Personally, I don't think the change to sneak attack was that big of a nerf. It just means that you don't get to use it on other peoples turns. So is that annoying? Yeah, I'd honestly rather have had it not be changed. But that being said, rogues have no in-built damage dealing reactions, so using sneak attack on other peoples turns doesn't happen much, and imagine how annoying it was to the DM knowing the rogue can deal 10-gazillion damage as an OA and having the monster not know that. This isn't a big nerf, it's a minor tweak. The only build this really messes with is rogues who multiclassed to get attacks as reactions, and builds like that are extremely rare.
And as an aside, yay Thief! They seem to have a lot more cool and unique abilities and I'm much more interested in playing the 1DD version of them than I am in playing the 5e subclass. It's also neat to see how they get some abilities to interact with magic devices, which makes sense because they'd probably need to be able to use the things they stole. Also, who noticed where it said "Rogues have an almost supernatural knack for, and a few learn magical tricks to supplement their other abilities." Meaning, we're almost certainly keeping Arcane Trickster or something like it! This doesn't come as a surprise, but it's still nice to know that some rogues will have access to magic.
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.
The biggest problem/question I have is with the name. Experts? When they're the jack of all trade classes? They're not the best in melee, not the best in magic, not the best in healing nor have they the closest connection to nature, etc... If anything they're dilletantes.
Not much change with the Rogue, Thief is improved a bit, but isn't really all that different.
Sorry, late to the party and just saw this thread, but I believe they did nerf Rogue as they can only get one sneak attack on their turn, not “a turn”. So no more multiple SA in a round, not that you could stack that many. Unless I read it wrong.
Sneak Attack also can’t proc off of booming blade anymore either.
The biggest problem/question I have is with the name. Experts? When they're the jack of all trade classes? They're not the best in melee, not the best in magic, not the best in healing nor have they the closest connection to nature, etc... If anything they're dilletantes.
Only bard is a jack of all trades class (literally), and even then they still get expertise. Rogues and bards, through their Expertise feature, got to be the best at a bunch of things. Rangers, who really should have been able to be the best at sneaking and tracking and stuff, now get to be the best too.
Now has access to all arcane spells within the specified schools. Limited by preparation but arguably more access than they currently do.
Fewer inspirations but can heal with them on a reaction.
Automatically have healing spells prepared in addition to whatever they choose to
Magical secrets now are also preparation, with the main choice being the category.
Are Bards now intended as party healers? And by 15th, a bard can have access to all divine spells, all primal spells and half of all arcane spells. I am generally pro-bard, but that seems... a bit much
I don't think they are. Song of Restoration + healing BI are replacements for the loss of Song of Rest and natural healing spells. Bards are now really good at keeping people on their feet mid battle, but are kinda crappy outside of it.
Most games will end before you see Magical Secrets so I can't count that towards average bard healer attempts.
Looks much improved, but why is 'Conjure Barrage' a Hunter subclass ability? That is more a military field action style ability. It is like hunting game with a field howitzer firing HE rounds. It is a great ability but makes no sense for the subclass.
Old hunter had a mini, non magical version of it at that level. Makes sense to me to use the spell instead of the odd version Hunter had.
Personally, I don't think the change to sneak attack was that big of a nerf. It just means that you don't get to use it on other peoples turns. So is that annoying? Yeah, I'd honestly rather have had it not be changed. But that being said, rogues have no in-built damage dealing reactions, so using sneak attack on other peoples turns doesn't happen much, and imagine how annoying it was to the DM knowing the rogue can deal 10-gazillion damage as an OA and having the monster not know that. This isn't a big nerf, it's a minor tweak. The only build this really messes with is rogues who multiclassed to get attacks as reactions, and builds like that are extremely rare.
