Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 91
  1. - Top - End - #31
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Griffon

    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's

    IMO what melee Rangers need to be viable is mostly just a better TWF system. Putting the core of their attack style into direct competition with so many important class features is a travesty.
    Spoiler: Tweaks
    Show

  2. - Top - End - #32
    Orc in the Playground
     
    WolfInSheepsClothing

    Join Date
    Mar 2017

    Default Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's

    Quote Originally Posted by Mara View Post
    You must have missed that they said back then that player picks for greater summons. They only said DM picks for lesser summons.

    I understand this is confusing because both kinds of spells have the same wording in the PH. For this book they decided to double down on their clarification.

    Which makes me very glad I looked at a friend's book and haven't spent a single dime on this game since the PH, DMG, and MM. I do not feel that 5e has been managed well and that the game is worse now than when it was released.
    Given the chain of replies... i honestly do not understand your point.

    Is it an error to give players the ability to choose what to summon (in any case, level of power...) for you?
    It also doesn't help that i have no idea what sage advice clarification you are referring to. :D

  3. - Top - End - #33
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Specter's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Brazil

    Default Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's

    Quote Originally Posted by mer.c View Post
    IMO what melee Rangers need to be viable is mostly just a better TWF system. Putting the core of their attack style into direct competition with so many important class features is a travesty.
    Or just making less class abilities rely on bonus action. I swear, even Hunter's Mark could have just been a class feature that started with 'when you make your first attack on your turn'...
    Last edited by Specter; 2017-11-25 at 02:16 PM.

  4. - Top - End - #34
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    BlueKnightGuy

    Join Date
    Sep 2017

    Default Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's

    Quote Originally Posted by mer.c View Post
    IMO what melee Rangers need to be viable is mostly just a better TWF system. Putting the core of their attack style into direct competition with so many important class features is a travesty.
    I agree with this one. I feel TWF is under-powered and more thematically adequate to classes that have already plenty of uses for bonus actions.
    Methods & Madness - my D&D 5e /OSR /game design blog.
    *5e: easy survival rules. Bringing balance to the Forge (yup!). Fort/Ref/Will.
    *OSR: One page hacks, my answer to retroclones. Would love to take ONE PAGE from YOUR book!
    *3e x 4e x 5e - Can you trip an ooze? Are miniatures required?

  5. - Top - End - #35
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    DwarfClericGuy

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Albuquerque, NM

    Default Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's

    Quote Originally Posted by Mara View Post
    I do not feel that 5e has been managed well and that the game is worse now than when it was released.
    These aren't patches to a video game... you can play the game exactly the same with Phb, DMG and MM, ignoring everything that came after...
    Trollbait extraordinaire

  6. - Top - End - #36
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    BigONotation's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2014

    Default Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Diaz View Post
    I agree with this one. I feel TWF is under-powered and more thematically adequate to classes that have already plenty of uses for bonus actions.
    Just change the Dual Wielder feat to accommodate: Change the +1 AC into Your offhand attacks become part of your Attack action.
    https://twitch.tv/LapBandit - streaming D&D , D&D After Dark - Discord chat

  7. - Top - End - #37
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    WhiteWizardGirl

    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Earth

    Default Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's

    Quote Originally Posted by Theodoxus View Post
    These aren't patches to a video game... you can play the game exactly the same with Phb, DMG and MM, ignoring everything that came after...
    I can't undo the sage advice that ruined summoning/summoning character concepts.

  8. - Top - End - #38
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Chimera

    Join Date
    Dec 2015

    Default Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's

    Quote Originally Posted by Mara View Post
    I can't undo the sage advice that ruined summoning/summoning character concepts.
    Honestly, the best response is just to reiterate, These aren't patches to a video game... you can play the game exactly the same with Phb, DMG and MM, ignoring everything that came after...
    ... including the Sage Advice.

  9. - Top - End - #39
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Tanarii's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2015

    Default Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's

    Do you guys not run or play in AL or something? Your patch analogy is actually pretty close to the D&D experience for a lot of people.

