I’m really disappointed with dnd beyond for their lack of updates regarding the “new” sorcerer subclasses. Tashas came out 6 months ago and there havnt really been any updates about when they’re going to fix the subclass spell abilities. 6 months!
I love dnd beyond, but when I bought Tashas through them, I expected to be able to use ALL the features at least within a couple of months. But 6 months for what seems to be a fairly simple change is ridiculous.
Im not a coder or website designer, but I just don’t understand the holdup. Even if they could clarify why it’s taking so long and what the issues are that they’re trying to solve, at least then we know they’re working on it!
//Fighting Style - Superior Technique. Not functional. We don't currently have a sensible way of implementing the selection of maneuvers that wouldn't cause characters to become broken in the future. We're working on a solution for this known issue.//
The part I don't understand is there is a feat Martial Adept, which functions exactly how the Fighting Style should. You select it, It adds to the correct field on the character sheet and I am presented with two pickable drop downs for the maneuvers.
Works flawlessly.
I'm mystified, frankly, why adding a fighting style that does basically the same thing would be so difficult to implement in the 6 months since Tasha's came out.
I am certain coding a mass use website is fiendishly complex in ways I cannot begin to imagine - but this could break the game? That seems implausible given how battle maneuvers are already implemented and can we expect the Tasha's class revisions to be more/less/or fully accessible anytime soon?
Superior Technique. Yeah, sorry, was on mobile and just... A few beers deep.
Absolutely boggles my mind that Superior Technique doesn't work.
I am very close to moving to "the other" character creation service. DnD beyond seem adept at taking my money but after half a bloody year they can't be arsed to code features and feats?
I think what a lot of it boils down to is the new Features System that's been in the works. They talked about it a lot in the latest Dev Update, among other development work. Basically, when D&D Beyond began building its services, things were relatively much simpler to implement. But recent releases have expanded into new areas of complexity, which is what the Features System plans to remedy; making everything much more modular from a coding standpoint, so that new features that behave contrary to existing ones will be far easier to implement.
I think of this situation like... If you have a spare room that needs to be repainted, but then decide to remodel your house and change where the walls stand, would you spend time repainting that spare room while remodeling? Or would your time be better served finishing the remodel, and slapping a brand new coat of paint over the newly-constructed walls? I can't say with any certainty whether that's the case here, but given all the talk in the past few months about this features rebuild, I suspect it's a "full steam ahead toward the new Features System" approach.
I work in IT as a software engineer so I don't need a metaphor to understand replacing a legacy system/sub-system - which I don't mean as harshly as it sounds - but I'm in the role of customer here and I am expressing my dissatisfaction at substandard products.
Whatever their issue is, whether it's staffing, middle tier, Legacy code or whatever really isn't my problem; it's been 6 months since I paid for a product and it doesn't work as it should.
Well in this analogy I rent my flat I can't remodel if I want to I have to live with what I am given but when my fridge packed up I notified the letting agency and it was fixed.
So a reasonable estimate of when they expect to address these issues would be, at least, welcome.
Even if the answer was "we are redesigning our core interface to make it more flexible and modular and we are 45-ish% complete" would be more than "It's a problem. A pretty big problem. We're tackling it.", which is kinda where we are at.
I only joined D&D beyond last month after a bit of a personal windfall and I could afford to buy all the books for a third bloody time and frankly I'm just surprised to discover Tasha's implementation has such a long lead up to being fully available. When I toggled optional content on my profile, I kinda assumed that meant said content was available. That doesn't strike me as being wholly unreasonable.
I've no idea what has been said or promised in the past I can only reflect as a new user of this service I went to make a character took a dip into echo knight, pondered what fighting style would best fit and superior technique seemed to be ideal - and nothing happened.
I found my way to the forums, posted this question on the fighters thread and received 0 replies for over a week. Finally I find my way to The Tasha's faults and Bugs page and a entire list on unimplimented features that are being worked on from exchangeable spells to my bloody fighting style which are apparently super difficult to get working.
And I don't know how I feel about that, and all the money I just spent, but I'm presently somewhere between flummoxed and disappointed.
I work in IT as a software engineer so I don't need a metaphor to understand replacing a legacy system/sub-system - which I don't mean as harshly as it sounds - but I'm in the role of customer here and I am expressing my dissatisfaction at substandard products.
Whatever their issue is, whether it's staffing, middle tier, Legacy code or whatever really isn't my problem; it's been 6 months since I paid for a product and it doesn't work as it should.
If you work in IT as a software engineer, then you really should be exercising the empathy of "things never go as well as you think they should and never take as fast as customers think it should."
They *have* been working on it, as part of another project that has taken ages due to more factors being introduced by WotC with each new book, nevermind the previous system overhaul they had to do to implement Dragonmarks, amongst other features from books released the previous year.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Formerly Devan Avalon.
Trying to get your physical content on Beyond is like going to Microsoft and saying "I have a physical Playstation disk, give me a digital Xbox version!"
I work in IT as a software engineer so I don't need a metaphor to understand replacing a legacy system/sub-system - which I don't mean as harshly as it sounds - but I'm in the role of customer here and I am expressing my dissatisfaction at substandard products.
Whatever their issue is, whether it's staffing, middle tier, Legacy code or whatever really isn't my problem; it's been 6 months since I paid for a product and it doesn't work as it should.
If you work in IT as a software engineer, then you really should be exercising the empathy of "things never go as well as you think they should and never take as fast as customers think it should."
They *have* been working on it, as part of another project that has taken ages due to more factors being introduced by WotC with each new book, nevermind the previous system overhaul they had to do to implement Dragonmarks, amongst other features from books released the previous year.
It is one thing to acknowledge that things happen. It is another to take a 'Deadlines are just guidelines' position.
Except the Beyond team doesn't *give* a deadline for EXACTLY this reason. Things will be released when they are done, and they don't want to cause a riot when they say "yeah this would be done by this time" and then it inevitably isn't.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Formerly Devan Avalon.
Trying to get your physical content on Beyond is like going to Microsoft and saying "I have a physical Playstation disk, give me a digital Xbox version!"
Well in this analogy I rent my flat I can't remodel if I want to I have to live with what I am given but when my fridge packed up I notified the letting agency and it was fixed.
So a reasonable estimate of when they expect to address these issues would be, at least, welcome.
Even if the answer was "we are redesigning our core interface to make it more flexible and modular and we are 45-ish% complete" would be more than "It's a problem. A pretty big problem. We're tackling it.", which is kinda where we are at.
I only joined D&D beyond last month after a bit of a personal windfall and I could afford to buy all the books for a third bloody time and frankly I'm just surprised to discover Tasha's implementation has such a long lead up to being fully available. When I toggled optional content on my profile, I kinda assumed that meant said content was available. That doesn't strike me as being wholly unreasonable.
I've no idea what has been said or promised in the past I can only reflect as a new user of this service I went to make a character took a dip into echo knight, pondered what fighting style would best fit and superior technique seemed to be ideal - and nothing happened.
I found my way to the forums, posted this question on the fighters thread and received 0 replies for over a week. Finally I find my way to The Tasha's faults and Bugs page and a entire list on unimplimented features that are being worked on from exchangeable spells to my bloody fighting style which are apparently super difficult to get working.
And I don't know how I feel about that, and all the money I just spent, but I'm presently somewhere between flummoxed and disappointed.
If you want to be able to have your Fighting Initiate Superior Technique and don't object to some minor homebrewing, here is a way to get it:
Homebrew a feat as a copy of Martial Adept. Name it "Fighting Initiate - Superior Technique" or such.
Change the "Total Number of Feat Options User Can Select" in Basic Information from 2 to 1.
Add the feat via Manage Feats on your character sheet, from the Features & Traits tab.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Helpful rewriter of Japanese->English translation and delver into software codebases (she/e/they)
I work in IT as a software engineer so I don't need a metaphor to understand replacing a legacy system/sub-system - which I don't mean as harshly as it sounds - but I'm in the role of customer here and I am expressing my dissatisfaction at substandard products.
Whatever their issue is, whether it's staffing, middle tier, Legacy code or whatever really isn't my problem; it's been 6 months since I paid for a product and it doesn't work as it should.
If you work in IT as a software engineer, then you really should be exercising the empathy of "things never go as well as you think they should and never take as fast as customers think it should."
They *have* been working on it, as part of another project that has taken ages due to more factors being introduced by WotC with each new book, nevermind the previous system overhaul they had to do to implement Dragonmarks, amongst other features from books released the previous year.
Telling me what I should be doing eh, classy.
Yeah, I'm a software engineer. Yeah, things sometimes don't go according to plan. However, as a professional I set delivery dates and I damn well try to deliver to them. If I can't, I have an open and frank dialogue with the customers I've let down. If there's a feature which won't be available for over half a frigging year, or indeed *features* *plural*, then it's time to apologise, explain and tell my customer when the features will be live.
What you *should* be doing is expecting a product to work when you've paid for it. Failing that, you *should* expect the company or developers who've failed to deliver that to set an expectation for redress. What you *shouldn't* be doing is telling other people what they should, or indeed should not, think or feel regards a product they have paid for.
As to this whole "set no deadlines and fail no deadlines" well sure, if a business wants to take that approach, that's their call. But if they do, it's perfectly reasonable for paying customers to keep asking for more information.
I work in IT as a software engineer so I don't need a metaphor to understand replacing a legacy system/sub-system - which I don't mean as harshly as it sounds - but I'm in the role of customer here and I am expressing my dissatisfaction at substandard products.
Whatever their issue is, whether it's staffing, middle tier, Legacy code or whatever really isn't my problem; it's been 6 months since I paid for a product and it doesn't work as it should.
If you work in IT as a software engineer, then you really should be exercising the empathy of "things never go as well as you think they should and never take as fast as customers think it should."
They *have* been working on it, as part of another project that has taken ages due to more factors being introduced by WotC with each new book, nevermind the previous system overhaul they had to do to implement Dragonmarks, amongst other features from books released the previous year.
It is one thing to acknowledge that things happen. It is another to take a 'Deadlines are just guidelines' position.
Except the Beyond team doesn't *give* a deadline for EXACTLY this reason. Things will be released when they are done, and they don't want to cause a riot when they say "yeah this would be done by this time" and then it inevitably isn't.
And that's their choice.
There are advantages to this.
However, there are downsides - mainly that people will ask when it's going to be ready. Which is entirely reasonable.
Moreover, as there is *no way* of finding out what is fixed beyond reading these threads and watching YT videos from the developers, it's entirely sensible for people to make themselves heard in these threads.
If they had some sort of public notification system which dropped me an email when they'd resolved an issue I was following, I'd not be here right now. Especially if I was able to vote to prioritise.
In the most recent Dev Update they've mentioned that they intend to do exactly this; to track reported issues and inform people when the reported issues have been resolved!
In the most recent Dev Update they've mentioned that they intend to do exactly this; to track reported issues and inform people when the reported issues have been resolved!
That'd be nice.
Until then, there's gonna be pissed off customers who feel in the dark.
Homebrew a feat as a copy of Martial Adept. Name it "Fighting Initiate - Superior Technique" or such.
Change the "Total Number of Feat Options User Can Select" in Basic Information from 2 to 1.
Add the feat via Manage Feats on your character sheet, from the Features & Traits tab.
Thanks. I did try taking the Martial Adept feat and only selecting one of the two options for maneuvers. I was not aware you could home brew feats so will give that a go.
While I am grateful for the workaround, does this strike anyone else that we're having to game the system (artificially upping the number of feats I can take just to jerry-rig a solution) while if it works will be good still feels awkward - like isn't that going to be game breaking if later in a campaign I want to take a feat for gameplay reasons?
Guess we'll just have to wait and see if this big update actually fixes the problem. I sure hope it does.
Just tried making a Warforged Abdjuration Wizard build with a 1 level dip into Clockwork Soul Sorceror to pick up clockwork magic and replace the free alarm spell I get with the much more functional Armour of Agyths, pinching from the warlock list.
Oh but fancy that - yet another road block of an unintegrated Tasha's feature!
I am having a truly disturbing run of bad luck thinking up character concepts using features D&D Beyond hasn't implemented yet!
So, last time the work around solution was homebrewing a feat to get the fighting style I wanted working. Any ideas on how I can get the spell I want onto my character sheet from a list I should have access to but currently don't because reasons?
Just tried making a Warforged Abdjuration Wizard build with a 1 level dip into Clockwork Soul Sorceror to pick up clockwork magic and replace the free alarm spell I get with the much more functional Armour of Agyths, pinching from the warlock list.
Oh but fancy that - yet another road block of an unintegrated Tasha's feature!
I am having a truly disturbing run of bad luck thinking up character concepts using features D&D Beyond hasn't implemented yet!
So, last time the work around solution was homebrewing a feat to get the fighting style I wanted working. Any ideas on how I can get the spell I want onto my character sheet from a list I should have access to but currently don't because reasons?
I have a clockwork soul sorc in one of my games. I created a homebrew subclass, based on the existing one, that grants the spells they wanted instead of the default options.
However, according to RAW, I'm not certain whether you're allowed to replace alarm until sorc level 2, since the relevant feature specifies that you can only replace a clockwork spell upon gaining a sorcerer level. I could see an argument for allowing one of the clockwork spells to be replaced at level one since that counts as gaining a sorc level, but I'm fairly certain you can't replace both.
Well since I would be gaining a level in sorcerer, I think it works. And I only want to ditch Alarm to get Armour of Agyths which the text says the warlock list is available and I want this guy up in the front line where Wizards normally aren't. I am a DM most of the time and I'd allow it.
Anyhow, so the solution is to homebrew an ENTIRE subclass for a single spell? I can't just go "this spell" > "that character sheet"? Good grief! It's not exactly intuitive, is it?
Is there like a "how-to-do-that-thing" guide for that, because I'm pretty new here and haven't got the first clue what I am doing.
You can find "Delete" in the "Tools" dropdown on your post.
To homebrew the Clockwork Sorc, create a homebrew subclass using Clockwork Sorcerer as a template. Then you can go down to Spells, and Edit the Alarm one to Armor of Agythys.
Or for ease of use later, leave Alarm and just add in the other 1st-level transmutation & abjuration spells on the wizard, warlock & sorcerer lists. (Going to Game Rules | Spells and selecting Wizard, Warlock, Sorcerer, then filtering for 1st level Abjuration & Transmutation will get you the whole set to fill in.) You'll be able to select from that dropdown in the future. (DDB can't just do this for the subclass since it has to start with Alarm & Protection from Good/Evil and they don't currently have a "provide this dropdown of spells but it has to default to this 1 spell for a level first" available in their interface.)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Helpful rewriter of Japanese->English translation and delver into software codebases (she/e/they)
It doesn't necessarily walk you step-by-step through the exact process of swapping a subclass spell, but it explains what just about everything does. And swapping out a single subclass spell will be relatively easy; all you need to do is use the subclass as a template, find where Alarm is granted, and swap it with Armor of Agathys.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I’m really disappointed with dnd beyond for their lack of updates regarding the “new” sorcerer subclasses. Tashas came out 6 months ago and there havnt really been any updates about when they’re going to fix the subclass spell abilities. 6 months!
I love dnd beyond, but when I bought Tashas through them, I expected to be able to use ALL the features at least within a couple of months. But 6 months for what seems to be a fairly simple change is ridiculous.
Im not a coder or website designer, but I just don’t understand the holdup. Even if they could clarify why it’s taking so long and what the issues are that they’re trying to solve, at least then we know they’re working on it!
//Fighting Style - Superior Technique. Not functional. We don't currently have a sensible way of implementing the selection of maneuvers that wouldn't cause characters to become broken in the future. We're working on a solution for this known issue.//
The part I don't understand is there is a feat Martial Adept, which functions exactly how the Fighting Style should. You select it, It adds to the correct field on the character sheet and I am presented with two pickable drop downs for the maneuvers.
Works flawlessly.
I'm mystified, frankly, why adding a fighting style that does basically the same thing would be so difficult to implement in the 6 months since Tasha's came out.
I am certain coding a mass use website is fiendishly complex in ways I cannot begin to imagine - but this could break the game? That seems implausible given how battle maneuvers are already implemented and can we expect the Tasha's class revisions to be more/less/or fully accessible anytime soon?
Superior Technique. Yeah, sorry, was on mobile and just... A few beers deep.
Absolutely boggles my mind that Superior Technique doesn't work.
I am very close to moving to "the other" character creation service. DnD beyond seem adept at taking my money but after half a bloody year they can't be arsed to code features and feats?
Ridiculous.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
AlumniI think what a lot of it boils down to is the new Features System that's been in the works. They talked about it a lot in the latest Dev Update, among other development work. Basically, when D&D Beyond began building its services, things were relatively much simpler to implement. But recent releases have expanded into new areas of complexity, which is what the Features System plans to remedy; making everything much more modular from a coding standpoint, so that new features that behave contrary to existing ones will be far easier to implement.
I think of this situation like... If you have a spare room that needs to be repainted, but then decide to remodel your house and change where the walls stand, would you spend time repainting that spare room while remodeling? Or would your time be better served finishing the remodel, and slapping a brand new coat of paint over the newly-constructed walls? I can't say with any certainty whether that's the case here, but given all the talk in the past few months about this features rebuild, I suspect it's a "full steam ahead toward the new Features System" approach.
I work in IT as a software engineer so I don't need a metaphor to understand replacing a legacy system/sub-system - which I don't mean as harshly as it sounds - but I'm in the role of customer here and I am expressing my dissatisfaction at substandard products.
Whatever their issue is, whether it's staffing, middle tier, Legacy code or whatever really isn't my problem; it's been 6 months since I paid for a product and it doesn't work as it should.
Well in this analogy I rent my flat I can't remodel if I want to I have to live with what I am given but when my fridge packed up I notified the letting agency and it was fixed.
So a reasonable estimate of when they expect to address these issues would be, at least, welcome.
Even if the answer was "we are redesigning our core interface to make it more flexible and modular and we are 45-ish% complete" would be more than "It's a problem. A pretty big problem. We're tackling it.", which is kinda where we are at.
I only joined D&D beyond last month after a bit of a personal windfall and I could afford to buy all the books for a third bloody time and frankly I'm just surprised to discover Tasha's implementation has such a long lead up to being fully available. When I toggled optional content on my profile, I kinda assumed that meant said content was available. That doesn't strike me as being wholly unreasonable.
I've no idea what has been said or promised in the past I can only reflect as a new user of this service I went to make a character took a dip into echo knight, pondered what fighting style would best fit and superior technique seemed to be ideal - and nothing happened.
I found my way to the forums, posted this question on the fighters thread and received 0 replies for over a week. Finally I find my way to The Tasha's faults and Bugs page and a entire list on unimplimented features that are being worked on from exchangeable spells to my bloody fighting style which are apparently super difficult to get working.
And I don't know how I feel about that, and all the money I just spent, but I'm presently somewhere between flummoxed and disappointed.
If you work in IT as a software engineer, then you really should be exercising the empathy of "things never go as well as you think they should and never take as fast as customers think it should."
They *have* been working on it, as part of another project that has taken ages due to more factors being introduced by WotC with each new book, nevermind the previous system overhaul they had to do to implement Dragonmarks, amongst other features from books released the previous year.
Formerly Devan Avalon.
Trying to get your physical content on Beyond is like going to Microsoft and saying "I have a physical Playstation disk, give me a digital Xbox version!"
Except the Beyond team doesn't *give* a deadline for EXACTLY this reason. Things will be released when they are done, and they don't want to cause a riot when they say "yeah this would be done by this time" and then it inevitably isn't.
Formerly Devan Avalon.
Trying to get your physical content on Beyond is like going to Microsoft and saying "I have a physical Playstation disk, give me a digital Xbox version!"
If you want to be able to have your Fighting Initiate Superior Technique and don't object to some minor homebrewing, here is a way to get it:
Helpful rewriter of Japanese->English translation and delver into software codebases (she/e/they)
Telling me what I should be doing eh, classy.
Yeah, I'm a software engineer. Yeah, things sometimes don't go according to plan. However, as a professional I set delivery dates and I damn well try to deliver to them. If I can't, I have an open and frank dialogue with the customers I've let down. If there's a feature which won't be available for over half a frigging year, or indeed *features* *plural*, then it's time to apologise, explain and tell my customer when the features will be live.
What you *should* be doing is expecting a product to work when you've paid for it. Failing that, you *should* expect the company or developers who've failed to deliver that to set an expectation for redress. What you *shouldn't* be doing is telling other people what they should, or indeed should not, think or feel regards a product they have paid for.
As to this whole "set no deadlines and fail no deadlines" well sure, if a business wants to take that approach, that's their call. But if they do, it's perfectly reasonable for paying customers to keep asking for more information.
And that's their choice.
There are advantages to this.
However, there are downsides - mainly that people will ask when it's going to be ready. Which is entirely reasonable.
Moreover, as there is *no way* of finding out what is fixed beyond reading these threads and watching YT videos from the developers, it's entirely sensible for people to make themselves heard in these threads.
If they had some sort of public notification system which dropped me an email when they'd resolved an issue I was following, I'd not be here right now. Especially if I was able to vote to prioritise.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
AlumniIn the most recent Dev Update they've mentioned that they intend to do exactly this; to track reported issues and inform people when the reported issues have been resolved!
That'd be nice.
Until then, there's gonna be pissed off customers who feel in the dark.
Thanks. I did try taking the Martial Adept feat and only selecting one of the two options for maneuvers. I was not aware you could home brew feats so will give that a go.
While I am grateful for the workaround, does this strike anyone else that we're having to game the system (artificially upping the number of feats I can take just to jerry-rig a solution) while if it works will be good still feels awkward - like isn't that going to be game breaking if later in a campaign I want to take a feat for gameplay reasons?
Guess we'll just have to wait and see if this big update actually fixes the problem. I sure hope it does.
So, a new problem, we'll actually the same one:
Just tried making a Warforged Abdjuration Wizard build with a 1 level dip into Clockwork Soul Sorceror to pick up clockwork magic and replace the free alarm spell I get with the much more functional Armour of Agyths, pinching from the warlock list.
Oh but fancy that - yet another road block of an unintegrated Tasha's feature!
I am having a truly disturbing run of bad luck thinking up character concepts using features D&D Beyond hasn't implemented yet!
So, last time the work around solution was homebrewing a feat to get the fighting style I wanted working. Any ideas on how I can get the spell I want onto my character sheet from a list I should have access to but currently don't because reasons?
I have a clockwork soul sorc in one of my games. I created a homebrew subclass, based on the existing one, that grants the spells they wanted instead of the default options.
However, according to RAW, I'm not certain whether you're allowed to replace alarm until sorc level 2, since the relevant feature specifies that you can only replace a clockwork spell upon gaining a sorcerer level. I could see an argument for allowing one of the clockwork spells to be replaced at level one since that counts as gaining a sorc level, but I'm fairly certain you can't replace both.
Well since I would be gaining a level in sorcerer, I think it works. And I only want to ditch Alarm to get Armour of Agyths which the text says the warlock list is available and I want this guy up in the front line where Wizards normally aren't. I am a DM most of the time and I'd allow it.
Anyhow, so the solution is to homebrew an ENTIRE subclass for a single spell? I can't just go "this spell" > "that character sheet"? Good grief! It's not exactly intuitive, is it?
Is there like a "how-to-do-that-thing" guide for that, because I'm pretty new here and haven't got the first clue what I am doing.
You can find "Delete" in the "Tools" dropdown on your post.
To homebrew the Clockwork Sorc, create a homebrew subclass using Clockwork Sorcerer as a template. Then you can go down to Spells, and Edit the Alarm one to Armor of Agythys.
Or for ease of use later, leave Alarm and just add in the other 1st-level transmutation & abjuration spells on the wizard, warlock & sorcerer lists. (Going to Game Rules | Spells and selecting Wizard, Warlock, Sorcerer, then filtering for 1st level Abjuration & Transmutation will get you the whole set to fill in.) You'll be able to select from that dropdown in the future. (DDB can't just do this for the subclass since it has to start with Alarm & Protection from Good/Evil and they don't currently have a "provide this dropdown of spells but it has to default to this 1 spell for a level first" available in their interface.)
Helpful rewriter of Japanese->English translation and delver into software codebases (she/e/they)
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
AlumniThere's a pretty good overall homebrew how-to by GPyromania: https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/dungeons-dragons-discussion/homebrew-house-rules/76031-demystifying-homebrew-updated-with-spells
It doesn't necessarily walk you step-by-step through the exact process of swapping a subclass spell, but it explains what just about everything does. And swapping out a single subclass spell will be relatively easy; all you need to do is use the subclass as a template, find where Alarm is granted, and swap it with Armor of Agathys.