How does a player know that they have the at-will ability to substitute their Dexterity for Strength when making an attack? Or the at-will ability to increase their weapon's damage when they have a free hand?
They "browse the weapons table" to see which weapons have the Finesse or Versatile properties. Learning weapon properties is already baked into the game. And any tricks for remembering these easier, such as the ever simple "write it on your character sheet", also work for masteries.
So here we have a system that people already have to engage with (look at a weapon, see what it does) and the masteries system is simply adding more options. It's literally a column in the table. Tracking which masteries you have is no different from tracking your proficiencies.
Meanwhile, you're proposing adding an extra layer of complexity to the weapons system. Rather than each feature of a weapon existing independently, you want people to browse a chart of techniques then browse the weapons table to see which weapons qualify for which techniques based on the base features of the weapon? They already had to read the weapons table, now they have to cross reference it?
I'm sorry, I don't see how this reduces referencing the weapons table in any way. Rather, I see it increasing how much reference time is needed.
And I've responded to this new premise. Any other thoughts to add, or are we done here?
I'm going off of your premise of maneuvers from 4e. Don't tell me the premise is flawed when you established it.
As for that homebrew, I fail to see how it's easier. It's not especially more or less complicated, just different. For optimal play, a player still has to learn what every technique does, get weapons that support that technique, and possibly still swap weapons to get the desired effects. You might save a little time by having one weapon able to use multiple techniques.
Meanwhile, a player who gets overwhelmed by so many options (eg a new player) would find having all these options at all times paralyzing. It would be faster to pick-up-and-play where you pick a weapon and get the one thing that weapon can do and that's what everyone else does too. Knowing what to expect when a guard charges you with a scimitar versus a greatsword aids players with lower system mastery.
The Masteries system may require slightly more knowledge to play optimal, but it has a much lower barrier to entry than the techniques you linked.
But maneuvers and stances are class-specific. The weapons are the same for every class. You learn it once and now you have that knowledge for every class you play or even if you DM. Meanwhile you have to re-learn class-specific abilities with every new character and the knowledge doesn't translate to DMing monsters who have their own abilities.
You call it complicated because it's not listed in the book next to the other class features. I call it simpler because it's the same for everyone.
You're talking about system mastery as if it's a requirement to engage with the system. It's not. Stuff like weapon swapping is firmly in the camp of optimization by advanced players.
A normal player picks a weapon they want, takes the mastery that fits, and then never changes their weapon. As such, the Weapon Mastery never changes and is just an additional effect they have. It's dead simple to engage with.
Which is not something the producers know, is it?
They know it better than the consumer. I don't know how many chips are in the bag, but I know I'm going to eat the entire bag. The manufacturer knows exactly what's in the bag.
I had literally never heard of Prince until he died. I'm a millennial american, but no one I knew listened to his genre, and I only started branching out once the internet let me discover things. As I've learned, Prince fought tooth and nail to keep his stuff off the internet, therefore I'd never come across him.
When he passed, my friends and I thought we were taking crazy pills. Everyone came out lauding his work as if he were common knowledge. This guy tried as hard as he could to hide from the modern world. Well, for many of us it succeeded.
A note, it's al'Lan, with that extra 'L' in there. This led to in-universe confusion a few times because it's an honorific added to the front of a given name in Lan's culture to denote royalty, but Rand al'Thor, Egwene al'Vere, and Nynaeve al'Mera all have it affixed to their surnames.
No. It highlights the distinction because the complaint is that the government is conflating the two as both bad. The critics don't want to see all shorting disabled simply because of naked shorting. The same way most people don't want all alcohol banned merely because of underage drinking.
The critics aren't conflating the two, they want the distinction drawn. Y'all are just projecting a corruption you want to see onto a situation where it doesn't apply.
Naked shorting was already illegal. They banned regular shorting temporarily in order to tackle naked shorting, which many saw as overkill.
Again, if they're being conflated, it's to paint all shorting as complicit in the illegal activity, not to paint the illegal activity as something that shouldn't be illegal.
Literally the opposite. "The government banned X to prevent Y, which received criticism because X is common in other places." The only way they could possibly be conflated is if you assume that all X leads to Y.
Perhaps a different example will make it clearer. "The government imposed a ban on alcohol to eradicate underage drinking. While churches welcomed the move, it has raised eyebrows in the restaurant industry as alcohol is commonly available in other markets."
The only way this sentence could conflate the two is to make them both seem bad, not make them both seem normal.
I don't think you understand the situation. The ban imposed in November was a ban on all short selling. The purpose was to flush out naked shorts and give time to implement a new detection system, but the ban was on all short selling.
Now, I'm not saying I like shorting at all, but there's no misdirection here. SK banned all shorting.
Nobody's insulting intelligence here.
Uh huh. But what's his voting record? That's literally the only thing that matters.
The giver of the bribe. Thought that was obvious.
Occasionally the non-competes aren't between an employer and their employee, but rather a non-poaching agreement between companies that work together. Not saying it was your situation specifically, but it wouldnt be uncommon for the contract between your employer and the school to have a clause in their contract that they won't hire each other's employees.
Never said that. Was pointing out the misunderstanding of the poster above.
I have zero interest in moving the goal posts. Have a good day.
The fruit seems slower in your video (or rather the OP seems faster) because you can see the fruit on screen for longer. Cover the top half of your video so that the fruit is only on screen moments before it's caught. It looks identical.
Because depression isn't a choice, it's a medical condition?
That's just for having it in your possession. Doing literally anything with it, including brandishing, are separate charges with different sentences.
Austin Powers
Nurse Honored for Compassion Is Fired After Referring to Gaza 'Genocide' in Speech
nottheonion