| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| #1ZardnaarNov 06, 2014 16:37:42 |
A few levels and several weeks ago I posted a thread about how I believe that bless is a overpowered if not outright broken spell. That was several sessions ago and now we have 2 groups hitting level 9 and 10. Bless may not be out right broken as such YMMV but I think it is a key enabler for the things that are broken.
For the most part a few of these things seem about as broken as things in a 3.0 or 3.5 game with a few exceptions. For the most part the really broken things in 3.0 or 3.5 required extra material to break them apart from things like 3.0 haste or 3.5 adding natural spell to the PHB. In 3.0 natural spell was in a splat book. Much like 3E and 4E the broken stuff is a combination of various things although I would argue more than a few spells of level 3+ are semi broken all by themselves as saves in this edition are terribad with DC 16 and 17 saes turning up by level 9 or so and most monsters may be lucky to have a +4 save or higher. There are a few exceptions but even a +6-+9 save bonus still has a decent chance of blowing ones save.
The other basic combo enablers are the feats. I am convinced that for the most part feats are better than a stat boost. What is better than +1 to hit and damage? I would argue an extra attack, advantage, and bless are better effects than +1 to hit and damage. A 20 is not really required as 18 seems to suffice for the most part although some things like a lore bard or light cleric probably want a 20 ASAP along with dex based classes like the Rogue. Some feats are better than others and I will identify several feats I regard as the worst offenders. They are.
Great Weapon Master Pole Arm Master Sharpshooter Warcaster
These are the feats I would go as far to rate as gold if I was writing a guide on a char op forums. Shield Master is also a good feat but I would only rate that as light blue as damage is way lower although that feat is an enabler. All 3 of the martial feats have several things in common. They enable multiple attacks and/or have a built in buff to damage. Great Weapon Master and Pole Arm master for example grant extra attacks as a bonus action and they combo off each other as well, sharp shooter combos with archery style and negates cover for firing into melee.
Warcaster is another enabler feat and combines well with bless and gets around RAW somatic gestures. You may even get to cast 2 spells a round via an attack of opportunity although you will burn through your spells fast doing this unless you cast a cantrip. Warcaster enables various concentration spells to stay up that would otherwise be difficult to maintain unless damage is getting over 20 or more. It interacts very well with bless and it combines very well with other concentration spells. As a basic enabler bless serves 3 functions.
1. It grants a bonus 1d4 to hit. This is good all by itself all of the time and it interacts well with the 3 martial feats I identified above. It is one of the few spells in the game that grants an outright bonus to hit
2. It buffs saving throws for concentration mechanics including the caster if they include themselves in the effect.
3. It buffs any other random saving throw the DM may throw at you.
To put bless in perspective compare what it does. On average if is “only” a +2.5 bonus to hit and saves. I’ll round that down to 2 for this example as you get a 2 or better 75% of the time on the dice roll. A feat may be worth +1 to hit and damage. Bless grants a +2 bonus to hit to 3 PC not just 1 (4 in a second level spell slot) and +2 bonus on all saves. This is equivalent to 8 levels of proficiency bonus on attacks and saves and it is on all saves not just your proficient saves. This is in a game with bounded accuracy as well it more or less reduces the ACs of the NPCs by 2 points (technically 2.5) AND more or less grants proficiency in all saving throws up to level 9 or so.
Bless is also swingy as well 50% of the time you are getting a +3 or +4 bonus to hit. If you roll crap on the dice a +1 bonus may not even matter (you hit anyway) but a +3 or +4 bonus can make a huge difference. People used bless in AD&D with less bounded accuracy and it only gave a +1 bonus. Note that bless helps mitigate the -5 to hit from the power attack and power shot functions of the sharp shooter and great weapon master feats.
As an added bonus warcaster also helps with other concentration spells but including domain spells bless is more or less better than all the other level 1 and 2 concentration spells and you burn less resources by using bless. Hold person can be better but that has a save and bless is always reliable. As a general rule only level 3 cleric spells requiring concentration can beat bless such as spiritual guardians and maximised call lightning from a tempest cleric. And even then in certain situations bless is still the best use of a level 3 spell slot as well blessing a 5 person party. It also indirectly scales as classes with multiple attacks gain them as well so a pole arm fighter for example can have 3 or 4 attacks without action surge at level 5.
These are the basic combos available that are readily apparent and I would rate them as gold. To push feats like sharp shooter and great weapon master over the top you need to figure out some way to act as an enabler. This means granting advantage for the most part and it is very obvious what effects grant advantage as well. Some very easy ways to get advantage.
1. Spells (Faerie Fire, Greater Invisibility, Foresight etc) 2. Hold person/monster and paralysation effects. Technically part of number 1. 3. Knocking someone prone.
There are probably plenty of others. Any strength based PC trained in athletics can have a reasonable chance at knocking over someone by giving up an attack. The shield master feat lets you do it as a bonus action. The valor bard gets expertise in 2 skills of their choice and proficiency with shields and dexterity saves. This makes the Valor bard the best shield master feat candidate in the game as the bard can also cast enhance ability which lets them reliably bowl over Ogres, dire animals and most things that are not huge in sie as +8-+12 athletics checks with advantage tend to do that. That means such a PC wants the warcaster feat as well. Every spell caster using concentration spells wants that feat IMHO and it is a feat take as far as I am concerned.
If one is not casting bless as an enabler one can also look at faerie fire or hold person/monster. Once again you are going to want that warcaster feat. My personal PC in the game I get to play is a bard using hold monster, warcaster and shield master feats. My damage is average at best but I make a great enabler. Said bard is very versatile if shield bash doesn’t work there is always hold monster/faerie fire/hypnotic pattern/greater invisibility available. Either way you are looking at enabling the sharpshooter or great weapon master fighters and you will not suck anyway even if the DM metagames against you as you can always switch to something else. A champion fighter for example doesn’t have that option, the battle master fighter can always commanders strike a ranged PC (with the sharp shooter feat).