And as an aside, yay Thief! They seem to have a lot more cool and unique abilities and I'm much more interested in playing the 1DD version of them than I am in playing the 5e subclass. It's also neat to see how they get some abilities to interact with magic devices, which makes sense because they'd probably need to be able to use the things they stole. Also, who noticed where it said "Rogues have an almost supernatural knack for, and a few learn magical tricks to supplement their other abilities." Meaning, we're almost certainly keeping Arcane Trickster or something like it! This doesn't come as a surprise, but it's still nice to know that some rogues will have access to magic.
I had not yet taken much of a look at the subclass, but although it says that the thief has a chance not to expend a charge when using a charged item, I don't see anything there about using other class' magic items. The 5e version is 3 levels later at 13th, but has the line "You ignore all class, race, and level requirements on the use of magic items."
The 1DD version can attune an extra item and has a chance to successfully use a cantrip or 1st level spell scroll, vs being able to use any item, including a scroll of higher level than the rogue.
True, I guess both versions have their trade-offs as well as benefits. But being able to attune to a fourth item, the special "Don't use charges if you're lucky," and the limited spell scroll use, all three levels lower, are still very cool abilities. Personally, I think 1DD'S version of Magic Device is cooler, even if it's not as powerful.
Anyways, the coolest thing I like about this Thief is that at level 14, they can use Cunning Action in addition to another bonus action an amount of times per a day equal to their proficiency bonus. The amount of versatility and coolness this feature gives the Thief subclass is immeasurable. And yes I know 5e's Thieves can take 2 turns in the first round of initiative at level 17. But at that level, a 10 in initiative is not very high, and you can only do this once per an encounter and can't pick when and when not to use it. Again, this feature also comes 3 levels later.
So I guess Thieves may not be that much more powerful. The difference between power level in 1DD's and 5e's version of this isn't massive. But either way, I really like 1DD's Thieves, and I think the game's designers did a great job at keeping them cool, unique and interesting, for the next edition. I look forward to playing them.
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.
In 5e, the only magic items a thief would really want to use with UMD was the Robe of the Archmage and a finesse Holy Avenger. And the robe was just as good as getting +3 armor w/ a spell mantle for the thief, with the latter being much more accessable and the former better in the hands of the party mage.
Needless to say, using either rarely came up. So this is rather a straight improvement no matter how you look at it.
In 5e, the only magic items a thief would really want to use with UMD was the Robe of the Archmage and a finesse Holy Avenger. And the robe was just as good as getting +3 armor w/ a spell mantle for the thief, with the latter being much more accessable and the former better in the hands of the party mage.
Needless to say, using either rarely came up. So this is rather a straight improvement no matter how you look at it.
Staves and wands were another area it panned out for thieves in 5e, though I guess a feat would get you the "spellcaster" requirement for many of them so it was not a huge benefit, but still tings like staff of fire etc needed a class. Overall the new version seems to be a wash, and thief took a hit with both fast hands and thief reflexes so overall I think the sub class is worse. Too bad the base rogue also got wrecked so hard.
Personally, I don't think the change to sneak attack was that big of a nerf. It just means that you don't get to use it on other peoples turns. So is that annoying? Yeah, I'd honestly rather have had it not be changed. But that being said, rogues have no in-built damage dealing reactions, so using sneak attack on other peoples turns doesn't happen much, and imagine how annoying it was to the DM knowing the rogue can deal 10-gazillion damage as an OA and having the monster not know that. This isn't a big nerf, it's a minor tweak. The only build this really messes with is rogues who multiclassed to get attacks as reactions, and builds like that are extremely rare.
And as an aside, yay Thief! They seem to have a lot more cool and unique abilities and I'm much more interested in playing the 1DD version of them than I am in playing the 5e subclass. It's also neat to see how they get some abilities to interact with magic devices, which makes sense because they'd probably need to be able to use the things they stole. Also, who noticed where it said "Rogues have an almost supernatural knack for, and a few learn magical tricks to supplement their other abilities." Meaning, we're almost certainly keeping Arcane Trickster or something like it! This doesn't come as a surprise, but it's still nice to know that some rogues will have access to magic.
