Search results

Never knew this, thanks! Do you have a rule reference for that? Because I could not find it. From level 5 on it is a stronger benefit than Hex, doesn't cost a spell slot, and on non-casters like the Adept, it would see a ton of value. But if it doesn't work on natural weapons (or unarmed...

The Imbue Weapon reflex from the Voidrunner's Codex targets "One melee weapon". Is this supposed to work on natural weapons (such as a Lizardsfolk's bite) as well? Obtaining this power with the Martial Mentalist feat is seriously powerful for Lizardfolk Adepts, if it were to work, since they...

Not for some of my ideas, but if you want to have Fighting Styles improve with level and be focused towards working together with a tradition, you would need to rewrite the selection of maneuvers for Fighters, rework Maneuver Specialization, as well as change many levels of class features to...

🤷‍♂️ I do not have access to the GPG other than what is published on the A5E.tools website. But if it is specified anywhere, the GPG issue that published the maneuvers would be my guess.

Added in one of the GPG's, but the site links are somewhat wonky: Dueling Maneuvers | Level Up and Gate Pass Gazette | Level Up for reference

Yes, but... ...makes me believe that the Dueling Maneuvers are not meant for general combat ;)

Don't get me wrong, I really like the CM system. It's just a problem of rewarding Fighters for sticking to a very narrow action pool, instead of rewarding them for embracing their enormous versatility. This leads to Fighters very rarely picking niche options for their specialization/combat...

The main problem I have with the Fighter design is that while most of the maneuvers are situationally awesome, some are just strong in any situation. These are the meneuvers Fighters will select for their maneuver specialization, and because of the added value of the specialization, the Fighter...

Well, that is what I don't know :p The relevant meneuvers state something like: And the Fighting Style states: So, I don't know. Would they? Arguments for either case can be made and I don't know what was intended by the authors. From a balance perspective, letting all attacks during a...

Are you adding the bonus damage from Technical Fighter to the bonus action attacks? Because I am not entirely convinced that is appropriate because those attacks are not technically part of the maneuver action... Though you could argue that the attacks still make use of the maneuver. But that...

"I am frightened by the dragon's roar! Quick, slap me in the face like the coward I am!"

The Sporting Chance maneuver from the Gallant Heart tradition (GPG #21) states the following: The flavour makes it abundantly clear that this is supposed to target enemies. However, I am, by definition, a creature within my own reach (and so are allies within my reach). I assume this should be...

Could be confusion between Incapacitated and Stunned?

Oh one final edge-case with your fix: If you manage to land a hit as a reaction during an opponent's turn (say with Speed Over Strength or Polearm Savant, for example), you stop the enemy right in their tracks AND make them skip their next turn as well.

Neither have I because my players are usually smart enough to not tempt me with their super-munchkins ;)

Your suggestion makes SA less powerful, in the sense that you and maybe not all of your partymembers will enjoy advantage. That is certainly good, because it lowers the chance of hitting in a subsequent turn where you would want to apply the stun again. But it still locks down enemies the same...

It is comparable in a sense yes, but the problem here seems to be that Stunning Assault is absurdly good at reliably locking down one or two enemies. With Stunning Assault you can easily force 3+ saving throws against an arguably stronger condition (because charm immune does not work against...

Honestly, with how little fighters gain in the late game and how tempting it is to mc, neither do most fighters in O5E... But even so, three attacks puts the exertion cost of unupgraded Stunning Assault in line with the Adept's Stunning Strike, which is fine I think.

How about just nerfing Stunning Assault (and potentially the other "assault" maneuvers that use the same mechanic), in this way: Still powerful, getting Fighters up to 4 stunning attacks at level 20 (instead of at level 5), but no longer incentivises them to dual wield and try to OoA or...

Not being able to move is an interesting concept that could allow for some tactical decisions, it's just that I see very little reason to use the feature as is, which is a bummer. Locking the Wooden Fists damage behind being rooted would be a good reason to use the feature, though I would...