So far these are the obvious combos that anyone playing 5E can pick up reasonably quickly. At the most casual level 3.5 was not that broken either it takes a little bit of effort to really wreck games. I have identified 3 feats I think are broken and 1 feat that I think is an out right feat tax in all meanings of the word. Technically you do not have to take them as such but they offer so much power you would be crazy not to. From a power level you want to really maximise the amount of attacks you make often using bonus actions and reaction and deal as much damage as you can with those attacks. So far I have shown you the basics of the 5E power levels. Make lots of attacks deal more damage this is not rocket science and it goes back to BECMI and AD&D. Focus fire is much the same concept in all editions of D&D.
Now the counter argument is that these feats are working as intended. People choosing those feats should deal more damage right? That is a fair enough sentiment to make. However how much damage at being better is to much? In AD&D that answer to that question was a few points for the most part, 3.5 you had a gulf and in 5E you can deal double or triple the damage of a similar counterpart or X3 or X5 damage over your less optimised foes. And by less optimised I mean those PCs who did not take one of those 3 feats or are using weapons with no combat style or multiple attacks via there class. This includes most clerics (war cleric is an exception) and things like valor bards doing things that are “fair” like hitting someone with a basic melee weapon.
Now for the final touch we can carry things a bit further. I will address feat combos and look at several which translate into uber damage. For the most part I think feats are better than stat buffs except for some of the spell casting classes like the lore bard and light cleric as they have so many things tied to having a higher ability score in addition to spell DCs and spells prepared.
They really only need the warcaster feat and an 18 or 20 spell casting stat.
Sharp Shooter +Crossbow sniper.
This combo negates the disadvantage for being adjacent to someone in melee and if they are prone for example you get advantage to hit them. Consider the difference between one PC with 18 dex+crossbow expert and the other PC with 16 and the feat combo.
Level 8 3 attacks 1d6+4 (7.5) or 22.5 average damage. Combo -5/+10 damage 1d6+13 16.5 damage per shot or 49.5 average damage or over double damage. Throw in action surge if a fighter is doing it. I had a fighter last night at level 10 pull of 100 damage by himself vs a prone target.
Polearm Master+ Great Weapon fighting Level 8 18 strength 3 attacks 1d10+14, 1d10+14, 1d4+14 damage. If they get to cleave that last attack is upgraded to a 1d10+14 as a bonus action. If they get a reaction they can have another attack for another 1d10+14 damage. Throw in the sentinel feat for more fun and games and you can have this combo up at level 6. Average damage depending on strength score these feats double your damage.
Sharp Shooter +archery style +20 dex level 8. You are very accurate and can use a 1d8 weapon like a bow. Gets better with the ranger class and as a DM I have a ranger doing exactly this (2d8+1d6+14 or 1d8+1d6+14 per shot).
Great Weapon Master+ sentinel (battle master fighter) level 8 1d12+15 damage per hit and you can’t run away and they may get an extra attack via cleave or a reaction if a NPC hits a different PC.
Put simply the more attacks you make with the great weapon and sharpshooter feats assuming you can suck up the -5/+10 damage the better you are. The way to suck up that penalty is have an enabler or two in the party to mitigate or partially mitigate the -5 penalty to hit. Advantage is worth about a +4 or +5 bonus to hit, bless is worth about +2.5. Together let’s just say it is worth +7. If you have a PC built as an enabler vs another PC built as a DPR cannon you in effect gain a +2 bonus to hit over the other PC and gain +10 damage per attack as well and you can often have your cake and eat it as well with an 18 or 20 strength on top of your feats.
The best part is its not like you have built a one trick pony and PCs will not always have both advantage and bless up at the same time. Sometimes ACs are low enough you can take the minus 5 penalty to hit and bless all by itself is never bad and lets you power attack moderate ACs anyway as ACs do not scale well in 5E. The advantage effect however you get it is once again always good. The buffing just turns a high damage build into an uber damage build that will leave other PCs doing fair things in the dust. And by fair things I mean not using a great weapon.
Ironically two handed weapons and archery/missile weapons are the best style in the game to use even without some form of enabler in the party as you get extra attacks and accuracy boosts anyway all by themselves. For those of you who played 3.5 and Pathfinder during the exile years not much has really changed in that regard since 3.5 if not 3.0 where two handed weapons and archery was better than sword and board. Time around Sword and board makes a great enabler I’m just not convinced it is worth making an attack as such with that type of character as you may be better off enabling others in the party assuming they have those feats.
A battle master fighter/bard using the shield master feat is better off knocking people prone and using commanders strike to transfer his attacks to someone else. Not 100% sure but I think the 4E lazy lord done the same thing through different effects. Your character is perfectly viable and you will deal a moderate amount of damage with high accuracy if your pet PC to buff gets neutralized.
The thing is we have figured this stuff out just by playing the game. I do not regard myself as an excessive min/maxer as I did not frequent the char op boards much and I do not like building things like “builds” on various char op guides which not many exist for 5E and a few of them I suspect are wrong based on to much theory crafting. I took war caster feat for example to get AoA with spells and casting spells as a gish not to abuse concentration effects. That just came later when I started playing with bless, faerie fire, etc. One of my players came up with the pole arm combos and the same player now has the crossbow expert+ sharpshooter combo. It is very obvious what feats you should be taking in 5E as in most cases the clue is in the title of the feat.
|
| #2DraconesNov 06, 2014 17:02:41 | I think the term "broken" is a bit inflamatory for a thread like this, but I agree with you that certain feats seem to lose their disadvantage when combined with enablers.
But you do have to take into consideration opportunity costs. Someone who's enabling so the fighter can do 2X damage probably isn't doing much in the way for damage themselves. Spending an action knocking someone prone so the GWM champion can take the -5 to-hit for +10 damage seems like a pretty solid gameplay mechanic. I think the game should promote this and I wouldn't call it a bug.
As for bless it's come up for you now and again and I'd probably suggest nerfing it and see how it plays. I don't think the game would break if you removed concentration from it and brought it back down to 3rd edition +1 levels. It'd probable end up as a pre-combat buff though, which would still be fine. That might tone down the worst of your problems and I'd be curious to see how it works out for your group.
Anyway, before the flames roll in I think what you wrote is pretty solid feedback.
|
| #3LawolfNov 06, 2014 17:11:32 | It is rather amusing that this feedback is the exact same feedback I gave regarding bless, great weapon master, and a few other spells and abilities over a year ago (the August 2013 playtest packet). These issues were blatantly obvious to anyone who did any mathematical testing in the game.
Oh well, if is what it is. I wasn't expecting 5e to have good combat balance so u am not surprised in the least. |
| #4AaronOfBarbariaNov 06, 2014 17:14:59 | I still thing the folks declaring things "broken" or "overpowered" are just aiming for a different power level than the designers of the game were - so everything that is on-target seems off.
And there are no feat taxes in 5e, stop mis-using terms Zard. |
| #5KarnosNov 06, 2014 17:40:40 | I don't agree. Synergy is *supposed* to reward certain combinations of abilities. They are not broken just because they are effective.
If bless is good, good! If it was bad, instead we would see threads complaining about how clerics are just lame healbots with nothing better than cures to cast. |
| #6GnarlNov 06, 2014 17:51:39 |
|
| #7melloredNov 06, 2014 18:11:40 | the only thing i found that's broken is conjure woodland being (8 pixies). because you get 8 polymorphs and/or fly instrad of 1. and wish (simulacron), because get twice as many pixies. |
| #8melloredNov 06, 2014 18:16:40 | moon druids are also a bit OP. |
| #9KalaniNov 06, 2014 18:26:12 | I always thought the term "tax" (as in feat tax, stat tax, etc) were to indicate features that were required in order to fix the math, or were the result of MAD.... For example, the various feats in 4E which gave characters +1 to hit/tier were considered feat taxes as they were introduced after players pointed out the math was off by ~1/tier.
Likewise, someone suggested applying dexterity penalties to heavy armor in another thread. It was pointed out that if said house rule was introduced it would only cause a stat tax on heavy armor/STR characters - penalizing them unnecessarily. In response, questions were raised as to what stat tax would be levied against DEX, in order to remain fair - variant encumbrance and mandatory enc. tracking being the easiest method. |
| #10ZardnaarNov 06, 2014 18:58:00 | Sure the maths of this game is actually getting worse if anything and we do play a wekly game. I don't think I put up a thread last week. As the PCs level up they are getting to put more and more pieces of the puzzle togather and its not like they are giving up much to enable this (see the bonus action shield master feat).
Its also not like I am the only one experienceing this as I am actually youminow playing the game unlike half the people on this forum. Theory crafters are going no no bless is only a 2.5 boost to attacks or whatever when its better than that and it combines well with everythign ewlse.
Do you think it is fine that using some basic optimization here that is blatantly obvious in a few cases enables PCs that deal double or triple the damage of other PCs? When doe something cross the line between over pwoered and broken in your opinion? |
| #11ShasarakNov 06, 2014 19:17:26 | I suspect that this is just working as expected because Mike did want to remove game mastery by enabling the casual player. |
| #12KalaniNov 06, 2014 19:20:11 | Zard - I DM for my local FLGS twice weekly for AL (Tues Expeditions, Wed Encounters/HotDQ) - and I can state for the record, you are overinflating the value of these feats. In fact, were it not for the fact that one of my table's fighters has the great weapon master feat - they would have had a party wipe on several occasions - and this by me just running the module (Hoard of the Dragon Queen) as written without embelleshment.
Take for example a particular encounter in Episode 3 where the party faces a half-dragon and two (or more) Berserkers. This fight was so brutal that I had Cyanwrath use his breath weapon to finish off the last few HPs of the berserkers (while hitting a single PC as well) - just to prevent the berserkers from having a final round of actions, which would undoubtably kill the PCs. Even despite going easy on the PCs - I dropped 4 of the 5 PCs that fight, two of which were healed and barely alive on single digits while the bear druid was next to dead with 4HPs and around 10 wildshape HPs left.
As it was, it was a combination of the GWM Fighter, some well-timed healing potions and spells, and one tanky Druid (who had to use both wildshapes) that prevented a total party wipe.
I have yet to see a problem caused by GWM. The module is populated heavily by cultists and kobolds, and while they have low ACs making them prime targets for the power attack - their HP is so low that the power attack accomplishes little. In situations where the Power Attack would be useful (such as the above mentioned encounter) - the enemies usually have high AC (18 or above) making said feature extremely risky.... Two examples occur in Episode 3 alone, with one encounter involving a creature with AC 20 and stupid-high HPs.
Episode 4 is not much better. In one possible encounter, the party may face a group of hobgoblins - each of which is AC18, and hit like bricks. My table came up against said hobgoblins last night - and I dropped 3 of the 6 PCs (one of which dropped twice), and almost killed one PC outright were it not for a timely channel divinity from the Life Cleric which boosted two PCs HP by 10. I resorted to playing the Hobgoblins stupidly in order to prevent a TPK.
