Search results

This is true, but what you really end up with is an answer or solution dominated by assumptions.

The question was not which class is the simple Arcane class, but rather which class should be the simple Arcane casting class. IMO Ranger should be the "simple" Arcane casting class.

I think it is different. The POTT Warlock has access to all 1st level rituals with a short rest because they can conjure a new book with different rituals. That is something the Wizard can't do, although the Wizard has more available immediately on tap. The other thing you can do if you allow...

Ranger.

I have done that at times yes. The Quasit can be Invisible and getting 2 attacks a turn (one using your action, one using your bonus action), potentially making 2 enemies poisoned for follow up with Summon Undead. They are pretty survivable at high level with 25hps plus another 15 or so from...

Investment of the Chain Master is pretty effective and requires POTC. Familiars are better late game if you get the Inspiring Leader Feat. Also though with the new rules where ti only takes an action to summon they are pretty much always on tap. IF they get killed every single fight you still...

I find a lot of wide variety in play styles. I think Sorcerer lends itself better to high damage, especially if multiclassed with Rogue. Twin spell is the cornerstone here as it essentially doubles damage. Even if you are just rocking Truestrike at level 11 that si going to be 2xWeapon+4d6...

There was no math in what I replied to there. I am not the one ignoring simple math re: "doing almost double damage every single round" Yeah the math shows that is nowhere near true! You seem to have completely ignored "chance to hit" when you made that statement.

I think more "campaigns" are less than 5 sessions than more than 5 sessions, I have played a lot of 1-20 campaigns though and those are all more than 5. You are correct in terms of numbers driving toward the mean overall, but what are we trying to achieve? If we accept that balance is...

One of them is about balance. The effect on balance will not be noticeable. The discussion with you on an earlier thread was not centered on balance, it was centered on capability or effectiveness. Characters notice the ability scores they have on their sheet and if they are privy to the...

This is not true. The exact chance is highlly dependant on monster AC, hit points, weapons, how many rolls you are having, what you are wielding and what you consider "balanced". This is not true. You have to make a bunch of assumptions to actually calculate this and those assumptions will...

Yeah exactly. A 1st level raging Barbarian with a 16 strength swinging a Greataxe against a 16 AC foe has mean damage of 6.1 with a standard deviation of 6.7! An "average" session is probably between 3 and 12 rounds of combat depending on the table. So two characters with the same strength...

It is possible the 20 strength Barbarian does double the damage of the 14 strength Barbarian during a session, it is also possible the 20 Strength Barbarian does less damage than the 14 Strength Barbarian during a session and it is possible they will be within 25% of one another over the course...

This is really the crux of our disagreement. I think modern players tend to favor magic more than players 30 or even 10 years ago did.

Ok. this is impossible to calculate, but you are probably correct. This gets to my point though, a game can feel very unfair or biased just based on the random dice rolls in play and equal abilities will not remedy this. Go look at the BG3 forums on Steam and read about all the people...

What is useless is expecting identical ability scores to cause balance in play.

So one radomizer is ok but another one is not ok, even when that other one has a lower standard deviation and a smaller mathematical effect on success or failure?

Ok I will bite. What does it mean mathematically in play? I am not talking about probabilities or averages; I am talking about results. If we are talking about damage, how far off can say total damage in a session be before the game is "unbalanced"? Is a 10% difference in play unbalanced...

I really don't like this idea. One huge plus to 2024 is that they got rid of all the stereotypes and the ties to the basic character statistics.

Not effectively. A Bard or Sorcerer should be able to grab a sword Gandalf-style and get as many attacks and be able as do as many things with that sword as any other class can. To be clear, I am not suggesting a Gish subclass for every class I am suggesting that this kind of thing be a basic...