Page 8 of 13 FirstFirst 12345678910111213 LastLast
Results 211 to 240 of 385
  1. - Top - End - #211
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Easy_Lee's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2014

    Default Re: Why do People Hate on Crossbow Expert?

    Quote Originally Posted by pwykersotz View Post
    That has implications far beyond the thread as I've read it so far (and little to do with Xetheral's point). Are you suggesting that I'm not playing D&D if I rule that a fall from over 400' is instant death and that crossbows can only ever fire once before breaking? Or are you hyperbolizing the specifics of accepting that trying to make a combat system that never strains physics is improbable?
    I'm suggesting that trying to make an accurate model of physics is neither possible nor desirable in the context of D&D. Filling in the gaps with physics? That's one thing (though still pretty dubious since we know D&D is selective with physics at best). Outright changing the rules because you don't think something is possible? That's going way too far, especially since you might be wrong about what's possible in the real world.
    Breaking BM: Revised - an updated look at the beast-mounted halfling ranger based on the Revised Ranger: Beast Conclave.

  2. - Top - End - #212
    Orc in the Playground
     
    DwarfClericGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2014

    Default Re: Why do People Hate on Crossbow Expert?

    Quote Originally Posted by Xetheral View Post
    As it happens, we have a tweet from a developer clarifying that the word "loaded" was indeed superfluous.
    There is equally a tweet confirming you need a second weapon.

    Beyond that I'll admit that the argument itself is a clever way to try and get around the black and white text, though your exaggerated wording makes it seem more that you believe it will for some reason confuse me.

    Quote Originally Posted by GiantOctopodes View Post
    I get the point you're trying to make, I really do, even if I disagree with it. And again, as long as you're consistent with it that's fine, which means that Bards can only use Battle Magic if they already have a weapon in their hand when casting a spell, and can only make the weapon attack with that specific weapon they're holding, as you're arguing you must be ready to use the bonus action *right then* even if you're not going to use it, and can't change anything to be able to take advantage of the granted bonus action.

    That's a houserule, but hey, whatever works for your table.


    Bonus actions are their own thing, distinct from whatever actions or abilities spawned them. They are actions in and of their own right. You're saying that someone can make an attack with a melee weapon, walk across a room, tie a quick knot (but only with one hand, can't put down that crossbow or you'll lose the action!) and then take a shot with the loaded hand crossbow they've been holding this whole time, but they can't attack with a melee weapon, draw a loaded hand crossbow from a holster, and fire it right into the same person in front of them. That, even though they both met the requirements to gain the bonus action (attacking with a one handed melee weapon), because the person was not ready to use said bonus action *right then* they lose it. Beyond not being supported by the rules whatsoever, I personally find that a little silly, but hey, whatever works for you.

    Edit: Xetheral, I wish there was a "like" button for your post.
    For bards yes you would have to have a weapon in hand, conceptually your supposed to be fighting casting together not casting magic and then fighting separately.

    You did get that my whole using actions on another turn in sarcasm to point out how silly I find your use of the bonus action is right?
    Last edited by Regulas; 2014-12-03 at 04:28 PM.

  3. - Top - End - #213
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    MindFlayer

    Join Date
    Nov 2014

    Default Re: Why do People Hate on Crossbow Expert?

    Quote Originally Posted by Regulas View Post
    There is equally a tweet confirming you need a second weapon.

    Beyond that I'll admit that the argument itself is a clever way to try and get around the black and white text, though your exaggerated wording makes it seem more that you believe it will for some reason confuse me.



    For bards yes you would have to have a weapon in hand, conceptually your supposed to be fighting casting together not casting magic and then fighting separately.

    You did get that my whole using actions on another turn in sarcasm to point out how silly I find your use of the bonus action is right?
    Cool, so long as you also remember then that it would preclude them using two handed weapons (including most ranged weapons) when casting spells with somatic components. Battle Magic does not specify that the weapon needs to be in the other hand already, and personally I find the idea of someone with a shield casting burning hands at someone as they rush forward, then drawing a sword at the last moment and slashing away at their still burning opponent just as much of fighting and casting together as someone casting with one hand and basically being forced to dual wield a weapon in the other hand.

  4. - Top - End - #214
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    pwykersotz's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Western Washington
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why do People Hate on Crossbow Expert?

    Quote Originally Posted by Easy_Lee View Post
    I'm suggesting that trying to make an accurate model of physics is neither possible nor desirable in the context of D&D. Filling in the gaps with physics? That's one thing (though still pretty dubious since we know D&D is selective with physics at best). Outright changing the rules because you don't think something is possible? That's going way too far, especially since you might be wrong about what's possible in the real world.
    I dunno. Barring magical aid, it seems legit if a DM wants to cap run speed to Usain Bolt's top speed (as a random example used as a corollary to the point). I understand that you don't consider it worthwhile, but it's a fine playstyle.

    My interest in discussing this stems from how my players perceive the game. They don't care about RAW, they care about what makes sense to them. They never would start this crossbow conversation with me on their own because they wouldn't consider parsing it like we have. What they WOULD do is ask if they could do X because "It makes sense". So not only 'filling the holes' with physics but out and out banning or allowing some things based on how we perceive the world increases immersion and fun for them.

