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
Homebrewing the Battlemaster and Champion
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="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8249894" data-attributes="member: 6801228"><p>I see that point, but there are about a dozen ways to get around that, some of them with simple language some of them with more complex language. </p><p></p><p>I figured this was just the simplest way to express the mechanic, and I have a preference to make the mechanics simpler to grok for players. So, I could have "you can add half your proficiency to non-proficient dex, str, and con checks and your proficiency is 1.5 times its normal value for for proficient dex, str, and con checks" and get the same effect, I just find this way of doing it is simpler to convey, and if anyone tries to use my homebrew ease of use language to do something they aren't supposed to, then I can just tell them no. </p><p></p><p>But, I don't think most people ever consider Proficiency being added multiple times, so it likely isn't even a rule they are aware of.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>That is a fair point, but rules themselves are fairly meta-conceptual anyways, and I feel like that isn't a good reason not to include the rule. </p><p></p><p>I mean, it is good feedback, but it feels a bit like your objection is more aesthetic than mechanical, because there are things that "stack" in 5e, and some specific rules to prevent some specific types of stacking.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I can get behind the idea that Second Wind could use a boost at higher levels, that isn't something I feel is a big disagreement. However, as I said, you are doing the equivalent of a 6th or 7th level spells worth of healing twice (because I gave two uses) per short rest. </p><p></p><p>Even Warlocks don't generallu get 6th level spells once per short rest, so this is massively out of line in terms of expected power. </p><p></p><p>Could second wind use a boost? Solid thought. But the boost you recommended is beyond what I think this ability should do, and it sounds like this is more an issue with Second Wind in general, which is where I would look to change it.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I'm not quite following. There is no wasted healing here unless you are using it solely for the attack. And, still, if this heal is good enough for a bonus action anyways, there is zero reason to also make an attack. That is a bridge too far I think.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Two attacks is a definite no from me. That is WAY too good. </p><p></p><p>I get the feel you are going for. The Second Wind being a bonus action is how that comes across for me. Other classes usually have actions to heal them. And, I tend to find it a lot more complicated on whether or not an enemy ignores a dodging character. </p><p></p><p>But still, you proposed change at 11th level does the following.</p><p></p><p>As a bonus action the Fighter gets to heal 5d10+11, and make an attack, and Dodge. </p><p>Then as an action they can make three more attacks, making a total of 4d8+16</p><p></p><p>That is for a longsword fighter, an potential average of 39 hp healed, 34 damage dealt and a dodge for essentially +5 AC. That is way more than feels reasonable based off of needing to heal.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I can fully get behind the core SW falling off by T3. I can see that argument. But that feels like something to fix for all fighters, and I don't think it fits well as a change to the Champion alone. </p><p></p><p>Also, your rule didn't say anything about being in place of getting another use of second wind. So, as my homebrew is currently written, your rule would allow for 86 (12d10+20) and 129 (18d10+30) at 10th and 15th. If you were thinking that this would replace the 3rd and 15th then that is a bit different. But that didn't seem to be your intent</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The training and command sounds great for a bonus in the Strongholds and Followers rules. I'm not sure I'd want it in the class directly though, since it seems more like an "in addition to" type of thing. I don't like giving abilities that only apply if you are playing with a specific rule set</p><p></p><p>Logistics sounds interesting, but how would you want to implement it?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Ah, okay. The other two don't sound as good to me. The initiative is a paladin thing and I think my new banneret too. Insight and perception doesn't feel quite right. </p><p></p><p>And I can't really do a lot with the AP rules directly. Thanks for looking into those for me though.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Chaosmancer, post: 8249894, member: 6801228"] I see that point, but there are about a dozen ways to get around that, some of them with simple language some of them with more complex language. I figured this was just the simplest way to express the mechanic, and I have a preference to make the mechanics simpler to grok for players. So, I could have "you can add half your proficiency to non-proficient dex, str, and con checks and your proficiency is 1.5 times its normal value for for proficient dex, str, and con checks" and get the same effect, I just find this way of doing it is simpler to convey, and if anyone tries to use my homebrew ease of use language to do something they aren't supposed to, then I can just tell them no. But, I don't think most people ever consider Proficiency being added multiple times, so it likely isn't even a rule they are aware of. That is a fair point, but rules themselves are fairly meta-conceptual anyways, and I feel like that isn't a good reason not to include the rule. I mean, it is good feedback, but it feels a bit like your objection is more aesthetic than mechanical, because there are things that "stack" in 5e, and some specific rules to prevent some specific types of stacking. I can get behind the idea that Second Wind could use a boost at higher levels, that isn't something I feel is a big disagreement. However, as I said, you are doing the equivalent of a 6th or 7th level spells worth of healing twice (because I gave two uses) per short rest. Even Warlocks don't generallu get 6th level spells once per short rest, so this is massively out of line in terms of expected power. Could second wind use a boost? Solid thought. But the boost you recommended is beyond what I think this ability should do, and it sounds like this is more an issue with Second Wind in general, which is where I would look to change it. I'm not quite following. There is no wasted healing here unless you are using it solely for the attack. And, still, if this heal is good enough for a bonus action anyways, there is zero reason to also make an attack. That is a bridge too far I think. Two attacks is a definite no from me. That is WAY too good. I get the feel you are going for. The Second Wind being a bonus action is how that comes across for me. Other classes usually have actions to heal them. And, I tend to find it a lot more complicated on whether or not an enemy ignores a dodging character. But still, you proposed change at 11th level does the following. As a bonus action the Fighter gets to heal 5d10+11, and make an attack, and Dodge. Then as an action they can make three more attacks, making a total of 4d8+16 That is for a longsword fighter, an potential average of 39 hp healed, 34 damage dealt and a dodge for essentially +5 AC. That is way more than feels reasonable based off of needing to heal. I can fully get behind the core SW falling off by T3. I can see that argument. But that feels like something to fix for all fighters, and I don't think it fits well as a change to the Champion alone. Also, your rule didn't say anything about being in place of getting another use of second wind. So, as my homebrew is currently written, your rule would allow for 86 (12d10+20) and 129 (18d10+30) at 10th and 15th. If you were thinking that this would replace the 3rd and 15th then that is a bit different. But that didn't seem to be your intent The training and command sounds great for a bonus in the Strongholds and Followers rules. I'm not sure I'd want it in the class directly though, since it seems more like an "in addition to" type of thing. I don't like giving abilities that only apply if you are playing with a specific rule set Logistics sounds interesting, but how would you want to implement it? Ah, okay. The other two don't sound as good to me. The initiative is a paladin thing and I think my new banneret too. Insight and perception doesn't feel quite right. And I can't really do a lot with the AP rules directly. Thanks for looking into those for me though. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Homebrewing the Battlemaster and Champion
Top