The smite spells as I have said before, while being "interesting" have two inherent flaws, that being concentration (at least before the attack lands) and the second being that they are under powered. Paladin would become the next Monk if they had to rely on these spells as they do not increase DPR enough and Paladin doesn't really have anything else to increase damage except other concentration spells, at least until IDS, which is it's own issue.
Now I know you commented on concentration before, so I'm not going to bother arguing for something I think we agree on. On the flip side of damage, unfortunately the smite spells have effects which can be kind of save or die (blinding smite mostly), tho at least these are coming in at later levels/tiers of play than when full casters get these effects and actually suffer from the fact that Paladin is MAD instead of SAD. Since you both need to hit (STR/DEX) and have a good save DC(CHA), so Paladin needs more investment than a spell caster for those to matter as much in the first place, which goes back into all of spell casting actually needing to be reworked and re-balanced.
The smite spells as I have said before, while being "interesting" have two inherent flaws, that being concentration (at least before the attack lands) and the second being that they are under powered. Paladin would become the next Monk if they had to rely on these spells as they do not increase DPR enough and Paladin doesn't really have anything else to increase damage except other concentration spells, at least until IDS, which is it's own issue.
Current paladin is generally considered one of the top two or three classes in the game, so it could undergo a significant nerf without becoming nonviable.
The smite spells as I have said before, while being "interesting" have two inherent flaws, that being concentration (at least before the attack lands) and the second being that they are under powered. Paladin would become the next Monk if they had to rely on these spells as they do not increase DPR enough and Paladin doesn't really have anything else to increase damage except other concentration spells, at least until IDS, which is it's own issue.
Current paladin is generally considered one of the top two or three classes in the game, so it could undergo a significant nerf without becoming nonviable.
Like not letting Divine Smite benefit from a critical hit anymore?
It's not going away because Eldritch Smite isn't going away. Both might receive further adjustments, but I wouldn't count on it. I already said why on the previous page.
The smite spells as I have said before, while being "interesting" have two inherent flaws, that being concentration (at least before the attack lands) and the second being that they are under powered. Paladin would become the next Monk if they had to rely on these spells as they do not increase DPR enough and Paladin doesn't really have anything else to increase damage except other concentration spells, at least until IDS, which is it's own issue.
Current paladin is generally considered one of the top two or three classes in the game, so it could undergo a significant nerf without becoming nonviable.
Paladin is the strongest martial class for sure but it's easily beaten out by Sorcerer, Wizard, Cleric and perhaps even Druid. The only caster I'd say Paladin beats out is Warlock, and that is only so long as they don't go Hexblade/Pact of Blade. I think a lot of people overrate Paladin's strength because of the random crit smites hitting high numbers.
Paladin is the strongest martial class for sure but it's easily beaten out by Sorcerer, Wizard, Cleric and perhaps even Druid. The only caster I'd say Paladin beats out is Warlock, and that is only so long as they don't go Hexblade/Pact of Blade. I think a lot of people overrate Paladin's strength because of the random crit smites hitting high numbers.
Crit smites don't even play into my evaluation of paladin; it's better than everything you mention other than maybe Wizard (the third top-3 candidate is Bard).
The smite spells as I have said before, while being "interesting" have two inherent flaws, that being concentration (at least before the attack lands) and the second being that they are under powered. Paladin would become the next Monk if they had to rely on these spells as they do not increase DPR enough and Paladin doesn't really have anything else to increase damage except other concentration spells, at least until IDS, which is it's own issue.
Current paladin is generally considered one of the top two or three classes in the game, so it could undergo a significant nerf without becoming nonviable.
Like not letting Divine Smite benefit from a critical hit anymore?
It's not going away because Eldritch Smite isn't going away. Both might receive further adjustments, but I wouldn't count on it. I already said why on the previous page.
I would've bet money they weren't going to monkey with critical hit rules either, especially in ways that outright break existing items and class features (Adamantine armor, Grave cleric). yet they did just that. I think maybe we're EXTREMELY FORTUNATE (see the extra emphasis there, people? It's there for a reason!) in that the design team is willing to go further than anybody expected them to and pursue some true improvement to the game, rather than just a mild, meaningless facelift.
