So, I love the new packet...

The new packet is definitely my favorite packet to date. All in all, I love it. These are the small warts I have found:

The druid seems like it might be able to do a little too much right now. It still doesn't seem that bad. It isn't going to out damage the fighter, barbarian, or rogue with its beast forms, and it isn't going to outcast the wizard in terms of AoE spells, but I worry that it can do a bit too much of everything. I might be wrong. More playtesting is required. The daily beast-forms also seem a little difficult to use. Druids are going to hate doors!  

The fighter has none. I LOVE what I am seeing.

The barbarian and the rogue both look great as options. But, neither class is given nearly enough choice in terms of build options when they level. The rogue is a little better (due to its choice of scheme at level 1 and multiattack at level 9), but neither has nearly enough. And, they plan to work on the rogue more, and have said that more options will be added to the barbarian down the road, so I hold out hope. 

The cleric and the wizard are looking great. I don't really have any comments on them right now, other than to say that the worst spell offenders still need to be fixed. One can still use meteor swarm to make 4 meteors overlap for insane damage; trap the soul is still a horribly wonky spell; wish still wonks up the economy by making money/magic items. 

The monk needs some major work right now, but they seem to know that.  

The paladin and the ranger look very neat. I worry, however, that after level 10 they will start to feel underpowered. I also wish that the class would give you a few more options in terms of what abilities you gain as you level. They get some, as they can choose what spells they want to use, but I wouldn't mind a few more options in terms of their more martial features (channel divinity, favored enemies, or whatever) as they level.  

I don't really like that skills are recoupled to stats. Why can't I intimidate someone with Strength? Why am I always using Dexterity when I ride an animal? It isn't a deal breaker, but I liked the way that worked more in the last packet.   

I am also a little confused as to why only the fighter and the rogue get multiattack options. That doesn't seem right. 

Otherwise, things are looking great! 

The 5e of D&D: its like a more balanced version of 2e, but with the character customization frills of 3e and 4e. I love it!

I'm with you on this one. For the most part, I really like the changes/improvements to the fighter (in theory - still need to playtest this weekend), and I like the damage reduction, which should make for more exciting combat.

I've read a lot of negative feedback about merging maneuvers into skills, but I actually like this move. From my first couple of read-throughs, to me it simplifies things while still allowing for a good bit of customization.

The new packet is definitely my favorite packet to date. All in all, I love it. These are the small warts I have found:

The druid seems like it might be able to do a little too much right now. It still doesn't seem that bad. It isn't going to out damage the fighter, barbarian, or rogue with its beast forms, and it isn't going to outcast the wizard in terms of AoE spells, but I worry that it can do a bit too much of everything. I might be wrong. More playtesting is required. The daily beast-forms also seem a little difficult to use. Druids are going to hate doors!  

The fighter has none. I LOVE what I am seeing.

The barbarian and the rogue both look great as options. But, neither class is given nearly enough choice in terms of build options when they level. The rogue is a little better (due to its choice of scheme at level 1 and multiattack at level 9), but neither has nearly enough. And, they plan to work on the rogue more, and have said that more options will be added to the barbarian down the road, so I hold out hope. 

The cleric and the wizard are looking great. I don't really have any comments on them right now, other than to say that the worst spell offenders still need to be fixed. One can still use meteor swarm to make 4 meteors overlap for insane damage; trap the soul is still a horribly wonky spell; wish still wonks up the economy by making money/magic items. 

The monk needs some major work right now, but they seem to know that.  

The paladin and the ranger look very neat. I worry, however, that after level 10 they will start to feel underpowered. I also wish that the class would give you a few more options in terms of what abilities you gain as you level. They get some, as they can choose what spells they want to use, but I wouldn't mind a few more options in terms of their more martial features (channel divinity, favored enemies, or whatever) as they level.  

I don't really like that skills are recoupled to stats. Why can't I intimidate someone with Strength? Why am I always using Dexterity when I ride an animal? It isn't a deal breaker, but I liked the way that worked more in the last packet.   

I am also a little confused as to why only the fighter and the rogue get multiattack options. That doesn't seem right. 

