D&D 5E What is balance to you, and why do you care (or don't)?

[GMforPowergamers]

I am not the one to blame for that you know?

your the one making up the term 'late in development' you can choose to use if for half qay or you can uswe it for 3/4 or 90%... I just think half way isn't late (especially when it may NOT be half way since it isn't done yet).

If I ran a game form level 3 to level 17 (and I have multi times) and I said "It was late in the game" I think most people would not think of the transition from 9th to 10th level.

No about the same. The advantage is still to the fighter. The math has been shown in a previous post.

no it hasn't... this is just out right a lie.
level 1-10 a hex blade has the same number of attacks 1 less feat or ASI and is missing action surge... thats it. in it's place they get multi mini feats (invocations) they get magic spells (at 5th level of power) and cantrips (including the single most powerful cantrip in the game)

Which is not the way it happens to be (at least in my games).

okay... so why DON'T melee characters charge into melee and ranged characters take out ranged ones?

Ranged characters will be targeted by ranged attackers

yup... and so (example) if I have a warlock and an archer... they will be targeting flying and/or ranged threats first.

. If the blockers are all slain and your ranged characters start having problems,

then your melee characters fall back on ranged attacks (or close the distance)

the characters focused on melee will have trouble to get to the ranged attackers if they used terrain to their advantage (ledges, tree tops etc...) or are simply flying.

unless your melee character can fly, teleport or ignore terrain... look at that melee casters advantage.

If the enemy melee are ignored in favor of the ranged one,

why would any enemy EVER be ignored? the melee characters will try to handle them... like with the above occasionally the melee characters are down or there are more melee villians... and the ranged characters back up to melee attacks.

it may mean that melee opponents will get to the ranged characters.

rare in my experence but it happens...want to see ashocked DMwatch when the normal range is a wizard and a druid and the druid drops a combat cap wild shape and the wizard has bladsinger as his subclass... opps

One of the worst enemy for medium level characters is the manticore as its tail spikes can kill a wizard or a cleric relatively easily all the while being out of reach of melee characters.

1d8+3... lol. the maticore can attack for 1d8+3 damage at 100 feet... well within archer eldritch blast and many spells... good luck killing a wizard with that.

last time I remember fighting a manticore we dropped it round 2 they only have about 60hp... maybe if you drop like 5 of them this would work (average 1d8+3 is 7.5. average 3rd level wizard is 17-20hp so it takes 3 good hits)

Rogues are simply outdone as they will not be able to sneak and so forth.

wait why can't a rouge sneak? why can't a rouge hide? heck why can't he already be hidden and sneaking (or invisible)

how often are your parties "Suprised" and why did none of them take alert or a weapon of warning at this point since it happens so often?

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I mean, for me I'd want it to be everyone. But I'm a 4e fan, sooo...

me too

It's not like they aren't doing that already. That's literally what cantrips (with spell attack rolls) do. There has been a melee spell attack option literally from day 1 in the PHB (shocking grasp) and perfectly solid ranged options (fire bolt, ray of frost, chill touch). There are also the actual make-a-melee-attack options (green-flame blade and booming blade).

I don't know many wizards that don't attack with Int...

 

[Lanefan]

It's not like they aren't doing that already. That's literally what cantrips (with spell attack rolls) do. There has been a melee spell attack option literally from day 1 in the PHB (shocking grasp) and perfectly solid ranged options (fire bolt, ray of frost, chill touch). There are also the actual make-a-melee-attack options (green-flame blade and booming blade).

Yes, but none of those allowed the caster to use its Int bonus on the to-hit roll, which is what was proposed here.

For ranged attacks I allow a Dex bonus but I'm not sure if that follows RAW or not. For touch attacks e.g. Shocking Grasp there's no attack bonus but the target loses many of its armour benefits (3e IMO got this bang-on right).

One of the biggest factors in any battle is endurance. Being able to pummel your enemy non-stop, without giving them a break, without letting up, is an excellent strategy for overcoming enemy resistance. On a larger scale, this is literally the best tool humans have for violence; we are endurance hunters, not swift attackers (before the invention of weapons, at least).

Attacking with Con is, in a certain sense, the antithesis of attacking with Dex. Dex is, in theory, supposed to be making an attack in the precise weak point of their armor or whatever, right? Attacking with Con is "it doesn't matter if I miss 99 times so long as I hit the 100th time." Obviously something of an exaggeration, but this is something that shows up in (for example) fencing duels both in action films and IRL. People tend to wither before a "full-court press" strategy.

