Search results

Also one of the more annoying things is that they couldn't implement some of the more basic fixes the community has been doing for years, such as scaling FoB or even just getting more dis-a-points = to your wisdom modifier(level + mod). The monk ua just reeks of lack of basic knowledge of the...

Said this earlier but I'm very disappointed in this playtest for Monks, since they're practically the same class and even worse in some aspects. But I will try to be positive first as a make a "first reaction" review. Pros: Starting D6 MA Die and ending at a d12. The d12 isn't remarkable, it's...

Very disappointed to say the least

Power to you. It's playable in the sense that yes you can play it rn, but it's clear the game becomes very unbalanced around that tier due to how the game is built. T3 and T4 is just window dressing, something to look at for alot of people but nothing more.

It's just complicated for no reason. A -1 to all d20 rolls and dcs you have per level is very simple and easy to keep track of. I wouldn't mind if they increased how harsh it is as long as it remains simple to use.

Bruhhhh no way that is so dumb. It was good but nothing to go gorillas over. I actually hate how they're approaching stuff like that.

Wait where did they say this in the video? Do you know where the timestamp is?

I really hope Fighters get something new, cause they pretty much have no defining features besides like Action Surge(one more "fighter-esque" action per short rest woohoo) now that every martial has access to Weapon Masteries. Sure they have Weapon Expert, but that's at level 7 which most...

Fair. I do feel like it would lead to more unique design paths if subclasses were to alter base class features, or even "replace" them with different things. Although I can see that leading to the argument on you should just make a whole new class instead.

I think it's doable as a subclass, provided a reworked monk makes STR monks viable and customizable features like an invocation system or a spell-adjacent system. An idea I had for this was to lower the amount of spirituality tied to the subclass. So their stunning strike would get a nerf in...

Tbf ASIs are feats so you can absolutely compare the two assuming they only choose ASIs. Or even non-combat feats, like actor or inspiring leader.

Thank you bruh, I felt the video was so disingenuous since it hinges on powergaming to the max and playing in an ultra specific way in order to determine damage. Even then, these are the feats doing the numbers, not the base fighter.

Yes but that's my issue. If weapons are to be different, then they shouldn't be able to swap them on the fly. Hence is why I'd rather them emphasize base properties to make weapons different and turn "masteries" into "techniques" that you can apply to any weapon.

Yeah there are restrictions,, but what's to stop the fighter from using a graze maul or a topple greatsword? I don't like that they virtually become meaningless to the fighter at certain levels.

I really just think masteries should've been basic techniques martials can pick up to modify their gameplay regardless of weapon, then actually commit to making weapons distinct in their properties by changing alot of them/adding alot of properties. Level 7 Fighter just recreates the problem...

Tell you man, the second that happens the community will rally against wotc and burn the company HQ to the ground

I guess it's comes from different opinions on multiclassing. Personally speaking, I don't really like how multiclassing is sometimes the default leaving endgame classes especially barren. And it can lead to some extremely absurd builds, easily outclassing straight classing in alot of cases. Tis...

Yeah I understand that. But my issue is that it's an optional rule, not a core mechanic to the game. It's popular for sure, but it shouldn't be treated as if it's a main mechanic. And that is causing massive issues in balancing, such as Action Surge. Iirc they even changed one of the Cleric's...

I think the biggest folly of the design team right now is that they're balancing around multiclassing. It's an optional rule, and a currently flawed one at that. The game should first and for most be balanced for itself, and multiclassing should be balanced around the base game, not the other...

Regardless, it's a unwarranted claim to say someone is shilling simply because they like a design decision.