D&D (2024) D&D 2024 Rules Oddities (Kibbles’ Collected Complaints)

[mamba]

Sure, but it's a DDB-issue, not really a "backwards compatibility"-issue.

agreed, it absolutely is a DDB issue

They might not have pulled it off this time if it weren't for Adam Bradford.

agreed, the longer it takes them to even get the bare minimum done, the clearer it gets that they could not have created this themselves…

To me it looks like they bought it for 150M without any plan or ability to do anything with it other than to milk it for all that it is worth and discard the husk once they have sucked it dry and people have moved on. A shame really, they are absolutely neglecting the platform.

Does not bode well for their VTT, if they ever even manage to get that off the ground

 

[ECMO3]

None of that makes the HM bonuses redundant.

Yes the advantage offered by the 17th level Ranger ability absolutely 100% is factually redundant with Vex - the only applicable mastery on light, dex based weapons that can be used more than once a turn.

That is what I stated and what I replied to. You are wrong.

have played RaIngers. Often Hunter's Mark spent 2 to 3 turns on the same creature. Maybe we were just better at picking targets than you.

I have played them where it happened to and as I pointed out I have seen that sewt up work. To reiterate what I said - it does not work MOST OF THE TIME.

I do not believe it has worked most of the time on Rangers you have seen try this.

If I cast a spell, I don't have a bonus action that can have immediate impact, so no, my "setting up" of Hunter's Mark is not preventing me from doing something else that has an immediate pay-off.

But on a Ranger at high level you almost always do have a bonus action that can have an immediate impact.

In this corner case sure - where you don't have such a bonus action available, where you have an unspent use of Hunter's Mark without using a spell slot, when the spell you just cast is not concentration ..... it can be a good move despite the fact it probably won't work, and in some cases it will work .,. just not most of them.

You are presenting this as a normal, viable tactic for a high level Ranger who is casting a spell with thier action when it is not.

This is the equivalent of saying my Ranger can dodge instead of attacking or casting a spell.... I absolutely can and in some corner cases that is a viable, helpful decision. It is not a normal viable choice and Hunter's Mark is not a normal, viable choice as a bonus action when you are casting another spell as an action.

No, they have more than that because Crossbow Expert doesn't work with other Light Vex Weapons

Yes it does. A Hand crossbow has both the light and vex properties. It works the same as any other light weapons. It works for two-weapon-fighting and works with the Crossbow expert feat and other light weapons you want to wield.

Again, you aren't understanding what I am saying.

I may not understand what you mean, but what you are "saying" as in writing on the thread is incorrect.

I thought only Rangers who were weapon users, or "like to hit things with pointy sticks" used Hunter's Mark.

That is not what I said. To reiterate what I said regarding sticks (not specifically pointy sticks either):

"[It is a bad] for any Rangers that don't want to hit it with a stick"

This is a factually true statement. Hunter's Mark is a terrible, terrible spell to cast if you are not going to attack and take advantage of the damage boost.

Unlike your spellcasting ranger which didn't do that? Or, again, are we just changing terms to score points?

All rangers are spellcasters as a class and any Ranger that casts a spell, including Hunter's Mark is a spell caster.

This is not a difficult concept to understand.

Why is it bad design? YOu just keep stating it like a brute fact of the universe, but that doesn't make it so.

Because it is a fact. Any class design that requires use of a specific single spell for four separate class features is a bad design.

I keep stating it like a fact because it is a fact.

A class with some 60 to 70 class abilities is not well-designed. It would be incredibly complicated. You are proposing more class abilities than the warlock and all their eldritch invocations. IT would be massively overwhelming even for experienced players.

Ok just have one like at the end of my last post.

This lets a player who wants to use HM continue to use HM and it lets a player who doesn't use any other spell with those 4 abilities .... and it takes up nothe same space as the current abilities.

Disagree.

Ok, but you are still wrong.

I literally pointed this out, you really need to read more carefully.

Not in the post I qouted you didn't what you said was: "I also notice that of the very few spells you mentioned that deal damage ..."

30% is more than "very few"

So it isn't bad class design to focus four class abilities on a spell with concentration. Which has consistently been what you have claimed.

A SPELL they offered more than one option it would not be a class designed to focus on A SPELL.

Offering a choice of spells to use those abilities with or alternatively making the ability generic so you could choose any spell to use would both be better alternatives.

Sometime I wonder if you really truely are trying and failing to understand or if you are just trying to be difficult.

So, it would be better class design if only it gave far more options to do literally the exact same things.

More different spells you could choose yes. That way you would not be tied to one spell on any PC you build.

