Search results

Correct. It was probably never meant to, considering that the article merely presented it as good example on how to do a home-brew. That, I don't know. I would like to know your sources, if you do. Edit: I think doctorbadwolf just put me on ignore? I can no longer see their posts, not even the...

Actually, no. My apologies, I misguided you by saying it was an UA, but it wasn't. It was an article on the official D&D site, aimed to DMs, to help them create home-brew class variants. It pre-dates the UA series. The spell-less ranger was the example they provided as a class variant. It gave...

How do you know that? In my personal anecdotal experience DMing 5e, the one player that picked Ranger asked me to switch over to the spell-less Ranger variant (the one with combat superiority dice that got published on an UA or something) at about level 3.

I wouldn't call it trolling, because of the negative connotations of using that word, but yeah, they are testing if they can get away with turning every feature that is even slightly complex into an existing spell. The Hunter's Conjure Barrage = Multiattack is an obvious example. I think that...

Cool, and I also prefer how those feats are handled now. HAM may be a bit too good, but I’m not sure yet. What I’m saying, is the most powerful combos involving those feats were nerfed. Examples: GWM/SS + accuracy boosters for insane damage output Polearm master/crossbow expert + GWM/SS for a...

That’s an interesting thought experiment, almost a “build your own class”. Makes me think even more that giving something similar to warlock invocations to the ranger would works well. Instead of spellcasting, of course, which could be reserved to subclasses.

While it’s indeed too early to freak out, we should watch how things develop very carefully. Yeah, with SS and GWM (and polearm master to a degree) deprived of their broken features, WotC now has the chance to buff martials, bringing up their baseline performance, without worrying of the broken...

It feels like an auto pick for anyone who wants to stay alive in melee, and strong in general. More in the ball park of a 4th level feat than a 1st level one.

Tough might be overtuned for a level 1 feat.

I think the position of wanting the ranger to have spells without calling them spells (with all that entails) is simply a position born of compromise. I'm fairly sure all in favor of the non-spellcasting ranger would love if the ranger was given actually unique features and powers that...

They're 1st level feats, not 4th level feats, so they shouldn't be compared to feats like heavy armor master or sharpshooter, but to feats like alert, savage attacker and tough. I think some fighting styles are in need of a buff (protection, great weapon, two weapon), some are overall fine...

Tbh, I think they are appropriate for some characters - I appreciate that my wizards must use Dr Strange-like gestures and stuff.

The Warlock with its various invocations is a good example IMO.

Warlock and Warlord on PHB1, with no Bard, Barbarian, Druid, Sorcerer and Monk. That was quite ballsy on WotC's part, back then.

I'm intrigued by the concept of the razor-sharp senses Ranger. A passable warrior, good at skills (expertise), but the main class features all focus on an almost supernatural ability to listen, smell and watch their surroundings. Then you can give them limited spell casting on a subclass basis...

Yeah, a PHB with a dozen pages for each individual class, just to give each of them their own list of abilities? Never seen that before :p (Tried to attach the cover image of a 4e PHB here, but the Enworld forum decided to not do that and ruined my joke.)

The more this discussion goes on, the more it looks like the main issue is VSM components. I get it, nobody wants their Aragorn-like character to go abracadabra while they do weird gestures and toss bat crap everywhere.

The main difference between this tactic and a genuine meteor swarm would probably be the 1 mile range and the pretty dang huge AoE. Still, pretty interesting. Literal carpet bombing.

And let's not forget barbarians! Resistance (and immunity) to non-magical weapons is also very common on monsters, even low level ones. And flying enemies, mocking the poor melee warriors. I'd say that are at least as many monster abilities screwing martials, as there are anti-spellcasting ones.

D&D is a complex game with many moving parts. Balance is hard to find in such a game. The closest we ever got to a balanced D&D game was 4e, and that was because every class worked in the same mechanical framework: powers and (to a lesser degree) feats. I see your point. The extreme scenario of...