Search results

Classes are far more than just a collection of mechanics. Functionally, another class may be able to fill the mechanical role that a Ranger does, but Narratively, for many, they never will. There are certain narrative conceits that are automatically envisioned when the words Fighter, Rogue...

Do Artificers have a distinctive narrative and a distinctive purpose? If so, then it should be its own class. If it should be its own class, does its mechanics effectively support its distinctive purpose? If not, then the mechanics need to be changed or developed to do so.

P.S.: I think Kamikaze's Narrative Distinction is why Ranger and Warrior should be distinct classes. Warriors, in my mind, have a common origin, and learn a common set of skills. That origin is Military. All Warriors (Fighters) received the medieval equivalent of basic training. They were...

I think Kamikaze has a big part of it when he said "You need a narrative distinction." Along with that, I think you also need a Purpose. To me, classes are a lot like career fields. The example I always give new players is military MOS's or AFSC's (Job Specialties and Career Paths). These...

I would not allow a Kender in a non-Dragonlance game of mine. It's not because I have a problem with characters outside of their original setting. It's because I have a problem with Kenders, or at least with the way people typically play them. The whole stealing everything and anything...

No. It's always a variable percentage less than 100%. Any remaining percentage is merely arbitrary... :p (Woops. Thread Closed. Was writing before Morrus's post. Sorry.)

I disagree. Dissent is a good thing. Dissent spurs conversation. Dissent adds energy to the subject. Dissent is usually the catalyst for change, for improvement...for Evolution and Revolution. If everybody always agreed, what would be the point? What would we have to talk about? However...

My amp goes to 11...

I agree with Mouseferatu. And adding on to what he said, I'd point out that +1 to hit (or +2, +3) are all graduations that mean nothing except in relation to a reference; that reference being randomized Attack and Damage rolls, Proficiency Bonuses, arbitrary one-size-fits-all (unscientific)...

P.S.: A campaign is defined by both the DM and the Players. Their combined contributions create the ongoing story. The areas of contribution vary from group to group. In some groups, setting, world creation, plot, etc., might all be strictly the purview of the DM, and only the PC's and their...

A campaign is a continuing story with a semi-regular set of characters. It may involve unrelated adventures, but there is a story continuum based on the involved characters (and their players). A campaign is to adventures, as a series is to episodes.

First, I said the loading property does NOT focus on hands at all. That means no accession has been made in the rules for a same-hand load. Common sense prevails in this case. Second, the load property description leads off with "Because of the TIME required to load this weapon..." It most...

First, a brace of bolts and cocking mechanism would definitely make for a non-standard piece of equipment, and should be paid for as such. Second, the Feat says nothing about special equipment. Third, I can use my imagination...thank you very much...and even my imagination knows, this just is...

Okay. There is a lot of misunderstanding going on here about dual-wielding hand crossbows. Here's the comprehensive, RAW explanation. First, Dual Wielding hand crossbows have absolutely nothing to do with Two-Weapon Fighting, the Two-Weapon Fighting class feature, or the Dual Wielder Feat...

I understand, and after further thinking on it, I agree with you. I think the thing to do is just remove the increased damage dice for the Mighty property, and use their original damage dice as is. I'm still sticking with the replacement of the bow's STR score for attack and damage though (if...

I disagree, by both common sense and RAW. The Loading property specifically states "Because of the time required...", and focuses on that and nothing else. Having a Feat that states "You ignore the loading quality of crossbows with which you are proficient.", means you ignore the "Time"...

For the most part, Crossbows wouldn't fit into this. Crossbows already have their own feat (Crossbow Expert), and a feat that can be used with crossbows (Sharpshooter). Learning to use a Mighty Bow (a powerful composite shortbow, an English longbow, etc.) is very different...and harder...than...

Sounds great, except for...as said before...drawing a bow does not require high overall body strength...which is what the D&D strength score is...and it still bases extra to-hit and damage on the character's strength, and not that of the bow. All that's required to use such a bow is...

Ahrimon is absolutely right. Strength will most certainly help you hit the target: both in D&D AND real life. IRL, Human bodies have two different types of muscles or "Strength": fast twitch or smooth muscles and slow twitch or striated muscles. Fast twitch muscles provide what we commonly...

Before I say anything else, I'll say this: If one wants to use "Strength Bows" in 5E...whether the way they were done in 2E, 3E, or other...then do so. It's your game. It probably won't "break" it. And if it's something you and your group like, then it will be fun for you and your group...and...