I do not think heavy adjustment to existing classes, including the modification or deletion of existing features, is off the table. Provided the D&D Playerbase doesn't scare them off of some real, proper, meaty updates, of course.
The smite spells as I have said before, while being "interesting" have two inherent flaws, that being concentration (at least before the attack lands) and the second being that they are under powered. Paladin would become the next Monk if they had to rely on these spells as they do not increase DPR enough and Paladin doesn't really have anything else to increase damage except other concentration spells, at least until IDS, which is it's own issue.
Current paladin is generally considered one of the top two or three classes in the game, so it could undergo a significant nerf without becoming nonviable.
Like not letting Divine Smite benefit from a critical hit anymore?
It's not going away because Eldritch Smite isn't going away. Both might receive further adjustments, but I wouldn't count on it. I already said why on the previous page.
I would've bet money they weren't going to monkey with critical hit rules either, especially in ways that outright break existing items and class features (Adamantine armor, Grave cleric). yet they did just that. I think maybe we're EXTREMELY FORTUNATE (see the extra emphasis there, people? It's there for a reason!) in that the design team is willing to go further than anybody expected them to and pursue some true improvement to the game, rather than just a mild, meaningless facelift.
I do not think heavy adjustment to existing classes, including the modification or deletion of existing features, is off the table. Provided the D&D Playerbase doesn't scare them off of some real, proper, meaty updates, of course.
One thing if I may: as Pantagruel said, changing the ruling on something so rare as crits for one class, even if those crits can be big, does not do much if anything to help balance paladins. It mostly just serves to take away fun from the game.
I don't know how I feel about WotC modifying paladins, they're one of my favorite classes and I really don't want them to become fighters with a tad bit of healing. But then again, I'm willing to see what WotC thinks about modifying paladins to scale their power-level down for 1DD.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explainHERE.
Don't know if anyone's suggested anything like this, and haven't had much time to read right now, but I'd personally like the crit rules to be divided amongst the three types of D20 Tests, like this: Saving Throws = nat 1s fail, nat 20s succeed. good for drama. Ability Checks = inspiration on a nat20 (and/or on a nat 1). good for RP Attack Rolls = nat20 is double damage dice as it is now in 5e. It's the most fun. That way you get a good balance of the new and old rules, but only where they're the most fun. It also gives a distinct flavor to each of the types of D20 tests which may help new people remember the difference between the 3. Monster's not being able to crit is fine by me as I also always feel guilty as a DM when I crit. (Even if part of me inside is happy I rolled a nat20).
Personally, I'd bet on the crit changes not remaining, they seem overwhelmingly unpopular, but I'd also bet on a lot of problematic spammable actions, such as divine smite, battle master maneuvers, and stunning strike, becoming once per turn, and also on no damage that you declare after rolling being able to crit.
Paladin is the strongest martial class for sure but it's easily beaten out by Sorcerer, Wizard, Cleric and perhaps even Druid. The only caster I'd say Paladin beats out is Warlock, and that is only so long as they don't go Hexblade/Pact of Blade. I think a lot of people overrate Paladin's strength because of the random crit smites hitting high numbers.
After Tashas a Fey Wanderer, Gloomstalker or Swarmkeeper are generally more powerful than Paladins IMO, although it might not be fair to call them martials as they are more of a Gish than a Martial.
If you only consider combat it is close and it depends what you are fighting and what the environment is. If you consider all 3 pillars a Ranger runs away with it by a mile. A Fey Wanderer in particular can even do the Charisma skills better than a Paladin.
The most powerful non-Full caster I have seen played was a Goblin Fey Wanderer. Spamming Summon Fey without concentration and each Fey getting an attack and the equivalent of a charm monster every single turn and twisting it if someone saves. After 3 rounds of combat that is like 5 attacks and 3 charms and another charm or frightened if someone makes a save, while having a climb speed, swim speed and turning herself invisible as a bonus action.
Any ability that's guaranteed to inflict a condition and can be used multiple times has incredibly high potential for abuse. There's a reason practically nothing in the game works that way other than super high level spells like Power Word Stun. Honestly, they should've learned that lesson with Repelling Blast.
It is a weak condition though and actually detrimental for ranged combat, which is where you are going to use it and it is something anyone could do near automatically with a build for it without giving up as much. If you want to attack twice it is three invocations to do that AND you use a spell slot that has a more powerful condition.
At 5th level you can cast Fear. It ends a combat for multiple foes, or I can do some damage and make the enemy prone.
A Rune Knight with tavern brawler and expertise through a 1-level Rogue or Ranger dip can make an attack then use shove and pretty much automatically prone the enemy and then grapple him to keep him there .... and he can do it over and over again round after roung. While that is not technically automatic, it is nearly automatic.
Eldritch Smite can force legendary flying creatures to plummet and take additional falling damage with no recourse, and once grounded they can be trivially kept there thanks to 5e's busted grappling rules.
One corner case that is not going to come up very often and when it does there will often be another way to do this and if they are legendary they will often be resistant or immune to the non-magical falling damage.
"I'd have to pass up a more broken build" is not a reason to not balance something else that's broken. The only reason people say Pact of the Blade is crappy is because Eldritch Blast is way more broken than Eldritch Smite.
It is not as powerful as the spells you can cast with it. That is the basic problem with it, the 3 invocations you need to take is another problem. The only "broken" Warlock I have actually seen is a Bladesinger 6/Warlock that can Eldrtich Blast as part of extra attack. Other than that a blaster warlock is not that OP either.
It is a weak build that is going to get outshined in combat frequently.
The obvious thing to do in a major revision of the game is fix both, along with all the other broken things like Shapshooter, GWM, Polearm Master, Crossbow Expert, Faerie Fire, TWF (grossly underpowered at high levels), etc.
GWM, PAM and XBE are not OP either. The way to nerf these it to make all magic items random or play published adventures and don't add magic. This completely kills these builds when you are still using a non-magic Glaive or hand-crossbow at 11th level. This is how it should be too, a more rounded fighter should be able to find a weapon he can use effectively more easily.
The problem with these feats are the DMs that think they need to give a player a magic weapon they can use with their feat.
Sharpshooter is a really strong feat, but it still does not need to be nerfed IMO and faerie fire is fine.
TWF is fine too. It is a weaker choice, but the game is perf ectly playable and fun if you make that choice .... and if the DM drops random magic weapons it is going to work a lot better than the PAM-GWM build above.
Paladin is the strongest martial class for sure but it's easily beaten out by Sorcerer, Wizard, Cleric and perhaps even Druid. The only caster I'd say Paladin beats out is Warlock, and that is only so long as they don't go Hexblade/Pact of Blade. I think a lot of people overrate Paladin's strength because of the random crit smites hitting high numbers.
After Tashas a Fey Wanderer, Gloomstalker or Swarmkeeper are generally more powerful than Paladins IMO, although it might not be fair to call them martials as they are more of a Gish than a Martial.
If you only consider combat it is close and it depends what you are fighting and what the environment is. If you consider all 3 pillars a Ranger runs away with it by a mile. A Fey Wanderer in particular can even do the Charisma skills better than a Paladin.
The most powerful non-Full caster I have seen played was a Goblin Fey Wanderer. Spamming Summon Fey without concentration and each Fey getting an attack and the equivalent of a charm monster every single turn and twisting it if someone saves. After 3 rounds of combat that is like 5 attacks and 3 charms and another charm or frightened if someone makes a save, while having a climb speed, swim speed and turning herself invisible as a bonus action.
I am looking at overall class features rather than breaking down into subclasses as subclasses are not balanced against each other, Ancient Paladin breaks most spellcasters while vengence Paladin gets some of the stupidest DPS, Bear Totem Barbarian can tank anything that isn't psychic, Hexblade out does Paladin in smites while still being a full caster that gets medium armour, Bladesinger can get an AC so high it leaves Paladin and Fighter green-eyed while being able to cast Blade Ward and perform two melee attacks.
At 5th level you can cast Fear. It ends a combat for multiple foes, or I can do some damage and make the enemy prone.
You just reminded me that as a Devotion Paladin, I broke more encounters with Turn the Unholy than I ever did with Divine Smite while Crit Fishing. Since any Undead encounter is just auto-resolved, basically. It was easy to kill a flame skull when the 7 or the 9 skeletons meant to be backing it up are hiding around the corner, and my Paladin also just so happened to have Holy Water on them, so that Flame Skull was double feck'd.
