Looking at...

[TrueWarlord真の武]

Looking at Monk "Patient Defense" feature and realizing Larian had no trouble coding Dodge, they chose not to implement it by design. They really love to piss off the D&D 5e community. Seriously... Just... Why?

I know the reason, same reason they opt to not implement the Human Variant race. To piss off the D&D 5e community.

[BigJ]

For balance reasons. As you could use dodge to just ignore a lot of traps, hazards, etc.

It's extremely easy to piss off the dnd "fans" anyway, that seem more active at the forums than at their table. Just do a homebrew for balanace and everyone looses their ♥♥♥♥.

[FenvalTTV]

Ah, yes, I am sure Larian studio is petty like that, there could be no other reason.

As of right now, they're having a laught in their studio, I am sure.

[TrueWarlord真の武]

Originally posted by BigJ:

For balance reasons. As you could use dodge to just ignore a lot of traps, hazards, etc.

It's extremely easy to piss off the dnd "fans" anyway, that seem more active at the forums than at their table. Just do a homebrew for balanace and everyone looses their ♥♥♥♥.

Sure... Dodge action is extremely OP, it makes people ignore traps... Sure you totally know what you're talking about... LMAO these people...

Here, on one side, I'm voicing my concerns regarding a fundamental D&D 5e feature that was curiously excised without apparent reason. On the flip side, we have individuals like yourself who seem to have an allergic reaction to ANY form of criticism... literally ANY.

If balance is your concern, how about we examine the introduction of multiple fireballs in a single turn – now there's a modification to the D&D 5e magic rules that has led to a plethora of unbalanced scenarios. Then there's the Barbarian/Rogue tandem, merrily dashing around every turn, conveniently accumulating free temporary hit points as if they were on sale. THAT, my friend, is a decision skewed towards imbalance. In comparison, the Dodge action remains a basic situational strategic maneuver and nothing more.

Your attitude leaves much to be desired. It's rather regrettable, to put it mildly. You're essentially speaking from a place of ignorance, blissfully unaware of the topic you're addressing. Your staunch defense of every aspect of the game seems rooted in the notion that you need to keep treating a video game like a cherished football team necessitates unwavering support – an interesting perspective, to say the least.

[onealone]

Originally posted by TrueWarlord真の武:

They really love to piss off the D&D 5e community.

To piss off the D&D 5e community.

You don't mean this literally do you?

[BigJ]

Originally posted by TrueWarlord真の武:

Originally posted by BigJ:

For balance reasons. As you could use dodge to just ignore a lot of traps, hazards, etc.

It's extremely easy to piss off the dnd "fans" anyway, that seem more active at the forums than at their table. Just do a homebrew for balanace and everyone looses their ♥♥♥♥.

Sure... Dodge action is extremely OP, it makes people ignore traps... Sure you totally know what you're talking about... LMAO these people...

Here, on one side, I'm voicing my concerns regarding a fundamental D&D 5e feature that was curiously excised without apparent reason. On the flip side, we have individuals like yourself who seem to have an allergic reaction to ANY form of criticism... literally ANY.

If balance is your concern, how about we examine the introduction of multiple fireballs in a single turn – now there's a modification to the D&D 5e magic rules that has led to a plethora of unbalanced scenarios. Then there's the Barbarian/Rogue tandem, merrily dashing around every turn, conveniently accumulating free temporary hit points as if they were on sale. THAT, my friend, is a decision skewed towards imbalance. In comparison, the Dodge action remains a basic situational strategic maneuver and nothing more.

Your attitude leaves much to be desired. It's rather regrettable, to put it mildly. You're essentially speaking from a place of ignorance, blissfully unaware of the topic you're addressing. Your staunch defense of every aspect of the game seems rooted in the notion that you need to keep treating a video game like a cherished football team necessitates unwavering support – an interesting perspective, to say the least.

Making every attack roll have disadvantage in a game where your rogue can hit 26 AC at lvl 4 is not balanced now, is it.

So we don't talk about all the other changes, like shove been a bonus action, fixing enhanced leap, undoing the dnd one druid bs, making ranger actually not suck to play as and so on?

Please check my post history, it's just your point sucks.

It wouldn't be a dnd game without been able to take 4 actions per turn, the game is not balanced for build making... the game is balanced around not been able to impose disadvantage 120 boulder damage and get out unscathed. Which is the current issue with patient defense. Or been able to face tank most traps because they'll just miss.

THP is not cumulative, the latest source is what you get...

Keep trying to attack me, personal attacks just keep proving you lack arguments as to why dodge should be an action.

In the end the game let's ou have your Larian type of fun, breakint ♥♥♥♥, but guving every single class the possibility of ignoring TRAPS, without requiring any smart build planning as monk multiclass tends to do...now that's the line.

