OneDnD Why no new packs since late September?

Minigiant

Legend
Supporter
I don't think they're finding out that it's not as good as it looked. More likely they are finding out that simple expertise by itself is kind of bland and doesn't really have a ranger feel to it, especially if every expert class has it.
That's what I meant.

Not that it's bad. But that in actual play it doesn't actually do anywhere as much as the hype. So you are left with just blandness.

Much how Hunter's Mark without concentration sounds good. But the ranger class isn't built to really utilize nonconcentration buff because they lack both the spell slots and spells (in the PHB). So you quickly drop down to something bland.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
I mean like the whole community.

The designers never really expected people to play races whose ASI don't match their Class primary.
Yes, they very clearly did. That is part of why they opened up the ASI, though the biggest factor was inclusivity, not a mechanical issue.
The Tasha's ASI variants was due to people playing dwarf wizards and tiefling rogues often, something they didn't comprehend in house.
😂 this is the absolute opposite of the case.
The Tasha's cultural variants were due to people not running every race with the standard FR stereotype for them.
No. It was due to complaints relating to inclusivity.
Or subclasses that have different levels...

I agree it's not too hard to house rule it together. But that falls short of what I would consider "compatible".
While the rule offered in the UA (just gain subclass features at the level the subclass says, even if it’s totally different) is terrible, as long as they include an actual rational rule*, there won’t be a compatibility issue.

*You gain subclass feature levels when your class tells you that you do, if that is different from when your subclass lists those feature levels. If your class lists a subclass feature on the table for the level you have just gained, and your subclass has already given all of its features, you gain a bonus feat appropriate to your level, instead.”
 

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Much how Hunter's Mark without concentration sounds good. But the ranger class isn't built to really utilize nonconcentration buff because they lack both the spell slots and spells (in the PHB). So you quickly drop down to something bland.
The ranger has a ton of concentration spells. Hunters mark without concentration is a massive QoL improvement.
 

Minigiant

Legend
Supporter
Yes, they very clearly did. That is part of why they opened up the ASI, though the biggest factor was inclusivity, not a mechanical issue.
Actually, no.
In it was just inclusivity, they would have just removed the -2s like they were already doing.

They added floating +2/+1 to allow for goblin paladins. The change was to allow DMs and Players to create the race/class/culture combos they wants without feeling like the combos were weak or underpowered.

The ranger has a ton of concentration spells. Hunters mark without concentration is a massive QoL improvement.
It isn't that massive.

Like I said, rangers do not have the spell slots to put up 2 spells often in a 6-8 encounter day until hid-high levels. They'll burn though all their spells fast. And the primal spell list doesn't have that many spells you would stack within the short time. So it really doesn't do anything until level 9 when you get 3rd level spell slots and at that point most campaigns are over.

ALL concentrationless HM does is keep rangers from making checks to lose concentration on HM. Decent buff for melee rangers. Almost ignorable to ranged rangers.

So like what I said to Maxperson, It's looks cool on paper. Until actual play then its a big fat meh.
 

So like what I said to Maxperson, It's looks cool on paper. Until actual play then its a big fat meh.

Maybe prof bonus free uses or just 1 free use per day goes a long way.
Maybe add: against your favourite enemy it does not cost a spell slot.

Maybe changing hunter's mark to increase the number of targets, not duration when using a higher level slot.

There are quite some Ideas to make it work and a bit more interesting.

Right now I prefer the tasha ranger, just forgoing hunter's mark and use more interesting spells.
 


Minigiant

Legend
Supporter
It's a quality of life improvement - it's not like it was billed as revolutionary or anything. That's mostly what OneD&D is going to be, tweaks and QoL improvements.
My point is it is either a bad and useless QOLI.

If you can swap spells every day, it doesn't matter if you learn for free.
It still uses your slots.
If you are a half caster, you barely have the slots to run HM and some other spell.

Playtest FE looks cool but plays meh. Same with Expertise as you can swap skill-skipping spells like Goodberry or Speak with Animal in any day. And these are not the only things from my own home playtest that was like that. I filled out my survey late. I'm sue anyone who actually playtested the rules didn't fill out their surveys early either. Especially since the time was extended.

So there is a good chance the early surveys look very different from the later ones.
 

mellored

Hero
Not that it's bad. But that in actual play it doesn't actually do anywhere as much as the hype. So you are left with just blandness.
I kind of agree.

What they really should do (IMO) is still have the flavor, but make the power level small. Then you can have the bland power be bigger.

I.e.
favorite terrain: add 1d4 to checks on your favorite terrain. If you spend a month of downtime in an area, you can add it to your favorite terrain.
Expertise in 1 skill.

Now the ranger still has a swing in power based on terrain, but it's not drastic that everyone dips ranger to get desert in a darksun campaign.
 


tetrasodium

Legend
Supporter
My point is it is either a bad and useless QOLI.

