I think they should stop doing UA if they’re just going to show us something good, and then rip it in half and smear feces all over whatever’s left before publishing it.
I never saw any feces myself but if you feel that strongly about it why not continue to use the UA?
So just like XGTE, if you've been obsessing over the UA, the very little in the subclasses will be a surprise, and you'll only have disappointment in the nerfs. But remember most of the public doesn't pay attention to UA, it's only a small subset of players who spend time discussing DND in forums.
I think they really dropped the ball on the races. We were promised cool, unique changes and ways to customize races and it's just 'Swap stuff, or take a slightly different human variant'. Class feature variants also ended up being rather bland.
Ultimately, this is pretty much what I expected after playing 5e for many years and seeing the UA to Release cycle over and over. Cool, unique ideas tend to get dropped in favor of bland, but unoffensive ideas.
I don't mind the UA being put into official form. It's what it's meant to be for. What I mind is paying for a book that is what, 50% reprinted material from books I've already paid for? SCAG, Ravnica, Eberron, Theros, etc. I understand it's meant to alleviate the Adventurers Guild's book limitation rules, but it's infuriating to pay full price for a reprint.
Big agree on the first part. Unearthed Arcana sets an unrealistic expectation for players and DMs alike. Typically the power level of the most powerful subclasses will be scaled down for proper use in play. This also happened with the subclasses in Xanathar's Guide to Everything, it's just that not as many people were paying attention to the UA articles releasing before then. To expect the content in UA articles to be just as busted as they are presented is a bad mindset.
As for me, even with the lowered power level on some of the subclasses and the optional class features, I'm still very happy to be getting it officially published.
I don't mind the UA being put into official form.... but it's infuriating to pay full price for a reprint.
This, plus while large part of the material is reprints, but there's still a significant amount of material which is in the other books but not Tasha's. So it's not as though you can say "I'll ignore the rest and just buy Tasha's & the core 3".
I think it's about (or even long past) time for them to release new revisions of the 3 core rule books to bring in the updates.
I'm curious what kind of character content people are looking for that's not new subclasses and class feature variants. I mean there's not much more they can change unless you're looking for all new classes that work totally differently, and many people feel the existing classes already cover nearly all main archetypes. I know that some want a whole new system for psionics but keep in mind that when they have done that in the past it tends to flop.
This is just the design of 5e. It should not be a surprise. Yeah, this is what new content is going to look like. This edition is built to onboard new players and grow the franchise - new mechanics are going to be avoided whenever possible.
I'm curious what kind of character content people are looking for that's not new subclasses and class feature variants. I mean there's not much more they can change unless you're looking for all new classes that work totally differently, and many people feel the existing classes already cover nearly all main archetypes. I know that some want a whole new system for psionics but keep in mind that when they have done that in the past it tends to flop.
This is just the design of 5e. It should not be a surprise. Yeah, this is what new content is going to look like. This edition is built to onboard new players and grow the franchise - new mechanics are going to be avoided whenever possible.
I really love new subclasses as content when they make them fun and interesting. This is my first time seeing UA going into a proper print book, as I had never even heard of this website or organised play etc for 5e prior to Covid. Possibly why I am so disappointed in the dumbing down of things. One example is the Bard College of Spirits, I love the idea, and think it is amazing from a story point of view. I have a character in a home brew that just got bard 3 whilst trapped exploring a ghostly haunted underground monastery complex. It's full of ghosts and undead of all kinds. It was a perfect setting for getting this college. It is so thematic and appropriate - but based on my experience with this Tasha release, I am dreading how much they will change it if they do release it.
I'm curious what kind of character content people are looking for that's not new subclasses and class feature variants. I mean there's not much more they can change unless you're looking for all new classes that work totally differently, and many people feel the existing classes already cover nearly all main archetypes. I know that some want a whole new system for psionics but keep in mind that when they have done that in the past it tends to flop.
This is just the design of 5e. It should not be a surprise. Yeah, this is what new content is going to look like. This edition is built to onboard new players and grow the franchise - new mechanics are going to be avoided whenever possible.
Exactly. I'm glad there's at least one other person that actually likes the PC content in Tasha's.
I mean there is nothing I dislike I Tasha's. Everything there is a positive and good. I like the class variants, I like the new subclasses, I like the new spells.
It just leaves me going "Is this it?", and I find it a pretty depressing indication of the direction of of 5e as a whole.
My biggest issue with the book is the Personalizing Spells rules--they're kind of.... obvious. When I heard spell customization was incoming, I was hoping there would be some tangible rules that would codify changing damage types on spells; something that would actually allow you to customize many of the "must include" spells to fit your specific character. Perhaps the most frequent complaint I get from my players is "Fireball is just too good not to take, but I am a [insert different damage type] spellcaster, so it does not make sense for me to be using flames." I have my own homerules about changing damage types (basically splitting different spell types into tiers based on how many likely enemies are going to be resistant/immune to the damage, then allowing players to change type to a lesser or equal tier), but was really hoping Tasha's would contain a uniform set of rules for damage customization that would be applicable across multiple campaigns and with multiple DMs.
Instead, we got "you are allowed to reskin the visuals of your spells to fit your playstyle, but you cannot actually change the contents of the spell, so please feel free to enjoy your fireball-spamming Ice Wizard." No actual mechanical changes, just telling me I can do something that every halfway decent DM instinctively knows and allows.
I mean there is nothing I dislike I Tasha's. Everything there is a positive and good. I like the class variants, I like the new subclasses, I like the new spells.
It just leaves me going "Is this it?", and I find it a pretty depressing indication of the direction of of 5e as a whole.
I haven't played D&D in 5 years. Recently re-kindled my interest and will be starting in a group after Thanksgiving. Naturally, I've been combing through my books again and was very excited about TCoE. Bought it on D&D Beyond and also bought hardcopy. Couldn't wait to read it this morning, but like you I felt a little disappointment. There wasn't anything I disliked, I just felt there wasn't any content that was truly exciting.
But I do understand why WOTC isn't releasing anything truly incredible at this point. Not only do they have to exercise care not to destabilize the game, but there's also the issue of how you top "it". I'd rather they develop a regular cadence for source releases, and spend most of their resources on developing fantastic Adventures. Though, leaving a little to be able to include some zing in the source material would be nice!
The one thing that really irks me is that, in the very first chapter, it says the rules in this book are completely optional. No problem there.
But then due to DDB's licensing agreement with WOTC, any updates to previously published rules now become the ONLY printed version of the rule on the site.
I want to keep SCAG's GFB spell. I don't want the new one. The book says it's optional, so it should be optional. I know I can just add it as homebrew, but I shouldn't have to do that for an OPTIONAL rule.
IDK, I think I'm just starting to get bummed on 5e as a whole and this book sure didn't re-spark my enthusiasm. Probably a personal problem, and I'm not trying to talk anyone who enjoys it out of playing it any more, but this seemed like an appropriate void to scream into.
Where players can see things they aren't meant to see.
Outside of the actual module or adventure being used for the game they are in, there is nothing in the game that "players [...] aren't meant to see". There is no need for secret rules in D&D, at all.
I found a majority of the content disappointing or uninspiring, but not unexpected. I tend to play WIS-based spellcasters (including Rangers) and there was not a lot here for us. The UA options were great, especially for Rangers. And I knew they'd get dialed back for publication, but the way they got dialed back, and how was very frustrating. Similarly looking at all the candy wizards get in the magic items and spells section, where my casters get almost nothing (couldn't you have let clerics keep Otherworldly Guise?). And then even for wizards it's 'you have have the cherry flavored book, or the strawberry flavored book, or the lemon flavored book' and the spells are 'demon flavored spell, fae flavored spell, beast flavored spell' and I'm never going to waste my concentration on any of those. I am happy that the sorcerers got some interesting looking stuff, though I'm miffed that Metamagic Adept made it to publication. WYGD.
Honestly, my only consolation is that because they dragged their heels so long on getting CFV working on this site, if I do use any of this content here I can just homebrew it rather than spending money on the book. This is a book that I would borrow from a friend or library, not add to my own print collection.
I want to keep SCAG's GFB spell. I don't want the new one. The book says it's optional, so it should be optional. I know I can just add it as homebrew, but I shouldn't have to do that for an OPTIONAL rule.
I don't see any difference between the two spells, beyond slightly different wording to clarify Green Flame Blades mechanics (which is still overly complex imho).
I found a majority of the content disappointing or uninspiring, but not unexpected. I tend to play WIS-based spellcasters (including Rangers) and there was not a lot here for us. The UA options were great, especially for Rangers. And I knew they'd get dialed back for publication, but the way they got dialed back, and how was very frustrating. Similarly looking at all the candy wizards get in the magic items and spells section, where my casters get almost nothing (couldn't you have let clerics keep Otherworldly Guise?). And then even for wizards it's 'you have have the cherry flavored book, or the strawberry flavored book, or the lemon flavored book' and the spells are 'demon flavored spell, fae flavored spell, beast flavored spell' and I'm never going to waste my concentration on any of those. I am happy that the sorcerers got some interesting looking stuff, though I'm miffed that Metamagic Adept made it to publication. WYGD.
Honestly, my only consolation is that because they dragged their heels so long on getting CFV working on this site, if I do use any of this content here I can just homebrew it rather than spending money on the book. This is a book that I would borrow from a friend or library, not add to my own print collection.
I mean, by that logic, why buy any book? You can homebrew everything that they've implemented on this site.
The reason to buy it? Ease of access for yourself/whomever you share it with.
As for Wizards getting cool magic items? Well, it is called WIZARDS of the Coast, not Druids of the Coast or Clerics of the Coast. Also, it's a book written by a famous and far travelled WIZARD, of course she's going to talk about all the cool wizard books she found.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I never saw any feces myself but if you feel that strongly about it why not continue to use the UA?
I never even got to use some of them because DDB took this ******* long to implement CFVs, and now, they’re using the garbage versions.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
So just like XGTE, if you've been obsessing over the UA, the very little in the subclasses will be a surprise, and you'll only have disappointment in the nerfs. But remember most of the public doesn't pay attention to UA, it's only a small subset of players who spend time discussing DND in forums.
I think they really dropped the ball on the races. We were promised cool, unique changes and ways to customize races and it's just 'Swap stuff, or take a slightly different human variant'. Class feature variants also ended up being rather bland.
Ultimately, this is pretty much what I expected after playing 5e for many years and seeing the UA to Release cycle over and over. Cool, unique ideas tend to get dropped in favor of bland, but unoffensive ideas.
I don't mind the UA being put into official form. It's what it's meant to be for. What I mind is paying for a book that is what, 50% reprinted material from books I've already paid for? SCAG, Ravnica, Eberron, Theros, etc. I understand it's meant to alleviate the Adventurers Guild's book limitation rules, but it's infuriating to pay full price for a reprint.
Big agree on the first part. Unearthed Arcana sets an unrealistic expectation for players and DMs alike. Typically the power level of the most powerful subclasses will be scaled down for proper use in play. This also happened with the subclasses in Xanathar's Guide to Everything, it's just that not as many people were paying attention to the UA articles releasing before then. To expect the content in UA articles to be just as busted as they are presented is a bad mindset.
As for me, even with the lowered power level on some of the subclasses and the optional class features, I'm still very happy to be getting it officially published.
This, plus while large part of the material is reprints, but there's still a significant amount of material which is in the other books but not Tasha's. So it's not as though you can say "I'll ignore the rest and just buy Tasha's & the core 3".
I think it's about (or even long past) time for them to release new revisions of the 3 core rule books to bring in the updates.
Don't give them more reprint ideas, gosh! Last time they did that, we had a whole .5 edition on our hands.
I'm curious what kind of character content people are looking for that's not new subclasses and class feature variants. I mean there's not much more they can change unless you're looking for all new classes that work totally differently, and many people feel the existing classes already cover nearly all main archetypes. I know that some want a whole new system for psionics but keep in mind that when they have done that in the past it tends to flop.
This is just the design of 5e. It should not be a surprise. Yeah, this is what new content is going to look like. This edition is built to onboard new players and grow the franchise - new mechanics are going to be avoided whenever possible.
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
Unfortunately, I agree. I was expecting a lot more, and for the content to be a lot more exciting. I was disappointed in both regards. Ah well.
I really love new subclasses as content when they make them fun and interesting. This is my first time seeing UA going into a proper print book, as I had never even heard of this website or organised play etc for 5e prior to Covid. Possibly why I am so disappointed in the dumbing down of things. One example is the Bard College of Spirits, I love the idea, and think it is amazing from a story point of view. I have a character in a home brew that just got bard 3 whilst trapped exploring a ghostly haunted underground monastery complex. It's full of ghosts and undead of all kinds. It was a perfect setting for getting this college. It is so thematic and appropriate - but based on my experience with this Tasha release, I am dreading how much they will change it if they do release it.
Exactly. I'm glad there's at least one other person that actually likes the PC content in Tasha's.
I mean there is nothing I dislike I Tasha's. Everything there is a positive and good. I like the class variants, I like the new subclasses, I like the new spells.
It just leaves me going "Is this it?", and I find it a pretty depressing indication of the direction of of 5e as a whole.
My biggest issue with the book is the Personalizing Spells rules--they're kind of.... obvious. When I heard spell customization was incoming, I was hoping there would be some tangible rules that would codify changing damage types on spells; something that would actually allow you to customize many of the "must include" spells to fit your specific character. Perhaps the most frequent complaint I get from my players is "Fireball is just too good not to take, but I am a [insert different damage type] spellcaster, so it does not make sense for me to be using flames." I have my own homerules about changing damage types (basically splitting different spell types into tiers based on how many likely enemies are going to be resistant/immune to the damage, then allowing players to change type to a lesser or equal tier), but was really hoping Tasha's would contain a uniform set of rules for damage customization that would be applicable across multiple campaigns and with multiple DMs.
Instead, we got "you are allowed to reskin the visuals of your spells to fit your playstyle, but you cannot actually change the contents of the spell, so please feel free to enjoy your fireball-spamming Ice Wizard." No actual mechanical changes, just telling me I can do something that every halfway decent DM instinctively knows and allows.
I haven't played D&D in 5 years. Recently re-kindled my interest and will be starting in a group after Thanksgiving. Naturally, I've been combing through my books again and was very excited about TCoE. Bought it on D&D Beyond and also bought hardcopy. Couldn't wait to read it this morning, but like you I felt a little disappointment. There wasn't anything I disliked, I just felt there wasn't any content that was truly exciting.
But I do understand why WOTC isn't releasing anything truly incredible at this point. Not only do they have to exercise care not to destabilize the game, but there's also the issue of how you top "it". I'd rather they develop a regular cadence for source releases, and spend most of their resources on developing fantastic Adventures. Though, leaving a little to be able to include some zing in the source material would be nice!
Yeah at first glance this seems like a dud.
The one thing that really irks me is that, in the very first chapter, it says the rules in this book are completely optional. No problem there.
But then due to DDB's licensing agreement with WOTC, any updates to previously published rules now become the ONLY printed version of the rule on the site.
I want to keep SCAG's GFB spell. I don't want the new one. The book says it's optional, so it should be optional. I know I can just add it as homebrew, but I shouldn't have to do that for an OPTIONAL rule.
IDK, I think I'm just starting to get bummed on 5e as a whole and this book sure didn't re-spark my enthusiasm. Probably a personal problem, and I'm not trying to talk anyone who enjoys it out of playing it any more, but this seemed like an appropriate void to scream into.
Outside of the actual module or adventure being used for the game they are in, there is nothing in the game that "players [...] aren't meant to see". There is no need for secret rules in D&D, at all.
I found a majority of the content disappointing or uninspiring, but not unexpected. I tend to play WIS-based spellcasters (including Rangers) and there was not a lot here for us. The UA options were great, especially for Rangers. And I knew they'd get dialed back for publication, but the way they got dialed back, and how was very frustrating. Similarly looking at all the candy wizards get in the magic items and spells section, where my casters get almost nothing (couldn't you have let clerics keep Otherworldly Guise?). And then even for wizards it's 'you have have the cherry flavored book, or the strawberry flavored book, or the lemon flavored book' and the spells are 'demon flavored spell, fae flavored spell, beast flavored spell' and I'm never going to waste my concentration on any of those. I am happy that the sorcerers got some interesting looking stuff, though I'm miffed that Metamagic Adept made it to publication. WYGD.
Honestly, my only consolation is that because they dragged their heels so long on getting CFV working on this site, if I do use any of this content here I can just homebrew it rather than spending money on the book. This is a book that I would borrow from a friend or library, not add to my own print collection.
Birgit | Shifter | Sorcerer | Dragonlords
Shayone | Hobgoblin | Sorcerer | Netherdeep
I don't see any difference between the two spells, beyond slightly different wording to clarify Green Flame Blades mechanics (which is still overly complex imho).
lvl Target, 2ndTarget
1 - Modifier dmg
5 1d8 1d8+3
11 2d8 2d8+3
17 3d8 3d8+3
I'm not sure why a lot of people are upset about the subclasses for Tasha's.
It has long been the case with WotC that they do public playtests of mechanics that will then be published into a future book.
Would people rather that WotC not have playtest periods to collect feedback? Or do they just want everything for free, businesses be damned?
Site Info: Wizard's ToS | Fan Content Policy | Forum Rules | Physical Books | Content Not Working | Contact Support
How To: Homebrew Rules | Create Homebrew | Snippet Codes | Tool Tips (Custom) | Rollables (Generator)
My Homebrew: Races | Subclasses | Backgrounds | Feats | Spells | Magic Items
Other: Beyond20 | Page References | Other Guides | Entitlements | Dice Randomization | Images Fix | FAQ
I mean, by that logic, why buy any book? You can homebrew everything that they've implemented on this site.
The reason to buy it? Ease of access for yourself/whomever you share it with.
As for Wizards getting cool magic items? Well, it is called WIZARDS of the Coast, not Druids of the Coast or Clerics of the Coast.
Also, it's a book written by a famous and far travelled WIZARD, of course she's going to talk about all the cool wizard books she found.