Search results

Someone earlier mentioned prestige classes. That’s essentially what subclasses are.

I wish it weren’t the case either but I think it’s inevitable. More choices in reality tends to yield greater optimization potential because the potential gains are cumulative across all choices.

IMO the difference is that once you aren’t making choices about what you want to play level by level then you actually differentiate your characters in play/personality/imagination/goals instead of just mechanics.

Sounds perfect to me. Game should be more about playing the character than building it.

IMO The game isn’t fun if all choices have the same overall effect. They should mostly all be viable but there will always be some better than others unless we go completely symmetric design.

Limit? No! Just not eliminate single class character concepts.

Sad but not super surprising.

Doing that you quickly end up with multiclass characters are always better. One thing I can say about 5e multiclassing is that for the level 1-20 progression it's very rare to be able to say that the single class character isn't better than some multiclass combo for at least some levels in that...

I think you'd have to go the other way. If you have X warrior features then your next warrior feature costs more. It's very easy to tune the 'more' such that it's almost always better to hybrid, which isn't an improvement either IMO. Yea, synergistic abilities is usually the cause of...

IMO. There is a fundamental problem with point buy. It assumes the value of all abilities is independent of what abilities you have already chosen. It’s not.

If dude would add some numbers to his videos id be much happier. Though he is okay to listen to otherwise. Key takeaways - Limited range. 30ft before disadvantage. Relies on elven accuracy which is not 2024 core and thus may not be available (like at my table). Multiclasses out of Paladin...

But slow slow to get started doing anything.

Sorlock is a good call. It starts slow but scales really well. Maybe. Though CME is still like 10ft range. Hardly ranged damage IMO.

Broadly speaking I see 4 paths to ranged damage that scales well into t3 and t4. 1. Be a fighter 2. Be a rogue 3. Use summons and cantrips (warlock/wizard with summon fey/undead and EB) 4. Use a concentration aoe damage spell and cantrips (moonbeam or conjure animals comes to mind)...

You've forgotten maybe the most important step. This needs multiplied by the damage increase of you getting an extra round (assuming it's an actual extra round which i'm not on board with but since you view it that way then it needs accounted for that way). In a 4 round encounter an extra...

I think the key take away is, winning initiative isn't actually an extra turn compared to not winning it. In the 1v1 scenario you could say it's essentially equivalent to an extra turn, but as soon as you move to a 4PC vs 5enemy encounter it's nowhere close to that.

This makes no sense. Battlemaster dice only add damage, not extra rounds.

Not for the method I just proposed. The complaint isn't that I'm making assumptions, it's that the assumptions i'm having to make are far from universal and not very consisent. Well no, you going first isn't enough to actually get an extra turn. You could have went 4th and still had the same...

yes, and? Which is the basis for what makes DPR such a useful metric. DPR measures your damage per round. Getting extra damage along with an extra round means your DPR remains unchanged.

Here's what I think the proper way to handle initiative would in terms of DPR would be. Consider the observation that a party doing double DPR halves the number of enemy turns. That is enemy turns and DPR are inversely proportional. So if we can determine the expected difference in enemy...