Search results

Interesting - this has been my experience too - and evaluating the lower levels (the nodes and fane), they do seem to have way less in the way of monsters and more in the way of hazards. I could only assume that this was to make it easier for the characters to clear out the dungeons without...

Thank you for your feedback. My group is level 8 now - can you explain why you feel that way?

This is what I mean though, it's not the "I Win" button it's made out to be. It's very strong in certain scenarios, but not strong in other scenarios. Thank you. I have had quite a few challenging encounters running Princes now, without really intending them to be that way, and a few...

It was about a two hour combat.

Ahh I knew I was forgetting something! I'll re-adjust those numbers and post and updated screenshot a bit later. Thanks for catching that.

GWM isn't much of a problem at level 7 IMO, it's later levels (11+) it starts to become more of an issue. More attacks (Fighter), higher stat bonuses, less opportunity cost due to maxed out stats. Basically GWM damage pulls away the more buffs you throw on the GWM, which aligns to what...

Warning: This post contains Princes of the Apocalypse Spoilers. So the Sorcerer (favored soul) in my group just got twin Polymorph as the group was exploring the fane of the eye. She decided to cast it and turn the party Ranger and Wizard into huge giant apes. Fair enough then. They proceeded...

Deleted and moved to the other thread.

They're not. I think Hemlock probably means they're less interesting past level 11, which is true since most of their abilities cap out. They're far from weak however, especially given how important maintaining their d10 HD is as AC becomes less relevant. Say compared to a Paladin/Sorcerer.

I've seen Paladins in play level 1-18 and seriously what are you smoking? The Paladin is uber powerful at higher levels still, and my group loves to optimise.

Yeah I had to read your OP a couple of times, but after that I understand what you're trying to say. Indeed the numbers of people completely satisfied with the classes as written are a smaller percentile.

Most of my players are satisfied. It's only the long term DMs themselves who are also players who want to tweak things. DMs can either be the best players you'll ever have, or the worst players you'll ever have.

We too are also using the pre-SCAG Favored Soul in our games. Coupled with some levels of Paladin, she's pretty good.

The context of this conversation (specifically the post of mine which you quoted) is the Tempest Cleric out damaging everyone else in the party, and they're "very strong" due to their damage numbers. I'm not questioning how useful a Cleric is to have in the party, they're incredibly useful to...

What were your damage numbers? We had a fighter/rogue (Assassin) sharpshooter doing Alpha strikes of about 60 damage followed up by attacks of 40-50 damage after that. We had a Bladesong Arcane trickster averaging about 40 damage a round, who also had fantastic AC and advantage on her attacks...

As discussed in the other thread, melee Clerics like the War Cleric are mechanically unsatisfactory due to their lacklustre damage and MAD ability reliance (Str, Con, Wis). The other domains that can focus on pure Wis and spell casting feel much more mechanically satisfying.

Eldritch Knights take a few levels to get going. Barbarians are powerful out of the gate, however yes when it comes to higher level combat they can get shut down (especially non-berserkers) and made ineffective. Low - mid levels I'd take a Barbarian. High levels I'd take an EK. Specifically...

The Fighter, Paladin, Barbarian, and Hunter Ranger for example are good at melee. The Clerics generally are not. I seriously considered multiclassing my War Cleric to fighter to make him better in melee, but I ultimately decided against it due to spells being too useful - which is inherently...