D&D (2024) How is Flex still a thing?

[Seramus]

I like popcorn.

My players like popcorn.

Giving the players a chance to feel how much more powerful they have become compared to their beginnings is a very important part of pacing, story and appreciation of when things do get tough. Variations in high and low tension is core to any designed experience.

I am a player in a campaign where the DM has had a deadly encounter whenever we fight. It is tiresome and not fun that EVERY fight requires me to go all out. It really forces players into a 5 minute adventuring day even more.

The better design IMO is switching things up. Give varied challenges that make sense in the world and the story.

Sure, I looove popcorn. But we're talking about how much thought and care goes into individual encounter design. In the case of some bandits for some quick catharsis, that's essentially none. It's a delicious fluffy snack.

 

[Minigiant]

We shouldn't punish them for any of those things. Contrary to... everything they do in its name... simple and easy doesn't have to suck.

Actually it does.

That's the problem with extreme simplicity. If the simple easy version doesn't suck, it becomes the best if it isn't also niche.

 

[Krachek]

If those weapons started at 1d10(V 1d12), then I would not mind the Flex mastery.
Getting 1d12 1Handed damage would be nice counter part to Rapier 1d8 finesse+Vex combo.

I would make the increate by two dice step.
d8 —> d12.
That would be nice, and some would argue that it is too much damage, and that makes all other mastery option less interesting!

 

[Sulicius]

I would make the increate by two dice step.
d8 —> d12.
That would be nice, and some would argue that it is too much damage, and that makes all other mastery option less interesting!

the whole point is that it uses the higher of the two dice. Just a simple upgrade.

Sadly, to optimizers anything that is not the best is the worst thing since stepping on lego.

 

[Pauln6]

Isn't flex there for fighters? A damage boost that gets more interesting when you can layer it with other mysteries at higher levels?

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

I think WotC deliberately designs the "simple and easy" choices to be weak so that players who prefer a more active playstyle aren't even slightly enticed by them. The players that these options are made for aren't going to notice that they are sub-optimal.

 

[James Gasik]

So the more I think about it, the more I realize that Flex is literally just the new Monkey Grip. In case you're not familiar with it, Monkey Grip was a terrible Feat in 3.5 that allowed you to wield a bigger weapon than usual in one hand. It was one of those feats that you can prove with math is worse than not having it at all, but I've run into so many players who adore it (and several DM's who bemoaned how "overpowered" it was). Some people just want the fantasy of bigger damage with one handed weapons. and don't care what hoops you have to jump through to get it.

Should Flex be better? This is a tough question; on the one hand, I want to say yes, but on the other hand...if we want players to use masteries to make combat more tactical and interesting, I'm not sure how making Flex do more damage will get us there.

"See, you can use this d8 weapon to knock people prone and give your melee allies advantage."

"Or...you know, I could just do 1d12 damage and kill things faster! Best status effect is dead, amirite?"

"SIGH."

 

[James Gasik]

I think WotC deliberately designs the "simple and easy" choices to be weak so that players who prefer a more active playstyle aren't even slightly enticed by them. The players that these options are made for aren't going to notice that they are sub-optimal.

Ninja'd and you said what I said in two sentences, lol.

 

[Horwath]

So the more I think about it, the more I realize that Flex is literally just the new Monkey Grip. In case you're not familiar with it, Monkey Grip was a terrible Feat in 3.5 that allowed you to wield a bigger weapon than usual in one hand. It was one of those feats that you can prove with math is worse than not having it at all, but I've run into so many players who adore it (and several DM's who bemoaned how "overpowered" it was). Some people just want the fantasy of bigger damage with one handed weapons. and don't care what hoops you have to jump through to get it.

Should Flex be better? This is a tough question; on the one hand, I want to say yes, but on the other hand...if we want players to use masteries to make combat more tactical and interesting, I'm not sure how making Flex do more damage will get us there.

"See, you can use this d8 weapon to knock people prone and give your melee allies advantage."

"Or...you know, I could just do 1d12 damage and kill things faster! Best status effect is dead, amirite?"

"SIGH."

As someone who used Monkey grip in 3.5e(Fighter/tempest with dual-wielding greatswords), monkey grip is sliiigly better option for 1Handers in 3.5e than power attack. Power attack will give you with -2 attack, +2 to damage. Monkey grip will give you -2 attack and +2,5 damage, d8(4,5)->2d6(7). Both are not so good feats in 3.5e.

 

[Horwath]

Isn't flex there for fighters? A damage boost that gets more interesting when you can layer it with other mysteries at higher levels?

yes, at 13th level.
I am so happy for 1%(maybe) of playerbase that will enjoy that "superb" feature.