With TCoE and the origin option is there a game mechanic reason for the PHB +1 limit in AL?
The only thing I can think of it limiting now is origin flavor; similar to tiefling resistances (varies in MToF), racial abilities like tabaxi climb/run, tortle shell, genasi resistances & and some of the feats that are race specific.
Before TCoE there wasn't. Now you choose if you want subclasses, feats, and spells from TCoE or XGtE.
I personally don't see a balance reason why the PHB+1 rule needed to exist for 5e in the first place.
"To reduce the amount of books needed at the table."
except the DM needs to have all the books anyway.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Formerly Devan Avalon.
Trying to get your physical content on Beyond is like going to Microsoft and saying "I have a physical Playstation disk, give me a digital Xbox version!"
With TCoE and the origin option is there a game mechanic reason for the PHB +1 limit in AL?
The only thing I can think of it limiting now is origin flavor; similar to tiefling resistances (varies in MToF), racial abilities like tabaxi climb/run, tortle shell, genasi resistances & and some of the feats that are race specific.
Looks like you are mixing two things from Tasha's. 1. The Change to stat modifiers floating. 2. The Custom Lineage. Number 2 is No used.
Yes the PHB +1 rule should stand. I have seen over powered builds just using the +1 rule. If you start allowing 1 level dips into other classes, I can see the Damage per Round going way up. I have two Gloomstalkers in my Icewind Dale campaign, one at fifth level can lay down about 54 points of damage in the first round. Especially with the Sharpshooter feat. As a DM of Adventure League I love the PHB + 1 rule.
Yes the PHB +1 rule should stand. I have seen over powered builds just using the +1 rule. If you start allowing 1 level dips into other classes, I can see the Damage per Round going way up. I have two Gloomstalkers in my Icewind Dale campaign, one at fifth level can lay down about 54 points of damage in the first round. Especially with the Sharpshooter feat. As a DM of Adventure League I love the PHB + 1 rule.
If the PHB+1 rule is not preventing powerful builds, how would removing it make things worse?
TCoE just condensed options from 4 different books (3 of which weren't even AL legal) into 1. And season 10 made races not count toward +1. So there are only 2 books for +1, what are they worried about mixing?
Yes the PHB +1 rule should stand. I have seen over powered builds just using the +1 rule. If you start allowing 1 level dips into other classes, I can see the Damage per Round going way up. I have two Gloomstalkers in my Icewind Dale campaign, one at fifth level can lay down about 54 points of damage in the first round. Especially with the Sharpshooter feat. As a DM of Adventure League I love the PHB + 1 rule.
If the PHB+1 rule is not preventing powerful builds, how would removing it make things worse?
TCoE just condensed options from 4 different books (3 of which weren't even AL legal) into 1. And season 10 made races not count toward +1. So there are only 2 books for +1, what are they worried about mixing?
A tier 2 pc is pumping out tier 3 damage in the first round. I can see people build a tier 1 level 4 pc putting out tier 3 damage.
Yes the PHB +1 rule should stand. I have seen over powered builds just using the +1 rule. If you start allowing 1 level dips into other classes, I can see the Damage per Round going way up. I have two Gloomstalkers in my Icewind Dale campaign, one at fifth level can lay down about 54 points of damage in the first round. Especially with the Sharpshooter feat. As a DM of Adventure League I love the PHB + 1 rule.
If the PHB+1 rule is not preventing powerful builds, how would removing it make things worse?
TCoE just condensed options from 4 different books (3 of which weren't even AL legal) into 1. And season 10 made races not count toward +1. So there are only 2 books for +1, what are they worried about mixing?
A tier 2 pc is pumping out tier 3 damage in the first round. I can see people build a tier 1 level 4 pc putting out tier 3 damage.
How? Give an example.
T3 is when cantips get 3 dice and fighters get 3 attacks, so let's make an average of 20.5 damage without using limited resources like spell slots or an average of 42 with limited resources used as the minimum of t3 damage. And no magic items.
What build can do that at level 4 that requires 3 or more books to do so?
My player is running a Gloomstalker, with sharpshooter, and two hand crossbows. And it is Icewind dale. So Night time 18 hours of the day.
At level 4, the -5 to hit from sharpshooter compensates for the +10 against AC appropriate enemies. It average more damage if you have targets with low AC but with AC of 15+ it is often a bad choice.
Also, since crossbows have the ammunition property which requires a free hand to load the crossbow, they get one round to fire them before they can't be reloaded. In addition, they don't get a bonus action attack with a hand crossbow unless they also have the crossbow expert feat (which they might have) so I am guessing that the two hand crossbows is an attempt to get the second gloomstalker attack in the first round of combat using a second hand crossbow?