The smite spells as I have said before, while being "interesting" have two inherent flaws, that being concentration (at least before the attack lands) and the second being that they are under powered. Paladin would become the next Monk if they had to rely on these spells as they do not increase DPR enough and Paladin doesn't really have anything else to increase damage except other concentration spells, at least until IDS, which is it's own issue.
Current paladin is generally considered one of the top two or three classes in the game, so it could undergo a significant nerf without becoming nonviable.
Like not letting Divine Smite benefit from a critical hit anymore?
It's not going away because Eldritch Smite isn't going away. Both might receive further adjustments, but I wouldn't count on it. I already said why on the previous page.
I would've bet money they weren't going to monkey with critical hit rules either, especially in ways that outright break existing items and class features (Adamantine armor, Grave cleric). yet they did just that. I think maybe we're EXTREMELY FORTUNATE (see the extra emphasis there, people? It's there for a reason!) in that the design team is willing to go further than anybody expected them to and pursue some true improvement to the game, rather than just a mild, meaningless facelift.
I do not think heavy adjustment to existing classes, including the modification or deletion of existing features, is off the table. Provided the D&D Playerbase doesn't scare them off of some real, proper, meaty updates, of course.
I do think it's reasonable to expect some changes to base class features. I do not, however, think it's reasonable to expect entire redesigns. Everything is intended to be backwards compatible, so subclass features are still going to be acquired at the same levels. The base ranger features that can be replaced with alternates in Tasha's will likely still exist, though they might behave differently. And, yes, Divine Smite is probably not going to be limited to just once per turn. Just removing the ability to land critical hits makes it far less appealing. We'll probably see some changes to encourage more spellcasting, instead, to make that seem competitive.
That said, I sincerely hope the ranger's spellcasting changes from known to prepared. And did everyone catch how druids now have access to hunter's mark? Actually, not just druids. The suggested background for the sorcerer in the PHB is Hermit, and the OD&D equivalent comes with Magic Initiate (Primal). We might see a resurgence of some interesting gish builds. Never mind stuff like the elf/wizard/acolyte from LMoP showing up to play with three divine spells: two cantrips and a 1st-level spell. Shoot, a School of Evocation wizard with sacred flame and guiding bolt?! Forget not being able to land critical hits with spells. That, right there, is exciting.
And good catch with the adamantine armor and Grave Domain. A total loss of enemy critical hits would be disappointing. Then I remember that some NPCs, like the assassin, can expressly land critical hits. We might see a new trait that allows certain monsters to do so, or maybe Legendary creatures can, or they might just walk this change back. This is what the survey is for. We should be looking for ways this can or does break the game. It's a stress test.
Speaking of which, I've got one more game tonight for playtesting before filling it out tomorrow.
That said, I sincerely hope the ranger's spellcasting changes from known to prepared. And did everyone catch how druids now have access to hunter's mark?
Wizard, Sorcerer and Bard also have access to Hex too... also armor of agathys. Potentially Ranger and Paladin also getting Cantrips, would be nice.
That said, I sincerely hope the ranger's spellcasting changes from known to prepared. And did everyone catch how druids now have access to hunter's mark?
Wizard, Sorcerer and Bard also have access to Hex too... also armor of agathys. Potentially Ranger and Paladin also getting Cantrips, would be nice.
I don't think class spell lists are going anywhere. Bard, for one, has spells from all three lists right now. Reducing bard to just arcane would strip the class from most of its support tools - and turn the bard into blaster.
That said, I sincerely hope the ranger's spellcasting changes from known to prepared. And did everyone catch how druids now have access to hunter's mark?
Wizard, Sorcerer and Bard also have access to Hex too... also armor of agathys. Potentially Ranger and Paladin also getting Cantrips, would be nice.
I don't think class spell lists are going anywhere. Bard, for one, has spells from all three lists right now. Reducing bard to just arcane would strip the class from most of its support tools - and turn the bard into blaster.
Bard is going arcane (it's written in the PlayTest already), Jeremy Crawford said we would get to see how classes will gain access to spells from other lists, to me, that comment seemed most likely about Bard.
An Arcane Spelldraws on the ambient magic of the multiverse. Bards, Sorcerers, Warlocks, and Wizardsharness this magic, as do Artificers.