Yes, on paper it seems OP - but in actual play, not so much, and depending on the module - it can be the difference between success and failure. |
| #13ShasarakNov 06, 2014 19:48:45 |
|
| #14KarnosNov 06, 2014 19:42:41 |
|
| #15ZardnaarNov 06, 2014 19:50:42 |
|
| #16RastapopoulosNov 06, 2014 20:05:23 |
|
| #17GnarlNov 06, 2014 20:10:47 |
|
| #18GnarlNov 06, 2014 20:25:33 |
|
| #19MistwellNov 06, 2014 20:28:33 |
|
| #20melloredNov 07, 2014 5:25:10 | if i want to be an elf, i need to pay a race tax. if i want to be a rogue i need to pay a class tax. if i want to be a sniper i need to pay a feat tax.
so.... i don't see any issue here. as for the bless + sharpshooter + faire fire combo, yes it's a good one, but 3 people working together should be stronger then 3 individuals. |
| #21MistwellNov 06, 2014 20:34:24 |
|
| #22FFSAANov 06, 2014 20:41:35 | Just wait for the DMG to be out with STR belts, ioun stones and magic weapons it will be just as busted as the playtest was. Would have been nice if they'd given us a game with bounded accuracy, but obviously they don't even know what that is. |
| (Reply to #22)CCS |
|
| #24PsikerlordNov 06, 2014 21:14:26 | I dont consider Zard's game broken at all. All the DM has to do is add more monsters until it is a challenge. It's that simple. As long as the whole party is on a similar power level, and players feel like their PC is contributing to the fun, there's no issue.
If the party blasts through 4 vampires easily, dont give them 4 vampires. Give them 9.
You only get an issue if you have a mix low power level PCs and high power ones, which can lead to players not having fun, or continual, dangerous skirting of TPKs as you try to challenge the more powerful half of the party. |
| #25RastapopoulosNov 06, 2014 21:26:47 |
|
| #26ElfcrusherNov 06, 2014 21:44:36 |
|
| #27durntaurNov 06, 2014 22:03:35 |
|
| #28ClockworkNecktieNov 06, 2014 22:17:13 | Sure, feats make you better at the thing they say thry make you better at. I don't really see how that counts a a feat tax, though. More like an honest and open feat market with good consumer protections. If I want to play a guy who's good with greatswords, I take the "good with greatswords" feat. If I want to be good at acting or inspiring my allies or bar fights, I take those feats.
When you pick a feat or ability increase, there are clear and interesting tradeoffs involved. GWM is an awesome feat, as are Sentinel, Heavy Weapon Master, Polearm Master, Charger, Tough, Alert, Dungeon Delver, Resilience (Wis)... All for the same build. You can't have all of them, much less all of them plus decent stats. Does GWM help you when you fall into a spiked pit trap? When the enemy is 31 feet away? When an ogre saunters right past you to wail on your mage buddy? Not so much. |
| #29LawolfNov 06, 2014 22:41:32 |
|
| #30durntaurNov 06, 2014 23:13:18 |
|
| #31AaronOfBarbariaNov 06, 2014 23:10:40 | Feat taxes are not feats that the player is taking because they want the effect of that feat in particular, such as a great weapon user taking Great Weapon Mastery.
Feat taxes are feats that the player is encouraged or required to take because A) their basic ability to do something declines over time and the feat closes the gap (expertise feats in 4e covering the increasing difference between PC attack bonus and at-level monster AC), or B) the system says you have to take this feat, whether you plan on using it or not, in order to take some other feat or class which you do actually want (the dodge feat in the majority of cases in 3rd edition).
Which is why I can say without any doubt that there are currently zero feat taxes in D&D 5e. |
| #32durntaurNov 06, 2014 23:14:50 |
|
| #33ThunaerNov 06, 2014 23:28:10 |
|
| #34LawolfNov 06, 2014 23:59:45 |
|
| (Reply to #26)danyc |
|
| #36PsikerlordNov 07, 2014 3:16:50 |
|
| (Reply to #34)AaronOfBarbaria |
|
| (Reply to #35)Uchawi |
|
| (Reply to #25)UngeheuerLich |
|
| #40RamzourNov 07, 2014 6:50:18 | I propose a new rule: You can't use the terms "overpowered", "broken", or "feat tax" unless you use them correctly.
Just because something is good to use does NOT the same as an overpowered or broken.
There are no Feat Taxes in 5e. Bless isn't broken. Great Weapon Master / Polearm Master / Sharpshooter isn't broken. If anything, they give a much needed leg-up for martial characters so they can better compete against magic users.
Hey, should we start taking bets about what's going to be OP/Broken/Tax next week? I'm gonna go with *opens PHB to random page*......Pass Without Trace. This spell is stupid OP. I mean, really, +10 bonus to Dex checks??!!?? If you use the group check rules while Stealthing under the effect of this spell, you're basically invisible. No defenses are secure while there's a level 3 Druid at the table. /sarcasm |
| #41SorxoresNov 07, 2014 7:58:27 | ok I don't understand this.
Are you saying that a team working together, and ending up being more then the sum of the capabilities is bad? IMHO this is the purpose, a team of 5 character working together, using synergy between each other, and ending up being more powerfull then if they were 5 individual attacking the same target should be ENCOURAGE not called borken and askig for a the nerf bat.
Let's compare defender fighter in team with a barbarian, and a Greatsword fighter and a barbarian fighting individually:
Assumption: let's assume they are both lvl 10 and they attack a creature with 15 AC? (I took 15 as a random average number, it's not as low as a 8AC zombie, but it,s not neither the animated full plate with shield 20AC monster. I will also assume advantage as a +5 bonus for simplicity of the calculation. The fight will be a BBEG (100hp) and 3 little minion (10 HP). I will use average number so a 1d8=4.5. 2d6=7, 2d6 with great weapon fighting style = 7.6666 IIRC
TEAM: fighter deal 2 attack with a longsword (+9to hit / 9.5damage) and use his bonus action to prone the target. The already raging barbarian do 2 greatsword power attack (+9 to hit/ 24damage) . and if he kill the target (or crit) he'll have a 3rd attack.
so in a single round this team would do: The fighter deal 2 attack on the BBEG (+9 VS AC 15 = 70%) for a total of 13.3 damage The barbarian will do one attack on the minion, the minion isn't prone, but the barbarian still uses power attack since you need to activate it on the FIRST attack. So 45% chance to hit the minion dealing 10.8 damage. let's say it's enought to kill the minion, so the next 2 attacks will be on the BBEG who is prone: for a total average of 33.6 damage and killed a minion.