Otherwise, things are looking great! 





I think I am in agreement with you on all points here.
This is a rare occasion where I think every change they've made is an improvement. They brought the martial damage back into line with spells, so I can't complain about those being too weak anymore (I read it as overlapping area of effect does not increase the damage), and that was my biggest problem with the last packet.

I'm even a big fan of skills being hard-coded to stats. (You can't use Strength to intimidate anyone because your Charisma of 3 prevents you from expressing yourself clearly.)

If I had to reach for something to criticize, it would probably be something small like the armor table where all medium armors are built for +2. I mean, there are obviously areas that need polish and clarification/simplification, but I can't think of any good reason to not have exactly twelve sets of armor with both a basic and expensive version designed for each modifier between +0 and +5 (light armor for dex modifiers +4/+5, medium armor for dex modifiers +2/+3, and heavy armor for dex modifiers +0/+1).
The metagame is not the game.
OP +1

My mind is a deal-breaker.

I absolutely agree. Also, the formalized exploration rules they put in are genius and I love them so far. I am currently running an open world 4E campaign where there is a LOT of traveling between cities and through werewolf infested forests, so I am even thinking of implimenting these rules into my current game.

That is probably the big standout feature of this packet to me. All the classes really seem to be getting to a good place too. I like that the MDDs are gone, because they made the fighter really overpowered compared to the other classes.

Overall, favorite packet so far.
I pretty much disagree with most of it.
 
The fighter has none. I LOVE what I am seeing. 
in the podcast they said they wanted to divorce manuvers from damage, becouse damage was always the better option.
then sombody decided to add theDeath Dealer options leaving us in exactly the same place as we where,Only now the recource has become a encounter recource.
The fighter in many editions used to be the class that would shine in long fights, now he falls behind most other classes after round 2 when his dice are spent.

The paladin and the ranger look very neat.
they basicly are multi class characters.
fighter/druid for the ranger, fighter/cleric for the paladin  with some abilites swapped out.
They bring nothing new to the game feal or mecanic wise, so nothing that warrents their existance as seperate classes.
At this point just give each of them half a page in the multi class section and they are coverd. 
This is a rare occasion where I think every change they've made is an improvement. They brought the martial damage back into line with spells, so I can't complain about those being too weak anymore (I read it as overlapping area of effect does not increase the damage), and that was my biggest problem with the last packet.

I'm even a big fan of skills being hard-coded to stats. (You can't use Strength to intimidate anyone because your Charisma of 3 prevents you from expressing yourself clearly.)

If I had to reach for something to criticize, it would probably be something small like the armor table where all medium armors are built for +2. I mean, there are obviously areas that need polish and clarification/simplification, but I can't think of any good reason to not have exactly twelve sets of armor with both a basic and expensive version designed for each modifier between +0 and +5 (light armor for dex modifiers +4/+5, medium armor for dex modifiers +2/+3, and heavy armor for dex modifiers +0/+1).




i don't agree with that.

you're sitting in a prison cell waiting to be interrogated when an envelope is slid under the door. inside is a picture of a guy with 19 strength holding a steel pipe with a note on the back that says: this is the guy who's going to be questioning you. i'd probably spill my guts as soon as he came in the door,

i don't know about you, but personality doesn't actually account for much when i'm considering whether or not someone is scary. 

 
There are a mountain of tweaks that need to be made.

Each class has a host of problems.

I don't like how they tied skills back to abilities and I think the names of the skills are just silly.

But overall I'm quite pleased with the packet as a whole. 
There are a mountain of tweaks that need to be made.

Each class has a host of problems.

I don't like how they tied skills back to abilities and I think the names of the skills are just silly.

But overall I'm quite pleased with the packet as a whole. 



I actually laughed when I read that "Break Object" was a skill...

Disclaimer: Wizards of the Coast is not responsible for the consequences of splitting up the party, sticking appendages in the mouth of a leering green devil face, accepting a dinner invitation from bugbears, storming the feast hall of a hill giant steading, angering a dragon of any variety, or saying yes when the DM asks, "Are you really sure?"