I had not yet taken much of a look at the subclass, but although it says that the thief has a chance not to expend a charge when using a charged item, I don't see anything there about using other class' magic items. The 5e version is 3 levels later at 13th, but has the line "You ignore all class, race, and level requirements on the use of magic items."
The 1DD version can attune an extra item and has a chance to successfully use a cantrip or 1st level spell scroll, vs being able to use any item, including a scroll of higher level than the rogue.
True, I guess both versions have their trade-offs as well as benefits. But being able to attune to a fourth item, the special "Don't use charges if you're lucky," and the limited spell scroll use, all three levels lower, are still very cool abilities. Personally, I think 1DD'S version of Magic Device is cooler, even if it's not as powerful.
Anyways, the coolest thing I like about this Thief is that at level 14, they can use Cunning Action in addition to another bonus action an amount of times per a day equal to their proficiency bonus. The amount of versatility and coolness this feature gives the Thief subclass is immeasurable. And yes I know 5e's Thieves can take 2 turns in the first round of initiative at level 17. But at that level, a 10 in initiative is not very high, and you can only do this once per an encounter and can't pick when and when not to use it. Again, this feature also comes 3 levels later.
So I guess Thieves may not be that much more powerful. The difference between power level in 1DD's and 5e's version of this isn't massive. But either way, I really like 1DD's Thieves, and I think the game's designers did a great job at keeping them cool, unique and interesting, for the next edition. I look forward to playing them.
The 5e version has an unlimited use of spell scrolls (since they are also magic items) and you have to have a charged item you can use for the charge thing to matter. Most charged items recharge in the morning anyway so how often is a 1/6 chance of having an extra charge available really going to matter?
1/6 percent of the time I assume, and it can make a big difference then. But also, you can attune to a fourth magic item, and you get this feature 3 levels earlier. Anyways, I think 1DD's Thief is really cool. Maybe Magic Device isn't as strong as it used to be, but they also give it out three levels earlier and it's still cool and relatively useful. Yes, it may not be as powerful as before, but they had to make it slightly less powerful so it can be given earlier, and I think the most important part of an ability is not just how powerful it is but how, cool, unique, and interesting it is. But maybe that's just me.
Quote from Kotath>>In other news, it now takes an action to remember things?????
STUDY [ACTION] When you take the Study Action, you make an Intelligence Check to study your memory, a book, a creature, a clue, an object, or another source of knowledge and call to mind an important piece of information about it. The Areas of Knowledge table suggests which Skills are applicable when you take this Action, depending on the area of knowledge the Intelligence Check is about
No thinking in combat? (With the Keen Mind feat, you can think using a bonus action. Yay you?)
Yeah, study is a little ridiculous. It means that thinking is an action and studying and understanding the gist of a whole book is one two. I don't think either of those should be an action, and I think they should take very different amounts of time, but again, that's just me. You're the second other person I've seen on the forums to think it's kind of ridiculous too.
It is worth mentioning that this is UA stuff and commentary need not be all or nothing. It is fair game to criticize parts without needing it all to stay 5e.
No thinking in combat? (With the Keen Mind feat, you can think using a bonus action. Yay you?)
Requiring an action to delve through your memory for obscure facts seems reasonable enough. In general I would split knowledge between "readily available", "available with some searching", and "missing", and I'd require an action to remember anything in the second category. 5e doesn't have a particularly easy way of deciding what fits in which category; I'd be tempted by a rule such as "if you beat the DC by 10 you know without spending an action" but that's probably more complexity than they want.
Personally, I don't think the change to sneak attack was that big of a nerf. It just means that you don't get to use it on other peoples turns. So is that annoying? Yeah, I'd honestly rather have had it not be changed. But that being said, rogues have no in-built damage dealing reactions, so using sneak attack on other peoples turns doesn't happen much, and imagine how annoying it was to the DM knowing the rogue can deal 10-gazillion damage as an OA and having the monster not know that. This isn't a big nerf, it's a minor tweak. The only build this really messes with is rogues who multiclassed to get attacks as reactions, and builds like that are extremely rare.
