And the monk and ranger both need a lot more help being interesting than the warlock.
I disagree with this regarding Ranger. Hunter is maybe a little basic, but I think that Gloom Stalker, Fey Wanderer, Swarm Keeper, Horizon Walker, and Monster Slayer are all plenty interesting. And after Tasha's, the Ranger as a whole is in a good place. Particularly the new Beast Master.
Monks, I'm less familiar with. But I'd argue the subclasses are plenty interesting (Shadow, Mercy, Astral Self.) The question is whether or not they get the job done.
Yes, but how would you design a pact with a red dragon? What kinds of powers would it grant? As someone else has pointed out, genie warlocks cover a lot of the same mechanical ground - namely, additional elemental damage, resistance, flight, and elemental-themed spells. You'd have to go out of your way not to replicate features of an existing subclass and I think the result would be less than satisfying. Especially considering the opportunity cost of another class getting a subclass that is totally different from their current choices.
And the monk and ranger both need a lot more help being interesting than the warlock.
I don't disagree with this, but God-Like Multi-Dimensional Great Wyrm Dragons seems like a pretty good fit for potential Warlock Patrons.
The thing is that in comparison, Draconic sorcerers are defined by some pretty darn baseline dragon stuff. A draconic patron wouldn't be baseline anything. The Tiamats and Bahamuts of the pantheon are about as far from "regular" dragons as those are from your average human peasant.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Yeah it's a tricky balance. I think you could pull off dragon warlock, but a lot of the things I think of to give them would be too similar to draconic sorc. Though maybe that's just my lack of imagination.
Essentially free mage armor from dragon scales, choosing a dragon type and corresponding damage type to specialize in, eventually getting dragon wings, boost to social interactions with dragons, its own version of frightful presence.
About the only generic/bsaic dragon thing I can think of not touched upon is the breath weapon itself. I suppose you could try and build a warlock patron around that but I think giving it to the monk subclass fits better as monks are more often in the thick of things to make use of a medium range aoe breath weapon.
Maybe they could work by delving into more specific things, but a patron does need to have some flexibility. Bahamut or Tiamat would be too specific as patrons, as there generally need to be multiple enttities a patron subclass could come from.
I'm not saying it can't be done, but I do think it would be harder to come up with a general dragon patron warlock subclass that doesn't step too much on the toes of sorcerer. But maybe my lack of experience with playing warlocks has me lacking in imagination if others have more fleshed out ideas for it.
We do have celestial warlock and divine soul sorcerer for example, so it's not like common themes can't exist between sorc and warlock subclasses. I just struggle to personally think of what I'd do with a generic dragon patron that would stand out from the sorcerer subclass personally. Which may just be on me.
And the monk and ranger both need a lot more help being interesting than the warlock.
I don't disagree with this, but God-Like Multi-Dimensional Great Wyrm Dragons seems like a pretty good fit for potential Warlock Patrons.
The thing is that in comparison, Draconic sorcerers are defined by some pretty darn baseline dragon stuff. A draconic patron wouldn't be baseline anything. The Tiamats and Bahamuts of the pantheon are about as far from "regular" dragons as those are from your average human peasant.
I would venture a guess that the Great Wyrms that are being introduced in the upcoming book are more on par with Arch Fey, Great Old Ones, and Noble Genie. Pacts with Tiamat or Bahamut (aka actual Gods) would certainly fall under Fiend or Celestial and not Dragons.
Yeah it's a tricky balance. I think you could pull off dragon warlock, but a lot of the things I think of to give them would be too similar to draconic sorc. Though maybe that's just my lack of imagination.
<snip>
We do have celestial warlock and divine soul sorcerer for example, so it's not like common themes can't exist between sorc and warlock subclasses. I just struggle to personally think of what I'd do with a generic dragon patron that would stand out from the sorcerer subclass personally. Which may just be on me.
I agree that making a Dragon Patron would require some effort but that is what WotC gets paid to do. However, stepping on the toes of Draconic Sorcerer would be the least of my concerns because the PHB Sorcerer subclasses are pretty terrible in my opinion and should be completely re written.
Regardless, my original point was not that there should be a Draconic Patron, just that saying that Dragons are too diverse is a lame excuse and that Great Wyrm Dragons seem like a good fit for a Patron from strictly a lore perspective.