So the team did 47 damages
Now the individual Fighter deal 2 attack with a greatsword (+9 to hit / 9.5damge) and instead of shield master he took +2Constitution to survive longer since his an individual fighter. The already raging barbarian do 2 greatsword power attack (+4 to hit/ 24damage) . and if he kill the target (or crit) he'll have a 3rd attack.
so in a single round those individual will do: The barbarian attack a minion dealing 10.8 damage killing the minion and dealing 21.6 damage to the BBEG
So in total the 2 individual dealt 35 damages and killed a minion
So the team working together gave them an extra 12 damages at level 10? I thing it is balance, 12 damage at lvl 10 as a reward for being a team instead of individual working toward a common goal? This is fine.
Yes it is a good idea for a great weapon martial character (like a greatsword barbarian) to use Great Weapon Master feat and yes it's a must have if you want to do a lot of damage using a greatsword and there is nothign wrong with that. the +2 Strenght give +1 to hit and +1 damage to ALL strenght Weapon, the character with +2 strenght can change his greatsword for a shield and longsword without a problem. the player who took Great weaponmaster is LIMITED to heavy and versatile weapon using both hands, he won't be as good then the fighter who took +2strenght if he need to go defender and protect the team. +2 stat is the versatile choice (mandatory to most spell caster to increase the DC of your spells) and the feat are the specialized more powerfull choice. |
| #42UngeheuerLichNov 07, 2014 8:08:40 |
|
| #43KalaniNov 07, 2014 8:33:26 |
|
| #44ZardnaarNov 07, 2014 8:34:31 |
|
| #45LawolfNov 07, 2014 9:02:01 |
|
| #46KalaniNov 07, 2014 9:12:07 | I was referring to 3E, in which the difference between good and poor saves was +6/+12. I did not play 4E that frequently (as it was difficult to get players together) so my memory is faulty when it comes to the exact numbers used in 4E (and I am too lazy at this time to check my books).
As I said - resilient is the only feat which comes even close to being called a feat tax -and arguments can be made on both sides of the equation as to whether it IS or not. GWM, Sharpshooter, et al. are however - far from feat taxes.
They are niche feats that provide a highly specific benefit to a small number of archetypes. I expect more such feats to be introduced over time (albeit, not at the rate 3E or 4E, but eventually), although I expect few of them will be straight up copycat feats (-5 attack/+10 damage). Most will provide other benefits which are tailor-made for other archetypes. Take polearm mastery as an example of how other archetypes may be addressed.
With that being said, the fact that PM and GWM both stack for polearm weilders is an oversight IMO - as it strongly encourages melee types to use heavy, 2H Polearms over most other weapons. IMO - the only reason polearms were listed as heavy weapons was to keep them out of the hands of small characters. There were much better ways of doing this, given how there are feats and abilities which key off the heavy property, in addition to PM. |
| #47ElfcrusherNov 07, 2014 9:17:44 |
|
| #48melloredNov 07, 2014 9:25:16 | The feat tax of 4e was because they where planning on masterwork items. Then dropped them, but forgot to rebalance the math. Thus, you ended up 3 points short. So they made feats.
4e math
15 (+1/2 your level) 6 (Magic item) 3 (feat tax, or master work) +1 to all stats = +25 to all numbers.
3-4 (starting)+4 (ability score increases) to the ability score of your choice. = 3 point different at low (10 Str vs 18 Dex) level, 7 point difference at high level (12 Str vs 28 dex).
Monsters gain +1 per level, or +30
Of course, there's variability depending on build and items.
|
| #49ZardnaarNov 07, 2014 9:30:59 |
|
| #50KalaniNov 07, 2014 9:45:08 |
|
| #51LawolfNov 07, 2014 10:01:30 |
|
| #52melloredNov 07, 2014 10:12:08 |
|
| #53LawolfNov 07, 2014 10:14:19 |
|
| #54ChrisCarlsonNov 07, 2014 10:16:13 |
|
| #55melloredNov 07, 2014 10:17:27 |
|
| #56durntaurNov 07, 2014 10:33:12 |
|
| #57KalaniNov 07, 2014 10:41:32 | While I am typically the DM - my DMPC (gains DM experience and perks) for AL is a Paladin of Tiamat who absolutely hates the Cult of the Dragon. She considers herself a Talon of Tiamat, whose duty is to challenge the faithful in order to root out and eliminate the corrupt and/or weak members of her church.
In respect to Hoard of the Dragon Queen, she views the Cult of the Dragon as manipulative and deceitful - unworthy of Tiamat's praise, and seeks to uncover their deception (she believes they are manipulating Takhisis). Her own prejudices come into play quite strongly however, as she harbours deep hatred of the Cult for having manipulated and corrupted her Dark Majesty's children for centuries, and transforming them into hiddeous undead abominations.
Sure, I could have made her a carbon-copy of every other GWM polearm-wielding DPR robot, but given the flavour of the character, I went with something more interesting.
Character Design Goals
I built this character as an enabler. Sure, she can dish out considerable damage thanks to smite and oath of enmity features - but I wanted to improve the parties overall performance with this character, by granting the party a source of reliable melee advantage, esp. in parties lacking a wolf barbarian. |
| #58ZardnaarNov 07, 2014 10:39:44 | Lawolf i think I may have to yoink your stupid tax. If you are using one of those weapons and don't take the right feat you do kind of feel stupid.