I think that the Package was a good improvement over the last one. Just recheck balance, and make Wizards better, I think they are now underpowered.
i don't agree with that. 

Me too. The most common strenght-based indimidate is the man crushing things in his hand

[sblock]

Yan
Montréal, Canada
@Plaguescarred on twitter

I think that the Package was a good improvement over the last one. Just recheck balance, and make Wizards better, I think they are now underpowered.



No. Wizards are not under-powered. Making them better would under-power all the martial classes. They already nerfed martial damage with this packet. They don't need to also increase the power of wizards. That would swing the pendulum in the other direction. 

I pretty much disagree with most of it.
 
The fighter has none. I LOVE what I am seeing. 
in the podcast they said they wanted to divorce manuvers from damage, becouse damage was always the better option.
then sombody decided to add theDeath Dealer options leaving us in exactly the same place as we where,Only now the recource has become a encounter recource.
The fighter in many editions used to be the class that would shine in long fights, now he falls behind most other classes after round 2 when his dice are spent.



They did not reintroduce the problem. Because your XD are an encounter based resource, and all of your benefits work of them, people will think very carefully about whether they want to deal +1d6 damage. Gaining +1d6 AC when you are hit is often a better bet. Likewise, gaining a +1d6 attack bonus is a huge benefit in a bounded system, and can add up to more DPR than +1d6 damage. And, there are many effects that will make it more than worth it to spend that XD to gain +1d6 on a saving throw. Before, it was too much of a tax to spend those XD on anything but damage. The context of the current powers and damage outputs changes that. You are very often better served by using that XD on something else. I mean, if you roll, and you hit, sure, use deadly strike; but if you miss you are going to want to use glancing blow. Likewise, even when you do hit, depending on what foes you are fighting and how often they are hitting you, you might want to save that XD for parry. 

The paladin and the ranger look very neat.
they basicly are multi class characters.
fighter/druid for the ranger, fighter/cleric for the paladin  with some abilites swapped out.
They bring nothing new to the game feal or mecanic wise, so nothing that warrents their existance as seperate classes.
At this point just give each of them half a page in the multi class section and they are coverd. 



Again, I disagree. They both get unique features that make them something more than a mere multiclass character. Though, these two classes still need quite a bit of work. But, then, they are brand new…



Mar 21, 2013 -- 5:04PM, cassi_brazuca wrote:

I think that the Package was a good improvement over the last one. Just recheck balance, and make Wizards better, I think they are now underpowered.




No. Wizards are not under-powered. Making them better would under-power all the martial classes.


I think they are. Druids have all the spells and Wildshape and better hit die and cool features and Circle. Everyone has cool features. The Cleric is a gish, can use weapons and have Channel Divinity and better hit die and Deity. The Paladin and the Ranger get lots of spells for gishes. The Wizard only have spells (that they first learn and after prepare, unlike everyone else) in the same quantity of the Druid, Traditions that are still unbalanced and Arcane Recovery. The Wizard should be improved.

Actually the core four classes don't have cool features.
I'm even a big fan of skills being hard-coded to stats. (You can't use Strength to intimidate anyone because your Charisma of 3 prevents you from expressing yourself clearly.)


Like this?

www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2yv8aT0UFc

I'm really liking the encounter rules in the DM guidelines.





Mar 21, 2013 -- 5:04PM, cassi_brazuca wrote:

I think that the Package was a good improvement over the last one. Just recheck balance, and make Wizards better, I think they are now underpowered.






No. Wizards are not under-powered. Making them better would under-power all the martial classes.


I think they are. Druids have all the spells and Wildshape and better hit die and cool features and Circle. Everyone has cool features. The Cleric is a gish, can use weapons and have Channel Divinity and better hit die and Deity. The Paladin and the Ranger get lots of spells for gishes. The Wizard only have spells (that they first learn and after prepare, unlike everyone else) in the same quantity of the Druid, Traditions that are still unbalanced and Arcane Recovery. The Wizard should be improved. Actually the core four classes don't have cool features.




