D&D 5E December Package is here, it was about time!!

[Stalker0]

I don't consider AoE damage in damage totals for the reason that it's situational, and that always there's going to be one target that's the concern.

But that is what spell choice is all about. I can't use fireball against a single guy and then say its weak. I should be using single target spells. As a wizard I have the ability to use the right spell for the job, so if I'm not doing that...its not a problem with the spell.

 

[Grydan]

Another update to the equipment list, and the rapier still serves no purpose beyond flavour. It does the exact same damage and damage type as a short sword, costs more, and has fewer keywords/properties.

The only advantage it has over the short sword is that it weighs 1 pound less, which only has any impact if you're strictly following encumbrance rules (and who does?) and have a tendency to carry close to your maximum.

There's also the oddity that despite the rapier being the lighter of the two weapons, the short sword is considered light and the rapier is not. Perhaps the term they want is off-hand, rather than light.

Edit: My mistake, I misread the entry. My error has been pointed out to me, I will now go sit in the penalty box and feel shame.

(Though I still think it's silly that the heavier weapon is light, and the lighter one is not.)

 

[Ultimatecalibur]

Another update to the equipment list, and the rapier still serves no purpose beyond flavour. It does the exact same damage and damage type as a short sword, costs more, and has fewer keywords/properties.

The only advantage it has over the short sword is that it weighs 1 pound less, which only has any impact if you're strictly following encumbrance rules (and who does?) and have a tendency to carry close to your maximum.

There's also the oddity that despite the rapier being the lighter of the two weapons, the short sword is considered light and the rapier is not. Perhaps the term they want is off-hand, rather than light.

The rapier is 1d8/finesse and the short sword is 1d6/finesse/light in my packet.

 

[Walker N. Waistz]

I think that WoTC should have spent longer on writing an Alpha Play-test. Then spent longer letting us play with it and examining our feedback. Then responding with a Beta test. Then, again spending longer investigating opinions and findings. Then....go away and make the final game.

The drip fed test we are getting, written ahead of feedback inspection is, in my cynical grumpy opinion...a little bit muddled and pointless and as I have suggested...perhaps more about keeping us invested in the brand while they beaver away without product after the abandonment of 4th Edition.

I am still weirded out by your desire to sort of drop this opinion in here like a grenade, than rush out of the thread without defending it. If you were willing to discuss it, my main question would still be: What should the D&D Next game designers do between surveys? What should they be working on while collecting their checks? Or should Wizards hire freelancers to work in long spurts whenever a survey comes in?

 

[Kobold Avenger]

But that is what spell choice is all about. I can't use fireball against a single guy and then say its weak. I should be using single target spells. As a wizard I have the ability to use the right spell for the job, so if I'm not doing that...its not a problem with the spell.

But just because a Fireball could potentially hit 50 creatures all standing in it's own 5' square, doesn't mean that the damage should be considered x50 for any sort thing where average damages are being compared, as that's a very rare situation which will probably never happen in any game. By my estimation 1.5 is about as good of a multiplier as any to use in calculations where more than 1 target is affected, in comparing which average damage does more.

 

[Stalker0]

But just because a Fireball could potentially hit 50 creatures all standing in it's own 5' square, doesn't mean that the damage should be considered x50 for any sort thing where average damages are being compared, as that's a very rare situation which will probably never happen in any game. By my estimation 1.5 is about as good of a multiplier as any to use in calculations where more than 1 target is affected, in comparing which average damage does more.

Completely agree that a x50 modifier would be unreasonable, that situation just doesn't come up that often.

But I would still say x1.5 is too low. I think its reasonable to say that most players won't use fireball unless they can hit at least 2 creatures. Beyond that, its decently common to hit 3. I would say more than 3 and your starting to push into more specialty situations.

So my thought would be a x2.2 modifier or so, but no less than x2.

 

[Hussar]

...Why?

That's not at all right in my experience.

-O

I would say that in any combat encounter, there will always be one opponent. That's unavoidable. However, there doesn't need to be more than one. 3e, for example, featured a lot of module adventures with pretty small numbers (1-3) of opponents. It's not all that frequent that you get to break out the AOE spell and hit lots of baddies.

But, it's pretty much guaranteed that every single round of combat, the fighter will attack one target.

So, sure, you've got that fireball that does lots of damage, total, but, only if there are a lot of targets. I think Kobold Avenger's point is that the fighter is not dependent on the DM to create situations where he's going to do damage in every round.

 

[ForeverSlayer]

The more that comes out the less excited I'm getting.

Just not feeling it.