D&D 5E Should Deadly Strike be a level feature?

[gyor]

Its filler, they should have class specific features that does this basic job like how Druids get dire beast form and Shilliegh does, which buffs damage like Deadly strike does, but with Druidic flavour.

Perhaps for example instead of smite being a CD ability it became at will and replaced Deadly strike for the Paladin.

 

[Stalker0]

What is actually gained by forcing damage dice to increase the same time attack bonus increases? Is it "cleaner"? Perhaps. But if the original way isn't exactly all that "dirty" to begin with... making it cleaner just moves it more towards "antiseptic". Which is what drove many people away from 4E to begin with.

The difference in 4e imo was that damage scaled primarily through powers, forcing the players to use their encounter and daily powers to generate "reasonable damage"

5e's modle lets you get big damage on all attacks, so its not quite as bad.

 

[Dausuul]

When 4E created a class advancement format that was exactly the same across all the classes in the game (IE the AEDU format) so that you could have one table that made it simple and easy to understand, we had half the gamer populace criticizing it for being too "cookie-cutter".

Now we have each class gaining abilities individually based upon the needs and numbers of the class itself... and we have people criticizing it for it being "haphazard".

So it goes. Some people like AEDU-style unity among classes, others (like me) don't. The latter will complain when it's imposed. The former will complain when it's removed.

 

[kerleth]

I like deadly strike in general. I dislike it being a class based ability. Scaling damage is key to showing power growth in more martial classes, due to the flatter math of fifth edition. So if you miss out on it than you are in trouble as far as doing your part at later levels. Seems like this is begging to be an issue with multiclassing down the road. I say unify it between classes, possibly by tieing it to attack bonus (so the wizard with no axe training doesn't do as much damage as the fighter). Return rogue to a "sneak attack" system more similar to last packets scheme based options like assassinate and the like. If you make a standard, say up to 3 weapon dice for everyone, then you can always give more martial classes like fighter an extra ability that cranks it up to five dice for them. That way everyone contributes but the warriors still shine.

 

[Animal]

When 4E created a class advancement format that was exactly the same across all the classes in the game (IE the AEDU format) so that you could have one table that made it simple and easy to understand, we had half the gamer populace criticizing it for being too "cookie-cutter".

Now we have each class gaining abilities individually based upon the needs and numbers of the class itself... and we have people criticizing it for it being "haphazard".

You can't have it both ways.

Why is that? Haphazard is not antonymous to cookie-cutter, is it? Those are two unrelated flaws that both need to be avoided.
I personally don't play rpgs for arithmetics. As a fighter, I want to learn new combat tricks with levels. Stances, maneuvers, combat styles. Increased damage could come from some of such abilities. But just a flat increase in overall damage at a certain level.. Zero flavour, only there to patch up sloppy math.. That just sounds like lazy design to me.

 

[Weather Report]

I would like Deadly Strike and Multiattack merged, so if you have Deadly Strike (roll three times), you could attack once for 3W; or once for 2W and once for 1W; or thrice for 1W. The only caveat being you cannot target the same creature more than once a turn.

 

[fjw70]

I would like Deadly Strike and Multiattack merged, so if you have Deadly Strike (roll three times), you could attack once for 3W; or once for 2W and once for 1W; or thrice for 1W. The only caveat being you cannot target the same creature more than once a turn.

Love it. This is exactly what one of my BX house rules form about a year ago did.

 

[Rhenny]

Yes. This is much cleaner. It is also what Mike Mearls mentioned in a podcast before the new playtest package came out. I wonder if they are working on it internally?