D&D (2024) Just realized Sentinel is heavily nerfed! No longer works with PAM, no longer works on most enemies who Disengage.

[ECMO3]

If this is such a simple and elegant solution, then why did you bother coming here to make a thread just to tell us that your player was bummed about it?

I came here to tell people the feats changed, and explain how we realized it. Not to tell them my PC was bummed about it.

 

[pukunui]

That is not it, it is more like I am not going to do this because I said I wasn't going to do it in session 0, we will change it in the next game.



I do this, in session 0.



I find that discussions like this in the middle of the campaign sometimes cause problems. You presume everyone in the party will be ok with it, and in that case sure there is no problem. Often though one guy isn't ok with it and either he stays quiet about it so as not to go against others and then he feels cheated or he is honest says he doesn't want to change and then the guy who wanted the change feels slighted by others in the party.

I think it is easier and better just to let him get a different feat if he wants and we can change the rules when we play the next campaign campainn, which is only a few months away.



Quite the opposite. We all agree in session 0 to the rules and what homebrew we are going to use and we also only deviate if it causes very serious game play problems.



Sure if they buy in. Not so simple if they don't and we ALL already bought in to which feats we were using and which one we weren't.

Suit yourself! I still think that's too inflexible but whatever! Thanks for clarifying that you didn't actually want to talk about your player's feelings on the matter. I won't waste any more of anyone's time in this thread.

 

[ECMO3]

Suit yourself! I still think that's too inflexible but whatever! Thanks for clarifying that you didn't actually want to talk about your player's feelings on the matter. I won't waste any more of anyone's time in this thread.

I talk to my players during every game and we talk at length about the rules we are going to play with in session 0. Their feelings are generally that we should play by the rules we agreed to play by. I know that factually and they are unanimous in that in terms of a general position.

With this specific situation and specific feat I don't know that factually, but I do know the player whos PC took the feat did not ask to change the rules for the feat and neither did the other player that pointed the difference out in game and told him he was playing it incorrectly.

I note this because by pointing out in game that you can't do that it is pretty clear that one player at the table at least cared enough to actually correct another player and me because we were not playing by the rules we agreed to play by in session 0.

If I bring this up in the context you ask, I think (I don't know) that it will be unanimous and ALL the players, including the one with this feat will say we should not change the rules, but certainly at least one player (the one who pointed it out to start with) will say we should not change the rules for this feat since he made a point to say that is not how it works in game.

 

[Plaguescarred]

Coupled with the fact that Human can't take General Feat at level 1 pushed any feat combo using Sentinel to level 8 at minimum rather than 4, clearly they wanted to nerf that. But that's something DM can easily handwave if they want anyway.

 

[Valetudo]

I figure most groups do what I do. Keep the stuff I like. I still use the 2014 shocking grasp, because I don't think it needed nerfed.