Finally, they need to actually draw and load both weapons, so most of the time I don't think they would start combat with two drawn and loaded hand crossbows in their hands. They likely can't store them loaded (though that would be a DM call) and if they are walking around with two hand crossbows always drawn and loaded then they have no free hands to manipulate anything including opening doors or searching/investigating except for situations that rely only on sight. If they need to touch something (which I usually think is required when investigating things like a desk or testing for a secret door or a trap) then they would have to put down one of the crossbows. However, some of these issues may depend on how the DM chooses to run it.
Anyway, I've played with a few players running gloomstalkers with sharpshooter and I haven't found them particularly effective in tier 1 though when the situation is ideal - darkness for gloomstalker invisibility - which grants advantage then they can be effective but the -5 to hit really makes a significant difference in tier 1. Less of a difference when you get to late tier 2/tier 3.
Also, in the context of the AL+1, this build doesn't really gain that much from having Tasha's available - it is pretty much a PHB+XGTE build. The issue with +1s is not enabling more powerful builds with additional sources. Classic examples that some folks consider a bit OP would be yuan-ti pureblood hexblades .. or several other Volo's races when combined with the class options available in XGTE or Tasha's. Other previous options restricted by the +1 rules included combining booming blade with various classes - since booming blade required taking SCAG as a +1 which meant it would only work with PHB+SCAG races and class archetypes. Now it will also work with Tasha's class archetypes.
However, for me the primary reason to constrain +1s was to prevent some of the more powerful race options from Volo's being combined with some of the more powerful archetype options from XGTE and Tasha's. With races now being explicitly listed and some of the more powerful ones from Volo's excluded, there appears to be less motivation to keep the +1 rule since the only two relevant sources are Tasha's and XGTE. If there isn't anything particularly broken provided by combing XGTE and Tasha's with the specified list of races then I am not sure that the +1 rule is that useful for season 10. On the other hand, in past seasons with more source books, I do think the +1 rule made sense.
The +1 rule is there for future-proofing, just in case some broken combination pops up in the future when there are more sourcebooks to choose from.
It's arguable that such situations are more appropriate to address if they actually come up. The issues that +1 creates when WotC adds core things in supplementary books can be fairly disruptive -- requiring many special case rules.
They've already gone to limited treasure to stop wizard spell acquisition, the use of some spells (or at least severely limit) and fighters & paladins from getting plate before tier 3 (mid tier 3 at that unless they drop some magic armor in an adventure). They've included a list of available races there by stopping the racial special abilities from coming into play.
What exactly are they supposed to be 'future proofing' against? Spells & feats from other sources?
fighters & paladins from getting plate before tier 3 (mid tier 3 at that unless they drop some magic armor in an adventure).
Plate can technically be afforded some time in Tier 2 if getting max gold for each level. By the end of Tier 2 a PC is able to earn 2880 gold if my math is accurate.
fighters & paladins from getting plate before tier 3 (mid tier 3 at that unless they drop some magic armor in an adventure).
Plate can technically be afforded some time in Tier 2 if getting max gold for each level. By the end of Tier 2 a PC is able to earn 2880 gold if my math is accurate.
It isn't. The max you can get by the end of level 10 is 1760 (80×4+240×6) not counting starting gear and gold.
But you can still afford plate with that. By late level 9 to be precise.
Check your math again. At the earliest and assuming max gold you are going to be half way through level 10 (assuming 8 hours per level for tier 2) to get 1500 gp. And that assumes the character has spent NO gp for anything like snow shoes, crampons for season 10, or extra rope or a mount, spell casting services, etc.
Realistically the hardbacks assume you spend gp for flavor items (look at dragon heist) and dont take into consideration AL rules.
Check your math again. At the earliest and assuming max gold you are going to be half way through level 10 (assuming 8 hours per level for tier 2) to get 1500 gp. And that assumes the character has spent NO gp for anything like snow shoes, crampons for season 10, or extra rope or a mount, spell casting services, etc.
Realistically the hardbacks assume you spend gp for flavor items (look at dragon heist) and dont take into consideration AL rules.
Yeah, it is assuming you don't spend gold on anything else, which I have successfully done with 2 AL characters.
Checking math: level 1 80, level 2 160, level 3 240, level 4 320, level 5 560, level 6 800, level 7 1040, level 8 1280, end of level 9 1520. Looks like the earliest is about 7 hours into level 9 like I said.
For our groups I 'd say level 10, but I know not everyone does 3 - 4 hour sessions so you're right if the group splits sessions and you'd have 1490 at 7 hours into 9th level and assuming you also kept all the starting GP you would have 1500 for full plate (although whether you buy it between sessions or you buy it in the middle of something else is DM dependent.)
That has a few (don't know how common or odd) assumptions:
No GP spend for anything (no rations, no weather gear, no healing potions, no spell services, etc.).
Player gets full GP per hour/session.