Even though each of those spells would ALSO have many of the same problems you keep complaining about.

Each spell has different problems, advantages, uses and mechanics but you would choose the spell that matched what you desired thematically and/or mechanically.

Another issue with Hunter's Mark is the nearly complete lack of thematic support with it. Aside from being weak it is also very bland.

The bad design is tying the class abilities to one spell which the player has no say on. The problem is not tying a specific character to Hunter's Mark. Offering players the choice of spells to choose on their character would be a much better class design mechanic ... as is done with the Wizard's spell mastery.

So, in the end... the problem is you don't like Hunter's Mark.

Whether I like it or not is completely irrelevant to this discussion, it is a bad class design. Making it another spell with no choices might be a little more suited to my tastes than HM, but it would still be a bad class design.

To make it a good class design you would need to offer a choice of spells, or make it generic so I could choose any spell to use those abilities with. I offered an example of the latter to alleviate your concerns on length.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

agreed, it absolutely is a DDB issue


agreed, the longer it takes them to even get the bare minimum done, the clearer it gets that they could not have created this themselves…

To me it looks like they bought it for 150M without any plan or ability to do anything with it other than to milk it for all that it is worth and discard the husk once they have sucked it dry and people have moved on. A shame really, they are absolutely neglecting the platform.

Does not bode well for their VTT, if they ever even manage to get that off the ground

I really hope to be proven wrong, but based on track record, I wouldn't be remotely surprised if the VTT never fully appears. And if it does, there's a good chance that it will be late, and nowhere near as good as promised.

Glad to be incorrect! Ball is in your court, Wizards!

 

[mellored]

I really hope to be proven wrong, but based on track record, I wouldn't be remotely surprised if the VTT never fully appears. And if it does, there's a good chance that it will be late, and nowhere near as good as promised.

Glad to be incorrect! Ball is in your court, Wizards!

They have a working demo.

Which is a lot further than they got the last few attempts.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

They have a working demo.

Which is a lot further than they got the last few attempts.

Yup. There's hope, but OTOH, the working demo is supposedly very limited and buggy. Can they take it across the finish line? I hope so, but I wouldn't bet on it!

 

[mamba]

I really hope to be proven wrong, but based on track record, I wouldn't be remotely surprised if the VTT never fully appears. And if it does, there's a good chance that it will be late, and nowhere near as good as promised.

they never published an official timeline, but I cannot imagine any internal timeline in which they are not late already… I assume they wanted this to be out for the 50th anniversary and right now it looks like they barely make it into open beta in time

 

[FitzTheRuke]

they never published an official timeline, but I cannot imagine any internal timeline in which they are not late already… I assume they wanted this to be out for the 50th anniversary and right now it looks like they barely make it into open beta in time

Yeah, I expect you're rate. Late already. But how late will it get? And will it work? And will it be successful? I look forward to finding out, but with some trepidation.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Yes the advantage offered by the 17th level Ranger ability absolutely 100% is factually redundant with Vex - the only applicable mastery on light, dex based weapons that can be used more than once a turn.

That is what I stated and what I replied to. You are wrong.

Okay, so at level 17 the ranger takes a long rest, and changes to using a different mastery. Or they never use Hunter's Mark like you claim and they keep Vex. Either way this is only an issue if you insist that both of your weapons must have a different mastery when dual-wielding, and that you absolutely do not want to have a mastery with one weapon, then another different mastery for when you are going for range. Which is what I have done so far for every single character I've built.

I have played them where it happened to and as I pointed out I have seen that sewt up work. To reiterate what I said - it does not work MOST OF THE TIME.

I do not believe it has worked most of the time on Rangers you have seen try this.

You can believe falsehoods all you like.

But on a Ranger at high level you almost always do have a bonus action that can have an immediate impact.

In this corner case sure - where you don't have such a bonus action available, where you have an unspent use of Hunter's Mark without using a spell slot, when the spell you just cast is not concentration ..... it can be a good move despite the fact it probably won't work, and in some cases it will work .,. just not most of them.

You are presenting this as a normal, viable tactic for a high level Ranger who is casting a spell with thier action when it is not.

This is the equivalent of saying my Ranger can dodge instead of attacking or casting a spell.... I absolutely can and in some corner cases that is a viable, helpful decision. It is not a normal viable choice and Hunter's Mark is not a normal, viable choice as a bonus action when you are casting another spell as an action.

You really have a bizarrely narrow focus on a Ranger who is only high level. What if my Ranger is not high level, say level 10, and I'm a Longbow ranger, and I use my action to cast a spell like Conjure Barrage... what is the Bonus action I could use that turn? I can't cast any spell that would use a spell slot. I have no bonus action attacks. If I'm a hunter, gloomstalker or fey wanderer I don't have any subclass features with a bonus action.