And as an aside, yay Thief! They seem to have a lot more cool and unique abilities and I'm much more interested in playing the 1DD version of them than I am in playing the 5e subclass. It's also neat to see how they get some abilities to interact with magic devices, which makes sense because they'd probably need to be able to use the things they stole. Also, who noticed where it said "Rogues have an almost supernatural knack for, and a few learn magical tricks to supplement their other abilities." Meaning, we're almost certainly keeping Arcane Trickster or something like it! This doesn't come as a surprise, but it's still nice to know that some rogues will have access to magic.
I had not yet taken much of a look at the subclass, but although it says that the thief has a chance not to expend a charge when using a charged item, I don't see anything there about using other class' magic items. The 5e version is 3 levels later at 13th, but has the line "You ignore all class, race, and level requirements on the use of magic items."
The 1DD version can attune an extra item and has a chance to successfully use a cantrip or 1st level spell scroll, vs being able to use any item, including a scroll of higher level than the rogue.
True, I guess both versions have their trade-offs as well as benefits. But being able to attune to a fourth item, the special "Don't use charges if you're lucky," and the limited spell scroll use, all three levels lower, are still very cool abilities. Personally, I think 1DD'S version of Magic Device is cooler, even if it's not as powerful.
Anyways, the coolest thing I like about this Thief is that at level 14, they can use Cunning Action in addition to another bonus action an amount of times per a day equal to their proficiency bonus. The amount of versatility and coolness this feature gives the Thief subclass is immeasurable. And yes I know 5e's Thieves can take 2 turns in the first round of initiative at level 17. But at that level, a 10 in initiative is not very high, and you can only do this once per an encounter and can't pick when and when not to use it. Again, this feature also comes 3 levels later.
So I guess Thieves may not be that much more powerful. The difference between power level in 1DD's and 5e's version of this isn't massive. But either way, I really like 1DD's Thieves, and I think the game's designers did a great job at keeping them cool, unique and interesting, for the next edition. I look forward to playing them.
The 5e version has an unlimited use of spell scrolls (since they are also magic items) and you have to have a charged item you can use for the charge thing to matter. Most charged items recharge in the morning anyway so how often is a 1/6 chance of having an extra charge available really going to matter?
1/6 percent of the time I assume, and it can make a big difference then. But also, you can attune to a fourth magic item, and you get this feature 3 levels earlier. Anyways, I think 1DD's Thief is really cool. Maybe Magic Device isn't as strong as it used to be, but they also give it out three levels earlier and it's still cool and relatively useful. Yes, it may not be as powerful as before, but they had to make it slightly less powerful so it can be given earlier, and I think the most important part of an ability is not just how powerful it is but how, cool, unique, and interesting it is. But maybe that's just me/
Getting it 3 levels earlier is a thing. However the Thief subclass was generally considered weak, so not convinced it really did need that change even if available at lower level. Perhaps just limit scrolls to half the thief's level and retain the chance of casting failure (to prevent using wish at 10th or other shenanigans)
I guess, but 1DD's Thief doesn't seem that weak to me. Anyways, how cool something is and how fun it is to play are generally more important factors when considering what subclass to take for me. I think that 1DD managed to, with a relatively high level of success, make Thief a more interesting and unique subclass. I also think that they made it more powerful overall, since the leveling was scaled down, even if some of the abilities don't fully match up. But yeah, that proposal about making the scrolls Thieves can cast half their level (I'd round down) and having higher than that have a chance at failure is probably better than what they currently have, which only allows you to use cantrips or level 1 scrolls without worrying about whether it will misfire. Anyways, this is only a really minor detail about the overall Thief, I think all in all, the subclass is very cool.
It is worth mentioning that this is UA stuff and commentary need not be all or nothing. It is fair game to criticize parts without needing it all to stay 5e.
In other news, it now takes an action to remember things?????
