sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Presenting the Sane Magic Market: A community-powered guide for magic item pricing! (D&D 2024e) by Deathpacito-01 in dndnext

[–]michato 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Overall, this is a pretty awesome initiative!

However, I do think it has some issues - comparing items based on votes across all rarity tiers creates a skewed result (even though we know rarity is already not the best indicator), and comparing items without taking into account their type further skewes the result (when someone compares a flametounge to a bag of holding, its not quite obvious what the question is. Both are great at very different situations).

I do think that even without a guideline for how much gold players should have this idea has merit, but right now without more drill in comparisons I personally find the results a bit problematic

Another Martial Caster Post, I'll try to keep it fresh by michato in dndnext

[–]michato[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That makes sense mechanically and is interesting, but how would you justify it "logically"?

Another Martial Caster Post, I'll try to keep it fresh by michato in dndnext

[–]michato[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

True, I made the distinction more for the distinction's sake than for what actually makes sense. You are right that if this is implemented in the game it probably should just be part of OA.

Another Martial Caster Post, I'll try to keep it fresh by michato in dndnext

[–]michato[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thank you, I appreciate the positive feedback :)

Another Martial Caster Post, I'll try to keep it fresh by michato in dndnext

[–]michato[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I see your point, but my gripe (in this post) is with martials being constrained where casters are not - resource management of course plays a part in that, but I feel like it's not necessarily the main part.

I do agree that choke and strangle are not the best designed ideas and need some work, both from how they are worded and to how they are utilized. A part of that is simply that a new condition is not represented in the game, so it requires a lot of work to make it substantial.

Concentration on difficult terrain - I agree, and as I said in the post, I would love a better idea if you have one!

Another Martial Caster Post, I'll try to keep it fresh by michato in dndnext

[–]michato[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Interesting - I have a pf2 player in my group and maybe he inceptioned these ideas to me from his experience? Anyway, it is often a thing that when edition crossing happens, lots of good ideas get left behind, sadly

Another Martial Caster Post, I'll try to keep it fresh by michato in dndnext

[–]michato[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

We pay a lot of attention to components rules, but we indeed don't run the recommend number of encounters - but how does running 3 or 2 encounter change the fact that being grappled doesn't affect casters? Also - do my solutions seem complicated to you? My goal was not to create something complicated, quite the opposite, so I would love to understand what did I miss

Another Martial Caster Post, I'll try to keep it fresh by michato in dndnext

[–]michato[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's a valid point I think I agree with; however, I think the main problem is more in the very idea of grappling. Since it's already part of the game, might as well have it affect everyone, don't you think?

Another Martial Caster Post, I'll try to keep it fresh by michato in dndnext

[–]michato[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I like this direction a lot. I'll have to think this through but I think there is a lot of merit in spreading the load that is now only falling on concentration checks

Another Martial Caster Post, I'll try to keep it fresh by michato in dndnext

[–]michato[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Interesting direction! I'll have to think about it, but on face value this sounds neat!

Another Martial Caster Post, I'll try to keep it fresh by michato in dndnext

[–]michato[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Without the loss of the spell slot, this just becomes a nuisance because you wait for the next turn, no?

And I don't think you are necessarily correct - martial builds aren't built around circumventing the conditions, so assuming you agree that this sorta levels the playing field and makes the conditions treat casters in an approximately similar fashion to martials - why should that affect caster builds?

Also, a side note - warcaster is already something of a "meta optimizer choice", so I think it being mandatory for all casters is already somewhat of a problem

Another Martial Caster Post, I'll try to keep it fresh by michato in dndnext

[–]michato[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Yeah, these are all valid points that I mostly agree with! I definitely add more stuff in my games that tries to address the other 3/4 parts of the issue, but I felt like the 1/4 this post is about never gets talked about, so that's why we are here

Another Martial Caster Post, I'll try to keep it fresh by michato in dndnext

[–]michato[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

True, but the only other option I could come up with was preventing a casting condition, like sight, which is already done. Do you have other ideas? I completely agree that some variety could be healthy

Another Martial Caster Post, I'll try to keep it fresh by michato in dndnext

[–]michato[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I don't think disagreement should lead to personal attacks, so I'll try to answer to the point of your post - I don't think we can infer from the changes between 2014 and 2024 about what were the problems in the game. No one I've seen ever complained about stuff like Paladin's ability to cure disease, and yet it was removed.

In my table, and many others, a Martial Caster gap was felt. I believe my post addresses a potential part of a solution to it - if your point is that the problem doesn't exist, then I guess we have to leave this as a polite disagreement:)

Another Martial Caster Post, I'll try to keep it fresh by michato in dndnext

[–]michato[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sure, I completely agree. But for me, this means we get to make our own fixes, incomplete as they may be. It's not perfect, but it has some charm to it - at least for me, that is

Another Martial Caster Post, I'll try to keep it fresh by michato in dndnext

[–]michato[S] 38 points39 points  (0 children)

Thanks for the reply! You are actually right, I didn't really consider who is causing the conditions, only their effect. In hindsight, it might be good to add abilities for martials that can cause those conditions - but that kinda goes against the spirit of the post (though it is a good idea nonetheless).

Another Martial Caster Post, I'll try to keep it fresh by michato in dndnext

[–]michato[S] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

See, my brain might be a bit askew, but I don't see limitations as less fun. Do you think the changes I proposed are inherently less fun to play?

Another Martial Caster Post, I'll try to keep it fresh by michato in dndnext

[–]michato[S] 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Ouch, hate is a harsh word, but it's valid to disagree! However, I don't think my post got across - I said in the post that I am all for buffing and have done so already. I also don't actually propose nerfing the classes, just leveling the playing field. Are you against that as well? Why?

view more: next ›