So... yeah. I'm presenting this as a situation that is likely to occur, where I open with a big AOE spell that the ranger has on their list, and since they aren't attacking (and therefore can't dual-wield) or aren't a dual-wielder (and therefore likely don't have a bonus action attack) they could set up Hunter's Mark.

And frankly, I don't see this even changing at level 17 when they instead cast Conjure Volley, but are still a a bow-wielding ranger.

Yes it does. A Hand crossbow has both the light and vex properties. It works the same as any other light weapons. It works for two-weapon-fighting and works with the Crossbow expert feat and other light weapons you want to wield.

I may not understand what you mean, but what you are "saying" as in writing on the thread is incorrect.

Yes, and other light weapons with the Vex property don't work with Crossbow Expert. You continually are misunderstanding what I am saying, and all you are doing is repeating back to me my own words.

That is not what I said. To reiterate what I said regarding sticks (not specifically pointy sticks either):

"[It is a bad] for any Rangers that don't want to hit it with a stick"

This is a factually true statement. Hunter's Mark is a terrible, terrible spell to cast if you are not going to attack and take advantage of the damage boost.

So if you are attacking with weapons, like most rangers do, then it is actually a pretty decent spell.

Ok just have one like at the end of my last post.

This lets a player who wants to use HM continue to use HM and it lets a player who doesn't use any other spell with those 4 abilities .... and it takes up nothe same space as the current abilities.

Which highlights that your only real issue with it is Hunter's Mark. Because if you could swap it to Entangle, then you would be perfectly happy with the design.

Not in the post I qouted you didn't what you said was: "I also notice that of the very few spells you mentioned that deal damage ..."

30% is more than "very few"

No it isn't. It is 3 out of 10.

Each spell has different problems, advantages, uses and mechanics but you would choose the spell that matched what you desired thematically and/or mechanically.

Another issue with Hunter's Mark is the nearly complete lack of thematic support with it. Aside from being weak it is also very bland.

The bad design is tying the class abilities to one spell which the player has no say on. The problem is not tying a specific character to Hunter's Mark. Offering players the choice of spells to choose on their character would be a much better class design mechanic ... as is done with the Wizard's spell mastery.

Except most of those spells would still have concentration. Most of them are also an action, meaning that you won't be able to attack the same turn, if losing a single bonus action attack would be devastating to Hunter's Mark, how is losing all three to four attacks not even more detrimental? I could go back and find all your complaints about why Hunter's Mark is bad compared to casting something like Summon Fey, and they all apply to all these other 1st level spells.

Whether I like it or not is completely irrelevant to this discussion, it is a bad class design. Making it another spell with no choices might be a little more suited to my tastes than HM, but it would still be a bad class design.

To make it a good class design you would need to offer a choice of spells, or make it generic so I could choose any spell to use those abilities with. I offered an example of the latter to alleviate your concerns on length.

So if you could avoid Hunter's Mark then it taking concentration and an action would no longer be part of the bad design? Losing a single Bonus action attack is worse design than losing three attacks including the action and bonus action?

 

[Azzy]

Yeah, I expect you're rate. Late already. But how late will it get? And will it work? And will it be successful? I look forward to finding out, but with some trepidation.

I think it will be successful. It probably won't be the best thing since VTTs, but it's got the home team advantage.

 

[ECMO3]

Okay, so at level 17 the ranger takes a long rest, and changes to using a different mastery.

It does not matter what masteries they know, the only masteries that work with light dex weapons are Vex and Nick. Here are all the light weapons that use dexterity:

Dagger (Nick)
Scimitar (Nick)
Shortsword (Vex)
Hand Crossbow (vex)

Those are the only weapons they can use with the light property and dexterity.

All your damage calculations above include extra attacks from a light 1d6 weapon .... well then you are using these weapons and you are not getting a mastery on 3 of your 4 attacks with it (or 2 of 3 attacks on rounds you cast or move HM).

Or they never use Hunter's Mark like you claim and they keep Vex.

In which case they are not getting the advantage from hunters mark.

Either way this is only an issue if you insist that both of your weapons must have a different mastery when dual-wielding,

There are only 2 masteries to choose from for dual wielding dex weapons. One of them only does something on 1 attack a round, the other is redundant with the 17th level feature.

Yes you can give up Vex and get something else and then 3 of your 4 attacks are getting nothing from weapon mastery .... or you can keep Vex and 3 of your 4 attacks are getting nothing from weapon mastery when concentrating on Hunter's Mark.

and that you absolutely do not want to have a mastery with one weapon, then another different mastery for when you are going for range.