You can think that, but you would be wrong. The wizard is more powerful as the ranger and the paladin (who are a little underpowered right now, at least at higher levels). Meanwhile, the druid might be a little more powerful, but the druid is looking like it is slightly overpowered right now. So, that is not a justification to boost the wizard. Meanwhile, the cleric is not more powerful than the wizard. It does get more features, but it also gets less spells. And, without using a channel divinity power in conjunction with a melee attack, clerics (and wizards) deal more damage with cantrips. So, the fact that they get a 3[w] attack isn't a justification to make the wizard more powerful.


I would actually be pretty upset if they made the wizard any more powerful. One of the best things about this edition is that it is fairly balance and feels more classic than 4e. If they upset that balance too much, however, I will quickly lose interest. Boosting the wizard any more is a good way to start upsetting that balance. 


 
I just want to join in the general chorus of voices raised in praise of this packet.  It is indeed the best one yet.

If you have to resort to making offensive comments instead of making logical arguments, you deserve to be ignored.

I just want to join in the general chorus of voices raised in praise of this packet.  It is indeed the best one yet.



"One of the best" unfortunately says very little.

The new packet is definitely my favorite packet to date. All in all, I love it. These are the small warts I have found:

The druid seems like it might be able to do a little too much right now. It still doesn't seem that bad. It isn't going to out damage the fighter, barbarian, or rogue with its beast forms, and it isn't going to outcast the wizard in terms of AoE spells, but I worry that it can do a bit too much of everything. I might be wrong. More playtesting is required. The daily beast-forms also seem a little difficult to use. Druids are going to hate doors!  

The fighter has none. I LOVE what I am seeing.

The barbarian and the rogue both look great as options. But, neither class is given nearly enough choice in terms of build options when they level. The rogue is a little better (due to its choice of scheme at level 1 and multiattack at level 9), but neither has nearly enough. And, they plan to work on the rogue more, and have said that more options will be added to the barbarian down the road, so I hold out hope. 

The cleric and the wizard are looking great. I don't really have any comments on them right now, other than to say that the worst spell offenders still need to be fixed. One can still use meteor swarm to make 4 meteors overlap for insane damage; trap the soul is still a horribly wonky spell; wish still wonks up the economy by making money/magic items. 

The monk needs some major work right now, but they seem to know that.  

The paladin and the ranger look very neat. I worry, however, that after level 10 they will start to feel underpowered. I also wish that the class would give you a few more options in terms of what abilities you gain as you level. They get some, as they can choose what spells they want to use, but I wouldn't mind a few more options in terms of their more martial features (channel divinity, favored enemies, or whatever) as they level.  

I don't really like that skills are recoupled to stats. Why can't I intimidate someone with Strength? Why am I always using Dexterity when I ride an animal? It isn't a deal breaker, but I liked the way that worked more in the last packet.   

I am also a little confused as to why only the fighter and the rogue get multiattack options. That doesn't seem right. 

Otherwise, things are looking great! 



I agree 100% with everything you said
Try radiance RPG. A complete D20 game that supports fantasy and steampunk. Download the FREE PDF here: http://www.radiancerpg.com

I am also a little confused as to why only the fighter and the rogue get multiattack options. That doesn't seem right. 

Otherwise, things are looking great! 




In my opinion, it's like all of a sudden, developers started to actually read and test some of our ideas on the forum.

I think that some characters get things that others don't so that people doing a survey on characters with multiattack and people doing a survey on characters with no multiattack can be compared.



Mar 21, 2013 -- 5:04PM, cassi_brazuca wrote:

I think that the Package was a good improvement over the last one. Just recheck balance, and make Wizards better, I think they are now underpowered.






No. Wizards are not under-powered. Making them better would under-power all the martial classes.


I think they are. Druids have all the spells and Wildshape and better hit die and cool features and Circle. Everyone has cool features. The Cleric is a gish, can use weapons and have Channel Divinity and better hit die and Deity. The Paladin and the Ranger get lots of spells for gishes. The Wizard only have spells (that they first learn and after prepare, unlike everyone else) in the same quantity of the Druid, Traditions that are still unbalanced and Arcane Recovery. The Wizard should be improved. Actually the core four classes don't have cool features.




You can think that, but you would be wrong. The wizard is more powerful as the ranger and the paladin (who are a little underpowered right now, at least at higher levels). Meanwhile, the druid might be a little more powerful, but the druid is looking like it is slightly overpowered right now. So, that is not a justification to boost the wizard. Meanwhile, the cleric is not more powerful than the wizard. It does get more features, but it also gets less spells. And, without using a channel divinity power in conjunction with a melee attack, clerics (and wizards) deal more damage with cantrips. So, the fact that they get a 3[w] attack isn't a justification to make the wizard more powerful.


I would actually be pretty upset if they made the wizard any more powerful. One of the best things about this edition is that it is fairly balance and feels more classic than 4e. If they upset that balance too much, however, I will quickly lose interest. Boosting the wizard any more is a good way to start upsetting that balance. 


 



I think that everyone needs to really examine the reorganized Wizard spell list before they start calling WotC out.  This was the biggest boost that the Wizard got in this packet.

Flaming Sphere 2nd level spell, wizard gets  it at lvl 1
A lot of spells that are Wizard Only also got tweaked.  Melf's Acid Arrow is up to 3d8/2d8 from 3d8/1d8 and no longer requires an attack
Scorching Ray is up from 15 dmg to 6d6.
Magic Missile is 3 darts instead of 2
Stinking cloud went up to 6d6 and is still one of the best (if not the best) 3rd level combat spells available

Although I really can't figure something out.... who gets the spell Sound Burst?  It was in the last packet too.  And I have no idea who gets access to it.

Andd what the Heck does "Airy Water" do... damn missing spells.

Mar 21, 2013 -- 5:25PM, cassi_brazuca wrote:

Mar 21, 2013 -- 5:12PM, Cyber-Dave wrote:




Mar 21, 2013 -- 5:04PM, cassi_brazuca wrote:

I think that the Package was a good improvement over the last one. Just recheck balance, and make Wizards better, I think they are now underpowered.






No. Wizards are not under-powered. Making them better would under-power all the martial classes.


I think they are. Druids have all the spells and Wildshape and better hit die and cool features and Circle. Everyone has cool features. The Cleric is a gish, can use weapons and have Channel Divinity and better hit die and Deity. The Paladin and the Ranger get lots of spells for gishes. The Wizard only have spells (that they first learn and after prepare, unlike everyone else) in the same quantity of the Druid, Traditions that are still unbalanced and Arcane Recovery. The Wizard should be improved. Actually the core four classes don't have cool features.





You can think that, but you would be wrong. The wizard is more powerful as the ranger and the paladin (who are a little underpowered right now, at least at higher levels). Meanwhile, the druid might be a little more powerful, but the druid is looking like it is slightly overpowered right now. So, that is not a justification to boost the wizard. Meanwhile, the cleric is not more powerful than the wizard. It does get more features, but it also gets less spells. And, without using a channel divinity power in conjunction with a melee attack, clerics (and wizards) deal more damage with cantrips. So, the fact that they get a 3[w] attack isn't a justification to make the wizard more powerful.


I would actually be pretty upset if they made the wizard any more powerful. One of the best things about this edition is that it is fairly balance and feels more classic than 4e. If they upset that balance too much, however, I will quickly lose interest. Boosting the wizard any more is a good way to start upsetting that balance. 


 

The Cleric gains a good amount of spells and Channel Divinity and still some martial proficiency. Think in that way: With Channel Divinity a Cleric is on pair with a Wizard in casting terms, plus they have martial proficiency. The Druid now gets so much spells as the Wizard and have Wildshape and Circle Benefits. Now the Traditions of Wizard are unbalanced (School of Evocation and School of Illusion are underpowered compared to Scholarly Wizardry). That and new cool things that the new classes get it (like Evergreen). First they should learn more spells and perhaps prepare more spells (both Clerics and Druids with Circle of the Oak get extra spells prepared), but in general I think they should make a least a little more powerful.
Dispel Evil is missing, too.

Another +1 for this packet, though I wish more work was done on the barb and monk. Equipment still needs some work, though its great to see whips are no longer two handed.

