Search results

The feats are the new king it seems. Very interesting article. I like the idea behind it because it suggests there's gonna be a lot (A LOT) of streamlining of rules from where we are now. Looks like feats will be fewer but much more powerful. What I'm taking from this article is this: - Since a...

But not on swimming? ;) What about climbing, crawling and jumping?

I would love that. That'd be perfect. I'd up the number maybe to 10, but not higher, and up the number of feats you get to 5 (one every two levels). Unfortunately I can't XP you Jeff.

I will not use this idea because I want to keep things as simple as possible. This would be perfect for a rules module though.

But priest is not a monk. Priests serve as guides to local communities, while monks separate themselves from the outside world.

Yeah, I know. To be honest, I didn't really know what to give them. But since I'm switching to only two tiers, I'll look into it as well.

Maybe you're right about only two tiers. It would make things easier, and that's always good thing.

I like the basics of how skills work in Dnext so far, but I have some issues with it. - not enough skills - this is probably a matter of taste, but I'd like to have more options when it comes to skills - skills are equal - probably because of simplicity, currently all skills are supposed to be...

Yes please! but with one change. To makes matter simpler I advocate making them binary. So each feat you have can either be simple or expert. Expert has increased effect but requires two feats essentially. All expert versions require level 6. Specialities also work a little different. Instead...

I like that, but I'd go one step further. I could be nice if a character who has multiple proficiency with the same weapon from various sources gets +1 to damage with the weapon for each redundant proficiency.

Same here!

Me too. But I can imagine this funny scenario where wotc makes this april's fool article, only to be unexpectingly loved by the fans. Pressed by popular demand they take what was meant to be a joke and put it into the game for real :)

Maybe feats could be designed in such way that benefits are reduced if you don't meet prereqs.

Also agreed. I don't want to use feats in my game, but I do want specialities.

Playtest doesn't necessarily reflect final game in this respect. Maybe this packet looks like it does because they want us to playtest the feats. Maybe that's why feats are a must in this version.

Agreed. IMO sleep should be split into two separate spells. 1. Sleep casting time 2 actions. range 30 ft. You put a 1 HD creature that is not fighting or otherwise agitated to sleep. It sleeps for one hour and has disadvantage on saves to awaken. At higher levels: If you cast sleep at higher...

This is good solution to a potentially very annoing problem.

I kinda agree with you. Bonus damage could be a function of attack bonus. For example, a simple rule that says that everybody gets +2 to damage for each point of attack bonus, or that for each point you beat target's AC you deal +2 or +5 or +X damage, or a rule that everyone can sacrifice any...

No problem, sorry if I sounded rough :)

Maybe he doesn't need stuff, but IMO better question is is he better with some out-of-combat stuff or without it?