Page 11 of 50 FirstFirst ... 2345678910111213141516171819202136 ... LastLast
Results 301 to 330 of 1492
  1. - Top - End - #301
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    TheOOB's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Seattle, USA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeful View Post
    What I want you to do is scroll up like 6 posts. I've gone over this, but since you seem to have skipped it: I don't like the bloodline concept period, because this draconic sorcerer, like every draconic sorcerer, is simply a bunch of random bonuses tied together with a vauge theme that I find dumb and limiting as hell. I've looked over this concept for nearly ten years, and every time it's a bunch of random pluses tied together with one of the following words: draconic, angelic, demonic, elemental, undead, arcane.

    No one has ever done anything meaningful with the concept to change my mind about heritage's place in the game as a feat-tree.
    Except it's not random. Mechanics always inform role play, and role play informs mechanics, any player who has been playing for any length of time should know that. Do you have a problem with clerics getting their spells through gods, or fighters performing their maneuvers through swords? If you don't have a problem with those, why do you have a problem with a sorcerer using powers via dragon blood, or any other heritage. You just don't make any sense.

    Quote Originally Posted by noparlpf View Post
    The complaint is just that THUS FAR they've only given us the Draconic sorcerer. We want more than just that later.
    The complaint is that the thing they scraped together right before GenCon is incomplete. People have to think a little. They wanted something new to show for GenCon, but since they are not done with the fighter and wizard yet, that means that whatever they show will be incomplete. Considering PAX Prime is in just over a week, it will likely be incomplete for a little while. They have already shown way more transparency than with any other edition, which i praise and enjoy. What you're all getting is a rare glimpse into the design process, and many of you may be learning for the first time that the design process is a weird, disfigured, and often slow mess that slowly begins to resemble a completed product.

    I'm all for critiquing what is there, but don't complain about what's not there.

    And by all means, please everyone listen to the podcasts. They explain a lot about what's going on and what's planned.

    Quote Originally Posted by Starbuck_II View Post
    True, I perfer -3 penalty to damage or 1/2 damage to each attack when dual wielding whichever is higher.

    So if you deal 1d6+3, you deal 1d6 with each.
    If you deal 1d6+1 then you deal 1/2 damage as -3 (is lower).

    It works better with Sneak attack as well.
    The problem is, the way 3e did it is that they couldn't measure the power level of TWF. Every time they made an ability that added damage, they had to worry about the fact that it could be doubled with TWF, which oftentimes meant an ability was either overpowered with TWF, and balanced without it, or balanced with TWF, and a weak without it. That's not a good way to design things.
    Last edited by TheOOB; 2012-08-22 at 10:12 PM.
    "Sometimes, were heroes. Sometimes, we shoot other people right in the face for money."

    -Shadowrun 4e, Runner's Companion

  2. - Top - End - #302
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    DwarfFighterGuy

    Join Date
    Apr 2011

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    What is good about TWF this time around is that with the feat you get to attack with both weapons using one action, period. No wrangling to trigger full attacks, no to hit penalties. The half damage is too harsh though, especially in light of the monstrous multiattack ability, which deals full damage. I expect that to change.

  3. - Top - End - #303
    Banned
     
    Zeful's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by TheOOB View Post
    Except it's not random. Mechanics always inform role play, and role play informs mechanics, any player who has been playing for any length of time should know that. Do you have a problem with clerics getting their spells through gods, or fighters performing their maneuvers through swords? If you don't have a problem with those, why do you have a problem with a sorcerer using powers via dragon blood, or any other heritage. You just don't make any sense.
    I'm quite aware of how mechanics influence play, that's why I'm saying it's random. It's also why I'm saying it's bad. The draconic abilities present in the 5e playtest are a boost to your strength score, a boost to your AC, and a "special attack", all given "dragony" names to make the "theme". Strip away the word "dragon" everything and suddenly the abilities lose literally all their context, and become nonsensical. If you strip away "god" or "divine" from the cleric, his spell list and abilities still informs his niche, as his identity as a class is defined by playstyle and abilities, not random pluses that require the fluff to maintain context.