40% boost to damage Lawolf is that with our without enablers? I remember a whiole ago I asked for advice on a Gish and you recommended the Warlock and backed it up with the numbers. That gish concept ended up0 being a shield bash bard as I sat ion the idea for a few months. |
| (Reply to #51)Finieous |
|
| #60ZardnaarNov 07, 2014 10:41:50 |
|
| #61ElfcrusherNov 07, 2014 10:43:40 |
|
| #62KalaniNov 07, 2014 11:00:21 |
|
| #63KalaniNov 07, 2014 11:05:32 |
|
| (Reply to #62)Finieous |
|
| #65MistwellNov 07, 2014 11:12:55 | What are all those poor people who don't use feats and/or who play only Basic edition going to do without any feats to take as a tax? Oh my their campaigns will simply fall apart! Unplayable I say! |
| #66kalilNov 07, 2014 11:17:30 |
|
| #67ElfcrusherNov 07, 2014 11:23:21 |
|
| #68DraconesNov 07, 2014 11:36:55 |
|
| #69MistwellNov 07, 2014 11:44:21 |
|
| #70KarnosNov 07, 2014 11:49:30 | From various posters, I have now heard that all of the following are overpowered:
1- Maxxing Ability Scores (it's usually the best way to increase damage, boring compared to feats but if you want to do the most damage you max your primary score first)
2- Con (At higher levels, the scaling of your HP from a +1 con increase gets to be very big, way too strong! Con should only add to your level 1 hp to be balanced!)
3- Heavy Armor Mastery
4- Great Weapon Master
5- Polearm Master
6- Sharpshooter
7- Resilient
8- Bless
9- Wizards
10- Especially Mountain Dwarf Wizards
So, if I understand correctly, the most incredible OP possible build is a mountain dwarf wizard with maxxed Str/Con, sharpshooter and polearm master (oh, you ran out of feats, oh well).
Really folks, when there are so many different "OP" things that they cover virtually every class niche and character concept, it might just be that they are actually balanced just fine overall. |
| #71ElfcrusherNov 07, 2014 11:53:01 | Honestly, my biggest concern/worry/fear about overpowered feats is limited to the crossbow marksman exploit. it's really a buzzkill for me to think about fighters taking crossbow just so they can run up close to prone enemies and score wtfpwn damage. The polearm hack is the runner up. In my mind's eye glaives and halbards are weapons for palace guards and infantry, not dungeon delving heroes.
EDIT: Two possible rules adjustments:
1) Changed prone so that ranged weapons are at disadvantage, rather than attacks from more than 5' 2) Change Great Weapon Master to apply only to Greataxe, Greatsword, and Maul
|
| #72RastapopoulosNov 07, 2014 11:52:53 |
|
| #73KarnosNov 07, 2014 11:56:14 |
|
| #74melloredNov 07, 2014 12:13:48 |
|
| #75PolarisNov 07, 2014 12:23:05 |
|
| #76ChakravantNov 07, 2014 12:37:26 | How can we make a better D&D community? How about we start by posting about the content of a post more often than attacking a poster's personal definition of a single word that has no mutually agreed upon definition. |
| #77melloredNov 07, 2014 12:47:04 |
|
| #78ShasarakNov 07, 2014 12:47:48 |
|
| #79ElfcrusherNov 07, 2014 13:00:55 | I would pay to watch a telecast of Zardnaar's min maxed crew being DM'd by Bawlyie through an adventure he wrote. |
| (Reply to #79)Timborama |
|
| #81KalaniNov 07, 2014 13:09:47 | And peer reviewed and play tested by me and my crew - to iron out the bugs lol
isirith, bawlyie and myself seem to agree on most things - although we sometimes disagree about small stylistic differences |
| #82FFSAANov 07, 2014 13:16:51 |
|
| #83LawolfNov 07, 2014 13:55:16 | I honesty would have preferred for feats to not affect DPR at all. That would has been great.
Have feats exist only to provide character depth and complexity. Have feats that grant new capabilities instead of boring +X bonuses. Have feats that help define archetypes and concepts instead of being another means for combat optimization.
Instead we have blech. |
| #84DraconesNov 07, 2014 14:25:35 |
|
| #85admcewenNov 07, 2014 14:53:43 |
|
| #86ClockworkNecktieNov 07, 2014 14:58:41 |
|
| #87ElfcrusherNov 07, 2014 15:00:52 |
|
| #88ZardnaarNov 07, 2014 15:11:53 |
|
| #89ClockworkNecktieNov 07, 2014 15:14:17 |
|
| #90ZardnaarNov 07, 2014 15:20:13 |
|
| #91ElfcrusherNov 07, 2014 15:20:19 | Removing the -5/+10 from both feats would help, too. |
| #92ZardnaarNov 07, 2014 15:22:44 |
|
| #93ClockworkNecktieNov 07, 2014 15:46:49 |
|
| #94DraconesNov 07, 2014 16:00:33 | As far as how useful the feats are, that'll show up in play at the tables. I think Charger will be taken a lot less than GWM/Sharpshooter and it'll be precisely because it's not nearly as good a feat in play.
I still think it'd be interesting to remove bless and see how much that nerfs GWM/Sharpshooter in play. It might also tone down warcaster since it sounds like bless combines with that and is a major reason to take the feat. |
| #95abs1nthNov 07, 2014 16:20:52 |
|
| #96ZardnaarNov 07, 2014 16:48:33 |
|
| #97IllithidbixNov 07, 2014 17:10:34 | They are good. And probably do allow you to punch above your weight over builds/combanations that don't.
But the game works perfectly fine (as far as I can tell) if you don't have them, so not sure I'd view them as Feat Taxes,
Looking at the MM, the AC of monsters seems to pretty reasonably allow the Proficiency+ Ability score I'd expect at their CR to hit them, no need for additional modifiers.
Sharpshooter is pretty damn good.... but Archery fighting style already gives +2 to hit, which counters the +2 to AC enermies will get in most combat situations from half-cover (e.g firing into melee).
Bless requires concentration, at certain times situations will favour the caster casting something else with concentration.
If players needed them to overcome expected challenges, then it'd be a problem. As I see it, taking the "taxes" merely mean your party can kick more ass, so the DM can throw harder/more encounters at you.
