Search results

Sure. I mean it’s 2 actions per day that it might cost you, I don’t think that’s terrible. Though missing out on sap for those attacks is a defensive negative. I'm not sure how to really compare 3 extra saps per day vs not. Probably can do something like compute chance to hit with and...

I agree with you, I’d just note there’s just a smidge of ambiguity there as to whether the spell book feature refers to spells you can prepare as a wizard or spells you can prepare as a character. It’s obviously intended to be Wizard, but it’s just ambiguous enough IMO.

Ummm, one cannot prepare wizard spells of higher level than their wizard level indicates. So no, by 2024 RAW you wouldn’t be able to add it into the spell book.

Just a clickbait way of asking which is best ;)

I think there could be one. I’m not sure whether there is.

I now think it’s between Paladin and Barbarian. Instead of Fighter and Barbarian. I went agead and changed my vote to Paladin.

Yea. I think before i was still treating cure wounds as 1d8 instead of 2d8. Paladin should be more durable with cure wounds and lay on hands. He will miss the +1AC but it’s not enough to put the fighter ahead IMO. One thing I’ve not considered on barbarian is ehp per round. While raging...

I’m kind of interested to really examine whether aoe control and single target damage is actually better or aoe damage and single target control. Something like a sorcerer with heighten and careful metamagic with 3x single target strikers or the aoe damage caster heavy party I referenced.

I agree you want a mix of damage and control. However where I differ is that IMO, ideally you want strong AOE damage and strong single target control. Thus, I’m focused more on druids/clerics for aoe damage and wizards/sorcerers/bards/half caster with magic initiate for single target control...

I think it’s ambiguous under pure 2014 RAW. I don’t feel like dragging out those books to explain the reasoning, but iirc the crux is wizard classes spell book feature didn’t specify wizard levels. This was similar to the warlock invocations level prerequisites not stating warlock level. I...

It may just be certain monsters that cause issues when doing this.

IMO, all that is probably fine, though personally I wouldn’t lower attack stat, but 14 vs 16 isn’t a big deal). . Should be +1 as 0 short rests is 2, etc. I’m coming around to them.

I speculate that this may be the issue and maybe the larger issue related to the multiple tpks. I’m not super worried about 4 regular 5e wererats, it would probably be a tough but ultimately winnable slog of an encounter. I am very worried with 4 a5e versions. Maybe some a5e designers can...

Why would you assume the barbarian gets it and not the fighter?

Beat fighter at what?

Was the adventure in question written specifically for a5e? Or was it converted to a5e?

Oh wow so A5e wererats are buffed. This was 4 creatures with advantage and able to deal 3d6+2 x2 damage at level 3, I think I could kill most 4 person parties with that. Especially if they acted in a single initiative group.

Were rats do d6+2 x2 they have about a 50% hit chance on the rogue. Probably a 40% on the Paladin. That’s 5.5 average damage per wererat on the rogue and 4.4 per the Paladin. Rogue probably has 24 hp. Paladin probably has 28. Wererats probably shouldn’t have killed the Paladin in 1 turn and...

You did notice I said "at level 1"?

Anyways, it strikes me that broadly speaking there are 3 primary durability considerations here. We can add a few more categories but I think most important differences summarize into these categories. First Turn no-prebuff Enemies go first BPS vs AC only 1st encounter Non BPS 1st encounter...