D&D 5E The Decrease in Desire for Magic in D&D

[Micah Sweet]

How about tricks that only work once per fight because you know after they see the trick its a lot harder to pull it off/fool them ... instead of repeat repeat repeat... like the 5e disarm is. (or riposte or whatever). Boring boring boring riposte after riposte after riposte.

The more complex the trick the more it is likely dependent on things that are unobvious too letting the player choose when those narrative bits happen is more fun than making them a random die roll to me. if I wanted things to just be a random die roll that is what the champion is for.

How about a mixture of those.

instead of oh a disarm makes me tired... seems more plausible to me, sigh

That's a narrative reason that wouldn't necessary apply to every fight. It didn't work for me in 4e, and it won't work here.

 

[Garthanos]

That's a narrative reason that wouldn't necessary apply to every fight.

yes because you find it equally possible/plausible to pull off a trick repetitively... whatever.

 

[Garthanos]

Fatigue preventing a disarm or riposte attempt is also kind of hilarious.

Maybe around the time your arm is too fatigued to swing the weapon but ummm at that point you are having problems keeping it up to hit or for the standard self defense (the skill for which is not even included in 5e except as hit points for some reason)

 

[Garthanos]

and it won't work here.

dripping with ego you are.

 

[Garthanos]

Do they want to know now?
Does your Battlemaster player want to know why he has limited maneuver dice?

The common answer fatigue is not overly plausible when the maneuvers do not seem very extreme.

We could readily change many of them to just cost a bonus action or an extra attack instead of a die you have to track ... it might make the people who think martial types should just be "unlimited" happier

Then use the fatigue thing for big bold maneuvers we do not have any examples of right now.

 

[Lanefan]

How about tricks that only work once per fight (or even once per enemy) because you know after they see the trick its a lot harder to pull it off/fool them ... instead of repeat repeat repeat... like the 5e disarm is. (or riposte or whatever). Boring boring boring riposte after riposte after riposte.

Or another : The more complex the trick the more it is likely dependent on things that are unobvious like a special type of opening an enemy happens to leave. Letting the player choose when those narrative bits happen is more fun than making them a random die roll to me. if I wanted things to just be a random die roll that is what the champion is for.

Another possible option: moves that you can do an unlimited number of times per combat/day/whatever BUT only on your very next attack against a foe after that foe has missed you on its attack, the in-fiction rationale being that in missing the foe left itself open to something.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

But hey, historically, I know you’re not going to acknowledge the difference between these two arguments...

Because there isn't one? It's a distinction without a difference.

Why does "you can do one of three things three times before taking a break" make absolute unequivocal sense, when those three things are completely different from one another, while "you can do these three things once each" is totally unacceptable under all circumstances?

They're both equally unrealistic. They're both equally not how physical things work. And yet one gets a pass because it's...what, less specific?

 

[FireLance]

Except there is a rationale built in - a rest, even a short one, gives the fighter enough of a rest to recover them.
The idea that there are resources that refresh with sufficient rest isn’t really the problem. The problem comes from how those are structured. If the battlemaster had 4 maneuvers, each of which he could use once, but only once each, per rest, then you’re looking at the kind of structure people really complain about. But if he’s got a pool of, say, energy that he can tap into 4 times but in any combination he wants, that’s an abstraction people are less likely to mind because we can rationalize being able to push one’s self a limited amount of time before we‘re simply out of gas and have no more to push.
But hey, historically, I know you’re not going to acknowledge the difference between these two arguments...

Speaking as a rather vocal 4E fan, I do see the difference between the two arguments.

My follow up question is whether you would accept a similar framework for martial dailies, i.e. up to (say) four units of a resource which allow a fighter to pull off a variety of spectacular effects (stun, paralysis, unconsciousness, etc.), but which can only be recovered after finishing a long rest?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I don't think martial dailies are a no go anymore. I also think, martial dailies is not the one thing that made people dislike 4e. I think the structural similarity to wizards created a bigger problem.

Essentials resolved both issues in one go, although dailes, if I remember correctly were still present in utility manueuvers, but I could be wrong here.

 

[Fanaelialae]

I think the FIRST feat in the multiclass chain was very good and usually well regarded. It gave you a skill proficiency and a limited use of a signature class feature. It's the power swapping feats that sucked.

The first feat was generally well regarded by the pro-4e contingent. I don't recall anything but vitriol towards feat-based multiclassing from the con-4e faction.

But yeah, the swap feats weren't particularly popular with either side.

EDIT
I think, ultimately, the designers recognized the limits of feat-based, because they added the hybrid multiclassing option. Technically, we still have a very limited form of feat based multiclassing today, with various feats that grant some access to class abilities.

I don't think that most people would find exclusively feat-based multiclassing to be sufficient. You could make it work as an alternative that's available in addition to level-based multiclassing, but I don't think most people would be satisfied by a system that only allowed multiclassing via feats.