Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 7925890" data-attributes="member: 6801228">I can see that, but I feel like there an important question for your first point. More satisfying for who? Some classes, like the fighter and the rogue, have been built for a single solution to combat problems. And, sure, the fighter can invest in warhammers, but there are no finesse bludgeoning weapons for the rogue to use. So, is it satisfying for the player who becomes "pretty much useless"? I remember we had a DM who sent a pack of werewolves after us at like, 4th level, and I mean after us. They ambushed us. We had a single magic weapon, and a single mage who could cantrip them. And I will admit, the fight was challenging and tactically insane. But, I also remember one of the players who didn't have the weapon or the anything like it. He just stood in the corner of the map and passed his turn, for the entire fight. And when we were like "hey dude, fighting for our lives here, help please?" his response was essentially "I can't do anything in this stupid fight, so I'm standing where I won't get hurt while you idiots die". I fully admit, he wasn't a pleasant person to play with and he dropped soon after, but the point was... I couldn't fault him for getting frustrated. His character was completely useless in terms of actually killing them. The only thing most of our party tried was grappling them and pinning them so that the people who could damage the creatures could focus on a few at a time. So, I can see why the designers made 5e with the balance towards "you do good, and you awesome" instead of "you suck and you do good" because players don't like feeling like they are worthless in their power fantasy game. Still, nothing wrong with doing that once in a while. As an occasional fight, it can be bloody awesome to try and figure out how to deal with an enemy you are not equipped for. But as the norm? I don't think I would enjoy it.I will put this out there, and I think I know you will disagree, but the Monster Manual was not written with the assumption that the players will have magical weapons. Magical weapons are supposed to be somewhat rare and special, that's why the game specifically says you can't just buy them. Which is why the game doesn't make a big distinction between how magical a weapon is. Because it is not assumed that the player will have a magical weapon when fighting the monster. This is also why the Blade Pact, Moon Druid, and Monk abilities are treated as big deals. Because in the design logic of the game, they are big deals. Because dealing magical damage is pretty rare for a melee type. Now, if you play the game where by 5th level every character has at least one magical weapon, then yes, it will seem pointless. And I can agree with that, because I've seen it happen and I just tend to forget those monsters have resistance. But, I have also played in games and fights where that is not the case, and where fighting a few devils when no one has magical weapons, is a terrifying prospect, because they take forever to actually drop. It is in what the game was designed around, not how we actually play it, that the stuff in the books tends to make the most sense.</blockquote>

Verification