Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Flèche: Charge Attack For Light Fighters
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="doctorbadwolf" data-source="post: 8980332" data-attributes="member: 6704184"><p>These abilities have always been fairly limited in uses, </p><p></p><p>Not really. </p><p></p><p>This doesn’t follow even if we accept the claim above it as a premise. Who says that a feat should be compared to one ability of three in a level two feature, that most folks agree could use a boost anyway?</p><p></p><p>It’s literally limited to 1-2 times per day. </p><p>It’s also of no use to heavy fighters, except finesse sword and boarders. </p><p></p><p>Check my last revision. </p><p></p><p>I get the idea, but it doesn’t do the point of the feat. It is locked to a type of fighting, and is no more restrictive than the Crusher feat. </p><p>It also doesn’t include defensive weapons, which as described in the OP are a new weapon property. I’m more likely to make shields somehow no count for light fighting than tie the feat to shields. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Did you take into account the Charge Attack special action, detailed toward the end of the OP?</p><p>I agree the wording needs work, but I’m 3 drafts in, so I’m fine with that for the moment. </p><p></p><p>Well, the cost of a resource that the feat gives you two of per day. It says “spend a maneuver die to attack as part of the same reaction”. </p><p></p><p>Most of the criticism above is no longer relevant to the most recent draft, though, so I’ll move on other to say that the benefits of disadv on attacks against you are very familiar to me, and I disagree with the conclusion that it’s a huge deal. It’s a solid bonus. That’s it. Shield is stronger, most of the time. </p><p></p><p>Nah. Even the first draft, which we have moved on from, wasn’t better than GWM with GW Fighting Style, heavy armor, and a greatsword. It just allows a light weapons and armor fighter actually stand up next to a GW fighter with access to feats. </p><p></p><p>Seriously, the fact that the riposte cost a die, that you have two of, is in the original post. In the text of the riposte. </p><p></p><p>And it’s all at-will, and you can take heavy armor master. </p><p></p><p>No, you’re doing the extra damage once, maybe twice, unless you’ve spent more character build resources to get manuvers and dice. Your analysis also ignores the possibility of other things to use a reaction on, and the bolded part confuses me. Do you mean attack back on your next turn plus the reaction (1-2 a day) attack? It doesn’t parse that way, but context suggests no other reasonable conclusion I can see. </p><p></p><p>Did you forget the other bullet point in GWM, that makes it great against little guys that you almost never just fight one of? You also don’t seem to be calculating the average damage effect of rerolling one and twos, and since both are throwing the same chance to hit and 2 dice of damage, the fighter is at most behind by 3 points DPR, which is trivial. </p><p></p><p>Given that you seem to think the riposte is at-will, and are missing that the GWM build will be making an extra bonus action attack with every crit, etc, let’s don’t. </p><p></p><p></p><p>Also this is in the OP. Just sayin.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="doctorbadwolf, post: 8980332, member: 6704184"] These abilities have always been fairly limited in uses, Not really. This doesn’t follow even if we accept the claim above it as a premise. Who says that a feat should be compared to one ability of three in a level two feature, that most folks agree could use a boost anyway? It’s literally limited to 1-2 times per day. It’s also of no use to heavy fighters, except finesse sword and boarders. Check my last revision. I get the idea, but it doesn’t do the point of the feat. It is locked to a type of fighting, and is no more restrictive than the Crusher feat. It also doesn’t include defensive weapons, which as described in the OP are a new weapon property. I’m more likely to make shields somehow no count for light fighting than tie the feat to shields. Did you take into account the Charge Attack special action, detailed toward the end of the OP? I agree the wording needs work, but I’m 3 drafts in, so I’m fine with that for the moment. Well, the cost of a resource that the feat gives you two of per day. It says “spend a maneuver die to attack as part of the same reaction”. Most of the criticism above is no longer relevant to the most recent draft, though, so I’ll move on other to say that the benefits of disadv on attacks against you are very familiar to me, and I disagree with the conclusion that it’s a huge deal. It’s a solid bonus. That’s it. Shield is stronger, most of the time. Nah. Even the first draft, which we have moved on from, wasn’t better than GWM with GW Fighting Style, heavy armor, and a greatsword. It just allows a light weapons and armor fighter actually stand up next to a GW fighter with access to feats. Seriously, the fact that the riposte cost a die, that you have two of, is in the original post. In the text of the riposte. And it’s all at-will, and you can take heavy armor master. No, you’re doing the extra damage once, maybe twice, unless you’ve spent more character build resources to get manuvers and dice. Your analysis also ignores the possibility of other things to use a reaction on, and the bolded part confuses me. Do you mean attack back on your next turn plus the reaction (1-2 a day) attack? It doesn’t parse that way, but context suggests no other reasonable conclusion I can see. Did you forget the other bullet point in GWM, that makes it great against little guys that you almost never just fight one of? You also don’t seem to be calculating the average damage effect of rerolling one and twos, and since both are throwing the same chance to hit and 2 dice of damage, the fighter is at most behind by 3 points DPR, which is trivial. Given that you seem to think the riposte is at-will, and are missing that the GWM build will be making an extra bonus action attack with every crit, etc, let’s don’t. Also this is in the OP. Just sayin. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Flèche: Charge Attack For Light Fighters
Top