| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| hammer of Moradin |
Posted - 19 Aug 2014 : 18:28:20
Today is the general release of the Player's Handbook!
My copy should be in the mail waiting when I get home. Unfortunately, I have 7 more hours until I can open it up and start reading/playing.
As much as I want to support the local gaming store, and I'm on a first name basis with the owners, I cannot put $50 down on it, so I did order it from Amazon. $29.97 for it and still showing that price today. |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Matt James |
Posted - 23 Sep 2014 : 13:10:43
You guys might hate my games. There are three distinct aspects of play. You can master one of them if you want, but you could ultimately being hurting yourself, and the party.
Combat
Exploration
Social |
| The Sage |
Posted - 07 Sep 2014 : 02:26:55
Ah, cool. Thanks. |
| xaeyruudh |
Posted - 06 Sep 2014 : 17:37:01
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
I must have missed the announcement about the Realms being made the core setting.
Dug up the reference I saw:
quote:
”The Forgotten Realms is our flagship setting for the new edition, however we are supporting, or will support, all of our key settings in the future.” That includes Ebberon, says Perkins, and “you are going to see more Ravenloft stuff very soon.”
Source: http://web.archive.org/web/20140903080517/http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidewalt/2014/04/11/secrets-from-the-tyranny-of-dragons/
I tried to make a link out of it but I think the second http messes it up... you can, however, just copy/paste the entire url into the address bar.
I predict that "all our core settings" will still mean just FR and Eberron, and they'll bring back modrons (mentioned a couple lines down in the same article) as core monsters rather than revamping Planescape. The Ravenloft mention also suggests that they will do something with the Mists and maybe some monsters, rather than a new Ravenloft product line.
If they were going to bring back Planescape or Ravenloft, the quote would have been something like "we're bringing back a couple of key settings including Planescape and Ravenloft." The fact that the settings were mentioned kinda obliquely without really being included seems significant. I'm reading into it, but time will tell. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 06 Sep 2014 : 14:41:38
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by The Masked Mage
I think this is largely due to Ed still being around, while Gary is not.
I disagree. I think it's because the Realms is the only setting that has remained in print all this time, and it is still supported. It's all about sales.
Indeed. And I think the relative sales success of "The Sundering" series has gone a long way toward reinforcing that current trend in the RPG market as well. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 06 Sep 2014 : 13:31:26
quote:
Originally posted by The Masked Mage
I think this is largely due to Ed still being around, while Gary is not.
I disagree. I think it's because the Realms is the only setting that has remained in print all this time, and it is still supported. It's all about sales. |
| The Masked Mage |
Posted - 06 Sep 2014 : 08:42:02
I think this is largely due to Ed still being around, while Gary is not. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 05 Sep 2014 : 04:59:53
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh
Well, it's not really my intent to begrudge your affection for Greyhawk. Buuttt...
Putting GH in the PH would go against their stated intent of making the Realms the flagship setting.
Oh, see, I didn't actually know of this. I thought it was just standard for all core editions of D&D that GREYHAWK was THE SETTING to have detailing core game elements. I must have missed the announcement about the Realms being made the core setting.
That's kind of neat, now, and does help to explain the presence of so much FR material in the PHB. |
| Irennan |
Posted - 04 Sep 2014 : 22:46:09
Dw, the SC has an index that includes all the original names of spells along their generalized ones. |
| xaeyruudh |
Posted - 04 Sep 2014 : 21:38:35
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
The Spell Compendium did, however, remove all the names from the Forgotten Realms like Laeral's Cutting Hand (to just Cutting Hand).
Now that's just insulting, and mystifying.  |
| Diffan |
Posted - 04 Sep 2014 : 21:29:32
The Spell Compendium did, however, remove all the names from the Forgotten Realms like Laeral's Cutting Hand (to just Cutting Hand). |
| Delwa |
Posted - 04 Sep 2014 : 20:49:25
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Delwa
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh
It's 5th edition and they still haven't removed Bigby-and-company's names from a bunch of spells. By my estimation Greyhawk has more representation than any other setting. 
Actually, didn't they do that back in 3rd edition? I recall them stripping the names from a bunch of spells, and most of those names were from Greyhawk.
They did for the SRD. The 3.5 PHB still called spells like Bigby's Fist by the Greyhawk names.
Didn't the Spell Compendium also remove all the names?
