D&D (2024) What innovative elements from Baldur's Gate 3 would you like to see implimented in 2024 D&D?

[Mirrorrorrim]

I mean why even limit it? If Casters get to cantrip forever, so what if a Fighter is proficient with x weapon, it gains a bonus effect.

If its OP (and I doubt it highly) then just say you reduce the damage, or you get a bonus to hit for 'just a normal swing'. Simple stuff.

Currently, the designers think the "at-will" level of power are already represented by the current Weapon Mastery system being playtested. Are you suggesting that those are insufficient and deserve to be more powerful?

 

[Scribe]

Currently, the designers think the "at-will" level of power are already represented by the current Weapon Mastery system being playtested. Are you suggesting that those are insufficient and deserve to be more powerful?

I'd have to look, but I'm not convinced that what Wizards thinks is or is not too powerful (or more importantly fun) for Martial classes, matches my reality anyway.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

Currently, the designers think the "at-will" level of power are already represented by the current Weapon Mastery system being playtested. Are you suggesting that those are insufficient and deserve to be more powerful?

The BG3 weapon abilities are effectively doing what the Weapon Mastery abilities are covering, only BG3 gives a short rest ability to anyone proficient with the weapon, and Weapon Mastery only works for limited combat classes, and they are at-will.

They fill the same space. But Weapon Mastery is better for the TTRPG. They are at-will, for only weapon specialists, and it makes sense.

 

[Scribe]

The BG3 weapon abilities are effectively doing what the Weapon Mastery abilities are covering, only BG3 gives a short rest ability to anyone proficient with the weapon, and Weapon Mastery only works for limited combat classes, and they are at-will.

They fill the same space. But Weapon Mastery is better for the TTRPG. They are at-will, for only weapon specialists, and it makes sense.

I think just making it tied to proficiency would be enough, but cool either way.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

And @doctorbadwolf, we're not going back to 4E Encounter Power design. And I'm glad. Fighters using the narrative Encounter power "Come and Get It" and the enemy cannot resist being "pulled" in before they are attacked? Nope. And even after the errata, it became an attack vs. Will and if successful that is when you pulled them in, and the damage was automatic, despite their armor? Didn't make sense either way.

You…um…you know that using per encounter ability recharge doesn’t have anything to do, literally absolutely nothing, with specific 4e encounter powers, right?
Like…right? You get that?

Some things work better as narrative, or gamist, or simulationist mechanic styles, but not everything works using just any mechanic style.

And the two solutions I listed are both great ways to handle proficiency based mundane abilities that are too strong to be at-will (which also makes no sense. You can’t do advanced moves every attack all day no rest. It’s complete nonsense.) and so need a use limit.

In both cases, you have a number of times you can do [proficiency attack abilities] without resting, or some other recharge, and you can use any [proficiency attack ability] with that pool of uses. It’s no different from superiority dice as a use limiter, just generalized.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

But Weapon Mastery is better for the TTRPG. They are at-will, for only weapon specialists, and it makes sense.

It absolutely does not make sense. You can just do advanced moves all day with no rest. Lol nope. If I cared about stuff like this “making sense”, wpn mastery would be a complete non-starter.

 

[Vaalingrade]

But it is still a video game cooldown for a mundane action that has no legitimate reason [in-world] to be limited.

Nope.

It is a narrative limitation because we're telling a story like in movies and TV. It's a pacing mechanism.

Legolas doesn't stab a dude with an arrow, then fire it every time he gets a chance because it would get repetitive and boring, so he just doesn't do it. Encounters powers aren't per encounter because they have to be portioned out like those videogamey (term used to illustrate the needlessly antagonistic usage of the term especially in a thread about backporting ideas from a game) spells; no it's to keep players from spamming them over and over an them becoming boring like a basic attack is.

The purpose of encounter based design is entirely about a holistic view spinning a narrative, but in and out of universe.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I mean why even limit it? If Casters get to cantrip forever, so what if a Fighter is proficient with x weapon, it gains a bonus effect.

If its OP (and I doubt it highly) then just say you reduce the damage, or you get a bonus to hit for 'just a normal swing'. Simple stuff.

Not all simpler solutions are better solutions.

If you make them at-will they need to replace weapon mastery, for a start.

That could totally work in 5E if it was included as greater part of the Weapon Mastery system, built in for all characters. But you'd have to determine how often you can use such a maneruver between short rests, and even then it overlaps the narrative design space for the Fighter's Superiority Dice, exactly. Why isn't it just that?

No, it does not. Superiority dice are specialized resource that adds damage and an effect to an attack. There is no reason for these to add damage, necessarily.

These are also part of weapon proficiency, not tied to a class, which puts them further from SD.

Just limit by prof bonus, because everyone has the same PB at the same level. Mixing it in with superiority dice would just muddy things for no reason, and basically force the designers to make these moves into Battlemaster manuevers, rather than having some freedom with them, and it would just make balancing SD harder.

Keeping them separate still gives fighters a bigger boost than most, stacks with mastery, and doesn’t interfere with or fight over resources with manuevers for the Battlemaster.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Currently, the designers think the "at-will" level of power are already represented by the current Weapon Mastery system being playtested. Are you suggesting that those are insufficient and deserve to be more powerful?

Yes.

 

[Scribe]

Not all simpler solutions are better solutions.

If you make them at-will they need to replace weapon mastery, for a start.

I havent been keeping up on whats going on in the packets but yes they would seemingly need to address that.