D&D 5E Class Discussion

[NJClaw]

Now thats an issue with 5e edition after this autism session in Codex decided to pick the crafting and magic items session to read a bit.
Back in 3.5 edition you had materials and you could enchant in X,Y and Z ways. Now 5e the crafting rules are really abstract and you have ready baked magic items to distribute from the DMG table.

Nothing good ever came out of 3.x crafting system.

Paizo subverted multiclassing?
I'm not going to argue against it since I'm not really that knowledgeable about the topic, but it seems to match poorly with the fact that basically any guide for " top builds" in Kingmaker seems to suggest you to make a concoction of 15 different classes for your main character.

One of the premises of Pathfinder was "let's give the player a reason to keep leveling up the same class".

 

[Takamori]

Now thats an issue with 5e edition after this autism session in Codex decided to pick the crafting and magic items session to read a bit.
Back in 3.5 edition you had materials and you could enchant in X,Y and Z ways. Now 5e the crafting rules are really abstract and you have ready baked magic items to distribute from the DMG table.

Nothing good ever came out of 3.x crafting system.

Paizo subverted multiclassing?
I'm not going to argue against it since I'm not really that knowledgeable about the topic, but it seems to match poorly with the fact that basically any guide for " top builds" in Kingmaker seems to suggest you to make a concoction of 15 different classes for your main character.

One of the premises of Pathfinder was "let's give the player a reason to keep leveling up the same class".

Not saying 3.x crafting was perfect given you have pages and pages of enchantments to choose from and it was a minefield of bad choices or really niche use.
But established some sort of parameter, now 5e is almost wizards of the coast telling you to do whatever, now sum with the fact that BGS3 our Dungeonmaster is Larian I don't expect good stuff from their itemization and they will have an excuse to copy pasta from the horrible DOS2 system

 

[Desiderius]

Paizo subverted multiclassing?
I'm not going to argue against it since I'm not really that knowledgeable about the topic, but it seems to match poorly with the fact that basically any guide for " top builds" in Kingmaker seems to suggest you to make a concoction of 15 different classes for your main character.

What part of game journos are idiots do you not understand?

There’s a reason they always demonstrate their meme builds in the starter dungeon and seem to be choosing spells, feats, and skills at random. They get their clicks by giving the masses what they want - confirmation of their D&D priors so they don’t have to bother playing the goddamned game.

P:K classes feature several abilities that scale by class level, others that are locked behind class levels, and a spell casting system that relies of caster (I.e. class) level not only to penetrate Spell Resistance but also to unlock the spell levels on time for their DC to beat mob saves.

Another way to look at it is that you get most of the benefits of multiclassing through the many hybrid classes Pathfinder offers. You’re better off accentuating your strengths and relying on sound party design to ameliorate weaknesses.

 

[Lacrymas]

A 5E class discussion was definitely off-topic in a thread about a game based on 5E.

 

[Black]

0 days without jewish tricks.

 

[Takamori]

Guess we should have spammed the thread with we want to fuck X BGS3 girl to not be off topic?

 

[Tuco Benedicto Pacifico]

What part of game journos are idiots do you not understand?

At what point did "game journos" even enter this conversation?
What the fuck is wrong with you?

 

[Sweeper]

Dude move on from 3.5e. We are posting in the godamn BG3 thread. Stop living in the past.

Sir this is a grognard forum.

 

[Desiderius]

What part of game journos are idiots do you not understand?

At what point did "game journos" even enter this conversation?
What the fuck is wrong with you?

Who do you think writes the guides and top builds, dipshit?

What’s wrong with me is off topic. My general approach grows out of the natural corollary to the observation that a man can’t be reasoned out of a position that he wasn’t reasoned into.

Decline in RPG design is at least 50% demand-side and the better part of that is lazy thinking from people who should know better.

Git gud.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

3.5e was trash
AD&D or go home

 

[Tuco Benedicto Pacifico]

Who do you think writes the guides and top builds, dipshit?

The overwhelming majority of times? Other users, you fucking sperg.

 

[Spectacle]

A 5E class discussion was definitely off-topic in a thread about a game based on 5E.

Indeed! But on the plus side, this way the prestigious D&D class discussion won't get interrupted by random posts about popamole CRPGs.

 

[aleph]

Dude move on from 3.5e. We are posting in the godamn BG3 thread. Stop living in the past.

Sir this is a grognard forum.

So keep modern trash like 3.5 out of the discussion.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

I find no soul in the new[3E] D&D game, no archetypes, just seek and destroy play and too much of the comic book superhero in characters.

There is no relationship between 3E and original D&D, or OAD&D for that matter. Different games, style, and spirit.

IMO there has been a vast shift in game focus in 3E. The archetype has gone by the board, comic book-like feats are a feature, the whole purpose of play is set on killing things, and power gaming is encouraged. Long-term play is not facilitated by the new game.

Of the more recent versions of the game I have played only 3E. It is rules intensive, removes the “Master” from Dungeon Master, has no archetypes left, encourages the players to compete for dominance, devalued magic items, and substitutes statutes in the rules for innovation.

I intended to revise OAD&D, but not into one that graftet skill-based play onto a class based vehicle. I think that brings the worst of both system types. In the long term I don’t think I’d have made many changes in the AD&D game, only those necessary to allow the core rules to apply to more genres.

 

[Tacgnol]

Paizo subverted multiclassing?
I'm not going to argue against it since I'm not really that knowledgeable about the topic, but it seems to match poorly with the fact that basically any guide for " top builds" in Kingmaker seems to suggest you to make a concoction of 15 different classes for your main character.

One of the premises of Pathfinder was "let's give the player a reason to keep leveling up the same class".

To add to this, I hardly ever see wild multi classing on the Pathfinder tabletop. All these weird multiclass builds mostly seem to be a Kingmaker thing, probably because Kingmaker is purely a numbers game and also Owlcat fucked up the implementation of a lot of rules, so a lot of things that are not practical in the tabletop are viable in the game.

The most I've really seen on the tabletop are barbarians occasionally taking a one level dip into the Unbreakable fighter archetype to get a bunch of free feats, and I also once played with someone that did a Necromancer build from an Oracle base that took a bunch of dips and prestige classes.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

PF1E did a good job at putting a bandaid on the fucked up multiclass situation of 3E/3.5E.

 

[Desiderius]

Who do you think writes the guides and top builds, dipshit?

The overwhelming majority of times? Other users, you fucking sperg.

Then why aren’t you reading us instead of them?

 

[Alex]

Dude move on from 3.5e. We are posting in the godamn BG3 thread. Stop living in the past.

Sir this is a grognard forum.

Yes! So stop talking about 3e and talk about a good edition. Like 2e.

 

[Desiderius]

Paizo subverted multiclassing?
I'm not going to argue against it since I'm not really that knowledgeable about the topic, but it seems to match poorly with the fact that basically any guide for " top builds" in Kingmaker seems to suggest you to make a concoction of 15 different classes for your main character.

One of the premises of Pathfinder was "let's give the player a reason to keep leveling up the same class".

To add to this, I hardly ever see wild multi classing on the Pathfinder tabletop. All these weird multiclass builds mostly seem to be a Kingmaker thing, probably because Kingmaker is purely a numbers game and also Owlcat fucked up the implementation of a lot of rules, so a lot of things that are not practical in the tabletop are viable in the game.

The most I've really seen on the tabletop are barbarians occasionally taking a one level dip into the Unbreakable fighter archetype to get a bunch of free feats, and I also once played with someone that did a Necromancer build from an Oracle base that took a bunch of dips and prestige classes.

No, anyone who tries both in P:K will find the same thing, it’s just the lazy fools like Tuco trusted the journos/their own 3.5 priors and never even played the actual game as designed.

 

[Desiderius]

I enjoy both the 3.5 style and those more committed to carrying on the original Gygax vision (see P:K companion design and - gasp - non-minmaxxed stats).

If we want great devs we owe it to them to play their games as designed before passing judgment on them one way or another instead of shoehorning them into our own preconceived notions then complaining about the fit.

 

[Lacrymas]

Tabletop is routinely played without minmaxed stats.

 

[Grampy_Bone]

When did dual-classing become so common in D&D? It seems like it’s the norm now.

My players rarely if ever multiclassed. In 3E PRCs were the shizit.

3E may have suffered from scaling issues and bloat but 4E sucked all the fun and creativity out of the game for me. No interest in bothering with 5E after that. Both 4E and 5E strike me as games designed by low-int DMs who could never figure out a way to challenge players beyond level 4. "Oh no, my players defeated my awesome ambush by flying over it!" This was the legacy of the low-XP bug that was added in 2E.

I've pointed this out many times but it bears repeating, 2E was often a very low-powered game because people were playing it wrong. The XP tables were designed to use GP = XP, but the actual rule for XP for treasure was listed as "optional." People assumed this meant 'non-standard,' and they played without it. The rules said if you didn't use treasure XP then you should use quest XP. But this was also an 'optional' rule, so many games used neither. As a result your only source of XP in 2E was combat, which was a paltry 15 xp per goblin, divided 4+ ways, and you needed 2000 to level. Yikes.

Many such 2E games never made it past levels 2-4. This gave D&D its reputation for glacial leveling and grueling fights. On top of that, a way overblown reaction to 'monty haul' led to DMs treating +1 daggers as one-of-a-kind ultimate artifacts. 2E was a boring AF game at most tables.

When 3E came along they revamped the XP system so players could actually reach level 5, and so many DMs were like "that's PoWErGaMIng!" They didn't enjoy players having access to spells and powers that let them, you know, win fights. The urge to nerf was so insane I saw 3E games where half the classes, spells, feats, and magic items were all banned.

Yes, 3E could get pretty crazy, and some players got so cheesy with their builds it could ruin the fun for the rest of the players. The real problem in 3E was the difference between an optimized build and someone who just took whatever. But I never once had a problem challenging my PCs with 3E.

4E and 5E are an attempt to bring back the suck. Make the game slower, more boring, fewer level ups, tightly restricted magic and items, hard limits with no justification, and keep the players on the ground so they can't fly over the DM's super cool ambush he spent all night on.

 

[Lacrymas]

DMs had trouble challenging parties past level 4 because they already started having ready answers and tools for every situation. Fireball itself is a problem all on its own.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

fireball inside a dungeon is suicide RAW

 

[Lacrymas]

Sure, but encounters in cramped corridors are never really a problem or occur that often, and so don't necessitate fireball usage. It's always about dealing (hueg) AoE damage to a lot of creatures, a 10 foot wide corridor isn't the most likely candidate or the place where a party could be challenged 99% of the time. Fireball is a symptom, not the cause, it's just a very widely known one.