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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="CapnZapp" data-source="post: 6980932" data-attributes="member: 12731">Well, it's not about "enough", it's more that this type of advice boils down to "5E has made changes that you can live with if you change the way you run your entire game". I'm all like "but why not identify a minimal set of rollbacks, so we don't have to do all that?"I mean, it's not as if I'm not having varied encounters already. Breezily saying "Limiting range, varying enemy types and numbers, terrain and other environmental factors" disingenously makes it sounds so natural and so easy, when in fact it's anything but.Yes, absolutely. Getting to use your reaction to make an additional attack is definitely valuable. However, I haven't seen it come into play THAT often. For it to happen, the monsters will need to leave the reach of the melee fighter.Perhaps we're not playing with enough 2 ft wide corridors. Our fights seldom feature the "tanking" where a melee character actively tries to prevent monsters from reaching the casters. The monsters die quickly enough even without this. Besides, there are other more reliable ways to put your reaction in play, and my players prefer to have control over when and where the reaction is used. They use their reaction for Shield spells and other defensive measures. Another example is feats like Polearm where the reaction is all but guaranteed to be put to use.Let's not forget - all you can do with your reaction (without feats etc*)  is make one stab at one enemy. That is simply not enough of a tactical advantage, apparently, for my players to focus on it. *) I am, of course, aware you can create a build based on Sentinel etc. We haven't seen that kind of build yet, probably because my players were so fast in identifying ranged and highly mobile builds to be generally preferable to slow and steady builds.Perhaps in my next campaign, with a minimal set of houserules (no negativing disadvantage from melee; strength-based ranged fire) we will see more melee builds in general and a sentinel build in particular <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 understand that, but this only serves to illustrate the first step to changing this perception is awareness. The more people that realize the balance between melee and ranged may be severely damaged this edition, the better. I myself didn't fully understand and accept it until just a few months myself. I simply couldn't believe they didn't catch this in playtest. So believe me when I say I understand you.</blockquote>

Verification