Search results

Well, there's my good chuckle for the day. At the end of the day I think HP should stay pretty abstract. The problem is finding a counter-weight to the cost to healing, you shouldn't get something for nothing, or its worth exactly that. WOTC is trying to enable players with options, its doesn't...

A big launch, with a not only fun, but also a really well crafted pre-made dungeon would go a long way. They need to find a way of making it accessible to non-die hards right from the start, and build on that with steady logical supporting releases that get people excited. A lot of their...

Well when you put it like that... yeah, it does make a lot of sense ;)

Won't something have to be done about monster balance? If one healing extreme turns on per encounter resource management , and one extreme bends things towards a full adventuring day, you'll have to do some sort of re-balancing to stop the 'encounter based healing systems' from being a cake...

I'm not really against it, I'd prefer it in my games, really. Wizards should be casting spells! I'm merely suggesting that's why, perhaps, people think its overpowered. There's always weird creative applications to inexhaustible resources, especially magical ones.

I think its mostly the inexhaustible nature of unlimited cantrips that makes them a little unwieldy, it gets messy in the same way 'fly' gets messy, when there are no limits on your abilities they often get out of hand with creative folks. At least with a xbow you're limited to your arrow...

A big problem is convincing new players that their wizard should/needs be sporting an xbow. If they roll a wizard, they want to play spells, and not be gimped archers for 75% of the dungeon/encounters. It doesn't matter how powerful their spells are, if they're situational for 1 of the 3-4...

I think Li Sheron's apprehensions are definitely legitimate. The mechanic has its ups and downs, I hope the meta-game doesn't become 'lets get advantage'. The prevalence of the machanic in the playtest could have more do to with its easy simplicity (its an easy mechanic to assign in a "feat...

*delete*

I did suggest that it was approximate. :P You can't add 3.5 to a roll.

I'm not 100% up on this in the latest playtest, but no one else is chiming in. There's a few combat mechanics that will allow you to gain advantage. Including attacking someone who doesn't know you're there, and I believe attacking someone who is prone is also a situation that would trigger...

With balancing the ability option with feats, as well as some people just preferring a separation between the two pillars (exploration and combat), its not a completely surprising direction.

I would be careful making that conclusion. The modularity of the basic system will allow for a lot of flexibility. The robust one is the just the one they're working on, because they get the most requests for it, and will take the most refinement, it makes sense for that option to be available...

So some people think +1 stat is way too powerful, and the other half think its only worth doing if you can hand out 2 +1's per feat... interesting... The statistical probability of a PC dying because that the mod increase didn't kick in vs. having a feat has to be fairly low, although maybe not...

I think 3 is less of an issue than most people think. It makes a TON of sense for basic, and even if it does prove more powerful in standard than taking feats, it'll be pretty boring. A lot of games are full of boring paths to min/max, and usually get stigmatized, but it'll depend on group in...

So it'll be 2 class abilities for 1 and 2, and then a feat/stat increase at level 3. Works pretty well with the multi-class system they're going with, you'll two level of class abilities when you multi-class 2 level in.

I think we're unlikely to see a feat a level. They also said no dead levels. Although, feats only have to be balanced on half a ability score. Hmm... Exactly how much is half a modifier (one ability score) worth?

Can someone archive these posts for after 5th is released? Maybe we could make a blog post celebrating theirs immense levels of 'asinine' speculation?

Only if their internal playtest looks anything like the public one, and I don't think it does.

I thought they were going to simplify feats by giving classes 'feat trees'? I think the point about a lot of the problem being "no-good" or "no obvious" feat is a really fair one. They need to make the feat tree feel organic. balancing the options so there isn't an obvious choice for power...