    That's just bad design. It's not interesting, it's not unique, and it's not even good writing.

    Also your last lines are a pretty basic false equivalence. So I'm not going to bother answering outside of "X ≠ Y".

  4. - Top - End - #304
    Orc in the Playground
     
    Madfellow's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2012

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Alright, since arguing with you is clearly getting nobody anywhere, Zeful,

    what do you want from the sorcerer?

  5. - Top - End - #305
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    DwarfFighterGuy

    Join Date
    Apr 2011

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    The changes made to the sorcerer make perfect sense: the more they tap their innate magical powers the more the source of that power becomes evident. What I miss is some threshold over which the sorcerer may lose control completely and may be consumed by this raw power. Kind of a last ditch effort, if you will.

  6. - Top - End - #306
    Banned
     
    Zeful's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by Madfellow View Post
    Alright, since arguing with you is clearly getting nobody anywhere, Zeful,

    what do you want from the sorcerer?
    Quote Originally Posted by Zeful View Post
    Remember the psion's differing bonus spells he got from discipline? Same thing only that select sorcerer spells change based on how his power manifested in his youth; you do remember that bit of fluff from the sorcerer class entry right?
    That. I want a caster that is different from the Wizard, but has the same kind of decision making at character creation that shapes it's play style and capabilities. I want a class that incites the imagination so a player can define what it means to him. I want something that doesn't take me two hours to port into a setting because I have to rewrite it's entire background. And I want to see something new.

  7. - Top - End - #307
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    DwarfFighterGuy

    Join Date
    Apr 2011

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeful View Post
    That. I want a caster that is different from the Wizard, but has the same kind of decision making at character creation that shapes it's play style and capabilities. I want a class that incites the imagination so a player can define what it means to him. I want something that doesn't take me two hours to port into a setting because I have to rewrite it's entire background. And I want to see something new.
    So, domain spells? How is that new?

  8. - Top - End - #308
    Banned
     
    Griffon

    Join Date
    Feb 2011

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeful View Post
    What I want you to do is scroll up like 6 posts. I've gone over this, but since you seem to have skipped it: I don't like the bloodline concept period, because this draconic sorcerer, like every draconic sorcerer, is simply a bunch of random bonuses tied together with a vauge theme that I find dumb and limiting as hell. I've looked over this concept for nearly ten years, and every time it's a bunch of random pluses tied together with one of the following words: draconic, angelic, demonic, elemental, undead, arcane.

    No one has ever done anything meaningful with the concept to change my mind about heritage's place in the game as a feat-tree.
    You responded to me you had a problem with the implementation but not the idea. Now you are saying you hate the idea.

    You don't like it, fine. I have my own pet peeves of implementations and ideas that would have me declare "I hate this" no compromise at all. So far they have not been shown, and I hope they never will. I'm still pleased 5E is working on introducing sorcerer bloodlines and hope they will offer more than just dragon. If such an idea is a take your ball and go home deal-breaker, shucks.

  9. - Top - End - #309
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    TheOOB's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Seattle, USA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeful View Post
    That. I want a caster that is different from the Wizard, but has the same kind of decision making at character creation that shapes it's play style and capabilities. I want a class that incites the imagination so a player can define what it means to him. I want something that doesn't take me two hours to port into a setting because I have to rewrite it's entire background. And I want to see something new.
    You're contradicting yourself.

    First, the sorcerer is different from a wizard. A wizard(currently), just has spells, background, and feats to help you shape them. A sorcerer has all that, plus a bloodline.

    I'll admit the draconic bloodline gives you a little less wiggle room, but it still gives you unique abilities and has a flavor that is internally consistent with the setting present in D&D. Forgetten Realms, Greyhawk, Eberron, Dragon Lance, heck even Ravenloft could accommodate someone who is of draconic blood and gains some magical powers from it. If your setting can't accommodate a Dragon Sorcerer, maybe D&D isn't the game system for you. If you can't fit a Dragon Blooded Sorcerer in your setting, that's your problem, not the games. And if you can't make an interesting character with that blood line, that is also your problem.
    "Sometimes, were heroes. Sometimes, we shoot other people right in the face for money."