I've also ran and played in numerous sessions (all hard back modules) where the max GP/hour played wasn't given because that particular section of the module didn't have a GP reward. Even played in some where there was no GP in a session, but that was prior to them adding a minimium GP/hour played. A couple of sessions in Rime of the Frost Maiden so far and quiet a few in Saltmarsh and Dragon Heist.
I think the bigger question is why bother having GP in current AL? Replace it with a basic equipment list for tier 1 (max armor, max weapon), ban or limit the 'problem' spells. declare a max type of Armor per tier. Basically just carry through with the same philosophy as they used to limit magic items.
That has a few (don't know how common or odd) assumptions:
No GP spend for anything (no rations, no weather gear, no healing potions, no spell services, etc.).
Player gets full GP per hour/session.
This was certainly my experience in season 9. Eberron and season 10 were less charitable, and I haven't played before then.
I think the bigger question is why bother having GP in current AL? Replace it with a basic equipment list for tier 1 (max armor, max weapon), ban or limit the 'problem' spells. declare a max type of Armor per tier. Basically just carry through with the same philosophy as they used to limit magic items.
For weapons and armor, this certainly makes sense. But for a bunch of other (optional) adventuring gear, scrolls, potions, and spellcasting services having no GP limits would be hard to balance.
Not really. Scrolls and potions are treasure. They already give a free potion per session (type based on tier). Put a GP cost limit on normal equipment, like nothing more than 50GP for tier 1, nothing more than 250 for tier 2. They would need to work out specifics but it wouldn't' be difficult.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Basically just like the title says.
With TCoE and the origin option is there a game mechanic reason for the PHB +1 limit in AL?
The only thing I can think of it limiting now is origin flavor; similar to tiefling resistances (varies in MToF), racial abilities like tabaxi climb/run, tortle shell, genasi resistances & and some of the feats that are race specific.
Before TCoE there wasn't. Now you choose if you want subclasses, feats, and spells from TCoE or XGtE.
I personally don't see a balance reason why the PHB+1 rule needed to exist for 5e in the first place.
"To reduce the amount of books needed at the table."
except the DM needs to have all the books anyway.
Formerly Devan Avalon.
Trying to get your physical content on Beyond is like going to Microsoft and saying "I have a physical Playstation disk, give me a digital Xbox version!"
Looks like you are mixing two things from Tasha's. 1. The Change to stat modifiers floating. 2. The Custom Lineage. Number 2 is No used.
Yes the PHB +1 rule should stand. I have seen over powered builds just using the +1 rule. If you start allowing 1 level dips into other classes, I can see the Damage per Round going way up. I have two Gloomstalkers in my Icewind Dale campaign, one at fifth level can lay down about 54 points of damage in the first round. Especially with the Sharpshooter feat. As a DM of Adventure League I love the PHB + 1 rule.
No Gaming is Better than Bad Gaming.
If the PHB+1 rule is not preventing powerful builds, how would removing it make things worse?
TCoE just condensed options from 4 different books (3 of which weren't even AL legal) into 1. And season 10 made races not count toward +1. So there are only 2 books for +1, what are they worried about mixing?
The Gloomstalker ranger is XGtE which is only PHB+1. How is +1 limiting that? How much more powerful are you expecting it to get?
A tier 2 pc is pumping out tier 3 damage in the first round. I can see people build a tier 1 level 4 pc putting out tier 3 damage.
No Gaming is Better than Bad Gaming.
How? Give an example.
T3 is when cantips get 3 dice and fighters get 3 attacks, so let's make an average of 20.5 damage without using limited resources like spell slots or an average of 42 with limited resources used as the minimum of t3 damage. And no magic items.
What build can do that at level 4 that requires 3 or more books to do so?
My player is running a Gloomstalker, with sharpshooter, and two hand crossbows. And it is Icewind dale. So Night time 18 hours of the day.
No Gaming is Better than Bad Gaming.
At level 4, the -5 to hit from sharpshooter compensates for the +10 against AC appropriate enemies. It average more damage if you have targets with low AC but with AC of 15+ it is often a bad choice.
Also, since crossbows have the ammunition property which requires a free hand to load the crossbow, they get one round to fire them before they can't be reloaded. In addition, they don't get a bonus action attack with a hand crossbow unless they also have the crossbow expert feat (which they might have) so I am guessing that the two hand crossbows is an attempt to get the second gloomstalker attack in the first round of combat using a second hand crossbow?
Finally, they need to actually draw and load both weapons, so most of the time I don't think they would start combat with two drawn and loaded hand crossbows in their hands. They likely can't store them loaded (though that would be a DM call) and if they are walking around with two hand crossbows always drawn and loaded then they have no free hands to manipulate anything including opening doors or searching/investigating except for situations that rely only on sight. If they need to touch something (which I usually think is required when investigating things like a desk or testing for a secret door or a trap) then they would have to put down one of the crossbows. However, some of these issues may depend on how the DM chooses to run it.
