To be honest, the only part of this I was still looking forward to at all was the Class Feature Variants, and the more I have read from the leaks, the less I even care about those. The more I read about Tasha’s the more I wish the entire book was just a bad dream I could wake up from and realize it isn’t real.
I feel similarly. When the book was teased, it looked great. After looking at the actual leaks, the CFV's don't go far enough, I'm not super interested in the subclasses, and the Lineage system could be improved upon. While some stuff still looks interesting, a lot of it turns me off from buying the book.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
The thing is, magic items have rules and effects on the game that need to playtested. Group patrons are just flavor. Sure they are nice templates, but I felt like the thirty pages of them in Eberron was excessive. (I think it was thirty pages?)
They're not just flavor, though. That's exactly what I mean. Group patrons do have rules and mechanical effects. That said, the "flavor" is also really important. Like, 80% of the Dungeon Master's Guide is exactly the kind of thing RFtLW provides for group patrons. It has really specific information for the relevant playstyles for a particular patron, really specific ideas for niches that individual player characters can fill, etc. I get that it's not super interesting for a player, but it's a gold mine for a GM. It's exactly the kind of thing that a DMG2 would have, and 5e's apparent publishing philosophy is that these rules expansions be PHB2 and DMG2 wrapped up into one book.
To be honest, the only part of this I was still looking forward to at all was the Class Feature Variants, and the more I have read from the leaks, the less I even care about those. The more I read about Tasha’s the more I wish the entire book was just a bad dream I could wake up from and realize it isn’t real.
I feel similarly. When the book was teased, it looked great. After looking at the actual leaks, the CFV's don't go far enough, I'm not super interested in the subclasses, and the Lineage system could be improved upon. While some stuff still looks interesting, a lot of it turns me off from buying the book.
Same. It's really disappointing that the hype that I had didn't get the reward that it normally does. I thought that this was going to be better than Xanathar's and the best selling book of 5e besides the 3 Core Rulebooks, but now it just seems like an inadequate sequel to XGtE. I was excited for the Lineage System, and now it seems mostly boring (which is okay, but I was hoping for something more), I was excited for the CFV, but they got nerfed and destroyed so much that most of them are just useless or insufficient to fix the thing they were meant to fix. I was excited for there to be more spells, but there are less than 2 dozen of them, and as far as we can tell there are no Artificer or Sorcerer specific spells in this book. The nerfs to GFB and BB are just disheartening, IMO.
I am only excited for a handful of the subclasses (Genielock, Armorer Artificer, Rune Carver Fighter, Wildfire Druid, Phantom Rogue), and am excited for the changes to the Bladesinger. I guess I shouldn't have gotten my hopes up. It's 2020, after all.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Convincing argument. I guess I'm just not a fan of the rules. Worldbuilding and the like is something I'm pretty good at, so the specific rules for group patrons never interested me that much.
What game mechanics do they actually have? I haven't read Eberron in a while.
Monk optional class feature Dedicated Weapon. Basically yanks core uniqueness away from an entire subclass, and gives it to them a level earlier. Kensei is my favorite monk subclass and now almost any monk can run around with longswords and bows, sort of cheapens Kensei. Yeah, i get that the subclass still gets groovy features like making the weapon magic, giving it bonuses, etc but still, i was very sad when i read a level 2 class feature accomplishing pretty much the entire concept of a level 3 subclass.
Kensei still has the added benefit of you gaining proficiency in them. With Dedicated Weapon, you only get to use them as a monk weapon if you have proficiency with them. Something you really only get from a multiclass or certain races.
Kensei still has the added benefit of you gaining proficiency in them. With Dedicated Weapon, you only get to use them as a monk weapon if you have proficiency with them. Something you really only get from a multiclass or certain races.
This is true. And like I mentioned, Kensei still get to do cool stuff with their weapon. It's a very minor "Least looking forward to" which says a lot about my opinion on the rest of what I've read about the book. I'm crazy excited to get it. Just had to mention this is the only instance i've noticed/feel where they took a core concept of a subclass, that thing that makes the class unique and builds upon, and then just give it to the base class (again, just the the concept, not the fun abilities and differences). Just sort of cheapened one of my fav subclasses is all.
hmmm... it all seems pretty cool to me. i guess it has to be either the meta magic feat (for reasons that have already been said), or that they did not use the class feature variants to fix sorcerer.
The thing is, magic items have rules and effects on the game that need to playtested. Group patrons are just flavor. Sure they are nice templates, but I felt like the thirty pages of them in Eberron was excessive. (I think it was thirty pages?)
The Eberron book is a campaign sourcebook, which is a fancy way of saying it probably contains a bunch of setting flavour. I don’t think those 30ish pages are excessive for that type of book. If it’s another 30 pages in Tasha’s that might be a bit much, though I ‘d want to see how it’s done first.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
The Lineage/Heritage system (whatever that thing is called now) is not a mechanical fix for a lore issue, but that's kind of besides the point of this thread.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
The convenient timing of the announcement right after a disastrous string of online backlash of its inclusion in a book and lack of play testing before implementation says otherwise to my practiced (albeit cynical) eyes. (Amazing the things you see publishing companies do in response to public outcry over the course of 40 years in hobby).
But no... I do not look forward to those rules. The lack of playtesting alone raises too many red flags for me.
Just because they didn't put it in an Unearthed Arcana doesn't mean that they didn't playtest it, and even if they didn't playtest the "racial feature/proficiency switcheroo-system," that's not really an issue, as it isn't a thing that needs playtesting.
My daughter's current character, an Undead pact warlock either has to be rebuilt from the ground up, or we'll have to recreate the subclass in homebrew. If it's been in UA for the last, what, year or so, I cannot see the reason it can't remain*.
* excepting, of course, bizarre and arcane IP licencing agreements.
The Undead Warlock has only been around for about 3 months and a week now. It isn't coming out in Tasha's because it is likely planned for a future release, probably a Ravenloft or Innistrad setting book. It will still remain in the UA options for this site until it is archived.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
My daughter's current character, an Undead pact warlock either has to be rebuilt from the ground up, or we'll have to recreate the subclass in homebrew. If it's been in UA for the last, what, year or so, I cannot see the reason it can't remain*.
* excepting, of course, bizarre and arcane IP licencing agreements.
UA is not going to be removed from character sheet if it's already in it
Besides, the Undead warlock isn't coming out in Tasha's anyways, it's too new for that, and not in the table of contents.
My daughter's current character, an Undead pact warlock either has to be rebuilt from the ground up, or we'll have to recreate the subclass in homebrew. If it's been in UA for the last, what, year or so, I cannot see the reason it can't remain*.
* excepting, of course, bizarre and arcane IP licencing agreements.
UA is not going to be removed from character sheet if it's already in it
Besides, the Undead warlock isn't coming out in Tasha's anyways, it's too new for that, and not in the table of contents.
It won't be removed from the character sheet, but she won't be able to advance in it.
And it not being in Tasha's is what concerns me; according to history, when UA content isn't made official, it gets removed from DDB. As someone mentioned above, it's only been around for about 3 months, so it may have longer than I thought to go - *fingers crossed*.
The Undead Warlock has only been around for about 3 months and a week now. It isn't coming out in Tasha's because it is likely planned for a future release, probably a Ravenloft or Innistrad setting book. It will still remain in the UA options for this site until it is archived.
I hope that it's later rather than sooner. I had thought there was a tendency for DDB to "purge" UA stuff when a new book came out. But having said that, I thought the Undead pact had been around longer than that, so you've eased my mind somewhat. :)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I feel similarly. When the book was teased, it looked great. After looking at the actual leaks, the CFV's don't go far enough, I'm not super interested in the subclasses, and the Lineage system could be improved upon. While some stuff still looks interesting, a lot of it turns me off from buying the book.
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
My Improved Lineage System
They're not just flavor, though. That's exactly what I mean. Group patrons do have rules and mechanical effects. That said, the "flavor" is also really important. Like, 80% of the Dungeon Master's Guide is exactly the kind of thing RFtLW provides for group patrons. It has really specific information for the relevant playstyles for a particular patron, really specific ideas for niches that individual player characters can fill, etc. I get that it's not super interesting for a player, but it's a gold mine for a GM. It's exactly the kind of thing that a DMG2 would have, and 5e's apparent publishing philosophy is that these rules expansions be PHB2 and DMG2 wrapped up into one book.
Same. It's really disappointing that the hype that I had didn't get the reward that it normally does. I thought that this was going to be better than Xanathar's and the best selling book of 5e besides the 3 Core Rulebooks, but now it just seems like an inadequate sequel to XGtE. I was excited for the Lineage System, and now it seems mostly boring (which is okay, but I was hoping for something more), I was excited for the CFV, but they got nerfed and destroyed so much that most of them are just useless or insufficient to fix the thing they were meant to fix. I was excited for there to be more spells, but there are less than 2 dozen of them, and as far as we can tell there are no Artificer or Sorcerer specific spells in this book. The nerfs to GFB and BB are just disheartening, IMO.
I am only excited for a handful of the subclasses (Genielock, Armorer Artificer, Rune Carver Fighter, Wildfire Druid, Phantom Rogue), and am excited for the changes to the Bladesinger. I guess I shouldn't have gotten my hopes up. It's 2020, after all.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Convincing argument. I guess I'm just not a fan of the rules. Worldbuilding and the like is something I'm pretty good at, so the specific rules for group patrons never interested me that much.
What game mechanics do they actually have? I haven't read Eberron in a while.
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
My Improved Lineage System
Monk optional class feature Dedicated Weapon. Basically yanks core uniqueness away from an entire subclass, and gives it to them a level earlier. Kensei is my favorite monk subclass and now almost any monk can run around with longswords and bows, sort of cheapens Kensei. Yeah, i get that the subclass still gets groovy features like making the weapon magic, giving it bonuses, etc but still, i was very sad when i read a level 2 class feature accomplishing pretty much the entire concept of a level 3 subclass.
I'm least excited about the internet trolls and people bashing a book before they
ve even read it. That being said it's a pretty good book so far! Well written with enough in it for everybody
Kensei still has the added benefit of you gaining proficiency in them. With Dedicated Weapon, you only get to use them as a monk weapon if you have proficiency with them. Something you really only get from a multiclass or certain races.
Dominick Finch
This is true. And like I mentioned, Kensei still get to do cool stuff with their weapon. It's a very minor "Least looking forward to" which says a lot about my opinion on the rest of what I've read about the book. I'm crazy excited to get it. Just had to mention this is the only instance i've noticed/feel where they took a core concept of a subclass, that thing that makes the class unique and builds upon, and then just give it to the base class (again, just the the concept, not the fun abilities and differences). Just sort of cheapened one of my fav subclasses is all.
I second using the ignore button. It works wonders.
hmmm... it all seems pretty cool to me. i guess it has to be either the meta magic feat (for reasons that have already been said), or that they did not use the class feature variants to fix sorcerer.
I am an average mathematics enjoyer.
>Extended Signature<
The Eberron book is a campaign sourcebook, which is a fancy way of saying it probably contains a bunch of setting flavour. I don’t think those 30ish pages are excessive for that type of book. If it’s another 30 pages in Tasha’s that might be a bit much, though I ‘d want to see how it’s done first.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
The Lineage/Heritage system...
a mechanical fix for a Lore issue never works as intended.
The Lineage/Heritage system (whatever that thing is called now) is not a mechanical fix for a lore issue, but that's kind of besides the point of this thread.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
The convenient timing of the announcement right after a disastrous string of online backlash of its inclusion in a book and lack of play testing before implementation says otherwise to my practiced (albeit cynical) eyes. (Amazing the things you see publishing companies do in response to public outcry over the course of 40 years in hobby).
But no... I do not look forward to those rules.
The lack of playtesting alone raises too many red flags for me.
Just because they didn't put it in an Unearthed Arcana doesn't mean that they didn't playtest it, and even if they didn't playtest the "racial feature/proficiency switcheroo-system," that's not really an issue, as it isn't a thing that needs playtesting.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
+100%.
My daughter's current character, an Undead pact warlock either has to be rebuilt from the ground up, or we'll have to recreate the subclass in homebrew. If it's been in UA for the last, what, year or so, I cannot see the reason it can't remain*.
* excepting, of course, bizarre and arcane IP licencing agreements.
The Undead Warlock has only been around for about 3 months and a week now. It isn't coming out in Tasha's because it is likely planned for a future release, probably a Ravenloft or Innistrad setting book. It will still remain in the UA options for this site until it is archived.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
UA is not going to be removed from character sheet if it's already in it
Besides, the Undead warlock isn't coming out in Tasha's anyways, it's too new for that, and not in the table of contents.
It won't be removed from the character sheet, but she won't be able to advance in it.
And it not being in Tasha's is what concerns me; according to history, when UA content isn't made official, it gets removed from DDB. As someone mentioned above, it's only been around for about 3 months, so it may have longer than I thought to go - *fingers crossed*.
I hope that it's later rather than sooner. I had thought there was a tendency for DDB to "purge" UA stuff when a new book came out. But having said that, I thought the Undead pact had been around longer than that, so you've eased my mind somewhat. :)