Search results

This was something I was dabbling with for Hunter's Mark. I wanted to put together some alternative castings/upcasts to bring it more into parity with the Smite spells, around the theme of particular monster abilities. So if you be a good Ranger and assess the incoming threat, you've got...

See ideally spells like Flame Arrows or Lightning Arrow would fill that sort of utility, but. I find you unlock them far too late, and they're pretty expensive spell slots for what you get. Lightning Arrow is at least kinda cool and effective, Flame Arrows kinda shakes out to just elemental...

Ranger's lack of a definitive enemy in terms of bestiary category (outside of Monstrosities debatably), like what's generally considered true for Paladins and Undead etc., is part of why I like Force damage as Ranger's "element". They become a universal threat, they can fight anything! There is...

I agree, but the wilds already are pretty naturally chaotic and magical. Though admittedly just as much is down to meddling. Hubris of Wizards, cruelty of extraplanar entities etc. That's sorta part of how I tend to think of Rangers, they're like the counterbalance against the things plaguing...

Not for me personally, no. My thinking on the issue is partly on flavour grounds, and I've already arrived at a solution I like. And I don't plan on changing my view.

I dunno. You can if you want I guess?

Oh yeah for sure. Like I get them being reluctant to mess with that sorta stuff for the main chunk of 5E's lifespan, but. Bit of a shame they never did.

I mean technically Fighter has additional (attack) actions as their thing too, sorta. Somewhat double-dipping in that respect. But yeah possibly. I don't necessarily have huge problems with 5E's designs for the other classes like some folks. Not in "you should try another system" territory yet...

That's the sorta thing I might like for Ranger. I was messing with something in that vein for my homebrew; I wanted them to have more means of capitalizing on their bonus damage mechanic. I figured they probably can't get more Extra Attacks because that's Fighter's bag, so I gave them a later...

Do sorta agree, but I still reckon those are solveable issues. I like what BG3 did for the Thief subclass specifically, just gave them an additional bonus action. Universally useful, nominally relevant for specific Thief/Rogue things.

Yes, I think that's accurate. I don't really care about this discussion. You got anything else?

Spell scrolls specifically don't require any components. So okay, pretend I said that then. I mean, I agree, so I have no idea why you brought settings up. That's what I was expressing confusion over.

I mean. It was the point I was making. The initial question was about power-gaming multiclass combinations, and the reasons why a given occupant of a world might not immediately rush to achieve the pinnacle of power. Not everyone can, not everyone wants to. It came out of a point about Ranger...

But that is my point! Something might be, in a mechanical sense, the absolute highest power a person can achieve in a setting, but not everybody can do that, nor does everyone want to! Even when they're risking their skin going out to fight stuff.

Not always of course, I'm just kinda thinking about the median. Your average PC can't wander into the room next door to the one they started the campaign in, and summon a Fiend for a quick pact. Or hop on over to their artificer buddy's workshop, and procure a repeating firearm at a mate's...

"Relative commoners" in terms of knowledge and access, at the baseline. Mechanically it doesn't shake out that way, but they don't usually have much to draw on at the very start of a game.

I mean sure, but I'd argue PCs that start as relative "commoners" are pretty normal? Sure, but that still doesn't mean it's gonna work for/be available to everybody. For one reason or another. Some people simply will not enter a Warlock pact, because they believe it's a bad idea, they're genre...

We're getting back into "why doesn't every peasant simply become a master wizard" style logic. There are (usually) meaningful barriers to (greater) power, including but not limited to; knowledge, and access. They did! But when global knowledge of and access to firearms became the norm, and not...

You sure can! And y'know what it doesn't do? Cast at it's highest available level. Like it does when a Warlock casts it with a Warlock spell slot.

It's not though. A Wizard flatly cannot decide "well I'm a master of arcana, I'm just gonna only have my highest level spell slots like those warlock fellas, why not?". Warlocks have their own system of magic, that is a mechanical reflection of it's source. To cast the same spells, yes of...