STUDY [ACTION] When you take the Study Action, you make an Intelligence Check to study your memory, a book, a creature, a clue, an object, or another source of knowledge and call to mind an important piece of information about it. The Areas of Knowledge table suggests which Skills are applicable when you take this Action, depending on the area of knowledge the Intelligence Check is about
No thinking in combat? (With the Keen Mind feat, you can think using a bonus action. Yay you?)
Yeah I've said it in other threads, I do not like this rule. I don't mind codifying what type of action knowledge checks are, in fact I think that is good, less work for the DM when its just in the rules. But making things like this an action just means they never get used. Having a feat then make it thing you may do is just bad design. Its not like attacking people is a bad action on its own and you need a feat to make it useful, feats should be making a useful for a action action even better. So the default should be a bonus action(I'd make some default rule that bonus actions can be taken as actions if you already used your bonus action.) and the feat should make that bonus action more enticing somehow.
When your choice is think about the enemy and maybe remember a detail you learned like its resistant to fire, or just attacking the, the player will always just attack them. No one wants to give up their action to be the Aktually meme. Everyone does something useful person sits in the back Aktually you should be using a club. As a bonus action sure have at it, they go oh crap we should use a club and then you know use a club. Instead of round one hey we should use a club, round two uses the club but the enemy would have been dead either way at this point woo. So after the feat yeah its a useful thing as its not stopping your action, before then no. And for me that is just bad design.
Jump is a similar problem in this edition but there is no feat that fixes it, you wont spend your action to jump when you have any other option in a fight. "when the wyvren flies down I'm going to jump up and grab on, ooh sorry jump is an action so you jump up and do nothing and fall back down." "the orcs on the other side of the chasm pull bows and begin shooting at you, i jump across the gap and begin attack them, ooh sorry jump is an action so you jump to other other side and just stand there getting massacred"
The big thing I noticed is that preparations are now tied to spell level. That means more preps overall, but fewer at the highest levels that you can cast. It sucks that they made the best 9th level spell into the only one you'd ever see prepared on Mages.
That’s not necessarily true across all classes. Wizards use spellbooks. They might prepare spells different.
I guess, but 1DD's Thief doesn't seem that weak to me. Anyways, how cool something is and how fun it is to play are generally more important factors when considering what subclass to take for me. I think that 1DD managed to, with a relatively high level of success, make Thief a more interesting and unique subclass. I also think that they made it more powerful overall, since the leveling was scaled down, even if some of the abilities don't fully match up. But yeah, that proposal about making the scrolls Thieves can cast half their level (I'd round down) and having higher than that have a chance at failure is probably better than what they currently have, which only allows you to use cantrips or level 1 scrolls without worrying about whether it will misfire. Anyways, this is only a really minor detail about the overall Thief, I think all in all, the subclass is very cool.
Use magic device is okay in 1dd, but they unnecessarily weakened both fast hands and thief reflexes, yeah thief reflexes is 3 levels earlier but its a very lame final ability for a sub class, maybe if they put no limit on how many times it could be done it would be okayish but still weaker than what it was.
No thinking in combat? (With the Keen Mind feat, you can think using a bonus action. Yay you?)
Requiring an action to delve through your memory for obscure facts seems reasonable enough. In general I would split knowledge between "readily available", "available with some searching", and "missing", and I'd require an action to remember anything in the second category. 5e doesn't have a particularly easy way of deciding what fits in which category; I'd be tempted by a rule such as "if you beat the DC by 10 you know without spending an action" but that's probably more complexity than they want.
The problem is it is going against things like attacking, casting a spell for an action.
The big thing I noticed is that preparations are now tied to spell level. That means more preps overall, but fewer at the highest levels that you can cast. It sucks that they made the best 9th level spell into the only one you'd ever see prepared on Mages.
That’s not necessarily true across all classes. Wizards use spellbooks. They might prepare spells different.
I suspect wizards will, if wizards have both a smaller pool of spells to choose from(only the ones in their spellbook) and prep the same that will be a big hit compared to the other casters. Like I get balancing spell casters but that would not be balanced amongst the spell casters. Though they may use the same style of mechanic and just get more.
