Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 7141804" data-attributes="member: 12731">That is true - but coming up with entirely new feats is really Wizards' job.(And their effort so far was really poor - we don't want to be tied down to specific weapons, we want support for our chosen "mode" or style of fighting, just as you enumerate)Thanks. Can't take credit for Running though. That was suggested to me.Running is not a feat - it is a general rules change. Everybody gets to dash plus bonus dash, for "free"!I have used a much more complicated rule to allow faster running. This is much simpler.So when I talk of using your action, I specifically mean that unless you're a Rogue etc, you need to use your action to Dash in order to Charge (since using your action to Dash is your only way to use your bonus action to Dash, which is what triggering Charge).But the end result is that everybody can take the Charger feat, and everybody can use it, thanks to the new Running rule.Just as with the old feat, you don't automatically get to Attack + Charge (or Charge + Attack) but at least now it's possible (if you gain a bonus Dash somehow, like Rogues do).Duelist exists already as a fighting style name. I really wanted to stick to either of the existing two feat names. I hope Defensive Duelist isn't THAT bad and that my players can get used to it - "oh yeah, whenever I play a dual wielder, Defensive Duelist is the feat for me".As for the bullet point - you're probably right. I think I wrote it at a time when the phrase wasn't dependent on the overall condition (to wield a melee weapon in one hand and no shield).Me too. Not sure what to do about it. At least it's easier to buff things than to nerf them. My biggest concern is when you lot tell me something is too good.Feel free to explain mandatory katanas if you like <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />I'm sure plenty of people will dislike the new Archery Style. The alternative is to remove it entirely, however. So let's not discuss it in terms of it being too weak. Let's discuss it in terms of how needlessly good it was before, and how ranged fighting is so damn good in 5E it certainly didn't need a super-generous general +2 to everything...!That said - I'm open to new takes on Archery (and Protection) that makes them get taken. I just haven't spend much brain power on making sure Archers get stuff to take, since I have spent it on making sure Archers don't get the best stuff to take... <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />+2 to actual disadvantage... I guess I can do it. Minmaxers won't think of it as an improvement, though. Making attacks at actual disadvantage is something you never do.I wanted Sharpshooter's benefits to still be linked to the name and theme. Out of all the variants this was the best, or least bad, in terms of concept as well as implementation. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />The main benefit compared to old Sharpshooter's "ignore long range" is that short range remains better than long range. With the old feat, there was no reason to stick with short range, which made it outright broken for weapons like the hand crossbow - that effectively got its range increased from 30 to 120 ft. It was the unholy trifecta of not good enough rules; either that, or MMearls is a secret hand crossbow admirer, since SS+CE made it the best supreme weapon of all.Sure long range goes from disadvantage to neutral, but the rules for disadvantage ensures you can never benefit from actual advantage there. I imagine minmaxers will stay at short range. Which I've doubled by the way, so there's that. Thanks!</blockquote>

Verification