fade
Staff member
My favorite class has always been bard, and the new 5e bard looks interesting.
Let's talk D&D
- Thread starter Jay
- Start date
Wizards: able to learn any number of spells, but must memorize the ones they want to cast each day and have limited numbers of spells they can cast
Warlocks: very out of the box, heavy reliance on pact abilities, more locked into their choices but still versatile
Sorcerors: only know so many spells, no need to memorize, can only cast so many per day, absolute kings of on the spot versatile casting
Warlocks: very out of the box, heavy reliance on pact abilities, more locked into their choices but still versatile
Sorcerors: only know so many spells, no need to memorize, can only cast so many per day, absolute kings of on the spot versatile casting
Do Wizards, sorcerers, and Clerics still get the infinite use cantrips? I know it's something they added in for the early levels to get rid of the idiocy of a wizard having to wade into melee with a staff and robes.
Well yeah, but that's fine. The whole point was to keep you from ether doing nothing during a turn or doing something stupid.
????
So... it's apparent we need to set up a game then.
Fuck... I'm going to pick up the book while it's only 30.
Heh, it's cheaper in Canada.
http://www.amazon.ca/Players-Handbo...F8&qid=1408627115&sr=8-1&keywords=5th+edition
So looking at the Basic Rules download, it mentions that you should talk to your DM for information about playing Death Domain clerics... except there is NO information about it in the DM rules. Looking on Reddit, it says those rules aren't in the Player's Handbook ether.
Which means I need to wait until... what, october, and buy ANOTHER book to play the character I want. What the hell?
Which means I need to wait until... what, october, and buy ANOTHER book to play the character I want. What the hell?
Having now looked over all of the PHB....I can't quite decide whether I like the Lock or Sorceror better. Or, frankly ,the Wiz, because they really are all quite similar. Lock can be incredibly powerful, IF your DM allows plenty of short rests. If your DM sticks to "short rest means 1 hour of uninterrupted nothing in a safe environment", aka, practically impossible in a dungeon, Locks are crappy weak-ass casters with less and weaker spells than a wizard. If you get plenty of short rests, they're more like their 3.5 counterparts, having slightly less powerful spells/invocations but being able to throw them around willy-nilly.
That's one of the biggest shockers to 4E players.
Indeed. Though I have to say, I've never played with a DM who enforces those rules all too strictly - in 3.0 and 3.5 (not sure about 4 really), a night's rest was also only supposed to count if it was uninterrupted and 8 or so hours. But you were supposed to roll for a random encounter every...2 hours? And you had a 1/4 chance or so of having an encounter? I mean, RAW would mean you'd regularly start your day off unhealed, unrefreshed, and without new spells.
While we've had to interrupt our rests and rest longer because of it, meaning we couldn't leave at first light but left around 10ish or so, I don't think our DMs ever just plain said "sorry, no new spells today! Sucks for you, you met those two wolfs!"
That said, yeah, a short rest's been made a bit tougher to take - those short rests were just too easy as healing moments in 4.0.
While we've had to interrupt our rests and rest longer because of it, meaning we couldn't leave at first light but left around 10ish or so, I don't think our DMs ever just plain said "sorry, no new spells today! Sucks for you, you met those two wolfs!"
That said, yeah, a short rest's been made a bit tougher to take - those short rests were just too easy as healing moments in 4.0.