    This makes for interesting situations, because I myself tend more towards a gamist mindset while GM'ing, even if I go simulationist while playing. Thus, a lot of these ideas compound on each other. If I allow X, my players perceive it 'makes sense' for y to happen, since x is clearly possible. Y is unintended, and broken from a gamist perspective though, so I have to disallow X to keep both sides happy.

    So yeah, I've done exactly what you suggest should never be done, alter the rules to deny players certain options, though with the noble reason being because of the way they prefer to interact with the world. I also alter the world to grant them boons...it's not all about taking options away, sometimes breaking or bending a few rules leads to better things.

    So to finish with a question, does that style conflict with your sense of what D&D is?
    Attacking the darkness since 2009.

    List of Unearthed Arcana, Sage Advice, etc.
    Spoiler: Quotes I like
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by icefractal regarding What would a Cat Lord want? View Post
    She wants the renegade Red Dot brought to her court in chains.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dimers regarding a description of Stygia View Post
    Yes, I believe you have won GitP for the day.
    Quote Originally Posted by pwykersotz regarding randomly rolling edgelord backstories View Post
    Huh...Apparently I'm Agony Blood Blood, Half-orc Shadow Sorcerer. I killed a Dragons. I'm Chaotic Good, probably racist.

  5. - Top - End - #215
    Orc in the Playground
     
    DwarfClericGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2014

    Default Re: Why do People Hate on Crossbow Expert?

    Quote Originally Posted by GiantOctopodes View Post
    Cool, so long as you also remember then that it would preclude them using two handed weapons (including most ranged weapons) when casting spells with somatic components. Battle Magic does not specify that the weapon needs to be in the other hand already, and personally I find the idea of someone with a shield casting burning hands at someone as they rush forward, then drawing a sword at the last moment and slashing away at their still burning opponent just as much of fighting and casting together as someone casting with one hand and basically being forced to dual wield a weapon in the other hand.
    To begin with I see this as a big part of the whole point of War Caster Feat so you can wield anything and cast all together.
    It's a DM call but I would probably allow Two-handed weapons because you can just let go with one hand while still holding onto the weapon with the other as that's far less then unsheathing.

  6. - Top - End - #216
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Easy_Lee's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2014

    Default Re: Why do People Hate on Crossbow Expert?

    Quote Originally Posted by pwykersotz View Post
    So to finish with a question, does that style conflict with your sense of what D&D is?
    A couple things:
    • D&D is the ruleset. D&D with different rules is something else. Maybe it's pathfinder, maybe it's almost D&D, but it's not the game we all know any longer. These forums are about D&D 5e. If we all play by different rules, there's a limit to what we can discuss.
    • D&D with a perfect physics simulator wouldn't have dragons, magic, or anything else fantasy. If I wanted realistic, I'd go to Wal-Mart and slap random people with an overlong stick of salami. Or I might play some sports.
    • D&D with no rules other than what seems right at the time is more akin to play-pretend than an actual game.

    As I see it, this is why one should be careful when ignoring RAW, and really ought to have the decency to at least acknowledge that's what they're doing. People who say fighters can't fire a crossbow X times because it would be hard in real life? That's not D&D, that's pretense.
    Breaking BM: Revised - an updated look at the beast-mounted halfling ranger based on the Revised Ranger: Beast Conclave.

  7. - Top - End - #217
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    EvilAnagram's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    United States
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why do People Hate on Crossbow Expert?

    Quote Originally Posted by Easy_Lee View Post
    {scrubbed}
    {scrubbed}

    Quote Originally Posted by Easy_Lee View Post
    And second, ever seen an experienced piano player play a fast section? Their hands move pretty damn fast. Hell, in the real world people can throw baseballs at 90mph. Does it really seem at all inordinate that someone in a fantasy game can reload a crossbow pretty quick?
    Pianos rely on small, swift movements. Crossbows rely on much larger, dissimilar movements. Also, baseball pitchers can accelerate the ball much faster than their arms, and they don't have to move back and forth rapidly. Neither of these has any bearing on anything.
    Last edited by Savannah; 2014-12-05 at 09:58 PM.

  8. - Top - End - #218
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Easy_Lee's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2014

    Default Re: Why do People Hate on Crossbow Expert?

    @EvilAnagram you're being rude, you're argument in no way contradicts my own, and you're arguing about what's possible in a fantasy game. So congratulations, I guess.

    But your real-world concerns would have no relevance in D&D even if they were correct. And they're not. If I can load a crossbow twice in six seconds, and I can, I would expect a fighter in D&D can do better. Case closed.
    Breaking BM: Revised - an updated look at the beast-mounted halfling ranger based on the Revised Ranger: Beast Conclave.

  9. - Top - End - #219
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Saint Louis
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why do People Hate on Crossbow Expert?

    Quote Originally Posted by EvilAnagram View Post
    {scrubbed}
    No one is saying reality doesn't matter at all even if it doesn't.

    What is being said that if there are rules within a fantasy game that defy real world reality then the rules win and not reality.

    I guess you don't play with HP, AC, Magic, or Monsters in your game. Cause you know, they are realiatic.
    Last edited by Savannah; 2014-12-05 at 09:59 PM.

  10. - Top - End - #220
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    MindFlayer

    Join Date
    Nov 2014

    Default Re: Why do People Hate on Crossbow Expert?

    Quote Originally Posted by Regulas View Post
    To begin with I see this as a big part of the whole point of War Caster Feat so you can wield anything and cast all together.
    It's a DM call but I would probably allow Two-handed weapons because you can just let go with one hand while still holding onto the weapon with the other as that's far less then unsheathing.
    Right, but then they're changing their wielded weapons (since a two handed weapon can't be wielded in one hand) in order to take advantage of the bonus action granted by the action they had previously successfully completed (casting a spell), which is in all ways exactly the same thing as changing your wielded weapons to take advantage of the bonus action granted by crossbow expert. I agree that it's a big part of the whole war caster feat, but my point is, if you're not adding in extra requirements which don't currently exist to that ability, in order to enforce your idea of bonus actions being all together with the action that triggered it (even though they're not required to be, and explicitly allowed to be separated by movement and object interaction), why would you do so with crossbow expert? If you accept that you don't have to perform the action that triggers a bonus action with the same items in hand you use to complete the bonus action (which is indeed allowable by RAW), why would crossbow expert be the lone exception?

  11. - Top - End - #221
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    pwykersotz's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Western Washington
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why do People Hate on Crossbow Expert?

    Quote Originally Posted by SpawnOfMorbo View Post
    No one is saying reality doesn't matter at all even if it doesn't.

    What is being said that if there are rules within a fantasy game that defy real world reality then the rules win and not reality.

    I guess you don't play with HP, AC, Magic, or Monsters in your game. Cause you know, they are realiatic.
    The rules win for as far as you're willing to take them.

    There is no explicit rule regarding the speed with which one can reload a crossbow. We have only inference from multiple sources. It would seem to follow that it is then up to interpretation based on the type of game you're running.

    Arguing that logical extremes of rules here and there create a new type of physics that bears no similarity to anything previously seen, especially when the rules themselves are trying to model non-magical actions, is not really useful to most DM's. As theorycraft, sure. As practical application, not typically. Arguing that it is the one true way is, in my opinion, silly.
    Attacking the darkness since 2009.

    List of Unearthed Arcana, Sage Advice, etc.
    Spoiler: Quotes I like
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by icefractal regarding What would a Cat Lord want? View Post
    She wants the renegade Red Dot brought to her court in chains.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dimers regarding a description of Stygia View Post
    Yes, I believe you have won GitP for the day.
    Quote Originally Posted by pwykersotz regarding randomly rolling edgelord backstories View Post
    Huh...Apparently I'm Agony Blood Blood, Half-orc Shadow Sorcerer. I killed a Dragons. I'm Chaotic Good, probably racist.

  12. - Top - End - #222
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Saint Louis
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why do People Hate on Crossbow Expert?

    Quote Originally Posted by pwykersotz View Post
    The rules win for as far as you're willing to take them.

    There is no explicit rule regarding the speed with which one can reload a crossbow. We have only inference from multiple sources. It would seem to follow that it is then up to interpretation based on the type of game you're running.

    Arguing that logical extremes of rules here and there create a new type of physics that bears no similarity to anything previously seen, especially when the rules themselves are trying to model non-magical actions, is not really useful to most DM's. As theorycraft, sure. As practical application, not typically. Arguing that it is the one true way is, in my opinion, silly.
    Yes there is rules for how fast you can reload a crossbow.

    Normal: Per action, bonus action, or reaction you can load and fire only once.

    With feat: Per action, bonus action, or reaction you can loaf and fire as many times as the ability let's you.

    Using the ammunition and loading properties along with the feat tells you this.

    So if you get 4 attacks with one action and that feat you can reload the crossbow 4 times as fast as you normally could without the feat.

  13. - Top - End - #223
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Aug 2014

    Default Re: Why do People Hate on Crossbow Expert?

    Quote Originally Posted by Regulas View Post
    The designers response was "you juggle your gear". So if I accept that is valid then I must accept that juggling does not require any skill checks.

    I guess that also means I don't need warcaster, since I can just juggle my shield and sword to free up my hands.
    I guess it WOULD require skills checks....without the feat. the feat is what enables you to have the skill to wield two crossbows and load them effectively in combat.

    so, so obvious.
    My Characters:

    Rai'un - Monk(8)/Warlock(2) :: The Westfold: Homebrew persistent open world campaign RIP
    Myrion Farcaster - Rogue (no levels) :: The Adventurers Code Vice: homebrew RP campaign RIP
    Pellanistra Tuin'tarl - Paladin (10), Rogue (1) :: Drow underdark campaign RIP

    all the campaigns....they are died....

  14. - Top - End - #224
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    EvilAnagram's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    United States
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why do People Hate on Crossbow Expert?

    Quote Originally Posted by Easy_Lee View Post
    @EvilAnagram you're being rude, you're argument in no way contradicts my own, and you're arguing about what's possible in a fantasy game. So congratulations, I guess.
    ...you are also arguing about what's possible in a fantasy game...

    Quote Originally Posted by Easy_Lee View Post
    But your real-world concerns would have no relevance in D&D even if they were correct. And they're not. If I can load a crossbow twice in six seconds, and I can, I would expect a fighter in D&D can do better. Case closed.
    If you are suggesting that you can accurately load, aim, and fire an actual crossbow twice in six seconds - drawing from a quiver - I am going to have to demand proof.

    And yes, they have relevance. D&D rules obviously don't obey the laws of physics, but they do their best to simulate them in a simplified way. The fact that the acceleration due to gravity isn't accurately represented doesn't really matter because the purpose is to simulate the fact that you get pulled towards the ground. The rules exist to make the simulation of a fantasy adventure fun and immersive, and if a rule breaks immersion for me, then I have every right as DM to say, "Screw that rule, it's a variant anyways."



    Quote Originally Posted by SpawnOfMorbo View Post
    No one is saying reality doesn't matter at all even if it doesn't.

    What is being said that if there are rules within a fantasy game that defy real world reality then the rules win and not reality.

    I guess you don't play with HP, AC, Magic, or Monsters in your game. Cause you know, they are realiatic.
    That's a lovely straw man. Clearly, because I would prefer that fantasy games have some sort of internal consistency, I only allow things that are entirely realistic and not at all magical. Your point is well made, and I congratulate you.

    And I would point out that feats are allowed at the DM's discretion. If I think a rule is silly or broken or simply doesn't fit in the world we're playing in, then - as DM - I am not only allowed, but encouraged to change it or cast it aside, especially if it's a variant rule.

    That said, some people have been making actual arguments in favor of the Crossbow Expert feat, so I'm warming to it.

  15. - Top - End - #225
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Saint Louis
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why do People Hate on Crossbow Expert?

    Quote Originally Posted by EvilAnagram View Post

    That's a lovely straw man. Clearly, because I would prefer that fantasy games have some sort of internal consistency, I only allow things that are entirely realistic and not at all magical. Your point is well made, and I congratulate you.

    And I would point out that feats are allowed at the DM's discretion. If I think a rule is silly or broken or simply doesn't fit in the world we're playing in, then - as DM - I am not only allowed, but encouraged to change it or cast it aside, especially if it's a variant rule.

    That said, some people have been making actual arguments in favor of the Crossbow Expert feat, so I'm warming to it.
    Crying strawmen only works in debate club, look it up.

    Anyways the game is consistent. If you have X ability or Y training you can do Z. You are trying to make the game inconsistent by applying out of game rules because you think adding reality to a fantasy game make more sense.

    I'm saying that when a game gas rules that break reality then you go by what the rules say. The rules says you can fire a hand cross bow a million times per action then guess what? You can fire a million times per action no natter if a real world person could do it or not.

    You are taking the rules of a game and comparing them to the real world. If some things don't add up that's ok (HP, AC, Magic) bit if other things don't add up then the world ends (loading a hand cross bow and firing a lot).

    You are the one making the rules inconsistent with by applying real life reality into the game on whatever whim you want.

  16. - Top - End - #226
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Mechaviking's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Iceland
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why do People Hate on Crossbow Expert?

    Ok there are about 2-4 arguments going on in this thread... I think.

    Ill add some perspective and feel free to disagree or ignore at your leisure.

    Player A Is a Valor bard using swift quiver, disease, bestow curse and some such to increase his damage alot(most of this helps the party but takes a while to set up), since presumably he is too starved for attribute points to get more than 1 or 2 feats at the most(lets use point buy for convenience). Number of attacks 4(5 with haste)

    Player B Is a Warlock 2/Sorcerer rest, doing double eldritch blasts each round(not optimal but this is a mental exercise) 4 Beams at 5, 6 at 11 and 8 at 17.(fighter 2 for a hilarious 12 in one round)

    Player C is a Bow wielding Eldritch knight with Haste(duh!) 2 attacks at lvl 5, 3 Attacks at 11, 3 attacks + Haste at 14, 4 attacks + Haste at 20.

    Player D is just like Player C but has a heavy crossbow with expert so his damage goes up by 1 per attack on average(in one game he has 1 attack + 1 haste attack unless he pays for a repeating crossbow of some sort, even though player A and B can fly, teleport out of close combat and have full spell progression)

    Player E Uses a Hand crossbow and crossbow expert Since we are going for max attacks he gets one extra from crossbow expert and using hand crossbow(or bows whatever) Number of attacks 10.


    Ok, Im not really great with dpr calculations but the hand crossbow is d6 and the longbow is d8, so you lose 1 point of damage per attack, you gain an extra attack the is on average 8,5 so you are losing a net 1,5 damage but since we are probably going for marksman you can subtract the 1,5 from the 10 you get from marksman netting you a 8,5 increase in damage per round if all of your attacks hit(they probably wont) at Lvl 20.

    Since the damage for Heavy crossbow is d10 you gain a point of damage on each of the attacks so you actually get more damage by using a Heavy crossbow granted this is half a point of damage.

    /Irony

    Holy **** letting a hand crossbow get a bonus attack from itself is SO OVER POWERED that it reduces your damage compared to a heavy crossbow by half a point(at level 20) OP AS **** AMARITE?!

    /Irony off

    If anybody can do the math on a-e that be super but Im sure they are somewhat similar but again more of a perspective thing maybie if we actually drag out all of the numbers we can find out if this is AN EXPLOIT or not.

    Also I dont like how the word exploit has become a negative word. How else do you win battles other than exploiting the weakness of the enemy or exploiting your own strength?

    Im assuming it has something to with MMOs and a reference to exploits from there.

    Also props for spell checker wanting to rename Eldritch to Britches :D

  17. - Top - End - #227
    Banned
     
    Shadow's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    A van down by the river.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why do People Hate on Crossbow Expert?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mechaviking View Post
    /Irony

    Holy **** letting a hand crossbow get a bonus attack from itself is SO OVER POWERED that it reduces your damage compared to a heavy crossbow by half a point(at level 20) OP AS **** AMARITE?!

    /Irony off

    If anybody can do the math on a-e that be super but Im sure they are somewhat similar but again more of a perspective thing maybie if we actually drag out all of the numbers we can find out if this is AN EXPLOIT or not.

    Also I dont like how the word exploit has become a negative word. How else do you win battles other than exploiting the weakness of the enemy or exploiting your own strength?

    Im assuming it has something to with MMOs and a reference to exploits from there.
    I think you mean /sarcasm, not /irony.
    It isn't about dragging out the numbers to find out if it's an exploit. Numbers aren't the determining factor in whether something is an exploit or not.
    And the word exploit has a few different definitions, one of which, and the one being referenced, is the transitive verb, not the noun. Granted, it is almost exclusively misused as a noun while intending the transitive verb definition, but that's neither here nor there.
    Exploit: to make use of meanly or unfairly for one's own advantage
    In this case it absolutely is an exploit, as it it being used as a way to grant more attacks per round than was intended or is available to any other character with any single ranged weapon. That was not its intent (as specified by a designer tweet) and that is not fair to any other ranged weapon.
    That makes it an exploit. Period.

    Now whether or not you choose to allow said exploit in your game is completely up to you as a DM, but at least have the decency to recognize it as the exploit that it is.
    Is it game breaking? No.
    Is it exploitative? Absolutely without a doubt.
    Last edited by Shadow; 2014-12-03 at 08:03 PM.

  18. - Top - End - #228
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Saint Louis
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why do People Hate on Crossbow Expert?

    It isn't about being over powered or not.

    The problem is that some people can't get the idea that a fantasy game has rules that defies reality without it being magic. They can't wrap their heads around the idea that these non-casters with training can be "just that damn good" and expect them to work off real world rules while almost everything else in the game does not.

    They are saying the rules don't make sense with regard to the setting logic when they really mean they the rules don't make sense when it comes to real world logic.

    Hint. Fantasy is all about having things that don't make sense in the real world. It is the fundamental aspect of fantasy. Without having things that break real world logic YOU DON'T HAVE A FANTASY SETTING.

    Saying that it doesn't make sense compared to the real world is a invalid argument because while some things are like the real world, rules that say otherwise are not like the real world.

    People just can't wrap their heads around that. Just think if everyone's precious tolkein was told "hey you can't write that because it doesn't make sense in the real world". Where would we be?

  19. - Top - End - #229
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Easy_Lee's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2014

    Default Re: Why do People Hate on Crossbow Expert?

    Would just like to reiterate that I don't think a realistic fantasy setting is desirable. In the real world, people die of disease and accident far more often than combat. Often, people die for absolutely no reason at all, just out of the blue. Nothing learned, nothing gained, just a random, meaningless death as if George R Martin wrote it. We can't cast spells; we can't make a career out of exploring dungeons and slaying the evil monsters within; we don't even have a clear adversary, since everyone is lying all the damn time. Some people are pretty, most people are ugly. Some people are born athletes or into rich families, and most aren't. Is that fair? Hell no it isn't fair, but that's real life. What are you going to do, take money away from all the rich people and tell all the attractive men and women that they have to sleep with ugly people? Good luck with that.

    Even the fun stuff, like eating and sex, have all kinds of bullcrap associated with them. Can't eat too much good food, or you'll get fat and look and feel like crap! Can't be promiscuous because you'll catch a disease, have an unwanted child, or in the very least make someone jealous and start a bunch of drama. Every time you take a step forward, it feels like a step back because some mofo starts hating on you for doing well. And we adapt, meaning that no matter how good we have it, we still don't feel any better about ourselves for very long. People commit suicide more often in the US, a developed and rich country, than they do in most poor, disease-ridden countries.

    Point is, we get enough of that kind of crap in the real world. I don't want to make those kinds of compromises in my fantasy too. Fantasy worlds have fantasy elements, and that's not only expected, it's a good thing. Some people want a nitty gritty fantasy setting where the bad guys always win and the good guys have to deal with petty crap all the time. I think most people who want that are angsty teenagers, or never matured past that point. You want to take the fantasy out of D&D? Count me out. I'll run my own game where fighters can fire a crossbow nine times in six seconds, thank you very much.
    Last edited by Easy_Lee; 2014-12-03 at 08:34 PM.
    Breaking BM: Revised - an updated look at the beast-mounted halfling ranger based on the Revised Ranger: Beast Conclave.

  20. - Top - End - #230
    Orc in the Playground
     
    TheDeadlyShoe's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2014

    Default Re: Why do People Hate on Crossbow Expert?

    The rules are a convenience. They are meant to help simulate and arbitrate the story that the players and DM are creating as a group. They are not holy writ, and when you get up on your high horse about a *variant rule* you are being silly. Even if all parties involved agree to treat the rulebooks as legal documents and anything RAW goes, the DM can arbitrarily ban feats.

    Crossbows work the way they do (lots of potential attacks) because it keeps the rules simple, and for no other plausible reason. Obviously the designers know its hard to load crossbows, just look at 3.5.

    Personally if people are unhappy with how crossbows work, I would rule it that crossbows can only target one creature per round. In this interpretation, they are only shooting one bolt, and the attack/damage rolls just simulate how well targeted it is.
    Last edited by TheDeadlyShoe; 2014-12-03 at 08:38 PM.

  21. - Top - End - #231
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    EvilAnagram's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    United States
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why do People Hate on Crossbow Expert?

    Quote Originally Posted by SpawnOfMorbo View Post
    Crying strawmen only works in debate club, look it up.
    Sorry, but I tend to apply rules of discourse to any argument. In this case, you were arguing against a statement I had not made in order to feel smart. That's a straw man argument. Whether or not this is a formal debate does not matter, as we have identified informal fallacies in order to more clearly identify and see through terrible discourse. You can apply it to any heated discussion.

    Quote Originally Posted by SpawnOfMorbo View Post
    Anyways the game is consistent. If you have X ability or Y training you can do Z. You are trying to make the game inconsistent by applying out of game rules because you think adding reality to a fantasy game make more sense.
    The game is consistent in that occasionally vaguely written rules are used to describe how your characters interact with the world.

    It is inconsistent in the implications of some of these rules.

    Now, I quite like GiantOctopodes' suggestion that, through dedication, Fighters gain access to some kind of natural magic to increase their martial ability, explaining why they can accomplish what they do. However, nothing you've said is in the least bit sensible. Of course I will compare what is allowed in-game to what is possible in real life. People always do that. When a shin-high fence blocks your way in a video game, people often remark on how silly that is. It's the same with D&D, save that because the DM is an intermediary whose job is to interpret the rules, he can alter them to create a more immersive environment.

  22. - Top - End - #232
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2013

    Default Re: Why do People Hate on Crossbow Expert?

    What I've taken from this thread:

    The rules absolutely allow you to fire one hand crossbow twice.

    People hate that.

    I would allow firing a single hand crossbow twice but would disallow dual crossbows. It's more feasible to load one crossbow fast than loading two crossbows with your hands full.

    'Course you can't do it with a shield, either.

  23. - Top - End - #233
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Saint Louis
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why do People Hate on Crossbow Expert?

    Quote Originally Posted by bloodshed343 View Post
    What I've taken from this thread:

    The rules absolutely allow you to fire one hand crossbow twice.

    People hate that.

    I would allow firing a single hand crossbow twice but would disallow dual crossbows. It's more feasible to load one crossbow fast than loading two crossbows with your hands full.

    'Course you can't do it with a shield, either.
    Feasable in the real world, yeah. In a fantasy world? That's the closest to real world feasible you will get with a lot of these rules.

    Just remember "they are just that damn good".

  24. - Top - End - #234
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    MindFlayer

    Join Date
    Nov 2014

    Default Re: Why do People Hate on Crossbow Expert?

    Quote Originally Posted by Shadow View Post
    I think you mean /sarcasm, not /irony.
    It isn't about dragging out the numbers to find out if it's an exploit. Numbers aren't the determining factor in whether something is an exploit or not.
    And the word exploit has a few different definitions, one of which, and the one being referenced, is the transitive verb, not the noun. Granted, it is almost exclusively misused as a noun while intending the transitive verb definition, but that's neither here nor there.
    Exploit: to make use of meanly or unfairly for one's own advantage
    In this case it absolutely is an exploit, as it it being used as a way to grant more attacks per round than was intended or is available to any other character with any single ranged weapon. That was not its intent (as specified by a designer tweet) and that is not fair to any other ranged weapon.
    That makes it an exploit. Period.

    Now whether or not you choose to allow said exploit in your game is completely up to you as a DM, but at least have the decency to recognize it as the exploit that it is.
    Is it game breaking? No.
    Is it exploitative? Absolutely without a doubt.
    Unless, of course, said character has swift quiver, in which case of course they are doing two attacks on their bonus action instead of one, and obviously it can be with the same weapon that was used to make the attack action, as there is nothing barring that from occurring (exactly the same as crossbow expert). So, in that case, without using a feat they are getting two additional attacks with the same weapon, more than is possible with this feat. They are of course using a spell. Alternately, someone with Haste gets an additional attack with a ranged weapon, which can obviously be with the same ranged weapon as they used on an attack action, as there is nothing barring it from occurring (same as crossbow expert). In fact, one can stack haste and this feat to get exactly the same mechanical advantage as someone using swift quiver, but as swift quiver directly replaces this benefit (providing two attacks during a bonus action), and also stacks with haste, obviously the most advantageous method is swift quiver + haste, to get a bonus three attacks from a single ranged weapon.

    So how exactly is it more attacks per round than was intended or is available to any other character with any single ranged weapon? The tweet from the developer also has absolutely nothing to do with the number of attacks. Furthermore, the tweet from the developer is not a part of the rules of the game nor is it in any way included in the RAW until and unless it is made into an errata. Finally, in your quote itself: To make use of meanly or unfairly for one's own advantage. Meaning, if it is not to one's own advantage (it's not obviously mechanically superior to other available options, which apparently you agree with, based upon the start of your post), and it's not unfair (by not positing a mechanical advantage over other available options, you have not reduced the fairness of the game), it fails to meet your own definition for exploiting the rules. Beyond that, I also argue it's not "mean" to recognize what the rules actually say vs what the developer (who may or may not have been the one who actually made the rule) supposedly intended them to say (which is also supposition as he never indicated intent, merely what he would rule in his own games).

  25. - Top - End - #235
    Banned
     
    Shadow's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    A van down by the river.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why do People Hate on Crossbow Expert?

    The argument that casting and maintaining a spell, which requires using resources and maintaining concentration, somehow makes offering a similar effect at-will using zero resources at all obsolete is ridiculous.
    That's like saying there should be feats, available to anyone at level 4, which offer the best parts of spells, which aren't even available yet at level 4, without needing spell slots at all.
    You're essentially saying "casters can do it a couple of times per day with slots, so anyone should be able to do it at-will with no resources required."
    That was quite possibly the most ridiculous argument you could have just made defending your position.
    Last edited by Shadow; 2014-12-03 at 09:22 PM.

  26. - Top - End - #236
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2013

    Default Re: Why do People Hate on Crossbow Expert?

    Quote Originally Posted by Shadow View Post
    The argument that casting and maintaining a spell, which requires using resources and maintaining concentration, somehow makes offering a similar effect at-will using zero resources at all obsolete is ridiculous.
    That's like saying there should be feats, available to anyone at level 4, which offer the best parts of spells, which aren't even available yet at level 4, without needing spell slots at all.
    You're essentially saying "casters can do it a couple of times per day with slots, so anyone should be able to do it at-will with no resources required."
    That was quite possibly the most ridiculous argument you could have just made defending your position.
    Way to beat that straw-man shadow.

  27. - Top - End - #237
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Mechaviking's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Iceland
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why do People Hate on Crossbow Expert?

    Right you are Shadow, Sarcasm not Irony.

    Also SpawnofMorbo:

    You could swing it Earthdawn style if you are familiar with earthdawn:

    This is a fantasy world full of magical dragons, beasts & whatnot. The fighter harnesses ambient magical energies to become a superhuman. already mentioned nvm.

    Also an "exploit" to me is something that breaks the game in half much like Bane Crushing Batmans back, rendering unplayable.
    Last edited by Mechaviking; 2014-12-03 at 10:40 PM.

  28. - Top - End - #238
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Saint Louis
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why do People Hate on Crossbow Expert?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mechaviking View Post
    Right you are Shadow, Sarcasm not Irony.

    Also SpawnofMorbo:

    You could swing it Earthdawn style if you are familiar with earthdawn:

    This is a fantasy world full of magical dragons, beasts & whatnot. The fighter harnesses ambient magical energies to become a superhuman.
    This isn't that though. This is a setting where the Fighter or whomever is just that good.

    People need to understand that you don't need magic to be awesome in a fantasy setting.

    The Flash isn't magical, the initiation into the class is messed up (Kid Flash copied it), but his abilities aren't magical just really really awesome. He can physically phase through solid objects. There is magic in that setting but it isn't the be all end all.

    People readily accept this and yet they can't accept a fighter is "Just that damn good" in D&D.

    Edit:

    There are base rules that allow fighters or whomever to be just that damn good and they don't come close to where they could be. People's minds might melt if they were shown nonmagical abilities being awesome.
    Last edited by SpawnOfMorbo; 2014-12-03 at 10:42 PM.

  29. - Top - End - #239
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    MindFlayer

    Join Date
    Nov 2014

    Default Re: Why do People Hate on Crossbow Expert?

    Quote Originally Posted by Shadow View Post
    The argument that casting and maintaining a spell, which requires using resources and maintaining concentration, somehow makes offering a similar effect at-will using zero resources at all obsolete is ridiculous.
    That's like saying there should be feats, available to anyone at level 4, which offer the best parts of spells, which aren't even available yet at level 4, without needing spell slots at all.
    You're essentially saying "casters can do it a couple of times per day with slots, so anyone should be able to do it at-will with no resources required."
    That was quite possibly the most ridiculous argument you could have just made defending your position.
    That's not what I was saying at all. I was responding to your comment:

    Quote Originally Posted by Shadow View Post
    In this case it absolutely is an exploit, as it it being used as a way to grant more attacks per round than was intended or is available to any other character with any single ranged weapon.
    Note that in no way shape or form was or is my argument that casting and maintaining a spell somehow makes offering a similar effect at will using zero resources at all obsolete. I never used those words, I never posited that position, I made no claims even remotely to that effect. What I did indicate is that your statement was factually inaccurate. That is indeed, as Bloodshed so aptly indicated, a Strawman argument. (edited to remove an unfair and inaccurate accusation leveled at Bloodshed. Once again my apologies Bloodshed!)

    Now, ignoring your blatant misrepresentation of both my position and my claims, and ignoring as well your continued factual inaccuracies (mainly your falsely comparing it to haste, which provides an additional action, and therefore has no opportunity cost, vs the opportunity cost of anything else you could be doing with your bonus action), here is what my actual position was and still is, so that it is clear:

    The effect of the feat per the rules as written is that if you make an attack with a one handed weapon, you gain a bonus action option which may be used to make an attack with a loaded hand crossbow. That is the rules as they are written, and that does not preclude, in any way shape or form, any of the following combinations:
    Attacking with a melee weapon, and using your bonus action to attack with a hand crossbow
    Attacking with a hand crossbow in one hand, and using your bonus action to attack with a different hand crossbow
    Attacking with a hand crossbow in one hand, reloading said hand crossbow using your free object interaction during movement, and using it to make the bonus action attack

    All of those are 100% permissible according to the rules, as they are written in the player's handbook, and distributed by the company that makes the game. There are neither rules nor errata that preclude any of the aforementioned options from being used.

    Now that I've made clear my stance and argument, let's return to the crux of what you argued:

    Quote Originally Posted by Shadow View Post
    In this case it absolutely is an exploit, as it it being used as a way to grant more attacks per round than was intended or is available to any other character with any single ranged weapon.
    Now we've already discussed why this is factually inaccurate, so that's all well and good. Let's move on to your very next statement.


    Quote Originally Posted by Shadow View Post
    That was not its intent (as specified by a designer tweet) and that is not fair to any other ranged weapon.
    Now, we also have designer tweets saying to disregard the loaded bit, but you'll notice I don't- because those designer tweets are not in the rules. They really could and should make an errata or an official FAQ, and that would support your stance if it was in there, but ultimately, the currently released and published rules for this game are what they are. Until and unless modified, you can house rule your game to match Merl's all day long, but that doesn't change the rules written in the PHB.

    Note too that you return to the concept of fair. Being "fair" to a ranged weapon is an odd verbiage, but let's roll with it. What does that even mean? Well, to be "fair" could mean a number of things, but I doubt you're referring to skin tone or hair color. The most likely meanings you intend to convey (and please correct me if I'm wrong) would mean "without bias", or more specifically, "treating things in such a way as does not favor one over the other". The other option is "conforming with the established rules". The latter I've covered on a point by point basis how it conforms to the established rules, and you have not indicated that you disagree, nor on what point you might disagree.

    The former, though, wouldn't that merit exactly what you indicated was not warranted? An examination of the mechanical results, to determine if (with or without that feat) one ranged weapon was indeed favored, or more mechanically advantageous, vs another? If without that feat, other ranged weapons were mechanically superior, and with that feat, a mechanical balance was achieved, or alternately (and more 'fairly' ) a superiority equivalent to that which could be obtained with a different feat, that would indicate that all options were then treated equally, right? So why not examine the mechanics? If that's what you wish to prove (which again, I frankly don't care. It is not my personal argument that it is or is not fair. I could care less, I just care what the rules say), then by all means prove it! But simply saying that it is unfair doesn't make it so, and an unwillingness to examine the numbers to identify if you are indeed correct or not does not lend significant weight to your argument.
    Last edited by GiantOctopodes; 2014-12-06 at 02:18 AM.

  30. - Top - End - #240
    Banned
     
    Shadow's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    A van down by the river.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Why do People Hate on Crossbow Expert?

    Quote Originally Posted by GiantOctopodes View Post
    Now *that*, by the way, bloodshed, is a strawman- the act of claiming that your opponent's argument or position is something other than it actually is, and then attacking that position instead of their actual position. Since you seemed to be uninformed on the term you were throwing around. Just throwing it out there.
    I'm not the one that said the word strawman. Just throwing it out there.

    Quote Originally Posted by GiantOctopodes View Post
    Now, ignoring your blatant misrepresentation of both my position and my claims,
    You mean like you blatantly misrepresented my position and my claims when you told me what fits or does not fit within my own definition of something? Or do you maybe mean like you blatantly misrepresented both my position and my claims when you told me what I do or do not agree with, when I had already stated my opinion on the matter?

    That's where I stopped reading, because hypocrisy, misrepresentation and insults (in the way of calling me uninformed) of this level gets added to my ignore list.
    Last edited by Shadow; 2014-12-03 at 10:53 PM.

Posting Permissions

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