Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D 6th edition - What do you want to see?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="doctorbadwolf" data-source="post: 7792735" data-attributes="member: 6704184"><p>Heck, we aren't new at all, and have years of experience with other systems for crafting and invention, but the total lack of any guidance whatsoever is....frustrating for people who like a nicely balanced system. We get it done, by having conversations to figure out the nearest equivalent spells or existing magic items, vaguely average out the power level, then use the damage by level and magic item rarity by spell level charts in the DMG to figure out an equivelent rarity, and see if the cost and time for that makes sense to us for what I'm trying to create. It's...very imperfect.</p><p></p><p>[spoiler="crafting rant but also genuinely do you have advice lol"] Like...what is the power level of a magic rapier that has 7 charges, with which it can cast Absorb Elements, Dispel Magic, and Counterspel, but only on effects which either target or originate within 5ft of the user? Is it Rare? Very Rare? We can look up staves with similar spell levels, but they aren't also a finesse weapon.</p><p>How much does adding that it can be used as a spellcasting focus change the equation, if at all?</p><p></p><p>What if we gave it a random chance to regain charges when the user casts Absorb Elements, if they choose not to use the extra damage from that spell? Do we balance that like it has more charges?</p><p></p><p>What if instead, it eventually gains the ability to disrupt summoning and mind control magic, by perhaps causing damage to the caster of such magic when you damage a creature summoned or controlled by them, and forcing a concentration save to maintain the effect even if it normally isn't a concentration effect? Do we use Banishing Smite as a basis for that?</p><p></p><p>What if it instead gains a feature that boosts the Mage Slayer feat, making your reaction attacks as a result of spellcasting resolve before the spell resolves, thus allowing it to work against teleportation spells? The hell can that be compared to?</p><p></p><p>And that doesn't even get into stuff like a grappling gun attachment to a hand crossbow, or a arm bracer with a grappling retractor device built in that you can hook an arrow with webbing based cord packed into it onto, thus gaining a grapple shot device with the range of a longbow. Is it like a teleportation spell? Is it like a limited version of Fly? Is it like a more powerful Jump? What if it can pull flying creatures down if they fail a contested Strength check against the user?</p><p></p><p>What about a suit that resembles the flying suit of the kid from How To Train Your Dragon? Is that like a broom of flying?</p><p></p><p>What about improved designs for ship sails, weapons, etc? The damn ship related book didn't even have prices for the ship upgrades! How am I supposed to use that!?</p><p></p><p>Ugh! And don't get me started on Alchemy! At least I have the extensive list of Alchemical formulas from 4e to draw upon, but my wife's master alchemist needs some kind of system she can dig into to do more interesting things than acid and alchemist's fire without breaking the game! And my alchemist in a different game has like...2 alchemical inventions so far, because I don't want to push the DM. And those are literally just improved acid and alchemist's fire so that they can be loaded into an arrow with no loss of damage from the smaller amount of fluid.</p><p>[/spoiler]</p><p></p><p></p><p>I'd be fine with that. I actually think the Ranger would make sense as a Warlock style caster, with an option to trade spellcasting alltogether for something like manuevers, and woodslore type abilities.</p><p>As long as I don't have to choose between spellcasting and an animal companion, which would be entirely unacceptable, and which also just isn't ever going to happen outside of variant rules options published after a phb in order to "fix without errata" a screw up in balancing options.</p><p></p><p>[spoiler]Because they may claim they got the numbers right on the PHB beast, but they absolutely did not. A creature with 24 HP at level 8 is less powerful than a creature with 12 hp at level 3. The PHB beast loses power as you level. That isn't a balanced option. Monster damage output scales relative to PC HP. That means that a built in pet that can't be resummoned between fights has to scale it's HP by the same math.</p><p></p><p>People that claim that this calls for a pet that is bascially a full PC are being disingenuous. A wolf that can't even attack without using up the PC's actions, and has HP comperable to a rogue with none of the defensive or offensive class features, isn't anything like a PC.</p><p></p><p>Even the Revised Ranger Beast, which works, isn't anything like a full PC. It's a damage boost in the form of an extra attack most rounds, and an extra rogue's worth of HP and low AC on a moving target on your team. And that's all it is, without putting resources that you'd normally put into yourself into the pet, like magic armor. </p><p></p><p>Its the same perception issue that Hexblades have. They aren't more powerful than other warlocks, but they can seem that way on paper, because they seem to get "more" than other patrons. But what they actually get is the what they need to be as effective as other patrons while being in melee instead of the warlock's normal ranged focus. That's it. And if you make a ranged hexblade, much of the extra stuff doesn't even come into play. And yet, people claim they're OP or broken or "ruinously powerful" left and right.</p><p></p><p>But yeah, give me a ranger that keeps subclasses where they are, folds some later features into earlier levels and beefs up Natural Explorer and Favored Enemy, and/or uses something like invocations to let me get those things while someone else grabs something different, and I'm fine with it. As it is, the Ranger literally just needs some light tweaking here and there. [/spoiler]</p><p></p><p>Aside: I'd actually love a FE feature that lets you study an enemy and hyperfocus on them, spending a spell slot to gain a non-concentration bonus to attack and damage against them, using d4s or d6s since it's multiple attacks, but balanced against the Paladin's Smite, and keeping in mind that the ranger can stack Hunter's Mark or other damage boost spells on top of it. You'd be able to activate this ability without a spell slot 1/day, or without an action, or something, against your favored enemy? For terrain, I'd love to be able to study an area, and become preternaturally surefooted and impossible to evade while in that area, gaining this feature automatically in my favored terrain.</p><p></p><p></p><p>This is a misrepresentation of their points. They never said that it should exist because it was in a previous edition. They used a previous edition's take on skills as an example of what they feel the game needs, directly contrasting it with what they see as effectively a lack of literally any system for skills.