Levistus's_Leviathan
5e Freelancer
Yep, they did. They specifically mentioned 4 subclasses per class.Did they? I know they said 48 subclasses, but I am concerned there will be 10 wizards in there.
Yep, they did. They specifically mentioned 4 subclasses per class.Did they? I know they said 48 subclasses, but I am concerned there will be 10 wizards in there.
Back in the day we would let anyone do a "god call" of 2% per level. Clerics got 5% per level.Th capstone is great... the level 11 ability is just a ribbon.
I think, t should be "roll under 3 times your level." This would go from 1/3 chance to 1/2 until it finally becomes automatic.
Or it should be roll under 30 and it increases by 10 at the 2 currently dead levels.
That would make it feel like taking a chance, not wasting a round.
The Ardling could become some sort of nature themed animal people, give them primal spells instead of divine and break the celestial link. It'd make it more interesting in my opinion, assuming they come up with some lore for the race that can help cement them in a setting.I still don't like the Ardling. Either give us the existing Aasimar or a non-celestial anthropomorphic animal species. Stop trying to merge the two.
I think that too, I completely removed it from my cleric rebuild and replaced it with a domain related feature. I feel like divine intervention should be a completely different system that any class can interact with, if the DM wants to include it.Divine Intervention is an odd choice when they called out that "Mother May I" is something that they're trying to remove from the game. That ability (while I love the story implications) is entirely up to the DM to decide what to do with. You know, if it ever happens, which will be almost never.
I'm afraid that I think it needs to be excised and replaced with something more boring, but more reliable.
Makes sense. Jump specifically probably would, by default, otherwise use the jump action which is a special form of Dash.Ah, I misunderstood you. I thought you were saying it would use your movement.
So the party was chasing an arcanloth that was in humanoid cat form and impersonating the goddess Sharess/Bast. They narrowed down the lair's location at a brothel in the world's version of Las Vegas.This absolutely baffled me, too. I like fluffy, open-ended abilities, but even I am not a fan of the current Divine Intervention and it seems pretty much the same, despite the whole 'Let's not make abilities GM dependent' conversation. I had a Cleric player in a campaign who managed to roll low enough to trigger it at level 11, and when it happened we both sat there, non-plussed. What happens? Deus ex Machina? The effect of any cleric spell seems a bit much when all the fighter gets is another attack every round.
In some systems, this wouldn't be a problem. But D&D is so tightly coiled around the idea of 'pull this trigger, get this effect' that the sudden permissiveness seems really out of place.
In the recent video they did, yeahDid they? I know they said 48 subclasses, but I am concerned there will be 10 wizards in there.
Not in my opinion. A character makes a choice on what to wield, and should abide by the inconvenience of that choice if the situation isn't optimal.How do people feel about this:
PHB: If a flying creature is knocked prone, has its speed reduced to 0, or is otherwise deprived of the ability to move, the creature falls, unless it has the ability to hover or it is being held aloft by magic, such as by the fly spell.
D&D One: While flying, you fall if you are Incapacitated or Restrained. If you have the Hover trait, you can stay aloft even while Incapacitated or Restrained.
My martial players groan whenever I pit them against flying creatures. One has a magic Skewering Spear that can restrain once per day and three are level 3+ battlemasters with tripping attacks. How much fun will it be for martials to deal with flying creatures if magic is needed to bring them down? I do feel that the prone condition is a bit too easy to fell a flying creature but this feels a bit far the other way. Grappling a flying creature in mid air would have previously caused a few possibly logic issues, size dependent, but wing span doesn't really factor into that.
They can use bows but shield wielders feel like they are being punished if it takes an action to equip them. Is it entitlement or unnecessary punishment. Drawing a weapon as part of the attach action in addition to having an object interaction will cover off some complaints. Should equipping a shield be a bonus.
The 5e version was. This says that an acceptable response is any spell on their spell list.Divine Intervention is an odd choice when they called out that "Mother May I" is something that they're trying to remove from the game. That ability (while I love the story implications) is entirely up to the DM to decide what to do with. You know, if it ever happens, which will be almost never.
Gonna be a sad player when the DM just has the deity give their character guidance or something.The 5e version was. This says that an acceptable response is any spell on their spell list.
That's not a change, the 5e version also says thisThe 5e version was. This says that an acceptable response is any spell on their spell list.
That shouldn't happen by the rules. Unlike other editions of D&D, there are set DCs - they aren't level dependent. With bounded accuracy the modifiers are kept close enough that this works. So characters with reasonable rolls will still have a decent chance even if characters with expertise will have a good chance.I feel that at higher levels expertise starts to have echoes of 3e where players without expertise just can't be bothered to roll.
If a retroactive Guidance (since it's an action to Divine Inspiration, it has to be retroactive already) was what was needed to turn that failed check that was critical enough the cleric was asking for divine intervention into a successful one, that's a fine use for me.Gonna be a sad player when the DM just has the deity give their character guidance or something.
This assumes that you're doing the same things at level 3 as at level 15. Sure it's always the same DC to pick the lock of the chest in the goblin cave and always the same DC to pick the lock to the treasury - but if the level 3 PCs are breaking into the treasury something weird has happened and if the level 15 PCs are cleaning out basic goblin camps again it's ... unusual.That shouldn't happen by the rules. Unlike other editions of D&D, there are set DCs - they aren't level dependent. With bounded accuracy the modifiers are kept close enough that this works. So characters with reasonable rolls will still have a decent chance even if characters with expertise will have a good chance.
If the DM is arbitrarily increasing DCs they have either houseruled it, so it's outside the scope of this discussion, they are ignorant of the rule - also outside this discussion.
And during that time your proficiency has increased, your ability scores have increased, and you have kept pace because the DCs didn't increase faster than that.This assumes that you're doing the same things at level 3 as at level 15. Sure it's always the same DC to pick the lock of the chest in the goblin cave and always the same DC to pick the lock to the treasury - but if the level 3 PCs are breaking into the treasury something weird has happened and if the level 15 PCs are cleaning out basic goblin camps again it's ... unusual.
No. The gm need not bump the DC to encounter the 3.5 problems that bounded accuracy was intended to fix. Stock RAW PHB DMG only is enough. Back then you had a situation where some classes vrs some challenges (ie full 1/1 BaB ones & monster ACs became impossible to hit for others (ie fractional BaB ones) if the first set had so much as a chance of missing... The second part of that was in addition if the second group was simply capable of hitting the AC/DC/etc the first group was almost incapable of failure.That shouldn't happen by the rules. Unlike other editions of D&D, there are set DCs - they aren't level dependent. With bounded accuracy the modifiers are kept close enough that this works. So characters with reasonable rolls will still have a decent chance even if characters with expertise will have a good chance.
If the DM is arbitrarily increasing DCs they have either houseruled it, so it's outside the scope of this discussion, they are ignorant of the rule - also outside this discussion.