    -Shadowrun 4e, Runner's Companion

  10. - Top - End - #310
    Orc in the Playground
     
    Madfellow's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2012

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by TheOOB View Post
    Forgetten Realms, Greyhawk, Eberron, Dragon Lance, heck even Ravenloft could accommodate someone who is of draconic blood and gains some magical powers from it. If your setting can't accommodate a Dragon Sorcerer, maybe D&D isn't the game system for you. If you can't fit a Dragon Blooded Sorcerer in your setting, that's your problem, not the games. And if you can't make an interesting character with that blood line, that is also your problem.
    This.

    OK, WotC came up with something you find restrictive and that happens to not fit with your campaign setting. OK, similar things have been done before with the sorcerer. That makes them iconic, not cliched. There is a difference. You don't want bloodlines in your campaign setting? You don't need them. You don't like the idea of bloodlines in general? Tell that to Wotc in the next questionnaire. Maybe a lot of people agree with you and they'll change it. But most of the people on this thread are happy to see them back and are looking forward to them, and your whining about it is not going to change their minds. So can you give it a rest already?

  11. - Top - End - #311
    Banned
     
    Zeful's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by Gwendol View Post
    So, domain spells? How is that new?
    Strawman.

    Quote Originally Posted by navar100 View Post
    You responded to me you had a problem with the implementation but not the idea. Now you are saying you hate the idea.
    Because writing out "The bloodline concept as espoused by the current implementation of the concept" for the third time is annoying as hell. Forgive me for attempting to be concise with something I had said twice previously, in a response to a general statement I have, in my entire participation in this thread, have expressed disapproval for.

    Quote Originally Posted by TheOOB View Post
    You're contradicting yourself.
    Am I? I see it as having to deal with several people asking innane questions and then forgetting the answers I give them.

    First, the sorcerer is different from a wizard.
    Which is a good start, you'll notice I have made no mention of that in any of my complaints.
    A wizard(currently), just has spells, background, and feats to help you shape them. A sorcerer has all that, plus a bloodline.
    A bloodline that does not fit in with any of what I said, if you've been paying attention.

  12. - Top - End - #312
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Knaight's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2008

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by Gwendol View Post
    So, domain spells? How is that new?
    The comparison was to the Psion, which involves a distinct spell list, a distinct non-vancian casting style, and mandatory specialization within a broad field that informs character capabilities in a large way. This is somewhat more than just domain spells.
    Fudge Assistant in the Playground.

  13. - Top - End - #313
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    TheOOB's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Seattle, USA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeful View Post
    Strawman.
    Quoting the name of a logical fallacy without going into details doesn't make you sound smart, and defiantly doesn't win you an argument, it makes you sounds like a jerk. You keep saying how people are ignoring what you are saying, but you are failing to make a coherent argument. About the only thing you have made clear is that you really don't like characters having draconic themed abilities. That's definatly a big no for you.

    Of course now you'll reply that you have no problems with draconic themed abilities, thus muddling up your arguments even further.
    "Sometimes, were heroes. Sometimes, we shoot other people right in the face for money."

    -Shadowrun 4e, Runner's Companion

  14. - Top - End - #314
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    AgentPaper's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2008

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    He doesn't have anything against bloodlines for sorcerers, he just hates every single implementation of bloodlines for sorcerers, and doesn't have any better ideas.

    So, yes, he doesn't like bloodlines for sorcerers.


    Anyways, I remember some discussion earlier on how Expertise Dice (for the fighter) should regenerate at the end of the fighter's turn, instead of the beginning. Everyone seemed to have come to a consensus, but on thinking about it further, I have an opposing argument to bring forward:

    Specifically, the crux of the argument seems to be that if you decide to save your dice to parry, there's a chance you don't get hit by any attacks, and thus waste your dice.