If you are using two weapon fighting and dual wielding Hand Crossbow is the only option for long range and that uses Vex.

Moreover if you are using anything else for ranged attacks then the damage is way different than what you posted earlier because you are only doing 2 attacks a round.

You can believe falsehoods all you like.

It is not a falsehood. The problems with Hunter's Mark bonus action switching are well documented.

You really have a bizarrely narrow focus on a Ranger who is only high level.

3 of the 4 abilities that make it a bad class design are at high level. It is an ok class design at low level (the potential concern on expertise notwithstanding).

What if my Ranger is not high level, say level 10, and I'm a Longbow ranger, and I use my action to cast a spell like Conjure Barrage... what is the Bonus action I could use that turn?

It depends on your subclass, feats, species abilities and spells.

If I am a Drakewarden or a Beastmaster I can have my pet attack. If I am a Swarmkeeper I can use writhing tide.

The two Rangers I discussed previously were Fey Wnderers. They have no Ranger bonus actions, but using the 2024 rules here are the real world examples for those characters (note not including Nature's Viel since that is now at a higher level):

Lena: Disengage, Hide, Misty Step, Hex

Chromescale: Misty Step

I can't cast any spell that would use a spell slot. I have no bonus action attacks. If I'm a hunter, gloomstalker or fey wanderer I don't have any subclass features with a bonus action.

The two Rangers I discussed previously were Fey Wnderers. They have no Ranger bonus actions, but using the 2024 rules here are the real world examples for those characters (note not including Nature's Veil since that is now at a higher level):

Lena: Disengage, Hide, Misty Step, Hex

Chromescale: Misty Step

So... yeah. I'm presenting this as a situation that is likely to occur, where I open with a big AOE spell that the ranger has on their list, and since they aren't attacking (and therefore can't dual-wield) or aren't a dual-wielder (and therefore likely don't have a bonus action attack) they could set up Hunter's Mark.

Like I said, I have done it before (although not while using another spell). It is not going to be successful often and it will use up one of those 2 slot-free castings.

I did not say you can't do it or won;t ever do it. I said it is unlikely to be beneficial.

If you really have nothing else to use your bonus action on that turn though it might make sense.

Yes, and other light weapons with the Vex property don't work with Crossbow Expert. You continually are misunderstanding what I am saying, and all you are doing is repeating back to me my own words.

Yes they do. Short Sword and Hand Crossbow work fine with crossbow expert. So does every other light weapon. Do you need me to list out all the light weapons for you to illustrate this?

I may not understand what you mean, but I understand what you are writing and it is wrong.

So if you are attacking with weapons, like most rangers do, then it is actually a pretty decent spell.

No it is a weak spell, even when you are attacking with weapons. I was just correcting your claim about what I said.

Which highlights that your only real issue with it is Hunter's Mark. Because if you could swap it to Entangle, then you would be perfectly happy with the design.

No it would need to be more than just entangle to be a good design. Having 4 abilities that keyed on entangle would be as bad as having 4 abilities that key off of HM.

If we are limiting it to one spell and limiting use to Ranger spells, Cure Wounds is the only one I think they could use and not have it be a bad class design. There are a few other spells on other lists that would be good thematically as well.

No it isn't. It is 3 out of 10.

3 out of 10 is 30%.

Except most of those spells would still have concentration. Most of them are also an action, meaning that you won't be able to attack the same turn, if losing a single bonus action attack would be devastating to Hunter's Mark, how is losing all three to four attacks not even more detrimental? I could go back and find all your complaints about why Hunter's Mark is bad compared to casting something like Summon Fey, and they all apply to all these other 1st level spells.

If you were forced to using one of those spells I mentioned it would be an equally bad class design and that would be true whether I liked that particular spell or not.

Me disliking HM is not what makes it a bad design. Having 4 separate class abilities centered around a single spell is what makes it a bad design. HM just happens to be that spell and also happens to be a weak spell.

So if you could avoid Hunter's Mark then it taking concentration and an action would no longer be part of the bad design? Losing a single Bonus action attack is worse design than losing three attacks including the action and bonus action?

Making it non-concentration would be better, and more palatable at high level, as would be true for any of the concentration spells I mentioned, but you really should have a choice of spells to use.

Although I do not agree with everything he says, this screenshot and many of Kobold's comments near the end of his video kind of sum it up. His position is they should have gotten Find Familiar with all these buffs instead. IMO that would be better than HM because of the thematics, but would still not be good IMO: