A mish-mash of 5E observations

September 6, 2014 at 3:40 pm
filed under Roleplaying
Tagged ,

Here’s another list of observations about 5E. These are just things that caught my attention when I read things through, either because of how it was different, because there was a technicality, or what have you.

That’s all for now.

  • Phil

    Couple of quick comments:
    Weren’t Rangers d8 in AD&D? But they got 2d8HP at 1st level, and 1d8 thereafter?

    Re: dual wielding with non-light weapons, you can do it (in the sense of having a weapon in each hand) but you can’t use a Bonus action to attack with off-hand unless they meet the requirement. Still could be useful if you’re up against Disarming opponent.

  • Matthew

    Hey, this was a really interesting comment. Thanks!

    You’re right: in AD&D 1E, rangers started with 2d8. Having started with 2E, I did not know this! In 2E and 3.0, they got d10. Then in 3.5 they were back down to d8 and the 4E equivalent was similar. You know, now I wonder if anyone else’s hit die has changed as many times.

    Excellent point regarding dual-wielding, though. This is one of those areas which made plain the difference between 5E and 3E: the rules aren’t exhaustive. For instance, they don’t talk about attacking *just* with your off-hand. Or: would Extra Attack allow a sort of ad-hoc dual wielding?

    It seems like it’d be fine to allow either as long as there’s not some other crazy loophole; you’re not getting much except maybe variety in damage types, possibly from magic items. But if the group doesn’t like it, you could use the existing precedent: no damage bonus on the off-hand weapon. Or no proficiency bonus. Or disadvantage. I wonder which of those last two would be worse.

%d bloggers like this: