Honestly dnd needs to release a necromancy book like in 3.5 (Libris Mortis) and elaborate the science and morals of necromancy and undead.
They're never going to dictate the morals of necromancy or any other substantial body of lore regarding it as a universal baseline in 5e. Honestly, sometimes I wonder if we're even going to get another substantial setting book for anything larger than a moderate community like Strixhaven. For better or worse they seem to be getting very hands off that kind of worldbuilding in official products.
I leave every single one of these videos wanting to make new characters, but I'm going ALL IN on Abjuration wizards. What do you think about the new changes?
I've got a concept with the background feats for an Acolyte Abjuration Wizard who has to keep explaining to people that while yes he's a magic user associated with X church who can cast Cure Wounds, he's not a Cleric or a fully ordained priest.
To be fair, if the acolyte has the suspected feat of magic initiate cleric than the wizard can have cure wounds as part of his spells available.
Honestly dnd needs to release a necromancy book like in 3.5 (Libris Mortis) and elaborate the science and morals of necromancy and undead.
Honestly D&D is probably happy leaving necromancy and undead in the 'villains to be killed without qualms or remorse' category. A follow-up to VRGtR that includes more 'dark' PC options is possible but doesn't seem like it would be super high priority.
Honestly dnd needs to release a necromancy book like in 3.5 (Libris Mortis) and elaborate the science and morals of necromancy and undead.
Honestly D&D is probably happy leaving necromancy and undead in the 'villains to be killed without qualms or remorse' category. A follow-up to VRGtR that includes more 'dark' PC options is possible but doesn't seem like it would be super high priority.
I truly don't buy that - Necromancer nearly made it into the PHB, to the point that Crawford was openly talking about in the UA videos - and while we don't know for sure why it fell short, my bet is on the "opposites" theming they were going for with Wizard i.e. Offense/Defense/Truth/Lies ultimately beating it out.
Honestly dnd needs to release a necromancy book like in 3.5 (Libris Mortis) and elaborate the science and morals of necromancy and undead.
Honestly D&D is probably happy leaving necromancy and undead in the 'villains to be killed without qualms or remorse' category. A follow-up to VRGtR that includes more 'dark' PC options is possible but doesn't seem like it would be super high priority.
I truly don't buy that - Necromancer nearly made it into the PHB, to the point that Crawford was openly talking about in the UA videos - and while we don't know for sure why it fell short, my bet is on the "opposites" theming they were going for with Wizard i.e. Offense/Defense/Truth/Lies ultimately beating it out.
Oh yeah, they're definitely gonna want to hit all the schools as subclasses eventually. I still say they need to put Necromancer in the DMG alongside Oathbreaker and Death Cleric or whatever people want to call them now because those are iconic villain archetypes and the printed NPC stat blocks anymore are garbage for anything that's supposed to interact with the setting outside of a single combat encounter.
Honestly dnd needs to release a necromancy book like in 3.5 (Libris Mortis) and elaborate the science and morals of necromancy and undead.
Honestly D&D is probably happy leaving necromancy and undead in the 'villains to be killed without qualms or remorse' category. A follow-up to VRGtR that includes more 'dark' PC options is possible but doesn't seem like it would be super high priority.
I truly don't buy that - Necromancer nearly made it into the PHB, to the point that Crawford was openly talking about in the UA videos - and while we don't know for sure why it fell short, my bet is on the "opposites" theming they were going for with Wizard i.e. Offense/Defense/Truth/Lies ultimately beating it out.
I think I remember Jeremy Crawford saying, in the video that introduced the first Druid playtest, that they were looking at using standardised stat blocks for the Necromancer’s summons/creates Undead. The use of generic stat blocks for Wildshape got a lot of negative feedback, so that might have prompted them to choose a less potentially contentious subclass for the PHB and give the Necromancer a bit more thinking time.
Oh yeah, they're definitely gonna want to hit all the schools as subclasses eventually. I still say they need to put Necromancer in the DMG alongside Oathbreaker and Death Cleric or whatever people want to call them now because those are iconic villain archetypes and the printed NPC stat blocks anymore are garbage for anything that's supposed to interact with the setting outside of a single combat encounter.
They appear to see all the subclasses as heroes, judging by the Warlock video where Crawford gently chided Kenreck about the Great Old One and Celestial: "It's not a PvP game. They're friends."
(Be reeeal interesting to learn where he sees Oathbreaker fitting into that though 😝)
Honestly dnd needs to release a necromancy book like in 3.5 (Libris Mortis) and elaborate the science and morals of necromancy and undead.
Honestly D&D is probably happy leaving necromancy and undead in the 'villains to be killed without qualms or remorse' category. A follow-up to VRGtR that includes more 'dark' PC options is possible but doesn't seem like it would be super high priority.
I truly don't buy that - Necromancer nearly made it into the PHB, to the point that Crawford was openly talking about in the UA videos - and while we don't know for sure why it fell short, my bet is on the "opposites" theming they were going for with Wizard i.e. Offense/Defense/Truth/Lies ultimately beating it out.
I think I remember Jeremy Crawford saying, in the video that introduced the first Druid playtest, that they were looking at using standardised stat blocks for the Necromancer’s summons/creates Undead. The use of generic stat blocks for Wildshape got a lot of negative feedback, so that might have prompted them to choose a less potentially contentious subclass for the PHB and give the Necromancer a bit more thinking time.
It's not like it's that hard to use Animate Dead/Create Undead; literally all of the 6 stat block options are in the Basic Rules so literally anyone with an internet connection can look up and print, download, or copy down the stats, and stopping a PC from making a giant army with them is just a matter of the DM setting some reasonable boundaries on play. Plus the spells are probably going to appear in the PHB anyways; I don't recall seeing them butchered "modified" alongside the Conjure spells.
One thing I could see them doing is putting out a book with a large number of subclasses, probably intended to replace XGTE/TCOE (similar to MMM replacing VGTM and MTOF). Some things might go away as being low popularity, but if they were to put out another 4 subclasses per main class, that's likely something like (note: I'm ignoring partnered content and stuff in non-core books).
Barbarian: missing ancestral guardian, beast, storm herald, wild magic). I think they're conceptually all pretty okay, so I could see them all going in.
Bard: missing creation, eloquence, spirits, swords, whispers. I'd tend to think either eloquence or swords would miss out, as neither does anything really new.
Fighter: missing arcane archer, cavalier, rune knight, samurai. I could see some of them being removed or merged (banneret is a decent concept with a crap implementation, maybe merge it with cavalier)
Monk: missing ascendant dragon, astral self, drunken master, kensei, sun soul. Ascendant dragon is pretty redundant with the new elements monk, drunken master and kensei might get renamed to less cultural-specific concepts.
Paladin: missing conquest, redemption, watchers, oathbreaker. Oathbreaker I would expect to be renamed and adjusted.
Ranger: missing drakewarden, fey wanderer, horizon walker, monster slayer, swarmkeeper. No real expectations on what would get cut.
Rogue: missing inquisitive, mastermind, phantom, scout, swashbuckler. No real expectations on what would get cut.
Sorcerer: missing divine, shadow, storm. Dunno what they'd add.
Warlock: missing celestial, fathomless, genie, hexblade, undead. I'd bet on hexblade being cut, it only ever existed to fix the bladelock.
Wizard: missing bladesinging, scribe, conjuration, enchantment, necromancy, transformation, war. I'd expect them to finish off the school list; I think they could just toss scribe and war. For bladesinging.... there's a part of me that thinks it will become a Bard option, there's always been some cognitive dissonance on a name that clearly relates to performance as a wizard subclass. If so, I would expect it to replace the swords bard.
One thing I could see them doing is putting out a book with a large number of subclasses, probably intended to replace XGTE/TCOE (similar to MMM replacing VGTM and MTOF). Some things might go away as being low popularity, but if they were to put out another 4 subclasses per main class, that's likely something like (note: I'm ignoring partnered content and stuff in non-core books).
Barbarian: missing ancestral guardian, beast, storm herald, wild magic). I think they're conceptually all pretty okay, so I could see them all going in.
Bard: missing creation, eloquence, spirits, swords, whispers. I'd tend to think either eloquence or swords would miss out, as neither does anything really new.
Fighter: missing arcane archer, cavalier, rune knight, samurai. I could see some of them being removed or merged (banneret is a decent concept with a crap implementation, maybe merge it with cavalier)
Monk: missing ascendant dragon, astral self, drunken master, kensei, sun soul. Ascendant dragon is pretty redundant with the new elements monk, drunken master and kensei might get renamed to less cultural-specific concepts.
Paladin: missing conquest, redemption, watchers, oathbreaker. Oathbreaker I would expect to be renamed and adjusted.
Ranger: missing drakewarden, fey wanderer, horizon walker, monster slayer, swarmkeeper. No real expectations on what would get cut.
Rogue: missing inquisitive, mastermind, phantom, scout, swashbuckler. No real expectations on what would get cut.
Sorcerer: missing divine, shadow, storm. Dunno what they'd add.
Warlock: missing celestial, fathomless, genie, hexblade, undead. I'd bet on hexblade being cut, it only ever existed to fix the bladelock.
Wizard: missing bladesinging, scribe, conjuration, enchantment, necromancy, transformation, war. I'd expect them to finish off the school list; I think they could just toss scribe and war. For bladesinging.... there's a part of me that thinks it will become a Bard option, there's always been some cognitive dissonance on a name that clearly relates to performance as a wizard subclass. If so, I would expect it to replace the swords bard.
Such a book (a “Tasha’s Tiny Cupcakes of the Multiverse”, if you will) seems almost inevitable, and would seem the natural home for the Artificer. I’m not sure that they would limit it to four subclasses per class: there wouldn’t be same conflict for space that there is in the PHB.
(The Fey Wanderer is in the new PHB. Lunar sorcerer and Giant barbarian could be added to the list, plus I think there are some Sword Coast Adventurers Guide subclasses missing: Way of the Long Death monk?)
While I really like the idea of Shadow Daddy's Book of Brooding Subclasses, I really really do, I think in order for it to sell it will need a mix of updated subclass AND brand new ones.
Necromancer is iconic enough that I think it is a "must include" at some point.
With all the subclasses missing it will probably be as big as the PHB so it's gonna take a while, most likely they will drip down the subclasses since those are the ones that push sales on books.
I am playing a wizard right now and it does seem like there may be only slight incentive to change over. It would depend really on how my DM-brewed subclass would fit into it. The changes are overall positive though and the subclasses seem to have gotten a more thorough reworking. Abjurer seems pretty neat.
I'm mostly worried about the fact I have an Astral Self Monk I'll be getting back to likely after the new PHB launches.
And with the base monk class changes (ie:deflect energy) that makes part of their subclass features obsolete.... I still love the rest of the Astral Self Monk features.... but I mean they apparently haven't touched them (yet?) So dunno what I'll be able to do x) (just ignore tht part of the subclass?!?!)
I'm mostly worried about the fact I have an Astral Self Monk I'll be getting back to likely after the new PHB launches.
And with the base monk class changes (ie:deflect energy) that makes part of their subclass features obsolete.... I still love the rest of the Astral Self Monk features.... but I mean they apparently haven't touched them (yet?) So dunno what I'll be able to do x) (just ignore tht part of the subclass?!?!)
This probably would be a better post in the monk changes discussion thread than the one for wizards.
They're never going to dictate the morals of necromancy or any other substantial body of lore regarding it as a universal baseline in 5e. Honestly, sometimes I wonder if we're even going to get another substantial setting book for anything larger than a moderate community like Strixhaven. For better or worse they seem to be getting very hands off that kind of worldbuilding in official products.
That's the idea.
Still spooky gothic or undead subclasses be nice like Undead Patron in Ravenloft
Honestly D&D is probably happy leaving necromancy and undead in the 'villains to be killed without qualms or remorse' category. A follow-up to VRGtR that includes more 'dark' PC options is possible but doesn't seem like it would be super high priority.
I truly don't buy that - Necromancer nearly made it into the PHB, to the point that Crawford was openly talking about in the UA videos - and while we don't know for sure why it fell short, my bet is on the "opposites" theming they were going for with Wizard i.e. Offense/Defense/Truth/Lies ultimately beating it out.
I could buy Ancestral Guardian.
Echo Knight? Summoning a ghost? 😛
Oh yeah, they're definitely gonna want to hit all the schools as subclasses eventually. I still say they need to put Necromancer in the DMG alongside Oathbreaker and Death Cleric or whatever people want to call them now because those are iconic villain archetypes and the printed NPC stat blocks anymore are garbage for anything that's supposed to interact with the setting outside of a single combat encounter.
I think I remember Jeremy Crawford saying, in the video that introduced the first Druid playtest, that they were looking at using standardised stat blocks for the Necromancer’s summons/creates Undead. The use of generic stat blocks for Wildshape got a lot of negative feedback, so that might have prompted them to choose a less potentially contentious subclass for the PHB and give the Necromancer a bit more thinking time.
They appear to see all the subclasses as heroes, judging by the Warlock video where Crawford gently chided Kenreck about the Great Old One and Celestial: "It's not a PvP game. They're friends."
(Be reeeal interesting to learn where he sees Oathbreaker fitting into that though 😝)
It's not like it's that hard to use Animate Dead/Create Undead; literally all of the 6 stat block options are in the Basic Rules so literally anyone with an internet connection can look up and print, download, or copy down the stats, and stopping a PC from making a giant army with them is just a matter of the DM setting some reasonable boundaries on play. Plus the spells are probably going to appear in the PHB anyways; I don't recall seeing them
butchered"modified" alongside the Conjure spells.One thing I could see them doing is putting out a book with a large number of subclasses, probably intended to replace XGTE/TCOE (similar to MMM replacing VGTM and MTOF). Some things might go away as being low popularity, but if they were to put out another 4 subclasses per main class, that's likely something like (note: I'm ignoring partnered content and stuff in non-core books).
I think they should innovate and give us new subs and it's up to fans to homebrew a '5.5 edition'
Such a book (a “Tasha’s Tiny Cupcakes of the Multiverse”, if you will) seems almost inevitable, and would seem the natural home for the Artificer. I’m not sure that they would limit it to four subclasses per class: there wouldn’t be same conflict for space that there is in the PHB.
(The Fey Wanderer is in the new PHB. Lunar sorcerer and Giant barbarian could be added to the list, plus I think there are some Sword Coast Adventurers Guide subclasses missing: Way of the Long Death monk?)
While I really like the idea of Shadow Daddy's Book of Brooding Subclasses, I really really do, I think in order for it to sell it will need a mix of updated subclass AND brand new ones.
Necromancer is iconic enough that I think it is a "must include" at some point.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
With all the subclasses missing it will probably be as big as the PHB so it's gonna take a while, most likely they will drip down the subclasses since those are the ones that push sales on books.
I am playing a wizard right now and it does seem like there may be only slight incentive to change over. It would depend really on how my DM-brewed subclass would fit into it. The changes are overall positive though and the subclasses seem to have gotten a more thorough reworking. Abjurer seems pretty neat.
DM mostly, Player occasionally | Session 0 form | He/Him/They/Them
EXTENDED SIGNATURE!
Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock
Try DDB free: Free Rules (2024), premade PCs, adventures, one shots, encounters, SC, homebrew, more
Answers: physical books, purchases, and subbing.
Check out my life-changing
I'm mostly worried about the fact I have an Astral Self Monk I'll be getting back to likely after the new PHB launches.
And with the base monk class changes (ie:deflect energy) that makes part of their subclass features obsolete.... I still love the rest of the Astral Self Monk features.... but I mean they apparently haven't touched them (yet?) So dunno what I'll be able to do x) (just ignore tht part of the subclass?!?!)
This probably would be a better post in the monk changes discussion thread than the one for wizards.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/d-d-beyond-general/general-discussion/200958-discussion-monk-overview-2024-players-handbook