This makes them more of a slippery specialist than a striker. The Expert is a lot like a Rogue, minus the high-damage sneak attack. If they're Dexterity based, they can probably afford to shoot foes from the back line until they are more resilient. Keep in mind that if a Warrior is Strength-based, they'll often be in melee range. This means a greater risk of death at lower levels, especially without proper gear. If the party is short on muscle, the Fighter has a shield-sibling or the Ranger needs a hunting partner, this specialty is a good choice. The Warrior is like a Fighter with some Barbarian mixed in, meaning they're sturdier, more likely to critically strike and (so long as they're humanoid) can use all weapons and armor.
Related: D&D: Why 5e Has Been So Successful At Bringing In New Players After that, the player and DM choose which Sidekick specialty makes sense: the Warrior, the Expert or the Spellcaster. But in some circumstances, for the sake of fun or flavor, a DM could choose to allow it. This makes recruiting certain creature types, like mindless oozes or constructs, dubious at best. This likely means a player has done them a big favor, made one or more successful Persuasion or Animal Handling checks (depending on who's up for recruitment) or both. To become a Sidekick, a creature has to be "friends" with a player character. In other words, before getting too attached, it might be best to choose the Warhorse with 19 Hit Points over the Mastiff with five. So if a Sidekick of that sort is going to last, a player is better off looking for a friend with great strength or unique abilities. The Unearthed Arcana document, however, doesn't make a creature's attributes any better or worse for being a Sidekick - at least not at first. The rules in the Essentials Kit fully replace the chosen creature's original attributes, which safeguards against recruiting a Commoner with a ten in every ability score. This kind of bloat gets worse if the Sidekick ends up being dead weight.
0 kommentar(er)
