Search results

I'd say that shifting from flat energy resist and DR to 50% pretty squarely falls under that "if". The change erased the downside posed for multiple smaller instances of damage each getting nickeled & dimed while nullifying the benefit of a single big instance powering through a small ding

https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells?filter-attack-type=1&filter-partnered-content=f&filter-search= https://www.dndbeyond.com/spells?filter-attack-type=2&filter-partnered-content=f&filter-search= Your white room scenario is still a variation of "look at these negatives that are worse than that...

The multiple attacks pc also gets the benefit being hurt less when one attack misses or they roll low on an attack that adds mods/attrib. This kind of stuff is one area where 5e fundamentally missed the boat statistically in the way so many things shifted to make sure that PC's making multiple...

Actually up until 5e casters faced a problem directly related to that. Specifically very low hp and the general inability to wear armor other than a few very specific magic/generally unavailable varieties like elven chain shirt & bracers of defense while still being able to succeed at...

It's been over a decade. Not including so much as a sidebar setting an expectation of need for GM action in a UA or ALPH/ALDMG in all of that time is a choice highlighting priorities by now. 745 phrased it well

I agree. Likewise with the comment someone else made about designing it to avoid the wheels falling off or whatever. The fact that they didn't do that --AND-- didn't include a notice like that sets the GM up for a. Uphill battle where they need to convince players to work with them willingly...

The entirety of your post straight up ignores the additional problem caused here by your own hypothetical "if" that you mentioned where spells need to be designed targeting all six saves under a six save system. That means either creating a bunch more spells allowing players a wider selection...

Nah, I'm going to disagree with this because it's somewhat reliant on the assumption of correlation equals causation where the wheels come off the system after the gm runs out of steam with no allowance for the possibility that the campaigns themselves break down at about the same level ranges...

This reads a lot like "6 is better than 3 if d&d d&d 5e had done something hypothetical that it didn't do and that hypothetical did not also create a bunch of new problems instead of being pixie dust" it falls apart immediately because players are still equipped with neovancian prep and could...

3.5's move and attack did not have individual players spending multiple minutes dragging out their attack xhain in drips and drabs pumping the gm for information about how the monster is doing so they don't potentially make an attack that is overkill or whatever. It was objectively better for...

No it really does not. You keep asserting that it's great but never expound on the reasons why without contradicting your earlier posts about how easy it is to target weak monster saves. This is straight up ROLEplay vrs ROLLplay and to make matters worse it's using a pure fluff vut if roleplay...

Those "barriers" were important balancing elements that got discarded on the altar of simplicity in service of more simplicity for players only. Again they served as both a defense for monsters in addition to a positive incentive for players to choose different more cooperative spells over...

Yea he got asked & wrote more about it the other day. Shedding some of the simplicity to plug in alternatives that fit setting specific lore/themes would do much better than subclasses in darksun (especially for spellcasting). Supporting it halfway with subclasses alone would give GMs a...

While I agree there is likely a level of truth in that I think that the reason might be found at a more foundational level. Wotc built 5e with design choices that would allow "modular" replacements of base class features but never elaborated on what they meant by modular. It has the result of...

Mostly agree. Trouble is that the oversimplification broke a bunch of safeguards and outright removed most of the safety valves previously under gm control in the name of simplicity for the sake of simplicity

Not quite accurate when we had fort/reflex/will+SR. Firstly and most obvious is the fact that intelligence was not one of those saves even if there were probably feat/prc boons to use it for wis saves. What you are describing is a symptom that is the result of 5e breaking an objectively...

Even worse is players building scout and tank as out types then playing that way to the point that squishies or uncoordinated drum set PC's wind up needing to take point for the group. I saw it shockingly often in My AL games.

See this is where you are getting lost in the weeds expecting one monster to do every. Yim almost posit you linked to the ivory tower game design thing if 3.x and are familiar with the way it sets up everything to have a situation where it is great even if it's bad in other situations. Your...

No we were talking about how good bad and medium saves worked on monsters in 3.5 when the monster manual literally had an entry about adding SR to monsters. I liter linked to it and you quoted ihe link, all 3 saves are positive at +12/+3/+4 even with no template or class levels modifying them...

A hill giant had 16/6/10 An ogre had 6/0/1 or 12/2/2 The base skeleton had 0/1/2 or lots of other options depending on which skeleton you picked A kobold had 2/1/-1 On and on and on. Good save bad save medium save was very much the norm and the trend continued as cr scaled to a higher...