[Ku]

Originally posted by TrueWarlord真の武:

Originally posted by BigJ:

For balance reasons. As you could use dodge to just ignore a lot of traps, hazards, etc.

It's extremely easy to piss off the dnd "fans" anyway, that seem more active at the forums than at their table. Just do a homebrew for balanace and everyone looses their ♥♥♥♥.

Sure... Dodge action is extremely OP, it makes people ignore traps... Sure you totally know what you're talking about... LMAO these people...

Here, on one side, I'm voicing my concerns regarding a fundamental D&D 5e feature that was curiously excised without apparent reason. On the flip side, we have individuals like yourself who seem to have an allergic reaction to ANY form of criticism... literally ANY.

If balance is your concern, how about we examine the introduction of multiple fireballs in a single turn – now there's a modification to the D&D 5e magic rules that has led to a plethora of unbalanced scenarios. Then there's the Barbarian/Rogue tandem, merrily dashing around every turn, conveniently accumulating free temporary hit points as if they were on sale. THAT, my friend, is a decision skewed towards imbalance. In comparison, the Dodge action remains a basic situational strategic maneuver and nothing more.

Your attitude leaves much to be desired. It's rather regrettable, to put it mildly. You're essentially speaking from a place of ignorance, blissfully unaware of the topic you're addressing. Your staunch defense of every aspect of the game seems rooted in the notion that you need to keep treating a video game like a cherished football team necessitates unwavering support – an interesting perspective, to say the least.

Touch grass please

[TrueWarlord真の武]

Originally posted by BigJ:

Originally posted by TrueWarlord真の武:

Sure... Dodge action is extremely OP, it makes people ignore traps... Sure you totally know what you're talking about... LMAO these people...

Here, on one side, I'm voicing my concerns regarding a fundamental D&D 5e feature that was curiously excised without apparent reason. On the flip side, we have individuals like yourself who seem to have an allergic reaction to ANY form of criticism... literally ANY.

If balance is your concern, how about we examine the introduction of multiple fireballs in a single turn – now there's a modification to the D&D 5e magic rules that has led to a plethora of unbalanced scenarios. Then there's the Barbarian/Rogue tandem, merrily dashing around every turn, conveniently accumulating free temporary hit points as if they were on sale. THAT, my friend, is a decision skewed towards imbalance. In comparison, the Dodge action remains a basic situational strategic maneuver and nothing more.

Your attitude leaves much to be desired. It's rather regrettable, to put it mildly. You're essentially speaking from a place of ignorance, blissfully unaware of the topic you're addressing. Your staunch defense of every aspect of the game seems rooted in the notion that you need to keep treating a video game like a cherished football team necessitates unwavering support – an interesting perspective, to say the least.

Making every attack roll have disadvantage in a game where your rogue can hit 26 AC at lvl 4 is not balanced now, is it.

So we don't talk about all the other changes, like shove been a bonus action, fixing enhanced leap, undoing the dnd one druid bs, making ranger actually not suck to play as and so on?

Please check my post history, it's just your point sucks.

It wouldn't be a dnd game without been able to take 4 actions per turn, the game is not balanced for build making... the game is balanced around not been able to impose disadvantage 120 boulder damage and get out unscathed. Which is the current issue with patient defense. Or been able to face tank most traps because they'll just miss.

THP is not cumulative, the latest source is what you get...

Keep trying to attack me, personal attacks just keep proving you lack arguments as to why dodge should be an action.

In the end the game let's ou have your Larian type of fun, breakint ♥♥♥♥, but guving every single class the possibility of ignoring TRAPS, without requiring any smart build planning as monk multiclass tends to do...now that's the line.

Dodge is balanced in D&D 5e, and that's the idea. In BG3, its absence was a game design choice, just like the other changes they made, which led to some seriously overpowered combos.

You're focusing on Dodge, which the D&D community wanted, but the problem is really the unnecessary stuff Larian added – which the D&D community never asked for. So, your argument doesn't hold up.

Anyway, MODs will fix the game soon. You can keep your cheerleader behavior.

[Jaggid Edje]

Originally posted by BigJ:

For balance reasons. As you could use dodge to just ignore a lot of traps, hazards, etc.

It's extremely easy to piss off the dnd "fans" anyway, that seem more active at the forums than at their table. Just do a homebrew for balanace and everyone looses their ♥♥♥♥.

Personally, I don't think any of those angry people are actually DnD fans. I've been playing DnD for over 40 years and have never, and I mean NEVER, played in a campaign that didn't have various house rules.

I may not like or agree with everything Larian changed, but I also don't like or agree with every house rule a DM uses, so I'm used to it and just roll with it.

[Coldhands]

While the OP is coming off like a kid who can't control their emotions, I do agree that Dodge would be a good addition. Same with Delay.
There are a lot of turns in combat where my character can't get to the enemy in one move, but will probably take an attack before their next turn, so being able to dodge sure would be nice. Or delay and wait until after the enemy has moved closer on their turn.

