Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Acr0ssTh3P0nd" data-source="post: 6871861" data-attributes="member: 6762652">Survivalist Dice are an inherently more flexible mechanic that can be applied in a wider variety of ways than a Quarry mechanic would. The Ranger needs a wide variety of subclasses to cover every identity people want from it while remaining both focused and balanced, so the more flexible a mechanic is, the better. To put it this way - it would be very easy and simple to make a Marking mechanic using survivalist dice, but it would require a lot more work and complication to make a purely utility option from a Marking mechanic.Sure, the uses of survivalist dice are mostly combat-related right now, but that's due to the unfinished nature of the work. One could easily make more utility options with them, or more healing, or different combat mechanics than we currently have. Additionally, I've run the base math, and it's actually very well balanced - 2d6 is an extra 7 damage, on average, which is the same as what a Have-Your-Cake Beast Master beast does at that level, and is less than what a Hunter Official-Ranger with Colossus Slayer and Hunter's Mark up would get. Have-Your-Cake Hunter Rangers also do not benefit from the extra utility, healing, and combat power of magic. At the core of it, it comes down to needing a mechanic that can be applied (whether in the current or future builds, or in other subclases made post-final-release) in a wide variety of utility and combat situations to represent a single set of skills being applied in different ways. A Hunter's Mark inherently limits unifying mechanics like this to combat, even if it's not solely for damage-increase effects, and furthermore limits what kind of combat the character does. Should rangers have the option to gain their combat power from focusing on a single creature? Yeah! Is it an absolutely core, irremovable part of the identity of every ranger? No more so than magic, and look at the disagreements over that. In the end, I don't feel comfortable saying "If your character does not gain its combat power from focusing on one creature, they aren't a ranger", which is what putting such a mechanic in the core class functionally does. It's an idea that may easily be worth its own subclass, but is not as vital to the identity of every ranger.</blockquote>

Verification