Search results

We are speaking of 3d6 damage at level 20. Lower AC. Lower classical rogue skills. No way to dual wield. Which lowers the damage gap significantly. So this whole optimizer thing is way overblown in 5e. Good that people are doing the math. But even their conclusion is that every class is...

Yes. If you can fire meaningful arrows at the start of the fight, your average damage does not suffer. And -1 AC is compensated by shöting a minion dead before they reach you.

See below. If you compare a solid B Claas with 2 S or A classes, you are comparing apples to oranges. Artificers are great. They even have their niche and advantages over both classes. But power wise they are a bit behind. They might be more fun or fitting for what you imagine.

This is why lifting a portcullis should have a DC of 20 to 25. And only someone with high strength or training can do it given some time. If you take vanilla 3e and look at everything that way, the skill system makes sense. DC for good locks were DC 25 and above. So even a rogue (at low level)...

I have sucessfully played a rogue3/bard4/sorcerer3 in 5.0 with comparable stats (14 dex and 14 cha after stat increases). The character was focussed on blade cantips and rituals. I was given some nice magic items and we played in a 2 player party. No. It really does not effect your character...

Tanking. Supporting. Creating magic items. Opening locks. Solving problems. You are a spellcaster. You have a lot of tools. If you have 14 dexterity, you can sneak around very well too. Don't be fooled by the weapons. It is just a neat side job. Similar to valor bards or war clerics. This...

Yes. I know. I 100% agree with you. Which is what I said in my first post already. I think artificer overall and each subclass at B seems right to me. Some lower B, some higher B. But all B. Solid.

Dealing damage is not your main job. But yes. The built in weapons are not that great. They do their job though. At level 8 I was really really impressed how tough the class (in 5.0) is overall. And I was just focussing on the tanky and utility side. The hominculus is extremely versatile. I...

The Artificer is really nice. I think rating all subclasses as B seems correct. Not everyone has to do damage themselves. Movement granting options are great assets. I really like the Armorer. It does not look spectacular. But it is really tough.

No. That is not what I mean. Especially not if backgrounds are randomly rolled. I like level 0 as some kind of training level. Where your character still develops. I like level 0 if it dors not have everything set in stone. If you want to have randomness in stats and already want to set...

I have played with level 0 chars quite a lot: 1. Don't reduce proficiency bonus. Having a skill should make a difference. 2. Keep Hit dice at 1d6. 2. Start with lower stats instead. Maybe 13,12,11,10,8,6. This is a difference of 12 points/+6 total bonuses. During your game, instead of...

In an old Warhammer Fantasy RPG, being at 0 hp did not knock you out but once you ran out of HP, you suffer griveous wounds. So maybe only 1st level hp, but you can still chose and fight a bit longer. One just has to be careful not making it a death spiral.

Sorry. Missed that. Can you ex0lain it a bit more? 5th level features like extra attack at level 1 might be excessive. On the other hand, it could be totally ok.

I do not like 3 hd at level 1. I like the squishiness of level 1. But yeah. It should work too. Maybe you can just decide how many hd at level 1. Gritty 2d, heroic 3d.

4e was designed around automation in mind. That said, I have played it a lot during its entire life span. Only using the builder for automation. It worked. Especially with the restructured martials after essentials. And still, I really do not remember a lot of iconic abilities even though...

Until you realize that 2 against players is really unfun...

On a different note : Hit points as someone else mentioned... gygax got it right: capped HP after name level... or at least better direction. One way to correct it: level 0: start with a size based hit die + con (or str) modifier. Standard d8. Take the average rounded up: 5. Level 1 and...

Yes. One cleave like attack would be sufficient. Different ways to access the same maneuver. 5e also has what I regard as problematic. An universal maneuver system would have been nice. Ideally I would like: Spells (magic: arcane/divine/primal) Maneuvers (weapon/armor/body based: martial...

It was an issue for me. I really did not like this. I still think printing 10 variations of attack for 3dx damage, push 1 was a waste of space (in the book and in my memory). It also made everything not really iconic. There were a few standouts (come and get it). No. It is not. It is a...

Disagreed. Overlapping spell lists and maneuvers save design space. I think not having them was an issue in 4e. So many maneuvers that nearly did the same thing for different classes. In the end a DM had to memorize 100 different maneuvers. Having a general list makes it way easier. That is...