Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 5425513" data-attributes="member: 2011">I've played it myself. Granted, I was making a mistake when playing it (I foobared and allowed Arcane Reserves and Gauntlets of Blood to work when they should not have which probably average 3 extra points of damage). This mistake increased the frequency of MM being even better.But even without that, I am the type of player who is extremely tactical. I pretty much have a rough idea of how much damage each NPC has taken (I don't write it down, but I do have a rough ballpark). It's pretty easy to know when a foe is on the cusp or not especially since "bloodied" (and rough idea of level) can give one a good idea of total hit points. For a more laid back player who is not a DM or player in 5 games, it would be harder to guess correctly when the situation calls for it.And note: I have not stated that it is overpowered. I have stated that it is now a solid choice of At Will for low levels. It has great range. It has higher utility than it had before, not higher power.But when MM first came out, everyone was ragging on it and almost nobody took it. Now, it is viable. Then, not so much.In many respects, yes.Why do you think that the PHB suggests that a 5th PC be a Striker? Because the faster the PCs take out individual foes, the faster the action economy leans in the direction of the PCs and the fewer resources the PCs use.The main way in which Controllers are better controllers than Strikers is when they can a) more or less totally take away actions from foes (i.e. stun, or possibly blind or immobilize), and b) when their area effect attacks do more overall damage spread over many foes than a Striker does against a single target.</blockquote>

Verification