Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
One D&D is one D&D too much (-)
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Levistus's_Leviathan" data-source="post: 8738830" data-attributes="member: 7023887"><p>Then give that advice in the survey. I like the core concept, but also would like if they gave an optional rule for combining the mechanics of two different races. I'm giving that feedback. If you want that, you should too. </p><p></p><p>Flavor. And, nothing appears to have changed from earlier this edition. And they didn't change the ranges of Small, they just gave different ranges for different races. So Small Humans cover a larger range of the Small size than Ardlings. Like how it worked in the 2014 PHB for Halflings and Gnomes.</p><p></p><p>Then give that in the playtest. </p><p></p><p>Not every race can be every size. What's with the snark?</p><p></p><p>Again, no, every race has different sizes they can be. What's your problem with this? And we haven't seen the changes to tool proficiencies yet, so wait to complain about that until we see it. </p><p></p><p>Stonecunning being limited? I don't know. Balance maybe. Or a blessing from Moradin like Forge Wise. However, I would just make it always on. If you want that too, leave that advice in the survey.</p><p></p><p>Trend? Is it that races have different height ranges? Because that's the trend.</p><p></p><p>They do make limits. You can't use your Physical Ability Scores to cast the spells. They're just opening it up a bit so a) you don't have to keep track of multiple different spell save DCs from your race and class if you're a Wizard or other spellcasting class.</p><p></p><p>Do you like races being limited to different sizes, or do you just want to complain without saying what you want?</p><p></p><p>Good! Giving full race stats for Half-Elves and Half-Orcs always brings up questions of "What about Half-Gnomes, or Half-Halflings, or Half-Tabaxi" and whatnot. It's a slippery slope. This is a win for game designers. </p><p></p><p>They're opening up Tieflings to be of non-human heritages, like they did for Genasi, Aasimar, and other races in Monsters of the Multiverse. That includes small races, which explains why they can be Medium or Small. To me, that's a win. </p><p></p><p>If you want one of them to be resistant to Cold damage instead of Poison or Necrotic, say that in the survey. That's a fine recommendation. </p><p></p><p>Except for Small Giant and everything else built into the race that makes them stronger/tougher than halflings. </p><p></p><p>They are. It's actually a really common mistake online from the discussions that I've been in for people to miss the whole "you are recommended to customize the backgrounds how you want" part of the UA. Apparently, people online take things out of context and don't actually fully read the thing they're posting about. Who knew?</p><p></p><p>And they're tying them to backgrounds to give some justification of why they're even in the game at this point. Soldiers will be stronger/healthier than the average person, so the sample Soldier background they give grants them a bonus to STR and CON. They're quietly saying "Hey, you should build your custom backgrounds around where it would make sense for the Background ASIs to go". That's why they're still a thing. They're testing to see if it works for the broader community. </p><p></p><p>There might be some people that didn't read the rule fully and complain about specific ASIs, feats, and languages being "locked" into certain backgrounds, but WotC shouldn't design the game around the dumbest interpretation of a rule that's explicitly clear in how it works. </p><p></p><p>To make Backgrounds more important and give an easy excuse for including one of the most common homebrew rules people take. And to make stuff like Strixhaven Initiate and the Knights of Solamnia feats possible.</p><p></p><p>Yep. </p><p></p><p>Because it clearly looks like they're trying to balance them out a bit. And separating them by levels is a part of that. </p><p></p><p>And it looks like they're planning on making it easier to add more. So what are you complaining about?</p><p></p><p>I'm pretty sure that's their goal with the whole "separating feats by level" thing they're testing with this document. 1st level feats will be useful, but not as good as later level feats (which, presumably, will be the feats like Crossbow Expert, Polearm Master, and Sharpshooter). And, compared to the rest of 1st level feats in this document . . . this is still a worthwhile feat to take, and it did get a utility buff. </p><p></p><p>Nerf? Can you please explain how? Because, to me, it looks like it both got nerfed and buffed. And are you mad that they're giving options for nonmagical healing . . . because there aren't other options? Dude, don't complain about a good thing. That will just make them less likely to give you more of that good thing. If you want more sources of nonmagical healing ask for that in the survey document. Scolding them for it not being present before probably won't achieve . . . whatever you're aiming to achieve with this. </p><p></p><p>Actually, no. Because, while you do get more uses, now it's just advantage/disadvantage. The wording is slightly off, so it doesn't really do what it intends to do, but this is definitely a nerf from the PHB version of this feat. If you want it to be nerfed even more, put that in the survey.