Subclasses and missing class features

[Shyao]

Will we be seeing the current classes being completed? I noticed Fighter and Rogue specifically don't have any of their subclasses while Cleric is missing a good half of their domains, including the really fun War domain. I'm not expecting every single subclass and the like to be accounted for, but I would like to see all the classes, subclasses, and the like from the 5E Player's Handbook.

[Hobocop]

Автор сообщения: Shyao

Автор сообщения: Zouls

I honestly always started my players at level 3 because i found the disconnect jarring, Playing BG3 is good stuff on story, options etc, but damn im happy i switched to pathfinder 2e for my group or i would have gone insane over the simplicity.

I've never even played 5e. I have the handbook for it, just never joined a game for it. I mostly played AD&D in high school and 3.5 since it came out. I've actually been learning 5e's systems for this game and that's when I noticed the missing features.

Yeah, the game is clearly not finished yet. They're looking to get at the very least all of the PHB options in, plus a few campaign-dependent extras.

[Shyao]

Автор сообщения: Zouls

Автор сообщения: Shyao

Wut.

Kensai Monk, yeah, They can turn any weapon into a monk dex weapon (Which is why a longsword twohanding kensai monk basically gets the damage dice of their level 8 or so counter parts)

There is a samurai fighter though, still use armor, is a bit weird, gets trained in society cause manners.

That is EXTREMELY weird. Kensai was always a subclass for Fighter and, honestly, kind of awesome. You gave up armor proficiency, helmet use, and the use of gauntlets/bracers for some pretty extreme offensive bonuses. You got a bonus to-hit, to damage, bonus speed, initiative, and a nice unarmored AC bonus, but it was a really tough start as well.

Putting Kensai on Monk, who already gets a ton of bonuses for being unarmored, just strikes me as "What's the point?" Seems almost like Kensai, as I'm familiar with it, would have no downsides from being combined with a Monk.

It's like someone looked at Kensai and figured Monk would better benefit it than Fighter, without realizing that the point of it was you had to sacrifice something for that offensive power. That was the point of archetypes and subclasses. You sacrifice one thing to get something new.

[Zouls]

Автор сообщения: Shyao

Автор сообщения: Zouls

Kensai Monk, yeah, They can turn any weapon into a monk dex weapon (Which is why a longsword twohanding kensai monk basically gets the damage dice of their level 8 or so counter parts)

There is a samurai fighter though, still use armor, is a bit weird, gets trained in society cause manners.

That is EXTREMELY weird. Kensai was always a subclass for Fighter and, honestly, kind of awesome. You gave up armor proficiency, helmet use, and the use of gauntlets/bracers for some pretty extreme offensive bonuses. You got a bonus to-hit, to damage, bonus speed, initiative, and a nice unarmored AC bonus, but it was a really tough start as well.

Putting Kensai on Monk, who already gets a ton of bonuses for being unarmored, just strikes me as "What's the point?" Seems almost like Kensai, as I'm familiar with it, would have no downsides from being combined with a Monk.

It's like someone looked at Kensai and figured Monk would better benefit it than Fighter, without realizing that the point of it was you had to sacrifice something for that offensive power. That was the point of archetypes and subclasses. You sacrifice one thing to get something new.

Aint no sacrifices in 5e only bonuses, but tiny teeny bonuses. (If anyone says great weapon master which gives +10 damage for a -5 to hit is a sacrifice i will smack you)