3rd ed had the idea that of building up into Prestige Classes rather than starting with a Kit, an idea that continued a bit into 4th ed which had built in prestige and epic destinies.ĥth Ed is sort of mixture of 2nd ed kits and 4th ed prestige classes being built into the class. There's a clear progression from Non-Weapon Proficiencies to Skills in 3rd Ed, deciding that 3rd ed skill points were a bit much and moving to the way skills work in 4th ed which got carried over to 5th ed.ġst ed had a lot of variant classes in Dragon magazine et al and then became kits in late 2nd ed. 4e I'm given to understand was a lot better and more stable after a bit and it continued on a lot after I gave up on it, and it introduced a lot of cool things, but it didn't really have the same flavor as D&D. So some concepts were put in as deliberate traps. The main problem with 3.X was that there were some options that were deliberately designed to be better or worse than others with this concept of "System Mastery". Rather give more basic attacks with a penalty when you have more weapons. Mixing basic attacks with bonus actions was a mistake. By design, the feats should be separated from ASI's and more on the weaker side but you should get more of them.Īnd they should redesign how Dual Wielding works. And it doesn't redeem the design that certain feats like Polearm Master are overpowered (and that particular one laughs really hard at any dual wielding attempts adding extra AoO's and reach in addition to a similar off-hand attack). Even using more cheese from Larian and dipping your dual weapons in a torch all the time only brings dual short swords closer in damage.ġ8 Strength with any weapon or shield combination or 18 Dex with dual short swords is just so much better.Īll the feats in BG3 are really lackluster and useless compared to a +2 ASI. The off-hand attack is always competing against the silly bonus Shove or drinking a potion or something. Partly because a long sword is only +1 damage over a short sword, but the real killer is the off-hand attack eating up your Bonus Action. but it's still useful to some degree, I suppose.I tried a dual long sword wielding Strength Ranger for fun who picked Dual Wielder at level 4 instead of raising Str from 16 to 18.
There's usually better things I want to do with a Bonus Action than to make an attack. Like nobody wants to play a fighter who can't really fight, so they have to dangle some pretty compelling feats in front of you to pass on pushing up the prime attributes.ĭual wield without the wide-expanse of magical weapon options and a GM to work with you feels wasted. It's hard to overcome the push of many successive editions still saying that attributes are core to class and having a high prime is key just for the mechanics to work. Like Str or Con if playing a brawler, Dex if a thief, Wisdom as a priest or whatever. Not to bring too much into it, but just that idea there of feeling pressure to juice an attribute because the class association is so strong. I think 3e had a fun build your own thing out of legos kind of vibe for characterization, but the novelty there kind of wares thin over time, just since it was around for so long. I don't know really where they run with it in 6e, but there always seems to be this tension between class archetype and wanting the grab bag. In 5e they started running back in the other direction again, so we have backgrounds that blurr into class skills, and classes that have these branch paths with a specialization. In 4e this was even more pronounced where class became like a collection of mix and match powers. So in 3e and 3.5 skills and feats are separated out, and race is basically ditched, all chars become multiclass essentially.
If you have an odd number on dex, it might be worth.In my head, it felt like each new edition of the game has taken more of what used to be Class in 1e and 2e parsed those out into things that aren't quite class but their own separate things. If it's either this or getting 18 dex to 20 or 16 to 18 etc etc, don't take it. What do you get? A possible 2 extra damage on your main and offhand. Let's say you tick alll those boxes above and you really want two rapiers. Rogues without sneak attack are rangers that forgot to workout. To be honest that's all you'd really want to use aside from the scimitar (I think) because if it isn't dex-based, you don't get stealth and at that point you really should just be a ranger. The base proficiencies for rogue are basics, shortswords, and rapiers. All this would let you do is wield 2 rapiers or 1 rapier and 1 other based of what proficiencies you got from background/race. Two weapon fighting is pretty much useless in this game unless you're using a fighter with 2 longswords. If you're a rogue looking at this, in all honesty take something else unless you have like 19/20 dex.
0 kommentar(er)