  10. - Top - End - #40
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    DwarfClericGuy

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Albuquerque, NM

    Default Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's

    Nope. Don't play AL... This is just spitballing here, but if you Play AL, have contact with a decent group of people there, couldn't you branch off and find enough folk willing to play "not AL" on a different day? Then you get the best of both - play AL because organization and whatnot, and not AL to play the game however you want with whatever rules you want...
    Last edited by Theodoxus; 2017-11-26 at 08:47 AM.
    Trollbait extraordinaire

  11. - Top - End - #41
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Imp

    Join Date
    Feb 2017

    Default Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's

    Patches in video game, you say?
    Spoiler
    Show

    Last edited by Unoriginal; 2017-11-26 at 08:41 AM.

  12. - Top - End - #42
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    WhiteWizardGirl

    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Earth

    Default Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's

    Quote Originally Posted by Willie the Duck View Post
    Honestly, the best response is just to reiterate, These aren't patches to a video game... you can play the game exactly the same with Phb, DMG and MM, ignoring everything that came after...
    ... including the Sage Advice.
    Because of dev commentary, you can now reasonably assume the summoning spells were always meant to work that way. Before the sage advice, no one could have REASONABLY read the summoning spells that way.

    So sure, making up a bunch of houserules and playing basically a different game is an option, but I could just be playing a BETTER game then. The only reason I would be playing 5e is because it is popular atm. Anytime I would be playing 5e, I have to live with the dev's sage advice and mismanagement. Way too many people are watching those YouTube staged TTRPG shows and assume 5e's mechanics are whats allowing professional writers and actors to put on a good show.

  13. - Top - End - #43
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    Rowan Wolf's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Cincinnati OH

    Default Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Diaz View Post
    I agree with this one. I feel TWF is under-powered and more thematically adequate to classes that have already plenty of uses for bonus actions.
    I think bonus action as a whole are showing growing pains (I can see what they were going for, but the system doesn't feel right to me). It make it a matter of practice to find some use for that action every round (if at all possible) for perceived effectiveness.

    I think was as a interview/dnd beyond video with Mearls discussing bonus actions and their limitations.

  14. - Top - End - #44
    Banned
     
    Devil

    Join Date
    Nov 2012

    Default Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's

    Quote Originally Posted by Rowan Wolf View Post
    I think bonus action as a whole are showing growing pains (I can see what they were going for, but the system doesn't feel right to me). It make it a matter of practice to find some use for that action every round (if at all possible) for perceived effectiveness.

    I think was as a interview/dnd beyond video with Mearls discussing bonus actions and their limitations.
    Mearls needs to get the **** away from anything to do with rules.

  15. - Top - End - #45
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Specter's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Brazil

    Default Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's

    And yet another error I found, this time comparing Forge and War Clerics.

    At level 17, War Cleric gets Avatar of Battle, which gives them resistance to nonmagical B/S/P damage.
    Forge Cleric gets Saint of Forge and Fire, which gets the same... along with immunity to fire damage.

    Get it together, Wizards.

  16. - Top - End - #46
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    Dec 2005

    Default Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's

    Quote Originally Posted by Specter View Post
    And yet another error I found, this time comparing Forge and War Clerics.

    At level 17, War Cleric gets Avatar of Battle, which gives them resistance to nonmagical B/S/P damage.
    Forge Cleric gets Saint of Forge and Fire, which gets the same... along with immunity to fire damage.

    Get it together, Wizards.
    Are you assuming that the rest of the subclasses are perfectly balanced, so that you can weigh the level 17 abilities against each other in a vacuum?
    Ur-member and coffee caterer of the fan club.

    I wish people would stop using phrases such as "in my humble opinion", "just my two cents", and "we're out of coffee".

    Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for they are out drinking coffee and, like, whatever.

  17. - Top - End - #47
    Orc in the Playground
     
    DruidGuy

    Join Date
    Jan 2008

    Default Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's

    As far as balance goes, I've yet to encounter something that disgusting that it'll break the game 100 % of times it is being played.

    Xanathar's has interesting options for each class. Sorcerer with the Divine Soul got what divine clerics needed.

    Ranger are brand new, and new archetypes (Swashbuckler for Rogue is so good) bring new concepts on the table (College of Glamour from Bard is a good contestant for the best supporting ability in the game with Mantle of Inspiration).

  18. - Top - End - #48
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Planetar

    Join Date
    Apr 2011

    Default Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's

    Quote Originally Posted by Tanarii View Post
    Do you guys not run or play in AL or something? Your patch analogy is actually pretty close to the D&D experience for a lot of people.
    Once upon a time the AL documentation specified that Sage Advice was available for AL DMs to use as rulings at their table, but not mandatory. Has that changed? (I can't easily check now that they've put the AL documentation in the DMs Guild store.)

  19. - Top - End - #49
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Tanarii's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2015

    Default Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's

    Quote Originally Posted by Xetheral View Post
    Once upon a time the AL documentation specified that Sage Advice was available for AL DMs to use as rulings at their table, but not mandatory. Has that changed? (I can't easily check now that they've put the AL documentation in the DMs Guild store.)
    Lol I had to go back to see what the hell I was talking about a month ago, and if it still made any sense.

    To my knowledge AL does not require Sage Advice be used. But every AL table I played at the DM used them, although that was some time ago. And I still interact with AL DMs regularly in 3 different stores while running my campaign. They tend to be internet and rules savvy people.

  20. - Top - End - #50
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Planetar

    Join Date
    Apr 2011

    Default Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's

    Quote Originally Posted by Tanarii View Post
    Lol I had to go back to see what the hell I was talking about a month ago, and if it still made any sense.

    To my knowledge AL does not require Sage Advice be used. But every AL table I played at the DM used them, although that was some time ago. And I still interact with AL DMs regularly in 3 different stores while running my campaign. They tend to be internet and rules savvy people.
    Thanks! I hadn't noticed the date jump in the posts. *blushes*

  21. - Top - End - #51
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    DwarfClericGuy

    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    Maplewood, MO
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's

    Quote Originally Posted by Tanarii View Post
    Do you guys not run or play in AL or something? Your patch analogy is actually pretty close to the D&D experience for a lot of people.
    I am currently locked into AL with all my groups but I like AL and I like 5e. I like that I generally know what kind of game (no weird house rules) I am getting into.

    To me it is what AD&D aspired to but took the wrong fork in the road while trying to get there.

    Admiitedly being turned off by 2e steroidal detailled changes to 1e and missing the debacle that 3.x and 4e were (according to old war gamer friends who played such after starting with me in OD&D) I am content to play my Clerics, Fighters, (ranged) Rangers, and Wizards so far and am branching into Rogues and Druids without a major discontent so far.

    It is the people more than the rules that make the experience.
    I play AL games only nowdays.

    Preferences: Role play over optimization; Dwarf over Gnome over Variant Human; War games over FRPG; Zorro over Batman over everyone else.

    The nation that makes a great distinction between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and fighting by fools.

    Charles George Gordon
    1833-1885

  22. - Top - End - #52
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Specter's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Brazil

    Default Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's

    Quote Originally Posted by Coffee_Dragon View Post
    Are you assuming that the rest of the subclasses are perfectly balanced, so that you can weigh the level 17 abilities against each other in a vacuum?
    Unless you can state an earlier feature of the Forge Cleric that is definitely bad (not just situational, but downright weak) compared to other clerics, this is an error. This would be like Rangers getting two fighting styles at level 2 and Paladins getting only one.

  23. - Top - End - #53
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    WhiteWizardGirl

    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    North Carolina
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's

    I believe the design team has stated that their intent is to eventually release a revised version of the PHB ranger. I wouldn't be surprised if the apparent imbalance in the XGTE ranger subclasses is no longer present if they are applied to a revised ranger. ie, the ranger revision would include bonus spells for the Hunter & Beastmaster. At least that's what I'm hoping for.

  24. - Top - End - #54
    Bugbear in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2007

    Default Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganymede View Post
    Hexblade warlocks get two really good combat abilities at level one, while Old One warlocks get a ribbon. That has to be an error, right?
    No, it's an attempt to make a Bladepact Warlock viable, since before Hexblade existed the best melee Warlock you got was a tome warlock who picked up Shillelagh and went Green Flame Blade/Booming Blade and PAM/Sentinel.

  25. - Top - End - #55
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Grod_The_Giant's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's

    Quote Originally Posted by Specter View Post
    Unless you can state an earlier feature of the Forge Cleric that is definitely bad (not just situational, but downright weak) compared to other clerics, this is an error. This would be like Rangers getting two fighting styles at level 2 and Paladins getting only one.
    Their Channel Divinity is a fairly fluffy noncombat option that largely exists to save you a trip to the local smith or arms merchant, their Divine Strike deals commonly-resisted fire damage instead of commonly-vulnerable radiant, and they're a melee-focused subclass that doesn't get additional weapon proficiencies.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mikal View Post
    No, it's an attempt to make a Bladepact Warlock viable, since before Hexblade existed the best melee Warlock you got was a tome warlock who picked up Shillelagh and went Green Flame Blade/Booming Blade and PAM/Sentinel.
    It's about exactly what people clamored for for Bladelocks-- the armor proficiencies they desperately needed, and a Cha-to-attack so they weren't "behind" compared to Eldritch Blasters. It's just a sloppy patch that clearly was made without multiclassing in mind.

    (Me, I'd have suggested a Warlock cantrip that works kind of like Shillelagh-- activate as a bonus action for Cha-to-attack and an increased damage die with... oh, let's say daggers or sickles, those sound Warlock-y... or your Pact Weapon. Boom, good gishing for an equal price to Eldritch Blast-ing (one cantrip and one invocation), and if you want to pick it up without dipping, you're tying yourself into an inferior weapon and an action cost)
    Last edited by Grod_The_Giant; 2018-01-02 at 04:02 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Grod_The_Giant View Post
    Grod's Law: You cannot and should not balance bad mechanics by making them annoying to use
    Major Works

    I also write superhero trash, if you like to read.

  26. - Top - End - #56
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    DrowGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2013

    Default Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's

    Side tangent: EK's War Magic is great for the 7-10 period before Extra Attack II. Greenflame+second attack every turn is pretty legit, all things considered, especially since you're playing a Str/Int class that doesn't need multiclassing to be quite enjoyable...
    Cookie Count: One

    Quote Originally Posted by digiman619 View Post
    Spoiler: True Facts
    Show

  27. - Top - End - #57
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    WhiteWizardGirl

    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    North Carolina
    Gender
    Female

    Default Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's

    Quote Originally Posted by Ganymede View Post
    Hexblade warlocks get two really good combat abilities at level one, while Old One warlocks get a ribbon. That has to be an error, right?
    Always-on, silent telepathic communication with all intelligent beings, bypassing language barriers entirely (with its only limitation being 30ft range) is a pretty freaking good non-combat ability. I wouldn't really call it a "ribbon" to be honest. Not saying it's necessarily of the same power as the hexblade's abilities, but it ain't nothing.

  28. - Top - End - #58
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Tanarii's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2015

    Default Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's

    Quote Originally Posted by JBPuffin View Post
    Side tangent: EK's War Magic is great for the 7-10 period before Extra Attack II. Greenflame+second attack every turn is pretty legit, all things considered, especially since you're playing a Str/Int class that doesn't need multiclassing to be quite enjoyable...
    Before the SCAG cantrips, it was generally superior to War Magic as opposed to 3 attacks, unless you were GWM or SS. Since SCAG, it's always superior to War Magic over 3 attacks, unless (again) GWM or SS.

  29. - Top - End - #59
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Specter's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Brazil

    Default Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's

    Quote Originally Posted by Grod_The_Giant View Post
    Their Channel Divinity is a fairly fluffy noncombat option that largely exists to save you a trip to the local smith or arms merchant, their Divine Strike deals commonly-resisted fire damage instead of commonly-vulnerable radiant, and they're a melee-focused subclass that doesn't get additional weapon proficiencies.
    Most of Knowledge Cleric's abilities aren't combat-related either, but no one's complained. Different strokes. But same stroke with an extra stroke? That's bad.

  30. - Top - End - #60
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Specter's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Brazil

    Default Re: Design "errors" in Xanathar's

    Quote Originally Posted by Tanarii View Post
    Before the SCAG cantrips, it was generally superior to War Magic as opposed to 3 attacks, unless you were GWM or SS. Since SCAG, it's always superior to War Magic over 3 attacks, unless (again) GWM or SS.
    And sometimes, you can get similar damage than you would with an extra attack, but with an effect you need (Ray of Frost, Frostbite).

Posting Permissions

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