Recent content by EzekielRaiden

Which edition? Because in 4e, he's either an Assassin or an Avenger. In 5e, too many options, but the polar opposite ends are Wizard or Rogue.

Except all you agreed to was that it was easier to follow whoever was in front. Why is that (perfectly real effect) a problem? Frankly, it comes across as your playstyle being openly hostile to the very idea of teamwork. "Ew! No! Then I might accidentally do something because someone told me...

I'd like to offer a different perspective to DoaM. Your "attack roll" is not one singular strike. It's half a dozen strikes, and whether or not the collective of them was worth it or not. DoaM is saying, "Sure, you barely did anything...but 'barely anything' is not 'nothing.'" This is a...

That isn't what was said though. You are drawing a false equivalence between "someone was in front, so it was easier to go the same direction" with "someone else told me exactly what to do and what to be and I was simply a witness to it". That's you creating the thing you're claiming is there...

But that isn't "contradiction". Contradiction is where 90% of the paths forward are actually dead ends, but you won't find that out until you walk into them. When the rules themselves are actually broken, every direction is now (massively) uphill. That's not "potential". That's "become an...

And that's....bad? :confused:

Uh...what? I don't think that follows.

But "follower" can mean "subordinate", or it can mean "second in line". The person at the front of a line is the leader of that line. Does that also make them the person to whom everyone else owes fealty?

Might I ask what your issue with DoaM is? Because it's been part of D&D for ages. Heck, 5.5e has it too! The Graze mastery property is straight-up DoaM: Mastery: Graze. If your attack roll with this weapon misses a creature, you can deal damage to that creature equal to the ability modifier you...

I cannot help attempting to do the math. I'm literally not capable of not trying to do the math. So while I appreciate what you're saying, it doesn't help. Okay, but what if you...didn't use inherently pejorative terms for the one and terms you consider favorable for the other? Like what if we...

I sincerely apologize for having derailed the thread. I will say nothing more on the previous subject, and will only reply further if I have something productive to say about the Binder. Again, my sincere apologies. Perhaps as a starting point: If we want to ensure that some modern form of...

Perhaps. I would argue it is...more complicated than that. Certainly, the extremely easy-to-use tools went away...sort of. Yar-har-fiddle-dee-tee etc.

It is in absolutely no way such a thing, when this edition's launch was defined by answering EVERY question with "ask your GM". Up to and including "do my class features work this way?" and "is this what the rules say?" Up to and including telling that to numerous people who then responded with...

And much the same can be said of various other games, like 13th Age and Pathfinder 2nd Edition. 4e's influence and reach will last much longer than the hate did.

And the idea that threads should be woven together is less useful than a pile of disconnected threads. Threads you might still do something with. The nebulous concept of weaving is not something you can actually do something with. No. Threads are material. It is weaving that is potential...