</p><p>The responding claim, that they were claiming that things from old editions shouldn't be removed, was a blatant strawman argument.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="doctorbadwolf, post: 7792735, member: 6704184"] Heck, we aren't new at all, and have years of experience with other systems for crafting and invention, but the total lack of any guidance whatsoever is....frustrating for people who like a nicely balanced system. We get it done, by having conversations to figure out the nearest equivalent spells or existing magic items, vaguely average out the power level, then use the damage by level and magic item rarity by spell level charts in the DMG to figure out an equivelent rarity, and see if the cost and time for that makes sense to us for what I'm trying to create. It's...very imperfect. [spoiler="crafting rant but also genuinely do you have advice lol"] Like...what is the power level of a magic rapier that has 7 charges, with which it can cast Absorb Elements, Dispel Magic, and Counterspel, but only on effects which either target or originate within 5ft of the user? Is it Rare? Very Rare? We can look up staves with similar spell levels, but they aren't also a finesse weapon. How much does adding that it can be used as a spellcasting focus change the equation, if at all? What if we gave it a random chance to regain charges when the user casts Absorb Elements, if they choose not to use the extra damage from that spell? Do we balance that like it has more charges? What if instead, it eventually gains the ability to disrupt summoning and mind control magic, by perhaps causing damage to the caster of such magic when you damage a creature summoned or controlled by them, and forcing a concentration save to maintain the effect even if it normally isn't a concentration effect? Do we use Banishing Smite as a basis for that? What if it instead gains a feature that boosts the Mage Slayer feat, making your reaction attacks as a result of spellcasting resolve before the spell resolves, thus allowing it to work against teleportation spells? The hell can that be compared to? And that doesn't even get into stuff like a grappling gun attachment to a hand crossbow, or a arm bracer with a grappling retractor device built in that you can hook an arrow with webbing based cord packed into it onto, thus gaining a grapple shot device with the range of a longbow. Is it like a teleportation spell? Is it like a limited version of Fly? Is it like a more powerful Jump? What if it can pull flying creatures down if they fail a contested Strength check against the user? What about a suit that resembles the flying suit of the kid from How To Train Your Dragon? Is that like a broom of flying? What about improved designs for ship sails, weapons, etc? The damn ship related book didn't even have prices for the ship upgrades! How am I supposed to use that!? Ugh! And don't get me started on Alchemy! At least I have the extensive list of Alchemical formulas from 4e to draw upon, but my wife's master alchemist needs some kind of system she can dig into to do more interesting things than acid and alchemist's fire without breaking the game! And my alchemist in a different game has like...2 alchemical inventions so far, because I don't want to push the DM. And those are literally just improved acid and alchemist's fire so that they can be loaded into an arrow with no loss of damage from the smaller amount of fluid. [/spoiler] I'd be fine with that. I actually think the Ranger would make sense as a Warlock style caster, with an option to trade spellcasting alltogether for something like manuevers, and woodslore type abilities. As long as I don't have to choose between spellcasting and an animal companion, which would be entirely unacceptable, and which also just isn't ever going to happen outside of variant rules options published after a phb in order to "fix without errata" a screw up in balancing options. [spoiler]Because they may claim they got the numbers right on the PHB beast, but they absolutely did not. A creature with 24 HP at level 8 is less powerful than a creature with 12 hp at level 3. The PHB beast loses power as you level. That isn't a balanced option. Monster damage output scales relative to PC HP. That means that a built in pet that can't be resummoned between fights has to scale it's HP by the same math. People that claim that this calls for a pet that is bascially a full PC are being disingenuous. A wolf that can't even attack without using up the PC's actions, and has HP comperable to a rogue with none of the defensive or offensive class features, isn't anything like a PC. Even the Revised Ranger Beast, which works, isn't anything like a full PC. It's a damage boost in the form of an extra attack most rounds, and an extra rogue's worth of HP and low AC on a moving target on your team. And that's all it is, without putting resources that you'd normally put into yourself into the pet, like magic armor. Its the same perception issue that Hexblades have. They aren't more powerful than other warlocks, but they can seem that way on paper, because they seem to get "more" than other patrons. But what they actually get is the what they need to be as effective as other patrons while being in melee instead of the warlock's normal ranged focus. That's it. And if you make a ranged hexblade, much of the extra stuff doesn't even come into play. And yet, people claim they're OP or broken or "ruinously powerful" left and right. But yeah, give me a ranger that keeps subclasses where they are, folds some later features into earlier levels and beefs up Natural Explorer and Favored Enemy, and/or uses something like invocations to let me get those things while someone else grabs something different, and I'm fine with it. As it is, the Ranger literally just needs some light tweaking here and there. [/spoiler] Aside: I'd actually love a FE feature that lets you study an enemy and hyperfocus on them, spending a spell slot to gain a non-concentration bonus to attack and damage against them, using d4s or d6s since it's multiple attacks, but balanced against the Paladin's Smite, and keeping in mind that the ranger can stack Hunter's Mark or other damage boost spells on top of it. You'd be able to activate this ability without a spell slot 1/day, or without an action, or something, against your favored enemy? For terrain, I'd love to be able to study an area, and become preternaturally surefooted and impossible to evade while in that area, gaining this feature automatically in my favored terrain. This is a misrepresentation of their points. They never said that it should exist because it was in a previous edition. They used a previous edition's take on skills as an example of what they feel the game needs, directly contrasting it with what they see as effectively a lack of literally any system for skills. The responding claim, that they were claiming that things from old editions shouldn't be removed, was a blatant strawman argument. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D 6th edition - What do you want to see?
Top