My partner picked a Warlock for her first character and yeah those first couple of levels were rough
I really had to spice up the "visuals" of what the blasts did cause it was 90% of her combat activity
0
#pipeCocky Stride, Musky odoursPope of Chili TownRegistered Userregular
I mean
It's highly effective at low levels. When you have a group of 4 level 1 characters, someone who can reliably output high damage at range is very valuable
It's highly effective at low levels. When you have a group of 4 level 1 characters, someone who can reliably output high damage at range is very valuable
Yes but also it is extremely boring and not fun for new players to basically just cast the same spell for most of your turns in each combat encounter when other party members are doing creative shit
0
#pipeCocky Stride, Musky odoursPope of Chili TownRegistered Userregular
I guess.
I mean barbarians hit shit, fighters swing swords, rangers fire arrows, rogues hide
My partner was a new player and she said she found it real boring until she got some more spells because the other party members had cooler abilities from the jump
I'm not talking about a hypothetical, that is what happened in our game
Combat can be really boring in d&d in general I think.
Especially now that 5e made it harder again for dm's to easily design encounters like fun cooperative puzzles like in 4e by moving back to CR from the xp budget and less will defined monster and charter combat roles. Not to say that 4e didn't also have problems.
Combat can be really boring in d&d in general I think.
Especially now that 5e made it harder again for dm's to easily design encounters like fun cooperative puzzles like in 4e by moving back to CR from the xp budget and less will defined monster and charter combat roles. Not to say that 4e didn't also have problems.
How interesting combat is has always been a function of balancing difficulty and giving players opportunities to do interesting things.
5e is probably doesn't give a dm enough tools out of the box but 4e bogged everyone down with how tactical it was meant to be laid out.
Combat can be really boring in d&d in general I think.
Especially now that 5e made it harder again for dm's to easily design encounters like fun cooperative puzzles like in 4e by moving back to CR from the xp budget and less will defined monster and charter combat roles. Not to say that 4e didn't also have problems.
How interesting combat is has always been a function of balancing difficulty and giving players opportunities to do interesting things.
5e is probably doesn't give a dm enough tools out of the box but 4e bogged everyone down with how tactical it was meant to be laid out.
Yeah, 4e certainly fell into that trap sometimes, but I feel that largely was a function of players and dm expectations not lining up. Like one or two people playing it "optimally" really slowed everthing down if everyone else just did the stuff they thought was interesting like I prefer.
I'm my experience 4e got slow and boring when one or two players would take half an hour picking which power to use every turn.
In 5e its been a function of how well planned the encounter is whether or not the table is even engaging with the game or not.
My partner was a new player and she said she found it real boring until she got some more spells because the other party members had cooler abilities from the jump
I'm not talking about a hypothetical, that is what happened in our game
Sure, but, well. Did they have a point, or was it a case of grass is greener? I think my Bard spent the first few levels mostly using Vicious Mockery, which doesn't even get the damage numbers for the trouble.
My partner was a new player and she said she found it real boring until she got some more spells because the other party members had cooler abilities from the jump
I'm not talking about a hypothetical, that is what happened in our game
Sure, but, well. Did they have a point, or was it a case of grass is greener? I think my Bard spent the first few levels mostly using Vicious Mockery, which doesn't even get the damage numbers for the trouble.
We had a bard, a ranger and a cleric
The bard had viscious mockery and, I think, thunderclap or something that had a similar affect as well as proficiency with a rapier
The cleric could heal, do damage and had decent armor
The ranger had dual swords and good stats and was marking folks left and right and doing cool flippy shit
Until level 3 or so the warlock basically just had Eldritch Blast in terms of what they could use regularly
Like
I don't get what y'all are trying to do here
We played the game, it was her first time playing, she did not have a lot of fun until a few levels in. Going "well, did she have a point, really?" Is kinda shitty!
Combat can be really boring in d&d in general I think.
Especially now that 5e made it harder again for dm's to easily design encounters like fun cooperative puzzles like in 4e by moving back to CR from the xp budget and less will defined monster and charter combat roles. Not to say that 4e didn't also have problems.
