Search results

Maybe. I think when people talk about "PC Power", it's more wrapped in other abilities like spells and such or unbalanced features. Doing something that increased PCs basically across the board seems less controversial, but I could be wrong.

Ah cool, like to know that this works in a particular set of circumstances and not most of them. Again, if we have to get very specific, that's not exactly the "practice" as much as "what we need to get it to work". I think you mean "Not forgoing", as that means to not do something. FOB can...

But that's basically just taking an ASI with a feat. Like, by that logic if I gave you an ASI plus a Feat, that's just a feat with a custom ASI on it.

That doesn't make my fighter a better speaker or my Rogue wiser. The problem is that we are talking about a system based around numerical rolls and to be better at things, we ostensible need two things: better stats or better proficiency. The problem is that proficiency is locked in, so the only...

Because, largely speaking, there are so few ways to do it already? I mean, I know 5E is a low numbers game, but that's kind of what you get when you make it like that. I don't think ASIs are necessarily the most interesting thing in the world, but they also let you overcome the basic limitations...

Uh, who are they falling behind? The enemy? Everyone getting more is fine. MAD classes have problems because they don't have enough stats to go around and get hamstrung by lacking something; giving them more helps them out. Who cares if a fighter gets another boost, the Monk can get a feat as...

Not really? Like, in choosing both it creates more potential split points as well as allowing MAD characters to fill out better. Forcing a choice between the two things doesn't add to customization because it prevents it: it forces you away from certain choices because you have to abandon them...

It feels bad to me because it's just an unnecessary limit: why do I have to choose between the two when I could simply have both? In a game where there are very limited choices outside of the class ones, allowing more options to customize them beyond the class structure would seem good. I...

For certain classes it means more than others. Martials, in particular, probably get more benefits from feats because (so far in 5E, at least) feats have had big implications on how they interact with combat. +1 to hit is always good, but the +1 to damage is less meaningful. For Spellcasters...

I "don't understand" it because it's a bad design decision. I've never heard a good argument for it, hence I "never understood". I'm not sure what point you're trying to make other than not grokking casual idioms.

Never understood why it had to be a choice and not just let people have both. It was one of my first changes because it was always a bad choice to have to make.

Given that they are sectioned off by level and usage, it's actually a lot less. Definitely not more "Session 0 slog", certainly, and for those who don't want to use them they won't. You talk about decision points, but sometimes a lack of options can slow things down because nothing quite fits...

That's only if you don't take any Feats, or you managed to convince your DM to roll-up stats and got good rolls. Their AC can be better than most, but that isn't really as true in practice because of the nature of the game. The Monk has to spend valuable ASIs, while others can simply put on...

I think multiclassing feats works when you have enough feats to do it, and allows you to curate which features can be combined with what. But I'd agree that making more classes that fill more niches might be a better solution than what D&D currently has.

Honestly one of the biggest things that allowed PF2 to find its footing that it took from 4E was its "You multiclass by taking feats", which ended up allowing the early levels of a class to be distinct and interesting because you couldn't just dip in for the good stuff. The problems with...

I mean, being fast is part of the Monk's thing, though. It is a small augment to the ability to cruise up vertical surfaces/running across liquids, but largely by saving a single ki point. I don't really see it, tbh. You can tank a bit, but you don't have the hit points to take a huge hit...

But again: why not just give it for free? It already incurs cost by taking your bonus action in a class relying on them, so what's the point in also making it take up all your "Cool Thing" points? When it's something so situational, double-paying makes it even less desirable. This is a big...

And it's not like it wouldn't already have cost: most of the big class stuff (like Stunning Strike) are tied to Flurry of Blows and such, which also cost a Bonus Action. There are really two costs rather than one, because there's the opportunity cost of using your Bonus Action for something...