D&D 5E I hate expertise dice as a universal mechanic.


log in or register to remove this ad



MoonSong

Rules-lawyering drama queen but not a munchkin
Well, a point against it. As a fighter exclusive mechanic it feels good, granting the fighter a mechanical niche. On the rogue it feels interesting, but at the same time it has watered him down. Being forced to follow the fighter rules, has given us a very weakened sneak attack (one that doesn't even feel familiar due to using different sized die).

Don't get me wrong, it seems fine when used for non-combat stuff, but we could have managed a similar effect with a different mechanic, one based on d6s that couldn't be used on combat except for sneak attack or backstab. However now rogues have become "like a weak fighter just with 4 more skills".

Also worrying that when rangers and paladins show up they will end up inheriting the mechanic too, causing fighters to become a weak class again.
 


erleni

First Post
I'm fully for expertise being a default mechanic for "martial" characters. It gives you a simple chassis which is easy to understand for newbies and makes it simplier to "learn" a new class, and each class can then be differentied by maneuvers. This is basically something I loved from 4e and would like to see kept in Next.
 




I'd like to see each of the group classes (and extended class-groups) have a unique mechanic. Base it on channel divinity for clerics, expertise dice for fighters, Vancian casting/spell slots for wizards, and something else (maybe skill-based?) for rogues.

Fighters, in particular, are always at risk of having their schtick stepped on and stolen by other classes.
 

Remove ads

Top