</p><p></p><p>They don't want people to get every cantrip in the game and the equivalent of 8 1st level spell slots, I guess. If you want it repeatable, leave that in the survey. </p><p></p><p>Umm . . . to me, it looks like this feat got buffed and the minor nerf of not working on OAs. It no longer specified "melee weapon attack" and just works on any weapon. </p><p></p><p>The feat still isn't good (well, it might be for level 1 if it's the only damaging feat option), but it's definitely not worse than before, IMO. It's opened up to more weapon options and you can get it before you'd get access to Great Weapon Master or Polearm Master. Looks like a slight improvement upon garbage to . . . slightly shiny garbage. </p><p></p><p>If you want them to be repeatable, put that in the survey. I think the main reason Musician couldn't be repeated is because Inspiring Song exists, and Crafter probably isn't repeatable to not get a 100% discount on your shopping prices/crafting times. </p><p></p><p>My guess is that they wanted to make it more specific to Taverns . . . for some reason. Yeah, this one is weird. I got nothing.</p><p></p><p>Yep. So, good change? No need for the salt. </p><p></p><p>Critical unarmed strikes didn't do extra damage before . . . so I don't know if you were playing correctly. </p><p></p><p>??? That's how it worked in base 5e. Now, your grapple just automatically works <strong>if you hit them</strong> and they have to try to break out later (presumably through using an Action to escape, but it's not clear yet). If this does what I think it does, this is a huge improvement of how Grappling worked in 5e and might actually encourage players to use it (which was very uncommon before). </p><p></p><p>5e was designed under the assumption that Inspiration was going to be more common than it ended up being in practice. So, it's not powercreep from the intended power level, because it's actually making the mechanic built into the system to remind players and DMs that it exists and is useful. </p><p></p><p>So, you like the change. No need to be negative if you like the darn thing.</p><p></p><p>If you needed to get that out of your system, I hope it helped. However, I think you were being a bit uncharitable to the document and the reasons behind a lot of the changes. Maybe look over things a bit more with new eyes (you got a few things wrong, and definitely have a grudge) if you can.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Levistus's_Leviathan, post: 8738830, member: 7023887"] Then give that advice in the survey. I like the core concept, but also would like if they gave an optional rule for combining the mechanics of two different races. I'm giving that feedback. If you want that, you should too. Flavor. And, nothing appears to have changed from earlier this edition. And they didn't change the ranges of Small, they just gave different ranges for different races. So Small Humans cover a larger range of the Small size than Ardlings. Like how it worked in the 2014 PHB for Halflings and Gnomes. Then give that in the playtest. Not every race can be every size. What's with the snark? Again, no, every race has different sizes they can be. What's your problem with this? And we haven't seen the changes to tool proficiencies yet, so wait to complain about that until we see it. Stonecunning being limited? I don't know. Balance maybe. Or a blessing from Moradin like Forge Wise. However, I would just make it always on. If you want that too, leave that advice in the survey. Trend? Is it that races have different height ranges? Because that's the trend. They do make limits. You can't use your Physical Ability Scores to cast the spells. They're just opening it up a bit so a) you don't have to keep track of multiple different spell save DCs from your race and class if you're a Wizard or other spellcasting class. Do you like races being limited to different sizes, or do you just want to complain without saying what you want? Good! Giving full race stats for Half-Elves and Half-Orcs always brings up questions of "What about Half-Gnomes, or Half-Halflings, or Half-Tabaxi" and whatnot. It's a slippery slope. This is a win for game designers. They're opening up Tieflings to be of non-human heritages, like they did for Genasi, Aasimar, and other races in Monsters of the Multiverse. That includes small races, which explains why they can be Medium or Small. To me, that's a win. If you want one of them to be resistant to Cold damage instead of Poison or Necrotic, say that in the survey. That's a fine recommendation. Except for Small Giant and everything else built into the race that makes them stronger/tougher than halflings. They are. It's actually a