Edit to add also they are mentioning pact magic, unless that has dramatically changed they only cast at their highest level and two-4 spells so I suspect they will just have a flat prep X number of spells, and even if they don't look at the ranger charts 1-5 but you get 5th level spells at 9th level how many would be prepped in 5th level spots at say 11th or 15th level.
The big thing I noticed is that preparations are now tied to spell level. That means more preps overall, but fewer at the highest levels that you can cast. It sucks that they made the best 9th level spell into the only one you'd ever see prepared on Mages.
That’s not necessarily true across all classes. Wizards use spellbooks. They might prepare spells different.
I suspect wizards will, if wizards have both a smaller pool of spells to choose from(only the ones in their spellbook) and prep the same that will be a big hit compared to the other casters. Like I get balancing spell casters but that would not be balanced amongst the spell casters. Though they may use the same style of mechanic and just get more.
Edit to add also they are mentioning pact magic, unless that has dramatically changed they only cast at their highest level and two-4 spells so I suspect they will just have a flat prep X number of spells, and even if they don't look at the ranger charts 1-5 but you get 5th level spells at 9th level how many would be prepped in 5th level spots at say 11th or 15th level.
I highly doubt this. This will most likely be the way things are for all casters except wizards and warlocks. Wizards will most likely be able to prepare much like 5e. It will probably be based on prof bonus instead of int bonus amount of additional spells because it seems to be the direction they are headed. Warlocks is going to be a weird one. I have no clue how they will decide that.
The biggest problem/question I have is with the name. Experts? When they're the jack of all trade classes? They're not the best in melee, not the best in magic, not the best in healing nor have they the closest connection to nature, etc... If anything they're dilletantes.
Only bard is a jack of all trades class (literally), and even then they still get expertise. Rogues and bards, through their Expertise feature, got to be the best at a bunch of things. Rangers, who really should have been able to be the best at sneaking and tracking and stuff, now get to be the best too.
Do your games just never use skills or something?
We use a lot of skill checks, only nobody has played a ranger or a rogue in the last three years. Rogues are useless at the moment, as you don't need them to open locks or disarm traps. Other classes can do the same thing and have more versatility, like a Bard, or even a Wizard. Rangers, well I was the only DM running an outdoor campaign and nobody bothered to take one. Most of the time, we use skill checks that are class locked. So a Barb has 0 chance in passing an Arcana check in most of the cases. Rogues, even with expertise, will still have a higher DC than a Wizard to recognize a spell. This makes skill checks more logical and less: Oh yes, we have a skill monkey with us, who without any spelcasting is still better in arcana checks than the casters.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Personally, I don't think the change to sneak attack was that big of a nerf. It just means that you don't get to use it on other peoples turns. So is that annoying? Yeah, I'd honestly rather have had it not be changed. But that being said, rogues have no in-built damage dealing reactions, so using sneak attack on other peoples turns doesn't happen much, and imagine how annoying it was to the DM knowing the rogue can deal 10-gazillion damage as an OA and having the monster not know that. This isn't a big nerf, it's a minor tweak. The only build this really messes with is rogues who multiclassed to get attacks as reactions, and builds like that are extremely rare.
And as an aside, yay Thief! They seem to have a lot more cool and unique abilities and I'm much more interested in playing the 1DD version of them than I am in playing the 5e subclass. It's also neat to see how they get some abilities to interact with magic devices, which makes sense because they'd probably need to be able to use the things they stole. Also, who noticed where it said "Rogues have an almost supernatural knack for, and a few learn magical tricks to supplement their other abilities." Meaning, we're almost certainly keeping Arcane Trickster or something like it! This doesn't come as a surprise, but it's still nice to know that some rogues will have access to magic.
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.The biggest problem/question I have is with the name. Experts? When they're the jack of all trade classes? They're not the best in melee, not the best in magic, not the best in healing nor have they the closest connection to nature, etc... If anything they're dilletantes.
