Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DDNFan" data-source="post: 6313812" data-attributes="member: 6776483">Damage on a miss is probably toast though, which is why I've been playing D&D Next twice a week for months now in a campaign that will likely evolve into the final rules. There will be an axeman pregen who will definitely have the final GWF selected, there is just no way they're releasing damage on a miss as the preselected feature for the new edition. I have it on good sources that it was removed during private playtests. The greatsword / greataxe divide is house-rulable, but still bothersome. Polearms are another story. One of my characters is a dual wielder, and about to turn level 4. It's vexing to look at Dual Wielder feat compared with Polearm Master feat, which is loads and loads better, and if they don't fix that, it seems like they haven't understood a single thing about feat balance and the rest of the game is probably going to have similar trap choices in it.Trap choices are poor game design, I thought they wrote some L&L articles about how they didn't want system mastery to be a thing in 5th edition. If my character picks Dual Wielder instead of Polearm Master, he will gain only 2/3rds the benefit of great weapon master, while giving up reach and a possible extra attack, as well as extra damage. It seems like the design team should have spent more time reading the text of the feedback they received instead of multiple choice radio buttons. My character, when comparing which to take, would think, gee, do I want to do d10 damage with reach possibly 3x per round, and d4 + mods (two weapon fighting + colossus slayer d6 + any other buffs that may or may not benefit a single weapon or multiple weapons). They gave paladins access to two weapon fighting style, yet didn't think to make Sacred Weapon, another class feature, benefit both weapons? Or even divide the bonus between each hand, for symmetry? More facepalm stuff. They should spend more time peering over their work with a critical eye. I noticed tons of bugs that many others brought up and they probably didn't fix half of them.Maybe then they could explain to us why they thought it was a good idea for Mauls and Greatswords to be better than Greataxes, and why rapiers are 2 lbs and non-light, whereas scimitars are 3lbs and light.To quote someone on another forum, maybe Mearls thinks 2 is greater than 3. I've swung rapiers and scimitars in real life, and rapiers are both much lighter and much easier to swing (weight doesn't always tell the whole story, but in this case, it definitely does).Don't mistake my criticisms here for assent that prior editions are perfect or even better. They aren't. But 5th ed could have been so much better than it already is turning out to be. I don't believe those who think that it's pithy to say "don't let perfect be the enemy of good", that sounds like a rationalisation for lazy mediocrity.</blockquote>

Verification