A quick glance shows the Bigby Spells retain their name for the Compendium. I personally like it. It adds flavor and encourages players to think of how they can leave a lasting impression on the world besides burning the village down. |
| xaeyruudh |
Posted - 04 Sep 2014 : 20:48:15
I'll agree somewhat with the theme part, because I kinda like themed spells. But I'll stand by the names being too world-specific for the PH. When the author's name is attached to the spell, particularly when it's an oddly specific spell like Evard's black tentacles or Otto's irresistible dance, it belongs in Pages from the Mages. The PH should cover the bases with 2-3 spells from each school for each level; no names. Expansions of the spell list should follow in other world-specific products, and I look forward to seeing the relevant name/date/place lore there.
Nothing stops me from ignoring Bigby's name, but referencing a specific mage in the spell name says clearly that this spell came from a specific place and time. Is this spell available in a campaign which is set in a different world, before the named caster was born? Easily decided, but the point is that it's even easier to avoid the issue entirely by not putting somebody's name on the spell. Magic missile can be Minath's unerring bolts in my Waterdeep campaign, Abanalo's invisible fists in my Shining South campaign, and Zin's claws in my Al-Qadim campaign, and even though their function is the same I can easily introduce minor tweaks (colors, sounds, material components) to help the players suspend disbelief and accept that different areas of the world have entirely different spell lists. Bigby's grasping hand pretty much has to be somebody's grasping hand in every campaign, and it will be obvious to everyone with a PH that they're all the same spell.
Flavor belongs in world-specific books. In the core rules, generic is better than specific in my opinion, but I know mileage may vary. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 04 Sep 2014 : 20:15:21
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh
I just don't think spells in the PH should have names attached.
I disagree. I think it makes the spells more flavorful to have a name attached, especially when there is a common theme, like with the Bigby spells. |
| xaeyruudh |
Posted - 04 Sep 2014 : 19:16:37
Not sure. Maybe, but then I would just observe that it didn't "stick" and the PH which introduces players to the game still uses the Greyhawk names. I don't hate Mordenkainen, et al... I just don't think spells in the PH should have names attached. Maybe it's WotC's way of paying homage to Gary; I dunno.
I'll try to get back in Sage's good graces by converting some old Greyhawk modules/hooks to 5e. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 04 Sep 2014 : 18:18:19
quote:
Originally posted by Delwa
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh
It's 5th edition and they still haven't removed Bigby-and-company's names from a bunch of spells. By my estimation Greyhawk has more representation than any other setting.
Actually, didn't they do that back in 3rd edition? I recall them stripping the names from a bunch of spells, and most of those names were from Greyhawk.
They did for the SRD. The 3.5 PHB still called spells like Bigby's Fist by the Greyhawk names.
Didn't the Spell Compendium also remove all the names? |
| Delwa |
Posted - 04 Sep 2014 : 14:28:38
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh
It's 5th edition and they still haven't removed Bigby-and-company's names from a bunch of spells. By my estimation Greyhawk has more representation than any other setting.
Actually, didn't they do that back in 3rd edition? I recall them stripping the names from a bunch of spells, and most of those names were from Greyhawk.
They did for the SRD. The 3.5 PHB still called spells like Bigby's Fist by the Greyhawk names. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 04 Sep 2014 : 12:41:08
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh
It's 5th edition and they still haven't removed Bigby-and-company's names from a bunch of spells. By my estimation Greyhawk has more representation than any other setting.
Actually, didn't they do that back in 3rd edition? I recall them stripping the names from a bunch of spells, and most of those names were from Greyhawk. |
| xaeyruudh |
Posted - 04 Sep 2014 : 05:44:17
Well, it's not really my intent to begrudge your affection for Greyhawk. Buuttt...
Putting GH in the PH would go against their stated intent of making the Realms the flagship setting. I'm not in favor of filling the PH with Realms references; matter of fact I don't even want the Realms to be the setting they focus on. I think the settings need to be kept out of the Core rules as completely as possible. Just sayin... after Pikachuing ("I choose you!") the Realms, other settings shouldn't be given much/any wordcount.
Greyhawk (and Dragonlance) gods appear on page 295; Eberron gods are on the next page.
It's 5th edition and they still haven't removed Bigby-and-company's names from a bunch of spells. By my estimation Greyhawk has more representation than any other setting.
|
| The Sage |
Posted - 04 Sep 2014 : 03:04:49
Finally had the chance to skim through most of it.
It's certainly decoratively impressive. And I've noticed a great many Realms references specifically characterising core D&D elements. That's cool stuff, but I'm not sure I like the idea of there being so little GREYHAWK stuff in the core material. Unless I missed something in my skimming. Maybe a full read will reveal some hidden GH gems in the text. |
| Diffan |
Posted - 03 Sep 2014 : 15:20:43
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
I've just been notified by email that my copy has finally arrived at my doorstep.
It's infuriating for me to have to be at work while the promise of adventures with a new edition PHB is so far away! 
Yea, I could see that as a pain in the butt. Since I was off the last two days I wanted to take the chance to go see the books at the local FLGS but sadly BOTH my and my wife's cars died on the same day so now we're stuck with just a rental until one of them gets fixed.
However I created my first "real" 5E character using the Basic PDF packet (and a little help from the last playtest one) to create a Knight. I'll post him below:
Sir Kerian Désol
Medium Chondathan human, lawful neutral
-------------------------------------
Armor Class 18 (scale mail, shield)
Hit Points 13 (1d10 + 3)
Speed 30 ft.
-------------------------------------
STR 18 (+4) DEX 14 (+2) CON +17 (+3) INT 12 (+1) WIS 13 (+1) CHA 16 (+3)
-------------------------------------
Saving Throws Str +6, Con +5
Senses passive Perception 11
Skills Animal Handling (+3), Athletics (+6), Insight (+4), Persuasion (+5)
Languages Chondathan, Common
-------------------------------------
ACTIONS
Longsword. Melee Weapon Attack: +6 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. Hit: (1d8 + 4) slashing damage, or (1d10 + 4) slashing damage if used with two hands.
Lance. Melee Weapon Attack: +6 to hit, reach 10 ft., one target. Hit: (1d12 + 4) piercing damage. Sir Kerian has disadvantage on attacks within 5 ft.
Heavy Crossbow. Ranged Weapon Attack: +4 to hit, range 100/400 ft., one target. Hit: (1d10 + 2) piercing damage.
REACTIONS
Protection. If an attack targets another creature within 5 ft. of Sir Kerian, he may use his reaction to impose Disadvantage on the attack roll. Sir Kerian must be wielding a shield to use this ability.
-------------------------------------
EQUIPMENT Scale mail, shield, longsword, heavy crossbow with 20 bolts, explorer's pack, gaming set (Three-Dragon Ante)
Personality Traits: "I face problems head on. Simple, direct solutions are the best path to success." Sir Kerian is also always polite and respectful of others, as is the knightly way.
Ideals: "I do what I must and obey just authority."
Bonds: "Those who fight beside me are worth dying for."
Flaws: "My hatred for my enemies is blind and unreasoning." |
| The Sage |
Posted - 03 Sep 2014 : 04:00:27
I've just been notified by email that my copy has finally arrived at my doorstep.
It's infuriating for me to have to be at work while the promise of adventures with a new edition PHB is so far away! |
| Diffan |
Posted - 03 Sep 2014 : 03:35:26
quote:
Originally posted by The Masked Mage
You make the point yourselves guys - if everyone needs to sleep, that is not something making a mage less powerful - it is even across the board. Everyone has limited hp, though the new edition gives everyone a little more than they used to get, including mages. My point is, if mages were always this powerful, I doubt I'd ever have chosen to play another character class: they start out kick ass and pretty much become archmages in power by the time fighters are able to specialize in 2 weapons.
From my play-test experience, few classes match the fighter for un-bridled damage and explosive destruction. The Barbarian comes in a very close second and the paladin a near 3rd. Basically the fighter and his 4 attacks per round (of which he can move around all he likes), his critical hit chances heavily improved (18-20 by 15th level) AND the MOST ability score Improvements / Feats of any other class make him a pretty hard class to pass up if your looking for that sort of power. Not to mention Action Surge which DOUBLES his attacks 1/battle (2/battle at 17th) makes him a whirling death machine. And you wanna complain about 1d10 firebolts all day long?
From this perspective say a Wizard at 11th level casts Fire bolt on a Fighter. The fighter takes 3d10 damage (because cantrips scale with wizard class). That's an average of 11 damage. The figher then rolls up and attacks with his great sword and a Strength of 20 (2d6 +5) three times. He hits say....twice for an average of 22. He then action surges and gets three more attacks and hits for all three with an average damage of 33. Now compare the two, which once is a bit stronger?
Now obviously a wizard at that high of a level has better options to throw at a fighter and the Fighter will probably have some magical items and such. These things are all done in a vacuum and often have so many other characteristics that comparing the two is difficult. All I'm saying is that at-will spells have been a thing for quite some time. In 4E I never had a problem with it, nor has it been in our v3.5 games where people took the Reserve Feats (Complete Mage) or in Pathfinder. |
| Diffan |
Posted - 03 Sep 2014 : 02:45:50
quote:
Originally posted by The Masked Mage
What you are forgetting, comparing 1d10 firebolt to the 3d4 magic missile is simple - and HUGE. You get 1 magic missile. I get infinite firebolts. You have 1 spell. I have a million.
Just to clarify, Magic Missile at 1st level is 3 missiles that can target 3 different targets and more if you prepare it in a higher level slot. This instantly makes it more versatile than fire bolt because you can target more creatures in a single round. Also, don't forget that fire bolt requires an attack roll vs. AC and can be difficult when monster's AC gets higher (no more "touch" attacks anymore) while magic missile is auto-damage, no save.
quote:
Originally posted by The Masked Mage
Even the the Simbul used to only be able to cast 61 spells total. Some were very big spells, but she had to stop when she ran out. Now a 1st level wizard can go on casting FOREVER.
Yea, that's not that terrible. In fact, I'd say that MOST wizards aren't going to want to go adventuring after they've wasted the majority of their big offensive weapons. No one wants to be limited to only cantrip spells.
quote:
Originally posted by The Masked Mage
This is totally new to any kind of D&D. Never before has a 1st level wizard had anything approaching power.
Apparently you skipped 4E where wizards got at-will spells and cantrips and Pathfinder where cantrips are At-Will too OR Reserve Feats which could be obtained as early as 3rd level. Actually, it's been pretty prevalent within the last 8 years or so.
quote:
Originally posted by The Masked Mage
1st level wiz vs. 1st level fighter, normally the fighter would win. Now the 1st level mage stands equal or superior in combat to everyone else. Your archer you mentioned is gonna run out of arrows but my piddly 1st level mage can go right on casting his firebolts.
And I'd still take a longbow (d8 + Dexterity modifier) over Fire bolt any day of the week. Ammo or no.
quote:
Originally posted by The Masked Mage
Imagine 100 1st level mages gathered. Boom. You have an army? An orc horde? An Army of skeletons and zombies? No problem, we'll cantrip them all to death and dust.
And when a lot of them miss the target's AC, then what?
quote:
Originally posted by The Masked Mage
Hell - even a troll army would not stand a chance against these new fire-flinging 1st level archmages. Very bad planning in my book.
At this point, I'm pretty sure your not even debating the supposed "problem". I don't really know what to say other than, maybe 5E isn't for you? Plenty of opportunities to play other editions of the game. |
| xaeyruudh |
Posted - 01 Sep 2014 : 21:36:13
quote:
Originally posted by The Masked Mage
But before he could not lend much help to a party. 1 bang or 1 whatever.
This is your idea of preventing a wizard from being too powerful? You seem to be implying that this was good or desirable.
quote:
Originally posted by The Masked Mage
1d10 until all foes fall, with whatever help the rest of the party can muster - depending on class.
This has always been true for every other class. An attempt is finally being made to make wizards equal to other classes.
quote:
Originally posted by The Masked Mage
Whole new game for spellcasters if you ask me.
Indeed. One worthy of consideration.
This is no longer relevant to the original topic, and it's clear we're not going to convince each other. I hope we both enjoy the new game. If not, then as always house rules are still an option. |
| The Masked Mage |
Posted - 01 Sep 2014 : 20:21:22
Indeed. So instead of memorizing his 1 spell slot as magic missile - he's gonna choose a defensive spell - say shield for sake of argument. He's also going to stand behind everyone - as has always been typical - no change here. But before he could not lend much help to a party. 1 bang or 1 whatever. Now he can blast away while the melee players are a shield wall for him and the cleric keeps em alive. 1d10 until all foes fall, with whatever help the rest of the party can muster - depending on class.
Honestly it blows my mind you can't see how the biggest limitation that was always in place for low level mages to prevent them from being too powerful has been reversed 180 degrees.
Another thing I forgot to mention is this - you pick your cantrips at level 1 and your specialty at level 2. So an ILLUSIONIST could pick this damaging cantrip. Talk about crazy talk. Whole new game for spellcasters if you ask me. |
| xaeyruudh |
Posted - 01 Sep 2014 : 20:06:47
There is also the fact that a wizard throwing firebolts is a lot more visible than any melee combatant, particularly in dusk/dark conditions. Every intelligent foe knows that a wizard is capable of doing more than just flinging firebolts. This raises his "threat level" and makes his life considerably more difficult.
There are also environmental factors. Standing on a prairie? Firebolt is a bad idea. Innocent bystanders? Even if you win this fight the local constabulary might view you as a serious threat. Having the ability to cast at will doesn't make it a reliable defense/offense. |
| The Masked Mage |
Posted - 01 Sep 2014 : 19:59:38
You make the point yourselves guys - if everyone needs to sleep, that is not something making a mage less powerful - it is even across the board. Everyone has limited hp, though the new edition gives everyone a little more than they used to get, including mages. My point is, if mages were always this powerful, I doubt I'd ever have chosen to play another character class: they start out kick ass and pretty much become archmages in power by the time fighters are able to specialize in 2 weapons. |
| xaeyruudh |
Posted - 01 Sep 2014 : 19:57:51
quote:
Originally posted by The Masked Mage
What you are forgetting, comparing 1d10 firebolt to the 3d4 magic missile is simple - and HUGE. You get 1 magic missile. I get infinite firebolts. You have 1 spell. I have a million.
A fighter has infinite sword swings. At-will firebolts is no different than swinging a bastard sword, except that it can be used at range. Which is an advantage since arrows probably still only deal d6 or d8 damage, but that's a small advantage... an average 1-2 points of damage per successful attack.
And look at what's involved in making a successful attack. Defaulting to 3e for a second because I haven't read the finer points of 5e combat yet, fighters use Str for their hit rolls, archers use Dex. A wizard casting a ranged-touch attack like firebolt will probably use Dex too... a stat which he's unlikely to have maxed. Simply put, a wizard will hit less often, balancing or overbalancing the slightly higher average damage from a hit.
Even if a wizard used Int for his ranged spell attack rolls, the slightly higher damage would be (over)balanced by his ridiculous lack of armor, and hit points, and healing spells. It takes a lot less oomph to kill a wizard* than it takes to kill a fighter of the same level. * - at higher levels wizards can be more dodgy due to teleport etc... but fighters can benefit from teleportation circles and protective magic items just like anyone else.
Archers running out of arrows? Maybe, but it might take a while if he has a barrel (or a bag of holding or portable hole) of arrows. It's situational.
Giving wizards at-will damaging spells merely gives them the ability to participate in combat situations which aren't life-and-death. This is something they've never had until now. A smart wizard in 1e-3e just did whatever he could to avoid notice in minor combat situations, saving his finite spells for important confrontations. This is a tough roleplaying situation because the entire party is perpetually reminded that the wizard is severely dependent on everyone else.
A troll army might be scared off for a few rounds by a wall of 100 fireflinging mages, but after that the story changes. Once they realize that the fire burns but comes nowhere close to killing them --5 points of damage on a hit, and more misses than hits-- the trolls will swarm and maul the wizards, and dine well that night. At most the trolls might lose 1 or 2 of their number, and the survivors would be slower to flee from mages next time so ultimately it would be very bad planning on the humans/demihumans' part.
At-will combat spells merely enable the wizard to pull his own weight in combat. It's like he has a sword that he can use at (probably short) range; it can't be disarmed, but he's vulnerable to silence.
He still has a ridiculous lack of armor, hit points, and healing spells. He's just as vulnerable as he's always been. He's now simply able to contribute. |
| Kentinal |
Posted - 01 Sep 2014 : 19:08:54
quote:
Originally posted by Delwa
Even Mages have to sleep. And they have limited HP. It wouldn't take long before any army would send a strike team to take out your mage.
Every one needs to sleep, well elves revere maybe, that make all a prefect target when less then flat footed. A single blow kill no matter hit points. |
| Delwa |
Posted - 01 Sep 2014 : 18:38:27
Even Mages have to sleep. And they have limited HP. It wouldn't take long before any army would send a strike team to take out your mage. |
|
|