As an aside, its good to see them listening to some of the better suggestions on the boards. Orzel's ranger ideas seem to have influenced them and if I believe correctly Cyber-Dave was the first to suggest weapon dice coming back. Not to mention yours truly suggested bringing back search as a skill on En World months ago.

IMAGE(http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/10.jpg)

you're sitting in a prison cell waiting to be interrogated when an envelope is slid under the door. inside is a picture of a guy with 19 strength holding a steel pipe with a note on the back that says: this is the guy who's going to be questioning you.

And then he walks into the room. He stutters, and can't make eye contact. You're not even sure what he wants to know, so you couldn't tell him even if you wanted to.

The linked ability score for any skill is just as much about what prevents you from succeeding as it is about what helps you to succeed.

The metagame is not the game.
+1 OP, totally agree.

Also the exploration rules are just great: good structured guidelines and yay wandering monsters are back!

I'm not sure if wizards are under or over powered or ok. I think it nearly all turns on how the final details of their spells end up. Utility wise - currently great. Combat wise, I think they will be just fine provided (i) spell damage is not nerfed and (ii) a handful of true save or die style spells - like the current polymorph - remain. At higher levels many monsters seem to have advantage on saves (magic resistence). Too many "multi-save" spells (like hold monster) will be statistically useless against foes with MR.  

Best packet so far.



Mar 21, 2013 -- 5:25PM, cassi_brazuca wrote:



Mar 21, 2013 -- 5:12PM, Cyber-Dave wrote:







Mar 21, 2013 -- 5:04PM, cassi_brazuca wrote:



I think that the Package was a good improvement over the last one. Just recheck balance, and make Wizards better, I think they are now underpowered.








No. Wizards are not under-powered. Making them better would under-power all the martial classes.





I think they are. Druids have all the spells and Wildshape and better hit die and cool features and Circle. Everyone has cool features. The Cleric is a gish, can use weapons and have Channel Divinity and better hit die and Deity. The Paladin and the Ranger get lots of spells for gishes. The Wizard only have spells (that they first learn and after prepare, unlike everyone else) in the same quantity of the Druid, Traditions that are still unbalanced and Arcane Recovery. The Wizard should be improved. Actually the core four classes don't have cool features.








You can think that, but you would be wrong. The wizard is more powerful as the ranger and the paladin (who are a little underpowered right now, at least at higher levels). Meanwhile, the druid might be a little more powerful, but the druid is looking like it is slightly overpowered right now. So, that is not a justification to boost the wizard. Meanwhile, the cleric is not more powerful than the wizard. It does get more features, but it also gets less spells. And, without using a channel divinity power in conjunction with a melee attack, clerics (and wizards) deal more damage with cantrips. So, the fact that they get a 3[w] attack isn't a justification to make the wizard more powerful.




I would actually be pretty upset if they made the wizard any more powerful. One of the best things about this edition is that it is fairly balance and feels more classic than 4e. If they upset that balance too much, however, I will quickly lose interest. Boosting the wizard any more is a good way to start upsetting that balance. 



 

The Cleric gains a good amount of spells and Channel Divinity and still some martial proficiency. Think in that way: With Channel Divinity a Cleric is on pair with a Wizard in casting terms, plus they have martial proficiency. The Druid now gets so much spells as the Wizard and have Wildshape and Circle Benefits. Now the Traditions of Wizard are unbalanced (School of Evocation and School of Illusion are underpowered compared to Scholarly Wizardry). That and new cool things that the new classes get it (like Evergreen). First they should learn more spells and perhaps prepare more spells (both Clerics and Druids with Circle of the Oak get extra spells prepared), but in general I think they should make a least a little more powerful.



Well, you have to keep in mind a few things.  

Yes the Druid is OP right now... I think we all know that.

The Cleric with his reduced allotment of spells-per-day is not on par with the wizard just because of Channel.  Channel powers are cool, but they are not as good as spells.  
(Wizard gets an additional 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th, level spell per day and can also recover 3 3rd level spells per day)
As far as the martial stuff?  Well, its really just a flavor choice.  At best, the cleric is rolling at a +8 for 3d12 + 5 (avg of 24.5)... this is instead of using lance of faith for 5d8 (avg of 22.5), with a +10 to hit, at range.  They are pretty much even choices.  This means that it is also evenly paced with the Wizard's cantrip attacks.
Defensively, the cleric gets a nice boost from his armor proficiencies (if he takes them).  This is really the big difference between the two classes as I see it.  The cleric can wear armor, his spells are generally a bit weaker and he gets less of them.  Offensively, outside of spells, he is the same as the Wizard whether he chooses to fight with magic or weapons. I think that the Cleric is just about right when compared to the Wizard right now.
Nothing new. Nothing innovative. Nothing worth switching editions for.

As much as I hate to admit it, Bounded Accuracy is both new and innovative as far as D&D goes. If you liked 2E or 3E, but hated how the math worked out, this is somewhat like a fix for that.

The metagame is not the game.
I'll cast my agreement in with the OP about liking this packet.  I feel there is still a bit of tweaking to be done but the direction is solid.  Druids look good albeit possibly a little on the powerful side.  Wizards look like wizards and I believe this cleric is the best version of any edition.  The monk is a bit underpowered but the designers have stated that it is still in flux.  Overall, good job guys!!
Nothing new. Nothing innovative. Nothing worth switching editions for.

As much as I hate to admit it, Bounded Accuracy is both new and innovative as far as D&D goes. If you liked 2E or 3E, but hated how the math worked out, this is somewhat like a fix for that.




VERY true.

We’ve removed content from this thread because of a violation of the Code of Conduct.


You can review the Code here: www.wizards.com/Company/About.aspx?x=wz_...


Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively.


Remember, a community is a joint effort of all those involved, and while we want intellegent meaningful and productive banter to ensue we also need it to be polite and considerate of others. Believe us when we say it is possible.


Thank you for your time and support as we continue to try and make a great community for everyone.

Looks like I will need to play online to test this packet. Then I will see if I will change my mind. Seems better than the last one though

 Fear is the Mind Killer

 



Well, you have to keep in mind a few things.  

Yes the Druid is OP right now... I think we all know that.

The Cleric with his reduced allotment of spells-per-day is not on par with the wizard just because of Channel.  Channel powers are cool, but they are not as good as spells.  
(Wizard gets an additional 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th, level spell per day and can also recover 3 3rd level spells per day)
As far as the martial stuff?  Well, its really just a flavor choice.  At best, the cleric is rolling at a +8 for 3d12 + 5 (avg of 24.5)... this is instead of using lance of faith for 5d8 (avg of 22.5), with a +10 to hit, at range.  They are pretty much even choices.  This means that it is also evenly paced with the Wizard's cantrip attacks.
Defensively, the cleric gets a nice boost from his armor proficiencies (if he takes them).  This is really the big difference between the two classes as I see it.  The cleric can wear armor, his spells are generally a bit weaker and he gets less of them.  Offensively, outside of spells, he is the same as the Wizard whether he chooses to fight with magic or weapons. I think that the Cleric is just about right when compared to the Wizard right now.



+1. The wizard does not need to be made any more powerful.



Mar 21, 2013 -- 5:04PM, cassi_brazuca wrote:

I think that the Package was a good improvement over the last one. Just recheck balance, and make Wizards better, I think they are now underpowered.






No. Wizards are not under-powered. Making them better would under-power all the martial classes.


I think they are. Druids have all the spells and Wildshape and better hit die and cool features and Circle. Everyone has cool features. The Cleric is a gish, can use weapons and have Channel Divinity and better hit die and Deity. The Paladin and the Ranger get lots of spells for gishes. The Wizard only have spells (that they first learn and after prepare, unlike everyone else) in the same quantity of the Druid, Traditions that are still unbalanced and Arcane Recovery. The Wizard should be improved. Actually the core four classes don't have cool features.




