Search results

Tbh the Rogue needs a Hawkeye/Thief CRPG style subclass, as a mostly mundane alternative to the artificer, and simply because it fits so well.

It’s absurd to attribute that to the feat in question. It gives you a discount on magic items (if your dm even lets you buy them) and lets you make mundane stuff, via tool proficiency. That’s it. It’s not adding any significant ability or bonus to the character. You’re better off just using...

Kinda. Had 4e been given time to fully cook, it wouldn’t have looked so different from 3.5 in the first place, and people wouldn’t have gone so nuts against it. The designers have said that they wanted to make the game closer to what essentials ended up looking like, but didn’t have time and had...

Eh I disagree, but either way nothing actually points to collaborations and crossovers in D&D being slop, yet. I mean other than the fact that Hasbro is owned by shareholders who only care about things that can be quantified on a spreadsheet.

That is vastly weaker than Lucky or Magic Initiate.

The game is better for not needing a dedicated healer for the game to function. The cleric also had to track the tradeoff of burning spells to heal, and you are leaving out the fact that two players having to negotiate the use of resources in order to do the thing is a layer of complexity. It...

Not every crossover of IP is blended up or slop.

This is silly. You think anyone that cares about optimizing is taking the crafting feat when they can take Lucky? Most players don’t even optimize, and the ones that do, still do with the current origin feats.

This is a non-statement. It means nothing. Not remotely the same. Not even in the same ballpark.

Rampant vitriol from grognards can sabotage almost any niche hobby product.

I would assume that anyone using this rule would limit it thus, for sure. My game has 1 action and two quick actions, and phase based rounds, but I considered changing it to 3 actions. But I like having Quick Actions for reacting and interrupting and doing something small and “extra” and...

Eh it wasn’t casuals that killed 4e, it was dedicated players that were really angry about changes.

No, I’m not. I’m speaking purely about mechanics. HS don’t do this. The same amount of stuff is being tracked, and it is less complex for everyone to track their own stuff rather than having some classes require tracking stuff for everyone and weighing the use of resources for the whole group...

When I’m less sleepy I will post more, but for now a short answer; the characters.

I think episode 1 works extremely well, as long as you’re able to care about characters quickly. If it takes hours and hours, you likely won’t like campaign 4. Like all CR, the episodes are insanely long, though.

No, it is more complex to force the group to strategize about spell slots per day and which should be used for healing. Healing surges are absolutely dirt simple, and every player having them makes them simpler, not more complex. No they don’t, they simply change what that layer is called and...

Higher complexity. Healing surges are simpler, because they don’t require any one character to hoard a resources to the benefit of the whole party, because the resource is in each character’s resource pool. You just take a few minutes between scenes, mark off whatever resources are needed...

I’d personally fold some of the “leader” roll into this, rather than anywhere else. IMO this is better split between skirmisher and sniper, but I’m fine with it separate if you don’t want the others to have multi-target capabilities. IMO needs a focus on intellectual academic study or it...

I like the idea of Seelie and Unseelie being purely things mortals call different Fey, while the Fey don’t ten to even know what the terms mean or where they came from.

I’ve never seen a single person ever claim that 5e is perfectly balanced. I’ve rarely seen anyone claim that it is even fairly well balanced.