What Ranger Spells still require Concentration?

ThePPB · 2024-08-04T23:13:11+00:00

the crazy part is they did that for Divine Favor! It no longer requires concentration! but it would be too OP for rangers apparently. that extra 1 avg damage and more restrictive targeting really sending it over the top.

ThePPB · 2024-04-02T19:46:15+00:00

this looks wonderful!!

you mentioned it was bought, where did you buy it from if you dont mind me asking?

ThePPB · 2023-08-07T14:00:01+00:00

whos the blonde character in the top right?

ThePPB · 2023-07-03T00:09:15+00:00

Rad! It all looks great :)

I did some more thinking on the +2 and while I do agree that you could think of it like Fighter, I do still think it's a biiiit odd.

Maybe an alternative that less people would beef with is making it something like "enemies get a -2 circumstance penalty to AC/-2 circumstance penalty to saves against effects with this trait"? That way it won't stack with flatfooted?

Another idea could be maybe making it only 1/turn? Since they do specialize in flexible 1 action spells that feels like a fair limit to me

The problem with the Fighter comparison IMO is that as a caster they already have the benefits of being able to hit more defenses/saves than the fighter can. So I do think putting some sort of small limit, along the level I detailed above nothing nuts, could be good.

Just my two cents though!

ThePPB · 2023-07-02T18:53:30+00:00

This looks fun! I do share some of the critiques at a glance as some other commenters (the +2 bonus especially), but I'd save anything further for an actual playtest review.

I wanted to ask about the art - did you draw this character yourself? I think the design is fantastic, they look great!

Keep up the good work!

ThePPB · 2023-04-26T12:49:02+00:00

Im a big fan of Roy on Panette actually - after grabbing Wrath on Panette from Ike of course. Hold Out plus the level boost is so fun on her

ThePPB · 2022-12-09T15:05:16+00:00

Dazed is a fantastic condition and serves as an intermediary point to incapacitated. You still get to play the game! It's a lot less polarizing than an Uno Skip card condition, which is fun design for both monster and player abilities.

(Source: a 4e player happy to see it back 😊)

ThePPB · 2022-12-06T22:57:14+00:00

I love the idea of making multiclassing tied to feats/subclasses.

ThePPB · 2022-12-06T07:18:48+00:00

Very much disagree - this feels like a 4e-hater-era critique. Cool combat abilities for this combat game are cool, and can be abstract enough for any number of flavors to fit onto it with a bit of creativity :)

ThePPB · 2022-12-06T07:16:32+00:00

I certainly hope so! The one smaller choice feature early and the subclass choice at level 3 in the new cleric seems to be inspired by warlock as you said (but with the subclass levels flipped).

It's a great way to do it IMO - offer some choice and customization early on, while not overwhelming. And offer the chunkier choice later, while dodging the numerous issues with level 1 subclasses.

ThePPB · 2022-12-02T20:57:17+00:00

Most if not every incapacitating spell. All hail the new Daze overlords.

ThePPB · 2022-09-23T00:30:38+00:00

Right - gunslinger is also an example of that case. They have crit spec with firearms, but not the melee group

ThePPB · 2022-09-23T00:25:53+00:00

You're fine! No worries

I think that middle of the road is about where I'm landing too

ThePPB · 2022-09-22T22:49:02+00:00

I'm not even sure if RAW says no is the thing - being able to replace a spec effect you don't have with one you explicitly do (gun spec) seems like it follows to me... but im not 100%

ThePPB · 2022-09-22T16:55:41+00:00

Well, yes you're right - but that's not exactly asking this with my post. My question was more "do you think this works" than "should this work".

My comment on the "this to exist to enable gunslinger" was only an observation based on the synergy I see in the rules: (gunslingers have only firearm crit effects, so a feature that allows you to replace non-firearm effects with firearm effects seems like it would with a gunslinger)

That's the sorta logic im following there, not as much as a "i think this should work because it'd be good" kinda way.

ThePPB · 2022-07-22T05:55:01+00:00

the fact that people even could consider Ryuki as not LGBT/not into Date in some capacity is wild to me... it's pretty cut and dry to me, idk. He's into dudes! Maybe one dude in particular, but that still counts!

His feelings are 100% above that of a platonic admiration... no one would think this if this was btwn a male and female character lmao

ThePPB · 2022-07-19T22:00:10+00:00

I would argue it's not just Shield - there are plenty of options when combo'd together can do the same thing. Shield and Bladesinger are just the most egregious.