How interesting combat is has always been a function of balancing difficulty and giving players opportunities to do interesting things.
5e is probably doesn't give a dm enough tools out of the box but 4e bogged everyone down with how tactical it was meant to be laid out.
Yeah, 4e certainly fell into that trap sometimes, but I feel that largely was a function of players and dm expectations not lining up. Like one or two people playing it "optimally" really slowed everthing down if everyone else just did the stuff they thought was interesting like I prefer.
I'm my experience 4e got slow and boring when one or two players would take half an hour picking which power to use every turn.
In 5e its been a function of how well planned the encounter is whether or not the table is even engaging with the game or not.
Players not knowing what powers to use in 4e is an issue of them not being familiar with their own characters and/or not paying attention to what's going on when it isn't their turn.
I would argue that much of 5e is the same problems, but the spells are even worse in 5e than the powers because they aren't all organized neatly separately for each class and by level, y'know?
Combat can be really boring in d&d in general I think.
Especially now that 5e made it harder again for dm's to easily design encounters like fun cooperative puzzles like in 4e by moving back to CR from the xp budget and less will defined monster and charter combat roles. Not to say that 4e didn't also have problems.
How interesting combat is has always been a function of balancing difficulty and giving players opportunities to do interesting things.
5e is probably doesn't give a dm enough tools out of the box but 4e bogged everyone down with how tactical it was meant to be laid out.
Yeah, 4e certainly fell into that trap sometimes, but I feel that largely was a function of players and dm expectations not lining up. Like one or two people playing it "optimally" really slowed everthing down if everyone else just did the stuff they thought was interesting like I prefer.
I'm my experience 4e got slow and boring when one or two players would take half an hour picking which power to use every turn.
In 5e its been a function of how well planned the encounter is whether or not the table is even engaging with the game or not.
Players not knowing what powers to use in 4e is an issue of them not being familiar with their own characters and/or not paying attention to what's going on when it isn't their turn.
I would argue that much of 5e is the same problems, but the spells are even worse in 5e than the powers because they aren't all organized neatly separately for each class and by level, y'know?
That can certainly be an issue, it's just in my experience the players that knew the most about their powers and characters in 4e spent ages agonizing over which ones to use and engaged in the game as of playing solitaire rather than pay attention or communicate with the rest of the table and these were the players who had the most experience with older editions.
I do agree that 5e spells and abilities have major layout issues with regards to referencing the phb all the time though.
Tallahasseeriel on
+2
#pipeCocky Stride, Musky odoursPope of Chili TownRegistered Userregular
We played the game, it was her first time playing, she did not have a lot of fun until a few levels in. Going "well, did she have a point, really?" Is kinda shitty!
I'm not trying to be combative, personally.
I think ttrpgs are as fun as you make them. You don't HAVE to cast eldritch blast every round. They also have proficiency with rapiers and other simple weapons, as well as a couple spell slots and some decent control spells.
Warlocks also have high charisma as a rule which is where all the fun NPC interaction comes from which makes them fun to play out of combat.
It sucks that she didn't have fun. I hope she was able to find a character/playstyle she liked!
Going "well, did she have a point, really?" Is kinda shitty!
You're taking this too personally, I was genuinely asking because I wasn't there and as such cannot make that call. It's a shame they didn't have fun, but taking that experience and then extrapolating from it that Warlocks are "extremely boring and not fun for new players" as a truism is... well, that's not how games work.
One thing about Warlocks that's easy to miss is that their spell slots recharge after a short resr, not long. So in most situations, they can burn all of their slots every enclunter.
That said, I still miss the 3rd ed warlock. They obviously saw it as popular but they never really seemed to get the appeal, crunch-wise.
You know what? Nanowrimo's cancelled on account of the world is stupid.
One thing about Warlocks that's easy to miss is that their spell slots recharge after a short resr, not long. So in most situations, they can burn all of their slots every enclunter.
That said, I still miss the 3rd ed warlock. They obviously saw it as popular but they never really seemed to get the appeal, crunch-wise.
This is why warlock paladin is the absurd overpowered combination.
Smite everything every encounter then rest for an hour and smite everything the next encounter too.
One thing about Warlocks that's easy to miss is that their spell slots recharge after a short resr, not long. So in most situations, they can burn all of their slots every enclunter.
That said, I still miss the 3rd ed warlock. They obviously saw it as popular but they never really seemed to get the appeal, crunch-wise.
Posts
Thee are better more realistic wtf things done with flight sim
Duration: 5:34
This will be here until I receive an apology or Weedlordvegeta get any consequences for being a bully
At least it's "we're taking an insane amount of trouble to make this meal" fancy and not "we drowned everything in truffle and gold leaf" fancy.
Duration: 5:16
Need some stuff designed or printed? I can help with that.
I really had to spice up the "visuals" of what the blasts did cause it was 90% of her combat activity
It's highly effective at low levels. When you have a group of 4 level 1 characters, someone who can reliably output high damage at range is very valuable
Need some stuff designed or printed? I can help with that.
I mean barbarians hit shit, fighters swing swords, rangers fire arrows, rogues hide
Everyone is kinda boring at low level
Need some stuff designed or printed? I can help with that.
I don't know what to tell you here man
My partner was a new player and she said she found it real boring until she got some more spells because the other party members had cooler abilities from the jump
I'm not talking about a hypothetical, that is what happened in our game
Especially now that 5e made it harder again for dm's to easily design encounters like fun cooperative puzzles like in 4e by moving back to CR from the xp budget and less will defined monster and charter combat roles. Not to say that 4e didn't also have problems.
How interesting combat is has always been a function of balancing difficulty and giving players opportunities to do interesting things.
5e is probably doesn't give a dm enough tools out of the box but 4e bogged everyone down with how tactical it was meant to be laid out.
Yeah, 4e certainly fell into that trap sometimes, but I feel that largely was a function of players and dm expectations not lining up. Like one or two people playing it "optimally" really slowed everthing down if everyone else just did the stuff they thought was interesting like I prefer.
I'm my experience 4e got slow and boring when one or two players would take half an hour picking which power to use every turn.
In 5e its been a function of how well planned the encounter is whether or not the table is even engaging with the game or not.
The bard had viscious mockery and, I think, thunderclap or something that had a similar affect as well as proficiency with a rapier
The cleric could heal, do damage and had decent armor
The ranger had dual swords and good stats and was marking folks left and right and doing cool flippy shit
Until level 3 or so the warlock basically just had Eldritch Blast in terms of what they could use regularly
Like
I don't get what y'all are trying to do here
We played the game, it was her first time playing, she did not have a lot of fun until a few levels in. Going "well, did she have a point, really?" Is kinda shitty!
Players not knowing what powers to use in 4e is an issue of them not being familiar with their own characters and/or not paying attention to what's going on when it isn't their turn.
I would argue that much of 5e is the same problems, but the spells are even worse in 5e than the powers because they aren't all organized neatly separately for each class and by level, y'know?
Gamertag: PrimusD | Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
That can certainly be an issue, it's just in my experience the players that knew the most about their powers and characters in 4e spent ages agonizing over which ones to use and engaged in the game as of playing solitaire rather than pay attention or communicate with the rest of the table and these were the players who had the most experience with older editions.
I do agree that 5e spells and abilities have major layout issues with regards to referencing the phb all the time though.
I'm not trying to be combative, personally.
I think ttrpgs are as fun as you make them. You don't HAVE to cast eldritch blast every round. They also have proficiency with rapiers and other simple weapons, as well as a couple spell slots and some decent control spells.
Warlocks also have high charisma as a rule which is where all the fun NPC interaction comes from which makes them fun to play out of combat.
It sucks that she didn't have fun. I hope she was able to find a character/playstyle she liked!
Need some stuff designed or printed? I can help with that.
Gamertag: PrimusD | Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
That said, I still miss the 3rd ed warlock. They obviously saw it as popular but they never really seemed to get the appeal, crunch-wise.
Tumblr | Twitter PSN: misterdapper Av by Satellite_09
Steam: Chagrin LoL: Bonhomie
This is why warlock paladin is the absurd overpowered combination.
Smite everything every encounter then rest for an hour and smite everything the next encounter too.