    However, I would say that while having combat dice regen at the end of your turn does increase the power of Parry, it also reduces the amount of decision-making you have when using the dice. If combat dice regen at the end of your turn, and you get hit by a monster, using those dice to reduce the damage you take will be the correct choice 99% of the time, because your hit points are much more valuable than the hit dice of enemies, and even if you do save your dice, there's a decent chance that you won't even hit with your attack, thus wasting your combat dice.

    On the other hand, if combat dice regen at the start of your round, you have a much tougher decision to make. Do you spend your dice to deal extra damage and maybe kill the monster faster, or do you save them to potentially reduce the amount of damage you take? In this case, the current situation you're in has a huge effect on your decision-making process. If you're low on life, and surrounded by monsters, then you absolutely want to save your dice to parry and quite likely save your life. On the other hand, if you're facing a single monster, and it's likely to attack someone else, then you definitely want to use your dice for damage, to hopefully kill the monster and save your friend from getting hit.

    These are fairly clear-cut situations, but it can also be much more complicated. For example, say you're surrounded by 5 orcs, but there's also 3 more orcs closing in on your friend. Do you use your dice to deal more damage, and hopefully come to your friend's rescue, or do you fight defensively, and hope that your friend can handle himself? Or maybe you have other abilities to use, such as Shift and Jab, and instead you decide that you want to shift, move to your friend, and jab at one of the orcs, leaving one of your dice open to parry any incoming attacks.

    All of this adds immensely to the depth of strategy for Expertise Dice, with parry. The only reason I could see for having combat dice regen at the end of your turn would be to make parry or similar out-of-turn options more powerful, but parry already seems like a fairly powerful ability, so making it even more of a no-brainer doesn't sound like a good idea.
    Excellent avatar by Elder Tsofu.

  15. - Top - End - #315
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2011

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Aragon is a pathfinder switch hitter. He may have traded his spellcasting out for some other class feature or he may be in an e6 world where ranger spellcasting never manifests results that couldn't appear to be fairly mundane in nature. He also traded his pet class feature away.

  16. - Top - End - #316
    Banned
     
    Zeful's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by TheOOB View Post
    Quoting the name of a logical fallacy without going into details doesn't make you sound smart, and defiantly doesn't win you an argument, it makes you sounds like a jerk. You keep saying how people are ignoring what you are saying, but you are failing to make a coherent argument. About the only thing you have made clear is that you really don't like characters having draconic themed abilities. That's definatly a big no for you.

    Of course now you'll reply that you have no problems with draconic themed abilities, thus muddling up your arguments even further.
    I've been infracted by the mods for doing so. I don't have the option to elaborate without getting banned. If he can't figure out why he's getting that response, which has now been posted by Knaight, then there's no point responding to him further at all.

    But fine you want me to be clear and unambiguous about my position:

    Bloodline abilities, as implemented by ****ing everyone writing a sorcerer fix, have universally been focused around adding marginal, useless bonuses that fail to differentiate the class outside of shoestring justification attching it to a theme. Thus they all fail to add any meaningful weight to any decision in choosing a bloodline comparable to Psionic disciplines and Wizard schools. This design paradigm, with it's remarkable lack of impact towards any core feature of the sorcerer can, and in my opinion, should be removed and replaced with something fitting the design direction of Psionic disciplines and Wizard Schools, which restrict and inform playstyle and add choice in a meaningful way.

    Further, the addition of racial traits to a class, rather than a line of feats or advanced classes creates one of two detrimental situations: first being the heavy handed direction of the inherent fluff to an unprecedented degree, and is unsupported by the fluff of every other class. Choosing to ignore this by saying that "fluff can be changed" is equivalent to saying "the game isn't broken, the game master can fix it", and thus is a fallacious argument and must be discarded. The second being the arbitrary restriction of the associated racial traits, making adding heritage options for other classes unlikely, or making the racial options presented by the class seem nonsensical in the face of heritage options for other classes in the form of feats or advanced classes.

