[quote=SorcererVictor]I already agreed with you that nerfing ranges to the extent that you can close that gap in 1 round is too much. It should be 2-2.5 rounds of movement for a long range spell imo. That would make it much harder to catch a kiting caster while giving bonuses to classes with speed bonuses (Rogue / Monk / Barbarian).
I have a better suggestion. Why not not mindless charge into a sniper who has the range advantage?
You are right. Force > Piercing.
Anyway, i disagree about 2 rounds. It was NEVER a good strategy. On battle of agincourt, French with heavy cavalry, good quality armor and shields failed to charge into a far smaller number of British longbowman. On Wild West, there are cases of a single fort being defended by 2 guys with gatling guns because the weapon had good range and rate of fire.
People are too used to solve everything with a fast swinging blade. And when for eg, Pathfinder Kingmaker throws Insect Swarm in a quest where the quest giver says that you will probably need it, and people "but swords should be effective vs everything, like a insect swarm, a iron golem and a dragon" and gave negative reviews.
I don't cry because certain enemies like Spawn of Rovagug can devour my magic and has 36 SR meaning that my lv 20 main character sorcerer with greater spell penetration has only 40% of chances of hitting him with anything that allows SR. The spawn of the God of destruction should be a deadly enemy. My sorcerer was only being useful vs his minions while my kineticist and my barbarian and archer was trying to kill him.
The spell has a range of 150 feet, the average walking speed is 30 feet.
Even a monk with haste cannot walk so far in one round. And when the enemy can use haste, you can use it too.
.
And why the enemy should be able to close the gap in one round and knock down your sorcerer/wizard/warlock?
At this point, just remove all archers and arcane casters and remove all ranged attacks from divine casters because they will gonna be useless.
In a open field, if you have a melee weapon and the enemy has archers, you are screwed in 99% of the cases. Unless his weapon breaks or you got extremely lucky. Doesn't matter if you are in a no magic, low magic, high magic, no technology, sci setting, etc.
What allowed humans to conquer and kill far stronger creatures like Bears was not fast swinging blades, was RANGED weaponry, Bows, Crossbows, Firearms, and melee weapons with decent range that can be trowed like spears. All of this weapons are underrepresented in fantasy in favor of "fast swinging blade festival".
One thing that 2e did right is that the AC vs slashes, piercing and blunt from plate armor is different. That means that a mace is far more likely to damage plate armor than a sword. IMO the difference should be far greater.
(...) The rogue in the gameplay reveal had a "Pin Down" attack (18m rage so already 50% "better" than DOS2!). (...)Might I humbly suggest you're overly fixated on realism in a fantasy game where the focus should be fun and balance?
You are comparing with DOS2 not with 5e D&D. But lets talk about fun then.
After you playing the game for like dozens of hours and finally getting one fireball per long rest, having no way to use it without blasting your own party and even if you can use, enemies closing the gap in one round and knocking down you doesn't sound fun or interesting.
If Larian made this nerf toy ranges because fast "swinging blades should solve everything", i will try find a way to mod the spells into P&P like values. Just like NWN2 nerfed spells to oblivion and Spell Fixes mod fixed most of then.
Without spell fixes, you can have one summon. With spell fixes, you can control your caster level * 2 hit dice worth of creatures. Without spell fixes, a lot of DC's are broken, spells that grapple won't grapple, etc.
So youre playing fantasy games wrong if youre not playing a wizard?(...)
>Muh wow clone
reductium ad hitlerum is a shitty argument.
Straw-man fallacy. I an not saying that you should play as a wizard. I an saying that wanting to use magic in a highly magical setting makes sense and ruin the magic setting will kill most of the gun of the game for a significant portion of the public.
The own creators of 4e said that they took inspirations on wow. 3.5e can be awful on your opinion but guess what. Pathfinder or as some people know as 3.75e took the spotlight of your loved 4e(only loved by you) as the most sold tabletop RPG. And even after 5e, if you sum pathfinder with 3.5e, pathfinder and 3.5e are more played than 5e.
