Search results

Thanks for clarifying. I was under the mistaken assumption that they hadn't delivered much of what was promised. This doesn't sound nearly as bad as all that. Glad to hear it.

Yeah, I agree. I didn't back the Alternity KS, but I did consider it, and it really seemed like a safe bet to me. There are plenty of projects where I accept non-fulfillment as a possibility, but I wouldn't have expected it of Sasquatch (prior to this). I mean, even a heavy hearted apology about...

KS actually says in their terms that they're not responsible for and don't guarantee fulfillment. It's unfortunate, but it does happen. I've pledged to a lot of KS over the years and most fulfilled. A few didn't but did offer explanations and apologized. And a couple (Hunter's Mark, ZNAPS...

The way I rule it is that if you're on another plane, you're on another plane, even if you're right next to an open portal to "this" plane. Meaning that if a wizard opens a gate to Celestia and my character steps through, that character is on another plane, even while the gate is open. If the...

I disagree. I don't think that an extra dimensional space counts as a different plane of existence. It's extra dimensional, which to me means that it's a fold in space (like a tesseract). If you rule otherwise, beware. There are abilities (such as divination spells) that only function on the...

I believe it's intended in the 1e/2e sense, where a player character could have a certain number of henchmen and hirelings (determined by their Charisma score). Henchmen were kind of like sidekicks, while hirelings were basically paid mercs.

Sure. Personally, I would improve the fighter while introducing a new simple class like the 4e Slayer (which was a fighter that just focused on dealing big damage and not much else). But that's a relatively unimportant distinction. Heck, I think that a basic class for all of the big 4...

It might not. Of course, given the revision, it also might. I don't necessarily think it will, but I hold out hope that the revision will improve the fighter. I don't expect that the fighter will be 100% the wizard's equal in every respect, but I do genuinely hope that the designers narrow the...

4e rituals were quite discrete in terms of both their requirements and effects. Just because one could extend them beyond the listed effect with DM fiat, doesn't change that fact. At a certain point, any open ended RPG like D&D is going to require some fiat. You can't possibly handle everything...

That's exactly the issue. If the DM decides to allow it, they set a DC. So: DM A doesn't allow it. DM B sets the DC at 30. DM C sets the DC at 20. DM D sets the DC at 10. You might as well argue that the Fighter is fine because if the DM allows, they can set a DC for the Fighter to cast Wall...

I think that you absolutely could design a fighter to do all of those things. I don't think there's been any edition where a fighter actually could do all of those things, except perhaps 4e. I mean, just for starters, you have several instances of Arthur killing someone with a single, powerful...

If you define magic user so broadly as to be someone who can influence the fiction at a narrative level, then you might be right. If you define magic user in the more traditional manner (someone who casts spells) then you couldn't be more wrong. I define MUs as the latter, but it seems like a...

I like what you did with High Magic. I couldn't find the High Magic list for warlocks though. Do warlocks not have access to High Magic? If so, did you replace their Mystic Arcanum with anything?

Keep in mind that even taking the D&D Beyond data at face value, that doesn't exactly tell the whole story. 13% fighters / 8% wizards is for all players. A large portion of whom appear to be free users, given that around 40% of those users chose champion, and evocation as their respective...

I accept that might be true at your table, but it isn't at mine. Even if fighters were stronger wizards would still get played at my table (and, I suspect, plenty of others). The only meaningful difference at your table would be that maybe your players wouldn't feel that someone needs to play a...

Why would your takeaway be that anyone wants wizards removed from the game? How about, narrow the imbalance between wizards and fighters? This could be done by improving fighters. By giving them better tools to achieve their role in combat, and by giving them tools to be able to do things out...

Are you a Sith? Claiming that power level isn't tied to fun is an absolute. Moreover, it's one that I know from my own experiences to be a false claim. I've seen players retire characters that they were enjoying as characters, because they weren't enjoying them from a power-level perspective...

Your experiences are different from mine. I've never seen anyone's arm twisted into playing a caster, unless it was a healer. I've definitely seen folks play a tank simply because the party lacked for a front line. That doesn't mean that everyone always wants to play a caster, of course. Most...

I think a more reasonable conclusion is that many players choose their class based on concept rather than power level. Which means that if you were to make fighters stronger, wizards would continue to be played, because people would still be attracted to playing characters based on the wizard...

The thread topic is: 5E Merlin and Arthur or Batman and zatana Seems to me that this was a "casters vs martials" thread from the beginning.