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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9143021" data-attributes="member: 6790260">Monk probably not? Most of their damage is coming from ki stuff and martial arts, which I don't think would be radically changed by getting more extra attacks. I guess it would let you save your ki for more utility effects or something?Barbarian...maybe. Spells are undeniable flexibility for Paladin. But Barbarian (presuming Totem, since it's quite strong) getting to tack Rage damage on twice as often might make a difference?But if your goal is to close the gap with spellcasters, extra attacks per round is of limited utility--it requires that the party face more rounds of combat to get more benefit. Meanwhile, spells get more benefit from facing fewer rounds of combat. Thus the inherent tension: casters are always wanting to favor something closer to the 5MWD (or, I guess in 5e, the "three-hour workday," since casters usually still want to take at least one short rest per day), while non-casters are always wanting to favor the longest possible day.If you can ensure that Paladins (and casters generally) actually HAVE to run out of spells now and then, then yes, this change would very likely push Barbarians into the same zone or even just above it. But if you can't ensure that Paladins have to run out of spells sometimes (or delay running out of spells by not spending them early on when they would have liked to--because the two are mostly equivalent), then no, I don't think the Barbarian is pushed up far enough.</blockquote>

Verification