D&D Next Q&A 9 August

[GX.Sigma]

But lots of classes have spells. Some classes use spells in a slightly different way, but lots of them use the same spells. Why should combat maneuvers be any different?

 

[Sammael]

But lots of classes have spells. Some classes use spells in a slightly different way, but lots of them use the same spells. Why should combat maneuvers be any different?

FWIW, I don't like spell overlap and have eliminated it completely from my Fatebinder system. There is no spell sharing. Classes may have spells that do similar things, but there are always significant differences that reflect the nature of each class.

 

[Falling Icicle]

I'm concerned about the power inflation that this mechanic might bring. They've said that fighters will be getting extra attacks as they go up in level, and now they're getting combat superiority dice on top of that? This means fighters will be able to put out ridiculous amounts of damage. Hopefully, this mechanic replaces the extra attacks fighters were going to get rather than adding on top of it. Even then, I'm still a bit concerned.

 

[Argyle King]

I like the sounds of the idea. It reminds me a little bit of Iron Heroes.


However, I'm starting to see phrasing such as 'greater numeric bonuses' tossed around more and more. How does that mesh with the idea of bounded accuracy and making the system more horizontal and broad rather than vertical and number-stacking?

 

[Steely_Dan]

But a level 5 rogue in 5e will have +5d6 sneak attack

Is that confirmed (i've only seen up to 3rd level characters so far)?

So, for negating oncoming damage, do you have to save dice?

 

[Jack99]

Is that confirmed (i've only seen up to 3rd level characters so far)?

So, for negating oncoming damage, do you have to save dice?

At some point, it was scaling like that yes. The CS system leads me to believe rogues will be able to trade SA dice for "effects". Like bleed damage or movement impairing, just like in 3.x and 4e. Never been a fan of it so far, but might work if its not an all or nothing thing.

 

[Steely_Dan]

At some point, it was scaling like that yes.

I find it best not to assume (people get fired that way); are we talking about a 13th level Rogue doing 13d6 SA damage?

 

[tlantl]

I find it best not to assume (people get fired that way); are we talking about a 13th level Rogue doing 13d6 SA damage?

Since the developers have reduced damage and hit points in the next round of play tests, I would think that they also had to reduce the number of dice the rogue gains each level for their sneak attacks.

What it looks like is the question.

I suppose that within the next couple of weeks we'll find out. I also suppose that things will change several times before everything written in stone.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I'm concerned about the power inflation that this mechanic might bring. They've said that fighters will be getting extra attacks as they go up in level, and now they're getting combat superiority dice on top of that? This means fighters will be able to put out ridiculous amounts of damage. Hopefully, this mechanic replaces the extra attacks fighters were going to get rather than adding on top of it. Even then, I'm still a bit concerned.

It could well be that you need to use cs dice for your secondary attacks, or that secondary attacks are dailies (i.e. fighter surges)

I am really looking forward to the next playtest. Especially the lowered hp wake my interest, as i have the feeling, those are a bit too high right now.

What I like about the playtest, is that some iconic abilities are gained during the first 3 levels. So if you want a complete character like a rogue with nightvision (finally) you just start at 3rd level.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

While I agree there's already some caster overlap wrt spells, I definitely would prefer--as others have stated--that each class be as mechanically distinct as possible. This was, in fact, one of my biggest issues with 4.0. The mechanical homogenization.

It's great to be able to switch from a rogue character to a wizard, and have them feel completely different. 3.5's problem was that not all of the mechanical systems were equally compelling. Building/playing a cleric was amazing. You had domain spells and powers to consider, whether or not to spend resources on martial prowess (and if so what kind of focus), and of course high level spells.

Meanwhile the poor fighter (and to a lesser extent the paladin and ranger) while different...was simplistic, fairly boring, and in some cases outright ineffective.

This new system pleases me, in that on a conceptual level it adds a lot of distinctive complexity to the fighter class.

It remains to be seen whether the paladin and/or ranger will be core classes or kits (as far as I know), but if they are core classes, it's my hope that they are given equally exciting toys.