Search results

The biggest problem I have with the new grapple rolls is that it's against AC. It makes no sense to me that a bear should be easier to grapple than a house cat.

Precisely, though I think the point of it was pointing out that it would mesh well with Flurry of Blows being a bonus action. A rewarding of Flurry of Blows could fix that though. Honestly I don't see any reason why Flurry couldn't just be included in the attack action by default. It's not...

My issue with that is that it wouldn't really help most builds until 5th level. If we're making it a mastery I'd ideally like it usable at level 1. I'd suggest making it be: "If you hit a creature, you can use your bonus action to make it Grappled." It keeps the "autosuccess" factor and...

We will agree to disagree.

I'll give this one a chance, but I'll be honest. I despised the first book. The first half was filled with nothing but bloated exposition and one of the whiniest and most selfish characters ever written that just reaks of being a Fan Fiction insert character, and the second half just felt like...

Honestly in terms of gloomstalker I expect/hope they will fix the wonkiness of the darkvision invisibility next pass. I don't think it's necessarily broken as written but just...odd. Like my larger concern with them being invisible to darkvision isn't even combat but all sorts of odd out of...

Yeah, potential balance questions aside I don't feel like the idea of "I attack them back" feels very defensive in nature. If anything I feel like doing something like making a opposed roll to try to prevent them from succeeding is sufficient enough. Especially because the intended point of...

As noted. It's at 7th level, which is arguably at the point where ki for the Monk starts to become less of an issue. It's also about at a point where most campaigns are either 3/4 of the way through. If it were a lower level ability that the monk got around level three that would be better, but...

And yet they did nothing in this playtest to reduce the monk's dependence on short rests, despite doing precisely that for the Warlock. If this playtest goes live monks will essentially be the only class that is significantly balanced around short rests and it is something that will be noticed...

So I've been playing around with a few monk changes for my table. I've not yet fully incorporated weapon masteries because we're not yet fully switching to the playtest but I've sort of done it? Tentatively I like the idea of monks getting masteries at level one like other martials and then...

As written I'll still be choosing to ignore the existence of these feats, and instead continue to use my homebrew feat that our table has been using without any real issues: ARMED AND ARMORED: You gain your choice of two of the following options. This feat can be taken multiple times, though...

Ah yes. The most boring and arguably weakest of all of the "masteries" that nearly every person discussing Weapon masteries has claimed is by far the worst of them since the system was publically announced. Such a great alternative. ...sarcasm aside, you seem or have misunderstood or failed to...

Agree with all of this. I frankly don't understand where people are coming away from this thinking the monk is "better" than the 2014 version when 95% of it is the same and the few tweaks they did add neither address the actual issues with the class or consider the mechanical implications that...

Honestly I like all of the changes to cleric with the exception of one thing: War domain needs extra attack at 6th level. I wish they'd replace the bonus action limited attack with something else minor.

While I disagree with the narrow definition of what a "fighter" is in this thread. (I'm on board for ruling out Eldritch Knight but frankly every other subclass I would argue should be present. Though to answer the question we've had a number of straight class fighters, many of whom has made it...

Personally I think it would be simpler to just make a template with more options to pick from from monstrous abilities. I mean if you throw in enough options that you can basically build any typical sort of animal, why do you need it to be monster statblock? Off hand I'd say easy examples are...

And I think you're giving business executives too much credit. The corporate brainrot runs deep. They don't know a dang thing about this game or market or they wouldn't have tried to pull that OGL stunt in the first place. Or alternatively they simply do not care and will do it anyway. Again...

The real question is why is anyone here even asking this question, when we all know the answer: they'll release new classes as paid dlc / microtransactions for their new VTT, likely at a rushed or untested rate that has nothing to do with actual balance or quality of game play, but at whatever...

Other way around. The warlock mechanics should just be rolled into the sorcerer. I'm not talking a subclass. I'm talking get rid of warock and fundamentally rebuild sorcerer from the ground up taking the better ideas of warlock with it. Then take all existing warlock subclasses and make them...

I'd be okay with that too, so long as it was properly balanced. The larger point is that the warlock shouldn't exist. The two classes both eat into each other's design spaces constantly (i.e. we don't have a dragon warlock because of sorcerer, and we don't have a fey/hag sorcerer because of...