Anyway, I've played with a few players running gloomstalkers with sharpshooter and I haven't found them particularly effective in tier 1 though when the situation is ideal - darkness for gloomstalker invisibility - which grants advantage then they can be effective but the -5 to hit really makes a significant difference in tier 1. Less of a difference when you get to late tier 2/tier 3.
Also, in the context of the AL+1, this build doesn't really gain that much from having Tasha's available - it is pretty much a PHB+XGTE build. The issue with +1s is not enabling more powerful builds with additional sources. Classic examples that some folks consider a bit OP would be yuan-ti pureblood hexblades .. or several other Volo's races when combined with the class options available in XGTE or Tasha's. Other previous options restricted by the +1 rules included combining booming blade with various classes - since booming blade required taking SCAG as a +1 which meant it would only work with PHB+SCAG races and class archetypes. Now it will also work with Tasha's class archetypes.
However, for me the primary reason to constrain +1s was to prevent some of the more powerful race options from Volo's being combined with some of the more powerful archetype options from XGTE and Tasha's. With races now being explicitly listed and some of the more powerful ones from Volo's excluded, there appears to be less motivation to keep the +1 rule since the only two relevant sources are Tasha's and XGTE. If there isn't anything particularly broken provided by combing XGTE and Tasha's with the specified list of races then I am not sure that the +1 rule is that useful for season 10. On the other hand, in past seasons with more source books, I do think the +1 rule made sense.
The +1 rule is there for future-proofing, just in case some broken combination pops up in the future when there are more sourcebooks to choose from.
Powers &8^]
It's arguable that such situations are more appropriate to address if they actually come up. The issues that +1 creates when WotC adds core things in supplementary books can be fairly disruptive -- requiring many special case rules.
They've already gone to limited treasure to stop wizard spell acquisition, the use of some spells (or at least severely limit) and fighters & paladins from getting plate before tier 3 (mid tier 3 at that unless they drop some magic armor in an adventure). They've included a list of available races there by stopping the racial special abilities from coming into play.
What exactly are they supposed to be 'future proofing' against? Spells & feats from other sources?
Plate can technically be afforded some time in Tier 2 if getting max gold for each level. By the end of Tier 2 a PC is able to earn 2880 gold if my math is accurate.
It isn't. The max you can get by the end of level 10 is 1760 (80×4+240×6) not counting starting gear and gold.
But you can still afford plate with that. By late level 9 to be precise.
Check your math again. At the earliest and assuming max gold you are going to be half way through level 10 (assuming 8 hours per level for tier 2) to get 1500 gp. And that assumes the character has spent NO gp for anything like snow shoes, crampons for season 10, or extra rope or a mount, spell casting services, etc.
Realistically the hardbacks assume you spend gp for flavor items (look at dragon heist) and dont take into consideration AL rules.
Yeah, it is assuming you don't spend gold on anything else, which I have successfully done with 2 AL characters.
Checking math: level 1 80, level 2 160, level 3 240, level 4 320, level 5 560, level 6 800, level 7 1040, level 8 1280, end of level 9 1520. Looks like the earliest is about 7 hours into level 9 like I said.
For our groups I 'd say level 10, but I know not everyone does 3 - 4 hour sessions so you're right if the group splits sessions and you'd have 1490 at 7 hours into 9th level and assuming you also kept all the starting GP you would have 1500 for full plate (although whether you buy it between sessions or you buy it in the middle of something else is DM dependent.)
That has a few (don't know how common or odd) assumptions:
I've also ran and played in numerous sessions (all hard back modules) where the max GP/hour played wasn't given because that particular section of the module didn't have a GP reward. Even played in some where there was no GP in a session, but that was prior to them adding a minimium GP/hour played. A couple of sessions in Rime of the Frost Maiden so far and quiet a few in Saltmarsh and Dragon Heist.
I think the bigger question is why bother having GP in current AL? Replace it with a basic equipment list for tier 1 (max armor, max weapon), ban or limit the 'problem' spells. declare a max type of Armor per tier. Basically just carry through with the same philosophy as they used to limit magic items.
This was certainly my experience in season 9. Eberron and season 10 were less charitable, and I haven't played before then.
For weapons and armor, this certainly makes sense. But for a bunch of other (optional) adventuring gear, scrolls, potions, and spellcasting services having no GP limits would be hard to balance.
Not really. Scrolls and potions are treasure. They already give a free potion per session (type based on tier). Put a GP cost limit on normal equipment, like nothing more than 50GP for tier 1, nothing more than 250 for tier 2. They would need to work out specifics but it wouldn't' be difficult.