    Moving on, it is only the bloodline abilities that are part of the set "as implemented by ****ing everyone writing a sorcerer fix", that are in contention, as stated above they do not fit with the existing design of other classes, either mechanically or with regards to fluff, and attributing arguments toward that set to the set of "bloodline abilities" is failing to grasp the scale of the argument as the general set of "bloodline abilities" are not, nor ever have been, in contention.

    There, is that clear enough for you?

  17. - Top - End - #317
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    AgentPaper's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2008

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeful View Post
    There, is that clear enough for you?
    Actually, yes. I think we can have a meaningful discussion now. Speaking of which:

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeful View Post
    Bloodline abilities, as implemented by ****ing everyone writing a sorcerer fix, have universally been focused around adding marginal, useless bonuses that fail to differentiate the class outside of shoestring justification attching it to a theme. Thus they all fail to add any meaningful weight to any decision in choosing a bloodline comparable to Psionic disciplines and Wizard schools. This design paradigm, with it's remarkable lack of impact towards any core feature of the sorcerer can, and in my opinion, should be removed and replaced with something fitting the design direction of Psionic disciplines and Wizard Schools, which restrict and inform playstyle and add choice in a meaningful way.
    If the bonuses are marginal and useless, then the solution is to simply make them more powerful and significant. This is a matter of balance, not an inherent issue with the design of the class or the features.

    I would also say that it's hard to say, as of yet, whether choosing between each bloodline will have "meaningful weight", simply because we only have one option to look at so far. However, even with just the one, it looks fairly likely that the bloodlines will be fairly important to how the sorcerer plays. Specifically, I would point out how the Hit Dice and armor and weapon proficiencies are listed under the Draconic Heritage, which implies that other heritages will have completely different amounts of HP and use different weapons. The Draconic Sorcerer has good HP, can use heavy armor (even while casting), and can wield martial melee weapons, but another Sorcerer might have d4 hit dice and no proficiencies to speak of, but instead get other bonuses like extra spells, extra willpower, etc. If this is the case, I would say that that is in fact a very weighty decision to make.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeful View Post
    Further, the addition of racial traits to a class, rather than a line of feats or advanced classes creates one of two detrimental situations: first being the heavy handed direction of the inherent fluff to an unprecedented degree, and is unsupported by the fluff of every other class. Choosing to ignore this by saying that "fluff can be changed" is equivalent to saying "the game isn't broken, the game master can fix it", and thus is a fallacious argument and must be discarded. The second being the arbitrary restriction of the associated racial traits, making adding heritage options for other classes unlikely, or making the racial options presented by the class seem nonsensical in the face of heritage options for other classes in the form of feats or advanced classes.
    As we've said before, Bloodlines don't make any more assumptions of your setting that most of the other classes (with fighters and rogues being the obvious exceptions). In addition, if you're making your own setting that doesn't line up with the standard DnD fare, then you're going to need to make and alter a LOT of fluff, depending on how much different your campaign is, so changing a few bits of fluff to make sorcerers fit better isn't a big deal, and likely is something you'll have to do for many of the races, classes, spells, abilities, items, monsters, and so on.

    As to arbitrary restrictions on other types of racial heritage, I call baloney. The sorcerer as a class represents a certain type of bloodline heritage, which grants extremely powerful abilities such as spellcasting. It's not a race, because you can have dragon-blooded humans, or halflings, or elves, or kobolds, or whatever else you wish.

    If you want to add in your own heritage options, the sorcerer doesn't do anything to prevent that. Just because the bloodline heritage that creates a sorcerer is so powerful, doesn't meant that all heritage feats/backgrounds/etc have to be just as powerful. This is magic we're talking about, after all, and genetics isn't exactly a straightforwards science, either, so you could easily have a dragon-blooded sorcerer and also have another character, say a fighter, who has some dragon blood in him as well, and takes feats to represent those.

