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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Devilbass" data-source="post: 7517494" data-attributes="member: 6686729">Hey folks,I'm looking for a bit of feedback on this homebrewed class.<a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/1mVA-jVgHbvzJDuopF0pUM7o6P3pvF4eB/view?usp=sharing" target="_blank">https://drive.google.com/file/d/1mVA-jVgHbvzJDuopF0pUM7o6P3pvF4eB/view?usp=sharing</a>  The main reason I went through with putting this together is because I love the idea of playing martial warrior types, but wish they had access to the kind of round to round decision points a spellcaster has.  I guess I just wanted a bit more variety in my martial play experience.  But also, I LOVE tinkering with the game and doing homebrew.  To me, that's half the fun of the hobby, so building a class is fun on its own, regardless of whether or not it sees any kind of use (though I am playtesting this in Dragon Heist).I am anticipating a few questions, so I'll try to address them here.  Also, the name Duelist is not necessarily permanent, it's kind of a placeholder.Why not play a Battlemaster?I love what they did with the battlemaster, and I think it's good.  That being said, I'm greedy, and I want MORE of what the battlemaster offers.  I want to do maneuvers more often, and I want other tactical choices built into my class.Why not play a caster and re-fluff spells into martial abilities?This is a completely viable approach, and for some is satisfying.  For me (and some others), it simply is not satisfying, especially when the game has already introduced another subsystem (combat superiority) to model interesting martial abilities.**edit**This class isn't thematically unique enough to be anything other than a subclass.I have further thoughts on this a few posts down, but in short, but as you should be able to tell from the above two points, I am motivated by mechanics as much as theme.  You may not think that's a valid motivation, and that's fine.  I do.That being said, I have one area in particular that I'd like to discuss for any interested regarding the new Stances feature I made for this class (which took some inspiration from the Mystic's Psychic Focus abilities).My thoughts are that there needs to be some action economy cost, or opportunity cost given their otherwise free/at-will nature (which is important to keep IMO).  The bonus action though, is only really a cost for dual-wielders, and essentially not an inconvenience at all for others.  In discussion with a friend I suggested maybe entering a stance uses half of your movement, thus being a cost for everyone.  He pointed out (I believe rightly) that there are no non-movement effects that reduce your movement, and so this solution would be incongruous with existing designs.  My question is: does that matter?  Is the cost of a bonus action more appropriate?  Would halving movement be an elegant-enough solution?Anyways, I don't want to ramble here, as there's already plenty of  reading to be done in the class itself.  But I'd also like to know general impressions; is the class somehow broken and I somehow missed it? Are there particular abilities that are just too good, too  awkward, or dangerously subpar?Hope this is enjoyed by some.*NOTE* The only subclass atm is in its first incarnation, and I'm not sure how I feel about its direction.</blockquote>

Verification