Pacts with Tiamat or Bahamut (aka actual Gods) would certainly fall under Fiend or Celestial and not Dragons.
I'll go one further and add that considering Tiamat and Bahamut are both gods, Warlock isn't the appropriate class for them, Cleric is. Trying to fit them in as Warlock Patrons is a bit beyond what the class was intended, you might was well be trying to make Patrons of Corellon and Lolth.
(Although, now that the hamster wheel in my brain is spinning: hmmm, Dragon Domain Cleric...)
Pacts with Tiamat or Bahamut (aka actual Gods) would certainly fall under Fiend or Celestial and not Dragons.
I'll go one further and add that considering Tiamat and Bahamut are both gods, Warlock isn't the appropriate class for them, Cleric is. Trying to fit them in as Warlock Patrons is a bit beyond what the class was intended, you might was well be trying to make Patrons of Corellon and Lolth.
(Although, now that the hamster wheel in my brain is spinning: hmmm, Dragon Domain Cleric...)
"Put that thing back where it came from, or so help me" - Mike Wazowski
The Clerics have enough subclasses
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Four-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
Pacts with Tiamat or Bahamut (aka actual Gods) would certainly fall under Fiend or Celestial and not Dragons.
I'll go one further and add that considering Tiamat and Bahamut are both gods, Warlock isn't the appropriate class for them, Cleric is. Trying to fit them in as Warlock Patrons is a bit beyond what the class was intended, you might was well be trying to make Patrons of Corellon and Lolth.
(Although, now that the hamster wheel in my brain is spinning: hmmm, Dragon Domain Cleric...)
"Put that thing back where it came from, or so help me" - Mike Wazowski
The Clerics have enough subclasses
Do they have all the subclasses? No, they don't. They obviously need more, then ;)
(They do need some more subclasses, like an Ocean Domain, Frost Domain, Song Domain, Air Domain, and an Earth Domain.)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
And the monk and ranger both need a lot more help being interesting than the warlock.
I don't disagree with this, but God-Like Multi-Dimensional Great Wyrm Dragons seems like a pretty good fit for potential Warlock Patrons.
The thing is that in comparison, Draconic sorcerers are defined by some pretty darn baseline dragon stuff. A draconic patron wouldn't be baseline anything. The Tiamats and Bahamuts of the pantheon are about as far from "regular" dragons as those are from your average human peasant.
I would venture a guess that the Great Wyrms that are being introduced in the upcoming book are more on par with Arch Fey, Great Old Ones, and Noble Genie. Pacts with Tiamat or Bahamut (aka actual Gods) would certainly fall under Fiend or Celestial and not Dragons.
Not disagreeing, but dragons that can bestow magical powers via a pact aren't exactly what comes to mind from just the word "dragon". To me, draconic entities with that kind of power have transcended being dragons and are arguably defined as much by what sets them apart than by what they have in common with their lesser kin.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I agree that the dragons are too diverse thing wouldn't be an issue. That doesn't stop dragonblood sorc from picking one of the types, or from monks being able to pretty freely choose between any of the five on the fly as an example. I could see an ancient dragon being powerful enough to make a warlock.
Though, while I wouldn't say no to more dragon subclasses, I don't think I'd trade either of the two we're getting here for warlock, especially not the dragon monk.
And the monk and ranger both need a lot more help being interesting than the warlock.
I don't disagree with this, but God-Like Multi-Dimensional Great Wyrm Dragons seems like a pretty good fit for potential Warlock Patrons.
The thing is that in comparison, Draconic sorcerers are defined by some pretty darn baseline dragon stuff. A draconic patron wouldn't be baseline anything. The Tiamats and Bahamuts of the pantheon are about as far from "regular" dragons as those are from your average human peasant.
I would venture a guess that the Great Wyrms that are being introduced in the upcoming book are more on par with Arch Fey, Great Old Ones, and Noble Genie. Pacts with Tiamat or Bahamut (aka actual Gods) would certainly fall under Fiend or Celestial and not Dragons.
Not disagreeing, but dragons that can bestow magical powers via a pact aren't exactly what comes to mind from just the word "dragon". To me, draconic entities with that kind of power have transcended being dragons and are arguably defined as much by what sets them apart than by what they have in common with their lesser kin.
You could be right, but we will have to wait a little longer to see the Great Wyrm Dragons and find out what those differences might be.
Yes, but how would you design a pact with a red dragon? What kinds of powers would it grant? As someone else has pointed out, genie warlocks cover a lot of the same mechanical ground - namely, additional elemental damage, resistance, flight, and elemental-themed spells. You'd have to go out of your way not to replicate features of an existing subclass and I think the result would be less than satisfying. Especially considering the opportunity cost of another class getting a subclass that is totally different from their current choices.
We'd need to know how Greatwyrms work, but bear in mind Genielocks already broke the mold on it being "ok" to deeply screw this up and hope no-one will notice - for example, a Genielock with a Marid patron is granted bonus cold damage, even though Marids have literally 0 sources of cold damage in their statblock. Marids do have the cold resistance they grant a Genielock - but water elementals are particularly weak to cold. The damage type most consistently resisted by "watery" elementals is acid (followed by poison - I think Marids are the only watery elementals not resistant or immune to poison), and the damage type they usually inflict is bludgeoning. It's pretty bizarre and out of left field that Marids grant Genielocks cold powers.
Once we have a better understanding of Greatwyrms, it'll be more reasonable to discuss what features the "missing" Dragonlock subclass should grant.
Well, there are previews for Fizban's Treasury of Dragons now. The Metallic Dragonborn, which got a minor nerf, but is still better than the PHB Dragonborn, the Drakewarden, which got some major buffs (but still doesn't have an automatic known spell table), and the Moonstone Dragon, which surprisingly doesn't have a breath weapon, but does have a ton of lair options.
Any thoughts?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
The Drakewarden looks so good!!!! Sucks that it doesn't get an expanded spell list, but w/e. You can mount your drake at 7th level! And it lasts indefinitely!!!
The Drakewarden looks so good!!!! Sucks that it doesn't get an expanded spell list, but w/e. You can mount your drake at 7th level! And it lasts indefinitely!!!
So good!!!!
If I were the person that made the Drakewarden, I would give it the expanded spell list of Absorb Elements, Dragon's Breath, Protection from Energy, Elemental Bane, and Summon Draconic Spirit (UA, 5th level spell).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
And the monk and ranger both need a lot more help being interesting than the warlock.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
I don't disagree with this, but God-Like Multi-Dimensional Great Wyrm Dragons seems like a pretty good fit for potential Warlock Patrons.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
I disagree with this regarding Ranger. Hunter is maybe a little basic, but I think that Gloom Stalker, Fey Wanderer, Swarm Keeper, Horizon Walker, and Monster Slayer are all plenty interesting. And after Tasha's, the Ranger as a whole is in a good place. Particularly the new Beast Master.
Monks, I'm less familiar with. But I'd argue the subclasses are plenty interesting (Shadow, Mercy, Astral Self.) The question is whether or not they get the job done.
Yes, but how would you design a pact with a red dragon? What kinds of powers would it grant? As someone else has pointed out, genie warlocks cover a lot of the same mechanical ground - namely, additional elemental damage, resistance, flight, and elemental-themed spells. You'd have to go out of your way not to replicate features of an existing subclass and I think the result would be less than satisfying. Especially considering the opportunity cost of another class getting a subclass that is totally different from their current choices.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
The thing is that in comparison, Draconic sorcerers are defined by some pretty darn baseline dragon stuff. A draconic patron wouldn't be baseline anything. The Tiamats and Bahamuts of the pantheon are about as far from "regular" dragons as those are from your average human peasant.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Yeah it's a tricky balance. I think you could pull off dragon warlock, but a lot of the things I think of to give them would be too similar to draconic sorc. Though maybe that's just my lack of imagination.
Essentially free mage armor from dragon scales, choosing a dragon type and corresponding damage type to specialize in, eventually getting dragon wings, boost to social interactions with dragons, its own version of frightful presence.
About the only generic/bsaic dragon thing I can think of not touched upon is the breath weapon itself. I suppose you could try and build a warlock patron around that but I think giving it to the monk subclass fits better as monks are more often in the thick of things to make use of a medium range aoe breath weapon.
Maybe they could work by delving into more specific things, but a patron does need to have some flexibility. Bahamut or Tiamat would be too specific as patrons, as there generally need to be multiple enttities a patron subclass could come from.
I'm not saying it can't be done, but I do think it would be harder to come up with a general dragon patron warlock subclass that doesn't step too much on the toes of sorcerer. But maybe my lack of experience with playing warlocks has me lacking in imagination if others have more fleshed out ideas for it.
We do have celestial warlock and divine soul sorcerer for example, so it's not like common themes can't exist between sorc and warlock subclasses. I just struggle to personally think of what I'd do with a generic dragon patron that would stand out from the sorcerer subclass personally. Which may just be on me.
I would venture a guess that the Great Wyrms that are being introduced in the upcoming book are more on par with Arch Fey, Great Old Ones, and Noble Genie. Pacts with Tiamat or Bahamut (aka actual Gods) would certainly fall under Fiend or Celestial and not Dragons.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
I agree that making a Dragon Patron would require some effort but that is what WotC gets paid to do. However, stepping on the toes of Draconic Sorcerer would be the least of my concerns because the PHB Sorcerer subclasses are pretty terrible in my opinion and should be completely re written.
Regardless, my original point was not that there should be a Draconic Patron, just that saying that Dragons are too diverse is a lame excuse and that Great Wyrm Dragons seem like a good fit for a Patron from strictly a lore perspective.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
I'll go one further and add that considering Tiamat and Bahamut are both gods, Warlock isn't the appropriate class for them, Cleric is. Trying to fit them in as Warlock Patrons is a bit beyond what the class was intended, you might was well be trying to make Patrons of Corellon and Lolth.
(Although, now that the hamster wheel in my brain is spinning: hmmm, Dragon Domain Cleric...)
"Put that thing back where it came from, or so help me" - Mike Wazowski
The Clerics have enough subclasses
Four-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
Do they have all the subclasses? No, they don't. They obviously need more, then ;)
(They do need some more subclasses, like an Ocean Domain, Frost Domain, Song Domain, Air Domain, and an Earth Domain.)
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Not disagreeing, but dragons that can bestow magical powers via a pact aren't exactly what comes to mind from just the word "dragon". To me, draconic entities with that kind of power have transcended being dragons and are arguably defined as much by what sets them apart than by what they have in common with their lesser kin.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I agree that the dragons are too diverse thing wouldn't be an issue. That doesn't stop dragonblood sorc from picking one of the types, or from monks being able to pretty freely choose between any of the five on the fly as an example. I could see an ancient dragon being powerful enough to make a warlock.
Though, while I wouldn't say no to more dragon subclasses, I don't think I'd trade either of the two we're getting here for warlock, especially not the dragon monk.
You could be right, but we will have to wait a little longer to see the Great Wyrm Dragons and find out what those differences might be.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
We'd need to know how Greatwyrms work, but bear in mind Genielocks already broke the mold on it being "ok" to deeply screw this up and hope no-one will notice - for example, a Genielock with a Marid patron is granted bonus cold damage, even though Marids have literally 0 sources of cold damage in their statblock. Marids do have the cold resistance they grant a Genielock - but water elementals are particularly weak to cold. The damage type most consistently resisted by "watery" elementals is acid (followed by poison - I think Marids are the only watery elementals not resistant or immune to poison), and the damage type they usually inflict is bludgeoning. It's pretty bizarre and out of left field that Marids grant Genielocks cold powers.
Once we have a better understanding of Greatwyrms, it'll be more reasonable to discuss what features the "missing" Dragonlock subclass should grant.
Well, there are previews for Fizban's Treasury of Dragons now. The Metallic Dragonborn, which got a minor nerf, but is still better than the PHB Dragonborn, the Drakewarden, which got some major buffs (but still doesn't have an automatic known spell table), and the Moonstone Dragon, which surprisingly doesn't have a breath weapon, but does have a ton of lair options.
Any thoughts?
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
The Drakewarden looks so good!!!! Sucks that it doesn't get an expanded spell list, but w/e. You can mount your drake at 7th level! And it lasts indefinitely!!!
So good!!!!
I hope that there is more to the Moonstone Dragon than what has been shown. Has is, it seems kind of defenseless outside of it's lair
The rest looks pretty good to me.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Very excited for this to finally arrive.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
If I were the person that made the Drakewarden, I would give it the expanded spell list of Absorb Elements, Dragon's Breath, Protection from Energy, Elemental Bane, and Summon Draconic Spirit (UA, 5th level spell).
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms