Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Neonivek]

I honestly hope the "You cannot use proper class enemies because they would cause a moneyvalance" is patched up.

[Bauglir]

Huh, I just looked at the multiclassing rules and... I don't hate them. I'm impressed. The Proficiency Bonus rule handles a lot of my gripes about the system. Some of the rules are a little kludgy, but they do what they're supposed to, and while I don't much like the prerequisites, that's purely an opinion about how game rules are meant to model characters, and WotC has a different opinion than me. I can't really hold that against them.

[sambojin]

The basic rules have now been released for free by WoTC. No feats, less spells and a cut-down class system, but good to see a finalized version. For free!

Can be found here:
 http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/basicrules

From a basic glance the only things that stood out was the abundance of healing, a few dubious rogue'y things (sneak attack is good and easy now) and a cantrip. Guidance is ridiculously good, giving +d4 on any ability check done in the next minute by someone. That's +2-3 on average for anything you or someone else might do outside combat. Anything. It might not have the lolz of prestidigation or the damage of a firebolt, but it's amazingly versatile. It's equivalent to a big stat bonus or 1-16 extra character levels of proficiency for anyone for any task, which is huge. This is in the version where skill checks and modifiers were meant to be kept in a nice level/ability curve. Can't wait to multi-class a rogue/cleric. Oh well, one liners away.....

"Clerics: Making everyone good at everything since 5.0"

"Guidance: Googling god to help you tie your own shoelaces."

"Guidance: Every damn thing we do has d4 more religious bullshit in it now!"

[Zireael]

That's great to know, thanks for the tip!

[sambojin]

Rogues are great too. Another extreme example, but with auto-take10, doubled proficiency, a maxed attribute, lvl 17+ and Guidance cast on you, the minimum you can roll is: 10+12+5+d4=28-31. As the minimum roll for any of the four skills you've picked up along the way for that maxed attribute (Dex?)

I know lvl 17+ is epic tier stuff, but that's more than just reliable talent, that really is godly shit right there. This is how good you are when you're not even trying hard to do something. A DC of 27 is like your minimum amount of effort, you literally can do normal things with your eyes closed.

Now here's hoping that they add in maximized cantrips, 30 foot "touch" range spells or some other sort of overpowered crap in the missing domains and feats. Or just an easy way for rogues to get guidance (even multiclassing) so they start getting uber'd even earlier (lvl 6-12 or so). Or extended crits for easy insta-sneak-attack kills. Why not break stuff more?

It actually doesn't seem like too bad a version. It's the extras and options that tend to break D&D. Oh, and spiked chains.

[Rakonas]

It definitely seems nice to me, the proficiency thing is excellent, no keeping track of variable levelling bonuses (and assigning skill points, woo), the base classes seem quite nicely balanced and complementary. I'm looking forward to seeing the PHB.

[Neonivek]

That kind of makes me dislike the handling of rogues more now.

Mind you I like rogues themselves, I dislike the reliance on them... Something 4e fixed >_< (And what a coincidence that few people played a rogue... and they were enhanced from their 3.5 version)

The Rogues being SUPER DUPER in skills sambojin is likely intentional...

[Rakonas]

Rogues are still skill wizards because they have 4 class proficiencies and they start with 2 proficiencies with expertise, meaning that they're basically double proficient. Eventually get 4 skills expertise. So a level 1 rogue with a max stat and expertise would get +9 to a skill roll. The big difference is that having multiple rogues in a party would be very useful, and you don't have to deal with the assigning skill points metagame.

[Neonivek]

Honestly if there was one thing Rogues REALLY didn't need it was making them even more of a skill monkey.

It isn't that I wouldn't want to be someone who is very great at minor skills... it is that the game adjusts to Rogues.

So expect Rogues and Clerics to be pretty much forced into parties once again... (I know Pathfinder didn't fix the cleric issue... but 4e did)

And if it doesn't adjust to rogues then it makes any skill a rogue picks up trivial.

[sambojin]

I don't know. Bards have music magic. Rogues have skill magic. Clerics have divine magic (they can ask a god for help with *anything*. See above). Fighters have fighty/healy magic. Barbarians probably get angry magic. Wizards have magicky magic.

Everyone gets some stuff that needs hand wavey explanations. Can't wait for multi-classing and feats. Because of core-rule stat gains and multi-mega-oohh-shit-how-does-any-of-it-make-sense-any-more-magic. The answer? It never did, you just got used to it.

Still thinking a high dex, high elf rogue with a splash of cleric is looking good though. Or fighter. Or both.

Now what's the most broken wizard cantrip a high elf should pick? Prestidigitation, minor illusion, light, mage hand or fire bolt? I'm voting minor illusion due to it's "do anything" value, but prestidigitation is awesome as well for the same reason (but it's less rulesy and more RP'y). Light's good for making light rocks to throw, fire bolt's good for lighting things that aren't rock, and mage hand is good for nut slaps. But if you need anything else, there's minor illusion, always.

[Rakonas]

Maybe Mage Hand with it established that you get a big bonus to sleight of hand checks. Become the literal god of pick pocketing as you discretely steal the clothes off of your enemies backs. I think some of the cantrips actually have a component requirement meaning you'll need to buy a pouch or arcane focus, though.

[Neonivek]

Here is the difference sambojin.

If your party doesn't have a bard... you are fine. If your party doesn't have a barbarian you are fine. If your party doesn't have a warrior you are fine. HECK if your party doesn't have a wizard you are mostly fine (it hurts, but you are fine).

If you don't have a cleric the game grinds to a halt every few steps... If you don't have a rogue then the game has to suspiciously exclude several aspects.

Rogue HURTS even more because Rogue is a very restrictive class. I've had parties where people argued over who had to play a rogue because no one wanted to touch one. I've had DMs who barred outside sources allow alternate rogue classes because otherwise people would have to play a rogue. Why? because Rogues have two tricks, skills and sneak attack... of which both rely on the right circumstances.

While a Cleric actually has a bit of room even if a Cleric doesn't want to be all heal heavy. (and yet it still stinks that it HURTS not to have a cleric).

The problem isn't that everyone has a specialty sambojin... the problem is some classes have a specialty that is railroaded into required territory.

Now what's the most broken wizard cantrip a high elf should pick? Prestidigitation, minor illusion, light, mage hand or fire bolt?

Mage Hand, most DMs don't know how the spell works.

[sambojin]

Well, you can't nut slap with it. But you can carry a 10 pound rock, 20 feet up, just waiting to drop it on someone. Yes, that hurts a lot. There's far more creative uses as well.

I'm still going for pres or MI though. They really don't limit your creativity, and they let you know exactly what sort pf DM (or player) you're working with pretty quickly.

On the "skill bunny" thing, it's less of an issue in Next. You might be an uber-skill-bunny as a rogue, but everyone can do anything, and sneak attack is a hell of a lot easier as well.

Healing is more abundant too, versatility of casting for clerics is way better (sort of a mixed sorc/cleric system, with the best of all worlds), healing potions are a pretty core item, and the basic cleric casts heals whenever they want with scalable spell levels.

The same goes for wizards in casting versatility.

All-in-all, this is the least character pidgeon-holed version so far. Everyone is awesome at a few things, but everyone can get by otherwise. Just. As soon as we see the full PHB we'll probably laugh at that statement, because some characters might be "too good" at some things, thus safely putting them in their role, with DCs and encounters altered to reflect the min-maxing that will happen. Also making it pointless to attempt things outside your role.

We'll see.

[Neonivek]

You might be an uber-skill-bunny as a rogue, but everyone can do anything, and sneak attack is a hell of a lot easier as well

It depends we haven't seen the checks yet. But there are two issues that seem like they might be present
1) Skills that the rogue gets are trivial when he does it. "I am here, locks will always open"
or
2) Skills that the rogue get are SO DIFFICULT that you absolutely need a rogue to do it. "Dang we don't have a rogue, now we have to walk into these traps"

There are alternatives and here is the only way out
3) Rogue's high skill threshold is actually there because the rogue can do things, faster. "Whoa we are in a fight and the flood gate is locked. Rogue we need it done 2 rounds ago!"

Sounds like Clerics are mixed with the Druids (Druids were always an odd bunch... there was like a 2 level range where Druids were even better offensive casters then Wizards... outside)

All-in-all, this is the least character pidgeon-holed version so far. Everyone is awesome at a few things, but everyone can get by otherwise. Just. As soon as we see the full PHB we'll probably laugh at that statement, because some characters might be "too good" at some things, thus safely putting them in their role, with DCs and encounters altered to reflect the min-maxing that will happen. Also making it pointless to attempt things outside your role.

We'll see

Indeed. The major reason why Rogues just stank soo much in 3.5 was mostly because all the enemies immune to rogues were extremely common (Aberrations, constructs, undead, plants, oozes, some outsiders, elementals, anything with an inability to be flanked, anything with immunity to crits.). Yet if you just read the rogue's section you would never realize that.

Heck in the right situation Fighters and Rogues were amazing. Campaigns dealing almost exclusively with humanoid enemies made them shine even brighter then mages (if you had complete warrior).

[Rakonas]

The major reason why Rogues just stank soo much in 3.5 was mostly because all the enemies immune to rogues were extremely common (Aberrations, constructs, undead, plants, oozes, some outsiders, elementals, anything with an inability to be flanked, anything with immunity to crits.). Yet if you just read the rogue's section you would never realize that.

All of this is really just based on the campaign. That's the point of the whole genre, things can be totally broken if the DM wants, or the DM can fix things that ruin the fun on the fly.