I'm a bit doubtful of the crit changes as they stand at the moment. But its as I said in a previous post, it opens up space to make other changes with feats, classes and subclasses to do other things that would be difficult to balance as it is at the moment. E.g. A rogue's Sneak Attack may specifically say "if you crit then double the sneak attack dice" or maybe just "if you crit then roll a number of additional sneak attack dice equal to your proficiency mod". And then rogue subclasses could build on this: One subclass could increase sneak attack dice to d8s or inflict some debilitating effect on a crit.
Any of which may or may not happen, which is why I'm reserving judgement till I see a bit more playtest material!
Well it's a great opportunity to rework the classes, give the martial characters a few new ways to inflict damage and be slightly more resilient against on the old saving throws.
I'd say it's not about the damage really - it's about versatility and resources. Monk, for instance, has to really struggle with ki shortage until mid-levels. So many fun features use ki, you can burn through them in first few rounds and be reduced to just punching the enemy like a weaker fighter.
Monk by far has the worst punishment for resource usage, want to bonus action dash or disengage, that'll be a ki point; Rogue wants to bonus action dash, that'll be free. yea, still I think the problem with this argument is that it'd require that Fighter itself not need a bit of a buff; I think the only Martial that doesn't need a buff is Paladin.
DnD players: spellcasters outclass martials in everything, and can deal insane amounts of damage, this needs to be balanced.
Same DnD players: WTF where are my spell crits, I want to do all the damage!
What people seem to be missing is that this is also an big nerf to martial damage as well.
Now a weapon crit is going to just do 1 extra weapon die, which is only an average of 2.5 to 6.5 damage (7 on a great sword). This isn't anything that is going to shift the momentum in a combat anymore and is only slightly less disappointing as doing no extra damage at all.
"If a player character rolls a 20 for an attack roll with a Weapon or an Unarmed Strike, the attack is also a Critical Hit, which means it deals extra damage to the target; you roll the damage dice of the Weapon or Unarmed Strike a second time and add the second roll as extra damage to the target."
Nothing changed in the basic crit mechanics for martials; you still roll all the weapon damage dice, 2d6 turn into 4d6.
Nope, wrong.
Anything other than weapon die now does not crit which is a huge part of tons of martial subclasses.
Off the top of my head: Sneak attack Smite Combat Inspiration Hunters mark Colossus slayer Dread ambusher Arcane jolt Divine Fury Divine strike Hex Battle master maneuvers Enlarge extra damage
On top of that there are features that these rules just destroy. For example:
"Assassinate Starting at 3rd level, you are at your deadliest when you get the drop on your enemies. You have advantage on attack rolls against any creature that hasn't taken a turn in the combat yet. In addition, any hit you score against a creature that is surprised is a critical hit."
Without sneak attack being doubled, this basically makes an entire subclass not worth every playing.
Monk by far has the worst punishment for resource usage, want to bonus action dash or disengage, that'll be a ki point; Rogue wants to bonus action dash, that'll be free. yea, still I think the problem with this argument is that it'd require that Fighter itself not need a bit of a buff; I think the only Martial that doesn't need a buff is Paladin.
Yes, paladins are in the right place; I'd personally touch up their subclasses to feel less formulaic and more diverse, but in terms of power they're just about where martials need to be.
Gee, it's almost like all those things are part of future 1DD playtests and have the opportunity to be changed in accordance with improved crit rules!
What is that based on? Have they said anything about addressing stuff like this?
They don't have to. This is all playtest. It's blind smack obvious that old bits of content that relied on the rules being a certain way, like the Assassin subclass for rogues, will be updated in accordance with new rules if those new rules muck with what they do. The entire reason for the One D&D project in the first place is to learn from ten years of mistakes and trial-and-error to un-whack all the shit in the game that's currently whack. Why would anyone assume they're not going to touch class/subclass features during this whole mess?
Gee, it's almost like all those things are part of future 1DD playtests and have the opportunity to be changed in accordance with improved crit rules!
What is that based on? Have they said anything about addressing stuff like this?
They don't have to. This is all playtest. It's blind smack obvious that old bits of content that relied on the rules being a certain way, like the Assassin subclass for rogues, will be updated in accordance with new rules if those new rules muck with what they do. The entire reason for the One D&D project in the first place is to learn from ten years of mistakes and trial-and-error to un-whack all the shit in the game that's currently whack. Why would anyone assume they're not going to touch class/subclass features during this whole mess?
So basically, no there is no indication at all that they will change anything else regarding martial crits in future playtest material and you are just going off of an assumption?
So are you. Your assumption is "Everything is Ruined Forever martials have been nerfed straight to death they won't possibly make any changes to improve them so we have to make sure everything in OPT gets thrown out so we can keep the current crit rules that are deeply unfair to everything not named Dingdong, Brogue, or Fattlemaster." My assumption is "this is Part 1 of an 18-part playtest cycle meant to develop the new ruleset going forward, it makes absolutely zero sense for each step of the cycle not to build on the cycles before it and incorporate feedback the entire way, exactly the same way they did for D&D Next back in yesteryear."
You tell me which of those assumptions makes more sense, ne?
So are you. Your assumption is "Everything is Ruined Forever martials have been nerfed straight to death they won't possibly make any changes to improve them so we have to make sure everything in OPT gets thrown out so we can keep the current crit rules that are deeply unfair to everything not named Dingdong, Brogue, or Fattlemaster." My assumption is "this is Part 1 of an 18-part playtest cycle meant to develop the new ruleset going forward, it makes absolutely zero sense for each step of the cycle not to build on the cycles before it and incorporate feedback the entire way, exactly the same way they did for D&D Next back in yesteryear."
You tell me which of those assumptions makes more sense, ne?
No, I simply commented on the the playtest material. I didn't say that "Everything is Ruined Forever martials have been nerfed straight to death they won't possibly make any changes to improve them.... ", or anything even close to that. I didn't even mention anything even approaching weather they would or wouldn't keep these changes, simply my thought on the playtest rules.
Please show me where you are getting this? Where did I imply anything like this in anything I said?
Anything other than weapon die now does not crit which is a huge part of tons of martial subclasses.
Off the top of my head: Sneak attack Smite Combat Inspiration Hunters mark Colossus slayer Dread ambusher Arcane jolt Divine Fury Divine strike Hex Battle master maneuvers Enlarge extra damage
On top of that there are features that these rules just destroy. For example:
"Assassinate Starting at 3rd level, you are at your deadliest when you get the drop on your enemies. You have advantage on attack rolls against any creature that hasn't taken a turn in the combat yet. In addition, any hit you score against a creature that is surprised is a critical hit."
Without sneak attack being doubled, this basically makes an entire subclass not worth every playing.
Dunno. Seems pretty clear-cut a case of "THE SKY IS FALLING" to me.
Anything other than weapon die now does not crit which is a huge part of tons of martial subclasses.
Off the top of my head: Sneak attack Smite Combat Inspiration Hunters mark Colossus slayer Dread ambusher Arcane jolt Divine Fury Divine strike Hex Battle master maneuvers Enlarge extra damage
On top of that there are features that these rules just destroy. For example:
"Assassinate Starting at 3rd level, you are at your deadliest when you get the drop on your enemies. You have advantage on attack rolls against any creature that hasn't taken a turn in the combat yet. In addition, any hit you score against a creature that is surprised is a critical hit."
Without sneak attack being doubled, this basically makes an entire subclass not worth every playing.
Dunno. Seems pretty clear-cut a case of "THE SKY IS FALLING" to me.
I mean if you think that stating the facts and actual rules amounts to "the sky is falling" then that's on the rules, not me.
You said "Your assumption is "Everything is Ruined Forever martials have been nerfed straight to death they won't possibly make any changes to improve them so we have to make sure everything in OPT gets thrown out so we can keep the current crit rules that are deeply unfair to everything not named Dingdong, Brogue, or Fattlemaster.""
Where are you getting that from?
If you can't point to anything then maybe it's because it was never actually said or implied. Maybe you are straw-manning people and should think about that before put things in quotation marks that were never said.
How do you think people are going to take your words when you list over a dozen things that "the rules just destroy" and then claim an entire subclass becomes unplayable just because crits got monkeyed with? The hell is your actual point with this? Are you somehow trying to honestly tell me you're not protesting the new crit rules when your entire case is "look at this gigantic list of things that don't work anymore!"?
Palladalladingdong, a.k.a. paladin. R5e's very own homegrown omnicompetent superhero class, both the best healer and the best damage dealer in the game as well as having the single best class feature in all of R5e in Aura of Protection.
Anyone who says paladins are getting nerfed by not being able to Crit Smite really has no complaints coming. Dingdongs are still head and shoulders above any other class in the game in terms of sheer potential outside of Spell Lists, and full-progression casters only compete because high-level spells are literal gamechangers.
How do you think people are going to take your words when you list over a dozen things that "the rules just destroy" and then claim an entire subclass becomes unplayable just because crits got monkeyed with? The hell is your actual point with this? Are you somehow trying to honestly tell me you're not protesting the new crit rules when your entire case is "look at this gigantic list of things that don't work anymore!"?
The point is exactly what I responded to.
The guys said "Nothing changed in the basic crit mechanics for martials; you still roll all the weapon damage dice, 2d6 turn into 4d6." The long list is just a partial list of martial features that were changed and no longer double on crits.
I said that Assassin would no longer be worth playing, and yeah I stand by that, the whole subclass is built around doubling sneak attack damage. What part about this do you disagree with?
What part about what I actually said are you disagreeing with?
The insinuation that all those things need to be able to crit for martials to be Worth It, and that classes which bolster crits such as Assassin are "unplayable" without SuperMegaUltraCrits. And the further insinuation that none of those things will be changed/adjusted in further playtest cycles down the line. You're claiming "crits changed because none of these things double anymore" and leading people towards the unclaimed falsehood "this means martial classes are useless and we should dump the new crit rules."
Gee, it's almost like all those things are part of future 1DD playtests and have the opportunity to be changed in accordance with improved crit rules!
What is that based on? Have they said anything about addressing stuff like this?
They don't have to. This is all playtest. It's blind smack obvious that old bits of content that relied on the rules being a certain way, like the Assassin subclass for rogues, will be updated in accordance with new rules if those new rules muck with what they do. The entire reason for the One D&D project in the first place is to learn from ten years of mistakes and trial-and-error to un-whack all the shit in the game that's currently whack. Why would anyone assume they're not going to touch class/subclass features during this whole mess?
Exactly, the 1DD rules are not set in stone, and are pending player feedback, so we're giving ours. Many of your recent posts here have just been mocking people who disagree with you. Disagreeing with us is one thing, but it shouldn't come at the cost of civility.
Crits happen on 5% of rolls, there are so many different ways to balance this for the new edition: for example, help buff martials, which I've given numerous examples of how to do in the previous thread on this. Crits are super fun for everyone, and martials, who generally make more attacks, will likely have more of them.
We've spent 7 pages of explaining this on this thread, I really don't want to have to do all the math and stuff again since you can just read that and see how this really doesn't help solve the martials VS. casters balance disparity.
The insinuation that all those things need to be able to crit for martials to be Worth It, and that classes which bolster crits such as Assassin are "unplayable" without SuperMegaUltraCrits. And the further insinuation that none of those things will be changed/adjusted in further playtest cycles down the line. You're claiming "crits changed because none of these things double anymore" and leading people towards the unclaimed falsehood "this means martial classes are useless and we should dump the new crit rules."
Is that clearer?
Um, no one actually said that. People gave a specific example for the assassin subclass, but they did not say this applied to every single martial class.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explainHERE.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Agreed.
I'm a bit doubtful of the crit changes as they stand at the moment. But its as I said in a previous post, it opens up space to make other changes with feats, classes and subclasses to do other things that would be difficult to balance as it is at the moment. E.g. A rogue's Sneak Attack may specifically say "if you crit then double the sneak attack dice" or maybe just "if you crit then roll a number of additional sneak attack dice equal to your proficiency mod". And then rogue subclasses could build on this: One subclass could increase sneak attack dice to d8s or inflict some debilitating effect on a crit.
Any of which may or may not happen, which is why I'm reserving judgement till I see a bit more playtest material!
Monk by far has the worst punishment for resource usage, want to bonus action dash or disengage, that'll be a ki point; Rogue wants to bonus action dash, that'll be free. yea, still I think the problem with this argument is that it'd require that Fighter itself not need a bit of a buff; I think the only Martial that doesn't need a buff is Paladin.
Nope, wrong.
Anything other than weapon die now does not crit which is a huge part of tons of martial subclasses.
Off the top of my head:
Sneak attack
Smite
Combat Inspiration
Hunters mark
Colossus slayer
Dread ambusher
Arcane jolt
Divine Fury
Divine strike
Hex
Battle master maneuvers
Enlarge extra damage
On top of that there are features that these rules just destroy. For example:
"Assassinate
Starting at 3rd level, you are at your deadliest when you get the drop on your enemies. You have advantage on attack rolls against any creature that hasn't taken a turn in the combat yet. In addition, any hit you score against a creature that is surprised is a critical hit."
Without sneak attack being doubled, this basically makes an entire subclass not worth every playing.
Gee, it's almost like all those things are part of future 1DD playtests and have the opportunity to be changed in accordance with improved crit rules!
Please do not contact or message me.
Yes, paladins are in the right place; I'd personally touch up their subclasses to feel less formulaic and more diverse, but in terms of power they're just about where martials need to be.
Don't be ridiculous, everything is final and set in stone by now!
What is that based on? Have they said anything about addressing stuff like this?
They don't have to. This is all playtest. It's blind smack obvious that old bits of content that relied on the rules being a certain way, like the Assassin subclass for rogues, will be updated in accordance with new rules if those new rules muck with what they do. The entire reason for the One D&D project in the first place is to learn from ten years of mistakes and trial-and-error to un-whack all the shit in the game that's currently whack. Why would anyone assume they're not going to touch class/subclass features during this whole mess?