[Jaggid Edje]

Originally posted by Coldhands:

Or delay and wait until after the enemy has moved closer on their turn.

"Delay" is not a thing in 5E.

The closest you can get to that in the 5E rules is to use the "Ready" action, which has a ton of limitations. You have to specify the trigger condition, it uses your reaction (so you can't do any other reactions, such as Opportunity attacks) and it only allows a single action, not your full initiative turn, to be done on the trigger.

Also, in the cast of spellcasters, if you ready a spellcast, it burns the spell slot even if you the trigger never occurs and you don't actually cast the spell.

That said, Solasta did a nice job of implementing the "ready" action, albeit limited to just weapon attacks and cantrips. BG3 certainly would benefit from a similar mechanic.

[Coldhands]

Originally posted by Jaggid Edje:

Originally posted by Coldhands:

Or delay and wait until after the enemy has moved closer on their turn.

"Delay" is not a thing in 5E.

The closest you can get to that in the 5E rules is to use the "Ready" action, which has a ton of limitations. You have to specify the trigger condition, it uses your reaction (so you can't do any other reactions, such as Opportunity attacks) and it only allows a single action, not your full initiative turn, to be done on the trigger.

Also, in the cast of spellcasters, if you ready a spellcast, it burns the spell slot even if you the trigger never occurs and you don't actually cast the spell.

You're right. I forgot about that.
Well, Delay would still be a nice house rule then. : p

[TrueWarlord真の武]

Originally posted by Jaggid Edje:

Originally posted by BigJ:

For balance reasons. As you could use dodge to just ignore a lot of traps, hazards, etc.

It's extremely easy to piss off the dnd "fans" anyway, that seem more active at the forums than at their table. Just do a homebrew for balanace and everyone looses their ♥♥♥♥.

Personally, I don't think any of those angry people are actually DnD fans. I've been playing DnD for over 40 years and have never, and I mean NEVER, played in a campaign that didn't have various house rules.

I may not like or agree with everything Larian changed, but I also don't like or agree with every house rule a DM uses, so I'm used to it and just roll with it.

House rules? Yeah, they're cool – never said otherwise.

But blindly embracing every change without questioning the rationale or considering balance doesn't mark you as a good player. It's more like being a sheep with a shortage of critical thinking.

For instance, in my tables I usually cap Conjure Animals at summoning max of 4 beasts (even when upcast, CR goes up but max 4 beasts). It's about handling management, time, and action economy. But that doesn't mean if a GM I'm playing with goes, "No DODGE, too OP," I'll nod in agreement. I'd say, "That's kinda silly, DODGE action is just fine."

There's a stark difference between being a mindless follower and appreciating house rules/homebrews that don't wreck the game.

[Jaggid Edje]

Originally posted by TrueWarlord真の武:

There's a stark difference between being a mindless follower and appreciating house rules/homebrews that don't wreck the game.

Discussing with a DM is what real dnd players do. ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ and moaning and arguing with the DM is not.

Most of the people complaining here are not "discussing" they are ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ and moaning and with a tone that would just get them shown to the door never to be invited back in any of the tabletop games I have played in. Doesn't matter if you're even right or not, when you approach the DM in that manner.

[TrueWarlord真の武]

Originally posted by Jaggid Edje:

Originally posted by TrueWarlord真の武:

There's a stark difference between being a mindless follower and appreciating house rules/homebrews that don't wreck the game.

Discussing with a DM is what real dnd players do. ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ and moaning and arguing with the DM is not.

Most of the people complaining here are not "discussing" they are ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ and moaning.

Unless you can actually highlight instances where I'm merely "♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥" without presenting valid reasoning and arguments (with quotes, mind you), your response holds no weight.

The fact remains that you differ in opinion without being able to substantiate that I'm incorrect. Instead, you seem to be adopting an emotional stance akin to "must protect Larian from the evil D&D community." That's the impression, at least.

[Jaggid Edje]

Where did I say you didn't have valid reasoning and arguments? Or even that you were "angry" which are the people I specifically indicated I was talking about.

Again, if you ARE angry and making that anger clear, it doesn't matter whether your argument is valid and logical or not, and even if it was, at the tabletop, the DM is the final arbiter no matter how right you consider yourself. Just as Larian is the final arbiter in BG3.

At the point the DM makes their final decision, you have to let it go or you are just being a disruptive player that will get shown to the door. That's how tabletop DnD works. Players, right or not, have to bow to the final decisions of the DM.

Every DnD player with any experience is well versed in players that refuse to do that because "they are right, the DM is wrong". Even when you agree with those players, they are a pain in the ass. Have the discussion, then the DM decides, then drop it.