Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="NotAYakk" data-source="post: 8469977" data-attributes="member: 72555">I'd avoid math.Like, 1d8, increasing to 2d8 at level 5, 3d8 at level 11 and 4d8 at level 17.&nbsp; And the slow version just maximizes the healing.LoH is a combat bonus, as is heavy armor.&nbsp; As you are adding healing, that can track.The PHB Ranger was considered a bad class by most.&nbsp; Partly because it was poor at level 1.I am just talking about level 1.&nbsp; It matters.(Smite at 2 works well, as advised fights/day is low at 2.&nbsp; And it is 100% accurate.)Only for rangers?&nbsp; Like, I can imagine a bunch of Ranger style variations.&nbsp; But only 1 style for 1 class... seems awkward.They said different things.&nbsp; Maybe I read one or the other wrong.You have an ability that states &quot;using your reaction&quot;.&nbsp; Not a reaction to something, just action economy resource token.Guarding use 5 and 6 of a T3 ability behind anti-multiclassing is needless complexity to solve at best a trivial problem.Doing this for T1 abilities makes sense if you can't manage anything better.&nbsp; By T3, it is nonsense; you added an extra lookup table to prevent someone who is already more than 50% ranger from getting 6 instead of 4 uses a day of an ability at level 17.Yes, but going from 1d8 to 2d6 here, and 1d6 to 2d6 elsewhere, seems like a typo.&nbsp;&nbsp; I'd expect 1d8 to 2d8.&nbsp; Not a die change.The level 11 offensive boosts are not very balanced against each other.&nbsp; Without design intent info, all I can say is it looks funny.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="NotAYakk, post: 8469977, member: 72555"] I'd avoid math. Like, 1d8, increasing to 2d8 at level 5, 3d8 at level 11 and 4d8 at level 17. And the slow version just maximizes the healing. LoH is a combat bonus, as is heavy armor. As you are adding healing, that can track. The PHB Ranger was considered a bad class by most. Partly because it was poor at level 1. I am just talking about level 1. It matters. (Smite at 2 works well, as advised fights/day is low at 2. And it is 100% accurate.) Only for rangers? Like, I can imagine a bunch of Ranger style variations. But only 1 style for 1 class... seems awkward. They said different things. Maybe I read one or the other wrong. You have an ability that states "using your reaction". Not a reaction to something, just action economy resource token. Guarding use 5 and 6 of a T3 ability behind anti-multiclassing is needless complexity to solve at best a trivial problem. Doing this for T1 abilities makes sense if you can't manage anything better. By T3, it is nonsense; you added an extra lookup table to prevent someone who is already more than 50% ranger from getting 6 instead of 4 uses a day of an ability at level 17. Yes, but going from [B]1d8[/B] to [B]2d6[/B] here, and [B]1d6[/B] to [B]2d6[/B] elsewhere, seems like a typo. I'd expect 1d8 to 2d8. Not a die change. The level 11 offensive boosts are not very balanced against each other. Without design intent info, all I can say is it looks funny. [/QUOTE]

Verification