd4v).Haste won't give another SA. It grants another attack on your turn, so you have another chance of landing the SA if your first attack misses, but you won't actually get two SA's.
I think CapnZapp was more thinking of feats that allow use of reactions to make opportunity attacks and SA on other people's turns.
My own take is that classes is the life blood of D&D, and that any move towards genericized classes will destroy the game.Hot take: The thief hurt D&D by siloing combat and non-combat specialization into different classes. A unified "warrior" class merging combat and practical skills would have been better.
Current D&D is in a weird spot for me where I think it should have gone more generic or more specialized, but it ended up in a compromise position. I'd love to see a book of 50 specialized classes, all of which take up only 2 pages each. Or my own homebrew project, which is a lot of mini-classes that become accessible only as campaign rewards.My own take is that classes is the life blood of D&D, and that any move towards genericized classes will destroy the game.
In other words, I definitely want fighters and rogues to remain separate. I just need the devs to understand that "skill monkey" is far less valuable in a regular game of D&D than they seem to think.
Give Rogues skills AND awesome DPS, and people will still play fighters simply because they last longer on the battlefield and can actually protect their friends.
I find the exact opposite. Combat is maybe 20%, and the rest is social and exploration (exact division depends on what parts qualify as "exploration"). And in fact I am often envious of the skill selection and expertise available to rogues and bards. I do not think they are overrated at all, as they are vastly useful for large portions of our games.Now then. I am of the firm belief Rogues should be DPS machines. Skill use is vastly overrated by a dev team that perpetuates the fantasy that the three pillars are in any way equal. Just look at any published module to instantly see that the game is maybe 80% combat and 15% exploration. The times you make a social check that actually matters can be counted on one hand, for all books together! So putting even 5% on social is generous.
This is the perfect example of my point - even a presumable knowledgeable player getting it wrong (no offense dnd4v).