If you can swap spells every day, it doesn't matter if you learn for free.
It still uses your slots.
If you are a half caster, you barely have the slots to run HM and some other spell.

Playtest FE looks cool but plays meh. Same with Expertise as you can swap skill-skipping spells like Goodberry or Speak with Animal in any day. And these are not the only things from my own home playtest that was like that. I filled out my survey late. I'm sue anyone who actually playtested the rules didn't fill out their surveys early either. Especially since the time was extended.

So there is a good chance the early surveys look very different from the later ones.
I found that mark was very effective in our test at level 6-7 for two very important reasons. The first is that it's easier to get more attacks now with the light weapon property or PAM making that extra d6 add up. HM lasts 1 hour & a level 6/7 ranger has 4 level 1 slots 2 level 2 slots/4 level1 3 level 2 slots respectively. That's up to 6 hours & you start hitting forced march after 8 hours... Step up the pace a bit & let those marks spread across multiple combats if you want to cast spells on top of them by saying things like "no bob I have mark running, maybe instead of pushing for us to take a short rest every fight or so you should start learning to psace yourself better & dialing back on the warlock nova/monk stunning strike/etc".
 

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
As I remember, your claim was that if you can use a 5e with a onednd character, so you can use a 3.5 character. So that they work on a totally different scale (BAB) seems to be negligible...
No. YOUR claim was that "it works" was the criteria for using something in 5.5. I simply pointed out that 3e characters use the same basics for d20+bonuses to beat AC or DC, etc, so those technically "work" as well. So if the criteria is "it works," then 3e characters are in the same boat. Personally "it works" doesn't cut it for me. I never claimed that they were equal and in FACT said the opposite and that the 3e disparity was far more extreme.
 

No. YOUR claim was that "it works" was the criteria for using something in 5.5. I simply pointed out that 3e characters use the same basics for d20+bonuses to beat AC or DC, etc, so those technically "work" as well. So if the criteria is "it works," then 3e characters are in the same boat. Personally "it works" doesn't cut it for me. I never claimed that they were equal and in FACT said the opposite and that the 3e disparity was far more extreme.

If by far you mean comparing apples to oranges, then I agree...

And yes, a 5e and a onednd character will work together. THE POWER DIFFERENCE IS NEGLEGIBLE.
 

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
If by far you mean comparing apples to oranges, then I agree...
How is 1d20+bonuses > or = AC being a hit(5.5), apples and 1d20+bonuses > or = AC being a hit(3e), oranges? Seems like both formulas are the same to me. They would work together, even if the numbers plugged in are different. They're just two different types of apples.
THE POWER DIFFERENCE IS NEGLEGIBLE.
To you.
 


Minigiant

Legend
Supporter
I found that mark was very effective in our test at level 6-7 for two very important reasons. The first is that it's easier to get more attacks now with the light weapon property or PAM making that extra d6 add up. HM lasts 1 hour & a level 6/7 ranger has 4 level 1 slots 2 level 2 slots/4 level1 3 level 2 slots respectively. That's up to 6 hours & you start hitting forced march after 8 hours... Step up the pace a bit & let those marks spread across multiple combats if you want to cast spells on top of them by saying things like "no bob I have mark running, maybe instead of pushing for us to take a short rest every fight or so you should start learning to psace yourself better & dialing back on the warlock nova/monk stunning strike/etc".
You don't get 3rd level spells until level 9.

You are dedicating 3 of your first level slots to Hunter's mark if you are doing too short rest per long rest. Until level nine, that leaves you only 0-4 more spell slots for the day.

Most campaigns do not last past level 9 or 10. That means for the most part you won't be able to fully utilize this ability for most of the campaign.

As a whole it is a lot weaker than the Tasha's substitute Primal awareness.
 

tetrasodium

Legend
Supporter
You don't get 3rd level spells until level 9.

You are dedicating 3 of your first level slots to Hunter's mark if you are doing too short rest per long rest. Until level nine, that leaves you only 0-4 more spell slots for the day.

Most campaigns do not last past level 9 or 10. That means for the most part you won't be able to fully utilize this ability for most of the campaign.

As a whole it is a lot weaker than the Tasha's substitute Primal awareness.
1669760894128.png

and my ranger player had three second level slots at level seven (as I seem to have said). The 2014phb & expert playtest packet both list hunters mark as a level 1 spell.

Why is that bold bit relevant?

My campaigns tend to run into low to mid teens & a level 6-7 playtest with a couple 3.x modules made for a good test since it was far enough past the intro levels for players to have their characters starting to come into their own but not so far into classes that players might have enough trouble jumping into a fresh pc with so many fresh but not yet settled toys to cause a distortion if Alice lucked into the swing better than Bob.

So again make those HM casts last by keeping up the pace & pushing short rest spamming players to pace themselves rather than going nova then pushing for a short rest at your expense.
 