Sneak Attack also can’t proc off of booming blade anymore either.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Only bard is a jack of all trades class (literally), and even then they still get expertise. Rogues and bards, through their Expertise feature, got to be the best at a bunch of things. Rangers, who really should have been able to be the best at sneaking and tracking and stuff, now get to be the best too.
Do your games just never use skills or something?
I don't think they are. Song of Restoration + healing BI are replacements for the loss of Song of Rest and natural healing spells. Bards are now really good at keeping people on their feet mid battle, but are kinda crappy outside of it.
Most games will end before you see Magical Secrets so I can't count that towards average bard healer attempts.
Old hunter had a mini, non magical version of it at that level. Makes sense to me to use the spell instead of the odd version Hunter had.
Crit rules are back to old 2014 PHB version.
True, I guess both versions have their trade-offs as well as benefits. But being able to attune to a fourth item, the special "Don't use charges if you're lucky," and the limited spell scroll use, all three levels lower, are still very cool abilities. Personally, I think 1DD'S version of Magic Device is cooler, even if it's not as powerful.
Anyways, the coolest thing I like about this Thief is that at level 14, they can use Cunning Action in addition to another bonus action an amount of times per a day equal to their proficiency bonus. The amount of versatility and coolness this feature gives the Thief subclass is immeasurable. And yes I know 5e's Thieves can take 2 turns in the first round of initiative at level 17. But at that level, a 10 in initiative is not very high, and you can only do this once per an encounter and can't pick when and when not to use it. Again, this feature also comes 3 levels later.
So I guess Thieves may not be that much more powerful. The difference between power level in 1DD's and 5e's version of this isn't massive. But either way, I really like 1DD's Thieves, and I think the game's designers did a great job at keeping them cool, unique and interesting, for the next edition. I look forward to playing them.
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.In 5e, the only magic items a thief would really want to use with UMD was the Robe of the Archmage and a finesse Holy Avenger. And the robe was just as good as getting +3 armor w/ a spell mantle for the thief, with the latter being much more accessable and the former better in the hands of the party mage.
Needless to say, using either rarely came up. So this is rather a straight improvement no matter how you look at it.
Staves and wands were another area it panned out for thieves in 5e, though I guess a feat would get you the "spellcaster" requirement for many of them so it was not a huge benefit, but still tings like staff of fire etc needed a class. Overall the new version seems to be a wash, and thief took a hit with both fast hands and thief reflexes so overall I think the sub class is worse. Too bad the base rogue also got wrecked so hard.
1/6 percent of the time I assume, and it can make a big difference then. But also, you can attune to a fourth magic item, and you get this feature 3 levels earlier. Anyways, I think 1DD's Thief is really cool. Maybe Magic Device isn't as strong as it used to be, but they also give it out three levels earlier and it's still cool and relatively useful. Yes, it may not be as powerful as before, but they had to make it slightly less powerful so it can be given earlier, and I think the most important part of an ability is not just how powerful it is but how, cool, unique, and interesting it is. But maybe that's just me.
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.Yeah, study is a little ridiculous. It means that thinking is an action and studying and understanding the gist of a whole book is one two. I don't think either of those should be an action, and I think they should take very different amounts of time, but again, that's just me. You're the second other person I've seen on the forums to think it's kind of ridiculous too.
Yeah, it is worth mentioning. I hated the spells can't crit rule that was in the first UA, but I love things about it such as the new background system and how it allows you to control the level of complexity.
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.Requiring an action to delve through your memory for obscure facts seems reasonable enough. In general I would split knowledge between "readily available", "available with some searching", and "missing", and I'd require an action to remember anything in the second category. 5e doesn't have a particularly easy way of deciding what fits in which category; I'd be tempted by a rule such as "if you beat the DC by 10 you know without spending an action" but that's probably more complexity than they want.
