Search results

Yes, with the provision that there is only one combination: 1 scythe and the rest is normal attacks. See, the scythe substitutes a melee attack for an attack with the scythe. The Eldritch Scythe feature says you can do so once per turn, so it transforms your (only, at level 1) attack into a...

To me it's quite clear: you have 1 melee attack thirsting blade allows you to make 2 melee attacks with the pact weapon on your attack action you can swap 1 melee attack for a scythe attack once you have Extra Blast you can use scythe more than once per turn, but only if you didn't make melee...

The initial point was about Thirsting Blade and whether it scaled well at higher levels. Extra blast counts as having extra attack for the purpose of qualifying to feats, etc, but it specifies that it only allows you to make multiple blast attacks. Thirsting blade specifies that you can attack...

This was a suggestion for a rare version of the spell, it's not supposed to be in the hands of every wizard. Disadvantage on next attack seems stronger to me

What about "creatures that hit you with a melee attack while this spell is active must save vs Con or become rattled until the start of their next turn"? The AC bonus doesn't increase over the base spell, but there's a useful side effect in case the spell doesn't protect you. The effect is quite...

I was initially surprised (not in a favorable way) by its removal, but I have to say that it really was for the best. Action Surge is not iconic at all IMO, it was introduced in 5e and is popular only for the crazy broken combos it allowed, so I'm happy it's gone. And for anyone who wants it...

Yes, plus the DC should still come from the creature's power. Of course if you can upcast its power is still related to your own power, but using your own DC would be weird IMO. Imagine summoning a demon, and creatures have to save against its powers but using your own spellcasting DC because...

Yes, as written there's a hole IMO. It doesn't make sense for you to roll a save against your own DC. Since you're acting against the spirit's will it would make more sense to roll against some DC depending on it's proficiency and probably Cha mod. I'd guess such a creature could have between...

I don't see it different from the ranger being able to change their favorite terrain, or the herald changing what creatures it can perceive with divine sense, etc etc. And I wouldn't see this as someone who dedicated their life to perfect anything (it's a first level feature!), but much closer...

None of that. The examples I made were specifically not about maneuvers, but about fighting styles and weapon properties. I'd definitely not restrict them to only use maneuvers from one tradition at a time. Quite on the contrary, I think I'll experiment with removing the restriction of "known"...

This. A lot of features that in o5E are a one and done choice, in LU can be "refocused" with a long rest. I'm not yet sure about maneuver specialization, but I'd 100% allow it with the fighting style. If we're talking about (partial) re-design, I think that switching styles mid combat would be...

I think they forgot the word "melee" before attack. Strangely I cannot find references for "threatening" targets. It sounds more like a 3.5 keyword, because now you can make opportunity attacks as melee weapon reactions on targets you can reach...

You're very good at creating monsters, and it matters way more! For the rest, there are all of us here ;)

Also con should be 20 instead of 19

Ok, if so the scores on the Hobgoblin Warlord are not correct as it's Cha is still 18. Also, is Cha to be boosted by 4 if the baseline has a score higher than 20?

This is a bit confusing. Is Cha to be increased by 4 or to be bumped to 20?

At least, that's how I read "when" entries. Maybe it's also ok to just say "I'm taking the attack action, but activate the bonus action immediately" and benefit from knockdown before the normal attack. This gives a very significant edge in combat, which is why I'm reading it the way I do, but...

I can't tell you if it was officially intended as I wasn't part of the design team. The way I read the rules suggests so. However, I think this needs a small clarification: given the way the "defensive" property is spelled ("When you make an attack with this weapon and are using a shield...

I think this would be a pretty standard approach for sword and board fighters I think using a shield to make a normal melee attack is generally one of the worst options. It only deals 1d4 damage, normally you can't apply strength damage and proficiency bonus to attacks since it's an improvised...

If you look at Use a Basic Maneuver it says I think it's way simpler and flexible. I don't see reasons why it shouldn't be possible to do that with bonus actions or even reactions Edit: The exceptions would be the Grab on and Overrun maneuvers, as they also entail some significant form of...