Search results

Many movies use the trope of the Npc realising they've been duped after the event. Few of them swear vengeance.

That seems like a lot of work! Much easier to buff the core class but tbh, I don't think fighters are underpowered so much as they need a nova ability and a couple of out of combat things to do to make them more interesting.

So I suppose the question is, are there any changes to Battlemaster that could be made that would not massively unbalance the subclass? Could higher level battlemasters apply rider effects (not damage) to a second attack in the same turn?

I bet they could downgrade the more powerful ones as second tier manoeuvres more in keeping with 5e.

Parry should be twice your superiority die.

I think all fighters need are the ability to core combat things better. So defensive retreat - apply disadvantage to opportunity attacks against them as a reaction, then against them and any allies within 5 feet at higher levels, then without costing a reaction later on. The for all those...

Yes. In my experience it's the extra damage on a crit and the extra attack from riposte that get people excited. The riders often just get thrown in as an afterthought. Some players just multiclass after level 5 because nothing interesting is coming and you already picked the manoeuvres you...

But then are you saying that every rogue MUST take nick just to function properly? I've never once played a TWF rogue and never once felt my rogue was underpowered. It was just a choice. If a weapon mastery with nick can be taken with a feat, doesn't it remain a choice?

Weapon Mastery was popular but I have reservations about giving at level 1 to Barbarians, paladins and rogues since none of those classes have any need for new lvl 1 at wills IMO. If it's available as a fighting style then it's up for grabs anyway, including as a feat. Rangers, monks, and...

Oh yes, I was talking more about the racial tendencies (and possibly rangers). I'm not really sure about gnomes, but the other racial tendencies were very heavily influenced. Elves are a mixed bag, where the cultural tendencies were Tolkien heavy but the racial modifiers are hugely diluted...

Too much of early DnD was tied to Tolkien assumptions. I still can't cope with dwarves wizards so don't ask me anything. If there is no racial bias towards anything, the stat increases are meaningless.

Remove them completely. Pointless under the lineage system. You could instead have ability caps. So e.g. dwarves cap at 20 con, everything else 18. Few people want to buy a 20 at level 1 so possibly pointless.

Personally I don't think barbarians, Rogues, or Paladins should get weapon masteries as level 1 class features. Rangers and monks need a bit of a boost. Barbarians, Rogues, and Paladins do not. As an alternative, we could include gaining a weapon mastery as a fighting style, which would also...

I think for me is the inability to build a satisfactory themed Sorcerer because the standard list is functional but not intriguing. Adding themed spells to the list helps add flavour.

Yes but priests get additional damage to their attacks on top. So, my question remains. If some people feel that bladelocks fall behind blasters, would a feature similar to the warpriest, giving them an occasional third attack deal with the objections on both sides?

I was in favour of aligning Eldritch Blast to warlock level to curtail some of its excesses. As for pact of the blade, would a class feature similar to the war cleric allowing a third attack as a bonus action meet in the middle?

In practice though that's poor design. That glass cannon gets to deal all that extra damage to overshadow other characters whose primary function is melee damage and then soaks up other group resources to stay in the game to continue overshadowing. It's true that Warlock players were not...

Same with shadow sorcerer. I did build a necromancer as a multiclass death cleric and shadow mage as multiclass warlock but class features letting you re-flavour existing spells in theme-appropriate ways might work for these subclasses.

I've always felt that the Banneret just needs some manoeuvre support to be a passable warlord. If Second Wind is to be linked to new options, then attaching some warlord style options into the subclass could plug the gaps. For the above, I would just put the teamwork fighting style as an...

I think my fighter players would just ditch their thrown weapons. In 1e you would throw your spear while closing and then draw your sword but that seems out of vogue.