i think the fact that sorcerers dont have a gish subclass yet is really weird they are the casters with magic in their blood they should of had a bladesinger style class before wizard
i think the fact that sorcerers dont have a gish subclass yet is really weird they are the casters with magic in their blood they should of had a bladesinger style class before wizard
It kinda makes sense if you think about it; their subclasses are about manifesting stronger natural powers, as opposed to developing on established techniques. I wouldn't be opposed to it, but honestly most gish classes are pretty meh anyways so they're not missing out on much.
My hot take is that more classes should get access to magic, or at least cantrips. Most DND worlds are so filled with magic that it makes up the basis of a lot of things, and if a level 1 Wizard who only learnt from books and has had no adventuring experience can commit a couple cantrips to memory, it makes perfect sense that a Level 10 Battle Master Fighter, who has most likely had tonnes of exposure to magic and how it works to also have picked up a few cantrips. If cantrips are so easy that they can be memorised, I don't see why learning one couldn't be treated as a downtime activity over the course of a couple weeks. I'm sure that even the thickest of Barbarians could learn the words and gestures to something as simple as Firebolt if they tried to learn it every long rest under the tutorage of a wizard. That in itself is so much better than multiclassing into a caster class for only one or two levels just to get magic. It builds on the character development, gives the character something to do in a long rest (which often go under utilised), and doesn't feel as out of place as a multiclass would just because the player feels like a using a couple spells. Also, magic is one of the strongest things in the game, especially at higher levels, so it being a common thing any class could pick up, with other classes being specialised would make much more sense and would make a more fun game experience.
My hot take is that tieflings are not that attractive or interesting and are greatly overrepresented the art and general marketing of D&D and adjacent products like Baldur's Gate. I just don't get the appeal.
My hot take is that tieflings are not that attractive or interesting and are greatly overrepresented the art and general marketing of D&D and adjacent products like Baldur's Gate. I just don't get the appeal.
It could be rebound or snapback from satanic panic. Back when people thought D&D was demonic, now you can play one!
And you know it gives the finger to that whole anti-D&D culture by doing what they were afraid it was doing. HA!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
All other classes are now folded into subclasses and/or converted to backgrounds. Bard isn't a class. Singing, dancing, or playing instruments while knowing trivia isn't a class, it's a hobby your adventurer can dabble in.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The mongoose blew out its candle and was asleep in bed before the room went dark." —Llanowar fable
Singing, dancing, or playing instruments while knowing trivia isn't a class, it's a hobby your adventurer can dabble in.
You could easily apply this flippant logic to most classes - getting angry isn't a class, it's just a problem your fighter has to resolve (barbarian)....etc. Not that I'm necessarily disagreeing with you, but just saying that without more concrete reasons nobody will really be swayed.
Though again, I guess this is all about hot takes so you've got the right idea lol.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I know what you're thinking: "In that flurry of blows, did he use all his ki points, or save one?" Well, are ya feeling lucky, punk?
You could easily apply this flippant logic to most classes - getting angry isn't a class, it's just a problem your fighter has to resolve (barbarian)....etc. Not that I'm necessarily disagreeing with you, but just saying that without more concrete reasons nobody will really be swayed.
Though again, I guess this is all about hot takes so you've got the right idea lol.
I see your point. But "rage" is a terrible comparison. Rage is more than "getting angry." The feature has its origins in both Celtic and Nordic cultures.
Among the Vikings the berserkers who entered this state were said to be in a trance. They weren't just "getting angry." Among the Celts the demigod Cú Chulainn was said to mutate when he entered a battle frenzy and the character of Sláine inspired by this demigod draws upon the power of the goddess Danu to similarly transform. I've known players over the years who would skin the feature so that its effects mirrored that transformation.
Rage is not a mundane feature. That much is even suggested in the PHB: "communion with fierce animal spirits"?
Consider the Gauls as Goscinny imagined them. They drink a potion concocted by the village's druid that grants them superhuman strength to enable them to get the better of the Romans. I would argue that is more an example of what a type of "rage" common to a community might look like than one of simply drinking a potion of giant strength.
The bard also has its origin in these cultures and others. A bard was not just anyone who could sing and dance. Bards occupied a specific role in their cultures. And that's basically what the class system is all about. Roles.
Though again, I guess this is all about hot takes so you've got the right idea lol.
That was the plan, yes.
But in a mechanical level, if I were building from the beginning, Bard wouldn't be a Class. It is a dabbler type of character and that's why we have multi-classing rules. Dabble away and get some music lessons while you're at it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The mongoose blew out its candle and was asleep in bed before the room went dark." —Llanowar fable
All other classes are now folded into subclasses and/or converted to backgrounds. Bard isn't a class. Singing, dancing, or playing instruments while knowing trivia isn't a class, it's a hobby your adventurer can dabble in.
That's a very reductive and inaccurate description of what a Bard is; by definition having Expertise means they're not "dabblers", and you're ignoring the entire "use music to cast spells" aspect. A Bard is at least as learned as a Wizard going by the material (note that Bards have Colleges to go with a Wizard's Schools), they just double majored rather than doubling down on one topic. Or possibly double major undergrad vs single major graduate is a better analogy, but the point is that both classes are "knowledge is power", it's just a difference between depth and breadth.
It could be rebound or snapback from satanic panic. Back when people thought D&D was demonic, now you can play one!
And you know it gives the finger to that whole anti-D&D culture by doing what they were afraid it was doing. HA!
The tiefling first became a playable race in 2nd Edition. The edition of the game that removed mention of "devils" and "demons" and replaced these words with words thought to be more digestible so they wouldn't offend the sensibilities of those who led the Satanic panic. The tiefling has never been a middle finger to such people. It was a safe addition then.
It could be rebound or snapback from satanic panic. Back when people thought D&D was demonic, now you can play one!
And you know it gives the finger to that whole anti-D&D culture by doing what they were afraid it was doing. HA!
The tiefling first became a playable race in 2nd Edition. The edition of the game that removed mention of "devils" and "demons" and replaced these words with words thought to be more digestible so they wouldn't offend the sensibilities of those who led the Satanic panic. The tiefling has never been a middle finger to such people. It was a safe addition then.
Yeah like calling the red or blue or purple skinned, horned, and barbed tailed folk tieflings. It was the mid/late 90s and the panic was reduced to a murmur by then.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
But in a mechanical level, if I were building from the beginning, Bard wouldn't be a Class. It is a dabbler type of character and that's why we have multi-classing rules. Dabble away and get some music lessons while you're at it.
Historical bards weren't just "hobbyists" who had "taken music lessons." They occupied important roles in their respective societies. Many weren't even musicians. (You seem to be confusing the word "bard" with the word "minstrel.")
Consider how C&C handles the class. Bards in C&C aren't even casters. They're more like skalds. They're still distinct from regular fighters. And just as much as barbarians and paladins.
If people want to play bards as jacks-of-all-trades who happen to play musical instruments that's their right. I couldn't care less. Those of us who give bards a more specific role in our homebrew settings should not be deprived of the class just because some play them as "wizard-thief-fighters" and that bothers you.
But in a mechanical level, if I were building from the beginning, Bard wouldn't be a Class. It is a dabbler type of character and that's why we have multi-classing rules. Dabble away and get some music lessons while you're at it.
Historical bards weren't just "hobbyists" who had "taken music lessons." They occupied important roles in their respective societies. Many weren't even musicians. (You seem to be confusing the word "bard" with the word "minstrel.")
That's actually a mistake that TSR made about 40 years ago when bards were first added to the game.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
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.
Yeah like calling the red or blue or purple skinned, horned, and barbed tailed folk tieflings. It was the mid/late 90s and the panic was reduced to a murmur by then.
Planescape came out in 1994. That is the same year in which the West Memphis Three were wrongly convicted in a trial that arguably remains America's most egregious example of Satanic panic hysteria. And that hysteria wouldn't wane for a good while yet. I know. Because I grew up in a small town in which anyone who played the game or listened to heavy metal or had even a passing interest in ceremonial magic was suspected of devil-worship. That sentiment stretched well into the 1990s.
My point is the introduction of the race clearly wasn't a middle finger to those TSR had just spent an entire edition desperately trying to appease. The tiefling is and has always been about as "subversive" as a Cthulhu plushie. Even the first illustrations of tieflings—as beautifully as they might have been done by DiTerlizzi—were cute and were safe. Compare that to some of the illustrations of devils and of other fiends that appeared in 1st Edition monster manuals. To the content of a third-party book at the time containing summoning rituals. A middle finger would have been telling those brandishing torches and pitchforks to go to Hell and ignoring the sensationalist nonsense in the media at the time. There is nothing "brave" about the introduction of the tiefling. Even less so had that hysteria been "reduced to a murmur by then." That's like giving the middle finger to someone who has turned their back on you and walked away.
That's actually a mistake that TSR made about 40 years ago when bards were first added to the game.
Yes. TSR originally conceived of them of as a combination of three classes: wizard-thief-fighter. And they put lutes in their hands. Like I said: if people want to play them as that that's their right. Half the fun of the game is they needn't.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
i think the fact that sorcerers dont have a gish subclass yet is really weird they are the casters with magic in their blood they should of had a bladesinger style class before wizard
It kinda makes sense if you think about it; their subclasses are about manifesting stronger natural powers, as opposed to developing on established techniques. I wouldn't be opposed to it, but honestly most gish classes are pretty meh anyways so they're not missing out on much.
My hot take is that more classes should get access to magic, or at least cantrips. Most DND worlds are so filled with magic that it makes up the basis of a lot of things, and if a level 1 Wizard who only learnt from books and has had no adventuring experience can commit a couple cantrips to memory, it makes perfect sense that a Level 10 Battle Master Fighter, who has most likely had tonnes of exposure to magic and how it works to also have picked up a few cantrips. If cantrips are so easy that they can be memorised, I don't see why learning one couldn't be treated as a downtime activity over the course of a couple weeks. I'm sure that even the thickest of Barbarians could learn the words and gestures to something as simple as Firebolt if they tried to learn it every long rest under the tutorage of a wizard. That in itself is so much better than multiclassing into a caster class for only one or two levels just to get magic. It builds on the character development, gives the character something to do in a long rest (which often go under utilised), and doesn't feel as out of place as a multiclass would just because the player feels like a using a couple spells. Also, magic is one of the strongest things in the game, especially at higher levels, so it being a common thing any class could pick up, with other classes being specialised would make much more sense and would make a more fun game experience.
Xaul Lackluster: Half-Orc Fathomless Warlock: Warlock Dragon Heist
Borvnir Chelvnich: Black Dragonborn Barbarian: Dragons of Stormwreck Isle
Pushover Gerilwitz: Tiefling Wizard: Acquisitions Incorporated
Callow Sunken-Eyes: Goliath Arctic Druid: We Are Modron
DMing The 100 Dungeons of the Blood Archivist , The Hunt for the Balowang and Surviving Tempest City!
Killer Queen has already extended this signature, though not by much!
That's what feats that give you cantrips are for.
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.
My hot take is that tieflings are not that attractive or interesting and are greatly overrepresented the art and general marketing of D&D and adjacent products like Baldur's Gate. I just don't get the appeal.
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
It could be rebound or snapback from satanic panic. Back when people thought D&D was demonic, now you can play one!
And you know it gives the finger to that whole anti-D&D culture by doing what they were afraid it was doing. HA!
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
There is no such thing as a Paladin.
Paladins are actually Warlocks pretending that they are a holy warrior.
How do you explain the armor?
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
Class breakdown and revolving stat should be:
Stabby Friends - Fighter (Str), Rogue (Dex), Barbarian (Con), Ranger (Wisdom), Paladin (Charisma), [Int intentionally missing]
Casty Friends - Wizard (Int), Cleric (Wisdom), Warlock (Cha), Sorcerer (Con), Artificer (Dex), [Str intentionally missing]
All other classes are now folded into subclasses and/or converted to backgrounds. Bard isn't a class. Singing, dancing, or playing instruments while knowing trivia isn't a class, it's a hobby your adventurer can dabble in.
Maybe warlocks are just paladins who are still angsty teens.
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.
You could easily apply this flippant logic to most classes - getting angry isn't a class, it's just a problem your fighter has to resolve (barbarian)....etc. Not that I'm necessarily disagreeing with you, but just saying that without more concrete reasons nobody will really be swayed.
Though again, I guess this is all about hot takes so you've got the right idea lol.
I know what you're thinking: "In that flurry of blows, did he use all his ki points, or save one?" Well, are ya feeling lucky, punk?
I see your point. But "rage" is a terrible comparison. Rage is more than "getting angry." The feature has its origins in both Celtic and Nordic cultures.
Among the Vikings the berserkers who entered this state were said to be in a trance. They weren't just "getting angry." Among the Celts the demigod Cú Chulainn was said to mutate when he entered a battle frenzy and the character of Sláine inspired by this demigod draws upon the power of the goddess Danu to similarly transform. I've known players over the years who would skin the feature so that its effects mirrored that transformation.
Rage is not a mundane feature. That much is even suggested in the PHB: "communion with fierce animal spirits"?
Consider the Gauls as Goscinny imagined them. They drink a potion concocted by the village's druid that grants them superhuman strength to enable them to get the better of the Romans. I would argue that is more an example of what a type of "rage" common to a community might look like than one of simply drinking a potion of giant strength.
The bard also has its origin in these cultures and others. A bard was not just anyone who could sing and dance. Bards occupied a specific role in their cultures. And that's basically what the class system is all about. Roles.
That was the plan, yes.
But in a mechanical level, if I were building from the beginning, Bard wouldn't be a Class. It is a dabbler type of character and that's why we have multi-classing rules. Dabble away and get some music lessons while you're at it.
That's a very reductive and inaccurate description of what a Bard is; by definition having Expertise means they're not "dabblers", and you're ignoring the entire "use music to cast spells" aspect. A Bard is at least as learned as a Wizard going by the material (note that Bards have Colleges to go with a Wizard's Schools), they just double majored rather than doubling down on one topic. Or possibly double major undergrad vs single major graduate is a better analogy, but the point is that both classes are "knowledge is power", it's just a difference between depth and breadth.
The tiefling first became a playable race in 2nd Edition. The edition of the game that removed mention of "devils" and "demons" and replaced these words with words thought to be more digestible so they wouldn't offend the sensibilities of those who led the Satanic panic. The tiefling has never been a middle finger to such people. It was a safe addition then.
Yeah like calling the red or blue or purple skinned, horned, and barbed tailed folk tieflings. It was the mid/late 90s and the panic was reduced to a murmur by then.
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
Historical bards weren't just "hobbyists" who had "taken music lessons." They occupied important roles in their respective societies. Many weren't even musicians. (You seem to be confusing the word "bard" with the word "minstrel.")
Consider how C&C handles the class. Bards in C&C aren't even casters. They're more like skalds. They're still distinct from regular fighters. And just as much as barbarians and paladins.
If people want to play bards as jacks-of-all-trades who happen to play musical instruments that's their right. I couldn't care less. Those of us who give bards a more specific role in our homebrew settings should not be deprived of the class just because some play them as "wizard-thief-fighters" and that bothers you.
That's actually a mistake that TSR made about 40 years ago when bards were first added to the game.
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.
Planescape came out in 1994. That is the same year in which the West Memphis Three were wrongly convicted in a trial that arguably remains America's most egregious example of Satanic panic hysteria. And that hysteria wouldn't wane for a good while yet. I know. Because I grew up in a small town in which anyone who played the game or listened to heavy metal or had even a passing interest in ceremonial magic was suspected of devil-worship. That sentiment stretched well into the 1990s.
My point is the introduction of the race clearly wasn't a middle finger to those TSR had just spent an entire edition desperately trying to appease. The tiefling is and has always been about as "subversive" as a Cthulhu plushie. Even the first illustrations of tieflings—as beautifully as they might have been done by DiTerlizzi—were cute and were safe. Compare that to some of the illustrations of devils and of other fiends that appeared in 1st Edition monster manuals. To the content of a third-party book at the time containing summoning rituals. A middle finger would have been telling those brandishing torches and pitchforks to go to Hell and ignoring the sensationalist nonsense in the media at the time. There is nothing "brave" about the introduction of the tiefling. Even less so had that hysteria been "reduced to a murmur by then." That's like giving the middle finger to someone who has turned their back on you and walked away.
Yes. TSR originally conceived of them of as a combination of three classes: wizard-thief-fighter. And they put lutes in their hands. Like I said: if people want to play them as that that's their right. Half the fun of the game is they needn't.