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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dausuul" data-source="post: 8406616" data-attributes="member: 58197">Housekeeping, I'd expect. Beyond races and classes, there are a lot of areas that could do with a balance tweak--feats being a prime example, and the Monster Manual's CR values are all over the place.Then there are bonus actions. Bonus actions cause issues in a number of places: The bonus action spellcasting rules that nobody can keep straight*, two-weapon fighting clashing with bonus-action class features, and "triggered" BAs like the Shield Master push attack, which cause confusion around timing (can you use the push before your regular attack? after your first attack but before the second? only after all attacks?). I don't think they will get rid of BAs altogether, but there is certainly room to scale back their use and clarify those that remain.They also seem to be angling to get rid of short rests, with recent books substituting "proficiency bonus times per long rest" for what would once have been a short-rest ability. Myself, I'd rather see them resurrect the 4E-style short rest, but that's probably not in the cards, and the current system can create balance headaches if the DM doesn't take care to carve out space for short rests. I would never bring a warlock or a monk PC to a new gaming table; I'd wait to see how the DM ran things first.All this would add up to D&D 5.5. It would be mostly backwards compatible, but not a hundred percent; it would polish and refine the 5E engine without making fundamental changes. Mainly, it would be a chance for the designers to apply the lessons of 7 years watching 5E play out in the wild.*I expect this post to get at least one reply from somebody telling me the bonus action spellcasting rules are dead simple, who will then go on to explain how they work, and get it wrong.</blockquote>

Verification