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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9147330" data-attributes="member: 6790260">Battlemasters do not get extra skill proficiencies. Minigiant spoke in error. They meant an additional artisan tool proficiency. You can probably guess what I think of this so-called "utility" benefit.As for the actual contribution BM makes, namely the Commanding Presence and Tactical Assessment maneuvers, subclass is separate from class. If subclasses elect to offer such choices, that's cool (though I wish it were better*). They can do so or not do so; they aren't meant to provide the core functionality of a character. The class itself, however, needs to give at least a thin veneer of distinctive support to all pillars of the game. Otherwise, the pillars aren't pillars, or the class is poorly designed for the explicit, stated intent of the game.I have, twice now, given an example of what I consider such a thin veneer. A properly-playtested idea in the general shape of my Gritty Determination proposal, and decoupling Tactical Mind from Second Wind. If you coupled those changes with small improvements to the Battle Master's skill maneuvers (and, ideally, adding more such maneuvers, e.g. relating to Survival, Perception, and (say) Medicine--call it "Survival Training" or something), then I could accept it as being adequate.*In brief: Having tools to do cool social things is great. It sucks balls that you can only do so by giving up the stuff you need in order to keep up with other classes in terms of combat contribution. If Commanding Presence and Tactical Assessment had a "this die is not consumed if the roll still fails" clause, I'd consider them in the ragged-edge-of-acceptable range.This is part of why it's so frustrating to discuss these things. You ask for an inch and people act like you're demanding a mile. They catastrophize. They turn any criticism at all into the most heinous thing ever, and anyone speaking that criticism is instantly and irrevocably impossible to please, someone who will take and take and take and take until Kingdom come. The changes do not need to be dramatic! And they can be quite simple to use in actual play!Though of course one must then wonder why you don't just play Rogue. Which, believe it or not, is actually pretty close to acceptable for me! There are a few tweaks I'd still want to make, but overall, Rogue isn't bad in 5e. It's not what I would consider good either, but it's not bad. (Its subclasses, on the other hand....)</blockquote>

Verification