Optamised characters in the hands of players who know what they're doing will always be more potent if you have a game that involves choices of abilities. It's a question of whether the game handles non-optamised characters fine. |
| #98FFSAANov 07, 2014 20:21:01 |
|
| #99FFSAANov 07, 2014 20:27:33 |
|
| (Reply to #7)JohnnyBlaise |
|
| #101PsikerlordNov 07, 2014 20:54:14 |
|
| #102ShasarakNov 07, 2014 20:54:21 |
|
| #103-ktkenshinx-Nov 07, 2014 21:10:57 | The only math that is off in this game is CR calculation, and it's not even THAT off. If you just increase the encounter CR by a few points, or just use more creative combinations of terrain, conditions, and enemies, you won't have issues. Indeed, I have yet to have problems with any of these feats, spells, or compositions, and that's working with players who actively try to optimize their builds. This is without any houseruling or homebrewing; just treating the CR of monsters as lower than listed, or just mixing and matching enemy compositions.
I find that DMs have this problem when they hurl homogenous mobs at PCs and pray they work. This was exemplified in the OPs last thread, which showcased a party manhandling a series of encounters with a bunch of landlocked, nonmagical, melee-focused brutes. Those sort of poorly designed, white-room scenarios are easy for groups to overcome and always lead to mechanical complaints. |
| #104ZardnaarNov 07, 2014 22:23:53 |
|
| #105durntaurNov 07, 2014 23:01:07 |
|
| (Reply to #93)UngeheuerLich |
|
| #107FFSAANov 08, 2014 7:26:48 |
|
| #108melloredNov 08, 2014 7:48:13 | Give your dragons the wind wall spell. Now the archer combo fails. |
| #109ZardnaarNov 08, 2014 11:28:28 |
|
| #110ZardnaarNov 08, 2014 11:32:57 |
|
| #111MistwellNov 08, 2014 12:09:43 |
|
| #112LawolfNov 08, 2014 12:19:43 |
|
| #113The_JesterNov 08, 2014 12:33:34 | Is bless good? Yup. Is it so good that you wouldn't cast any other spell ? Nope. Is it better than every other 1st-level spell? Not universally. Is it so good that it makes it impossible to lose? Nope. Then it's not broken.
Here's the thing: half the time, bless does nothing. If you're already hitting an enemy or making a saving throw then an extra +2 or even +4 means nothing. It's a nice buff but it's not universally applicable and there's a lot of time you're better off casting a different spell.
Feats are also good. They're very good. But there's a lot of people who argue that a 10% bonus to hit or saves is pretty darn good. The ability score boost means you're always more accurate, deal more damage, and nail more saving throws. The fact that so many people can say ability score boosts are better and others say feats are better is a pretty good indication they're pretty well balanced.
The fact you can combine a couple feats and a spell or two to make a superiour combatant is a factor of option creep: options will always make you more powerful even if individual options are balanced. That cannot be helped or prevented except by eliminating options. |
| #114FFSAANov 08, 2014 13:02:19 |
|
| #115The_JesterNov 08, 2014 13:46:56 |
|
| #116abs1nthNov 08, 2014 14:03:37 |
|
| #117abs1nthNov 09, 2014 2:46:53 | Maybe bless would be better (as in more balanced and thus more interesting) if it had a "oncer per turn" restriction. That way you could use it on one of your attacks on your opportunity attack and possibly on spell saving throws during a round. It would also solve the problem of bless overshadowing higher level spells by making it less powerful the more extra attacks you get.
Edit: Maybe bless should just be a 2nd lvl spell. Or what I've been considering is having it only affect you and 1 other target for a 1st lvl spell slot. I don't know if that really fits the idea of blessing though. Or just have it target 2 people for a 1st lvl spell slot. |
| #118PsikerlordNov 08, 2014 15:38:33 | If people think bless if far too good, overpowered, broken - there is a very easy fix - make it self only. Done. Next problem? |
| #119melloredNov 08, 2014 17:54:54 |
|
| #120ORC_KophNov 08, 2014 19:32:27 |
You can review the Code of Conduct here: http://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.
If you wish to report a post for Code of Conduct violation, click on the “Report Post” button above the post and this will submit your report to the moderators on duty. |
| #121KarnosNov 09, 2014 20:06:45 |
|
| #122ZardnaarNov 09, 2014 20:55:45 |
|
| (Reply to #70)Chakrum |
|
| #124ZardnaarNov 10, 2014 1:31:45 |
|
| #125melloredNov 10, 2014 7:19:51 | So what would people consider balanced?
If a PC took the Actor feat, another PC took a damage feat.
How much extra damage should the second PC do? |
| #126TimboramaNov 10, 2014 10:13:51 | To be fair, the "+40% more damage" thing can be akin to +40% more RP potential with things like Actor. Or +40% more Exploration potential with Dungeon Delver. So, in essence, while I agree there should be different options other than "more damage" I think it should skew for MORE RP and Exploration feats (than we have now), and not LESS damage feats. Besides, some people might just think that something like Observant is "Oh, you're better at looking and remembering things? *Yawn* Ho-hum."
Granted combat is often seen as the bread and butter of DnD, but some of us like our meat and potatoes, and veggies too! |
| #127ZardnaarNov 10, 2014 10:22:28 |
|
| #128MistwellNov 10, 2014 10:43:37 |
|
| #129MistwellNov 10, 2014 10:52:27 |
|
| #130RastapopoulosNov 10, 2014 10:51:30 |
|
| #131ZardnaarNov 10, 2014 10:59:35 |
|
| #132melloredNov 10, 2014 11:08:37 |
|
| #133ZardnaarNov 10, 2014 11:11:00 |
|
| #134melloredNov 10, 2014 11:19:17 |
|
| (Reply to #130)Timborama |
|
| #136ZardnaarNov 10, 2014 11:30:36 |
|
| #137TimboramaNov 10, 2014 11:36:46 | Actually, no, Zard, you can't. You can only choose Resilience once...
You choose Resilience as a feat and THEN pick an ability, not pick Resilience (Ability) as a feat
(DMs are free to choose otherwise, though, if a player really really wants CON and WIS saves or something...) |
| #138KalaniNov 10, 2014 11:53:10 |
|
| #139ZardnaarNov 10, 2014 11:47:15 |
|
| #140ElfcrusherNov 10, 2014 11:54:42 | Wait....did you say that 2 of the big hitters DIED? Even with Bless on them?
