Search results

IF you crit in the first place, and preferably within the first two rounds of combat where it would actually make a meaningful difference. Crits only happen 5% of the time. Getting hit within the AC range where Shield will make a difference happens a lot more often than that.

"One or two attacks" That just tells me you've either (a) never played the game at all, or (b) never faced anything higher than CR2 where creatures have multiattack.

You can get AC 26 multiple times per day. That is broken if you know even a little bit of the math involved in 5e.

Either: (a) Make it work against only the triggering attack or Magic Missile, or (b) Make it work more like older editions. Cast as action instead of a reaction, the shield it creates grants cover vs. attacks coming from in front of the caster, takes another action on subsequent turns to move...

For starters, I would not make these Arcane weapon spells deal anywhere near the extra damage Smite spells are capable of. Because that's the core of the current OneD&D problem with the Cleric out-smiting the Paladin, but spread to Wizards and the like. Instead, I would steer these Arcane weapon...

Then they need to make new arcane-flavored spells that are used with weapons but aren't smites. Smiting is a Paladin thing, and it should remain a Paladin thing. Period.

Leomund's Tiny Hut would be fine if it was like previous editions' versions. Protects you only from extreme weather, not from enemies.

I like the broad concept but the specifics still need a lot of work. Mostly, I'd prefer those weapon mastery properties to be a list of techniques warrior classes can pick from and apply broadly. Those techniques can still have their prerequisites as far as what kinds of weapons they work with...

To be fair, the level 7 feature does allow for some neat interactions that wouldn't be available otherwise. Like taking the Dual Wielder feat, putting Push on a Versatile weapon (which none of them have by default), and then throwing a dagger or light hammer (with Nick) at the enemy after you...

Which actually feels closer to the way Weapon Mastery should work by default.

I'm not against the idea as one of many options. I AM against it being far and away the optimised way to play a martial.

Monk + revised Experts. The revised Experts may each have an additional subclass, as well. Also since we know some of the Expert classes are getting weapon mastery, some (very much needed) changes to that system may show up.

What has really become glaring to me about the Fighter's Weapon Expert and Weapon Adept features is that they are not increases in power or capability at all, but merely in convenience. A level 13 Fighter with two properties on a weapon is not doing anything they couldn't do since level 1. They...

Yeah. It's basically the "Champion" of weapon masteries. It's probably meant for those who don't want to do anything but just hit things, yet it's still painfully suboptimal at even that.

You can do it from level 1 with the Golf Bag of Weapons (TM).

Weapon Mastery comes close to hitting the mark ... and then whizzes on past the target by another 400 yards. The optimal way to play any Fighter before level 7, and any other non-Fighter martial ever, will be to carry a golf bag of weapons and switch weapons with each attack for their different...

Fighter gets 3 attacks at that level and can change mastery effect on each one.

Welcome to the previous UA. It only happens at level 20, where, quite frankly, it makes sense for it to happen.

The difference in that case is because there is no drawback whatsoever to taking the rapier or longsword over the shortsword. You literally lose nothing while gaining that +1 damage. Whereas taking a Flex weapon means you're not taking a Push, Slow, Cleave, Puncture, etc. weapon.

That's a difference that round of ... 6 points of damage. With Action Surge. You're really not selling me the value of the Flex property here compared to free pushes, free slows, damage on miss, damage vs. second enemy, etc.