Search results

I saw this before and I'm not so sure about it. The thing is, with a low strength you're already doing less damage than a higher strength character so does it really make sense to doubly penalize them? And other than the fighter, the other classes have various weapon restrictions in place...

The problem with this is that it makes a huge chunk of the weapon's list undesirable at higher levels as most will just gravitate to the highest die weapons they can use. This is why they went with skill bonuses being expressed with d6s regardless of weapon. That way, (especially at higher...

I'm really not a fan of daily powers for fighters either. I'd rather have that power toned down and then use a certain amount of martial dice that cannot be recovered without a short rest. That would at least suggest some level of fatigue when putting your all into a particular move.

Well there is Whirlwind attack to help deal with multiple LL opponents. Throw in a Cleave reaction, extra reaction feat, potential Haste from the wizard, possibly pick up an offhand weapon to deal with mooks and I'm sure things I've forgotten. There are ways and I'm sure there'll be more before...

Personally I like how they've reigned in the ability scores to keep disparities from getting out of hand. So 20 as a hard cap on ability scores for mortals is a pretty sensible limit. As far as levels go, I don't feel all that strongly one way or the other. I wouldn't mind it going up to 30 as...

IMO weapon specific maneuvers and feats are not the answer. Once you go down the route of pigeon-holing yourself into a specific weapon it makes all other weapons undesirable, especially if you run across a weapon with a nice enchantment you like, but not one of your specialization. That's why I...

I support what D&DN is trying to do now, even if the numbers need some work. At low levels your skill only plays a minor role gradually transitioning to high levels where the specific weapon plays very little role and your skill is what really matters. As I've touched on in other threads I...

Seeing an example of how it all comes together in say, a 10th level fight with some tactical play involved as well as hazards, ranged, melee, reach, spell action I think would be very beneficial. Address some of the corner cases. Just looking around there are plenty of rules that still need to...

The language definitely needs to be cleared up on this. What would also help on the next playtest is perhaps have an example encounter (even just a mid-level fight) that includes a lot of the standard abilities and common feats, maneuvers, spells and such. Zero in on potentially tricky rulings...

You have to be careful about that though, because very quickly you run into the same issues we had before where there are only a few ideal weapon choices and no player would touch anything else. Right now they've got the right approach and what I think we'll see happen is the damage dice & bonus...

One of the problems you can run into with specific weapon specializations is when, in true D&D fashion, you find an awesome weapon... that isn't one you're specialized in. The broad, skill-based approach keeps everything from boiling down to a couple of ideal weapon choices. Even the Weapon...

Because it allows for a wider range of viable character styles. For example, the fighter who wants to play up the Riddick-style high-level dagger-based fighter is now a viable option... This is a good thing! And now if you find magical weapons with an enchantment you like, you don't have to balk...

Lol! Even they can't keep it straight... :D That said, Mearls agrees that applying to every action is just too much.

The skill die will apply to all tasks you perform that uses it with one exception. Any trick which requires you to use a skill die to activate that also involves a check as part of it - you don't get to apply the skill die to that specific check.

From twitter we've gotten a good answer on this from WotC. At the start of your round you must decide (if you're a fighter) how you are going to spread around your MDD between your attack / maneuver and parry. If you use all of your dice in an attack, you will have none left to use in your parry...

Whirlwind Attack and Volley maneuvers essentially do just that. For every MDD you trade in you get an additional attack.

Yeah, I can't say as I'm eager to see multiple attacks come back either. There's enough for players to do already. You already have potential extra actions with Haste, Cleave, Whirlwind Attack, Two Weapons, Surge, Reactions, Extra Reaction Feats...

One of goals of this edition was to speed up fights... well... there ya go. :cool: But seriously, my concern is if they are looking to have fewer rounds / battle things like initiative and surprise weigh that much more in the outcome. They need to deal with damage/hp. Help stretch out those...

Kinda funny actually... ;) Yeah, clearly there's still a lot of work to be done. I will note though you don't double the the MDB, just the MDD you roll. So, the dragon would have another 15hps for what little that's worth.

I'm kinda torn what I'd like to see from resuscitated Greyhawk. Either go right back to it's roots... or kick it forward (and hopefully) take it in some cool new directions. Either way, Greyhawk has always had the best villains and memorable artifacts and would really want to see them brought...