It is a weak condition though and actually detrimental for ranged combat, which is where you are going to use it and it is something anyone could do near automatically with a build for it without giving up as much.
Inflicting advantage on received attacks, disadvantage on their attacks and halved movement isn't weak. Bringing down flying enemies without a save isn't weak.
The most common ways of breaking 5e combat involve some form of advantage that's way too inexpensive/reliable (e.g. grapple + prone, Farie Fire, Stunning Strike), some ability that amplifies the benefits of advantage, (GWF, Sharpshooter), shutting down enemies without due process (5e grapple/shove rules, Levitate, Earthbind, Eldritch Smite) or some way to bypass the normal action economy (Divine Smite converts too many spell slots to damage per turn without costing any actions; Stunning Strike forces too many stun saves without costing any actions.)
The fact that Eldritch Smite inflicts advantage, has no save, can be used from long range and can't be wasted opens it up to abuse. And these things tend to compound on each other, like the current meta of easy advantage source plus broken feat demonstrates. It has to be nipped in the bud and an edition change is the perfect time to do it. Because if the usual culprits get nerfed into proper balance, min/maxers will just move down the list.
At 5th level you can cast Fear. It ends a combat for multiple foes, or I can do some damage and make the enemy prone.
Statistically unlikely to work on everyone in a group, and it has a save per round. Also cost you the opportunity to cast Fireball instead.
A Rune Knight with tavern brawler and expertise through a 1-level Rogue or Ranger dip can make an attack then use shove and pretty much automatically prone the enemy and then grapple him to keep him there .... and he can do it over and over again round after roung. While that is not technically automatic, it is nearly automatic.
I agree. Which is why the grapple and shove rules are broken and also desperately need revision. But also note that strategy's not easily applied to flyers unless, I don't know, you had a way to knock them out of the sky easily. Flying yourself also works, of course, but comes with its own risks.
One corner case that is not going to come up very often and when it does there will often be another way to do this and if they are legendary they will often be resistant or immune to the non-magical falling damage.
There is no such immunity, unless they can levitate and simply don't fall. Falling isn't an attack.
GWM, PAM and XBE are not OP either.
I call boosting your DPS another 50% on top of the large increase you already have from advantage pretty broken. Any build with those feats is on another weight class than the alternatives. They produce a degenerate strategy where the solution to almost every combat is to get advantage by any means and go to town. In the case of Sharpshooter it even removes the usual counterplay for ranged attacks (cover, long range.) And because they're very obviously the best options, they also limit the range of player builds because anything else would be clearly suboptimal.
I don't think anyone on this forum has spent as much time as me comparing builds on spreadsheets and AnyDice. Trust me, I know where the outliers are in theory and I've seen many of these dumb rules break games in practice. I've been on the player and DM side of most of these exploits. Squashing the 5% of content that's game breaking would let the other 95% of player options thrive, make the DM's planning a lot easier and lead to fewer anticlimactic fights for players.
That said, I sincerely hope the ranger's spellcasting changes from known to prepared. And did everyone catch how druids now have access to hunter's mark?
Wizard, Sorcerer and Bard also have access to Hex too... also armor of agathys. Potentially Ranger and Paladin also getting Cantrips, would be nice.
I don't think class spell lists are going anywhere. Bard, for one, has spells from all three lists right now. Reducing bard to just arcane would strip the class from most of its support tools - and turn the bard into blaster.
Bard is going arcane (it's written in the PlayTest already), Jeremy Crawford said we would get to see how classes will gain access to spells from other lists, to me, that comment seemed most likely about Bard.
An Arcane Spelldraws on the ambient magic of the multiverse. Bards, Sorcerers, Warlocks, and Wizardsharness this magic, as do Artificers.
Bards have been arcane spellcasters since at least 3rd edition. Every class will also have its own spell list to expand on the core options. This will, however, shake the bard up considerably. That's a whole mess of it doesn't normally have access to.
Bards have been arcane spellcasters since at least 3rd edition. Every class will also have its own spell list to expand on the core options. This will, however, shake the bard up considerably. That's a whole mess of it doesn't normally have access to.
Bards used the druid spell list in 1st edition AD&D, wizard spell list in 2nd edition (though they were roughly 2/3 casters).
That said, I sincerely hope the ranger's spellcasting changes from known to prepared. And did everyone catch how druids now have access to hunter's mark?