    It's already explicitly stated that draconic heritage doesn't always result in a sorcerer, for example a sorcerer character doesn't necessarily have sorcerer parents, so it's not hard to imagine that there might be degrees in how much the dragon heritage manifests in different people, or what traits specifically are manifested.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zeful View Post
    Moving on, it is only the bloodline abilities that are part of the set "as implemented by ****ing everyone writing a sorcerer fix", that are in contention, as stated above they do not fit with the existing design of other classes, either mechanically or with regards to fluff, and attributing arguments toward that set to the set of "bloodline abilities" is failing to grasp the scale of the argument as the general set of "bloodline abilities" are not, nor ever have been, in contention.
    I'm not sure what you mean here. Are you saying that the sorcerer is too different from the other classes? Well, of course it's different, that's the whole point of different classes. The wizard is also very different from the fighter, which is very different from the warlock, which is different from the cleric, and so on. Or do you mean that the sorcerer is different in that he is born into his abilities, rather than obtaining them at some later date? Well, this is true, but it has always been true of the sorcerer, even when the specific source of those born-in talents weren't as explicitly stated, so I don't know why you think this is a problem of 5E style sorcerers.
    Excellent avatar by Elder Tsofu.

  18. - Top - End - #318
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    TheOOB's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Seattle, USA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    I would made an in depth point by point post, but AgentPaper said most of what I was going to say just as good if not better than I could have said it.

    I want to reiterate how significant the powers of the presented bloodline are. I am honestly a little worried that if bloodlines are all as powerful as the draconic bloodline, than bloodline might overshadow the sorcerers spell casting abilities. Their activated powers are every bit as good as spells, and the passive benefits turn them into a really good melee warrior. It's a very significant part of a character.

    I also want to reiterate that fighter and rogue are pretty much the only classes whose abilities are setting independent, and even then they assume a high fantasy setting at that. D&D has shapeshifting tree huggers and martial artists who can heal their wounds and kill someone with a strike. Dragon Sorcerers are not a stretch.

    As far as racial elements in a class. You have to understand that in this case, game mechanics are king. The mechanics of a game always take priority over fluff, and this is especially true for D&D, which is essentially a small group war game.(not saying you have to play it as a war game, but it's a chainmail spin off whether anyone likes it or not). The single most influential part of your characters mechanics is your class, your race and feats are very minor compared to your class. So if you want a character with a strong draconic magic theme to them that is represented by mechanics, it needs to be a class. That's your only option. Making a series of draconic magic feats will just feel like a feat tax for people who want them, and ignored by everyone else, and balancing a draconic magic race will be a nightmare. If a dragon sorcerer is going to exist, it has to be a class.
    "Sometimes, were heroes. Sometimes, we shoot other people right in the face for money."

    -Shadowrun 4e, Runner's Companion

  19. - Top - End - #319
    Troll in the Playground
     
    lesser_minion's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Bristol, UK

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by Flickerdart View Post
    WotC fluff has always been awful. No big deal.
    Incorrect. WotC are attempting to write and publish a roleplaying game. They have just as great a responsibility to provide competent fluff, irrespective of whether or not they're likely to pull it off.

    Forcing an overused trope down people's throats when there are alternatives is a betrayal of those responsibilities. And there are alternatives to making the sorcerer pick a bloodline. Among them:

    • Pick three 'gifts' from a list. Each grants you a minor bonus power. This is no better crunch-wise, but it covers everything that the bloodlines do, without forcing them down our throats.
    • Pick ten 'gifts' from a list, which determine which spells and other powers you receive. Each gift offers at least one spell or power that isn't otherwise available. Fluff as desired.
    • Don't give the sorcerers anything like this, and instead differentiate them by making their magic genuinely and radically different -- a sorcerer could make up spells on the fly, for example.
    Last edited by lesser_minion; 2012-08-23 at 02:54 AM.
    Thanks to Serpentine for the half-elf sorceress avatar.

    Spoiler
    Show

  20. - Top - End - #320
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    TheOOB's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Seattle, USA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by lesser_minion View Post
    Incorrect. WotC are attempting to write and publish a roleplaying game. They have just as great a responsibility to provide competent fluff, irrespective of whether or not they're likely to pull it off.