Minigiant

Legend
Supporter
View attachment 268288
and my ranger player had three second level slots at level seven (as I seem to have said). The 2014phb & expert playtest packet both list hunters mark as a level 1 spell.

Why is that bold bit relevant?

My campaigns tend to run into low to mid teens & a level 6-7 playtest with a couple 3.x modules made for a good test since it was far enough past the intro levels for players to have their characters starting to come into their own but not so far into classes that players might have enough trouble jumping into a fresh pc with so many fresh but not yet settled toys to cause a distortion if Alice lucked into the swing better than Bob.

So again make those HM casts last by keeping up the pace & pushing short rest spamming players to pace themselves rather than going nova then pushing for a short rest at your expense.
5e was designed around taking 2-3 short rests. Short rests are still 1 hour.. So a ranger would be expected to use 3-4 first level Hunter's Marks a day.
 


That's very obviously to anyone following this conversation, false. My bringing up the scale multiple times as having meaning does not equal "seems to have no meaning." I mean, seriously dude.

I was not reading every post of yours, just responses to me.
So when I said, it was working, you said 3.5 characters work too. Then you said, the power difference between onednd and 5e characters is big.
So no, I don't think your scale in any way reflects the actual facts.
So we just need to agree to disagree here.
 

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Actually, no.
In it was just inclusivity, they would have just removed the -2s like they were already doing.
The hell are you talking about? There were two races with -2s, and the complaints were about quite a lot more than orcs and kobolds.

If I were wrong, Tasha's wouldn't have also allowed you to pick whatever proficiencies you want, use custom lineage to represent your character however you want, they wouldn't have removed a bunch of "culture as inborn trait" language from the game, and they wouldn't have made videos talking about how in dnd the race writeup doesn't actually reflect racial norms, but rather the classic adventurer of that race, which is clearly nonsensical and designed to distance their depiction of the races from concepts of genetic essentialism.
They added floating +2/+1 to allow for goblin paladins. The change was to allow DMs and Players to create the race/class/culture combos they wants without feeling like the combos were weak or underpowered.
This is such a silly argument to make. They changed how races worked because one of the biggest inclusivity complaints was that the cultural traits and static ASIs represented racial/genetic essentialism, which is a racist concept used in the real world to justify atrocities.

Do you not remember the online discourse directed at wizards at the time leading up to Tasha's? d

it happened in response to inclusivity based complaints.
It isn't that massive.

Like I said, rangers do not have the spell slots to put up 2 spells often in a 6-8 encounter day until hid-high levels. They'll burn though all their spells fast. And the primal spell list doesn't have that many spells you would stack within the short time. So it really doesn't do anything until level 9 when you get 3rd level spell slots and at that point most campaigns are over.
You're thinking level 11 or 12, first of all, but no. They have just as many slots as Paladins, and the primal spell list has plenty of very good concentration spells. But even if we only look at damage dealing, the Ranger can now go nova, and stack weapon attack spells (which all require concentration) on top of hunter's mark.

If an hour duration is short in your experience, I doubt that is a common experience.

Also, there is no assumption of a 6-8 encounter day, that isn't the norm, it's literally just the number of encounters that is suggested to deplete the group's resources when using only fairly mild encounters.

3-4 encounters is almost certainly at least twice as common, and 1-2 at least as common as that.
ALL concentrationless HM does is keep rangers from making checks to lose concentration on HM. Decent buff for melee rangers. Almost ignorable to ranged rangers.
Any ranged ranger that never has to make concentration checks is either prone to ignoring concentration spells, or has an easy mode DM.

Beyond that, again, it allows a DPR focused ranger, especially the twf rangers which aren't even all melee with this UA, to throw up HM and any of ensnaring strike, hail of thorns, barkskin, summon beast (they clearly state that the list is only PHB spells, and there's nowhere else summon beast would go), spike growth, pass without trace (usually kept up until the first blows land, and HM can now be put up ahead of time as well, for a deadlier ambush. whether it can be used in combat past that point to any benefit depends on how stealth is run), enlarge/reduce (I once had a party go all in on the two-rapier ranger/monk with haste, enlarge/reduce, heroism, aid, from the party and HM from the ranger herself, and let her hold a chokepoint while the team performed a ritual. I threw 6 deadly fights at the ranger by herself aside from the occassional heal between fights. She held. It was rad as hell. I gave her a bonus level as a reward for extreme bravery under fire), and of course all those level 3 spells you want to pretend don't exist in order to make your wrong point.
So like what I said to Maxperson, It's looks cool on paper. Until actual play then its a big fat meh.
In your game, you certainly seem to have not used it well enough to see it's value, or perhaps your DM just runs things in a way that you've somehow got 6-8 encounters per day, and they never happen 2+ in a single hour.


I don't think that is especially representative.
 

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top