Wizard, Sorcerer and Bard also have access to Hex too... also armor of agathys. Potentially Ranger and Paladin also getting Cantrips, would be nice.
I don't think class spell lists are going anywhere. Bard, for one, has spells from all three lists right now. Reducing bard to just arcane would strip the class from most of its support tools - and turn the bard into blaster.
Bard is going arcane (it's written in the PlayTest already), Jeremy Crawford said we would get to see how classes will gain access to spells from other lists, to me, that comment seemed most likely about Bard.
An Arcane Spelldraws on the ambient magic of the multiverse. Bards, Sorcerers, Warlocks, and Wizardsharness this magic, as do Artificers.
Bards have been arcane spellcasters since at least 3rd edition. Every class will also have its own spell list to expand on the core options. This will, however, shake the bard up considerably. That's a whole mess of it doesn't normally have access to.
I really dunno what I think about the three main spell lists. I'm interested, if a bit apprehensive, to see how it plays out.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explainHERE.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The smite spells as I have said before, while being "interesting" have two inherent flaws, that being concentration (at least before the attack lands) and the second being that they are under powered. Paladin would become the next Monk if they had to rely on these spells as they do not increase DPR enough and Paladin doesn't really have anything else to increase damage except other concentration spells, at least until IDS, which is it's own issue.
Now I know you commented on concentration before, so I'm not going to bother arguing for something I think we agree on. On the flip side of damage, unfortunately the smite spells have effects which can be kind of save or die (blinding smite mostly), tho at least these are coming in at later levels/tiers of play than when full casters get these effects and actually suffer from the fact that Paladin is MAD instead of SAD. Since you both need to hit (STR/DEX) and have a good save DC(CHA), so Paladin needs more investment than a spell caster for those to matter as much in the first place, which goes back into all of spell casting actually needing to be reworked and re-balanced.
Current paladin is generally considered one of the top two or three classes in the game, so it could undergo a significant nerf without becoming nonviable.
Like not letting Divine Smite benefit from a critical hit anymore?
It's not going away because Eldritch Smite isn't going away. Both might receive further adjustments, but I wouldn't count on it. I already said why on the previous page.
Paladin is the strongest martial class for sure but it's easily beaten out by Sorcerer, Wizard, Cleric and perhaps even Druid. The only caster I'd say Paladin beats out is Warlock, and that is only so long as they don't go Hexblade/Pact of Blade. I think a lot of people overrate Paladin's strength because of the random crit smites hitting high numbers.
Crit smites don't even play into my evaluation of paladin; it's better than everything you mention other than maybe Wizard (the third top-3 candidate is Bard).
I would've bet money they weren't going to monkey with critical hit rules either, especially in ways that outright break existing items and class features (Adamantine armor, Grave cleric). yet they did just that. I think maybe we're EXTREMELY FORTUNATE (see the extra emphasis there, people? It's there for a reason!) in that the design team is willing to go further than anybody expected them to and pursue some true improvement to the game, rather than just a mild, meaningless facelift.
I do not think heavy adjustment to existing classes, including the modification or deletion of existing features, is off the table. Provided the D&D Playerbase doesn't scare them off of some real, proper, meaty updates, of course.
Please do not contact or message me.
One thing if I may: as Pantagruel said, changing the ruling on something so rare as crits for one class, even if those crits can be big, does not do much if anything to help balance paladins. It mostly just serves to take away fun from the game.
I don't know how I feel about WotC modifying paladins, they're one of my favorite classes and I really don't want them to become fighters with a tad bit of healing. But then again, I'm willing to see what WotC thinks about modifying paladins to scale their power-level down for 1DD.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.Don't know if anyone's suggested anything like this, and haven't had much time to read right now,
but I'd personally like the crit rules to be divided amongst the three types of D20 Tests, like this:
Saving Throws = nat 1s fail, nat 20s succeed. good for drama.
Ability Checks = inspiration on a nat20 (and/or on a nat 1). good for RP
Attack Rolls = nat20 is double damage dice as it is now in 5e. It's the most fun.
That way you get a good balance of the new and old rules, but only where they're the most fun. It also gives a distinct flavor to each of the types of D20 tests which may help new people remember the difference between the 3.
