Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Li Shenron" data-source="post: 934169" data-attributes="member: 1465">I like basically everything.Druidic weapons restrictions needed a clear rule to put a line between what is ok and what is forbidden, especially when using equipment from other sources. It was easy for Armors (no armors with metal), but not for weapons; the only other way to fix it would have been to apply the no-metal rule to weapons as well, but it would have reduced the list a lot, and banned some very druid-flavor weapons like the Sickle and the Scythe. The 3.5e decision makes everything simple, and I think it is after all very fine for me; it still takes a feat for the Druid to take a new proficiency so it doesn't make her overpowered, and armor use doesn't change; it is just simply easier to explain and understand.Skills changes are great. We already got that Intuit Direction goes into Survival, and Scry is either going into Spellcraft or a new simple rule will be provided for using scrying spells. Listen & Spot make very sense for a character who use its senses extensively in the wilderness, and doesn't overpower again since the Druid doesn't get 6 sp/lev as the Ranger <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f644.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":rolleyes:" title="Roll eyes    :rolleyes:"  data-smilie="11"data-shortname=":rolleyes:" /> , she just has one sp/level saved from Animal Empathy. Which I am surprised to notice it works by level instead of by skill; I haven't thought about this and I think it's better.Animal Companions: I should check if a 3e Druid is still ok under the new rules. If it is, it means that the 3.5e rules just expand the possibilities (with possible but not necessary extra abilities taken in exchange with HD?). This of course if there is still the chance to get more weaker Animal Companions instead of only one; if there isn't, it will be probably a house rule because it's been popular in my games. There is probably a section in the PHB with full rules.To fully understand Wild Shape we probably need to wait for the Polymorph spell? The minor tweaks work fine, again not overpowering. The hours/day limit is not going to break the low-level usefulness and gives an extra (minor) motivation to level up as pure class.I wonder too if the spell/day progression has a typo rather than a fix... I don't really see why a fix was needed. The spell list is going to be better, we all know in advance.Nature Sense is quite small, it could be better; it still retains usefulness to Knowledge(Nature). But I really want to keep the ability to spot if water is clear or corrupted, maybe it just becomes part of Kno(Nat).Spontaneous casting of SNA is not really powerful (but let's see if they changed the summoned animals list!), but adds flavor.So... it seems the only stuff I dislike it's the pictures. How do I get stunned by this nymph beauty? <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />---------------------------------------------------------------------------------A final note.All class changes I have seen so far seem to imply the will by WotC to motivate a PC to level up in her main class. I think it's a very good attitude: multiclassing remains a great option both for strategy and for RP, but I'd like to be there a good reason also to go further in each class.I really really really hope that something, anything, has been done in the same direction for Wizards and Sorcerers; although multiclassing is for them mostly useless (except for a couple of levels), there is almost NO REASON not to take a Prestige Class. That should be a viable and enjoyable choice, but definitely not so much convenient that if you don't you are always giving up power and getting Familiar spell resistance in return...</blockquote>

Verification