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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 8369023" data-attributes="member: 87792">There's a huge difference between rewriting to align things thematically and taking something entirely away from being a player-side option. "Moving to the DMG" is little different to "putting through a paper shredder" other than plausible deniability and "make room for new ideas" when very little space is freed up makes no sense. Come up with the new ideas before removing the old ones and then show why you can't have both.Meanwhile e.g. turning the barbarian into a subclass of fighter opens up some options for the barbarian - for example it means barbarians get a fighting style, and both second wind and action surge feel entirely in line with the martial barbarian. It also puts the option of some barbarian options into the fighter; the unarmoured defences would be a positive as would fast movement for many fighter-types. And unlike your removal of a race suggestion care is being taken here to keep as much of the thematics as possible.The huge thing you lose when you turn one class into a subclass of another is the subclasses of what is now a subclass. I don't think e.g. Storm Herald would survive turning the barbarian into a subclass, and it's worthwhile.I'd have put it very differently; subclasses are a 4e thing more than they belong to any other edition and the barbarian being primal is very much 4e. 5e just made sure that it didn't look at all like 4e to people who hated 4e.2nd level... And 3.X had already brought the start of spellcasting down to 4th level for ranger and paladin.Has fighter damage output been "drastically reduced"?In AD&D (either 2e or post Unearthed Arcana 1e) assuming Str of 17 you only have +1 to hit and damage and 3 attacks/2 rounds, rising to 2 attacks/round at level 7. A longsword therefore does 1d8+3 damage or an average of 7.5/attack (9.5 vs large) for an average of 11.25 dpr. But this is extremely frontloaded as other than getting a magic +1 or +2 sword the next damage increase the fighter gets is the level 7 2 attacks/round and more likelihood of facing large foes.By contrast in 5e a first level fighter with Str 16, longsword, and the duelist fighting style is doing 1d8+5 damage for 9.5 damage/attack or in round terms 20% behind. With only one attack per round this isn't looking so good - but that's first level. At second they gain Action Surge, closing about half the gap assuming the textbook 6 encounters, 2 short rests/day. At third they gain a subclass which (depending on subclass) finishes closing the gap. At fourth it's an ASI or a feat - and at 5th level they get their second attack, doubling their DPR and permanently ending the one reason the AD&D fighter was doing more damage.Of course all of this is largely irrelevant when an AD&D ogre had 19 hp, a 3.5 ogre had 29hp, and a 5e ogre has 59hp. Fighter damage might not have been drastically reduced but hps were massively upped so the effect is the same. The fighter might as well be waving a nerf bat.</blockquote>

Verification