Please do not contact or message me.
So basically, no there is no indication at all that they will change anything else regarding martial crits in future playtest material and you are just going off of an assumption?
So are you. Your assumption is "Everything is Ruined Forever martials have been nerfed straight to death they won't possibly make any changes to improve them so we have to make sure everything in OPT gets thrown out so we can keep the current crit rules that are deeply unfair to everything not named Dingdong, Brogue, or Fattlemaster." My assumption is "this is Part 1 of an 18-part playtest cycle meant to develop the new ruleset going forward, it makes absolutely zero sense for each step of the cycle not to build on the cycles before it and incorporate feedback the entire way, exactly the same way they did for D&D Next back in yesteryear."
You tell me which of those assumptions makes more sense, ne?
Please do not contact or message me.
No, I simply commented on the the playtest material. I didn't say that "Everything is Ruined Forever martials have been nerfed straight to death they won't possibly make any changes to improve them.... ", or anything even close to that. I didn't even mention anything even approaching weather they would or wouldn't keep these changes, simply my thought on the playtest rules.
Please show me where you are getting this? Where did I imply anything like this in anything I said?
Dunno. Seems pretty clear-cut a case of "THE SKY IS FALLING" to me.
Please do not contact or message me.
I mean if you think that stating the facts and actual rules amounts to "the sky is falling" then that's on the rules, not me.
You said "Your assumption is "Everything is Ruined Forever martials have been nerfed straight to death they won't possibly make any changes to improve them so we have to make sure everything in OPT gets thrown out so we can keep the current crit rules that are deeply unfair to everything not named Dingdong, Brogue, or Fattlemaster.""
Where are you getting that from?
If you can't point to anything then maybe it's because it was never actually said or implied. Maybe you are straw-manning people and should think about that before put things in quotation marks that were never said.
How do you think people are going to take your words when you list over a dozen things that "the rules just destroy" and then claim an entire subclass becomes unplayable just because crits got monkeyed with? The hell is your actual point with this? Are you somehow trying to honestly tell me you're not protesting the new crit rules when your entire case is "look at this gigantic list of things that don't work anymore!"?
Please do not contact or message me.
Okay, gotta ask. What's dingdong supposed to be here?
Palladalladingdong, a.k.a. paladin. R5e's very own homegrown omnicompetent superhero class, both the best healer and the best damage dealer in the game as well as having the single best class feature in all of R5e in Aura of Protection.
Anyone who says paladins are getting nerfed by not being able to Crit Smite really has no complaints coming. Dingdongs are still head and shoulders above any other class in the game in terms of sheer potential outside of Spell Lists, and full-progression casters only compete because high-level spells are literal gamechangers.
Please do not contact or message me.
Ah. Fair enough. I was thinking it was an obscure warlock reference at first. (Ding dong, the witch is dead. Witch = warlock)
I admit, that's a clever read on it. Heh.
Please do not contact or message me.
The point is exactly what I responded to.
The guys said "Nothing changed in the basic crit mechanics for martials; you still roll all the weapon damage dice, 2d6 turn into 4d6."
The long list is just a partial list of martial features that were changed and no longer double on crits.
I said that Assassin would no longer be worth playing, and yeah I stand by that, the whole subclass is built around doubling sneak attack damage. What part about this do you disagree with?
What part about what I actually said are you disagreeing with?
The insinuation that all those things need to be able to crit for martials to be Worth It, and that classes which bolster crits such as Assassin are "unplayable" without SuperMegaUltraCrits. And the further insinuation that none of those things will be changed/adjusted in further playtest cycles down the line. You're claiming "crits changed because none of these things double anymore" and leading people towards the unclaimed falsehood "this means martial classes are useless and we should dump the new crit rules."
Is that clearer?
Please do not contact or message me.
Exactly, the 1DD rules are not set in stone, and are pending player feedback, so we're giving ours. Many of your recent posts here have just been mocking people who disagree with you. Disagreeing with us is one thing, but it shouldn't come at the cost of civility.
Crits happen on 5% of rolls, there are so many different ways to balance this for the new edition: for example, help buff martials, which I've given numerous examples of how to do in the previous thread on this. Crits are super fun for everyone, and martials, who generally make more attacks, will likely have more of them.
We've spent 7 pages of explaining this on this thread, I really don't want to have to do all the math and stuff again since you can just read that and see how this really doesn't help solve the martials VS. casters balance disparity.
Um, no one actually said that. People gave a specific example for the assassin subclass, but they did not say this applied to every single martial class.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.