really common mistake online from the discussions that I've been in for people to miss the whole "you are recommended to customize the backgrounds how you want" part of the UA. Apparently, people online take things out of context and don't actually fully read the thing they're posting about. Who knew? And they're tying them to backgrounds to give some justification of why they're even in the game at this point. Soldiers will be stronger/healthier than the average person, so the sample Soldier background they give grants them a bonus to STR and CON. They're quietly saying "Hey, you should build your custom backgrounds around where it would make sense for the Background ASIs to go". That's why they're still a thing. They're testing to see if it works for the broader community. There might be some people that didn't read the rule fully and complain about specific ASIs, feats, and languages being "locked" into certain backgrounds, but WotC shouldn't design the game around the dumbest interpretation of a rule that's explicitly clear in how it works. To make Backgrounds more important and give an easy excuse for including one of the most common homebrew rules people take. And to make stuff like Strixhaven Initiate and the Knights of Solamnia feats possible. Yep. Because it clearly looks like they're trying to balance them out a bit. And separating them by levels is a part of that. And it looks like they're planning on making it easier to add more. So what are you complaining about? I'm pretty sure that's their goal with the whole "separating feats by level" thing they're testing with this document. 1st level feats will be useful, but not as good as later level feats (which, presumably, will be the feats like Crossbow Expert, Polearm Master, and Sharpshooter). And, compared to the rest of 1st level feats in this document . . . this is still a worthwhile feat to take, and it did get a utility buff. Nerf? Can you please explain how? Because, to me, it looks like it both got nerfed and buffed. And are you mad that they're giving options for nonmagical healing . . . because there aren't other options? Dude, don't complain about a good thing. That will just make them less likely to give you more of that good thing. If you want more sources of nonmagical healing ask for that in the survey document. Scolding them for it not being present before probably won't achieve . . . whatever you're aiming to achieve with this. Actually, no. Because, while you do get more uses, now it's just advantage/disadvantage. The wording is slightly off, so it doesn't really do what it intends to do, but this is definitely a nerf from the PHB version of this feat. If you want it to be nerfed even more, put that in the survey. They don't want people to get every cantrip in the game and the equivalent of 8 1st level spell slots, I guess. If you want it repeatable, leave that in the survey. Umm . . . to me, it looks like this feat got buffed and the minor nerf of not working on OAs. It no longer specified "melee weapon attack" and just works on any weapon. The feat still isn't good (well, it might be for level 1 if it's the only damaging feat option), but it's definitely not worse than before, IMO. It's opened up to more weapon options and you can get it before you'd get access to Great Weapon Master or Polearm Master. Looks like a slight improvement upon garbage to . . . slightly shiny garbage. If you want them to be repeatable, put that in the survey. I think the main reason Musician couldn't be repeated is because Inspiring Song exists, and Crafter probably isn't repeatable to not get a 100% discount on your shopping prices/crafting times. My guess is that they wanted to make it more specific to Taverns . . . for some reason. Yeah, this one is weird. I got nothing. Yep. So, good change? No need for the salt. Critical unarmed strikes didn't do extra damage before . . . so I don't know if you were playing correctly. ??? That's how it worked in base 5e. Now, your grapple just automatically works [B]if you hit them[/B] and they have to try to break out later (presumably through using an Action to escape, but it's not clear yet). If this does what I think it does, this is a huge improvement of how Grappling worked in 5e and might actually encourage players to use it (which was very uncommon before). 5e was designed under the assumption that Inspiration was going to be more common than it ended up being in practice. So, it's not powercreep from the intended power level, because it's actually making the mechanic built into the system to remind players and DMs that it exists and is useful. So, you like the change. No need to be negative if you like the darn thing. If you needed to get that out of your system, I hope it helped. However, I think you were being a bit uncharitable to the document and the reasons behind a lot of the changes. Maybe look over things a bit more with new eyes (you got a few things wrong, and definitely have a grudge) if you can. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
One D&D is one D&D too much (-)
Top