D&D 5E IMHO and comments about DnDNext new packet

[Zaphling]

Deadly Strike on Cleric - comment it
-I'm kinda not into Deadly Strike being shared by all classes. I guess cleric's can use them, but I don't know about a Lifegiver using it when it's built around support.




Fighter:
I like the way the new fighter is designed. You can actually build your ideal fighter (archer, great weapon, shield, warlord, etc) with the new way of getting expertise through Death Dealer, SUperior Defense, Unerring attack, and Unstoppable. Plus with all four expertise covering damage, AC, attack roll, and saving throws; fighters always have a good option for the 4 important stats whether the fighter is built as an archer, duelist, or a knight.


Monk:
Monk Grasp of Stone - WHY does the grappled creature has advantage on all its melee attacks agains the monk? Can someone explain the logic behind an enemy trapped in a stone-ish prison?


Monk Ki Abilties - all of its attacks are triggered with Unarmed Attacks. What about those monks who want to weild nanchakus, bo staffs, sianghams? Why can't they trigger the Ki Abilities? So what's the use of Weapon Proficiency then? Wotc? Explain.




Paladin:
Divine Sense - is actually nice. a solid ability.


Channel Divinity - is a fine way of making your abilties flexible. although for it's meh. but i can understand because it is rather awkward for a Blackguard to have Lay On Hands too.


Nature's Wrath - is pretty powerful. I don't why other paladins will take Divine Smite when Nature's Wrath is a stronger option


Oaths - are solid in its current state. But we would also love to see an Oath of the Liberator (chaotic good), and other alignment options. Since it is more fun to have them.


Aura of Protection - why does an AURA need a 'reaction' to be triggered? Isn't aura a passive thing where you just stand in it and benefit from it? As we can further read, Aura of Courage doesn't need actions to be triggered. needs rethinking.


Mount - is good. I like it.


Final NOtes: since the paladin has spellcasting in 3.5, and since DnDNext is meant to please both crowds from 3.5 and 4e, it's okay for me. But it would be very nice to see the 4e version of the paladin. The Non-Spellcasting one, where all of its powers are more of might and supernatural powers compared to the spellcasting of the clerics.








Ranger:
I have nothing against the ranger.
Although it would be lovely to see the 4e version of it. Non-spellcasting.


Rogue:
Sneak Attack - So all rogues now have Sneak Attack? What happend to the rogue that is more skilled in dodging, or how about the new Assassinate? WHere is that?
Also Sneak Attacks have a very funny and awkward way of delivering it. Why disadvantage?


Distract - is good ability




Background and SKills:
Search - why is it Int based? Just why?


Where is Use Rope? And what is its substitute?


Where is Sleight of Hand?


Where is Open lock?


Where is Disarm Device?




DM GUidlines:
Exploration rules are solid and great to have.




Equipment:
Why is a Katana two-handed?


Two Weapon Fighting is actually fair.


Feats:
Hafted Weapon - the bonus is almost useless. Why would we waste a feat so that we can use the butt-end of a polearm for 1d4 bludgeon damage? WHy not give a +1 to AC as well?


Pick Pockets - why is Sleight of Hand converted to a feat?


Open Lock/Disarm Trap - why converted to a feat?


Read Lips - isn't this suppose to be part of a skill or something? It's such a small bonus for a feat.




Spells:
Druidcraft - what is it? and where is it?

 

[Frank Foulis]

Druid Craft is in an updated packet. They announced it on the 21st you can just download the updated packet.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Pick Pockets - why is Sleight of Hand converted to a feat?

Open Lock/Disarm Trap - why converted to a feat?

My intuition tells me that it is to help create the "Basic" versions of the Core Four classes that are still balanced and usable in and amongst "Standard" game character versions.

Since the Basic Core Four game seems to not include selectable Skills or Feats... they instead will get set Class Features that are equivalent to what a Standard PC would get from the Skills or Feats mechanics. That way both a Basic and Standard version of the same class are relatively balanced against one another.

So by having Open Locks, Find/Remove Traps, Pickpocketing, Climb Sheer Surfaces as feats (rather than as part of the skill system)... in all the places where a Standard Rogue would ordinarily choose a feat, the Basic Rogue can get assigned as a Class Feature a non-skill system "thief skill" feat from the list above.

What this does is allow the Basic Rogue to end up having all the "Thief Skills" that an AD&D 1E Thief would have, without needing to use the actual Skill System for all the other Basic Core Four classes. While at the same time... giving the Basic Rogue just as many Feats as the Standard Rogue so that if by some chance the game evolves from a Basic game into a Standard game (or a player wants to use a Basic Rogue in a Standard game)... that Basic Rogue is still balanced against a Standard Rogue because they both have the same number of feats.

It's actually a rather clever way to allow the Basic game to mimic a 1E Rogue (for those players who wish to use D&DN for a 1E-styled game) without having to port in the Skill System that every other class would ordinarily also have to use.

(The only downside is that it now assumes that those specific "thief skills" are only usable by someone specially qualified to use them [IE a Rogue] rather than attemptable by anyone. Some people will be okay with that. They'll think that disarming traps is such a specialized action that not every single PC should be able to do it just by using the skill system-- only Rogues (who will get the feats as a bonus with their Rogue Scheme) and those who spend a feat slot on it, should be able to. Other folks will disagree with that thinking and believe that every class should be able to attempt to open locks. And those folks will have to have their DM just rule that those "thief skill" feats don't exist and that their uses get swallowed up by the skill system itself.)

 

[Iosue]

My thinking was much along DEFCON 1's. By putting them into feats, you also open up the possibility of non-Rogues essentially taking a spread of thieves' skills without having to use up their other skills.

Speaking of Rogues, I find I really like the Sneak Attack rules. At first blush it seems convoluted, but then you see it's elegant in execution. Be a swashbuckler, and automatically gain advantage every turn when you can get an enemy all to yourself! Or, be a thief and automatically gain advantage when you double-team an enemy! It doesn't have to be 4e style flanking -- just an ally adjacent to the enemy. Then, you can turn in the advantage for extra damage! Fighting a guy with high AC, low hp, stick with the advantage. Fighting a guy with low AC, high hp, go for the sneak attack every turn. That's flavorful and crunchy!

 

[gyor]

The bonus feats and stuff are just temperary.

Smite should be split off from Channel Divinity and replace deadly strike. Smite should also have different special bonuses depending upon your Oath.

Just an idea but what if Mounts could shape shift into humaniod squire form in Dungeons or could squeeze without penalties?

The Rogue took the worst beating and they need to take a step back to the last verison.

Barbarians still need thier tribes or totoems or whatever thier subclass thingy will be.