I guess, but 1DD's Thief doesn't seem that weak to me. Anyways, how cool something is and how fun it is to play are generally more important factors when considering what subclass to take for me. I think that 1DD managed to, with a relatively high level of success, make Thief a more interesting and unique subclass. I also think that they made it more powerful overall, since the leveling was scaled down, even if some of the abilities don't fully match up. But yeah, that proposal about making the scrolls Thieves can cast half their level (I'd round down) and having higher than that have a chance at failure is probably better than what they currently have, which only allows you to use cantrips or level 1 scrolls without worrying about whether it will misfire. Anyways, this is only a really minor detail about the overall Thief, I think all in all, the subclass is very cool.
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.Yeah I've said it in other threads, I do not like this rule. I don't mind codifying what type of action knowledge checks are, in fact I think that is good, less work for the DM when its just in the rules. But making things like this an action just means they never get used. Having a feat then make it thing you may do is just bad design. Its not like attacking people is a bad action on its own and you need a feat to make it useful, feats should be making a useful for a action action even better. So the default should be a bonus action(I'd make some default rule that bonus actions can be taken as actions if you already used your bonus action.) and the feat should make that bonus action more enticing somehow.
When your choice is think about the enemy and maybe remember a detail you learned like its resistant to fire, or just attacking the, the player will always just attack them. No one wants to give up their action to be the Aktually meme. Everyone does something useful person sits in the back Aktually you should be using a club. As a bonus action sure have at it, they go oh crap we should use a club and then you know use a club. Instead of round one hey we should use a club, round two uses the club but the enemy would have been dead either way at this point woo. So after the feat yeah its a useful thing as its not stopping your action, before then no. And for me that is just bad design.
Jump is a similar problem in this edition but there is no feat that fixes it, you wont spend your action to jump when you have any other option in a fight. "when the wyvren flies down I'm going to jump up and grab on, ooh sorry jump is an action so you jump up and do nothing and fall back down." "the orcs on the other side of the chasm pull bows and begin shooting at you, i jump across the gap and begin attack them, ooh sorry jump is an action so you jump to other other side and just stand there getting massacred"
That’s not necessarily true across all classes. Wizards use spellbooks. They might prepare spells different.
Use magic device is okay in 1dd, but they unnecessarily weakened both fast hands and thief reflexes, yeah thief reflexes is 3 levels earlier but its a very lame final ability for a sub class, maybe if they put no limit on how many times it could be done it would be okayish but still weaker than what it was.
The problem is it is going against things like attacking, casting a spell for an action.
I suspect wizards will, if wizards have both a smaller pool of spells to choose from(only the ones in their spellbook) and prep the same that will be a big hit compared to the other casters. Like I get balancing spell casters but that would not be balanced amongst the spell casters. Though they may use the same style of mechanic and just get more.
Edit to add also they are mentioning pact magic, unless that has dramatically changed they only cast at their highest level and two-4 spells so I suspect they will just have a flat prep X number of spells, and even if they don't look at the ranger charts 1-5 but you get 5th level spells at 9th level how many would be prepped in 5th level spots at say 11th or 15th level.
I highly doubt this. This will most likely be the way things are for all casters except wizards and warlocks. Wizards will most likely be able to prepare much like 5e. It will probably be based on prof bonus instead of int bonus amount of additional spells because it seems to be the direction they are headed. Warlocks is going to be a weird one. I have no clue how they will decide that.
We use a lot of skill checks, only nobody has played a ranger or a rogue in the last three years. Rogues are useless at the moment, as you don't need them to open locks or disarm traps. Other classes can do the same thing and have more versatility, like a Bard, or even a Wizard. Rangers, well I was the only DM running an outdoor campaign and nobody bothered to take one. Most of the time, we use skill checks that are class locked. So a Barb has 0 chance in passing an Arcana check in most of the cases. Rogues, even with expertise, will still have a higher DC than a Wizard to recognize a spell. This makes skill checks more logical and less: Oh yes, we have a skill monkey with us, who without any spelcasting is still better in arcana checks than the casters.