You can think that, but you would be wrong. The wizard is more powerful as the ranger and the paladin (who are a little underpowered right now, at least at higher levels). Meanwhile, the druid might be a little more powerful, but the druid is looking like it is slightly overpowered right now. So, that is not a justification to boost the wizard. Meanwhile, the cleric is not more powerful than the wizard. It does get more features, but it also gets less spells. And, without using a channel divinity power in conjunction with a melee attack, clerics (and wizards) deal more damage with cantrips. So, the fact that they get a 3[w] attack isn't a justification to make the wizard more powerful.


I would actually be pretty upset if they made the wizard any more powerful. One of the best things about this edition is that it is fairly balance and feels more classic than 4e. If they upset that balance too much, however, I will quickly lose interest. Boosting the wizard any more is a good way to start upsetting that balance. 


 



I think that everyone needs to really examine the reorganized Wizard spell list before they start calling WotC out.  This was the biggest boost that the Wizard got in this packet.

Flaming Sphere 2nd level spell, wizard gets  it at lvl 1
A lot of spells that are Wizard Only also got tweaked.  Melf's Acid Arrow is up to 3d8/2d8 from 3d8/1d8 and no longer requires an attack
Scorching Ray is up from 15 dmg to 6d6.
Magic Missile is 3 darts instead of 2
Stinking cloud went up to 6d6 and is still one of the best (if not the best) 3rd level combat spells available

Although I really can't figure something out.... who gets the spell Sound Burst?  It was in the last packet too.  And I have no idea who gets access to it.

Andd what the Heck does "Airy Water" do... damn missing spells.



airy water lets you create a pocket of oxygen underwater so people can breath while under the water its pretty sweet. it also makes underwater movement easier i believe
I don't think that spell existed in 3rd ed and how quickly people forget.

 Fear is the Mind Killer

 

Why do you keep comming back if you feel a "monumental lack of interrest" with this "steaming turd of a game" that is "never gonna get published" ? 



Because they don't get to move the game in such a crappy direction without hearing about it. I'll stop coming here and ripping on the game when they quit and turn it over to a better design team.


Which you know is not gonna happend.

You want to be heard? answer the surveys, formulate constructive criticism, make your money do the talking by buying some other game. 
What you are doing is not helping anyone achieve anything. 
Try radiance RPG. A complete D20 game that supports fantasy and steampunk. Download the FREE PDF here: http://www.radiancerpg.com
Skill with weapons means nothing when you have Cantrips that do decent damage at-will.  The only time you should be swinging a weapon as a Cleric is if you're also casting a Swift action spell (mostly just heals) or if for whatever reasons you chose not to take an attack Cantrip.

I'm really happy with Wizards vs. Clerics at the moment. 

I think that everyone needs to really examine the reorganized Wizard spell list before they start calling WotC out.  This was the biggest boost that the Wizard got in this packet.

Flaming Sphere 2nd level spell, wizard gets  it at lvl 1
A lot of spells that are Wizard Only also got tweaked.  Melf's Acid Arrow is up to 3d8/2d8 from 3d8/1d8 and no longer requires an attack
Scorching Ray is up from 15 dmg to 6d6.
Magic Missile is 3 darts instead of 2
Stinking cloud went up to 6d6 and is still one of the best (if not the best) 3rd level combat spells available

Although I really can't figure something out.... who gets the spell Sound Burst?  It was in the last packet too.  And I have no idea who gets access to it.

Andd what the Heck does "Airy Water" do... damn missing spells.



Now I am thinking I need to look over the spell list. This has me worried that wizards might be overpowered again.
I don't think that spell existed in 3rd ed and how quickly people forget.



It did sort of ... it got changed to Life Bubble, so you could also use it space or to avoid gas attacks.

Anyway it was really more of a complaint that Airy Water is yet another spell missing from the playtest packet.  Sound Burst is just.... it just doesn't exist as an option for any class.  Maybe its a bard spell that hasn't been put on a list yet or something... but its wierd, thats all. 

I can assume that Save from Dying (druid cantrip) does exactly what it suggests... but there is still no entry for it. 
 I haven't got around to looking at the spells yet. I do not think it will be relevent for the amount of time planned to test this packet.

 Fear is the Mind Killer