    Forcing an overused trope down people's throats when there are alternatives is a betrayal of those responsibilities. And there are alternatives to making the sorcerer pick a bloodline. Among them:

    • Pick three 'gifts' from a list. Each grants you a minor bonus power. This is no better crunch-wise, but it covers everything that the bloodlines do, without forcing them down our throats.
    • Pick ten 'gifts' from a list, which determine which spells and other powers you receive. Each gift offers at least one spell or power that isn't otherwise available. Fluff as desired.
    • Don't give the sorcerers anything like this, and instead differentiate them by making their magic genuinely and radically different -- a sorcerer could make up spells on the fly, for example.
    Honestly, the gift idea can be problematic, and here is why.

    People who played a lot of D&D 3/3.5 know that D&D can be very unbalanced. Certain choices a character can make can make one character vastly more powerful than another character, and the game was worse off for it.

    Here's the thing, the more different abilities you give a player to choose from, the more unbalancing it is. In other words, the more choices a player has, the exponentially more difficulty balancing all those possible choice together are.

    This is why most game systems either tend to create boring, generic characters, or tend to be wildly unbalanced.

    Using a class based system like D&D gives the designers an advantage though. Classes are basically pre-selected ability sets that have been carefully balanced to work together. You are able to give a player more powerful and more interesting abilities if you know what other abilities they will have.

    Creating a build your own class set up, on the other hand, makes the balance problem pop up again.

    Another thing you have to remember are casual players. As a rule, casual players don't want to make tough choices. As it is essential the the game is accessible to casual players, they need to make options for them. Sorcerer is supposed to be more simple to play than the wizard. Other than the blood line choice, a sorcerer only gains 1 or 2 more spells every level, otherwise their class is laid out for them. This is a good thing, the game needs casual player classes. Making a simple to build and play class overly complex by making a player build their own class will scare away casual players.

    Besides, I'm not buying WotC products to make my own game :) I'm already working on my own system, I don't need to make classes for D&D on top of it.

    I still don't get how sorcerer's are ruining roleplay or forcing an overused trope down peoples throats. Fighters are an overused trope, I've seen tons of characters run up to monsters and kill them with swords, and people don't have a problem with the class existing or roleplaying good fighters. Why can't someone role play a good sorcerer, whatever bloodline they are?
    "Sometimes, were heroes. Sometimes, we shoot other people right in the face for money."

    -Shadowrun 4e, Runner's Companion

  21. - Top - End - #321
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    DwarfFighterGuy

    Join Date
    Apr 2011

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by Knaight View Post
    The comparison was to the Psion, which involves a distinct spell list, a distinct non-vancian casting style, and mandatory specialization within a broad field that informs character capabilities in a large way. This is somewhat more than just domain spells.
    Yes, but not so much in Zeful's own words. And besides, why would he want the sorcerer to be like the psion; that's not exactly unique either. It looks to me like heritage can play a big role in how the sorcerer takes shape, impacting a number of things including spells. And they get a more spontaneous spellcasting system.

    His arguments for not liking the bloodlines are pretty much that; he doesn't like them and he's being quite insulting about those who address his (evolving) reasons.

  22. - Top - End - #322
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Yora's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Germany

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Then why are you talking about it?!

    I don't like bloodlines. I have no good reason than that I want sorcerers to be something else. So what, that's not worth debating for four pages.
    Spriggan's Den - Thoughts on RPGs and some of my personal creations.
    Ancient Lands - PF/d20 Sword & Sorcery campaign setting

  23. - Top - End - #323
    Orc in the Playground
     
    SwashbucklerGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2011

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by TheOOB View Post
    The problem is, the way 3e did it is that they couldn't measure the power level of TWF. Every time they made an ability that added damage, they had to worry about the fact that it could be doubled with TWF, which oftentimes meant an ability was either overpowered with TWF, and balanced without it, or balanced with TWF, and a weak without it. That's not a good way to design things.
    I don't think that's really a problem. Every single ability in the game can be Blessed or augmented by a variety of spells already; they should be able to account for TWF the same way they account for those. It costs a Feat, it should be a distinct bump in power. If it was a free option like fighting defensively or charging, then being situational is perfect. But this costs character creation resources and so it really needs to advance your power in visible ways, like learning a new spell or increasing Skills or BAB, etc., etc.
    Last edited by Stubbazubba; 2012-08-23 at 08:53 AM.
    *********
    Matters of Critical Insignificance - My Blog for all my favorite entertainment
    09/14: Special guest post on Quests and Travel, with a whole new quest-generation system!