Monster's not being able to crit is fine by me as I also always feel guilty as a DM when I crit. (Even if part of me inside is happy I rolled a nat20).
Personally, I'd bet on the crit changes not remaining, they seem overwhelmingly unpopular, but I'd also bet on a lot of problematic spammable actions, such as divine smite, battle master maneuvers, and stunning strike, becoming once per turn, and also on no damage that you declare after rolling being able to crit.
After Tashas a Fey Wanderer, Gloomstalker or Swarmkeeper are generally more powerful than Paladins IMO, although it might not be fair to call them martials as they are more of a Gish than a Martial.
If you only consider combat it is close and it depends what you are fighting and what the environment is. If you consider all 3 pillars a Ranger runs away with it by a mile. A Fey Wanderer in particular can even do the Charisma skills better than a Paladin.
The most powerful non-Full caster I have seen played was a Goblin Fey Wanderer. Spamming Summon Fey without concentration and each Fey getting an attack and the equivalent of a charm monster every single turn and twisting it if someone saves. After 3 rounds of combat that is like 5 attacks and 3 charms and another charm or frightened if someone makes a save, while having a climb speed, swim speed and turning herself invisible as a bonus action.
It is a weak condition though and actually detrimental for ranged combat, which is where you are going to use it and it is something anyone could do near automatically with a build for it without giving up as much. If you want to attack twice it is three invocations to do that AND you use a spell slot that has a more powerful condition.
At 5th level you can cast Fear. It ends a combat for multiple foes, or I can do some damage and make the enemy prone.
A Rune Knight with tavern brawler and expertise through a 1-level Rogue or Ranger dip can make an attack then use shove and pretty much automatically prone the enemy and then grapple him to keep him there .... and he can do it over and over again round after roung. While that is not technically automatic, it is nearly automatic.
One corner case that is not going to come up very often and when it does there will often be another way to do this and if they are legendary they will often be resistant or immune to the non-magical falling damage.
It is not as powerful as the spells you can cast with it. That is the basic problem with it, the 3 invocations you need to take is another problem. The only "broken" Warlock I have actually seen is a Bladesinger 6/Warlock that can Eldrtich Blast as part of extra attack. Other than that a blaster warlock is not that OP either.
It is a weak build that is going to get outshined in combat frequently.
GWM, PAM and XBE are not OP either. The way to nerf these it to make all magic items random or play published adventures and don't add magic. This completely kills these builds when you are still using a non-magic Glaive or hand-crossbow at 11th level. This is how it should be too, a more rounded fighter should be able to find a weapon he can use effectively more easily.
The problem with these feats are the DMs that think they need to give a player a magic weapon they can use with their feat.
Sharpshooter is a really strong feat, but it still does not need to be nerfed IMO and faerie fire is fine.
TWF is fine too. It is a weaker choice, but the game is perf ectly playable and fun if you make that choice .... and if the DM drops random magic weapons it is going to work a lot better than the PAM-GWM build above.
I am looking at overall class features rather than breaking down into subclasses as subclasses are not balanced against each other, Ancient Paladin breaks most spellcasters while vengence Paladin gets some of the stupidest DPS, Bear Totem Barbarian can tank anything that isn't psychic, Hexblade out does Paladin in smites while still being a full caster that gets medium armour, Bladesinger can get an AC so high it leaves Paladin and Fighter green-eyed while being able to cast Blade Ward and perform two melee attacks.
You just reminded me that as a Devotion Paladin, I broke more encounters with Turn the Unholy than I ever did with Divine Smite while Crit Fishing. Since any Undead encounter is just auto-resolved, basically. It was easy to kill a flame skull when the 7 or the 9 skeletons meant to be backing it up are hiding around the corner, and my Paladin also just so happened to have Holy Water on them, so that Flame Skull was double feck'd.
I do think it's reasonable to expect some changes to base class features. I do not, however, think it's reasonable to expect entire redesigns. Everything is intended to be backwards compatible, so subclass features are still going to be acquired at the same levels. The base ranger features that can be replaced with alternates in Tasha's will likely still exist, though they might behave differently. And, yes, Divine Smite is probably not going to be limited to just once per turn. Just removing the ability to land critical hits makes it far less appealing. We'll probably see some changes to encourage more spellcasting, instead, to make that seem competitive.
