D&D General Things That Bug You

[Reynard]

well, it would be nice to how what grabs people.

Are you asking about Conan or the PC?

Conan is compelling because he is expressly NOT what people think of stereotypically.

In the case of the PC I bet the answer boils down to "the adventures they went on and what they did."

If the only thing that is interesting about a character is how they function in combat, I can think of a few genres of games better suited than RPGs.

 

[Mind of tempest]

Are you asking about Conan or the PC?

Conan is compelling because he is expressly NOT what people think of stereotypically.

In the case of the PC I bet the answer boils down to "the adventures they went on and what they did."

If the only thing that is interesting about a character is how they function in combat, I can think of a few genres of games better suited than RPGs.

conan mostly, but any works as if I know what makes one thing work I can learn to make better things.

 

[CubicsRube]

expert and skill master.

Like a bard without spells.

The assassin should be the sneak-attacker.

I think the ranger should be the class that gets sneak attack. Makes sense to me as an ambusher type role.

 

[Mind of tempest]

I think the ranger should be the class that gets sneak attack. Makes sense to me as an ambusher type role.

I am still trying to figure out what a ranger is as it feels less of an idea than say the paladin.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

I think the ranger should be the class that gets sneak attack. Makes sense to me as an ambusher type role.

Though, my idea would be to have an Explorer or Expert class that would gather the themes of rogue and ranger. In the end, both of them are more or less the same thing, just in different settings (civilization vs wilderness).

 

[CubicsRube]

I am still trying to figure out what a ranger is as it feels less of an idea than say the paladin.

Yeah. That's where I see the sneak attack come in. Lose hunters mark, and make them spike damage ambushes. It's the class that sneaks up and takes out the camp guard before he's had a chance to yell.

 

[Reynard]

I am still trying to figure out what a ranger is as it feels less of an idea than say the paladin.

Aragorn and the Rangers of both the North and Osgiliath. That's literally what they are: heroes who defend the hinterlands so the heartland never feels the sting of the Enemy. As such they not only excel at survival, they have a keen understanding of the Enemy and how to hunt, scout and kill them. It is a narrow class, much like a paladin or warlock, but its narrow focus helps it stand out.

The problem is people want the ranger to be more broad in scope and that means it starts to get fuzzy. Making it a pet class was the real start of the mistake, I think, and trying to define it by one particular dark elf was worse.

 

[Reynard]

Another thing that bugs me: builds and the whole build subculture. Just play your character.

 

[DeviousQuail]

Like I said, gigantic handwave. Also, most of those on-hit effects impose either CON or STR saves.

Second handwave: heavy armor proficiency = your fighting skill largely revolves around maneuvering, positioning, and facing such that blows are deflected by your pauldrons or your greaves or your gigantic steel codpiece with the ruby-eyed skull on it, a skill that simply doesn't translate into unarmed fighting whatsoever.

Before we continue can you clarify if you agree or disagree with my position? I honestly can't tell if when you say handwave you mean "the game is handwaiving the issue by giving out other benefits like bigger hit dice" or "DeviousQuail is handwaiving these other benefits that make up for the drop in AC when unarmored."

 

[el-remmen]

Another thing that bugs me: builds and the whole build subculture. Just play your character.

Word.