Aristotle's D&D Experience

[Sphyre]

Regarding Hunter's Mark-

Only the nearest enemy can be designated as the quarry. But archers are ranged attackers. This means that they can either beat up on nearby foes very efficiently, or they can forgo some damage in order to shoot someone in the back lines. It also gives them some incentive to maneuver a bit in order to get the target they want into position as the nearest.

Yep. It's also interesting, that you can close on that enemy, get the quarry, and then get farther away and keep the quarry. I like that sort of mechanic. It certainly keeps the ranger moving around rather than just standing in back.

 

[Hjorimir]

I don't think book keeping will be less, but I think the core mechanic is even more streamlined so that the things you have to keep track of are all running under the same mechanics. I certainly don't think it's worse, but I don't think less book keeping should be a selling point.

Actually, I ran a little test today with some friends and one of the things that really sunk in with me was that I didn't have to track durations on effects or damage on minions. That was a lot of bookkeeping that went away for the DM.

Thanks for the review!

 

[Spatula]

Yep. It's also interesting, that you can close on that enemy, get the quarry, and then get farther away and keep the quarry. I like that sort of mechanic. It certainly keeps the ranger moving around rather than just standing in back.

I do wonder if a target is allowed to remain your quarry if someone else moves closer to you. It would seem somewhat odd to me to maneuver to get someone barely closer to you than other foes, "mark" it, and then run off and get extra damage against it. I was interpreting it more as "+1d8 damage vs the target closest to you."

 

[VannATLC]

I do wonder if a target is allowed to remain your quarry if someone else moves closer to you. It would seem somewhat odd to me to maneuver to get someone barely closer to you than other foes, "mark" it, and then run off and get extra damage against it. I was interpreting it more as "+1d8 damage vs the target closest to you."

Nothing in the rules that says otherwise, but it does then beg the question of why require it in the first place.

Perhaps it is intended to be analogous to the Assassin's DeathStrike, and requires a re-connitoire(sp?) of the target, albeit a quick one, to determine weak spots. Once located, Bam.

But that still lacks consistency.

 

[Sphyre]

I do wonder if a target is allowed to remain your quarry if someone else moves closer to you. It would seem somewhat odd to me to maneuver to get someone barely closer to you than other foes, "mark" it, and then run off and get extra damage against it. I was interpreting it more as "+1d8 damage vs the target closest to you."

I see it more as your target of choice. It doesn't force you to make a new minor action to select a new quarry when something is close. It is a little weird, but requiring the target to be the closest prevents you from sniping controllers in back from the beginning of combat with the bonus.

Other than the fact that it requires some bookkeeping or memory of what your quarry is, I like the mechanic.

 

[AZRogue]

Another good review. Thank you, sir. The paladin issue, as mentioned above, has been addressed and is being fixed, but there wasn't time to fix it for the event, they say.

Twice as many rounds, same amount of time? I'll take it. It will make things feel more like a pitched battle. I wanted the time to come down, but if you can take twice as many actions in that time, then it will SEEM faster paced, at least.

 

[Mathew_Freeman]

Thanks for the review - I'm really enjoying getting solid information on how the game actually plays.

 

[TerraDave]

Aristotle, it was nice meeting you.

Both the ranger and the warlock had a similar ability to mark an enemy and do extra damage, but I think both were supposed to be against the closest target. Probably another way to distinguish them from the wizard/controller. (and I don't think this was picked in the session I played in either, at least not by my friend playing the warlock).