Search results

I think there are a couple issues with 5e races that confuse the issue a bit. Like, if the only way to offset not having penalties is to give humans +1 to everything, that seems a bit silly to me.

There's a new Q&A up. First question: Will there be racial penalties to ability scores? (Answer: no. Carrot is more fun than stick.) Second question: Will there be room for "white mage" style cloth-wearing clerics? (Answer: yes. In response to feedback they're putting more stuff like armor...

I'd probably recommend it only if you're comfortable playing with the four "core" classes and races, and stopping by level 10. They've already put in and taken out warlocks and sorcerers, so I wouldn't make, say, a monk and expect it to even exist by the next packet. But if you play a rogue...

I guess we're a few days behind the curve here with the forum outages. But hey, why not! Rogues: I really have no idea what the heck they're talking about with skill dice here. But are they saying rogues basically get that PLUS full expertise dice? So every round the fighter chooses between...

This was not at all a problem in previous playtests, but the current playtest does re-introduce it. Except, now it's the rogue with (by 10th level) ridiculous bonuses to 8+ skills thanks to skill mastery. (Also fighters or monks with the maneuver that boosts Strength checks, although that is...

Interesting results so far - looks like a majority actually prefer the "expertise + spells + extra stuff" approach the designers are taking, rather than a more unified mechanic. And very few people seem to want JUST spells or JUST maneuvers. I wonder how those paladin spells will play out...

I think they've struck a pretty fine balance at the moment when it comes to wizard spells like Knock and Stoneskin. It has mostly to do with the extremely limited number of spell slots in the current playtest: Stoneskin is a crazy powerful buff, but preparing it has a high opportunity cost. Even...

Quick version of the answers: 1. No, the monk is already a limited enough concept (with complex enough mechanics) that it doesn't need styles/schemes/whatever. 2. Trying to make sure that spells can't replace other class roles as effectively, or for very long. Example: "Knock" takes a spell...

The etymology of "feat taxes" aside, I think Manbearcat's core point is a good one: right now, TWF and single-weapon fighting are less powerful than sword-and-shield or large-weapon fighting. Those latter styles can be "fixed" with feats, but this leads to other problems and violates what I'd...

In the latest L&L column, Mike Mearls discusses the current iteration of class design, where there look to be three core systems (expertise dice, spells, and a new skill-related system), and "hybrid" classes like the paladin dip into more than one of them. (So the paladin would have a...

I think most of the individual changes to existing classes he mentions sound good (rogues getting something else instead of XD, monks incorporating ki into their maneuvers, more distinct maneuver lists, a new approach to skill bonuses), and it sounds like it'll make the core 4 classes pretty...

I still don't like everyone getting expertise dice at the same rate as a damage bonus, because I'd rather see the option of bigger chunks of damage tied to conditions (like 3e sneak attack) or daily power limits (like 3e rage or smite, or 4e dailies).

I actually like having a bit of non-variable padding to attack damage. It's nice to know that if I smack a guy with my greatsword, I'm doing AT LEAST 5 damage. But there's no reason that low-level monster damage and hp has to play by the same rules; let an ogre with a longsword deal 1d12+0...

I'm guessing that's because a lot of traditionalists want to see it cap out at 9th level spells, and others don't necessarily understand that you're counting cantrips and don't want to see 11th-level spells.

This. Especially when DR has made a semi-comeback with the monk's Iron Root Defense and that one feat, it's important that multiple attacks be separated out. If you're actually dealing with more than 5-6 identical monsters making the same attack against the same target at the same initiative...

I kind of agree with your conclusion but from the opposite direction: if I'm playing a monk or a rogue or a paladin, I don't want it to be a fighter-lite with additional class abilities tacked on. The new monk already shows us how having two separate mechanics (ki and expertise) dilutes both and...

The "built-in scalability" is actually what makes me the most nervous about applying this mechanic across classes. We've already seen how tempting it is to apply it broadly in a way that (IMHO) dilutes class diversity. (Want to incorporate a Sneak Attack ability? Add your expertise dice, but...

Another point - saying that all martial classes should do +3d10 damage per round at level 10 is incredibly limiting, as we're already seeing with the new rogue Sneak Attack. First off, shouldn't some classes with better defense and/or mobility and/or other tactical advantages do less damage? I...

So what started as a simple, flexible, interesting way for fighters to stand out has become another annoying part of the system math. Now everyone is ASSUMED to be dealing +3d10 damage at 10th level, and if the fighter wants to be special he needs another "parry" system ON TOP OF the...

Heh, that sounds like a somewhat whiny group! This seems like a situation where it'd be easy to satisfy both sides: let the "basic" heals accessible to most or all clerics be "minor actions" (in scare quotes because they're not called that anymore), and let those with a healing domain access...