Search results

You’re essentially asking me to “briefly” design a game system and a class for it, which is a bit easier said than done… but, as I said earlier, I think @doctorbadwolf ‘s suggestions in post 92 were a good starting point for a simple casting system. From there it’s a matter of offering a number...

Note that the Zhentarim Feats may not be available if the campaign isn’t set in the forgotten realms (or the DM hasn’t ported the FR factions to whatever setting the campaign takes place in), and even if it is, the character might need to be a member of the Zhentarim, which may not be an option...

Her position, but yes.

Well, no, that’s not what I believe. I just don’t believe ease of building is an essential component of a simple class. I was just adopting your preferred terminology for ease of communication, because you expressed interest in better understanding my position. I disagree that it wouldn’t be...

Assassin only adds level damage once per turn. Thief doesn’t add any damage at all.

Then by your definitions I guess what I’m arguing for is a simple game with complex classes. Again, we are just disagreeing about what it means for a class to be simple. I think all classes should be able to be built in a way that is easy to play. If it takes some system mastery to understand...

Have you looked at rogue subclasses lately? 3d6 extra damage 2 or 3 times a day is WAY more than any of the others give at level 3. Dispelling a debuff or as you say, ending a buff at the end of combat, and giving an ally back a 1st or 2nd level spell slot 2 or 3 times a day on top of that is...

Three is already enough for an 11th+ level fighter to use for all of their attacks. True in the 2014 rules, but in the revised rules, Shillelagh also increases in damage die at cantrip scaling levels - it’s a d8 at 1st level, d10 at 5th level, d12 at 11th level, and 2d6 at 17th level. So...

The name is definitely terrible. Mechanically, this subclass really doesn’t seem to have anything to do with stealing spells. Rather, it seems to be another take on the same concept as the Paladin in this UA - martial support for a Battlemage unit. The Spellbreaker paladins form the phalanx...

Because other characters can attack with them. I think that would be pretty reasonable, but in that case I would have it only affect one stone at a time that only you can attack with.

It’s way more damage than any other rogue subclass currently provides at level 3. And I’ve never seen a 5e party that wouldn’t be able to enable this rogue. Are many people really out there playing with parties consisting exclusively of non wild magic barbarians, non elemental monks, non...

I agree with these criteria I think this is where we differ. I can see why you would consider my goal unattainable if you consider few decision points during character building and leveling up to be a requirement of simplicity, since what I’m describing would necessarily require many building...

Using your reaction when your ally casts a spell to add d6s equal to the spell’s level to your next sneak attack (with no negative effect on the spell or caster whatsoever) is a tactically poor choice? Why? 🤷‍♀️ whatever sinks your boat, I guess

Nothing in the text requires the spells to be cast by enemies

I simply don’t agree that this isn’t an achievable design goal, but there isn’t really anywhere else for that line of discussion to go, so… enjoy the thread, I guess.

Ok. We clearly have different ideas of what “simple” means.

I disagree. The wizard already doesn’t feel like memorizing complex formula. The bard doesn’t feel like playing music. The monk doesn’t feel like doing Kung Fu. Etc.

Yeah, your reading was how I meant it, but I can see where it could be easily misunderstood.

Ah, yeah, your reaction makes much more sense to me in that context. I agree that would be a poor way to go about it. I suspect this is related to us having different ideas of what “simple” and “complex” mean here. Fundamentally I do agree there’s probably an upper limit to how far a single...

Just because the character is learning complex formulae doesn’t mean the player needs to be doing so. And there should still be complex options for those who want them. Not just for wizards but for all classes. How much complex rules minutia you want to deal with and what fantasy archetype you...