  24. - Top - End - #324
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Togath's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Washington
    Gender
    Male2Female

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    I'm sorry about having misses this week's skype playtest, it took longer to get my computer 100% funtioning then i thought it would, and I only today managed to fix it so it can open the playtest documents again
    Spoiler
    Show
    Sawagakure: Village Hidden by the Valley Marsh
    OOC: I, IC: Team 1(I), Team 2(I)
    Lereth: Stormport
    OOC: I, IC: I
    Verden
    OOC: I, IC: I
    Homebrewer's Link(+PBP)
    Member of;

    Ninja by Grinner

    PM box is now clear(ish), so sending them should work now =3

  25. - Top - End - #325
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    DwarfFighterGuy

    Join Date
    Apr 2011

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by Yora View Post
    Then why are you talking about it?!

    I don't like bloodlines. I have no good reason than that I want sorcerers to be something else. So what, that's not worth debating for four pages.
    Last I checked, I wasn't the only one debating, nor have I debated you. In fact this debate hasn't been about your opinion of sorcerer bloodlines at all.

  26. - Top - End - #326
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    DwarfFighterGuy

    Join Date
    Apr 2011

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by Stubbazubba View Post
    It costs a Feat, it should be a distinct bump in power.
    Hear, hear. The half damage part of TWF is too much of a penalty, likewise the +1 AC is a little light.

  27. - Top - End - #327
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Imp

    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    New York
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by Gwendol View Post
    Hear, hear. The half damage part of TWF is too much of a penalty, likewise the +1 AC is a little light.
    I also find it a bit limiting that both weapons have to be finesse weapons to use TWF. Unless you use a Quarterstaff (can you use both ends of the Quarterstaff to attack if you have TWF?), there are no d8 weapons. (I don't think you can use a katana for TWF, since that is two-handed, but only has one dangerous end, unlike the Quarterstaff). At a cost of 2 sp and 1d8 damage, every dual wielder will be running around with a Quarterstaff.

    On the other hand, Sniper, the Level 3 Feat in the Archer Speciality, seems pretty cool. Giving up an action to gain advantage and ignore cover can be worthwhile, I think, especially if you can sneak attack.

  28. - Top - End - #328
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    SwashbucklerGuy

    Join Date
    Jul 2009

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    I apologize if I am asking something that has already been discussed, but: If I am reading the packet correctly, no PC actually picks and chooses what feats they want. You choose a specialty, and after you do so, your feats have already been picked for you and you simply gain them as you level. Right?

  29. - Top - End - #329
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Knaight's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2008

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Quote Originally Posted by Alejandro View Post
    I apologize if I am asking something that has already been discussed, but: If I am reading the packet correctly, no PC actually picks and chooses what feats they want. You choose a specialty, and after you do so, your feats have already been picked for you and you simply gain them as you level. Right?
    For now, yes, but this is theoretically a stopgap measure to be replaced by actual feats eventually. I'm guessing that the idea is to get the classes fully functional prior to introducing feats.
    Fudge Assistant in the Playground.

  30. - Top - End - #330
    Orc in the Playground
     
    Madfellow's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2012

    Default Re: D&D 5th Editon Discussion: 6th thread and counting

    Based on what they've been saying in press releases and such, backgrounds and specialties will be part of the finished product, but the rules will include an option to instead pick and choose skills, feats, and traits for yourself. The idea is that 3.5 fans and character optimizers will have maximum customization capacity, while fans of other editions and casual players will have simpler character creation options.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •