I still disagree with that.It needs to be better designed, not to not be a generalist option, but to give something that tempts it into being a good first choice.
Well, maybe because we all don't agree on how utterly terrible it is?
Either way, if you did want to add something to the two-handed version, it would have to be equally simple. Add +1 damage to Critical Hits when used Two-handed. There. At the very least, it would have to be always-on option, which means it can't be equal to abilities that need to be activated/can be resisted.
And yes, I maintain there should be some abilities that are passive. We obviously don't want to redesign the entire game around the lowest-common-denominator of player skill. But I firmly believe there should be at least some options that cater to people who don't want to think that hard on every attack.
ITs fair, but that ship was long since sailed. No one uses them that way.The entire POINT of versatile weapons was that you could analyze what you needed in the fight, and be able to adapt.
The ship can sail back.ITs fair, but that ship was long since sailed. No one uses them that way.
For fighter, they wouldn't. But anyone who is at only 2 masteries might just do that.then they would just switch to the greatsword....why bother with the longsword in both hands.
"Spellcasting" is also a class feature.Since the ability to use Weapon Masteries is a class feature, I think Weapon Masteries should be equal in power to a Fighting Style.
Two handed weapons could use a damage bump too. After Great Weapon Master was removed, there's little reason for any weapon user to forego using a shield if they have proficiency.A one die bump is not enough? Are you suggesting that versatile weapons should do more damage than two handed weapons but be usable one handed? This is at will first level and can be acquired via a feat. You will need to work harder to convince me that this a good idea.
No. You design something like the Warlock, where you have a solid, reliable "button mashing" mechanic and then a small, focused, rarely changing list of features.And you should also design all casters so that they only have three spells. Because otherwise players who will forget how spells work can never learn them. Right?
You mean the one they just annihilated last playtest to make it the wizard?No. You design something like the Warlock, where you have a solid, reliable "button mashing" mechanic and then a small, focused, rarely changing list of features.
The Warlock is the "flex" of casters.
Two handed weapons could use a damage bump too. After Great Weapon Master was removed, there's little reason for any weapon user to forego using a shield if they have proficiency.