Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="5ekyu" data-source="post: 7582106" data-attributes="member: 6919838">Maybe this has been forgotten? Idk..Some of the intentional designs of 5e were driven by the idea of &quot;more hits, less misses&quot; because they felt players enjoyed it more. So &quot;getting hits&quot; was made broadly easier even while the value of a single hit was kind of mitigated by HP inflation, quicker recoveries etc. So, when you see an ability for 5e compared to an ability from 3.x which say drops a reaction attack and drops the &quot;you do no damage&quot; and *replaces them* with &quot;hey, give up that advantage, which is also easy to get in 5e&quot; it really starts to beggar rhe quality of the &quot;analysis&quot; being done. In games i run and play in, it is rare that we dont see attacks with advantsge during a combat. If we were to allow an add-on disarm at the cost of that advantage, keeping all the damage you normally do, then i cannot imagine agsinst any significant enemy with weapon that disarm not being done. I cannot imagine it not becoming the go-to tactic against any enemy that uses weapons and lasts. Thats inconsistent with a world where potent blades of power exist without any disarm proofing but even worse, its gonna drive play too much towards that niche. Walking weapon trees so you can keep drawing reolacements are not a direction i think this idea was aiming for (at least, not openly) but its a result its going to favor or incentivize.Or maybe all thst means is (to some) &quot;i hate it&quot; so dismiss away.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="5ekyu, post: 7582106, member: 6919838"] Maybe this has been forgotten? Idk.. Some of the intentional designs of 5e were driven by the idea of "more hits, less misses" because they felt players enjoyed it more. So "getting hits" was made broadly easier even while the value of a single hit was kind of mitigated by HP inflation, quicker recoveries etc. So, when you see an ability for 5e compared to an ability from 3.x which say drops a reaction attack and drops the "you do no damage" and *replaces them* with "hey, give up that advantage, which is also easy to get in 5e" it really starts to beggar rhe quality of the "analysis" being done. In games i run and play in, it is rare that we dont see attacks with advantsge during a combat. If we were to allow an add-on disarm at the cost of that advantage, keeping all the damage you normally do, then i cannot imagine agsinst any significant enemy with weapon that disarm not being done. I cannot imagine it not becoming the go-to tactic against any enemy that uses weapons and lasts. Thats inconsistent with a world where potent blades of power exist without any disarm proofing but even worse, its gonna drive play too much towards that niche. Walking weapon trees so you can keep drawing reolacements are not a direction i think this idea was aiming for (at least, not openly) but its a result its going to favor or incentivize. Or maybe all thst means is (to some) "i hate it" so dismiss away. [/QUOTE]

Verification