Working as intended? |
| #141ZardnaarNov 10, 2014 12:06:22 |
|
| #142melloredNov 10, 2014 12:13:49 |
|
| #143ZardnaarNov 10, 2014 12:16:44 |
|
| #144melloredNov 10, 2014 12:19:13 |
|
| #145MistwellNov 10, 2014 12:23:05 |
|
| #146ZardnaarNov 10, 2014 12:35:51 |
|
| #147melloredNov 10, 2014 12:39:33 |
|
| #148ZardnaarNov 10, 2014 12:46:11 |
|
| #149MistwellNov 10, 2014 12:50:48 |
|
| #150ZardnaarNov 10, 2014 12:58:27 |
|
| #151melloredNov 10, 2014 12:57:43 |
|
| #152ZardnaarNov 10, 2014 13:02:41 |
|
| #153melloredNov 10, 2014 13:12:07 |
|
| #154ZardnaarNov 10, 2014 13:21:35 |
|
| #155melloredNov 10, 2014 13:26:03 |
|
| #156ZardnaarNov 10, 2014 13:34:31 |
|
| #157melloredNov 10, 2014 13:38:21 |
|
| #158ZardnaarNov 10, 2014 13:56:43 |
|
| #159Dave2Nov 10, 2014 16:42:03 | [quote="Rastapopoulos"]
|
| #160ZardnaarNov 10, 2014 16:52:49 | [quote="Dave2"]
|
| #161ThunaerNov 10, 2014 17:14:42 |
|
| #162RastapopoulosNov 10, 2014 18:58:20 |
|
| #163KalaniNov 10, 2014 20:19:15 | I am not sure what game you were playing - but on the 3e charop forums, there was a major belief that the fighter was underpowered compared against the likes of the Barbarian - let alone other classes which came later (such as the ToB classes). I disagreed with that consensus, and wrote several stickied articles about such, but still - that was the general belief. |
| #164Dave2Nov 10, 2014 20:31:09 | We will have to agree to disagree on the fighter in 3e. I have played 3e and 3.5 since the begining, and even started with Advanced and the blue box basic. played the most 3e of any addition. With haste and meta magic 3e was actually one of the more unbalanced toward casters. Fighters were no where near spell casters in damage output and could not save vs the numerious save or die spells. So I played years of 3e and 3,5 as fighter usually half dragon to come close to spell caster damage out put. We would often stop play at high levels related to martials not being able to do the save or die. So with meta magic, haste, contengencies we can not honestly say that 3 or 3.5 core or beyond was balanced. Saying it is does not make it so. The only book that made it close was tome of battles which caused the casters to wail and dispair related to fighter no longer the cady. Tome is not core though. If you are talking Pathfinder which curbed save or die and cotingency and gave criticals that had condition/effects that was closer to being balanced. This becomes more balanced with the advanced players guide and some architypes within for fighters unbreakabe and two handed fighter can do a sigle attack great deal damage if built right and combined stunnend critical feat. This however is not 3 or 3.5. So we will have to agree to disagree. 3 and 3,5 core were not overly balanced. I think 5e does much better job out of the box |
| #165abs1nthNov 11, 2014 3:00:12 |
|
| (Reply to #162)AaronOfBarbaria |
|
| #167UchawiNov 11, 2014 5:39:55 | I think 3E was good at creating very specialized fighters, but when you compared that against how other classes specialized from an overall class perspecitve, the class was still limited. And every edition has never done a good job of making fighters have some level of parity when choosing class ability. Even 4E had too many limits in place out of the the gate for the class, especially in reference to weapon use or mulitple attacks. And feats in the current edition do little to make the game interesting for martial characters. |
| #168melloredNov 11, 2014 8:08:29 |
|
| #169Dave2Nov 11, 2014 8:23:28 | I do like 3e and 3.5 and will always have special place in the groups game with. We met and played 3 and 3.5 and had great times for over 15 years. It is the game that brought me back to D&D. In college and high school played Warhammer and Roll Master and always played caster. The group moved to Pathfinder and have enjoyed it. One still likes it the best. It does go along way with making fighters somewhat more interesting through feats and archtypes. Mythic also scales somewhat well for fighter champion ect. We also played allot of 4th. We always thought monster math was somewhat off. We would always go through encounter and dailys, Then be stuck with at wills. Combats seemed drag and last several hours. A idea to speed that up was something barrowed a little 13th age. Take 6 sided die round 1 1x hit damage round two +2 hit x2 damage culminated +6 and 6x damage. Thinking about pathfinder 3e is letting highest base attack bonus be the one for all attacks no minus -5 for each following attack. Then let best save for each class be the save periode for all saves con, dex, and will then add stat bonus or minus. This does reduce the save or die effects for many classes but does not eliminate them. Just a thought.
I must say though that out box 5e to me is still very ballanced even saves for Fighters. indominable, resilence, lucky/feat, and mage slayer give you decent chance with saves. The damage out put is also competitive. The choices with battle master, eldritch knights, and champion. I think the champion will get some more options with damage options in DMG. Lingering wounds ect.
The group feedback for 5e has been very positive. As mentionend before big fan bounded accuracy and advantage and disadvantage.
|
| #170RastapopoulosNov 11, 2014 8:35:55 |
|
| #171AhglockNov 11, 2014 9:08:17 | Sorry that is just wrong. When you factor in how saves, magic resistance, casting time, spell interruption worked pre3e wizards were weaker than the 3e era.
Fighters were weak sauce in comparison if the wizard wasn't an idiot. Save or else/die was stupid easy to pull off with how saves worked in 3e. The lack of casting times allowed you to pull off your big gun spells easy peasy. Fighters flat out sucked in comparison |
| #172ElfcrusherNov 11, 2014 9:21:28 |
|
| (Reply to #170)AaronOfBarbaria |
|
| (Reply to #170)danyc |
|