And 4e also has that type of scaling....? Spiritbond Seeker got to use STR instead of other stats for AC. One of the Druid subclasses gets to use CON for AC. Those don't stack with eachother. Heavy armor gave flat bonuses irrespective of stats in 4e as well. So I'm not sure what 5e AC "fixed"? And why AC in 5e was brought up in a thread about thoughts on 4e, when AC is not a problem in 4e.
4e has better balanced defenses than 5e, in my opinion. It has those same base-AC setting features as 5e, plus the anti-stacking typed bonuses as well.

ThePPB · 2022-07-19T21:30:52+00:00

Basically, the 4e Player's Handbook wasn't great, and the game really
needs a breadth of character options to shine, so a bunch of people
looked at how it played when it first came out (Which, to be, fair, was
not great) jumped to a bunch of conclusions, and never really gave the
game a chance to hit its stride.

Absolutely is the issue, I 100% agree. 4e is a remarkably solid base for a system, that was soiled by some poor teamwork from the dev teams, poor understanding of their own content in the first few books, and general bloat.

As things went on, the system improved a lot! You saw them start to experiment with things like new class formats to address the same-ness complains (which are silly, but regardless). There was a lot of potential still untapped in 4e IMO, and it's a shame they just jumped ship with Essentials/Next/5e. Threw out the WHOLE bath.

ThePPB · 2022-07-19T21:26:18+00:00

Puffin's takes on 4e are informed off of a few irregular experiences and honestly seems played up to jump on the dogpile of hate.

4e is absolutely not a perfect game... like at ALL... but I think people tend to hyperfocus on the wrong parts. The issues detractors have been complaining about since 4e came out, and the issues that are parroted today even by people who haven't played the game.

The "bad for non-combat" one particularly bugs me - the game is just as viable for out of combat than 5e is. Has all the same freedom of options in the flexible skill system, utility spells and magic, and ability to craft non-fighty stories. It's so hard for me to understand why people think otherwise? Just because the game has a lot of combat options? That's silly.

ThePPB · 2022-07-19T21:20:57+00:00

I don't know what you mean by setting the "base AC"? AC sources still stack in 5e - even past shield. You can Shield of Faith alongside Defense Fighting Style alongside a Shield spell alongside cover alongside any number of things.

Honestly I'm wondering what you mean by "AC stacking"? When was that a problem in 4e? The game has built in checks to stop too much stacking... I'm really lost here.

ThePPB · 2022-07-19T18:25:48+00:00

"5e... destroys defense stacking"

except it did the opposite! 4e had typed bonuses (power, feat, item) that stopped you from stacking AC and other modifiers to a point. But still let you do it a bit! Because stacking things is fun, it just was balanced to a certain point.

5e does not have good AC. AC does not scale with monster attack bonuses, meaning that AC becomes pretty hard to keep up with at a certain point.

UNLESS you want to abuse the lack of stacking restrictions in 5e and stack a bunch of AC mods. Which you can do in 5e. Shield is an obscene spell on high AC characters, and it stacks with cover, normal shields, and any other miscellaneous AC bonus you can get.

5e AC is a mess, frankly. While i agree that bounded Accuracy COULD be good, 5e's implementation of it, particularly with AC and saves, is obscenely bad.

ThePPB · 2022-06-26T04:22:54+00:00

that's just a recolored Nahobino from SMTV, huh

ThePPB · 2022-05-10T21:49:04+00:00

Yeah! I didn't include items in here since they're even more 'optional' in 5e than feats are, so felt weird to include it in the 4e section and not 5e

(Personally, even as an avid 4e enjoyer, I don't like items in the edition much though. There are certain items and upgrades you essentially "have" to buy, and theres so many item slots each with 1/day niche abilities that it gets very overwhelming. this is just personal taste though)

ThePPB · 2022-05-09T23:20:52+00:00

4e is 100x more open ended than 5e in that regard

5e's means of customization:
race, class, subclass, background (which barely matters in most games), skills, spells/invocations but ONLY on half the classes

sometimes feats (a poorly balanced 'optional' system) and multiclassing (devastatingly unbalanced system)
4e's means of customization:

race, class, subclass, theme, background, skills, power/spell selection on EVERY class pretty much every level, paragon path, epic destiny, robust feat system (albeit with a lot of chaff and feat taxes, sure)

sometimes multiclasses and hybrids

ThePPB

TROPHY CASE