|
10 months ago ::
Aug 06, 2012 - 8:03AM
#51
|
Date Joined:
Nov 21, 2009
|
Fighter Options: We saw this last week and it has potential. I look forward to giving it a go. Surprise: Although the rule in the first packet was simple, it had some problems. It makes combats less dynamic because you have each group in their own cluster of initiative counts instead of interspersed with each other. I think a surprise round with limited action will probably work better. I might add a quirk where if someone in the surprised party rolled well on initiative (perhaps a nat 20), they also get to act in the surprise round. Critical Hits: Not a big deal to me. Resting and Healing: I am not sure on this one, and will have to see how the new values play. With regard to “Hit Dice” as the primary non-magical healing mechanic, I am in favor of changing the name to something like “Healing Dice.” This better represents what they are, and more importantly, gives the designers the freedom to have different numbers of healing dice from hit dice. It may turn out that one per level is not the right progression for these (or alternate healing modules require a different progression) and separating the names makes it easier to accommodate this. Skills: This does not feel right to me. It is like they are solving the wrong problem, but I will reserve judgment until I see how it plays. As I mentioned earlier, it may be time to take perception out of the skill system. How many times per session does your DM ask you to roll perception (or checks your passive value)? Noticing things is so central to adventuring, both in and out of combat, that it probably deserves its own space. It could be a class feature where each class gets a choice of two abilities plus a small static modifier (which could scale with level, as appropriate for the class and bounded accuracy).
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Aug 06, 2012 - 8:35AM
#52
|
Date Joined:
Jan 29, 2005
|
My fundamental challenge to the rogue skill change is why skills are so central to a specific class? If I want a skills-heavy caster, I have to also be a rogue!? I would like to see an "Expert" specialty at a minimum to allow all classes to have wider access to skill trainings, and skill mastery.
To repeat, the Skill Mastery feature as rogue-only is not good IMO.
Magic Dual Color Test
Show
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Aug 06, 2012 - 8:43AM
#53
|
Date Joined:
May 24, 2012
|
My fundamental challenge to the rogue skill change is why skills are so central to a specific class? If I want a skills-heavy caster, I have to also be a rogue!? I would like to see an "Expert" specialty at a minimum to allow all classes to have wider access to skill trainings, and skill mastery.
To repeat, the Skill Mastery feature as rogue-only is not good IMO.
Maybe there should be an Expert Class and a Rogue Specialty.
Perception is unique:
1- It is a passive and active skill
2- Results are often hard to relate to the characters without all the players becoming aware. Little notes are slowing. I like the private msgs in PbP forums!
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Aug 06, 2012 - 8:45AM
#54
|
|
|
Fighter Options
We've already discussed this in depth, until they give us some meat to go with it, there's nothing to say here. Surprise
I'm honestly surprised it took this long. This is an example of a mechanic that worked fine before and the change really wasn't needed unless they were making further changes to initiative. Critical Hits
I'd like to see critical hits get a little bonus damage in addition to the max damage. A crit taking away your ability to roll dice just feels wrong. I know 4e had crit bonus dice attached to magic weapons/implements, why not just make each weapon have a crit bonus attached to it (like Longsword adds d6, Battleaxe adds d10, whatever), and maybe have that increase if your weapon is magical (+1 weapon gets 2d6 instead of 1d6). Don't need a damage multiplier, just getting a couple dice to roll is enough to make them feel good to me. Rest and Healing
I still don't like this "Reducing HP and Damage" because I still really can't see how this is supposed to fit in with bounded accuracy. We've been told that HP and Damage will be the main source of scaling with hit/AC/etc not going up, yet HP and Damage scaling is being restricted now as well. Besides that, hit dice still aren't enough healing to replace a cleric's healing, ESPECIALLY with the Cleric healing being boosted and the cleric getting more healing separate from its spells. When they initially said they were changing HP values didn't they say they were leaving healing the same? I guess that doesn't apply to the Cleric who gets a boost to his healing to go along with lower HP values. I don't care about the full heal on a long rest, and wouldn't mind if they dropped that even as the core assumption, but I want to see hit dice boosted up to a point where the Cleric isn't the main source of group healing and the group can survive a full day of adventuring without a cleric being present. Spoiler:
Show
Ideally I'd like to see something like a healing surge where your healing surge value drops with each use until you run out, and a long rest restores your healing surge value by some amount, and gives you hp equal to the surge value at the end of the rest. So if a character has a surge value of 6 which goes down by 1 with each use, he could heal 21 hp in one day. If he goes through all of his surges in one day, he can take an extended rest, bringing his surge value from 0 to 3, and healing him for 3 hit points. If he rests for another day without using a surge at all during the first day, the surge value goes up to 6 (his cap), and heals him for 6 hit points.
You could work Constitution into this to make it more valuable, factoring con into the surge value somehow, or allowing self healing con mod times per day without reducing surge value (meaning the example character above with a +3 con mod would go from 21 hp healed to 39 hp healed, a very noticeable difference in longevity) Skills
Since reading this thread I'm actually more okay with the mechanic change. When I first read it, I interpretted it as removing the ability mod altogether and giving the higher of ability mod or skill bonus as the bonus. So a rogue trained in perception has a +3. Having read it again, it's basically just saying "If the rogue is trained in this, treat his stat as a 16 unless your stat is better" which is fine. The real question is will the rogue be able to take advantage of this by eventually training a huge number of skills, or are our characters always going to be stuck with 3-6 skills? Also, I did like that they defined a skill list. An undefined skill list always causes problems, and giving a common baseline to refer back to is almost always a good idea. Can't say much else until we actually see the skill list though.
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Aug 06, 2012 - 8:52AM
#55
|
Date Joined:
Feb 17, 2012
|
I’ve removed content from this thread because vulgarity is a violation of the Code of Conduct. You can review the Code of Conduct here: company.wizards.com/conduct 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.
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Aug 06, 2012 - 9:06AM
#56
|
Date Joined:
Dec 15, 2009
|
I guess my big problem comes down to whether this change is in addition to, or replaces the current form of Skill Mastery.
- If it replaces it, I can live with that. I'm not a fan of rewarding players for MinMaxing, but a +3 for Rogues to Trained skills isn't that bad.
- If it is in addition to the minimum dice roll of 10, that automatically makes any DC under 16 a success for any skill that Rogue has trained. That's unacceptable, and completely breaks what I thought WoTC were trying to do with Boundless Accuracy.
It is my opinon that as someone earlier had posted, that just like the Combat System, Perception and Wisdom need to be fixed first before trying to change the Rogue's abilities. It does no good to fix the symptom, when the cause remains unchanged.
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Aug 06, 2012 - 9:11AM
#57
|
Date Joined:
Jul 11, 2012
|
My fundamental challenge to the rogue skill change is why skills are so central to a specific class? If I want a skills-heavy caster, I have to also be a rogue!? I would like to see an "Expert" specialty at a minimum to allow all classes to have wider access to skill trainings, and skill mastery.
To repeat, the Skill Mastery feature as rogue-only is not good IMO.
Seconded. I like interacting with fantasy worlds trough skills of my character. Why they (seem to) insist on only one class out of a dozen to be good at it, and leaps and bounds better than anyone else baffles me. What is so great about stabbing people in the back that it makes you good at architecture, or singing, or knowledge of demons? Under current rules I just feel like level dipping all my future characters into thief.
EDIT: maybe Im overreacting, and they will add some good options for other classes to boost their skills. But right now every skill booster goes to rogue, and they are not even limited to "rogue" skills, but any skill under the sun.
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Aug 06, 2012 - 9:12AM
#58
|
Date Joined:
Jun 17, 2003
|
While I agree that the "-20 when surprised' wasn't quite right, going back to the surprise round is also a bad idea, IMO. How about ambushers roll Initiative twice during the first round? In Mearls' example, both the PCs and the Distraction Goblins would get one action, but the Ambush Goblins would roll twice. Sure, there's a risk that the Ambush would fail against some of the high Init PCs, but really twitchy characters should be difficult to ambush, even if they have poor Perception scores. Case in point... www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASfj6BdGkCMEDIT: Fixed link.
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Aug 06, 2012 - 9:20AM
#59
|
Date Joined:
Nov 21, 2009
|
While I agree that the "-20 when surprised' wasn't quite right, going back to the surprise round is also a bad idea, IMO. How about ambushers roll Initiative twice during the first round? In Mearls' example, both the PCs and the Distraction Goblins would get one action, but the Ambush Goblins would roll twice. Sure, there's a risk that the Ambush would fail against some of the high Init PCs, but really twitchy characters should be difficult to ambush, even if they have poor Perception scores. Case in point... www.youtube.com/index?desktop_uri=%2F&gl...
This isn't bad, but I would simplify it. Ambushers roll initiative as usual, but get to go twice in the first round. Once at their initiative count, and one at their count +5 (or +10).
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Aug 06, 2012 - 9:24AM
#60
|
|
|
Wisdom for perception makes sense for "being in tune with your surroundings", but not so much for "excellent eyesight and hearing" which might be Dexterity or Constitution. Inteligence makes sense for "that outcrag would be a good place for some archers". Allow different ability modifiers to apply to perception checks based on how the character notices things and the issue is solved.
Yep, most skill checks could realistically use multiple abilities.
Since 5e skills have disconnected from abilities scores, the player can already add the skill bonus to whichever ability seems appropriate in context.
|
|
|
