I will ask a simple question: From the player's perspective, does Tasha's:
a. Make the game harder to play?
b. Make the game easier to play?
c. Maintain the same difficulty level?
Those that use Tasha's are the ones that want the motor, and WOTC is the one selling the motor aka Tasha's.
a: No not really
b: Depends....Its easier than ever to make the character you want thanks to floating ASI. Some subclass stuff is wonky (Twlight/Peace) but the rest is not really an issue. Overall its easier at creation but about the same for the rest of the game.
c. For about 85% of the game I would say its the same difficulty as it was before if you have the same DM with the same practices. Creating a character is easier thats about it.
I will ask a simple question: From the player's perspective, does Tasha's:
a. Make the game harder to play?
b. Make the game easier to play?
c. Maintain the same difficulty level?
Those that use Tasha's are the ones that want the motor, and WOTC is the one selling the motor aka Tasha's.
a: No not really
b: Depends....Its easier than ever to make the character you want thanks to floating ASI. Some subclass stuff is wonky (Twlight/Peace) but the rest is not really an issue. Overall its easier at creation but about the same for the rest of the game.
c. For about 85% of the game I would say its the same difficulty as it was before if you have the same DM with the same practices. Creating a character is easier thats about it.
It didn't even make a difference for stats in my game, since I'd already eliminated set racial modifiers for stats and just gone with a '+2/+1/-1 wherever you want' set-up.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I will ask a simple question: From the player's perspective, does Tasha's:
a. Make the game harder to play?
b. Make the game easier to play?
c. Maintain the same difficulty level?
Those that use Tasha's are the ones that want the motor, and WOTC is the one selling the motor aka Tasha's.
a: No not really
b: Depends....Its easier than ever to make the character you want thanks to floating ASI. Some subclass stuff is wonky (Twlight/Peace) but the rest is not really an issue. Overall its easier at creation but about the same for the rest of the game.
c. For about 85% of the game I would say its the same difficulty as it was before if you have the same DM with the same practices. Creating a character is easier thats about it.
And new class feature that is introduced with no tradeoff with another feature inherently makes the game easier. Pretty much every class in the game has such features added. Of course, they are listed as "optional". So if I, as a DM, say "no, I choose not to introduce them", and toss away the OP of the new subclasses, and choose not to use the optional char building mechanism, all I am left with are some new Feats (many of which I refuse to add to my game, because they are power creep), and a set of new spells, and a few subclasses.
Yes, it is far easier to ban the entire book. The negatives far outweigh any potential expansion of the game that is not power creep.
The new stuff really didn't change how my players have played even with them added....
They hardly used the stuff they had much less the extra stuff they got. Overall it mostly adds stuff like "you can swap this at this time" or "you get some more options"
Stuff like he barb extra movement when you rage happens litterally like 3 times a day and has so little impact on the game I mostly forget its there.
Besides the Twlight/Peace cleric stuff (which I agree needs changes) what else is breaking your game so much?
I will ask a simple question: From the player's perspective, does Tasha's:
a. Make the game harder to play?
b. Make the game easier to play?
c. Maintain the same difficulty level?
Those that use Tasha's are the ones that want the motor, and WOTC is the one selling the motor aka Tasha's.
a: No not really
b: Depends....Its easier than ever to make the character you want thanks to floating ASI. Some subclass stuff is wonky (Twlight/Peace) but the rest is not really an issue. Overall its easier at creation but about the same for the rest of the game.
c. For about 85% of the game I would say its the same difficulty as it was before if you have the same DM with the same practices. Creating a character is easier thats about it.
And new class feature that is introduced with no tradeoff with another feature inherently makes the game easier. Pretty much every class in the game has such features added. Of course, they are listed as "optional". So if I, as a DM, say "no, I choose not to introduce them", and toss away the OP of the new subclasses, and choose not to use the optional char building mechanism, all I am left with are some new Feats (many of which I refuse to add to my game, because they are power creep), and a set of new spells, and a few subclasses.
Yes, it is far easier to ban the entire book. The negatives far outweigh any potential expansion of the game that is not power creep.
The new stuff really didn't change how my players have played even with them added....
They hardly used the stuff they had much less the extra stuff they got. Overall it mostly adds stuff like "you can swap this at this time" or "you get some more options"
Stuff like he barb extra movement when you rage happens litterally like 3 times a day and has so little impact on the game I mostly forget its there.
Besides the Twlight/Peace cleric stuff (which I agree needs changes) what else is breaking your game so much?
Given that I have banned that book, it is hard to answer that question. I looked at it, said "nope" to the power creep, especially with the char building mechanism, and have had no issues.....no, that is not entirely true.
I am also running an "easygoing" game for a couple friends, that I figured would end as soon as the Covid lockdowns eased. Surprisingly, the game is still going on. Because it was a supposed to be a throwaway game, I let one of the players MC with a Light Cleric and Path of the Beast Barb. The other player is a straight up Arcane Trickster. The Rogue has been into death saves almost every game, while the LC/Barb cruises along, because the abilities of that char are really strong. It makes balancing encounters a serious headache. I want to challenge both players/chars, but one is clearly a superior build to the other, thanks to the subclass out of Tasha's.I have seen first hand how that subclass works. It would be banned in a more serious campaign game. That is one thing that a super small table does. It allows one char build to be compared to another, and I can see how the various features of a subclass work.
To say I am not impressed with the part of Tasha's I have allowed into a game I run would be an understatement.
So you didn't even try it? Seems like its hard to know what its going to do until you actually give it a shot in play.
"superior" is what you let it be as a DM....pretty much the only thing I would adjust is the twilight/peace.
Otherwise letting a barbarian have another skill is going to break your game?
Honest question....what part did you think would make the game untenable for you?
Anything that makes the game easier for the players is bad idea. Any PB focused feature falls into that category.
Tasha's is riddled with new buffs to classes and subclasses with zero tradeoffs, just a straight gift.
I am so sick of the "the game must be easier for me to have fun" crowd.
Some of us actually LOVE playing within a set of restrictive set of rules, not opening the floodgates like Tasha's did. Not nearly enough of us, but some. We recognize that playing a harder game actually takes MORE creativity to accomplish something, and a mastery of the actual rules. And when something is accomplished in such a game, it is way more satisfying, and lasting.
But no, WOTC said, "tell you what, we will soften all the restrictions, by giving you way more stuff your classes can do. There are the cheat codes in Tashas, so buy the book."
You do know that as DM you can sic anything you want against them, even making creatures up completely on the spot.... it is not a Them vs You game. The DM has infinite power.
I was speaking as player when I wrote what I just did, not as a DM.
The game is too easy. From either side of the table. Good players, who in my opinion = ones who know the rules, and maximize their effectiveness within those rules, should be rewarded. Players who can't be bothered to grasp the basic concepts of the game and decide to go off book and hope the DM thinks their actions are cool and allow them should not be rewarded."
Here is a missive I just sent to a DM of a new campaign that is gearing up tomorrow. He and I have already discussed the fact that I like to place restrictions on my chars that are tougher than even RAW, and he is fine with that. Hopefully, the following blurb will reveal my mindset. If everyone thought and played like this it would be a far more challenging game, and certainly easier for the DM to adjudicate, while many players, especially the new ones, would hate it:
"Going with the idea that I like to make things more difficult for my char, a question for you. Would you be OK with the following? Though the PHB does not specifically say this, I am going to assume that any new spells I learn when I level up (2 per level) must follow the same costs of writing them into my book as copying them into my book from some other source, like a scroll. Further, I am debating on the idea that though I can be anywhere when I attempt a copy of a spell into my spellbook (assuming I have the inks/ mat components available), when it comes to acquiring new spells when I level up, that can't be done on the road/ in a dungeon. Though it might be handwaved, I still need downtime in a library/lab/quiet place to research/experiment. So when we level up, my guy would need some downtime, likely in a fairly urban setting/ friendly wizard's tower, to get the spells into my book. What do you think?"
This last part really feels like that meme where the guy is riding his bike, puts a stick in the wheel, then complains its someone else's fault that he fell off. Like, you are literally choosing to make the game harder for yourself (which is fine if that is fun for you) and then complaining about the game being so much easier for everyone else, even when everyone else isn't "going off book" by using officially published materials like Tashas
Hardly. It is more like the guy that who adds a 10 kilo weight to his bike because the ride is too easy otherwise, and shaking his head at a number of riders adding a motor to their bikes because they think the ride is too hard, and then looking at the organizers of the ride who are advertising for sale the motors in the first place.
So you just think you are better than everyone else just because you like to add a challenge, whereas other people are just out for a ride on a nice day? Not everyone plays D&D to "work out" some are just wanting to have fun with their friends. No one is stopping you from riding your bike with extra challenge, but you seem to be intent on telling the ones that are cruising along that they should get out of your lane
Again, everything you complain about is the fault of the players and not the game. And most of the things you complain about seem to rather extreme examples and not the norm...
[Edited to remove comment, the above response was made to me by mistake and my response to it was also a mistake, lol]
Unless you roll for stats (which I don't do and actively suggest against) everyone will be on the exact same footing with stats even if they now have a 16 instead of a 15.
If you are talking about racial armor and such then you could simply say "as a dwarf wizard you did not feel the need to train in armor....pick another skill that would be applicable to your background" if you feel its going to impact the game too much.
Wholescale denying an entire book because of one or two problematic things is pretty extreme to me I guess.
There is one book that is essential to play D&D, that is the Dungeon Master's Guide. Everything else is optional. The Player's handbook contains options for your character, but the DM gets to decided which ones. The Monster Manual has Monsters in it, and each one is an option. The DMG has rules for creating new ones, so it's not essential. All the other books are Optional.
Tell me which options I have. I will decide if I consider playing in your game to be fun, and then I will invoke my Optional Rule, which is to find another (hopefully D&D) game.
(Note. I was going on about 100% RAW games, and this is the wrong thread for that, so I deleted the post I made, and had to re-create it. There was one person who hit the little up arrow, and I do appreciate it, so thank you.)
Anything that makes the game easier for the players is bad idea. Any PB focused feature falls into that category.
Tasha's is riddled with new buffs to classes and subclasses with zero tradeoffs, just a straight gift.
I am so sick of the "the game must be easier for me to have fun" crowd.
Some of us actually LOVE playing within a set of restrictive set of rules, not opening the floodgates like Tasha's did. Not nearly enough of us, but some. We recognize that playing a harder game actually takes MORE creativity to accomplish something, and a mastery of the actual rules. And when something is accomplished in such a game, it is way more satisfying, and lasting.
But no, WOTC said, "tell you what, we will soften all the restrictions, by giving you way more stuff your classes can do. There are the cheat codes in Tashas, so buy the book."
You do know that as DM you can sic anything you want against them, even making creatures up completely on the spot.... it is not a Them vs You game. The DM has infinite power.
I was speaking as player when I wrote what I just did, not as a DM.
The game is too easy. From either side of the table. Good players, who in my opinion = ones who know the rules, and maximize their effectiveness within those rules, should be rewarded. Players who can't be bothered to grasp the basic concepts of the game and decide to go off book and hope the DM thinks their actions are cool and allow them should not be rewarded."
Here is a missive I just sent to a DM of a new campaign that is gearing up tomorrow. He and I have already discussed the fact that I like to place restrictions on my chars that are tougher than even RAW, and he is fine with that. Hopefully, the following blurb will reveal my mindset. If everyone thought and played like this it would be a far more challenging game, and certainly easier for the DM to adjudicate, while many players, especially the new ones, would hate it:
"Going with the idea that I like to make things more difficult for my char, a question for you. Would you be OK with the following? Though the PHB does not specifically say this, I am going to assume that any new spells I learn when I level up (2 per level) must follow the same costs of writing them into my book as copying them into my book from some other source, like a scroll. Further, I am debating on the idea that though I can be anywhere when I attempt a copy of a spell into my spellbook (assuming I have the inks/ mat components available), when it comes to acquiring new spells when I level up, that can't be done on the road/ in a dungeon. Though it might be handwaved, I still need downtime in a library/lab/quiet place to research/experiment. So when we level up, my guy would need some downtime, likely in a fairly urban setting/ friendly wizard's tower, to get the spells into my book. What do you think?"
This last part really feels like that meme where the guy is riding his bike, puts a stick in the wheel, then complains its someone else's fault that he fell off. Like, you are literally choosing to make the game harder for yourself (which is fine if that is fun for you) and then complaining about the game being so much easier for everyone else, even when everyone else isn't "going off book" by using officially published materials like Tashas
Hardly. It is more like the guy that who adds a 10 kilo weight to his bike because the ride is too easy otherwise, and shaking his head at a number of riders adding a motor to their bikes because they think the ride is too hard, and then looking at the organizers of the ride who are advertising for sale the motors in the first place.
So you just think you are better than everyone else just because you like to add a challenge, whereas other people are just out for a ride on a nice day? Not everyone plays D&D to "work out" some are just wanting to have fun with their friends. No one is stopping you from riding your bike with extra challenge, but you seem to be intent on telling the ones that are cruising along that they should get out of your lane
Again, everything you complain about is the fault of the players and not the game. And most of the things you complain about seem to rather extreme examples and not the norm...
What have I complained about? Look back over this thread of comments. My only complaint has been against what you have been saying. So, no, it has nothing to do with what the players were doing nor does it have anything to do with the game design. It is 100% just pointing out how ridiculous you are being for imposing your own expectations for difficulty onto other players at other tables.
I think we might have been replying to the wrong messages. My response was supposed to go to Dennis. :P
Exactly which part of the Path of the Beast are you struggling with as a DM?
Honestly. I think if you explain to us what the problem you are having with the Barbarian Cleric we may be able to help.
It sounded more to me like every encounter is geared towards trying to take down the barb, which forces the rogue into situations where their skills aren't as applicable and they take a bunch of damage. I mean, this is the guy that thinks everything = combat.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
We've had this whole "the game is easier if the characters are more powerful" argument before, and it's still seems just as silly even focusing on Tasha's. For one, because while the subclasses in it are strong they're not stronger than some of their counterparts in Xanathar's or even the PHB (with the exception of the Peace cleric) - Path of the Beast doesn't outshine Ancestral Guardian or Totem Warrior, and the Twilight domain isn't really better than Forge, Light or Order (which was in the Ravnica book before it was repeated in Tasha's). Neither of these two represents power creep. For another, because the one subclass that does represent power creep still doesn't have a patch on some exploitative edge cases like the optimized sorlock or padlock or shapechanging into an Intellect Devourer or Moon Druids (Raging if you feel like it) for most of the levels that matter for a typical campaign or Sharpshooting Crossbow Experts or any of a number of other things (most of which don't require any books other than the core set), and even those are still nothing compared to the power of the all mighty DM. As DM I adjust encounters all the time to take party composition into account. Not necessarily to counter the more powerful ones either, doing this applies to all characters: giving everyone a chance to shine, giving everyone interesting challenges. And since I'm doing that anyway, taking a look at which characters might hog the spotlight and how isn't even extra effort.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I believe I have stated my position. Most of you have taken an opposite position. I know my position is intractable. I don't see any more point me posting about this particular topic. WOTC obviously agrees with your position, because they also recognize that easier sells more product under the current socio-political structure of the western world.
When the designers of the books coming out in November were promoting these new books by describing how players can plan a prom and deal with all idiotic fremeny stuff that children did in college and high school, or going to a fair where you toss rings at teleporting unicorn bunnies, or run through a module 1-8 without combat, or how orphans live in a treehouse on a Treant, with a displacer beast as a mascot (yeah, the writeup for that monster is that it is hunted to extinction in the Feywild, but who worries about canon), well, the WOTC has telegraphed loud and clear where they are taking the game. They own the rights, and D&D sales accounted for 22% of Hasbro's 2020 revenue. Tasha's is a horrible, horrible book, but nothing like what is coming.
Me sacrificing innocent electrons and photons to discuss it further with people that are convinced WOTC are the saviours of D&D is pointless.
Its almost as if Dungeons and Dragons is something that can be played by children in a more family-friendly setting and they want to appeal to that audience. The starter set is literally listed as for being ages 14 and up. Also, underlining the "..children did in college..." bit because......really?
At the end of the day if players enjoy playing like this the system is perfect for them, and they no doubt have DMs who love DMing these players.
Many other players instead look at this as a massive opportunity to make interesting roleplay options, the half orc who has spent his life learning, taught by his human scholar father (+2 int). The player purposely pics a low strength stat and then roleplays this as the orc and half orc civilization in my world, who value strength, look down on him as a runt.
You could already make that character. The issue is that +2 isn’t supposed to represent you growing up at pappy’s knee learnin’ just as it isn’t meant to represent a childhood of combat training when it goes into Str. Putting the highest number you got into Int (or Str) represents what you spent your childhood doing. That +2 is meant to represent the fact that no matter what you spent your childhood doing you will inevitably be bigger and stronger than an equivalent human kid. So putting the 15 in Int and the 8 in Str is what gives you a runt (Str 10 is a runt for an Orc) and a childhood of book learnin.’ And if the 8 is too high and the 15 too low, that’s what rolled stats are for. Then you can put that hard 5 you rolled into Str and that amazing 18 into Int and now you got a smarter, weaker Orc even with the +2 in Str.
Researcher. When the Sage attempts to learn or recall a piece of lore, if it does not know that information, it often* know where and from whom it can be obtained. Usually, this information comes from a library, scriptorium, university, or another sage or other learned person or creature. *(The knowledge it seeks might be secreted away in an almost inaccessible place, or that it simply cannot be found.)
Actions
Handaxe. Melee or Ranged Weapon Attack: +3 to hit, reach 5 ft. or range 20/60 ft., one target. Hit: 4 (1d6 + 1) slashing damage.
Bonus Actions
Aggressive. As a bonus action, most Orcs can move up 30 ft. (their speed) toward an enemy of their choice that they can see or hear, and must end this move closer to that enemy than they started.
Description
Most of the orcs that stay behind when the warriors go on their raids are weaker than their tribe mates or otherwise not suited for a life of battle. Worshipers of Luthic fall into this category, as do some of those that revere Yurtrus or Shargaas. But even these orcs are trained in combat, and all of them are expected to act like warriors if the lair is attacked or threatened. Their numbers are augmented by any orogs in the tribe, which are primarily responsible for making sure that the lair is protected from intruders.
An Orc Sage has spent years learning the lore of the multiverse. It scoured manuscripts, studied scrolls, and listened to the greatest experts on the subjects that interested it. Those efforts have made the Orc Sage a master in its fields of study.
Specialty
To determine the nature of the Sage’s scholarly training, roll a d8 or choose from the options in the table below.
Anything smarter and weaker than that is a “smart runt” by Orc standards.
If that +2 was the only thing holding someone back from making an Orc Wizard before, then they are the Min-Maxers. This isn’t “a new roleplay opportunity” at all. The exact same opportunity was already there before. Now it’s just an excuse to do it without having suboptimized stats. But again, if stat optimization is what was preventing it before then RP isn’t your focus, powergaming is. And now you just don’t have to feel limited by your own powergaming. If RP was your focus, you would already be playing that PC and stats be damned.
The same goes for the nimble Dwarf or the clumsy Tabaxi. It’s all the same. A “clumsy” Tabaxi will still be no clumsier than an average human. To a Tabaxi, 10 Dex is clumsy. And if you want lower, roll. I can almost guarantee you’ll end up with one or more trash scores that you could plug into Dex and be thankful for the +2 where it is.
PS- If I rolled #7 on that I would totally slap on Magic Initiate (Wizard) and give it 2 Cantrips and a single 1st level spell, maybe swap the Handaxe for a Quarterstaff and Dagger.
The player isn’t an orc wizard, he is actually a warlock. His patron used his sense of being ostracised, his love of books and reading.and it is completely acceptable that a half orc might be born who is the runt and so needed to use his intelligence. You say that the character can be created anyway, how exactly, if we used point buy or fixed array his strength will always be a min of 10 because of the auto plus 2 he wanted a strength of 8, the best way of getting that is moving the +2 strength and he wanted to move it to intelligence, what to most would be a dump stat for a warlock, because that made sense to his backstory.
It is completely acceptable that a half orc might be born who is the runt and so needed to use his intelligence. If we used point buy or fixed array his strength will always be a min of 10 because of the auto plus 2 he wanted a strength of 8, the best way of getting that is moving the +2 strength and he wanted to move it to intelligence, what to most would be a dump stat for a warlock, because that made sense to his backstory.
You say that the character can be created anyway, how exactly?
Well, for one thing a 10 Str is a runt as far as Half-Orcs go. You want it to be smarter? Simple, put the 12 in Int.
And an even easier way to get a number lower than 8 to put in Str? Simple, roll your stats….
It is completely acceptable that a half orc might be born who is the runt and so needed to use his intelligence. If we used point buy or fixed array his strength will always be a min of 10 because of the auto plus 2 he wanted a strength of 8, the best way of getting that is moving the +2 strength and he wanted to move it to intelligence, what to most would be a dump stat for a warlock, because that made sense to his backstory.
You say that the character can be created anyway, how exactly?
Well, for one thing a 10 Str is a runt as far as Half-Orcs go. You want it to be smarter? Simple, put the 12 in Int.
And an even easier way to get a number lower than 8 to put in Str? Simple, roll your stats….
Ability scores: 1212910124
Oh hey, look at tha’ 👆, even with a +2 Str that 4 is only gonna be at most a 6. (Even runtier!) And if they even have average human luck (instead of my famously abysmal, terrible luck), they would actually have a couple good stats too. (Honestly, when 4d6 drop lowest gives a score of 4, that means I rolled three 1s and a 2 for crying out loud. Average would be 11, and my three highest rolls were three 12s. Everyone has better luck than me.)
I believe I have stated my position. Most of you have taken an opposite position. I know my position is intractable. I don't see any more point me posting about this particular topic. WOTC obviously agrees with your position, because they also recognize that easier sells more product under the current socio-political structure of the western world.
When the designers of the books coming out in November were promoting these new books by describing how players can plan a prom and deal with all idiotic fremeny stuff that children did in college and high school, or going to a fair where you toss rings at teleporting unicorn bunnies, or run through a module 1-8 without combat, or how orphans live in a treehouse on a Treant, with a displacer beast as a mascot (yeah, the writeup for that monster is that it is hunted to extinction in the Feywild, but who worries about canon), well, the WOTC has telegraphed loud and clear where they are taking the game. They own the rights, and D&D sales accounted for 22% of Hasbro's 2020 revenue. Tasha's is a horrible, horrible book, but nothing like what is coming.
Me sacrificing innocent electrons and photons to discuss it further with people that are convinced WOTC are the saviours of D&D is pointless.
Again, no-one is denying you your opinion, but people are just poinitng out that your opinion matters very little when it comes to the actual quality of the product. As has been stated before, just because you dislike something doesn't mean that it is objectively bad.
I do agree however that you are wasting energy by continuing your arguing.
It is completely acceptable that a half orc might be born who is the runt and so needed to use his intelligence. If we used point buy or fixed array his strength will always be a min of 10 because of the auto plus 2 he wanted a strength of 8, the best way of getting that is moving the +2 strength and he wanted to move it to intelligence, what to most would be a dump stat for a warlock, because that made sense to his backstory.
You say that the character can be created anyway, how exactly?
Well, for one thing a 10 Str is a runt as far as Half-Orcs go. You want it to be smarter? Simple, put the 12 in Int.
And an even easier way to get a number lower than 8 to put in Str? Simple, roll your stats….
Ability scores: 1212910124
Oh hey, look at tha’ 👆, even with a +2 Str that 4 is only gonna be at most a 6. (Even runtier!) And if they even have average human luck (instead of my famously abysmal, terrible luck), they would actually have a couple good stats too. (Honestly, when 4d6 drop lowest gives a score of 4, that means I rolled three 1s and a 2 for crying out loud. Average would be 11, and my three highest rolls were three 12s. Everyone has better luck than me.)
Mostly this is more an advertisement to not roll for stats...but I won't get on that soap box.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
a: No not really
b: Depends....Its easier than ever to make the character you want thanks to floating ASI. Some subclass stuff is wonky (Twlight/Peace) but the rest is not really an issue. Overall its easier at creation but about the same for the rest of the game.
c. For about 85% of the game I would say its the same difficulty as it was before if you have the same DM with the same practices. Creating a character is easier thats about it.
It didn't even make a difference for stats in my game, since I'd already eliminated set racial modifiers for stats and just gone with a '+2/+1/-1 wherever you want' set-up.
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
The new stuff really didn't change how my players have played even with them added....
They hardly used the stuff they had much less the extra stuff they got. Overall it mostly adds stuff like "you can swap this at this time" or "you get some more options"
Stuff like he barb extra movement when you rage happens litterally like 3 times a day and has so little impact on the game I mostly forget its there.
Besides the Twlight/Peace cleric stuff (which I agree needs changes) what else is breaking your game so much?
So you didn't even try it? Seems like its hard to know what its going to do until you actually give it a shot in play.
"superior" is what you let it be as a DM....pretty much the only thing I would adjust is the twilight/peace.
Otherwise letting a barbarian have another skill is going to break your game?
Honest question....what part did you think would make the game untenable for you?
[Edited to remove comment, the above response was made to me by mistake and my response to it was also a mistake, lol]
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
Exactly which part of the Path of the Beast are you struggling with as a DM?
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Also does the ASI really do much for your game?
Unless you roll for stats (which I don't do and actively suggest against) everyone will be on the exact same footing with stats even if they now have a 16 instead of a 15.
If you are talking about racial armor and such then you could simply say "as a dwarf wizard you did not feel the need to train in armor....pick another skill that would be applicable to your background" if you feel its going to impact the game too much.
Wholescale denying an entire book because of one or two problematic things is pretty extreme to me I guess.
There is one book that is essential to play D&D, that is the Dungeon Master's Guide. Everything else is optional. The Player's handbook contains options for your character, but the DM gets to decided which ones. The Monster Manual has Monsters in it, and each one is an option. The DMG has rules for creating new ones, so it's not essential. All the other books are Optional.
Tell me which options I have. I will decide if I consider playing in your game to be fun, and then I will invoke my Optional Rule, which is to find another (hopefully D&D) game.
(Note. I was going on about 100% RAW games, and this is the wrong thread for that, so I deleted the post I made, and had to re-create it. There was one person who hit the little up arrow, and I do appreciate it, so thank you.)
<Insert clever signature here>
I think we might have been replying to the wrong messages. My response was supposed to go to Dennis. :P
Oh whoops. Looks like I thought I was responding to Dennis too. Lol.
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
Honestly. I think if you explain to us what the problem you are having with the Barbarian Cleric we may be able to help.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
It sounded more to me like every encounter is geared towards trying to take down the barb, which forces the rogue into situations where their skills aren't as applicable and they take a bunch of damage. I mean, this is the guy that thinks everything = combat.
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
We've had this whole "the game is easier if the characters are more powerful" argument before, and it's still seems just as silly even focusing on Tasha's. For one, because while the subclasses in it are strong they're not stronger than some of their counterparts in Xanathar's or even the PHB (with the exception of the Peace cleric) - Path of the Beast doesn't outshine Ancestral Guardian or Totem Warrior, and the Twilight domain isn't really better than Forge, Light or Order (which was in the Ravnica book before it was repeated in Tasha's). Neither of these two represents power creep. For another, because the one subclass that does represent power creep still doesn't have a patch on some exploitative edge cases like the optimized sorlock or padlock or shapechanging into an Intellect Devourer or Moon Druids (Raging if you feel like it) for most of the levels that matter for a typical campaign or Sharpshooting Crossbow Experts or any of a number of other things (most of which don't require any books other than the core set), and even those are still nothing compared to the power of the all mighty DM. As DM I adjust encounters all the time to take party composition into account. Not necessarily to counter the more powerful ones either, doing this applies to all characters: giving everyone a chance to shine, giving everyone interesting challenges. And since I'm doing that anyway, taking a look at which characters might hog the spotlight and how isn't even extra effort.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Its almost as if Dungeons and Dragons is something that can be played by children in a more family-friendly setting and they want to appeal to that audience. The starter set is literally listed as for being ages 14 and up. Also, underlining the "..children did in college..." bit because......really?
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
The player isn’t an orc wizard, he is actually a warlock. His patron used his sense of being ostracised, his love of books and reading.and it is completely acceptable that a half orc might be born who is the runt and so needed to use his intelligence. You say that the character can be created anyway, how exactly, if we used point buy or fixed array his strength will always be a min of 10 because of the auto plus 2 he wanted a strength of 8, the best way of getting that is moving the +2 strength and he wanted to move it to intelligence, what to most would be a dump stat for a warlock, because that made sense to his backstory.
I was an avid D&D player in the late '80s and all throughout the '90s. WotC being the saviours of D&D should really not be in doubt.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Well, for one thing a 10 Str is a runt as far as Half-Orcs go. You want it to be smarter? Simple, put the 12 in Int.
And an even easier way to get a number lower than 8 to put in Str? Simple, roll your stats….
Ability scores: 7 13 11 13 11 14
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Oh hey, look at tha’ 👆, even with a +2 Str that 4 is only gonna be at most a 6. (Even runtier!) And if they even have average human luck (instead of my famously abysmal, terrible luck), they would actually have a couple good stats too. (Honestly, when 4d6 drop lowest gives a score of 4, that means I rolled three 1s and a 2 for crying out loud. Average would be 11, and my three highest rolls were three 12s. Everyone has better luck than me.)
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Again, no-one is denying you your opinion, but people are just poinitng out that your opinion matters very little when it comes to the actual quality of the product. As has been stated before, just because you dislike something doesn't mean that it is objectively bad.
I do agree however that you are wasting energy by continuing your arguing.
Mostly this is more an advertisement to not roll for stats...but I won't get on that soap box.