I don't know if people just didn't like it or if there was something mechanical with it that unbalanced to an extreme but I really enjoyed the lore of Onomancy and I wish it became official.
In the UA that they announced that the Onomancer was being dumped, they said they might use its idea for other subclasses. It's disappointing, but maybe we'll get a cool, true-naming bard subclass out of it?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
I guess. That's part of what I liked about it being a wizard though. It was something completely new to the wizard. I don't know how i would feel if it was tied to a bardic inspiration the same way that blade flourishes are. I mean, i get it you need to spend a resource to make the good thing happen, but IDK how id feel about it.
I wish more wizard subclasses fundamentally changed the class on some level... The bladesinger does it.. but every other wizard behaves in a very similar fashion... very "safe" I guess.
I wish more wizard subclasses fundamentally changed the class on some level... The bladesinger does it.. but every other wizard behaves in a very similar fashion... very "safe" I guess.
I agree with this. I think you have to be careful with wizards though, because the base class is so powerful out of the box.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Absolutely... As a full caster you're supposed to get most of your options from the base class.. And you can't just add a bunch of character defining features ontop of that without risking it being way too powerful... The issue is that all wizards have a are spells.. thjere arent' really any defining class "thing" outside of that that you can play with or modifiy. Atleast druids have their wildshape to add some intersting new core uses.. Wizards.. it's all just spells any subclass can pick.. Honestly I think I would prefer it if the subclasses had more meaningful features but also took away from the core class.. like missing out on certain spell schools.. or maybe your half your picked spells had to be in your subclass school.. somerthing like that.
There's a lot to be said about features which aren't just things from a list any caster can acces.. something specific and flavorful..
Absolutely... As a full caster you're supposed to get most of your options from the base class.. atleast druids have their wildshape to add some intersting new core uses.. Wizards.. it's all just spells any subclass can pick.. Honestly I think I would prefer it if the subclasses had more meaningful features but also took away from the core class.. like missing out on certain spell schools.. or maybe your half your picked spells had to be in your subclass school.. somerthing like that.
There's a lot to be said about features which aren't just things from a list any caster can acces.. something specific and flavorful..
That's how it used to be in 2e. There was a diagram with the 8 major schools of magic. A specialist wizard got some bonuses to the school they specialized in, and they were banned from learning spells from the opposition schools. That was either two or three schools, I don't recall exactly which. I want to say three, but I'd have to get my PHB and look it up. here's the diagram:
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
It's two schools. Say you wanted to be an Invoker to blow things up, your two opposition schools were enchantment/charm and Conjuration/Summoning. Divination was an oddball, opposed only by Conjuration and Summoning. Lesser Divination were spells under 4th level and all wizards could learn them regardless of opposition.
I kind of miss that, and wish that was still a thing.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
It's two schools. Say you wanted to be an Invoker to blow things up, your two opposition schools were enchantment/charm and Conjuration/Summoning. Divination was an oddball, opposed only by Conjuration and Summoning. Lesser Divination were spells under 4th level and all wizards could learn them regardless of opposition.
I kind of miss that, and wish that was still a thing.
Yea something like that would be neat.. A kind of system where the closer you get to your picked school, the more potent the spells become.. So the opposing ones cant' be picked.. the ones on the side are "normal" and the picked school has some cool twist to it..
I actually made a really generic wizard "by accident" by simply picking whatever spells I found to be the most useful at the time.. Ended up lacking a real identity to my class.. Had to ask my DM to "reroll" subclass and a lot of my spells so I could force a proper sense of direction into my choices.
So, putting aside the idea of banned schools of magic, what other way would you really make the wizard subclasses stand out and be different?
Maybe something like going Court Wizard, and putting an emphasis on social-fu, different from Illusionist/Enchanter? Or how about something dealing with Puzzles and Trap specialties?
well, my answer to that would be those ribbon abilities that are rarely useful are a part of why Ranger is considered underpowered.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
I have no clue what you're trying to say there. Most people around here use "ribbon" to mean underpowered ability, so it sounds like you're saying "the ranger is underpowered because of the underpowered abilities." Like... yeah?
So, putting aside the idea of banned schools of magic, what other way would you really make the wizard subclasses stand out and be different?
I would need a bit of time to come up with the balance of these features.. But basically things that gave you a nice angle view everything from... Certain subclasses like the illusionist gain something like this.. But much, much too late... THe ability to make part of illusion real is a strong subclass direction.. But most players will never see it.. The 2nd, 6th and 10th level feature all have very little impact on how the base class actually plays... I'm not saying they do nothing.. the 6th gives some flexibility... But they don't make the illusionist want to use illusions as their base skill ability set... They don't actually make the wizzard focus on being "illusionist"... Hope that makes sense :P
I played a conjuration wizard... When I picked the sublcass I was naive and thought that the subclass ment I was actually gonna play someone who primarily conjures things. To my disappointment I ended up doing what any other generic wizard would be doing in battle.. because low level conjuration spells may aswell be evocation and my subclass features did not give me any useful powers of conjurations in battle... Minor conjuratinon is fun, but like with the illutionist... it doesn't actually change the class at all.
I would probably give the conjuration school an elemental pet or something.. It's not perfect but it would make the conjurer actually stand out... Could also be an arcane familiar.. similar to the pact of the chain... only with different choices..
Another possiblity would be to give each sublcass the ability to cast their selected school cheaper... Spells from your selected school counts as one spell slot highter. when cast.. encouraging you to use that school..
I'm sure there are better more refined ideas I could come up with if I sat down thought it though.. But those are my initial thoughts.
I have no clue what you're trying to say there. Most people around here use "ribbon" to mean underpowered ability, so it sounds like you're saying "the ranger is underpowered because of the underpowered abilities." Like... yeah?
I'm saying that the ranger is considered underpowered because it's class features are generally not useful in combat. That is pretty much exactly what you proposed if I am understanding you correctly.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Not really.The Ranger is generally considered passible in combat, especially the Hunter. It's the exploration abilities being weak and restrictive that hurt the Ranger, coupled with the iconic Beastmaster subclass being terrible and the lack of synergy between features. People generally don't mind social or exploration features, so long as they're good features, and you can hold your own in a fight. Primeval Awareness, Favored Enemy and Natural Explorer are restrictive in their use and sometimes worse than just Expertise in Survival; to be useful, you really need to metagamen them, and even then....sometimes they're just bad.
Fundamentally, there's nothing wrong with the ideas behind Ranger, confirmed via survey, just the execution of said ideas.
So, I proposed new ideas. Not even ideas, but broad themes, one of which is actually combat oriented. No one knows if these are good or bad mechanically, because said mechanics haven't been written
But they don't make the illusionist want to use illusions as their base skill ability set... They don't actually make the wizzard focus on being "illusionist"... Hope that makes sense :P
Sounds kinda like the Shadow line of spells from 3.x. those were fun, but ultimately just another flavor of blaster. So, yeah.
I played a conjuration wizard... When I picked the sublcass I was naive and thought that the subclass ment I was actually gonna play someone who primarily conjures things. To my disappointment I ended up doing what any other generic wizard would be doing in battle.. because low level conjuration spells may aswell be evocation and my subclass features did not give me any useful powers of conjurations in battle... Minor conjuratinon is fun, but like with the illutionist... it doesn't actually change the class at all.
I would probably give the conjuration school an elemental pet or something.. It's not perfect but it would make the conjurer actually stand out... Could also be an arcane familiar.. similar to the pact of the chain... only with different choices..
Oh totally get you there. I had the same problem playing a necromancer. Until you get to level 6, you actually don't do anything necromancerish. And even then, had to keep spell slots in reserve. Rather disappointing, all in all.
Another possiblity would be to give each sublcass the ability to cast their selected school cheaper... Spells from your selected school counts as one spell slot highter. when cast.. encouraging you to use that school..
I'm sure there are better more refined ideas I could come up with if I sat down thought it though.. But those are my initial thoughts.
Sounds like we are still talking about refining around schools... nothing past that?
Sounds like we are still talking about refining around schools... nothing past that?
I mean I gave a few other ideas for the conjurer right? Coming up with more impactful unique features for each sublcass would take days and weeks... As I mentioned earlier, there is nothing that is super obvious to work with, because the wizard does not have any cool defining class feature outside of spell casting... Which is why it's powerful but also kind of generic to me.
I'm happy to see more druid subclasses work with the wildshape ability for example... it's a good way to really make each subclass feel different.
It's obvious that things will revolve around spell schools since many of the wizard subclasses are directly linked to those schools... So asking for example for spell school subclass features without focusing on spell schools seems strange to me. It's possible that it would've been more interesting if the subclasses had a different focus than simply schools.. like magic traditions.. different culture's take on wizards you know.
I don't know if people just didn't like it or if there was something mechanical with it that unbalanced to an extreme but I really enjoyed the lore of Onomancy and I wish it became official.
Not that we need more Wizards.
Buyers Guide for D&D Beyond - Hardcover Books, D&D Beyond and You - How/What is Toggled Content?
Everything you need to know about Homebrew - Homebrew FAQ - Digital Book on D&D Beyond Vs Physical Books
Can't find the content you are supposed to have access to? Read this FAQ.
"Play the game however you want to play the game. After all, your fun doesn't threaten my fun."
I agree. It was way better than this stupid Order of the Scribes.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
same... i really liked onomancy
I am an average mathematics enjoyer.
>Extended Signature<
I like order of scribes, but I COMPLETELY AGREE
Buyers Guide for D&D Beyond - Hardcover Books, D&D Beyond and You - How/What is Toggled Content?
Everything you need to know about Homebrew - Homebrew FAQ - Digital Book on D&D Beyond Vs Physical Books
Can't find the content you are supposed to have access to? Read this FAQ.
"Play the game however you want to play the game. After all, your fun doesn't threaten my fun."
In the UA that they announced that the Onomancer was being dumped, they said they might use its idea for other subclasses. It's disappointing, but maybe we'll get a cool, true-naming bard subclass out of it?
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
I guess. That's part of what I liked about it being a wizard though. It was something completely new to the wizard. I don't know how i would feel if it was tied to a bardic inspiration the same way that blade flourishes are. I mean, i get it you need to spend a resource to make the good thing happen, but IDK how id feel about it.
Buyers Guide for D&D Beyond - Hardcover Books, D&D Beyond and You - How/What is Toggled Content?
Everything you need to know about Homebrew - Homebrew FAQ - Digital Book on D&D Beyond Vs Physical Books
Can't find the content you are supposed to have access to? Read this FAQ.
"Play the game however you want to play the game. After all, your fun doesn't threaten my fun."
I wish more wizard subclasses fundamentally changed the class on some level... The bladesinger does it.. but every other wizard behaves in a very similar fashion... very "safe" I guess.
I agree with this. I think you have to be careful with wizards though, because the base class is so powerful out of the box.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
Absolutely... As a full caster you're supposed to get most of your options from the base class.. And you can't just add a bunch of character defining features ontop of that without risking it being way too powerful... The issue is that all wizards have a are spells.. thjere arent' really any defining class "thing" outside of that that you can play with or modifiy. Atleast druids have their wildshape to add some intersting new core uses.. Wizards.. it's all just spells any subclass can pick.. Honestly I think I would prefer it if the subclasses had more meaningful features but also took away from the core class.. like missing out on certain spell schools.. or maybe your half your picked spells had to be in your subclass school.. somerthing like that.
There's a lot to be said about features which aren't just things from a list any caster can acces.. something specific and flavorful..
That's how it used to be in 2e. There was a diagram with the 8 major schools of magic. A specialist wizard got some bonuses to the school they specialized in, and they were banned from learning spells from the opposition schools. That was either two or three schools, I don't recall exactly which. I want to say three, but I'd have to get my PHB and look it up. here's the diagram:
https://advanced-dungeons-dragons-2nd-edition.fandom.com/wiki/The_Schools_of_Magic
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
It's two schools. Say you wanted to be an Invoker to blow things up, your two opposition schools were enchantment/charm and Conjuration/Summoning. Divination was an oddball, opposed only by Conjuration and Summoning. Lesser Divination were spells under 4th level and all wizards could learn them regardless of opposition.
I kind of miss that, and wish that was still a thing.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
Yea something like that would be neat.. A kind of system where the closer you get to your picked school, the more potent the spells become.. So the opposing ones cant' be picked.. the ones on the side are "normal" and the picked school has some cool twist to it..
I actually made a really generic wizard "by accident" by simply picking whatever spells I found to be the most useful at the time.. Ended up lacking a real identity to my class.. Had to ask my DM to "reroll" subclass and a lot of my spells so I could force a proper sense of direction into my choices.
So, putting aside the idea of banned schools of magic, what other way would you really make the wizard subclasses stand out and be different?
Maybe something like going Court Wizard, and putting an emphasis on social-fu, different from Illusionist/Enchanter? Or how about something dealing with Puzzles and Trap specialties?
well, my answer to that would be those ribbon abilities that are rarely useful are a part of why Ranger is considered underpowered.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
I have no clue what you're trying to say there. Most people around here use "ribbon" to mean underpowered ability, so it sounds like you're saying "the ranger is underpowered because of the underpowered abilities." Like... yeah?
I would need a bit of time to come up with the balance of these features.. But basically things that gave you a nice angle view everything from... Certain subclasses like the illusionist gain something like this.. But much, much too late... THe ability to make part of illusion real is a strong subclass direction.. But most players will never see it.. The 2nd, 6th and 10th level feature all have very little impact on how the base class actually plays... I'm not saying they do nothing.. the 6th gives some flexibility... But they don't make the illusionist want to use illusions as their base skill ability set... They don't actually make the wizzard focus on being "illusionist"... Hope that makes sense :P
I played a conjuration wizard... When I picked the sublcass I was naive and thought that the subclass ment I was actually gonna play someone who primarily conjures things. To my disappointment I ended up doing what any other generic wizard would be doing in battle.. because low level conjuration spells may aswell be evocation and my subclass features did not give me any useful powers of conjurations in battle... Minor conjuratinon is fun, but like with the illutionist... it doesn't actually change the class at all.
I would probably give the conjuration school an elemental pet or something.. It's not perfect but it would make the conjurer actually stand out... Could also be an arcane familiar.. similar to the pact of the chain... only with different choices..
Another possiblity would be to give each sublcass the ability to cast their selected school cheaper... Spells from your selected school counts as one spell slot highter. when cast.. encouraging you to use that school..
I'm sure there are better more refined ideas I could come up with if I sat down thought it though.. But those are my initial thoughts.
I'm saying that the ranger is considered underpowered because it's class features are generally not useful in combat. That is pretty much exactly what you proposed if I am understanding you correctly.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
Not really.The Ranger is generally considered passible in combat, especially the Hunter. It's the exploration abilities being weak and restrictive that hurt the Ranger, coupled with the iconic Beastmaster subclass being terrible and the lack of synergy between features. People generally don't mind social or exploration features, so long as they're good features, and you can hold your own in a fight. Primeval Awareness, Favored Enemy and Natural Explorer are restrictive in their use and sometimes worse than just Expertise in Survival; to be useful, you really need to metagamen them, and even then....sometimes they're just bad.
Fundamentally, there's nothing wrong with the ideas behind Ranger, confirmed via survey, just the execution of said ideas.
So, I proposed new ideas. Not even ideas, but broad themes, one of which is actually combat oriented. No one knows if these are good or bad mechanically, because said mechanics haven't been written
Sounds kinda like the Shadow line of spells from 3.x. those were fun, but ultimately just another flavor of blaster. So, yeah.
Oh totally get you there. I had the same problem playing a necromancer. Until you get to level 6, you actually don't do anything necromancerish. And even then, had to keep spell slots in reserve. Rather disappointing, all in all.
Sounds like we are still talking about refining around schools... nothing past that?
I mean I gave a few other ideas for the conjurer right? Coming up with more impactful unique features for each sublcass would take days and weeks... As I mentioned earlier, there is nothing that is super obvious to work with, because the wizard does not have any cool defining class feature outside of spell casting... Which is why it's powerful but also kind of generic to me.
I'm happy to see more druid subclasses work with the wildshape ability for example... it's a good way to really make each subclass feel different.
It's obvious that things will revolve around spell schools since many of the wizard subclasses are directly linked to those schools... So asking for example for spell school subclass features without focusing on spell schools seems strange to me.
It's possible that it would've been more interesting if the subclasses had a different focus than simply schools.. like magic traditions.. different culture's take on wizards you know.