Bill Zebub
“It’s probably Matt Mercer’s fault.”
Because there are more complaints about failed attack rolls than failed ability checks.
Wait, is there a hotline I can call when I fail an attack roll? Why does nobody tell me these things?
Because there are more complaints about failed attack rolls than failed ability checks.
Obviously I can't dispute your findings at your table... but those are quite a bit different than what I see at my own.Half speed is devastating. I'd never, ever touch an ability which came with "half speed for the rest of the day" as a cost.
Difficult terrain affects all combatants equally (most of the time), and it is often possible to maneuver around it or bypass it. Having just your speed halved is far worse. If you're a melee warrior, it usually means losing a round of attacks as you close, and each time you need to get to a different place on the battlefield, there goes another round. If you're a ranged attacker or caster, it means you can't escape from the enemy's melee warriors without burning spell power.
And on top of all that, half speed and difficult terrain stack.
I don’t see a problem with that. Of course players would try to avoid it (presumably they would try to avoid the first level too, though they might be a bit more willing to risk it for a sufficient payoff). The thing is, it’s not always avoidable.
What are your thoughts?
TLDR: The new exhaustion rules not being as harsh so quickly, allows the players to actually engage with it as a risk, and DM's to use it as a consequence of exploration, and a way to pressure players outside of just combat/resources, without completely screwing over the players immediately like before.
There's not much point in having them because, with rare exceptions that are usually outside their control, players will simply consider any action that leads to gaining more than one level of exhaustion as off the table.
Can you elaborate?I strongly disagree.