Search results

All the warrior types have a reliable way to do extra damage, and that is their main "schtick". I think that Favored Enemy is the best translation of the ranger's schtick into D&D rules so far, but I also understand its problems as implemented in 3E. To me, the ranger is the thoughtful hunter...

My only disappointment with the MM is how much page count they wasted on dragons, and certain variant monsters that are nearly identical to the base monster ( e.g. Death tyrant). But I love the ratio of lore to stat block, so ideally yes, more of the same. We could definitely use more fey and...

It's a good point. Even in 1E, I think it was mostly useful against animals, who wouldn't change their target just because they were holding a pointy stick.

You're right, by leaving it out of the MM they basically locked themselves into magic/psionic transparency from the outset. But in 1E, my reading was that psionic character aren't very powerful out of the gate. Someone with 4 disciplines and 2 sciences, for example, only knows 1 discipline at...

So in some previous editions spears and certain pole arms could be "set for a charge" -- ready your action to attack in an opponent charges you -- and would do double damage on a hit, but if no one charged you then of course your action was wasted that round. In the inverse situation, the lance...

A few quick responses to various points: Personally, I'm very comfortable giving the warlord a d10, because it is still a kind of soldier, and expected to fight on the front lines. I would give them full weapon and armor proficiency too, and the second attack at L5 that all other martials get...

If we start from a fighter, I would strip out Second Wind, Action Surge, 2 ASIs, Indomitable, and Extra attacks 3 and 4 from the base class. This is enough change to make it a new class, rather than a subclass of fighter. It's still a martial class, so I think the 2nd attack at L5 is a must...

All together now... Give me that old time religion Give me that old time religion Give me that old time religion It's good enough for me!

I was so pissed off when I saw them in the psionics book. The 3E psionic classes were already very close to the wizard in feel--it baffled me that the designers wanted to give them a familiar too. I did play a couple of psions but never used the crystal. Anyway, crystals a a means of power...

Sorry for the confusion--I was comparing to a standard wizard not the spell point variant. I don't like the spell point option in the DMG for wizards either. Ben

Yeah, but even if the DC stays at 11 you have a decent chance of affecting some high-level monsters. I think tweaking the cost is a better solution, just enough so that 1st-level slots are never a trivial fraction of the pool.

How about a Galaxy Quest campaign with a generic ruleset such as SW, Gurps, or HERO?

By the way, I think WotC has succeeded in designing a psionics class that caters to a different sort of player and supports a different dynamic. I can see this class appealing to the players who want flexible characters, the sort of person who makes a superhero with a variable power pool (in...

Yes, that's not a problem. I'm sure the total points available at each level is well scaled to give a number of high-level effects equivalent to other casters. What I don't like about the points system is that in order to scale the high-level slots you end up with hundreds of points at high...

Overall, not too bad. Disciplines are sort of like cleric domains (always prepared) that you can swap out. I would hope that at higher levels the class gets to maintain more than one domain at a time somehow. The saving throw mechanic is also neat, but I'd expect most PCs to leave it set to...

That could work... it wouldn't resolve the problem of warlords having high DPR themselves, though. You'd want to give the player an incentive to grant their extra attacks to other PCs, like a temp HP rider. And I'd like to see some mid-to-high level abilities that let them boost their entire...

That's what I'm saying! What on Earth do you give a class to make up for the fact that it no longer has the hope of gaining high-level spells? If you look at the fighter and rogue, you give the class DPR. For the warlord, I think it would have to be giving the WHOLE PARTY DPR. Not just more...

OK, here's another question: Assume that the warlord is a full class, with a few major features such as inspiration, maneuvers, extra attack, and mechanics to let allies spend HD during a combat. Is this broad enough to have at least two subclasses? What would those subclasses be?

There are some really good ideas coming out of this thread. Here's a sample progression: (But it's probably redundant to give the Warlord 2 dice pools! Maybe instead of superiority dice we could borrow a page from PF and introduce special abilities similar to teamwork feats.) Warlord The...

Tony, those are all good points and make me think that a "true" warlord is better modeled as a spell-less valor bard. This limits extra attack to 2, so its DPR is respectable but never goes through the roof. Song of rest can be reskinned. Inspiration can be adjusted a little to allow people to...