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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Willie the Duck" data-source="post: 8786378" data-attributes="member: 6799660">It's kind of an age-old question -- if category A is lessor to category B, is it ever right to go into category A and do any kind of remediation to outlier subcategories that are disproportionate within the category. In general I would say it is a good plan -- that hand-crossbow CBE/SS spammers, halberd PAM/GWM-ers, and one-handed staff/spear and shield PAMers are such disproportionate winners within the martial category doesn't really do much benefit for anyone wanting to play a martial in any other light (be it two weapon fighting, sword and shield, or whatnot). Better to bring those strategies in line with the other options, while simultaneously working on bringing playing a martial up overall (and/or casters down). I mean, if this is the only change that happens, yes, any nerf to martials would push people towards other options. I am seriously curious to see what happens with casters (spells, really) and rest frequency (and fighters outside of combat, but that is another issue). If the worst of the caster spells  (or the most MC-benefiting) are re-written to not be so troublesome, and there is better guidance on addressing the 5-minute workday, these may well be stealth nerfs on casters that comes along with these culling of optimal martial tactics.I'm wondering if they are trying to get rid of this strategy in general. SS/GWM land squarely in the 'these are reasonable benefit-offset-by-penalty unless you have lots of significant ways to make to-hit penalties not significant.' The rolled-stat elven fighter with archery fighting style and SS and 20 Dex by level 4 (and an ally who casts bless most combats) has a much different experience with the feat than the gwm MAD paladin taking on Vecna.</blockquote>

Verification