Sorry, not buying it. Defending with Con? Sure, and all your points above agree with that. But attacking with it? Doesn't make sense.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Yes, but none of those allowed the caster to use its Int bonus on the to-hit roll, which is what was proposed here.

fire bolt... make a ranged spell attack. that is an attack roll with int and prof (and if you have wand bonus)

For ranged attacks I allow a Dex bonus but I'm not sure if that follows RAW or not. For touch attacks e.g. Shocking Grasp there's no attack bonus but the target loses many of its armour benefits (3e IMO got this bang-on right).

shocking grasp is AGAIN a spell attack so Int mod + Porf + if you have a magic wand

Sorry, not buying it. Defending with Con? Sure, and all your points above agree with that. But attacking with it? Doesn't make sense.

again Con is the hardest but not immpossible.

 

[James Gasik]

Yes, but none of those allowed the caster to use its Int bonus on the to-hit roll, which is what was proposed here.

For ranged attacks I allow a Dex bonus but I'm not sure if that follows RAW or not. For touch attacks e.g. Shocking Grasp there's no attack bonus but the target loses many of its armour benefits (3e IMO got this bang-on right).

Sorry, not buying it. Defending with Con? Sure, and all your points above agree with that. But attacking with it? Doesn't make sense.

The old Marvel RPG let flying characters ram into people using Stamina as I recall.

 

[Lanefan]

fire bolt... make a ranged spell attack. that is an attack roll with int and prof (and if you have wand bonus)

In 5e maybe, but the example was trying to suggest this has always been the case. It hasn't.

Prior to 3e Int never gave an attack bonus (possible exception: psionic attacks, but I never used that system). I don't remember whether anything in 3e allowed Int as an attack bonus, though it did affect the target's save in some cases.

shocking grasp is AGAIN a spell attack so Int mod + Porf + if you have a magic wand

What does a wand have to do with anything when you're hard-casting the spell?

 

[GMforPowergamers]

In 5e maybe, but the example was trying to suggest this has always been the case. It hasn't.

um yes we are talking about 5e cantrips

Prior to 3e

you mean 23 years ago?

What does a wand have to do with anything when you're hard-casting the spell?

wands have +1/+2/+3 that adds to attacks but not saves

 

[Maxperson]

your the one making up the term 'late in development' you can choose to use if for half qay or you can uswe it for 3/4 or 90%... I just think half way isn't late (especially when it may NOT be half way since it isn't done yet).

If I ran a game form level 3 to level 17 (and I have multi times) and I said "It was late in the game" I think most people would not think of the transition from 9th to 10th level.

I would assume 13+ for late game in a 3-17 level campaign.

wait why can't a rouge sneak? why can't a rouge hide? heck why can't he already be hidden and sneaking (or invisible)

I don't know if it can or can't, but whatever it does it will have rosy cheeks doing it!

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I would assume 13+ for late game in a 3-17 level campaign.

yeah somewhere about there... that is about 3/4

I don't know if it can or can't, but whatever it does it will have rosy cheeks doing it!

the sneaky make up

 

[EzekielRaiden]

Yes, but none of those allowed the caster to use its Int bonus on the to-hit roll, which is what was proposed here.

....yes they do. Shocking grasp is a melee spell attack. That makes it use your spellcasting modifier. It's a Wizard cantrip. In fact, not only that, but to compensate for it being a melee cantrip, it's actually really strong! To whit: "Make a melee spell attack against the target. You have advantage on the attack roll if the target is wearing armor made of metal. On a hit, the target takes 1d8 lightning damage, and it can't take reactions until the start of its next turn." Metal armor applies to many opponents, so that's a major edge. Denying the enemy reactions if you hit is likewise powerful if your group intends to gang up on that enemy. Unless it goes immediately after you, I guess? It's still a lot of benefits and a d8 melee attack that scales up to 4d8.

For ranged attacks I allow a Dex bonus but I'm not sure if that follows RAW or not. For touch attacks e.g. Shocking Grasp there's no attack bonus but the target loses many of its armour benefits (3e IMO got this bang-on right).

Alright. I assumed we were talking about 5e, given the thread label. Mildly annoying to pretend like the conversation is inherently about all editions ever (or about whatever editions you feel like talking about), without actually specifying. I did, specifically, note "spell attacks" and other things which are unique terms to 5e, so I assumed it was clear from context which edition I was referring to...especially since I mentioned green-flame blade and booming blade, spells which didn't even exist in 3e (they were originally Swordmage at-will powers in 4e; naturally this means they were used to make full-casters stronger in 5e.)

Sorry, not buying it. Defending with Con? Sure, and all your points above agree with that. But attacking with it? Doesn't make sense.

I mean, that's your right, but like...this actually IS a thing in real life. Wielding endurance aggressively, by pounding and pounding and never letting up, is quite potent in the right contexts. As mentioned, some folks win fencing duels this way. Whether or not you choose to buy it is your business.