Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Pickles JG" data-source="post: 6347445" data-attributes="member: 61501">It's exactly the same as 4e up to level 12, if you are not a fighter. If you start at 16 you will have better accuracy (or save DCs) &amp; do more damage, assuming you usually hit on a 9 with a 14 (ir starting AC about 13 like the orc) it is much the same. The +3 damage is not as much as the +5 but the generally lower numbers mean the differences are more significant.14 or 15 will mean you lag one behind until level 12 when you become a feat behind (or the high stat guy catches up in secondary stats). This is of course outside the life of most campaigns.13 or less will mean you are noticeably less effective than someone with a 16 but may be able to be more versatile with better secondary stats (though except CON these are less directly relevant than in 4e where every class can leverage one or two secondaries. I also expect that we will see far more 16s in 5e than 20s in 4e so the 13s will be more obviously behind.That said it does not matter so much for secondary spell casting if you are not attacking - (it effects healing but not most buffs or utilities) so you can multi-class quite effectively I feel &amp; hybrids like rangers will not need huge casting stats.&nbsp; I do like the cap though - the removal of stat pressure after level 12 at the latest will give a much better feel to the game. You could stop at 18 &amp; not be crippled &amp; have more options for later. Starting at 16 &amp; bumping it once will leave you a point behind the top people but that's like being 18 not 20 in 4e so acceptable.Of course being more rounded may be better in a game that has a wide scope where many skills are used, but it will not help your &quot;basic&quot; combat effectiveness.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Pickles JG, post: 6347445, member: 61501"] It's exactly the same as 4e up to level 12, if you are not a fighter. If you start at 16 you will have better accuracy (or save DCs) & do more damage, assuming you usually hit on a 9 with a 14 (ir starting AC about 13 like the orc) it is much the same. The +3 damage is not as much as the +5 but the generally lower numbers mean the differences are more significant. 14 or 15 will mean you lag one behind until level 12 when you become a feat behind (or the high stat guy catches up in secondary stats). This is of course outside the life of most campaigns. 13 or less will mean you are noticeably less effective than someone with a 16 but may be able to be more versatile with better secondary stats (though except CON these are less directly relevant than in 4e where every class can leverage one or two secondaries. I also expect that we will see far more 16s in 5e than 20s in 4e so the 13s will be more obviously behind. That said it does not matter so much for secondary spell casting if you are not attacking - (it effects healing but not most buffs or utilities) so you can multi-class quite effectively I feel & hybrids like rangers will not need huge casting stats. I do like the cap though - the removal of stat pressure after level 12 at the latest will give a much better feel to the game. You could stop at 18 & not be crippled & have more options for later. Starting at 16 & bumping it once will leave you a point behind the top people but that's like being 18 not 20 in 4e so acceptable. Of course being more rounded may be better in a game that has a wide scope where many skills are used, but it will not help your "basic" combat effectiveness. [/QUOTE]

Verification