That said, I sincerely hope the ranger's spellcasting changes from known to prepared. And did everyone catch how druids now have access to hunter's mark? Actually, not just druids. The suggested background for the sorcerer in the PHB is Hermit, and the OD&D equivalent comes with Magic Initiate (Primal). We might see a resurgence of some interesting gish builds. Never mind stuff like the elf/wizard/acolyte from LMoP showing up to play with three divine spells: two cantrips and a 1st-level spell. Shoot, a School of Evocation wizard with sacred flame and guiding bolt?! Forget not being able to land critical hits with spells. That, right there, is exciting.
And good catch with the adamantine armor and Grave Domain. A total loss of enemy critical hits would be disappointing. Then I remember that some NPCs, like the assassin, can expressly land critical hits. We might see a new trait that allows certain monsters to do so, or maybe Legendary creatures can, or they might just walk this change back. This is what the survey is for. We should be looking for ways this can or does break the game. It's a stress test.
Speaking of which, I've got one more game tonight for playtesting before filling it out tomorrow.
Wizard, Sorcerer and Bard also have access to Hex too... also armor of agathys. Potentially Ranger and Paladin also getting Cantrips, would be nice.
I don't think class spell lists are going anywhere. Bard, for one, has spells from all three lists right now. Reducing bard to just arcane would strip the class from most of its support tools - and turn the bard into blaster.
Bard is going arcane (it's written in the PlayTest already), Jeremy Crawford said we would get to see how classes will gain access to spells from other lists, to me, that comment seemed most likely about Bard.
Inflicting advantage on received attacks, disadvantage on their attacks and halved movement isn't weak. Bringing down flying enemies without a save isn't weak.
The most common ways of breaking 5e combat involve some form of advantage that's way too inexpensive/reliable (e.g. grapple + prone, Farie Fire, Stunning Strike), some ability that amplifies the benefits of advantage, (GWF, Sharpshooter), shutting down enemies without due process (5e grapple/shove rules, Levitate, Earthbind, Eldritch Smite) or some way to bypass the normal action economy (Divine Smite converts too many spell slots to damage per turn without costing any actions; Stunning Strike forces too many stun saves without costing any actions.)
The fact that Eldritch Smite inflicts advantage, has no save, can be used from long range and can't be wasted opens it up to abuse. And these things tend to compound on each other, like the current meta of easy advantage source plus broken feat demonstrates. It has to be nipped in the bud and an edition change is the perfect time to do it. Because if the usual culprits get nerfed into proper balance, min/maxers will just move down the list.
Statistically unlikely to work on everyone in a group, and it has a save per round. Also cost you the opportunity to cast Fireball instead.
I agree. Which is why the grapple and shove rules are broken and also desperately need revision. But also note that strategy's not easily applied to flyers unless, I don't know, you had a way to knock them out of the sky easily. Flying yourself also works, of course, but comes with its own risks.
There is no such immunity, unless they can levitate and simply don't fall. Falling isn't an attack.
I call boosting your DPS another 50% on top of the large increase you already have from advantage pretty broken. Any build with those feats is on another weight class than the alternatives. They produce a degenerate strategy where the solution to almost every combat is to get advantage by any means and go to town. In the case of Sharpshooter it even removes the usual counterplay for ranged attacks (cover, long range.) And because they're very obviously the best options, they also limit the range of player builds because anything else would be clearly suboptimal.
I don't think anyone on this forum has spent as much time as me comparing builds on spreadsheets and AnyDice. Trust me, I know where the outliers are in theory and I've seen many of these dumb rules break games in practice. I've been on the player and DM side of most of these exploits. Squashing the 5% of content that's game breaking would let the other 95% of player options thrive, make the DM's planning a lot easier and lead to fewer anticlimactic fights for players.
The Forum Infestation (TM)
Bards have been arcane spellcasters since at least 3rd edition. Every class will also have its own spell list to expand on the core options. This will, however, shake the bard up considerably. That's a whole mess of it doesn't normally have access to.
Bards used the druid spell list in 1st edition AD&D, wizard spell list in 2nd edition (though they were roughly 2/3 casters).
I really dunno what I think about the three main spell lists. I'm interested, if a bit apprehensive, to see how it plays out.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.