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
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
How fast does PC damage rise relative to monster hit points?
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="MoutonRustique" data-source="post: 6482571" data-attributes="member: 22362"><p>I thought as much... well I'll keep playing it as stacking : I find it strange that if you deal ALL x, only x applies but as soon as there is a 1 point of something else, both apply...</p><p></p><p>Especially when juxtaposed to x and y vulnerable which do stack.</p><p></p><p>That was one of the major mistakes of 4e for me - having untyped damage. It just leads to weird stuff...</p><p></p><p> [MENTION=6696971]Manbearcat[/MENTION]</p><p>That first party was a very strong group indeed!</p><p></p><p>It'd be curious to compare all martial Vs all primal, Vs all divine, etc parties in terms of feel and capabilities... My gut feeling is something along the lines of :</p><p></p><p>All <strong>martial</strong> : very strong. Requires a few items against specific foes to make life easier, but other than that... very strong.</p><p> - Fighter : great tank, high damage</p><p> - Ranger : great damage, nice utility</p><p> - Rogue : great damage, nice utility</p><p> - Warlord : good healer, <em>immense</em> synergy with melee classes</p><p> - Knight : meh, good enough</p><p> - Slayer : for those who <em>really</em> need the top of the sheet to say <em>fighter</em> and don't want to tank</p><p> - Scout : a slightly lower damage ranger, but with a wider variety of competing options in play (only played this one once)</p><p><em>special note: will require some characters to invest in some items or builds to avoid too much overlap and to cover some deficiencies (energy damage, AoE, ranged damage, mobility, social encounters, etc.)</em></p><p></p><p>All <strong>divine</strong> : pretty strong. Might require some more system mastery to get a party as effective as all martial. Stupid strong against some foes (undead? don't bother friend, you're better off staying in your crypt...) Damage might be a bit harder to come by, but there are very strong leader, tanking and control options. Feels like it might lead to a "slow and steady" kind of group.</p><p> - Paladin : ok tank, nice secondary leader, some interesting utility</p><p> - Cleric : very good leader (potentially ridiculous healer), good utility (rituals and +)</p><p> - Runepriest : ok leader, good synergy with low-mobility allies, potential utility</p><p> - Avenger : a very mobile striker, can work as a form of off-tank</p><p> - Invoker : very strong control and utility (rituals)</p><p> - Warpriest : a strong leader (I'm told) with off-tanking capabilities</p><p><em>special note: a high ratio of radiant damage - which is almost always very good. Some excellent social skills. Could have some troubles with stealth... Awesome roleplaying hooks built-in.</em></p><p></p><p>All <strong>primal</strong> : hard control might be an issue... but then again, maybe not. Damage output certainly isn't. Haven't had a chance to play many of the classes...</p><p> - Barbarian : ARGGHHHHH!! DAMAGE! (hehe) with the possibility of very strong minion destruction and good physical challenge utility</p><p> - Druid : good control (but harder to build right) and some leader possibilities, <em>excellent</em> utility</p><p> - Seeker : controller - but is considered weaker than others (too much soft-control), offers impressive versatility in play though.</p><p> - Shaman : good leader, potential off-tank, excellent utility</p><p> - Berserker : a cool idea - starts encounter as tank, finish as striker</p><p> - Warden : a very strong tank (melee control)</p><p><em>special note: versatility of damage types is a non-issue, undead could prove challenging and control can be a bit more challenging. Travel-type challenges will be laughed at</em></p><p></p><p>All <strong>arcane</strong> : oohh, this one's for me! (as a personal prefence) These groups would probably always be on the move and create some very dramatic fights - unless they hard-control everything... Single-large foes might take a bit more time to go down, but groups vulnerable to AoE would explode! This would probably more tactically-savvy players as they would be pretty squishy if allowed into bad positioning... (An excellent shielding swordmage would do wonders in this setup.)</p><p> - Wizard : excellent control, excellent utility</p><p> - Swordmage : can be a very strong tank, tends to have lower damage, high combat utility but has a fairly high system mastery/game play power variance (but SO much fun)</p><p> - Artificer : a good leader with excellent utility</p><p> - Sorcerer : things will go boom. A lot. (also has a fairly high power variance)</p><p> - Warlock : dripping with story. Mechanics wise, ok damage and potential control. Some cool variants.</p><p> - Mageblade : strikery-control. Very, very cool. Some options much stronger than others (high power variance)</p><p><em>special note: versatility of damage types is a non-issue. Most classes are fairly squishy : tanking, mobility and action-denial are critical assets. Excellent out-of-combat utility. May be easy to dupe (low <em>insight</em> scores... hehehe). Could tend to have lower single-target damage output, but control options can cancel that draw-back. Groups of enemies will be obliterated.</em></p><p></p><p>All <strong>psionic</strong> : my greatest regret is not having played this game yet! While I don't like the psionic fluff, their mechanics look like so much fun! (And they're easy to re-fluff into arcane!) I have NO way of knowing if it would work, but I'm pretty confident it would.</p><p><em>special note: On paper, this reads like the one with the greatest breath of tactics.</em></p><p></p><p>All <strong>shadow</strong> : yeah... IMO that's a stupid power source. Somebody else do this one.</p><p></p><p>[will be continued]</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="MoutonRustique, post: 6482571, member: 22362"] I thought as much... well I'll keep playing it as stacking : I find it strange that if you deal ALL x, only x applies but as soon as there is a 1 point of something else, both apply... Especially when juxtaposed to x and y vulnerable which do stack. That was one of the major mistakes of 4e for me - having untyped damage. It just leads to weird stuff... [MENTION=6696971]Manbearcat[/MENTION] That first party was a very strong group indeed! It'd be curious to compare all martial Vs all primal, Vs all divine, etc parties in terms of feel and capabilities... My gut feeling is something along the lines of : All [B]martial[/B] : very strong. Requires a few items against specific foes to make life easier, but other than that... very strong. - Fighter : great tank, high damage - Ranger : great damage, nice utility - Rogue : great damage, nice utility - Warlord : good healer, [I]immense[/I] synergy with melee classes - Knight : meh, good enough - Slayer : for those who [I]really[/I] need the top of the sheet to say [I]fighter[/I] and don't want to tank - Scout : a slightly lower damage ranger, but with a wider variety of competing options in play (only played this one once) [I]special note: will require some characters to invest in some items or builds to avoid too much overlap and to cover some deficiencies (energy damage, AoE, ranged damage, mobility, social encounters, etc.)[/I] All [B]divine[/B] : pretty strong. Might require some more system mastery to get a party as effective as all martial. Stupid strong against some foes (undead? don't bother friend, you're better off staying in your crypt...) Damage might be a bit harder to come by, but there are very strong leader, tanking and control options. Feels like it might lead to a "slow and steady" kind of group. - Paladin : ok tank, nice secondary leader, some interesting utility - Cleric : very good leader (potentially ridiculous healer), good utility (rituals and +) - Runepriest : ok leader, good synergy with low-mobility allies, potential utility - Avenger : a very mobile striker, can work as a form of off-tank - Invoker : very strong control and utility (rituals) - Warpriest : a strong leader (I'm told) with off-tanking capabilities [I]special note: a high ratio of radiant damage - which is almost always very good. Some excellent social skills. Could have some troubles with stealth... Awesome roleplaying hooks built-in.[/I] All [B]primal[/B] : hard control might be an issue... but then again, maybe not. Damage output certainly isn't. Haven't had a chance to play many of the classes... - Barbarian : ARGGHHHHH!! DAMAGE! (hehe) with the possibility of very strong minion destruction and good physical challenge utility - Druid : good control (but harder to build right) and some leader possibilities, [I]excellent[/I] utility - Seeker : controller - but is considered weaker than others (too much soft-control), offers impressive versatility in play though. - Shaman : good leader, potential off-tank, excellent utility - Berserker : a cool idea - starts encounter as tank, finish as striker - Warden : a very strong tank (melee control) [I]special note: versatility of damage types is a non-issue, undead could prove challenging and control can be a bit more challenging. Travel-type challenges will be laughed at[/I] All [B]arcane[/B] : oohh, this one's for me! (as a personal prefence) These groups would probably always be on the move and create some very dramatic fights - unless they hard-control everything... Single-large foes might take a bit more time to go down, but groups vulnerable to AoE would explode! This would probably more tactically-savvy players as they would be pretty squishy if allowed into bad positioning... (An excellent shielding swordmage would do wonders in this setup.) - Wizard : excellent control, excellent utility - Swordmage : can be a very strong tank, tends to have lower damage, high combat utility but has a fairly high system mastery/game play power variance (but SO much fun) - Artificer : a good leader with excellent utility - Sorcerer : things will go boom. A lot. (also has a fairly high power variance) - Warlock : dripping with story. Mechanics wise, ok damage and potential control. Some cool variants. - Mageblade : strikery-control. Very, very cool. Some options much stronger than others (high power variance) [I]special note: versatility of damage types is a non-issue. Most classes are fairly squishy : tanking, mobility and action-denial are critical assets. Excellent out-of-combat utility. May be easy to dupe (low [I]insight[/I] scores... hehehe). Could tend to have lower single-target damage output, but control options can cancel that draw-back. Groups of enemies will be obliterated.[/I] All [b]psionic[/b] : my greatest regret is not having played this game yet! While I don't like the psionic fluff, their mechanics look like so much fun! (And they're easy to re-fluff into arcane!) I have NO way of knowing if it would work, but I'm pretty confident it would. [I]special note: On paper, this reads like the one with the greatest breath of tactics.[/I] All [b]shadow[/b] : yeah... IMO that's a stupid power source. Somebody else do this one. [will be continued] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
How fast does PC damage rise relative to monster hit points?
Top