D&D 5E L&L: New Packet Hits This Wednesday

[Li Shenron]

The multiple rolls did slow down combat too much but the stagnation that I disliked was caused by the five foot step. Our 3.x combats would reach a point where there was next to no maneuvering. The PCs and NPCs with multiple attacks would take the first round or two to get in place and from then on they would park and full-attack. It made combats very boring to me.

Then it should be better in 5e since you can split your movement per round as you wish, unless the new iterative attacks require to give up the move action but I don't think so.

 

[Zaukrie]

Isn't a ranger without magic just a fighter that is trained in wood lore and uses a bow a lot? I mean, if you are going to have a class, it should be more than just a fighter with a specialty, I would think.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

One of the big problems with multiple attacks was that they were iterative attacks, while it might seem simple to subtract -5 from each in a row, the fact you usually have to either row one die at a time, or always declare which colour is at which bonus slowed things down. I don't like multiple attacks as a standard, but at least with all of them at the same bonus it'll go a bit quicker. Though I still see that even with rolling the all the attack rolls at once, you'll still need to declare which colour goes with which target.

 

[Li Shenron]

Though I still see that even with rolling the all the attack rolls at once, you'll still need to declare which colour goes with which target.

Well if you're still targeting different foes with your multiple attacks, obviously it's better to roll them one by one rather than all at once. Roll all at once if you target the same foe with all attacks, the worst that can happen is you hit it more than it needs...

 

[Sadrik]

Hmm, paladin and ranger as spellcasters. That personally does not fit well with my concepts of the classes. Hopefully there will be non-caster versions of the spells.

Paladin/Blackgaurd/Warden should all fall under the Defender title or Champion title or some such. Cavalier is simply a horseman and that should be a specialty.

Druid... As always it mixes a bit of arcane and divine and multi-prongs itself as the front line fighter, healer and area attack caster. Was hoping they would go one direction with it. Wildshape should be spells. If the cleric is warriorish divine caster, the druid should be a wizardish divine caster. We will see though... I may not be impressed though due to my feeling wildshape should be a spell, and a scalable one at that.

I do note that MM mentions at the end that they are already onto the next iteration internally hopefully to deflect some of the negativism he may anticipate with this release.

Bonus attacks for high level characters! Woot and the two-weapon fighting assumption is well warranted too. It looks like there is a lot of good coming in this pack.

 

[Chris_Nightwing]

If multiple attacks all have the same to-hit bonus and deal the same damage then they're actually quite quick. When I think back to mid-level games of 2E, the highly specialised Fighter would just throw them out one at a time, rolling damage with each hit and it would pass quite quickly - easily as quick as a caster throwing down a blast in 4E. It would be fine if you could combine all your attacks into a single die-roll, provided there was some reason to do so, such as DR or a one-off bonus you wanted to use effectively. In fact, I wonder if you can design around this - creatures that you would consider bosses or solos might have locations you can choose to hit provided you combine all your attacks to do so - so against a Hydra you can do some consistent damage by splitting your attacks against the heads, or you can use them all at once to try and rush the body.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

Well if you're still targeting different foes with your multiple attacks, obviously it's better to roll them one by one rather than all at once. Roll all at once if you target the same foe with all attacks, the worst that can happen is you hit it more than it needs...

I've always seen a problem with rolling 1 attack at a time as always being slow, and in that case it's probably better to roll attack and damage at the same time.

 

[Blue]

A lot of this sounds pretty good, but this is my reaction to spellcasting rangers.

But the "skilled woodman" part is all in your background/skills. You want one with no casting, it's a fighter with an appropriate background. Who's already got access to lots of archer/dual wielding, etc. options.

Or it's a rogue with an appropriate background.

Why retread the same ground again? Don't get hooked up that you can only play a skilled nature character as the ranger class. It's not like some earlier editions where there was a skill divide between them.

 

[kerleth]

I just wanted to point out that Mearls didn't say that they were getting rid of martial damage dice. He said that they were getting rid of the martial damage BONUS. I think that was the static number that scaled up +5, +10, etc. If it is, they had stated that it was pretty much a place holder long ago. Personally I liked the manuever system in the previous packet, though it of course needed some tweaking. All in all I'm really excited about the next packet, including seeing the new take on the fighter.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I just wanted to point out that Mearls didn't say that they were getting rid of martial damage dice. He said that they were getting rid of the martial damage BONUS. I think that was the static number that scaled up +5, +10, etc. If it is, they had stated that it was pretty much a place holder long ago.

Good catch!

I also like a lot of what I heard here... although as someone who is DMing at PAX East this weekend... I hope they aren't expecting us to cram the new packet rules immediately and want us to use all of them at the con. That'd be a clusterbomb of epic proportions.