Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Yeah but it's also on a *crit*, which means like 1 or 2 out of every 20 attacks. Battlemasters can use the maneuver whenever they wish, and they have several maneuvers per short rest.
It certainly feels like Larian was unaware of a lot of things. Like how the hell could they forget to add Shield spell during all three years of Early Access, and only shove it in at the last minute? It's literally the main defensive spell for Arcane casters...
I say it's abused because SO many people use it as a dip in multiclassing because of how viable it is.
In 3.5 edition D&D 20th level spellcasters WERE "like gods" in almost everything but name. And then, of course, you got Epic levels, and the possibility of actual ascension to Godhood - where you could literally fight other gods.
5.0 D&D is a pale shadow of that former power. Not only are 20th level characters much, much weaker now, but there are no more epic levels, and no divine ascension possible. Hell, you can't even become a lich or vampire properly anymore (at most you'll turn your character into a DM-controlled NPC).
Dipping a class is not "abuse". Multiclassing is not "abuse". Using spells and abilities the way they are written and intended is not "abuse". And no, rules are not written and intended to make sure that every single character and every single player are all equal in every single way.
Is castling in chess "abuse"? Is a gambit "abuse"? Well, same thing here. In fact, D&D is and has been a lot like chess, but too many people want to view it as a "feel good game" and get angry when somebody plays it better than them.
I don't really care. I like hexblade and literally said above I'm gonna try doing a hexblade multiclass.
You are more like super heroes, Doctor strange and thor than actual gods. Read the lore on what just demi gods can do then compare that to a level 20.
For instance, Elminster is level 40 by lore and NOT a god. daurgothoth is a level 20 wizard, level 20 sorc, leve 5 arch mage and a draco lich.....not a god.
level 20 is not even that ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ special.
You said then and repeat it now that dipping is "abused". There is only one way to understand it, and the fact that you refer to a "contention" between "some players and DMs" confirms it.
Again, it's not an "abuse" to dip a class in a multiclass build. More often than not it is actually a short-term nerf to the character, in favour of a long-term game (i.e. exactly like a gambit in chess). There is absolutely no reason for it to be a "contention", unless the DM in question is a narcissistic SOB who hates it when his players play a smart game.
Seems like the pact of blade is just a multi-class fodder. It will not work without a dip of paladin realy.